community attitudes of the local communities and participation of local communities in ..... Do you think that your local culture is affected positively or negatively as a result of ... At what level of tourism development would you support? 5. .... the local business association recommends local tourist industry to hire international ...
Close Encounters with the Local Communities in Rural Tourism Destinations of Bario, Malaysia and Yufuin, Japan Associate Professor Dr. Lo May Chiun, Professor Dr Peter Songan, Abang Azlan Mohamad Professor Iwao Kato, Dr Fumitaka Furuoka, Associate Professor Dr Alvin W. Yeo Abstract The objectives of the study are to analyze and make comparisons on the relation between natural environment and ecotourism development in Malaysia and Japan; and to improve community livelihoods by opening up the rich biodiversity and fascinating culture to tourists. This study has chosen the destinations of Bario in Malaysia and Yufuin in Japan to assess ecotourism impact on social economics, crowding and congestion, services, environment, and community attitudes of the local communities and participation of local communities in planning, decision making and enterprise ownership for sustainable management of ecotourism. The findings of the study reveal that by empowering local communities, community-based tourism has the capability to help the local residents to improve their income, preserve local culture and traditions, provide educational opportunities, diversify the local economy and conserve the environment. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings of the study were discussed further. Keywords: tourism, sustainability, local communities, Malaysia, Japan
Introduction Past researchers have postulated that tourism is one of the industries that have the highest potential to contribute towards economic development and job creation particularly in rural areas (Bredhenhann &Wickens, 2003; Ruiz Molina, Gil-Saura, &Moliner-Velazquez, 2010). Tourism is essentially a service industry and its management practices are concerned with issues such as quality and productivity (Otto &Ritchie, 1996) so as to serve the tourists well. Malaysia was rated the ninth most visited country in the world and was reported to acquire RM1 billion receipts per week from foreign visitors. It is anticipated that by year 2020, Malaysia will receive 36 million tourist arrivals and RM168 billion tourist receipts (Ng, 2012). In addition to that, tourism is one of the National Key Economic Areas (NKEA) under the Tenth Malaysia Plan and it is Malaysia’s third largest revenue generating industry, after oil and gas, and manufacturing sectors. Past researches on tourism focused heavily on the social economic benefits of tourism (Kuvan & Akan, 2005; Tosun, 2005) and no known researchers have been found to have investigated the impact of tourism from communities’ perspective especially when it comes to important decision on the development of rural sites. This study aims to examine communities’ attitudes toward the impacts of tourism by comparing two rural tourism sites, namely, Bario in Malaysia, and Yufuin in Japan. Past researchers posited that most of the tourism studies concerning local communities were mostly focusing on the economic well being, but ignoring on the other factors, such as, environment, social, and cultural aspects, of which are equally important in determining if tourism has posted positive or negative impact. In studying communities’ perception on 1
ecotourism development, it is necessary to explore the impacts of economics, environmental, social and cultural dimensions on local communities, which will be the foundation of this research. From the economic standpoint, local people deserves to be given fair opportunities to be involved in the tourism related activities, thereby increasing their earnings which could subsequently help to improve their standard of living. Without the involvement of the local communities, the most likely outcome is that the local communities maybe powerless in the face of development and does not have the strength to influence development (Brandon, 1993). Furthermore, ecotourism provides employment opportunities, such as, homestay, retail, agriculture and handicraft. From the social aspect, communities’ perceptions and attitudes are vital in the development of ecotourism as ecotourism may have a negative impact on the community, such as increase in crime rates, traffic congestion, and social ills. The destructive effect of tourism on environmental scale such as pollution, the construction of accommodation and other tourists’ facilities, and overcrowding is also being examined in this study. From the cultural perspective, this study is to investigate how ecotourism is likely to affect the local communities’ way of life, the local culture and if the local communities are likely to face difficulties as a result of ecotourism. The problem with tourism in rural destination is that the community’s levels of knowledge and skilfulness at rural sites on average are found to be much lower than in the city. This hinders efforts to bring in development into the region and may cause severe damages in the destination, for example, the locals destroy parts of their heritage or give up their traditional lifestyle for modern global trends. To achieve the objectives, the study was developed as follows. Based on previous research, the section on assumptions proposes a series of probable assumptions on the 5 dimensions of questions that were planned for this research, namely tourism impact on social economics, crowding and congestion, services, environment, and attitudes of the local communities. The methodology section presents the data and the method used to examine the assumptions postulated for this study. The findings of the study were described next, and finally, the section on conclusions discusses the results and points out some of the limitations of this study. It is not known whether there exist any concrete relationships between tourism impacts on these dimensions. If certain connections are discovered, it would be desirable to pursue further the study in the future. This research was conducted specific few objectives in mind which are as follows:
To understand the general impact of tourism in Bario, Sarawak, and Yufuin, Japan.
To examine the perception of the local communities of the development of tourism at Bario and Yufuin.
To make comparisons between the tourism industry between two rural tourism destinations at both developed (Yufuin, Japan) and developing (Bario) countries.
To propose a more effective development of tourism projects that is sustainable. 2
Description of research sites Bario, Malaysia This study investigated the impact of tourism on the Kelabit community in Bario, Sarawak, Malaysia. Bario, located close to the Malaysia-Indonesia border between Sarawak, Malaysia and Kalimantan, Indonesia was selected for study as it provides an ideal example for analysing the impact of rural tourism on the local community and given the fact that Bario is an ideal rural tourism site that is remotely located. There are 12 longhouses in Bario which are homes to about 1,000 people. The majority of the people are Kelabits, one of the smallest ethnic groups in Sarawak and are considered as economically poor (World Bank, 2009). They are generally farmers, growing the famous fragrant Bario rice. At present, it takes about 14 hours’ drive through unpaved and muddy logging road; or a two-day boat ride or a 12day-long trek across forested mountains. Hence, the only practical way to get to Bario is a one-hour flight on a 19 seater Twin Otter. This remote tourism destination had attracted the attention among the world several years back when Universiti Malaysia Sarawak (UNIMAS) first introduced its eBario Project in the year 1999. The Kelabit community have limited basic infrastructure, as such there is no 24-hour electricity supply and water is available through gravity-fed systems. The community depends on portable electric generators fueled by diesel or petrol for lighting. A few individuals, and some government departments, use solar panels whilst others depend on kerosene lamps or candles. It is believed that by introducing tourism to the local communities, it will help to alleviate poverty by addressing the basic dimensions of poverty namely income, health, education and security which will in turn lead to the empowerment of the community.
Figure 1: An aerial view of Bario
Figure 2: Kelabit women performing during the 2011 Bario Food Festival
3
Yufuin, Japan Yufuin in Oita prefecture is one of the most popular spa towns in Japan. Every year approximately four million tourists visit this small spa town surrounded by the mountains. The town itself is located inside the green valley of Mount Yufu which is called “Yufudake”. In recent years, not only Japanese lovers of natural hot spring but also a lot of international tourists, especially from Korea and China, are becoming member of “Yufuin fan club”. Many of those visitors to the town are keen to enjoy outdoor bath called “Rotenburo”, where they can amuse themselves by looking at the picturesque scenery of Yufudake. The location of Yufuin seems to give the town unique advantages. The distance between Tokyo and Yufuin is over 1,000 km and the town itself is in a remote mountain area of Kyushu Island, the southwest part of Japan. On the other hand, Kyushu Island is a neighbour district to Korea and China, where the residents in the north part of this island can listen to Korean and Chinese radio programs. Apparently, Yufuin is closer to Chinese continent than Tokyo or Osaka. Historically, they have been influenced from these countries in many aspects. As mentioned above, the town of Yufuin is often imagined as a “small town”. Even Japanese nationals sometimes misunderstand that Yufuin is a sort of an isolated village. People easily associate the town name of Yufuin to mountain tiny area. However, the population in the area currently reaches about thirty four thousand. In 2005, three towns, Yufuin-machi, Hasama-machi and Shounai-chou, were merged and became one city "Yufu-shi". In this case, the merger of the three towns has become one comparatively huge town1. Since then, their formal name has become “Yufu-shi” or city of Yufu. However, a lot of people still prefer to use Yufuin as the town name, because of their old good memory of the town and the power of the brand "Yufuin".
Figure 3: A natural hot spring in Yufuin
1
Figure 4: Natural scenery of Yufuin
In Japanese, the words “machi” and “chou”, mean town, on the other hand the term of “shi” refers to city.
4
Literature review Community-based tourism The community-based tourism is a relatively new concept in the tourism literature. Despite the fact that there is no clear-cut definition to describe community-based tourism, there are several well-accepted ones. The community-based tourism is based on the participatory methods that have emerged as an alternative to more conventional “top-down” approach to tourism development (Goodwin and Santilli, 2009). According to the Thailand community-based tourism institute (TCBTI), the communitybased tourism should be developed around the lifestyle, culture and nature that the local community feels proud of and is willing to share with visitors (TCBTI, 2012). On the other hand, the Oikos Institute defined the community-based tourism as an alternative tourism in which local residences invited tourists to visit their community by providing overnight accommodations (Oikos Institute, 2012). In their seminal paper, Jamal and Getz (1994) asserted that, the collaborations among multiple stakeholders are crucial to solve issues relating to the planning and development of the community-based tourism. This is mainly due to fact that there would be diverse community views on the tourism development. Some community residences who would benefit from the tourism development tends to perceive the greater economic gains than social-environmental losses. Others who would not benefit from tourism development tend to show more concerned about negative social-environmental impacts. According to Jamal and Getz (1994), there are six factors that would contribute to facilitate the community collaboration for the community-based tourism development and planning. First of all, the collaboration of community-based tourism would require high level of perception of interdependency among community member. The community-based tourism would be based on the limited resources and infrastructure within the community. In other words, tourism development that would exceed the carrying capacity of economic and sociocultural environment of community would have a negative impact on the community. Secondly, Jamal and Getz (1994) argued that the collaboration for the community-based tourism would require the high level understanding of mutual benefits among community members. The mutual benefits include the greater degrees of environmental and sociocultural sustainability. In other words, some private companies that would be motivated by self-interest and quick profits would alienate social interests in the local community. Thirdly, they asserted that the collaboration for the community-based tourism require higher degree of perception that decisions about tourism development would be implemented with sufficient resources. Due to the limited resource in the community, the community-based tourism projects would be interrupted due to insufficient resources. There is a need to ensure community member that adequate expertise and money would be provided in order to sustain the community-based tourism project.
5
Next, Jamal and Getz (1994) pointed out that the collaboration for community-based need a system of representation. In other words, the community-based tourism could be costeffective if the key stakeholder would be selected to represent diverse interests among the community members. Fifthly, the collaboration for the community-based tourism would require appropriate facilitator for their collaboration. The main role of facilitator is to identify and invite all stakeholders to discuss about the collaboration for the community-based tourism development. More importantly, the facilitator should have a long-standing reputation of trust among these stakeholders. The local government could play a role of facilitator when the issues related community-based tourism could a land usage problem. Finally, Jamal and Getz (1994) asserted that the collaboration of community-based tourism require a long-run vision for the tourism development and joint formation of tourism goals and objectives. In other words, there is need extensive community consultation for overall vision for the community development through the community involvement into the community-based tourism projects. However, Reed (1997) argued that, despite its theoretical importance, the research on the collaborative community-based tourism relies on the weak theories of power relations within the communities. The proponent of the collaborative community-based tourism made a convenient assumption that the collaboration would overcome any power imbalance by involving all necessary stakeholders. Instead, Reed asserted that the power relations within the communities could alter the outcome of the collaborative efforts. Or, the power relations could prevent them from conducting collaborative actions. According to Bramwell and Sharman (1999), the local collaborative community-based tourism may offer advantages to the various stakeholders in their communities. However, development of these tourisms might give some difficulties to the communities because the resource allocation and local practices are often embedded in their community. The embedded social institution may negatively affect the influences of particular stakeholders on the collaborative actions. In other words, the collaborative efforts do not seem to reduce the power imbalance within the community. Mitchell and Reid (2001) pointed out that community would experience high and dispersed economic benefits to its residence when the community-based tourism would take place within community. Some residents would expect high earning from the tourism development and, however, would earn relatively less benefit from economic activities than others. According to them, the equitable distribution of benefits to local community could depend on the following three conditions, 1) the degree of the collaborative efforts, 2) the level of community integration, 3) the degree of control for administrating tourism development. On the other hand, Reid et al. (2003) claimed that the community should participate in tourism development and planning in order to counter negative reactions from the tourism development project. In other words, the participatory approach of the community-based tourism could alleviate the negative aspect of the tourism development. The community 6
participation in the tourism development could be important not only for the implementation of tourism development project, but also for the sustainability of the tourism project. Manyama and Jones (2007) asserted that, despite the fact that the UN World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) stressed the importance of the tourism industry for the poverty reduction, tourism developments in the developing countries, such as Kenya, could not obtain expected benefits because tourism development in developing countries are historically embedded in the colonial pasts. More importantly, local communities were hardly involved in the tourism development and planning and tourism resources and facilities are owned by the Western investors who were driven by profit-maximization. By contrast, the communitybased small and medium tourism enterprises (SMTEs) could bring the benefits to muchwaited communities. However, Manyama and Jones argued that there are several obstacles for the development of the community-based SMTEs, the limited access to global tourism marketplace, the lack of sufficient education among the employees, the lack of industryspecific skills among employees, the poor access to capital market, lack of the government support and so on. Furthermore, Simpson (2008) pointed out that the community-based tourism should incorporate a community initiative that aims to bring socio-economic and environmental benefits to the community. These community benefits should be achieved in a sustainable manner. In other words, the socio-economic and environmental cost from the community initiative should be less than its benefits. The sustainability of these benefits could be a matter of importance and the community initiative should bring benefit not only to key stakeholders, but also to the community as whole. It means that all stakeholders should be aware of objectives and responsibilities of the community involvement. The best practice of the community initiative for the tourism development would emerge when all stakeholders would act in supportive and accountable manner. More importantly, the potential benefits to community could be diminished when the community would seriously engage in the tourism activities. The heavy involvement in the tourism industry could create conflicts, jealousies and unnecessary hierarchy within the community. According to Trejos and Chiang (2009), the potential benefits from the community-based tourism would depend on the interaction between the backward linkage of supply side or the producer of the tourism products and the downward linkage of demand side or the consumers of the tourism products. The essential issue of this interaction is so-called the “leakage problem” in which the customers would not be willing to consume the local products and prefer to spend their money outside the community. For a prominent example, tourists have a preference of imported foods and drinks over local ones. To increase the benefits to local communities, there is a need to find a way to increase the utilization of local food industries. Goodwin and Santilli (2009) conducted a research to identify the criteria for the successful community-based tourism project. According to them, there are the following five main reasons why the projects can be considered as successful, 1) social capital and empowerment, 2) local economic development, 3) livelihood, 4) conservation, 5) economic viability.
7
Firstly, Goodwin and Santilli (2009) argued that the most important benefit of communitybased tourism is creation of new cultural skills and institution. Furthermore, the communitybased tourism would contribute to the empowerment of community by providing the equal opportunities and compromising on the conflicting interests among community members. Secondly, they also pointed out that one of most frequently cited criterion for the success factor is the local economic development. The community-based tourism would deliver the much waited economic development into community and would contribute to reduce the poverty among the community members. Thirdly, Goodwin and Santilli (2009) asserted that increase in options of the livelihood can be considered as a factor of successful community-based tourism. In other words, the community-based tourism would contribute to improve the standard of living among the community member by providing new choice for the livelihood, such as establishment of the micro-enterprises for the tourists. Next, they also pointed out that the less frequently cited, but important criterion for the success is the environmental conservation and maintenance of local heritage. The community-based tourism could be befits to the environmental conservation by developing the sustainable technology for the tourism industry and identifying the appropriate environmental policy for the community-based tourism. Finally, Goodwin and Santilli (2009) argued that the community-based tourism would be benefit to the community because it would contribute to develop profitable and commercially viable small or micro enterprises within community. In other words, successful communitybased tourism project would produce a innovative tourism products that would properly make used of local products and materials. Phu et al. (2011) asserted that the tourism industry has become one of main foreign currency earners and fastest growing industry to create much-waited job opportunities in many developing countries. Thus, these developing countries have made serious efforts to promote the community-based tourism to link the local tourism products and international tourists. However, there could be several obstacles for development of the community-based tourism, including constraint in the human resource. More precisely, there is lack of tourist guides who could command good English to communicate with foreign tourists. There are limited numbers of systematic researches on the community-based tourism in Japan. Miyakani and Stoep (2006) examined a community-based tourism project in Okinawa prefecture, Japan. Under the community-based tourism project, the Okinawa’s unique history is closely linked with its tourism product in order to increase tourism experience. The effective linkage is incorporated into a historical site restoration in Okinawa. However, the physical linkage to connect the local community to international tourist remains poor and there is a need to improve some infrastructure and transportation in the prefecture. Shikada et al. (2009) analyzed a community-based tourism in Hokkaido, Japan. They pointed out that the community-based tourism is promoted in Japan in order to increase income in the 8
rural areas. Many rural communities have suffered from economic decline due to rapid urbanization and industrialization since the 1960s. Furthermore, due to prolong economic crisis in Japan, the central government in Japan has decreased subsidies to the local governments. In other words, the local communities need to find their own way to sustain their economy without relying on the central government. Under such background, Japan enacted the Ecotourism Promotion Act of 2006 that is designed to promote the communitybased tourism under the name of sustainable ecotourism. However, the main issue for the development of community-based tourism is involvement of the outsider or the so-called the “extra-community stakeholders” in the community initiative. In other words, the sustainable development of the community-based tourism would necessitate the involvement extracommunity stakeholders for the consumption of tourist product and further investments. On the other hand, there is still a lack of research on community-based tourism in Malaysia. The notable exception is the homestay program in Malaysia (Razzaq et al. 2011). In Malaysia, the community-based tourism is seen as a prominent tool for community development. Retrospectively, the Malaysian government encouraged the homestay program as a community-based tourism product. Due to strong government initiative, there are more than 140 homestay projects that attracted more than three thousand tourists in Malaysia. For the sustainable development of homestay projects, there is a need to enhance the carrying capacities in the local communities. Without local communities’ sufficient capacity to involve in these projects, socio-economic benefits from tourism development to local communities could be limited due to the manipulation by the extra-community stakeholders. Based on these discussions, the following assumptions were proposed: Assumption 1: Tourism development enhances the social economics dimension of the local communities Assumption 2: Tourism development results in crowding and congestion at the rural tourists’ destination Assumption 3: Tourism development has a positive impact on the services provided by the local communities. Assumption 4: Tourism development improves on the environment of the tourists’ destination by creating the awareness of the importance of conserving the environment among the local communities Assumption 5: Tourism development enriches the attitudes of the local communities as tourism has created new opportunities and tangible benefits for the communities.
9
Methodology Despite the importance of the impact of tourism can have on the rural communities, little research has been done to examine the subsequent impact of rural tourism industries and to explore the satisfaction level of local communities. This study is unique in a sense that a rural community, such as Bario, is remotely situated from the outside world and comparison will be made with another rural tourism site of Yufuin which is from a developed country. The following were some of the questions that were posed to the local communities during the in-depth interview: Social Economics: 1. Do you think that your local culture is affected positively or negatively as a result of the tourism activities? 2. Does tourism development improve your community’s appearance? Why? 3. How do you feel about living in a tourism destination? 4. Does tourism encourage development of a variety of cultural activities by the local residents? 5. Do you think tourism will result in more cultural exchanges between tourists and local residents? 6. Do you feel that meeting people from other regions of the world is a valuable experience to better understand their culture and society? 7. What do you think of the level of development resulting from tourism activities? Has it increased or remain the same? 8. Has your income increase as a result of tourism activities? 9. Do you think that tourism is likely to create more jobs for your community? 10. Do you think that tourism is likely to provide more business opportunities for local entrepreneurs? 11. Has development in tourism increased your quality of life? 12. Do you think tourism will create social ills in your community? Crowding and Congestion 1. Do you think that tourists’ arrivals have result in your community becoming overcrowded? 2. Are the natural environment affected as a result of tourism activities? 3. Will tourism development causes pollution (e.g. noise and environmental)? 4. Is tourism is likely to cause traffic congestion? 5. Has the level of noise level increased due to the number of tourists?
10
Service: 1. Do you think tourism activities have improved local services capabilities in doing business? 2. Is there any sense of cooperation among the local communities to provide better services to the tourists? 3. Do you take pride in developing and being part of tourism? 4. Are there a variety of restaurants in your area as a result of tourism? 5. Do you think that the services provided are at a promised time and satisfactory level? Environment: 1. Do you think that tourism development provide an incentive for the conservation of natural resources? 2. What is your opinion on managing the number of tourists arrival in preserving the natural environment? 3. Do you think that tourism development is environmental friendly? 4. Are the wildlife (plants, birds and animals) in your area the main tourists attractions? 5. What is your opinion on the natural environment as more and more tourists are arriving? Community Attitudes: 1. Do you feel proud with the arrival of tourists? 2. What do you feel about tourism here? 3. What kind of interactions do you have with tourists? 4. At what level of tourism development would you support? 5. Do you feel proud to take part in developing tourism activities?
11
Findings and Discussion The local communities play a critical role in the development of tourism activities as their participation and involvement are vital to the process. This study attempts to investigate the impact of tourism on social economics, crowding and congestion, service, environment, and community attitudes of the local communities. The findings of the study highlights that by empowering local communities, community-based tourism has the capability to help the local residents to improve their income, preserve local culture and traditions, provide educational opportunities, diversify the local economy and conserve the environment (Coughlin & Nair, 2011). From the in-depth interviews conducted, it was found that the local communities of Bario were supportive of tourism. From the social economic aspect, the local communities of Bario, comprising of the Kelabits ethnicity, felt that their culture and traditions should be practiced as they need to ensure that these are the attractions for tourists. As Bario borders the Kalimantan region of Indonesia, there have been occasions whereby the local homestay owners invited the Kelabits from Kalimantan who practice the traditional culture, to teach the local Kelabits community of Bario these old traditions. This has revived dying traditions and found to be beneficial to the local Kelabits, as the older generations are able to practice these traditions and pass them down to the younger generations. It was also found that tourism activities in Bario bring about better public facilities such as roads and toilets being built and maintained. Cleanliness in the areas is also being uphold as a top priority so as to ensure that tourists are comfortable during their visits. The local residents are appreciative of tourism activities as there has been a project in planting the famous, fragrant Bario rice on a large scale at this moment. Bario rice is popular and well known among local people of Sarawak due to the smooth and soft texture of the rice and there is a high demand for it, however, production is limited due to financial and human capital constraints. One of the problems faced by rice farmers in Bario is lack of labour force as the demographic distribution is Bario is skewed towards the age groups of below 15 years old and above 50 years old. Those in between these age groups are working in the city as there is no economic activities that are suitable for them. Hence, the planting of the rice on a large scale has provided additional incentives for tourists to visit Bario and contribute to the local economy. As a result of tourism activities, the local residents felt that there ought be more development for Bario. As Bario lacks basic infrastructure such as roads, electricity, tap/running water, they opined that there is a need for development in Bario to improve these. However, they agree on the whole that Bario should not be over-developed as it will lose its unique features as a community-based ecotourism destination.
12
Comparisons between Rural Tourism Sites of Malaysia and Japan One of the purposes of our research is to discuss how Yufuin has maintained its good reputation for decades. For this purpose, it seems to be valuable to observe the relationship between Yufuin and Beppu, another popular spa town in Oita prefecture. Beppu, the second largest city in Oita, is around 50 km away from Yufuin. These two towns compete to attract more tourists; on the other hand, apparently they support each other as “satellite cities”. If we consider their intentional competition and unintentional collaboration between Beppu and Yufuin, we could precisely understand the secret of their successes. These two towns apparently have different features and different strategies for tourism industry. Beppu, big well-known city, has almost everything to attract tourists, compared with Yufuin. Yufuin has much environmental friendly circumstances which Beppu has less. Therefore, visitors to Beppu-Yufuin area are given the chances to enjoy the different features of different towns at the same time. For instance, tourists to Yufuin can enjoy three unique features of Beppu, which partly Yufuin itself cannot offer, as follows: 1. Spa and medical tourism 2. Collaboration with local university 3. Volcanic cone and trekking 4. Variety of accommodations First you might be surprised to see many hospitals in Beppu. It might sound strange that there are many hospitals in spa town. In Beppu, tourists can enjoy spa and also undergo medical check-up. Basically spa in Japan is popular among senior citizens, because natural hot spring is believed to be good for the health care. Senior citizens paying attentions to their health condition tend to enjoy medical tourism. In fact, some hospitals in Beppu are specialized to treat a particular disease. For instance, Noguchi Hospital in Beppu is specialized to treat thyroid gland cancer. Several years ago, a member of the Japanese loyal family visited Noguchi hospital for the cancer operation. This noble person took the medical operation in Beppu, not in Tokyo. These hospitals in Beppu have successfully gathered patients from all over Japan and foreign countries. So, recently hospitals in Beppu collaborate with hotels in Oita prefecture. For instance, Noguchi hospital recommends some hotels on their website, which offer discount to their patients. Therefore patients or tourists paying attention to their health care can enjoy "Rotenburo", outdoor bath in Yufuin and have medical treatment by the specialized hospitals in Beppu. In this sense, Bario has a big potential to be a good place for healing-tourism. If Bario, having a lot of greens and fine environmental circumstances, would offer something related to “healing”, they can attract more tourists from “busy” advanced countries. The creation of healing-industry could make Bario more “charming” place as healing-tourism site for the modern people.
13
Second, there are a lot of foreigners working for the tourist industry in Beppu. For example, if you stay at Suginoi hotel, the biggest hotel in Beppu, you may meet a British door man, a Korean receptionist, a Bangladesh bellboy and a Chinese waitress in the hotel's main restaurant. Almost all of them are the international students of a local university in Beppu. They are international students studying at the local university in Beppu. With their contribution, hotels in Beppu have successfully become internationally well known. Of course, Japan's central government allows international students to work for the local private companies with their student’s visa. These students do not need to get the work permit. Also, the local business association recommends local tourist industry to hire international students. Therefore international tourists staying in Yufuin-Beppu region could have comparatively more chances to enjoy the guest-relations services in their own languages. This type of service which the international staff can offer would be another advanced feature for YufuinBeppu area. We might be able to discuss about the possibility of employing international students studying in Malaysia for the tourist industry of Bario. For instance, if Bario's local community or business association permits the Japanese students studying in Malaysia to work for their tourist industry, they would be “pull” factor of Japanese tourists. In this case, there is an option to use the professional tour guide instead of Japanese student studying in Malaysia who usually does not have proper experience to work for the tourist industry. However Japanese students studying in Malaysia often have much more “vivid” personal experiences more than the tour guides. In fact, many of tour guides working for Japanese tourist companies in Malaysia are Malaysian personal. And some Japanese tourist guides coming with Japanese tourists to Malaysia have not ever lived in Malaysia. Third, the trekking near volcano in Beppu and Yufuin is very popular. The trekking in other spa towns is not so popular; usually the tourists come and just simply take spa. But in Beppu or in Yufuin the tourists take hot spa and enjoy a walk around mountain side. What is difference between the Beppu region and other spa towns? Especially the tourist board of Beppu advertises their volcanic cones as the “entrance of hell” or “hell” itself and they call the trekking around the mountain site volcanic cones “taking a walk around the hell”. It might sound strange again. They recommend the tourists to take a walk around the “hell” as a “must” activity for tourist. Of course, all volcanic cones are almost same anywhere in Japan. However the naming in Beppu is unique. The unique name of volcano makes people interested to take a walk in mountains around Beppu and Yufuin. Mountain hikers can enjoy trekking and hot spa at the same time in Yufuin-Beppu region. One veteran hikers who visit Yufuin and Beppu several times every year, Mr. & Mrs. Matsuda, told us, “we go to the mountain site by our car and enjoy hiking for a few hours; after the walking, on the way to our home we visit Yufuin to enjoy Rotenburo, outdoor bath. The package of trekking and hot spa is really wonderful”. From the several aspects mentioned above, we are able to learn a few factors for the development of Bario's tourist industry. Bario is apparently full of natural "contents" on which we can put unique names. For example, Bario might have “devil’s rock”, “door of the heaven”, “two horns of goat” and “monster’s mountain”. It must be emphasized that unique 14
names are also advanced features to attract the tourists. In fact, recently the “naming-rights” business has increased in Japan. For example, some private companies buy naming-rights to put the company’s name on the public facilities such as park, stadium, music hall, museum, and so on. These facts indicate that the unique naming is one of the useful methods for advertisements and the business schemes to improve the value of organization or region. Fourth, the tourist to Yufuin-Beppu area can enjoy variety of accommodations. Basically, the sizes of ordinary hotels and Japanese-style hotels or inns in Yufuin are much smaller than those in Beppu. Visitors would have choices to stay at large scale luxury hotel in Beppu or to stay at small family business type inn in Yufuin. If people spend a few days in Yufuin-Beppu area, they can enjoy face to face relationship at small accommodation in Yufuin in the first night and in the second night they can change their accommodation to the big hotel in Beppu providing a full services and advanced facilities. In linking the 2 research sites, the findings revealed that these two locations have attracted visitors with different type of social power. It was found that Yufuin had comparatively more “hard power” meaning that it has a well-managed social infrastructure including efficient public transportations, modern hospitals, and the tourists to the region could enjoy varieties of restaurants, bars, pubs, karaoke, theatres, museums, galleries, department stores, and shopping malls in the satellite city. Bario, on the other hand, had comparatively “soft power” as Bario is blessed with beautiful natural environment and homestay programme for the visitors whereby the homestay in Bario are basically small family businesses. Also in Bario daily activities or seasonal events seem to be conducted by local human network, which is not completely businesslike. Visitors to Bario never expect efficient public transportations, highly qualified hospitals, universities, or varieties of restaurants like Beppu or Yufuin. Therefore, visitors to Bario enjoyed close “face-to-face” relations hence, Yufuin, relatively a rural area, could adopt and learn the “soft power” strategy from Bario. Reciprocal competition by satellite towns with different community based concept Yufuin as a town has unique atmosphere. Many of visitors to Yufuin might feel that they finally arrive at the “old traditional village”. One of the reasons why this spa town in mountain site successfully gives people “home-coming” feelings seems to come from the integrated design of the old traditional town. Apparently the outward appearance of Yufuin makes tourists more relax than other spa towns. Generally the first impression of the town is important to attract the tourists. Also it often has an effect on increment of the visitors repeatedly coming back to the town. And atmosphere of the town is a critical factor for the tourists to judge whether they can spend good time or not in the particular site. Their integrated old traditional design of street, houses and buildings could be a key to give good impression to visitors. This might be another interesting point of Yufuin. In recent years, typical “villages” have been disappearing all over Japan. It is widely said that in Japan, almost all cities and towns have been loosing their own features, because of the progressive economic expansionism. Even in rural area, the towns have been aggressively 15
developed; social capital and public facilities have been prepared and well maintained. With high economic growth in 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, the “local” features of towns in Japan have been lost. So, when international tourists visit Japanese modern typical town, they might have "deja-vu" feeling which they have already visited those towns. The creation of integrated atmosphere in the whole area of the town definitely needs the community based agreement. Otherwise, the town can not keep the integrated beautiful design of the streets. If every single resident builds their own favoured houses and shops, the appearance of the town would be jumbled. In this sense, the residents of Yufuin have successfully gotten the community based agreement to keep the integrated old traditional appearance of the town. It creates the impression of the town meaningful for the tourists. Successfully sharing the concept to sustain the good impression of the town among the residents is one of the important factors of Yufuin. Regarding the atmosphere of Yufuin, Mr. Kohta Niikura whose family business is souvenir shop in Yufuin told us, “we love Yufuin and we really don’t wish to change the town”. “We now enjoy good reputation of the town, so we all know that we should share the same concept to keep the town special”. On the other hand, Beppu is a modern decorated city which has high buildings, almost all advanced social facilities, public transportation network, etc. The atmosphere of Beppu is apparently different from Yufuin. However, as mentioned already, Beppu also is still attractive tourist site. Therefore Yufuin and Beppu have developed with their different own community based concepts. More importantly these two towns with different features have “reciprocally” competed for decades. “Reciprocal competition” by a few satellite cities would give supplemental functions each other and sometimes supplies direct positive economic impacts to these cities. In this meaning, Bario could have Miri as their satellite city. Miri seem to be too far as satellite city to Bario. But in this case, the distance is not a big matter, because Miri is now the “entrance” for Bario. If these two towns with different features recognize the possibility for the cooperation, they would have fruitful results with their reciprocal competition. In linking the 2 research sites of Bario and Yufuin, the findings revealed that these two locations have attracted visitors with different type of social power. It was found that Yufuin has comparatively more “hard power” meaning that it has a well-managed social infrastructure including efficient public transportations, modern hospitals, and the tourists to the region could enjoy varieties of restaurants, bars, pubs, karaoke, theatres, museums, galleries, department stores, and shopping malls in satellite city. Bario, on the other hand, had comparatively “soft power” as Bario is blessed with beautiful natural environment and homestay programme for the visitors whereby the homestay in Bario are basically small family businesses. Also, in Bario daily activities or seasonal events seem to be conducted by local human network, which is not completely businesslike. Visitors to Bario never expect any efficient public transportations, modern hospitals, universities, or varieties of restaurants like Beppu or Yufuin. Therefore, visitors to Bario enjoyed close “face-to-face” relations
16
hence, Yufuin, relatively a rural area, could adopt and learn the “soft power” strategy from Bario.
Figure 5: Concept of Reciprocal Competition by Satellite Towns
Boundary of effect ②
Boundary of effect ①
City B Village A
Source: Designed by Iwao Kato, Wako University, 2012
Implications This research has a number of theoretical and practical implications both for scholars and practitioners, especially in the study of rural tourism. Firstly, this study represents the theoretical research regarding the important dimensions resulted from the impact of tourism development in rural settings. Despite the fact that the involvement of local communities is an important factor as a basic requirement for the development of rural tourism destinations, there have been very few researches conducted that compared rural tourism destinations between developed and developing countries. Thus, this study has allowed for a better understanding of how communities’ perceptions were formed and the mechanisms linking the impact of tourism development to the choice of and effective use of further tourism development projects. Secondly, by exploring the phenomenon of tourism impacts among local communities, it has certainly broadened the understanding of tourism development from the eyes of the communities. Without a doubt the research on rural tourism developments are still limited in its ability to provide an unequivocal guideline and to advise on the best way to help improve the standard of living of the rural communities.
17
This study reveals significant points in developing rural tourism destinations. In both countries, there are noteworthy attributes that ought to be considered. Firstly, rural tourism itself will be hampered without the community’s desire and readiness to improve their welfare; hence it is imperative that there is a full community participation to ensure the sustainability. As we are dealing with the community, the foremost important aspect in rural tourism development and management is the existence of local champions. Local champions fulfill leadership roles as they motivate, provide support and encouragement to the community to ensure that rural tourism is progressing and able to meet the goals and objectives when they first set out to embark. The local champions also act as the focal points in tourism development initiatives and are considered as the “torch bearer” of the communities’ tourism activities. As rural tourism project progresses, it is advisable for the local communities to collaborate with other stakeholders such as tour operators and governmental bodies in promotional activities of rural destination. Apart from promoting the rural destinations for financial gains, the collaboration allows local communities some degree of control on tourism and social development. For instance, a partnership with local municipality will see that cleanliness are being kept and maintained at all times. Repairs on any dysfunctional public utility properties would be carried out promptly when the communities are in a partnership with the local government. A joint venture with tour operators may result in higher tourists’ arrivals to the destination as the tour operators may get a slice of the tourism revenue of the tourism project. Sustaining rural tourism involves continuous training to enhance the knowledge level of the tourism players in every aspect of tourism management. Furthermore, the industry players consisting of local homestay operators, trekking guides and retailers ought to be equipped with the necessary skills in managing tourism especially the delicate nature of the environment. In one of the interviews conducted with a trekking guide, the guide mentioned that he learnt from tourists in caring for the environment as the tourists would take with them the trash while trekking the forests, rather than litter the precious forest. Another example that the trekking guides learnt from tourists is when the tourists introduced an environmentallyfriendly soap that does not contain chemicals that detriment the environment. According to the guide, he was also informed by tourists to not burn plastic bags or any form of plastics in the forests as plastics emit gasses that are harmful to the living environment and he was appreciative that the tourists share with him this valuable information and he understands now that the natural environments are the core product that attracts tourists to the destination site. The environmental impact that tourism brings to rural destination is not only limited to trekking guides but to the local residents as well. A local resident felt that he was are able to learn from tourists on showing respect to the natural environment from his interactions with them. Another local resident however is of the view that an increase in tourists arrival could lead to the destruction of the natural environment as it would be a tough task to preserve the attraction in the event of an influx of tourists. However, he is of the opinion that without the natural environment, the unique attractions for tourists to visit will cease to exist. For community based rural tourism to succeed, it is crucial that the community is supportive of it in its entirety and an organized structure has to be in place in carrying out the goals and 18
objectives. The community would have to embrace the concept of rural tourism as the means to improve their financial standings. An interview with a local homestay owner revealed the fact that tourism activities have increase the standard of living whereby he is able to improve the condition of his house such as having better toilets and extend his house from the money obtained from tourism. In another interview, a local resident of Bario opined that the infrastructure has improved as concrete roads are now being built as oppose to gravel roads previously. There is also an initiative on paddy planting on a large scale as generating more income for local farmers as well as creation of jobs for local residents. Conclusion This study has provided compelling evidence for the importance of continuing the efforts to understand the impact of rural tourism development from the local communities’ perspectives. It is worth examining the impact of important dimensions of tourism development can have on the communities in view that identifying and developing effective rural tourism development effort continues to be important in alleviating poverty in rural areas. This research demonstrates the existence of a positive and significant link between 5 crucial dimensions as perceived by local communities on rural tourism development. Hence, it is crucial to understand that tourism development has produced a positive impact on these dimensions and supported by the local communities. The results supported past researches (Lo, Mohamad, Songan & Yeo, 2012) that sustainable tourism, albeit its importance, will not be successful without the local participation and in order to successfully develop a sustainable rural tourism destination, the views from the local communities should be taken into consideration as tourism environment, just like any other industry, is rapidly changing.
19
References Bramwell, B. and Sharman, A. (1999). Collaborations in local tourism policymaking. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(2), pp.392-415. Briedenhann, J. & Wickens, E. (2003) Tourism routes as a tool for the economic development of rural areas: Vibrant hope or impossible dream? Tourism Management, 25 (1), 71-79. Chandralal, K.P.l (2010). Impacts of Tourism and Community Attitude Towards Tourism: A Case study in Sri Lanka. South Asian Journal on Tourism and Heritage, 3(2): 41-49. Coughlin, E. & Nair, V. (2011). Alleviating Poverty Via Community Based Tourism: A Case Study of the Kelabit Community in Bario, Sarawak, Proceedings of the Advances in Hospitality & Tourism Marketing & Management Conference: 19 - 24 June 2011, Istanbul, Turkey Goodwin, H. and Santilli, R. (2009). “Community-based tourism: A success? ICRT Occpational, Paper, No.11. Jamal, T. and Getz, D. (1994). Collaboration theory and community tourism planning. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), pp.186-204. Kuvan, Y. & Akan, P. (2005), Residents’ attitudes toward general and forest-related impacts of tourism: the case of Belek, Antalya, Tourism Management, 26(5), 691-706. Lo, M. C., Mohamad, A.A., Songan, P., & Yeo, A. W. (2012). Rural Tourism Positioning Strategy: A Community Perspective. IPEDR, 28,22-26. Manyama, G. and Jones, E. (2007). Community-based tourism enterprise development in Kenya: An exploration of their potentials as avenues for poverty reduction. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(6), pp.628-644. Mitchell, R.E. and Reid, D. G. (2001). Community integration: Island tourism in Peru. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(1), pp.113-139. Miyakuni, K. and Stoep, G.A. V. (2006). Linking linkage concepts from diverse fields to build a community-based tourism planning framework. Tourism Geography, 8(3), pp.286-309. Ng. Y.Y. (2012). Chapter 10 Revving up the Tourism Industry. Oikos Institute (2012). Community-based tourism. http://www.communitybasedtourism.info/, [accessed on June18, 2012] . Otto, J. E. & Ritchie J. R. (1996). The service experience in tourism. Tourism Management, 17, 165-174. Phu, P.X, Anh, V.T., Tran, N.T.B., Van, P.H.T. and Duyen, P.N. (2011). Contribution of community-based tourism to poverty alleviation in Vietnam: A case study. Asia-Pacific Journal of Rural Development, 11(1), pp.65-89. Razaq, A.R.A., Hadi, M.Y., Mustafa, M.Z. (2011). Local community participation in homestay programs development in Malaysia. Journal of Modern Accounting and Auditing, 7(12), pp.1418-1429. Reed, M.G. (1997). Power relations and community-based tourism planning. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(3), pp.565-591. Reid, D.G, Mair, H. and George, W. (2004). Community tourism planning: A self-assessment instrument. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(1), pp.623-639. Ruiz-Molina, M. E., Gil-Saura, I. & Moliner-Velázquez, B. (2010) The role of information technology in relationships between travel agencies and their suppliers. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, 1(2), 144 – 16.
20
Shikada, A., Yoda, M. Kino, A. and Morishige, M. (2006). Tourism relationship model and intermediary for sustainable tourism management: Case study of Kiritappu Watland Trust in Hamanaka, Hokkaido. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 10, pp.105-115. Simpson, M.C. (2008). Community benefit tourism initiative - A conceptual oxymoron? Tourism Management, 29, 1-18. Thailand community-based tourism institute (2012). What is community-based tourism? http://www.cbt-i.org/travel.php?&lang=en, [accessed on June18, 2012]. Tosun, C., (2005). Stages in the emergence of a participatory tourism development approach in the Developing World, Geoforum, 36(3), 333-352. Trejos, B. & Chiang, L.H.N. (2009). Local economic linkage to community-based tourism in rural Costa Rica. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 30, 373-387. Wang, Y., Pfister, R.E., & Morais, D.B. (2006). Residents’ Attitudes toward Tourism Development: A Case Study of Washington, NC. In the proceedings of the 2006 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium.
21
