WWF GREATER MEKONG CAMBODIA COUNTRY PROGRAMME …

Sre

po

k W

ilde

rne

ss A

rea

Pro

jec

tTe

ch

nic

al P

ap

er

Serie

s -

No

. 3

WWF GREATER MEKONGCAMBODIA COUNTRY PROGRAMME

ECOTOURISM FEASIBILITY STUDY

cotourism_2.qxp 9/14/2007 5:16 AM Page 1

WWF GREATER MEKONGCAMBODIA COUNTRY PROGRAMME

ECOTOURISM FEASIBILITY STUDY

Sandrine PantelMarch 2007

Srepok Wilderness Area Project WRITTEN BY SHAREE BAULDTechnical Paper Series - No. 3 MAY 2007


i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................................................iii1.INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................................1

1.1. BACKGROUND CONTEXT......................................................................................................................11.2. RATIONALE................................................................................................................................................1

2. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION.....................................................................................................................32.1. COMMUNITY PROFILE...............................................................................................................................3

2.1.1. Demographics..................................................................................................................................32.1.2. Economic Profile..............................................................................................................................4

2.2. PROVINCIAL ECOTOURISM WORKSHOP..........................................................................................42.2.1. Results of Ecotourism Workshop..................................................................................................5

2.2.1.1 Ecotourism........................................................................................................................................52.2.1.2 Community.......................................................................................................................................62.2.1.3 Natural Resource Management.........................................................................................................6

2.3. CONCLUSIONS...........................................................................................................................................7

3. MARKET ASSESSMENT & FEASIBILITY......................................................................................................83.1. INDUSTRY TRENDS..................................................................................................................................8

3.1.1. Visitor Patterns in Cambodia.........................................................................................................83.1.2. Markets in Cambodia......................................................................................................................93.1.3. The FIT Market.................................................................................................................................93.1.4. The Resort Industry.......................................................................................................................9

3.2. MPF ECOTOURISM PRODUCTS...........................................................................................................103.3. COMPETITION TO THE MPF................................................................................................................103.4. TOUR OPERATOR SURVEYS.................................................................................................................12

3.4.1. Current Ecotours Offered.............................................................................................................123.4.2. Interest in Future Ecotourism Operations..................................................................................133.4.3. Interest in Financial Investment in Ecotourism.........................................................................143.4.4. Current Weaknesses of the Tourism Sector...............................................................................143.4.5. Moving Forward with Ecotourism..............................................................................................15

3.5. CONCLUSIONS.........................................................................................................................................16

4. FEASIBILITY OF ECOTOURISM IN SREPOK WILDERNESS AREA....................................................174.1. PRE-CONDITIONS TO ECOTOURISM DEVELOPMENT.................................................................174.2. RATIONALE & APPROACH..................................................................................................................184.3. THE ECOLODGE......................................................................................................................................18

4.3.1. Lodge Description..........................................................................................................................184.3.2. Investment Resources.....................................................................................................................19

4.3.2.1 Habitat Grup Empresarial...............................................................................................................194.3.2.2 International Finance Corporation..............................................................................................19

4.4. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COMMUNITY-BASED ECOTOURISM..............................................204.4.1. Ecolodge.........................................................................................................................................204.4.2. Small-Scale, Micro-Enterprises and Partnerships.....................................................................214.4.3. Conclusions.....................................................................................................................................22

TABLE OFCONTENTS


ii

5. STEPS FORWARD..............................................................................................................................................235.1.1. Market Assessment........................................................................................................................235.1.2. Community Assessment................................................................................................................235.1.3. Environmental Assessment..........................................................................................................245.1.4. Financial Assessment.....................................................................................................................24

5.2. PARTNERSHIPS........................................................................................................................................245.2.1. WWF................................................................................................................................................255.2.2. Department of Tourism................................................................................................................255.2.3. Forestry Administration...............................................................................................................255.2.4. Communities...................................................................................................................................265.2.5. Habitat Grup Empresarial............................................................................................................265.2.6. Tourism Private Sector..................................................................................................................265.2.7. Mondulkiri Provincial Authority.................................................................................................26

6. STAGED IMPLEMENTATION........................................................................................................................286.1. PHASE 1 - FOUNDATION.......................................................................................................................28

6.1.1. Assessments....................................................................................................................................286.1.2. Ecotourism Management Plan......................................................................................................286.1.3. Monitoring and Evaluation Procedures......................................................................................296.1.4. Tourism Awareness Raising.........................................................................................................296.1.5. Institutional Strengthening............................................................................................................306.1.6. Site Development Planning and Zoning.....................................................................................30

6.1.6.1 Ecotourism Anchor Zones................................................................................................................306.1.6.2 Secondary Ecotourism Zones...........................................................................................................306.1.6.3 Ecotourism Conservation Zones ...................................................................................................31

6.2. PHASE 2 - PREPARATION......................................................................................................................316.2.1. Ecolodge Development..................................................................................................................316.2.2. Sourcing Human Resources and Training..................................................................................316.2.3. Commu Tourism Committees.......................................................................................................316.2.4. Tourism Community Fund...........................................................................................................326.2.5. Capacity Building and Advocacy................................................................................................33

6.3. PHASE 3 - IMPLEMENTATION.............................................................................................................336.3.1. Tour Operations and Product Establishment.............................................................................336.3.2. Establishing Networks..................................................................................................................33

7. REFERENCES........................................................................................................................................................36

APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................................................37APPENDIX 1 - SWOT RESULTS ...........................................................................................................................37APPENDIX 2 - WORKSHOP SWOT STRATEGIES AND LIST OF

TOUR OPERATORS INTERVIEWED......................................................................................38


Much of WWF's current work in Cambodia focuses on theLower Mekong Dry Forest Ecoregion, the largest continuous

tract of dry forest in the whole of mainland Southeast Asia.WWF has embarked on a project to develop conservation andecotourism initiatives in collaboration with local communities,with the aim of protecting the landscape and generating new,alternative jobs for local people to replace hunting and commer-cial logging that threaten the forest. The Srepok Wilderness AreaProject, aims to: "restore the once abundant populations of largemammal species in the Srepok Wilderness Area (SWA) throughcommunity based natural resource management and by developingecotourism as a source of income for local communities". In partic-ular, high-value, low-impact wildlife ecotourism has been iden-tified as a means of securing the future of these species and theirecosystem through generating financing for conservation activities,supporting local livelihoods, and to ensure the financial sustain-ability of the protected area.

Community stakeholders identified their willingness to supportthe development of ecotourism in the MPF, providing that anumber of conditions were met. The equal distribution of allbenefits that arise from ecotourism development was seen bythe community as important. Clear and defined guidelines forthe distribution of benefits, channelled directly to the communityand targeting those in need, with the community retaining controlover the growth of tourism in their area allows for ecotourism tobe better received and viewed as a means of improving liveli-hoods and quality of life. Furthermore, local capacity in eco-tourism will need to be built to ensure that the community isfully aware of the positive and negative aspects of tourism, andthe need for equality in benefit distribution from ecotourismrevenues will be paramount to success.

This assessment revealed an identified need in the market for aluxury, high-end, wilderness lodge in Cambodia. In 2006,Cambodia received 1.7 million international visitor arrivals,many of which flew directly into and out of Siem Reap withoutseeing or experiencing any other aspects of the country. The lackof established tourism products and destinations in Cambodiameans that tourists stay for a short time and continue on to otherdestinations within the region to fulfil other needs and experi-ences e.g. beach, jungle, hill tribes, tranquillity holidays, etc. Theremote value of the MPF and the SWA is significantly high for theregion, containing a significant percentage of undisturbed habitat,an aesthetically attractive river, remote and unique landscapes,forests, and wildlife. This creates a greater potential to attract thehigher-end of the market, willing to pay for the privilege of stayingin the protected area.

To maximise the success of ecotourism inthe MPF, it will be important to ensure astaged approach towards implementation.All stages of implementation must be con-sidered within a holistic, long-rangestrategic planning approach to tourismdevelopment in the area, with each newdevelopment part of a logical step of thewhole approach process. The structure ofthis process should be separated intothree phases - Phase 1 (foundation), Phase2 (preparation), and Phase 3 (implementa-tion). These three phases are recommendedto WWF as the necessary steps requiredand outline related activities that WWF caneither undertake or delegate. Several stake-holders (organisations and institutions)will be required to devote a fixed amountof time in varying stages to the imple-mentation depending on the phase, activityand the support required.

Phase 1 lays the foundation for developingecotourism. Activities outlined in thisphase involve raising awareness with thecommunity and stakeholders, whilepreparing all of the necessary agreementsand guidelines that will need to be estab-lished before ecotourism can proceed.This will include guidelines, monitoringand evaluation programmes, and capacitybuilding. Phase 2 is the preparation phasewhere the community and the MPF isorganised for the implementation of eco-tourism. This will include sourcing thenecessary workers and providing targetedtraining and further capacity building,product development, and developingand implementing benefit sharing guide-lines. Phase 3 is the implementation phasewhere all aspects of the previous twophases are put into action. This willinclude establishing the final tour activi-ties and operations, establishing networksand establishing tourism products. It isenvisioned that each phase will requireapproximately 6-12 months to undertakedepending upon the progress of the com-munity, availability of resources, financialmobilisation, as well as any unforseen events.

iii

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY


dry forest in the whole of mainland Southeast Asia (1WWF).WWF identified the Mondulkiri Protected Forest (MPF) as beingof high priority during a comprehensive biodiversity assessmentprocess conducted between 1999 and 2003. WWF subsequentlydeveloped the Srepok Wilderness Area Project (SWAP) - estab-lishing a 370,000 hectare intensive protected zone in 2003 withfinancial support from WWF Netherlands. Working with localcommunities and authorities, WWF is developing an ecotourismventure similar to the successful game reserves of South Africathat will attract tourists from all over the world to bird watch,angle in the river, and take safaris into the forest to view thespectacular wildlife.

In recent times, threats to these Dry Forests have become exten-sive, persistent, and diverse. They now include overexploitationof its flora and fauna (logging, Non Timber Forest Products(NTFP) collection, hunting, wildlife trade, over fishing),encroachment from agricultural expansion resulting in habitatloss and degradation, and human settlement and unplannedinfrastructure development resulting in further habitat loss andpollution (agri-chemicals). Underlying these threats, are numerousindirect causes such as poverty and lack of sustainable opportu-nities, and a lack of funding of management bodies responsiblefor the management of natural resources (Goodman, Conwayand Timmins, 2003).

1.2. Rationale

In an effort to secure the necessary funding for the ForestryAdministration to manage the protected area into the future, thedevelopment of ecotourism as a financing mechanism was iden-tified. As a result, WWF has embarked on a project to developconservation and ecotourism initiatives in collaboration withlocal communities, with the aim of protecting the landscape andgenerating new, alternative jobs for local people to replace huntingand commercial logging that threaten the forest (1WWF). TheSrepok Wilderness Area Project2, aims to: "restore the once popu-lations of large mammal species in the Srepok Wilderness Area

1.1. Background Context

The Lower Mekong Dry Forests Ecore-gion consists of a mosaic of open dry

forests, semi-evergreen forests and smallponds and wet seasonally wet grasslands,which support a host of species thatdepend on this variation in habitat (WWF ).These forests also contain some ofSoutheast Asia's last significant popula-tions of large vertebrate fauna locatedwithin tropical dry forests, with somespecies now considered by the IUCN tobe Globally Threatened with extinction.These include the Asian elephant, tiger,wild water buffalo, douc, langur, gaur,Eld's Deer and leopard. The Dry Forestsare also home to several species of threat-ened birds, particularly large waterbirdand vulture populations, of which keyspecies include the Giant Ibis, White-shouldered Ibis, Sarus Crane, LesserAdjutant Stork, and the White-backedand Long-billed Vultures. Reptiles of specialconcern in this landscape includes theSiamese Crocodile, Yellow-headed TempleTurtle, Elongated Tortoise, Indochi- neseBox Turtle, and the Asian Giant Soft-shelled Turtle. In the Eastern Plains area,the San, Kong and Srepok Rivers con-verge to form one of the Mekong River'slargest and most important tributaries,which support threatened species such asIrrawaddy Dolphin, Giant Catfish andGiant Barb (Tordoff et. al., 2005).

Much of WWF's current work in Cambodiafocuses on the Lower Mekong Dry ForestEcoregion, the largest continuous tract of

1INTRODUCTION

1http://panda.org/about_wwf/where_we_work/asia_pacific/our_solutions/greatermekong/dry_forests_ecoregion/index.cfm2SWA is not a physical place nor official name for any part of the MPF but was suggested as a name to describe the core area of the MPFwhere management is most intensive, as well as a potential good name for marketing the protected area for tourism

61


Styled on the ecolodges and safari resortsin Africa, WWF has set in motion the ideafor an ecolodge of a similar nature in theMPF, based on the scenic value, presenceof large animal species, remoteness, andeasily-spotted wildlife opportunities. Theabsence of an ecotourism product ofequivalent size, nature and level inCambodia, and the current dearth of devel-oped attractions and resorts in Cambodiahas meant that a real gap in the marketexists. Thus, the intention of this docu-ment is to advise WWF as to the feasibili-ty of an ecolodge in the MPF, and broadsteps on how WWF can proceed forward.As the previous feasibility study outlinedmuch of the information of the province,it will not be repeated in this document.

2

(SWA) through community based natural resource managementand by developing ecotourism as a source of income for localcommunities". Project's objectives and outputs are:

i. To improve natural resource management through increased community participation in natural resource use decision-making, and to ensure access and sharing benefits of the associated economic benefits;

ii. To initiate wildlife ecotourism activities in the Srepok Wilderness Area and to provide a model for the developmentof sustainable ecotourism activities elsewhere in Cambodia;

iii. To establish community-based monitoring of indicator species in order to track the progress of wildlife restora-tion and inform natural resource management efforts.

iv. To increase the wildlife populations of the area.In particular, high-value, low-impact wildlife ecotourismhas been identified as a means of securing the future of these species and their ecosystem through generating financing for conservation activities, supporting local livelihoods, and to ensure the financial sustainability of the protected area. From an ecotourism perspective, the high habitat diversity creates the potential for a number ofopportunities such as fishing safaris, boating, birding, ele-phant backed rides, walking trails, and game viewing (Goodman et. al., 2003).

This feasibility study follows on from a previous feasibilityassessment of the Mondulkiri Province produced for WWF bySchellhorn (2003). The previous report Developing WildlifeTourism in the Dry Forest Ecoregion of North-eastern Cambodia con-tains much background information necessary for developmentof ecotourism in the province. The report also provided a num-ber of options for ecotourism in the region, as well as tentativesteps to begin the process of development. This current feasibil-ity study will not re-assess the potential for ecotourism in theprovince, but rather build on the recommendations and informa-tion provided in the previous assessment, for ecotourism devel-opment in the MPF.


Table 2.1: Three Clusters of Communes Aroundthe MPF

2.1.1.DemographicsThe following demographic and economic data is derived fromthe results of the above socio-economic survey conducted forselected villages around the MPF (Maling, 2006).

PPooppuullaattiioonn ssiizzeeAs of 2005, there were approximately 16,983 individuals com-prising 3,542 families in the eight communes around the MPF.Communes with the highest, as well as the lowest population,are found in the western clusters. The total population in thethree clusters accounted for about 36% of the total Mondulkiripopulation in 2005.

EEtthhnniicciittyyEleven groups comprise the population in the three clusters,with Bunong Commune accounting for the majority of ethnicpeople at 45% (also the most diverse commune with eight differentethnic groups). The other major groups are Khmer (33%) andLao (13%).

To maintain the success and sustain-ability of ecotourism in a community,

it is important to ensure the community isrepresented and involved, to ensure a senseof ownership and responsibility. Understan-ding community attitudes towards devel-opment and identifying how ecotourismcan integrate with the community's prior-ities allows recommendations for devel-opment to be more realistic and moreachievable. A brief over-view of the com-munities living around the MPF is pre-sented below. The purpose of this is tobuild a picture of the demographic, socio-cultural and economic aspects of the com-munities surrounding the MPF, so thatecotourism can begin to be thought ofwithin these contexts.

2.1.Community Profile

The WWF team conducted a rapid base-line survey in three community clusters.The study included focus group discus-sions in 14 villages, interviewing 568households representing 43% of the totalhouseholds in sampled villages. Resultsof this socio-economic survey are shownbelow (Maling, 2006).

The MPF is located predominately inPech Chenda and Kon Nheaek Districts.There are eight communes located adjacentto the protected forest and for the purposesof the socio-economic survey, were strate-gically grouped in to three clusters -Southern, Western and Northern Clusters(see table 2.1).

2COMMUNITYPARTICIPATION

Cluster/District/Commune VillageSouthern Cluster - Pech Chenda District

Krang Teh Krang TehPu Chrey Mapaei PutangWestern Cluster - Kaoh Nheaek DistrictO Buon O Buon LeuRoya RoyaSokh Sant Klang Le; Ou AgnorSrae Huy Srae Huy; CholSrae Sangkom Serei RotNorthern Cluster - Kaon Nheaek District

Nang Khi Loek Peam Chi Miet; Nang Buo; Kaoh Moueleu; Kaoh Meul Krom

3


4

MMiiggrraattiioonnThe rate of migration into the area was very slow until the lastthree years. 2003 onwards saw the highest entry of migrants inBu Chri and O Boun Leu villages - where 76% are recent migrants.The western cluster, which also contains the most available land,received the highest number of migrants.

EEdduuccaattiioonnWhile there are primary schools in all villages, data shows ashortage of classrooms and teachers in more remote areas ofnorthern and western clusters, thus resulting in multi-gradeclasses. This and the apparent lack of interest among parents tosend children to school and lack of financial capability, con-tributes to a low literacy level for the province.

2.1.2. Economic ProfileAAggrriiccuullttuurree && FFiisshhiinnggFarming and fishing are considered the principal livelihoods ofthe area. Agricultural production is low, however, requiringimprovements in current applications and technologies such asirrigation, soil and pest management systems, and addressingthe shortage of labour and necessary farm implements. All farmsare rain fed, thus crops are harvested once a year. In addition, amajority of households (92%) also raised stock for home con-sumption or sale. All village residents in the three clustersengage in fishing, particularly those closest to major streams orthe Srepok River. Except for the 19% of respondents whoclaimed fishing as a full-time activity, most are part-time fishersfor family consumption purposes.

NNoonn-TTiimmbbeerr FFoorreesstt PPrroodduuccttssAlmost all households interviewed (92%) gather forest productseither for trading or household use. The most important non-timber forest products collected to augment their cash incomeare resin, wildlife, honey, orchids and sleng seeds. Wild vegeta-bles and fruits, fuel wood, thatch, bamboo and wood for housingconstruction were other products collected for non-commercialpurposes. In addition to farm and resource-based productionactivities, several households are also involved in other incomegenerating activities in the form of merchandise/trading withinthe village, hiring out services (skilled labour) or additionalwork in both formal and non formal labour sectors.

2.2. Provincial EcotourismWorkshop

A stakeholder focus group meeting wasconducted in Sen Monorom, Mondulkiriprovince on the 5th and 6th April, 2007.The workshop brought together stakehold-ers of the MPF to discuss the possibility forecotourism development. Participants ofthe meetings included the provincialDepartment of Tourism, Forestry Admin-istration, Department of Environment,Provincial Government and communityrepresentatives surrounding the MPF.The purpose of the workshop was tobring together stakeholders of the MPF todecide whether they wanted to see eco-tourism develop in the area, and how thisdevelopment should proceed. By bringingtogether stakeholders to agree on a con-sensus for development and managementpriorities, it helps them to place eco-tourism development within their owngoals and objectives for the area.

During the first part of the workshop aSWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportu-nities, and Threats) analysis was conductedwhereby participants were divided intotwo groups to discuss the SWOTs fordeveloping ecotourism in the MPF (dueto the small number of participants eachgroup had 2 discussions). Following thediscussion, each participant voted onwhat they believed to be the key priorityfor each SWOT category. After comple-tion of the voting process, the most popu-lar three priorities chosen by the groupare presented below (full SWOT inAppendix 1).

Strengths1.Animals (monkeys, ban

teng, elephants, tigers)2.Birdlife3.Srepok River and rapids

Weaknesses1.Law enforcement

limited/ineffective2.Lack of capital,

resources or knowledge3.No guidelines, eco

tourism law or policy at national or provincial level, no ecotourism plan

Opportunities 1.Support from WWF and

government2.Road connection from

Snoul to Sen Monorom to becompleted in the near future

3.More tourists coming

Threats1.Illegal hunting2.Land grabbing3.Illegal logging


through a strong economic incentive to protect the environmentfor tourism. A shift in current livelihoods of the communityfrom unsustainable practices to livelihoods in ecotourism couldcreate more sustainable forms of employment as the communityis benefiting from ecotourism activities and in turn will feelmore responsible for protection of their resources. Therefore it isimportant to understand how the community uses their naturalresources and how the use and protection of those resourcesaffects livelihoods and conservation. This understanding canindicate whether ecotourism can be a viable strategy for supple-menting livelihoods and conserving resources.In terms of livelihood and income generation, stakeholders sawtourism as providing economic benefits in the form of increasedincome and jobs, and as a result improving social conditionswhich can help to improve the poverty situation in the community.They identified a number of possible livelihood activities result-ing from ecotourism such as handicraft and agriculture produc-tion and general job opportunities. The groups further empha-sised the need and ability to link agriculture with tourism. It isimportant to recognise other aspects of the tourism supply chainthat do not include attractions and can provide an income tocommunities. Economic activities in agriculture, such as fishfarming for example, enables villagers to breed, cultivate andsell fish to restaurants, hotels and guesthouses in addition to thegeneral public. Other backward linkages from tourism to agri-culture could include raising livestock or growing particularkinds of fruit and vegetables required by the industry, to sell tolocal tourist businesses. The assistance required for linking agri-culture to tourism could be in the form of training of farmers,access to markets, ease of processing and transportation,improved farming techniques, access to finance to begin produc-tion or expand, and access to materials required for productioni.e. seed, fertiliser etc. As Mondulkiri province received approx-imately 11,800 domestic tourists in 2006 (see section 3.1.1), thiswould seem a viable option particularly in the short term forsustainable livelihoods of local farmers.

There will also be a need to further assess income options fromlivelihood activities of the communities, in terms of existingskills which can be transferred to tourism, the following werefound: basket weaving, mat weaving, hunters with vast knowledgeof plants and animals, fishing baskets, silk weaving. If ecotourismcan provide higher levels of income to communities or can effectivelysupplement current livelihoods, then this can provide a strongeconomic justification for its development. Through achievinghigher levels of income through ecotourism, this can also providea strong economic incentive to protect the MPF.

Stakeholders expressed a lack of understanding of the nature oftourism and tourists indicating the need for a tourism awarenessraising programme, with local capacity building in tourism.They identified that local capacity will be required before eco-tourism occurs in the area, to ensure that the community is fullyaware of the positive and negative impacts that arise fromtourism. This will include the need for communities to under-stand about ecotourism concepts, the impacts of tourism andtourists on the natural and cultural values, factors affecting thefuture success of ecotourism in the MPF, concepts of supply and

The purpose of the second part of theworkshop was to develop strategies forecotourism in the MPF. This involved theuse of a SWOT matrix. The SWOT matrixwas used as a basis for evaluating wherethe area's strengths lie and thus served asa guide in determining which type ofdevelopment to pursue, and what weak-nesses and threats must be overcome inorder to take advantage of developmentopportunities. Based on their understand-ing of ecotourism, the MPF and theregion, participants were asked to considerthese strengths, weaknesses, opportunitiesand threats in the context of developingstrategies for ecotourism in the MPF. Thecapacity of the group hindered the devel-opment of concrete strategies, and finaloutcomes from this process resulted inrecommendations from the group on howthey would like to see ecotourism developed,and what they felt needed to occur forecotourism to be successful. As this feasi-bility study is the first step at engaging thecommunity in ecotourism, these resultswill form the basis with which to proceedwith further discussion and consultation.

2.2.1. Results of EcotourismWorkshopWhile full strategies were not developedby the group, they did make a number ofrecommendations on how they wouldlike to see ecotourism developed, andwhat needs to occur for ecotourism to besuccessful. These recommendations canbe grouped into three main categories:Ecotourism, Community, and NaturalResource Management.

2.2.1.1 EcotourismAs natural resources are a central drawcard to the success of any ecotourismdevelopment, it was identified by stake-holders that for ecotourism to occur suc-cessfully and remain sustainable, the pro-tection and conservation of the naturalresources of the MPF is paramount. In theprotection of natural resources, commu-nities often lose certain benefits, usuallyrelated to the inability of the communityto expand or exploit current resources oragricultural opportunities. As a result,alternative forms of employment must beidentified. Ecotourism can be used as aconservation and livelihood strategy

5


6

demand, and benefits that could be received through projectsand partnerships.

The equal distribution of all benefits that arise from ecotourismdevelopment in the MPF was seen as important. Benefits generatedfrom tourism must contribute to the objectives of ecotourism,conservation, and community development. Clear and definedguidelines for the distribution of ecotourism benefits will ensurethat benefits are channelled directly to the community, targetingthose in need, and that the community retains control over thegrowth of tourism in their area. When the financial benefits oftourist spending are spread throughout the community whetherby rotating cooperatives, direct use of local services, or generatingfees, ecotourism is better received and viewed as a means ofimproving livelihoods and quality of life. Furthermore, providingincentives for community participation was also recognised asimportant by stakeholders, such as training courses and micro-credit.

Stakeholders also saw the importance of promoting the MPF asa destination for tourists. Effective promotion will be required toencourage visitation to the MPF, to ensure accuracy of information,and to inform tourists of the range of ecotourism opportunitiesavailable. The many attractions of the MPF will have the potentialto be developed further for both domestic and international eco-tourism activities. The communities' ability to promote the MPFas a tourism destination is minimal. Utilising the services of a touroperator, however, to promote, organise, and facilitate touristscan greatly enhance the sustainability of ecotourism in the com-munes. The operator's access to customers and tourism industrynetworks, and their established marketing and promotionstrategies gives them a significant advantage over communitiestrying to do it themselves.

Finally, it was recognised that the development of a proposal toWWF for technical and financial support for ecotourism wasrequired for the community to begin. Financial and non-financialsupport can be derived from local and national governments,donors, NGOs and private stakeholders for developing eco-tourism. This would include developing proposals for financialsupport of ecotourism to submit to relevant agencies and insti-tutions, proposals for developing new products as identifiedaccordingly by the community (walking tracks, homestay etc.),proposals for training related to the previous identified servicessuch as guides, language, environmental training, customerservice, and proposals for infrastructure and equipment neededfor identified products.

2.2.1.2 CommunityCommunity representatives raised the issue of an ambiguousunderstanding of the rights of communities living around theprotected forest and how it applies to development, law enforcement,etc. There was a strong emphasis by stakeholders on reinforcingcooperation with the local authority and line departments to stopillegal activities in the protected forest. In particular, communityempowerment in terms of natural resource protection and com-munity committees in the MPF was seen as a major weakness ofthe communities. The communities largely felt afraid to enforce

and carry out the functions of the NRM com-mittees due to powerful vested interests inthe area. They also recommended strength-ening the safety, security, and social orderin the area.

Stakeholders further identified humanresource development and local capacitybuilding not exclusive to tourism, butalso awareness raising about the naturalresources and the protected area (MPF).Through consultation with the surroundingvillagers of the MPF and through villagemeetings, the community would have theopportunity to better understand aboutthe development of ecotourism and theprotection of natural resources. It wasalso felt that strengthening the cultureand tradition of the indigenous communitywas important to undertake before eco-tourism development commenced. Finally,cleaning up and beautifying the villageswas seen as an important step in attractingtourists to the villages, as well as improvinglocal community hygiene.

2.2.1.3 Natural ResourceManagementThe issue of illegal land grabbing and forestclearing/logging was raised by stakeholdersas paramount to future sustainability ofthe MPF. A key issue identified was theimmediate need to strengthen lawenforcement of the natural resources ofthe protected area, to stop illegal activities. Ifthe natural resources were to remain forfuture generations, as well as for thedevelopment of ecotourism, then theissue of 'soft' law enforcement needed tobe addressed by the relevant authorities.Stakeholders also felt that resources iden-tified for ecotourism and near tourismattractions would require added protec-tion to ensure they remain intact for thefuture. From this, there will need to be anemphasis on the need for a clearer under-standing of the legal framework, stakeholderresponsibilities and empowerment ofcommunity committees to ensure resourcesand livelihoods are protected.

Further recommendations to protect reso-urces included establishing a communitywildlife protected area, and establishing aSrepok River networking community tobetter protect the resources as well as toshare ideas and information about NRMand ecotourism. The issue of damming


the Srepok River in Vietnam and theeffects this would have on the communitieswas felt to be an important issue thatneeded addressing. Stakeholders recom-mended cooperating with Vietnameseauthorities on the issue of shared waterresources.

2.3.Conclusions

A key issue arising from the workshop wasthe practice of illegal land grabbing, forestclearing/logging, and illegal wildlifehunting on the borders of the MPF, thateffectively reduces the community's abili-ty to earn long-term, sustainable incomefrom tourism. The incidence and manage-ment of this would be dependent on thelocal authorities and their ability to miti-gate these impacts, indicating the needfor strong leadership and guidelines forconservation and tourism development,before tourism occurs in the area. Byencouraging the protection of resourcesfor ecotourism, retaining ownership forfuture sustainability, and building aware-ness in community participation, the situ-ation of land clearing and the wildlife tradecould begin to be addressed.

7


8

3.1. Industry Trends

According to the World Tourism Organisation, a total of 24million tourist arrivals are expected for Thailand, Laos,

Cambodia and Vietnam in 2007, with 17 million forecast forThailand alone (WTO, 2007). In recent years there has been anhistoric turning point in the flow of international visitor arrivalsthroughout the globe, with Asia Pacific region overtaking NorthAmerica as the second most visited region after Europe. TheAsia Pacific region accounts for 153.3 million arrivals (over 20%of total world tourism arrivals). According to the Pacific AsiaTravel Association (PATA), Asia and the Pacific recorded betterthan 7% growth during calendar year 2005, largely driven byNortheast Asian markets which grew by almost 10%, year-on-year. The Pacific and South Asia grew by more than 5% whileSoutheast Asia grew by almost 4% (PATA, 2006). The GreaterMekong Subregion (Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Vietnam, China- Yunnan Province, Myanmar) accounted for 17.8 million inter-national visitor arrivals or around 14% of total internationalarrivals to the Asia-Pacific region in 2004. Individually a numberof countries within the region recorded dramatic growth during2005, notably:

• Cambodia +44.0%• Macau SAR +25.9%• Lao PDR +20%• Vietnam +16.7%

3.1.1. Visitor Patterns in CambodiaThe tourism sector in Cambodia has been growing at a rate of20-30% per year, making it one of the country's strongest growthsectors. The high international recognition of Angkor as a desti-nation is the result of intensive promotion by the government atthe expense of other attractions. Cambodia benefits from closeproximity to regional markets and the ease with which it can becombined with tourism destinations in neighbouring countries.As a result it is often offered as a 2-4 day side trip from tourpackage itineraries in the region. The four major markets toCambodia are:

1. medium or long haul tours that include Cambodia among other regional destinations;

2. as an add-on to a nearby destinationsuch as Thailand

3. as a single destination sold within the region;

4. as a single long-haul destination forFully Independent Travellers (FITs).

Cambodia has undergone rapid tourismgrowth over the last 10 years. In 1994when tourism data was first recorded,Cambodia received around 200,000 inter-national tourists. In 2006, Cambodiareceived just over 1.7 million internationalvisitors - an increase of 20% from the 2005figure of 1.4 million. Just over 1 millionvisitors arrived by air, accounting for 60%of all international arrivals, of whichapproximately 25% came through PhnomPenh International Airport and 35% camethrough Siem Reap International Airport.The main purpose of visit was holiday(79%). The breakdown of travel group in2006 was: FIT (59%), and group tour(40%) (Ministry of Tourism, 2006). Thetop ten generating markets for Cambodiaare presented below.

Table 3.1: Top Ten GeneratingRegions for 2006

Source: Ministry of Tourism, 2006

3MARKET ASSESSMENT & FEASIBILITY

2006Rank 2006 Visitors Share(%) Change(%)

1 Korea 285,353 16.79 31.75%2 Japan 158,353 9.31 14.87%3 U.S.A 123,847 7.28 13.19%4 Taiwan 85,139 5.01 55.45%5 China 80,540 4.74 36.16%6 Vietnam 77,524 4.56 56.17%7 Malaysia 77,028 4.53 108.88%8 Thailand 76,953 4.53 20.94%9 United Kingdom 73,767 4.53 10.87%10 France 71,978 4.23 4.40%


3.1.3. The FIT Market FITs made up almost 60% of all tourists coming to Cambodia in2006 (Ministry of Tourism, 2006). The FIT market in Cambodiaoverall is not highly segmented. Common markets that dominatethis segment include FIT budget backpackers and mid to high-endsemi-FIT. Backpacking tourists predominately of a younger ageon a low budget are the dominant segment of this FIT market.Accommodation, tours and food are purchased on the lower endof the scale, however length of stay tends to be longer than pack-age group tourists, thus injecting smaller but sustained incomeinto an area over time. A sub-group of the FIT markets is thesemi-FIT - an emerging market in Cambodia. These are typicallymid to high-end range markets and consist of those who pur-chase a range of products and services independently, butrequire the services of an inbound operator to do the rest. Thismay consist of, for example, purchasing airfares but utilising theservices of a local inbound operator to provide accommodation,tours, and transportation while in country.

For the more specialised tours and FIT, the use of secondary des-tinations such as Battambang, Kampot and Kratie, albeit in smallnumbers, is a more common characteristic of these visitors' patterns.The primary reason for an underutilisation of the country'sresources and destinations is the absence of viable alternativetourism products to the current offerings. There are however, afew specialised inbound operators working in Cambodia whoprovide tours to out-of-the-way places or specialised toursaccording to the needs of the tour group (i.e. bird watching,handicrafts).

While a level of accurate data on specific market segments andtheir characteristics does not exist in Cambodia, the above inter-pretation is based on the consultant's experience in tourism inCambodia, combined with a number of visitor studies conductedover the past four years on ecotourism in Cambodia. A more rig-orous examination of market characteristics in Cambodia will berequired in the future. Questions to be answered will include:who provides for high-end FITs in Cambodia and the region?What is their product? What services are provided? Who com-petes with them? Is this type of market increasing or decreasingin Cambodia and the region? What is the size of this market inCambodia and the region? Where is their origin? Budgets?

3.1.4. The Resort IndustryResorts in the South-east Asia region have become more andmore sophisticated in their product offering over the past fewyears. From spa resorts to yoga retreats, safaris and meditationhideaways, this type of market segment has been growing inpopularity. Trends in the region are towards the higher end ofthe market for these types of resorts.

The resort market in Cambodia is limited to Siem Reap andSihanoukville. While the beach market is evident in Sihanouk-ville, Siem Reap resorts have not developed a segmentationstrategy to differentiate themselves from their competitors. Thisis largely due to the resorts in Siem Reap offering a bed to sleeprather than an experience or holiday. Again, data on resorttourism in Cambodia and the region is not readily available, and

Average length of stay in Cambodia isshort, due to a lack of organised product,and is reflected in the below table.

Table 3.2: Average Length ofStay for FIT and Group Tour in2006

Source: Ministry of Tourism, 2006

Visitor numbers in the four north-easternprovinces (Mondulkiri, Ratanakiri, StungTreng, and Kratie) have been increasingat a steady rate. In 2006, these fourprovinces combined, received approxi-mately 32,707 international tourists.According to official figures, internationalvisitor numbers in Mondulkiri provincegrew from 65 visitors in 1999 to 395 visi-tors in 2002, with recent figures showing1,828 international tourists and 11,831domestic tourists in 2006 (Ministry ofTourism, 2006).

In the feasibility assessment of the DryForest region of north-east Cambodia,tourism was predicted to grow signifi-cantly (Schellhorn, 2003). Trans-boundarytourism flows are a significant factor inthe flow of tourists throughout this regionof Cambodia. The opening of bordercheckpoints to Laos and in the futureVietnam will create significant growth invisitor traffic. Planned infrastructureimprovements, largely focused on roadsand airports, will also increase visitormovement around this region.

3.1.2. Markets in CambodiaMarket segments in Cambodia are cur-rently predominately either the largegroup package tours or FIT, concentratedaround the attraction of Angkor Wat. Thegeneral prepaid medium to large grouptour package typically focuses on SiemReap/Angkor Wat, Phnom Penh andSihanoukville as the primary destinations.A brief overview of the FIT market and itscharacteristics is given below.

PPhhnnoomm PPeennhh SSiieemm RReeaappKKiinndd ooff TToouurriisstt

((ddaayyss)) ((ddaayyss))

Group TourIndividualTotal

2.044.643.34

3.523.983.75

9


thus would require a further in-depth study to assess such factorsas: country of origin, motivation, length of stay, market segments,budgets, and experience offered.

Table 3.3: Resort Industry Trends - Regional

3.2. MPF Ecotourism Products

Tourism products encompass the combination of the physicaland cultural attractions to be promoted, the types of experiencesgained by the tourist, and the services required to deliver it. Aworkshop conducted in July, 2006 in Kratie province, by SNVthe Dutch Agency for Development, conducted (among a numberof activities) an inventory, mapping, and evaluation exercise ofthe ecotourism attractions in north-eastern Cambodia. This wasconducted as a group exercise by the participants from each ofthe north-eastern provinces (including representatives fromWWF). Stakeholders from the provinces were asked to draw acurrent tourist map of their respective province, after whicheach group evaluated their current and potential ecotourismattractions based on a set criteria. Following the evaluation, anumber of sites were identified as priority areas in each province.One of these sites was the MPF.

Participants identified a number of products as being of high valuein the MPF. This included: scenic value (diversity of landscape),biodiversity, presence of large animal species, easily-spottedwildlife, interesting forms of vegetation (e.g. tropical dry andsemi-evergreen forest), uniqueness of species, or of topographi-cal elements, pristine quality of the ecosystems, opportunitiesfor swimming (beach, lake, waterfalls), and natural sports possi-bilities (rafting, diving, climbing) (SNV, 2006). Site visits to theMPF have confirmed these products as being of high quality andimportance in attracting tourists to the area. These products andmore, and their potential for supporting ecotourism develop-ment, will need to be assessed more in-depth focusing on thesteps required for their implementation, beneficiaries and bene-

factors of the activities, and potential neg-ative impacts.

While a detailed summary of ecotourismproducts (based on the resources of thearea and stakeholder and market assess-ment) was not carried out for this study,the resources of the MPF were taken intoaccount during a field visit, to assess thepotential for an up-market ecolodge. Theremoteness, scenic landscapes and presenceof large mammals lends itself to a numberof activities conducive to ecotourism.Activities and experiences can include theopportunity to see wildlife, participate inactivities such as canoeing, fishing safaris,boating, birding, elephant rides, walkingtrails, spas, or just relaxing. Understandablythere will be an inclination to primarilysell the ecotourism experience in the MPFas a wildlife experience. Therefore, ratherthan offering a wildlife experience as thecore product, a more targeted approachwould be to focus on the lodge and theMPF itself as a unique, luxury, wildernessexperience with the highest standards ofservice and excellence as well as qualityof wildlife interpretation, not experiencedanywhere in South-east Asia. Specificactivities that will accompany the overallexperience of staying at the lodge will bedetermined in greater detail, as the lodgedevelopment takes place.

3.3. Competition to theMPF

There are two types of competitor to con-sider: primary competitors who offer sim-ilar products and services that target sim-ilar clientele; and secondary competitorswho offer other operations that providesimilar services but do not attract similarclientele. Competition was examined inthe context of luxury lodges or the equiv-alent, currently offered in Cambodia andthe region, giving indications of how anecolodge in the MPF can be positioned inlight of these existing competitors. Comp-etition was also considered in the contextof the experience. The primary featurethat is unique and significant to the MPFis that it provides a unique, luxury, wilder-ness experience with the opportunity toexperience wildlife viewing not availableelsewhere in Cambodia or the region.

10

Primary Product Type of Experience Comments PredominantLocations

Spa Relaxation, rejuvenation

Thailand is leading the region in innovative spa resorts, and has become a very popular product. Vietnam is up and coming in popularity. All offer a wide variety of treatments.

Thailand, Malaysia, Bali, India, Vietnam

Health Relaxation, rejuvenation

Holistic holidays focusing on detox,yoga, meditation etc. Thailand, Bali, India

Honeymoon Seclusion, romantic

Typically packaged as romantic getaways, the emphasis is on intimate activities (i.e. candlelit dinner,walks)

Malaysia, Thailand, Bali, Maldives, Laos

Eco / Nature

Wilderness, remoteness, relaxation, flora/fauna,adventure

There is a focus on the adventure side with rafting, biking, trekking activities combined with wildlife viewing. The higher end of the market focuses more on remotenessand relaxation.

Sabah, BorneoSapa, Vietnam, Laos,Sarawak, BorneoMalaysiaThailand

Beach / Islands Relaxation, seclusion, tranquillity,

While still offering all beach activities,move towards the seclusion experience

Maldives, southern Thailand, central Vietnam, Malaysia, Philippines, India

Boutique Intimate, tranquillity, seclusion

An emerging market in the region, there is a move away from the largehotels and their tour groups

Thailand, Laos


the range of stock standard resorts available in the region. Thesecould be considered the secondary competitors, as they providesimilar services (i.e. a reasonably level of luxury) but do notattract the type of clientele targeted for the MPF. While this tableprovides considerably lower rates than those proposed for theMPF ecolodge, the price range of the rates gives a comparativeindication of capturing the lower end of the luxury market. Oneaspect needed to be considered is the use of the resort by expa-triates living in both Cambodia and the region looking for shortretreats. The price range of this group would be similar to thoseof the first table. Furthermore, a number of these luxury resortsfeatured do not offer a wilderness or overtly unique experience,however the room rates give an example of a tourist's willingnessto pay for an upmarket (albeit standard) hotel in the region.

The purpose of presenting the second table was to show the pos-sible regional competitors to a luxury, high-end wildernessecolodge in the SWA - primary competitors who offer comparableproducts and services that also target similar clientele. The prop-erties featured are either supplying a luxury wilderness experi-ence or a luxury resort experience in the higher price category.

Analysing competition in terms of pri-mary and secondary competitors enablesthe development of a unique product thatcan add value to the destination, whileensuring that the new product is also com-petitive and sustainable in the long term.

The two tables below briefly and broadlyshow a cross-section of resorts availablein the region. Rates are given for low andhigh season where applicable and basedon the calendar year for 2007. In verybroad terms, high season is typicallycharacterised as 1st November to 30thApril, and low season 1st May to 31stOctober. Unless otherwise specified,resort rates given are for twin share, withstandard features of a resort such as airconditioning, mini bar, satellite T.V., coffee& tea making facilities, IDD telephone,tour desk, swimming pool, bar, spa/mas-sage, restaurants with multiple cuisines,tour desk, business centre, gym. The objective of the first table is to show

Resort and Location DescriptionRates

$USD / nightLow Season High Season

Maison Souvannaphoum Luang Prabang, Laos

French colonial restored building, once the residence of the royal family members, located in the town of Luang Prabang.

$84$96

$165$177

Victoria Angkor Resort & SpaSiem Reap, Cambodia

Located close to Angkor Wat World Heritage Area. Colonial style hotel.

$142$153

Le Meridien AngkorSiem Reap, Cambodia

Located in Siem Reap town close to Angkor Wat World HeritageArea

$200$240

$250$290

La Residence d'AngkorSiem Reap, Cambodia


$165$412

Grand Hotel D'Angkor (Raffles)Siem Reap, Cambodia

Part of the popular Raffles Hotel group. Restored old French colo-nial building. Located in Siem Reap town close to Angkor WatWorld Heritage Area 131 Rooms

$224$224

$271$295

Sofitel Royal Angkor Siem Reap,Cambodia


$200$224

Sokha Beach Resort Sihanoukville,Cambodia

Cambodia's most popular beach resort, this resort is the only luxuryaccommodation on offer in Sihanoukville. Very popular with local expatriates and some locals of Cambodia.

$107$118

$118$130

Victoria Hoi An Resort Hoi An, Vietnam

100 Rooms Located at the beach resort of Hoi An, 30 km south ofDanang city. Closest access is Danang Airport. Close proximity toHoi An World Heritage town.

$132$161$185

Victoria Phan Thiet Resort Phan Thiet, Vietnam

Located on one of Vietnam's pristine beaches, from Ho Chi MinhCity the journey by vehicle takes 3 ½ hours

$110$126$150

The River House Resort & SpaChiang Rai, Thailand

Nestled in a tropical rainforest overlooking the city of Chiang Raiand the River Kok.

$116$174

The Chedi PhuketPhuket, Thailand

108 Cottages Located on the beach

$193$257$307

The Chedi Chiang Mai, Thailand 52 rooms with private courtyard entrances with balconies offeringviews of the Mae Ping River and mountain range

$276$382

$386$422

Ana MandaraNha Trang, Vietnam

Located directly on the beach on 20,000 square metres of privatetropical gardens overlooking the sea, 450 km from Ho Chi MinhCity 68 rooms

$253$318

11

Table 3. 4: Selected Luxury Resorts in the SE Asia Region


Table 3.5: Regional Competitors to Potential SWA Ecotourism Lodge

Ecotours offered in Siem Reap are to PrekToal Wildlife Sanctuary and KampungPhluk, visiting the community fisheriesproject. Another company has been offer-ing community-based tours for a fewyears including an overnight stay inYaklom Lodge, Rattanakiri. They alsooffer homestays in villages in threeprovinces a few times a month. While notentirely ecotourism, one company hasbeen offering adventure trips in Cambodiafor the past 4-5 years, involving trekkingand camping, and cycling tours toSihanoukville, Kampot, Kep, and KampongCham. A list of operators interviewed ispresented in Appendix 3.

12

Resort and Location DescriptionRates

$USD / night

Low Season High Season

Evason Hideaway Nha Trang, Vietnam

Located on Ninh Van Bay a picturesque white beach with coralreefs and towering tropical mountains. 32 beach villas

$655$754

$831$931

Amanpuri ResortPhuket, Thailand

Located on Pansea Beach. 40 Pavilions and 30 Thai villas all with private pool and living anddining villas

$623$700

$831$979

Soneva Gili & SpaMaldives

44 stilted villas Villas are crafted in a traditional style from natural materials andoffer roof-top and over-water sundecks, featuring open air bathrooms, daybeds and a personal entertainment centre.

$1,055$1,585$1,660

$1,995$3,040$3,440

Pangkor Laut ResortPangkor Laut Island, Malaysia

Privately owned island located three miles off the West Coast ofMalaysia with rainforest and pockets of beach coves 148 Malaysian-style luxury villas

$325$400$475$800

AmansaraSiem Reap, Cambodia

12 rooms Each room has individual pool and all similar in design featuringan open plan setting.

$959$1,182

$1,262$1,036

The StrandYangon, Myanmar

32 roomsAll suites are furnished with luxurious fittings and fixtures withfull amenities.

$450$525$900

AmanusaNusa Dua, Bali

Located on a garden hillside with views of Indian Ocean andMount Agung. 35 thatched-roof suites with sunken indoor bath, outdoor shower, agarden courtyard, private swimming pools and terrace.

$700$900$1,100$1,500

Amanwana Moyo Island, Indonesia

Luxury wilderness camp surrounded by tropical forest, set on thenature reserve of Moyo Island. Island is home to deer, wild boar, macaque monkeys, sea eaglesand osprey.20 luxury tents

$650$750

Mahua Kothi Lodgecentral Indian state of MadhyaPradesh,India

Located in Bandhavgarh National Park amongst hills and tropicalforests - a 448 km2 renowned tiger reserve with large variety of mammals: leopard, chital, Sambar deer, dhole, nilgai, wild boar, chinkara, sloth bear, rhesus macaque, black faced langur, junglecat, hyena.12 individual tents each with private courtyards and traditionalmud floors.

$600

Aman-i-KhásIndia

Wilderness camp located on the fringe of Ranthambhore National Park, Rajasthan, India. 400 km2 of park with opportunity for spotting tigers, leopards, jungle cats, caracal, hyenas, sloth bears, Chital and Sambar deer,antelopes and gazelles and a plethora of birdlife. 10 luxury tents, each in Moghul style.

$825

3.4. Tour Operator Surveys

A total of eight inbound tour operators were interviewed inPhnom Penh, to understand more about the current market inCambodia, and the potential for ecotourism. These operatorswere chosen due to the origin of their client base - predominate-ly north America, Europe and Australia, offering unique toursand experiences other than the typical offerings. Of the eightoperators, four currently offered ecotours and four did not.

3.4.1. Current Ecotours OfferedIn terms of ecotours currently offered in Cambodia, Rattanakiri,Mondulkiri and Siem Reap are the only destinations promoted.One company has had a strong ecotour program in place for 7years predominately in Rattanakiri (trekking, elephant rides,visit hill tribes, boat rides), however it recently started sendingclients to Mondulkiri (visit waterfalls, visit a local village).


smaller, more specialised tours, as tourists are becoming increas-ingly interested in being involved both in the environment andcommunities they visit. For the current ecotours offered by opera-tors, customers are mostly very satisfied with ecotours inCambodia as they find their tour a unique experience.Dissatisfaction generally arises from a lack or quality of the facil-ities, such as old boats or hotels, rather than with the ecotourexperience itself, which is a positive and encouraging trend.

Of those companies who did not offer ecotours, the primaryproduct offered was cultural heritage and the temples, a typical,standard tour offered by all operators in Cambodia. One companyconcluded that the small number of requests for ecotours bytheir clients was a result of the age of their clients, who are moreinterested in comfortable high-end tours to cultural sights. Thisindicates a somewhat misguided perception by Cambodianoperators that all ecotourism is budget, difficult, and uncomfort-able. However, it also indicates the presence of a higher endmarket looking for comfort and luxury. Of those companies whodid not offer ecotours, they identified that ecotourism wasbecoming more popular in the region, however the currentproduct offering in Cambodia was small due to the lack oforganised products. Some operators felt that currently a trueecotourism industry did not yet exist in Cambodia, in terms oforganised products, niche operators, and strategic branding andmarketing. Rather the current state of ecotourism in the countryis confined to occasional specialised tour groups or backpackerstravelling to remote destinations. Moreover, if Cambodia hadmore to offer tourists in terms of ecotourism products, thedemand would also grow quicker. Poor infrastructure at thedestinations has also meant that those operators who do promoteRattanakiri and Mondulkiri as an ecotourism destination, gener-ally find them difficult to sell.

3.4.2. Interest in Future EcotourismOperationsAll operators expressed an interest to expand ecotourism prod-ucts offered in the future - a growing market in Cambodia, anincrease in demand for ecotourism, and a high level of interestin ecotours were all reasons why current operators wanted toexpand their products. One operator expressed the need forCambodia to attain the same level as Thailand where niche oper-ators exist to channel specialised tourists from other countries.Another company is currently implementing an ecotourism pro-gramme for their Cambodia office, after a successful ecotourismprogramme in Laos. Another operator was unsure of specificideas to expand, however was keen if the right opportunity pre-sented itself. Furthermore, some operators felt that by offeringecotours, emphasis is placed on the lesser known parts ofCambodia and not only Angkor Wat, which would allow themto offer a more varied package and increase the length of stay.

Operators were asked whether they would consider expandingtheir current ecotourism product to include other products suchas community guides, community-run tours, lodge investment,homestay, etc. Some operators felt that it was important to investin local resources, such as hiring local people and local guides,already linking with some community-based products, was fur-

Frequency of all these ecotours is highlydependent on the season and weather.With difficult road access, particularlyduring the wet season, and in Rattanakiriwith the airport closed, it makes theseareas very inaccessible. In high season,some companies send clients to Rattanakiriand Mondulkiri twice a month, while oth-ers have between 5 and 15 trips permonth. Low season will see between 5and 8 trips per month.

Of those companies offering the aboveproducts, their main markets are high-endtourists from the Netherlands, Germany,western Europe (various countries),Australia, UK, and America. One companyhas remarked that lately there is increasedbusiness for unique ecotours from expatsresiding in Asia, while another has seen agrowing interest from their clients to bemore in touch with nature and the localcommunities, and thus is introducing vol-unteer extensions to their trips, whereclients can stay 3-4 days longer to volun-teer. These philanthropic-type tours haverecently generated much income in thecommunity in Siem Reap. The top fourgenerating markets to Cambodia are typ-ical of the large, prepaid group tour. InSiem Reap in particular, this group type isoften seen as annoying and impinging onothers experiences of the temples. Mostoperators had an aversion to operatingwith big tour groups, as is the increasingtrend in Siem Reap, and thus by offeringsmall group or individual packages theirclients are prepared to pay more for theprivilege. The level of interest in ecotoursfor all companies by their clients washigh, with tours often tailor made for theclient.

All companies promote their ecotoursand other products by attending all themajor travel trade shows in Europe andAmerica, as well as working with severaltravel agents and tour operators inEurope and the US. However, one com-pany's clients also predominately learnabout their company from their website.Most operators feel that the interest inecotourism in Cambodia is increasing, asmore and more tourists are beginning torequest ecotours. The awareness by con-sumers of the impacts to the environ-ment, has meant that larger, tour bus typegroups are losing their popularity to

13


ther interested in linking with niche services or other opportuni-ties. Some operators expressed that the nature of their opera-tions (generally small with limited time and money), restrictedthem in expanding, although the possibility had not beenexcluded if the right opportunity was available. When askedwhether operators would require a partner to expand their ecotourproduct, almost all mentioned the importance of working with apartner. Operators largely felt that a partner would help tobridge the gap between them and suppliers and/or opportunities,and that a good partner would provide all the facilities at thelocation, such as guides, home stays, transport, etc.

Those operators who currently did not offer ecotours, had a highlevel of interest in providing such tours in the future. Reasonsfor this included increasing client length of stay in Cambodiaand thus income to the business, increasing clients understandingand appreciation of the country (which assists in repeat visita-tion), as well as providing opportunities for local people to earnincome from tourism. One operator believed that Cambodia hadthe potential to grow from ecotourism, if it had more productsto offer tourists - a very common issue facing both operators andtourists. The current length of stay in Cambodia is limited to lessthan 6 days and this limits the typical itinerary to Siem Reap andPhnom Penh. The main reason for such a short length of stay isthe lack of organised product and destinations, a common com-plaint by both hotels and operators in Cambodia. Thus, in orderto develop more tourism product offerings, operators were askedwhat they would require to create an ecotour product for theirclients. Infrastructure, in particular high-end accommodation,was the most common response by all operators. Other responsesincluded better trained guides, transportation, accessibility,roads, tourist facilities, and a safe environment.

All operators expressed the need for a partner, whether govern-ment, communities or other private sector, to assist in the creationof an ecotour product. Operators require a high standard of pro-fessionalism as their customers are predominately high-end andthus pay a lot and expect a high standard of service. Therefore,the partner would also need to be able to provide the right serviceand facilities at the chosen location.

There was a high level of motivation by operators for creatingecotours as part of their current itineraries, primarily as it createsjobs and income for local people, helps to develop communities,and teaches local people how to preserve their environment. Oneoperator who has been operating in Cambodia for over 10 years,was motivated to provide ecotours in order to show the beautyand wonder of the country.

3.4.3. Interest in Financial Investment inEcotourismOperators were asked to register their level of interest in finan-cially investing in an ecotourism venture in Mondulkiri. Threeof the eight operators expressed a high level of interest as theysee this segment of the market growing and can see the benefitsof investment. However, the issue of a current lack of infrastruc-ture and facilities would need to be addressed before they couldinvest in the area.

Of those not wanting to invest, the pri-mary reason was accessibility. The diffi-culty in travelling to Mondulkiri, coupledwith long travelling times, was felt to be ahindrance to operations and thus popular-ity of the area. Some operators expressed alimited interest by clients in trips toMondulkiri, however this lack of interestis largely due to a lack of knowledgeabout, and promotion of Mondulkiri. Ifthe area was to receive targeted andstrategic promotion by the governmentand private operators then interest anddesire will grow for the area.

When asked how secure the investmentclimate in tourism in Cambodia was, allfelt confident that investment was secureand would only improve. It was felt thatinvestments not properly researched wasthe biggest issue to security of investmentin Cambodia. Operators were asked whatthey would require to encourage them toinvest in an ecotourism venture inCambodia. Responses included:

• reliable partners and good contacts • the appropriate facilities• a national ecotourism network for

tour operators and travel agencies • a variety of interesting products to

offer, and • excellent quality of product and

service.

The type of investment that operators wereinterested in was tour operations, luxuryaccommodation, and an investment innational level marketing. Stipula- tions oragreements required by the operatorsbefore investing included a small invest-ment with a small private partner (i.e. nomultilateral chains-Hilton, Intercontinental),a good structure, a high level of control,and written agreements of all thingsrelevant with the operations

3.4.4. Current Weaknesses ofthe Tourism SectorThe four most commons identified weak-nesses of the tourism sector in Cambodiawere:

1. a lack of developed, quality prod-ucts, destinations and suppliers.

2. lack of infrastructure (roads, facili-ties)

3. human resources and a lack of pro-fessionalism

4. a lack of marketing by the govern-

14


lagers don't understand that elephants are interesting fortourists). One company already trains 40 guides per year in SiemReap as they see investing in people as a major investment forthe company. Operators felt that more attention was needed atcapturing the higher-end of the market, by offering luxuryaccommodation with tours in the surrounding natural environ-ment.

3.4.5. Moving Forward with EcotourismOperators were asked for their opinions on first steps, if eco-tourism was to start developing today in Mondulkiri. The mostcommon response was to identify the right product according tomarket needs, clarify whether it could be developed and sus-tained, and then promote it to the client. Another commonresponse was to ensure that local communities were educatedabout the impacts of ecotourism, the need for protection of thenatural resources, and the needs of international customers,while ensuring that mechanisms were set in place to ensure ben-efits from ecotourism reach the community. One operator alsocommented on the common issue of 'rent seekers' whereby theMinistry in charge of the protected area typically takes a per-centage of the revenue through fees or rent, without adding tan-gible value to the operators business such as ensuring conserva-tion of the area, managing waste etc. The issue in Cambodiawith tourism and protected areas is the predominance of these'rent seekers' in unequal proportions, making it particularly dif-ficult to operate an ecotourism business. Issues such as this willneed to be sorted out before ecotourism develops.

Operators were asked for their suggestions on how to betterdevelop, market and sustain ecotourism in the future. Responseswere varied. In terms of developing ecotourism, one operatorsaw a current mismatch between the current product offered inCambodia and consumer needs and expectations. Currentlymuch of what is on offer in terms of ecotourism has not beenbased on market research or has been designed by NGOs withthe purpose of raising funds to support community and conser-vation efforts, and has failed to meet consumers expectationsand requirements. The supply-driven approach is also oftenadopted - I have something to sell, and if I offer it, someone will wantto buy it - rather than being based on reliable data.

The need to move beyond the current offering of community-based ecotourism to a more luxury, up-market form of eco-tourism, such as a luxury ecolodge was suggested as a move inthe right direction. Improving on the current tourism infrastructure(roads, accommodation, access) in the country was seen by someoperators as crucial, as well as infrastructure required for eco-tourism such as paths, trails, etc.

In terms of marketing ecotourism, suggestions for the govern-ment included helping to change the image of Cambodia abroadthrough a more targeted and branded approach to marketingand promotions, and seminars and awareness raising to educatestakeholders on the importance of ecotourism to the economy,natural resources and community empowerment. Marketingsuggestions for the tourism private sector included hosting anecotourism fair to promote ecotours in Cambodia and strengthen

ment, a lack of advertising medi-ums, no coordinated promotion of Cambodia abroad, a dark image (violent history and only Angkor Wat) as a result of limited promotion.

Operators felt that all of these reasonsdiminished the ability to attract morehigh-end markets from Europe, Austra-lia, and the US. In terms of the local com-munity, the lack of understanding abouttourism and ecotourism by the widerCambodian community, how to take careof their natural resources and habitatsand turn them into tourist attractions, andhow they can benefit from ecotourismwas thought to currently undermine theindustry.

A lack of tour products to offer and a lackof qualified staff were considered the pri-mary weaknesses that affected operators'businesses and day-to-day operations. Acurrent lack of interest in seeing otherplaces in Cambodia has been the result ofundeveloped product which limits wheretourists go. High-end clients shy awayfrom coming to Cambodia due to theservice and infrastructure limitations. Asmost of the operators specialise in high-endtravel, the lack of luxury accommodationavailable in other destinations means thecompany is unable to send the clientsthere. The dearth of established infra-structure would make it easier to promoteother destinations, as operators find it dif-ficult to organise overland trips when theinfrastructure is so poor. Not havingenough qualified staff was also identifiedas inhibiting operators from expandingtheir business, including the inability ofthe local people to participate due to theirlack of understanding of ecotourism and itsoperations. While one operator felt thatthese weaknesses do not prevent themfrom expanding, they are however cau-tious about expansion - spending timeand money on research before undertakingany expansion.

Suggestions by operators to improve oncurrent weaknesses included improvedgeneral education, training and improvinghuman resource capacities, improving thecurrent promotional efforts of Cambodia,developing ecotourism projects, and edu-cation of local communities about turningtheir assets into tourist attractions (i.e. vil-

15


operator networks, although with a limited product offering andlack of facilities and infrastructure this would be difficult in theshort-term. Other suggestions included inviting tour operatorsto experience the product to best match overseas client needs,and coordination between the government, the private sector,and local people for a coordinated message and image.

Identified challenges in developing, marketing and sustainingecotourism included the lack of awareness of Cambodia as atourism and ecotourism destination overseas and how thatcould be overcome through developing more quality products,helping the local communities to organise and identify localassets as tourist attractions, having the appropriate humanresources to fulfil client needs, and ensuring the sustainability ofecotourism (economic, preservation, and social aspects) is con-sidered as a whole.

3.5. Conclusions

When assessing the potential for high end markets in Cambodia,it is important to tap into areas that are already catering to thismarket. As the Ministry of Tourism does not collect in-depth sta-tistics on visitor segments to Cambodia, it is difficult to make aprediction on the state of the high end market in Cambodia.However, experience in Siem Reap with a number of hotels andNGOs shows that there is a high end market currently coming toCambodia, however the segmentation of this market is unclear.Philan-thropic tourists interested in the plight of Cambodia haverecently increased in greater number, primarily in Siem Reap.

While a number of hotels and guesthouses engage in supportingthis type of tourist, two very successful examples are the Hotelde la Paix and Amansara, in Siem Reap. These hotels are consid-ered five star luxury accommodation, offering twin rooms inhigh season for approximately $350-$600 and $850-$1200 pernight respectively. Amongst the many holiday packages thatthese hotels offer, are their community connection packages,whereby in addition to a visit to Angkor Wat their guests organisethe donation of gifts in advance, of which they deliver to com-munities or respectable NGOs. These packages are their mostpopular and as a result allow them to avoid the crippling lowseason where the majority of hotels run at 30% capacity.Donations have included houses, bicycles, school uniforms for awhole school, etc. One client from the Amansara had a guestwrite a cheque for US$30,0003 to build a school for orphans . Thistype of tourism is increasing, and gives some insight into the high-er end of the market currently in Cambodia. Further in-depthinvestigation of the high-end market and its needs is warranted.However, interviews with Cambodian tour operators has sug-gested that there is a high end market emerging, who do have aninterest in ecotourism and wildlife tourism and thus gives anindication of the future potential for this market.The approach that has often been applied to ecotourism and

community-based tourism is to establishsmall-scale ventures that typically attractthe backpacker market. Depending on arange of external factors, it can take awhile for visitors to utilise these ventures,such as knowledge of the venture on aworld-wide or regional scale, and a timelag between starting and attracting thevisitor to getting the visitor there. Often,these types of remote operations attractthe budget backpacker who is somewhatflexible in their itinerary and may consid-er a visit after learning about it, but againtakes time to reach them and get themthere. This all often takes time and canalso affect the communities perception ofthe benefits of ecotourism. The construc-tion of a high-end ecolodge has the possi-bility of greater ease in attracting and tar-geting visitors due to established marketingand intermediary channels available tothe resorts owners. Adverti- sing and pro-motion budgets are also much larger andtherefore have the ability to target andreach a much wider audience more quickly.Finally, the resort market established inSiem Reap (albeit small) brings potentialfor guests to the resort in the SWA.

In the planning stage of developing eco-tourism in Mondulkiri province and theMPF, WWF, in partnership with the gov-ernment and project investors must con-sider a range of actual and potential mar-kets for the area that would have an effecton a number of levels. Although WWFmay choose to concentrate on one type oftourism market segment (i.e. high end) inthe MPF it must do this in cooperationwith other stakeholders in the province.In doing this, it allows others to enter themarket to provide other products andservices so that a spectrum of tourismneeds are met and the region develops asa whole. If only one type of tourism mar-ket or product is focused upon, thentourism will not reach the wider commu-nity as intended and will lead to sustain-ability issues in the future. By combininga range of activities, attractions and serv-ices, a more holistic product can beoffered that in the long term provides sus-tainability to the industry and the area.

16

3Pers. Com with GM of Amansara


• ecosystems that have the capacity to absorb an acceptablelevel of tourist volumes and a variety of appropriate activities;

• A local community that has undergone awareness raisingon the positive and negative impacts of tourism, as wellas the potential opportunities and risks involved, and isinterested in receiving tourists4.

If the above preconditions are met, this does not necessarilymean that ecotourism will be successful, only that it is worthproceeding to the next stage of consultation and assessment.While not completely void of problems, the general environmentin Cambodia lends itself to a favourable investment environ-ment. Tour operators interviewed all agreed that the countrymaintained a secure environment with which to invest in, albeittaking into account the typical issues associated with a developingcountry. For example, while much work has been undertaken inCambodia to ensure that communities obtain a sufficient level ofownership rights and decision-making and while in practice thismostly occurs, there will be situations where these are ignored,due to issues of power and politics. Aspects such as safety and secu-rity, attractive biodiversity, communities empowered to make deci-sions, an increasing market demand for tourism attractions inCambodia, sufficient ownership rights for local communities,and a favourable economic and political environment all lendthemselves to an environment in which tourism investments cangrow in Cambodia.

The method developed for the purposes of this feasibility studywas to conduct an assessment, to be used initially to appraise thefeasibility, justifiability, and sensibility of tourism in the MPF.This stage represents a snapshot based on rough, qualitativeevaluations and, on assumptions made based on the author'sextensive experience in ecotourism in Cambodia. This rapidassessment of ecotourism's feasibility in the MPF only allows acertain level of judgement of the feasibility and sensibility ofecotourism. Further analysis will be necessary, as it representsthe cornerstone for all subsequent considerations, but is frequentlyneglected in practice.

17

4.1. Pre-conditions toEcotourism Development

Clarifying the various interests of thestakeholders and keeping in mind thegeneral development goals and the specificproject objectives are a major precondi-tion for assessing a possible tourism com-ponent for the current conservation projectin the MPF. The question of ecotourismfeasibility in the MPF would need to belooked at in the context of the precondi-tions listed below. From an investmentpoint of view, it is considered that reason-able conditions for undertaking a tourismventure would include:

• a stable economic environment thatallows the investment to operate and grow, and an effective politicalstructure that gives security to investment;

• a level of ownership rights that allows for effective and inclusive decision-making and participation within the local community;

• perceived and actual safety and security for visitors;

• market feasibility outlining demandand return for a particular investment;

• low health risks, access to appropriate medical services, and a clean water supply;

• the ease of physical access and abilityto connect to the site;

• secure land tenure and protection, with rights and powers to the relevant governing authorities;

• landscapes and/or biodiversity thatprovides a 'pull' factor for a range of tourist groups;

4FEASIBILITY OF ECOTOURISM INSREPOK WILDERNESS AREA

4WWW INTERNATIONAL (2001)


18

4.2. Rationale & Approach

The objective of ecotourism for the current WWF project in theMPF is for ecotourism to be the dominant driver to support thefinancial operations of the protected area that will enhance theconservation of natural resources, as well as providing theopportunity to generate economic benefits from ecotourism forlocal communities. Generally, while ecotourism has the potentialto generate a rate of return for natural resource management andcommunity livelihoods, for many projects the revenue has typi-cally not been substantial enough due to the small nature of theventure, or quick enough for the venture to continue. This is par-ticularly true for hopeful communities, where the realities ofecotourism are not clearly defined. Benefits from ecotourism canalso be slow to show, due to a time lag between start-up, arrivalof actual tourist numbers, and profit generated. Thus the issue ofmanaging expectations of the nature, scale and benefits of eco-tourism in the MPF will need to be managed.

For these reasons, the rationale for initial ecotourism develop-ment in the MPF will be in the form of an up-market, luxurywilderness ecolodge. The MPF provides a combination ofremote wilderness unique to the SE Asia region, and a higherpotential for increasing wildlife compared to other areas inneighbouring areas. The nature and scale of the proposed lodgehas the opportunity to set a benchmark for high-end, high-valuetourism where the rate of return is significant enough to make aprofit for the investor, to support local communities, and for theForestry Administration to finance the conservation objectivesof the MPF.

4.3. The Ecolodge

4.3.1. Lodge DescriptionThe following description, encompasses an example of the possi-ble structure and design of the ecolodge. Only one design hasbeen proposed for the lodge, as the final structure and design willbe dependent on environmental and financial feasibility. Forexample, the final number of tents or rooms will be dependentupon the area's carrying capacity, as well as the break even rate ofreturn for a specified number of guests etc. However, the descrip-tion gives the essence of the type of lodge that is being proposed andpaints a general picture of the resort being proposed and is of aconceptual nature.

The ecolodge is comprised of 15 luxury tents set along theSrepok River at Mereuch, set in the forest. Each tent is elegantlydesigned and furnished, yet when set-up complements andblends in unobtrusively with the native vegetation and with thesurrounding environment. Tents are designed to accommodatetwo guests, and will be identical in design. To minimise the needfor a lot of fixed structures, tents will be set on a concrete baseand constructed of an appropriate material designed for thetemperatures and weather conditions of the MPF. Interior wallsand ceilings are draped in silk with 'rooms' separated by cottonor silk drapes. Entry to each tent is through a screened area that

doubles as a balcony/patio with a diningtable with lazy chairs. There are furthersections for sleeping, bathing and dress-ing. The bedroom area is fitted with aking-size bed. The bathing area includes ashower under the sky and separate toiletwhile the dressing area contains cup-boards. Furniture is minimal and unob-trusive, mimicking the travelling campsof an earlier time. Each tent is air-condi-tioned and there is also a ceiling fan and acooler chest for drinks.

There will be additional tents for dining, alibrary and a spa. Meals will often beserved in different locations throughoutthe grounds e.g. under the large bambooforests along the Srepok River. A selectionof Cambodian and international cuisinewill be served. The library will provide awide collection of coffee-table and generalinformation books on Cambodia. Also onoffer is a selection of novels, magazinesand board games. A small range of localhandicrafts are available for purchase.The Spa tent will consist of treatment roomsand will include massage and beautytreatments.

The tourism industry provides manyopportunities to use and benefit fromclean and renewable energy systems. Forsome tourism businesses, renewableenergy offers an opportunity to demon-strate an environmental credential thattheir customers desire. For others, it is abottom line decision. For the MPF it willbe necessary to implement clean andrenewable energy systems to ensure noirreversible impact occurs to the ecosys-tem. Their use will also present a bench-mark in ecotourism development forCambodia. Action should be taken, bothat the development stage and in operat-ing the facility, to reduce consumption ofwater and energy, reduce waste andavoid pollution. The structural designshould be carefully considered, with tra-ditional styles and locally available mate-rials used when available. In some com-munities, useful income has been earnedthrough, for example, the supply ofthatching. Alternative energy technolo-gies appropriate to the location should beapplied where possible such as solar,wind or hydropower generating systems. Recycling will be paramount and allforms of waste disposal should be metic-


Habitat's participation in the project is seen in terms of supplyingthe necessary start-up capital for the resort's implementation aswell as providing experience in the field of tourism manage-ment, sustainable architecture, and construction. The projectdesign is according to the principles of sustainable architectureand in-line with local building tradition. With minimal impacton the environment at the forefront, the ecolodge will operatewith renewable energies such as thermal solar water heating,photovoltaic and mini-hydraulic power generation, and biomasscombustion, with the buildings incorporating passive measuresto reduce energy consumption, with the building materials sus-tainably sourced, and the wastewater treated (Habitat GrupEmpresarial, 2006b).

4.3.2.2 International Finance Corporation The IFC is one of a number of viable options for financing theSWA ecolodge, however there will be a number of criteria thatwill need to be assessed by the IFC to determine feasibility of theinvestment such as the level of finance of the project, credibilityof the investor in terms of strong operations and good reputa-tion, clear development impact story, etc.

As the private sector arm of the World Bank, the InternationalFinance Corporation (IFC) has a mandate to promote sustain-able private sector development in emerging markets by: 1) pro-viding long term loans/equity, 2) mobilizing capital from othersources (e.g. commercial banks, private equity firms), and 3)providing advisory services. In terms of tourism, the IFC hasinvested in over 180 hotel projects to date (over $1.5 billionincluding syndicated loans) in over 75 different developingcountries. Their portfolio includes a range of projects from largehotels in capital cities to beach resorts and small tented camps inSub-Saharan Africa. Tourism represents a small percentage ofthe IFC's portfolio but it is an important sector for the significanteconomic benefits that hotel investments bring about in devel-oping countries: jobs, taxes and foreign exchange. The IFC'smandate is to promote private sector development in lowincome countries and as such the IFC has a risk appetite that isdifferent from other commercial lenders, preferring to invest insome of the riskier countries.

The IFC focuses its attention to countries that have an attractiverisk/reward profile, but are not necessarily on everyone's radarscreen. Though some countries have a greater growth potentialthan others, there exists niche opportunities where there is aclear gap in supply with growing demand due to unrealizedpotential stemming from unique natural and/or cultural assets.Another unique feature of the IFC is its support for countriesthat are currently off the development map, often supporting thefirst hotel investment in this scenario. As an example, the IFCprovided the debt for the recently opened Serena Hotel in Kabulwhich is expected to cater to the hotel demand derived fromefforts to rebuild the country. As well as investment, the IFC alsoprovides technical assistance to complement investments, suchas developing stronger linkages with local food suppliers orworking with our hotel clients on a natural resource rehabilita-tion project.

ulously managed, with a principle of takingas much waste away from the site as pos-sible, or re-using where possible. Tomaintain economic benefit within thearea, every effort should be made to uselocal produce and services where possible,and to give preference to the employmentof local people. This may require action toidentify local people and sustainablesources.

4.3.2. Investment Resources4.3.2.1 Habitat Grup Empresarial Habitat Grup Empresarial is a privately-owned hotel company based in Barce-lona, Spain. In 2005 Habitat committeditself to an environmental programme inconjunction with WWF International,with the aim of protecting and managingthe natural resources of the north-east ofCambodia through the cautious introduc-tion of sustainable tourism at a low-impact scale (Habitat Grup Empresarial,2006). Habitat hotels joined WWF's 1001Club and as a member, Habitat has been asupporter of WWF International's conser-vation goals for a number of years. Thecompany is also a pioneer of "green con-struction" and is committed to sustainabletourism. To this end, Habitat is interestedin combining its tourism business expertisewith biodiversity conservation; placing astrong emphasis on ensuring mechanismsare in place for sustainable financing ofconservation, and equitable sharing ofbenefits with communities.

Habitat's most important project in thefield of environmental protection is a longtradition with Adena/WWF Spain, executedwithin the framework of the internationalproject's programmes undertaken byWWF International and with the coopera-tion of the Forestry Administration inCambodia. The project is based on threeobjectives, of which one is to "establish anecotourism programme that will con-tribute to the sustainable development ofthe region by converting the naturalresources into both a valuable source ofincome for both the local population andfor the management of the protected area".The supporting structure will consist of anecolodge, with minimal impact to theenvironment, to serve as accommodationfor visitors and personnel (Habitat GrupEmpre- sarial, 2006).

19


20

The IFC's basic criteria for hotel investment are projects that arecommercially viable, environmentally and socially sustainableand have a positive development impact on the country. Thetype of hotels invested by the IFC depends on the specific desti-nation or country and stage of development. On the resort side,experience has shown that mid-market to high end all-inclusiveresorts continue to provide attractive investment opportunitiesin areas such as Mexico and parts of Latin America and theCaribbean, while other resort products ranging from high-endboutique hotels and single resort hotels, to large mixed-useintegrated resorts are attracting investor attention throughoutthe developing world given the high quality of the naturalresources in these countries.

The IFC's hotel investment strategy has changed over the pastfew years, shifting away from investing in single asset hotelprojects (except in frontier or undersupplied markets), in favourof supporting hotel companies (preferably owner operators) orprojects which include groups of hotels, the objective being tohave larger investments with experienced investors and todiversify the risk amongst several properties and/or destina-tions. In this respect the IFC's investment can take a number offorms such as supporting acquisitions, expansion/renovationsand balance sheet restructuring. Their overall goal is to encour-age these groups to invest more aggressively in emerging mar-kets, particularly more frontier destinations, in order to supporttourism growth. One example of this was providing a $50 milliondebt facility for Orient Express Hotels in which they could tapinto for projects in emerging markets, subject to certain criteriabeing met. With other syndication programme, they can supple-ment the IFC's debt with loans from other commercial banks.

4.4. Recommendations for Community-Based Ecotourism

For tourism to produce a positive social cost-benefit ratio, a largeproportion of local people must benefit from the influx oftourists, rather than merely bear the burden of its costs. Localparticipation in ecotourism development has long been a strategyof conservation organisations to provide the opportunity to inte-grate conservation with economic development. Typically in thepast, conservation organisations have pursued a line ofapproach to ecotourism and community-based tourism that dic-tates a bottom up approach, whereby an ecotourism venture isformed with the community and the community eventuallytakes over the operation and management of the venture.

There have been degrees of success with these types of opera-tions worldwide, however failures have resulted, and are largelyattributed to the perceived versus the actual benefits derivedfrom ecotourism, as well as the capacity of communities to operatean ecotourism venture independently. Often it is found thatcomplicated tourism systems require a more sophisticatedapproach to management than local people are typically preparedfor, or capable of. Furthermore, support given by the conserva-tion organisation after the venture is established, which does not

last indefinitely, can suffer after theorganisation has pulled critical supportaway. Those community-based ecotourismprojects that have been less than successfulare predominately the result of notattracting a sufficient number or qualityof visitors. Often, assumptions madeabout the marketability of a particularlocation or experience, have been unreal-istic and not based on research, resultingin misdirected marketing efforts. A lackof tourism knowledge among local com-munities and supporting agencies oftenleads to common mistakes. This oftenincludes overlooking the supply sidesuch that marketing and promotions orpartnerships with the private sector areneglected, or the supply driven approachis often misunderstood and adopted the -if we build a hotel, tourists will comeidea- often plagues the success of tourismprojects undertaken by organisations.

Broadly, two options for communityinvolvement in the MPF are recommended:

1. Private ecolodge employing the local community surrounding the MPF;

2. Local individuals or communities selling products (handicrafts, pro-duce) and services (tour guides) orrunning and controlling their own tourism businesses.

4.4.1. EcolodgePartnerships between the ecolodgeinvestor and the community will be keyto establishing tourism in the area. A part-nership aiming to utilise the knowledge,experience, networks and skills of theinvestor to support local employmentand enterprise can incorporate manyforms such as community developmentagreements, training, or developing supplycontracts. A number of different ways ofgenerating cash flow for the communitythrough the ecolodge should be identifiedincluding training, wages, SME earnings,and a channel for donations.

A fundamental factor of community par-ticipation and benefit generation of theecolodge will be the ability of the commu-nities to provide human resources to sup-ply the ecolodge. Tourism is a labourintensive industry and requires a skilledworkforce for its continued sustainable


Over time as capacity is built with communities around the MPFand experience increases, there will be greater opportunities forcommunities to learn and branch out into their own tourismventures. This also means that development can begin immedi-ately without having to thoroughly train a significant number ofpeople. However, a permanent training strategy targeting specificand immediate training needs will be required. Furthermore,while ecotourism is developing, attention can be given more tocommunities and how they can begin start-up businesses. Localindividuals or communities selling products or running theirown businesses can take the following form:

1. Local individuals selling produce and handicrafts to visi-tors directly or through tourism businesses or theecolodge, is often an effective small-scale way of spreadingbenefits within a community

2. Private tourism businesses (internally or externally owned) granted a concession by the community to operate in return for a fee and a share of revenue

3. Individuals, with links to the broader community, run their own small tourism businesses, with success depend-ent on level of skills and tourism knowledge (important consideration in the training phase)

4. Communally owned and run enterprises - which can suffer from lack of access, skills, organization, and incen-tive can be overcome by support from various sources over time.

Another important component will be to form a close workingrelationship with specialist tour operators. These should beselected carefully to ensure they are well established and aredelivering reliable business. A dominant factor in the limitedsuccess of community-based tourism ventures is the inability ofcommunities to market and promote themselves to adequatelymeet the ever increasing, sophisticated tourism market.

The use of a tour operator to promote, organise, and facilitatetourists to these community-based tourism ventures is oftenoverlooked, however, it can greatly reduce the risk. The opera-tor's knowledge of products and consumers, their experiencewith operations management, their connections and strong networkswith outbound tour operators, their understanding of the tourismsystem and its linkages, and their established marketing and pro-motion networks gives them a significant advantage over com-munities trying to do it themselves. However, setting up a fullysaleable tour can take time. An initial step may be to test a tourprogramme initially with one or two groups. This also has theadvantage of acquainting the community with the experience ofhandling guests. Other considerations include ensuring thatproducts developed are based on the community's traditionalknowledge, values and skills rather than trying to create a supplylink that does not exist, as well as the community decidingwhich aspects of their cultural traditions they wish to share withvisitors.

growth. The ecolodge will be a keyemployer of the local community providingjobs, support services or as suppliers to thelodge. The ecolodge investor and man-agement must ensure that recruitment forthe ecolodge must come from the sur-rounding local communities of the MPF.Staff wages are typically one of thebiggest components of cash that flowsinto local households, accounting foraround 60% of local income5 .

Therefore it is envisioned that employ-ment at the ecolodge should in every waypossible be sourced from the local com-munity. Particular middle-managementpositions within the lodge will require theemployment of outsiders initially, to dealwith such aspects as human resourcesand training, marketing and sales, andfinance and general administration. Thereshould be an agreement to concurrentlytrain willing local community membersfor these positions, with a gradual phasingout of 'outsiders'. In the short term, priori-tised, targeted training and capacitybuilding will be required and in the initialphases will include basic training intourism and hospitality services, pro-gressing to more focused, specialisedtraining in the longer term.

4.4.2. Small-Scale, Micro-Enterprises andPartnershipsOperational agreements should also bedeveloped between local community sup-pliers or entrepreneurs and the investor,for the supply of a particular commodityor service, as well as providing or assistingwith training, expertise, or enterprisedevelopment (also called an embeddedservice). Embedded services add value tothe end product which in turn adds valueto the overall supply of tourism productsand services in the area and ensures sus-tainability of these. Agreements withlocal entrepreneurs may assist them tobecome commercial suppliers, or inde-pendent guides etc. Agreements such asthese, for small-medium enterprises(SME) to supply the ecolodge with prod-ucts and services, has considerable poten-tial in the area.

21

5Lengefeld, K. (2007). Fighting Poverty in Bikini & Slippers: The Contribution of Mainstream Tourism to Poverty Alleviation. GTZ TourismSector Project.


22

4.4.3. ConclusionsThere is an identified need in the market for a luxury high-endwilderness lodge in Cambodia. In 2006, Cambodia received 1.7million international visitor arrivals, many of which flew directlyinto and out of Siem Reap without seeing or experiencing anyother aspects of the country. The lack of established tourismproducts and destinations in Cambodia means that tourists stayfor a short time and continue on to other destinations within theregion to fulfil other needs and experiences e.g. beach, jungle, hilltribes, tranquillity holidays, etc. A common complaint heardfrom the inbound tour operators in Cambodia is their inabilityto offer a diversified package for Cambodia to their outboundoperators in Europe and North America, who continuallyrequest additional products. However, the lack of developedproducts and attractions curtails their ability to offer somethingapart from Angkor Wat, Phnom Penh, and Sihanoukville. Manytour operators interviewed were asked what they would requireto create an ecotour product for their clients. High-end luxuryaccommodation was the most common response by all operators.

There is a luxury market established in the region and anemerging market in Cambodia. Table 3.5 shows a range of luxuryhigh-end resorts available in the SE Asia region. The experiencein Siem Reap with a number of hotels and NGOs shows thatthere are high-end market tourists currently coming toCambodia. Interviews with Cambodian tour operators also con-firm this. In the context of visitor's experiences, the primary featurethat is unique and significant to the MPF is that it will be a luxuryresort experience, in a remote area, with the opportunity toexperience wildlife viewing not available elsewhere inCambodia or the region. As shown in Table 3.4, there exists anumber of luxury resorts in the region that do not offer a wilder-ness or overtly unique experience, however the higher-endroom rates give an example of a tourist's willingness to pay fora normal, but attractive hotel in the region.

High-end, luxury market segments. Either long haul from theircountry of origin or from Siem Reap, for tourists with an interestin conservation, wildlife and relaxation is considered the pri-mary market. Expatriates living in Cambodia and the regionlooking for short retreats form the secondary market. Theresources and attractions of the MPF lend themselves to thepotential to attract a variety of market segments seeking a rangeof nature-based experiences. The advantage in this would be thespread of benefits as well as the impacts of tourists in the area.The remote value of the MPF and the SWA is significantly highfor the region, containing a significant percentage of undis-turbed habitat, an aesthetically attractive river, remote andunique landscapes, forests, and wildlife. This creates a greaterpotential to attract the higher-end of the market, willing to payfor the privilege of staying in the protected area.

The remoteness of the MPF and the SWAalso means that the provision of serviceswill involve importing everything fromeither Phnom Penh or Sen Monorom. Asthe MPF is unable to support any type oftourism activity or development with thecurrent level of services available, this willbe a significant feature to consider whenassessing set-up and operating costs forthe project. However, the use of small-scale micro-enterprises and operationalagreements with local entrepreneurs hasconsiderable potential in the area andwhere possible can reduce operationscosts for the importation of goods.Services will include, but are not limitedto: access, electricity, communications,sewage and water treatment systems, andwater supply. Supplies will include: food,drink, furniture and fixtures, constructionequipment, construction materials, etc.

Community stakeholders identified theirwillingness to support the developmentof ecotourism in the MPF, providing thata number of conditions were met. Localcapacity in ecotourism will need to bebuilt to ensure that the community is fullyaware of the positive and negativeaspects of tourism, and the need forequality in benefit distribution from eco-tourism revenues will be paramount tosuccess.

While this feasibility study is by nomeans a rigorous manipulation of themarket, environmental, social and financialfeasibility of the ecolodge, it can givesome insights into the potential forinvestment and its viability, and areas forfurther investigation.


they travelling? What psychological, physical, emotional, pro-fessional needs are visitors seeking to fulfil while on their holi-day? What sites are they visiting during their stay? What expe-riences and knowledge are they seeking? Are they interested ingaining a deeper understanding of the wildlife, the local culture,or local history, or just the economical aspects? What are theyplanning to do during their visit?

Purchasing preferences: How much and what services are theypurchasing? What kind of tours are they buying? Do they purchasetheir tickets internationally or locally? What other services arethey using? Are they satisfied with the services they are purchasing?What are the expenditure patterns of particular markets and atparticular locations? How much do they generally spend?

Travel behaviour: Group or FIT? What are the travel party sizes?Have the visitors been to the destination before? What informa-tion or reservation method did they use? What types of trans-portation did they use to get to the destination and once at thedestination? How many are 'touring' and on a multi-trip itinerary?How many are just to going to the destination?

Tourism marketing needs to focus on product development interms of the probable interest to the consumer. Visitors are morelikely to engage in activities and experiences in the destination ifthey perceive them as meeting their personal motives and reap-ing real benefits to them. The unique or particular qualities that anarea might offer in comparison to other existing products or des-tinations should be identified. From knowledge of the market,an initial profile of target visitors should be drawn up. Attentionneeds to be paid to the different opportunities and requirementsof experienced ecotourists, more general mid-market visitors whoenjoy seeing nature and local culture, backpackers, and educa-tional markets. The level and nature of marketing should alsotake into account the environmental and cultural integrity of thearea and implications for visitor numbers.

5.1.2. Community AssessmentInvolving as many primary stakeholders as possible, includingthe local community, tourism industry members, and govern-ment, in the development and implementation of tourism plan-ning, greatly increases the chances of long-term success. In orderto ensure adequate stakeholder representation, it will be crucialto involve a broad selection of target stakeholders in the destina-tion including the provincial government, commune and village

23

Arecurring theme with ecotourismventures established as part of exter-

nally funded and assisted programmes,has been a tendency for the venture to notcontinue satisfactorily after the donor haspulled out. Therefore it will be importantto ensure the following:

• a reasonable time span is allotted tothe project so that withdrawal of assistance does not occur too early

• an 'exit strategy' exists• all stakeholders providing support

ensure knowledge and skills are imparted to local individuals and organisations

• a strategy of long-term, local ownership is maintained

• use is made of national or local authority and private sector support.

To fill in the gaps of information identi-fied in this study, as well as assess viabilityof such an operation, a comprehensive,rigorous analysis of the market, environ-mental, social and financial feasibility ofthe ecolodge in the MPF will be required.Each of these assessments requires a con-sultant with knowledge and expertise intheir respective fields.

5.1.1. Market AssessmentTo determine market feasibility, an estimateof the size of the tourism market will berequired to establish its viability as wellas the potential demand for the product.To understand market segments better,an analysis will need to determine:

Demographic profiles: Age, gender, edu-cation level, country of origin, nationality.Who is travelling to the destinationalready, and how many?

Travel motivations: Have the visitorscome for business, leisure, VFR? Why are

STEPSFORWARD5


chiefs/representatives, Community Forestry and Fishery Commit-tees, the tourism private sector, local conservation organisations,local community development organisations, organisationsworking with indigenous people, and the farming community.

Understanding community feasibility will be determined byunderstanding resident attitudes towards tourism development,probable positive and negative impacts on the "quality of life" ofthe host population, and their underlying conservation, social,and economic issues. It also entails analysis of tourism stake-holders' priorities, their views of the tourism sector and biodiver-sity conservation. Participatory dialogue with community stake-holders will allow the community to voice their views on oppor-tunities and concerns to tourism development in the MPF. Apopular and effective method used is the Visioning Exercise.This is commonly used in strategic management and planningapplications and involves asking the audience to reflect on threesimple questions:

1. Where are we now? (What is the current situation at the destination?)

2. Where do we want to go? (Where would the destination be five years from now?)

3. How do we get there? (What are the actions that need tohappen to get from where we presently are to where we want to go?)

Depending on the context of tourism development in the MPF,specific topics may need to be further assessed i.e. biodiversityissues and tourism, tourism development in general, indigenouscommunity issues and tourism. As a further element of commu-nity stakeholder feasibility, individual consultations with localcommunity leaders, key experts, and representatives of localorganisations will help to gain an understanding of communityissues, priorities, and concerns and initial reactions to the poten-tial of tourism development in the MPF.

5.1.3. Environmental AssessmentThe more obvious and most documented of all impacts arisingfrom ecotourism in protected areas is the environmentalimpacts. Before ecotourism can develop in the MPF there willneed to be a benchmarking of the current biodiversity situationso that impacts can later be monitored and assessed against thisbenchmark. A monitoring and evaluation programme recom-mended in this document, will require an initial baseline of indi-cators with which to measure impacts over time and establishchanges (positive and negative) in the natural resources of theprotected area. Those aspects to be documented will include:

• flora and fauna species, including their endemicity, endangered or threatened status;

• functioning ecosystems (e.g. wet-lands, forest mosaic, grasslands, etc.);

• physical landscapes (e.g. biological corridors, mountain systems);

• water resources (rivers, lakes, lagoons, water catchment areas, etc.);

5.1.4. Financial AssessmentA 5-10 year financial projection of theresort will be required to assess the financialfeasibility of the ecolodge. A consultantwith expertise in the field of financialmanagement would require an analysis ofsuch items as projections on future finan-cial performance (returns on investment,cash flows, sales), operating costs, futureoperational performance, estimates onworking capital requirements, inventoryevaluations, business and asset valua-tions, analyses on market demand andentrance strategies, investment equity,loan servicing and capital (re)structuring.Companies such KPMG, Horwath andHorwath, or Colliers International areamong a range of financial consultantswho undertake financial assessments ofthis magnitude.

5.2. PartnershipsBefore proceeding with ecotourism in theMPF, it will be critical for success to forma number of beneficial partnershipsbetween key stakeholders. This will covera range of responsibilities required forplanning, developing, facilitating, andmanaging ecotourism, with each stake-holder contributing to this processaccording to its strengths. Each stake-holder requires a set of roles and respon-sibilities to ensure that efforts are notreplicated or overlooked.

Partnership formation will be requiredover a period of time, with successivesteps depending on the pace and successof progress. Agreements between stake-holders will require active and collectiveparticipation by all, to ensure an effectiveprocess whereby adjustments or changescan be made to suit capacity and ability ofthe stakeholders over time. Below representsthe types of responsibilities each keystakeholder of the MPF should considerand the types of partnerships that are nec-essary. These partnership responsibilitieswere derived from a Cooperation Agree mentbetween the Cambodian Forestry Adminis-tration, WWF, and project donor HabitatGrup Empresarial.

24


• Develop and implement a sustainable financial mechanismand cost and benefit sharing guide lines

• Assist in building the capacity of the FA in tourism• Work with the communities to assist them in integrating

tourism sector plans into their overall Commune Development Plans, using the local government Executive Committee as the vehicle through which these plans are organised and integrated.

5.2.2. Department of Tourism The Department of Tourism is the lead agency for all tourismdevelopment in the province, and therefore plays a role inadvising, managing and monitoring tourism in the respectiveprovinces. The Department's roles and responsibilities willinclude:

• Facilitate discussions at all levels of government on strategiesfor ecotourism development and management of the Mondulkiri Protected Forest

• Lead the initiative to improve tourism and eco tourism development in the province

• Lobby the central government to allocate funds from the national budget to promote ecotourism development in the province through an information centre, provincial brochure, etc.

• Provide support as well as lead approval processes for community tourism project proposals

• Endorse letters of intent to donors for proposals related toecotourism development or management in the Mondulkiri Protected Forest

• Recruit and manage all staff needed for DoT tourism activities

• Cooperate with local authorities, and other authorized institutions in order to prepare development plans for thepreservation of tourist sites, tourist centres and other tourist resorts under its supervision.

• To supervise the service activities of tourism services suchas resorts and transport services

• To collaborate with investors to develop tourism.

5.2.3. Forestry AdministrationThe Forestry Administration (FA) under the management struc-ture of the Ministry of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF), isresponsible for the management of protected forests and forestresources. The FA's roles and responsibilities will include:

• Manage and maintain tourism infrastructure in the MPF as appropriate and in relation to infrastructure serving both tourism and protected area management, e.g. roads

• Provide permission for tourism infrastructure developmentin MPF

• Issue operator licences and investor leases, and evaluate their performance and adherence to policies, regulations, codes of conduct, etc., and if necessary revoke operationlicences, leases, etc.

• Lead the approval of benefit sharing guidelines developedby Forestry Administration, Habitat,

• Lead the approval of tourism zones articulated in the

5.2.1. WWF WWF as the initiator of ecotourism devel-opment will need to take a leading role inthe ecotourism development process,providing advice, technical assistanceand support to stakeholders, facilitatinginformation between the stakeholders,and initiating the sustainable develop-ment of ecotourism in the MPF. This willinclude such roles and responsibilities as:

• Seek additional financial support to the project where needed and facilitate the application of fundinggrants for such things as start-up capital or micro-credit finance schemes for the community

• Communicate to, and network with, internal and external partnersand donors on project activities and results

• Develop procedures, policies and regulations for tourism operations,as well as guidelines for sustainabledevelopment with stakeholders, for adoption by government

• Provide necessary technical supportand capacity building in tourism

• Provide project monitoring and evaluation of all ecotourism venturesand activities in the MPF

• Manage and maintain relevant tourism infrastructure in the MPF as appropriate in addition to the responsibilities government and private sector partners

• As appropriate, support recruitmentand management of staff needed for projected tourism activities in MPF e.g. an Ecotourism Officer toliaise with communities, investors,of government, and WWF

• Input, design and assistance to establish a Srepok Wilderness AreaTourism Committee

• Make day-to-day management decisions on activities related to ecotourism activities as appropriatein addition to the responsibilities ofgovernment and private sector partners

• Monitor tourism development andventures, providing updates and reports to the FA, communities andlocal departments. Also monitor operations as a feedback loop in evaluating performance and non-compliance of operators'agreements/leases

25


management plan• Provide input into the development and implementation

of a sustainable financial mechanism and cost and benefitsharing guidelines, Tourism Committee and communityfunds

• Input into a Srepok Wilderness Area Tourism Committee• Input into a sustainable financial mechanism and cost and

benefit sharing guidelines.

5.2.4. CommunitiesCommunities also play a significant role in the ecotourismdevelopment partnership. They contribute their knowledge,resources (human and natural) and time to its development, inaddition to committing ownership. This is an important aspectto be aware of when developing tourism in local communities,as communities must be committed to take ownership of theproject for it to fully succeed. The communities' roles andresponsibilities will include:

• Actively participate in the development and implementa-tion of a sustainable financial mechanism and cost and benefit sharing guidelines,Tourism Committee and community funds

• Identify those members of the community for direct and indirect participation in tourism

• Participate in the planning, implementing and monitoringof tourism development in the MPF

• Establish agreements and guidelines between the community and the tourism investor prior to tourism operations or development. These agreements and guide-lines are presented in the next section - Section 5.5.3 Tourism Committees, and 5.5.3.1 Tourism Community Fund.

5.2.5. Habitat Grup EmpresarialHabitat's participation, including the company contracted tomanage the ecolodge (whether Habitat or not), will consist ofsupplying the necessary capital for its implementation as well asproviding the experience in the field of tourism management,and sustainable architecture and construction. Habitat's rolesand responsibilities will include:

• Develop and implement the tourism marketing strategy for the resort. Input and co-manage a marketing strategyfor the MPF

• Design and establish a Srepok Wilderness Area Tourism Committee

• Co-design the tourism infrastructure • Procure a company to manage the operations of the

ecolodge. Supervise and monitor contractors including recruitment, contract terms of references and conditions

• Employ local people where possible and adhere to Community Committee and Fund guidelines for equitablebenefit sharing. Input into a sustainable financial mechanismand cost and benefit sharing guidelines.

5.2.6. Tourism Private SectorInbound tour operators will provide thecrucial link between communities and thetourist, through networking, sourcingand bringing the tourists to Cambodiaand the MPF. The inbound operator'sroles and responsibilities will include:

• Marketing, packaging, and selling of the product or tour

• Logistics arrangements for the tourists

• Source products where available and practical, directly from the community

• Adhere to Community Committeeand Fund guidelines for equitable benefit sharing

• Input and agree to a sustainable financing mechanism, and cost benefit sharing guidelines

A significant advantage in forming part-nerships between the community andlocal tour operators is that impacts can becontrolled, employment opportunitiesincreased, the level of development deter-mined, and other responsibilities andrequirements established. Possible disad-vantages of utilising an operator is that aproportion of revenue will leave the area.This risk can be minimised in the planningstages whereby it is decided that opera-tors must pay either an annual fee or apercentage based on each tourist (whichis ultimately passed on to the consumer),or some variation on that concept.

5.2.7. Mondulkiri ProvincialAuthorityThe local governing authority of theprovince is responsible for all publicworks within the municipality. TheAuthority's roles and responsibilities willinclude:

• Adher to, and comply with, TourismCommittee regulations and guidelinesin terms of tourism development standards and benefit sharing

• Lead and assist in the facilitation of investors in the province

• Ensure that guidelines for tourism development standards and communityconsultation are sufficient and transparent

• Ensure investors follow and adhere to those guidelines and standards and investment fits with communityand provincial plans for economic development

26


Figure 4.1: Stakeholder Participation in Tourism in the MPF

27


6STAGEDIMPLEMENTATION

To maximise the success of ecotourism in the MPF, it will beimportant to ensure a staged approach towards implementation

is adopted. In this way the necessary requirements are successfullymet before proceeding to more complex stages of development.This will ensure that all stakeholders are prepared and equippedto handle the ensuing effects that will occur as a result of tourismentering the area. All stages of implementation must be consid-ered within a holistic, long-range strategic planning approach totourism development in the area, with each new developmentpart of a logical step of the whole-approach process. In movingforward towards next steps, WWF and Habitat will need toundertake an Ecotourism Management Plan for the MPF.

The plan's structure should be separated into three phases-Phase 1 (foundation), Phase 2 (preparation), and Phase 3 (imple-mentation). These three phases are recommended to WWF asthe necessary steps required and outline related activities thatWWF can either undertake or delegate. Several stakeholders(organisations and institutions) will be required to devote afixed amount of time in varying stages to the implementationdepending on the phase, activity and the support required. AllPhases must be considered within a holistic, strategic planningapproach to tourism development in the area.

Phase 1 lays the foundation for developing ecotourism. Activitiesoutlined in this Phase involve raising awareness with the com-munity and stakeholders, while preparing all of the necessaryagreements and guidelines that will need to be establishedbefore ecotourism can proceed. This will include guidelines,monitoring and evaluation programmes, and capacity building.Phase 2 is the preparation phase where the community and theMPF is organised for the implementation of ecotourism. Thiswill include sourcing the necessary workers and providing targetedtraining and further capacity building, product development,and developing and implementing benefit sharing guidelines.Phase 3 is the implementation phase where all aspects of the previoustwo phases are put into action. This will include establishing thefinal tour activities and operations, establishing networks andestablishing tourism products. It is envisioned that each phasewill require approximately 6-12 months to undertake dependingupon the progress of the community, availability of resources,financial mobilisation, as well as any unforseen events.

6.1. Phase 1 - Foundation

6.1.1. AssessmentsSections 5.1.1 to 5.1.4 outline the reasoningand process for a full assessment of theviability of the ecolodge. A market, envi-ronmental, social and financial feasibilityassessment will be required at the outset,with each assessment requiring the servicesof consultants with knowledge andexpertise in their respective fields. Theseassessments can be conducted in paralleland would take between 2-4 months toconduct. From there, specific plans can bedeveloped for the ecolodge (i.e. marketingplan, financial business plan etc) that willfocus, channel and drive the development ofthe ecolodge, and will act as primaryguidelines from which decisions will bemade.

6.1.2. EcotourismManagement PlanThe Ecotourism Management Plan is adocument that expresses recommenda-tions for how ecotourism is to be carriedout in a protected area, and is based uponthe general management plan of a speci-fied protected area. Typically, the planwill be a detailed continuation of generalguidelines established in the general man-agement plan, such as overall protectedarea management objectives, zoningstructure and recommendations for eco-tourism. The main philosophy of the planwill be to establish a situation that willgovern the development of tourism withinthe MPF, as well as diversify the productto encourage private sector and localcommunities to develop ecotourismactivities within and outside the MPA.

The plan should propose the creation of adiversity of experiences, accommodationtypes, and locations for ecotourism facili-ties that are crucial to the success of any

28


Evaluation Procedures Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) is crucial to assess the successof ecotourism as well as identify problems and adaptive man-agement strategies. Programme evaluation is essential to ensurethat ecotourism development is meeting the needs of the industry,community, and government institutions. Through M&E it willbe possible to determine the effectiveness of ecotourism devel-opment as a strategy for poverty alleviation, conservation, eco-nomic improvement, etc. M&E programmes should be estab-lished to examine changes (positive and negative) in the naturalresources, community livelihoods, and tourism growth in theprovince.

Projects will be considerably strengthened by regular monitoringand feedback to assess success and identify weaknesses thatmay need to be adjusted. Simple indicators should be agreedand made known to the community. These should cover eco-nomic performance, local community reaction and well-being,visitor satisfaction, and environmental changes. Monitoringshould be kept simple and feedback should be obtained fromvisitors, tour operators, and local people. Training of local participantsin monitoring processes may be required.

There is a need to monitor the extent of tourism activities andtheir impacts. An efficient visitor site monitoring programmeshould be developed to identify both positive and negativetrends with respect to environmental conditions, visitor experience,and the condition of tourism infrastructure and services. Typicalmonitoring criteria relating to unacceptable impacts include bio-physical (erosion, vegetation damage, water quality, spatialspread, pollutants) and social (conflicts of use, visitor behaviour,visitor flows, visitor satisfaction, facility standards, communityimpacts, social change).

A typical monitoring programme will incorporate identifyingimpacts and indicators to be monitored, selecting methods ofmeasurement, identifying limits or ranges of acceptable changewith stakeholder input, developing an operational monitoringplan, training of staff, managers and community representativesin monitoring techniques, analysis of data and effecting manage-ment changes, carrying out monitoring and examining data,presenting monitoring results to all stakeholders, and evaluatingthe monitoring programme and conducting outreach.

6.1.4. Tourism Awareness Raising The purpose of awareness raising is to allow communities tounderstand the nature of tourism and its impacts in addition tohow this affects conservation of the area. Materials such asposters, videos, and community meetings will be the key to dis-tributing this information. The outcome is to ensure that com-munities are fully aware of tourism and using this informationare able to make informed choices regarding the type and level oftourism development in their community.Before proceeding with ecotourism the community must be pre-pared for the possible effects arising from its development.Capacity building in tourism will involve tourism and eco-tourism concepts, types of ecotourism development and partici-pation levels, the positive and negative impacts of tourism onthe environment and the community, factors affecting the suc-

ecotourism destination. Input from allstakeholders around the MPF such asthose outlined in section 5.2. (i.e. tourismoperators, representatives from commu-nities, representatives from local governmentagencies, WWF etc.), will be required ifthe plan is to be embraced and 'owned' byall stakeholders. While initiated at thegroundwork stage in Phase 1, the Ecotou-rism Management Plan (EMP) will needto be refined throughout the phases, totake into account changing conditions.However, implementation of the planwould ideally begin in Phase 2.

A typical EMP should incorporate thefollowing aspects:

• Background, objectives and contextof the plan, within the overall integration of the management plan of the MPF

• A detailed description of products,attractions and facilities to be con-sidered, focusing on resources required, community participation,potential impacts and product development.

• Development of a tourism conceptor brand (e.g. Serengeti of Asia), including relevant themes and linkages to other attractions,products and areas

• A spatial plan, including site specificplans for tourism development andzoning

• A circulation plan, outlining possibleroutes, gateways, distribution points etc. for tourism activities and movements, to ensure that additional roads and paths are not constructed for tourism use, andcarrying capacities can be set, as these transport nodes will receive the most impact

• Identification of pilot projects, concessions, partners, community participation, training interventionsfor activities and projects etc.

• Identification of tourism support services and aspects such as inter-pretation, facilities, infrastructure etc.

• A framework of developmentincluding timeframes for completionof activities and adequate feedbackmechanisms of the plan by all stakeholders.

6.1.3. Monitoring and

29


30

cess of ecotourism, ways the community can be involved in eco-tourism, the benefits that could be received, and the benefits ofconserving the natural resources for ecotourism.

Awareness raising would be undertaken over a period of time toallow for communities to absorb the information and raise ques-tions about particular issues. It also gives them the opportunity tomore widely disseminate this information so that the whole com-munity is aware, and any ideas or issues can be raised at the nextsession. Training of the local community at a variety of levelswill also be required and will be dependent on the level of par-ticipation and types of ecotourism development proposed forthe area.

6.1.5. Institutional StrengtheningThis will involve strengthening the collaboration between governmentinstitutions and stakeholders by making arrangements for each towork together to ensure all aspects of the plan for ecotourismdevelopment is being implemented. Regular meetings betweenstakeholders in order to encourage proactive participation in theplanning and decision making process will ensure comprehensivedevelopment of tourism. A tourism working group made up ofrepresentatives from all relevant institutions may also strength-en this collaboration process.A certain element of awareness raising in tourism will need to beconducted with the relevant institutions of the MPF. This is toensure that decisions made by institutions correlate to esta-blished tourism principles of markets, demand, supply, compe-tition, and sustainability. Often decisions regarding tourismdevelopment in Cambodia are made in an environment of limitedunderstanding of the tourism system and how it functions. As aresult, many tourism developments may not contribute to thelong term sustainability of the tourism industry, communitiesand resources. Therefore it will be essential to include institution-al strengthening and capacity building in tourism for relevantinstitutions.

6.1.6. Site Development Planning and ZoningIndividual site development plans for the primary ecotourismsites identified in the MPF will need to be developed. Site planswill need to carefully take into account land clearing for resortdevelopment, waste systems and their disposal, construction ofnecessary roads if required, to minimise impacts. Further,acceptable resort density, referring to the number of buildingsper square metre as well as the average size of individual buildings,primarily requires that the correct balance be found betweendevelopment and ecological sensitivity. This will also need to beconsidered in the site development plans in the MPF.These site plans should contain details of all the actions neededto develop these sites and their order of implementation, the scopeof the proposed development and detailed maps to indicatewhere proposed infrastructure should be located. Additionally,an infrastructure plan outlining the availability of basic servicessuch as electricity, sewage and water, will all need to be consid-ered within a sustainable context and protected area best practice.In addition to setting aside areas for ecotourism development,further zoning as it relates to ecotourism will need to be carriedout to properly allocate different uses of the MPF. It is envisaged

that tourism activities will be carried outin a variety of forms and intensities in theMPF in the future, and thus zoning fortourism and the capacity of the area tosustain numbers and volumes shouldreflect this. Ecotourism zoning categories,are based on an underlying philosophy ofcreating a balance between ecotourismdevelopment objectives and conservationof the area and its carrying capacity.These ecotourism zones should be devel-oped to fit within the overarching zoningmanagement recommendations for theMPF, with the location of the various eco-tourism elements incorporated. Thedemarcation of ecotourism zones will bedependant on the proposed and actualuse of the MPA and its biological impor-tance. Typical zones will include:

• Ecotourism Anchor Zones• Secondary Ecotourism Zones• Ecotourism Conservation Zones

6.1.6.1 Ecotourism Anchor ZonesLand uses which typically require specialconsideration can be located in the eco-tourism anchor zones because of theirneed to interface with a range of touristmarkets and desire to capitalise on theamenity of the area. These should belocated outside the MPF. Within thesezones will be support services such ascommercial, educational, medical, utilityservices, etc. This zone can act as the basefor all ecotourism activities and could beplaced within the buffer zone of the MPF.

6.1.6.2 Secondary EcotourismZonesSecondary ecotourism zones can be locat-ed within and outside the MPF, and caninclude areas of biological importance,though do not include critical habitats.These zones are typically set aside formoderate ecotourism uses (e.g. ecolodge,interpretative trails) with an agreed level ofimpacts accepted. Planning and regula-tions in secondary zones should be morestringent than in anchor zones. In addi-tion, there must be an assurance that allproposed facilities respect the zoningguidelines set down in the overall man-agement plan of the MPF. The following isan example of facilities and activities thatcould occur in secondary zones and howthey relate to the overall managementplan for zoning:


In terms of training, it will be important to get the level of deliv-ery and content right. In general, it has been found that short,technical courses have had little impact. Longer courses, includinglearning by doing and on the job training, have proved necessary.Ecolodge training will incorporate specific training in the varietyof sectors (i.e. kitchen, housekeeping), with more general service-type training (i.e. handling visitors, personal hygiene, customercare, hospitality skills).

Those in the community who wish to set up their own tourismbusiness or ventures will require training in a variety of aspects.This should be carefully discussed with the communities them-selves beforehand. The type and length of training will bedependant upon the type of job, and should involve a mixture offormal and informal methods. Ancillary training would berequired for boat drivers, vendors, porters, community rangers,and general labour force. Targeted training for small-scale micro-enterprises will encompass such aspects as:

• product development• handling visitors, customer care and hospitality skills• working and negotiating with commercial operators• management skills, legal issues and financial control• guide training, including content and delivery• basic language training

Once villagers are identified for training the procedure is todevelop specific training programmes, designing course content,select trainees and trainers, and develop an evaluation proce-dure. It will be important for those employed in the ecolodge togo through intensive training in aspects of operations, languageand service for six months with the remainder being learnt 'onthe job', with instruction, guidance and feedback mechanisms toadjust and improve upon the current knowledge and skills.

6.2.3. Community Tourism CommitteesA Community Tourism Committee (CTC) is a new concept inCambodia, created for the purposes of the planning and manage-ment of tourism and its resources. While community-basedforestry and community-based fishery committees are alreadyestablished in many communities throughout Cambodia,tourism is a new addition. In other areas where community-based tourism has developed, tourism committees are usuallyformed within existing community forestry or village commit-tees. The necessity for having a specific tourism committee is toensure that all issues related to the development of tourism aregiven appropriate consideration within a context conducive toits sustainable and appropriate development.

In the initial stages of planning for ecotourism in the MPF, a CTCshould be established to facilitate the planning, development andbenefit sharing processes of ecotourism development. The CTCwill be the key body through which all decisions regardingtourism development are made, allowing for the coordinationand participation of all stakeholders of the MPF. This would alsoensure that outside interests do not have the chance to control thepower, development decisions and benefits of tourism. The role ofthe Committee could include such aspects as:

Luxury tented ecolodge - Zone 3. Mereuch,where the location of the ecolodge will be,has been identified as a managementzone 3 area (visitation minimal, no last-ing, permanent infrastructure, high con-servation priority) and is consistent withzone 3 recommendations that suggestmoderate tourism (defined as swimming,boating, fishing, walking/trekking). Thiszone has been identified as containinghigh scenic and biological value and maynot be able to withstand a large amount ofdisturbance over time, and thus a set ofmonitoring indicators and limits foracceptable change should be developed.

6.1.6.3 Ecotourism ConservationZonesThis zone is typically based on a highlevel of biodiversity sensitivity andthreatened and vulnerable species andhabitats. This zone can be divided toinclude zones of exclusion to tourists,where WWF/FA staff and researchers areonly allowed access, as well as zoneswhere minimum infrastructure is allowedbut predominately for interpretive purpos-es and aimed at facilitating visitor accesswith as little impact on the naturalresources as possible. This can includesuch facilities as trails, bird hides, board-walks, viewing platforms, and minimalinterpretive panels for orientation andinterpretation.

6.2. Phase 2 - Preparation

6.2.1. Ecolodge DevelopmentBased on the outcomes of the individualin-depth assessment of the feasibility ofthe ecolodge in Phase 1, it is envisagedthat the development of the lodge wouldbegin in this phase.

6.2.2. Sourcing HumanResources and TrainingStaff sourced from the local communitiesaround the MPF will take precedenceover employing outsiders in the ecolodge.Community consultations will determinethose within the community who wish tobe employed in tourism, and a selectionprocess will need to occur. This will largelycome from community meetings and focusgroups.

31


32

• deciding on the direction of development and managementof ecotourism in their commune,

• benefit-sharing arrangements, • endorsing the establishment of guidelines and regulations

for tourism, • participation arrangements, • developing partnerships with relevant stakeholders, and • coordinating with tourism industry operators and

government institutions.Establishing the CTC should be guided by existing models ofcommunity-based forestry and fishery committees alreadyimplemented in the MPF. Reasons for this are twofold. Firstly,the community is accustomed to the structure and setting upprocess of these committees so the transference process totourism can be done with relative ease. Secondly, the commit-tees are supported by the structures and guidelines set out in theRoyal Decrees for establishing forestry communities thus givingthem validity within a legitimate context. It is highly recom-mended therefore that the tourism committees follow theprocess mentioned in the Royal Decrees with adaptation to thetourism context.

6.2.4. Tourism Community FundBenefits generated from tourism in the area must contribute tothe objectives of ecotourism, conservation, and community deve-lopment. Ecotourism development in the MPF should be structuredin a way that members of the community benefit from its devel-opment. Clear and defined guidelines for the distribution of eco-tourism benefits will ensure that benefits are channelled directlyto the community, as well as the MPF, targeting people andareas in need. When the financial benefits of tourist spending arespread throughout the community whether by rotating cooperatives,outsourced local services, or generating direct fees, ecotourism isbetter received and viewed as a means of improving livelihoodsand quality of life as well as resulting in better protection of theresources. Benefit sharing arrangements will need to be plannedfor and established prior to the implementation of any activitiesand the generation of funds.

There are a number of ways for the community to generateincome from tourism. Apart from individual salaries, the com-munity and the MPF must also be able to benefit as a whole fromecotourism development. One popular method of raising collectivefunds for the community is through a Community Fund. TheFund is a type of revenue generating mechanism that consists ofa fee or percentage of the total revenue earned from all tourismactivities. From entrance fees to private sector levies, these fundscan be channelled back to pay for securing livelihoods andenforcing conservation.

Assistance will be required by the community to establish theFund. This may come from various sources such as Seila6 andWWF. As the CTC should be the key body through which all deci-sions regarding tourism development are made in the commune,it should play a key role in the establishment and operation ofthe Fund.

The objective, structure, and distributionsharing mechanisms of these CommunityFunds will need to be decided and agreedto by the community, possibly through theCTC (see previous section). Before revenuesare collected, it will be important to estab-lish how the income should be spent, toensure that conservation objectives andcommunity welfare is being met. If this isnot achieved at the beginning, ecotourismdevelopment is less likely to be successfulin the long-term.

There are a number of ways to spend rev-enues in order to meet conservation andcommunity objectives. This must be decidedand developed by all stakeholdersaccording to priorities such as training orstudy tours; small-scale marketing; payingsalaries of community rangers; improvinginfrastructure in the commune; assistingthe poorer people in the community;providing communities with start-upfunding to begin an ecotourism venture, orimproving schools or health services.

An example of the types of steps requiredfor establishing a community fund include:

1. Set the purpose and objectives of the Fund (i.e. what type of fund and what will the Fund contribute towards?)

2. Determine and record targeted beneficiaries (individuals, groups,

committees, selected villages, communes, departments etc.)

3. Determine the percentage and frequency of revenue to be depositedinto the fund

4. Establish procedures for the collection and distribution of all income, with transparency measures built in:

a. How will payments be collectedand how will revenue be deposited into the Fund?

b. What will be the procedure to withdraw money from the Fundto pay beneficiaries and expenses(i.e. records, approval signatures,multiple signatures etc.)?

c. How often will the Fund be reviewed and audited?

5. Establish monitoring procedures to see if targeted beneficiaries are benefiting from the income from ecotourism.

6As of early 2007, the government and donor-supported Seila decentralization programme is undergoing restructuring. It is expected tocontinue, but in a different form.


ship agreements are established. If a tour operator is involved,discussions and negotiations regarding the logistics of the tourwill be required. This will involve the tour operator coordinat-ing with the community to refine the product and develop a setpackage or packages to sell to their customers. Benefit sharingarrangements between the operator and the community in theform of payments will also need to be decided in addition to theuse of the community's resources (i.e. what will be used from thecommunity and what will need to be brought from outside).Responsibilities and roles of the operator and the community willalso need to be established. This can all be facilitated through theCTC.

6.3.2. Establishing NetworksThis will involve building networks with industry and othercommunities to maximise promotion and support. The commu-nity will need to build networks with the tourism industry tomake them aware of the tourism products offered in the MPFarea, as well as helping in the facilitation of tourists to the area.These networks can also assist the community with importantfeedback on their products and customer satisfaction. It will alsobe important for the communities to build networks with othercommunities either engaged in or considering community basedecotourism. This will allow both communities to share andexchange experiences and lessons learnt, as well as receive supportfrom each other. To build on the learning and understanding ofthe community with regard to community based ecotourism, itwill be important for selected representatives to attend relevantmeetings or workshops. This will allow the community toreceive new ideas as well as support. Furthermore, by invitingother communities to the MPF area this further builds on thesesupport and information sharing networks. These activities areall designed to expand on current learning and understand sothat ecotourism development in the MPF area can improve andsucceed.

6.2.5. Capacity Building andAdvocacy This will need to be continued throughoutthis phase, its activities being an extensionof the activities occurring in Phase 1.Capacity building in plan preparation,committee operations, and partnershipagreements will need to be undertakenand built upon previous efforts. The use ofstudy tours to other community-basedecotourism sites both in Cambodia andregionally would be beneficial in exposingthe community to how community basedecotourism is structured and how it oper-ates, in addition to drawing lessons learntby other communities. These sites couldinclude Chambok, Kompong Speuprovince, and Prek Toal Wildlife Sanctuary,on the Tonle Sap Lake.

6.3. Phase 3 -Implementation

6.3.1. Tour Operations andProduct Establishment This will involve each community memberor enterprise ensuring that their tourismproducts are finalised and ready fortourists. This would require that theappropriate infrastructure is in place, thecommunity is well-informed and trained,benefit sharing arrangements and partner-

33


34

Activity Objective Implementation Timing Target Groups ResponsibleStakeholder

Assessments· A market, environmental,

social and financial feasibility assessment

· site and country surveys

· specific plans i.e. marketing plan, financial business plan etc

2-4 months

· Industry· Community· Prov. Gov· FA, DoE, DoT

WWF

Tourism awareness raising

1. Definition of tourism2. Types of tourism3. Tourism impacts: economic,

environmental, social and cultural4. Tourism for conservation

· brochure· communal meetings· video 2 months

· Community· Private sector· Government

institutions

Department of Tourism, Mondulkiri

Monitoring & evaluation

· determine the effectiveness of ecotourism development as a strategy for poverty alleviation etc, conservation,economic improvement etc.

· examine changes in the natural resources, community livelihoods, andtourism growth" Ensure that ecotourismdevel opment is meeting the needs of the industry, community and government institutions

· site surveys· community surveys on going

· Industry· Community· Relevant government

institutions

· WWF· FA

Ecotourism Management Plan

· objectives and context of the plan· detailed description of products,

attractions and facilities to be considered· relevant themes and linkages to other

attractions, products and areas· spatial plan, including site specific

plans for tourism development and zoning

· circulation plan, outlining possible routes, gateways, distribution points etc.

· identification of pilot projects, concessions, partners, community participation, training, support services.

· timeframes for completion

· stakeholder workshops

· inventory of attractions & products

· site surveys

·

Site Development Planning &

Zoning

· To develop detailed site plans incorporating:- actions needed - scope of proposed develpment detailed- infrastructure plan

· site surveys· community

surveys 1-2 months· FA· WWF

Institutional Strengthening

· To strengthen collaborations between government institutions and stakeholders

· arrangements for working collaboratively

· regular meetings between governmentinstitutions and stakeholders

· institutional meetings

· awareness raising 2 months

· relevant government institutions

· Community Tourism Committee

·

Phase 1 -FFoundation


35


Sourcing HR & Training

· To ensure that the community is properlytrained to receive tourists develop specific traiing programmes

· design curriculum content· select trainees and trainers· conduct training modules· develop an evaluation procedure

· Training programmes(formal & informal)

Dependant on type of job or skill required Up to 18 months

· Communities of MPF

· Technical advisors / Specialised trainers

· WWF· DoT

Ecolodge Development

· identifying key product, location, targetmarkets, pricing schedules, types of promotional mediums, channels of distribution, possible partnerships

· lodge construction

2 years

· Technical Advisors

· WWF· Habitat

Capacity Building & Advocacy

· To ensure communities understand the activities of Phase 1

· reinforce and build on this understandingCapacity building in plan preparation, by-laws, committee operations, partnership agreements

· Community meetings 6 months

· Community· Community Tourism

Committee

· Supporting NGOs

· WWF· Relevant

government institutions

Establish Community Tourism Committee (CTC)

· Organizational structure· Roles and responsibilities· Selection Criteria· Committee election

· Communal meetings · 3 months · Community

representatives· WWF· Seila

Establish Tourism Community Fund

· Objective· Structure· Distribution sharing mechaisms

· Communal meetings · 3 months · Community

representatives

· WWF· Commune

Councils· Seila

Phase 2 - Preparation


Tour operations & product establishment

· Check:− community well-informedand trained− benefit sharing arrangements and

partnerships established− logistics established − responsibilities and roles of the

operator and the community

· surveys/evaluations· community

meetings· partner/stake

holder meetings

1-2 months· CTC· industry

· Technical advisor

· CTC· Industry

Establishing Networks

· provide information to the tourism industry

· encourage industry to patronise tourismactivities in the MPF

· exchange experiences of CBET with other communities

· receive support from other communitiesfor CBET

· attend related meetings and workshops· invite outside communities to the

surrounding communities of the MPF toexchange ideas

· tour operator consultations

· media communications· study tours,

workshops etc.

6 months

· CTC· Community· industry · CTC

Phase 3 - Implementation


36

Denman, R (2001) Guidelines for Community-Based Ecotourism Development. WWF International. The TourismCompany, .

Habitat Grup Empresarial (2006). Habitat Proyecta. Habitat Grup Empresarial, Spain.

Habitat Grup Empresarial (2006b). Srepok Wilderness Area Ecolodge Cambodia. Habitat Grup Empresarial, Spain.

Koch, E. & and Massyn, P. J. (forthcoming). The African Safari Lodge and Sustainable Rural Development: Lessonslearnt from six case studies in Southern Africa and proposals about how to extend these to other ASLs.

SNV (2006) Report on the Northeast Cambodia Regional Workshop on Ecotourism Strategy Development, KratieProvince 12-13 July, 2006.

PATA (2006). Chairman's Report. Sustainable Tourism Committee, PATA. Pattaya, Thailand, 22 April 2006.

WTO (2007) Tourism Market Trends, Asia, 2006 Report. United Nations World Tourism Organisation, Madrid,Spain.

7REFERENCES


37

Strengths1. birdlife (2nd) 2. Srepok River and rapids and rocky in some

places (3rd)3. islands4. beaches and sand 5. animals - monkey, elephants, banteng, tiger (1st)6. river rafting or canoeing 7. dolphins in Srepok8. visit indigenous village9. traditional customs10. traditional performances11. indigenous culture12. savannah grassland13. friendly people, honest, hospitable14. fish - trey pa-se-ee15. traditional cuisine16. lots of trees and shade17. picnic and recreational activities18. fresh air19. good security and safety20. support from the provincial government to the

communes21. clear demarcation of the border with the WPF 22. Recognition by the authority of demarcation23. partnership agreement with WWF, private and

the community

Weaknesses1. no main road, no accessibility2. some community don't understand about

tourism, or have limited knowledge3. law enforcement is limited, not effective (1st)4. lack of cooperation between authority NGO and

community - better facilitation needed5. no guidelines, ecotourism law or policy at

national or provincial level, no ecotourism plan (3rd)

6. community lack of power to manage their naturalresources

7. lack of capital, resources or knowledge about tourism (2nd)

8. not experienced about ecotourism9. not many alternative sources of income; poverty10. lack of communication and language skills for

tourists11. lack of business skills in tourism12. no tourism or CBT by-law by the local government

to regulate or start tourism13. high school at provincial and district levels14. lack of seeds for cultivation

Opportunities1. road connection from Snoul to province coming

soon (2nd)2. support from WWF and govt (1st)3. more tourists coming (3rd)4. good security and safety5. law to establish CBNRM 6. support from all authorities 7. generate income from tourists8. for increased investment opportunities coming

into the province9. good soil for producing agricultural products10. conservation situation is better than before, so

easier to attract tourists

Threats1. illegal hunting (1st At the commune/village level

is a problem, but province not identify)2. flood3. forest fires4. illegal logging (3rd)5. overfishing/illegal fishing6. Land grabbing (2nd At the provincial level is a

problem, but village not identify)7. dynamite8. water pollution9. plastic bags, rubbish10. pollution harmful to health11. mining12. poison fish13. sex tourism14. conflicts with benefit sharing from ecotourism

(outsiders, private sector, communities and govenment- across all sectors)

15. disease and health (outside and inside) (HIV)16. inappropriate behaviour from tourists and clash

of cultures

APPENDIX 1 - SWOT RESULTS

APPENDICES


38

WT Strategies1. Make village meeting/consultation with villagers2. strengthening law enforcement3. human resource development/local capacity building in

tourism4. cooperation with local authority5. ask for help from outsiders such as govt NGO and private

sector6. finding alternative income or livelihood7. build trail, road or path8. empower community9. fair benefit sharing from ecotourism and incentive for

community participation10. cooperation with line departments to stop illegal activities11. clean up the village/beautify the village12. strengthen safety and security/strengthen social order13. stop illegal land grabbing and cutting/logging espe

cially near the tourism attractions

- LLIISSTT OOFF TTOOUURR OOPPEERRAATTOORRSS IINNTTEERRVVIIEEWWEEDD

The following are the eight tour operators, based in Cambodiawith offices in Phnom Penh and Siem Reap, who were inter-viewed for this report. Information about their business opera-tions is considered confidential and was not revealed to theauthor.

• Travel Indochina• Exotissimo• Local Adventures Cambodia• Phnom Penh Tours• Asia Trails• Trails of Indochina• Indochina Services• East West Travel

APPENDIX 2

- WWOORRKKSSHHOOPP SSWWOOTT SSTTRRAATTEEGGIIEESS

Strategies1. establish community wildlife

protected area2. establish Srepok river networking

community and cooperate with Vietnam

3. cooperate with the line departmentsto protect the wildlife and natural resources

4. strengthen culture and tradition indigenous community

5. enhance local livelihood thru handi-craft, agriculture and job opportunity

6. awareness raising about natural resources and the protected area

7. improve agricultural techniques

WO Strategies1. promote tourism destination to

tourists2. provide incentive for investor3. develop a proposal to WWF for

technical and financial support for ecotourism

4. to link agriculture with tourism

ST Strategies1. strengthen law enforcement on NRM2. protect environment3. protect against sex tourism4. build local capacity 5. Develop fair benefit-sharing guidelines


39


�1986 P

anda symbol W

WF – W

orld Wide Fund For N

ature (Formerly W

orld Wildlife Fund) �

“WW

F” and “living planet” are Registered Tradem

arks

WWF Greater Mekong Cambodia Country Programme

28, Street 9, Tonle Bassac Phnom Penh, Cambodia P.O. Box: 2467

Tel: +855 23 218 034 Fax: +855 23 211 909 [email protected]

www.panda.org/greatermekongwww.panda.org

WWF's mission is to stop the degradation of the planet's natural environment and to build a future in which humans live in harmony with nature, by:

- conserving the world's biological diversity - ensuring that the use of renewable natural resources is

sustainable - promoting the reduction of pollution and wasteful

consumption


Documents

WWF GREATER MEKONG CAMBODIA COUNTRY PROGRAMME …