Conference PaperPDF Available

Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas in Africa: Contributing to community development and conservation: Summary Report

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Africa’s natural resources, landscapes, wildlife and protected areas form the very basis of its dynamically growing tourism sector in most of its countries. The management of tourism in protected areas represents great challenges and opportunities at the same time. On one hand, the seasonality of tourism activities can cause high concentration of visitors in fragile areas, inappropriate development and management of tourism facilities can harm the environment, inadequate coordination with local communities can cause conflicting situations and pressures from other types of land use and economic activities can affect the quality of the natural attractions. Further challenges come from the large size, fragmented areas and transfrontier regions of many protected areas. On the other hand, ecotourism, if adequately planned, managed and monitored can bring income and job opportunities in remote rural areas where few other options exist, and can be harnessed to generate much needed revenues for the maintenance and conservation of protected areas. National Parks and other protected areas are iconic places of Africa and can serve as motors of economic development in broader regions in support of poverty reduction objectives and the Millennium Development Goals through the wise use of tourism activities. The potentials and challenges of ecotourism have been recognized internationally through the International Year of Ecotourism (IYE), the Johannesburg Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002, and a number of related international processes and events. Ecotourism remains a key area of the work of UNWTO, and it is also one of the priorities in its Special Programme for Sub- Saharan Africa. The first Regional Preparatory Conference for the IYE took place in Maputo, Mozambique at the end of the year 2001. After 7 years, this Seminar presented an interesting opportunity to return to Maputo, upon the kind invitation of the Ministry of Tourism of Mozambique, in order to discuss on advances in this subject.
No caption available
… 
Content may be subject to copyright.
Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas in Africa:
Contributing to community development and conservation
Summary Report
Maputo, Mozambique
5-7 November 2008
República de Moçambique
Ministério do Turismo
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
1
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................3
1.1 Background.........................................................................................................................................................3
1.2 Objectives ...........................................................................................................................................................3
2 Conclusions and Recommendations..........................................................................5
2.1 Creating the enabling environment for nature conservation and ecotourism development:
coordinated policies, plans and actions between stakeholders..................................................................5
2.2 Reducing poverty and providing community benefits through building up local supply chains .............7
2.3 Supporting nature conservation through tourism: developing creative financial sources and
mitigating environmental impacts..................................................................................................................11
2.4 Monitoring tourism development and operations: supporting decision making through accurate
information on tourism impacts and policies................................................................................................14
2.5 The Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area................................................................................16
3 Presentation Summaries ...........................................................................................18
3.1 Opening Ceremony .........................................................................................................................................18
3.2 Keynote Presentations....................................................................................................................................20
3.3 Session 1 presentations: Creating the enabling environment for nature conservation and
ecotourism development: coordinated policies, plans and actions between stakeholders. .................23
3.4 Session 2 presentations: Reducing poverty and providing community benefits through
building up local supply chains ......................................................................................................................29
3.5 Session 3 presentations: Supporting nature conservation through tourism: developing creative
financial sources and mitigating environmental impacts............................................................................38
3.6 Anchor tourism investments in Mozambique...............................................................................................48
4 The Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area.............................................50
4.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................................................50
4.2 Panel debate ....................................................................................................................................................51
5 Working Group Discussions .....................................................................................58
5.1 Introduction to the Working Group Presentations.......................................................................................58
5.2 Background Briefing for each Working Group.............................................................................................58
5.3 Working group 1 – Creating the enabling environment for nature conservation and ecotourism
development: coordinated policies, plans and actions between stakeholders.......................................59
5.4 Working group 2 – Reducing poverty and providing community benefits through building up local
supply chains....................................................................................................................................................60
5.5 Working group 3 – Supporting nature conservation through tourism: developing creative financial
sources and mitigating environmental impacts ...........................................................................................63
5.6 Working group 4 – Monitoring tourism development and operations: supporting decision making
through accurate information on tourism impacts and policies.................................................................65
6 Closing Ceremony......................................................................................................69
ANNEX 1: Conference program...................................................................................................................... 71
ANNEX 2: List of Participants………………………………………………………………………………………...75
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
2
Acknowledgements
The UN World Tourism Organisation is particularly grateful to the Ministry of Tourism of
Mozambique for hosting this event and providing logistical support throughout.
The UNWTO Delegation to the Conference included:
Mr. Ousmane Ndiaye, UNWTO Regional Representative for Africa
Mr. Helder Tomas, UNWTO Regional Representation for Africa
Mr. Gabor Vereczi, Chief, Environment and Quality Section, Sustainable Development of
Tourism Department
Dr. Anna Spenceley, UNWTO Expert, Director of the International Centre for Responsible
Tourism, South Africa
This report was prepared by Dr Anna Spenceley, reviewed and edited by Gabor Vereczi.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
3
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
Africa’s natural resources, landscapes, wildlife and protected areas form the very basis of its
dynamically growing tourism sector in most of its countries. The management of tourism in
protected areas represents great challenges and opportunities at the same time.
On one hand, the seasonality of tourism activities can cause high concentration of visitors in fragile
areas, inappropriate development and management of tourism facilities can harm the environment,
inadequate coordination with local communities can cause conflicting situations and pressures
from other types of land use and economic activities can affect the quality of the natural attractions.
Further challenges come from the large size, fragmented areas and transfrontier regions of many
protected areas. On the other hand, ecotourism, if adequately planned, managed and monitored
can bring income and job opportunities in remote rural areas where few other options exist, and
can be harnessed to generate much needed revenues for the maintenance and conservation of
protected areas. National Parks and other protected areas are iconic places of Africa and can
serve as motors of economic development in broader regions in support of poverty reduction
objectives and the Millennium Development Goals through the wise use of tourism activities.
The potentials and challenges of ecotourism have been recognized internationally through the
International Year of Ecotourism (IYE), the Johannesburg Summit on Sustainable Development in
2002, and a number of related international processes and events. Ecotourism remains a key area
of the work of UNWTO, and it is also one of the priorities in its Special Programme for Sub-
Saharan Africa. The first Regional Preparatory Conference for the IYE took place in Maputo,
Mozambique at the end of the year 2001. After 7 years, this Seminar presented an interesting
opportunity to return to Maputo, upon the kind invitation of the Ministry of Tourism of Mozambique,
in order to discuss on advances in this subject.
1.2 Objectives
The seminar focused on the contribution of ecotourism to community development, poverty
reduction and financing of protected areas, as well as related social and environmental issues,
offering a forum to address the following questions, among others:
How can policies and destination plans create enabling environments to support the
development of high quality ecotourism products, community enterprises and services and
other poverty-reduction mechanisms recommended by UNWTO, as well as revenue
generation for protected areas, and transfrontier conservation areas?
How can partnerships be established between protected area and tourism authorities,
tourism companies and local communities, and what mechanisms make them function
effectively?
What actions and support mechanisms are needed to build up local supply chains for
tourism, linking local services and products and spread the benefits of tourism activities in
broader regions, surrounding protected areas that are already established destinations?
What consultation, coordination and capacity building processes can be applied to
empower local communities in decision making processes regarding planning and
management of tourism in and around protected areas?
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
4
What is the role of community-based tourism organizations in strengthening small
community businesses, and how these can be supported?
How can tourism be used to develop innovative and creative financing mechanisms for the
conservation of protected areas, how these funds can be retained and best used at the
sites, and what policies are needed to make these happen?
How can ecotourism activities be effectively linked with other forms of tourism (like
conventional beach tourism) and special events (like the FIFA World Cup in South Africa in
2010).
How can the overall socio-economic impacts of ecotourism be evaluated and monitored,
and how this information can be best communicated to policy-makers and managers?
This event was intended to provide opportunities for countries in the region to present experiences
and examples, as well as analyzing the case of Mozambique and the Great Limpopo National
Park, in order to reflect and discuss on the opportunities and challenges of ecotourism, related
policy issues and management techniques. The seminar aimed at providing a practical experience
for policy makers, managers, operators and development organizations involved in ecotourism,
through dynamic exchanges and concrete examples.
Opening session
Panel debate session on the Great Limpopo Working group debates
Transfrontier Conservation Area
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
5
2 Conclusions and Recommendations
During the course of the seminar, speakers and delegates presented and discussed a wide range
of key issues, challenges to maximizing the opportunities for conservation and poverty reduction
from ecotourism. They also suggested a number of constructive recommendations to enhance
positive impacts, and reduce negative impacts in destinations. These challenges and
recommendations are synthesized below.
2.1 Creating the enabling environment for nature conservation and ecotourism
development: coordinated policies, plans and actions between stakeholders
Presentations and discussions in this session focused on how policies and destination plans could
create enabling environments to support the development of high quality ecotourism products,
community enterprises and services and other poverty-reduction mechanisms, in addition to
generating revenue for protected areas (including Transfrontier conservation areas). The session
also considered how partnerships could be established between protected areas, tourism
authorities, tourism companies and local communities, and the mechanisms required to make them
function effectively.
2.1.1 Key issues and challenges
Issues and challenges relating to policies and plans, and stakeholder interactions included:
¾ There is a need to strengthen political support by governments in Africa to make
ecotourism a key industry, in relation to other sectors. This is justified given the rich
ecotourism resources and the development potential of the sector.
¾ The international community has a wide range of bilateral and multilateral conventions that
have implications for ecotourism development. These include the Convention on Biological
Diversity, the Commission on Sustainable Development, and the World Heritage
Convention, and agreements between countries on Transfrontier conservation areas
(TFCAs).
¾ At the national level, countries may have many different policies that relate to ecotourism
addressing biodiversity, poverty reduction, property rights and resource use rights are all
relevant to tourism. The complexity of general and sectoral policies and the lack of
coordination between corresponding authorities can create inconsistencies, overlap and
gaps in policy scope and implementation.
¾ Policies and conservation management plans are not always implemented or respected.
¾ Power struggles can arise where conservation management is unclear or conflicting.
¾ Examples of national policies that support ecotourism directly include the Namibia
conservancy policy (which gives people in communal lands the rights to manage and
benefit from natural resources), controlled hunting areas and wildlife management areas in
Botswana, and the public private partnerships (PPP) policy in South Africa.
¾ Interactions between different stakeholders in ecotourism policy and plan development
requires:
o
communication
o
transparency
o coordination
o clear roles and responsibilities
o sound conservation management
o understanding of market demand
o monitoring and evaluation.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
6
¾ There is a need to understand the need and responsibility for destination marketing versus
product marketing.
Regarding TFCAs, benefits and challenges highlighted include the following:
Benefits
o promoting confidence and cooperation,
with friendship between neighbours
o mobilising political support for local
socio-economic development
o creating strategic alliances to promote
culture of peace
o creating opportunities to mobilize funds
for conservation
o poverty alleviation and job creation
Challenges
o a loss of sovereignty
o weak mechanisms for conflict resolution
o different institutional organizations
o disparities in technical and financial
capacity
o cross-border management of
conservation activities and tourism
operations (burocracy)
Key issues relating to partnerships included the following:
¾ Build Operate Transfer (BOT) agreements can be used to transfer financial risks of capital
investment for ecotourism from the state to the private sector with PPPs in protected areas.
¾ Equity for communities in PPPs can be sourced from donors, or in return for their land
rights. However, the question is how to do this at scale, as currently the process takes
place on a project by project basis with high transaction costs for partners.
¾ Challenges for PPPs include:
o providing supportive state agencies and a conducive institutional environment
o an emphasis on technical rather than financial bids to avoid market failure
o well-structured contracts and sound contract management
o clear rights frameworks
o competitive set of natural assets (valued by tourism industry)
o capacitated an legitimate community based organizations with strong support
programs
o capital subsidies (equity grants; ‘risk-tolerant’ loan financiers)
2.1.2 Recommendations
Recommendations and suggestions to enhance the effectiveness of policies and plans included:
¾ African countries should develop their strategic tourism policies, and use a coordinated
approach to developing and implementing them.
¾ Countries should establish tourism boards, and ensure collaboration of different ministries
(e.g. environment, agriculture etc) to promote ecotourism and poverty reduction.
¾
Countries should endeavor to consistency and effectiveness in their ecotourism and
conservation policies, by addressing gaps and overlap between existing policies that affect
protected areas (as is taking place in Mozambique), with consistent understanding of what
tourism can do for the economy and conservation.
¾ Clearly define stages, stakeholder roles and support mechanisms for policy
formulation/coordination and regulations, and implementation
¾ Countries should clearly define the responsibilities of different ministries around policy
coordination, to avoid conflicts between government agencies (e.g. ministries of tourism
with roads, fishing, conservation agencies)
¾ Understand the uniqueness of each situation, and destination.
¾ Promote conservation objectives and benefits across all government ministries, so that they
understand the value of tourism to the economy as a sustainable earner of export
revenues.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
7
¾ Tourism planning should be sustainable, comprehensive, cross-sectoral, integrated,
participatory, process oriented, viable and long-term oriented.
¾ A wide range of stakeholders should participate in policy and plan development, and
decision making. Stakeholders include government, local communities, NGOs and the
private sector.
¾ The relationship between stakeholders should be understood, in order to create effective
partnerships.
¾ Practical regulations should be devised and implemented for conservation.
With regard to partnerships, recommendations included:
¾ Bidding for PPPs should include a mixture of regional benchmarking (i.e. on market values)
and competitive bidding for concessions.
¾ PPPs should attract private partners with:
o strong commitment to community partnership
o strong marketing, sales and operational capacity
o sufficient capital reserves to fund start-up and buffer seasonal fluctuations of
tourism activities
o PPPs need the following for social sustainability:
o careful initial institution building
o ongoing capacity building and administrative support for communities and the
private sector
o training interventions to build skills and succession planning
o management of benefits by the community with legitimacy, transparency and
fairness
o good relationships between the partners
¾ Concessioning should not only be considered for luxury operations, but also for budget, and
mid-range ecotourism products in protected areas.
2.2 Reducing poverty and providing community benefits through building up local supply
chains
The session on reducing poverty and maximizing local supply chain benefits considered the
actions and support mechanisms required, and how to link to linking local services and products to
the tourism market in established destinations. Discussions also addressed the type of
consultation, coordination and capacity building processes applied to empower local communities
in decision making processes, in relation to the planning and management of tourism in and
around protected areas. The role of CBOs in tourism, and their support needs were also reviewed.
2.2.1 Key issues and challenges
Tourism has the potential to reduce poverty for a number of reasons including that:
¾ Tourism is a diverse industry, which increases the scope for wide participation, including
the participation of the informal sector.
¾ The customer comes to the product, providing considerable opportunities for linkages (e.g.
souvenir selling).
¾ Tourism is highly dependent upon natural capital (e.g. wildlife, scenery) and culture. These
are assets that some of the poor have, even if they have no financial resources.
¾ Tourism is labour intensive, therefore it can create a wide range of jobs from unskilled to
highly skilled ones.
¾ Compared to other modern sectors, a higher proportion of tourism benefits can go to
women (e.g. jobs, direct sale to tourists, small businesses, etc.).
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
8
¾ Tourism can bring development opportunities to remote and disadvantaged areas where
few other options exist
¾ The entry costs and capital for tourism businesses are usually lower than in other economic
sectors
The UNWTO also suggest seven key ways that the poor can benefit from tourism. These are:
1. Employment of the poor in tourism enterprises
2. Supply of goods and services to tourism enterprises by the poor or by enterprises
employing the poor
3. Direct sales of goods and services to visitors by the poor (informal economy)
4. Establishment and running of tourism enterprises by the poor - e.g. micro, small and
medium sized enterprises (MSMEs), or community based enterprises (formal economy)
5. Tax or levy on tourism income or profits with proceeds benefiting the poor
6. Voluntary giving/support by tourism enterprises and tourists
7. Investment in infrastructure stimulated by tourism also benefiting the poor in the locality,
directly or through support to other sectors
Key issues and challenges for the supply chain include:
¾ The supply chain can be used to establish linkages and minimize leakages, increase the
multiplier effect by sourcing local goods and services. These can include food products,
furniture, decoration, construction material, souvenirs, and services (e.g. guided walks,
skills demonstrations, village tours, storytelling etc), in addition to local employment.
¾ Interventions to enhance local supply chains for poor people focus on removing barriers;
enhancing the terms on which the poor work; and improving the multiplier affects that
tourism operations have on surrounding communities.
¾ Stimulating communication between the tourism sector (demand) and producers (supply),
on the types of products and quality (e.g. hotels where the furniture and craft is all
imported)
¾ Considering the timing of information – i.e. to producers at the design phase of an
enterprise so that skills and produce can be developed.
¾ Getting local people to buy into the idea – and the need to work ‘bottom-up’ with the ‘target’
involved from the start
¾ Challenges for the local supply of products and services include:
o Finding investors, who wants to enter partnership with local communities
o Communities often have limited understanding of basic principles of tourism
o Lack of technical skills (e.g. carpentry/maintenance/agriculture)
o Limited skills in business/entrepreneurship in rural communities
o Seasonality of agricultural products
o Poor agricultural potential in remote areas
o Quality standards of products and services
o Reliability of supply in time and quantity
o Distribution of local products at the point of sale
o Lack of entrepreneurial skills and spirit
o Language barriers
o Poor communication in rural areas
o Lack of local trainers – to train local people
o Product/needs match (i.e. making souvenirs that tourists want to buy; growing
vegetables that restaurants need)
o Economies of scale – with enough demand, and enough farmers supplying produce
to fill the demand.
o Fair pricing and negotiations
o Profitability – for producers, middlemen and customers
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
9
¾ Middlemen have power and relationships between producers and clients, and may exploit
producers
Issues relating to community-based tourism enterprises (CBTEs) and Community Based
Organisations (CBOs) raised included:
¾ Proposals for CBTEs usually consider elements of participation, gender, empowerment and
capacity building, but rarely include business planning, market research product
development, target markets and cooperation with the private sector.
¾ The development of CBOs takes considerable time. Committees need to be developed,
constitutions devised, and associations registered. Bank accounts need to be opened and
then funds need to be managed transparently.
¾ Some countries distribute a percentage of park fees to local communities, but establishing
and operating legal CBOs to manage the fees equitably is not easy.
¾ Common problems with community-based tourism enterprises are insufficient flows of
visitors; bad quality of services and infrastructure; misunderstanding of tourism business;
poor marketing; limited skills (e.g. language, management capacity); remote locations; poor
communication and unequal distribution of benefits.
General issues relating to this area included:
¾ In some destinations (e.g. Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda) the only variable
that affects the amount of money retained in the local economy is length of stay, rather than
aged, gender, motivation or the price of accommodation.
¾ Increasing ecotourism fees to tourist may not necessarily lead to increased financial
benefits to local communities from ecotourism.
¾ Tourism development can have significant impacts on livelihoods (e.g. housing, income,
employment, social services provision, skill acquisition in tourism etc).
¾ Communities in Botswana have been able to collectively use natural resource capital
through community-based natural resources management (CBNRM) to achieve a shared
goal which is the improvement of their livelihoods.
¾ Problems in wildlife areas operating ecotourism include land use conflicts. Therefore the
development of positive attitudes by local people towards tourism development and
biodiversity conservation is very important.
¾ Solidarity tourism is a proposed subset of sustainable tourism that focuses humanity and
human relations integrated into a local development logic; involvement of local population
in; respect for the individuals and cultural differences; respect for the natural environment;
and fair distribution of benefits.
2.2.2 Recommendations
Recommendations to enhance local supply chains included the following:
¾ Find institutions to bring producers and customers together, and bridge the gap (e.g.
middlemen)
¾ Reduce barriers for the poor to access supply chains by purchasing locally, rather than
importing goods; and also procuring direct from the producer, rather than through a chain of
middlemen and distribution agents.
¾ Develop oversight boards/committees to ensure fairness and best practice and identifying
changes in demand
¾ The private sector should consider undertaking surveys of existing suppliers in relation to
corporate values (e.g. local, poor, environmentally aware) and investigate new suppliers.
They should consider opportunities to stimulate change among existing suppliers and
developing new suppliers.
¾ Build capacity in government and civil society to identify the type of linkages and
associations, and type of skills required
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
10
¾ Interventions to enhance supply chains should be action oriented, and consider how to get
local people involved practically. They can be simple and short-term, but within a long term
strategic program.
¾ The level of market demand for specific products and services should guide where
interventions are focused (e.g. specific agricultural products that operators and tourists
demand in lodges).
¾ Diversify small business options for the poor to benefit from tourism away from only
accommodation, and consider other products and services required to support the sector
(e.g. guiding, food etc.)
¾ Encouraging a mixture of types of tourism (e.g. short-high value stays & long budget trips)
in destinations may maximize local benefits.
¾ Improve training and communication
¾ Support ethical production and labelling of products.
¾ Provide access to start up funding (e.g. microfinance and capital finance)
¾ Use exchange visits to learn from good examples
¾ Promote coordinated efforts of aid agencies / donors to decrease overlap and support more
strategic interventions.
¾ Share experiences, on what works and what does not by monitoring, evaluating and
publishing results.
Recommendations for CBTEs and community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) to
be successful included:
¾ Making linkages to tourism companies (e.g. tour operators) with long term partnerships
¾ Good financial management
¾ Close proximity to main tourism routes & access
¾ Ensuring competitive advantage
¾ Good quality handling of visitors
¾ Promote community motivation & demonstrate successes
¾ Empower local people to make decisions about their resources
¾ Cooperate with provincial professionals and officers
¾ Establish long-term projects (i.e. 5 years) with intensive training, capacity building and
awareness raising
¾ Establish Community Trusts that work with government officials
¾ Employ Trust managers
¾ Establish CBTE/CBNRM forums, where all stakeholders meet and discuss issues affecting
them.
¾ Create a Secretariat at Ministry level responsible for CBTE and CBNRM
Recommendations for monitoring and evaluation on this issue included:
¾ Monitor and evaluate the livelihood and financial benefits to the poor from tourism, and
relate these to the level of visitation in the area.
¾ Undertake baseline studies to establish the supply and value chains, and where
interventions can be most productive.
¾ Use household surveys to establish how benefits to CBOs from tourism are distributed, and
whether this is fair and equitable.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
11
The responsibilities of different stakeholders in relation to specific recommendations were also
proposed:
Recommendation
Responsibility
National level:
Identify opportunities (e.g. where tourists will be going)
Develop skills
Review policy (e.g. land use) to protect opportunities
Ministry of tourism and the private
sector
Product and service development strategy, in parallel with
tourism development
Private sector and collaborators
(e.g. community brokers)
Local level:
Identify opportunities – with suppliers / demand / capacities
Private sector communicate demand before development
Provincial forum to introduce
investors to suppliers (e.g. chamber
of commerce)
Provincial tourism directorate
Marketing and promotion agency
Community coordinators/brokers should interact and
mediate between government, the private sector and
communities (brokers at national and local level), and
standardised
Operational local development
agencies
Advanced planning and understanding timeframes
Government departments that deal
with planning and permissions
General:
Disseminate lessons (e.g. distribution of entry fees; accountability
of presentation of information in an accessible format and location)
Tailor local solutions based on basic principles.
NGOs, research institutions,
universities, think tanks
2.3 Supporting nature conservation through tourism: developing creative financial
sources and mitigating environmental impacts
The third session addressed how tourism could be used to develop innovative and creative
mechanisms to finance the conservation of protected areas. Delegates considered how funds
could be retained and best used at the sites, and what policies were needed to make these
happen. The session also considered how negative environmental impacts of ecotourism activities
could be mitigated.
Globally there are 106,000 national protected areas, that cover 18 million km
2
(12.7% of the globe),
but the funding gap is considerable in many parts of the world. There are a range of market-based
fees for conservation, which include tourism, resource use, bioprospecting charges, and payments
for ecosystem services. A number of key issues, challenges and recommendations were made to
enhance payments for conservation.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
12
2.3.1 Key issues and challenges
Tourism has potential to contribute to nature conservation because it:
¾ generates revenue in areas of high biodiversity (e.g. protected areas, TFCAs) an help to
make them economically viable
¾ raises public support for conservation with environmental education for visitors and local
people (e.g. with alternative employment & business opportunities for local people, and
perception of value may give conservation incentives)
¾ is less environmentally damaging than other revenue generating industries based on
natural resource use (e.g. forestry, slash and burn agriculture)
¾ may be one of the few economic activities suited to take place within conservation areas
located on marginal land
¾ can be sustainable if its impacts are managed and mitigated.
The profitability of ecolodges depends on a number of factors, including:
¾ Destination: regarding wildlife resources, safety and accessibility (being some hours from a
local airport with reasonable international connections)
¾ Value: regarding competitive pricing considering design, facilities, location, wildlife
resources, and services compared to similar destinations
¾ Interpretation and Activities: unique wildlife species to be observed; interesting activities
available; and quality guiding and interpretation
¾ Management capacity: the ability to manage marketing, finances, logistics, human
resources, efficiently
¾ Access to capital: financing structures that allow for longer term return on investment are
the most beneficial.
Key issues relating to revenue retention in protected areas included:
¾ Many protected areas are dependent on state funding to meet their conservation
management costs.
¾ In some countries revenues generated by protected areas from tourism are accrued
centrally by the state, rather than being retained and re-invested locally.
¾ Other mechanisms to generate income for conservation include payments for
environmental services, green taxes and trust funds.
¾ Protected area revenue retention schemes can share funds generated from tourism (e.g.
concession fees, guide fees, entry fees) between conservation management agencies and
local communities (e.g. as in Malawi).
¾ Low visitor numbers can make the generation of viable incomes difficult (need good pricing
level fitted to volume of visitation, and critical mass of visitors)
¾ PPPs can be used to generate revenue for conservation from tourism and the sustainable
use of natural resources.
Issues and challenges relating to communities raised were:
¾ If local communities do not have viable livelihood options, it does not matter what money
you invest in a conservation area: it will not be sustainable. Without alternative options,
unsustainable use of natural resources may take place to support livelihoods.
¾ Where protected areas neighbour high density populations, tourism product development
and conservation efforts need to be integrated with regional land use and urban planning
processes.
¾ There is insufficient capacity to negotiating concession agreements and monitoring the
proceeds against initial projections at most protected areas.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
13
¾ Human-wildlife conflict is critical for the safety of people and their property, and for the
safety of wildlife (particularly elephants).
¾ Obtaining adequate and fair support from the law and courts on punishment for illegal
hunting (i.e. poaching).
¾ Contracts between communities and protected areas need commitment from both parties.
¾ Difficulties can arise where people living inside reserves when populations grow and
destruction continues.
¾ Weak leadership and poverty.
¾ Corruption, whether it is financial, nepotism (i.e. giving advantage for personal rather than
merit reasons), non compliance with the law
Regarding mitigating environmental impacts of ecotourism, key issues and challenges included:
¾ Some bio-diverse areas suffer from over-popularity of tourism, and this can cause physical
damage to conservation areas. Zoning, planning visitor management and protective
infrastructure are important, as is limiting resource use.
¾ There are a range of ways to mitigate and avoid environmental impacts, through good
planning, and being sensitive to the type of habitat where tourism takes place, and by using
environmental management systems.
¾ Environmental Impact Assessments should precede planning permission for infrastructure
construction in protected areas.
¾ Establishing guidelines and environmental management agreements with tourism operators
(e.g. on waste management, resource use etc.) and enforcing them.
¾ The balance between development, revenue generation and conserving biodiversity.
2.3.2 Recommendations
¾ Use a diverse array market (e.g. concession fees, hunting licenses, payments for
ecosystem goods and services, events) and non-market based income sources (e.g. Trust
Funds, donations, government subsidies, tax breaks) to finance conservation management.
¾ Use commercialisation programs with public private partnerships to reduce the dependence
of protected areas on state and donor funding, while enhancing tourism assets.
¾ Promote protected areas and enhance visitation by tourists through marketing and product
development
¾ Use finance from protected areas to support district development plans that have identified
areas of economic potential.
¾ Create business plans for protected areas to establish the options for revenue generation,
the operating costs that need to be met, and therefore the shortfall of revenue to cover
conservation costs.
¾ Conservation should be perceived as an economic opportunity.
¾ Sustainable hunting can be used to generate income when wildlife densities are too low for
wildlife viewing and photographic tourism, or where a protected area has low levels of
tourism.
¾ Reduce operational costs by outsourcing activities (e.g. tourism, law enforcement, fire
management), improving local and regional cooperation, and encouraging political will.
¾ Use associations to bring about the product of goods and services, with a collaborative
approach and direct impact on reduction of poverty.
¾ Where high densities of people inhabit protected areas, consider de-gazettement.
¾ Agencies can apply to the donors for funding, such as the Spanish Agency for International
Development through Spanish Embassies, to finance tourism interventions that :
o promote environmental conservation through adopting sustainable policies
regarding zoning and natural resources in the partner countries.
o improve the environmental conditions of urban and rural populations through
providing better access to safe drinking water and sanitation;
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
14
o favour the adoption of sustainable development patterns in the production systems;
and
o strengthen human and social capital.
¾ Countries should share experiences on resolving human-wildlife conflict, as initiatives vary
between regions, countries and destinations.
2.4 Monitoring tourism development and operations: supporting decision making through
accurate information on tourism impacts and policies
During the working group discussions, delegates reviewed how the overall socio-economic impacts
of ecotourism could be evaluated and monitored, and how this information can be best
communicated to policy-makers and managers.
2.4.1 Key issues and challenges
Distortion and reliability of data (e.g. reluctance of providing accurate information and
building trust)
Lack of capacity to get the data (e.g. data collection in communities, illiteracy, government
officials over-worked)
Financial limitations (e.g. for the use of modern techniques to gather environmental data,
such as aerial surveys for wildlife census)
Lack of coordination between institutions for gathering information
Technical staff availability (e.g. some parks have high turnover, that hinders reliable and
consistent data capture)
Frequency of monitoring
Lack of clear monitoring guidelines.
Communicating information to policy makers, managers, users and sources (e.g. tour
operators)
Lack of baseline data for planning and fund allocation
Need to monitor tourist profiles and satisfaction, for tourist surveys language issues and
lack of well developed exit points to conduct survey. Need to develop user-friendly
questionnaires
Harmonisation of data
Use of immigration data
2.4.2 Recommendations
Recommendations were made on the type of information that should be collected within monitoring
and evaluation programs regarding policies, tourism, community impacts, and impacts on the
environment:
i. Information on policies:
Impacts of international policies
Level of implementation of regulations
Existence of policies/regulation coordination
Level of conflicts on land and resource use
Level of compliance
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
15
ii. Information on tourism:
Number of tourism (# bed nights, tourist profile, tourist origin, age, gender, education,
spend, where from)
Employment
Demographic dynamics
Carrying capacity/limits of acceptable change
Visitor satisfaction and behaviour
Infrastructure development
Tour operators providing information on local customs of the people.
Number of operators
Public private partnerships: number and revenues. Are operators satisfied?
Tour operator activities (management of resources) support for communities for capacity
building
iii. Information on community benefits / impacts:
Employment
Number of community members involved in tourism
Household income
Community benefits from tourism (economic and social) – maintain transparency and goo e
community relations
Level and coverage of social infrastructure – e.g. schools – electricity
Involvement in decision making on protected area and tourism enterprise
Existence of a consultation mechanism in communities (e.g. Covane Lodge with a board
and voting on expenditure)
Cultural perceptions and relations - acceptance and perception of community.
Changes in lifestyle and impact (e.g. language / dress / food) – operators provide
information on community customs
Number of local tourism associations (e.g. of women)
Community facilities
Level of support to communities
Impacts on community livelihoods and resources
Distribution of benefits in the community
Revenue generation
iv. Information on impacts on the natural environment:
Expenditure on conservation management
Monitoring driving off track (existence of zoning in management plans; number of off-road
tracks)
Number of rangers and their level of skills (per area, distribution, hours of patrolling, are
they all in the main camp or covering a large area of the park?)
Coordinator to gather data from rangers and compile reports for decision makers (e.g.
repeat surveys for comparing years of data)
Changes in land use (baseline data sets – satellite imagery)
Population, agriculture, settlements, bio-annual surveys, partnership with ministries and
sending data to parks for use.
Environmental issues:
o Waste management
o Wildlife populations
o Land use changes
o Change in wildlife dynamics
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
16
In general, surveys would be improved through:
Engagement with tour operators in data collection (e.g. online questions and by email). For
example, tour operators can use questionnaires with tourists at lodges, or on the way back
from trips to reserves on tourist satisfaction.
Conducting surveys at airports, borders, and on transportation (e.g. bus, boats) and
interviewing tourists when leaving country – can do exit surveys (e.g. airports in Botswana
and Mozambique)
Using multiple choice questions (e.g. user-friendly 1-2 page questionnaires with ‘ticks’)
Suggestion books
Online questionnaires
Training interviewers. This can be costly but interviewers are important and their behaviour
can influence results.
2.5 The Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area
The Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area (GLTFCA) covers 99,800 km
2
of protected
areas and interstitial areas between Zimbabwe, South Africa and Mozambique. The TFCA
includes the Gonarezhou National Park in Zimbabwe, Kruger NP in South Africa, and in
Mozambique it stretches between the Limpopo NP, across to Banhine NP and Zinave NP, and to
the coast at Vilanculos. The TFCA was established in 2000 when an agreement was signed
between the three governments.
2.5.1 Key issues and challenges
¾ The three countries are motivated to participate in the TFCA for shared but also
differentiated reasons. E.g. South Africa is principally interested in biodiversity conservation
(e.g. providing more space for elephants) while Mozambique and Zimbabwe are interested
in attracting new investment.
¾ There is a complex and tiered system for management of the TFCA, incorporating ministers
and technical advisory committees. Creating mechanisms for good communication, and
consistent understanding and agreement at a political and technical level is difficult. Often
technical difficulties need to be resolved through political agreements at the ministerial
level.
¾ Despite political instability in Zimbabwe, there is practical collaboration between those
responsible for security and control between the three countries.
¾ Structures within each country responsible for the TFCA vary, as do their processes for
generating and retaining income. Diversities need to be recognised.
¾ Currently there is fragmented and un-coordinated marketing and promotion of tourism
destinations within the TFCA, lacking a clear message. This is partly because some
existing brands are very strong (e.g. Kruger National Park), and there is a wide disparity
between the marketing capacity of each country (South Africa being the strongest). The
implications are that many tourists do not know they are within a TFCA.
¾ Hiring, training and retaining high quality staff is critical.
¾ Revenues are not currently shared between the different countries participating in the
TFCA, but efforts are being made to harmonised policies and the regulatory framework.
¾ Developing infrastructure for tourists is necessary for the TFCA to function (e.g. border
posts, bridges, accommodation).
¾ Challenges for tourism operators in the TFCA include border issues and import taxes when
moving people and goods between Kruger NP and Limpopo NP.
¾ Safety and security for visitors is not consistent in all areas of the TFCA, and
communication and coordination of emergency services is required. People living inside the
Limpopo National Park (LNP) are of concern because of human wildlife conflict, but
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
17
resettlement of people is a highly sensitive process, time consuming and expensive
process.
¾ Exchanging information between communities and park management is done through
committees at district level in Mozambique, and through community forums in South Africa.
¾ Monitoring and evaluation is required to ascertain if the objectives of the TFCA are being
met, with short, medium and long-term goals.
2.5.2 Recommendations
¾ Countries and stakeholders collaborating on the TFCA should consider themselves
partners, and act accordingly.
¾ The TFCA should establish joint-marketing programs, with consistent and coordinated
branding and promotion for the area as a whole, rather than each country promoting
individual destinations within the TFCA. The ‘boundless’ brand has been established to
harmonise branding for TFCAs in southern Africa, and needs to be applied.
¾ Community members should be involved in decision making, through series of workshops
and participation in planning processes.
¾ Members of local communities should be shareholders in tourism enterprises operating in
the TFCA.
¾ Policies should be harmonized between countries.
¾ Institutional structures should be coordinated, with good capacity and communication.
¾ Good communication mechanisms should be implemented at local, national and regional
level, with appropriate technologies and protocols.
¾ The private sector should be mobilized by appropriate promotion and providing an enabling
environment, and consequently investment facilitated for infrastructure, and also for
capacity building, education and training (by both governments and the private sector).
¾ NGOs should be strengthened to provide support to the development of the TFCA, with
regards conservation and poverty reduction.
¾ Careers in conservation should be competitive with other professions like medicine, law
and engineering.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
18
3 Presentation Summaries
3.1 Opening Ceremony
Mr. Ousmane Ndiaye
UNWTO Regional Representative for Africa
Mr Ndiaye thanked the minister for being present at the seminar, demonstrating the importance of
the sector in the country.
He noted that there was no doubt of the positive impact that tourism can make on poverty, which is
one of the Millennium Development Goals. The cooperation between Mozambique and UNWTO is
exemplary. There have been two important regional seminars here: on ecotourism and on new
information technology in tourism. Within the UNWTO Sustainable Tourism – Eliminating Poverty
(ST-EP) program, UNWTO program has assisted Mozambique with the implementation of two
community based tourism projects. Also, the first regional seminar of this kind took place in
Mozambique in 2001, and others have taken place since. They are important to promote
sustainable tourism in sub-saharan Africa.
The UNWTO helps its members to define tourism strategies and techniques for the planning and
management of the sector. There have been more than 3300 participants from private sector,
government, NGOs and international organisations that have benefited from these activities, where
the main goal has been to strengthen local capacities. This includes statistics, and the
measurement of tourism impacts, ecotourism, poverty reduction and quality in the tourism sector.
This conference comes at a critical time, when the world economy and markets are undergoing the
greatest turbulence since World War II. This has an impact on the real economy, and the economy
of emerging countries is not growing at the same pace as before.
Tourism has shown an astonishing reaction to the problem. There were 903 million tourism arrivals
in 2007, which generated $856 billion in tourism receipts, which was a 5.6% increase on 2006. In
the first months of 2008, arrivals worldwide were not too far below 2007 levels.
There are indications that dwindling shares in power have led consumers in the USA to spend less
in destinations and have changed their behaviour. There is now a decline in confidence, and a
short term outlook. However we are not giving in.
Tourism is resilient. Looking at Africa, the continent is not in the worst position. Growth has been
outstanding, and the number of arrivals rose to 445 m in 2007. The African market share rose from
3.5% to 4.9% over this time, and tourism receipts increased to $28.3 bn in 2007. The tourism is
not only in South Africa, and the industry is providing jobs and wealth. Since 2001 UNWTO has
worked through its Tourism Program for Africa, and the ST-EP program. More than 50 ST-EP
projects are ongoing world-wide. The Regional Project on Tourism is a network of cross-border
parks, that was initiated with 9 west African countries. UNWTO is engaged in looking for partners
to finance initiatives.
This seminar is opportunity to reflect on role of ecotourism in the conservation of nature in 21
st
century. Here we will be reflecting on concerns regarding how ecotourism should be conceived to
better respect the environment. Tourism should provide an opportunity for communities, and not
be an obstacle to their livelihoods. Tourism in protected areas should be a key element of poverty
reduction strategies in Africa. The purpose of workshop is to provide mechanism to link tourism
and the environment.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
19
His Excellency Mr. Fernando Sumbana
Minister of Tourism, Mozambique
H.E. Mr Fernando Submana started with congratulating the United States for their election results,
which seminar participants learnt in the morning this event started. The elections demonstrate that
democracy is about tolerance and learning, and that regardless of race and origin, all people have
an important role to play. When elections are open and transparent, people can achieve and
respect planned objectives. Great changes have taken place in terms of the voting process in the
USA, and this shows that having the talent and capacity to make things happen is important.
H. E. Mr Sumbana noted that this seminar will look at tourism and biodiversity and economic
growth of the region. This is a very important mark for the partnership between the countries in the
UNWTO to stress the positive force of tourism. After months of intense work, here we here, with
the openness, warmth and Mozambican smile saying welcome to this beautiful country named
Mozambique.
Ecotourism provides diverse experiences that enable tourists to look at diverse cultures. Benefits
are provided to local communities, with alternative income sources. Ecotourism raises awareness
on the value of conservation, and the importance of minimising negative social, cultural and
environmental impacts. Practical mechanisms can be found for the social and economic growth of
the continent.
The African continent has rich resources, but has been suffering for a long time, and often tourism
does not benefit citizens. There has been erosion of cultural values and poverty. Africa is one of
the continents providing oxygen for the world, but the low level of development creates greater
problems. H.E. Mr Sumbana noted that we need to build a world better for the environment and
should look to communities, as the greatest resource they have is nature. Tourism should be used
to eradicate poverty, and the conditions, capacity and resources to do so need to be created. The
UNWTO has been helping to pave a path for Mozambique to make use of opportunities.
Ecotourism can be used to promote development, and conservation and protected areas have
played a part in this. For example, the Transfrontier Conservation Areas (TFCAs) are now a proud
reality that establishes possibility for regional initiatives to promote transboundary tourism.
Mozambique is one of the regions that has established TFCAs in southern Africa.
Seminars have been developed in different regions by UNWTO to share ecotourism experiences,
and to take them to the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD). Mozambique hosted
the first regional seminar in Maputo in 2001.
Natural regions in Mozambique should prioritise tourism and economic development plans that
benefit the people. Tourism has brought tangible benefits for tourism and the African continent,
and a fundamental element is that benefit should accrue to local people. We have brought in good
tools to incorporate this in Mozambique, by not stopping at just making speeches, but using
practical tools to guide our development.
In 2007 Africa received 44 million tourists, which is low compared with 480 million in Europe, so
there is a challenge to increase it. Financing protected areas is critical, and a challenge for African
countries. South Africa will host the World Cup in 2010, and there will be global focus on the
African continent. People visiting for 2010 will also be encouraged to travel to other regional
countries.
Boundless southern Africa’ is a brand approved for TFCAs, demonstrating that this is an area
without borders. TFCAs will increase movement of animals and people, which will be facilitated by
customs and policies etc. The tourism strategy is concentrated on conservation and TFCAs, and
role players will work to guarantee security and safety on the continent. In 2010 visitors will enjoy
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
20
the best of southern Africa, and initiatives here will be developed to benefit humankind. The
expertise of international ecotourism experts will be used to help with this. All participants at this
seminar should be encouraged to share knowledge for the success of ecotourism in the world.
H.E. Mr Sumbana then solemnly declared the Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas open
3.2 Keynote Presentations
The UNWTO Special Programme for Africa
Mr. Ousmane Ndiaye, UNWTO Regional Representative for Africa
Mr Ndiaye reflected that the secretary general of UNWTO proposed a special program for Africa.
The program is part of a finding that despite the tourism potential of Africa, the continent plays a
lesser role in international tourism than might be expected. It is known that Africa has 5% of
international tourism arrivals, but only 3% of its revenues. This situation is paradoxical for a
continent with an extremely important tourism potential. There are several reasons for this, which
include:
1. The need for more political support by governments in Africa to make the ecotourism sector
a key industry in relation to other sectors. There have been low levels of investment in
Africa.
2. Insufficient infrastructure overall (e.g. roads, rails, airports, hotels etc)
3. Poor media representation of Africa, which focuses on major problems and negative events
mostly. These negative statements affect people’s decisions to travel.
4. A lack of technical capacity among tourism personnel.
Mr Ndiaye remarked that it is not only up to governments, but solidarity is needed to help African
countries. The UNWTO has put programs into the region, including the ST-EP, in order to
maximise action and increasing institutional capacity of people working in tourism areas. There
are complimentary objectives, such as those that help African countries to develop their strategic
policies in tourism. UNWTO also aims to raise awareness of tourism among travel practitioners,
local communities, and other stakeholders. The Minister said that local communities have tourism
as a key objective, and backing is needed from the financial sector too.
Objectives for Africa include:
¾ Development of know-how in the region. This includes the design, building and
management of tourism in the region, and using information technology.
¾ Promoting the involvement of local communities in ecotourism projects, to create jobs and
reduce poverty.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
21
Sustainable tourism in protected areas: principles and practices
Mr. Gabor Vereczi, Chief of Environment and Quality Section,
Sustainable Development of Tourism Department, UNWTO
Mr Vereczi noted that the UNWTO started an important journey 7 years ago when it organised the
first seminar on ecotourism and protected areas in 2001. That seminar really helped them to reflect
on the themes and the process for International Year of Ecotourism and the World Ecotourism
Summit that took place in 2002. This Seminar in 2008 presents a great opportunity to review the
findings and advances made since.
Mr Vereczi demonstrated that tourism has become one of the most important socio-economic
phenomenon of our modern times, through showing international tourist arrivals that have grown
globally, from a mere 25 million in 2005 to over 900 million in 2007. Although Africa had a
relatively small (5%) of global market share in 2007. The growth rate in Africa was 6.8%, which is
higher than world average (4%).
In low income countries, tourism is growing stronger, and is a key source of revenue for developing
countries, and a key sector that can meet the Millennium Development Goals. Mr Vereczi reflected
that tourism can really bring opportunities to areas where there are few development options. He
noted that there are hardly any places in world that cannot be reached with tourism (i.e. there is
even tourism in space), but that we need to recognise that this represents an increasing pressure
on the environment, and sustainable development is very important. The Quebec Declaration on
Ecotourism was presented, which includes a series of principles, such as including indigenous
communities in planning processes.
Mr Vereczi reflected that the number of protected areas in the world is increasing, and according to
the IUCN there are 102,102 protected areas, which cover more than 18.8 km
2
, or 12.65% of the
earths surface. There are national parks, protected areas, and community conservancies: diverse
and dynamic mechanisms for conservation. Mr Vereczi listed a number of key events in
conservation, such as the 2003 World Parks Congress in Durban, and the 2008 World
Conservation Congress in Barcelona. 2010 will be the International Year of Biodiversity declared
by the UN, and there will be a series of activities arranged on this. He stated that responding to
climate change was also critical, and both protected areas and nature-based tourism are
vulnerable to it.
UNWTO- ST-EP projects are numerous in Africa, and many of them address nature-based tourism
and community-based tourism, and are next to or close to protected areas. UNWTO is also helping
to develop TFCAs in West Africa, under a ‘Transfrontier Ecotourism in Africa’ program that acts at
both the local and national level. The UNWTO also worked on a ‘Sustainable Tourism in Coastal
Destinations’ program, which will begin implementation in 2009. UNWTO also developed a
community-based tourism market access program with the Regional Tourism Authority for
Southern Africa, with enterprises entered on a website. UNWTO also produces documents
including statistics and technical manuals.
Mr Vereczi noted that Africa is a unique continent with rich nature and culture. Tourism can benefit
both communities and their heritage, but there is a need for a strategic approach. For the
integrated planning and management of destinations, tourism relies on a wide range of public
services, such as access, water, waste, energy, communication etc. A long chain of tourism supply
services is built on these, including transport, hotels, tour operators and guiding, which makes
public-private-partnerships essential factor for sustainable tourism.
National ecotourism committees have been convened by some countries. To have successful
ecotourism, countries require a tourism board, and collaboration of different ministries (e.g.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
22
environment, agriculture etc). Building consensus and helping implementation on the ground is
important. There is potential for diverse tourism programs and products, of which cultural
experiences are important.
Mr Vereczi suggested that to reduce the negative impacts of tourism, specific infrastructure and
visitor management systems needs to be in place. For example, the Jiuzhaigou Valley Biosphere
Reserve in China can receive up to 20,000 tourists a day in peak season. However, there are no
negative impacts, as there are elevated boardwalks to protect the land, and good signage, camera
controlled shuttle buses coordinated from a Command Center, among other measures. In sensitive
forest areas, boardwalks can be constructed in the canopy to offer a different view of the forest.
There are also techniques to construct accommodation facilities that are in line with nature, such
as Rocktail Bay Camp in South Africa, with tents nestled within the forest.
It is important to look at visitor safety, and for example rangers may go with tourists on trails, and
communication booths or cellphone reception may be available on site. Tourist information is
needed, and can be provided in a variety of forms, including brochures. Information can be
provided by people ranging from taxi drivers to receptionists. In The Gambia fir example in the
Kartong community-based tourism project, people did not have fancy brochures, but instead drew
a stylised map of the area, with pictures, which reflects how the community see themselves. In
Portugal, a virtual viewpoint has been created using a screen with real view images and with
interpretation information.
Mr Vereczi highlighted that interpretation is a tool with many purposes. ‘Edutainment’ is where
education and entertainment come together, in order to create a sense of place and a high quality
tourist experience.
Creating revenue generating mechanisms is critical for protected areas (PAs), as the IUCN states
that 80% of parks are underfinanced. Diverse funding options can be used to generate income for
PAs.
A key task for protected area managers is to ensure the benefits stretch beyond the parks, to help
with growth and reduce pressure on the PAs. Local sourcing of goods and services from local
businesses can help with this, by looking at the supply chain. For example they can consider
providing local dishes in restaurants. Handicrafts need to be suitable for the market, and related to
what tourists want to buy.
Mr Vereczi noted the importance of understanding tourism markets. The UNWTO has undertaken
market surveys for ecotourism. There have been many well intentioned community based tourism
projects that did not think about how tourists would get there, and what they would want to do, or
what they would be willing to pay. A better approach is start with a market assessment and good
promotion.
Monitoring the impacts of tourism is important. Sometimes tourism development plans are
prepared in a way that focuses on marketing, product development and community involvement,
without establishing reliable baseline data and monitoring mechanisms from the onset, affecting
the efficiency of the implementation. This requires indicators so that people can monitor impacts
over time, and in relation to the baseline of where they started. Monitoring should start with some
basic techniques, such as visitor registry books and feedback forms, and capacities should be
developed progressively to cover all mayor areas of tourism impacts and sustainability
(environmental, socio-cultural, economic, tourist satisfaction). Rather than looking at the merely
number of tourists, and establishing the ‘carrying capacity’, it is useful to look at ‘limits of
acceptable change’, tasking into consideration environmental, managerial, infrastructural and even
psychological factors. For example, the perception of crowding is very different for different types
of tourists. Even a small number of tourists in one place can cause a lot of harm for resources,
diminishing the overall tourist experience.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
23
As a good example, at Sydney Quarantine Station in Australia, planners considered an acceptable
range of impacts, and devised benchmarks and monitoring methods. In China, various World
Heritage Sites with high visitation use a Global Positioning System (GPS) system to track shuttle
buses and monitor visitor flows, in order to avoid overcrowding. Tourism exit surveys can also be
used to collect market information, and establish what tourists did and did not like.
This conference on Ecotourism and Protected Areas in Africa has been designed to include a rich
exchange of experience. Mr Vereczi stressed that it gave an opportunity to look at policy
implications and to reflect on the African experience.
3.3 Session 1 presentations: Creating the enabling environment for nature conservation
and ecotourism development: coordinated policies, plans and actions between
stakeholders.
Introduction
Dr Anna Spenceley, UNWTO expert
Dr Spenceley introduced the session on ‘Creating the enabling environment for nature
conservation and ecotourism development’ by reviewing the range of international policies and
conventions that relate to ecotourism. These include the Convention on Biological Diversity, the
Commission on Sustainable Development, and the World Heritage Convention. Multi-lateral
agreements include those on Transfrontier conservation areas (TFCAs), which are large areas
encompassing one or more protected areas, that straddle frontiers between two or more countries.
TFCAs have potential to conserve greater biodiversity, and provide greater opportunities for
tourism than other protected areas. At a national level, policies addressing biodiversity, poverty
reduction, property rights and resource use rights are all relevant to tourism. Sometimes countries
have a suite of policies that address these issues.
Some examples of national policies include devolution in Zimbabwe, the concessions policy in
Namibia, and public-private partnerships in South Africa.
Taking Zimbabwe as an example, Communal Areas Management Program for Indigenous
Resources (CAMPFIRE) has operated since 1988. Here Rural District Councils were devolved the
legal authority to manage wildlife from the government. This allowed local communities to manage
natural resources (including wildlife) on communal lands, and sell quotas to hunting operators.
Therefore wildlife conservation linked to community benefits from safari hunting and wildlife
tourism, and by 1993, there were 23 CAMPFIRE districts were earning revenue from wildlife
tourism. CAMPFIRE led to reduced poaching, improved attitudes to wildlife. Revenue for rural
infrastructure and household incomes increased by 15-25% in rural areas. Between 1989 - 2001,
US$10 million was paid in dividends to local communities (46% of revenue earned).
In Namibia, there is an incentive-based conservancy policy that gives people in communal lands
the rights to manage and benefit from natural resources. Registered conservancies acquire rights
and responsibilities for the consumptive and non-consumptive use and management of wildlife, on
behalf of the community. For registration conservancies need a defined membership; a committee
that is representative of community members; clearly defined, undisputed boundaries; and a land
management plan. In this case the government formally owns conservancy land but communities
have rights of occupation. Currently there are 50 conservancies in Namibia
Planning tourism and management should be sustainable, comprehensive, cross-sectoral,
integrated, participatory, process oriented, viable and long-term oriented. Considering the
participatory aspect of planning, Dr Spenceley reflected on the importance of people in
destinations making their own decisions, rather than passively receiving benefits. Participatory
planning ensures that plans are more effective and comprehensive; allow people to set priorities
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
24
for their area; increases their stake in and support for the plan; and makes plans easier to
implement. She also described the role of different stakeholders – including government, local
communities, NGOs and the private sector
Planning a tourism enterprise itself also requires consideration, such as minimising the negative
impacts of construction considering the type of habitat, taking advantage of natural light and
ventilation, and also using local skills and techniques in construction and decoration. Using
appropriate technology, and ensuring that managers can maintain what they construct, is also vital.
The interactions between different stakeholders requires communication, transparency,
coordination, clear roles and responsibilities, sound conservation management, that tourism
operations are based on market demand, and monitoring and evaluation. An example of this is in
the development of joint-ventures. One such joint-venture is Rocktail Beach Camp in KwaZulu-
Natal, South Africa. The iSimangaliso Wetland Park Authority (IWPA) rents land to a joint-venture
company comprising Wilderness Safaris (a private sector operator) and a Small Business
Development Company. The SMDC is also a joint-venture between Wilderness Safaris and a
community association. A R2.5 m grant from the EU was used to purchase the community share
in the operation. The involvement of Wilderness Safaris in the SBDC is envisaged to assist the
community in business management and marketing. This case involves government, the private
sector, local people and also donors.
Dr Spenceley noted that the presentations following in this session would reflect on these
concepts. They include:
The experience of Mozambique on Transfrontier Conservation Areas, Dr Bartolomeu Soto
Public private partnerships: The rationale, beliefs and lessons learned, Giju Varghese
Ecotourism markets and community ownership: evaluating outcomes at Madikwe , Peter-
John Massyn
The experience of Mozambique on Transfrontier Conservation Areas,
Dr Bartolomeu Soto, Coordinator of the TFCA Unit Project, Mozambique
Dr Soto first reflected on the different terminology that exists for TFCAs, and the distribution of
TFCAs that were in progress or established across southern Africa. He noted that TFCAs are
about cooperation, collaboration, harmonising policies, joint planning, enhancing complementary
economic opportunities and socio-cultural values, and maintaining peace and stability. For
example, the boundaries of African countries are not always associated with social structure. Their
creation has divided families and groups that shared the same type of cultural values
The challenges for TFCAs include a loss of sovereignty, weak mechanisms for conflict resolution
(i.e. countries can not put sanctions or declare war in case of failure); different institutional
organizations; and disparities in capacity (both technical and financial). For example there is a
difference between Zimbabwe and South Africa in the Great Limpopo TFCA. Also there may be
national institutional conflicts (e.g. with decentralized governments), conflicts between government
and local communities; and different policies and legislations (e.g. on country hunting, and another
not). Even if there is technical will to harmonise policies, there also needs to be political will.
Countries may have different approaches in involving the stakeholders, such as devolving rights to
manage wildlife, or operating public private partnerships. There may also be different infrastructure
for biodiversity management and tourism (e.g. between Kruger National Park and Limpopo NP,
which has been seen by some as an unfair relationship). In Mozambique there was a perception
that the GLTFCA would only benefit South Africa. This was because Kruger NP was culling
elephants, and needed space for them to spread as they were under pressure to stop killing
elephants. These are important challenge and win-win situations are needed.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
25
The benefits of TFCAs include promoting confidence and confidence, such as friendship with
neighbours and cooperating. This can be as simple as picking up phone to call other presidents
and building partnerships. Benefits also include mobilising political support support for local socio-
economic development; creating strategic alliances to promote culture of peace; and creating
opportunities to mobilize additional funds for conservation, poverty alleviation, job creation, through
ecotourism. Often conservation areas are not good agricultural areas.
The development of TFCAs in Mozambique has largely been a top-down political process. This is
because they deal with sovereignty, and it would have been to build them from the community level
upwards. Communities and other stakeholders were involved later, once their roles were clarified.
The stakeholders agreed it was a good initiative.
There are 5 TFCAs in Mozambique: Limpopo, Libombo, Chimanimani, Zimoza and Niassa/Cabo
Delgado.
Dr Soto first outlined the development process for the Great Limpopo Limpopo TFCA, regarding
the agreements that took place, and the institutional framework (from ministerial level, through a
Joint Management Board, management committees, coordinating country and secretariat). The
coordinating country was initially rotated every 2 years, but it was realised that this was not
effective, as it dispersed knowledge and resources.
The declaration of the GL Transfrontier Park (a smaller area in the core of the TFCA) was initially
declared with an international treaty. A controlled hunting area (Coutada 16) in Mozambique was
also transformed to declare the Limpopo NP. Wildlife was introduced from Kruger NP, and
workshops were held for communities in the three countries. These allowed people to discuss
common issues, share experiences, and discuss in their own language.
Other activities include:
¾ A malaria eradication program
¾ Cutting 15 km of fence between Kruger NP and Limpopo NP
¾ Development of the first concession in Limpopo NP: Machampane Wilderness camp
¾ A second phase of tenders for tourism development that hope to be established by 2009:
o Madonse concession for 4 star lodge
o Massingir Concession for a 3 star lodge
o Development of boats in Massingir Dam
o Community projects in Massingir and Mapai
¾ Establishment of a border post between Kruger NP and Limpopo NP, though which 55,000
people have passed since December 2006
The Lubombo TFCA has a similar institutional structure, with a ministerial framework similar to
GLTFCA, with a Ministerial committee, TFCA commission and a secretariat. Major achievements
have included signing of the international treaty; development of 2 community lodges (Madjedjane
and Tinti Gala); establishing a fence to protect people and a tourism development plan.
Dr Soto concluded by highlighting that the TFCAs are being positioned as destination for the 2010
Soccer World Cup, with linkages between those present in southern Africa.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
26
Public-private partnerships: The rationale, benefits and lessons learned
Giju Varghese, Head: Business Development, South Africa National Parks
Mr Varghese introduced his presentation by describing the institutional structure of South African
National Parks (SANParks) as a state-run conservation body. It operates 23 National Parks across
4 million hectares of land and 6 biomes. SANParks core functions are nature conservation,
constituency building and tourism. Most tourism in national parks is done by the state (e.g. 6000
camping sites and 15,000 self-catering beds). There are different styles of enterprise, and different
fauna in different areas of the parks.
The reason for the commercialisation process was to reduce dependence on state funding, which
had become pressing since 1994 when government became accountable to 44 million people, and
there were more pressing needs for state funds.
SANParks wanted to enter the 5-star catered market, of which there are many in the private
reserves adjacent to the parks. However, SANParks did not have the skills to operate in this
market, nor access to capital to do so. SANParks was also operating restaurants at a loss.
Therefore the private sector was needed to raise capital, operate tourism, and generate profit.
Commercialising meant that the assets would be leased from the state to the private sector.
The approach was Build Operate Transfer (BOT) for lodges, and to outsource shops and
restaurants. In 2000, 11 lodge concessions were awarded with BOT arrangements, and 21 shops
and 17 restaurants were outsourced. This generated net R181 million, and infrastructure worth
R320 in 2006 terms that would revert to the state after 20 years. This transferred the risk from
loans to the private sector. The shops now look very professional, with service and product that is
higher than before.
The concessions enhanced the socio-economic impact of the parks, creating 620 additional jobs,
and guaranteed spend at local SMMEs of R14 million. So in areas where there was initially no
economic activity, there are now more businesses operating.
Mr Varghese outlined lessons learned from the 2000 concession strategy. These included taking a
responsible tourism approach and the relative weighting of tenders (i.e. that more emphasis should
have been placed on technical, rather than financial bids – to avoid market failure). Initially
SANParks employees were taken on by the concessionaries of the restaurants, but now SANParks
does not have skills in that area. Processes were also needed to terminate contracts of companies
that were not succeeding. Effective contract management was also needed, and they identified
hidden costs, such as legal advisory services.
Going forward, Mr Varghese noted that new concessions will be available in a number of the parks,
including Kruger NP, Addo NP and Thessen Island.
Ecotourism markets and community ownership: evaluating outcomes at Madikwe
Peter John Massyn, IFC, World Bank Group
Mr Massyn reviewed the experience of 2 community owned lodges in Madikwe Game Reserve, in
South Africa: Thakadu River Camp (owned by the Batlokwa community) and Buffalo Ridge Safari
Lodge (owned by the Balete community). In both cases, the land and wildlife is owned, developed
and managed by the state. The lodges are owned by the state, but and leased from the North West
Parks and Tourism Board (NWPTB) to a community trust on a 45 year BOT lease, and managed
by the private sector (The Madikwe Collection) on their behalf on a 10 year sub-lease. This sub-
lease has strong empowerment clauses, and hands back the lodges to the community at the end
of the lease. A joint-liaison committee exists between the community trust and private sector.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
27
Social issues of institution building, legislation governing trusts, and the value of technical support
from NGOs, local government and the private sector were outlined. Competitive rents are paid by
the trusts to the NWPTB (e.g. R28,000 p/a for Balete and a variable fee of 6% lodge turnover).
The private sector pays this rental, and also a fixed fee of R5,000 p/a per commercial bed and 10%
of annual turnover.
Mr Massyn summarised that this model will produce the following benefits in 2008:
Thakadu:
– R550k in lease fees to the NWPTB
– R875k in sublease fees to the Sebolao Trust
– R1.54m in wage payments (excluding
gratuities)
– R155k in local business contracts*
- Total benefit of R2.57-m (excluding lease
fees)*
- 39 staff (21 women)
Buffalo Ridge:
– R380k in lease fees to the NWPTB
– R595k in sublease fees to the Sebolao Trust
– R950k in wage payments (excluding
gratuities)
– R145k in local business contracts*
- Total benefit of R1.69-m (excluding lease
fees)*
- 26 jobs (14 women)
Mr Massyn summarised key lessons learned from the process, which included that community-
ownership of high value leases/concessions requires:
¾ Supportive state agencies and a conducive institutional environment
¾ Clear rights frameworks
¾ Well-structured contracts
¾ Competitive set of natural assets (valued by tourism industry) (i.e. luxury lodges cannot be
operated on degraded land)
¾ Capacitated an legitimate community based organizations with strong support programs
¾ Capital subsidies (equity grants; ‘risk-tolerant’ loan financiers)
¾ Well-balanced capital structure, to avoid too much debt
He noted that commercial viability in this market requires private partner with strong commitment to
community partnership; strong marketing, sales and operational capacity; and sufficient capital
reserves to fund start-up and seasonal slumps. Social sustainability also requires careful initial
institution building; ongoing capacity building and administrative support; training interventions to
build skills and succession planning.
Mr Massyn summarized that this strategy is replicable, and provides a strategic opportunity across
region linked to widespread adoption of public private partnerships (PPPs) in protected areas. It
requires that legal and policy frameworks are mostly in place. Private sector partners need to be
available and loan financiers need to be risk tolerant. However, support from government
agencies is variable, and there is a shortage of technical support agencies to facilitate the process.
There is also a question of how to capitalize community equity, and a need for subsidies to
facilitate roll-out and to avoid high case-by-case transaction costs.
Discussion and debate from session 1
¾ The development of TFCAs was considered, in relation to different ideologies between
participating countries. It was noted that there is delicacy in the development of TFCAs, and
lessons need to be used from elsewhere particularly on coordination and financing.
¾ There are challenges to developing TFCAs, as many of the processes and initiatives are
new and programs need to be developed further. There is little expertise in the field and
fragmented knowledge. TFCAs look at complete ecosystems without political borders, and
consider the conservation of biodiversity resources. Other parallel possibilities include
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
28
revitalising cultural and social exchange, and regional economic planning. There are still
challenges and work is needed to create good approaches for TFCAs.
¾ On concessioning in SANParks, there was a discussion on how much investment was
required of the private sector. It was noted that there would be a minimum fee (not less
than 5% of turnover), and that there were weightings in the tender process for financial,
social and environmental bids. However, the concessions fit within a conservation and
development framework, that is not primarily focused on revenue.
¾ The framework of developing leases to communities was explored, and in Madikwe they
considered what the market was paying in southern Africa for similar areas. They then used
a competitive bidding procedure (i.e. communities put out a call for proposals). When
evaluating the proposals they looked heavily at the financial offer. Private sector fees were
arranged by NWPTB, and their experience from competitive bidding was that 7% turnover
was reasonable, but they also gave a discount to 6%. Therefore there was a mixture of
regional benchmarking and competitive bidding used.
¾ It was noted that the process of concessioning could be applied to mid-range and low-end
products. For example the joint-venture of Bulungula in South Africa is a backpacker
enterprise. The luxury market is not yet saturated in southern Africa, but the 5-star market
will have a ceiling
¾ How communities finance their investment is critical. Sometimes communities get land
rights and use that as access to capital. There is also lots of donor money available, as
many donors see this as a strategic investment, when considering the economic rate of
return too. This is not just about capacity building, but also money well spent. However, the
question is how to do this at scale, as currently the process takes place on a project by
project basis.
¾ How benefits are managed for the community is also critical, with respect to legitimacy and
the framework for support to ensure that benefits are fairly distributed. The level of support
from communities is critical, and more established operators are interested in this model,
but the model needs to be affordable to the private sector.
¾ Support for communities and the private sector needs to be structured from the start. One
approach is to draw in the private sector to help the community (although there is potential
conflict of interest). Some companies used independent NGOs to support communities.
¾ PPPs are dependent on good relationships with local people. Therefore there are strong
incentives for the private sector to ensure communities are benefiting (not only with
financial benefits).
¾ In the SANParks PPPs, the highest preference was given to the bidder with the best
empowerment options. South Africa now has a tourism charter, with a regulated
empowerment requirement and targets for 2014.
¾ Training local people up to management level takes time. The amount of time depends on
the baseline level of education, and requires structured training interventions (e.g. field
guide training).
¾ More examples and information on public private partnerships can be found in the new
Earthscan book ‘Responsible Tourism: critical issues for conservation and development’
from the IUCN Southern African Sustainable Use Specialist Group.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
29
3.4 Session 2 presentations: Reducing poverty and providing community benefits
through building up local supply chains
Introduction
Dr Anna Spenceley, UNWTO expert
Dr Spenceley stated that there are a number of reasons that tourism has the potential to reduce
poverty, and these include:
¾ Tourism is a diverse industry, which increases the scope for wide participation, including
the participation of the informal sector.
¾ The customer comes to the product, providing considerable opportunities for linkages (e.g.
souvenir selling).
¾ Tourism is highly dependent upon natural capital (e.g. wildlife, scenery) and culture. These
are assets that some of the poor have, even if they have no financial resources.
¾ Tourism can be more labour intensive than manufacturing, although less labour intensive
than agriculture.
¾ Compared to other modern sectors, a higher proportion of tourism benefits go to women
(e.g. jobs, petty trade opportunities).
The UNWTO also suggest seven key ways that the poor can benefit from tourism. These are:
1. Employment of the poor in tourism enterprises
2. Supply of goods and services to tourism enterprises by the poor or by enterprises
employing the poor
3. Direct sales of goods and services to visitors by the poor (informal economy)
4. Establishment and running of tourism enterprises by the poor - e.g. micro, small and
medium sized enterprises (MSMEs), or community based enterprises (formal economy)
5. Tax or levy on tourism income or profits with proceeds benefiting the poor
6. Voluntary giving/support by tourism enterprises and tourists
7. Investment in infrastructure stimulated by tourism also benefiting the poor in the locality,
directly or through support to other sectors
Taking the establishment of community based tourism enterprises (CBTEs) as an example, Dr
Spenceley presented data from a review of 218 CBTEs in southern Africa. The majority of these
enterprises reported significant limitations to their operation, including market access, accessibility
and motivation – despite more than half being supported by a third party. Research from Africa
and Asia reveals common problems with CBTEs including insufficient flows of visitors; bad quality
of services and infrastructure; misunderstanding of tourism business (e.g. insufficient information
on income, donor investment, visitor numbers); poor marketing; poor communication (e.g. of 138
CBTEs in Latin America, only 32% had a valid email account, 42% had out of service phone
numbers) and power relations in communities meaning that majority of the poor do not benefit
(unequal distribution). Proposals for CBTEs usually consider elements of participation, gender,
empowerment and capacity building, but rarely include business planning, market research product
development, target markets and cooperation with the private sector. Where CBTEs are
successful, they address:
¾ Linkages to tourism companies (e.g. tour operators)
¾ Financial management
¾ Proximity to main tourism routes
¾ Competitive advantage
¾ Visitor handling
¾ Community motivation
¾ Cooperation with provincial professionals/officers
¾ Long-term projects (i.e. 5 years) with intensive training
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
30
Considering local supply chains, Dr Spenceley summarized the differences between supply and
value chains, and illustrated how interventions at this level aimed to enhance the positive impacts
of tourism on poor people by removing barriers that prevent poor people entering the industry;
enhancing the terms on which they work; and improving the knock-on affects that tourism
operations have on surrounding communities. Reducing barriers could mean purchasing locally,
rather than importing goods; and also procuring direct from the producer, rather than through a
chain of middlemen and distribution agents. Helping people to use resources they already have, to
provide products and services to tourism, can diversify livelihoods (e.g. fishermen operating boat
trips for tourists). By looking at tourism value chains it is possible to see what proportion of visitor
spend reaches the local level. Then interventions can be designed to maximise this proportion.
Dr Spenceley spoke about work undertaken by Spier Lesiure, in South Africa. Here the operation
had taken a strategic shift away from philanthropy towards responsibilities as corporate citizen.
They had surveyed existing suppliers in relation to corporate values (e.g. local, previously
disadvantaged, environmentally aware) and investigated new suppliers. They also considered
opportunities for change, such as stimulating change among existing suppliers and developing new
suppliers. They calculated that by establishing a new laundry, they could not only save money
($15,000 per year) but also have a greater impact on the local economy – with more jobs and
revenue accruing to local people.
Dr Spenceley then introduced the presentations for the session, which were drawn from across
Africa:
Local benefits of gorilla tourism in Uganda, Chris Sandbrook
Community based tourism in the Quirimbas National Park, Rebecca Phillips Marques
Solidarity tourism, Joana Marques
The Botswana Experience, Joseph Mbaiwa
Local supply chains in Selous-Niassa Wildlife Corridor, Tanzania, Rudolf Hanh
Local and pro-poor benefits from tourism, SNV
Rural livelihoods in Madjadjane community, Matutuine, Mozamibuqe, Felismina Langa
Searching for ecotourism: Monitoring the links between tourists’ characteristics and their
impacts
Dr Chris Sandbrook, University of Cambridge
In reviewing the impact of tourism at Bwindi Impenetrable National Park in South West Uganda, Dr
Sandbrook noted that only 24 permits were available per day to see gorillas (the main attraction).
Each permit costs $500 for 1 hour with the gorillas. Accommodation ranges from community-
owned camps to luxury lodges, with 7 camps in total. This is a closed system, so everyone has to
stay the night in Bwindi prior to viewing the gorillas.
Dr Sandbrook’s research included surveys with 364 tourists, and a survey of households and local
businesses. The work revealed that the only variable that affects the amount of money retained in
the local economy is length of stay, rather than aged, gender, motivation or the price of
accommodation. Therefore, people with the greatest positive impact were those who stayed
longer.
Local people interviewed did think that they benefited from tourism, and were supportive of the
national park as a result. Most associated benefits of tourism with money generated by a local
community camp ground. However, luxury lodges that are externally owned not perceived to be
benefiting people, which are owned by outsiders. The luxury lodges procure goods from Kampala,
and very little purchased locally. During the research a community vegetable garden was
established, which is now supplying food to lodges. Dr Sandbrook noted that there is a need to
spend more money locally, so that it is not leaked out.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
31
Dr Sandbrook reflected that budget tourism is actually doing better at delivering economic goals of
ecotourism, although the park pricing policy is pushing these people away. The implications of
these findings are that it is not always true that luxury tourism has greatest benefits for tourism.
Therefore increasing permit fees may not actually generate more income for local communities.
This is particularly important with the current global financial crisis, and with the renewed unrest in
the Democratic Republic of Congo. However, gorilla tourism is robust, and tourists still tend to
come despite perceived danger.
He concluded that perhaps the best would be to mix the types of tourists, to maximise benefits,
minimise seasonality impacts, and minimise the impact of external shocks.
Community based tourism in the Quirimbas National Park
Rebecca Phillips Marques
Mrs Marques noted that the strategy for CBT was to identify site-specific opportunities for local
people to offer services. They aim to ensure that benefits go beyond individual participants,
through a community fund that receives 20% of park fees. They also aim to diversify away from
accommodation, and look at the broader products and services that people can provide (e.g.
guiding and excursions). The strategy also uses products to inspire the community members
Mrs Marques presented the example of Ibo Island. Successes have included establishment of 3
houses with B&B facilities, and household income is doubled or tripled in most months. Around
20,000 MTS has been accrued by the community fund, and a Community Based Organisation
(CBO) has been registered at the district level. Difficulties have included devising more activities to
diversify and keep tourists on Ibo for longer. Also the park pays financial coordinator, and they are
not independent. The operations currently dependent on a local operator for marketing support,
and there is an issue with quality control (i.e. it is not consistently a high quality of product).
Seasonality is an issue with visitation.
The Muagamula look-out is managed by the Ningaia Natural Resources Management Committee,
involving 5 communities. A 50 MTS entry fee is charged by Guludo Beach Lodge, a local operator.
Some training has been provided but more is needed, and there is potential for building a campsite
in the future. Difficulties include limited use of the site, as they only receive Guludo visitors); the
low income does not justify abandoning other livelihood options, but rather an add-on. There is
limited management capacity, no English language skills and limited education. A private sector
partner will be essential. The community committee is not yet legalised, and therefore cannot have
a bank account.
Namau is an example of rural tourism in development, with a guesthouse and village-based
activities. There is a raised walkway through a mangrove into the mouth of River Tari. This is within
easy reach of Pemba for short visits by boat or car, and one of few sites located in the south-
eastern part of the Park. Meluco is also in development, where conditions of a local guesthouse
are being improved. There are plans to train guides for walking in inselbergs. Difficulties include
that the site is very remote; is not on existing tourism routes; has no phone network; there are no
existing tourism operators nearby, and therefore would need to stimulate demand from scratch.
Therefore it may not be worth pursuing.
Bird tourism is an alternative product, with potentially a large market. Many tourists are prepared to
travel large distances to see birds, and there is a growing number of tour operators specialising in
this. The site has a mixture of Southern and East African species, and there are important
habitats. Ten local community rangers were trained as bird guides. There is a proposal to develop
more sites, potentially in partnership with the private sector renting facilities. This will provide a
contribution to the community for making the land available. The first group of birders is expected
April 2009.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
32
Mrs Marques then concluded by listing a number of problems, and potential solutions:
Problems: Potential solutions:
Lack of experience of tourism except in
a very few sites
Language and communication
problems
Access difficult for many areas
Getting associations organised and
legalised is a lengthy and difficult
process
All projects so far dependent on
financial support of park
Longer-term sustainability depends on
diversification of products and services
on offer
Awareness-raising, training, capacity building
(private sector partners have valuable role to
play)
Language training, radios, mobile phones
Improve access with help of private sector
partners
Should get easier with experience, make use of
existing structures
Protected areas committed to supporting
initiatives for several years, projected growth in
tourism should lead to increased incomes
Examples of success should motivate
community members to participate in other
activities
Solidarity Tourism: a possible framework for building up a positive relationship between
Tourism, Community Development and Conservation in Protected Areas
Joana Marques, Researcher, Centro de Estudos Africanos, ISCTE, Portugal
Ms Marques introduced an ongoing research program in Portugal, as a theoretical approach
because it was too early to present data.
The objective of the research will be to compare tourism impacts at community level, identifying the
improvements of living standards, as well as the negative effects. This will involve both theoretical
and methodological orientation: valuing the local capacities and potentialities. A comparative study
will be based on two Small Island Developing States (SIDS): Cape Verde and Sao Tome &
Principe.
Ms Marques noted the challenge of finding balance between tourism, conservation and community
development, particularly as protected areas were becoming more popular destinations. She
reflected on the literature, that indicates where tourism can help stimulate peace and cooperation,
and that it should meet the needs of host communities.
She defined solidarity tourism, as that which respects the principles of sustainable tourism, and is
based on the feeling of a common future, mutual dependency and respect, and a vision of
protected areas as global goods. She noted that solidarity tourism groups all forms of alternative
tourism centred on humanity and human relations integrated into a local development logic,
encompassing such issues as the involvement of local population at each phase of a tourism
project; respect for the individual, and for cultural differences; respect for the natural environment;
and fair distribution of the resources generated.
When described, solidarity tourism incorporates characteristics that are generally associated with
sustainable or responsible tourism. For example, economic elements address fair pay, improving
living standards, local economic benefits). Socially it considers looking at spiritual issues,
reinforcing community ties and social innovation. Environmentally it addresses biodiversity
conservation, waste management, and self-financing of protected areas. Ms Marques also
described initiatives to enhance culture, governance, and knowledge generation and
dissemination.
Obstacles to the approach include a lack of information provided to travellers or government on
solidarity tourism, and opportunistic behaviours of commercial enterprises (i.e. exploiting the term).
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
33
She recommended that tourism should be used to educate and empower local populations, and
that tourism should be integrated into existing community practices, rather than replace them.
Community-based natural resource management in the Okavango Delta, Botswana
Dr Joseph Mbaiwa, Researcher, Oppenheimer Institute, Botswana
Dr Mbaiwa gave an overview of Botswana’s history and economy, before introducing the
Okavango Delta. This is an area that is rich in wildlife, and with over 122,000 people whose
livelihoods are supported by the area. He posed the question: how does tourism, through
community-based natural resource management (CBNRM), affect livelihoods and resource use in
the Delta? He noted that there were consumptive uses (e.g. sport and trophy hunting) and also
non-consumptive uses of wildlife (e.g. photographic tourism, mekoro safaris etc).
Challenges include the threat of extinction of rare species (e.g. through poaching); the inability of
state to protect declining wildlife resources; negative attitudes & land use conflicts in wildlife areas;
and the need to link conservation and rural development (e.g. poverty alleviation). Policy initiatives
in Botswana include those to develop Controlled Hunting Areas and Wildlife Management Areas.
Three study sites were reviewed in the Delta: Sankoyo, Khwai and Mababe. Livelihood options
ranked highly by people in these areas included CBNRM activities (64% interviewees noting this in
first place), followed by employment, and government grants. Dr Mbaiwa also recorded shifts in
livelihood activities due to tourism, including that subsistence hunting had either been reduced or
abandoned:
Between 1997 and 2007, employment relating to tourism rose from 51 people in Sankoyo to 248
employees across the three areas. People reported better housing, water, income to households,
better diets and transport. Income from CBNRM is contributing to social services too, including
local sport, scholarships, assistance for funerals and communication tools (e.g. radios).
Lessons learned include:
¾ tourism development has significant impacts on livelihoods (e.g. housing, income,
employment, social services provision, skill acquisition in tourism etc).
¾ poverty is described as having been high before tourism development, as a result CBNRM
has reduced it.
¾ communities have been able to collectively use natural resources (capital) through CBNRM
to achieve a shared goal which is the improvement of their livelihoods.
Costs Benefits
1. Special Game Licenses suspended
1. Hunting Quota system introduced under CBNRM
2. Subsistence hunting either reduced or
abandoned
2. Commercial hunting and photographic tourism has
become the main livelihood option
3. Collection of veld products (gathering)
either reduced or abandoned
3. Employment and income generation from CBNRM
and other tourism enterprises.
4. Livestock and crop farming areas either
minimized or abandoned
4. Area now reserved for wildlife conservation and
tourism development
5. Little interest on collecting local foods (e.g.
berries, frogs, tubers etc)
5. Generation of income to purchase food (e.g. rice,
macaroni, spaghetti, potatoes etc)
6. Floodplain crop and livestock farming
either reduced or abandoned
6. Income from CBNRM enterprises
7. Unrestricted harvesting of thatching grass
7. Controlled and commercialization of thatching grass
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
34
¾ development of positive attitudes by local people towards tourism development and
biodiversity conservation is very important.
CBNRM Challenges include a l
ack of entrepreneurship, lack of managerial & marketing skills, lack
of diversification into non-wildlife based tourism activities, 65% donation to conservation fund (i.e. it
might kill CBNRM), mismanagement & misappropriation of funds. Possible solutions suggested by
Dr Mbaiwa include:
¾ Community Trusts working with government officials
¾ Employment of Trust managers
¾ Formation of CBNRM Forums (i.e. all stakeholders meet and discuss issues affecting
them).
¾ Creation of a CBNRM Secretariat at Ministry level
¾ Skill development & educate locals on the tourism business
Potentials for building up local supply chains for tourism in order to provide community
benefits and reducing poverty
Rudolf Hahn, Technical Adviser, Selous-Niassa Wildlife Corridor, Tanzania
The Selous – Niassa Wildlife Corridor is a landscape linkage between the largest Game Reserves
in Africa, including the Selous Game Reserve (World Heritage Site) in Tanzania (47,000 km
2
) and
Niassa Game Reserve in Mozambique (42,000 km
2
). The corridor (SNWC) itself covers 10,000
km
2
and is a contiguous network of five community Wildlife Management Areas. Five CBOs are
present representing 29 villages. The area is very remote, with hardly any tourists. The area has
half global wild dog population.
Mr Hanh introduced the tourism vision for the corridor, which included providing an authentic
wilderness experience, combined with nature, culture and adventure activities, involving interaction
with local communities. It also aims to contribute to the improvement of livelihoods, poverty
reduction, local economic development, with increased acceptance of wildlife leading to long-term
conservation of the SNWC. They also propose to use the supply chain to establish linkages and
minimize leakages, increase the multiplier effect by sourcing local goods and services.
There is potential for local sourcing of food products, furniture, decoration, construction material,
souvenirs, and services (e.g. guided walks, skills demonstrations, village tours, storytelling etc).
There are also options for local employment and use of skills. There are a number of challenges,
which include:
Finding an investor, who wants to enter in partnership with local communities
Communities have no understanding of basic principles of tourism
Seasonality of agricultural products
Quality standard of products and services
Reliability of supply in time and quantity
Product/needs match (i.e. making souvenirs that tourists want to buy)
No skills in hospitality
Limited skills in business/entrepreneurship
Language barrier
Possible solutions include capacity building and training, product improvement and building
conditions for success (e.g. building of long-term partnerships between communities and key
private sector in tourism; fair pricing).
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
35
Inhambane Tourism Integrated Development Approach, Mozambique
Kristjan Suurna, SNV - Mozambique
Mr Suurna made a presentation on an Inhambane Tourism Integrated Development Approach
which is currently being implemented by local and national organisations with the help of SNV. He
noted that SNV is an advisory organisation, which assists in the following areas:
Capacity development services
¾ Diagnosis and learning
¾ Inter/Organizational strengthening networking
¾ Institutional change
Knowledge Development and Networking
Work in two sectors
¾ Economic development (Production, Income and Employment)
¾ Basic Services; Water/Sanitation and Education
The approach of SNV is to consider that If tourists like a destination they may stay longer, and will
spend more money. To help tourists spend more in the local economy, there are some pro-poor
interventions required.
Inhambane is a tourism destination on the coast of Mozambique. There are many investors in
Inhambane who have little background in tourism. Some basic accommodation (mainly self
catering) is available. There is no tourism plan and tourism investments are ad hoc. New investors
are interested, but the enabling environment is not supportive. However there are two investments
proposed for quality hotels providing 500 beds in next few years. Some investments have been
built on primary dunes, are of low quality, and are falling down into the sea.
Tourists are mostly regional (56%), from South Africa and Zimbabwe. They are self-drive tourists
who just want basic accommodation, and to use the beach and ocean. There are also international
tourists (27%) and a small portion of national tourists (17%).
SNV’s approach is action oriented, and looks at what can be initiated to get local people involved,
rather than undertaking long and thorough planning process. Interventions are short term, and not
too complex. A long term program being developed, and actors will become more confident, with
more capacity, and more interest for program as it gains ground. Initially few people talking to
each other, but SNV are working with 16 organisations including the private sector, government
and associations, and from national to local level. Interest is now increasing from the private
sector. The networking is promoting positive relationships, and a number of concrete actions are in
progress.
Mr Suurna noted that SNV is involved in vocational basic skills training in hospitality, by working
with national vocational training institution, and with the municipal council. They are also
developing a destination marketing program, which includes working with tourism products to
diversify them. SNV are working to help develop agricultural and other supply chains linked to
tourism. In a baseline study they found that 90% of all agricultural products consumed are
imported from South Africa, and that the only local produce is fish and prawns. The program is
also working with basic service sectors including water, sanitation and education. The municipal
council and local associations are looking at solid waste management. First thing you used to see
in the town was a large dump. Now this has been changed.
Outcomes include:
Multi Stakeholder Platforms have been created and are functioning
Tourism Association has been re-organized and is functioning
National Training Institute runs tailor made courses (about 100 employees trained from
August, 08). This will be expanded.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
36
Solid Waste Management has been organized and improved
Viability of local agricultural supply chains has been investigated, and they are looking at
greenhouse technologies with the International Trade Centre of UNCTAD.
Destination marketing discussions are underway
Anticipated impacts will include:
Increased direct employment with 2 000, to reach around 3 500 total in 3-5 years
5-6 local, value chains established in 3 years (as today none are functioning)
Tourism product diversification led and managed by local groups and entrepreneurs
5000 families with increased income and around 6000 with increased access to basic
services
The implications of tourism for rural livelihoods: the case of Madjadjane community,
Matutuine district, Mozambique
Felismina Langa, Ministry of Tourism Mozambique
Mr Langa reviewed the livelihood impacts of the community based tourism enterprise which was
established with the assistance of the IUCN in the buffer zone of the Maputo Special Reserve
(MSR) in Matutuine District. The study reviewed how livelihoods had been changed, and what
people’s attitudes were to conservation. The literature indicates that survival strategies of the
poor are adaptive, responding to opportunities and changing constraints. There is a growing role
of community involvement in the management of natural resources, which is increasingly
acknowledged in the design of tourism projects.
In 1999 the IUCN facilitated the enterprise as a CBNRM initiative. The local community ran the
lodge of ‘Tsakane (Joy) ka Madjadjane’, with the following facilities: camping and cottage, museum
& souvenir shop with local honey, arts and crafts, bar and tearoom, conference room. At the
beginning of the tourism project the ‘workers’ used to receive a small allowance, but currently there
are no allowances at all, and the facility is not in use.
The study included interviews with head of households and key stakeholders, the community
leader, and self-administered questionnaires. The results of the survey with 1% of the population
indicated that most of the livelihood activities had not changed since the start of the project, and
most people were undertaking small-scale farming. However, after the development of the
enterprise there were a higher proportion of people having 2 livelihood activities (45% before, 64%
afterwards)
1
. The majority of people interviewed did not think that their livelihood activities had
changed because of tourism. More than half the sample perceived that local people were involved
in natural resources conservation (62%), but fewer thought that tourism contributed to conservation
(32%).
Mr Langa concluded by noting that the tourism enterprise had not improved the livelihoods of local
people, and in its current state is not sustainable.
Discussion and debate from session 2
¾ Quantification of the benefits reaching the community is important, particularly how many
people benefit and how much revenue is distributed. Presentations had demonstrated the
annual benefits from tourism, through employment and dividends.
¾ Trophy hunting and photographic tourism are difficult to do confidently together. For
example some of the animals may be afraid and so tourists cannot photograph them.
1
The level of visitation by tourists to the enterprise was not indicated in relation to level of impact, nor was whether the
study was longitudinal or cross sectional at each stage.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
37
¾ In Botswana there are too many elephants and people are complaining. They should give
communities more elephants to hunt, to generate more revenue. Arial surveys each year on
elephants to set hunting quotas.
¾ Solidarity tourism seems to be like other forms of tourism (e.g. sustainable, responsible,
fair-trade tourism) but with small changes.
¾ There are many problems across the countries in the region, including HIV and the
distribution of anti-retrovirals for free. Awareness raising can help reduce the spread of
HIV/AIDS. Operators in the formal sector of tourism should include staff training in their
packages. Government also needs to raise awareness on HIV/AIDs. HIV/AIDS is an
intangible cost in the short term.
¾ The mechanism for distributing 20% of funds generated to the community, is based on a
national policy in Mozambique. 20% of fines, recreation fees, and concession fee go to
communities in Quirimbas on a rotational basis. Committees are being established in each
area to receive the funds. It is important to integrate wider benefits (i.e. not just benefits to
individuals) but they do not yet have an association with a bank account. There will be
training in financial management, and awareness raising on what is possible with a certain
size of funds.
¾ When monitoring impacts of revenue from tourism, household surveys can be done. It is
important to know about real money going into the communities, and the challenges. In
Botswana there are Monitoring Oriented Management Systems, where communities are
doing the monitoring. They are working on behalf of the park managers to assess the
populations of wildlife.
¾ Often the total amount of money going into a community is known, but what is not known is
whether the level of distribution is fair and equal.
¾ On Ibo island there were baseline surveys of 3 households. These provided information on
household spending and income patterns. This survey is being repeated with the same
participants each year. There is one indicator of the impacts on the community (the number
of local shops). Community members have opened 3 new shops, which shows that people
have more money and were buying more locally.
¾ Household surveys are critical, and are the only way to look at distribution of impacts. It is
also important to triangulate data sources to verify information. As much monitoring as
possible is valuable.
¾ Responding to a claim that UNWTO should prove funds and push governments to develop
more tourism, it was clarified that UNWTO is an intergovernmental agency, rather than a
donor agency. It provides a global platform for tourism policy making, through coordination
and support, but cannot force members to do A or B. UNWTO facilitates this process with
research, by analysing tourism and policy trends and identifying practical tolls and methods
for planning and management. UNWTO also organises dissemination mechanisms (e.g.
such as this seminar) and direct technical assistance (e.g. through the STEP program).
Mozambique has lots of potential, and conferences like this can be used to see what works
and what does not.
¾ The work from Uganda noted that the assumption that high end tourism does not
necessarily benefit local people more is interesting. Is this because of a pricing strategy to
control capacity and visitation? Is the pricing strategy is wrong? There is an assumption
that luxury tourism generates more for local people, but this is not always correct.
Researchers should look at whether the tourism product is strong enough to support that
market. Then go for a lower price range of product, which may be more realistic for local
people to have a stake in it, as it is less difficult. It is important not to have a pre-formed
assumption. It is not possible to have unlimited tourists in sensitive areas, and there is a
need to balance environmental consequences. It could be possible to have more tourists at
slightly lower prices for a greater overall impact.
¾ The impact of diamonds in Botswana has had an impact on tourism in the country. For
example, revenue from diamonds has been used to build roads, and tourists drive on those
roads.
¾ Since there is currently no tourism in the Selous-Niassa corridor, it is difficult to tangibly
realise supply chain benefits to communities in the future. Sometimes it can be useful to
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
38
provide an obligatory requirement for the private sector to use local suppliers, or
alternatively it can be more voluntary? There are investors interested in the corridor, but
since the area is very remote, it will be very costly to bring products from far away, and
there is a need to develop a local market. There is a public private partnership process
here projects can engage with training and capacity building. The area is not subsidising
tourism for the future. It needs to work as a business, and if not, then it is better to leave
tourism rather than do something that does not profit anyone.
3.5 Session 3 presentations: Supporting nature conservation through tourism: developing
creative financial sources and mitigating environmental impacts
Introduction
Dr Anna Spenceley, UNWTO expert
IUCN reports that globally there are 106,000 national protected areas, that cover 18 million km
2
(12.7% of the globe). However the funding gap is considerable in many parts of the world. For
example, sub-saharan Africa meets less than 10% of its overall conservation costs. Dr Spenceley
noted that there are a range of market-based fees for conservation, which include tourism,
resource use, bioprospecting charges, and payments for ecosystem services.
Tourism has potential to contribute to nature conservation because it:
¾ generates revenue in areas of high biodiversity (e.g. protected areas, TFCAs) an help to
make them economically viable
¾ raises public support for conservation with environmental education for visitors and local
people
Alternative employment & business opportunities for local people.
Perception of value may give conservation incentives
¾ less environmentally damaging than other revenue generating industries based on natural
resource use (e.g. forestry, slash and burn agriculture)
¾ may be one of the few economic activities suited to take place within conservation areas
located on marginal land
¾ can theoretically be sustainable if its impacts are managed and mitigated.
Dr Spenceley noted that statistics on nature-based tourism are not consistent, but in 2000 it was
estimated that there were 8.9 million arrivals generating US$ 3.6 bn. In Tanzania, tourism
generates 30% of GDP, while in South Africa it only generates 5% - despite South Africa having
the greatest number of nature-tourism arrivals in southern Africa. Tourism is a major revenue
earner for South African National Parks, generating 67% of turnover (US$74 million in 2008),
followed by grants, land acquisition, sales of flora and fauna and donations. The profitability of
ecolodges depends on a number of factors, including:
Destination:
regarding wildlife resources, safety and accessibility
being 1 hour from a local airport with reasonable international connections
Value:
competitive pricing considering design, facilities, location, wildlife resources, and
services compared to similar destinations
Interpretation and Activities:
unique wildlife species to be observed
interesting activities available
quality guiding and interpretation
Management capacity:
ability to manage marketing, finances, logistics, human resources, efficiently
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
39
Access to capital:
financing structures that allow for longer term return on investment are the most
beneficial.
Nature-based tourism can also benefit conservation. For example, the community-run Torra
conservancy in Namibia has entered a partnership with the private sector operator Wilderness
Safaris. Damaraland camp has a 15 year Build Operate Transfer (BTO) for a luxury lodge, in a
hybrid rental agreement. 10% of the net accommodation fees from each guest's stay are allocated
directly to the community, and for the last 5 years of the agreement Wilderness would transfer 20%
ownership of assets to the conservancy per year. By year 15 the conservancy would have owned
and manage the lodge, and Wilderness would continue to market it. This partnership has not only
generated economic benefits for local people (e.g. by increasing salaries from tourism by over
250% between 1999 and 2004; and payouts of US$74 p/a to each conservancy member), but it
has also had conservation benefits. For example, populations of wildlife have increased within the
conservancy (i.e. for elephant, lion, leopard, cheetah), and black rhino populations have more than
doubled over the past 30 years in this region of Namibia. However, there are contentious issues,
such as conflict between increasing livestock populations (sometimes funded by tourism revenues)
and stress on the ecosystem supporting wildlife (the resource for tourism).
Some biodiverse areas suffer from over-popularity. For example the Galapagos is a World
Heritage Site on the ‘danger list’. 97% of the island is national park, and there are 30,000
inhabitants. The inhabitants receive 170,000 tourists per annum, who generate US$400 million per
annum (65% of the economy). The island has observed a vicious cycle of growth, with inhabitants
wanting higher standards of living. The islands are now looking at how they can control
development through concessions. Over-popularity can also lead to unsustainable natural
resource exploitation, where controls and monitoring are not in place.
There are a range of ways to mitigate and avoid environmental impacts, through good planning,
and being sensitive to the type of habitat where tourism takes place. Effective environmental
management systems can address water use, waste disposal, energy use, biodiversity
conservation (e.g. planting indigenous species; re-stocking harvested species), land management,
sustainable natural resource use and environmental education.
There are many guidelines and codes of conduct that consider responsible use of natural
resources through tourism. The Partnership for Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria launched
baseline sustainable tourism criteria at the IUCN World Conservation Congress in Barcelona in
2008. These included a number of criteria for conserving biodiversity, ecosystems and landscapes.
It is envisaged that these will be used to develop an overarching accreditation scheme for local
certification programs in destinations, and provide consistency to assist tourists in their decision
making.
Dr Spenceley noted that presentations within this session would include:
Ecotourism and protected areas: The case of Gorongoza National Park, Joao Viseu
Supporting nature conservation through tourism: experiences from Malawi
Chizamsoka Manda
Environment and tourism in the framework of the Spanish Development Cooperation: The
Azahar Programme, Natascha Trick
A contribution to the sustainable financing mechanisms for Protected Areas in
Mozambique, Helena Motta
The experience of Vamizi, Mozambique, Isabel Marques da Silva
Supporting nature conservation through tourism: The case of Niassa National Reserve,
Anabela Rodrigues
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
40
Ecotourism and protected areas: The experience of Gorongoza National Park
Joao Viseu, Director of Operations and Infrastructure, Carr Foundation
Mr Viseau provided a historical account of Gorongoza, noting that it had been colonial Portuguese
administration until 1920, and became a hunting concession in 1995. In 1960 it became the first
national park in Mozambique. After the civil war in the 1990s, tourism numbers started to increase,
and in 2004 the Carr Foundation began negotiating with government to manage the park.
There are 250,000 people in buffer zone, and 1500 people inside the park within 5 groups who
practice fishing and agriculture. The main associated problems in the park are poaching,
uncontrolled fires, deforestation, and poverty. Fish are caught to supply the cities. 4 months ago
the park confiscated 2 tons of fish. Mr Viseau noted that they are introducing a quota system, so
that each family has a card and number, and a number of days that people can fish on. 98% of the
herbivores in the park have been introduced since 1992, but in terms of poaching, 30-60 tonnes
meat leaves Gorongoza each year.
The park uses satellite picture to monitor fires, and has found that on 1 September 2008 there
were 277 fires inside the park. The park covers 367 km
2
, but resources are not yet at level should
be. Areas at above 700 m cover 151 km
2
, and there has been a growth in deforestation in these
areas. The cause of the deforestation is the opening of machambas. Each is of about 1-2 ha and is
used to plant maize/beans to supply demand from cities (including for charcoal).
Mr Viseau explained that gold mining is also a major problem, and is particularly damaging
because of the use of mercury and cyanide in the process. Middlemen also exploit the miners, and
safety conditions are very poor (e.g. 8 people died during the rains in one of the gold mining holes).
There either needs to be a sustainable process of mining, or it should be stopped.
Gorongoza is adopting an integrated model for development with 3 components:
¾ Ecological equilibrium (i.e. conservation and science)
¾ Human development (i.e. environmental education, health, forestry products)
¾ Economic development (i.e. high end tourism, community and public tourism, commercial
agriculture)
Mr Viseau stated that if communities are not viable, it does not matter what money you put in the
conservation area: it will not be sustainable. Although tourism is main developing agent, is not the
only one. The mission is to recognise the basic human and ecological services of the park, and to
have sustainable conservation of nature. In Gorongoza this can only be done through sustainable
land uses and policies; and sustainable livelihoods.
From an ecological perspective, there is a great deal of biodiversity, and the park has the highest
density of lions in the world. A 20 year project has been established with the Ministry of Tourism
(MITUR), which includes the reintroduction of wildlife, including buffalo, giraffe, wildebeest, hippo
and elephants. There is better law enforcement, including training for guards and equipping them
with guns; training in fire protection and training members of communities as scouts. Scientific
research includes looking at ecology of the park, and monitoring wildlife health, and removing
invasive species. The park monitors the impact that the project activities have on a continual
basis. This has been supported by an SNV baseline study of the economics of 5 communities, to
identify opportunities for development.
In community development, the park is helping communities to formalise themselves and establish
management committees. They are building democracy into these systems, and supporting the
development of plans in the districts that identify economic potential. Some areas will need to be
re-zoned for development. The park will look at how to help the villages to be come self-sustaining.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
41
The Park has developed a contract with community, saying that they will support community if they
will not poach wildlife/light fires.
For human development, the park is planning infrastructure, and developing community
businesses for the private sector to use. They envisage that everything needed would be
produced by the communities. They provide community education, about conservation and the
environment and have constructed an environmental education centre. Health / HIV AIDS is a big
problem in this area and social infrastructure is being developed in conjunction with the Ministry of
Health. An environmental education centre is being developed, as one of the first truly eco-friendly
buildings in the area.
The park has 55 conservation agents, who re-plant trees (the same type of tree that have been
removed). Deforestation is a major problem. They are developing a range of forestry products,
improving quality of products they produce, and providing market access. Jobs and
entrepreneurship help with tourism and community-based agriculture is being developed. For
tourism, there are a number of development sites. A public site (medium to low-end); 5 high-end
concession areas, and eco-community-based tourism in the buffer area:
¾ The public area will offer 150 beds, 150 camp sites, conference facilities for 150 people,
restaurants, bars, sales craft, and a museum within this centre.
¾ Chitengo camp is proposed to have 150 beds (currently there are 9 cabanas), and the
training centre in the middle. This will be located on a previously disturbed area. The area is
safe for tourists, but de-mining needs to be undertaken.
¾ The high-value tourism concessions will require Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA)
to see what the options are for the number of beds, and where they can be located.
¾ Community tourism activities will include activities like Makoro rides. The community will
have title to any activity (e.g. a lodge), and will operate joint-ventures. There will be co-
management contracts, and when ‘loan’ are paid back, the community can either operate
co-management or get the concession to operate themselves. Therefore the community will
not loose title to their land, and they will see benefits.
Mr Viseau noted that developing community-based tourism needs to start from raising awareness.
For example, explaining why a white person would come to see an animal that they see every day.
Education about what tourism is and why it works. If you can link wildlife to the payment to people,
they will directly understand the benefit of conservation. They need to maximise economic benefits
and minimise negative impacts on the communities and enhance spiritual and cultural values.
In agriculture, products will be developed for export. It is predicted that communities will treble
their revenues by processing products (e.g. making juices from fruit, rather than letting it rot away).
Revenue will be reinvested in the community (i.e. 20% as a community fund and the rest into the
business). Linkages will also be forged between community tourism enterprises, local staff and
community organisations: bridging the gap between community farmers and commercial
agriculture.
Supporting nature conservation through tourism: experiences from Malawi
Chizamsoka Manda, Director, National Parks and Wildlife, Malawi
Mr Manda noted that conservation in Malawi has been dependent on state funding, and tourism
management used to be a state function. All the revenues (e.g. park fees) used to accrue to the
state but these were in small amount. However, over a period of time state budget declined
(though it has just gone up in the past few years).
The protected areas operate collaborative management, with sustainable use of resources inside
the protected areas. This supplements law enforcement. The forest reserves are managed by the
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
42
Department of Forestry. Two TFCAs are being developed between Zambia and Malawi (i.e. Nyika
TFCA & Kasungu – Lukusuzi TFCA) with assistance from the Peace Parks Foundation.
There have been problems with drops in wildlife numbers, and a decline in key species. Malawi
wants to re-dress the trend, and to reduce negative impacts of wildlife on people, for example by
providing fencing. To finance conservation, they involve the private sector in tourism
management. The department has eight lodges / tourist camps, most of which have had some
renovation or rehabilitation, while some have been constructed.
A revenue retention scheme was initiated in 1996 in Nyika NP and these revenues are being
shared between communities (20 %) and the Department (80 %). Liwonde NP has a revenue
retention scheme but the revenues are all used by the Department. Revenues comprise
concession fees, guide fees and park entry fees. With the private concessions, the revenues from
tourism increased by 50% between 2001 and 2005. Financing through tourism comes from
Community selling curios and other products using natural materials e.g. at Makhanga camp in
Liwonde NP near Mvuu camp. They also charge fees for tourists witnessing capture of animals
(such as in Liwonde National Park when capturing animals for Majete Wildlife Reserve).
Mitigating environmental impacts is not a serious concern at the moment because visitation is
within carrying capacity except for Liwonde NP and Lake Malawi NP. Concession agreements are
made with tour operators, that specify carrying capacities of lodges sites, and standards for tourism
activities and waste management are part of the agreements. These include controlling off road
driving, noise etc. There should be minimal impacts on natural resources, including with waste
management.
Challenges highlighted by Mr Manda included:
¾ Insufficient capacity in terms of skills when it comes to negotiating concession agreements
and monitoring the proceeds against initial projections. They are experimenting with
community conservation areas, but otherwise most tourism restricted to areas of state land.
¾ Low number of visitors to protected areas (e.g. only about 2000 visitors to Nyika NP which
is very remote) largely due to fact that the product is not adequately developed and access
problems. Tourism is increasing in Malawi.
¾ Protected areas neighbour human settlements with relatively high population densities
(about 105 persons per sq km on average, 1998 census) making product development a
problem
¾ HIV AIDS mainstreaming in conservation.
Environment and tourism in the framework of the Spanish Development Cooperation : The
Azahar Programme
Natascha Trick, Spanish Agency for International Development
Ms Trick introduced the Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation, as a State
Agency attached to the Ministry of Foreign Affaires and Cooperation through the Secretariat of
State for International Cooperation. The agency is responsible of the design, implementation and
management of the development projects and programs. Their final goal is the fight against
poverty and to achieve the millennium development goals, with commitments to less developed
countries. The SDC is scaling up its overseas development assistance, and tools for financing
include multilateral and bilateral assistance. This includes projects (either direct, through NGOs or
international organizations), budget support, exchange or debt cancellation.
The agency considers the environment to be a priority, and they wish to promote cooperative
actions in which economic and social development and environmental protection strengthen each
other mutually. The actions being carried out focus on:
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
43
¾ Promoting environmental conservation through adopting sustainable policies regarding
zoning and natural resources in the partner countries.
¾ Improving the environmental conditions of urban and rural populations through providing
better access to safe drinking water and sanitation;
¾ Favouring the adoption of sustainable development patterns in the production systems; and
¾ Strengthening human and social capital.
Regarding tourism, the agency objectives include to develop tourism as alternative development
instrument, versus other economic activities that are more aggressive to the environment. They
wish to increase the sustainability of conventional tourism, and promote and support sustainable
tourism.
Procedures for applying for funds are open agencies, and require an economic and technical
report submitted to the Spanish embassy.
A contribution to the sustainable financing mechanisms for Protected Areas in Mozambique
Dr Helena Motta, WWF Mozambique
Dr Motta provided an overview of the conservation opportunities in Mozambique. These included a
long and ecologically diverse coastal and marine environment; a positive policy environment;
recently declared protected areas (e.g. Limpopo, Quirimbas, Chimamimani, Bazaruto Archipelago
National Park); charismatic species including elephants, turtles, whales; and extensive and
commercially important dry miombo, including coastal forests and mangroves. However, there is
poor information on natural resources, and problems include poverty, illiteracy, lack of alternative
sources of livelihood; wild fires, charcoal production, illegal logging; over-fishing and degradation of
habitats such as mangroves and corals; Illegal fishing by foreign vessels; and unplanned
developments along the coast
Protected areas cover 4000 km
2
in Mozambique, which fall under MITUR. Mozambique is in the
process of revisiting its conservation policies. The country has good legal framework, but it is very
sectoral, and there is a need for better coordination. The group revising the policy engaged
government institutions, civil society and donors. Major topics of discussion included the current
legal and institutional set-up of conservation in Mozambique. Parallel to this process was a sub-
group promoting a discussion on sustainable financing mechanisms for the network of protected
areas. A series of background papers were produced on (a) current costs and investments in PAs
in Mozambique (b) Assessment of economic benefits of PAs in Mozambique (c) Legal mechanisms
for the creation of sustainable financing mechanisms of PAs (d) Pilot financial planning for PAs in
Mozambique. Consequently a conference took place in 2007 where the papers were presented
and experiences from other countries were shared.
Some of the research looked at existing bus plans of Limpopo, Bazaruto and Qurimbas National
Parks. They considered what their total costs were, and what the funding gap was. The work found
that the gap was considerable. The gap also depended on the way that the business plans were
done, and the costs of managing protected areas varies from place to place (e.g. from $80 – 300
per km2). There are a diverse range of sustainable financing mechanisms, including:
Entry fees (inc. landing fees, etc), payment of services and activities (diving, photography,
sport fishing, bird watching, trophy hunting, etc);
Government budget allocations;
Payment for Environmental Services (Carbon sequestration, watershed protection, etc) and
Bio-prospecting;
Mecenato Law (up to 15% of the profit can be treated as loss or costs, and used for the
establishment and maintenance of “ecological sites” and/or training). Mecanto is for private
companies, with a tax deductable ‘charity’ for conservation; and
“Green Taxes”, multilateral and bilateral donations, Trust Funds.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
44
After the 2007 conference, and the conservation and biodiversity group did a study on possibility of
looking at one of the mechanisms, and on the options for creating a Trust fund. The process from
this point forward is:
In the next 12 months, a Trust Fund is to be discussed and proposed to the Government of
Mozambique to be created;
It is expected that will not be the only source of funding for the PAs in Mozambique;
The governing body of the Trust Fund is expected to be related to the governing body of
the network of PAs in Mozambique;
Several donors have already expressed their willingness to support the Trust Fund
The experience of Vamizi
Isabel Marques da Silva, Maluane Project, Cabo Delgado
Ms da Silva introduced the mission of the Muluane conservation area “To preserve the pristine
coastal and marine biodiversity, natural resources and wildlife in and around Maluane conservation
areas, whilst ensuring a better livelihood for the local communities who depend on these natural
resources for their survival”. Development of the lodge used local materials, and the capacity of
local workers from Zanzibar was enhanced. The location of villas depended on the local
vegetation, and was designed to have minimal impact on the dunes.
Tatler rate it as one of the 101 best hotels in the world. Activities include whale watching, catch and
release fishing, diving, turtle watching, and guided trails. There immense bird biodiversity that
tourists go to see
The initiative has the ‘Friends of Maluane’ which channels donations (including for turtle tagging),
and other revenue is generated from grants, collaborations, a shop and from the partner agency
ZSL. Research includes turtle tagging and fish and coral surveys, and uses finance from scientists
who study there. There is a conservation team which does various activities, including with local
people. There are 20 rangers, but lots of human-wildlife conflict.
Micro projects are developed to support local livelihoods. They work with the fishing, horticulture
and women’s associations. It is very difficult to get products to the area. They need to build up the
experience of workers (who would rather be in Maputo, not 2700 km from there!) so training for
local people is very important, including for language and skills. Social projects have also been
undertaken, including developing a school for Vamizi.
Supporting nature conservation through tourism: The case of Niassa National Reserve
Anabela Rodrigues, Director General, SGDRN
Ms Rodrigues noted that Niassa National Reserve (NNR) covers 42 000 km
2
, and is the largest
protected area in Mozambique, representing 36% of the total area under conservation in the
country. The area is vitally important for conservation on a national and global scale due to its size
and wilderness quality. The NNR has most of the wildlife remaining in the country, including
13,000 elephants, 14,000 sable, 350 wild dogs and between 600 and 900 lions.
The human inhabitants are among the lowest population densities in the country. There is an
expanding population of 35,000 people in 40 villages with 2 District Administrations: Mecula (4 500
people) and Mavago (9 000 people). The ethnic groups are Yao and Macua.
The NNR was established in 1954, as a ‘paper’ reserve without any management. A pre-project
was then established between 1995-8 and an MOU signed between Government of Mozambique
and the private sector to initiate the rehabilitation of the NNR. The first Management Plan was
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
45
Niassa National Reserve: Income vs Expenditure
Best Tourism & Hunting Model
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Year
Dollars ('000)
SRN Inc ome
Community
Inc ome
Wildlif e Income
Tou ris m Inc ome
Operating
Costs
prepared and activities began. A consolidation of management and institutions took place between
1998-2000, and the Society for Development and Management of Niassa Reserve (SGDRN) was
established as the first Public-Private Partnership. In 2002 SGDRN was given mandate to manage
and develop NNR and a Management Contract was signed with MITUR.
The focus of the management plan for 2007-13 is on biodiversity, community issues, financial
sustainability through tourism, and creating an enabling environment to implement the
management model. There are three categories of management zones: Special conservation
areas; wilderness areas and natural resource use conservation areas.
Tourism activities include conservation hunting and nature tourism. The challenges of tourism
development include the following:
¾ It is a remote and unknown destination
¾ Low densities of wildlife populations to support tourism
¾ Expanded human settlements
¾ Poor internal road network
¾ Logistical difficulties of operation
¾ High dependency of hunting safaris on sensitive species (e.g. leopard and lion)
¾ High investment costs and relatively low financial returns. The reserve still below its
potential
A tender process was launched for the management units in 2008, which received 34 expressions
of interest (47%) from Mozambican entities. There was an audited evaluation of tenders and
contracts were negotiated that included obligations, and investment in infrastructure and anti-
poaching units). A business plan was done before the tenders took place. Hunting quota-setting
was done by SGDRN, with final approval by the government. Aerial surveys were used, in
addition to existing quota figures. She noted that there is a growth trend of the wildlife in the NNR.
Licensing, monitoring and evaluation
systems have been developed,
including reporting and annual
planning, with feedback annual
meetings. Hunt Return Forms and
tourism regulations have been
developed and carnivore surveys
take place (e.g. 6 lions and 5
leopards collared for the carnivore
surveys, and lions less than 6 years
old cannot be hunted. Hunting of lion
and leopard was the reason to start a
research program on these species).
Since 2000, 6 Blocks have hosted
273 hunting safaris (37000 hunter
days), and growth is limited by the
quota, and the availability of key
species specially buffalo. The
estimated overall income since 2004 is US$ 4,035,354. Nature tourism is still in its infancy. A 16-
bed high quality tented camp opened in 2006, and contracts are to be signed in 2008 with three
new investors to increase the capacity to 50 beds.
Revenue accrues to the community from the 20% community levy (from abate tickets and
concession fees). The conservation cost (US$/km
2
) is 4 x Annual Scout Salary / Protected Area.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
46
For NNR this is US$ 40/km
2
or US$1.68 million (excluding capital investment in infrastructure). On
average conservation areas have a shortfall of $150 per km
2
.
SGDRN is effectively managing 17 protected areas. The operating budget is US$800,000, with
revenue from concession fees, hunting licenses and some donor support (by comparison, South
Africa spends US$15 million on 37,000 km
2
. Revenue can be increased by having long term
concessions, diversifying the product, and attracting investment (e.g. carbon credits, philanthropy
and fractional ownership).
Results from a recent tender process shows that the CAPEX is far higher for non-consumptive
tourism than hunting ($457 vs $70 per km
2
) but the offers on concession fees are the opposite:
hunting has higher fixed fee than non-consumptive tourism, and lower variable fee. Therefore, non-
consumptive puts risk on the protective area. Until the nature conservation picks up, hunting will be
required to sustain the park. The NNR is trying to reduce its operational costs by:
a) “Outsourcing” routine management responsibilities (law enforcement, fire management etc.)
b) Integrating stakeholders including communities (through associations); Local, Provincial and
National Government; and improved regional cooperation (cross border illegal activities). This
includes creating associations to liaise with.
c) Improving the enabling environment, by filling the “policy vacuum” and encouraging political
will
Challenges include people living within the park, and conflicts that result. Many people also cross
the reserve using pedestrian routes, and start fires to protect themselves. Some of the legislation is
very good but implementation is very difficult. Animals are trapped by snares, and wire is stolen
from fences to protect villages from the elephants. The fishing methods used are unsustainable,
and there are fishing camps along 20 km of the river. People are even growing cotton in the NNR.
Harmonisation of legislation is required. For example, even though the forestry and mining laws
are clear that it should not happen, it does. There is a weak commitment to initiate appropriate
land use strategies for communities who are accommodated in conservation areas.
If zonation of the reserve could be agreed at all levels of government, it would be easier to promote
investment. This is particularly if the investment areas were zoned together. Ms Rodrigues stated
that the NNR has great potential for tourism and conservation.
Discussion and debate from session 3
¾ One of the critical issues is the conflict of wildlife with humans. Sometimes district
government has put pressure on park administration to intervene because of elephants.
There are a number of actions to reduce conflict, such as surrounding farms with wires
impregnated with chilli; burning elephant faeces infused with chilli around villages, and
installing electric fencing. Chilli guns were also bought by the Ministry of Defence.
¾ Another critical issue is poaching. In Gorongoza communities do not have money to pay
the fines even if they are sent to the tax judgement. According to wildlife law in
Mozambique, the only crime that people are imprisoned for is setting fires.
¾ Poaching is very serious, and there is good support from the Tribunals. Within 48 hours
poachers are arrested, and convicted. Some poachers cannot pay the fines, and some of
those caught were trying to get a job in the project to stop the poaching. Some were
caught for first time, but others had been poaching for 15 years. In the park there is a
musician who is an ex-poacher, and he has been working in the field.
¾ Fires are a major problem in Gorongoza. 6 elephants were brought from Kruger NP, and
radio collared. Due to the burning, and because of the loss of food, elephants were able to
cross the river and entered local farms. Gorongoza elephants are scared of people, but
those from Kruger NP were habituated. The elephant that escaped had been under a lot of
stress. Fortunately there were no deaths. Using cranes the park managed to bring them
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
47
back, but 50 metres from the park the elephant died. This was all because of an
uncontrolled burn. The problem is that there is no legislation, and we need communities to
work with us. We are trying to rehabilitate the poachers.
¾ The process of registering communities is not easy. They first have to be organised into
natural resource committees, and they form an association. An agreement is then
developed between parks and the wildlife department. It is quite a long process to register
associations. However, after a year they had certificate and agreement signed with the
park management. They had to open a bank account, and to do so needed a constitution
and minutes of a meeting where all trustees attended. The association was assisted by a
KfW funded project. When the community came to use the 20% of park revenue problems
arose with issues of transparency with the funds.
¾ In Quirimbas, $4m is the gross revenue of operators before the taxes etc are deducted.
20% of this is distributed to communities, and this process started before associations were
established. It is hard to show the community that money is coming from the activity of a
specific tourism operator. Money was used to support the creation of the associations.
Other funds are sent to the Ministry of Tourism. Here associations have been created but
are not legally registered, so accounts have very real risks. It is important to have all
stakeholders involved, but what happens if they take the money and vanish? Legal
frameworks are limited in Mozambique. The experiences seen in Namibia and other
countries, where communities become partners, is the kind of mechanism needed here
now.
¾ In Niassa it would be better not to have hunting, but it is a form of tourism that contributes
to conservation. In Niassa it is even related to the habitats: i.e. miombo woodland is hard to
operate photographic tourism in. There are also options for adventure tourism, but this is
not going to happen yet.
¾ There was a statement that conservation with finance is just conservation. However,
conservation can be done without funding. Education is key. This is an opinion: some think
that conservation pays for itself, and in part this is true. But there is some scepticism, and
extra financing mechanisms are needed because conservation more than just using
resources. It also requires monitoring and management.
¾ The use of carbon credits is still being debated at a UN level. In the application of this, it
was known that 42,000 km
2
of miombo needed to be looked at. Niassa has a strategic
partner helping (Floral and Fauna International) with technical assistance. Niassa is also
looking at time shares, and have tendered 6 areas. The legislation is very recent for time
shares in Mozambique.
¾ Gorongoza is looking at carbon trading. However, so far forests are not included, because
they have difficult with land tenure, and the security of the ‘investment’ in forest is not
secure (e.g. to prevent deforestation, slash and burn agriculture, charcoal production).
Therefore forestry is within the voluntary carbon market.
¾ The Spanish Development Corporation can finance items that are not in a master plan.
What is required for an application depends on whether you are an NGO or government.
The procedure is complex, and it is best to work through the technical cooperation offices in
each country to find the best mechanism. For example, they can relate to national parks,
and assisting the local population to generate income. There is a wide range of possible
projects that are possible, as long as criteria are taken into consideration.
¾ Contracts with communities need commitment from both parties. They take various forms,
such as MoU’s with communities where they produce vegetables. There are also
agricultural development contracts in return for not deforesting areas. There is a need to
replace charcoal production with alternative livelihood and energy sources.
¾ It is very difficult to deal with communities living inside reserves, particularly when
populations grow. Destruction continues unsustainably, so in Kenya sometimes we advise
government to de-gazette reserves.
¾ A climate change fund has been created, but as yet no African country has access to that
fund.
¾ With the issue of communities and integration in the reserves, there is a challenge that
populations in the parks should limit their activities. This means that a segment of society
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
48
has less rights than others. Parks have infrastructure and roads to satisfy tourists, but in a
park you cannot build schools and resources for people. Managing large numbers of people
is not easy, and integration with the tourism product is needed.
¾ There have been several initiatives since the 80’s in Gorongoza to remove mines.
¾ Niassa is aware of the problem of people living within the reserves. Some people were born
there, and will stay there for their entire lives. People move according to incentives they
have. People have a natural trend to improve their livelihoods and quality of life, so one of
the secrets is to provide incentives to encourage people to voluntarily move to areas where
quality of life is better.
¾ Conservationists get constrained when we discuss conservation areas in relation to human
rights. However, these constraints are not there when we talk about a dam. Look at mining
of heavy sands in reserves. Conservation must be seen as an economic opportunity. At
Niassa we train monitors and drivers. There is no technical skill in the area, and so we run
catering courses. People then go and find jobs elsewhere.
¾ One of the issues in the new conservation policy for Mozambique, is that there were very
few alternatives in terms of categorisation of protected areas and socio-cultural value. This
limited the type of institutional arrangement. There are problems in the over use of
resources – and solution for conservation of protected areas. In Quirimbas, the human-
wildlife conflict was largely resolved by re-categorising the conservation area from one of
the most strict, to community based management. Some conservation areas are not
suitable for habitation. For example in Bazaruto NP the sandy soil cannot be used for
agriculture, but people still try and use it because they are poor and have few alternatives.
¾ There is no universal solution to human wildlife conflict, and initiatives vary between
regions, countries, and destinations. Part of the solution can be exchange of experiences. It
is common that African countries have rich protected areas. We should learn from each
other and draw from this experience. The relationship between conservation and tourism is
what we are talking about.
¾ In Quirimbas there is pressure on marine reserves for fishing. The fish is not usually for
local consumption. A photographic exhibition was undertaken, and 25 disposable cameras
were given to local people who photographed what they wanted to conserve. This was the
vision of people living in the reserve.
3.6 Anchor tourism investments in Mozambique
Program of Anchor Investments in Tourism
Irene Visser, International Finance Corporation
Mrs Visser announced the pre-launch of tender options for tourism investment in the Maputo
Special Reserve in Mozambique, and stated that the IFC looked forward to applying the
recommendations of the seminar, in order to realise quality investment in protected areas.
The anchor tourism investment program is joint initiative between MITUR and the IFC,
implemented by FUTUR. The objective to promote the growth of the tourism sector and to identify
and market quality investment in selected areas, called anchor investment sites. By doing so, the
program aims to create sustainable model for investments, and maximise local benefits with
participatory models. The IFC is streamlining procedures to encourage investment in tourism.
The anchor process was launched in 2007, and is now in phase 2 realising investment in the
anchor sites. On conclusion of the investment agreements, the IFC will move towards a phase of
MITUR supporting investment (e.g. with SNV assisting with community programs). The program
supports two distinct models of development: private sector and joint-ventures with communities.
The program will facilitate investment of about $1 billion for large resort developments. These will
maximise benefits at local level, by working with communities.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
49
Strategy for tourism concessions in Maputo Special Reserve
Dr Bartolomeu Soto
Dr Soto highlighted the general objective of promoting tourism in the Maputo Special Reserve
(MSR) in 3 areas: Ponta Chemucane, Ponta Dobela, and Ponta Milibangalala. These are
investments for regional and local investors that will promote community participation and local
economic development and support of the management of the MSR.
At Chemucane, communities will have lease for land, and would sub-lease (or have some other
form of partnership) the site to a private sector operator. Competitive bidding might bring
innovative proposals for partnerships. At Dobela and Milibangalala, there will be a bid launched for
private sector to operate the two sites.
The sequence of events for the competitive bid will be an Expression of Interest between
December 2008 and February 2009, led by MITUR, which will lead to prequalification of operators.
The second stage will be a Request for Proposals for the three sites. The result will be the
selection of private operator between March 2009 and June 2009.
Criteria for pre-selection of investments will be:
¾ Chemucane: a regional investor with high end tourism market and community
partnerships
¾ Milibangalala: an international investor operating in the high end market
¾ Dobela: a local investor with several types of accommodation, including camp sites with
variable prices structure.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
50
4 The Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area
4.1 Introduction
The Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area
Dr Bartolomeu Soto, Coordinator of the TFCA Unit Project, Mozambique
Dr Soto took delegates on a Google Earth virtual ‘tour’ of the Great Limpopo Transfrontier
Conservation Area (GLTFCA), and then described the institutional structure and advisory
committees.
A resettlement process is underway for people
that are living in Limpopo National Park (LNP).
A resettlement plan was devised, and a
committee established that represents the
Minister of Tourism. There was planning of
resettlement – and a committee – representative
of the minister of tourism. There will be
compensation for people who are resettled, and
18,000 houses are being built for people to move
to.
The presence of people in the LNP is a concern
because of human-wildlife conflict. Resettling
people is a sensitive process, and expectations
are high. There is a step by step process to
address their needs.
There is a tourism masterplan for the LNP, and
200 beds are planned. The 1
st
phase of tourism
development consisted of Machampane
Wilderness Camp: a low cost tented camp on
the Machampane river with associated
wilderness and hiking trails. Covane Community
Lodge was developed with funds from USAID
secured by the Swiss NGO Helvetas, and this
lies just outside the LNP.
A border post has been constructed between Mozambique’s LNP and South Africa’s Kruger
National Park. Construction began in 2005 and was opened in 2006. 55,000 tourists use the post
each year.
Areas of interest in the TFCA vary for different stakeholders. For example, South Africa is
interested in the TFCA because of the need to conserve biodiversity, and in particular give more
space for elephants. Mozambique and Zimbabwe are interested in the potential to attract new
investment.
Sharing revenue from the TFCA needs to be equitable and fair. KNP receives about 2 million
tourists each year, and some want to visit Zimbabwe and Mozambique. A series of options are
being discussed.
Land mines are present in some areas of Zimbabwe and Mozambique, and these need to be
cleared.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
51
In Zimbabwe, there is a need to proclaim the Sengwe corridor, which lies to the north of Kruger
NP, and would act as a corridor to the Gonerezhou NP. There is a plan to build a bridge across the
river between Kruger NP and the Sengwe Corridor.
The TFCA needs capital (both financial and human). The TFCA needs to promote employment and
local economic development.
Monitoring and evaluation is another important issue for the park, and is conducted to see if it is
reaching the proposed objectives. Work plans are created, and then progress towards short-term
objectives are monitored. However there is also a need to create long- and medium-term
objectives. Each participating country is to design objectives for 2, 4 and 5 years and to monitor
progress towards reaching them. Monitoring also considers the growth of certain species
population, to indicate the success of conservation.
4.2 Panel debate
Following the introduction, a panel of stakeholders discussed various issues relating to tourism
activities in the TFCA. The panellists included
2
:
Dr Bartolomeu Soto, Coordinator of the TFCA Unit Project, Mozambique
Giju Varghese, Head: Business Development, South Africa National Parks
Glynn O’Leary, Transfrontier Park Destinations, Operator of Machampane Wilderness
Camp in LNP
Henrique Massango, Ministry of Tourism, Mozambique
Luis Filipe Dinis, Executive Director, the NGO Lupa (ex Helvetas)
Salmao Valoi, Covane Community Lodge, Manager
Dr Simon Munthali, Regional Director, African Wildlife Foundation, Technical advisor in
Banhine National Park
Teodósio Bento Nunes Jeremias, Coordenador do Projecto Lhuvuka, LNP
Teodoro de Abreu, Communications officer on the TFCA Unit Project, Mozambique
4.2.1 Part 1: Question and answer session
Following brief introductions by each panelist, Mr Gabor Vereczi moderated a debate involving the
panelists, and delegates, in order to identify recommendations for the GLTFCA.
When tourists enter the GLTFCA, do they know that they know they are in a transfrontier
area?
When you enter Kruger NP, you do not know that you are entering a TFCA, and this needs
to be looked at. There is an opportunity from the Mozambican side to use the TFCA brand
from the start. There also needs to be a central fund to promote the brand.
There is a challenge on branding the LNP from the Mozambique side. We have to explore
opportunities and create conditions for accommodation. With the creation of the border
between KNP and LNP, we expose the area to the tourists as a corridor to link to the
coastal zone. A management plan is in its final stages. We need to promote the area in
other ways.
There is a perception of Limpopo NP that there is no wildlife, and this perception is
heightened by the fence presence. Priority should be given to this. We have seen all of the
Big 5 on foot from our camp, but people doubt this and say all of the wildlife is in Kruger
NP.
2
Note that there were no representatives from Zimbabwe available for this session.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
52
We are a small operator at Machampane (i.e. a 10 bed camp with 4x4s, hiking trail, and
canoeing). We are not an operator with 1000s of beds, but are doing 99% of the destination
marketing and product marketing. This is very difficult when trying to develop a new
destination. We need to look at some joint-marketing, for the TFCAs and specific parks.
SANParks does a great job, and we need to do the same in Mozambique.
How does the TFCA contribute to community-based tourism activities?
Tourists come through Limpopo NP and Kruger NP, so it is a source of clients. They come
and visit the parks and then stay in our lodge. It is a good opportunity to be close to the
park.
How do you coordinate the TFCA on a practical basis, in terms of communication and
meetings?
Management of the transfrontier park is complex, and involves ministers and people at
other levels. There are experts from the three countries who prepare proposals and submit
them to the ministers. Decisions are agreed by consensus.
However, people come from different places with different ideas, and there can be a
struggle to reach consensus. Below the technical committees are specialist committees
(e.g. on customs, veterinary issues) and consensus is hard to reach.
There is a national process to consult with national stakeholders, communities etc. there
are also structures within each country. Once a national position is achieved, that position
is defended by them.
Political will exists for the area (or about 80-90%). When experts cannot agree, ministers
have to do so. There is a fragile structure, and once there is a difference at the political
level it may not be possible often to take a decision. There is a major challenge in
understanding. Ministers may not feel comfortable with particular structures and then give
up, so this is a major challenge.
How does communication help, and what are the challenges to communicate to a policy
level?
There is a challenge for communication on TFCA, particularly with respect to
communicating at the same level with the other parts (e.g. Kruger NP and Zimbabwe). In
Mozambique we have a communication strategy that has been accepted by the Ministry of
Tourism.
The communities in the LNP have a problem when wildlife destroys crops. Who do they turn
to, and how do their comments get to the top level?
Awareness is being raised at the community level on problem animals and resettlement. It
is not straightforward, but when possible we establish communication from bottom to the
top. There are some constraints on the Mozambique side (e.g. infrastructure). We also
need to link to travel agencies and operators and encourage them to visit the park. It is a
major challenge.
Exchanging information between the community and park management on issues like
conflict, is done through committees of the district. There are 52 villages in the park, which
is divided into 3 districts. There is a network of information distributed through these
districts.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
53
There is communication between community leaders and park administration to solve
animal-man conflict.
Sometimes the communication is difficult, for example because a motorbike takes time to
travel between a community to the administration of the park in order to report incidence of
a human-wildlife problem. Forums are established and there is a need to improve the
communication
These are huge and remote areas. Sometimes radios can be useful.
What are the challenges of working in a fragmented area?
We should not look at the Transfrontier Park in isolation – it is part of the Transfrontier
Conservation Area. This includes communal areas in-between the national parks. The
African Wildlife Foundation works in Banhine NP, and our operations aim to diversify the
tourism product. Landscapes are similar in LNP and KNP, so Banhine provides something
different.
What are the practicalities of crossing the border crossing? What are the challenges? Is it
easy for a tour operator take tourists through?
The ministerial committee decided to develop a transit post for tourists at Giriyondo, which
is a temporary border post. In the long term SADC plans to have uni-visa, and by then
Mozambicans will easily be able to travel to South Africa. The TFCA does not allow the
passage of goods and commercial use of the border post. There is a quick process for
tourists with small amounts of luggage. Operators have to pass through there frequently,
and we establish mechanisms to save people’s passports by not stamping them. The
border post has some difficulties, as some goods that are used in Mozambique cannot be
obtained close to the park (e.g. fuel, fish). Therefore operators have to go a long distance to
obtain products. Therefore, for Mozambique it is an option to have goods on the South
African side and then to pay customs duties. The SADC region is also in the process of
relaxing customs demands.
You do not have to stamp elephants when they cross the border!
The border is open for the community. They want to have a border for trade. These are
some of the advantages for community, however they travel through and border people turn
a blind eye to the trade. A major objective of the park is movement of people and goods.
The reason for TFCAs is to have wildlife moving across borders. The political will for doing
that is 100% in principle idea. In terms of the transition to the operational phase, efficiencies
and maturity levels are needed.
On product diversity, people talk about Kruger NP and two other parks. However
Mozambique brings a cultural product, links to the beach, and different landscapes. The
brand needs to be looked at.
There was a cycling event through Kruger NP & Limpopo NP, where a participant broke a
leg at 4 pm. They were only evacuated the following day, because when Kruger NP was
alerted to problem they wanted to fly helicopter to the site and had to get clearance, and fly
via Maputo. They were unable to fly. In a Big 5 park there can be incidents, and needs to
be a process of what to do.
The discussion was opened up to delegates of the seminar for questions and comments.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
54
How are revenues shared in the GLTFCA? What is being done to address the regulatory
frameworks?
There are 3 parks that have different objectives relating to biodiversity and sustainable
development. With a long term plan it is possible to create a series of long term tools (e.g.
like the tourism plan that was devised at the outset). The parks form an alliance between
wildlife and the beach, and the park can offer good experience.
Limpopo NP will not have same kind of revenue as Kruger NP, but wants to learn from
Kruger NP, and benefit from extending tourists through to the coast. Efforts are being made
to harmonise policies and the regulatory framework. The treaty signed is strong document.
Who has jurisdiction in the buffer zones? Are there guiding laws or development plans for
these areas? Is agreement between the administrators of the park?
The buffer zone is between the Limpopo river and the border of Limpopo NP. The buffer
zone is under the administration of the park, and is an area of multiple uses with people
living there.
In the Canhane area (the community that owns Covane Community Lodge), Helvetas
facilitated the zoning and definition of areas for agriculture, tourism, and accommodation
according to its potential. This zoning will help with administration of the district.
What is the current involvement of Zimbabwe in the GLTFCA?
There is active involvement of Zimbabwe whenever necessary. There was a strategic
review of the GLTP which resulted in reducing the number of activities. Previously
Zimbabwe had been one of the coordinating countries. It was decided that this was not
sustainable, and there needed to be a central place for coordination. Coordination was
passed to South Africa, because there may be some organizational problems to establish
secretariat in Zimbabwe. The group of three countries is not well organized.
In practical terms with the three parks, and security and control. The last meeting in
Zimbabwe was attended by the police and managers of Gonarezhou. At this level, and
regarding security and movement on poaching issues, there is communication and regular
meetings, with active involvement of Zimbabwe.
The brand of ‘boundless’ has been launched for TFCAs. This was launched in Durban at the
Tourism Indaba in 2008 with ministers of 9 southern African countries. This brand will be
used to raise awareness of TFCAs.
Terminology is confusing. We talk about the Great Limpopo, the Great Limpopo
Transfrontier Park, the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area, the Limpopo
National Park, Parque Nacional do Limpopo, and also Limpopo province in South Africa.
This is confusing. The parties need to agree on an identify that is clear.
This harmonization is what was envisaged when the treaty was signed.
We need to have political will. Since the transfrontier parks are working well, the concept
has been extended to these 9 countries.
The GLTFCA structures vary between countries. For example SANParks is a parastatal.
This means operationally that revenues are ring fenced in separate business units, and
expenses come from the parks. However, provincial parks report to provincial government.
Mozambique does not have a parastatal, so it takes longer to obtain money. Also there is
no incentive of financial benefit if the area does not retain its income. It needs to be clear
how governments are aligned, and also we need to recognise diversities.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
55
Governance is critical to protected areas, and plowing ideas back to management. We
need capacity to hire high quality staff. Some countries rely on money from the
government, and this is a long process. We need to learn from each other and evaluate
what has worked, and what has not.
In Mozambique 20% of the revenues from protected areas are channeled to communities.
However, Communities need bank accounts, and these are difficult to obtain. For example,
communities need associations where approvals are signed by 3 people. However, signed
documents at the District level are not recognized by banks which needs only 1 signature.
The community cannot do this by itself, as they do not have resources. It is difficult to get
identification numbers, and 3 people to open accounts. How do we sensitize banks?
From a different angle, we talked about the dream versus the reality of a transfrontier park
for an operator. There are challenges, at a governmental level and park level. One of the
first challenges is to sell transfrontier parks, and sell the perception of boundary-less area
and free and ease of movement within a common entity. But in the GLTFCA, you need to
deliver a passport at the border, so you cannot move between them without this. You
cannot simply visit Limpopo NP if you arrive at Kruger NP. There also need to be common
charges. For example, a tourist pays a fee at Kruger NP entry, and a park entry fee at LNP
entry and a visa etc. Then a tour operator also has to pay to cross border fee for the
vehicle. When self-drive clients from South Africa enter Kruger NP with a ‘wild card’ (which
provides free entry to national parks on an annual basis), they leave their cars at one of the
Kruger NP camps, and enter Mozambique on the Machampane open-top vehicle. However,
when they return to Kruger NP to collect their vehicles, they have to pay an open safari
vehicle fee. There had been an arrangement to get to Machampane without the extra
charges, but now tourists pay extra. This has increased costs for people visiting the area,
which is a major issue. SANParks suggested they buy a closed vehicle, or cut prices.
However this makes them non-competitive and less attractive to both tourists and other
operators. Parks have to sort out the issue, as future concessions will be hard to operate.
Duties and taxes are also difficult. Machampane operates a 4x4 trail, and since there is
none available at the border, they bring additional diesel with them. They are charged duty
on this. We need governments to get a deal on these issues and common prices. By
contrast at Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park between South Africa and Botswana, you pay one
fee, and you do not need a passport as long as you exit from the same gate that you
entered.
On resettlement, what actions are going to be introduced to avoid human wildlife conflict?
Along the rivers there are problems, in the buffer zones of the Limpopo NP that are to be
resettled. The first people to be resettled are in the Massingir area, and that process that
ended in October 2008. This is an area to be considered for tourism and ecotourism. Other
areas are also to be resettled, unless people are in the buffer zone. The south has greater
wildlife problems, and there are lots of community members and agricultural activity.
Elephants go to this area because it is green along Olifants river, and water is available.
We will be making contact with associations and farmers, and need to see results so that
efforts can be replicated.
Mozambican legislation on wildlife considers that animals are man’s enemies (not vice
versa). If an animal attacks a person, the animal does not compensate the person. They
will continue to attack people if there is no accountability. When an animal attacks a person
outside a national park, the District authorities are responsible (e.g. the ministry of
agriculture). There is a need to include a compensation system.
Humans are part of biodiversity. We have to avoid these problems, but cannot see animals
like goats. Wildlife is asset of the state.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
56
Where is the TFCA committee based, and are the countries coordinating with this?
The coordination used to rotate between countries every 2 years. There followed an
institutional analysis, and it was decided to have a stationary headquarters in South Africa
with staff from each country. Zimbabwe took role of coordination. However there have been
budgeting problems because countries are not contributing, and each country is varying its
contributions. The treaty indicated a fund would be established, which is not in place yet
and needs to be developed. Employees that were initially there have left.
4.2.2 Part 2: Scenario development
Mr Gabor Vereczi asked panel members to imagine a fictitious scenario in the future, where the
year was 2020, all problems had been solved, and the TFCA was operating well. In a series of key
questions, he asked them to reflect on how they had achieved this success.
What are the key policies that created this success, for the benefit of communities?
Success has depended on policies and partnerships with the people. Land is one aspect of
this, to bring in capital so that communities could buy shares in businesses. Local
employment alone would not have made this impact.
Members of the community were involved with decision making organisations in the park
itself. The issue of protection and safety has been addressed by the management of the
park.
Some years ago we were afraid that there was too little land for all of us, and we thought
that we would remain where we were. We were worried that the TFCA would take all our
culture away, but we are still in those communities. We have our culture where we are now,
even after being resettled. We had workshops, and we are part of the park working jointly
with the park. We have the benefits of development. There was a lack of integration of
other conservation institutions, and they brought other ideas. We now have a similar way of
speaking about these areas.
Imagine that Covane Community Lodge has 90% occupancy, local products and services
are purchased, all of the village is supporting the business. Tourists come from across the
region, there is good marketing, good capacity, and the lodge is a success. How was this
done?
This seems like a dream. When I think about previous years, I did not know before what
tourism meant, and some members of the community are still like that. It was good to get
close to the communities and address their well being, and certain works were carried out,
to clarify things. I have managed the lodge for a long time, and the community now is not
the same as what I saw in 2008.
Investment was important, to provide more training, facilitators and brokers. The capacity of
brokers was also improved at the local level. Service providers were established at a
district level, with training
The private sector was mobilised.
Imagine that there is full coordination between the three countries, the committee is
working, and the concessions are functioning. How was this achieved?
We are now in a position to drive the development of the TFCA because a few years ago
we realised that coordination of the countries was not happening. This was because there
were different policies and understandings of infrastructure, goals and objectives. It took a
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
57
lot of time to address them. We did not have human capacity to solve the problems, so
went to governments and told them that the conservation area goals need to be addressed
with incentives. People began to study conservation as a way of life, and it became a
profession that was competitive with medicine, law and engineering. NGOs were weak so
we strengthened them. Policies were harmonised. The structure today is efficient and
there is coordination. We created good capacity to communicate with people and make
them understand that national parks and wildlife are a resource that we rely on. We have a
green society that understands the value of conservation. People visited other areas and
are environmentally aware. The three governments decided to use education, and people
had never thought that it would be the starting point. The result was a change in service
quality.
Now the GLTFCA is widely known. There was considerable work with communities, and
people feel ownership of the park. They started sharing a dream between communities and
civil society. At the community level the communication system was improved. Previously
needed a motorbike to go from community to community. Systems are now all interlinked
with good communication system. There was great work in communication between the
three countries, and they developed a strong brand that was the dream of all parties.
‘We had a dream’ about conservation and tourism, and we achieved it. There was sufficient
funding for conservation, and demand grew for the product. Communities are better off than
they were. The private sector came in as there was a demand for the product. This is
because we did the marketing right. We looked at the market and catered for that. Our
economies grow to 2020, and now there is lots of domestic tourism in Mozambique. There
was a foreign market to Mozambique that had not been fully exploited. Now there is a
growing market, and we have fantastic products. These are not all at the top end, but also
in the 3* market. This is because the South African market is largely self-catering.
So now there is good marketing and promotion, and products are available that meet the
market demand. There is no fence, the border is just a nice building that has facilities for
tourists. There is only a 1-hour wait for evacuation of injured people. How did we get here?
We reached this point very simply: by refining the word partnership. It was not just
presidents saying ‘we’re going to be partners’, but their statements were implemented. We
had the parks working together to achieve this situation as true partners. Now the GLTFCA
is one protected area with four sections. Communities are partners in the lodges, and a
number of activities have sprung up. Park authorities are partners with the private sector
working to achieve a common goal. Another thing that got us here was understanding that
while conservation needs money, so does infrastructure. This was about funding for
access and activities. Governments are facilitators but previously had invested too little to
allow communities to be participants in activities. These are remote areas and it was clear
that communities needed funding. Risks are huge for the private sector to put in
infrastructure. Governments, NGOs and donors have made an investment to get
infrastructure running, and to allow them to become self sustaining. The risk was taken by
those that would get long term benefits. There is a true partnership in investment that has
worked.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
58
5 Working Group Discussions
5.1 Introduction to the Working Group Presentations
The working group discussions gave Delegates the opportunity to explore the key themes of the
seminar in more detail, and to share their experiences. In addition, the additional issue of
monitoring and evaluation was also addressed. Delegates selected groups to work in that they
were interested in, from the following:
Working group 1 – Creating the enabling environment for nature conservation and
ecotourism development: coordinated policies, plans and actions between stakeholders.
Working group 2 – Reducing poverty and providing community benefits through building up
local supply chains
Working group 3 – Supporting nature conservation through tourism: developing creative
financial sources and mitigating environmental impacts
Working group 4 – Monitoring tourism development and operations: supporting decision
making through accurate information on tourism impacts and policies
5.2 Background Briefing for each Working Group
Each working group was asked to:
A. Identify the key challenges
B. Identify the key opportunities
C. Develop some recommendations to overcome the challenges and realise the opportunities
(specifying the roles of different stakeholders)
D. Identify 2-3 good practice examples from the different countries of the region
The discussions within each working group were guided by the following talking points:
Working group 1 – Creating the enabling environment for nature conservation and
ecotourism development: coordinated policies, plans and actions between stakeholders:
How should tourism policies and strategies for protected areas be developed, in line with
policies of other sector (i.e. conservation, agriculture, poverty reduction etc)?
What are the key policy tools to help implement them? (i.e. regulations, voluntary initiatives,
financial incentives and marketing)
How can good governance and transparency be achieved?
How can the day-to-day operations of tourism be best coordinated between park
authorities, operators and communities?
Working group 2 – Reducing poverty and providing community benefits through building
up local supply chains:
How can stakeholders increase the level of local benefits from:
o Employment
o Supply of goods and services
o Direct sales of goods and services to visitors
o Running of tourism enterprises or community based enterprises
o Joint-venture partnerships with the private sector
o Taxes or levies on tourism benefiting the poor
o Voluntary giving/support
o Investment in infrastructure stimulated by tourism
What policies, actions and support programs (e.g. training, marketing, planning) facilitate
the involvement of local communities in tourism?
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
59
Working group 3 – Supporting nature conservation through tourism: developing creative
financial sources and mitigating environmental impacts:
What types of diverse and innovative financial mechanisms can be used to finance
protected areas and support ecotourism resources?
Can they be implemented?
How can nature conservation and wildlife management be conducted through tourism so
that it supports local livelihoods and lifestyles and avoids negative impacts?
Working group 4 – Monitoring tourism development and operations: supporting decision
making through accurate information on tourism impacts and policies:
What are the key aspects to be monitored in relation to tourism operations (environmental,
social and economic aspects)?
What are the key challenges in gathering baseline information on visitor statistics in parks?
How can data be gathered and analysed in a systematic way?
How can the data and information be reported and shared to support policy and
management decision making?
What capacities are needed for regular monitoring processes?
5.3 Working group 1 – Creating the enabling environment for nature conservation and
ecotourism development: coordinated policies, plans and actions between
stakeholders.
A. Challenges:
Fragmented implementation of policy (i.e. presence of policy is not necessarily reflective of
what is happening on the ground)
Conservation management area plans are not respected.
Areas of conflict (e.g. district councils in Kenya, where the councils override conservation
objectives).
Establishing clarity where the management of conservation is unclear or conflicting, to
avoid power struggles
The importance of understanding need and responsibility for destination marketing versus
product marketing.
B. Key Opportunities:
Clearly defining the responsibilities of different ministries around policy coordination, to
avoid conflicts between government agencies (e.g. ministries of tourism with roads, fishing,
conservation agencies
Promote conservation objectives and benefits across all government ministries, so that they
understand the value of tourism to the economy as a sustainable earner of export
revenues.
Sustainable revenue generation from tourism and conservation areas
Promotion of the Ministry of Tourism among other government bodies to create a
comprehensive understanding of what tourism can do for the economy and conservation
Understanding the challenges that various parties have (e.g. access, visa fees)
Using a coordinated approach to develop good policies
Identification of key issues by consulting key stakeholders
Implementing policies that have been developed
Understanding multiplier effects
Understanding key issues around conservation and tourism
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
60
C: Recommendations to overcome challenges and realise opportunities
Develop practical regulations relating to conservation
Separate policy formulation/coordination and regulations, and implementation
Recognise the relationship between stakeholders, and when implementation is taking place
people are working as partners on the ground.
Understand the uniqueness of each situation (e.g. Kruger National Park is not like Limpopo
National Park).
Give stakeholders who live around parks the opportunity to be involved in decision making.
D. Good practice examples
!Xaus Lodge in the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park : This is a lodge that was result of land claim by the
Khomani San and Mier communities. The two San communities made the claim against SANParks, which
was settled in 2002 in ‘national interests’. The lodge was developed as a ‘cooperation lodge’ between
different stakeholders. A cooperative environment was created that led to an agreement being reached. This
was signed by the Government of South Africa, the Department of Agriculture, Land Affairs, Tourism,
SANParks and the two communities. There is a need to replicate this type of win-win agreement between
parties.
Gorongoza National Park: In the planning phase, many negotiations took place between communities
regarding the functions of different stakeholders. The park has been developed in a relatively short period of
time through this cooperation. A key outcome has been to understand the need for cooperation, and to
consolidate activities within one ministry.
5.4 Working group 2 – Reducing poverty and providing community benefits through
building up local supply chains
A. Key Challenges:
Getting local people to buy into the idea – and the need to work ‘bottom-up’ with the ‘target’
involved from the start
No strategic parallel craft development strategy
Historical conflict between the private sector and communities
Lack of entrepreneurial skills and spirit
Salaries are low
Poor agricultural potential in remote areas
Middlemen have power and relationships between producers and clients, and may exploit
producers
Fair pricing and negotiations
Distribution of local products at the point of sale
Quality and quantity of local products
Lack of technical skills (e.g. carpentry/maintenance/agriculture/understanding of tourism)
Raising awareness of opportunities
Local trainers – to train local people
Profitability – for producers, middlemen and customers
Population involvement (not only in tourism) – such as women’s associations involved in
chicken production
Promoting local culture
Communication between the tourism sector (demand) and producers (supply), on the types
of products and quality (e.g. hotels where the furniture and craft is all imported)
Lack of awareness in the private sector of how to source local produce
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
61
Timing of information – i.e. to producers at the design phase of an enterprise so that skills
and produce can be developed.
Monitoring and evaluation of the supply chain by local people, and to observe demand
changes over time
Institutional capacity to increase local skills at lodge planning phase
No requirements for local staffing/supply
Poor communication in rural areas (e.g. phones)
Economies of scale – with enough small farmers to fulfil demand
Low base education levels.
B. Key Opportunities
Finding institutions to bring producers and customers together, and bridge the gap (e.g.
middlemen)
Building capacity in government and civil society to identify the type of linkages and
associations, and type of skills required
Bringing local people into the commercial environment
An overseeing board/committee to ensure fairness and best practice and identifying
changes in demand
Improving communication
Training
Craft in interior design and direct sales to tourists
Ethical production and labelling of products (e.g. wood craft made and associated with re-
forestation: Commercial opportunity for tourists to buy a replacement tree)
Use the 20% from part entry for community projects (e.g. improve schooling; partnerships
between NGOs and communities to use it
Start up funding – microfinance and capital
Political stability
Exchange visits to learn from good examples
Coordinated efforts of aid agencies / donors to decrease overlap and more strategic – a
forum
Sharing experiences – what works and what does not (being more pragmatic and realistic)
Monitoring and evaluating results – knowing the outcomes
Publishing results (e.g. Spier annual report)
TFCAs – an opportunity to share knowledge and revenue
Ensure benefits to communities are not from damaging biodiversity
Communities obtaining direct income from tourism
Empowering local people to make decisions about their resources
Local cultural products (dance, food etc)
Biodiversity provides an opportunity to conserve it, and would be aware of the importance
of these resources (e.g. conserve a tree – sale to tourist)
C: Recommendations to overcome challenges and realise opportunities
Recommendation
Responsibility
National level:
Identify opportunities (e.g. where tourists will be going)
Develop skills
Review policy (e.g. land use) to protect opportunities
Ministry of tourism and the private
sector
Product and service development strategy, in parallel with
tourism development
Private sector and collaborators
(e.g. community brokers)
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
62
Local level:
Identify opportunities – with suppliers / demand / capacities
Private sector communicate demand before development
Provincial forum to introduce
investors to suppliers (e.g. chamber
of commerce)
Provincial tourism directorate
Marketing and promotion agency
Community brokers to interact and mediate between
government, the private sector and communities (brokers at
national and local level), and standardised
Operational local development
agencies
Advanced planning and understanding timeframes
Government departments that deal
with planning and permissions
General:
Dissemination lessons (e.g. use of 20% of protected area entry fees
and how it is distributed; accountability of presentation of
information in an accessible format and location. Tailored local
solutions based on basic principles.
NGOs, research institutions,
universities, think tanks
D. Good practice examples
Tinti Gala: A community tourism lodge which has had additional training through the UNWTO/STEP
program in chicken and pineapple production. This is in its initial stages, and the market demand is
uncertain, but small entrepreneurs are already diversifying their income.
The International Trade Centre: The ITC has been working near Maputo to develop a series of
greenhouses and a packing/processing area for vegetables. This has led to a 100-fold increase in income for
farmers. There was a demand analysis, training with industry, curriculum development, entrepreneurial skills
development (for entry level, not managers). 120 trainers have been trained and 6000 farmers. Those
trained will not only depend on the tourism market
Regional rotating craft market in central Asia: This market moves between 5 countries. All countries
present their craft at the tourism fair. Initially facilitated by an NGO, the communities now run the fair
independently. Similarly another annual fair developed in Maputo each December, and led to a local NGO
development ‘As mãos’
The Toda community in South India. A private company began working with them, and taking groups of
people to their beehive huts as part of an adventure travel trip. The situation when from having no
development, to spreading money through the community. The company rotated which community members
they stayed with. They developed a supply chain for providing food to the tourists. Gave basic training in
hygiene and waste disposal, and developed local craft. They established a time and place to sell to tourists
(i.e. 1 hour in the evening, and 1 hour in the morning). There were guidelines on taking photographs, and
one person would take a digital camera and then photographs would be shared. There was nothing there
beforehand, and the company began to spread money through the community. They had discussion about
the money (as a percentage went to the community, and a community fund), and how it would be used in the
community, including defining who is stakeholders and have power to make decisions.
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
63
5.5 Working group 3 – Supporting nature conservation through tourism: developing
creative financial sources and mitigating environmental impacts
The group began by reviewing the range of financial mechanisms available to support nature
conservation through tourism. These included:
¾ Entry fees
¾ Shops with merchandise
¾ State funding
¾ Cultural tourism
¾ Concessions
¾ Donations
¾ Trust funds
¾ Volunteer work
¾ Activity fees
¾ Sponsoring (e.g. naming animals)
¾ Bed levies
¾ Carbon offsetting
¾ Training
¾ Business tourism
¾ Research activities
A. Key Challenges:
Limits to density (e.g. carrying capacity)
Mitigating environmental impacts of developing tourism
Zoning areas
Limits on resource use.
Awareness raising
Guidelines for building and operating infrastructure for tourism
Waste management, energy sources, transport.
Quotas for visitor numbers – with respect to environmental and social limits (i.e. people
have different levels of tolerance to crowding, and this relates to costs)
Environmental Impact Assessments in planning stages
Management plans for protected areas
Law enforcement
Political will
Legislation and policy frameworks that facilitate tourism
Need sufficient demand from tourists
Access to tourism product
Tourism infrastructure (roads, hotels etc)
Good marketing strategy
Financial resources need to exist
Reasonable human resources
Interaction with the local, national and international economy
Quality of tourism product being sold
The balance between conserving and protecting biodiversity and having tourism products
How to control the number of entries for the tourists – make sure that you have structures in
place and ensure you are collecting entry fees you are supposed to.
The impact of tourism on local communities
Level of awareness
Weak leadership
A lack of communication and coordination (at all levels including local and international)
e.g. local agencies may be working on common aim, but not together
Corruption – whether it is financial, nepotism (i.e. giving advantage for personal rather than
merit reasons), non compliance with the law
Bad management
Poverty
Lack of transparency
Limited environmental education
Negligence
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
64
Lack of monitoring
Lack of information
B: Key Opportunities:
Internationally and international interest increasing
The media and internet
International and national fund for protected areas
Do fund raising events – e.g. concerts
Growing ecotourism market (was small 20 years ago)
Interest from the private sector
Tax breaks
Free trade movement
Financial incentives
Transfrontier conservation areas
Domestic tourism that is growing
Cultural prospecting
Bio-prospecting
Budget tourism
Public private partnerships
Charitable donations
Liberalisation of movement of goods in SADC region.
Africa is blessed by natural resources
How to use international conventions
Making most of seasonal events in the natural world (e.g. sardine migrations, wildebeest
migrations etc)
Research
Local knowledge
C: Recommendations to overcome challenges and realise opportunities
Broadly divided actions into international/national/local level in order to achieve socioeconomic and
environmental sustainability in protected areas:
The need for community-level participation is most important
All stakeholders should be involved (national, NGOs etc)
Key outputs would include the creation of legislation to make the enabling environment.
Consultations should feed into the process
Output – creation of committees, interest groups, forums at the community level and PS
associations.
Local knowledge
Associations with NGOs and private companies.
Planning and zoning activities
Sustainable use of natural resources
Associations bring about the product of goods and services – collaborative approach – and
direct impact on reduction of poverty.
Awareness raising, planning etc.
Legislation and operational guidelines – African associations, communities etc.
Sourcing funding more easily . . .
National and international funds
Ratification of conventions
Registration issue
Encouraging private investment in protected areas
UNWTO Seminar on Ecotourism and Protected Areas
5-7 November 2008, Maputo, Mozambique
65
Law enforcement – institutionally through state funded rangers, and community regulation
too.
People protecting things
Final output from legislation – fees for entry would need to be collected effectively.
D. Good practice example
Green Association: As part of the Chimanimani TFCA, this association has been ‘Green association ‘
which is removing invasive species. Association has functioned since 2007. World Bank through
Chimanimani CTF – activities should first give priorities to the community and we will have better results.
When local communities are left aside there is no development. Can compare with the tourist sites. Most of
the knowledge on base tourists areas may be unknown. Let us involve the local communities to have a
better response.
5.6 Working group 4 – Monitoring tourism development and operations: supporting
decision making through accurate information on tourism impacts and policies
A. Key Challenges
Distortion and reliability of data: e.g. reluctance of providing accura