Knowledge Series  |  Tourism for Development Supporting Sustainable Livelihoods through Wildlife Tourism A Supporting Sustainable Livelihoods through Wildlife Tourism Produced with support from and FIAS Development Partners © 2018 The World Bank Group 1818 H Street NW Washington, DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This volume is a product of the staff of the World Bank Group. Member institutions of the World Bank Group include the World Bank (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development); the International Finance Corporation (IFC); and the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), which are separate and distinct legal entities, each organized under its respective Articles of Agreement. We encourage use of this publication for educational and noncommercial purposes. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the directors or executive directors of the respective institutions of the World Bank Group or the governments they represent. The World Bank Group does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. Rights and Permissions The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions or all of this work without permission may be a violation of applicable law. The World Bank encourages dissemi- nation of its work and normally will promptly grant permission to reproduce portions of the work. For permission to photocopy or reprint any part of this work, please send a request with complete information to the Copyright Clearance Center Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, USA; telephone: 978-750-8400; fax: 978-750-4470; Internet: www.copyright.com. All other queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to the Office of the Publisher, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2422; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. This publication was developed in part with funding provided by the Global Environment ­ Facility (GEF) through the Global Wildlife Program (GWP). About the Global Wildlife Program The GWP is a World Bank–led global partnership that promotes wildlife conservation and sustainable development by combating illicit trafficking in wildlife. This seven-year, US$131 million ­ grant program, funded by the GEF, aims to promote investments across 19 countries in Africa and Asia. The GWP seeks to reduce the ­ trafficking of and demand for illegal wildlife trade both through national-level projects of integrated landscape planning that invest in the protection of species and habitats and through a global project that brings key stakeholders together to exchange knowledge and increase coordination. GWP national project investments include interventions ­ linked to wildlife-based tourism as an important mechanism for inclusive poverty reduction and wildlife conservation. About the Facility for Investment Climate Advisory Services (FIAS) This publication was developed in part with funding provided by FIAS Development Partners under the FY17–21 FIAS strategy. Through the FIAS program, the World Bank Group and donor partners facilitate investment climate reforms in developing countries to foster open, productive, and com- petitive markets and to unlock sustainable private investments in sectors that contribute to growth and poverty reduction. The FIAS program is managed by the World Bank Group global practice. This paper was written by Dr. Louise Twining-Ward, Wendy Li, Hasita Bhammar, and Elisson Wright with contributions by Benoit Blarel, Jaime Cavelier, Richard Damania, Bronwyn James, Shaun Mann, Urvashi Narain, Hermione Nevill, Talia Salem, Jim Sano, Claudia Sobrevila, Anna Spenceley, and Lisa Steele. The report was copyedited and designed by Wilsted & Taylor Publishing Services. Contents Foreword    5 Definitions    7 Introduction    8 Tourism’s Growing Importance   for Destinations and Communities    11 Sustainable Wildlife Tourism    14 Wildlife Tourism Experiences    15 Benefits and Impacts of Sustainable Wildlife Tourism    21 Social and Economic Impacts    21 Environmental Impacts    25 Creating Wildlife Tourism with Community Participation    26 Community Tourism Management Models    27 Partnership Models Case Studies    31 Recommendations and Next Steps    45 Enabling Conditions    45 Management Considerations    47 Closing Note   50 Appendix 1: Stakeholders    52 Appendix 2: Additional Resources    54 Notes    58 4 Foreword Tourism is an engine for jobs, exports, and investments. In 2016, travel and tourism generated $7.6 trillion (10.2% of global Gross Domestic Product) and an estimated 292 million jobs globally. The tourism sector is also the largest market-based contributor to finance protected areas such as national parks. In some countries, tourism depends almost exclusively on natural systems, often with wildlife as the primary attraction. This nature-based tourism (NBT) is a powerful tool that countries can leverage to grow and bring jobs to local communities, generate government revenues and foreign exchange, and create new markets for entrepreneurs to sell their goods and services. Wildlife is an essential draw for tourists who visit parks and generate economic activities that benefit local people. For NBT to flourish, wildlife and its natural habitat must be protected and managed sustainably. To achieve the latter, the design of conservation programs that are socially and economically sustainable will be essential. Successful NBT experiences are emerging from across the world, especially in Southern and Eastern Africa, Southeast Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean. This report highlights Namibia’s successful model of NBT that promotes community conservation and has contributed an estimated N$5.98 billion (approximately US$488 million at 2018 exchange rates) to net national income and created 5,147 jobs from the beginning of 1990 to the end of 2016. It also presents other NBT experiences from Botswana, India, Kenya, Malawi, South Africa, and Uganda. We hope countries across the globe can apply the lessons learned from these projects to promote investment in well- planned, sustainably run NBT operations that improve the livelihoods of Martin Mecnarowski, Shutterstock.com rural communities and protect nature. This report is part of a broader effort by the World Bank Group, the Global Environment Facility (GEF), and numerous conservation partners to explore innovative tourism partnerships to help countries open up smart investment in this sector and capitalize on their natural assets. The World Bank has experience implementing over 300 tourism-related projects across 5 more than 86 countries since the 1960s. We help our clients maximize their development resources and unlock the intrinsic value of their natural assets. We support their efforts to access capital markets, attract private-sector partners, and deploy innovative solutions and technologies. With the support from the GEF grant of US$131 million to the Global Wildlife Program (GWP), we are working with 19 countries across Africa and Asia and numerous development partners to promote wildlife conservation and sustainable development by combating illicit trafficking in wildlife and investing in NBT. Our staff stand ready to engage with committed partners to sustainably grow this sector while protecting both nature and livelihoods. Laura Tuck Jan Walliser Naoko Ishii vice president vice president ceo and chairperson sustainable development equitable growth, global environment facility world bank group finance, and institutions world bank group 6 Definitions Community-based tourism enterprises or semi-captive wildlife (game and safari Businesses located within a community, parks, animal refuges), as opposed to ­ or owned or managed by community non-consumptive tourism that uses captive members. wildlife (e.g., zoos, aquariums, animal attractions). Concession  The right to use land or other property for a specific purpose, granted Protected areas  Nationally designated by a government, company, or other body. natural habitats for protecting wildlife, buffer zones, and their gateways, as well Consumptive wildlife tourism  as community, private, and state reserves Animals being deliberately killed or and areas surrounding protected forests removed, or having any of their parts used, under land-use policies that promote such as trophy hunting or whaling. In wildlife management. some countries, consumption of wildlife or wildlife products is illegal; in others, Sustainable wildlife tourism  consumption of specific species may Non-consumptive wildlife tourism that be legal, depending on the season and conserves the environment, protects other factors. wildlife, and improves the well-being of local people. Ecotourism  “Responsible travel to natural Tourism  The movement of people to areas that conserves the environment and places or countries outside their usual improves the well-being of local people.”1 environment for personal or business/ Nature-based tourism  All categories of professional purposes, for more than tourism in natural settings that contributes 24 hours and less than a year. This to poverty reduction and promotes envi­ definition includes both domestic and ronmental sustainability. international travel. Non-consumptive wildlife tourism  Wildlife tourism  Tourism undertaken to Viewing, photographing, and feeding. view and/or encounter non-domesticated This publication primarily discusses animals in a natural setting.2 Two main non-consumptive tourism that relies on types of wildlife tourism exist: consumptive non-captive wildlife (e.g., photographic and non-consumptive.3 This work focuses safari, whale watching, bird-watching) only on non-consumptive tourism. 7 Introduction Tourism is a significant and growing contributor to global economies through job creation, revenue generation, and infrastructure development. Nature-based tourism and, more specifically, wildlife tourism are thriving in many countries, especially in Asia and Africa. However, wildlife and the habitats on which this type of tourism is based are increasingly threatened by rising human populations, economic activity, illegal poaching, and lack of funding. The tourism sector is the largest, global, market-based contributor to ­ financing protected-area systems in many countries.4 To deliver environ- Bambara, Shutterstock.com mental and economic benefits to protected areas, managers need to explore innovative tourism partnerships and investments to secure sustainable ­ funding mechanisms that protect species and improve livelihoods. Well- planned, sustainably run tourism operations enhance the perceived value of live animals, reduce poaching, and increase investments in protected areas and reserves. Sustainable wildlife tourism can also provide opportunities for rural communities to improve their livelihoods through tourism-related jobs, ­ revenue-sharing arrangements, and co-management of natural resources. Sustainable wildlife tourism is often considered an economic alternative or preferable land-use model to other economic activities with greater environ- mental impact, such as agriculture or mining. When communities see direct benefits from prospering wildlife populations, they have a greater stake in protecting them. There are numerous examples of community involvement in wildlife tourism, in which community-based tourism enterprises—such as - eco-lodges and cultural villages—were set up outside wildlife-rich pro­ tected areas to generate conservation incentives and enhance tourism experi- ences. This brief report explores different sustainable wildlife tourism models with community involvement as well as solutions and case studies that offer insight into this sector. ­ 8 Sustainable Wildlife Tourism with Community Involvement In Namibia, small tourism enterprises In Uganda, women are often beneficiaries were founded on communal conservancies within communities* like Mukono Parish, outside of national parks.5 One such one of 27 parishes surrounding Bwindi example is Grootberg Lodge, the first Impenetrable National Park. Gorilla lodge to be wholly owned by a communal tourism has brought economic and social conservancy. European Union funds paid benefits to this parish, and women are now for its establishment, and a private tourism for the first time being accepted as income company operates it under a favorable earners. Tourism employment will likely agreement for the conservancy. The lodge change the social and gender dynamics in has created local jobs and revenue as well these communities as more women become as facilitated the successful reintroduction empowered.9 of endangered species, such as the black In India, community-based cultural rhino, lion, and elephant.6 tourism experiences were created around In Kenya, communities established the popular Pench Tiger Reserve. The Gond revenue-sharing, joint ventures with tribal communities live on the fringes of the private tourism companies by engaging reserve and are economically vulnerable a neutral third party, such as the NGO due to uncertain monsoons, loss of lands African Wildlife Foundation, to act as a to tiger conservation, and crop destruction broker.7 Another Kenyan example of a by wildlife. These traditional societies have community-led NGO is the Northern a unique culture, characterized by animism Rangelands Trust, set up in 2004 by a as well as rich folklore, art, and music. coalition of local leaders, politicians, and The Conservation Wildlands Trust (CWT), conservation interests. Sixty percent of an NGO that promotes community-based the tourism revenue earned by the trust wildlife conservation, created the Tiger goes into community projects, such as Tribes program to provide communities school endowments, water pumps, and with an opportunity to share their lives and infrastructure. The other 40% funds the traditions with tourists through guided annual operating costs of the conservancy, tours, while simultaneously earning a such as rangers’ salaries.8 livelihood.10 For more information about how to involve women in tourism projects, see the World Bank Group publication * Women and Tourism: Designing for Inclusion and other resources listed in Appendix 2. 9 Tourism’s Growing Importance for Destinations and Communities Travel and tourism are an engine   for job creation, exports, and investment. Jobs. In 2016, travel and tourism supported 292 million jobs, or one in ten jobs across the world—more than financial services, telecommunications, mining, chemicals, and auto manufacturing.11 Exports. Tourism represents 7% of all international trade and 30% of the world’s exports of services.12 Between 2010 and 2015, export earnings from international tourism grew nearly 25%, outpacing automotive manufacturing at 22%, food at 19%, and chemicals at 9%.13 Investment. Tourism and hospitality are now the second-largest generator of foreign direct investment (FDI). US$806.5 billion (4.4% of total investment) was invested in travel and tourism in 2016.14 BlueOrange Studio, Shutterstock.com JuRitt, Shutterstock.com 11 Tourism Impacts Development Growth in the tourism sector can help contributes to funding the protection remote communities, artisans, farmers, of important cultural sites.21 Intangible and fisher folk.15 Every US dollar spent in cultural heritage such as music, the tourism sector generates US$3.20 performing arts, and oral traditions in the rest of the economy, benefiting can also be revived or protected a wide supply chain of artisans and craft through tourism.22 people.16 This multiplier effect can help Tourism is one of the few sectors in stem rural-urban migration,17 improve which female labor participation is infrastructure, and contribute to the already above parity in some regions.23 ­ ­ dynamism of arts and crafts in the world Women account for up to 70% of all market.18 workers in the tourism industry.24 In vation funds. Tourism generates conser­ Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, The high demand for nature-based and Thailand, more than half of tourism tourism increases the value that residents businesses are run by women.25 place on the environment and wildlife.19 For example, the economic value of gorilla tourism in Uganda is estimated at up to US$34.3 million and has led to policy that supports conservation and ecotourism.20 Tourism plays an important role in cultural heritage management, funding, and protection. Visitor spending on entrance tickets, guides, and souvenirs 12 michele B, Shutterstock.com Like other economic activities, tourism both gives and takes from communities. Poorly planned and managed tourism can negatively impact cities, parks, and monuments; produce low-level jobs; and put pressure on resident communities. The goal of tourism planning and management is to help ensure that tourism contributes to development goals by providing jobs and natural resource protection through a vision of improved competitiveness, sustainability, and inclusion. 13 Sustainable Wildlife Tourism The demand for all types of nature tourism, particularly   adventure tourism and wildlife tourism, is predicted   to expand rapidly over the next two decades.26 Drivers of wildlife tourism demand include people’s interest in wildlife, urbanites’ wish to escape cities and relax in natural settings, and a desire of tourists—particularly millennials—to seek new and authentic experiences. Global data on specific numbers, source markets, and visitor behavior is lacking, but anecdotal studies paint a picture of a growing and lucrative market segment. • Researchers estimated in 2015 that protected areas globally receive eight billion visits a year, generating as much as US$600 billion of tourism expenditure annually. In contrast, less than US$10 billion a year is spent on protecting these sites.27 • A 2015 American Express study shows that 66% of all international travelers are now motivated to travel specifically to experience nature and beautiful scenery.28 • In a survey of international travelers from key travel markets commissioned by Brand USA, the destination marketing organization for the USA, ecotourism and nature were consistently ranked in the top five motivating factors for travelers selecting their last vacations.29 • Recreational visits to US national parks grew 7.7% in 2016, to 333 million visitors. Park visitors spent an estimated US$18.4 billion in gateway regions, and their total contribution to the national economy reached US$34.9 billion.30 • A 2015 United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) survey found that 80% (and growing) of trips sold to Africa are for wildlife watching, making it the most important tourism segment in the region. The survey determined that 14 African countries generate an estimated US$142 million in protected-area entrance fees.31 14 • A 2010 study found that nature-based tourism in India’s protected areas grew by an average of 15% from 2002 to 2008, with domestic visitors accounting for 80% of total visitors.32 In a 2011 survey, Indian tourists noted the main reasons for visiting were to see nature, tigers, and scenic beauty. Only 34% said they would be willing to visit the parks if tigers were absent.33 • A 2009 study by the University of Cambridge of visitor trends at 280 natural protected areas in 20 countries found that visitation is increasing about 4% per year,34 in line with the growth of international tourism.35 As the demand for tourism grows, so does the potential for wildlife tourism to benefit its host countries and rural communities. Sustainable wildlife tourism can be developed where the product and the demand exist. The main places wildlife tourism can be found are in and around protected areas. Wildlife Tourism Experiences While wildlife tourism demand is global, wildlife tourism experiences are not equally distributed across the world. Most wildlife tourism occurs in and around protected areas (which cover fotogrin, Shutterstock.com 15% of land and 12% of waters globally; see following pages), resulting in high concentrations of visitors in these areas.36 Major terrestrial wildlife tourism destinations are a limited, finite resource. Destinations that are easily accessible by tourists are even fewer.37 Conservation Travel Scorec ard The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) piloted a Conservation Travel Scorecard in Namibia, Nepal, Bhutan, and Peru to assess readiness for tourism. Through desk research, stakeholder interviews, and field visits, the scorecard examines four pillars: •  Conservation value and policy readiness    •  Tourism readiness •  Conservation travel potential   •  WWF country office readiness This scorecard can be used in new tourism projects that have a wildlife conservation component. Source: World Wildlife Fund. Protected Areas of the World Yellowstone National Park (USA) Galápagos Islands (Ecuador) Pantanal Wetlands   (Brazil) Falkland Islands South Georgia Antarctica Peninsula ■ Terrestrial  protected areas  ■ Marine protected areas 16 Popular wildlife tourism destinations Chitwan National Park (Nepal) Bandhavgarh National Park (India) Khao Yai National Park (Thailand) Gunung Leuser National Park (Indonesia) Eastern Rift Valley Lakes (Kenya) Maasai Mara National Reserve (Kenya) Serengeti (Tanzania) Kakadu National Park   (Australia) Kruger National Park (South Africa) Source: IUCN and UNEP-WCMC, The World Database on Protected Areas, 2016, www.protectedplanet.net. 17 Charismatic Animals Wildlife tourism can be even more concentrated because   it often focuses on one or more charismatic species. Some of the key species that draw in tourists are highlighted below. Tigers. Approximately 3,890 wild tigers remain in tiger-range states, which include Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nepal, Russia, and Thailand.38 Most tiger tourism today takes place in the popular national parks/tiger reserves in India and Nepal.39 More than half of the world’s wild tigers are found in India; 50 tiger reserves there are also popular tourist destinations.40 From 2013 to 2014, Northern India’s Ranthambore Tiger Reserve collected nearly US$300,000 in gate fees from 324,000 visitors, 63% of whom were domestic.41 In 2016–2017, India’s Pench Tiger Reserve earned around US$430,383 and received 78,235 visitors, 90% domestic.42 Jaguars. The large cats are located in Central and South America, particularly in the Amazon basin. The relatively new jaguar tourism segment, which is gaining traction in Brazil’s Pantanal Wetlands, is estimated to generate US$6.8 million a year in direct revenue for local tourism lodges. Jaguars are targeted by cattle ranchers, who view them as a threat to their livestock. Orangutans. Orangutan viewing is gaining popularity in Malaysian Borneo and Indonesia. One study in Semenggoh Nature Reserve in Malaysian Borneo found that orangutans contributed up to US$23 million to the economy in 2011. The reserve attracts an average of 70,000 visitors a year.43 TIGER: kyslynskyyhal, Shutterstock.com; JAGUAR: Anan Kaewkhammul, Shutterstock.com; ORANgUTAN: Naoto Shinkai, Shutterstock.com 18 Elephants. Africa has approximately 415,000 African elephants across their 37 range states in Sub-Saharan Africa.44 Researchers in 2016 estimated that 110 protected areas that harbor elephants receive 2 million visitors a year.45 Elephant poaching for ivory continues to threaten populations, even in protected areas. A 2013 study by the David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust estimated the tourism value of a single living elephant as US$1.6 million over its lifetime to travel companies, airlines, and local economies. Mountain gorillas. A subspecies of the critically endangered eastern gorilla, mountain gorillas are the only great ape that has been increasing in number. Roughly 880 individuals live in two populations in the Volcanoes National Park in Rwanda and Bwindi Impenetrable National Park in Uganda.46 In Volcanoes National Park, only 80 visitors a day are permitted on the guided gorilla treks. In 2014, the park received more than 20,000 visitors who each paid US$750 for permits, generating US$15 million in revenue.47 In 2017, the Rwanda Development Board implemented a new high-end tourism strategy that doubled the permit cost to US$1,500 and increased the revenue-sharing rate with communities from 5% to 10%.48 Manta rays. The largest ray in the world, mantas are globally distributed and threatened by unsustainable fishing. Studies show they are much more valuable as a tourism attraction than as a consumptive resource. Manta ray tourism generates an estimated US$73 million a year for dive operators and US$140 million in direct economic impact in 23 countries, including Japan, Indonesia, Maldives, Mozambique, Thailand, and Australia. Over 1 million manta ray dives and snorkels occur a year in the studied countries. ELEPHANT: Patryk Kosmider, Shutterstock.com; MOUNTAIN GORILLA: Gudkov Andrey, Shutterstock.com; MANTA RAY: StudioSmart, Shutterstock.com 19 20 Benefits and Impacts of Sustainable Wildlife Tourism Tourism can be a catalyst for community development and benefit rural communities by stemming rural-urban migration. Tourism stimulates investments in infrastructure and livelihood opportunities in rural areas; increases the demand for agricultural and artisan goods; employs and empowers women; and provides an economic incentive for conservation for communities living with wildlife. Tourism also helps to raise awareness of the threats to biodiversity and creates a long-lasting impression of wildlife and protected areas. While tourism engenders many social and economic benefits, it may cause undesired social and environmental impacts when not effectively managed. Social and Economic Impacts The economic benefits of wildlife tourism can be   far-reaching if tourism products, services, and value   chains are optimized for tourists to spend their money locally. When well managed, tourism can have a significant multiplier effect (indirect and induced benefits). Direct Impacts Direct tourism impacts include tourist transactions with tourist service providers and products, such as lodging, recreation, transportation, entrance fees, taxes, guiding, food services, and shopping/souvenirs. Tourist concessions and leases, as well givaga, istock as volunteers and donations, can also be substantial.49 jane rix, Shutterstock.com 21 PeopleImages, iStock In some instances, particularly for premium market segments, direct sources of revenue can be boosted by increasing or creating multitier fee levels. For example, Conservation Strategy Fund partnered with Tanzania National Parks to assess their visitors’ “willingness-to-pay.”* They found * Visitors’ reported intents often differ from their actions, and that demand for various parks in Tanzania was relatively inelastic, and they there may be social reasons subsequently raised fees several times for a number of the popular northern for not raising entrance fees or having tiered pricing— parks without reducing visitation. In other instances, where demand is 50 for example, to encourage more elastic or reliant on domestic consumers, increases in fees could domestic tourism and raise awareness of conservation. potentially reduce visitation. 22 Carrying Capacity Despite carrying capacity’s appeal as a Myth Busting “magic number” management strategy, several difficulties arise in using it for tourism. Even low levels of tourism can adversely impact protected areas; visitation thus needs to be 1 Carrying capacity predicts impacts increase carefully managed. with use in a linear fashion. In fact, impact The UNWTO defines tourism carrying depends not on absolute numbers of tourists capacity as the maximum number of visitors but on tourist behavior, infrastructure, that a given destination or territory can bear at management, etc. any time (1) without their presence undermining 2 Second, it assumes tourism is the only impact the area’s environmental, economic, and on an area, when in fact residents also have sociocultural characteristics, and (2) without impact and use resources in both sustainable reducing tourists’ satisfaction levels. The and unsustainable ways. economic component of carrying capacity relates 3 While the number gives the impression of to the extent to which the economy can rely on being scientifically computed, like impact incomes and jobs provided by tourism without assessments, tourism carrying capacity studies becoming too dependent on the sector. The are inherently value-laden, and different physical component is the extent to which the assessments come up with completely infrastructure can accommodate current and different numbers. future tourism demands. The ecological carrying 4 Carrying capacity focuses on limiting capacity is the extent to which the ecosystem numbers rather than improving conditions, can absorb the impact of tourism. The social so it may lead to concentrating on numbers component is the amount of tourism that can be rather than on quality experiences. developed without exceeding the tolerance of the 5 Such limits are rarely adhered to and therefore residents or reducing the satisfaction of guests. usually remain as scientific exercises. Employing adaptive management or “limits of acceptable change” techniques helps shift the focus from numbers to identifying and maintaining qualitative conditions that are decided with stakeholder input and monitored carefully over time. Results from monitoring may then be used to adapt strategies to maintain optimum ecological conditions. Source: Adapted from L. Twining-Ward, “Tourism Carrying Capacity Assessment Tobago” (unpublished final report for Tobago House of Assembly), 2007. manali baruah 23 Kjersti Joergensen, Shutterstock.com Sustainable Wildlife Tourism Enterprises Many types of wildlife-related tourism enterprises/opportunities generate direct, indirect, and induced impacts, including: • Lodging/accommodation and services to cater to wildlife tourists • Self-guided wildlife-viewing routes (some safaris, bird-watching, etc.) • Viewing and various experiences offered by guides or tour operators • Information and interpretation sites, including museums, visitor centers, and interactive installations • Projects and nature-oriented volunteering programs (e.g., coral cleaning) • Academic and research programs • Adventure-themed infrastructure for viewing (creation of nature trails, canopy walkways, etc.) • Fee-based residential classes and lectures (on species, painting, wildlife photography, etc.) • Merchandising, especially lucrative for iconic species (gorillas, lemurs, etc.) • Hosting of events, conferences, and meetings that incorporate wildlife tourism experiences mezzotint, shutterstock.com Artisan carving a monkey orange bowl at iSimangaliso Wetland Park, South Africa. 24 Indirect and Induced Impacts Indirect benefits occur when tourism suppliers buy from the wider supply chain of goods and services; this includes employment generated through industries such as farming, food production, and retail.51 For example, in Zambia’s South Luangwa National Park, the US$14.8 million in direct benefits to local communities (craft sales, food/produce sales, infrastructure improvements) is estimated to generate US$24 million in induced and indirect benefits to the national economy. The park also generated an additional US$9.1 million earned by the Government of Zambia for park fees, direct taxes, and induced taxes.52 Environmental Impacts The environmental impacts of wildlife tourism vary greatly and depend on the destination’s environmental conditions, type of tourist activity, and tourist quantity, behavior, and carrying capacity (see sidebar). Direct impacts on wildlife include disturbance of feeding and breeding patterns; increased vulnerability to competitors and predators if wildlife is accidentally or deliberately introduced to new places; disruption of parent-offspring bonds; transmission of diseases; and, in some cases, death of individual animals due to road collisions.53 Robust scientific research, monitoring, and evaluation can help manage unintended risks and minimize negative impacts. Building park agencies’ management capacity to effectively Villiers Steyn, Shutterstock.com engage in partnerships with the tourism industry and monitor growth is essential to minimizing environmental impacts and maximizing financial and technical support to protected areas. 25 Creating Wildlife Tourism with Community Participation Sustainable wildlife tourism does not occur on its own.   It requires a set of conditions and expertise to benefit   communities and governments. Effective planning, management skills, technology use, and stakeholder collaboration are required to deliver tourism’s economic and development benefits while minimizing potential adverse environmental and social impacts. Whereas tourism provides income-generating opportunities for communities, it must be properly developed and marketed to target consumers. New technologies such as travel booking websites, social media marketing, and mobile apps give local communities and entrepreneurs opportunities to connect directly with consumers. Still, communities need greater access to, understanding of, and capability with these tools to fully leverage their power. Adaptive management techniques with ongoing monitoring are required to help communities engage, manage growth, optimize benefit sharing, and better understand limitations. One key factor influencing the sustainability of wildlife tourism is ensuring that local communities benefit from tourism activities. Communities who live adjacent to protected areas often rely on these regions for forest products, firewood, thatching, and grazing, and they may have customary rights related to the natural resources. Studies have shown that community apathy, disengagement, or hostility can cause tourism initiatives to fail; conversely, where communities are engaged and benefiting, sustainable wildlife tourism can be a win-win. An overview of stakeholders involved in wildlife tourism and their respective roles and goals is included in Appendix 1 (page 52). Performing a stakeholder assessment is often fundamental to understanding the requirements and competitive advantages of the major stakeholders who can contribute to sustainable wildlife tourism activities. The remainder of this section highlights different community tourism management models and provides case studies from Africa and Asia. 26 Community Tourism Management Models Approaches to community tourism management differ. Three of the most common include: Passive engagement. Communities own the asset and lease to a private- or public-sector partner, or the government owns the asset and provides revenue sharing to communities (a legal obligation in such countries as Kenya, Tanzania, and Zambia). Active engagement. Communities are empowered economically and socially through employment in tourism activities either independently or with a public, private, or NGO partner. Co-management. Communities have an equal decision-making role in the management of the asset with the owner. Who owns the asset, services the asset, and decides and sets the rules are critical factors. Understanding these three approaches helps determine what kind of tourism management model the community takes on. radek borovka, Shutterstock.com The Five Most Common Wildlife Tourism Partnership Models Public-Community   Public-Private   Community-Owned-  Initiative Partnership and-Run Enterprise (see pages 32–35) (see pages 36–37) (see pages 42–43) Cooperation between public Agreement between public Tourism enterprise that is wholly institution and local community to institution and private party, or mostly owned and run by operate and manage community- granting private party use rights community group or member based tourism venture to land or infrastructure for commercial purposes Partners’ roles and responsibilities Partners’ roles and responsibilities Partners’ roles and responsibilities •  Public institution facilitates •  Public authority contracts or leases Community operates and manages •  access to and use of land or rights to land or infrastructure the venture infrastructure •  Private party funds and operates Donors provide initial or ongoing •  •  Community operates the venture tourism venture and receives risks investment and training and benefits Key success factors Key success factors Key success factors •  Capacity building for community Attractive environment and •  Ongoing donor involvement •  members in business, service, terms that enable private Capacity building for community •  marketing, and sales skills involvement Direct market access •  •  Tourism is part of integrated Professional private party •  Strong business viability •  community development is invested for medium to long term Challenges and limitations Challenges and limitations Challenges and limitations Conducting effective marketing •  Managing the level of community •  Financial self-sustainability •  •  Coexisting with private-sector involvement enterprises Fostering sustainability •  Managing growth •  Case studies Case study Case study Okavango Delta, Botswana (page 33) •  Majete Wildlife Reserve, •  Bwindi Impenetrable •  Periyar National Park, India (page 34) •  Malawi (page 37) National Park, Uganda (page 43) iSimangaliso Wetland Park, •  South Africa (page 35) 28 Community-Private  Public-Private-Community   Partnership Partnership (see pages 38–39) (see pages 40–41) Agreement between community and Agreement between public institution, private party, granting private party private party, and community to manage use rights to land or infrastructure for and operate tourism venture commercial purposes Partners’ roles and responsibilities Partners’ roles and responsibilities •  Community enters agreement with Public institution facilitates the partnership with •  private party who would fund and/or operate private party who would fund and/or operate tourism venture, with community sharing tourism venture, with community sharing in benefits in benefits Community may work in or manage venture •  Private party ensures community benefits •  Parties all agree that community should benefit •  through revenue, employment, social If private party is an NGO, may also provide •  services, etc. training and funding to community Key success factors Key success factors •  Attractive environment and terms that Attractive environment and terms that enable •  enable private involvement private involvement •  Professional private party is invested for Professional private party is invested for medium •  medium to long term to long term •  Community is supportive and engaged Community is supportive and engaged •  •  Capacity building and skills training for Capacity building and skills training for •  community members community members Challenges and limitations Challenges and limitations Managing community’s varying levels of •  Managing community’s varying levels of •  readiness and engagement readiness and engagement Dealing with tensions that arise within and •  Dealing with tensions that arise within and •  outside of community outside of community Case study Case study Sanctuary at Ol Lentille, Kenya (page 39) •  Communal Conservancies, Namibia (page 40) •  29 30 Partnership Models Case Studies The debate continues about whether community-based conservation initiatives are effective for conservation and development, or whether they are able to financially self-sustain after donors withdraw. Success factors include the context, the management, the assets, and the type of engagement. The following section identifies several case studies to help assess factors likely to contribute to success in sustainable wildlife tourism and the approaches that facilitate them. Case Studies at a Glance Country Size Number of tourists Benefits from tourism Okavango Delta Botswana Entire delta is 16,000 Botswana received 14 ecotourism organizations page 33 km2, but study focuses 259,000 international employed 610 people and generated on northeast leisure tourists in 2015 over US$600,000 in revenue (2012) Periyar National India 925 km2 800,000 US$93,000 raised through Park and Tiger eco-charges on park entrance fees Reserve  page 34 (2005) iSimangaliso South Africa 3,600 km2 510,000 in the southern US$1.5 million in revenue plus 1,600 Wetland Park section of the park direct jobs and 6,000 indirect jobs page 35 (FY 2015/2016) Majete Wildlife Malawi 691 km2 8,000 US$400,000 in revenue Reserve  page 37 (2016) Sanctuary at Kenya 40,000 acres N/A US$20,000–30,000 Ol Lentille, Laikipia (~160 km2) 30% occupancy rate in lodge fees page 39 Communal Namibia 162,030 km2 N/A Community conservation facilitated Conservancies 5,147 jobs and generated nearly Em Campos, Shutterstock.com page 40 US$9 million (N$111 million) in returns for local communities (2016) Bwindi Uganda 331 km2 N/A US$573,000 (1998–2009) Impenetrable National Park page 43 31 Public-Community Initiatives In a public-community initiative, a public institution, such as a park management authority, partners with a local community to operate and manage a sustainable wildlife tourism venture. Though such a partnership is more often initiated by the government, it may also come at the request of the community. Key challenges are how to market effectively, how to coexist with the private sector, how to self-sustain, and how to manage growth. In these types of ventures, capacity building is particularly important to ensuring that community members have the business, service, marketing, and sales skills needed to keep the business running. Ecotourism ventures in Botswana (explored on page 33) are a good example of public-community initiatives that were successful but are still challenged to remain competitive with private operators. Wandel Guides, Shutterstock.com CASE STUDY Okavango Delta  Community-Based Natural Resource Management •   Location  Northern Botswana   Size  16,000 km2   Types of wildlife  Big Five (lion, leopard, elephant, buffalo, rhino), plus zebras and impalas Type and scale of tourism  Botswana promotes high-value, low-volume tourism typified by luxury resorts (rich wildlife viewing composed of high-cost accommodation establishments of 12 rooms or fewer). In 2015, Botswana welcomed 259,000 international leisure tourists (the number for wildlife tourism is unclear). Some community-based ecotourism does exist, offering wildlife-based and cultural tourism. Management/approach  Per government requirements, communities form community trusts, like the Chobe Conservation Trust, to implement ecotourism projects on the commu­ nities’ behalf. Trusts are registered legal entities that enable collective action in conservation and ecotourism development. They aim to use natural resources, such as wildlife, in jeanette dietl, Shutterstock.com ecotourism development to generate jobs and revenue. Results  In 2012, 14 ecotourism organizations in the northwest and Chobe districts of the Okavango Delta employed 610 people and generated over US$600,000 in revenue. The income was distributed to individuals, households, and community projects and funded social services, such as the construction of houses for the poor, community micro-credit schemes, funeral assistance, and scholarships. The introduction of ecotourism has positively changed community attitudes toward conservation, and poaching has declined. Key success factors  The government empowered community trusts to provide services and benefits to their communities. Community land management boards have been instrumental in ensuring public participation in decision making. Challenges and limitations  Community-based ecotourism competes with foreign- owned, well-developed wildlife tourism in the Okavango Delta. Communities tend to sublease their concession areas to foreign companies, in part because of a lack of entrepreneurial skills. No mechanism exists for the equitable distribution of ecotourism benefits, and there are also reports of mismanagement of funds. Source: J. E. Mbaiwa, “Ecotourism in Botswana: 30 Years Later,” Journal of Ecotourism 14, nos. 2–3 (2015): 204–222. CASE STUDY Periyar National Park and Tiger Reserve  Community-Based Ecotourism   Location  Kerala, India   Size  925 km2 •   Types of wildlife  Tigers, elephants, leopards, other mammals, and birds Type and scale of tourism  Periyar National Park and Tiger Reserve (PTR) receives 800,000 visitors a year, 92% of them domestic. Tourists are permitted only in the park’s buffer zone (the area peripheral to the protected area where regulated resource use is allowed).54 Community-based ecotourism offers guided day treks and rafting trips, and seeks to minimize environmental impact by limiting the number of visitors and overnight stays. A few modest lodges (owned by the Kerala Forests and Wildlife Department) provide accommodation. Management/approach  Collaboration between Colette3, Shutterstock.com community and Kerala Forests and Wildlife Department Results  Community members receive good salaries from tourism, and many young people formerly involved in poaching and other illegal activities are now involved in the tourism project. Poaching in the park has decreased. Key success factors  Park officials developed innovative approaches to involve communities through the India Eco-Development Project (funded by Global Environment Facility and the World Bank), offering financial and legal aid in exchange for cooperation against smuggling and poaching. Eco-development committees (EDCs) were created for ecotourism and other fields, and members were trained on tourist interpretation, monitoring, and reporting. Tourism income is used to pay EDC member salaries and park management expenses, and to build up a community development fund. A small surcharge on entrance fees is invested into the Periyar Tiger Conservation Foundation, a government-organized NGO that supports community- based tourism through training, advocacy, and funding. Challenges and limitations  Growth of private hotels outside the reserve, rising numbers of day trippers, and 10 million pilgrims a year to the shrine inside the reserve have increased environmental pressures.55 Conflict exists between state governments, those wanting more growth, and those wanting more protection for the park.56 Source: A. Banerjee, “Is Wildlife Tourism Benefiting Indian Protected Areas? A Survey,” Current Issues in Tourism 15, no. 3 (2012): 211–227, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2011.599367. CASE STUDY iSimangaliso Wetland Park  Community Concessions   Location  Northeast coast of South Africa   Size  3,600 km2 •   Types of wildlife  Big Five (lion, leopard, elephant, buffalo, rhino), plus birds Ownership  Tourism takes place on public lands with private and community concessions. The park was established in 2000 when a patchwork of 16 protected areas, commercial plantations, and former military sites were consolidated into a single protected area. Land ownership is complicated, and 680,000 people live in and around the park. There are 14 land claims on the park based on South Africa’s Restitution Act, which aimed to repatriate land to those who lost it unfairly during apartheid. Land claimants now receive 8% of gross commercial revenues (gate fees, concessions, and forestry revenue). Type and scale of tourism  Tourism activities abound, including hiking, boat rides, game drives, horse riding, turtle tours, and birding. The southern section of the park hosts 510,000 visitors, 42% of whom are foreign. Management/approach  The goals of empowerment and transformation of the local community guide the iSimangaliso Authority’s conservation strategy. Communities, including land claimant groups who live inside and next to iSimangaliso, are the primary beneficiaries of the equity partnerships, income generation, job opportunities, training, capacity building, and mentoring elements of land care and tourism development. Results  Skills development programs in tourism, hospitality, and guiding have enabled local people to work in the tourism industry. The park has attracted new investment into a range of lodges and hotels in the area. The region has seen a 14% increase in tourism beds (including the buffer zone) and an 89% growth in the number of establishments providing accommodation, food, and other services. The authority established a craft program, which supports 25 groups of mostly female artisans to design, produce, and market their crafts in higher-value urban markets and to tourists. Almost half of all the community residents employed are women. Key success factors  The rehabilitation of the park, which involved removal of alien plant species as well as wetland and dune rehabilitation, was critical to its success. Between 2001 and 2014, the construction and maintenance of fences, roads, field-ranger camps, picnic sites, park furniture, hides, public toilets, viewpoints, and canopy walks greatly contributed to local livelihoods. Challenges and limitations  Not every community benefits equally, as tourism is not evenly dispersed throughout the area and each trust depends on the revenue received in that municipality. The long and difficult restitution process creates tension within the communities. Sources: Bronwyn James, Senior Manager, personal communication, October 7, 2017; iSimangaliso, iSimangaliso Wetland Park 2017 Annual Report, https://isimangaliso.com/product/annual-report-2017/. Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) Partnering with a private-sector entity is common when the public sector or local community does not have the finance, capacity, or interest to independently run a tourism venture. Private-sector involvement can help address the need for market access, professional management skills, and StanislavBeloglazov, Shutterstock.com a sustainable growth model. However, the role of the community is often dependent on the local engagement and principles of the private-sector partners. Higher-end operators tend to include broader social benefits for communities. Three common models are used for private-sector participation in protected areas:57 • Lease. In this contractual agreement, one party (lessor) conveys an estate to another party (lessee) for a specified period. The lessor retains ownership, while the lessee obtains rights to use the land for a fee.58 A community trust can be a vehicle for sharing benefits from leases. For example, Zambia Wildlife Authority and Community Resource Boards lease land in game management areas to private operators.59 • Management contract. A government and a private operator agree to manage an existing tourism facility. The private operator is paid a fixed management fee, which is sometimes based on performance.60 African Parks’ agreement with the government of Malawi to manage three national parks is a large-scale example. • Concession. The most common model used for protected areas, the concession may include a commercial operation and/or a piece of land. The concessionaire can be a private owner or owner/operator or a community group.61 A tourism concession provides either accommodation, food and beverage, recreation, education, retail, or interpretive services. Any kind of private, public, NGO, or community group can manage a concession—management is often decided on a competitive basis.62 The example of Majete Wildlife Reserve in Malawi shows how communities benefit from such partnerships. 36 CASE STUDY Majete Wildlife Reserve  NGO Collaboration   Location  Southeastern Malawi   Size  691 km2 •   Types of wildlife  Big Five (lion, leopard, elephant, buffalo, rhino) Type and scale of tourism  Small-scale safari Management/approach  In 2003, the Department of National Parks and Wildlife entered a 25-year public-private partnership with the NGO African Parks (AP) to rehabilitate the heavily poached reserve. Results  A focus on tourism development has increased visitation, employment, and revenue. Majete’s visitor numbers grew from zero in 2003 to 8,000 in 2016, which generated US$400,000 in gross revenue. AP has reintroduced wildlife, including lions, and added fencing and patrols. Private operator Robin Pope Safaris, winner of the 2011 Responsible Tourism award from Virgin Holidays, opened a luxury safari lodge and has worked closely with local communities.63 Conservation and anti-poaching efforts have led to such an increase in elephant population that hundreds of elephants were relocated to another national park in 2017.64 In addition, maximum exposure pr health care and education have improved in the area. AP has now taken over management of two other national parks in Malawi (Liwonde National Park and Nkhotakota Wildlife Reserve). Key success factors  Having previously managed other national parks in Africa, AP brought financial resources and know-how to Majete and was committed to working with local communities and restocking wildlife. Challenges and limitations  The partnership arrangement seems to be working well, but the increased numbers of wildlife have impacted local communities who must share land and resources with them. The mass elephant relocation was meant to relieve some of that pressure.65 Sources: African Parks, “Largest Elephant Translocation in History Concludes in Malawi” (press release), August 2, 2017, https://500elephants.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/500-Elephants_August-2-2017_Press-Release_FINAL-FOR -DISTRIBUTION.pdf; African Parks, African Parks 2016 Annual Report: Impact Defined, https://www.african-parks .org/sites/default/files/uploads/resources/2017-05/2016_African_Parks_Annual_Report_Impact_Defined.pdf.  Community-Private Partnerships Community-private partnerships often result in win-win situations. The community provides labor, land, and experiences for guests, and the private- sector partner brings finance and access to the market. These types of partnerships work well when the parties maintain an active relationship and when the community has the know-how to participate in the enterprise. CASE STUDY Sanctuary at Ol Lentille, Laikipia   Tourism-Conservation Enterprise   Location  Kenya   Size  40,000 acres •   Types of wildlife  Elephants, wild dogs, zebras, leopards, and birds Ownership  Not a protected area, Laikipia is a private safari lodge. A group ranch (a group of community members who hold joint land title) owns the land and lodges, and the private investor Regenenis owns movable assets. Type and scale of tourism  High-end, small-scale tourism in a private-community conservancy Management/approach  The safari lodge is a tourism-conservation enterprise (TCE), a partnership formed between community landowners and a private investor who operates the lodge. The construction of the 16-bed Sanctuary lodge was funded by a private investor and donors. The Kijabe Group Ranch signed a 25-year management agreement with Regenesis, who manages the lodge and the 7,050-hectare conservation area. In return, the community receives a fixed-rights fee, as well as bed-night and conservation fees. The lodge also employs a number of community members. Results  The community receives US$20,000–30,000 a year in lodge fees, plus a further US$250,000 in education, health, and conservation benefits, including salaries for schoolteachers and health workers. Women’s roles are gradually improving due to linkages with other communities through women’s groups and enhanced financial status. Vegetation is recovering in the conservation area with an increase in mammals, such as elephants, zebras, and wild dogs. Key success factors  African Wildlife Foundation (AWF) provided capacity building: familiarization tours for community leaders to other regions to learn about TCEs; training for women’s groups in bead making, and savings and money management; and information on microfinance and financial management. Challenges and limitations  Occupancy rate is very low, at 30%. A recent drought has led to illegal grazing and reduced animal sightings. Tensions over benefits have arisen within the community and with the neighboring community.66 Source: R. W. Nthiga, R. Van der Duim, I. J. Visseren-Hamakers, and M. Lamers, “Tourism-Conservation Enterprises for Community Livelihoods and Biodiversity Conservation in Kenya,” Development Southern Africa 32, no. 3 (2015): 407–423. 39 Public-Private-Community Partnerships Public-private-community partnerships work well in situations in which the community may not be prepared to interact directly with the private-sector investor, or in which the land is owned by the government and managed by the community. CASE STUDY Namibia   Communal Conservancies   Location  Namibia   Size  162,030 km2 •   Types of wildlife  Lions, gazelles, elephants, and rhinos Ownership  Over the past two decades, rural communities have formed 82 communal conservancies (38 of which are directly involved in tourism activities), 32 community forests, and a community association living within national park boundaries. Together, these endeavors cover almost 20% of the land in Namibia and empower 10% of Namibian population as conservation stewards. Type and scale of tourism  Lodges in these conservancies range from joint ventures wholly owned by conservancies to those owned by investors with operating agreements with conservancies. Also, a variety of community tourism enterprises, owned and operated by local communities, offer authentic visitor experiences, such as living museums, craft centers, and campsites. At the end of 2016, 53 joint-venture agreements had been signed, of which most are still in operation. Conservancies have also been awarded high-end tourism concessions in national parks and concession areas, contributing to the increase in lodges. Management/approach  Joint-venture partnerships are formed between conservancies and private-sector investors. A typical joint-venture agreement is a lodge or a simple land lease payment. A private investor (individual or corporate) builds a lodge within a conservancy. In return, the conservancy provides eco-services, such as game guards, which ensure the maintenance of wildlife. The investor will receive a financial return on the investment, because visitors come to see the wildlife. The conservancy receives a negotiated percentage of the profits, and conservancy members are employed at the lodge. 40 Results  The lodges and luxury tented camps in Namibian communal conservancies are among the top-rated eco-lodges in the world. Not only does this type of venture bring jobs and employment, but also it empowers people to develop skills of negotiating with private investors and managing large sums of money. From the beginning of 1990 to the end of 2016, community conservation contributed an estimated N$5.98 billion (over US$482 million) to Namibia’s net national income. During 2016, community conservation generated over N$111 million (nearly US$9 million) in returns for local communities, and it facilitated 5,147 jobs. A total of 57 conservancies hosted 164 enterprises based on natural resources and community conservation, which supported wildlife recovery and environmental restoration. Between 1995 and 2016, Namibia’s elephant population grew from around 7,500 to about 22,800.67 Key success factors  Innovative legislation gave use and management rights over wildlife and other resources to local communities (as opposed ingehogenbijd, Shutterstock.com to local governments), which helped communities self-organize into communal conservancies. This decentralization of authority legally empowers the rural communities with responsibility over natural resources and opportunities to benefit from these resources. The participatory approach to management of natural resources also improves decision making and good governance through partnerships and stakeholder engagement. Challenges and limitations  Due to the rise in wildlife population numbers, human- wildlife conflict has increased. Additionally, drought has forced people to move into areas previously reserved by conservancies for wildlife. Rising threats from commercial poaching and trafficking also need to be combated. Other challenges include lack of experience in managing finances and high levies imposed by the Ministry of Lands and Resettlement, which make joint- venture lodges less viable. Sources: Namibian Association of CBNRM Support Organisations (NACSO), www.nacso.org.na; NACSO, The State of Community Conservation in Namibia: A Review of Communal Conservancies, Community Forests, and Other CBNRM Initiatives (annual report), 2016, http://www.nacso.org .na/sites/default/files/State%20of%20Community%20Conservation%20book%20web.pdf. 41 Community-Owned-and-Run Enterprises Community-owned-and-run enterprises are the least common type of wildlife tourism model, but they can be highly worthwhile for host communities if efforts are made to retain the majority of benefits within the community. A review of 212 community-based tourism enterprises in Southern Africa found that most were small-budget accommodations, such as bed-and-breakfasts and campsites with one to ten spaces. A majority (55%) of enterprises reported receiving support from a third party, such as an NGO or destination management organization (DMO). To ensure commercial viability, more business training and planning as well as market research are needed.68 The key challenges for community-owned wildlife tourism businesses are finance, business skills, and access to the market. The case study on Uganda’s Bwindi Impenetrable National Park highlights these issues. At Bwindi Impenetrable National Park. travel stock, shutterstock.com CASE STUDY Bwindi Impenetrable National Park (BINP)  Community-Owned Lodging   Location  Uganda   Size  331 km2 •   Type of wildlife  Mountain gorillas Ownership  A project owned by community members in the Mukono Parish and supported by the Uganda Wildlife Authority, International Gorilla Conservation Programme, USAID, and other donors. Type and scale of tourism  Community-based lodge and small-scale activities Management/approach  The Buhoma-Mukono Community Development Association manages profits and governs the tourism products, including the community-based lodge, a village trail (a series of sites within the community featuring craft shops, cooking demonstrations, dances, and more), a campsite, GUDKOV ANDREY, Shutterstock.com a shop, and a bar. Profits are reinvested into the business for expansion and used to pay for consultancies, such as training for lodge employees and guides. Revenue also supports community projects and sets up microfinance establishments that aid women and youth. Results  This project is competing well as an alternative to high-end lodges nearby. Attitudes toward conservation have improved, and gorilla populations have increased. The project has stimulated local employment, generated income, provided local social services, and funded other development projects. Women represent 70% of employees on the village trail. More than 92% of the funds generated between 1998 and 2009 (a total of US$573,000) was spent locally on salaries, projects, operations, and maintenance. Key success factors  The project had donor support, direct access to the market (with a prime location at the entrance to the BINP), personnel with marketing and sales experience, and good online presence to reach a global audience. Challenges and limitations  While the project directly employs around 70 people and supports part-time jobs, it does not generate enough benefits to improve the livelihoods of the entire parish (a population of over 5,000). Managing expectations and spreading the benefits are also challenges. Source: W. M. Ahebwa and René Van der Duim, “Conservation, Livelihoods, and Tourism: A Case Study of the Buhoma-Mukono Community-Based Tourism Project in Uganda,” Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 31, no. 3 (2013): 96–114. 44 Recommendations and Next Steps Sustainable wildlife tourism should be considered as a   potential tool for development and conservation efforts, but it   is not appropriate for all protected areas or local communities. It requires a long-term commitment and careful management. Global case studies and research reveal that location, accessibility, market demand, marketing, presence of infrastructure, finance, and governance, as well as the costs and benefits to the wildlife, environment, and communities, are major considerations. Enabling Conditions To be successful, sustainable wildlife tourism requires the right enabling conditions. Private-sector involvement is often a critical success factor for granting communities access to markets and finance. Communities often need partners who can provide the capital and expertise to help develop their natural assets (land and/or wildlife) into marketable tourism experiences. However, investors face questions of risk, financial viability, and management of community relations. In the publication Effective Community Based Tourism: A Best Practice Manual, June 2010, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation cited key enabling conditions: ✓ The community is already well-organized and cohesive. ✓ Community members (men, women, and youth) are widely involved in decision-making processes and financial management of the tourism venture. ✓ Land ownership and other resource issues are clear and well-defined. guennnterguni, iStock ✓ There is a bottom-up desire in the community for tourism. ✓ Decisions are made by the community based on informed choice and knowledge of impacts, options, risk, and outcomes. 45 ✓ Community engagement and participation levels are high. ✓ Good marketing mechanisms support the activity. ✓ A strong plan for expansion and/or to limit visitor numbers, to avoid adverse effects, exists. ✓ Strong partnerships with NGOs, government bodies, and other supporters have been established. ✓ Tourism is part of a broader community-development strategy. ✓ Good infrastructure to access the product exists. ✓ Tourism is linked to visitor education, and clear zoning of visitor and non-visitor areas is in place.69 In 2014, the World Bank and World Wildlife Fund produced Getting Financed: 9 Tips for Community Joint Ventures in Tourism, a booklet that discusses these points: 1 Choose a marketable place or idea. 2 Invest in a competitive enabling environment. 3 Strengthen governance structures. 4 Draw up equitable contracts. 5 Get creative about collateral. 6 Professionalize business operations. 7 Develop compelling proposals. 8 Improve sector data. 9 Maintain a community support system.70 46 Management Considerations 1 When developing wildlife tourism, the Assessment and strengths and historic roles of stakeholders Visioning should be considered. Public authorities have been managing protected areas, regulations, and entrance fees; private- 2 sector businesses have been efficiently Awareness Raising and Capacity Building running tourism operations; and communities have coexisted with wildlife and collaborated with law enforcement to address poaching and supporting tourism 3 Fostering and operations. Getting the right balance is Managing Growth site-specific, and supply and demand must be kept in mind. Management of sustainable wildlife Managers’ Considerations tourism is not easy. The three steps shown to Engage Communities in Community-Based Tourism at the right offer some considerations for project managers. Step 1: Assessment and Visioning Before developing sustainable wildlife tourism, an assessment of demand, competition, community assets, and wildlife supply is needed to ensure market viability. Where will tourists come from, how will they get there, what will their expectations be, and what do competitors offer? Undertaking an initial supply assessment is also important to establish the quality of assets (wildlife, landscapes, views) and what facilities and services are available and how they match those of the competition. What is the unique selling point of the park or wildlife area? Last, the community’s capacity for tourism must be determined. Are financial resources and entrepreneurs obtainable? Does the community have or can it develop capacity to participate in and benefit from tourism? 47 A sustainable wildlife tourism vision and strategy should be conducted and, when possible, be community-led. This exercise will require knowledge of tourism and conservation operations, so facilitation might be necessary. The vision should answer the questions “What do we want our future to look like? What are our communities’ aspirations?” The strategy should be the road map for how to get there. Stakeholders may include community representatives, knowledgeable tourism operators, local entrepreneurs, relevant NGOs, local authorities, protected-area managers, and other conservation agencies (see Appendix 1 for a list of stakeholders to consult).71 In creating a future vision, expectations need to be carefully managed to avoid conflict, as tourism may take years to develop and market, and returns may not come quickly.72 Canopy trail in Bukit Lawang orangutan viewing center, Indonesia. broewnis photo, shutterstock.com Sony Herdiana, shutterstock.com Step 2: Awareness Raising and Capacity Building Develop a capacity-building plan to help the community participate in and/or benefit from wildlife tourism. This effort might involve raising awareness about entrepreneurship opportunities; advising how to engage with and participate in community efforts and how to manage shared community revenue through a community trust; helping to establish linkages to the private sector; and building marketing outreach. Skills in marketing, finance, visitor service, guiding, and business development are crucial, as are strong ties to the private sector. These fundamentals may be challenging in communities that are relatively isolated and do not have experience in the private sector or tourism operations. Integrating women into management from the beginning is also vital. Tourism is one of the few sectors in which women have a comparative advantage, so getting women into management and decision-making roles can have a knock-on effect on other industries. Building capacity through a fully diverse workforce and entrepreneurship training helps create better inclusion. Step 3: Fostering and Managing Growth If infrastructure, marketing, and demand improve rapidly, a venture runs the risk of overtourism. When a park becomes too popular or numbers become difficult to handle, managers need to be prepared to reduce marketing spending, increase entrance fees, and consider limits on new accommodation permits. It is essential not to wait until crowding occurs before building 49 consensus on adaptive management techniques or limits of acceptable change for different areas and activities (see page 23 for information on carrying capacity). Regular monitoring can help identify problems before they seem severe. If roads are upgraded or accommodations increased, proactively managing growth through such techniques as dispersion, pricing, and infrastructure controls gain importance. The most successful projects balance fair benefits for communities with controlled growth of tourism—an outcome that is most likely when all the main stakeholders are involved and agree on limits to growth. Limits of acceptable change, growth management, and adaptive management—which focus on participatory monitoring, learning, and modifying—are more flexible management tools. Closing Note Wildlife tourism is one way to drive revenue to parks and the communities who depend on these resources, relieving some of the economic and development pressures. It is not a magic solution. It requires sustained time, funds, engagement, and enterprise skills in collaboration with wide-ranging partners with diverse interests. Much is still to be learned about what works and why for sustainable wildlife tourism, and how to effectively engage communities and manage growth. Critical gaps in knowledge include the long-term effects of various forms of wildlife tourism on animals and protected areas, the net economic impact of wildlife tourism for communities and how to maximize it, the most effective ways to control and limit wildlife tourism, comparisons on a global level of the efficacy of community-based tourism models, and how best to build the capacity of communities in community-based tourism. This report aims to identify key issues and examples and to provide a foundation for discussion and further research. Additional study, exchange bee-eater, shutterstock.com of knowledge, and continued collaboration are needed to collect and share lessons learned and best practices. Such information may then be leveraged to increase the use of sustainable wildlife tourism as a preferred land-use choice. 50 51 Appendix 1  Stakeholders Stakeholders involved in wildlife tourism include: • Governments (national, state, regional, • NGOs and donor agencies local authorities) • Academics and the scientific community • Protected-area, national park, and wildlife • Tourists (domestic and international) refuge administrators/managers • Traditional and religious leaders • Private-sector tourism suppliers and investors • Other service providers indirectly involved • Tourism planning and promotion in supporting tourism operations, including organizations guides • Communities Some of the principal roles, goals, and challenges of these groups are shown in the table below. Although not all goals are mutually compatible, finding win-win solutions is fundamental to the success of wildlife tourism. Stakeholders’ Roles and Goals in Wildlife Tourism Stakeholder Possible roles in wildlife tourism Expected primary goals Key challenges Governments Administer and provide funding to Financial sustainability Managing growth (national, protected areas state, regional, Positive tourism and Attracting sustainable local) Establish laws to regulate benefit conservation outcomes private-sector investment sharing and safeguard the resource and involvement Increased visitor numbers Enable conditions for tourism, and expenditure Executing effective marketing including investments, zoning, and promotion infrastructure, and community- Ensuring a good visitor managed areas experience Protected-area Protect wildlife and land Ecological sustainability Managing growth managers* of tourism activities Conserve genetic diversity Protecting wildlife from Positive conservation poachers Liaise with local communities outcomes Engaging with local Issue permits to visitors and guides Productive community communities engagement Attracting investment These are often part of governments (i.e., a wildlife agency within the tourism or forest department). In some cases, they have * been “outsourced” to an NGO through a public-private partnership (i.e., African Parks, Wildlife Conservation Society, etc.). 52 Stakeholder Possible roles in wildlife tourism Expected primary goals Key challenges Private-sector Develop and manage tourism Sustained growth of Engaging with government tourism operations under agreements, leases, wildlife tourism suppliers and Negotiating land tenure or concessions investors Profitable operations and leasing Market, sell, and deliver on wildlife Navigating permits and tourism experiences regulations Managing human resources Tourism Market and promote tourism Sustained growth of Developing proper tourism planning and tourism infrastructure promotion Provide information to visitors and organizations tourism stakeholders Increased visitor numbers Attracting target visitors and expenditure through marketing and Facilitate access promotion Collaborate with the public and Finding investors private sectors Communities Own or manage land Benefits to the Learning the business of community—health and tourism Be wildlife stewards education Protecting communities Use land sustainably Revenue from livelihood from outside interference Operate wildlife tours and lodges opportunities Ensuring fair negotiations Facilitate visits Minimal negative social and just share of benefits consequences Minimal disruption of local uses of wildlife NGOs Manage or co-manage protected Minimal threats to Committing the time needed areas and/or tour operators wildlife conservation to support communities and/or welfare Specialize in community engagement Funding to carry out programs and poverty alleviation Support of conservation Negotiating with government and/or development goals Academics   Foster the conservation of species Study human-wildlife Gathering time-series data and scientists interaction Funding for research Tourists Pay to visit protected areas and Close animal encounters Finding reliable information, encounter wildlife traveling to the destination, High value for money and securing permits and Unique experiences guides Seeing the wildlife Source: Adapted by authors from K. Higginbottom, ed., Wildlife Tourism: Impacts, Management and Planning (Altona, Australia: Common Ground Publishing and Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism, 2004). 53 Appendix 2 Additional Resources Tourism and Development and Poverty Alleviation—Practical Steps for Destinations. http://www.e-unwto.org/doi/pdf ­ International Finance Corporation. 2017. /10.18111/9789284413430. Tourism Counts for Twenty Reasons Sustainable ­ This manual gives organizations and individuals Development. Washington, DC: World Bank working in tourism destinations the tools to Group. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org ­ better support poverty alleviation and manage /handle/10986/28388. tourism to deliver more benefits to disadvan- Drawing on the five pillars of sustainable tourism taged communities. It is divided into three parts from the United Nations World Tourism Orga- of the project cycle: Analysis/Planning, Action, nization (UNWTO), this paper identifies 20 and Assessment. reasons that sustainable tourism should be con- ­ ­ evelop­ sidered a d ment tool, supported with evi- dence and case studies from around the globe. Wildlife and Wildlife Tourism International Labour Organization (ILO). 2013. United Nations Environment Programme kit on Poverty Training Package for the Tool­ (UNEP)/CMS. 2006. Wildlife Watching and Reduction through Tourism. http://www.ilo.org Tourism: A Study on the Benefits and Risks of a ­ /sector/Resources/training-materials/WCMS Fast Growing Tourism Activity and Its Impacts _218322/lang--en/index.htm. on Species. http://www.cms.int/sites/default/files The ILO provides a toolkit on poverty reduction /document/ScC14_Inf_08_Wildlife_Watching through tourism as well as a helpful package to _E_0.pdf. prepare trainers to conduct workshops on the This report, published by UNEP and the Secre- toolkit. tariat of the Convention on the Conservation United Nations World Tourism Organization of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS), (UNWTO). 2013. Sustainable Tourism for considers the socio­economic and environmental derived from wildlife-­ benefits that can be ­ ­ Development. http://www.e-unwto.org/doi/pdf watching tourism, i­ncluding case studies from /10.18111/9789284415496. Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, the United States, This publication provides guidance on imple- Australia, Indonesia, and Tanzania. menting sustainable tourism interventions. It begins with a guidance note on the basics of sus- United Nations World Tourism Organization tainable tourism, followed by a methodology for (UNWTO). 2015. Towards Measuring the assessing the approach to sustainable tourism Economic Value of Wildlife Watching Tourism by identifying needs and gaps. The final section examines the relationship between tourism and ­ frica—Briefing Paper. https://sustainable in A development. development.un.org/content/documents /1882unwtowildlifepaper.pdf. United Nations World Tourism Organization This paper is a first step by UNWTO toward a (UNWTO) and Netherlands Development systematic measurement of the economic value Organization (SNV). 2010. Manual on Tourism ­ of wildlife tourism in Africa, building on a survey 54 Red Ivory, shutterstock.com of 8 African tourism and conservation awareness of the opportunities for CBT as a authorities from 31 countries, as well as 145 vehicle for social, economic, and environmental international and African-based tour operators. development, drawing from case-study examples Survey results and case studies are included. of best practice. World Bank Group. 2016. Analysis of Spenceley, A., A. Rylance, S. Nanabhay, and International Funding to Tackle Illegal H. van der Watt. 2016. Operational Guidelines Wildlife Trade. Washington, DC: World Bank for Community-Based Tourism in South Group. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org Africa. Republic of South Africa: Department /handle/10986/25340. ­ ourism. https://annaspenceley.wordpress of T The World Bank’s 2016 report was an effort to .com/2017/05/23/operational-guidelines-for fill the knowledge gap in conservation funding. -community-based-tourism-in-south-africa/. It assesses the current state of international This guide gives a step-by-step approach for donor funding to combat illegal wildlife trade establishing and operating commercially viable and to identify trends in investment in this community-based tourism ventures in South sector in Africa and Asia since 2010. Africa, in both urban and rural areas. The guide ­ also provides examples of good practice; high- lights the challenges to community-based tourism; Community-Based Tourism and provides links to more detailed resources. Asker, S., L. Boronyak, N. Carrard, and WWF International. 2001. Guidelines for M. Paddon. 2010. Effective Community Based Community-Based Ecotourism Development. Tourism: A Best Practice Manual, June 2010. http://www.eldis.org/document/A10684. Sydney, Australia: Asia-Pacific Economic ­ WWF identifies principles and issues associated Cooperation (APEC). http://publications.apec with considering whether ecotourism is an .org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1037. appropriate option; planning ecotourism This manual discusses the issues to be with communities and other stakeholders; addressed when developing community-based developing viable community-based ecotourism tourism (CBT) activities managed by local projects; and strengthening benefits to the communities in rural areas. It aims to increase community and the environment. 55 Eric Isslee, shutterstock.com Tourism Financing in Protected Areas Concessions for Protected Areas: Generating Sustainable Revenues for Conservation and Duffus, D. A., and P. Dearden. 1990. Development. Report to the Secretariat of the “Non-Consumptive Wildlife-Oriented Convention on Biological Diversity and IUCN. Recreation: A Conceptual Framework.” https://www.cbd.int/tourism/doc/tourism Biological Conservation 53: 213–231. -partnerships-protected-areas-web.pdf. This paper explores a framework that integrates This report to the Secretariat of the Convention the major components of non-consumptive on Biological Diversity and IUCN sets wildlife recreation and connects research guidelines that aim to assist protected-area areas in ecology, animal behaviors, recreation, opment and use of authorities in the devel­ tourism, and existing wildlife management tourism partnerships and concessioning. These ­ institutions. guidelines provide information to help achieve Font, X., J. Cochrane, and R. Tapper. 2004. sustainable tourism operations, bring benefits to local populations, and avoid or mitigate negative Pay per Nature View: Understanding Tourism impacts. The report provides further resources Revenues for Effective Management Plans. for choosing partnership types, sources of Leeds, U.K.: Leeds Metropolitan University. finance, processes, and contract management. http://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net /downloads/paypernatureviewphotos.pdf. United Nations Development Programme. 2014. This paper discusses different mechanisms for Tourism Concessions in Protected Natural Areas: financing protected areas through tourism and Guidelines for Managers. https://www.cbd.int also examines the extent to which protected /financial/privatesector/undp-tourismconces areas should raise funds from tourism. sions.pdf. This extensive publication assists protected-area Spenceley, A., S. Snyman, and P. Eagles. 2017. managers to plan for, allocate, and manage Guidelines for Tourism Partnerships and concession activities to maximize the benefits of 56 working with the private sector. Numerous case Philippine Commission on Women. 2013. studies are included from the United States, Gender-Responsive Toolkit on Eco­ tourism Australia, New Zealand, Namibia, Mozambique, Management and Planning. Quezon City, Ecuador, and Mongolia. Philippines. http://library.pcw.gov.ph/sites World Bank and World Wildlife Fund. 2014. /default/files/gender_responsive_toolkit Getting Financed: 9 Tips for Community Joint _ecotourism.pdf. Ventures in Tourism. https://openknowledge. This toolkit provides information to local worldbank.org/handle/10986/21698. government units and protected-area managers This guide provides tips to reduce risk and for preparing and developing ecotourism improve joint venture access for stakeholders, management plans and ensuring that including governments, the private sector, ecotourism strategies are gender-responsive. communities, banks, and NGOs. WBG Africa Gender Innovation Lab. World Bank Group. 2016. An Introduction to http://www.worldbank.org/en/programs Tourism Concessioning: 14 Characteristics of /africa-gender-innovation-lab. Successful Programs. http://documents.worldbank This online portal offers evaluations of .org/curated/en/459431467995814879/pdf/105316 interventions on the gender gap in Sub- Saharan Africa. -WP-PUBLIC-Tourism-Toolkit-19-4-16.pdf. This short guide provides an overview of WBG Female Entrepreneurship Resource tourism concessioning in protected areas to Point. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXT those new to tourism, protected areas, and/or GENDER/Resources/FemaleEntrepreneurship concessioning. ResourcePoint041113.pdf. This resource provides guidelines on best Women practices and tools for evaluating and integrating gender dimensions in private-sector International Finance Corporation. 2017. development and entrepreneurship promotion Women and Tourism: Designing for Inclusion. programs, as well as case studies. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. https:// WBG Gender Data Portal. openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986 http://datatopics.worldbank.org/gender/. /28535. This website offers up-to-date, cross- This preparatory World Bank paper on tourism country data useful for benchmarking. and gender explains the rationale for integrating a gender lens into tourism development WBG Women, Business, and the Law: projects. It includes a set of resources designed Getting to Equal. http://wbl.worldbank.org to help development professionals and project /data/visualization. managers get started and find necessary data. This online portal tracks discriminatory laws This paper paves the way for more in-depth against women regarding employment; property operational research and data collection on ownership; agency; gender-based violence; and what works for empowering women in the access to credit, justice, and political and judicial tourism sector. representation. 57 Notes 1. TIES (The International Ecotourism Society), TIES Over- 13. WTTC, The Comparative Economic Impact of Travel view, 1990, http://www.ecotourism.org/ties-overview. & Tourism. 2. R. Tappard, Wildlife Watching and Tourism; A Study on 14. International Labour Organization (ILO), Sectorial Poli- the Benefits and Risks of a Fast Growing Tourism Activ- cies Department Fact Sheet: Tourism, http://www.ilo ity and Its Impact on Species (Bonn, Germany: UNEP/ .org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_dialogue/---sector CMS Convention on Migratory Species and TUI, 2006), /documents/publication/wcms_544196.pdf. http://www.cms.int/sites/default/files/document/ScC14 15. D. Bouchart, UNESCO Crafts/Tourism Index, 2004, _Inf_08_Wildlife_Watching_E_0.pdf. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001362 3. K. Higginbottom, ed., Wildlife Tourism: Impacts, Man- /136238eo.pdf. agement and Planning (Altona, Australia: Common 16. WTTC, The Comparative Economic Impact of Travel Ground Publishing and Cooperative Research Centre for & Tourism. Sustainable Tourism, 2004). 17. United Nations World Tourism Organization ­ (UNWTO), 4. A. Spenceley, S. Snyman, and P. Eagles, Guidelines for Sustainable Tourism for Development, 2013, http:// Tourism Partnerships and Concessions for Protected www.e-unwto.org/doi/pdf/10.18111/9789284415496. Areas: Generating Sustainable Revenues for Conservation 18. M. Hantow, Aid to Artisans: Building Profitable and Development, Report to the Secretariat of Craft Businesses: Notes from the Field, no. 4 (USAID/ the Convention on Biological Diversity and IUCN, EGAT/EG, 2009), http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs https://www.cbd.int/tourism/doc/tourism-partnerships /Pnadp427.pdf. -protected-areas-web.pdf. 19. United Nations World Tourism Organization 5. R. W. Nthiga, R. Van der Duim, I. J. Visseren-Hamakers, (UNWTO), “On the International Day for Biological ­ and M. Lamers, “Tourism-Conservation Enterprises for Diversity UNWTO Announces a Training on Tourism Community Livelihoods and Biodiversity Conservation and Biodiversity in West and Central Africa” (press in Kenya,” Development Southern Africa 32 no. 3 (2015): release), 2017, http://media.unwto.org/press-release 407–423; J. Saarinen, “Local Tourism Awareness: Com- /2017-05-22/international-day-biological-diversity munity Views in Katutura and King Nehale Conservancy, -unwto-announces-training-tourism-and. Namibia,” Development Southern Africa 27 no. 5 (2010): 20. Y. Moyini and B. Uwimbabazi, Final Draft Analysis 713–724. of the Economic Significance of Gorilla Tourism in 6. Grootberg Lodge, “Conservancy: A Success Story in Uganda (Rwanda: International Gorilla Conservation Community Based Conservation,” https://grootberg.com Programme, n.d.), http://www.igcp.org/wp-content /conservancy/. /themes/igcp/docs/pdf/MoyiniUganda.pdf. 7. Nthiga et al., “Tourism-Conservation Enterprises.” 21. E. Günlü, K. Yağcı, and I. Pırnar, “Preserving Cultural 8. Northern Rangelands Trust, “AdventureWORKS, ” http:// Heritage and Possible Impacts on Regional Development: www.nrt-kenya.org/tourism/. The Case of Izmir Dokuz Eylül University,” International 9. B. Boonabaana, “Negotiating Gender and Tourism Work: Journal of Emerging and Transitioning Economies 2 Women’s Lived Experiences in Uganda,” Tourism and (2009): 213–229, http://www.regionalstudies Hospitality Research 14, nos. 1–2 (2014). .org/uploads/networks/documents/tourism-regional 10. Conservation Wildlands Trust, “Conservation Wildlands -development-and-public-policy/gunlu.pdf. Trust” (n.d.), Conservationwildlands.org. 22. United Nations World Tourism Organization 11. World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC), The Compar- (UNWTO), Tourism and Intangible Cultural Heritage ­ ative Economic Impact of Travel & Tourism, 2012, https:// (Madrid, Spain: UNWTO, 2012), http://www.e-unwto www.wttc.org/-/media/files/reports/benchmark .org/doi/book/10.18111/9789284414796. %20reports/the_comparative_economic_impact_of 23. United Nations World Tourism Organization ­ (UNWTO) _travel__tourism.pdf . and the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and 12. United Nations World Tourism Organization the Empowerment of Women (UN Women), Global (UNWTO), World Tourism Barometer 15 (June 2017). Report on Women in Tourism 2010: Preliminary Findings, 58 2011, http://ethics.unwto.org/sites/all/files/docpdf on Trends in Nature-Based Tourism,” PLOS Biology 7, /folletoglobarlreport.pdf. no. 6 (2009): e1000144. 24. T. Baum, International Perspectives on Women and 35. World Travel & Tourism Council, Travel & Tourism Work in Hotels, Catering and Tourism (Working Paper) Global Economic Impact & Issues 2017, https://www (Geneva, Switzerland: International Labour Organiza- /wttc/org/-/media/files/reports/economic-impact tion, 2013), http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public -research/2017-documents/global-economic-impact /@dgreports/@gender/documents/publication/wcms -and-issues-2017.pdf. _209867.pdf. 36. World Bank, Marine Protected Areas (% of Territorial 25. United Nations World Tourism Organization Waters), 2014, https://data.worldbank.org. ­ (UNWTO), Tourism in Small Island Developing States 37. Newsome et al., Natural Area Tourism. (SIDS): Building a More Sustainable Future for the 38. International Union for Conservation of Nature People of Islands, 2014, http://cf.cdn.unwto.org/sites and Natural Resources (IUCN), The IUCN Red List of /all/files/docpdf/tourisminsids.pdf. Threatened Species: Panthera tigris, 2017, http://www 26. D. Newsome, S. A. Moore, and R. K. Dowling, Natural .iucnredlist.org/details/summary/15955/0. Area Tourism: Ecology, Impacts and Management, 2nd 39. R. Buckley, “Tiger Tourism: Critical Issues, General ed. (Bristol, U.K.: Channel View Publications, 2013). Lessons,” Tourism Recreation Research 38, no. 1 (2013): 27. A. Balmford et al., “Walk on the Wild Side: Estimating 101–103. the Global Magnitude of Visits to Protected Areas,”  40. World Wildlife Fund (WWF), “Global Wild Tiger Popula- PLOS Biology 13, no. 2 (2015): e1002074, http://www tion Increases, but Still a Long Way to Go,” 2016, http:// .cam.ac.uk/research/news/worlds-protected-natural www.wwfindia.org/?15361/Global-wild-tiger -areas-receive-eight-billion-visits-a-year. -population-increases. 28. The Futures Company and American Express, American 41. Centre for Ecological Services Management, Economic Express Travel—Future Travel Trends (PowerPoint pre- Valuation of Tiger Reserves in India—A Value+ ­ Approach sentation), July 9, 2015. (Bhopal, India: Indian Institute of Forest Management, 29. Brand USA, Market Profiles, 2015, https://www.the 2015), http://21tiger.zslsites.org/assets/21tiger/Resources brandusa.com/system/files/programs/documents /NTCA_Report2015.pdf. /FY15BP_MarketProfiles_01.pdf. 42. Pench Tiger Reserve, Madhya Pradesh, “Visiting infor- 30. C. Cullinane Thomas and L. Kootz, 2016 National Park mation,” http://www.penchtiger.co.in/visiting_informa Visitor Spending Effects: Economic Contributions to ­ Local tion.html. Communities, States, and the Nation, Natural R ­ esource 43. K. K. Zander et al., “Wild and Valuable? Tourist Values Report NPS/NRSS/EQD/NRR—2017/1421 (Fort Collins, for Orang-utan Conservation in Sarawak,” Conservation CO: National Park Service, 2017), https://www.nps.gov and Society 12, no. 1 (2014): 27. /nature/customcf/NPS_Data_Visualization/docs/2016 44. C. R. Thouless et al., African Elephant Status Report _VSE.pdf. 2016: Update from the African Elephant Database 31. United Nations World Tourism Organization (Gland, Switzerland: IUCN, 2016), https://portals.iucn ­ (UNWTO), Towards Measuring the Economic Value .org/library/sites/library/files/documents/SSC-OP-060 of Wildlife Watching Tourism in Africa—Briefing Paper, _A.pdf. 2015, http://cf.cdn.unwto.org/sites/all/files/docpdf­­ 45. R. Naidoo et al., “Estimating Economic Losses to Tour- /unwtowildlifepaper.pdf. ism in Africa from the Illegal Killing of Elephants,” 32. K. K. Karanth and R. DeFries, “Nature-Based Nature Communications 7 (2016): 13379, doi: 10.1038 Tourism in Indian Protected Areas: New Challenges /ncomms13379. for Park Management,” Conservation Letters 4 (2010): 46. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Nat- 137–149. ural Resources (IUCN), The IUCN Red List of Threatened 33. K. K. Karanth, R. DeFries, A. Srivathsa, and V. Sankara- Species: Gorilla beringei, 2017, http://www.iucnredlist man, “Wildlife Tourists in India’s Emerging Economy: .org/details/39994/0. Potential for a Conservation Constituency?,” Oryx 46, 47. New York Times, “Trekking with the Gorillas of Rwanda,” no. 3 (2012): 382–390. October 25, 2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/25 34. A. Balmford, J. Beresford, J. Green, R. Naidoo, /travel/safari-gorillas-rwanda.html?_r=0. M. Walpole, and A. Manica, “A Global Perspective 48. Rwanda Development Board, “Increase of Gorilla 59 Permit Tariffs” (press release), 2017, http://www.rwanda 60. World Bank Group, An Introduction to Tourism Conces- tourism.com/news/19-news/110-increase-of-gorilla sioning. -permit-tariffs. 61. Ibid. 49. X. Font, J. Cochrane, and R. Tapper, Pay per Nature 62. Spenceley et al., Guidelines for Tourism Partnerships and View: Understanding Tourism Revenues for Effective Concessions for Protected Areas. Management Plans (Leeds, U.K.: Leeds Metropolitan 63. N. Richardson, “Safari in Malawi: The Miracle of M­ ajete,” University, 2004), http://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront The Telegraph, 2013, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel .net/downloads/paypernatureviewphotos.pdf. /destinations/africa/malawi/articles/Safari-in-Malawi 50. A. Bruner, B. Kessy, J. Mnaya, J. Wakibara, and J. Mal- -the-miracle-of-Majete/. donado, Tourists’ Willingness to Pay to Visit Tanzania’s 64. S. Gibbens, “See What It Takes to Move 500 Elephants,” National Parks: A Contingent Valuation Study, Conser- National Geographic, 2017, http://www.nationalgeo vation Strategy Fund, 2015, http://conservation-strategy graphic.com/photography/proof/2017/07/500-elephants .org/sites/default/files/field-file/EN_discussion_paper -move-malawi-africa-video-spd/. _TANAPA.pdf. 65. African Parks, “Largest Elephant Translocation in His­ 51. F. Vellas, The Indirect Impact of Tourism: An Economic tory Concludes in Malawi” (press release), August 2, 2017, Analysis, 2011, http://t20.unwto.org/sites/all/files/pdf https://500elephants.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08 /111020-rapport_vellas_en.pdf. /500-Elephants_August-2-2017_Press-Release_FINAL 52. A. S. Pullin et al., Assessing the Effects of Terrestrial Pro- -FOR-DISTRIBUTION.pdf. tected Areas on Human Well-Being: A STAP Advisory 66. R . W. Nthiga, R. Van der Duim, I. J. Visseran-Hamakers, Document (Washington, DC: Global Environment and M. Lamers, “Tourism-Conservation Enterprises for Facility, 2014). ­ Community Livelihoods and Biodiversity Conservation 53. Newsome et al., Natural Area Tourism. in Kenya,” Development Southern Africa 32, no. 3 (2015): 54. Centre for Ecological Services Management, Economic 407–423. Valuation of Tiger Reserves in India. 67. Namibian Association of CBNRM Support Organisa- 55. A. Banerjee, “Is Wildlife Tourism Benefiting Indian tions (NACSO), The State of Community Conservation Protected Areas? A Survey,” Current Issues in Tourism ­ in Namibia: A Review of Communal Conservancies, 15, no. 3 (2012): 211–227, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080 Community Forests, and Other CBNRM Initiatives /13683500.2011.599367; Centre for Ecological Services (annual report), 2016, http://www.nacso.org.na/sites Management, Economic Valuation of Tiger Reserves /default/files/State%20of%20Community%20Conserva in India. tion%20book%20web.pdf. 56. Ibid. 68. A . Spenceley, “Local Impacts of Community-Based 57. World Bank Group, An Introduction to Tourism Con­ Tourism in Southern Africa,” in Responsible Tourism: cessioning: 14 Characteristics of Successful Programs, Critical Issues for Conservation and Development, ed. 2016, http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en A. Spenceley (London: Earthscan, 2008), 285–303. /459431467995814879/pdf/105316-WP-PUBLIC 69. S. Asker, L. Boronyak, N. Carrard, and M. Paddon, Effec- -Tourism-Toolkit-19-4-16.pdf. tive Community Based Tourism: A Best Practice Manual, 58. A. Spenceley, S. Snyman, and P. Eagles, Guidelines for June 2010 (Sydney, Australia: Asia-Pacific Economic Tourism Partnerships and Concessions for Protected Cooperation [APEC]), http://publications.apec.org Areas: Generating Sustainable Revenues for Conserva­ ­ - /publication-detail.php?pub_id=1037. tion and Development, Report to the Secretariat of the 70. World Bank and World Wildlife Fund, Getting ­ Financed: Convention on Biological Diversity and IUCN, 2017, 9 Tips for Community Joint Ventures in Tourism, 2014, https://www.cbd.int/tourism/doc/tourism-partnerships https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986 -protected-areas-web.pdf. /21698. 59. P. A. Lindsey et al., “Underperformance of African 71. R. Denman, Guidelines for Community-Based Ecotour- Protected Area Networks and the Case for New Con­ ism Development (report prepared for WWF), 2001, servation Models: Insights from Zambia,” PLOS ONE 9, http://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads no. 5 (2014): e94109, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal /guidelinesen.pdf. .pone.0094109. 72. Asker et al., Effective Community Based Tourism. 60 Visit us at: www.worldbank.org/global-wildlife-program www.theGEF.org Email us: Gwp-info@worldbankgroup.org Tourism@worldbankgroup.org Engage with us on Social Media: @WBG_Environment @WorldBankPSD @theGEF #tourism4dev #wildlife implementing Partners program steering committee Partners Supporting Sustainable Livelihoods through Wildlife Tourism