Content uploaded by Regina Scheyvens
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Regina Scheyvens on Oct 06, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 144–164, 2002
2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Printed in Great Britain
0160-7383/01/$22.00
www.elsevier.com/locate/atoures
PII: S0160-7383(01)00030-5
BACKPACKER TOURISM AND
THIRD WORLD DEVELOPMENT
Regina Scheyvens
Massey University, New Zealand
Abstract: Third World governments often scorn international backpackers, professing
instead an enthusiasm for pursuing higher-value, luxury tourism. This article presents an
alternative perspective, elaborating upon ways that providing goods and services for back-
packers can promote development, especially at the local level. Several challenges will need
to be addressed, however, if such communities are to have some control over the backpacker
submarket and maximize the benefits they gain from it. Such challenges include overcoming
the self-centered attitudes of some backpackers who might behave irresponsibly, and encour-
aging Third World governments to establish a policy environment and effective infrastructure
which support community involvement in this form of tourism. Keywords: Backpackers,
budget, Third World, development. 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Re
´sume
´:Le tourisme des routards et le de
´veloppement du tiers-monde. Les gouvernements
des pays du tiers-monde sont souvent tre
`s critiques a
`l’e
´gard des touristes du type routard
(backpackers), voulant pluto
ˆtde
´velopper un tourisme de luxe a
`forte contribution. Cet arti-
cle porte un regard diffe
´rent sur le phe
´nome
`ne en e
´laborant les moyens par lesquels les
prestations pour la cliente
`le backpacker peuvent e
ˆtre un vecteur de de
´veloppement, surtout
au niveau local. Cependant, les acteurs locaux devront se montrer a
`la hauteur de la situation
s’ils aspirent a
`contro
ˆler le tourisme des backpackers et en maximiser les retombe
´es. Il faud-
rait œuvrer pour transformer l’attitude e
´gocentrique de certains backpackers qui se compor-
tent de fac
¸on irresponsable et encourager les gouvernements du tiers-monde a
`mettre en
place une politique et une infrastructure qui soutiendra les initiatives des acteurs locaux vis-
a
`-vis de ce genre de tourisme. Mots-cle
´s: routards, tiers-monde, de
´veloppement. 2001 Elsev-
ier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
INTRODUCTION
Almost wherever it is viable, Third World governments are actively
pursuing tourism growth in their countries. They are particularly inter-
ested in international tourism (Harrison 1992), believing it brings their
countries numerous economic benefits including employment opport-
unities, small business development, and foreign exchange earnings.
They tend to assume that more money is earned by attracting tourists
who can afford luxury goods and services, despite the fact that this
often leads to a country’s dependence on imported products, foreign
investment, and expatriate skills, resulting in repatriation of resultant
Regina Scheyvens is Lecturer in geography and development studies at Massey University
(School of Global Studies, Private Bag 11 222, Palmerston North, New Zealand. Email
<r.a.scheyvens@massey.ac.nz>). Her interest in Third World tourism, especially ecotourism,
builds upon her earlier research on sustainable development and gender. She has carried
out fieldwork in both the South Pacific and Southern Africa.
144
145REGINA SCHEYVENS
profits (Baskin 1995). But those financial benefits received from luxury
tourism developments in the Third World very rarely “trickle down”
to be of any significance to people at grassroots level.
While a number of academics have noted this problem, thoroughly
critiquing forms of tourism development dominated by overseas inves-
tors (Britton 1982; Brohman 1996), they have rarely proposed support
for alternative forms of tourism based on the village economy (Brown
1998). The presumption that high-spending tourists bring the greatest
benefits to Third World countries is questioned in this paper. Instead,
it argues how local communities in the Third World might benefit
from involvement in budget tourism. In particular, the often maligned
backpacker market segment is considered.
The academic literature provides clues as to how the backpacker
segment can be described. This submarket is characterized by budget-
consciousness and a flexible tourism style, with most participants trave-
ling alone or in small groups. Backpackers are often keen to share the
local lifestyle (Loker 1993:33), citing “meeting the people”as a key
motivation (Riley 1988:325). Their recreational activities are likely to
focus around nature (such as trekking), culture (village stays and
more), or adventure (including river rafting or riding camels) (Loker-
Murphy and Pearce 1995). This is associated with the tendency for
backpackers to travel more widely than other tourists, seeking unusual
or out of the way locations and/or experiences (Haigh 1995). Accord-
ing to Riley, “the less traveled route and more difficult way of getting
there has a high degree of mystique and status conferral”(1988:321).
The tight budget many backpackers impose on themselves is largely
related to the longer duration of their travels (Gibbons and Selvarajah
1994). As Cohen warns, however, one could be misled by the idealized
image of the backpacker (or “youth tourists”in his study of southern
Thailand beaches) “as a curious and adventurous traveler in search of
‘authentic’experiences”(1982:221).
Perhaps because of its association with the “hippy”and “drifter”tour-
ism of the 60s and 70s, the backpacker segment of the tourism market
has not always been welcomed by Third World regional or national
governments (Cohen 1973; Erb 2000; Hall 1997; Hampton 1998;
Loker-Murphy and Pearce 1995). Much credence has been given to
the stereotypical image of the backpacker as an unkempt, immoral,
drug-taking individual. In Southeast Asia, the interest paid by most
government planners to the backpacker sector is either negligible or
negative. According to Hampton, this “sector is at best tacitly ignored,
or at worst actively discouraged in official tourism planning”
(1998:640). Independent travelers (hereafter tourists)—who include
backpackers—are actively discouraged in the Maldives (Lyon 1997),
and have been banned completely in Bhutan as they are seen as posing
a threat to the country’s gross national happiness, with only approved
tour parties allowed (Wood and House 1991). Meanwhile in Goa, the
Director of Tourism believes that “Luxury tourism was the way forward.
Hippies and backpackers do not bring in enough money”(cited in
Wilson 1997:68). Similarly, efforts to attract tourists in southern Africa
146 BACKPACKERS AND DEVELOPMENT
are centered on organized mass international tourists who have travel
arrangements made for them (Baskin 1995).
In some cases, government interest in discouraging backpackers and
other budget tourists has been translated into policy. For example,
government policy in Botswana states:
Foreign tourists who spend much of their time but little of their
money in Botswana are of little net benefit to the country. Indeed,
they are almost certainly a net loss because they crowd the available
public facilities such as roads and camp sites and cause environmental
damage …. It is important to shift the mix of tourists away from those
who are casual campers towards those who occupy permanent accom-
modation. Encouraging the latter while discouraging the former
through targeted marketing and the imposition of higher fees for the
use of public facilities, are obviously among the objectives to be pur-
sued (cited in Little 1991:4).
While denigrating budget tourists, this policy aims simultaneously to
“provide local communities with direct and indirect benefits from tour-
ism activities”(cited in Little 1991:6), without specifically considering
whether it is realistic for impoverished rural communities to cater for
higher end tourists. Local communities do not usually have the skills,
experience, or resources to provide services for luxury tourists. In
many cases, therefore, such communities miss out completely on the
benefits of tourism ventures in their own backyards.
In order to ensure a strong likelihood of economic, political, and
social benefits accruing to a local community, Ashley and Roe
(1998:25) stress the need for full participation of communities in tour-
ism. This can occur where communities supply the majority of goods
and services to tourists, have considerable input into planning
decisions, and collectively manage common resources. When tourism
ventures are largely dependent on local cultural and natural resources,
and are locally managed, communities can “participate with equity in
the [tourism] process”(Lillywhite and Lillywhite 1991:89g). This paper
will argue that such conditions are more likely to be present when
communities target the needs of budget tourists, especially the signifi-
cant backpacker segment.
BACKPACKERS AND LOCAL DEVELOPMENT
This paper considers both pros and cons of backpacker tourism in
terms of whether it promotes local level development. It provides a
review of the literature on this general research theme while also draw-
ing on the author’s backpacking experiences through Asia in 1989–
90, and more recent fieldwork on related issues of sustainable liveli-
hoods in southern Africa and the South Pacific.
Reservations About Backpackers
Before considering ways in which catering to the backpacker seg-
ment can promote local development, the discussion raises some con-
147REGINA SCHEYVENS
cerns about backpackers rather than assuming that they are an
inherently desirable submarket. The very tenets of backpacker culture,
including the independent nature of backpacker travel and their cul-
tural sensitivity, have been questioned, both in academic writing and
popular fiction. For example, the filming in Thailand of one of the
novels discussed below, The Beach, starring Hollywood golden boy
Leonardo DiCaprio, has sparked numerous discussion sites on the
internet and a torrent of media interest in backpacking, particularly
focusing on undesirable traits of backpackers. Similarly, when the Lon-
don-based nongovernmental organization, Tourism Concern,
addressed them in a special issue of their magazine, In Focus (Spring
1999), the British press were quick to pick up upon negative aspects
of backpacker culture.
One criticism of backpackers is that, in ensuring that their funds
will last for the duration of their travels, they become excessively con-
cerned with bargain hunting (Goodwin, Kent, Parker and Walpole
1998). They may regard haggling as a game, to the extent that they
exploit artisans and traders so desperate for a sale that they accept
unreasonably low prices for their products (Bradt 1995). According to
Riley “Status among travelers is closely tied to living cheaply and
obtaining the best ‘bargains’which serve as indicators that one is an
experienced traveler”(1988:320). Budi, an experienced tour guide,
argues that the average independent tourist to Indonesia has changed
somewhat in recent years:
Now tourists are going to Indonesia not to see the culture or the
people, but to compete with other travelers about how cheaply they
can travel. They all want to be the winner, and don’t realize how rude
they are to local people (cited in Wheat 1995:50).
While in the past the tendency for backpackers to seek out more inten-
sive contact with local people has generally been posed in a positive
light, some commentators have recognized that such “alternative”tour-
ism forms are also more invasive (Butler 1990). Because they seek “out
of the way”destinations, Spreitzhofer argues, the influence of back-
packers on Third World societies “… proves often to be more lasting
and shaping than organized, spatially selective package tourism”
(1998:982). Furthermore, their very search for authentic experiences
is based on exclusion of other tourists (Jamieson 1996), which is why
Mowforth and Munt suggest that backpackers can be included in the
category of the self-centered tourists they call “ego-tourists”(1998:135).
Possibly, backpackers’more lasting influence will involve the prob-
lem of seeking out new destinations but failing to understand cultural
norms of appropriate behavior in these new locales (Bradt 1995).
Some suggest that backpackers simply do not care about local customs
and acceptable behavior, instead showing blatant disregard for social
norms (Noronha 1999). Acting out their perceived freedom from
social commitments and constraints (Jamieson 1996) may lead then to
culturally and socially inappropriate behavior. This seems to be a prob-
lem particularly in backpacker ghettos or enclaves, places where large
numbers congregate to experience home comforts (from good phone
148 BACKPACKERS AND DEVELOPMENT
and internet services to familiar foods, such as the ubiquitous banana
pancake) and the company of tourists of similar mind. Such places
can be found in Khatmandu, Bangkok, and Pushkar, major points of
reference on the great backpackers’overland route through Asia.
There is increasing evidence that such ghettos are now emerging out-
side of the Asian region as well (Aziz 1999). As one guesthouse man-
ager stated, “The Indian tourists that visit Pushkar have a holy respect
for the place, but the foreigners just treat the place as a fun theme
park. They drink and smoke in the temples and show no respect”
(cited in Mandalia 1999:17). Scanty or excessively casual dress, drug
and alcohol abuse, and casual sexual encounters can all cause insult
to local residents (Aziz 1999; Mandalia 1999), whose reliance on
income from tourism often leads them to tolerate what they feel is
outright denigration of their customs.
Two popular novels have recently explored issues surrounding back-
packer culture, William Sutcliffe’sAre You Experienced? (1999) and Alex
Garland’sThe Beach (1997). The former follows the anti-hero, Dave
the British backpacker, as he travels around India as part of his “year-
off”before university. At one point, at a train station, he is delighted
to find a fellow European (who turns out to be a journalist) with whom
he can strike up a conversation. He is soon taken aback, however, as
the journalist starts to probe and question Dave’s travel experience.
The journalist sums up backpacker travel in India:
University of Life. Year one: Advanced Adventure Playgrounds. Part
One Exam: go to the Third World and survive. No revision, interest,
intellect or sensitivity required …(Sutcliffe 1999:138)…it’s not hipp-
ies on a spiritual mission who come here any more, just morons on
a poverty-tourism adventure holiday …going to India isn’t an act of
rebellion these days, it’s actually a form of conformity for ambitious
middle-class kids who want to be able to put something on their CV
that shows a bit of initiative …. Your kind of travel is all about low
horizons dressed up as open-mindedness. You have no interest in
India, and no sensitivity for the problems this country is trying to face
up to. You also treat Indians with a mixture of contempt and suspicion
which is reminiscent of the Victorian colonials. Your presence here,
in my opinion, is offensive (Sutcliffe 1999:140).
The sentiments of the journalist character are supported by Hutnyk,
who suggests that most backpackers visiting Calcutta have little interest
in meeting Indians and learning about their culture: “… there is much
doubt as to how far the desire to know others governs the activities of
the traveler. Certainly ‘foreign tourists’in Calcutta seem to do a good
deal of avoiding ‘others’” (1996:61).
The other novel, The Beach, was written as a critique of backpacker
culture. It explores a group of backpackers in Thailand seeking escape
from the well-traveled route, and serves “… as commentary on the folly
of smug, young tourists, who call themselves travelers—a special breed
more sensitive to the local cultures and locations they trample over”
(Gluckman 2000). When a British backpacker, a new arrival in Bang-
kok, asks a more seasoned French backpacker if he has been to Chiang
149REGINA SCHEYVENS
Mai (main stop off point for tourists setting out to see hill tribe
peoples), he replies:
“Yes, we went on a trek. We rafted on a river. Very boring, no?”He
sighed and leant backwards, resting his back on the stone step
behind him.
“Boring?”
Etienne smiled. “Raft, trek. I want to do something different, and
everybody wants to do something different. But we all do the same
thing. There is no …ah …”
“Adventure”(Garland 1997:19).
In the documentary Thailand Backpackers: Full Moon Party (Pendry
1998), which also addresses the subject of backpackers in Thailand, it
is clear that their experiences are framed more by group behavior than
the search for adventure. The bulk of this film focuses on backpackers
in the south of the country seeking self-fulfillment through a combi-
nation of the following: searching for the perfect beach, taking drugs,
having (sometimes unconventional) sexual experiences, going on a
meditation retreat, and partying. When one of the backpackers, who
has just eaten a “magic mushroom”omelet is asked: “Do you think this
is the real Thailand?”, he replies, “No, but I didn’t come for the real
Thailand—this is purely hedonistic”. The documentary finishes with a
full moon party on a beach, the atmosphere set by Ecstasy and techno
music. The next morning, the “perfect beach”so many have searched
for is littered with human bodies, and being used as a toilet by some
of the male backpackers. The only backpackers shown rejecting this
aspect of backpacker culture decide to go north, in search of “the real
Thailand”, meaning hill tribe peoples in colorful dress. Presumably
there is nothing valuable to see or learn from the millions of Thais
inhabiting the rest of the country who have adopted a more west-
ernized style of dress.
Based on such characterizations of backpackers, it is not at all sur-
prising that some authors have questioned the right of backpackers to
take the moral high ground when comparing their tourism experi-
ences to those of conventional tourists (Mowforth and Munt 1998;
Spreitzhofer 1998). Indeed, Aziz, commenting on backpackers in the
Egyptian beach resort of Dahab, suggests that far from being an alter-
native form of tourism, backpacking has turned into just another
strand of mass, institutionalized tourism:
The idea of backpackers as drifters and explorers who desire to set
themselves apart from the mainstream …is challenged. Backpacker
culture is now established for the tourists in Dahab as if waiting to be
consumed by them upon arrival (1999:15).
In Dahab, this “backpacker culture”includes particular forms of dress
(tie-dyed T-shirts), music (“rap, hip-hop, and sixties”), and behavior
(moving from coffee shop to coffee shop, consuming endless pancakes,
pizzas, and milkshakes, engaging in casual sexual liaisons, and consum-
150 BACKPACKERS AND DEVELOPMENT
ing drugs). Undoubtedly aspects of this culture can be found in back-
packer ghettos throughout Asia, if not more widely. Doorne (1993),
for example, talks about institutionalized backpacker culture associa-
ted with backpacker buses in New Zealand. Back in Dahab, Aziz (1999)
found that far from showing an interest in local culture, there was little
evidence of backpackers establishing contact with local people unless
it was for commercial transactions or to secure an Egyptian boyfriend,
and Egyptian food was not even available on the coffee shop menus.
The above accounts may suggest that contemporary backpackers are
engaging in a self-centered form of poverty-tourism, traveling around
shrouded from the “real Third World”by the backpacker ghettos
which provide the major stepping stones along their well-trodden
route. However, such negative generalizations about backpackers
derive largely from their recent representations in the popular media
and the associated hype, rather than providing an accurate represen-
tation of what appears to be developing into an increasingly diverse
demographic group. While self-gratification and indulgence may be
the primary motivation for one category of backpackers, others may
be driven by a genuine interest in learning about other peoples and
environments, and many may fall somewhere between these extremes.
Detailed research on backpacker characteristics is needed before one
can make assumptions about a general change, for the worse, in back-
packer attitudes and behavior over time. Furthermore, while concerns
about cultural insensitivity and inappropriate behavior of some back-
packers show that this submarket should not be seen as ethically
superior to other types, it is not as if other groups of tourists are
immune to such faults.
Both Hutnyk (1996) and Noronha (1999), however, identify a more
fundamental problem with backpacking, seeing it as just another vari-
ant of global tourism which reinforces inequitable links between the
West and the Third World:
Budget or “alternative”travel …can be criticized as an illusion of
“nice”cottage capitalism, soothing ideological anxieties while
extending commercialization and the tourism industry. Rather than
working towards social transformation, alternative travel …seems
often to tinker at the edges of capitalist expansion into new market
niches (Hutnyk 1996:x).
While recognizing the validity of the above criticisms, there are some
who seriously question academic perspectives which suggest that
“development”in general holds no possibility of improving the lives
of Third World peoples:
It seems ironic that contemporary scholarly debates should clamor
for a “post-development”era, just when voices from the margins—
so celebrated in discourses of difference and alternative culture—are
demanding their rights to greater access to a more generous idea of
development (Rangan 1996:222).
It seems particularly inappropriate to reject all tourism notions as a
strategy for development when this has been identified as a desirable
livelihood option by many Third World communities:
151REGINA SCHEYVENS
Tourism is part of the process of modernization, and globalization,
but local actors are agents in this process, and not just the recipients of
modernization processes. They attempt to develop strategies by which
encounters with tourists can be beneficial to them (Erb 2000:710).
Rather than reflecting on problems inherent in being integrated into
global tourism essentially as underdogs, local communities often
enthusiastically pursue the opportunities they feel this industry will
bring to them. For example, even in locations like Goa, with its well-
developed anti-tourism lobby, protests in the past have seemed to aim
at mass rather than independent tourists, even though this latter group
has given the area its “hippy haven”reputation. Wilson (1997), for
example, cites a well-publicized case of Goan people throwing rotten
fish and cow dung at tourist buses. Rather than an attack against all
tourism forms, he explains, this incident was instigated by small-scale
local entrepreneurs who felt that charter-package tourism was putting
them out of business by providing for all of the needs of tourists
(accommodation, transport, and food) in a single outlet. Wilson argues
that in general, Goans welcome backpackers because they can easily
service their needs, and this has resulted in an industry characterized
by “… wide local ownership of resources and the broad distribution
of benefits throughout the local community”(1997:63). It is thus
important to balance backpackers’problems with an exploration of
the literature which unearths positive contributions they can make to
local development.
Backpackers’ Contributions to Local Development
With the notable exceptions of Wilson (1997), Spreitzhofer (1998),
and Hampton (1998), few tourism researchers have explicitly exam-
ined ways in which backpackers contribute to local development in
Third World contexts. A body of evidence on this issue does emerge,
however, when research on related issues is also scrutinized. For
example, some useful ideas have been expressed about budget tourism
in general, and about backpacking in Australia and New Zealand. Such
evidence, as a whole, suggests that there may be much to gain from
aiming “low”, and providing for backpackers. Both economic and non-
economic development criteria need to be considered (Table 1).
A key reason behind the negative attitude of Third World govern-
ments to backpackers has been the perception that their living on a
budget means they bring little revenue to the destinations. This per-
ception has been seriously challenged, however, by research in New
Zealand and Australia which found that, largely due to the longer dur-
ation of their stay, international backpackers actually spent more
money than any other tourist category (Haigh 1995; Gibbons and Sel-
varajah 1994). In Australia, for example, a 1992 survey revealed that
the average expenditure per backpacker was US$2,667 (the 1992 aver-
age exchange rate of AUS$1=US$0.7353 has been used for conversions
throughout this article) compared to an average for all tourists of only
$1,272 (Haigh 1995:1). Furthermore, backpackers spread their spend-
ing over a wider geographic area, bringing benefits to remote and
152 BACKPACKERS AND DEVELOPMENT
Table 1. How Backpackers Can Facilitate Local Development
Economic Development Criteria Non-Economic Development Criteria
쐌Spend more money than other tourists 쐌Enterprises catering for backpackers
because of longer duration of visit. are generally small and thus ownership
쐌Adventuresome nature and longer and control can be retained locally.
duration of visit means money spent is 쐌Local people gain self-fulfillment
spread over a wider geographical area, through running own tourism
including remote, economically depressed, enterprises rather than filling in menial
or isolated regions. positions in enterprises run by outside
쐌Do not demand luxury therefore will operators.
spend more on locally produced goods 쐌Because they operate their own
(such as food) and services (transport, businesses, local people can form
homestay accommodation). organizations which promote local
쐌Economic benefits can be spread widely tourism, giving the community power in
within communities as even individuals with upholding their interests and
little capital or training can provide desired negotiating with outside bodies.
services or products. Formal qualifications 쐌The interest of backpackers in
are not needed to run small enterprises; meeting and learning from local people
skills can be learned on the job. can lead to a revitalisation of traditional
쐌Basic infrastructure is required therefore culture, respect for the knowledge of
ensuring low overhead costs and elders, and pride in traditional aspects
minimising the need for imported goods of one’s culture.
(such as can use bamboo and thatch to 쐌Backpackers use fewer resources (like
create a beach stall). cold showers and fans rather than hot
쐌Significant multiplier effects from baths and air conditioning), therefore
drawing on local skills and resources. are kinder to the environment.
쐌Local servicing of the tourism market
challenges foreign domination of
tourism enterprises.
otherwise economically depressed regions where other tourists rarely
venture, except perhaps if they dash past in their luxury coach (Baskin
1995; Gibbons and Selvarajah 1994; Loker-Murphy and Pearce 1995).
Backpackers can contribute significantly to local economic develop-
ment because they generally purchase more locally produced goods
and services than other categories of tourists (Hampton 1998; Good-
win et al 1998; Wheeler 1999; Wilson 1997). While there are exceptions
to this generality (Goodwin 1999), what needs to be stressed is that in
economic terms backpackers are worth more to the local economy
than they commonly receive credit for. The very nature of this practice
often results in their spending more money locally, while the more
structured nature of package tours limits contacts with local people.
For example, while package tourists traveling by coach in India are
delivered to the compound of their hotel, backpackers arrive at bus
and train stations where local traders have more opportunities to sell
them their wares (Goodwin 1999). Similarly, tourists staying in higher
class seaside resorts are likely to find that they have a private beach,
fenced off partly to shield the guests from local touts. Further down
the beach, however, these same touts can find backpackers willing to
153REGINA SCHEYVENS
buy a sarong, some jewelry, or a fresh pineapple. As another example,
Pobocik and Butalla (1998) compare the economic contributions of
independent and group trekkers, the latter being on pre-paid
organized trips, in the Annapurna Conservation Area Project in Nepal.
They found that while group trekkers spent $31 a day in Nepal com-
pared to only $6.50 a day for independent trekkers, independent trek-
kers were found to contribute much more to the local economy within
the Annapurna area. This was because the groups usually camped and
the companies brought in most provisions for their clients, whereas
independent trekkers stayed in local lodges, consumed local food and
drink, and purchased local souvenirs:
…group trekkers contribute little to local economies, which is a fun-
damental factor in the successful trekking agency management para-
digm of supplying all needs and reaping all profits. This practice is in
direct conflict with the accepted ecotourism paradigm of maximizing
local economic benefits (Pobocik and Butalla 1998:163).
Tourists visiting the Komodo National Park in Indonesia, attracted by
the unique “Komodo dragon”reptile, also support this trend. Those
in the highest spending category visit Komodo from cruiseships which
provide all food and accommodation, so that they spend very little on
Komodo; and the same applies to those who use charter boats for their
visit. Budget tourists, however, use the government ferry, which necessi-
tates a stay of at least one night on Komodo’s main island, and conse-
quently they spend two to three times as much money within the park
as do the other tourists (Goodwin et al 1998). Meanwhile, many famil-
ies in Samoa have built basic beach fales (traditional thatched houses)
which are popular with backpackers. Morning and evening meals are
included in the price of the accommodation and most of the money
generated is retained locally (Twining-Ward and Twining-Ward 1998).
Such findings from a variety of Third World countries support the
conclusion of Gibbons and Selvarajah who note that in the New Zea-
land case “… observational and anecdotal evidence suggests a lower
degree of leakage from the backpacker segment than any other”
(1994:19).
Local people and products can meet the needs of backpackers larg-
ely because they do not demand luxury (Polit 1991). Backpackers are:
…not so concerned about amenities (e.g., plumbing), restaurants
(e.g., Westernized food), and transportation (e.g., air conditioning)
geared specifically to the tastes of the mass tourist. If a budget traveler
place has an appeal to western tastes (e.g., banana pancakes), it
requires minimal infrastructure (Riley 1988:323).
The lack of importance of infrastructure is witnessed by “beach shacks”
selling food and drink to backpackers in Goa (Wilson 1997), or famil-
ies renting out rooms in their homes to backpackers, as is common
practice in Bali (Wall and Long 1996). These tourists may even be
interested in staying in very basic accommodation, such as could be
provided by a family in a township in South Africa, because of the
adventuresome nature of this experience.
When local resources and skills are used to provide facilities for tour-
154 BACKPACKERS AND DEVELOPMENT
ists, there can be important multiplier effects (Cater 1996:6). On Gili
Trawangan in eastern Indonesia, for example, backpacker bungalows
are built of local bamboo and concrete blocks manufactured in the
village, and they are furnished with bamboo tables and chairs made
in neighboring Lombok and curtains made of the traditional ikat fabric
(Hampton 1998:649). Such ventures can be economically viable even
with small numbers of tourists because of low overhead costs and mini-
mal leakages (Wall and Long 1996).
Backpackers are also likely to support certain economic enterprises
developed by local communities which other tourists, because of their
less flexible travel schedules, can not. For example, there are many
skilled artisans in the Third World whose work is much admired by
backpackers, among others. But it is these budget tourists who can
decide to attend a workshop on craft manufacture, such as weaving,
carving or pottery. In 1998, a week-long workshop on drum making
was held in a rural area of Zimbabwe, after being advertised in major
backpacker establishments in Harare. The fee charged covered accom-
modation, food, training, and all materials. In New Zealand, many in
Northland choose to attend a one day workshop in which they learn
from Maori artisans the skill of bone carving.
The spread of economic benefits within communities may be greater
when catering to tourists on a budget, as more community members
can participate. For example, a study in Namibia found that informal
sector activities associated with tourism, including the sale of fuelwood
and vegetables to campers, offered a valuable means of enhancing the
livelihoods of the poorest groups in society. Individuals did not need
capital, a broad range of skills, or a good command of a foreign langu-
age to participate successfully in tourism in this way (Ashley and Roe
1998:21). It has similarly been found that women, often excluded from
formal economic activities, are more likely to operate informal tourism
enterprises by selling handicrafts, operating food stalls, or working as
beach vendors (Goodwin et al 1998; Kindon forthcoming; Wilson
1997). Catering to backpackers will not usually require community
members to have any formal qualifications; rather, they can develop
skills on the job or build on their existing skills.
Contrary to the beliefs of many tourism policymakers, it appears that
starting small can offer greater economic benefits to a community than
investing in more sophisticated, capital-intensive projects. For example,
a Namibian study has shown that the establishment of a very basic
campsite with enough room for two tents and no paid staff can gain
a high rate of return on investment, while an upmarket campsite of
similar size and with a similar number of campers but with a paid man-
ager and individual ablutions, would run at a loss (Ashley and Gar-
land 1994:20).
Therefore, if tourism moves “up scale”in an area, local people can
lose important economic advantages they have gained. This is certainly
a concern in Pangandaran, a fishing village in Java which has
developed into a beach resort popular with backpackers as well as dom-
estic tourists. As noted by Wilkinson and Pratiwi (1995:295), Panganda-
ran may not retain the feeling of being a village for long, particularly
155REGINA SCHEYVENS
as tourism development here has been identified as a major priority
by the government. Major land ownership changes have started to
occur with both a proposal for a golf course and the development of
afive-star hotel on what was previously communal village land:
Such dramatic changes will have the greatest effect on lower-class
people: the poor. Many of them live on and cultivate household crops
on tanah negara (the nation’s land) which appears slated for tourism
development. They face the possibility of being displaced from their
homes and losing employment in their informal sector jobs as the tour-
ism product moves up-scale and creates demands for higher standards of
facilities and services (Wilkinson and Pratiwi 1995:295; emphasis
added).
Some governments are slowly starting to recognize the economic bene-
fits backpackers can bring. Following the interest from tourists
expected to accompany filming of the The Beach in Thailand, for
example, the Tourism Authority of Thailand is now welcoming back-
packers, largely in recognition of the fact that the nature of their
spending leads to local-level jobs (Gluckman 2000). As yet, however,
such proactive support for the backpacker sector has not arisen, as
found in other parts of the world, like Australia and New Zealand. For
example, the Australian Department of Tourism allocated $3 million
to developing the backpacker market between 1993–97 (Loker-Murphy
and Pearce 1995).
It is important not to confine discussions of the relationship between
budget tourism and local development to economic criteria. A dis-
cussion of some significant social and environmental benefits to com-
munities catering to backpackers is also in order. Encouraging local
people to cater to the needs of backpackers poses a challenge to
foreign domination of tourism enterprises within Third World coun-
tries. There is a global economic concentration of wealth in tourism,
witnessed by the domination of the package tourism market by a small
number of key players with advanced forward and backward linkages
controlling aspects of the industry. For example, company mergers tak-
ing place in the United Kingdom are likely to result in just four tour
companies controlling up to 90% of outbound charter capacity. These
companies do not just own tour operators in Britain and abroad, they
also own hotels, self-catering accommodations, airlines, cruiseships,
and retail chains (O’Connor 2000). As noted by the managing director
of Sunvil Holidays, Neil Josephides, such dominance is not necessarily
in the interests of host countries, such as his home, Cyprus:
Thomson combined with Preussag will control 20–30% of tourism to
Cyprus. Tourism represents over 20% of the country’s Gross Domestic
Product, so the operators don’t just control the hoteliers, they control
the country. It’s very depressing (cited in O’Connor 2000:5).
It has been suggested that through supporting smaller players in the
industry, backpackers pose a threat to such corporate domination:
Given the political will to constrain the larger players, backpacker
tourism could increase local participation in real development, part
156 BACKPACKERS AND DEVELOPMENT
of a more sustainable long-term strategy which attempts to balance
local economic development needs against powerful interests wishing
to build large international tourism resorts (Hampton 1998:655).
As was suggested in the case of Pangandaran, communities providing
services to backpackers are more likely to retain control over their
enterprises. This is also the case with the food and fale accommodation
options offered by Samoan families, as mentioned earlier. This provide
an example of the local ownership and participation which charac-
terizes Samoan tourism, leading to a “… more socially equitable and
ecologically sustainable tourism industry”than that found in neighbor-
ing Fiji where much is foreign-owned (Twining-Ward and Twining-
Ward 1998:270). The same trend has been noted in New Zealand,
where many small- to medium-sized businesses serving the backpacker
market are locally owned and operated. Much investment in the tra-
ditional package tourism, meanwhile, is overseas-based and thus profits
also flow offshore. Therefore, “If the package tourist segment is pur-
sued solely, New Zealand risks creating jobs mainly in servile positions
at the cost of small business entrepreneurs”(Gibbons and Selvarajah
1994:20).
Controlling one’s own enterprise is certainly a positive step in the
direction of self-determination for people otherwise dependent on
tourism for menial jobs or handouts, and appears more likely to lead
to self-fulfillment. For example, there is a notable difference for an
individual “… between being a cleaner in a large international hotel
compared with being the owner of a small losmen [homestay], cooking
and serving at tables in their own place”(Hampton 1998:650). An
example from Goa highlights this point. Wilson is concerned that a
growing emphasis on luxury tourism development in Goa, which has
traditionally been characterized by small family businesses catering to
the domestic and backpacker markets, may undermine local develop-
ment:
…this focus on upmarket tourism is out of keeping with the present
structure of the tourism industry in Goa, which is mainly low-budget
and served by a multitude of small hotels, guest-houses, rented rooms,
and a host of ancillary services …. The danger here is that control over
upmarket tourism could pass out of indigenous hands into foreign
ownership and that these multinationals might be …less sensitive to
…social, cultural, and environmental issues (1997:69).
Thus, he notes further, “… low-budget tourism might be the least
destructive path to follow in spite of the government’s promotion of
upmarket hotel development”(1997:52). Erb (2000) has similar con-
cerns about plans of regional Tourism Board officers to encourage
luxury resort development in the otherwise backpacker-dominated
areas of Flores, Indonesia.
When communities control their own tourism enterprises, as is more
common where they provide for the budget sector, they are in a better
position to participate in local business or tourism organizations
through which wider development goals and the well-being of their
people can be promoted. In Bali, Wall and Long (1996) explain how
157REGINA SCHEYVENS
a strong tourism organization was initiated in one neighborhood where
homestays were common. Its aims were to promote tourism in the area,
to protect the local environment, and to address any issues which con-
cerned the community, including the in-migration of outside
entrepreneurs. Therefore, forming organizations can help communi-
ties gain greater control over tourism development in their areas and
give them political strength to deal with outsiders, including the private
sector and government officials (Ashley and Garland 1994).
There is also evidence that the development of backpacker enclaves
has transformed some run-down, crime-ridden parts of cities in the
Third World. In Yogyakarta, Indonesia, for example, a kampung (urban
village) which formerly housed the red light district and was charac-
terized by poverty is now a thriving backpacker area with numerous
small businesses in a setting of well-kept lanes and houses. “The local
kampung residents are in no doubt at all that the arrival of the back-
packers has transformed their place for the better”(Hampton 1999:7).
Similarly, Edward Hasbrouk (a political activist and tourism writer) has
suggested that backpackers in Thailand “… are the foreign tourists
least interested in, and least drawn to Thailand by, sex tourism”, and
that the renowned backpacker ghetto in Bangkok, Khao San Road, is
the only area in this city not characterized by sex tourism (cited by
Bly 2000).
Finally, for the simple reason that backpackers want to spend less
and thus generally consume fewer resources, they can be more
environmentally friendly. In Goa, for example, backpackers are con-
tent with swimming at the beach and bathing under cold water show-
ers, while other tourists demand hot baths and large swimming pools
within their hotel complex. Therefore, the backpacker market has
been quite kind to the environment, especially “… compared to the
resource-guzzling five-star tourists”(Noronha 1999:5).
CONCLUSION
Clear evidence has been provided as to the potential benefits back-
packers can bring in terms of promoting local development in the
Third World. Communities can provide services and products
demanded by these tourists without the need for large amounts of
start-up capital or sophisticated infrastructure, and they can retain con-
trol over such enterprises. Conversely, comparatively few local people
have the skills, knowledge, networks, and so forth to be able to estab-
lish businesses which cater to luxury tourists, so such enterprises are
often monopolized by outside owners and bring few local benefits
(Cohen 1982). In addition, the foreign exchange brought in by back-
packers often surpasses that provided by other international tourists
who stay for shorter periods of time, and these expenditures are spread
far more widely than most, both geographically and to marginalized
social groups. This is not to suggest that this submarket should be the
main form of international tourism pursued by Third World govern-
ments. In fact, it is likely that smaller-scale, budget-oriented enterprises
will exist along with larger-scale developments in many circumstances
158 BACKPACKERS AND DEVELOPMENT
(Jenkins 1982). At the same time, for too long, Third World govern-
ments have overlooked the ways in which backpacker tourism may
bring numerous local economic benefits to small-scale entrepreneurs
and informal sectors actors. There are also significant non-economic
benefits which can come to communities from this form of tourism.
Aiming “low”builds upon the skills of the local population, promotes
self-reliance, and develops the confidence of community members in
dealing with outsiders, all signs of empowerment (Scheyvens 1999).
However, this paper has also raised concerns about the behavior and
attitudes of backpackers which, in some circumstances, can be harmful
from the perspective of local peoples. This may particularly be the case
in ghettos or enclaves frequented by them. However, a simplistic analy-
sis which asserts that they are all self-centered individuals following
each other around the world on a well-trodden route in search of sex,
drugs, and banana pancakes, is neither correct nor helpful. Neither is
the suggestion that backpacker are necessarily the saviors of local level
development in the Third World. By way of conclusion, therefore, a
number of challenges need to be addressed if communities are to max-
imize the benefits from backpacker tourism without compromising
their cultures, their environments or their general social-well-being. In
addition, recommendations for further research on backpacker tour-
ism are made.
Communities which choose to be involved in tourism need the
opportunity to participate in an active and equitable manner. In the
past, commentators have distinguished two major limitations for local
communities in engaging with tourism: the unequal distribution of
benefits and the fact that control often remains with outsiders (Ashley
and Roe 1998). Therefore, local communities need to be empowered
with both knowledge and confidence so that they can assert some con-
trol over any backpacking tourism which occurs in their area and deter-
mine the limits of their involvement with this segment of the market.
Ideally a strong community will organize itself to meet only those needs
of backpackers that do not compromise their own values, or the integ-
rity of their environment and social system. At the earliest stage poss-
ible, communities need accurate information about both the benefits
and pitfalls of backpacker tourism. Study tours—which take com-
munity members to visit existing such businesses or enclaves and
encourage them to talk with vendors and operators, and to see impacts
for themselves—could be very useful in this regard (see examples in
Scheyvens forthcoming).
Communities also need appropriate structures, such as a village
development committee or a local tourism board, which can represent
and protect community interests with regard to tourism. The neighbor-
hood tourism organization in Bali, mentioned earlier, provides one
such example. However, it is essential that the heterogeneous nature
of communities is recognized when considering how communities can
organize themselves to benefit from backpacker tourism in an equi-
table manner. Communities are typically characterized by a multiplicity
of interests and hierarchies of power, making it problematic to assume
that a community can work together for mutual benefit (Taylor 1995).
159REGINA SCHEYVENS
Social relations such as class, ethnicity, and gender assume great sig-
nificance in the distribution of the benefits and costs of tourism. Thus,
all too often, it is local elites, particularly men, who co-opt and come
to dominate community-based development efforts, thereby monopol-
izing the economic benefits of tourism (Wilkinson and Pratiwi 1995).
Consequently, it is critical to ensure democratic structures which allow
for representation of a variety of community groups and interests are
in place.
If a community decides to proceed with a tourism venture catering
to backpackers, institutional support will most likely be needed (Baskin
1995:111). This backing, from governments, nongovernmental organi-
zations, or the private sector can involve provision of information, net-
working opportunities, and capacity building through skills training.
Such assistance can help to overcome the disadvantage that most local
communities face when engaging with the tourism industry as,
The local destination remains relatively isolated from the international
market, receiving tourists but not understanding or playing any part
in controlling the terms on which, and the processes by which, they
arrive (Goodwin et al 1997:5).
Third World governments, in particular, have an important responsi-
bility to facilitate equitable involvement of local communities in the
industry. If they wish to support local development, they need to avoid
the temptation of focusing exclusively on higher end tourists and con-
sider strategies for encouraging and supporting carefully planned and
managed budget tourism. This may include providing investment capi-
tal for small-scale ventures such as homestay accommodation, as well
as removing restrictive legislation. For example, in the Solomon
Islands, where building codes are based upon Western standards, local
artisans cannot meet the requirements of the building code if they use
traditional construction methods and materials, available locally at
little cost. If building regulations were adhered to, a small-scale venture
would cost around $100,000 (Sofield 1993:737). Similarly, in some
countries official tourist guides need to pass extensive written tests to
gain a government endorsement, thus disqualifying illiterate or semi-
literate guides who may be excellent at their trade.
The independent position of the nongovernmental organization sec-
tor places it in an important position to support the interests of com-
munities involved in backpacker tourism. Such organizations can, for
example, work with community counterparts to establish ongoing
monitoring of the positive and negative impacts of tourism, to deter-
mine whether or not this business as they are pursuing it offers an
appropriate form of development for their community (Joppe
1996:479).
Tourism involves both hosts and guests and responsibilities by both
parties (Pearce 1995). As such, backpackers should not assume that by
choosing what they see to be an alternative tourism experience, their
ethics will be beyond scrutiny. As Noronha (1999:5) concludes,
If backpackers would like to distance themselves from the unjust face
of global tourism, there’s a long trek ahead …[They] need to be
160 BACKPACKERS AND DEVELOPMENT
more critical, more honest—and less selfishly enthusiastic—about how
they currently benefit from a patently unfair global system.
Both nongovernmental organizations and private sector interests, such
as guidebook publishers (including Lonely Planet and Rough Guides)
and travel agencies, could play a role here, providing backpackers with
thoroughly researched information on appropriate behavior and cul-
tural norms in their chosen destinations. In 1999, Tourism Concern
(UK) together with Gambia Tourism Concern produced a film entitled
Our Holiday, Their Homes, to be shown on flights to the Gambia. This
addresses issues such as local poverty and appropriate dress. Similarly,
Action for Southern Africa’s“People-First”tourism campaign in the
United Kingdom seeks to ensure that tourists to southern Africa are
aware of ways in which their experience is both rewarding for them-
selves and for the countries they visit. It would be useful for such
material and campaigns to specifically target the growing number of
backpackers.
Given the growing significance of the backpacker market and its
impact on Third World societies, environments, and economies,
further research into backpacking tourism is warranted. One
important issue which could be explored is implications for local com-
munities of the planned up-scaling, by some governments, of back-
packer ghettos into luxury tourism resorts (Aziz 1999; Wilkinson and
Pratiwi 1995). This raises serious issues of concern regarding inter-
ference with the economic opportunities provided for the local people
by a backpacker presence. It is also clear that one needs to know more
about this submarket. Is it transforming into just another variant of
mass, institutionalized tourism, as some have suggested (Aziz 1999), or
have distinct types of backpackers emerged, some of whom are quite
independent and others who are more institutionalized? If so, what
implications do these different types have for communities in different
destination areas?
Undoubtedly Third World tourism destinations have been incorpor-
ated into the global economic system on what are often unfair,
exploitative terms, and the industry in many countries is dominated by
foreign ownership and capital with little meaningful local involvement.
There are positive signs, however, which indicate that by catering to
backpackers, Third World peoples are able to gain real benefits from
tourism and control their own enterprises. This market segment is not
the universal scourge it is sometimes painted to be. Local participation
is necessary in defining and managing what is for destination com-
munities a desirable form of backpacking. National and local govern-
ment as well as nongovernmental organizations can play important
roles in facilitating a process to enable local communities to maximize
opportunities that international backpacking presents to them. The
advantages to local communities will also depend on the attitudes and
behavior of backpackers themselves. Private organizations which pro-
mote this form of tourism business can take advantage of their position
to promote attitudes that place sensitivity to local peoples and their
environments foremost in the minds of backpacking tourists.왎
161REGINA SCHEYVENS
Acknowledgements—Sincere thanks to Henry Scheyvens and Tina Jamieson, academic col-
leagues (and also backpacker buddies in an earlier life), for providing feedback on this
paper. The support of the Massey University Research Fund for fieldwork in southern
Africa in 1998, an experience which helped to formulate some of the ideas expressed
in this paper, is also gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
Ashley, C., and E. Garland
1994 Promoting Community-Based Tourism Development Research. Dis-
cussion Paper No. 4, Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Windhoek.
Ashley, C., and D. Roe
1998 Enhancing Community Involvement in Wildlife Tourism: Issues and
Challenges. IIED Wildlife and Development Series No. 11. London: Inter-
national Institute for Environment and Development.
Aziz, H.
1999 Whose Culture is it Anyway? In Focus (Spring):14–15.
Baskin, J.
1995 Local Economic Development: Tourism—Good or Bad? In Tourism
Workshop Proceedings: Small, Medium, Micro Enterprises, pp. 103–116.
Johannesburg: Land and Agriculture Policy Center.
Bly, L.
2000 Khao San Before Leonardo DiCaprio. USA Today Travel Guide (February
10), <http://www.usatoday.com/life/travel/leisure/2000/ltl103.htm>.
Bradt, H.
1995 Better to Travel Cheaply? The Independent on Sunday (February
12):49–50.
Britton, S. G.
1982 The Political Economy of Tourism in the Third World. Annals of Tour-
ism Research 9:331–358.
Brohman, J.
1996 New Directions in Tourism for Third World Development. Annals of
Tourism Research 23:48–70.
Brown, D. O.
1998 InSearchofanAppropriateFormofTourismforAfrica:Lessons
from the Past and Suggestions for the Future. Tourism Management
19:237–245.
Butler, R. W.
1990 Alternative Tourism: Pious Hope or Trojan Horse? Journal of Travel
Research 28(3):40–45.
Cater, E.
1996 Community Involvement in Third World Ecotourism. Discussion Paper
No. 46, the University of Reading, Department of Geography.
Cohen, E.
1973 Nomads from Affluence: Notes on the Phenomenon of Drifter Tourism.
International Journal of Comparative Sociology 14(1-2):89–103.
1982 Marginal Paradises: Bungalow Tourism on the Islands of Southern Thai-
land. Annals of Tourism Research 9:189–228.
Doorne, S.
1993 Expenditure Patterns of Backpackers. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth
Conference of the New Zealand Geographical Society, Wellington: Victoria
University.
Erb, M.
2000 Understanding Tourists: Interpretations from Indonesia. Annals of Tour-
ism Research 27:709–736.
Garland, A.
1997 The Beach. London: Penguin.
Gibbons, S. M., and C. T. Selvarajah
1994 A Study of the International Backpacker Visitor to New Zealand: Building
a Profile to Assess Value and Impact. Unpublished report. Albany: Depart-
ment of Management Systems, Massey University.
162 BACKPACKERS AND DEVELOPMENT
Gluckman, R.
2000 Postcards from the Beach. Asia Now. 具http://cnn.com/ASIANOW/
asiaweek/99/0219/nat4.html典.
Goodwin, H.
1999 Backpackers GOOD, Package Tourists BAD? In Focus (Spring):12–13.
Goodwin, H., I. Kent, K. Parker, and M. Walpole
1997 Tourism, Conservation and Sustainable Development: Vol. 1—Compara-
tive Report. London: Department for International Development.
1998 Tourism, Conservation and Sustainable Development: Case Studies from
Asia and Africa. IIED Wildlife and Development Series No. 12, London: Inter-
national Institute for Environment and Development.
Haigh, R.
1995 Backpackers in Australia. Occasional Paper No. 20, Canberra: Bureau of
Tourism Research.
Hall, C. M.
1997 Tourism in the Pacific Rim: Developments, Impacts and Markets. Mel-
bourne: Addison Wesley Longman.
Hampton, M. P.
1998 Backpacker Tourism and Economic Development. Annals of Tourism
Research 25:639–660.
1999 Same, Same, but Different. In Focus (Spring):6–7.
Harrison, D.
1992 International Tourism and the Less Developed Countries. In Tourism
and the Less Developed Countries, D. Harrison, ed., pp. 1–18. Chichester:
Wiley.
Hutnuk, J.
1996 The Rumour of Calcutta: Tourism, Charity and the Poverty of Represen-
tation. London: Zed.
Jamieson, T.
1996 “Been There—Done That”: Identity and the Overseas Experience of
Young Pakeha New Zealanders. Master of Arts in Social Anthropology, Mas-
sey University.
Jenkins, C.
1982 The Effects of Scale in Tourism Projects in Developing Countries. Annals
of Tourism Research 9:229–249.
Joppe, M.
1996 Sustainable Community Tourism Development Revisited. Tourism Man-
agement 17:475–479.
Kindon, S.
2001 Destablising “Maturity”: Women as Tourism Producers in Southeast Asia.
In Women as Producers and Consumers of Tourism in Developing Regions:
Issues, Experiences, Policies, Y. Apostopoulos, S. Sonmez and D. J. Timothy,
eds. Westport CT: Praeger (forthcoming).
Lillywhite, M., and L. Lillywhite
1991 Low Impact Tourism: Coupling Natural/Cultural Resource Conservation,
Economic Development, and the Tourism Industry. In Ecotourism and
Resource Conservation: A Collection of Papers Volume 1, J. A. Kusler, ed.,
pp. 89a-89r. From the 1st International Symposium on Ecotourism, Merida,
Mexico, and the 2nd International Symposium on Ecotourism and Resource
Conservation, 1990, Miami, FL.
Little, A. M.
1991 The Impact of Tourism on the Environment and the Culture of the Local
Population. Paper prepared for the Strategic Workshop for Transkei Tourism,
January, Port St Johns. Occasional Paper 69. Pietermaritzburg: Institute of
Natural Resources.
Loker, L.
1993 The Backpacker Phenomenon II: More Answers to Further Questions.
North Queensland: James Cook University.
Loker-Murphy, L., and P. L. Pearce
1995 Young Budget Travelers: Backpackers in Australia. Annals of Tourism
Research 22:819–843.
163REGINA SCHEYVENS
Lyon, J.
1997 Maldives. Hawthorn: Lonely Planet.
Mandalia, S.
1999 Getting the Hump. In Focus (Spring):16–17.
Mowforth, M., and I. Munt
1998 Tourism and Sustainability: New Tourism in the Third World. London:
Routledge.
Noronha, F.
1999 Culture Shocks. In Focus (Spring):4–5.
O’Connor, J.
2000 The Big Squeeze. In Focus (Summer):4–5.
Pendry, R.
1998 Thailand Backpackers: Full Moon Party. A First Circle Films Production
for Channel 5 Broadcasting Ltd.
Pobocik, M., and C. Butalla
1998 Development in Nepal: The Annapurna Conservation Area Project. In
Sustainable Tourism: A Geographical Perspective, C. M. Hall and A. A. Lew,
eds., pp. 159–172. Harlow: Longman.
Polit, J. J. P.
1991 Ecotourism: Proposals and Reflections for a Community Development and
Conservation Project. In Ecotourism and Resource Conservation: A Collection of
Papers, Volume 1, J. A. Kusler, ed., pp. 357–361. From the 1st International
Symposium on Ecotourism, 1989, Merida, Mexico, and the 2nd International
Symposium on Ecotourism and Resource Conservation, 1990, Miami, FL.
Rangan, H.
1996 From Chipko to Uttaranchal. In Liberation Ecologies: Environmental,
Development, Social Movements, R. Peet and M. Watts, eds., pp. 205–226.
New York: Routledge.
Riley, P. J.
1988 Road Culture of International Long-Term Budget Travelers. Annals of
Tourism Research 15:313–328.
Scheyvens, R.
1999 Ecotourism and the Empowerment of Local Communities. Tourism Man-
agement 20:245–249.
Forthcoming. The Potential for Ecotourism to Facilitate the Empowerment of
Local Communities in Southern Africa: A Summary Report Using Selected
Case Studies. Pietermaritzburg: Institute of Natural Resources.
Sofield, T.
1993 Indigenous Tourism Development. Annals of Tourism Research
20:729–750.
Spreitzhofer, G.
1998 Backpacking Tourism in South-East Asia. Annals of Tourism Research
25:979–983.
Sutcliffe, W.
1999 Are You Experienced?. London: Penguin.
Taylor, G.
1995 The Community Approach: Does it Really Work? Tourism Management
16:487–489.
Twining-Ward, L., and T. Twining-Ward
1998 Tourism Development in Samoa: Context and Constraints. Pacific Tour-
ism Review 2:261–271.
Wall, G., and V. Long
1996 Balinese Homestays: An Indigenous Response to Tourism Opportunities.
In Tourism and Indigenous Peoples, R. Butler and T. Hinch, eds., pp. 27–48.
London: International Thomson Business Press.
Wheat, S.
1995 Interview with a Tour Guide. The Independent on Sunday (February
12):50–51.
Wheeler, T.
1999 In Defence of Backpackers. In Focus (Spring):15–16.
164 BACKPACKERS AND DEVELOPMENT
Wilkinson, P. F., and W. Pratiwi
1995 Gender and Tourism in an Indonesian Village. Annals of Tourism
Research 22:283–299.
Wilson, D.
1997 Paradoxes of Tourism in Goa. Annals of Tourism Research 24:52–75.
Wood, K., and S. House
1991 The Good Tourist. London: Mandarin.
Submitted 11 April 2000. Resubmitted 7 November 2000. Accepted 14 December 2000. Final
version 4 January 2001. Refereed anonymously. Cooordinating Editor: Robert A. Poirier
