The Development Impact of Rural Tourism in Peru's Colca Valley

by Simon Bidwell

Introduction

This thesis aimed to evaluate claims that alternative forms of tourism can help reduce poverty and promote more inclusive development in Latin America by creating alternative economic opportunities in historically marginalised areas while supporting and revalorizing traditional cultures and livelihoods.

The focus of field research was the Colca Valley in southern Peru, which has become an increasingly popular tourist destination since the mid 1990s. A broad political economy approach was taken, combining detailed case studies of the experience of tourism in contrasting

localities in the Colca Valley with an analysis of Peru's wider economic and social context. The research thus framed the empirical question of “impacts” with historical-structural analysis while also acknowledging the potential diversity of perspectives on tourism and development. The key questions were as follows:

· What economic, political, social, cultural or other factors have structured the development of tourism in the case study areas?

· What have been the impacts of tourism to date in the case study areas and to what extent has it contributed to poverty reduction and more inclusive development?

· What are the expectations do different stakeholders have of tourism and what is their vision of its potential contribution to development?

Theoretical Background

Two streams of theoretical literature formed the background to the thesis. The first related to the Latin American structuralist and dependency theories which emerged during the 1950—80 period to challenge modernisationist accounts of development.

These theories argued that the position of Latin American and other developing countries as “resource peripheries” in the global economy constrained their development and perpetuated social inequalities. Since the late 1980s, these theories have been superceded by a broad set of approaches which may be grouped under the heading of “neostructuralism”.

Neostructuralism retains many of the insights of structuralism but is more optimistic about interaction with the international economy, in part based on the development success of previously peripheral countries in East Asia. It emphasises the need for resource peripheries to diversify and develop “non-traditional” exports that have a greater value-added component and greater links with local economies. Alternative forms of tourism have many of the characteristics of the non-traditional activities promoted by neostructuralist approaches.

The second stream of literature related to theories and case studies of alternative tourism,including ecotourism and “sustainable”, “responsible” or “pro-poor” tourism. Seen since the late 1980s as compatible with grassroots or sustainable development, alternative forms of tourism are claimed to help preserve natural environments, provide development benefits to local communities,and revalorize traditional livelihoods.

Among the criticisms, alternative forms of tourism have been argued to be no different from traditional tourism, to privilege Western views of sustainability and crowd out local use of resources, and to appropriate and commodify indigenous cultures or livelihoods for external profit. The model of “rural community tourism”, which has developed over the past decade in Latin America in particular, places more specific emphasis on local control and economic benefits but there is continued debate about its potential contribution to development.

Methodology

A broad political economy approach was taken to the research. This called for a mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods, combining ethnographic approaches in local communities,structured interviews with formal institutions, and analysis of data. I undertook four months of field work in Peru between March and July 2010, dividing my time between the regional capital of Arequipa, the provincial capital of Chivay, and the case study districts of Cabanaconde, Tapay (lower Colca Valley) and Sibayo (upper Colca Valley).

The perspectives of approximately 75 participants were recorded in field notes, including representatives of institutions, local authorities,small business proprietors and community members. I also conducted a quantitative survey of 41tour operators in the city of Arequipa. I participated in two meetings of the Tourism Technical Committee, which is comprised of 10 State, non-governmental and international institutions working to link tourism and development in the Colca Valley, and I attended a two-day conference on the “Municipal Management of Tourism”.

I also obtained CDs of detailed data from the Peruvian National Statistics Institute on population, poverty and development indicators down to district level and undertook extensive review of Census data.

Discussion of Research Findings

The research found that a broad political economy approach was useful for understanding the evolution and impact of tourism in the Colca Valley. Unlike Peru's most popular tourist destination of Machu Picchu, which is controlled by the State and monopolistic capital, in the Colca Valley tourism had developed in a spontaneous, informal way.

Outside investment had played a role in the provincial capital of Chivay, which is the centre of “conventional” minibus-based tourism, but in the more peripheral case study areas (where adventure and cultural tourism is predominant) almost all tourism services had been initiated by people with local origins, most frequently by return migrants who had accumulated capital in the cities.

However, thanks to their control of transport and information, tour operators based in the city of Arequipa had come to dominate the tourism market, with nearly 80 percent of tourists travelling to the Colca Valley doing so through an agency. Increasing competition among these mostly small-scale urban tour operators had driven down prices and led to pressure being placed on local providers to also reduce prices.

Pre-existing social differences and mistrust within the Colca Valley communities prevented a common front being presented to the tour operators. A cycle of conflict and destructive competition at a number of levels had thus restricted the overall value obtained, disincentivised innovation and led to what many participants described as the “disorderly” development of tourism.

Although lack of cohesion in civil society was a proximate cause of this disorder, the thesis argues that the underlying reasons related to the wider Peruvian context of narrow economic development, underemployment, and wages that have stagnated at early 1990s levels.

In the case study areas of Cabanaconde and Tapay, economic benefits had largely accrued to a few families who had established accommodation and restaurant services. These were mainly people with existing skills and resources who often maintained footholds both in the city of Arequipa and the local village.

Tourism did not necessarily produce large earnings, but assisted the long-term accumulation of assets and promoted economic resilience. Some other community members had obtained additional income through guiding, selling crafts or opening small stores.

However, growing urban dominance of tourism had reduced the space for local participation, particularly of guides. The majority of community members dedicated to agriculture or herding had little contact with tourism and received few benefits:

Little employment had been generated by tourism: jobs consisted of a few formal positions in larger accommodation services, mainly occupied by temporary migrants from the city, and informal work in family-run businesses, usually undertaken by migrants from poorer communities and paid below minimum wage.

In the case study area of Sibayo in the upper valley, a rural community tourism project had been developed over the past five years. In contrast with the lower valley districts, this emphasized equity, broad community participation and linking traditional livelhoods with tourism.

A more homogenous and cohesive social context, unusually proactive municipal leadership, and intensive assistance from outside institutions had permitted significant progress with community organization and development of infrastructure for tourism. However, low volumes of tourists constrained the further development of the project and raised questions about its long-term viability or replicability.

The research also considered social, cultural and environmental impacts of tourism. While studies of tourism in developing countries often paint it as socially and culturally destabilizing, the preliminary conclusion of this thesis was that tourism had had only a minor effect on rapid social change largely due to decades of migration, expansion of secondary education, and the influence of electronic media.

The cultural influence of tourism had on balance been positive, contributing to an increasing recognition and pride in traditional culture and livelihoods, which in Peru have historically suffered from marginalisation and discrimination. Environmental impacts were an increasing concern, notably the influx of non-biodegradable items into fragile natural environments.

Nevertheless, the increase in tourist numbers counterbalanced population decline in the case study districts, and their impact could potentially be mitigated. Greater environmental impacts in the canyon area were threatened by the building of new roads, mining, and a proposed hydroelectric project.

Overall, the research concluded that alternative forms of tourism can have a decentralizing impetus by creating new economic opportunities in historically marginalised areas of Latin America, although these are most accessible to those with existing skills and resources.

Tourism can also be culturally decentralising by bolstering challenges to cultural categories that have historically perpetuated marginalisation, and by offering a useful platform for local self-assertion. However, like other “non-traditional” industries it does little to directly promote equity or address the structural features of underdevelopment, which require wider social and political action to bring about change.

Implications for Development Practice and Policy

An increasing number of institutions were working to link tourism and development in the Colca Valley. Ten State, non-governmental and international institutions had formed a Tourism Technical Committee which met monthly in the provincial capital of Chivay .

These institutions deployed a discourse which combined elements of grassroots development, emphasising sustainability and participatory approaches, with aspects of neostructuralism, emphasising competitiveness and links to markets. The most controversial role was that of the Autocolca authority, a parastatal entity

theoretically responsible for both promotion and regulation of tourism in the Colca Valley and which obtained revenue by charging foreign and national tourists for the right to enter the valley. In 2005, concerted protest action by Colca residents saw the administration of Autocolca devolved from regional to provincial level. However, despite more localised governance and an increased budget for investment, most research participants were critical of some aspect of Autocolca.

The thesis made the following specific recommendations for institutions working to link tourism and development in the Colca Valley:

· Explicitly aim to decentralise tourism in the Colca Valley by presenting it as a place to

explore rather than visit in a tour from Arequipa. Reorient publicity towards extending the stay of visitors rather than simply attracting more tourists.

· Tailor interventions based on the specific needs and potential of each district rather than applying general solutions across the region.

· Consider using regulatory tools to promote local participation and control, given the limited potential to address urban bias of existing efforts to provide skills training and strengthen civil society.

· Improve the transparency of the Autocolca authority by publishing easily understandable summaries of expenditure in local media.

· Place more emphasis on preserving the Quechua language in the Colca Valley.

Some general lessons for development policy and practice emerged from the research. The most salient of these are listed below.

In a market paradigm, demand matters

Where institutions promote grassroots initiatives that remain within a market-based paradigm, they should take account of the nature of the relevant market, and pay particular attention to the demand side. The institutions working in the Colca Valley were doing a lot of work to upskill local people to deliver tourism services and develop new products.

However there was relatively little investigation into the nature or determinants of tourist demand, and few ideas about how to overcome problems with transport and information that prevented local people from gaining access to tourism markets, let alone participating in them on an equal footing. This risks of this approach included wasted investment, disillusionment, and new sources of conflict.

“Local” is a relative concept, and not all “local people” are the same.

An important finding of the research was how much social and cultural context varied within relatively small geographical spaces: despite being separated by little more than 50 km, the respective case study districts in the upper and lower Colca Valley differed in ethnicity, culture, language, livelihoods and migratory patterns. This was not often acknowledged by the various institutions.

People in the lower valley districts were said to be uninterested in projects or difficult to work with. However, all staff from NGOs and other institutions were based in the capital of Chivay (pop. 6,500) and usually only made brief visits to other parts of the valley. Lower valley residents saw this as a lack of commitment to learning about their distinct reality and (reasonably) wondered why no institution bothered to post a staff member in the village of Cabanaconde (pop 3,000).

In theory, the devolution of control of Autocolca to provincial level was a progressive step, putting the governance of the tourism authority in “local” hands. However, people in the lower valley districts felt little had improved: there were constant complaints about dominance of Autocolca by Chivay-based “interests”.

At the same time, people from all parts of the valley were united in complaining about the influence of Arequipa-based tour operators and guides. It isimportant for development agencies to be aware of the differences and commonalities that exist at different geographical levels and to understand how conflicts based on ethnic or territorial identity overlap with those based on class.

Grassroots interventions may be constrained by structural factors at the national level

A key argument of the thesis is that the evolution and impact of tourism in the case study areas were constrained and partly determined by structural factors at the national level. These factors included ongoing narrow economic development based on mineral extraction, widespread urban underemployment and stagnant wages.

Together they incentivised the development of a crowded sector of micro-enterprises with little capital and low risk tolerance, generating little formal employment and tending to compete on price rather than quality. Another specific factor was the deregulation of the travel agency industry in 2005, which contributed to the proliferation of smallscale urban tour operators.

While development institutions working at the grassroots often will not be able to influence these wider structural factors, they should at least recognise them and understand the constraints they place on otherwise worthy interventions. In some cases an understanding of the wider political and economic environment may help institutions develop more

Capetown Declaration: What is that?

by the Colca Specialist

This is a very important article everybody should read especially our future tour guides,our irresponsible tour operators,our empty headed authorities and our beloved commissionists or tour guides from Arequipa.
As John Lennon said one: You cannot trust in people older than 23 years old if they tell you that they are going to change.
You were right John,but the Colca Specialist is very positive, so that is why I keep sharing information because I know that somebody out there will listen my voice.

The Cape Town Declaration

The Cape Town Conference was organised by the Responsible Tourism Partnership (more) and Western Cape Tourism as a side event preceding the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002. The Cape Town Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations was attended by 280 delegates from 20 countries. The conference grew out of the South African work on responsible tourism guidelines and involved delegates field-testing the South African Guidelines on sites in and around Cape Town.

RESPONSIBLE TOURISM IN DESTINATIONS

Shaping sustainable spaces into better places

We, representatives of inbound and outbound tour operators, emerging entrepreneurs in the tourism industry, national parks, provincial conservation authorities, all spheres of government, tourism professionals, tourism authorities, NGOs and hotel groups and other tourism stakeholders, from 20 countries in Africa, North and South America, Europe and Asia; having come together in Cape Town to consider the issue of Responsible Tourism in Destinations have agreed this declaration.

Mindful of the debates at the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development in 1999, which asserted the importance of the economic, social and environment aspects of sustainable development and of the interests of indigenous peoples and local communities in particular.
Recognising the global challenge of reducing social and economic inequalities and reducing poverty, and the importance of New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) in the process.

Recognising the importance of the World Tourism Organization’s Global Code of Ethics, which aims to promote responsible, sustainable and universally accessible tourism and sharing its commitment to equitable, responsible and sustainable world tourism and its STEP initiative with UNCTAD, which seeks to harness sustainable tourism to help eliminate poverty.

Conscious that we are now ten years on from the Rio Earth Summit on Environment and Development, and that the World Summit on Sustainable Development taking place in Johannesburg will put renewed emphasis on sustainability, economic development, and in particular on poverty reduction.

Aware of the World Tourism Organization, World Travel and Tourism Council and the Earth Council's updated Agenda 21 for the Travel and Tourism Industry and the success achieved by a number of businesses, local communities and national and local governments in moving towards sustainability in tourism.

Aware of the work of the UNEP, and the Tourism Industry Report 2002, and work of UNESCO, and other UN agencies, promoting sustainable tourism in partnership with the private sector, NGOs, civil society organisations and government.

Aware of the guidelines for sustainable tourism in vulnerable ecosystems being developed in the framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity.

Conscious of developments in other industries and sectors, and in particular of the growing international demand for ethical business, and the adoption of clear Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) policies by companies, and the transparent reporting of achievements in meeting CSR objectives in company annual reports.

Recognising that there has been considerable progress in addressing the environmental impacts of tourism, although there is a long way to go to achieve sustainability; and that more limited progress has been made in harnessing tourism for local economic development, for the benefit of communities and indigenous peoples, and in managing the social impacts of tourism.

Endorsing the Global Code of Ethics and the importance of making all forms of tourism sustainable through all stakeholders taking responsibility for creating better forms of tourism and realising these aspirations.

Relishing the diversity of our world's cultures, habitats and species and the wealth of our cultural and natural heritage, as the very basis of tourism, we accept that responsible and sustainable tourism will be achieved in different ways in different places.

Accepting that, in the words of the Global Code of Ethics, an attitude of tolerance and respect for the diversity of religious, philosophical and moral beliefs, are both the foundation and the consequence of responsible tourism.

Recognising that dialogue, partnerships and multi-stakeholder processes - involving government, business and local communities - to make better places for hosts and guests can only be realised at the local level, and that all stakeholders have different, albeit interdependent, responsibilities; tourism can only be managed for sustainability at the destination level.

Conscious of the importance of good governance and political stability in providing the context for responsible tourism in destinations, and recognising that the devolution of decision making power to democratic local government is necessary to build stable partnerships at a local level, and to the empowerment of local communities.

Aware that the management of tourism requires the participation of a broad range of government agencies and particularly at the local destination level.

Recognising that in order to protect the cultural, social and environmental integrity of destinations limits to tourism development are sometimes necessary.

Having, during the Cape Town Conference, examined the South African Guidelines for Responsible Tourism, tested them in a series of field visits, and explored how tourism can be made to work better for local communities, tourists and businesses alike, we recognise their value in helping to shape sustainable tourism in South Africa.

Recognising that one of the strengths of the South African Guidelines for Responsible Tourism is that they were developed through a national consultative process, and that they reflect the priorities and aspirations of the South African people.

Recognising that Responsible Tourism takes many forms, that different destinations and stakeholders will have different priorities, and that local policies and guidelines will need to be developed through multi-stakeholder processes to develop responsible tourism in destinations.

Having the following characteristics, Responsible Tourism:

• minimises negative economic, environmental, and social impacts;
• generates greater economic benefits for local people and enhances the well-being of host communities, improves working conditions and access to the industry;
• involves local people in decisions that affect their lives and life chances;
• makes positive contributions to the conservation of natural and cultural heritage, to the maintenance of the world's diversity;
• provides more enjoyable experiences for tourists through more meaningful connections with local people, and a greater understanding of local cultural, social and environmental issues;
• provides access for physically challenged people; and
• is culturally sensitive, engenders respect between tourists and hosts, and builds local pride and confidence

We call upon countries, multilateral agencies, destinations and enterprises to develop similar practical guidelines and to encourage planning authorities, tourism businesses, tourists and local communities - to take responsibility for achieving sustainable tourism, and to create better places for people to live in and for people to visit.

We urge multilateral agencies responsible for development strategies to include sustainable responsible tourism in their outcomes.

Determined to make tourism more sustainable, and accepting that it is the responsibility of all stakeholders in tourism to achieve more sustainable forms of tourism, we commit ourselves to pursue the principles of Responsible Tourism.

Convinced that it is primarily in the destinations, the places that tourists visit, where tourism enterprises conduct their business and where local communities and tourists and the tourism industry interact, that the economic, social and environmental impacts of tourism need to be managed responsibly, to maximise positive impacts and minimise negative ones.

We undertake to work in concrete ways in destinations to achieve better forms of tourism and to work with other stakeholders in destinations. We commit to build the capacity of all stakeholders in order to ensure that they can secure an effective voice in decision making. We uphold the guiding principles for Responsible Tourism which were identified:

Guiding Principles for Economic Responsibility

• Assess economic impacts before developing tourism and exercise preference for those forms of development that benefit local communities and minimise negative impacts on local livelihoods (for example through loss of access to resources), recognising that tourism may not always be the most appropriate form of local economic development
• Maximise local economic benefits by increasing linkages and reducing leakages, by ensuring that communities are involved in, and benefit from, tourism. Wherever possible use tourism to assist in poverty reduction by adopting pro-poor strategies
• Develop quality products that reflect, complement, and enhance the destination
• Market tourism in ways which reflect the natural, cultural and social integrity of the destination, and which encourage appropriate forms of tourism
• Adopt equitable business practises, pay and charge fair prices, and build partnerships in ways in which risk is minimised and shared, and recruit and employ staff recognising international labour standards
• Provide appropriate and sufficient support to small, medium and micro enterprises to ensure tourism-related enterprises thrive and are sustainable
Guiding Principles for Social Responsibility
• Actively involve the local community in planning and decision-making and provide capacity building to make this a reality
• Assess social impacts throughout the life cycle of the operation – including the planning and design phases of projects - in order to minimise negative impacts and maximise positive ones
• Endeavour to make tourism an inclusive social experience and to ensure that there is access for all, in particular vulnerable and disadvantaged communities and individuals
• Combat the sexual exploitation of human beings, particularly the exploitation of children
• Be sensitive to the host culture, maintaining and encouraging social and cultural diversity
• Endeavour to ensure that tourism contributes to improvements in health and education
Guiding Principles for Environmental Responsibility
• Assess environmental impacts throughout the life cycle of tourist establishments and operations – including the planning and design phase - and ensure that negative impacts are reduced to the minimum and maximising positive ones
• Use resources sustainably, and reduce waste and over-consumption
• Manage natural diversity sustainably, and where appropriate restore it; and consider the volume and type of tourism that the environment can support, and respect the integrity of vulnerable ecosystems and protected areas
• Promote education and awareness for sustainable development – for all stakeholders
• Raise the capacity of all stakeholders and ensure that best practice is followed, for this purpose consult with environmental and conservation experts

We recognise that this list is not exhaustive and that multi-stakeholder groups in diverse destinations should adapt these principles to reflect their own culture and environment.
Responsible tourism seeks to maximise positive impacts and to minimise negative ones. Compliance with all relevant international and national standards, laws and regulations is assumed. Responsibility, and the market advantage that can go with it, is about doing more than the minimum.

We recognise that the transparent and auditable reporting of progress towards achieving responsible tourism targets and benchmarking, is essential to the integrity and credibility of our work, to the ability of all stakeholders to assess progress, and to enable consumers to exercise effective choice.

We commit to making our contribution to move towards a more balanced relationship between hosts and guests in destinations, and to create better places for local communities and indigenous peoples; and recognising that this can only be achieved by government, local communities and business cooperating on practical initiatives in destinations.

We call upon tourism enterprises and trade associations in originating markets and in destinations to adopt a responsible approach, to commit to specific responsible practises, and to report progress in a transparent and auditable way, and where appropriate to use this for market advantage. Corporate businesses can assist by providing markets, capacity building, mentoring and micro-financing support for small, medium and micro enterprises.

In order to implement the guiding principles for economic, social and environmental responsibility, it is necessary to use a portfolio of tools, which will include regulations, incentives, and multi-stakeholder participatory strategies. Changes in the market encouraged by consumer campaigns and new marketing initiatives also contribute to market driven change.

Local authorities have a central role to play in achieving responsible tourism through commitment to supportive policy frameworks and adequate funding. We call upon local authorities and tourism administrations to develop - through multi-stakeholder processes - destination management strategies and responsible tourism guidelines to create better places for host communities and the tourists who visit. Local Agenda 21 programs, with their participatory and monitoring processes, are particularly useful.

We call upon the media to exercise responsibility in the way in which they portray tourism destinations, to avoid raising false expectations and to provide balanced and fair reporting.
We all have a responsibility to make a difference by the way we act.

We commit ourselves to work with others to take responsibility for achieving the economic, social and environmental components of responsible and sustainable tourism.
Cape Town, August 2002
Co-chairs Mike Fabricius Western Cape Tourism & Harold Goodwin International Centre for Responsible Tourism

What is sustainable tourism Mr. Tour Guide?

By the Colca Specialist

This is a question that most of the tour guides are not able to answer. Not even our authorities who are thinking just about how to win the next elections.
Disgracefully Peru is one of the countries whose budget for education is very low and now we are seeing the effects of this chaotic type of politics well-known as centralism.

Sustainable tourism is not a trend but a need in these days especially in Arequipa where tourism is the second most important activity. Wikipedia offers a very concise article that can be very useful for everybody especially for the travel agencies, tour guides and authorities from Arequipa who maybe think that sustainable is just another “word” in the lexicon of tourism.

I chose it because The Colca Specialist loves education and as a teacher I love education. I think that the future of our country depends on our people especially on the new generations.
Our country´s economy is much dependant on natural resources so that is why mining is literally the activity which is moving the economy of Peru. But what will happen to Peru and to us when we run out of natural resources?

We have to invest in education and in our people. Ignorance is the enemy of the peoples.
If you check in Trip Advisor and in many other travelers forums you can find a lot of complaints coming from tourists from different countries around the world, all of them complaining from the bad service received in Colca Canyon, complaining from the tour guides commissions which are increasing each time more, but inside the complaints we can realize that part of the problem are TOURISTS too. Specially the very cheap ones who want to travel in all Peru with 500 bucks taking poor quality services, eating in places whose collection of bacteria would break a record Guiness and afterwards they write a complaint in Trip Advisor forum.

If there are many complaints in Trip Advisor against several travel agencies from Arequipa why I have to travel with those bad travel agencies? Very simple because I want something very cheap. Come on guys be reasonable. It is like eating in a restaurant.

In Travel and Living TV program I saw that in LAS VEGAS when you take a tour the guide charges 20 dollars per hour. A hamburguer in a exclusive place can cost 700 hundred US! In Chile the entrance fee to the hot springs in an exclusive place cost more than 30 dollars and here the "gringos" are complaining because the tour to the Colca Canyon costs 20 dollars! Come on guys be reasonable.

Economy here is different. The standards of quality are different but let me tell you something. Peruvian standards of quality are improving each time more and the prices for the next years are not going to be the same as in the past.

If I buy that 20 US tour I should not expect to have the best. 20 dollars for a tour with guide, hotel, transportation, etc it sounds a little bit strange.I would NOT like to sleep in the hotel or hostal offered in those tours. As we know those hotels are not classified and those beds should be terrible. I don´t want to think about the toilet. Those cheap hotels don´t even have a name. The same happens with those cheap 95 soles 2 day trekking tours inside Colca Canyon.

If I see that in Trip Advisor there are several complaints against a travel agency, it would be very stupid if I buy a tour in that travel agency and I would feel very ashamed of myself if my complaint appears with my name in Trip Advisor forum.

If there are hundred complaints about that bad travel agency I don´t have to be idiot hundred one in the same list! Tourists should be responsible, smart and SUSTAINABLE too.

According to the Hindi wise men, the most intelligent are those who learned from the others experience by reading, hearing or seeing. The foolest are the ones who don´t hear the advice and they suffer the consequences of their headstrong attitude.

Those are the ones who continue writing complaints about the same bad service travel agencies.Why? Because they are the cheapest. The problem are not the bad travel agencies who are already identified. The problem is tourists attitude. Are we looking for trouble in our HOLIDAYS?

We don´t recommend tourists to buy tours in the hotels. All of them end traveling with those bad travel agencies.

So what is sustainable tourism?

Sustainable tourism is tourism attempting to make a low impact on the environment and local culture, while helping to generate future employment for local people. The aim of sustainable tourism is to ensure that development brings a positive experience for local people, tourism companies and the tourists themselves. Sustainable tourism is not the same as ecotourism.

Overview

Global economists forecast continuing international tourism growth, ranging between 3 and 6 percent annually, depending on the location. As one of the world's largest and fastest growing industries, this continuous growth will place great stress on remaining biologically diverse habitats and indigenous cultures, which are often used to support mass tourism. Tourists who promote sustainable tourism are sensitive to these dangers and seek to protect tourist destinations, and to protect tourism as an industry. Sustainable tourists can reduce the impact of tourism in many ways, including:

· informing themselves of the culture, politics, and economy of the communities visited
· anticipating and respecting local cultures, expectations and assumptions
· contributing to intercultural understanding and tolerance
· supporting the integrity of local cultures by favoring businesses which conserve cultural heritage and traditional values
· supporting local economies by purchasing local goods and participating with small, local businesses
· conserving resources by seeking out businesses that are environmentally conscious, and by using the least possible amount of non-renewable resources

Increasingly, destinations and tourism operations are endorsing and following "responsible tourism" as a pathway towards sustainable tourism. Responsible tourism and sustainable tourism have an identical goal, that of sustainable development.

The pillars of responsible tourism are therefore the same as those of sustainable tourism – environmental integrity, social justice and economic development. The major difference between the two is that, in responsible tourism, individuals, organisations and businesses are asked to take responsibility for their actions and the impacts of their actions.

This shift in emphasis has taken place because some stakeholders feel that insufficient progress towards realising sustainable tourism has been made since the Earth Summit in Rio. This is partly because everyone has been expecting others to behave in a sustainable manner.

The emphasis on responsibility in responsible tourism means that everyone involved in tourism – government, product owners and operators, transport operators, community services, NGO’s and CBO’s, tourists, local communities, industry associations – are responsible for achieving the goals of responsible tourism.

Responsible Tourism

Responsible Tourism can be regarded as a behaviour. It is more than a form of tourism as it represents an approach to engaging with tourism, be that as a tourist, a business, locals at a destination or any other tourism stakeholder.

It emphasises that all stakeholders are responsible for the kind of tourism they develop or engage in. Whilst different groups will see responsibility in different ways, the shared understanding is that responsible tourism should entail an improvement in tourism. Tourism should become ‘better’ as a result of the responsible tourism approach.

Within the notion of betterment resides the acknowledgement that conflicting interests need to be balanced. However, the objective is to create better places for people to live in and to visit. Importantly, there is no blueprint for responsible tourism: what is deemed responsible may differ depending on places and cultures. Responsible Tourism is an aspiration that can be realised in different ways in different originating markets and in the diverse destinations of the world .

Focusing in particular on businesses, according to the Cape Town Declaration on Responsible Tourism, it will have the following characteristics:

· minimises negative economic, environmental, and social impacts
· generates greater economic benefits for local people and enhances the well-being of host communities, improves working conditions and access to the industry
· involves local people in decisions that affect their lives and life chances
· makes positive contributions to the conservation of natural and cultural heritage, to the maintenance of the world’s diversity
· provides more enjoyable experiences for tourists through more meaningful connections with local people, and a greater understanding of local cultural, social and environmental issues
· provides access for people with disabilities and
· is culturally sensitive, engenders respect between tourists and hosts, and builds local pride and confidence.

Sustainable tourism is where tourists can enjoy their holiday and at the same time respect the culture of people and also respect the environment. It also means that local people (such as the Masaai) get a fair say about tourism and also receive some money from the profit which the game reserve make. The environment is being damaged quite a lot by tourists and part of Sustainable tourism is to make sure that the damaging does not carry on.

There are many private companies who are working into embracing the principles and aspects of Responsible Tourism, some for the purpose of Corporate Social Responsibility activities, and others such WorldHotel-Link, which was originally a project of the International Finance Corporation, have built their entire business model around responsible tourism, local capacity building and increasing market access for small and medium tourism enterprises.

Responsible Hospitality

As with the view of Responsible Tourism, Responsible Hospitality is essentially about creating better places for people to live in, and better places for people to visit. This does not mean all forms of hospitality are also forms of tourism although hospitality is the largest sector of the tourism industry. As such we should not be surprised at overlaps between Responsible Hospitality and Responsible Tourism.

In the instance where place of permanent residence is also the place where the hospitality service is consumed, if for example a meal is consumed in a local restaurant, this does not obviate the requirement to improve the place of residence. As such, the essence of Responsible Hospitality is not contingent upon touristic forms of hospitality.

While Friedman (1962) famously argued that, admittedly within legal parameters, the sole responsibility of business was to generate profit for shareholders the idea that businesses’ responsibility extends beyond this has existed for decades and is most frequently encountered in the concept of corporate social responsibility.

There are numerous ways businesses can and do engage in activities that are not intended to benefit shareholders and management, at least not in the short term. However, often acts of corporate social responsibility are undertaken because of the perceived benefit to business. Usually in hospitality this relates to the cost reductions associated with improved energy efficiency (Pizam, 2009) but may also relate to, for example, the rise in ethical consumerism and the view that being seen to be a responsible business is beneficial to revenue growth.

As per the Cape Town Declaration on Responsible Tourism, Responsible Hospitality is culturally sensitive. Instead of then calling for the unachievable, Responsible Hospitality simply makes the case for more responsible forms of hospitality, hospitality that benefits locals first, and visitors second. Certainly, all forms of hospitality can be improved and managed so that negative impacts are minimised whilst striving for a maximisation of positive impacts.

Coastal tourism

Many coastal areas are experiencing particular pressure from growth in lifestyles and growing numbers of tourists. Coastal environments are limited in extent consisting of only a narrow strip along the edge of the ocean. Coastal areas are often the first environments to experience the detrimental impacts of tourism. A detailed study of the impact on coastal areas, with reference to western India can be an example.

The inevitable change is on the horizon as holiday destinations put more effort into sustainable tourism.[3] Planning and management controls can reduce the impact on coastal environments[4] and ensure that investment into tourism products supports sustainable coastal tourism.

Some Conceptual models in Coastal tourism

Some of the recent studies have led to some interesting conceptual models applicable for coastal tourism. The 'inverted funnel model' and the 'embedded model' can be good metaphors for understanding the interplay of different stake-holders like government, local community, tourists and business community in developing tourist destinations.

Community-based management

There has been the promotion of sustainable tourism practices surrounding the management of tourist locations by locals or more concisely, the community.

This form of tourism is based on the premise that the people living next to a resource are the ones best suited to protecting it. This means that the tourism activities and businesses are developed and operated by local community members, and certainly with their consent and support.

Sustainable tourism typically involves the conservation of resources that are capitalized upon for tourism purposes, such as coral reefs and pristine forests. Locals run the businesses and are responsible for promoting the conservation messages to protect their environment.

Community-based sustainable tourism (CBST) associates the success of the sustainability of the ecotourism location to the management practices of the communities who are directly or indirectly dependent on the location for their livelihoods.

A salient feature of CBST is that local knowledge is usually utilised alongside wide general frameworks of ecotourism business models. This allows the participation of locals at the management level and typically allows a more intimate understanding of the environment. The use of local knowledge also means an easier entry level into a tourism industry for locals whose jobs or livelihoods are affected by the use of their environment as tourism locations.

The involvement of locals restores the ownership of the environment to the local community and allows an alternative sustainable form of development for communities and their environments that are typically unable to support other forms of development.[citation needed]. However, recent research has found that economic linkages generated by CBST may only be sporadic, and that the linkages with agriculture are negatively affected by seasonality and by the small scale of the cultivated areas. This means that CBST may only have small-scale positive effects for these communities.

Stakeholders

Stakeholders of sustainable tourism play a role in continuing this form of tourism. This can include organizations as well as individuals.

Non-governmental organizations

Non-governmental organizations are one of the stakeholders in advocating sustainable tourism. Their roles can range from spearheading sustainable tourism practices to simply doing research. University research teams and scientists can be tapped to aid in the process of planning. Such solicitation of research can be observed in the planning of Cat Ba National Park in Vietnam.

Dive resort operators in Bunaken National Park, Indonesia, play a crucial role by developing exclusive zones for diving and fishing respectively, such that both tourists and locals can benefit from the venture.

Large conventions, meetings and other major organized events drive the travel, tourism and hospitality industry. Cities and convention centers compete to attract such commerce, commerce which has heavy impacts on resource use and the environment. Major sporting events, such as the Olympic Games, present special problems regarding environmental burdens and degradation. But burdens imposed by the regular convention industry can be vastly more significant.

Green conventions and events are a new but growing sector and marketing point within the convention and hospitality industry. More environmentally aware organizations, corporations and government agencies are now seeking more sustainable event practices, greener hotels, restaurants and convention venues, and more energy efficient or climate neutral travel and ground transportation.

Additionally, some convention centers have begun to take direct action in reducing the impact of the conventions they host. One example is the Moscone Center in San Francisco, California, which has a very aggressive recycling program, a large solar power system, and other programs aimed at reducing impact and increasing efficiency.

Tourists

With the advent of the internet, some traditional conventions are being replaced with virtual conventions, where the attendees remain in their home physical location and "attend" the convention by use of a web-based interface programmed for the task. This sort of "virtual" meeting eliminates all of the impacts associated with travel, accommodation, food wastage, and other necessary impacts of traditional, physical conventions.

Travel over long distances requires a large amount of time and/or energy. Generally this involves burning fossil fuels, a largely unsustainable practice and one that contributes to climate change, via CO2 emissions.

Air travel is perhaps the worst offender in this regard, contributing to between 2 and 3% of global carbon emissions.[8] Given a business-as-usual approach, this could be expected to rise to 5% by 2015 and 10% by 2050. Car travel is the next worst offender.

Mass transport is the most climate friendly method of travel, and generally the rule is "the bigger the better" - compared to cars, buses are relatively more sustainable, and trains and ships are even more so. Human energy and renewable energy are the most efficient, and hence, sustainable. Travel by bicycle, solar powered car, or sailing boat produces no carbon emissions (although the embodied energy in these vehicles generally comes at the expense of carbon emission).

Humane tourism

Humane tourism is part of the movement of responsible tourism. The idea is to empower local communities through travel related businesses around the world, first and foremost in developing countries.

The idea of humane travel or humane tourism is to connect travelers from Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand seeking new adventures and authentic experiences directly, to local businesses in the specific locations they wish to visit – thus, giving economic advantages to local businesses and giving travelers authentic and truly unique travel experiences.

Humane travel or humane tourism focuses on the people, the local community. The idea is to enable travelers to experience the world through the eyes of its local people while contributing directly to those people, ensuring that tourist dollars benefit the local community directly.
Humane tourism is about giving opportunity to the local people, empower them, enable them to enjoy the fruits of tourism directly.

The Internet is changing tourism. More and more travelers are planning their travels and vacations via the net. The Internet enables people to cut off commissions. The traveler can search for new destinations to visit, talk or read about other people experience, and buy the services directly.

The Internet platform can encourage local people to start new businesses and that already existing small businesses will begin to promote themselves through the net and receive the economic advantages of this directly in their communities. The world is now in a new tourism age, with globalization and the Internet playing a key role.

The new travelers have traveled the world, they have seen the classic sites. Staying at a Western hotel is not attractive enough, and they are excited by the prospect of experiencing the authentic local way of life: to go fishing with a local fisherman, to eat the fish with his family, to sleep in a typical village house.

These tourists or travellers, are happy to know that while doing so they promote the economic wellbeing of those same people they spend time with.

Humane tourism is part of Responsible tourism. The concept of Responsible Tourism originated in the work of Jost Krippendorf in The Holiday Makers[9] called for “rebellious tourists and rebellious locals” to create new forms of tourism.

His vision was “to develop and promote new forms of tourism, which will bring the greatest possible benefit to all the participants – travellers, the host population and the tourist business, without causing intolerable ecological and social damage.” As one can see he already talked, back in the 80s about benefits for the host population and used the term human tourism. Humane travel focuses on that host local population.

The South African national tourism policy (1996) [10] used the term "responsible tourism" and mentioned the wellbeing of the local community as a main factor.

The Cape Town Declaration on Responsible Tourism in Destinations,[12] agreed in 2002, that Responsible Tourism is about “making better places for people to live in and better places for people to visit.” The decleration focused on "places" but did nention the local population.

From the Rio summit or earth summit on 1992 [13] until the UN Commission on Sustainable Development in 1999,[14] the main focus of the tourism industry was the earth, the planet, the places, "green" or "eco" tourism. Now there is a trend to include the local population. This trend or branch of responsible tourism is called humane tourism or humane travel.