Communities and SMEs

[planeta]

TOPIC: Communities and SMEs
1. Assessing community priorities
2. Developing consistent community services
3. Linking businesses to community services

MODERATOR: Nicole Haeusler

SETTINGS: Active participants can reply to this topic

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

REFERENCE

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

[Nicole Haeusler]

Dear All,

Welcome to the discussion group "Communities and SMEs". I will be your moderador for this topic and was asked to introduce myself.
My name is Nicole H‰usler from Berlin/Germany. I am working since several years as a Tourism Consultant specializing in Ecotourism, Community-based Tourism, Tourism in Protected Areas and Tourism & Poverty Reduction. I lived for six years in Southeast Asia and I have just finished my two year contract in Bolivia as an Advisor for the Department of Protected Areas- SERNAP. In 2003 I published together with Wolfgang Strasdas ì The Training Manual for Community Based Tourismî.

I am looking forward to participate in an intense discussion about this very popular topic "Communities and SMEs" in Sustainable Tourism development.

And for all NON-NATIVE ENGLISH SPEAKER - Do not worry to write in English, just go ahead - I make as well still mistakes! But this kind of internet forum gives us a great opportunity of exchanging new and old ideas!

Regards, Nicole

[Meganew]

Hello everyone,

I am greatly looking forward to this dialogue, particularly on communities and SMEs. In the last 3 years, I have been asked to do a fair amount of work for the donor community - primarily USAID - on linking private businesses to community development. I have had the opportunity to work on this matter in Ecuador, Chiapas, Mexico and in southern Sri Lanka. In each case, I saw very particular examples of need at the community level. Frequently I have been dealing with issues of ethnic strife between minority community members and majority populations running the government and businesses.

I have been a strong advocate for many years of developing tools to better evaluate community needs before initiating projects. I have long felt that we need to better understand the social and political structures of the communities we seek to work with first - before beginning full tilt business development.

I realize that this can be an impediment to business development - which must respond to investor needs. Normally a business should be able to demonstrate that it can reach a profit in 3 years. This does not really leave enough time to sort out very sensitive community issues.

It is for this reason, among many others, that I feel private business cannot properly develop true ecotourism without some donor grant support - particularly if we are seeking to develop businesses in areas where poverty is high, infrastructure is poor, and ethnic differences tend to be sensitive.

I am hoping that private businesses can weigh in here with their own experiences in this matter, and particularly how they might imagine donors could provide assistance. Some of the businesses involved in this forum have a great deal of experience in this matter. I am hoping to find some practical solutions that allow donors to tailor more useful technical asisistance programs directly to business development in regions that have been "left behind" by traditional business development.

[jsweeting]

Noticing that Oliver's submission to the Marketing Session seemed pretty relevant here I have pasted it below...


Hi, this is Oliver Hillel from Puerto Princesa, Philippines. Please excuse me for my short message, but the topic is so interesting (and the participants so experienced) that I cannot avoid provoking a little debate... To make it short, in my experience there are only 2 ways to allow SMEs to get one step further in marketing: subsidies for 3-4 years AT LEAST (meaning training, technical assistance and persistent support), which will allow at least a few of them to pick up by themselves, or 1-3 leaders with a vision (the "follow the leader" approach). In most cases of SME networks that made a difference ( in Guatemala with Alianza Verde, in Europe with the "Gites Rureaux"), there was an organization that stayed on for a longer time, or a larger "anchor" enterprise that "created" a destination but (a rare case) allowed others to benefit as well. No technology by itself can do this - or can it???

Look forward to your replies!

[jsweeting]

CI has worked for many years with communities in developing countries and has had numerous experiences with regards to community tourism enterprise development. I for one believe this term "model" project to be a bit misleading, because the idea of a model is that it can be easily replicated...not something I see happening a whole lot around the World.
What I can say is that there are examples of community tourism SMEs that have spawned replication and local growth in the tourism industry - bringing with it entrepreneurialism...is this always for the good of the communities themselves, that is not necessarily for me to say, but rather them.

My question of the participants with a lot more knowledge of this area than I, is whether most communities (and I do hate to generalize but in this case I am interested in the overall perception of experts in this area) would prefer to own their own business, have a joint venture with an outside business or would rather to just have a job, or have people buy their crafts, or buy their crops?

[Nicole Haeusler]

I would like to summarize important points mentioned above:

1. There should be a linkage and cooperation between Private Sector, Communities and Donor Organizations in order to develop a successful community tourism project.
2. The implementation of a successful community project or SMEs have to be subsidized for at least 3-4 years (from my experience I would even say ten years)
3. There is no model project!

And the important question for me has been "...whether most communities would prefer to own their own business, have a joint venture with an outside business or would rather to just have a job, or have people buy their crafts, or buy their crops?"

I would say that this decision-making process is quite often highly manipulated (yes, in some cases I would use this strong word) by the organizations helping to implement the project. Most of the communities in developing countries do not have a clue of an idea what is tourism, so they depend fully on the information and recommendations given by the organization they work with. And these organizations have quite often a strong NGO background who recommend therefore the option: "Create your own business - do not work together with the devil private companies". And as well the option "Joint Ventures" were not recommended to them. But I personally find option three the most interesting one:
Do we really have to create always a community tourism project with expensive ecolodges, many years of intensive training which finally does not lead to a successful story due to different reasons. Would it be not better to support the activities the people already do - like handicraft, crops, honey making, medical plants etc. etc. by supporting the cooperation between the private sector (I am talking especially about 3/4/ 5 Star Hotels and "normal" tour companies) and the communities in their area?

Nicole (Moderator)

[oliver]

For those checking only the Community topic, this is Oliver Hillel from the beautiful city of Puerto Princesa in the Philippines (alas, too much rain these days so save your trip for later this year...).

Picking up on Jamie's very good question, we had all three options in Northern Palawan (please check www.sempnp.com for more info): an indigenous group in Coron wanted to become a full tourism operator and sell their own tours (and faced significant resistance from established players and lack of understanding from government officers), because they own one of the region's most important attraction, a wonderful karst island with lakes and caves; some traditional communities wanted to have a cut in tourism but through independent mechanisms like concessions (in a National Park where they lived); and some others just wanted regular jobs - this last one is probably the hardest, since you need sizable facilities to generate significant number of jobs and at least 4-5 years to train some members of a fishing/agricultural community to become professionals in tourism.

I guess there are two defining factors for what level of tourism benefits/participation a community can achieve: their perception (the extremely important issue of previous informed consent to what is planned, and the need to keep an open door for participation. It is amazing how much most communities have been ostracized from planning in spite of all our lofty ideals...) and the degree to which they are already familiar with basic, key issues relating to any product development.

In my experience here, the hardest part was to translate service-economy concepts like the difference between capital and income (spend only profits, NOT the capital), risk management (you may NOT sell), investment (no profit if you don't invest), markets (people with money have to WANT what you're selling). I learned a lot here about the huge cultural gap between rural extractive economies (and the corresponding cultural and personal values) and market-oriented urban service economies...

And you???

[redbilb]

I haven't personally had a lot of experience internationally in this area. However, I have been involved in a number of domestic community tourism projects that have involved a private sector consultant, a funding organization and the community.

More often than not I see the community leaders trying to steer the project in the direction they want while the actual people of the community are often ignored to a large extent.

The workshops that I have facilitated with the various communities are excellent opportunities for the people of the community to express their interest, level of involvement and vision for the project. However, I find very often that the community leaders have preconceived notions of what the project will be and therefore are only interested in thosse views that support their vision.

Community support quickly diminishes at this point and the project is then almost guaranteed to fail.

Has anybody else had similar experiences? I'd like to hear your views.


Rod Bilz
FRi Ecological Services

[planeta]

Earlier this year I was invited to the coffee-growing town of Pluma Hidalgo in southern Mexico. A new administration took office in January and officials convened a meeting to discuss the options of developing rural tourism and ecotourism.

Since then, there has been little advancement of the project.

One of the obstacles was that the new representative for "tourism" for the town is also in charge of educational programs and sports and probably a few other programs as well. Another problem is the lack of coordination or interest to coordinate efforts among the owners of the coffee fincas. To top things off, last month Hurricane Stan washed out major parts of the highway that link the town to the coast.

In the Sierra Norte (also in Oaxaca), there have been a number of guide training programs. But without marketing, many of the guides have taken other jobs. Colleagues complain that it's easier to find a bird watching guide at the water bottling plant than at the 'ecotourism' office.

As we review the role of communities in developing successful ecotourism, I would point out that from my point of view -- as a journalist and web publisher -- communities need to do a better job of communicating with media and with independent travelers. For this to occur, we need to insist that development agencies, ngos and others offer incentives for communication and continuity. If there are guide training programs, we need to see an accessible and updated database, preferably online AND at the local tourism office.

REFERENCES

Communities and Tourism Conference (2002)
http://www.planeta.com/ecotravel/tour/c ... urism.html

Pluma Hidalgo
http://www.planeta.com/ecotravel/mexico ... dalgo.html

Prioridades para el desarrollo del turismo: un manual para Pluma Hidalgo
http://www.imacmexico.org/ev_es.php?ID= ... 2=DO_TOPIC

[inamdar1]

I guess there are two defining factors for what level of tourism benefits/participation a community can achieve: their perception (the extremely important issue of previous informed consent to what is planned, and the need to keep an open door for participation. It is amazing how much most communities have been ostracized from planning in spite of all our lofty ideals...) and the degree to which they are already familiar with basic, key issues relating to any product development.

Hello all,
I'd also add the issue of time - which Jamie alluded to. The wants of the community will change over time - esp. as the tourism intervention will expose the people to new ideas, cultures and experiences. A community that may begin simply wanting to hold onto their existing lifestyle will grow to want a greater say in the enterprise - especially where their resources are involved.
Tourism represents a change to many - and their level of comfort in that change will not necessary be reflected in their participation in tourism.
Any successful intervention - whether NGO or private sector driven, needs to reflect this.
Hope this makes sense.

[janwig]

This is Jan in Sweden today.

What is being said herein is my experience too. Even within the same countries, the livelihood strategies of communities or parts of a community, differs greatly. The communities I have worked with respond differently as tourism approaches, be it introduced through private sector, NGO:s or donor projects. I have engaged in grassroots developments of tourism in as diverse countries such as Sweden (developed country) Mongolia (transition, nomadic and developing country), Suriname (the Amazon and developing country), Estonia (transition country).

Each community as a whole or as individuals understands and are highly capable of their overall strategy. However, their experience in service provision and understanding of urban service needs falls short many times and it takes time to develop this. However, when given an immediate reward, like appropriate payment against work or service provision (which includes if the job is not being done, being held accountable). They respond remarkably well. Which is often the advantage being a inbound tour operator with client's, as we are. We can offer an immediate benefit once we start somewhere.

Many NGO:s and donor agencies often fail to include or involve market players in the early stages, which may distort the real focus.

And many of us, who work in the chain of distribution of rural services, need to learn more about approaches working with the initial steps of tourism development. The first steps chosen, the kind of guest's they are being exposed to, very much determines the further steps (or failure).

The more remote location they are in (the Amazon, Mongolia), the more dependant they will be of cooperation with inbound tour operators or hotels, or if they are near affluent markets (Estonia, Sweden) they may develop single service products quite well unguided, as well as direct sales. The latter often leads to an over supply of the same services and drives general revenue down.

Nomadic Journeys Ltd challenge now is to accommodate growth. It requires more partners in different rural areas. Mongolia is theoretically big, but there are few people inbetween. Transportation, telecommunications are non existant. We just can't get out to these locations in the only short peak season and train the basics ourselves to be confident to send paying guest's to just anywhere.

Basic understanding such as product ownership is weak, so that someone meet up with the camels, yaks or horses on the day agreed. And to distribute money for different kinds of services locally. While locals are being trained without market contact in many places around the world, in our areas, there is no training to be had. So I invested in and co-founded a Tourism College (Wind Horse College) in Ulan Bator four years ago. And hopefully, some day, we can enrol the youngsters from rural areas, when some anyway get their higher education in the capital. But what is needed is on-the-job training programs somewhere else. To go somewhere else and be exposed where it is already going on, and with appropriate guidance. Then implement at home, and quickly be able to try it out on paying guest's.

JAN

[oliver]

Jan's excellent comment on how efficiently tour operators can intervene in community development to balance effort and return (just look at how well Posada Amazonas in Peru worked in sharing ownership with local communities - come on, Kurt, tell us how this is going!!), and to make changes feasible in terms of market realities (as against NGOs and other agencies who may raise inappropriate expectations or create white elephants) prompts me to raise the other side of the equation: it depends on the operator.

Just like Ron brought up, sometimes when the private sector intervenes directly, only a few community members (already "entrepreneurial") can jump on the bandwagon. Sometimes, a good NGO or project can actually raise the critical mass of potential participants, and can position tourism within a portfolio of development options (as against operators, who would reasonably only focus on their own business). Another problem I read about in the Sustainability Report of Voyages, a chain of Australian resorts who are pioneering in terms of social and environmental responsibility, is that when operators and resorts deal directly with communities, any benefits offered (like education, livelihood support or "affirmative action" job offers) tend to become normal expectations or even be expected to increase every year, i.e. when the businesses cannot keep the same level of support throughout, communities tend to perceive this as a sign of "not caring anymore" and this can lead to negative images. Finally, there is the question of optimizing credibility in communicating results - some customers may feel that when a third party is involved, there is less chance for greenwashing corporate social responsibility efforts.

This is what sometimes leads resorts and operators to either funnel support through NGOs or to establish a separate foundation for community outreach and conservation initiatives. And this, of course, opens a whole new can of worms... So, although there are lessons learned that can be shared, there is no modular approach to this.

[Richard Edwards]

Hello to the ìCommunities communityî. This is Richard Edwards and Iím moderating the Marketing topic. Everyone is welcome there to comment on how to reach potential markets and the best ways to develop those markets.

Picking up on Oliverís comments, there are nearly always going to be a chosen few who benefit immediately when an operator or other private enterprise comes in, while others are sitting by. But I feel this has been the most successful process leading to developing an area for tourism. With that vested economic interest pushing forward, infrastructure gets put in to place and a model for success is there. We can look at a Lapa Rios-type model in Costa Rica, where other locally-owned lodges have been able to benefit from the trial and area of bringing an ecolodge to international prominence. Not everyone benefits, but there is a precedent, and if that first enterprise is able to show that running a SME in a sustainable manner is profitable and productive, and maintains or enhances quality of life for locals, then other potential SMEs are going to seize that opportunity and follow that model, at least partially.

[janwig]

I really like Olivers phraseology and rhetoric in the expression - "open up a new can of worms", relating to channeling funds through an NGO or creating ones own foundation.

As an inbound tour operator, I am sort of sorry to say that, we alone, produce better community benefits and job creation in a locations in Mongolia that are outside of protected areas, far away from any NGO:s or donors attention, yet attractive for visitors.

Our best case is an arid and difficult place to live on. After a few years of "hiring the natives" approach, where we hired labor, horses and camels, local people resonded very well and tended to like this job. Onde day one family came to me and announced they had registered their own tour company! It ss the only example where we found our indigenous partners went to town and registered their own tour company. Now they are subcontractors to us, and get the bulk of their business through us, which includes running of a yurt camp (eco-lodge Mongolian style) a series horse riding expeditions and treks without vehicles support that are being sold the world over. Even film expeditions for documenting their lifestyles with international film teams. The folks in this region are proud nomads and have a sufficient number of livestock for a decent living.

In another area, with rivers and forests, we have for years been trying to make sportsfishing trips. Mongolia has 3800 rivers in its north This is where we are considering jumping into this "can of worms" in order to be transparent with other external stakeholders on our objectives. These stakeholders includes:

a) An American missionary that stayed and invested in a saw-mill, and forestry was part of the livelihood of this community in the communist period.
b) A gold mine in the headwaters of our fishery, partly owned by a former president of the country.
c) A donor program that are among other promoting Game Ranching of Red Deer (kind of Elk for Americans...) which would attract overseas hunters to come and shoot them. This program also manage the buffer zone management of a huge protected area that is a wilderness.

Needless to say, as tourism entrepreneurs, facing competition and shortage of time, it is hard to expand the work getting stakeholders groups together. Or to be included in them. We just do not have the time even if I have the experience of how to do it. Yet, we know that we can offer a good market for this community, many jobs, as in the first example. I also know that the coordination work of all these well-intended efforts (well, the gold mine is not for profit at the community level at all....just jobs) is very rough in the edges excersise and in time it will not be treated with the same matter of urgency as we would feel about the proposal to establish good conservation of the fishery, which is the partneship we require to be able to go out and sell fishing trips. We need to be confident that there are some fishes of the right sizes in 3-5 years time because this is what it takes of marketing efforts to get a flow of visitors going. The outcomes of these talks are uncertain. Why we hesitated to invest in the marketing required, for years, simply because we are not sure the integrity of the fishery can be maintained. Being few people in Mongolia generally, it is hard for us to find the local partner that we need, that can provide us with the focus required to shake it and move it towards sustainability.

In this case, I feel I am looking at "a can of worms" and considering to work with an NGO t assist us or create our own foudnation. However we may also redirect our efforts elsewhere, to the second best places. E.g. another community downstream who are blessed with lack of interventions. Which is, I must say, only from our perspective, better prospects to quicker establish a kind of grassroots tourism which is the goal of all ecotourism.

We are getting there, in many places, but the level of success (community benefits) depends on leadership and livelihood approaches of the community as well as the stakeholder scenario. And certainly, it will be a different "can of worms" in each place.

JAN

[febo]

Community base ecotourism success is about 90% communication, but not from the community to the outside, it is mainly the lack of internal communications inside communities the fact that stops long term ecotourism and any kind of development projects in developing countries.

While most of the training programs offered are just focusing on technical abilities it is often forgotten that community goals when deciding for an ecotourism project in stead of an agricultural or timber project are closer to a social process in which local groups are at the end looking for internal cohesion and recognition, this implies a great effort for consultants to start a step behind what they thought was the beginning of an ecotourism project.

If we can just see that ecotourism projects are closer to local needs related to migration, gender, and recognition than just ìconservation or even incomeî we can understand why marketing is not a priority at least in the case of Mexican indigenous communities and ejidos where we have seen that recognition as being the pioneer of an ecotourism projects can develop the strongest local relations community needs, one can become a leader if capable to convince others and start an ecotourism project whether it works at the end or not.

This recurrent discussion about marketing as a priority shows that most of the ecotourism consultants do not developed strong understanding of the local needs and aspirations.

www.balam.org.mx