Sustainable Tourism

and

Cultural Heritage

A Review of Development Assistance and Its Potential toPromote Sustainability

36993

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Table of ContentsList of Abbreviations

Preface

Acknowledgements

Executive Summary..................................................................................................................................... i

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1

2. The Context ........................................................................................................................................... 3

2.1. Tourism: System, Economic Impact, and Market........................................................................ 32.2. Culture and Its Preservation......................................................................................................... 52.3. Culture as a Tourism Attraction................................................................................................... 62.4. The Impacts of Tourism............................................................................................................... 72.5. Sustainable Tourism: Concepts and Objectives........................................................................... 82.6. Ecotourism and Parallels to Cultural Heritage Tourism .............................................................. 92.7. Industry Responses to Sustainable Tourism................................................................................. 92.8. The Realities of Industry Structure: A Role for Development Cooperation Programs.............. 11

3. Achieving Sustainability: Selected Strategies ..................................................................................... 14

3.1. Feasibility Studies, Project Formulation, and EIAs ................................................................... 143.2. Getting the Framework Right: Policy and Planning .................................................................. 153.3. Organizing for Sustainability: Institutional Issues..................................................................... 163.4. Partnerships: A Key Component................................................................................................ 173.5. The Basics: Marketing and Infrastructure Development ........................................................... 183.6. Financing: The Funding Necessary for Sustainability ............................................................... 193.7. Site purchase, Restoration, and Preservation ............................................................................. 213.8. Site-level Planning and Management Techniques ..................................................................... 213.9. Training in Tourism Management ............................................................................................. 233.10. Certification and Accreditation ............................................................................................... 233.11. Entrepreneurial and Hospitality Training and Financial Assistance........................................ 243.12. Information and Communication............................................................................................. 263.13. Research and Information Gathering....................................................................................... 273.14. Summary ................................................................................................................................. 28

4. Development Cooperation Agencies and Tourism.............................................................................. 29

4.1. Development Cooperation: A Brief Summary........................................................................... 294.2. Development Cooperation and Tourism: Overview and Selected Agencies ............................. 304.3. Development Cooperation and Tourism: Some Principles and Lessons Learned ..................... 36

5. Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................... 38

References ................................................................................................................................................ 40

Endnotes ................................................................................................................................................. 47

Appendices1. Players, processes, and documents: A review of selected activities within

cultural heritage tourism and sustainable tourism....................................................................... 552. The impacts of cultural tourism in Tana Toraja, Indonesia .......................................................... 633. List and description of relevant IDB, USAID, and World Bank projects..................................... 67

4. List and description of relevant projects sponsored by other agencies ......................................... 755. List and description of tourism projects undertaken by German Development Cooperation ....... 796. Case Study 1: The Ghana Central Region Project ........................................................................ 857. Case Study 2: The Training and Technology Transfer Program in Thailand ............................... 89

List of Abbreviations

Abbreviations are common in many fields, including those of tourism, cultural heritage management, anddevelopment cooperation. Abbreviations used only in limited areas (e.g., in one paragraph) are describedin the text. Those with broader use and relevance are listed below.

ADB Asian Development Bank

AfDB African Development Bank

BMZ German Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development

CHM Cultural Heritage Management

CHT Cultural Heritage Tourism

DFID Department for International Development (UK)

EIA Environmental impact analysis

EU European Union

GEF Global Environment Facility

GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (Germany)

ICCROM International Center for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Prop-

erty

ICOMOS International Council on Monuments and Sites

IDB Inter-American Development Bank

IUCN The World Conservation Union

NGO Non-governmental organization

NORAD Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation

OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development

PATA Pacific Asia Travel Association

SD Sustainable development

SIDA Swedish International Development Agency

SNV Netherlands Development Organisation

ST Sustainable tourism

UNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and Development

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization

USAID US Agency for International Development

WTO World Tourism Organization

WTTC World Travel and Tourism Council

Preface

The objective of this report on Sustainable Tourism and Cultural Heritage is to present the state ofthe art of knowledge, experiences and best practices from different multi- and bilateral agenciesthat have worked with this issue. The report draws on experience from sites and destinationsaround the world, including many that are inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List.

It is often said that knowledge in this field needs to be further developed before Sustainable Tour-ism can be integrated into multi- and bilateral development co-operation policies.

NWHO wants to show that this is not the case.

Arild Molstad A/S had administrative responsibility for the report, and Mr. Molstad contributed toits content in various ways. Kreg Lindberg (Institute of Transport Economics – TØI) had overallresponsibility for report writing and content. Don Hawkins contributed information on the activi-ties of selected agencies, including the World Bank and USAID, as well as the material containedin Appendix 3 and 4. Walter Jamieson contributed background information on several topics dis-cussed in the report. The case studies are based on material provided by Hawkins (Appendix 6)and Jamieson (Appendix 7).

This report is based on the experiences of the authors and available published and unpublished in-formation. There will, of course, be a lot of literature, case studies and other information relevant tothe concept of Sustainable Tourism and Cultural Heritage that is not published in this report.

Nevertheless, in our opinion, the relevant knowledge exists. Through multi- and bilateral partner-ships that also involve the private sector, strategies, programs and projects can be developed andimplemented. It is due time that this is recognised so that action can be taken.

The Strategy for Environment in Norwegian Multi- and Bilateral Development Co-operation rec-ognizes as a priority the development of models for sustainable tourism in prioritized areas of cul-tural interest (Agenda 21).

NWHO believes the time to take action is now, and we want to be a partner in developing thesestrategies, programs and projects.

Kris EndresenDirector, NWHONovember 1999

Acknowledgements

Kim Blackford provided research assistance, especially relating to World Bank and USAID activities.The following people reviewed drafts of the report and provided helpful comments: Jan Vidar Haukeland(TØI), Henning Lauridsen (TØI), Juan Jorge Luna-Kelser (IDB), Mark Phillips (USAID), and SynnøveVinsrygg (Riksantikvaren). In addition, several people provided relevant information during reportpreparation. These contributions are gratefully acknowledged.

i

Executive SummaryThis report 1) provides an up-to-date overviewof the relationship between protection of cul-tural heritage, including World Heritage Sites,and tourism, 2) describes strategies that canlead to sustainable tourism where cultural heri-tage is a key factor, and 3) points out how de-velopment cooperation can play a role in thisprocess, with a particular focus on Africa andAsia.

The mutual dependence that exists between tour-ism and cultural heritage is becoming more evi-dent. While culture heritage creates a foundationfor tourism’s growth, tourism has the power togenerate funds that make conservation possible.Cultural heritage loses much of its meaning with-out an audience, and a society participating in andbenefiting from it. Without sustainable manage-ment, tourism loses its potential for growth.

The focus of this report is how to promotesymbiosis rather than conflict between theneeds of conservation management and tour-ism, and particularly how development coop-eration can play a role in achieving this sym-biosis.

Recent growth has catapulted the tourism industryinto the position of becoming arguably the biggestindustry in the world, with a 12% share of globalGDP. Its size threatens vulnerable destinationswhose culture heritage is their main attraction,while on the other hand sustainable tourism canplay a vital part in addressing such developingcountry problems as poverty, poor infrastructure,unemployment, and a decline in a nation’s senseof cultural identity.

Though it has not been fully tapped, tourism hasthe potential to create benefits specifically for thepoor in destination countries. Indeed, the Britishdevelopment cooperation agency (DFID) has fo-cused on a pro-poor approach as part of its in-volvement in tourism.

Tourism poses important challenges for develop-ment assistance, which so far has involved itself inthis sector only to a minor degree. The reportpoints out that arguments against bilateral andmultilateral development assistance roles in tour-ism are real, but often overstated – and that these

problems are not unique to tourism: many are ge-neric to development cooperation and the devel-opment process. The report concludes that a fail-ure of development agencies to become involvedin tourism represents a failure to capitalize on theconsiderable opportunities it presents in terms ofresource management and sustainable develop-ment.

Development cooperation can help tackle chal-lenges such as global underestimation of the valueof culture- and nature-based attractions; currencyleakage that deprive local communities of tour-ism-generated income; a private industry preoccu-pied with short-term profits at the expense oflong-term resource management; and a lack ofexperience and administrative/organizationalstructure.

These challenges are particularly dramatic in thearea of cultural heritage, as damage inflicted uponlocal culture is accelerating and often irreparable(these are non-renewable resources). The "userpays" principle is often neglected, while the "freeand open access" argument is invoked by thetourism industry. The industry is characterized by"market failure," which means that a laissez-faireapproach may not lead to socially-desirable re-sults. Therefore, there is a need for governmentintervention. The report identifies and outlines arange of private-public sector alliances, usingstrategies and mechanisms ("best practices") thathave proved successful. Practical cases are pro-vided to illustrate ways to meet these challenges.

The report argues that development of sustain-able tourism can be consistent with the aim ofdevelopment cooperation in general. Moreover,sustainable tourism represents a hithertolargely neglected opportunity for a developingcountry to generate employment opportunities(including for poor people), growth, and amore viable economy on terms that do not runcounter to its long-term interests.

The authors of this report conclude that there is asolid, and growing, basis for action. In additionto the knowledge and experience of developmentagencies, there is extensive expertise within theconsultancy and academic world, among NGOs,as well as inside the tourism industry itself. How-

ii

ever, the importance of collaboration and infor-mation exchange in project development and im-plementation is vital. As is a sense of urgency tocombat the disappearance of cultural landscapesthat have value far beyond what can be measuredin economic terms; they are central, often fast-disappearing symbols of national identity anduniqueness. As expressed by World Bank Presi-dent James Wolfensohn, “culture can be justi-fied for tourism, for industry, and for employ-ment, but it must also be seen as an essentialelement in preserving and enhancing nationalpride and spirit.” 1

1

1. Introduction

Tourism to sites of cultural and natural signifi-cance has existed at least since the time of GreekAntiquity, as reflected by Hellenistic world’s in-vention of the Seven Wonders of the World. Inmore recent times, 157 countries have ratified theWorld Heritage Convention of 1972 (protectingthe world's cultural and natural heritage), and 582sites are inscribed on the UNESCO World Heri-tage List. UNESCO's Director General F. Mayorexpressed it this way:

“The potential benefits of World Heritage ex-tend far beyond the sites which have beenlisted, since these areas can play a leadershiprole in setting standards for protected areas asa whole, can bring resources for trainingwhich will be of wider application, and can be"flagships" in terms of raising public aware-ness of conservation issues.”

Together with other culture and nature areas, theseWorld Heritage Sites are important tourism at-tractions and form the backbone of the tourismindustry. Indeed, inscription on the World Heri-tage List can quickly cause a site to become amajor tourist attraction.

There is some debate regarding the exact sizeand growth of tourism, but it clearly is one ofthe largest industries in the world, if not theabsolute largest. The World Travel and Tour-ism Council (WTTC) estimates that tourismgenerated 192 million jobs and $3.6 billion2 inGDP in 1999, which is 12% of the world total.WTTC forecasts continued growth, with an-nual rates of 3% between 1999 and 2010 for theworld as a whole.3

In short, tourism’s economic impact is significantand still growing. Moreover, much of the em-ployment and associated income involves foreignexchange earnings. In addition, though there iswide variability across destinations and regions,tourism generally provides jobs of various types(from unskilled to skilled, part-time to full-time)and for both genders. Thus, tourism can make animportant contribution to economic development.Tourism also generates a variety of other impacts,both positive and negative. For example, it canhelp keep traditions alive and finance the protec-tion of cultural and natural heritage, as well as

increase visitor appreciation of that heritage. Con-versely, tourism can damage heritage when notwell managed.Thus, there is a tension between tourism and cul-tural and natural heritage management, indeedbetween tourism and broader societal values.Tourism is a double-edged sword. As noted byUNESCO:

Cultural tourism can encourage the revivalof traditions and the restoration of sites andmonuments. But unbridled tourism canhave the opposite effect. Here there is a realdilemma. Is there not a risk that the boomin cultural tourism, by the sheer weight ofnumbers involved, may harbour the seeds ofits own destruction by eroding the very cul-tures and sites that are its stock in trade?

Or, as stated by Egyptologist Rainer Stadelman,“Tourism is already a catastrophe. But we have toadmit that without tourism there would be nopublic interest, and without that there would be nomoney for our work.”4 The tension between sym-biosis and conflict has been repeated in manycontexts and provides the motivation for this re-port. On the one hand, cultural heritage can serveas a tourism attraction, while tourism can lead tofinancial and political support for management ofthis heritage. On the other hand, there is also po-tential conflict insofar as tourism can damagecultural heritage, and limits on visitation can dam-age tourism (or hinder its expansion).

What is clear is that tourism is growing and willhave an increasing impact on cultural heritage. Inits forecast Tourism: 2020 Vision, the WorldTourism Organization (WTO) predicts that cul-tural tourism will be one of the five key tourismmarket segments in the future, and notes thatgrowth in this area will present an increasingchallenge in terms of managing visitor flows tocultural sites.5 The focus of this report is how topromote symbiosis rather than conflict, and par-ticularly how development cooperation can fa-cilitate achievement of this objective.

The means to achieve symbiosis is to pursue well-managed tourism in cultural and natural heritagesettings. Although members of the tourism indus-try may oppose specific measures or management

2

in specific settings, industry organizations notethat “the challenge is to manage the future growthof the industry so as to minimise its negative im-pacts on the environment and host communitieswhilst maximising the benefits it brings in termsof jobs, wealth and support for local culture andindustry, and protection of the built and naturalenvironment.”

A recurring theme in this report is the motivationfor involving development cooperation in the pro-cess of achieving sustainable tourism, as well asthe roles that assistance can play. One can justifyproviding technical assistance, training, and finan-cial support in tourism just as in other economicsectors, like agriculture, that create jobs and in-come. However, for reasons discussed in Section2.8, there is a more specific rationale for devel-opment cooperation that stems from the nature ofthe tourism industry and relevant power relation-ships.

Development cooperation can be an importantlever, an important stimulus, for achieving sus-tainable tourism. If sustainable tourism isachieved, it will not only help development coop-eration agencies achieve economic developmentgoals, but also cultural heritage managementgoals. For example, tourism can financially con-tribute to resource management. In addition, localresidents may see tourism-related jobs as concretebenefits of cultural heritage management, whichcan enhance public support for that heritage.

Section 2 of this report describes the tourism de-velopment context, including a rationale for de-velopment cooperation. Section 3 reviews severalstrategies that promote sustainability in tourism.Section 4 reviews issues in development coopera-tion generally, as well as what selected agencieshave done within tourism. Section 5 is a conclud-ing statement that reiterates the importance of de-velopment cooperation in the sector. The appendi-ces contain various material, starting with anoverview of relevant agencies and processes out-side the bilateral and multilateral assistance sector.Other appendices contain a case study of tour-ism’s impacts in Tana Toraja, Indonesia, data-bases of relevant development cooperation proj-ects, and two case studies of tourism projectsfunded by development cooperation, one in Ghanaand one in Thailand.

It is worth noting several limitations, assumptions,and definitions in the context of this report. First,the focus is on cultural heritage. However, culturaland natural heritage often overlap, such that is-sues, examples, and experiences from naturetourism can also be relevant in the present context(and vice versa). This is discussed in Section 2.6.Second, the focus is on tourism, but it is recog-nized that the involvement of development agen-cies in cultural heritage clearly goes beyond tour-ism.6 Culture, like nature, can be an importantcomponent of economic development generally,not just in tourism. Moreover, culture providebenefits internationally to those who have not vis-ited, and may never visit, sites. Such “existence”and “option” values helped motivate funding forenvironmental programs such as the Global Envi-ronment Facility (a multi-billion dollar fund forenvironmental projects), and similar values in theculture context also justify development coopera-tion.7

Third, for purposes of this report, cultural heri-tage tourism (CHT) is viewed as travel concernedwith experiencing cultural environments, includ-ing landscapes, the visual and performing arts, andspecial lifestyles, values, traditions and events. Itis important to stress that CHT involves not onlytangible or visible heritage such as sites, colors,materials, and settlement patterns, but also intan-gible heritage such as societal structures, tradi-tions, values, and religion. However, the primaryfocus of this report will be on tangible culture.

Tourism can be, and often is, defined quitebroadly to include business and other forms oftravel. The present focus is on recreational travel,the “layman’s” concept of tourism. Likewise, thefocus will not be on volunteer tourism, in which“tourists” work on projects, though this can be animportant tool for cultural resource management.For example, the Cultural Restoration TourismProject is organizing an effort to rebuild the Bal-dan Baraivan temple in Mongolia. Several smallgroups of "volunteer-tourists" are brought to thesite to help with the restoration work.8

The focus of this report is on assistance by bilat-eral and multilateral development cooperationagencies. The general activities of UNESCO,UNEP, WTO, and other agencies and organiza-tions are discussed in Appendix 1. Geographi-cally, the focus is on Asia and Africa.9

3

Lastly, it should be noted that this report is basedon the experience of the authors, published andunpublished literature, personal communicationwith relevant actors, and other related sources.Site visits and detailed evaluation of the examplespresented here were not undertaken as part of theproject.10

4

2. The Context

Readers of this report may come from varied dis-ciplinary areas, so this section provides briefbackground on relevant aspects of tourism andculture. Background on development cooperationis presented later (Section 4).

2.1. Tourism: System, Economic Impact, andMarket

There are numerous books on what might looselybe called the tourism “system” – the nature andstructure of actors and their relationships in tour-ism. This section provides a brief description ofthat system. One of the key features of tourism isthe diversity in attractions, destinations, and busi-ness characteristics. Given this diversity, the fol-lowing is inevitably a simplified overview.

At the core, and the focus of this report, are at-tractions, in this case cultural and natural heritageattractions. These attractions can be grouped as:11

• Features within the natural environment.• Man-made buildings, structures and sites that

were designed for a purpose other than at-tracting visitors, such as religious worship,but which now attract substantial numbers ofvisitors who use them as leisure amenities.

• Man-made buildings, structures, and sitesthat are designed to attract visitors and arepurpose-built to accommodate their needs,such as theme parks.

• Special events.

Destinations often contain more than one attrac-tion, though major attractions (such as the Egyp-tian pyramids) can be either the sole or the leadingattraction at a destination. Within a destination,there are various tourism facilities, such as hotelsand restaurants. To some degree, these facilitiesdepend on the attractions, but the difference be-tween the two can be blurred, as some facilities(such as famous hotels) are themselves attractions.Attractions can be classified using various typolo-gies, such as ownership (e.g., public or private)

and whether they are primary or secondary interms of visitor decisions to visit a destination.

Tourism is a complex product and can be classi-fied by:

• Destination/activity type (e.g., beach, nature,culture, activity, visiting friends and relatives– VFR);

• Type of travel (e.g., organized in tour or freeindependent traveler – FIT);

• Source market (e.g., domestic or interna-tional); and

• Travel cost/style (e.g., high-end/luxury orbudget/backpacker).

Moreover, the scope of visitation to cultural andnatural heritage attractions goes beyond technicaldefinitions of tourism, which may require over-night stays or minimum distances traveled duringthe journey. Though much of the focus in Asiaand Africa is on international tourism, visitationby nearby residents can generate some of the sameimpacts, both positive and negative, as visitationby persons living thousands of kilometers away.

The diversity of travel relevant in the presentcontext includes both tourists who pay travelagents thousands of dollars for trips to the furthestreaches of the globe to residents visiting a nearbymuseum. To simplify matters, key actors, espe-cially for international visitation, include 1) theoutbound (source-market) operators, both at thewholesale and retail levels, that sell tours to trav-elers, 2) the inbound (ground) operators that or-ganize and lead the trips in the destination coun-try, and 3) the attraction that is being visited.

Regardless of how tourists travel, the tourismphenomenon generates substantial positive eco-nomic impacts around the world. The followingtable provides estimates from the WTTC.

4

Table 1: WTTC Economic Impact Estimates for Travel and Tourism (1999)

Region GDP EmploymentBillions % of Total Annual % Millions % of Total

of $ in Region Growth* of Jobs in Region

World 3,550 11.7 3.0 192.3 8.2

North Africa 20 6.8 6.0 2.2 7.4Sub-Saharan Africa 26 11.2 5.2 9.6 7.4North America 1,171 11.8 2.5 21.2 11.9Latin America 90 5.6 6.1 8.9 6.0Caribbean 29 20.6 5.5 3.6 15.8Oceania 68 14.7 3.8 2.1 16.0Northeast Asia 537 10.0 2.8 57.2 7.1Southeast Asia 81 10.6 5.5 15.2 7.3South Asia 27 5.3 9.1 22.3 5.4Europe 1,461 14.0 2.6 47.8 13.2Middle East 41 7.3 5.2 2.0 6.1

*1999-2010 estimated, adjusted for inflationGDP = Gross Domestic ProductSource: WTTC (1999)

These data not only show the current importanceof tourism as a generator of jobs and income, butalso the expected future growth, despite the recenteconomic problems in Asia. With the exception ofNortheast Asia, all the regions within Africa andAsia are expected to grow faster than the worldaverage for 1999 to 2010. Though inter-regionaltravel, especially from Europe and North Amer-ica, historically has been a major part of the mar-ket, intra-regional travel, especially in Asia, isexpected to be increasingly important as popula-tion, incomes, and leisure time increase.12

Future growth estimates paint a rosy picture fortourism, and those that want to benefit from it.However, the increase in demand is comple-mented by an increase in supply, as destinationsreact to the opportunities created by tourism. Theavailability of cultural resources (especially his-toric tangible resources) is ultimately limited.Nonetheless, new cultural attractions continue tobe developed.13 As the EU notes:

while global tourist demand is on the increase,the number of destinations and global capacityare advancing even more quickly.... To hold on

to their market share, destinations will have tocope with competition by enhancing qualityand by diversifying their products and markets.Emerging and potential destinations will haveto find their niche in this competitive market bycapitalising on their ‘uniqueness’ and noveltyand by avoiding mistakes made by other desti-nations.

This competition does not mean that CHT sitesneed to be turned into cultural Disneylands, butrather that attention needs to be paid to consumertastes and desires should tourism be desired atheritage sites. This might lead, for example, togreater attention to creative presentation and in-terpretation. With respect to heritage sites inOECD countries, it has been observed that:14

it is perhaps no accident that some of the newheritage attractions which rapidly gained sub-stantive market shares in the 1980s relied lesson the physical resource of their location andmore on the presentation of this place throughmulti-media interpretation: quite literally con-structing the resource to meet perceived de-mands.

5

Many heritage sites in Asia and Africa have reliedprimarily on their physical resources, and uniqueor unusual sites may be able to continue to do so.However, less unique sites will require greaterattention to the presentation, while unique sitesthat follow this path will be able to benefit finan-cially from their enhanced market position. Thedynamics of supply and demand will lead to theparadoxical situation of some sites being chal-lenged to attract tourists and other sites beingchallenged to manage an overabundance of tour-ists.

Reinforcing the increase in the number of sites isthe increasing sophistication of tourists. As de-scribed in the next section, many tourists haveexperienced sun, sand, and surf holidays and wantmore from their vacations. This leads to a greaterdemand for niche activities like CHT, but also tohigher expectations for quality. The increasingnumber of competing destinations provides theopportunity for these sophisticated consumers tobe more discriminating.

Another form of competition arises in source mar-kets themselves in the form of theme parks, notonly in North America but now throughout muchof the world. An even more recent phenomenon isvirtual reality, in which potential visitors may notneed to leave their home, or at least their home-town, to have CHT-like experiences. Thus, somesee virtual reality as a significant threat to tour-ism.15 However, others note that virtual realityexperiences (and perhaps visits to theme parks)may lead to more, rather than less, demand fororiginal sites insofar as they may stimulate con-sumer desire to experience “the real thing.”

Nonetheless, the trend towards the use of sophisti-cated electronic media may reinforce the trendtoward greater visitor sophistication and higherexpectations for stimulating and informative pres-entations at CHT sites. Of course, the develop-ment of electronic media also provides significantopportunities for sites to be interpreted in a muchmore interactive and interesting manner.

2.2. Culture and Its Preservation

This section briefly identifies some of the majorviews of culture and its physical manifestations

related to tourism, as well as the means that havebeen used to protect heritage environments.16

The UNESCO World Commission on Culture andDevelopment report Our Creative Diversity looksat culture as “ways of living together.” With thisas a point of departure, the World Bank definesculture as

the whole complex of distinctive spiritual, ma-terial, intellectual and emotional features thatcharacterize a society or social group. It in-cludes not only arts and letters, but also modesof life, the fundamental rights of the humanbeing, value systems, traditions, and beliefs.17

The above reflects the separation of culture andcultural heritage into both movable and immov-able forms. This report focuses primarily on cul-ture’s immovable forms, recognizing that the“cultural landscape” includes expressions of tra-ditions and lifestyles that must be taken into con-sideration when looking at effective ways of safe-guarding a community’s cultural heritage.

Culture and cultural heritage are prominent re-sources in any society. Tangible heritage may beconsidered a material manifestation or symbol ofcultural expression, either traditions of living so-ciety or those of past societies occupying the samearea. Therefore, material heritage is pivotal foranyone wanting to gain a deeper understanding ofthe society. This applies to the local inhabitantsas well as the visitor to a new or foreign society orenvironment.

A great deal of the activity within cultural heritagepreservation has been concerned with maintainingsingle buildings of architectural significance andconnected with important events and people.Various actors have been involved in this process,including non-governmental organizations, alllevels of government, and developers. Concernswith the limitations of identifying and protectingsingle buildings have led to laws and regulationsthat protect entire environments. This allowed theprocess to involve more people in heritage con-servation, and it defined a past that included theordinary as well as the most significant. Manycountries maintain heritage sites for interpretationand education; these are often characterized byhigh levels of research and documentation, as wellas government management.

6

Steadily increasing demand for culture-orientedactivities affects cultural heritage of interest at alllevels, from world heritage belonging to interna-tional society or mankind in general to heritage ofnational, regional and local significance. Preser-vation issues and challenges vary accordingly. Inmany developing countries, the legal frameworkfor protecting heritage is better than the manage-ment capacity. Surveying and monitoring systemsfor controlling the state of conservation of culturalheritage and taking the necessary precautions pre-sent great challenges.

Throughout the world, festivals and events – of-ten linked to or performed in areas with culturalrelics or at sites of cultural and natural signifi-cance – are now seen as important dimension ofcultural tourism. They play important roles inhelping to maintain cultural traditions and valueswhile providing communities with the ability tocreate jobs and income. Handicrafts often forman important dimension of a region's culturaltourism experience. Tourism can be important inhelping to maintain and develop traditional craftskills, though there is also the risk that increaseddemand leads to a loss of authenticity in terms ofprocess and product.

The discussion of different forms also reflects thatheritage, and conservation, can occur at differentspatial scales, including that of a single artifact, asingle building, a streetscape, an area, an entirehistoric town/city, a region/landscape, and evenup to national and international scales.

There are several reasons for public and privatesector involvement in cultural heritage man-agement (CHM), including:

• The recognition that heritage resources canplay an important role in community continu-ity, renewal, and development.

• The increased quality of life associated withheritage resources.

• The role of heritage resources in creating andmaintaining individual and community iden-tity.

• The value of heritage resources in the educa-tion of children.

• The role that heritage resources can play inproviding for pleasure/recreation opportuni-ties.

• The role that heritage resources can play ineconomic revitalization and tourism develop-ment.

The latter reason is the focus of the present report,but the non-tourism benefits are noted here to il-lustrate how the value of culture and culturalheritage goes beyond serving as tourism attrac-tions.

Our Creative Diversity goes on to note the contra-dictory forces of 1) globalization, which leads tocultural uniformity, and 2) fragmentation, whichreflects a driving apart. Both concepts are impor-tant when discussing the role of tourism and theways in which it contributes to the concept of aglobal culture, while also having in it the potentialto protect and promote local identity.

2.3. Culture as a Tourism Attraction

For tourists, the desire to travel is the desire, tovarying degrees, to experience something unfa-miliar; foreign cultures and their manifestationsthus serve as important attractions. Cultural tour-ism in particular is a search for and a celebrationof that which is unique and beautiful, representingour most valued inheritance.

Culture and cultural heritage are crucial to peo-ple's identity, self-respect, and dignity. This ap-plies to both affluent and poor societies. Tangibleheritage may be an avenue through which the con-scious tourist starts to grasp a basic understandingof the past and/or living culture, which hasadapted to and influenced the environment thevisitor is trying to make intelligible. Providedthese basic facts are understood and serve asguidelines for presentation and communicationbetween tourists and the local population, culturaltourism has great potential to improve under-standing and respect among different cultures, andin a long term perspective may be regarded as atool for creating and preserving peace.

Cultural tourism has long existed, but recentdemographic, social, and cultural changes in themain source countries have led to an increasingnumber of new niche markets in destinationcountries, including culture-oriented holidays.Though sun, sand, and surf holidays are not ex-pected to disappear, they have declined in relativeimportance as more and more visitors seek chal-

7

lenging, educational, and/or relatively unique ex-periences. These changes have led to increasedpopularity for tourism involving culture and na-ture as attractions. Some lament that recent inter-est in CHT does not stem from “genuine” interestin learning about the sites themselves as part of aclassical education, but rather to nostalgia. None-theless, one can also view this increased demandas an opportunity to generate interest and aware-ness in a broader swathe of the society than waspreviously possible. Moreover, cultural attractionstend to attract market segments with relativelyhigh levels of education and income, which canlead to relatively high net benefits to destinations.

Estimates of growth should be treated with cau-tion, but one study by Stanford University pre-dicted that nature tourism would grow at an an-nual rate of 25 to 30 percent during the 1990s.Cultural tourism was expected to grow at 10 to15 percent per year. It should be stressed thatsome visitors will take entire vacations focused onculture or nature, but many others will seek cul-ture/nature experiences as part of a larger vacationfocused on beach or other attractions and activi-ties. Various sites and countries are responding tothe opportunity provided by this growth in de-mand. For example, South Africa has historicallyrelied on its climate, beaches, and nature to attracttourists, but it recently (1997 to 1999) imple-mented a marketing campaign titled “ExploreSouth Africa - Culture” to attract culture-orientedtourists.

Though most of the attention in this area has beenon tourism involving western/northern visitors tosouthern destinations, there has also been a gen-eral increase in intra-regional (South-South) tour-ism, as noted above. Multiple sources of visitorspresents both opportunities in the form of in-creased benefits for destinations (due to increasednumbers), but also challenges in the form not onlyof limiting negative impacts, but also in effec-tively serving two markets. There is, of course,diversity in visitor expectations and preferenceswithin the “northern” market as well as within the“southern” market, but often the most striking dif-ference is between the two. This diversity is illus-trated in the context of visitation to a biospherereserve in China, and the challenge it presents tomanagers who may wish to satisfy both domesticand foreign visitors as well as natural/culturalheritage management objectives.18 In the culturalcontext, this tension is illustrated by an anecdote

of how what is seen as a joyous country-fair at-mosphere outside and inside Chinese temples inthe eyes of domestic visitors (and the businessesthey patronize) is desecration and vulgarization inthe eyes of Westerners.

2.4. The Impacts of Tourism

Tourism’s impacts are often grouped into eco-nomic, environmental, social, and cultural; thesecategories are somewhat arbitrary and overlap-ping, and the latter two often are combined intoone. Listing of these impacts is provided in nu-merous tourism reports, books, and articles.19 Thefocus in this section is to briefly note commonsocio-cultural impacts and to stress some generalconcepts.Potential positive impacts include:20

• building community pride;• enhancing the sense of identity of a commu-

nity or region;• promoting intercultural/international under-

standing;21

• encouraging revival or maintenance of tradi-tional crafts;22

• enhancing external support for minoritygroups and preservation of their culture;

• broadening community horizons;• providing funding for site preservation and

management; and• enhancing local and external appreciation and

support for cultural heritage.

Potential negative impacts include:

• commodification and cheapening of cultureand traditions;

• alienation and loss of cultural identity;• undermining of local traditions and ways of

life;• displacement of traditional residents;• increased division between those who do and

do not benefit from tourism;• conflict over (and at times loss of) land rights

and access to resources (including the attrac-tions themselves);

• damage to attractions and facilities;• loss of authenticity and historical accuracy in

interpretation; and• selectivity in which heritage attractions are

developed.23

8

Given the fundamental role that culture plays insociety and individual lives, these positive andnegative impacts can be profoundly important.

As noted, the grouping of impacts into categoriesis somewhat arbitrary and is used to convey basicissues. For example, positive economic impactscan ultimately lead to positive cultural heritageimpacts.

In 1995 the Inter-American DevelopmentBank (IDB) provided a $1.7 million grant tohelp preserve prehistoric cave paintings at260 sites within the Capivara Park, a WorldHeritage Site in northeastern Brazil. Thegrant included funding to improve roads inorder to stimulate tourism as a source of in-come for local residents, thereby improvingeconomic conditions and helping to reduceactivities that were destroying the sites.

This parallels the principle, if not always the real-ity, in ecotourism that creation of tourism jobsreduces pressure on natural resources. This princi-ple can also be an important motivator for donorassistance in tourism development, as exemplifiedby USAID’s funding of integrated conservationand development projects in Thailand, Nepal, andMadagascar.

The grouping of impacts into positive and nega-tive is also arbitrary, or at least subjective, aswhether a given impact is good or bad will dependon one’s perspective. For example, some commu-nity residents may desire cultural change, whileothers may oppose it. The “demonstration effect,”resulting from exposure to Western habits andlifestyles because of tourism, is blamed for erod-ing local culture. However, it can also stimulateentrepreneurial activity and economic develop-ment.

Likewise, some may desire continuity in localeconomic (and political) relationships, while oth-ers may desire reductions in income inequalities.Persons wishing to sell land would welcome in-creased land prices, while those who wish to buyland or to retain land they own (and on which theymay pay property taxes) would oppose increasedprices.

Even if there were consensus regarding the desir-ability of certain changes, it would not always beclear that the change is occurring because of tour-

ism. Many negative effects from tourism devel-opment, both culturally and otherwise, can be at-tributed to globalization processes rather than totourism in particular. Nonetheless, tourism cancontribute to profound changes in destination re-gions and, rightly or wrongly, it has been per-ceived by some as a new form of colonialism andNorthern domination of developing countries.24

Despite these complications and qualifications, itis clear that tourism generates a variety of im-pacts, and a key goal of sustainable tourism is togenerate a more favorable balance in these im-pacts. The balance will be site-specific and willdepend on various factors, including (importantlyin this context) how tourism is planned, devel-oped, and managed. The extent of cultural impactsin particular might depend on various aspects ofthe local population, including 1) the degree ofisolation from other, particularly Western, cul-tures, 2) local inhabitants’ reactions to previouscontext with outsiders, and remaining perceptions,3) resistance to external influences, which in turndepends on pride and self-esteem, and 4) rights ofownership and usage with respect to the land onwhich they live.

2.5. Sustainable Tourism: Concepts and Objec-tives

The concept of sustainable tourism has grown outof the concept of sustainable development (SD),whose most popular definition has arisen from theWorld Commission on Environment and Devel-opment (the Brundtland Commission). Their 1986report (Our Common Future) defined SD as:

development which meets the needs of the pre-sent without compromising the ability of futuregenerations to meet their own needs.

This definition is simple enough to be a popular“catch phrase,” and it has done much to publicizethe risk of economic development actions andpolicies that, through overharvest of or damage tonatural resources, jeopardize long-term humansurvival. However, its simplicity also hides thedifficulties of operationalizing the concept, ofputting it to work in practice. Much about SD andsustainability is contested, including “Who de-fines what sustainability is?” or, in specific andpractical terms, what, exactly is to be sustained?

9

Despite this limitation, the concept of SD, andrelated principles such as intra- and inter-generational equity, has been widely accepted inconcept and, increasingly, in practice. Predictably,SD has been applied to individual sectors, suchthat one talks of sustainable agriculture, sustain-able forestry, and sustainable tourism (ST).

As with SD, definitions of ST are plagued by thechallenge of operationalization—of applying theconcepts to specific situations. In practice, ST isoften operationalized by listing several criteria,such as tourism involving minimal environmentalimpact, enhanced local benefits and participation,and education of visitors. The selection of criteriais inherently subjective and varies across peopleand organizations. In general, there has been abroadening from the environmental dimension toinclude economic and sociocultural dimensions.25

In the tourism context, one can also talk of experi-ential sustainability (maintaining quality in thevisitor experience), though this can be viewed as apre-condition for economic sustainability.

In short, it is essentially impossible to say whethera specific tourism destination or activity is sus-tainable. Nonetheless, the concept of sustainabilityis useful in describing general concerns and ob-jectives. A more practical concept, though stillgeneral, is to think of moving towardsustainability. It is this concept that is used in thisreport, and the strategies described below aredesigned to facilitate a move towardsustainability in the sense of increasing thebenefits and decreasing the costs of tourismdevelopment.

2.6. Ecotourism and Parallels to CHT

In one sense, nature or eco tourism should be in-corporated within CHT insofar as nature also is acultural construct and often is a complementaryattraction.26 However, the present focus is on cul-ture and cultural heritage more narrowly defined.Nonetheless, nature and ecotourism issues andexamples are discussed in various places in thisreport because experience from a decade of pub-lic, industry, and research scrutiny of ecotourismcan be useful in the context of CHT.

One of these issues involves consumer demandsfor authentic nature and culture. In ecotourism,many assume that visitors seek authentic nature,

nature that has not been degraded by human ac-tivities. In principle, then, the interests of touristsand the tourism industry will coincide with thoseof the natural heritage managers–to maintain na-ture in a non-degraded state. However, this princi-ple may not always hold in practice, not only be-cause the industry often seeks short-term gains atthe expense of long-term revenues, but also be-cause 1) not all tourists seek authentic nature and2) not all tourists recognize departures from integ-rity.

A similar issue arises in cultural tourism. It is of-ten said that cultural tourists are seeking a high-quality, informed, and authentic cultural experi-ence. However, many tourists may not recognizedepartures from authenticity. This is not to saythat authenticity should be discouraged, but thatthose in charge of cultural heritage should not besurprised if the tourism industry, and consumers,have somewhat lower expectations of authenticity.If authenticity is to be preserved, the original mo-tivation for this preservation (values that go wellbeyond heritage as an attraction for tourism)should not be forsaken in favor of a motivationentirely oriented around tourism.A dependence on consumer-driven CHM not onlymay be limited by the above considerations, butmay also be risky insofar as consumer desires maychange. Desires may be reasonably stable acrosstime within one market, but may differ signifi-cantly across markets; the preferences of somevisitors may differ from those of others. They mayalso differ from those of mainstream (often West-ern) concepts of CHM. This situation raises im-portant issues of who defines CHM goals, whichis beyond the scope of this report. Nonetheless, areliance on market-driven CHM may not alwaysbe consistent with traditional Western CHM goals.

A final commonality occurs on the “big picture”level. To some degree, broad developments in thearea of CHM have followed those in the area ofenvironmental management. For example, the UNreports Our Creative Diversity followed OurCommon Future, and the World Bank and othersare adapting techniques developed to value envi-ronmental resources to the measurement of cul-tural resources. Given that environmental aware-ness has led to funding sources such as the GlobalEnvironmental Facility and tourism-related assis-tance focused on nature/ecotourism (e.g., DFIDand USAID), it is conceivable that increased cul-

10

tural awareness, if it can be achieved, would leadto similar developments in the cultural arena.

2.7. Industry Responses to SustainableTourism

Many individuals, companies, and organizationsin the tourism industry have responded to the callfor sustainable tourism with a variety of initia-tives.27 Consistent with the public focus on envi-ronmental sustainability, much of the industry’sresponse has been in this area, though there hasalso been some activity in other areas, includingCHM and local participation and control.

Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action that,together with the Rio Declaration on Environmentand Development, was adopted by more than 178Governments at the United Nations Conference onEnvironment and Development (UNCED) held inRio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. In 1996, theWTTC, WTO, and the Earth Council launchedAgenda 21 for the Travel and Tourism Industrybased on the Rio action plan. Recently, the WTTCand the International Council for Local Environ-mental Initiatives (ICLEI) agreed to integrate thisindustry Agenda 21 with the "Local Agenda 21"planning program (see also the discussion of theCSD process in Appendix 1).

WTTC has been involved in various other activi-ties. For example, in 1994 it launched the GreenGlobe program, which provides a certificationprocess linked to ISO standards and Agenda 21principles.28 It also developed the ECoNETT web-site which contains advice and data on good prac-tice, a bookstore, and other information.

Other industry organizations, particularly spe-cialty-oriented groups such as the InternationalHotel & Restaurant Association (IH&RA) and theInternational Hotels Environment Initiative (IHEI)have helped raise environmental awareness in theindustry and have provided practical advice, suchas the Environmental Action Pack for Hotels andthe Environmental Good Practice in Hotels. Vari-ous other industry associations, such as theAmerican Society of Travel Agents (ASTA) andthe Pacific Asia Tourism Association (PATA),have produced codes and guidelines for responsi-ble tourism.

Turning to individual companies, American Ex-press (AMEX) has been very active, particularlyas a donor in the field of culture tourism. As notedin Appendix 1, AMEX made a $5 million com-mitment to the World Monuments Watch for theirannual list of the 100 Most Endangered Sites andfor emergency grants.

As part of UNESCO’s “Memories of the Future”project the ACCOR Group, Radisson SAS, andJet Tours will support specific World Heritageprojects in Petra, Angkor, and Machu Picchu. Inthis project, UNESCO recommends the followingactions for operators. First, a financial contribu-tion of $5 per visitor will be made (by the visitorsthemselves or by the tour operator). Second, theoperator may adopt a project. Third, visitors willreceive a badge from UNESCO Friends of Heri-tage in recognition of their contribution, and theoperator will be allowed to publicize its officialrelationship with UNESCO. Actions for hotelsinclude adopting specific projects, renovation ofold buildings for use as hotel centers, and promo-tion of movable and immovable heritage. Fundsreceived by UNESCO are deposited into a specialaccount and are used solely for site protection andenhancement, rather than UNESCO administra-tion or other internal expenses.

Another example is Star Tour/Temaresor, whichcontributes to World Heritage Sites, includingBhaktapur, Nepal. As noted in its brochure,

Temaresor is Scandinavia’s leading operatorof nature and culture trips. Therefore, it is ob-vious that we should support this importantwork (World Heritage).... We believe that thepeople choosing Temaresor trips agree that itis important to preserve heritage for the future.Therefore we hope you are not opposed to theadded cost for your trip – for nature’s, cul-ture’s, and the future’s sake.29

With respect to environmental sensitivity andworking with the local community, an example isEcco Travel Group’s DreamCamp in the MasaiMara. This operator stresses close contact with theenvironment, using a broad definition to includeboth the natural and cultural environment. Withrespect to environmental considerations, Dream-Camp uses local building materials, solar cells,recycling of water, composting and sorting ofrubbish, and various means of reducing transport.With respect to cooperation with local communi-

11

ties, the camp hires local employees, stimulateslocal production of souvenirs, contributes to thedevelopment of the local village, provides an edu-cational stipend, and organizes Masai-led culturevisits in the local village.

Many operators have formal or informal programsthat channel money from clients to environmentalor cultural projects in destination areas. For ex-ample, Wildland Adventures, a US operator, es-tablished the Travelers Conservation Trust (TCT)in 1986 as a nonprofit affiliate of the business. Asdescribed in the trust overview:

TCT identifies and supports community levelprojects and conservation organizations whichpromote environmental or cultural preserva-tion. Many projects are carried out with vol-unteer assistance of Wildland Adventures staff,travelers and local officials and residents....

Participants on many Wildland Adventures areinvited to become international members of alocal conservation organization identified inadvance by the Travelers Conservation Trust.Wildland Adventures simply adds an optional$25-$50 line item on each traveler’s invoice asa voluntary contribution which the companythen donates in its entirety in the name of eachclient as an individual membership in the localconservation organization. Many WildlandAdventures trips include visits to sites whereactive preservation or community developmentecotourism projects are underway.

Several operators have alliances with local or in-ternational conservation and/or developmentNGOs, such as World Wildlife Fund, and tripsoften include visits to project sites, with a strongeducational orientation. Many of these operatorsare small and driven by personal environmental orsocial philosophies, hoping not only to make aliving while making a contribution, but also hop-ing to serve as examples for larger operators.There are also larger, and more up-market, op-erators active in such ways. For example, theConservation Corporation in Africa has developeda series of upmarket game parks and lodging fa-cilities, with local communities being a specificbeneficiary, in part through invigoration of localcrafts.

2.8. The Realities of Industry Structure: A Rolefor Development Cooperation Programs

The previous section illustrates what individualoperators, and the industry as a whole, have doneto contribute to sustainability. Businesses arecoming under increased pressure to focus on the“triple bottom line,” to attend to economic, envi-ronmental, and social factors rather than just thefirst, and many tourism businesses have respondedwith environmentally and/or socially responsibleactions.

Motives for these actions vary across businesses,and may include the following:

• Personal or corporate philanthropy and pro-sustainability philosophy;

• A desire to appeal to consumers who selecttourism “products” (tour packages, flights,etc.) based on concerns for sustainability;

• A desire to achieve cost savings through, forexample, using less water or energy;

• Enlightened self-interest in helping to pre-serve the products they sell; and/or

• A desire to be pro-active in order to avoidregulation.

The strategies described in the next section arebased in part on reinforcing these considerations.For example, information campaigns to raiseawareness within the industry may increase thefirst, third, and/or fourth motives. Likewise, in-formation campaigns to raise awareness amongstconsumers may increase the second motive.

However, the limitations of such campaignsshould be recognized. There certainly are con-sumers who choose trips based on concerns forsustainability, and companies try to portray favor-able images in recognition of this (interestingly,for the Memories of the Future project describedabove, industry donations have come from com-munications and publicity budgets within thecompanies). Nonetheless, there are limits to theextent to which consumers consider sustainabilityfactors when making purchases. This may be par-ticularly true in tourism, where the consumers of-ten are thinking of escapism and hedonism ratherthan environmental or social responsibility.Moreover, consumers often do not purchase di-rectly from various tourism actors, such as in-bound operators that sell via outbound operators.The pressure for these actors to be responsible is

12

mitigated by the presence of intermediaries whomay not share the same concerns as consumers.

Surveys conducted in the UK indicate that con-sumers are reasonably interested in receiving en-vironmental information.30 However, interest haddecreased since 1994. More importantly, whenasked to characterize their purchase behavior,41% selected “It is a good idea for airline and touroperators to consider environmental issues, but itdoes not influence my purchasing decision,” while53% selected “All things being equal, I wouldchoose the airline or tour operator that took intoaccount environmental issues.” Only 4% selected“I would only consider an airline or tour operatorthat took into account environmental issues.”Moreover, as noted above, it is not certain thatconsumers will recognize the quality of an opera-tor’s or destination’s environmental performance,even if they care about this in theory. Alterna-tively, they may notice, but may focus on aes-thetic issues, while society as a whole may careabout more fundamental issues, such as survivalof species that do not contribute to aesthetic val-ues.

Consumer decisions can be much more complexand nuanced than represented by these survey re-sponse categories, and consumers in some coun-tries (e.g., Norway) appear to place greater im-portance on environmental considerations. None-theless, research indicates that consumers prefercompanies to be environmentally responsible, butthat companies must still offer equivalent levels ofprice/value relationships as those offered by com-petitors who may not be environmentally respon-sible.31 Though similar research in the culturalarena apparently is not available, it is likely thatconsumers are even less responsive in that contextgiven the lack of publicity for cultural heritageissues as a part of an environmental approach.

Given these results, and strong competition inmany (though not all) sectoral and geographicareas within tourism, individual businesses arefaced with a dilemma—ignore sustainability ex-cept when it provides direct financial gains or riskbeing forced out of business by competitors usinglow-price strategies to achieve market share. Ofcourse, the dilemma typically is not so simple, andmany businesses have been able to pursuesustainability goals and remain competitive byserving niche markets and through other strate-

gies. However, this is a general dilemma withinthe tourism industry.

What is to be done in such a situation? Econo-mists might note that the industry is characterizedby strong competition, ease of entry for new busi-nesses, and high mobility amongst certain types ofbusinesses (e.g., outbound operators can shift des-tinations if a current one loses its appeal throughpollution or other causes). This suggests that afree market would lead to efficient outcomes–that,for example, destinations would be sure to pursuesustainability because it is in their own financialself-interest.

Unfortunately, tourism is also characterized byexternalities, common property resources, and freeriders. Tourism generates a variety of external-ities, many of which are negative. For example, itgenerates (often negative) environmental changefor which it does not have to pay, and thus doesnot always consider in its business decisions. Withrespect to “common property,” there often areweak or nonexistent price or numerical limitswithin tourism, such that the resource is one of“open access.” This often leads to “overharvest”(overuse) of the common property resources thatserve as tourism attractions.

Cooperation amongst users in such situations canlead to an “efficient” result, but such cooperationis often difficult to achieve when there are multi-ple businesses competing with each other (and inwhich many of the actors do not live in the areaand may have limited motivation to cooperate).The tendency is for businesses to act as “free rid-ers” by using the resource without paying (directlyor indirectly) for this use. In such cases, a singleowner of the resource could implement policies(e.g., numerical limits) to avoid overuse. How-ever, these owners tend to be governments in thecase of cultural or natural heritage, and govern-ments generally permit open access as a service tothe public.

Aside from being “owners” of cultural and naturalattractions, governments are also best equipped touse planning controls and other measures to en-sure that development in general is consistent withsocietal goals, especially in cases of “market fail-ure” such as this. As noted by Joseph Stiglitz,Senior Vice-President for Development Econom-ics and Chief Economist at the World Bank:

13

we need to recognize both the limits andstrengths of markets, as well as the strengths,and limits, of government interventions aimedat correcting market failures.

Similarly, the International Council for Local En-vironmental Initiatives (ICLEI) stresses that:

the primary barrier to sustainable developmentthrough tourism is an over reliance on marketmechanisms to guide tourism development andconsumption decisions.... Sustainable tourismdevelopment requires a partnership among thestakeholders of the local tourist destination.This partnership must use both market andnon-market instruments to implement a sharedsustainable development vision.

The challenge is that the private sector, whoseshort-term financial interests encourage overuse,is often more powerful than those people andagencies in government who may wish to controlthe development of tourism. In addition, there aremany in government who, for various reasons,have priorities similar to that of the private sector–priorities stressing growth over long-term plan-ning and management. Moreover, there may bemany in destination communities who benefitfrom tourism and desire unlimited growth, andtheir “voices” may be stronger than others in thecommunity who bear the costs. For these reasons,many developing countries have espoused theprinciple of sustainable tourism, but, as the EUobserves, “few of them have been able to convertthis into concrete action owing to the short-termeconomic interests to which, all too often, priorityis given to the detriment of protecting social andenvironmental assets.”

In short, the interests in favor of continued growthand the challenges of achieving sustainable usethrough effective management by single or coop-erative ownership lead to the problem of overusethat is encapsulated in the destination life cycleconcept in tourism.32 This concept suggests thatdestinations have a tendency to “overshoot” and“overdevelop,” with stagnation and decline re-sulting unless action is taken to avoid overdevel-opment or to rejuvenate the destination if it occurs(often at great cost).

Planning processes and management actions aredesigned to help destinations avoid overdevelop-ment. In concrete terms, planning and manage-

ment are designed to identify potential problemsbefore they become so significant that the re-source is unacceptably degraded or access to theresource needs to be limited or discontinued, asoccurred when King Tut’s tomb (Egypt) wasclosed in 1992 due to the bas-reliefs being erodedby human exhalations and perspiration. The in-dustry tends to prefer self-regulation over man-agement, but it is doubtful that this will lead tosustainability for the reasons discussed above.Indeed, many within the industry recognize therole of government, in part due to the free riderproblem.33

Working together, governments, the tourismindustry, and development cooperation canplay vital roles in this activity. Governmentand development cooperation can facilitateself-regulation within the industry throughprovision of information to businesses and con-sumers, as well as by supporting programs likeGreen Globe. However, in many cases it will becritical to provide uniform encouragement orrequirements across all businesses in an area toavoid the free rider problem.

Encouragement can take the form of incentivesand/or disincentives. Incentives can be direct,such as access to low-interest loans, training pro-grams, or particular attractions (e.g., only allow-ing qualified operators to use a site). They canalso be indirect, such as development of certifica-tion programs that can lead to market advantagerelative to non-certified businesses. Disincentivescan include levies on negative impacts, such asgeneration of waste. Governmental regulation canalso take various forms, ranging from requiringenvironmental impact assessments to limiting ac-cess to attractions and/or destinations as a whole.

Development cooperation agencies can play vari-ous roles in this process. Direct roles, for instance,might include funding for information, training, orcertification programs. However, in keeping withthe findings of the World Bank described below,development cooperation agencies may play theirmost important role in a broader manner, by iden-tifying and supporting individual reformers andreform processes within government and civil so-ciety. Though immediate visible outcomes may bemodest, the transfer of knowledge and fundingcan raise the status and power of reformers andreform-oriented actors (e.g., businesses or gov-ernment agencies), with the ultimate objective

14

being to provide a counterbalance to the forcespushing for unsustainable practices.

It should be stressed that market failure, theneed for effective government intervention, andthe challenges of achieving this are not uniqueto tourism. Moreover, there exist other justifi-cations for development cooperation in thetourism sector, as in agriculture and other sec-tors. This discussion of market failure is pre-

sented to explain why education, responsibleconsumerism, and market forces alone are notadequate and to note that development coop-eration, through provision of knowledge, en-couragement, and funding, can facilitateachievement of sustainability.

14

3. Achieving Sustainability: Selected Strategies

What, then, are the points of involvement for de-velopment cooperation? This section outlines se-lected strategies for promoting sustainability, eachof which has been, or can be, a focus of develop-ment cooperation. Though the intention is to gobeyond “conventional wisdom,” especially withrespect to issues like carrying capacity, we recog-nize that in general the strategies outlined here arefairly well known. They have appeared in variousdiscussions and reports within the culture, nature,and general tourism contexts. The challenge is toimplement them, and to be patient in the knowl-edge that change occurs slowly. Even more chal-lenging will be to implement them at early stagesof development, when they will be most effective,rather than at later stages, when the need will bemore obvious, but implementation likely moredifficult and more costly.

This presentation is inevitably limited by thescope of this report and the desire to provide aconcise overview. The goal is to identify potentialpoints of development cooperation action and tonote relevant issues and principles, rather than toprovide detailed description of the strategies. Thisis not a “how to” guide, but rather a “what to con-sider” guide.34 It is likely that any given contextwill involve issues and strategies (such as dealingwith land rights) that are not discussed here. Theclassification of strategies is inevitably somewhatarbitrary, and categories overlap with each other.

It should be noted that though these strategieshave been developed and applied in various coun-tries, there is inevitably a bias toward the experi-ence of OECD countries, in which much of theevaluation and writing about tourism occurs.Therefore, the strategies may need to be adapteddue to variations in decision-making processes,regulatory structures, economic conditions, andvalues and traditions.

3.1. Feasibility Studies, Project Formulation,and EIAs

This strategy is essentially a precursor that couldbe used to incorporate several of the followingstrategies. It particularly overlaps with site-levelplanning, which is used in the present context to

refer to planning and management after a decisionhas been made to implement a project, or whenthe site already exists, for instance on the WorldHeritage List.

Historically, many, if not most, feasibility studieshave been exactly that–evaluations of whether andhow a site or region could be developed to attractvisitors. Such evaluations remain critical, as theecotourism experience suggests that failure to un-derstand and evaluate the market (and what thedestination can offer) can lead to wasted fundingon infrastructure and unmet community expecta-tions regarding tourism benefits. Nonetheless,studies have been changing over time, and there isincreasing attention to the complementary aspectof desirability. That is, is it desirable to developthe site or region for tourism and, if so, underwhat conditions? This change in the objectives oftourism development, and of assistance in the pro-cess, is a fundamental step toward improving out-comes.

A complementary activity that typically occurs inthe early stages of the project cycle is environ-mental impact analysis (EIA). EIAs are often re-quired by national legislation in recipient coun-tries, but may also be required by donor legisla-tion. For example, NORAD requires that “all on-going and planned development cooperation proj-ects must be assessed with regard to environ-mental impacts.”

EIAs can be used to identify a project’s likely im-pacts on the environment, as well as to influenceproject design and choice of project alternatives.A primary objective is to identify possible impactsat an early stage so that they can be mitigated oravoided. Though the name implies a focus on thenatural environment, in some cases the environ-ment is interpreted broadly to include economic,social, and cultural impacts as well as impacts onthe natural environment.

Though EIAs can be an important tool in pro-moting sustainability, they can also suffer fromseveral limitations. EIA regulations are oftenexcellent in principle, but more difficult inpractice. At times there is pressure to shortcut theprocess on the part of interested parties (notably

15

the industry), and EIA processes often do not dealwell with impacts that are difficult to identify(such as those that are indirect), difficult to quan-tify (such as those on culture), those that are cu-mulative in nature (due to many small develop-ments rather than a single large development), andthose that require lengthy periods before beingdetected.

There is a frequent argument by property devel-opment interests that small-scale change in aheritage environment, such as the loss or altera-tion of a single building, is insignificant. How-ever, experience has shown that the cumulativeeffect of what can be seen as small-scale changescan have a significant impact on the heritage valueand character of an area or landscape. Most heri-tage resource management activity attempts toinfluence the level and pace of change in order tomaintain the value of the artifact itself or thelarger environment in which it is situated.

A joint project by the (Canadian) Training andTechnology Transfer Program (TTTP) andthe Minister of the Environment in Cambodiaillustrates application of an EIA process atSiem Reap, the community closest to AngkorWat, with a specific focus on cumulative ef-fects. Cambodian environment and tourismofficials identified a range of environmentalissues that face Siem Reap as it further de-velops its tourism potential, including sanita-tion, sewage, availability of clean water, andriver quality. There is recognition of the im-portance of effectively dealing with these is-sues not only to protect the welfare andhealth of local inhabitants but also to avoiddamaging the tourism industry.

The assessment is cumulative in nature inthat it evaluates both present and plannedhotels. Based on the assessment, mitigativemeasures will be identified and specific initia-tives undertaken. There will be a focus onidentifying feasible and appropriate mitigativemeasures for the community. The assess-ment and identified measures are expected toassist the community in their efforts to secureinternational funding for the implementation ofspecific actions (e.g., design and constructionof an appropriate sewage system).35

Though a distinct process, environmental man-agement systems (EMSs) can be viewed as exten-

sions of EIAs. They are developed by tourismbusinesses and provide a means for identifyingadverse social and environmental impacts, as wellas reducing those impacts. EMS registration pro-grams such as ISO 14001 and European EMS re-gimes offer extensive guidance to tourism busi-nesses, and can be adapted to conditions in otherparts of the world.

3.2. Getting the Framework Right: Policy andPlanning

This strategy is very broad, but also extremelyimportant. Without effective policy and planning,it will be difficult to achieve sustainable tourismand protection of cultural heritage. As noted bythe EU, private enterprise is the mainspring oftourism, but the sustainable development of thissector requires public sector involvement in es-tablishing the necessary legislative framework andregional planning, in coordinating the various ad-ministrative levels of competence, and ensuringcoordinated action amongst the variousstakeholders. For example, South African policyis that tourism should be government led, private-sector driven, and community based.

Many countries have been involved in tourismplanning for several years, but the resulting plansand actions have not always addressed importantissues. In addition, the planning process often hasnot involved important actors (discussed below)and/or has not been well-coordinated with theplanning and actions of relevant agencies, includ-ing agencies responsible for preservation andmanagement of cultural and natural heritage. Of-ten, the problem is even more acute for planningin the heritage arena.36

Development cooperation can play an importantrole in supporting planning efforts. For example,USAID supported the development of the Red SeaTourism Action Plan in Egypt. Likewise, in 1991UNESCO became active in the efforts to conserveand develop Angkor and has been involved indrafting relevant legislation (policy), as well aspreparing a Zoning and Environmental Manage-ment Plan (planning) for the site. Developmentcooperation can also be dependent on effectiveplanning efforts. As NORAD notes with respect todevelopment planning, “well-designed five yeardevelopment plans have been crucial in develop-ing Botswana according to the intentions and de-

16

cisions of the Parliament, and have been a valu-able guideline in planning and implementing de-velopment activities.”

Policies are a natural outgrowth of the planningprocess, as they are a means of achieving the ob-jectives set out in the plans. As with planning,policy development in tourism is fairly well ad-vanced, though often oriented more towardgrowth than sustainability. With respect to culturalheritage, many countries have yet to develop acoherent set of policies for the identification andprotection of heritage resources.

One important concern within the policy contextis that, to varying degrees across countries, manylaws and regulations remain “on the books” with-out being implemented effectively in practice.Another concern is that individual policies areoften uncoordinated and work against each other.For example, government regulations in the formof laws and building codes can have a positiveimpact on heritage resource management by sup-porting quality development, but can also be con-tradictory and difficult to implement.

One means for focusing attention on a specificniche such as CHT, and promoting coordinationacross relevant agencies, is to conduct niche tour-ism strategies, such as the ecotourism and ruraltourism strategies developed in Australia. Suchprocesses facilitate discussion and coordinationacross stakeholders, and help identify opportuni-ties for streamlining regulations.37

The following are selected policy areas relevant toCHT:

• environmental and cultural standards;• high quality registration/documentation;• land ownership and use policies;• investment conditions (such as joint venture

requirements);• human resource development;• tourist safety;• pricing policies; and• business regulation (the challenge of lifting

obstacles to an efficient private sector, whileensuring that environmental and social ob-jectives are being achieved).

Some of these are discussed in the following sec-tions. Development cooperation can assist in thedevelopment of policy in each of these areas. For

example, USAID has emphasized pricing policiesin its assistance program.

3.3. Organizing for Sustainability: InstitutionalIssues

As noted by the EU, many different bodies shareresponsibility for the development of tourism, andinadequate coordination is often the cause of un-balanced growth, as well as the failure to fullyreap the benefits of tourism. Lack of coordinationis not, of course, unique to tourism. However,tourism cuts across several sectors, includingtransport, finance, immigration/foreign affairs,and culture/nature/envi-ronment. Moreover, thetourism ministry, if it exists, often is less powerfulthan many of the other ministries; the same oftenis true for the culture/nature management minis-tries.38

The challenge, then, is to take a leadership role incoordinating across ministries despite unfavorablepower balances. Though there is no easy solutionto this challenge, development cooperation agen-cies can help by supporting the tourism and cul-ture/nature ministries, both in terms of fundingand in terms of policy and rhetoric. Coordinationacross ministries and departments within minis-tries can be promoted through establishment ofworking groups, boards, and other fora. Specificprojects requiring (and funding) coordination foreffective implementation (and receipt of donorassistance) can help stimulate this process.

Jordan’s Petra Regional Planning Council(PRPC) is an example of coordination acrossministries. Chaired by the minister of tourism,the council includes representatives of thedepartment of antiquities, the ministries ofplanning, finance, labor, health, local gov-ernment, and irrigation, the environmentalprotection department and local communities.There often is value in extending cooperationto the international level, as illustrated by theMundo Maya project in Central America, aswell as the Silk Route and Slave Route proj-ects.

Many countries, especially in Africa, house theirenvironmental and tourism departments within thesame ministry. In principle, if not always in prac-tice, this should facilitate coordination betweenthese two sectors.

17

The importance of policy, planning, and institu-tional issues is reflected in NORAD’s priority,within the environmental field, on:

• Development of effective administrative in-stitutions, including the strengthening of de-centralised environmental administrationwhen this is appropriate.

• Measures which create increased cooperationbetween administrative agencies locally.

• Support for drawing up national guidelinesand plans for environmental efforts, includ-ing sustainable management of all natural re-sources.

Though these focus on the natural environment,they are equally relevant in the cultural heritagecontext. The focus of this section has been on in-stitutional coordination, but NORAD’s prioritylist includes the vital and complementary goal ofinstitutional strengthening. NORAD continueswith a discussion of the importance of researchand development, as well as the active participa-tion of local communities, issues that are dis-cussed below.

3.4. Partnerships: A Key Component

There are a multitude of actors in CHT, as well asa multitude of scales (e.g., local, national, interna-tional) at which they interact. Achieving coordi-nation and partnerships across these groups ischallenging, but can be a key to sustainability.The EU stresses that:

the industry, the public authorities and civilsociety must work in concert, taking account ofthe needs of the market, the needs of the localpopulation and the special features of the des-tination.

Such partnerships not only promote the setting ofbalanced objectives, but also promote achieve-ment of these objectives through utilization of thevaried skills and contributions each actor canmake. For example, government clearly has animportant role in CHT, but the private sector andNGOs offer skills, contacts, flexibility, and politi-cal independence that government agencies andlocal communities may lack. Existing tourismbusinesses, and related associations or consultan-cies, can play particularly important roles in terms

of product evaluation, product development, andmarketing.

Private sector involvement in tourism is signifi-cant and likely to expand given current forces ofincreased globalization, privatization, and com-mercialization. However, the public sector needsto shape the environment in which the industrycan develop by taking responsibility for security,health, basic infrastructure, and ownership and/ormanagement of the natural and cultural heritagethat serves as tourism attractions. Communitiesplay important roles as receivers of tourists, aswell as the positive and negative impacts that theygenerate. NGOs have the vital ability to “forgepartnerships between stakeholders, to interfacewith local communities, and to ‘put it all together’by providing an overview.”

Various types of partnerships might be pursued,with national or regional CHT councils as oneoption. For example, the USAID-supported PaseoPantera project in Central America helped to es-tablish national nature tourism councils in Hondu-ras and Guatemala in order to involve local com-munities and tourism enterprises. An example ofpublic-private partnership is the formation of theNepal Tourism Board, with representation fromboth the private and public sectors. Joint market-ing undertaken by heritage sites, regional/nationaltourism agencies, and tourism businesses is an-other example of opportunities for partnerships toachieve mutual objectives in a cost-effective man-ner.

The remainder of this section will focus on localcommunities, and their relationship to tourismdevelopment and the tourism industry in particu-lar.39 At the most basic level, there is growingsupport for the concept that local residents shouldbe able to control tourism in their community.This is radical in the eyes of many, and govern-mental and industry support (or at least accep-tance) will be required if it is to be achieved. Inthe eyes of others, this is a necessary condition forachieving sustainable tourism development:40

at its heart sustainable cultural tourism recog-nizes the value of cultural diversity, and needsto provide local cultures with a forum in whichthey can participate in decisions that affect thefuture of their culture. In other words, hostcultures should be empowered to say no or yes

18

to tourism, and in the latter case, to set guide-lines for tourism if they so wish.

Similarly, Principles 4 and 5 of the ICOMOSCultural Tourism Charter (reproduced in Appen-dix 1), stress the importance of local involvementin, and benefit from, tourism development.

Communities have become increasingly involvedin tourism, and this involvement takes many dif-ferent forms. These forms can be grouped as fol-lows:41

• Employment by residents in tourism busi-nesses run by outsiders, or sale of local prod-ucts to such businesses.

• Ownership of tourism businesses by resi-dents.

• Collective ownership and/or management ofa tourism business.

• Joint venture between communities and out-side operators.

• Consultation by, or participation in, tourismplanning body.

The first form is perhaps the most traditional, butthe other forms are increasingly found. The sec-ond and third forms do not necessarily represent apartnership between the community and “outside”businesses, but this may exist either formally orinformally and involve outside businesses pro-viding advice, marketing channels, and otherforms of assistance out of goodwill and/or in ex-change for access to “community” resources thatserve as attractions (e.g., a cultural site or naturalarea), linkages with relevant community busi-nesses (e.g., guides), and so on. The fourth form isperhaps the most balanced form of collaborationbetween communities and outside businesses, inwhich there are contractual commitments involv-ing, for example, business access to land in ex-change for lease payments, local employment andsupply commitments, and/or revenue sharing.42

Given their lack of experience and power relativeto the tourism industry, communities often needcapacity building and institutional support. InNamibia, communities negotiating with theprivate sector can receive support from local,national, and international NGOs, govern-ment staff, and now from their own nationalorganization, the Namibia Community BasedTourism Association (NACOBTA).43

NACOBTA is supported by SIDA, USAID,and others, and illustrates how development

cooperation can support communityempowerment.

It should be stressed that the goal is not for com-munities to take advantage of the industry, but forthem to be on equal footing, a relationship that hasrarely existed in the past. One important aspect ofthis is information that helps communities under-stand tourism as an industry, and its impacts, sothat they can judge the desirability of, and oppor-tunities within, tourism. One outcome of suchprocesses is community cooperation with, ratherthan dependence on, the tourism industry.

3.5. The Basics: Marketing and InfrastructureDevelopment

Although the primary focus of Section 3 is onachieving a more favorable mix of impacts givena stream of visitors, the complement is to under-take marketing and infrastructure development topromote sustainability in that stream. Such activi-ties have been a common target of developmentcooperation in the past. Though marketing, espe-cially national-level mass-marketing, may dimin-ish somewhat as a target, infrastructure is likely toremain an important target of development coop-eration.

The marketing challenge in CHT is similar to thatin other areas: how to increase visitors to a site orcommunity, how to increase their length of stay,how to increase their spending per day, and howto ensure that they come back (and/or pass alonggood recommendations to others).

There has been some discussion within tourism,and within nature/cultural tourism in particular,regarding targeted marketing, through which adestination attracts particularly desirable tourists,usually defined as “big spenders.” If successful,such a strategy could greatly contribute tosustainability insofar as benefits (revenues andjobs) could be increased without increasing num-bers. However, to attract such a segment, and tobe able to charge commensurably high prices, adestination needs to offer attractions and/or serv-ice of a quality level sufficiently high to differen-tiate themselves from competitors.44 Some siteshave been successful in this regard, though suc-cess involves far more than simply the promo-tional side of marketing.

19

A comparative example comes from marinetourism in Egypt.45 At Ras Mohammed Na-tional Park, the government intervenes andregulates in the form of urban planning (e.g.,sewage control, height of buildings, and roadlocation), fishing regulations, public aware-ness program, and monitoring program. Thisdoes not occur at Hurghada. On a per-hotelor per-bed basis, there are more than threetimes as many dive sites and fixed mooringsat Ras Mohammed as at Hurghada.

Sixty-five percent of dive centers at Ras Mo-hammed provide a pre-dive briefing. Amongother things, this briefing includes adviceabout avoiding coral damage. Fewer than 5%of the dive centers at Hurghada provide sucha briefing. There is negligible anchor damageat Ras Mohammed, while anchor damage atHurghada is extensive. Visibility at Ras Mo-hammed is 15-30 meters, while it is 1-2 me-ters at Hurghada. The result of these differ-ences: the average price of a dive package atRas Mohammed is $45. At Hurghada, it is$27.

At Hurghada, regulation and funding for re-source management were avoided in order tokeep costs/prices down. This led to a rela-tively poor quality attraction, which forced lowprices and profit margins. This led to a lack offunding for regulation and resource manage-ment, and to a continuation of the cycle.

At Ras Mohammed, regulation and fundingfor resource management were implementedin order to provide a high quality attraction.This led to relatively high prices and profitmargins. This led to continued ability to fundregulation and resource management, and toa continuation of the cycle.

Other sites that have pursued an up-market strat-egy include Bhutan (compared to Nepal), NusaDua (vs. Kuta), Belize (vs. Cancun), and Ber-muda, St.Maarten/St.Martin, the British VirginIslands, and the Grenadines within the Caribbean.Success requires a strong government and indus-try commitment, an attraction of sufficient qualityto appeal to up-market visitors, and a local econ-omy that is sufficiently skilled and healthy that itcan provide high-quality service and avoid a“maximize jobs at all cost” mentality. As with anystrategy, the feasibility and desirability of such

approaches should be critically evaluated. For ex-ample, many rural communities in Africa andAsia simply cannot provide an upmarket experi-ence in the near term with respect to the productsor services offered. A substantial commitment ofresources, as well as patience, would be necessaryin such situations to develop the required hospi-tality and marketing skills.

Returning to the more general case, many tourismdestination require financial assistance to improvetheir infrastructure given the essential role thatclean air, sanitation, clean water and public safetyplay in ensuring quality CHT development. Ex-amples of this type of assistance include funds forimprovements in waste management, water sup-ply, air quality and traffic management, and basicservices (fire, police, and first aid). Where possi-ble, infrastructure should not only help to attractand satisfy visitors, but also to serve the needs ofresidents (roads and visitor centers are examplesof this potential).46

3.6. Financing: The Funding Necessary forSustainability

Many heritage resources are lost due to physicaldeterioration brought about by inadequate mainte-nance or by simple neglect. Often these conditionsare the result of a lack of financial resources. Inshort, public funding for cultural heritage sites isvery limited. Moreover, site visitation typicallygenerates additional costs for underfunded heri-tage managers.47 In such circumstances, somepeople speak of capturing tourism industry profitsin order to finance culture. A more realistic ap-proach is to view culture as an input to the tourismproduct, an input for which the industry shouldpay, just as they pay for petrol/gasoline for tourbusses.48 In other words, the “user pays” principleis adopted, and cultural and natural attractions are“sold” at a price high enough to generate thefunding needed to encourage their establishmentand maintenance.

The industry tends to oppose entrance and otherfees. To some degree, this is a result of oppositionto anything that might reduce client volume orprofits. If one takes the view that attractions are aninput for which the industry should pay, then thisconcern should be treated similarly to industrydesires for subsidized petrol and other inputs.Moreover, though little research has been done

20

regarding the price responsiveness (elasticity) offees at developing country cultural attractions,experience from natural attractions, as well as an-ecdotal evidence, indicate that modest fees wouldnot dramatically affect visitation levels.49

In a World Bank contingent valuation study ofwillingness to pay (WTP) of visitors to reha-bilitate the Fès Medina in Morocco, the aver-age visitor had an estimated WTP of as muchas $70 in the form of a special fee payableupon hotel reservation to help preserve andimprove conditions in the Medina.50

Additional reasons for industry opposition are thatgovernment sees the industry as an easy source ofrevenue and that fees are imposed quickly, with-out giving operators a chance to incorporate theminto tour packages. This has led to many conflictswhen it comes to fees at national parks and othernatural areas (e.g., the Great Barrier Reef in Aus-tralia, national parks in Costa Rica, and recent feeincreases in Zimbabwe). Fee implementationtiming can be as important as fee size.51

Collecting fees is only half the challenge. The re-mainder is ensuring that revenues benefit CHM.Many World Heritage Sites do not charge en-trance fees. When they do, revenue often contrib-utes little to site conservation and management,but rather is “lost” in the general governmenttreasury. US/ICOMOS laments that:52

much has been written about re-routing partof the tourist dollar towards conservation andpublic awareness funds, but in actual prac-tice, little has been done. The conservationcommunity has been unable to develop con-vincing arguments that will lure politicians,development organizations and the privatetourist industry to equitably share touristrevenues with conservation. In Jordan, wherehundreds of thousands of foreign tourists paynearly $30 to visit Petra, all of the revenue isdestined to what the authorities consider morepressing development concerns.53

Similarly, Aya Sofya mosque in Istanbulcharges an entrance fee of approximately$2.50, which generates approximately $5.5million per year. However, the revenue goesto city and national governments, with onlymodest funding allocated to maintenance ofAya Sofya. The result–relatively poor visitor

experience and poor conservation of the cul-tural resource.

Sri Lanka’s Central Cultural Fund, the country’sprincipal archaeological heritage managementorganization, provides a more promising example.The fund runs the UNESCO Cultural Triangleproject, which covers five World Heritage sitesand which has developed a funding arrangementbased largely on entrance fees. The fee is $7.50per site (or $32.50 for all sites), with concessionsfor residents, students, researchers, and so on.Revenues go to the Central Cultural Fund and areexclusively spent on research, conservation, pres-entation and public information, maintenance, andgeneral management.

Another example comes from Belize’s ProtectedAreas Conservation Trust (PACT). PACT in-volves a $3.75 conservation fee for all foreignvisitors, which is added to the pre-existing $11.25airport departure tax. Given an estimated 140,000foreign visitors per year, this recently-implemented program is expected to generatemore than $500,000 annually. The trust is inde-pendent of the government and is supervised by aboard comprised of both governmental and non-governmental representatives. PACT funding canbe used for a variety of purposes within the natu-ral and cultural resource arena, including training,environmental education, protected area planning,and institutional support. The trust is not intendedto replace core government funding.

The difficulty of establishing such a fund shouldnot be underestimated; PACT was five years indevelopment, and the final program differed sub-stantially from the initial proposal. Moreover, be-cause Belize's tourism is heavily dependent onnatural and cultural attractions, there is a rela-tively clear justification for levying such a fee ontourists. This will not be the case for all countries.Nonetheless, the PACT represents an excellentexample of creative finance for conservation.

Earmarking of revenue for conservation and man-agement of the site that generated it (or at least forthe relevant department/agency) is a controversialtopic, and the political, and legislative, obstaclesto achieving this can be significant. Nonetheless,the example of Bonaire Marine Park describedbelow (Section 4.3) illustrates how developmentcooperation can be important in generating suchchange in some cases. USAID has played various

21

roles in fee-related issues, including supportingstudies of fee structures in the Galápagos (Ecua-dor) and helping the King Mahendra Trust forNature Conservation in Nepal draft legislation forsharing fee revenue at Royal Chitwan NationalPark with local communities.

The Chitwan example illustrates how revenuefrom entrance and related fees at attractions canbe used to fund community projects, thereby pro-viding tangible conservation-related benefits tolocal residents. The Madagascar protected areamanagement agency (ANGAP) shares half its na-tional park entrance fees to fund projects in localvillages, and other countries (e.g., Kenya andZimbabwe) also have revenue-sharing programs.

This discussion has focused on entrance fees, butthe Belizean PACT illustrates how other forms ofvoluntary or mandatory revenue mechanisms alsoexist. In addition, UNESCO suggested that a do-nation program for Hue be implemented and couldinvolve recognizing donations via names on rooftiles, bricks, and plaques. One of Spain's majortourist destinations, the island of Minorca, is cur-rently planning to implement an “eco-tax” of up to12 euros per person, to be collected on arrival orwhen registering at hotels. This parallels thePACT approach, but at a more traditional tourismdestination. The revenue will be earmarked for themaintenance of national parks and the restorationof damaged coastline.54

The US territory of Guam has a Tourism Attrac-tion Fund financed by a hotel occupancy tax. Mostof the revenue is used for marketing, especially inJapan, but some of the funds are also used for lo-cal improvements (such as better streets, lighting,and sports fields), as well as support for culturalprograms, artists, tour guide training, workshops,travel for local artists and musicians, and manyother items related to cultural tourism.

The discussion above has focused on how to gen-erate revenue through tourism and channel it intoagency funding for site protection and/or into lo-cal communities. However, such revenue can alsopromote CHM through other means. For example,tax breaks and incentives have been used effec-tively in OECD countries to encourage privatesector conservation activities. Though such sys-tems are subject to abuse, they can be valuabletools for CHM.55

3.7. Site Purchase, Restoration, and Preserva-tion

Many sites face challenges similar to that of thePreah Vihear temple in Cambodia.56 Cambodiawants to upgrade tourist facilities at the mountain-top Preah Vihear temple on its northern borderwith Thailand and has asked UNESCO to helppreserve the ruins of the 12th century Angkor-eratemple, which was occupied by Khmer Rougeguerrillas until 1998. This is one of many sites inCambodia, and King Norodom Sihanouk has alsocalled on the world community to help to save theancient Angkor temples from the ravages of timeand looters, who still regularly to hack off stonecarvings for sale on the international black mar-ket. Tropical vegetation and rains also threaten theAngkor ruins, which are a World Heritage Siteand Cambodia's most popular tourist attraction.

The purchase, restoration, and preservation ofheritage sites is the center of CHM and, ulti-mately, CHT.57 Development cooperation canplay an important financial and technical assis-tance role not only with respect to heritage arti-facts and sites themselves, but also with accompa-nying infrastructure (e.g., museums) and activities(e.g., interpretation and cultural performances).For example, NORAD has provided support forestablishment of cultural centers and museums inrural areas in Botswana, for training of museumstaff (see Section 3.9), and for various groups thatstage presentations of cultural traditions.

3.8. Site-level Planning and ManagementTechniques

It is important to preserve sites in a manner thatboth maintains their attractiveness to visitors andmaintains the values for which they were pre-served (e.g., cultural heritage values). Given thefocus of this report, a detailed discussion of siteplanning and management techniques is not pro-vided here.58

One issue that merits discussion is that of carry-ing capacity (CC). The proposal to establish car-rying capacities at cultural and natural heritagesites stems from the realization that sites can be-come overused, that at some point negative im-pacts occur–on the cultural/natural attraction it-self, on other visitors (e.g., crowding), on local

22

residents, and so on. Therefore, it is intuitivelyappealing to speak of, and try to determine, themaximum number of visitors.59 However, in prac-tice, CC is impossible to determine without verystrong assumptions.60

To estimate a carrying capacity, one must selectindicators and standards. One indicator might bevisitor perceptions of crowding on a 1 to 8 scale,with a possible standard being an average of 5 orless. If the average level of reported crowding ex-ceeds 5, then management would take action; thiscould include limiting the number of visitors, butother actions, such as dispersal of visitors, alsocould be implemented. Indicators and standardscould also be developed with respect to resourceconditions or factors that affect them. For exam-ple, an indicator may be carbon dioxide levels inan enclosed environment containing limestoneformations, and a relevant standard might be2,400 parts per million.61

The problem is that “experts” typically selectthese indicators and standards when doing CCestimation. Though the indicators and standardsmay appear scientific (e.g., carbon dioxide levels),their selection is ultimately subjective in nature.There likely would be consensus that the lime-stone formations should not be allowed to deterio-rate (and thus agreement on the carbon dioxideindicator and standard). There may also be con-sensus that the site should not be “too crowded.”But it may be difficult to achieve consensus re-garding an indicator and, especially, a standard forcrowding. Should the indicator reflect actualnumber of encounters, perceptions of encounters,perceptions of crowding, or? If the latter, shouldthe standard be an average of 5 (using the examplefrom above)? The industry may feel that an aver-age of 6 is preferable.

In short, indicators and standards are based onwhat some person or group considers to be a pri-ority, and different people/groups may have dif-ferent priorities. Given that cultural heritage re-sources tend to be non-renewable, there may beagreement on some standards (e.g., a standard ofno degradation of immovable heritage). Nonethe-less, it is important for all stakeholders to agreeon, or at least accept, the indicators and standardsthat will be used if they are to support resultingmanagement actions.

The next assumption is that the relationship be-tween the number of visitors and the selected in-dicators is known. This relationship will be easierto determine for some measures (e.g., carbon di-oxide levels) than for others (e.g., perceivedcrowding). Nonetheless, in general, there is a lackof data concerning this relationship, especially indeveloping country contexts.62

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, CC as-sumes that factors beyond the number of visitorsdo not affect the indicator or, if they do, that theserelationships are also known. For example, therewill be a relationship between the number ofvisitors and carbon dioxide levels, but this rela-tionship can be affected by other factors, such asthe quality of the ventilation system. A key pointis that non-limit management actions, such as im-proving the ventilation system, can be used toachieve the same objective (no damage to the re-source). Moreover, in the tourism context, a focuson alternatives to limitations can be particularlyappealing given industry opposition to limits.

Other approaches, such as the Limits of Accept-able Change (LAC) process, exist. These focuson developing indicators and standards, and ex-plicitly recognize the subjective nature of the pro-cess. They also take the focus off visitor numbersin recognition that limiting numbers is only one ofmany management tools that can be used to en-sure that tourism does not cause undesirablechange. Management-by-objectives (MBO) pro-cesses like LAC typically require a commitmentof time and resources, and this is one reason whythey have not been embraced as strongly as onewould expect–it is much easier to hire a consultantto provide what appears to be a scientific solutionto a management problem. Unfortunately, the va-lidity of such solutions is deceptive and can be,and has been, challenged, often by interests in fa-vor of greater visitation. Processes like LAC pro-vide stronger bases for decisions and likely aremore resistant to challenges.

Nonetheless, given the commitment necessary forimplementing processes like LAC, it may be pos-sible, in at-risk situations, to begin with varioustechniques, including limiting numbers and man-aging behavior, and then move to indicators andstandards over time. Moreover, some visitor levelswill clearly lead to violation of acceptable condi-tions under realistic management regimes, suchthat they can be rejected based on informed man-

23

agement judgement, without collecting detailedindicator data. For example, the projected target of1 million tourists per year to Hue, Vietnam hasbeen evaluated as both unrealistic and unsustain-able.

On a final note regarding visitor numbers, theretypically also are “soft” measures that can be usedto manage visitor flows, thereby avoiding the needto limit entrances overall or in particular areas.For example, a site can offer more services (e.g.,greater availability of guides) at off-peak times orcan develop marked routes that avoid sensitiveareas. In general, “soft” or non-intrusive methods(such as affecting travel patterns through routedesign and information provision) is favored over“hard” or intrusive methods (such as physical bar-riers).

Regardless of whether sites implement formalprocesses like LAC, the development and moni-toring of indicators and standards is an importanttool for evaluating and promoting sustainability.Put bluntly, “good planning, control and manage-ment of tourism development, which is so impor-tant to limit the adverse effects and maximise itsadvantages, is inconceivable without a goodmonitoring system.”63 There has been much recentdiscussion and development of tourism-relatedindicators, which facilitates future implementationof monitoring programs.

Development cooperation can play important rolesby funding and possibly requiring use of indica-tors/standards or more comprehensive processeslike LAC; indeed, indicators can be seen as a logi-cal extension of the EIA requirements that mayalready exist.

3.9. Training in Tourism Management

Many countries lack the required range of skillsand knowledge that is essential to ensure authenticheritage resource management and a high-qualitytourism product. One of the major tasks of inter-national development cooperation in culturaltourism is to ensure that countries and regionshave access to capacity building in order to allowthem to ensure the integrity of their culture. Insome cases, there is a need to train a significantnumber of people in particular areas of activitywhile in others there is a need for only a few spe-cialists.

One of the challenges of CHM is the wide rangeof activities and professions that are represented inthe overall activity. CHM activities includebuilding/artifact conservation; research, docu-mentation, recording; inventory and evaluation;planning; interpretation and story-telling; curato-rial; management; marketing; finance; events andfestivals planning/management; landscape preser-vation; archaeology; and design/archi-tecture. Addto this, an understanding of, and ability to workwith, the tourism industry, and it is clear that pro-fessionals working in CHM and CHT need tohave broad training that includes social and com-munication, as well as technical, skills.

A key aspect of training is to illustrate that rec-ommended strategies and policies will work; thatis, that a maximum visitation, laissez-faire ap-proach is not the only possible, or most desirable,one. Well thought out demonstration projects, aswell as visits to effectively-managed sites, canserve as important training tools.

There are several examples of information ex-change and training funded by development coop-eration, including the Hué (Vietnam) “Workshopon Sustainable Tourism Development in WorldHeritage Sites” financed by NORAD and severalother agencies and foundations. Another exampleis the EU URBS program designed to share ex-pertise by linking European cities with developingcountry cities. Lastly, German development coop-eration (GTZ) is funding an on-site training centerat Petra in Jordan.

3.10. Certification and Accreditation

Certification and accreditation have been widelytouted as tools for promoting sustainability withrespect to tourism’s environmental impacts; byextension, they can also be applied in the culturalcontext. Such programs are a form of voluntaryindustry self-regulation that involve businesses (ordestinations) undergoing an evaluation and certifi-cation progress leading to an award that they canuse to differentiate themselves in the marketplace.Thus, they ultimately rely on responsible consum-erism. UNEP provides a good overview of suchprograms, which include Green Globe, Blue Flag,and many other labels.64

24

These programs certainly have value, not least asa learning process for the businesses themselves(as with EIAs and monitoring programs, the act ofgoing through the evaluation process can lead toincreased awareness and action). Through the In-ternational Hotel Environment Initiative (IHEI),set up by the Prince of Wales Business LeadersForum, over 8,000 hotels in 111 countries followguidelines for environmental practices. Similarly,the Green Globe program has led to 500 hotels in100 countries making commitments to environ-mental standards.

However, label programs are limited by their de-pendence on consumers who both know of andcare about such labels. Though responsible con-sumers have shaped markets for various products,such as cosmetics, the discussion in Section 2.8suggests that responsible consumerism withintourism may not be strong enough to encouragewidespread industry involvement in such pro-grams, especially programs that involve costlydepartures from current or planned practice. Asnoted by UNEP, evaluations of the impact of suchprograms on the environment, or demand for indi-vidual businesses, have been limited.

Aside from the challenge of stimulating consumerawareness of, and interest in, a given program,there are also practical problems that need to beovercome, such as that of multiple links in thetourism supply chain. For example, should an out-bound operator be certified if it is socially respon-sible itself, but one portion of its product (e.g., aregional airline it uses or a site it visits) is not? Inaddition, the industry components with arguablythe greatest impact at the local level, lodging fa-cilities and inbound operators, often are notbooked directly by consumers but rather throughoutbound operators, travel agents, and so on.65

Despite these important considerations and limi-tations, certification programs can contribute tosustainable tourism, and development cooperationhas played a role in such programs. For example,UNDP provided support for the early stages of theGreen Globe destination process in the Philip-pines. Likewise, the recent Costa Rican sustain-able tourism certification program was supportedby USAID under the PROARCA/CAPAS pro-gram. That certification program was developedby the Costa Rican Institute of Tourism to differ-entiate, stimulate, and promote tourism sectorbusinesses that comply with sustainable tourism

standards. Standards are within four categories,including:

• Physical-biological (evaluates the interactionbetween the company and its surroundingnatural habitat).

• Infrastructure (evaluates the managementpolicies and the operational systems withinthe company and its infrastructure).

• External clients (evaluates the interaction ofthe company with its clients in terms of howmuch it allows and invites the client to be anactive contributor to the company’s policiesof sustainability).

• Socio-economic environment (evaluates theinteraction of the company with the localcommunities and the population in general).

Details on the program and a database of evalu-ated hotels are provided on the program website(http://www.sustainable-tourism.co.cr).

3.11. Entrepreneurial and Hospitality Trainingand Financial Assistance

A key principle of sustainable tourism is the pro-vision of benefits, especially economic opportuni-ties, to local residents.66 These benefits can beachieved through resident participation in tourismor ancillary industries (e.g., farmers selling foodto restaurants). The challenge, then, is to facilitatethe integration of residents and local firms into thetourism economy, to increase the local economiclinkages within tourism, which conversely reducesthe leakages.

However, these firms tend to lack the knowledge,experience, and finance necessary to enter thetourism market. The EU observe that “problemsencountered by local firms, in particular smallbusinesses, in tapping international services mar-kets, are exacerbated by a lack of a commercialand marketing strategy, made all the more crucialby tight budgets.” DFID lists the following infor-mation needs:67

• basic skills such as financial planning andbook-keeping;

• marketing skills, to understand potential de-mand and how to meet it;

• access to small amounts of capital, throughmicro-credit or loan guarantee programs; and

• a supportive environment in which to oper-ate, especially the existence of similar busi-

25

nesses to help create local entrepreneurial“hot spots.”

The EU go on to say that:

developing these small firms, and in particu-lar their ability to offer competitive and reli-able services, is likely to contribute substan-tially to economic and social development.

As is common with several of the strategies pre-sented here, this is easier said than done. DFIDnote that:

linkages are frequently discussed, rarely seen,and particularly important, but difficult to de-velop.

DFID provide an excellent summary of the vari-ous actions that actors can pursue to promotebusiness linkages. The following is an edited ver-sion of that summary. Governments can:

• Remove red tape and regulations that sup-press the informal sector (e.g., the Fiji Tour-ism Development Plan identified 24 require-ments from different government depart-ments needed by new businesses, which is aparticular obstacle for small entrepreneurs).

• Ensure that planning and siting decisions donot prevent market access for entrepreneurs(e.g., locate lodges outside or at the edge ofparks or give local entrepreneurs a marketplace inside the park).

• Enhance the assets of residents, both humanassets (through training) and natural assets(through devolution of tenure).

• Assess which tourism market segments gen-erate the most local economic opportunities(e.g., backpackers, domestic tourists, or “up-market”) and encourage that market.

• Encourage or require non-local businesses toexpand local linkages (e.g., potential inves-tors in South Africa have to specify how theywill boost local development).

• Enhance local participation in decisionmak-ing (discussed above) so they can shape eco-nomic opportunities to their livelihood inter-ests.

NGOs can:

• Provide credit and non-financial services formicro-enterprise (the renowned GrameenBank in Bangladesh, which has loaned $2.5

billion to over 2 million lenders, is a goodexample of a successful micro-credit opera-tion).

• Build the capacity of residents to assesstourism options, contribute to planning, andimplement their chosen options.

• Facilitate communication and time-consuming negotiation between tourismbusinesses and local people.

• Invest time in understanding tourism busi-nesses in order to advise or mediate on com-bining commercial and development goals.

Businesses can explore opportunities to:

• Out-source, such as laundry and transportfunctions.

• Support local enterprise, such as by providingbusiness advice, and by sharing marketingand infrastructure.

• Facilitate opportunities for tourists to visitlocal sellers.

• Explore partnerships, such as building oncommunal land in southern Africa in partner-ship with communities.

• Join partnerships with donors, NGOs, andgovernments, including providing advice oncommercial feasibility.

• Be open-minded (e.g., is poor quality or reli-ability the real obstacle to linkages, or is itpoor attitude and communication?).

The above focuses primarily on entrepreneurialaspects, but training is also needed at the broaderlevel of hospitality employees in general if qualitystandards are to be met and maintained. The WTOnotes, in the Asian context, that visitor expecta-tions of quality exacerbate an existing need fortraining in hospitality/tourism; the same is true inAfrica.

Donors can support all of the above actions, canfacilitate strategic partnerships between groups,and can encourage exchange of experiences. Insome cases, development cooperation might beused to subsidize the transaction costs, such astraining, of changing to local suppliers.

Though there is widespread agreement that en-hanced linkages are desirable, a practical andcommercially-oriented viewpoint is important. Iflinkages do not currently exist because productsneed improving, transaction costs of changing are

26

too high, and information or communication islacking, then donors, NGOs, and committed busi-nesses can facilitate change. However, if localsupply is inherently infeasible, intervention is notappropriate. DFID finish by saying that “the lackof examples of strong linkage suggest it is diffi-cult and time-consuming—but also that concertedefforts have rarely been applied.”

An example of concerted effort comes from St.Lucia in the Caribbean, where a farmer’s coop-erative coordinates production and marketing offruit and vegetables to hotels on the island. The St.Lucia Hotel Association and the Ministry of Agri-culture have launched an “adopt a farmer” schemein which hotels buy produce from a specifiedfarmer at a price agreed before planting.68

In keeping with the general need for thoughtfulplanning and implementation, training programsideally will be part of a broader human resourcesdevelopment plan within the tourism sector. Inaddition, there can be substantial benefits fromcoordination across businesses, such as throughsponsored business associations. These associa-tions or boards could assist individual businessesin improving their products (and adherence to STprinciples), while also serving to enhance ormaintain tourism’s place on the national politicalagenda.

Guiding is frequently cited as a specific tourism-related source of income for local residents, and atsome sites there is a requirement to hire localguides. As DFID notes, the benefits of localguides go beyond the financial, and include pro-viding visitors a richer understanding of the localenvironment and providing residents a sense ofinvolvement and ownership in tourism and con-servation. Local guiding also can reinforce preser-vation of local culture insofar as guiding includeslocal stories, experiences, and practices. Site man-agement agencies can play important roles in fa-cilitating the development of a local guide pro-gram and the development of other networks andopportunities. It should be remembered that goodguiding requires a combination of technical, lin-guistic, and communication skills.

Crafts are also often cited as opportunities for lo-cal residents to benefit from tourism, and this pre-sumably is especially true in the case of CHT, ascrafts are one manifestation of cultural heritage.Though income from crafts may not be as stable

as that from wages from regular employment, theamounts can be significant. In addition, this in-come can be earned by a broad cross-section ofthe community, as capital, foreign language skills,and other prerequisites are relatively unimportant.

3.12. Information and Communication

As with certification programs, the informationand communication approach relies on voluntaryactions and thus should be only one part of abroader approach to achieving sustainability.69

Nonetheless, it can be an important strategy forsustainable tourism, one which has not been pur-sued to its potential. Within this area, at least threetarget groups can be considered: visitors, hostcommunities, and professionals within the indus-try and/or government.

The first group has received the greatest attention,at least in terms of formal information programs.There are numerous codes of conduct designed toinform visitors about appropriate behavior and toencourage them to conform to this (UNEP listsmany of these, as well as codes for communitiesand industry). Often, such codes are provided atdestinations, but they are also provided to mem-bers of organizations (such as environmentalNGOs) and/or through other channels. Codes ofconduct tend to focus primarily on environmen-tally-sensitive behavior, but often include itemsrelevant to tangible cultural heritage as well asrespecting host cultures. These can range from thegeneral (e.g., “accept differences and adopt localcustoms”) to the specific (e.g., appropriate be-havior when photographing, purchasing goods,and tipping). Australia is currently developing acode of conduct specifically for cultural purposes.

In addition to formal codes, there exist variouschannels for raising visitor awareness and encour-aging specific behavior, including in-flight videosand magazines, and advice on ticket wallets, inholiday brochures, by guides, and so on. Generalpublic information campaigns in source marketscan also be used to reinforce responsible consum-erism in trip choice. Development cooperation canplay an important role in this process.

For example, the German GTZ and BMZ, to-gether with church and private organizations,has promoted a series of journals calledSympathiemagazine, published by the Studi-

27

enkreis für Tourismus und Entwicklung(Study Group for Tourism and Development).The goal is to create understanding and posi-tive attitudes toward destinations and localpopulations, and many tour operators offerthese brochures to their customers in prepa-ration for their holidays.

The second group, host communities, has been thetarget of fewer codes of conduct. Some of thesereflect multiple objectives, including encouragingfriendly behavior to tourists as well as informingresidents of likely changes due to tourism devel-opment, as well as how they can safeguard theirculture and traditions in response to such changes(for example, the Mauritius Code of Ethics forTourism).

In the CHT context, it is logical to use such com-munication channels to also raise awareness ofcultural heritage issues. Lack of heritage knowl-edge is one of the major forces working againstthe retention of resources. On the other hand, insituations with effective education and awarenessbuilding, communities and individuals tend to bemore supportive of CHM activities.

In the context of the Hue workshop, UNESCOrecommends implementing public awarenesscampaigns in order to:

• heighten awareness of the need to preservecultural resources in the area;

• bolster local culture and traditional culturalvalues in light of the rapid social change thattourism could bring to the area;

• promote a positive attitude toward, and inter-pretation of, the cross-cultural encountersthat will result from increased internationaltourism; and

• inform local entrepreneurs, employers, andpotential employees of opportunities in tour-ism-related industries.

Existing educational systems and curricula canplay important roles here. They can be used notonly for training of potential employees withintourism or CHM, but also to raise awarenesswithin the general public. For example, NORADsupports the Forestry Association of Botswana inits efforts to introduce forestry as part of the cur-riculum for senior secondary schools in co-operation with the Ministry of Education.

The third groups comprises industry and govern-ment professionals. Industry associations and oth-ers have developed various codes of conduct forthe industry, with The Ecotourism Society guide-lines for nature tour operators being a relevantexample. Several countries and individual desti-nations also have developed guidelines for tour-ism businesses. An example of development co-operation in this arena is USAID’s work with ho-tels in Jamaica, in which a consultancy (HaglerBailly) has been hired to work with hotels toidentify opportunities for reducing water use andmanaging human waste. USAID has also helpedlodge operators in Sikkim, India utilize alternativeheating and cooking devices.

At the broadest level, the WTO has developed acode of ethics for tourism that focuses on the fol-lowing areas:

• Tourism’s contribution to mutual under-standing and respect between peoples andsocieties.

• Tourism as a vehicle for individual and col-lective fulfilment.

• Tourism, a factor of sustainable development.• Tourism, a user of the cultural heritage of

mankind and a contributor to its en-hancement.

• Tourism, a beneficial activity for host coun-tries and communities.

• Obligations of stakeholders in tourism devel-opment.

• Right to tourism.• Liberty of tourist movements.• Rights of the workers and entrepreneurs in the

tourism industry.• Implementation of the principles of the Global

Code of Ethics for Tourism.

The above presentation focuses on using informa-tion and persuasive communication to inform andmodify behavior though information lists, guide-lines, and codes of conduct. Of course, there areseveral other relevant information functions andchannels. With respect to visitors, interpretationalso can, and should, play a major role in provid-ing a quality visitor experience which, as withmarketing and infrastructure development, facili-tates sustainable visitor flows. There are manydiscussions of good interpretation,70 with a centralissue being to view interpretation not as provisionof facts, but as a communication process designedto reveal meanings and relationships of cultural

28

and natural heritage to the public (visitors)through first-hand experiences with objects, arti-facts, landscapes, traditions or sites. Currently,there is very little interpretation of any kind inmany developing countries, and much that existsinvolves basic provision of facts. Raising thequality of interpretive practice will require signifi-cant capacity building.

Amongst professionals, there is a need for a widerange of information related to CHT. Data banks,based on existing or new collections, that are eas-ily accessible for range of users can be importantresources, as can concentrations of resource ex-perts at various institutions. Networking, throughcommon projects, workshops, and electroniccommunication, can also be vital. For example,the UNESCO LEAP program is designed to en-courage and assist people living within or nearheritage sites to be involved in management andconservation. It includes an “online” componentthat serves as an email discussion and advocacyforum designed to enhance communication be-tween those interested in CHM and to increaseawareness of problems, solutions, and successstories.71 Lastly, UNESCO and PATA have joinedforces in the IMPACT program designed to edu-cate policy makers, heritage conservationists, andtourism industry personnel about how to developthe tourism industry while preserving natural andcultural heritage.72

3.13. Research and Information Gathering

Though the single most important input toachieving sustainable tourism is probably politicalwill, knowledge and information is also vital. Asignificant amount of knowledge and informationalready exists in various forms, from the “localknowledge” of communities to the academicknowledge of tourism and heritage researchers.Nonetheless, the discussion of strategies high-lights the importance of gathering additional in-formation in various arenas, from consumer re-search (e.g., on visitor preferences and decision-making processes) to tourism’s impacts (eco-nomic, environmental, social, and cultural). Thisinformation can serve as vital input to effectiveplanning and management.

With respect to consumer research, CHT appearslargely to be product driven, in the sense that itdevelops from the desire to integrate existing

heritage products into the tourism market. Thisdiffers from the user driven approach of develop-ing products specifically in response to consumerdesires. It also leads to a complacency with re-spect to market research, and thus a danger thatdemand for specific destinations may either notexist or not be sustained. Therefore, consideredmarket research can be critical for achieving sus-tainable CHT.

With respect to impacts, the lack of data concern-ing use-impact relationships (i.e., how increaseduse affects the level of impact) was noted in thediscussion of carrying capacity. If the CC ap-proach is to be utilized, at a minimum more in-formation is needed on these relationships andhow they are affected by other management ac-tions (e.g., visitor dispersal and persuasive com-munication designed to promote responsible visi-tor behavior).

A current World Bank research project inSouth Africa focuses on many of these is-sues. The project will evaluate the currentfiscal (park revenue), economic (local jobs),and environmental impacts of nature tourismin northeastern KwaZulu Natal province. Inaddition, it will evaluate how various policyscenarios, such as increased fees or en-hanced site quality, will affect these impacts.The resulting information can be used tomake informed policy decisions.

On another level, there is also a need for researchand evaluation regarding what strategies and whatdevelopment cooperation roles are most effectivein achieving ST. Though there are many discus-sions of these strategies, their endorsement tendsto be based on common sense and anecdotal evi-dence. These sources of knowledge are important,but focused empirical evaluation is strongly rec-ommended. Steps in that direction include DFID’sreport and the research on which it is based.73

Development agencies clearly can play a rolehere, as evidenced by DFID’s work, not least be-cause evaluation of development cooperation pro-grams can enhance their future effectiveness(NORAD also stresses the importance of utilizingresearch knowledge in their activities, whileWorld Bank (1998b) is an example at a macroscale). In addition, development cooperation cansupport on-site research, as well as educationaltraining in-country or abroad. For example, five

29

M.Sc. and five Ph.D. students have received Nor-wegian financial assistance as part of a program tostrengthen sustainable management of Chobe Na-tional Park in Botswana. Norway is also support-ing research at the University of Botswana.

3.14. Summary

Section 3 has briefly described several strategies,from the broad to the specific, that can be used topromote sustainable tourism. The general strate-gies, such as policy development and institutionalstrengthening, can have significant impact, buttend to have a long gestation period–it may takeyears to observe tangible results. The specific

strategies, such as a certification program or in-formation campaign, may be implemented morequickly, but tend to provide less extensive bene-fits.

These characteristics suggest that a long-term, andmulti-pronged approach may be necessary. If itwas easy to achieve sustainability, it would havealready happened. Such statements are not meantto inspire pessimism, but rather realism and acommitment to the challenge. Anecdotal reportsindicate that development cooperation projects intourism have, on occasion, been failures. How-ever, they also indicate that they have led to con-crete gains, particularly at local levels. It is thesegains that motivate future activity in this arena.

30

4. Development Cooperation Agencies and Tourism

4.1. Development Cooperation: A BriefSummary

Development objectives inevitably vary acrossagencies and countries. Nonetheless, there areseveral objectives and focus areas that are com-mon across many, if not most, developmentagencies.74 They include:

• Reduce the number of people living in ex-treme poverty.

• Invest in social development, especiallyeducation, primary health, and populationcontrol.

• Facilitate public participation in politicaland economic life, especially for women.

• Reduce social inequalities.• Pursue sustainable development to ensure

environmental resource loss is reversed.• Facilitate stable economies and good con-

ditions for an active private sector.• Promote well-functioning governments and

bureaucracies, including democratic con-trol, respect for human rights, and rule oflaw.

Though these objectives are fundamental and donot all involve tourism, tourism development isgenerally consistent with them. For example,tourism typically involves an active private sec-tor and creates jobs of varying skill levels andfor both genders, which can help to reduce socialinequalities. In addition, it can contribute tosustainable development and the preservationand enhancement of environmental resources.The EU notes that tourism can also make a ma-jor contribution to integrating developing coun-tries into the world economy, which is one of theEU general objectives for development coopera-tion.

Although there have been numerous studies ofdevelopment cooperation, the World Bank haspublished a recent and useful overview of cur-rent thinking on the topic.75 Views on develop-ment cooperation have varied over time, andcurrent views admittedly may someday be seenas outdated (and some may appear self-evident).

Nonetheless, they reflect current thinking andprovide a context for considering how develop-ment cooperation agencies may view, and beinvolved in, development cooperation relevantto tourism.

The overall theme of the World Bank report isthat effective development cooperation requiresthe right timing and the right mix of money andideas. Money has a large impact, but only inlow-income countries with sound management;before countries reform, finance has little im-pact. More specific findings are as follows.76

Financial aid works in a good policy environ-ment. Assistance is most effective in countrieswith sound economic management, which in-volves both macroeconomic policy and deliveryof public services.

Improvements in economic institutions and poli-cies are the key to a quantum leap in povertyreduction. There have been significant im-provements in governance and policies in thepast decade, but further reform could lead toadditional benefits. It is important that the desirefor reform exist in recipient countries, with as-sistance helping through ideas, training, and fi-nance. Efforts to “push” policy improvements incountries that lack internal desire for reformtypically have failed.

Effective financial assistance complements pri-vate investment. In countries with sound eco-nomic management, assistance complements,rather than competes with, private investment bysupporting important public services.

The value of development projects is tostrengthen institutions and policies so that serv-ices can be effectively delivered. Developmentcooperation brings both knowledge and finance,but the latter tends not to benefit specific sectors.Sectoral support, such as in education, tends toexpand public services in general rather than inthe targeted sector in particular. However,knowledge is more specific, less fungible, andstrengthens targeted sectors.

30

An active civil society improves public services.The top-down, technocratic approach has notworked well in critical areas of development.More participatory approaches often result insignificant improvements in service delivery.

Development cooperation can nurture reform ineven the most distorted environments, but it re-quires patience and a focus on ideas, not money.The goal is to help reformers develop and testtheir ideas rather than to provide funding forineffective policies or services.

Turning the attention to the development agen-cies themselves, the World Bank recommendedthat development agencies should become:

• More selective, by putting more money intoeconomies with sound management.

• More knowledge-based, by using resourcesto support new approaches to service deliv-ery, identifying what works, and dissemi-nating this information.

• Better coordinated, by being less interestedin donor agency prestige and more inter-ested in how communities, governments,and donors can work together to improveservices.

• More self-critical, by evaluating agencyobjectives and the impacts of agency ac-tivities.

A review of Norwegian development coopera-tion policy by the Nord-Sør Bistandskommisjonnoted the difficulties inherent in achieving de-velopment goals, and the impossibility of find-ing a standard “recipe” for development coop-eration. Some of the conclusions include:

• Assistance must be tailored to each countryand its conditions (no two countries arealike).

• Assistance must supplement and contributeto locally-driven development (rather thanto try to be the driver of development).

• Recipients must be responsible for planningand implementation.

• Assistance should build up local capacity,including institutional capacity, in order tohelp recipients take responsibility for de-velopment (rather than being dependent onassistance).

• Assistance should be based on a perspectiveof equal gender status.

These Norwegian findings are generally consis-tent with those in the World Bank report, thoughdifferences might occur in interpretation andimplementation (e.g., the Norwegian approachappears to stress recipient initiative, control, andresponsibility to a greater degree than that ofsome other agencies).

Of course, the above findings and considerationsare focused on a much more general level thantourism. They could, for example, affect devel-opment cooperation across potential recipientcountries. Nonetheless, they are also relevant inthe more narrow, and to some degree different,tourism context. Perhaps most fundamentally,they stress that funding in a poor economic pol-icy environment is likely to be wasted. In thetourism context, the discussion in Section 3 ofST strategies also stresses the importance ofstrong institutions, good policies, and effectiveplanning and management. Relatedly, thesestrategies stress training and knowledge transferand development. They also include improvedservices and infrastructure to facilitate privatesector investment and development. Lastly, theystress collaboration, not only across govern-mental agencies but also between governmentand civil society (NGOs, unions, the public gen-erally, etc.).

4.2. Development Cooperation and Tourism:Overview and Selected Agencies

Turning to tourism in particular, developmentcooperation has focused relatively rarely ontourism per se. More common has been fundingfor items like airports and roads, which contrib-ute to tourism, other economic sectors, and soci-ety generally. Recently, tourism has also bene-fitted from funding of environmental programs,which often include a tourism component77 (e.g.,biodiversity projects under GEF, and the DFIDand USAID programs discussed below). None-theless, substantial funding has also gone totourism-specific activities, including marketingand financial assistance to tourism businesses.

Assistance has occurred in three main forms:78

• technical assistance, especially in the prepa-ration of tourist development plans;

• loans for major infrastructure projects; and• loans and equity investments in the private

sector, especially in hotels.

31

The form of assistance has varied across organi-zations. For example, inter-governmental agen-cies like the Organization of American States(OAS) have emphasized technical assistance andplan preparation. The IBRD (International Bankfor Reconstruction and Development) and IDA(International Development Association) com-ponents of the World Bank Group have concen-trated on tourism infrastructure, while the IFC(International Finance Corporation) componenthas concentrated on the private sector. Histori-cally these agencies and other multilateral bankshave primarily encouraged large-scale projectswith a high degree of non-local participation.However, they have, to varying degrees, movedin the direction of small and medium sized busi-nesses (SMEs), community development, andother focus areas consistent with the abovestrategies.

For example, the Inter-American DevelopmentBank (IDB) has changed the emphasis of itsparticipation and focus in the tourism sector,especially since the beginning of the 1990s. In-stead of financing the mega development of newdestinations, such as Cancun and Bahías deHuatulco (1970s), the IDB is more responsive tohost communities and their socio-cultural, man-made and natural environments. Special empha-sis is being placed on indigenous communities.The three principal areas for the Bank's partici-pation in tourism development are:

• management of the environment and naturalresources;

• improvement in the quality of services pro-vided by municipalities; and

• rehabilitation of physical infrastructure toreclaim historical and cultural heritage.

The IDB increasingly is focusing on financingoperations that will include, among others, thefollowing principal components:

• establishment of an appropriate public sec-tor framework (both legal and regulatory)that will allow private sector investmentand organized civil society to participate;

• establishment of certification mechanisms;and

• human resources training modular pro-grams for both the public and private sec-tors.

Likewise, the World Bank stresses that "we mustdevelop a broadly owned framework for invest-ment and tourism development. Private inves-tors, public authorities, and local communitygroups need to work on several fronts, to:

• forge an investment climate of policies,regulations, and public infrastructure thatconserves heritage areas and tourist sites;

• help local communities develop attractionsand businesses; and

• forge business linkages between investorsand local producers and services."79

The examples presented in Section 3 (and Ap-pendices 3 through 7) illustrate a wide range oftourism-related projects supported by develop-ment cooperation. In addition, the increasinginvolvement of bilateral assistance in tourismsuggests an increasing grant orientation.

It has been suggested in the ecotourism contextthat a combination of loans and grants are criti-cal in promoting community tourism ventures,with loans going to businesses and grants goingto training local residents to participate in thesebusinesses. This follows the logic of private andpublic goods, with local employment being val-ued by broader society, which can therefore beexpected to pay the additional cost of bringinglocal residents into the industry. Similar logiccan be applied to other programs, including in-formation and communication, research, and soon. Given that grant funding from multilateralinstitutions is decreasing over time, a loan/grantcombination may increasingly depend on coor-dination between multilaterals (for loans) andbilaterals (for grants).

The remainder of this section summarizes thetourism-related activities of selected agencies.80

World Bank

The World Bank turned away from specifictourism projects following the close of theirTourism Projects Department in 1978. None-theless, portions of the World Bank Group(WBG), notably the International Finance Cor-poration (IFC) and the Multilateral InvestmentGuarantee Agency (MIGA), do support tourismthrough equity investments, insurance, guaran-tees, and other mechanisms. As of WTO’s 1996publication on development financing, the IFC

32

had invested in over 100 tourism projects,mainly hotels and resort villages, at a value ofclose to $600 million. Tourism represented 5.5%of the IFC’s portfolio at that point. In addition,Bank and Global Environment Facility (GEF)projects focused on other activities, especiallyinfrastructure, human resources, and environ-mental management, often have a tourism com-ponent.

The Bank will likely continue with such non-specific, but tourism related, activities. As BankPresident James Wolfensohn noted in the con-text of cooperation with the WTO, “in the 140countries where we operate, tourism has becomeone of the fastest growing economic sectors. Ouraim is to create a framework of power, water,health, justice, and financial systems that will beconducive to the development of tourism and totravel.” The Bank may also be moving towardmore direct involvement in tourism, with its co-operation with WTO being an example. MIGAobserves that “tourism really deserves the sup-port of the World Bank, because when properlymanaged it is an excellent way of alleviatingpoverty.”81

Bank involvement in tourism has been facili-tated by its small, community based programsthrough the Learning Innovation Loans (LILs)and the Development Grant Facilities (DGFs).The LILs provide opportunities to integrateCHM into local and national economic devel-opment. These will serve as pilot projects fordeveloping approaches to site planning and con-servation, as well as improving available sourcesof information about conservation. DGF fundingis minimal by Bank standards (no more than$50,000) and is focused on determining, andpreserving, what community residents value.Relevant potential areas for DGF include 1)community managed low-impact tourism devel-opment, 2) participatory assessment of culturalassets along with participatory priority-settingand planning, 3) programming and use of com-munications media to link cultural traditions tosustainable development (e.g., theater, literature,conservation of oral history, cultural radio pro-gramming), and 4) development of crafts mar-keting.

One particular activity worth noting is the de-velopment of a strategy paper focused on tour-

ism in Africa. Principles noted in the strategyinclude the importance of:

• an environmental component, such as ecot-ourism;

• engagement in community participation;• promotion of effective institution-building;

and• working with private industry to encourage

their competitiveness.

The World Bank Institute (WBI) has organizedvarious relevant conferences, including one fo-cused on the Architecture of Historic Cities andanother on Cultural Heritage and Development:Sustainable Management. In 1999, they hosted aconference in Florence, Italy on the economicsof cultural heritage development projects. WBIwill introduce a course in tourism in the nearfuture.

UNDP

Little information regarding the role of UnitedNations Development Programme (UNDP) intourism development was received in time forthis report. They often work with WTO and areinvolved in human resource development proj-ects, such as the Institute for Hotel and CateringServices hotel training center in the Maldives.They are also supporting development of a tour-ism master plan for Malawi, which includes afocus on creating employment in rural areas andconserving the country’s natural environmentand cultural heritage. However, UNDP appearsto concentrate more on other sectors, such associal development or urban development, thatultimately help tourism. UNDP also supportssome micro-enterprise programs, one of which isdescribed in the Ghana case study (Appendix 6).

According to the WTO, less than 0.001 percentof UNDP funding goes to cultural projects. Theagency does have a Sustainable Cities programthat started in Dar Es Salaam and now involves adozen projects focused on developing the infra-structure and capacity-building institutions ofdeveloping urban centers.

EU

As noted by the EU, “over the last 20 years the

33

European Community has led the way in pro-viding support for the expansion of tourism inthe developing countries.... Tourism features inall the EU’s framework cooperation agreements(Lomé Convention, Barcelona Declaration,etc.).” Article 122 of Lomé IV provides thatsupport should focus on 1) human resources andinstitutional development, 2) product develop-ment, 3) market development, and 4) researchand information. Relevant activities have alsobeen undertaken in other contexts, such as tour-ism training and promotion for Mediterraneancountries under the Barcelona Declaration. Inaddition, other EU programs relate to tourismand/or CHM, with one example being the AsiaURBS program, which ties EU cities with Asiancities to assist in urban development.

As an example of EU activities, it is supportingthe St. Lucia (West Indies) Heritage TourismProgramme, whose mission is to establish na-ture/heritage tourism as a viable and sustainablecomponent of the country’s tourism product.Program areas include 1) public awareness andcommunity mobilization, 2) human resourcedevelopment, training, and institutionalstrengthening, 3) product development, 4) policydevelopment and advocacy, and 5) niche mar-keting.

AfDB

Enquiries to the African Development Bank(AfDB) were not successful in generating in-formation, but a search of the Bank’s Web siteindicates that tourism is funded, at least as partof broader projects. For example, the Third Lineof Credit to Development Bank of Mauritius (aloan of $7.5 million) had as an objective to“contribute to the further development of Mau-ritius’ small- and medium-scale enterprises sec-tor and ultimately to the country’s efforts at eco-nomic diversification and job creation,” withtourism being one of the sectors to benefit fromthe loan.

IDB

Though Latin America is not a focus area forthis report, the Inter-American DevelopmentBank (IDB) is perhaps the most active of theregional development banks when it comes to

tourism. Since 1970, the IDB has committed$1.14 billion in loans to tourism, $10.3 millionin non-reimbursable technical assistance(grants), and $9.4 million in Multilateral In-vestment Fund (MIF) grants. The Inter-American Investment Corporation (part of theIDB Group) has committed US$21.2 million inloans and US$12 million in investment funds.

The IDB is involved in projects relating to infra-structure, hotel management training, and theprotection of cultural heritage. As an example ofthe latter, in 1995 the IDB provided a $1.7 mil-lion grant to help preserve prehistoric cavepaintings at 260 sites within the Capivara Park, aWorld Heritage Site in northeastern Brazil (de-scribed above in Section 2.4). Two recently ap-proved projects in Brazil are the Preservation ofUrban Historical and Cultural Sites - Monu-menta Program ($62.5 million) and the Techni-cal Cooperation Program to support the Devel-opment of Ecotourism in the Brazilian Amazon($11 million).82

Within the IDB group, the Multilateral Invest-ment Fund is an example of a relevant mecha-nism in this arena. The fund includes 1) a tech-nical cooperation program that assists in the de-velopment and modernization of the financial,regulatory and public sector framework neededfor an effective, competitive private sector, 2) ahuman resources development program thathelps build the skills and capabilities of the re-gion’s workforce, 3) a small enterprise devel-opment program focuses on broadening the par-ticipation of smaller enterprises in the regionaleconomy, and 4) a small enterprise investmentfund that demonstrates the use of equity as adevelopment tool.

NORAD

Norway is unusual in that it has a specific politi-cal mandate for environmental programs withinits development cooperation strategy, which pre-sents a special opportunity for effective action.These programs include the following priorityareas within the “Preservation of Cultural Heri-tage and Management of the Natural Environ-ment’s Cultural Values” section:

• Implementation and follow-up of recipientcountries’ commitments under the Conven-

34

tion for the Protection of the World Culturaland Natural Heritage (1972).

• Contribute to enhancing institutional andprofessional capacities which ensure ad-ministrative structures for the preservationof cultural heritage.

• Help to ensure that important sectors acceptan independent responsibility for the man-agement of cultural heritage and areas ofcultural interest (through, e.g., environ-mental impact analyses).

• Contribute to the integration of the preser-vation of cultural heritage in national actionplans.

• Contribute to the development of modelsfor sustainable tourism in prioritised areasof cultural interest (Agenda 21).

• Contribute to the sustainable use and devel-opment of historical cities and areas ofcultural heritage (Habitat II, Urban Sustain-able Development).

• Support sustainable production and con-sumption systems through knowledge abouttraditional building, customs, use of materi-als and crafts.

To date, the Norwegian Agency for Develop-ment Cooperation has supported various activi-ties relevant to the above, such as the SlaveRoute project and the Africa 2009 training proj-ect. However, it has not undergone the type ofextended discussion regarding potential in-volvement in tourism that has occurred in otheragencies (like SNV, GTZ, and DFID).

USAID

The US Agency for International Development(USAID) provides financial assistance for tour-ism-related infrastructure and ecotourism activi-ties as part of its economic development andenvironmental programs. Development coop-eration includes grants to governmental and non-governmental organizations, including technicalassistance and provision of equipment. Devel-opment cooperation is also available indirectlythrough USAID-funded programs, such as theBiodiversity Support Program.

USAID’s involvement in tourism is focused onecotourism, because it “offers countries newopportunities for small enterprise investment andemployment and increases the national stake in

protecting their biological resources.” Activitiesare supported out of the biodiversity conserva-tion programs and include developing nationalpark systems (including creation of new parks),demarcating and equipping parks, recruiting andtraining staff, encouraging government reforms,and promoting regulated investments in privatelodging, guide service, and other tourism ven-tures.

A recent review of USAID involvement in thisarea describes the following focus areas:

• Efforts to empower and encourage localcommunities to play an active role in thepreservation and enhancement of culturalenvironments and ecotourism sites. Thishas been accomplished by creating alterna-tives for local inhabitants to replace reve-nues formerly earned by utilizing naturalresources. These alternatives include tour-ism-related food, lodging, souvenirs, edu-cational materials, guides, and transporta-tion.

• Efforts to develop strong institutions thatare charged with the responsibility of man-aging and protecting national parks, culturalsites and ecologically sensitive areas.

• Economic linkages between local residents,private business, non-governmental organi-zations (NGOs), and government agenciesto ensure that the bulk of tourist generatedrevenues remain within the country.

• Strategies to create protected area entrancefees to provide revenues needed to maintainand upgrade sites. This frequently involvesemploying economic techniques that at-tempt to estimate tourist's willingness topay to enter sites.

Though much of this assistance has been forsites focused on the natural environment, it hasalso gone to cultural heritage, including theBonampak Mayan ruins in the Montes AzulesBiosphere Reserve in Mexico. Perhaps the mostcomprehensive relevant USAID support is to theJordan Promotion of Cultural Tourism project,which is designed to promote Jordan's touristsector by assisting in the development of se-lected cultural sites. The project is being imple-mented by the Ministry of Tourism and Antiq-uities (MOTA). It will 1) enhance selected sitesand develop tourist facilities, 2) increase publicawareness of, and local involvement at, the sites,

35

and 3) provide institutional development supportto MOTA.83

DFID

The British Department for International Devel-opment (DFID) has recently undergone anevaluation of its role in tourism and has decidedto focus on nature tourism in particular. In addi-tion, DFID is trying to bring the focus awayfrom generation of foreign exchange earningsand toward elimination of poverty. This linksdirectly with the development objectives de-scribed above, and DFID’s goal is to generatenet benefits for the poor in the context of tour-ism development, with net benefits incorporat-ing both benefits (such as jobs) and costs (suchas negative cultural and environmental impacts).DFID notes that domestic and independent trav-elers may create proportionally more local eco-nomic opportunities than do interna-tional/packaged tourists, such that selectivemarket development can be appropriate.84

SNV

SNV, the Dutch development cooperationagency, also has been active in tourism over theyears, and has undergone internal considerationand discussion of desired involvement in thisfield. The process is continuing, and SNV held aworkshop in Nepal during October 1999 withtourism advisors from countries in which SNVis involved in tourism projects. The objectives ofthe workshop are to:

• Exchange experiences and share knowledgeon the strategies, methods and results ofSNV tourism development programs.

• Discuss in depth topics such as: How canlocal poor people benefit more from tour-ism development? How can local participa-tion be ensured in tourism programs? Howcan negative environmental and socio-cultural impacts be mitigated?

• Contribute to SNV's policy developmentconcerning economic themes.

The workshop is expected to generate a docu-ment presenting the best (and worst) practices ofSNV's projects, a better understanding of meth-odologies and strategies for poverty alleviationin tourism development programs, and an over-

view of relevant references (documents, manu-als, books, publications, etc.) that SNV tourismprograms are using.

SNV’s focus to date is succinctly stated as fol-lows:85

By being present in-country (SNV maintainsfield offices in 26 countries), SNV is able toidentify areas that have a potential for tour-ism. Close cooperation with local people andorganisations offers a good starting pointfrom where tourism can be developed: nomassive scale luxury tourism but small-scaletourism in which the local population par-ticipates to the fullest extent and reaps thebenefits. People shape the ideas, execute theplans, gain extra income and retain theirdignity. In short, this is tourism for people,culture and the environment.

SNV supports this kind of developmentthrough research, training, marketing andthe transfer of knowledge and finance. In thepast few years, tourism projects have beenset up in Albania, Tanzania, Botswana, Ne-pal, Cameroon, Niger and Benin. This hasenabled SNV to build up experience and ex-pertise.

GTZ and BMZ

As early as 1981, the German Federal Ministryof Economic Cooperation and Development(BMZ) published an analysis of “Tourism inDeveloping Countries.” This was updated in1993, and BMZ set up an “Ecotourism WorkingGroup,” an interdisciplinary task force that com-bines research and practice-oriented consul-tancy. The report “Ecotourism as a ConservationInstrument,” which appeared in 1995, set outbasic policies and case studies. The GermanGTZ (Deutsche Gesellschaft für TechnischeZusammenarbeit) is responsible for planning andimplementing technical cooperation projectswith developing countries.

A recent GTZ publication86 notes that:

though tourism is not currently a priority is-sue in German development co-operationactivities, it could be a meaningful develop-ment policy option – especially where re-

36

gional rural development and nature conser-vation are concerned – if examined critically,planned competently and carried out pru-dently.

It goes on to say that the “development potentialof tourism has been unsatisfactorily exploited.”Tourism already does play a role in many coop-erative projects, and GTZ/BMZ have developedsubstantial material relating to this topic. Thismaterial was received too late to be fully incor-porated into the present report, but agencies in-volved in this field are encouraged to review it.

Limitations of space, time, and available in-formation mean that only selected examplesof agency activities can be presented. It is ac-knowledged that many other agencies aredoing relevant work in this area. For exam-ple, AusAid funds participation by Pacificregion tourism leaders in tourism conferencesheld in Australia to facilitate exchange ofknowledge and information. The involvementof so many agencies not only illustrates therole tourism can play in development coop-eration, but also underscores the need for do-nor coordination and partnerships.

4.3. Development Cooperation and Tourism:Some Principles and Lessons Learned

There is variation across donor agencies withrespect to resources, objectives, and approaches.There is also variation across recipient countrieswith respect to levels of development, the role oftourism within the economy, tourism develop-ment potential, and so on. Therefore, assistanceprograms inherently must be customized to suitspecific situations. Keeping this in mind, thissection presents some general principles (lessonslearned), based largely on the EU experiencewith such programs.

First, many assistance efforts have been toothinly spread. Therefore, a more focused effortbased on a sectoral approach and clearly targetedoperations is recommended. The scope, dura-tion, and geographic area of projects will belimited to make programs more effective (thisneeds to be balanced with the need to ensureintegration and coherence with national and re-gional development policies and activities).

Second, there has been a narrow focus onmarketing (to increase the number of arrivals),which has led to heavy dependence on continuedfunding to maintain market share, as well as afailure to seek alternative promotion and mar-keting instruments. Future funding in this area isexpected to be limited, not only because of in-creased cost-sharing by recipients (public-private partnerships), but also due to the in-creasing recognition that attention should bepaid not just to attracting visitor streams, whichhas been increasingly difficult in the frequentcase of destinations that have not adequatelymanaged the product, but also to focusing onsustaining the product itself.

Third, and related to the second, it is recognizedthat EU programs have not taken into accounttourism’s impacts on the environment andhost societies. This failure may jeopardize long-term development, both in terms of the benefitsto host communities and in terms of the visitorexperience.

The second and third “lessons learned” are con-sistent with the current tourism assistance pro-grams in many agencies insofar as much of theirfunding is aimed at activities other than market-ing, and in particular on projects designed tominimize negative environmental or social im-pacts, as well as to increase local economicbenefits.

Fourth, there has been a heavy focus onfunding national tourist offices (NTOs) andtourism authorities. This has led not only to theheavy focus on marketing (described above), butalso to inadequate 1) coordination with the pri-vate sector, 2) attention to sustainability, and 3)clout vis-à-vis other government bodies thathave more significant impacts on matters such asair access, border control, transport, fiscal pol-icy, education, and the environment.

This last “lesson learned” is consistent with thebroader range of recipient groups that exists to-day. Though NTOs likely will remain an im-portant recipient group, and they provide goodcontact points for the tourism industry, the rangeshould increasingly include national governmentagencies beyond NTOs, local and regional gov-ernment agencies, the private sector, and NGOs(as representatives of civil society).87 Of course,different development cooperation agencies are

37

likely to emphasize different recipient groups,both generally and with respect to tourism inparticular.

As noted by DFID, NGOs have the vital abilityto “forge partnerships between stakeholders, tointerface with local communities, and to ‘put itall together’ by providing an overview.” Thus,they can play pivotal roles with respect to manysustainable tourism strategies, including trainingand information provision, and lobbying for fa-vorable policies. NGO recipients can includethose based in donor countries, those based inrecipient countries, or international groups (e.g.,IUCN and WWF).

An important issue within development coop-eration generally, and also relevant in the tour-ism context, is the extent to which conditionsshould be attached to development cooperation.The imposition of conditions can be seen asleading to an imperial, unequal relationship, inwhich the donors impose their desires on recipi-ents. However, it can also be seen as promotingan equal partnership in which both parties makecommitments to projects.

The case of Bonaire Marine Park in theNetherlands Antilles provides an example.The park was established in 1979, in partwith funds from World Wildlife Fund, Hol-land, as well as from the Dutch and Antil-lean governments. However, this fundingonly covered the initial start up costs, andactive management of the park stopped af-ter five years due to the lack of a firm finan-cial base. In response, the Dutch govern-ment provided additional grant funding, butwith the condition that the park must be-come self-supporting within the term of thegrant (three years). Given that tourism reliesdirectly on the park’s resources, varioustourism-related funding options were con-sidered. After extensive consultation withthe dive community and hotels, an entrancefee was established, together with relevantlegislation and regulations to earmark feerevenues for park operations. This exampleillustrates how important conditions can bein achieving sustainable tourism. The Dutchgovernment did not micro-manage the proj-ect, but the inclusion of the condition helpedensure that its development cooperationobjectives (long term conservation and

management of the natural resource) wereachieved.

As noted above, efforts to “push” policy im-provements in countries with no internal desirefor reform typically have failed. This suggeststhat conditionality is likely to work only whenthe rationale for conditional policies is under-stood and accepted. Put differently, conditional-ity can be a stimulus to action, but is unlikely tobe effectively implemented in situations withstrong opposition by key actors. Conditionalityof the scope considered here is unlikely to be aspainful, and thus as opposed, as that in thestructural adjustment context. For example, arequirement that a site charge entrance fees andearmark them for site management will be farless onerous than reduced subsidies on food andenergy. Nonetheless, the principle that lastingimprovement in policies will most likely occurin an organic reform environment is a good one.

One cannot expect all actors to embrace theconditions (e.g., there was opposition to theBonaire fee by some dive operators and an in-fluential dive magazine), such that educationalefforts and political will may be necessary insituations where there is underlying support forthe condition. Lastly, it should be noted thatmore-or-less explicit conditions, such as thoserelated to environmental impact assessments, arein fact common in development cooperationprograms (e.g., both NORAD and SIDA haveEIA requirements).

Finally, there is the issue of recipient initiative,an important principle for NORAD and manyother agencies. Though the principle of recipientresponsibility and leadership is sound, depend-ing on how it is implemented it can also beproblematic for at least two reasons.

First, recipients simply may not be aware thatagencies, such as NORAD, have funding for andinterest in tourism-related projects. For example,WTO notes that “lack of systematic and up-to-date information on financing sources appears tobe a significant handicap for tourism project de-velopers, both public and private.” WTO pre-sumably was referring to actors with relativelystrong information networks. The statementwould be even more true when it comes to ruralcommunities and community groups.

38

Second, due to lack of experience with tourismdevelopment, recipients may tend to be morereactive (rather than proactive) relative to donoragencies, who either have or can gather infor-mation and expertise based on longer histories oftourism development. Using the life-cycle con-cept as an example, recipients might request as-sistance only after significant negative impactshave occurred.

In short, it is recommended that a more activeand interactive process be implemented, onewhich locates the fundamental initiative andleadership with recipients, but which providesfor active exploration by donors regarding po-tential assistance projects, as well as active pro-vision of information regarding potentially im-portant considerations, policies, and actions atvarious levels. This perspective appears consis-tent with SNV’s approach in tourism develop-ment, described above.

39

5. Conclusions

As noted in the Introduction, tourism dependsheavily on cultural and natural attractions, manyof which are World Heritage Sites. Conversely,tourism can make important contributions toprotection and management of cultural and natu-ral heritage—it can help keep traditions aliveand finance the protection of heritage, as well asincrease visitor appreciation of that heritage. Onthe other hand, tourism can damage heritagewhen not well managed.

After describing the tourism and heritage con-text, this report presented several strategies forpromoting sustainability in tourism associatedwith cultural and natural environments. Next, itreviewed the activities of development coopera-tion agencies, both in general and with respect totourism in particular and its potential to alleviatepoverty.

There certainly have been difficulties, chal-lenges, and failures in the context of develop-ment cooperation and tourism. The World Bankclosed its Tourism Projects Department in 1978.The EU notes that “tourism has only recentlyemerged as a sector for cooperation and mostdonors have little experience in this field.... Do-nors agree that operations lacked clear direction,that the interlocutors were poorly chosen or inef-fective and the results difficult to evaluate.”Moreover, the strategies designed to lead tosustainable tourism will not always be easy toimplement, and progress will not always bedramatic.

When one considers all this, a natural reactionwould be to avoid tourism in development coop-eration programs. However, these difficultiesand challenges are not unique to tourism–theyare generic to development cooperation and thedevelopment process.88 Tourism presents specialchallenges, but so, too, do other sectors, fromforestry to hydroelectric power generation.

In addition, many of the criticisms have been oftop-down approaches involving large "masstourism" development projects. Recent activityhas evolved toward new approaches and a focuson smaller projects oriented toward nature andcultural tourism contexts. Moreover, though do-

nors generally have little experience in this field,experience can be obtained and developed overtime, as it has been in other sectors.

In short, the arguments against a develop-ment cooperation role in tourism are real, butoften overstated. Moreover, tourism is one ofthe largest industries in the world, and one ofthe fastest growing. A failure of developmentcooperation agencies to become involved intourism represents a failure to capitalize onthe opportunities it presents (in job creation,economic development, cultural interchange,and cultural heritage management) and afailure to help steer it toward a sustainablepath.

Several development cooperation agencies haverecognized this and have actively incorporatedtourism into their programs. The efforts ofDFID, SNV, and GTZ to undertake research,review, and policy processes are particularlypraiseworthy, as this gives these agencies a con-sidered, rather than ad hoc, basis for action. Forexample, DFID developed its action agendabased on research carried out in nature tourismdestinations in India, Indonesia, and Zimbabwe.The experience and reports of these agencies, aswell as others like the EU, the IDB, and theWorld Bank, are valuable resources that can bethe stepping stones for action by other agenciesconsidering involvement in tourism.

In addition to the knowledge and experience ofdevelopment agencies, there is extensive rele-vant expertise within the consultancy, academic,NGO, and other sectors. Put simply, there is asolid, and growing, basis for action.

The importance of collaboration and informationexchange in project implementation was dis-cussed above. As part of an effort to enhanceknowledge and streamline activities, there is asimilar rationale for collaboration and com-munication across development cooperationagencies. Indeed, donor collaboration and coor-dination are stressed by the Norwegian Ministryof Foreign Affairs and NORAD. In the culturalarena, the World Bank has recently formed aknowledge-sharing network, the Cultural Heri-

40

tage Network, of like-minded agencies andNGOs (the network includes a tourism themearea). Such actions, and others, would also beproductive amongst agencies specifically in-volved in tourism.

Lack of information and awareness may alsobe a problem within agencies. Thus, network-ing and information sharing regarding tourism,and agency objectives for this sector, will beimportant within agencies as well as acrossagencies.

The present report has focused on providingbackground information, identifying what se-lected agencies are already doing in tourism, andpresenting a list of strategies that can formthe basis for further discussion, strategy de-velopment, and action. It is difficult to priori-tize strategies in general, as their importancewill depend on local conditions, agency objec-tives, and other considerations. Moreover, somestrategies, such as the development of partner-ships, are broad and cut across others.

Nonetheless, the development and strengtheningof institutions, planning processes, evaluation,and policies are fundamental tosustainability, such that these should be a pri-ority focus, at least at the national level. On theother hand, community involvement and

training would be key priorities for a sitelevel approach. Though community involve-ment (and control) is not a panacea, it is impor-tant for ensuring that local cultural values aremaintained and strengthened. Again, the inter-relatedness of the strategies should be stressed,as, for example, good policies are of limitedvalue if institutions are too weak to implementthem effectively.

Lastly, the importance of including a broadrange of stakeholders and other actors asparticipants in development cooperation pro-jects, and as recipients of development coop-eration funding, is stressed. Agencies haveincreasingly reached out to NGOs and othercomponents of civil society. An equivalent effortwill be needed with respect to the tourism in-dustry. As described above, the industry hasimportant viewpoints, knowledge, skills, andbusiness connections that can be critical to thesuccessful development of sustainable tourism.As the industry continues to grow, it can nolonger be ignored—it has to be a more activepartner in projects that promote sustainabletourism. The continued growth of the industry,the future of cultural heritage management, andthe growth of opportunities for the poor in desti-nation areas depend on new alliances and part-nerships.

"For too long the range of values provided by culture attributes and artifacts

has not been recognized – their role in job creation, social cohesion, tourism,

and so on. Cultural preservation and renewal is not a luxury good, something

to be done later. It is a productive sector."

James D. WolfensohnPresident of the World BankOctober 4, 1999 Florence

41

6. References

Citations by Section

In order to improve readability, citations in the text are not in typical academic format, but are combinedand presented here (endnotes retain the academic format). For each major section, the first paragraphcontains citations for the general material presented, and the second paragraph contains citations for quo-tations (if any). Page numbers for html documents are not provided as they will vary across setups. Cita-tions are separated by semicolons and follow the order of material in the text.

1. Introduction

Malkin 1999, WTTC 1999; Périer-D’Ieteren 1998; Herreman 1998.

UNESCO 1999:21; The Economist magazine, 31 July 1999, p. 74; WTTC and IH&RA 1999:2.

2. The Context

Cheong 1995; Dewailly 1999; Herbert 1997; Bennett 1999; Lindberg et al. 1997; Mowforth and Munt1998; Butler 1999; Lindberg 1991; Healy 1994b; Butler 1980; Frank and Bowermaster 1994:134; Canis1996; Williams and Montanari 1999.

Swarbrooke 1995:4; EU 1998; Prentice 1993:224; WTO 1999a:6; UNESCO 1998:Preface; World Bank1998a:8; Loermans 1995; Robinson 1999b; World Bank 1998a:74; Lindberg, Enriquez, and Sproule1996; WTO 1996:140; DFID 1999b; WCED 1987:43; Swarbrooke and Horner 1999:358-360; WorldBank 1998b:11; EU 1998; DFID 1999a.

3. Achieving Sustainability: Selected Strategies

UNESCO 1995; Steck, Strasdas, and Gustedt 1999; EU 1998; Ayad 1999; WTO 1996:140; Gurung 1996;EU 1998; Medio 1996; Carson et al. 1997; Shackley 1998b; Personal communication, S. Bandaranayake;Peters 1998; UNESCO 1995; NORAD 1998; Hawass 1998, Périer-D’Ieteren 1998; UNESCO 1995; Ayad1999; UNEP 1998; UN 1999; UNEP 1998; Telfer and Wall 1996; Ashley and Roe 1998; DFID 1999a;Lindberg and Enriquez 1994; Healy 1994a; UNEP 1995; UNESCO 1995:8; NORAD 1998; Richards1999; Goulding 1999; McArthur 1998; Moscardo 1999; van der Borg and Russo 1999; Prentice 1993;DFID 1999a; Goodwin et al. 1998; Morgan 1992; NORAD 1998.

NORAD 1993:5; Steyn 1998:138; NORAD 1998:18; MFA 1997:19; EU 1998; DFID 1999a; Robinson1999a:23; Ashley and Roe 1998; Loermans 1995:42; EU 1998; DFID 1999a; EU 1998; DFID 1999b.

4. Development Cooperation Agencies and Tourism

EU 1998; Christie and Crompton 1999; WTO 1997:115; WTO 1999a:10; Lee and Barrett 1994; WTO1996; WTO 1998; MFA 1997; DFID 1999b; GTZ 1997; Steck 1999; Steck, Strasdas, and Gustedt 1999;DFID 1999a; de Meyer n.d.

World Bank 1998b:27; Pearce 1989:45; WTO 1998; WTO 1999a:3; EU 1998:2; WTO 1996:139; WTO1996:ii.

5. Conclusions

EU 1998; MFA 1999:3.

42

43

Alphabetical Listing of References

Adams, K.M. 1990. Cultural Commodization in Tana Toraja, Indonesia. Cultural Survival Quarterly14(1):31-34.

Ashley, C. and D. Roe. 1998. Enhancing Community Involvement in Wildlife Tourism: Issues and Chal-lenges. IIED Wildlife and Development Series No. 11. International Institute for Environment and Devel-opment: London.

Ayad, C. 1999. Petra’s New Invaders. UNESCO Courier. July/August:40-42.

Bennett, M.M. 1999. The Role of Technology. In Leask, A. and I. Yeoman, eds. Heritage Visitor Attrac-tions: An Operations Management Perspective. Cassell: London.

Boniface, P. 1995. Managing Quality Cultural Tourism. Routledge: London.

Boniface, P. 1999. Tourism and Cultures: Consensus in the Making? In M. Robinson and P. Boniface,eds. Tourism and Cultural Conflicts. CAB International: Wallingford.

van der Borg, J. 1998. Tourism Management in Venice, or How to Deal with Success. In D. Tyler, Y.Guerrier, and M. Robertson, eds. Managing Tourism in Cities. Wiley: Chichester, UK.

van der Borg, J. and A.P. Russo (eds.). 1999. Tourism Management in Heritage Cities. Proceedings of theSeminar Organized by UNESCO, Erasmus University, and University of Venice, December 1998, Ven-ice.

Bosselman, F.P., C.A. Peterson, and C. McCarthy. 1999. Managing Tourism Growth: Issues and Appli-cations. Island Press: Washington, DC.

Butler, R.W. 1980. The Concept of a Tourist Area Life Cycle of Evolution: Implications for Managementof Resources. Canadian Geographer 24(1):5-12.

Butler, R.W. 1999. Sustainable Tourism: A State-of-the-Art Review. Tourism Geographies 1:7-25.

Canestrelli, E. and P. Costa. 1991. Tourist Carrying Capacity: A Fuzzy Approach. Annals of Tourism Re-search 18:295-311.

Canis, W.F. 1996. At Any Price? Cultural Sponsoring. In Kulturarv - en kilde til verdiskaping. RapportFra Konferansen i Sandefjord.

Carson, R.T., R.C. Mitchell, M.B. Conway, and S. Navrud. 1997. Non-Moroccan Values for Rehabilitat-ing the Fes Medina. The World Bank: Washington, DC.

Cheong, R. 1995. The Virtual Threat to Travel and Tourism. Tourism Management 16:417-422.

Christ, C. 1998. Taking Ecotourism to the Next Level: A Look at Private Sector Involvement with LocalCommunities. In Lindberg, K., M. Epler Wood, and D. Engeldrum, eds. Ecotourism: A Guide for Plan-ners & Managers, Volume 2. Ecotourism Society: N. Bennington, VT.

Christie, I. and D. Crompton. 1999. Tourism in Africa: Main Report (Draft). The World Bank: Washing-ton, DC.

Dahles, H. and K. Bras (eds.) 1999. Tourism and Small Entrepreneurs: Development, National Policyand Entrepreneurial Culture, Indonesian Cases. Cognizant Communication Corporation: New York.

44

DFID [Department for International Development]. 1999a. Changing the Nature of Tourism: Developingan Agenda for Action. Department for International Development: London.

DFID [Department for International Development]. 1999b. Tourism and Poverty Elimination: UntappedPotential. Department for International Development: London.

Dewailly, J.-M. 1999. Sustainable Tourist Space: From Reality to Virtual Reality Tourism Geographies1:41-55.

Drumm, A. 1998. New Approaches to Community-based Ecotourism Management: Lessons from Ecua-dor. In Lindberg, K., M. Epler Wood, and D. Engeldrum, eds. Ecotourism: A Guide for Planners & Man-agers, Volume 2. Ecotourism Society, N. Bennington, VT.

Epler Wood, M. 1998. Meeting the Global Challenge of Community Participation in Ecotourism: CaseStudies and Lessons from Ecuador. The Nature Conservancy: Arlington, VA.

EU [European Commission]. 1998. A European Community Strategy to Support the Development ofSustainable Tourism in the Developing Countries. Communication from the Commission to the Counciland the European Parliament, COM(1998) 563 Final.

Forsyth, T. 1997. Environmental Responsibility and Business Regulation: The Case of Sustainable Tour-ism. The Geographical Journal 163:270-280.

Frank, P. and J. Bowermaster 1994. Can Ecotourism Save the Planet? Conde Nast Traveller, Decem-ber:134-139.

Ghimire, K. 1997. Emerging Mass Tourism in the South: Reflections on the Social Opportunities andCosts of National and Regional Tourism in Developing Countries. United Nations Research Institute forSocial Development: Geneva.

Goodwin, H., I. Kent, K. Parker, and M. Walpole. 1998. Tourism, Conservation, and Sustainable Devel-opment. IIED Wildlife and Development Series No. 12.. International Institute for Environment and De-velopment: London.

Goulding, C. 1999. Interpretation and Presentation. In Leask, A. and I. Yeoman, eds. Heritage VisitorAttractions: An Operations Management Perspective. Cassell: London.

Grant, J. and A. Allcock. 1998. National Planning Limitations, Objectives, and Lessons. In Lindberg, K.,M. Epler Wood, and D. Engeldrum, eds. Ecotourism: A Guide for Planners & Managers, Volume 2.Ecotourism Society, N. Bennington, VT.

GTZ [Deutsche Geselleschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit] 1997. Tourism and Conservation of Bio-logical Diversity. GTZ: Eschborn.

Gurung, C. 1996. A Case Study Presentation on Providing the Quality Experience. Proceedings of the 8thPATA Adventure Travel and Ecotourism Conference, pp. 11-15.

Hall, C.M. and S. McArthur. 1998. Integrated Heritage Management: Principles and Practice. The Sta-tionery Office: London.

Hawass, Zabi. 1998. Site Management: The Response To Tourism. Museum International 50(4):31-37.

45

Healy, R. 1994a. Tourism Merchandise as a Means of Generating Local Benefits from Ecotourism. Jour-nal of Sustainable Tourism 2:137-151.

Healy, R. 1994b. The “Common Pool” Problem in Tourism Landscapes. Annals of Tourism Research21:596-611.

Herbert, D.T. (ed.). 1997. Heritage, tourism and society. London: Pinter.

Herreman, Y. 1998. Museums and Tourism: Culture and Consumption. Museum International 50(3):4-12.

Honey, M. 1999. Ecotourism and Sustainable Development: Who Owns Paradise? Island Press: Wash-ington, DC.

Hudson, B.J. 1999. Fall of Beauty: The Story of a Jamaican Waterfall – A Tragedy in Three Acts. Tour-ism Geographies 1:343-357.

Inskeep, E. 1998. Guide for Local Authorities on Developing Sustainable Tourism. World Tourism Or-ganization: Madrid.

Jacobsen, J.K.S. and A. Viken (eds.). 1997. Turisme: Fenomen og Næring. Universitetsforlaget: Oslo.

Jamieson, W. and A. Czarnecki. 1999. Sustainable Urban Tourism Destination Management: The Casesof Klong Khwang and Phimai, Thailand. Report to the World Bank.

de Jong, A. [SNV: Netherlands Development Organisation]. n.d. Cultural Tourism in Tanzania: Experi-ences of a Tourism Development Project. SNV: The Hague.

Karwacki, J. 1999. Indigenous Ecotourism: Overcoming the Challenges. The Ecotourism Society News-letter, 1st Quarter. The Ecotourism Society: North Bennington, VT.

Kelly, I. and T. Nankervis. 1998. Tourism as a Catalyst for Sociocultural Change: An Overview. Tourism,Culture and Communication 1:79-85.

Leask, A. and I. Yeoman (eds.). 1999. Heritage Visitor Attractions: An Operations Management Per-spective. Cassell: London.

Lee, G.P. and G.W. Barrett. 1994. EC Support For Tourism in ACP States and Regions. Tourism Man-agement 15:200-202.

Lindberg, K. 1991. Policies for Maximizing Nature Tourism's Ecological and Economic Benefits. WorldResources Institute: Washington, DC.

Lindberg, K. 1998. Economic Aspects of Ecotourism. In Lindberg, K., M. Epler Wood, and D. Engel-drum, eds. Ecotourism: A Guide for Planners & Managers, Volume 2. Ecotourism Society, N. Benning-ton, VT.

Lindberg, K. Forthcoming. Economic Impacts. In The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism, D. Weaver, ed. CABInternational: London.

Lindberg, K. and B. Aylward. 1999 (Forthcoming). Price Responsiveness in the Developing CountryNature Tourism Context: Review and Costa Rican Case Study. Journal of Leisure Research.

Lindberg, K. and J. Enriquez. 1994. An Analysis of Ecotourism's Economic Contribution to Conservationand Development in Belize (2 vols.). World Wildlife Fund, Washington, DC.

46

Lindberg, K., J. Enriquez, and K. Sproule. 1996. Ecotourism Questioned: Case Studies from Belize. An-nals of Tourism Research 23(3):543-562.

Lindberg, K., M. Epler Wood, and D. Engeldrum, (eds.) Ecotourism: A Guide for Planners & Managers,Volume 2. Ecotourism Society: N. Bennington, VT.

Lindberg, K., B. Furze, M. Staff, and R. Black. 1998. Ecotourism in the Asia-Pacific Region: Issues andOutlook. Ecotourism Society: N. Bennington, VT.

Lindberg, K., C. Goulding, Z. Huang, J. Mo, P. Wei, and G. Kong. 1997. Ecotourism in China: SelectedIssues and Challenges. In M. Oppermann, ed. Pacific Rim Tourism. CAB International: London.

Lindberg, K. and S.F. McCool. 1998. A Critique of Environmental Carrying Capacity as a Means ofManaging the Effects of Tourism Development (Comment). Environmental Conservation 25(4):291-292.

Lindberg, K., S. McCool, and G. Stankey. 1997. Rethinking Carrying Capacity. Annals of Tourism Re-search 24(2):461-465.

Loermans, H. [SNV: Netherlands Development Organisation]. 1995. Memorandum on Tourism. SNV:The Hague.

Malkin, R. 1999. The Pioneers. UNESCO Courier. July/August:24-25.

McArthur, S. 1998. Introducing the Undercapitalized World of Interpretation. In Lindberg, K., M. EplerWood, and D. Engeldrum, eds. Ecotourism: A Guide for Planners & Managers, Volume 2. EcotourismSociety: N. Bennington, VT.

McGregor, N. 1999. Risk and Environment. In Leask, A. and I. Yeoman, eds. Heritage Visitor Attrac-tions: An Operations Management Perspective. Cassell: London.

McKercher, B. 1998. The Business of Nature-Based Tourism. Hospitality Press: Melbourne.

Medio, D. 1996. Sustainable Tourism Development in the Ras Mohamed National Park, Egypt. In T.M.Swanson, C.F. Ugalde, and R.A. Luxmore. Survey of Wildlife Management Regimes for SustainableUtilization. World Conservation Monitoring Centre: Cambridge, UK.

de Meyer, K. n.d. Channeling Revenues to Resource Protection. Unpublished manuscript.

MFA [Nowegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs]. 1997. A Strategy for Environment in Development Coop-eration. Utenriksdepartementet: Oslo.

MFA [Nowegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs]. 1999. The 1999 Development Aid Budget. Utenriksde-partementet: Oslo.

Morgan, D. J. 1992. Aid Funded Tourism Projects In Tonga: An Assessment. Unpublished honours thesis,James Cook University, Australia.

Moscardo, G. 1999. Making Visitors Mindful: Principles for Creating Sustainable Visitor Experiencesthrough Effective Communication. Sagamore.

Mowforth, M. and I. Munt 1998. Tourism and Sustainability: New Tourism in the Third World. Rout-ledge: London.

47

NORAD [Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation]. 1993. Environmental Impact Assessment(EIA) of Development Aid Projects: Check Lists for Initial Screening of Projects. NORAD: Oslo.

NORAD [Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation]. 1998. Botswana and Norway: Partners inDevelopment. NORAD: Oslo.

NORAD [Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation]. 1999. NORAD investerer i framtida:NORADs strategi mot år 2005. NORAD: Oslo.

Pearce, D. 1989. Tourist Development. Longman: New York.

Périer-D’Ieteren, C. 1998. Tourism and Conservation: Striking a Balance. Museum International 50(4):5-14.

Peters, J. 1998. Sharing National Park Entrance Fees: Forging New Partnerships in Madagascar. Societyand Natural Resources 11:517-530.

Prentice, R. 1993. Tourism and Heritage Attractions. Routledge: London.

Richards, G. (ed.). 1999. Developing and marketing Crafts Tourism (EUROTEX). ATLAS:

Robinson, M. 1999a. Is Cultural Tourism on the Right Track? UNESCO Courier. July/August:22-23.

Robinson, M. 1999b. Cultural Conflicts in Tourism: Inevitability and Inequality. In M. Robinson and P.Boniface (eds.) Tourism and Cultural Conflicts. CAB International: Wallingford.

Roggenbuck, J. 1992. Use of persuasion to reduce resource impacts and visitor conflicts. In Manfredo,M.J., ed. Influencing human behavior. Sagamore Publishing: Champaign, Illinois

Schalken, W. 1999. Where are the Wild Ones? The Involvement of Indigenous Communities in Tourismin Namibia. Cultural Survival Quarterly, Summer:40-42.

Shackley, M. (ed.) 1998a. Visitor Management: Case Studies from World Heritage Sites. ButterworthHeinemann: Oxford.

Shackley, M. 1998b. Introduction: World Cultural Heritage Sites. In Shackley, M. ed. Visitor Manage-ment: Case Studies from World Heritage Sites. Butterworth Heinemann: Oxford.

Sofield, T.H.B. 1991. Sustainable Ethnic Tourism in the South Pacific: Some Principles. Journal ofTourism Studies 2(1):56-70.

Steck, B., W. Strasdas, and E. Gustedt 1999. Tourism in Technical Co-operation: A Guide to the Concep-tion, Planning, and Implementation of Project-Accompanying Measures in Regional Rural Developmentand Nature Conservation. GTZ and BMZ: Eschborn.

Steck, B. [based on Steck, Strasdas, and Gustedt] 1999. Sustainable Tourism as a Development Option:Practical Guide for Local Planners, Developers, and Decision Makers. GTZ and BMZ: Eschborn.

Steyn, H. 1998. South Africa. In Africa and Global Tourism Prospects to the Year 2020: Challenges andOpportunities, World Tourism Organization Seminar Proceedings. WTO: Madrid.

Swarbrooke, J. 1995. The Development and Management of Visitor Attractions. Butterworth Heinemann:Oxford.

48

Swarbrooke, J. and S. Horner. 1999. Consumer Behaviour in Tourism. Butterworth Heinemann: Oxford.

Sweeting, J.E.N., A.G. Bruner, and A.B. Rosenfeld. 1999. The Green Host Effect: An Integrated Ap-proach to Sustainable Tourism and Resort Development. Conservation International: Washington, DC.

Telfer, D.J. and G. Wall 1996. Linkages Between Tourism and Food Production. Annals of Tourism Re-search 23:635-653.

Throsby, D. 1994. Linking Culture and Development Models: Towards a Workable Concept of CulturallySustainable Development. Paper prepared for the World Commission on Culture and Development.

UN [United Nations]. 1999. Towards Sustainable Tourism: Governments, Tour Industry Seek Plan atUnited Nations to Cut Environmental and Social Impacts. Press Release, New York, February.

UNEP [United Nations Environment Programme]. 1995. Environmental Codes of Conduct for Tourism.UNEP: Paris.

UNEP [United Nations Environment Programme]. 1998. Ecolabels in the Tourism Industry. UNEP: Paris.

UNESCO. 1995. Workshop on Sustainable Tourism Development in World Heritage Sites: Planning forHue. Final Report, Vol. III: Executive Summary and Recommendations.

UNESCO. 1998. World Culture Report: Culture, Creativity and Markets. UNESCO: Paris.

UNESCO. 1999. Tourism and culture: Rethinking the mix. UNESCO Courier. July/August.

Wall, G. 1999. Partnerships Involving Indigenous Peoples in the Management of Heritage Sites. In M.Robinson and P. Boniface (eds.) Tourism and Cultural Conflicts. CAB International: Wallingford.

WCED [World Commission on Environment and Development]. 1987. Our Common Future. OxfordUniversity Press: Oxford.

Williams, A.M. and A. Montanari. 1999. Sustainability and Self-Regulation: Critical Perspectives. Tour-ism Geographies 1:26-40.

Wolfensohn, J.D. [World Bank President]. 1999. A Proposal for a Comprehensive Development Frame-work. Memo to the Board, Management, and Staff of the World Bank Group. January 21.

World Bank. 1998a. Culture and Development at the Millennium. The World Bank: Washington, DC.

World Bank. 1998b. Assessing Aid: What Works, What Doesn’t, and Why. Oxford University Press: Ox-ford.

WTO [World Tourism Organization]. 1996. Multilateral and Bilateral Sources of Financing for TourismDevelopment. WTO: Madrid.

WTO [World Tourism Organization]. 1997. Tourism 2000: Building a Sustainable Future for Asia-Pacific. Final Report, Asia Pacific Ministers’ Conference on Tourism and Environment. WTO: Madrid.

WTO [World Tourism Organization]. 1998. Tourism Gaining Prestige as Development Tool. June 25Press Release.

WTO [World Tourism Organization]. 1999a. WTO News, July/August/September issue.

49

WTO [World Tourism Organization]. 1999b. Tourism at World Heritage Cultural Sites: The Site Man-ager’s Handbook. WTO: Madrid.

WTTC [World Travel and Tourism Council]. 1999. Data from the WTTC WWW site at:http://www.wttc.org/

WTTC and IH&RA [World Travel and Tourism Council and International Hotel & Restaurant Associa-tion]. 1999. UNCSD-7 Dialogue Starter Paper.

50

1 21 January 1999 Comprehensive Development Framework memo, page 17.

2 All money figures in this report are in US$ unless otherwise noted. The report is written in US English,except where passages are taken directly from sources written in British English. To increase readability,this report will not utilize the academic author/date referencing system except in endnotes. Instead, thereference section includes listings of material utilized in writing each section, as well as the citations forquotes such as this one. In addition, the convention of using brackets to reference minor changes in quo-tations is not used here.

3 Additional data and forecasts can be found in UNESCO (1999) or relevant WTTC and World TourismOrganization (WTO) documents.

4 Or, as an Asian proverb states, "Tourism is like a fire: You can cook your soup on it, but you can alsoburn down your house with it."

5 Future growth will come on top of already substantial figures. For example, Hawass (1998) notes that534 million tourists visited archaeological sites around the world in 1995. In recognition of the importantconnection between culture and tourism, the WTO selected “Preserving World Heritage for the NewMillennium” as its theme for World Tourism Day 1999 (WTO 1999a).

6 World Bank President James D. Wolfensohn notes that "physical and expressive culture is an under-valued resource in many developing countries. It can earn income, through tourism, crafts and other cul-tural enterprises. And whether income-earning or not, support to cultural activities of the very poor canhave a profound effect on their well-being, social organization, and social functioning." October 4, 1999speech at the Culture Counts conference in Florence.

7 For example, the World Bank (1998a) has recently moved from a focus on avoiding cultural damage indevelopment projects to active support through 1) conceptual analyses, such as the contribution of cultureto empowerment, as well as the economic rationale for investments in culture, 2) financial and technicalsupport, and 3) partnerships.

8 More information is available at http://home.earthlink.net/~crtp

9 Given the geographic focus, and potential non-Scandinavian readers, the literature referenced in thisreport will be predominantly English. Various resources are available in Norwegian (e.g., Jacobsen andViken 1997), but most of these focus on Norway or Scandinavia (an exception is the 1996 issue of“Mango – Fredskorpsforum,” which has a tourism theme and focuses on developing country issues). Seealso the North/South Coalition (Idégruppen om Nord/Sør) Information Bulletin No. 1, 1999, "Tourism ina North/South Perspective."

10 Similarly, project timing and scope limited the ability to fully review the substantial relevant literature.Christie and Crompton (1999), Steck, Strasdas, and Gustedt (1999), and Sweeting, Bruner, and Rosenfeld(1999) are examples of potentially valuable publications that were not reviewed in time for more thancursory inclusion here. Further work on this topic would benefit from review of these, and other, docu-ments. In addition, NORAD (1999) was received too late to be adequately incorporated into this report.

11 Swarbrooke (1995).

12 The importance of domestic and South-South tourism is discussed in Ghimire (1997) and in Lindberget al. (1998).

13 And much potential remains. For example, WTO (1999a:4) estimates that Mexico alone has 200,000

51

ancient archaeological sites.

14 Prentice (1993).

15 Some argue that virtual reality should replace physical travel, that it is the ultimate form of sustainabletourism. This view assumes that physical travel (tourism) is currently unsustainable, that it generatesmore negative impacts than positive impacts. This report assumes, and argues, that tourism is, or at leastcan be, sustainable.

16 Additional discussion of the importance of cultural preservation and the motivation for enhancingtourism’s function in this process is provided elsewhere (e.g., Boniface 1999; Kelly and Nankervis 1998;World Bank 1998a).

17 In his speech at the October 1999 "Culture Counts" conference in Florence, World Bank PresidentWolfensohn referred to the presentation of Wole Soyinka, the Nigerian Nobel laureate, who noted that"culture is a matrix of infinite possibilities and choices… from (which) we can extract arguments andstrategies for the degradation and ennoblement of our species, for its enslavement or liberation, for thesuppression of its productive potential or its enrichment; the stagnation of social existence or its renewal."

A World Bank Web page describes culture as an:

elusive term because it is all pervasive. It is material things and artifacts as well as ex-pression of values that anchor people's identity and gives a sense of meaning to their life;it is expressed often in the performance and visual arts, music and dance. So it linksstrongly to social development or simply having fun. It is also the cultural or meaningmaking industries like film, publishing or music, the fifth largest industry the world andmainly based on cities -- so it has major economic and job accretion impacts. It is his-toric buildings, festivals, the arts and animation in cities and thus the reason why tourismvisit places. In turn this affects the images of cities and are inward investment prospects.

18 Lindberg et al. (1997).

19 E.g., Bosselman, Peterson, and McCarthy (1999), which also summarizes an unusually frank report onnegative impacts in Thailand issued by the Tourist Authority of Thailand.

20 Robinson (1999b).

21 A popular refrain in tourism, and probably overstated, but likely true to some degree.

22 There are many examples of this, including whale bone carving amongst the Maori of New Zealand,pottery and tile painting in Turkey, rug weaving amongst the Navajo of the American southwest, and abo-riginal painting in Australia.

23 The last two may lead to a false impression of historical reality.

24 As noted in the Conclusion, such challenges and perceptions are not unique to tourism, but also occurin other sectors.

25 Throsby (1994) goes one step further and proposes four principles, which mirror those of SD generally,specifically for culturally sustainable development. Sofield (1991) defines principles for sustainable eth-nic tourism, based on the Pentecost Land Jump (naghol) in Vanuatu.

26 For a recent series of articles discussing indigenous culture issues in the context of ecotourism, see theSummer 1999 issue of Cultural Survival Quarterly.

52

27 This section presents a few of those, but other examples can be found on the WTTC Web site(http://www.wttc.org), in Frank and Bowermaster (1994), and in other sources.

28 Green Globe is currently going through a reorganization process.

29 Likewise, Star Tour/Fritidsresor is a major supporter of Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) activitiesin the Mediterranean area via donations related to trips to selected Mediterranean destinations.

30 Swarbrooke and Horner (1999).

31 See, for example, the Business and Environment surveys conducted for WTTC by MORI in 1998.

32 This concept is much debated in the tourism research literature, but there is general support for the ideathat overdevelopment can lead to decline in the destination. Hudson (1999) provides a recent examplefrom Jamaica.

33 In a survey of 69 outbound tourism businesses in the UK, Forsyth (1997) found that 64% of these feltthat host governments should be responsible for implementing sustainable tourism, 30% felt it was a jointresponsibility of operators and the governments, and 6% felt it was the responsibility of operators alone orassociations. Though WTTC, the lead industry organization, prefers voluntary measures, it recognizes(e.g., its Millenium Vision fact sheet) the need for regulation in some cases.

34 There has been a proliferation of books and other material on CHT in OECD countries (e.g., Boniface1995; Prentice 1993; Leask and Yeoman 1999), while the ecotourism literature focuses somewhat moreon developing countries (e.g., Honey 1999; Lindberg, Epler Wood, and Engeldrum 1998). Shackley(1998a) includes developing country case studies of World Heritage Sites and tourism, but the book ismore descriptive than analytical, and thus of limited value for present purposes.

The following is additional material for readers interested in more detail. Steck, Strasdas, and Gustedt(1999) is a (relatively) brief but thorough and relevant discussion of issues and strategies. Sweeting,Bruner, and Rosenfeld (1999) provide another good discussion, with a focus on ecotourism. Inskeep(1998) and Bosselman, Peterson, and McCarthy (1999) are other good starting points.

35 More information on this project can be obtained from Walter Jamieson (wjtourism@hotmail.com).

36 Without going into detail regarding planning tools, the importance of zoning should be stressed. Al-though zoning is often used in site-level planning and management (see below), it is also an importanttool at higher levels, such as local and regional planning (e.g., for a town containing historic buildings andmonuments). Zoning can be used to segregate activities, with a common recommendation being thattourism-related infrastructure and services be located away from historic buildings both to reduce thelikelihood of damage to these buildings and to preserve authenticity in the “viewshed” encountered byvisitors. Such restrictions are often relaxed in cases in which infrastructure and services are consistentwith heritage values (e.g., they maintain architectural authenticity and do not negatively impact heritagevalues).

37 Grant and Allcock (1998) describe the Australian ecotourism strategy process, as well as the out-comes of this process.

38 Of course, the power relationships can be much more complex than presented here, as the tourismministry/department may be more powerful than the culture/nature ministry, its partner in principle. Inaddition, there may be power struggles within ministries/departments, with pro-development and moreconservative factions potentially at odds.

39 There is a growing literature that looks at the relationship between government and local communities

53

in the management and cultural and natural heritage resources, including co-management and joint man-agement. Wall (1999) discusses this topic in the tourism context.

40 Robinson (1999a).

41 Ashley and Roe (1998).

42 There are many variations on these basic forms of community involvement in tourism and collabora-tion with the private sector. Ashley and Roe (1998) and Epler Wood (1998) provide good overviews andoutline important considerations, while Christ (1998) and Drumm (1998) described examples in Africaand Ecuador, respectively.

43 NACOBTA is often used as an example of good community-based tourism development involvingcommunity-industry partnerships, and future assistance programs in this area would benefit from a reviewof the NACOBTA experience (recent descriptions include Ashley and Roe (1998), Karwacki (1999), andSchalken (1999)).

44 Some feel that up-market tourism, and the high prices sometimes charged for cultural and natural at-tractions in these cases, is a form of elitism. These concerns need to be weighed against the benefits thatsuch tourism can bring in terms of local employment and revenues for CHM.

45 From Medio (1996).

46 Bosselman, Peterson, and McCarthy (1999) report that the development of Huatulco Bay in Mexicobrought running water and electricity to area villages for the first time.

47 Though monetary evaluation of these costs was not found for cultural heritage settings, Lindberg, En-riquez, and Sproule (1996) provide an example from natural heritage settings (c.f., Goodwin et al. 1998).

48 Going further, it may be more palatable to the industry to present fees as a charge to visitors, not to theindustry; in the case of visitors on tours, this would imply that fee costs are passed on to visitors via thetour package price.

49 Lindberg and Aylward (1999) provide an empirical evaluation of price and visitation at national parksin Costa Rica, as well as report an estimate of losses to the tourism industry and employees resulting fromprice increases.

50 Carson et al. (1997).

51 This, as well as other principles and techniques in the context of attraction fees, is discussed in Lind-berg (1998).

52 US/ICOMOS Newsletter November/December 1996 special issue on tourism, page 3 of the WWWversion.

53 According to Ayad (1999), 25% of Petra’s entrance fee revenues now goes to fund the Petra RegionalPlanning Council noted above. Thus, the quote is somewhat outdated, though the principle holds at manysites.

54 Questioned about whether the tax might discourage tourists, regional finance minister Joan Mesquidareplied that, if they could not pay this sort of money, "I'd rather they didn't come." A spokesperson forthe Minorcan hotel owners' association told “ENDS Daily” that the proposal was a way of responding "toour clients who are demanding a better quality environment. This is a revolution in the tourist industryand one which we welcome."

54

55 This topic was a theme at the May 1999 UNESCO conference in Malaysia on The Economics of Heri-tage.

56 Based on a July 9 and July 26 1999 Reuters reports.

57 Physical CHM generally has involved restoration back to the original form of the building, landscapeor artifact with a goal of capturing and maintaining the essence and style of a resource. Reproduction of aresource is often not seen as an authentic response to CHM, though it can be seen as acceptable practicewhen the original has been lost and is seen as essential for interpretive purposes or when use of the origi-nal will damage its heritage properties.

International practice typically does not support any intervention in the physical fabric that removes(scrapes) away the accretions of time. In the past, accretions to a building or environment frequentlywere removed in order to go back to the original form of the artifact, but the Charter of Venice clearlyargues against scraping. Nonetheless, there are instances where bringing an artifact back to its originalform may be appropriate or is clearly required for cultural tourism and economic development purposes.

International practice generally does not encourage the re-creation of lost environments. This is based onthe fact that the original artifact with its materials and workmanship is in fact the heritage resource.Based on this understanding, re-creations cannot be seen as possessing heritage values. Still, there areinstances where recreation may be justified.

Many heritage resources are significant in large part because of their location within a particular place inthe landscape. The moving of resources changes the building or artifact’s heritage value and is generallydiscouraged. However, in cases where a resource may be lost due to redevelopment pressures and as-suming that a sensitive site is available moving may be justified.

58 There is a wealth of information on this topic for readers interested in learning more, with Hall andMcArthur (1998) and WTO (1999b) being good introductory references. New publications continue toappear, with a particularly relevant forthcoming one being Art Pedersen’s Suggestions for ManagingTourism at World Heritage Sites: A Practical Manual for World Heritage Site Managers.

59 For example, the recent UNCSD process included as an important priority a call to identify the limitsto social and environmental carrying capacities at destinations.

60 Only a brief discussion is presented here; further discussion, and opposing viewpoints, is provided invan der Borg (1998), Canestrelli and Costa (1991), Lindberg and McCool (1998), and Lindberg, McCooland Stankey (1997).

61 Based on McGregor (1999).

62 Indeed, collection of such data can be one of the research focus areas, discussed below.

63 Loermans (1995).

64 See also Loermans (1995), who notes the opportunity to learn from experience in other sectors (e.g.,timber certification).

65 This also illustrates why certification programs focused on entire destinations (e.g., the Green Globeprogram) have met with limited success. In addition, certification programs seem to be pushed by theNorth, with less interest in them in the South. For example, the Dutch organization Retour considereddeveloping a labeling program, but did not move forward with it when they found that NGOs in southerncountries were not interested (Loermans 1995).

55

66 Here, as elsewhere, “local” is a loose term and might include all national residents, depending on theobjectives.

67 McKercher (1998) expands on this topic. Though the focus is nature tourism in an OECD context, theprinciples are also relevant to the current context.

68 Ashley and Roe (1998). Lindberg and Enriquez (1994) discuss this issues in the context of enhancingagricultural linkages in Belize, and Lindberg (Forthcoming) presents relevant conceptual issues and ex-amples from ecotourism. See also Telfer and Wall (1996).

69 For example, Roggenbuck (1992) discusses the potential, and limitations, of using interpretation tolimit depreciative behavior at natural areas. The role of education and communication is discussed invarious fora, including DFID (1999a) and in the UNCSD summary athttp://www.un.org/esa/sustdeve/tsout.htm.

70 For example, Goulding (1999), McArthur (1998), and Moscardo (1999).

71 LEAP Online is described at http://www.unescobkk.org/culture/lo-txt.htm. See also van der Borg andRusso (1999), who describe a networking program in Europe designed to share experiences amongst pro-fessionals.

72 More information is available at http://www.unescobkk.org/culture/imp-txt.htm

73 See also Morgan’s (1992) evaluation of the Tongan National Centre, the Tonga Visitors Bureau, and aTongan handicraft project.

74 This is modified from World Bank (1998b) and other sources. More detail is provided in that docu-ment, as well as the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) report Shaping the 21st Century:The Role of Development Cooperation. See also NORAD (1999:9) for a statement of goals within Nor-wegian development assistance.

75 World Bank (1998b). The primary focus of that report is on official development assistance (grantsplus concessional loans that have at least a 25% grant component). However, the principles are also gen-erally relevant for official development finance more broadly, which includes “market” or almost-marketrate loans.

Complementary issues are raised in the Comprehensive Development Framework approach proposed byWorld Bank President James Wolfensohn (Wolfensohn 1999). This approach also places culture as oneof the core areas to be addressed.

76 Many of these issues also have been raised specifically in the Norwegian development cooperationcontext (see NORAD 1999).

77 Whether tourism is well-served by being part of a larger project is open to debate. On the one hand, ithelps to integrate tourism into other sectors and activities. On the other, it may not receive the attentionand expertise necessary to achieve objectives. As noted by Steck, Strasdas, and Gustedt (1999:2), techni-cal cooperation staff (for larger projects involving tourism) “tend to have little knowledge of the touristindustry and tourism management.”

78 Pearce (1989).

79 Speech of World Bank President James D. Wolfensohn at the Culture Counts conference in Florence,October 4, 1999.

56

80 Brief information on a broader range of agencies is provided in WTO (1996). In some cases (e.g., theAsian and African Development Banks), efforts to obtain information via Web sites and email contactyielded little success (the only information obtained for the Asian Development Bank (ADB) is fromWTO (1996) and states that tourism is a relatively new sector for ADB assistance). In other cases (e.g.,World Bank, DFID, and SNV, and GTZ), substantial information was obtained.

81 Statement of General Director Karin Millet.

82 Within the IDB, the link between heritage and economic development, as well as the economic ration-ale for public sector involvement and IDB support of heritage projects, is currently being discussed. Animportant focus for multilateral (e.g., IDB) and bilateral agencies can be to help the public sector (Minis-tries of Culture and/or Tourism) improve their performance in terms of efficiency and equity in the pres-ervation of heritage and other areas that are economically justifiable. Techniques and mechanisms thatdemonstrate the importance of heritage restoration for tourism development (and not just within the con-text of an urban renewal scheme) can make important contributions. The May-June 1999 Vol.26 No.5-6issue of IDBAMÉRICA reports on urban cultural heritage projects financed by the IDB. It is availableon-line at http://www.iadb.org/exr/idb/indexeng.htm.

83 The World Bank, through the Second Tourism Development Project, is also involved in Jordan, whichrelies heavily on its cultural heritage as a tourist attraction (tourism generates approximately 10% of thecountry’s gross national product) (World Bank 1998a:80). The Bank is currently formulating a medium-to long-term Tourism Development Program, with objectives being to create the conditions for environ-mentally sound and culturally sensitive tourism in Petra, Wadi Rum, Jerash, and Karak. This includesachieving employment and income-generation potential, as well as improving infrastructure, environ-mental protection, and site management.

84 There is some debate in the tourism literature on this topic, as higher benefits per dollar spent by thesevisitors may be offset by fewer dollars spent relative to more up-market visitors. An empirical exampleof this is provided in Lindberg (1998). In addition, the non-economic costs and benefits of each segmentcan be very difficult to quantify.

85 de Jong (n.d.: preface).

86 Beck, Strasdas, and Gustedt (1999).

87 NORAD (1999:9) lists partners in Norwegian development cooperation as voluntary organizations,businesses, unions, cultural organizations, research organizations, government agencies, and institutions.

88 For example, NORAD (1999:12, 5) notes that “development cooperation is filled with challenges, di-lemmas, and difficult stray paths.” Further, development cooperation is a “particularly risky business.There are few easy answers – from time to time one must take chances.”