LuceSEA: Promoting Community-Centric Tourism Economy in Southeast Asia
Aloha to all our friends in Hawaii, Southeast Asia, and continental United States. Aloha to all our friends in Hawaii, Southeast Asia, and continental United States. I am Pia Arboleda, Interim Director of the Center for Southeast Asian Studies. On behalf of the Center for Southeast Asian Studies, we thank you for being here today. This is the third webinar in our spring 2025 series brought to you by the Henry Luce Foundation. It is my honor to
present the moderator and speakers for today. Our moderator is Dr. Xiaodan Mao-Clark, an assistant professor at the University of Hawaii at Manoa's School of Travel Industry Management. With over 15 years of experience in investment banking, including serving as a partner at a Houston-based investment bank. Her research focuses on sustainability in tourism and hospitality
with an emphasis on economic policies, ESG (environmental, social, and governance) issues, and the financial dynamics of tourism development. She explores how sustainability impacts social, cultural, and economic capital, as well as the role of entrepreneurship and economic policies in shaping industry growth. Her work has been recognized with multiple accolades, including Best Paper Award nominations at the 26th and the 30th Annual Graduate Education and Graduate Student Research Conference in Hospitality and Tourism. Dr. Xiaodan Mao-Clark has published extensively on hospitality finance entrepreneurship, and economic equity, with recent studies analyzing the impact of economic policies on restaurant startups, crowdfunding success and the role of race and social movements in business fundraising. Mao-Clark. Our speaker would be Dr. Huong T. Bui, who is a professor at Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University in the College of Sustainability and Tourism. She specializes in tourism studies, cultural heritage governance, and tourism policy in emerging economies with a particular focus on community engagement and sustainable tourism development. Dr. Bui holds a PhD in tourism management from
Griffith University, Australia, along with master's degrees from Waseda University, Japan, and Griffith University. Her research explores the intersections of tourism governance, cultural heritage, and economic development, particularly in Southeast Asia and Japan. Her recent work examines war-related tourism and the governance of cultural heritage in Southeast Asia, focusing on how tourism can be leveraged for cultural preservation and policy development. She also serves as a consultant for the OECD, providing insights on tourism policies in emerging Asia. Beyond academia, Dr. Bui is committed to fostering cross-cultural understanding, professional skill development. And sustainable tourism strategies that benefit both local
communities and the broader industry. And our last speaker is Dr. Joselito Boboi Costas, a community-based tourism and ecotourism specialist with over 30 years of experience in sustainable tourism development, environmental conservation, and community organizing in the Philippines. As the founder of grassroots travel consulting, he has worked extensively with local governments, private enterprises, and rural communities to develop sustainable tourism models that empower local stakeholders. His work in Boho Alogisan Cebu is widely recognized as a model
for community-driven tourism, transforming a small fishing village into an internationally awarded ecotourism destination. His initiative, the Alunginsan River Echocultural Tour, won multiple global awards, including the United Nations Tourism Inspire Award in 2015, the ASEAN Community-Based Tourism Award in 2017, and recognition as a top 100 global sustainable destination from 2016 to 2018. In 2021, Boho Alokin-san was named a best tourism village in the world by the UNWTO. Previously, Boboi served as the Cebu Provincial Tourism Officer until 2019, leading sustainable tourism initiatives across the province. He is currently a board member of the Asian Ecotourism Network Eco Exploration. And Philippine parks and biodiversity,
as well as a consultant for the United Nations and other international organizations. His expertise lies in rural tourism development, sustainable tourism policies, and conservation-based tourism strategies, making him a strong advocate for resilient and inclusive community tourism models in Southeast Asia. My dear friends, these are our panelists for today. We hope that you have an insightful discussion and I will now turn it over to Dr. Mao-Clark. Thank you so much, Dr. Arboleda, for the kind introduction. And my name is Xiaodan Mao-Clark. I'll be moderating your sessions today. And, um. We are discussing the topic of community-centric tourism. And we know that Southeast Asia has a booming tourism industry.
And it is powered by rapid economic growth and has created wonderful opportunities for national economies, but also, this boom has created significant challenges for local communities. So while tourism drives the economic expansion. If left unchecked, the growth often impacts residents negatively. For example, pressuring natural resources, eroding cultural heritage, and increasing living costs for local residents. So today we're going to discuss how a community center approach to tourism can transform these challenges into opportunities. We're going to jumpstart this discussion with Dr. Bui's presentation about tourism governance and
development in Vietnam. Then Mr. Costas will talk to us about a community-based ecotourism project in Cebu, the Philippines. After those presentations, we'll have a moderated panel discussion. And we will end the webinar with Q&As. So throughout the presentation, as well as the webinar, please feel free to type your questions in the Q&A section of Zoom. This button is at the bottom of your Zoom, okay? So thank you so much. And Dr. Bui now will start her presentation. Thank
you very much, Dr. Xiaodan. And I will start my presentation now. Let me share my slide. Can you see my slide clearly? Yes. Okay, thank you very much. Good morning from Japan. It's a beautiful time with Sakura Blossom. So it's my great pleasure for um
to be invited to this webinar. And my topic for presentation today will focus on the governance and development of tourism in Southeast Asia. And a view from within in Vietnam, even though I'm working in Japan, but originally I'm from Vietnam, and my research is still quite a lot tied to the Southeast Asia tourism and Vietnam in particular. Dr. Bui, I think we're looking at your presentation from a presenter's perspective. Do change into Okay, so…
Let me see if I can share it from the others. Looks like there might be some. Okay. Is it a phone screen mode now? Okay, thank you very much. Yes. Get it. So my research interests cover a broad range of topics but mainly focus on the development issues. And
tourism and development in Southeast Asia was a book that I published a couple of years ago. And then lately we published our nature by tourism in Asia Mountainous protected area. And my latest publication focused entirely on Vietnam and analyzing the principle and practice in tourism on Vietnam. And I also work as a consultant for OECD, and this is the latest report. I work with
the consultant teams that focus on macroeconomic analysis for Southeast Asia. China and India. So I am in charge of two chapters in this report, and for today's presentation, I will take some of the data from this as well as some of the update informations. So the content of my presentation will divided into four sections. The first is looking at the position of Vietnam tourism within ASEAN and second is contextualize the governance theory from tourism development and apply it to Vietnam. And with some of critical comment and evaluation, we'll come up with an implication for policymaking and how to work with communities. I know that the topic is about community centers.
But before talking about community, we cannot ignore the macro environment and ignore sort of hierarchicals in decision making that inherent in the political system in Vietnam. So this is the compilation of the role of tourism in countries in Southeast Asia. As well as compared to China and India. So the OECD approach is not only look at the 10 countries in Southeast Asia, but look at Southeast Asia within interaction with India and China. As we see Indochina, or sort of Southeast
Asia, lies between these two power, economic powers as well as the world's largest population. So the impact of India and China on Southeast Asia is enormous. So enormous I'll extract on WTTC data that compiling a contribution of tourism to GDP, contribution of tourism to total employment, and contribution of tourism to total exports. The data is the latest one is 2023-2024. Some of the
country later might not available. So, so far from the pandemic level in 2019, and to the last one is last year, and some countries only have a 2023. We see that many countries in Southeast Asia, the tourism has bounce back, and some countries have read but choose a pre-pandemic level, for example, Philippine It's quite significant that is now back to the pre-pandemic level. But the countries are highly dependent on tourism like Cambodia. And Thailand, where 35%, 32% of GDP of Cambodia depending on tourism. More than 20% of Thailand's GDP depending on tourism. Those
countries seem to have a slower bouncing back. And look at the position of Vietnam. Vietnam is not a really tourism-dependent country, and similar to Indonesia, where tourism contribution to GDP is less than 10%, about 7%. And contribution to the export value is even lower, less than 5%. However, tourism is quite significant in employment for Vietnam. So the critical issue here is the tourism has already been bouncing back to Vietnam, and now, at 2023-2024, the contribution to GDP has already surpassed the pre-pandemic level. So it indicates that a pretty good recovery of Vietnam tourism. And also increasing the employment. However, it's critical
is its export value is still very low and not yet lead much to the prepandemic level and that has some indication about the market as well as the tourist spending. Sorry, I am an economist, so I tend to go more into the macro issues. So when we look at ASEAN tourism and inbound market, I also extract the data from UNWTO. Unfortunately, the data only available in 2021 and 2022. So I took on the percentage of the inbound visitor to country in Southeast Asia. And separated the
Chinese market because it's very important, and it's important account for a very large stress. So we can see for the Philippine market, for Vietnam and Cambodia. The market share of Chinese is reaching almost about 30 to 35%. So the entire total inbound market. So the Philippines, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Myanmar are highly dependent on Chinese inbound. While other countries Malaysia, Indonesia, Laos, Singapore, Brunei, Thailand also depend on Chinese inbound, but less than this poor country. And if we look at the market growth rate before the pandemic,
we also see the Chinese market grow very fast. I'd see every greater 25%, 30% in these four countries. And other countries in the lower bow, the lower quadrant, seem to be less dependent on Chinese market. And so distribution of intra-ASEAN and also needs to be emphasized because ASEAN now developed into one destination, and all countries and all residents in Southeast Asia can be traveled for free without visa restrictions. So the intra-ASEAN market is very important. For us, in because people within the region can travel to different countries in the region. So it indicates
that several countries having a very large market share from intra-regional travelers, like Laos and Malaysia is 60 to 70% of their inbound are coming from intra-ASEAN. Why Singapore, Myanmar, Thailand, Indonesia also have a larger market share, about 30% of interest in Outbound, Inbound. Philippines and Vietnam are less dependent. It's less than 10% for Philippines and slightly
more than 10% for Vietnam. Inbound visitors are coming from intra-ASEAN. So we see that Vietnam in the Philippines are less integrated to the intra-regional travels. So in terms of spending, it's also critical. So in the OECD report, I make two comparisons pre-pandemic. And the early recovery in 2021. And it indicates a trend that in the pre-pandemic. The countries that are highly dependent on inbound, like Cambodia, Thailand. Singapore, the revenue from inbound are very
high. It's about 75% in Cambodia, or 30%, 40%. For Thailand. And we do see that we do see for Vietnam is about 50%. So it's quite good balance. However, the pandemic changing the situation they're pushing. The inbound visitors, I am difficult to gain access to and reduce significantly spending
from the inbound market. And we do see from the situation of Cambodia's island the domestic spending grow up to 80%, 70%. So it indicates that the pandemic can really shift in the pattern of spending. And the early recovery also from 2022, this is the latest data I can get from WTTC. For
Cambodia, the share of international emails starts to increase, it is now taking more than 50%. And the share of inbound in Vietnam is lower. It's about 65%. So gradually it turned back to the pre-pandemic, but whether it really back to that level or not. But there was a good size at Southeast Asia tend to turn into domestic to balance the shortage of income. So now, briefly on the profile of Vietnam tourism through the macro analysis, it shows that Vietnam had pretty high growth of GDP, about 7% per year, and young populations. So the economy, as you see from the comparison, is less dependent on tourism, and tourism only contributes about 7% to the GDP is highly increasingly much dependent on the Chinese inbound, 35% of the market share. But it
has a pretty weak integration and linked to ASEAN and result in low intra-ASEAN and which is less than 10% of inbound visitors are from ASEAN. And there was a growing volume and spending of domestic tourists tourism that could be a grow engine for Vietnam tourism. And now I turn to the governance theory which is actually developed in political science and has adapted to tourism. And since the government typology is developed by whole 2011. It's widely used in tourism studies. So the governance theory developed mainly from democratic Western welfare states and whether it's critical when we apply this form of governance into analysis of the context of Vietnam or not. To a certain extent, the general theory is still working because it divides into four quadrant.
And for tie-up governance, the Hiraki kombucha is where the state league governance and state play a very dominant role. Where the market by mode is in Kayap. Assume that there's a real cell regulation of the business with state support. So this market for marketization and privatization of state instruments are working in a market economy is a well-taken-for-granted norm in Western countries, and in network mode is a public-private partnership where the public sector working with a private sector to lead the development, and where the most relevant to the discussion today is on community-based mode. That emphasizes a direct citizen involvement in tourism governance. So
how's this for? Type of governance work in tourism development in the context of Vietnam as well as in the context of Southeast Asia. So I have done up several publications actually discussed on the hierarchical form of governance. Because the context of Vietnam is still a socialist, a communist country with one single party. So the Vietnamese Communist Party involved everything and there was, uh, government actually play a very central role. So the center line and top-down system where the state exerts influence over the policy-making are dominant in Vietnam. And that is also deep-rooted from the European, actually French, colonization in Indochina, in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, that imposed a centralized, top-down system. And after gaining independence in
1945, this form of governance, together with one single body, is still dominant in the system of Vietnam. And along with the national narratives, the governance and hierarchical form of governance are very prevalent in the heritage tourism, particularly working as a national heritage, some designated by UNESCO as an open-build governed through this mode and in an effort to reinforce national narrative through state-controlled tourism and official tour guides license. So I analyzed this situation of commodification and politicization of heritage in one of the most important imperial city of Tamlang in the capital city of Hanoi. This is a UNESCO-designated heritage and it is right in the center of the capital city of Vietnam. So much of narrative and tourism activity in this side is governed and regulated by the National Tourism Authority. So the second form that taken for granted in a market economy. But when it linked to the
discussion of Vietnam. There was some mismatch. And my latest publication, which just came last year, is "Vietnam Tourism at a Crossroads of Socialism and Market Economy." As the name of the country is Socialist Republic of Vietnam. And it declared to have a market economy. So,
the critical point is in unitary states like Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia and Myanmar. There is a very strong tie between government and business, and that drives tourism, but often this form of alignment often excludes local communities and non-governmental organizations. And much of the activities and development are allocated to the state or enterprise or the enterprise that link closely to the state. In the early state of market economy, this closed relationship between state and business can lead to favoritism, corruption towards our enterprise, and, in any case, stakeholder engagement in certain extent. And so my argument is
Vietnam is as a crossroads of socialism where tourism tries to fulfill the social obligation and social objective while it's also needs to advocate. The market economy and function in the market economy because the inbound visitors are mainly from the country and the destination where market economy is privileged because it's a crossroads. It's a lack of competitiveness to capture the growth of high-value sectors such as oil and wellness and other value at the tourism and that making the tourism product are less competitive compared to another ASEAN country which has a full market economy mechanism. So one of the basically to example and an elaborate on the marketization is the development of Long Bay, particularly the cruise sector that has gradually transformed the state owned into a fully private sector dominant in this destination. So the third form of governance is a collaborative governance that looking at how the public sector and private sector set up a partnership. Again. The governance structure remains. Relatively adaptable and integrating diverse stakeholders such as government, community leaders, and private tourism into operating the tourism. And this seemed to be a quite successful form
of government where community worked together with government and private sector. And even though I don't mention here, but the local government play a very important role. They are connecting to the central state as well as connecting to community. So they play a private role of connecting the public and private sectors. However, this form can be successful if successful knowledge transfer to local community really depend on careful selection of the target group, which community to an understanding of the cultural resources and resilience to market-driven chains of the community, as well as understand the social dynamic. So one of the very
successful Caya Vietnam, the transformation of who I am. And world heritage cities into a renowned heritage tourist destination that exemplifies the importance of strong local leadership and community adaptability in reverberating control assets and for sustainable development. So I present in this case a poem that transforms and taking a debt to Brazilian For transforming a heritage destination into a famous and one of the most famous destinations in Vietnam is published on Journal of Sustainable Tourism a couple of years ago. Now it still remains one of
the most famous and most successful destinations that develop a strong community aligned with a local and capable local authority and linking to the overall strategies of development and work closely with private sectors. And perhaps… community of governance is what we often talk about community-centric governance. And there are two forms of community-based tourism that develop and adhere to the community-based governance system. Is fourth is CBT, or community-based tourism, that emphasize on active community involvement in tourism development and management. However, there are certain critics that usually CBT is operated at a small scale, initiated, and often struggled with financial sustainability due to weak market links, pseudo-participation of community, and inadequate business training, lack of knowledge transfer and commodification of traditional lifestyle. So, another form is actually a subset of CBT, but it focuses more and entries. The main purpose is social purpose is proper tourism, so Pro-Poor tourism often set
initiated into aiming at alleviation of poverty by increasing economic opportunity for marginalized groups. So the site selected for Pro-Poor-Tourism is often a poor and remote area, remote community with limited economic resources, but they might have abundant natural resources or scenery or culture that can turn into tourism products. So PPT is often be initiated by NGOs. And through the community development process. The NGOs together with private sector, might participate
on training the community and lift them up to a certain level that they can independently operate tourism. However, pro-tourism faced significant challenges, including a narrow focus on poverty. That's might alienate key tourism stakeholders such as managers and investors. And limiting opportunity for expansion, and many proper tourism projects actually been collapsed after the NGO withdrawal. So why Pro-Poor-Tourism aimed at benefit disadvantaged groups is often on some lack of a clear strategy for development for ensuring that equitable distribution of economic gains? Or income shares among the communities. So in one of my books, Tourism in Vietnam, Policy and Practice, we mentioned about the case of Sin Suoi Ho is one Hmong village near Sapa in Laokai province. So this community has kind of successfully turned their scenery and assessed.
As you see, the traditional lifestyle into a Pro-Poor community by its tourism—the magic he called the magics. The most successful key factor is the community is able to develop a local, what is local elite who are successful and who have certain ability to lead their community? So those local alerts take a very active role in developing their own community and sharing their experience. To other household which is less having a less advantaged in economics or access to the market So the local leader, community leader play a very important role in community-based governance. So I come to the conclusion from the analysis is cultural heritage tourism in Southeast Asia has gradually transitioned from a mass tourism to more into sustainable small-scale sustainable approach. And governor of tourism has also transformed from centralization to decentralization, from government-led to more community-led, emphasizing our role of community and partnership in decision-making. So my argument is while hierarchical governance continues to shape the nationally significant cultural heritage and market-driven tourism in urban areas, non-hierarchical modes such as network and community-led take a very active role, driving the bottom-up development in peripheral regions and rural areas. So this participatory
governance structure plays a vital role in poverty reduction and improve standard of living across Southeast Asia. However, successful decentralization of government depends on effective breaching knowledge and resources gap between external agency and the local stakeholder. Another set of conclusions draws on the effective tourism governance in Southeast Asia must be. I must be attuned to the region's historical control and social political context. It means indigenized the understanding of the community is exceptionally important,
winning successful community by policy. So policymaking in this sector requires a deep understanding of the social dynamic while accounting for diversity, flexibility, and adaptability of the target community. Or development. It is important to recognize that governance typologies. We primarily developed in a Western liberal democratic setting often assumed that the community takes the leadership and takes the ownership of their ideas and properties. However, it is important to notice that in unitary states in Southeast Asia, states still play a very important role. And whatever the model of development, it needs the state approval, state guidance, and state tech partnership into the context of communities. So that challenge
really the concept of community, and where the government are less control and less involved in community development. That point faces a lot of challenges in Southeast Asia, particularly developing Southeast Asia. And my full discussion on the governance of cultural heritage in tourism and development is Southeast Asia has been published on Georgetown Journal of International Affairs just last month. And this is the link. You can click here to the link to gain access to this full discussion. Broadened the context of not just our Asia, Vietnam, but Southeast Asia. So it's bring me to the end of my presentation. So, thank you very much. And now the Q&A can be open after
the second presentation. Thank you. Thank you so much, Dr. Bui, for a wonderful and insightful presentation. And next… we will have Mr. Costas to talk to us community-based ecotourism projects in Cebu, the Philippines. Would you mind start sharing your slides, Mr. Costas? Okay.
Okay. Good morning, everyone from the Mr. Costas, you're breaking up a little bit. Okay, I'll repeat now. Yes. Can you hear me now? Okay, so good morning, everyone from the Philippines, and good afternoon. They're from in Hawaii. My name is Bobo Costas, and I'm here to tell a story about a particular community-based ecotourism project in Cebu, Philippines. And… I actually organized this.
I mean, helped organize this community into a tourism association, a community-based tourism association, with the help of the local government of Aluginson, Cebu. So our story began in 2009. When the local government or when the municipality of Aloginson in the province of Cebu. That's a central part of the Philippines, responded to the call of the Department of Tourism in the Philippines to develop a new products, especially in community-based tourism.
So just to give you a background of the municipality, it's actually about 73 kilometers from the, from the capital city. It's a fourth-class municipality. Just about three years ago, with a population of about 26,000 hectares. So you can see in the slide. That's the red-shaded part of the island. That's the municipality, and right across is the Tanon Strait, which is actually the biggest marine protected area in the Philippines, declared as a marine protected area in 1998. And across Tanon Strait, beyond Tanon Strait, is the island of Negros. So these
married protected area is famous for its remarkable biodiversity, including the nautilus, which is actually a creature that is older than the dinosaur, they say. So despite Tanon Strait's wealth of resources. The protected area has lots of challenging issues, including destructive fishing practices of local communities which threatened the same resources from where they rely on their livelihoods. So in 2009, we started the Boho River Ecotourism
Project, which was actually based on the National Integrated Protected Area System, where ecotourism is the only type of tourism that is allowed in protected areas in the Philippines. It is also the project was also based on the National Ecotourism Strategy as well as the Tanon Strait. Protected, I mean, management plan—so these are all frameworks where community-driven ecotourism management and environmental management was based from highlighting ecotourism as a revenue, ecotourism revenue as a strong incentive to protect the environment. So we were treating the local communities not as enemies, but rather as allies to biodiversity conservation. So the general objective of the project was to protect the river and the coastal ecosystems, including the beach forest. And the seagrass ecosystems attract tourists and at the same time earn supplemental
income for the local community, who rely on the resources of the strait. So the local government also believed that environmental protection and conservation is a basic governance functions. So together with the municipal government, we sat down with the community. Mostly women, if you look up the photos because the men—their husbands, their brothers, their sons, the fathers—were out either fishing or working as laborers in Cebu City. So that's why a very interesting event happened during my first few months in the village. There was a training for women on home
states. And I was sort of upset why women who I or why the mothers have difficulty in learning the proper sequence of housekeeping of, you know, of cleaning toilets during a practical assessment exercise. And then I was embarrassed when I found out that most of them didn't even have toilets. And so, with the community, we started moving on. We started with the Natural Heritage Inventory Assessment with the help of civil society, biodiversity conservation groups, and even the academics. And we did natural heritage inventory and assessment of its river of the seagrass, of the corals, of the mangroves. Together with the community together with the community,
we actually found out 61 bird species, 24 mangrove species, five dolphin species, and seven seagrass species. And after the natural resource assessment, we look up. We also examined the community's cultural heritage, like their fishing rituals, important blood marks in the community as well as the traditional creative industry, like the grass weaving you see in the slide. We've done this through a cultural heritage mapping. And together
with the natural resource assessment data. We presented this to the community for validation. And once we had the validated data. We proceeded with community planning. So we proceeded with issue identification and analysis. We defined their needs,
we analyzed and ran community problems and issues and challenges according to their importance and urgency. And we've also identified commonly felt needs of the community. So we've discovered that most of them were earning an average monthly income of less than 3,000 pesos, or, to the uh today's current rate, that's about 50 US dollars now a month. And the community also discovered that fish catch has declined over the years. So we proceeded with community mobilization, and despite the declining attendance, because you know when we develop community-based tourism, it takes years, especially the gestational period.
So despite the declining attendance after a few months, the community decided on their own volition to form a community-based organization. And the Boho Ginsan Ecotourism Association was born. And the membership and shared leadership and simple organizational structure were emphasized to the group. This time the membership reached about 75 families. After a few weeks and months, we've
discovered potential leaders emerging from the group, from the pack. And we formed a core group and involving the more advanced leaders, and set up the groundwork and several community meetings to discuss their needs. We were motivating people towards collective action, towards, um towards community mobilization. Just to give you the initial profile of this association
with the group was formally registered in 2010, it had 52 core family members, mostly heads of the family, mostly fishermen and laborers, and a few farmers, 25% of them finished secondary education. More than half were fishermen and women, and 40% had an average monthly income of 50 US a month. And 65% of the members was born in the village. So the project also showed the importance of capacity building and community participation for unfolding the full positive power of tourism.
So for us, for the communities to participate in tourism development. And be empowered to make independent decisions to find their solutions to their problems. They need access to knowledge, education, and resources for us. That's why the capacity building came in first. And we engage
the community into action, mobilizing them. It was the expression of the community's power. If you look at the photos, they've dismantled illegal fish traps in the river. They've, uh, they've constructed their own community, a visitor community center. They've apprehended illegal fishers. And then the communities was, the community was moving towards, you know, volunteerism and volunteerism and sweat equity, where Their participation was monetized just to give Just to emphasize and just to highlight the importance of participation in community-based tourism. So at this point. At this stage many community members gave up. They gave up their membership. So from an attendance of almost 200 individuals. About that. A hundred gave up no And
it was also a time for the community to reflect and evaluate and to extract lessons learned along the way. So… When we've developed our product, we've considered the biodiversity conservation we've, we've developed, we've also considered the circular uh economy, uh economy model of business. So if you look at the slide. It shows how we developed our product. So the product actually helped contribute to local biodiversity conservation. And then the product should also involve and distribute benefits to the local community. It should provide opportunities for tourists to learn about biodiversity conservation. And to get firsthand experience of what it is
like living in a fishing community. And we've developed our market segment. We've developed our, we've matched our resources with the market. And we've developed a theme. So that's why this product was born, and this is called the Boho River Eco-Cultural Tour. So if you can see the photos, these are examples of our circular business model of product. So all of the materials
are found in the river. And we've served local cuisine. And most of our members have their own family gardens to cut on greenhouse emissions or carbon footprint; they don't have to go to the supermarket or the public market to buy food ingredients for their visitors. And they've also repurposed wood, no? Old wood from old village houses converted into boardwalks. And they've gathered ordinary stones now, uh, to improve walkways. And all sorts of materials in the village develop into serving our products and even the decor of the center using indigenous materials, even the architecture using vernacular architecture and using organic and locally sourced construction materials, grasses, bamboos, and wood. So they also had solar and off-grid power and rain and water, rainwater catchment for plants and to clean the toilets. And the facilities. And since we've discovered grass weaving to be a traditional economic activity.
We've tapped this particular traditional activity for to develop bags and other souvenir items for visitors. So just to show you the numbers, this was the number before the pandemic. This is how it looked at 10 years later. So you can really say that the community was earning from it. So how can the community benefit from CBT? So, um. Think well-being of host communities or the well-being
of the host community was improved. If you look at the photo, we've looked at the photo, we've trained and develop local guides, uh, mostly fishermen, under their under children. We've also spurred economic activities, and most of the community members have constructed their own houses from the income they received every month. But we've also retained most of the public spaces for other fishermen. Or for the boats of fishermen who did not join community association. So another thing is that income from the tourism activity was used to fund biodiversity conservation, prevention of butchers from illegal bird trout. Hunters as well as the protection of other natural valuable assets. And then the community also has an 18th-century
Spanish-built watchtower where, together with the local government, they've actually conserved the heritage cultural site. So the community, together with the local government unit, came up with a conservation management plan to address the damage, the maintenance, and the conservation. Of the tower, so now it becomes a hub for the community's creative activities. So income from
tourism has minimum leakage. In fact, out of the tour package the visitors pay. 17% of that goes to the government, and…83% goes to the local community. So it prevents, or it minimizes, what we call it minimizes what profit linkage. And that the 17% of the government share will go to the funding of the municipality's other biodiversity conservation efforts, as well as to the wages and of its rangers. And to fund the operational costs of their marine patrol boats. So, of course, the community has given so much empowerment to women. And lately, the community is developing a dolphin-watching tour which involves housewives guides this time, uh, not their husbands anymore, but only housewives. When it comes to community participation in tourism. There is really a
really they're really a huge they're they are a huge influence in the community because, for example, in the village elections, they are forced to reckon with. They are what you call, they can be kingmakers because of the share the government gets from them. They can influence the outcome of the election. So they actually endorse candidates which they think can do a difference
in the village's development. So this is the arrivals during the pandemic. So it really went—it really decreased. From the previous year. Just to show you. So during the pandemic, the local community was at the forefront because most of them were empowered already, so it was already uh, it took, it took the local government to use the full potential of the community-based tourism association to employ them as frontliners because at this point tourism halted, no. There was no tourism activity to speak of. And of course, the community also went back to their traditional—what do you call this?—uh, traditional creative and economic activity, so they've returned to fishing, and then they've started reviving their almost forgotten family recipes, and they went back to farming. And one of the major, I would say, accomplishments of the community was that during the pandemic, it took a community rather than the local government to initiate two community pantries. And the beneficiaries of their community pantries were not in fact their village but their village the surrounding villages in the municipality.
And during the pandemic, it was also time for them to recruit new batch of scholars, or, um, in the elementary education, because from the receipt of, uh, there are tourism activities, they fund the education of their kids. Not even their own kids, but you know kids from the neighboring villages and from their neighbors. They usually… assist in providing school supplies, bags, shoes, and clothing for these kids. And during the pandemic, it was also a time for the
association to recruit new members because the surrounding communities and the local residents found out that the pandemic. Well, the pandemic actually affected the association. But, I was sort of surprised because 10 years ago, I told them to set aside a particular amount from every from the payment of every guest. And I didn't know that they actually followed my advice. So during the pandemic, I was quite surprised and I nearly wept when they said, "Oh, we don't actually, we're not actually in need desparate need because, in fact, we have still our savings from the bank, and each family actually received about 60,000 pesos," or that's probably around 60,000 is actually around $1,000. Today's current rate. It was also during the pandemic when they elected a
new set of officers. And while we were struggling because of low tourist arrivals, we always revisited our accomplishments, naw? So in fact, as mentioned earlier. During the introduction, we've already won the introduction five global international awards because of the model we've, uh, we've developed, and the recent one was the best tourism village in 2021 given by the UNWPO. But for us, one of the lessons learned is sustainability is not really a destination. It's
a daily struggle; it's a really What do you call this? It's a journey for a sustainability is a journey. And the community feels that so much has to be done. In fact, one of the issues and child, one of the two issues. And challenges we are facing today. Currently is intergenerational sustainability and land development. I would say that the community is a victim of its own success. 10 years ago, 15 years ago. The community members dreamed of sending their kids to college. And,
you know, looking back, I would say be careful for what you wish for because their kids have actually have their college degrees now. And it's an issue now because the kids are leaving the village to work in the big cities. In the big city. Another problem we have or another issue we have right now is land development. If you see Cebu in the map, it's just a very narrow island,
but it's progressive. So it's, you know, it's that dream the aspiration of becoming a modernized city there. So land development is slowly creeping, or it's slowly encroaching on the protected areas. And I think that's a problem right now. So currently we are developing new local champions. We recruit kids, not even their, well some of them, they're children, but we're also
looking up the neighboring villages how we do open houses for them. We teach them about the value of biodiversity conservation, you know, environmental protection. We educate them. And, you know, kids are kids. So we have this sort of creative penalty for kids destroying, you know, mangroves poaching birds, wild birds in the mangrove forest. So what we do is we usually impose the creative penalty, you know, so we post. We let the kids work in the project for a month
but with food allowance and with free, you know, education and free sessions learning sessions. And another thing we're addressing now is access to digital technology. So the local community is now tapping the power of digital technology, from social media to booking and reservations and to seamless digital payments. And during the pandemic, we've harnessed the power of digital technology through productivity through the use of online meetings, through the use of Google Docs, for example, exchanging documents to just to increase productivity of the association. So looking back, I think the major lesson we've learned from this endeavors that the local government unit, or the municipal government, is a strong, should be a strong partner in community-based or community-centric tourism development. That's one. Number two is
even if you still work with the communities five, 10, 15, 20 years down the line. They still need handholding. You have to look at different partners. Of course, partners with the same vision, partners with the same philosophy aligned with the community's philosophy to hold hands with them. So that they want, you know, they want what you call this; they want to be astray, not in the journey towards sustainability. And lastly, I would say the third lesson we've learned from this is participation and empowerment are actually interdependent with each other. So, over time,
if a community participates. Over time, it becomes empowered. But then if a community is empowered over time. It will participate. Okay. And I think those are the three lessons we've learned from our journey. Thank you very much, and good morning from Cebu, Philippines. Thank you, Mr. Costas, for such an insightful and wonderful, uplifting presentation. And now I am… going to start our
moderated panel discussion. So feel free to jump in the conversation as you see fit. So for Based on both of your presentations. And your advocacy in advocating local communities involvement and ownership in tourism development And we saw an example, Mr. Costas, in a small community in Cebu. And so this question is for both of you. How do you think? How can you replicate models in small communities, such as the one that you developed in Cebu, to scale up? To a much bigger city.
For example, you know, capital city of Cebu or You know, even Honolulu, Hawaii, where I'm sitting right now. How can you effectively scale up your model so you can, we can promote community-centric tourism in a bigger scale? Should I start it? Sure, please. Okay. Okay. It's a very interesting question. And I always expect the same question whenever I and they give you this project. Well,
this model has been replicated in the region in the Philippines. And yes. It can be scaled up, naw? But then I would say it really depends if you, if you really, if you listen to my lessons learned. At the end of my presentation. The first is local government support. So even if you have the same model, even if you have the same a model that is going to be scaled up still depends on the government's support. For me personally, I don't really start implementing a community-based project using the same model unless I get the full guarantee of the local government unit, the support. And what does it take for the government to support? Well, of course, number one is logistics. That's assuming you already have a community. But then again, it depends on the community because there are local government units who selects the communities? You know what I mean? They select the beneficiary of the project. And why do they select this project's
beneficiaries? Because number one, dont, don't forget we're in the Philippines. It boils down to political reasons. Perhaps the politician won there. In that particular community, or maybe that uh, that local government chief executive wants to, I would say… the support of the community. So
that's one. Number two is, is the community worth assisting, or is there a site of the community that is worth protecting? Is there, Is there a charismatic species there? Like one project I worked with. Just wrapped up about, uh, three months ago. Is this community still in the central Philippines? It's so beautiful because they're iconic species, there is worth saving, you know it I'm not sure if you're familiar with Rafflesia. It is the biggest flower in the world, and it blooms
in that particular community. So, I mean, it's a charismatic species. It's worth saving. So, but the problem there is, again, it depends on the community's dynamics, peace and order. Peace and order. So perhaps you still have the same CBT model. And as you've asked, how can you
replicate it? It can easily be replicated because all the ingredients are there. Assuming… that you have the municipal government supporting with you. Which will provide you the logistics the funding, and you have an important biodiversity feature an important cultural heritage worth saving. That's it because for me, community-based tourism, number one, is of course we want to provide additional or supplemental income to the community who are, you know, who have been living in poverty, but at the same time, come to think of it. I would rather conserve or preserve the biodiversity. First. If I chose between biodiversity conservation and poverty alleviation. Well, of course,
you cannot do both, but in my own personal experience, I would rather go for biodiversity conservation first, although because when you talk about tourism, it's a double-edged sword. In the context of biodiversity conservation, number one, biodiversity conservation is one of the assets that can be used for tourism. But at the same time, once you have tourism there,. tourism can also destroy biodiversity, right? So it's… a delicate balance between, you know, environmental conservation and poverty alleviation. So to answer your question, to wrap it up. Yes, it can be scaled up; how? It depends on the dynamics working within the local government and the communities. Thank you, Mr. Costas. Anything to add, Dr. Bui?
In fact, I generally agree with your point, particularly in the pivotal role of the local authority, local government, where they operate the logistics and whether they support the community initiatives. And also, as a point of the unique resources that base of that community that becomes an attraction, because in order to turn a community applies into a touristic place, it must have something unique. Something is a visitor wants to see. So without that condition, it's impossible to develop tourism. And the next is the supporting for all logistics and developments that often come from the government. And these are two conditions I met. The community-based tourism might not be able to develop. And I also agree on the point of whether poverty evaluation should be the first of biodiversity conservation should be the first. And the
practice shows that if poverty alleviation is to be priority, the project cannot run into crisis. Yes. Yes. So yes, I share all your viewpoints from as a practical perspective, but also the theoretical perspective also advocates that the community cannot exist independent by itself. It linked to environment It linked to the culture, it linked to the surrounding environment, and it's also linked to political system where the community is a part of that. So
the community-based development really has to address the social ties, environmental ties, as well as the political economic ties. So it's a really complicated system. It's not just, oh, I want to work with the community. I want to develop the community. My favorite, but all the other conditions and contextual condition doesn't allow it. Yes. Then the project wouldn't be able to guaranteed, please. Yeah. And may I add one more idea. Yeah, for me, if the On my first day, when I go to a community on my first day, my first question would be. Do you like tourism here? And when they say,
No, we don't like tourists. And then I would respect that decision. I said, Okay. Fine. No. Yes. So residents attitudes to tourism development is also important. But in certain communities, they don't even know what is tourism. Oh, yes, yes, yes. I agree, Dr. Boy. And they are not anticipated. If I advocate and if I welcome to it, what's going to happen to my communities? So they have no imagination of what could be the picture in the future. Yeah. Yes, tourism sometimes has, in some community has a bad reputation, right? So overtourism destroys local resources and interrupts the local lifestyles. Yes. Staying. And
possibly Some residents even have the attitude that, oh they some tourists might stay permanently and take my jobs and things like that. Yeah. So it's definitely very important, well, to share a balanced perspective of tourism and how it can be done right. Yes. My point on that is the community only be able to see the negative impact of tourism after a while. And it's not already too
late to correct. So they might not anticipate all those negative effects at the time of development, and the effect might come maybe after 10 years, a decade. Where the community already so used to with the tourism is no way to turn back to the starting point. That is kind of a transparent lesson: going from one destination to another is sort of important. Right. So let's shift the lens
to hotel hospitality and tourism developers. Those big hotel companies, um, and what are some advice that you have for tour operators and hotel companies to shift the power to local communities? So they are aware that when they develop any tours were developed any kind of hotel accommodations that they are looking after the community's best interests as well. And anyone, Dr. Bui, you want to take a start first for this question? As we see, most of us, when we talk about community-based centric, it is small scale and community-based. Our homestides very small scale or even micro scale. But when we talk about the hotel development,
it's often like big group franchise, brand names. So there is a certain conflict. In the benefit as well as particularly in the land use and land yield planning as well. The practice is when the big hotel group comes into investment, it might be advocated by the government, state government, and local government. There's a new job, say there's new development, there's new accommodations, and visitors want to come. But in fact, who are actually working in that hotel? The major
important positions come from outsourcing. So the local community might have very small share in what they work and what they work is at a very low level. And the hotel group developed in a remote area; it may be unique resources like islands. They're also facing a big problem of how to recruit, how to have local people to work in their hotels. So many hotel groups, because in order to
remain their standard and quality, they might have to bring labour from outside. And again, that is migration, internal migration to the destination. And of course, the outsiders, the externals, the investors, will change the local communities. Significantly. But my question is, is my critical viewpoint is the development of hotels? Big hotels are not actually going to remote areas with unique resources and needs much biological conservation because the opportunity for business might not be very substantial today. Back to you, Costas. Okay, to answer that question, I think I would still prefer giving my experience. Yeah, the community-based Tourism Association is
actually or is currently working with hotels and tour operators. But before we do that. We… always require the hotel operators, I mean the tour operators and the hotels, to be educated in terms of sustainable tourism community-based tourism. So we make it a point that our association, the CBT, and the hotels that are using or that are promoting us or that is marketing our CBT. We have the same philosophy. We have the same business philosophy of the same, our visions are aligned. So we make it a point to educate these hotels and tour operators on the value of, you know, working with them and, um, doing business with them, so we always avoid, and we always call the attention of tour operators who are only doing greenwashing for us because, by experience, there are always tour operators. We've worked with in the past where they are actually greenwashing; in reality, they're not their hats are not into sustainable tourism. Another thing,
aside from the educational campaign or educational awareness we usually give to hotels and resorts. We accredit our tour operators. We allow them to promote and sell our packages. When we actually vet them and when we what you call the specify in the contract that there must be fair trade.
Meaning to say they don't, they don't, what do you call this, overprice our tour operators, and only the community will get just a smaller profit than these store operators get. And it would also be helpful for tour operators and hotels to have certifications because, you know, our community-based tourism association, we also we already have, because of our international awards, that is sort of a certification for us that, you know, we're now into sustainable practices and all that stuff. So I think for me, it should be educational awareness for tour operators and hotels. Second is we vet them according to fair trade practices. And number three
is there. If they can get a certification from, you know, although it's hard in the Philippines now because it's hard because it's not yet very much accepted by the hotel industry and tour operators, uh, you know, certification, green certifications, and sustainable tourism operations and that kind of stuff. Thank you. Yes, follow up your point. I think that now the EHE movement in the hotel and tourism sectors definitely wou
2025-04-28 17:08
