Planeta Forum

[planeta]

TOPIC: Developing Infrastructure for Sustainable Tourism
1. Rural infrastructure, transportation systems, sewage, water, and energy issues

MODERATOR: Oliver Hillel

SETTINGS: Active participants can reply to this topic

PARTICIPANTS:
http://www.planeta.com/ecotravel/tour/emerging.html#part

REFERENCE

Ecotourism Emerging Industry Forum (Nov 1-18, 2005)
http://www.planeta.com/ecotravel/tour/emerging.html

[oliver]

Hello, I am Oliver Hillel, tourism consultant from Puerto Princesa, Philippines. For the past 2 years, I've been the team leader of a sustainable tourism project for Northern Palawan, a beautiful destination with around 500 islands (for more information, please see www.sempnp.com). One of the recurrent themes I have had to deal with is the need for infrastructure as a stepping stone for ecotourism development - and under this term, I'd like to stick to the larger kind of facilities normally taken up by local governments or development agencies, such as roads, ports and airports, water, power, telecommunications, etc.

Although many ecotourism facilities today can operate practically independent of public services (using their own generators or solar panels, water wells or desalinators, private airports and satellite dishes), the investment requirements of this option limit products to high-end markets close to significant originating countries. In my experience, this is due not only to the high overhead necessary to cover the costs, but also to the logistics for maintenance and technical assistance needs to keep these high-tech resorts running. This, is turn, limits conservation and social development benefits. Most often, these solutions are not feasible for the local SMEs which are essential for ecotourism as a development option. This does not mean that these products are not sustainable or desirable - it just reduces the scope and political significance of ecotourism. For ecotourism to thrive and benefit parks on a larger scale, generate awareness of conservation needs and provide alternative livelihoods, local governments need to provide existing and potential investors with pretty much the same services than more traditional tourism destinations - don't you think so?

Some of the issues I'd like participants to share their experiences on include:
- Local governments in developing countries are normally unable to invest in all infrastructure needs upfront. Given today's technology, what are the minimal infrastructure needs local governments have to provide so that the private sector can start (or continue) investing? Which are the first bottlenecks they need to prioritize to attract investors to get established, or to expand their investments? For instance, nowadays private telecommunication companies can take care of secure Internet connections that allow travelers to pay with credit cards and use traveler's checks - so, at the end of the day, for ecotourism development, maybe land lines are not necessary... On the other hand, solar energy is still not economically feasible unless there is a measure of subsidies or technical assistance provided, so power supply is essential. Not 24 hour maybe... Is 12-hour daily supply enough?
- Sometimes, creative solutions can avoid large investments. In Palawan, for instance, a regular 4-wheel drive bus system on regular dirt roads (and relatively well kept bridges) could allow tourism arrivals to duplicate, avoiding the need to build million-dollar concrete roads. Often, a 1,000m compacted gravel airstrip and a landing apron allows 50- or 70-seater planes to arrive, again without the need for a 1.5 km international-level concrete runway which takes many years to fundraise for. What simple solutions have you come up with in your strugle to overcome infrastrucvture deficiencies?

Look forward to your answers and to the debate...

[inamdar1]

One example is the Shompole example in Southern Kenya.

The NGO brokered a deal on behalf of the community with donor agencies and the private sector. The private sector put in the funds to build and operate the ecolodge (with a 10 year transfer), while international donors / foundations were approached to address infrastructure and conservation investments, as well as community organizational development / capacity.

So the EU and USAID put in funds for roads for the conservation area, paid for patrol vehicles, radios etc, as well as an airstrip. The Ford Foundation put in funding for the OD / Capacity work. The NGO raised the funds for the laywers to represent the community with the investor on a strong footing.

The community also had to put in equity, but it was structured in the form of natural resources - building materials etc.

The private sector investor had to build and operate the lodge - and was responsible for all the business costs, including all the solar; water; etc.

It took over 2 years to negotiate !

[Toby]

Yes, infrastructure is often one of the biggies that can make or break tourism. The biggest problem is that infrastructure is a catch 22- without infrastructure, tourism cannot grow. However, without tourists physically coming to an area and indirectly demanding such services, it is hard to convince governments to invest in something without a visible, short term return(if there are no tourists coming now, why should we improve our roads and airports?). I think they key is to transform the big players into long term thinkers. Now, you want to talk about difficult??? THIS is the topic...

[Meganew]

Megan here,

I like Neel's model alot from Shompole. The question I have is can we create a more standardized set of solutions such as those he outlined for Shampole and perhaps create a less complex project development process next time round that might not take 2 years?

Could one of our outputs for the conference be to develop a variety of proposed "boiler plate" solutions for donors to draw from that can be incorporated into projects?

I just got off the phone with someone from USAID, and new money for sustainable tourism as a separate mechanism is really not in the offing. It will continue to be part of other categories. There are other donors of course who are increasing assistance directly in our category. But we will have to remain very lean and effective for the most part.

If we were to make certain boiler plate solutions to donor problems more accessible - perhaps they could be more cost-effecitively adopted into existing funding mechanisms?

[oliver]

I'd like to take one step further, responding to Megan's good suggestion of a possible approach for development agencies.

The point with Shompola, or with so many other good examples of eco-products and properties developed through partnerships (the IFC is innovating significantly in this regard, by giving grants for private sector partners to cover the "externalities" of being sustainable, such as with Inkaterra in Peru's Machu Picchu and El Nido Resorts in Palawan) is scale. On one hand, many donors are looking for a bigger bang for their buck than 20 or even 40 room resorts, however sustainable and successful it may be. I doubt that IDB would finance another Chalalan... Agencies are more an more talking about conservation corridors rather than parks, landscape-level effects rather than demonstrative projects, and thousands of jobs/business opportunities generated. On the other, governments need to think destination level, and are often reluctant to side with one or two investors or communities only - and governments are arguably the key stakeholder to provoke development banks and multilateral agencies.

Another element is that more and more agencies want considerable counterpart investment. In fact, a very common project architecture nowadays is to give out grants CONDITIONAL on the implementing agency finding around 50% - or more... - collateral locally in order to disburse any funds. They even put in a clause that you have to give the funds back if you don't find the money... And the consultancies are still taking this up...

So, our challenge in infrastructure development for ecotourism has to include:

- determine which are the critical infrastructure needs in the case of each destination - the bottleneck for the next incremental step, what CI used to call the "quantum leap". In one place in Northern Palawan, for instance, it seems to be aircarrier capacity which translates into larger and better equipped airports so 70-seaters can land where today only 19-seaters can. It is true that, in the high season, you can hardly find a place. Just this change would allow tourism arrivals to grow around 100% (granted that here numbers are still low, around 25,000/year for each municipality)!! In another one, it's water - they simply cannot accomodate more tourists in the high season because there's not enough potable water... All other infrastructure elements would still allow some more growth before they, too, become critical.

- Get more agencies to assist in developing proposals. For infrastructure, one of the challenges is that it's costly and quite technically difficult to produce the TORs for a project. Before you can approach a credit agency or donor, you need to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars just to carefully produce the requirements for an airport, water system or a road. Few agencies are willing to fund this first stage - one exception is JBIC's Special Assistance for Project Formation. Of course, consulting companies are very glad to come up with template, back-of-the-envelope proposals for free (prospecting their next bid), but this is simply not enough, and it's not done from the point of view of the destination's priorities.

- engender creative ways to raise local funds to provoke the interest of donors/lenders. Here, we've tried suggesting to the private sector to create a "challenge fund", say of US$ 10,000, specifically to demand matching funds from local politicians and Municipal Governments, which in turn can serve as initial collateral for donors. This fund is intended to stir political willingness and momentum as much as funds...

[febo]

Green infrastructure thinking and planning appears to be the future not only for ecotourism itself.

Long term sustainability where recreation as well as services, urban and rural landscape harmonize need another way of thinking and ìbuilding the greenî

Infrastructure main problem is not financing but ìdirectionî

What is infrastructure trying to accomplish for the long term?

How is infrastructure going to be part of the future needs?

Lets start thinking on regional and national schemas where corridors, green ways and green cities will link to hubs, crossing cities, regions and countryís urban and rural parks, ìsolar panels and ecolodging come laterî

Government officials usually think regional when planning infrastructure, the thing is they do not know how to do it green, and it get worse when consultants continue to promote site - specific conservation infrastructure which has prove to be less effective than green way thinking, it seems that linking infrastructure is becoming a key factor for planning and developing green corridors where ecotourism can happen, specially when we think about developing countries where services infrastructure is mainly directed to basic living services as water supply, sewage and waste management and many of these are priorities which can easily become green infrastructure if planned on that direction.

Why canít we start thinking on ecological infrastructure as we do it when building roads and planning ahead for connections, services and demand?

It will be more cost effective to have a multifunctional not single purpose panorama when thinking about ecotourism infrastructure.

Green infrastructure systems will help to protect and restore natural ecosystems providing a frame work for future development including social and economic benefits related to cleaner air, water, education and health while connecting cities, creating corridors and giving populations a chance to approach nature on their daily life.

If links and hubs are key players going through the right direction, trails and bicycle paths are some basic examples of green infrastructure for ecotourism, lets also remember that in many cases all kinds of lodging including ecolodging infrastructure become closer to real state speculation and land conflict processes mainly in developing countries.

As we teach the multiple trail building and green infrastructure school twice a year where local communities and officials assist we have discovered much more reception to regional infrastructure than just site project needs, we have seen green infrastructure concept as a way government investment can flow up to new directions including ecotourism.
Antonio Su·rez
www.balam.org.mx

[George Duffy]

I agree fully with Antonio. We need to step back and take a look at the entire infrastructure lifecycle and future livability goals before employing the band aid solution of 1950's technology.

Standard solutions for moving people around work well for the standard beach tourist but ecotourism, by virtue of the goals it sets for itself, implies there are alternative and more environmentally friendly means of accomplishing the same goals. If we assume that the ultimate goals are to move and accommodate large numbers of people (this, in itself, is debatable since it implies that growth by quantity is more profitable than growth by quality but that's another conversation) then, as I see it, there are alternate, non-exclusive, methods of approach.

1. For all financing, ensure the technology remains locally controlled. For example, the assumption that standard power lines are the only alternative to solar systems does not remain true when measured by capital, maintenance and replacement costs. If solar requires technical expertise, then the cost of paying for one or two trained people in the area is considerably less than the cost of installing power lines, maintaining a centralized plant and replacing damaged wires and poles. If salaries and materials are cost shared among other ecotourism operators and lodges, then expertise is brought into the local region. This expertise can be shared with the local residents which helps encourage more and better training and retains money in the local region, thereby stimulating the local economy. Buying groups help reduce the overall costs of any items that need to be imported. Shared experiences help reduce the number of problems associated with the systems. For more remote regions, what about a buy-in to a "roaming" technician? On a personal note, when visiting ecolodges we often see solar systems incorrectly installed in smaller operations, which increases the frustration with this technology. Sometimes, for the cost of $10.00 or obtaining better information for using batteries, these frustrations can be avoided. Why pay more for power lines when the solution is affordable? Why invest in the old power line technology that will become obsolete in the near future?

2. Change the technology. Incorporate systems. If you absoutely must have a runway or road then try to ensure the system and materials are more sustainable. Ensure roads construction incorporates at least stormwater containment. There are a number of products out there that enable storm water to be contained under roads, thereby reducing the problems associated with erosion and allowing slow infiltration back into the groundwater. Surface water is not then transported to a region it wouldn't have flowed to pre-development and risks of mud slides caused by roads is reduced. We can now build roads that permit grass to grow through the surface, allow stormwater to flow through, yet can take the load of a 747. These roads/airstrips are made from post-consumer materials and can be maintained by local labour using a shovel.

All roads should be designed to accomodate multi-modal traffic. Roads that don't accomodate bicycles and pedestrians in a safe manner are merely encouraging the use of the automobile.

Ensuring a clean water supply starts with ensuring you don't contaminate the water in the first place. Look at sewage treatment from a water purification perspective.

Any kind of financing should and must incorporate multiple infrastructure needs as though they were linked, rather than the present method of seeing these needs as disparate entities.

Alanna Dean, P.Eng.
Worldwide Ecolodges

[oliver]

It's great to see how different points of view are coming up in this discussion! I guess the Catch 22 problem brought up by Toby (infrastructure or tourism first?) is solved differently in developing (often really poor) countries and in developed ones. And then of course there are countries developing at fast rate, others still catching up and others... well, at the end of the line...

Speaking from the point of view of Palawan, Philippines ( a bit like the Brazilian Amazon), let's face it - the kind of systems thinking Alanna would like to see is difficult to see... Also, the regional integrated planning proposed by Antonio, however much we'd like to see it happen, just does not - at least not yet. Frankly, in a time horizon of 5-10 years, you're just going to get very frustrated and bitter if you think it will. From my experience, with a few exceptions where naturally illuminated leaders have produced islands of relative excellence (Puerto Princesa is one of them), most developing destinations will have a hard time trying to implement these ideas. Let me list why I think so, so that maybe a few solutions might come up.

1) Local governments do not have any resources. I mean REALLY no resources - in my region, Municipal Governments often have around US$ 3-5,000 per year for investment in all and sundry, and Provincial Governments have US$ 4,000 per year for tourism - training, planning and the whole nine yards. People are talking about decentralization and tax reform in many places, but it still hasn't happened - which central government wants to give up control of the budget??? And who wants to pay more taxes? No local resources means no local solutions or management, end of story...

2) Therefore, money for infrastructure will most often come from development banks and agencies, and has to be raised through a combination of consultant's interests (they format the proposals), "donor cultivation" (knowing which agency is open to what kind of proposal), analysis of available pipelines (for instance, in Palawan they wanted a road but the bank only had an environmental portfolio open, so we had ourselves an "environmentally sustainable road" - and we did just this, but the government agency was not really expecting the project to try so hard...). The number of agencies involved (and their organizational culture) and the architecture of the loan tend to have a big influence on the end result - as much so, or maybe more, than the long-term planning needs of a broad spectrum of stakeholders, like we'd like to see happen...

One of the consequences of this, for instance, is scale. Smaller, more local infra solutions are often not interesting for banks/donors - building, say, 8 or 9 small hydropower dams is so much more complicated than a bigger, Three-Gorge kind, and project management so much more demanding, that you'll have a hard time trying to raise funds for it... Did anyone succeed?

3) Political decisions (including those of the infra project proponents and the donors, of course) are not taken normally from an integrated long-term perspective, but respond to shorter term and personal circumstances. In young democracies, those who get elected often got their fame and fortune in extractive industries (i.e. fishing, slash-and-burn, cattle raising) or land speculation, and react to what they learned and what they can achieve in their term (actually, old democracies tend to do the same...). One of the arts any project leader has to learn is how to dance on a line precariously balanced between those various political interests, needs and expectations, while still trying to achieve the lofty project goals of sustainability.

4) One last difficulty is that the most environmentally sustainable technologies (or those tourists expect and accept) still aren't available in developing destinations. In pioneer outposts, what you get is the same old destructive technologies - even more wasteful than in bigger cities. Here in Palawan, for instance, in relatively urban areas the thermoelectric power grid is just sooo much cheaper, the technology is fully local, that only a few foreigners have solar (by the way, in the tropics the biggest need is refrigeration, and this you still cannot do with solar economically - you can heat up water and you can light up areas, but no freezers and aircon). The amazing cutting edge sustainable utilities of Maho Bay cannot be put in place in most of Africa or Southeast Asia because suppliers are not yet there - the scale problem pointed out by Antonio. It's another catch 22 - locals certainly have sustainable solutions - in Palawan, most toilets don't use running water (you use a pail and a water-filled bucket to flush it), use only fans to stir the humid air, low-watt fluorescent lighting and mosquito coils. But the first thing tourists ask for is running water, aircons, "nicer, yellow lighting" and nets - better yet, no mosquitoes... They go to those resorts with these modern facilities - probably 60% of them in the hands of non-resident urbanites or foreigners...

Do you also find those limitations in your sites? How did you solve those problems in your cases?

[Black Sheep Inn]

Greetings from Andres & Michelle from Black Sheep Inn Ecuador; we are trying to catch up on the forum and responding to a couple of posts:

Reference to Oliver asking ìWhat is the minimum infrastructure needed for ecotourism projects?î and the ensuing discussion we can give the example of Black Sheep Inn Ecuador (BSI).

We started the BSI in 1995 knowing that we needed a minimum infrastructure of good beds, good showers, and good food. We started with inexpensive prices (less than $10 per day per person) in order to gain recognition and clientele. BSI currently charges between $20 - $40 per person night, yet we are still using the same high quality mattresses (best foam available in Ecuador), the same hot water heaters in shared shower facilities and we serve family style gourmet vegetarian food. We still, to this day, do not have private bathrooms.

When we moved to Chugchilan in 1994 there was no phone service. The nearest gas station, bank and post office were over 3 hours away. We did on the other hand have electricity and more importantly water. Chugchilan was serviced by 1 bus a day.

This simple infrastructure was sufficient to build a tourist destination and permanently change the economy of the rural village of Chugchilan. Ecological practices in both management and design can be inexpensive and make any new destination sustainable.

Arnaldo Rodriguez* of Green Consulting Ecuador (www.green-consulting.com) visited Chugchilan as a part of an inspection for the WTTC 2005 Tourism for Tomorrow Awards. He wrote: ìCommunity-based ecotourism projects in Ecuador (and in several countries of Latin America) have failed because the initiatives did not start in the communities, but were created by NGOís or development agencies, which normally lack experience in tourism management. These initiatives focused their efforts in building the needed infrastructure and then left the community on its own, without any further training. In Chugchil·n the model has been different, because locals have had the opportunity to learn from Black Sheep Innís experiences, have developed products very well designed for the target client, and most importantly have learned from first-hand experiences how to provide a good service. I have been involved in community-based tourism for several years and I can assure that, by far, Mama Hilda and Cloud Forest (the other Hostels that have opened in Chugchilan) are amongst the best locally owned lodges in Ecuador, both in terms of infrastructure and service.î


As for Tobyís commentsÖ We have followed a grassroots model based on good beds, good showers and good food. The reputation of the BSI has continued to bring us more clients, without which we could have never afforded to improve our infrastructure. Toby couldnít be more correct when he said ìinfrastructure is often one of the biggies that can make or break tourismî. But infrastructure is not something that can successfully be implemented at start up. The infrastructure should always change due to the changing dynamics of the project. As the project grows so should the infrastructure. In starting up the Black Sheep Inn ten years ago; good food, good beds, and good showers were the key to success as BSI was born. Today, good managers are needed infrastructure at BSI in order to ensure a sustainable future.


AntonioÖ YES!! Ecotourism should not really be anything separate than good environmental and conservationist policy throughout any society. Why should ecotourism be a separate industry, or the Black Sheep of the tourism industry? We built an ecolodge because we care for and respect our surroundings, both the natural environment and the local community.

Hope these comments are helpfulÖ more later.


* Arnaldoís experiences include: Ecotourism Specialist, CAIMAN Project, Chemonics/USAID, General Manager, Green Consulting ñindependent consultant, Operations Manager, Kapawi Ecolodge and Reserve, Executive Director, FundaciÛn Pachamama.

[oliver]

Thanks for the excellent example of Black Sheep Inn, a recipient of various awards for sustainability and community participation. From what I can read, your infra started basically with a road, water and electricity, and you built up the rest. What about protected areas - do your products include any natural attraction with any kind of official protection?

Linking the example of BSI again with Antonio's and Alanna's valuable guidelines of integration and wider sustainability planning, the challenge of BSI may still be scale. Even with a good business going, the number of jobs and business opportunities, as well as the amount of resources produced for effective conservation, is probably still limited. For optimal results, would Chugchilan not need to have a critical mass of ecotourism players large enough to make DMOs feasible, and to stimulate Public-Private Partnerships which in turn raise the profile (and influence) of the industry with government and politicians, so that favourable policies and investments can make it fully sustainable? It's clear that ecotourism should never be the only source of revenues or the main economic option (just as we concluded before), but if it's to be taken seriously enough for donors to consider it as part of a development strategy, it has to mature beyond the pioneers, however great a job they do. Often, pioneers like BSI get frustrated with the little infrastructure and investment promotion support they get from local and regional governments - and often this is due to the still limited scale of ecotourism.

I would be very much interested in BSI's view on larger-scale planning in Chugchilan - which would be the key factors to leverage benefits from ecotourism to the destination?

[oliver]

As part of my responsibilities as moderator, here's a short summary of the first week's issues in Developing Infrastructure for Sustainable Tourism:

We started with Neel's example of Shompola in Kenya, where the private sector, NGOs and government partnered with communities to generate a winning product with a BOT system. Infrastructure, in this case, was a public investment matching efforts from communities and operators. Toby then raised the issue of the catch-22 between infra and tourism development, a point many participants came back to: tourism needs infra to develop (especially if sustainability is considered), but infra only becomes feasible (politically and economically) if demand from a critical mass of arrivals already exists.

Megan asked participants to come up with a boiler plate approach based on lessons learned, key points and steps so that eventual donors and investors in infrastructure could avoid past mistakes and efficiently use ecotourism as part of a development/conservation strategy. I added that larger scale tourism would be key to make social and environmental benefits relevant, raised the need for local funding counterparts and asked what critical infrastructure is needed for sustainable tourism/ecotourism.

Antonio then took us one step further by pointing to the need to consider infrastructure from a wider "user's" point of view - the type and amount of infra is related to the direction the community wants to go. Ecolodges and ecotourism cannot be separated from overall sustainability at regional level (nor can it shoulder the responsibility alone...). Therefore, ecotourism cannot be considered alone - we need sustainable cities, linked to rural areas and eco-destinations. Building green is a regional issue, and planning at this scale is essential. Alanna contributed the idea that systems thinking should be the basis for infra planning (encouraging donors to consider multi-infrastructure planning and not isolated needs), and came up with strong points on the need for locally controlled technology in relation to infrastructure and utilities. She gave a good example in that road development cannot be separated from the infra requirements for maintenance of the road, such as erosion control. I then shared my concerns on limitations experienced in the field (in this case in the Philippines, but the situation is arguably similar in many other developing destinations) on how much these concepts can be applied, and asked for suggestions on how to overcome them.

Finally, Andres and Michelle of Black Sheep Inn shared how they developed this award-winning product with basic infrastructure (access through a road with a bus a week, water and elecricity) and by involving communities and thinking destination-wide. I ended up by asking them to consider destination-level next steps in terms of infrastructure needs for sustainable tourism development. Overall, a great first week, with many relevant insights shared. If I have failed to highlight an important point you made, please feel free to remind me!! Thanks to all and MORE, PLEASE!!! I would like to particularly ask participants to share their on-the-ground experiences - not only of best cases. Your difficulties and challenges, and your efforts to overcome limitations, are extremely valuable in a forum like this.

[oliver]

When planning a destination, historically, infra needs seem to mostly come before investment... I remember an official of the Brazilian state government of Bahia, closely linked to several large IADB projects in the Northeast, telling me that "we need to overbuild a bit, create some pollution and deterioration, so that we can approach agencies for larger infra investments". Perversely, this also applies to accomodations: very often, pressure for better airports and access, better waste and water management and power supply comes after overbuilding.

Ideally it should be different, of course. Regional and local players and governments should prepare for possible overdevelopment before it happens, and one of the ways to do it is to set up appropriate infra (not only for tourism) just as Antonio and Alanna said. I'd love to hear more stories on what stage on this equation some of our participants are.

[planeta]

ELSEWHERE IN THE PLANETA FORUM -- We have a new topic in the Green Building section: Request for assistance with trail building in northern Laos
http://forum.planeta.com/viewtopic.php?t=559

Green Building - Planeta Forum
http://forum.planeta.com/viewforum.php?f=23

[Meganew]

I would just like to ditto Oliver's interest in how some of our participants have dealt with a lack of infrastructure - and what are some of the creative ways they have provided services to their clients, and what would they like support for in future from donors if they are seeking to expand?

Megan