General objectives To analyze and investigate the effects of social capital on local people’s benefits in the development of ecotourism in national parks in Red river delta and north ea
Trang 11
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 The thesis necessity
1.1.1 Theoretical aspect
The ecotourism term attached with responsible tourism tendency
“seeing, enjoying but not damaging” (Orams 1995) has been notified
since 1980s Ecotourism is different from other types of mass tourism in
the way of developing sustainability, supporting efforts in environmental
presevation and education, and bringing about benefits for local people
(Wood, 2002) Since its appearance, ecotourism has been researched
from various perspectives
Previous studies emphasized ecotourism as a responsible and ideal
tourism to achieve sustainable development goal Also, the exploration of
ecotourism should take notice of its effects on the effectiveness of
ecotourism development One important factor ensuring the success of
ecotourism is the local people’s involvement attached with their benefits
(Sharpley and Telfer, 2008) Therefore, analyzing factors having effects
on ecotourism development also means evaluating these factors’ effects
on local people’s benefits when they participate in tourism development
Among different factors influencing ecotourism development, social
capital is a quite new one, which has been researched since 2000 Unlike
other capital sources, social capital is an “unphysical source” established
from cooperative relationships of social networks, which are built up
based on trust, norms and regulation sharing and reciprocity Also, it has
a significant distraction to participants
Under the context of developing ecotourism attached with local
people’s participation, studies on the relationship between ecotourism and
social capital are essential, which aim at promoting benefits for local
people through developing values based on their social capital source
Previous studies on the relationship between social capital and
ecotourism (Foucat, 2002; Sawatsky, 2003; Jones, 2005; Nguyen, 2007;
Okazaki, 2008; Liu et.al, 2011; Marcinek and Hunt, 2015; Musavengane,
2017, etc) focused on the effects of social capital on certain specific
benefits for local people Thus, there is a lack of studies on a
comprehensive evaluation of social capital on economic, socio-cultural
and environmental benefits as well as the enhancement of local people’s
position In fact, this is a concerning aspect to develop ecotourism in a
responsible basis, which ensures the philosophy of sustainability Thus,
this thesis has theoretical meaning, which contributes to the knowledge of
social capital and its relationship with benefits for local people in
developing ecotourism
2
1.1.2 Practical aspect
Since 1990s, there have been various successful models of ecotoursim development, such as those in America, Canada, Belize, Kenya, Australia, Thailand and Japan, etc Although it appeared later than other
types, ecotourism is assessed by UNWTO as the highest growing with 10
- 15%/year (Sharpley, 2006) The effectiveness of ecotoursim development in reality shows its “advantages” in bringing about potentials of preservation and local livelihood cooperation as well as achieving these two objectives based on sustainable development In Vietnam, ecotourism development is trendy in National parks, especially
in Cát Bà, Cúc Phương, Ba Vì, etc located in Red river delta and north east coast area However, the role and benefits for local people are not clear This is partially because social capital of these people in communities of National parks is not strong and their relationship with other stakeholders is not effective Due to those rationales, the author
selected the thesis on “Effects of social capital on local people’s benefits
from the development of ecotourism of national parks located in Red river delta and north east coast” This aims at filling in the “gap” of
theory; and providing suggestions for policy makers, managers, local people and relevant stakeholders to improve the effectiveness of ecotourism in practice through social capital for the community
1.2 Researh objectives
1.2.1 General objectives
To analyze and investigate the effects of social capital on local people’s benefits in the development of ecotourism in national parks in Red river delta and north east coast
1.2.2 Specific objectives
(1) To determine elements of social capital, which have an influence
on benefits for local people in the development of ecotourism in national parks Then, it is the foundation for building up the theoretical framework (model) and research hypothesis
(2) To identify, test and analyze influencing level of social capital elements on different benefits (politics, economy, socio-culture and environment) of local people in the development of ecosystem in National parks in red river delta and north east coast
(3) To analyze the inluencing level of demography on the benefit for local people from the development of ecosystem in National parks in red river delta and north east coast
(4) To seek for solutions and recommendations based on the research
Trang 23
improve benefits of local people in the development of ecosystem in
National parks in red river delta and north east coast
1.3 Research questions
Question 1: What are elements of social capital that put an effect on
the benefits (politics, economy, socio-culture and environment) of local
people from the development of ecosystem in national parks? In addition
to the studied elements, are there any “new” ones identified and
discovered in the influence of social capital on local people from the
development of ecotoursim in national parks?
Question 2: How differently do different elements influence on
benefits (politics, economy, socio-culture and environment) of local
people from the development of ecosystem in national parks in red river
delta and north east coast?
Question 3: Are there any differences among National parks in Red
river delta and north east coast regarding effects of social capital on local
people’s benefits from the development of ecotoursim? If yes, how
different are they?
Question 4: Which elements of control variable (social capital) have
influence on benefits of local people from the development of ecotourism
in Red river delta and north east coast? Are there any differences among
these elements in terms of influencing level and tendency?
Question 5: Which elements of socail capital need to be improved
and increased to help local people gain better benefits from ecotoursim
development?
1.4 Research subject and scope
1.4.1 Research subject
- Research subject: Effects of social capital on local people’s benefits
from the development of ecotourism
1.4.2 Research scope
- Content: This study concentrates on exploring the relationship,
analyzing and testing effects of social capital’s elements on benefits of
local people in the development of ecotoursim
- Location: The research focuses on the area with participation and
benefits of local people in ecotoursim development in National parks of
Ba Vi, Cat Ba and Cuc Phương (belonging the Red river delta and north
east coast)
- Duration: Mainly in the period from 2013 to 2017 (secondary data
collection) and2016 - 2017, early 2018 periods (primary data collection)
1.5 Thesis organization
- Chapter 1: Introduction to the thesis
4
Chapter 2: Theroretical basis and literature review on effects of social capital on benefits of local people in the development of ecotourism
- Chapter 3: Research methods
- Chapter 4: Research results
recommendations, solutions
CHAPTER 2: THERORETICAL BASIS AND LITERATURE REVIEW ON EFFECTS OF SOCIAL CAPITAL ON BENEFITS
OF LOCAL PEOPLE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF
ECOTOURISM 2.1 Theories on social capital
2.1.1 Definition of social capital
According to various studies, social capital term appeared the first time in 1916 by Hanifan So far there have been different ways of understanding this term However, in general, social capital can be
defined as one type of “special resource” with “social” identity of human beings, social capital is established through relationships between individuals or groups (organization/society), improved through reciprocity and sharing, cooperation and partnership of social networks which are based on trust and respect for regulations, norms aiming at bringing about benefits for individuals /groups when they participate and invest in relationships institutionalized to some extent
2.1.2 Typical features of social capital
First, social capital derives from participation in social networks or investment in relationships of individuals/ groups in order to achieve benefits for them as well as their groups Second, social capital is considered as a “resource”, bringing about either economic or non-economic benefits, which cannot be measured by “physical” tools,
“tangible” values but “intangible”, “non-physical” elements of trust,
norms, cooperation and responsibility for the groups Third, social capital
is maintained and developed through internal and exteral interactions of
the networks Forth, social capital is a “chain” - “missing link” in
developing sustainably, improving position and bringing about socio-cultural benefits for the community
2.1.3 Measurement elements for social capital
Social capital is comprised of various elements Different studies have
Trang 35
the basic ones cover trust, reciprocity, sharing, norms/rules, cooperation
and social networks/connectedness
Although social capital is not a new research trend, recently, it has
been explored based on the relationship with tourism development In this
thesis, the author only selected certain elements of social capital
depending on their appropriateness with the research objectives, subject
and context, which would help to figure out and test effects of social
capital on benefits of local people in the development of ecotourism
These elements are sorted out through consultancy with experts and
selection of their popularity in previous studies
Table 2.1: Summary of social capital elements researched in tourism
No
Author,
published
year
Elements of social capital
Trust Reciprocity, sharing
Norms Cooperation
Social networks Others
1 Foucat (2002) X x X X
2 Jones (2005) X X X X 1,2
3 Liu et al
(2005)
4 Zhao et al
(2011)
5 Park et al
(2012)
6 Baksh et al
(2013)
7 Gaitho (2014) X X X X x
8 Marcinek and
Hunt (2015)
9 Musavengane
(2017)
Source: Compiled by the author
In particular:
X: the same studied element
x: compatability
X1: conflict and linkage
X2: Power, equality and decision making
X3: Involvement of local community
X4: Local institutions, attitude and awareness of community
2.2 Literature review on effects of social capital on benefits of local
people in the development of ecotourism
2.2.1 Definition of ecotoursim
Ecotourism has been researched since 1980s There have been
numerous definitions so far The most frequently cited concepts are given
6
by Lascurain (1983, 1987) which puts an emphasis on experiences improving visitors’ awareness and developing effectiveness attached with the rule of preservation; and by World Ecotoursim Association (1991, 2015) which focuses on natural sustainability, culture attached with lecturing activities and environmental education From my own
perspective and inheritance from revious studies, I define ecotourism as a type of tourism based on attracting values of neglected natural resources and unique local culture;it is attached with great involvement of local people and relevant stakeholders; there are environmental education and lectures as well as preservation activities; there is promotion of tourism business activities in local area at small scale with low consumption (resources), which still satisfy experiencing demand and improve visitors’ awareness; at the same time, it helps to bring about economic, socio-cultural and environemental benefits as well as improve the position of local people and relevant stakeholders
2.2.2 Studies on the development of ecotourism
2.2.2.1 Studies on the appearance and development of ecotourism
Studies by Wood (2002), Obenaus (2005), Weaver and Lawton (2007), Cobbinah (2015), Chandel and Mishra (2016), etc show that the development of ecotoursim has experienced changes and supplimentaries, which are reflecting more and more apparently the typical features of a responsible and sustainable type of tourism
2.2.2.2 Studies on features, rules and instructing tools of ecotourism development
Features and rules of ecotourism were integrated in the research by Butler (1992) Then, there have been different studies on rules providing specific instructions on ecotourism development for relevant stakeholders A set of rules for implementation of ecotourism has been largely recognized, which was issued in 1990 by World Association of Ecotoursim and amended in 2015 In these rules, there is an emphasis on
“the key pillar” of ecotourism development, which is not only attached with preservation, participation and benefits for local people, but also focuses on elements of lectures, explanations and environmental education
2.2.2.3 Studies on factors influencing ecotourism
Studies on factors that have an influence on ecotourism development aim at improving those with positive effects and minimizing those with negative effects This is carried out through sustainable management tools Discussing these influencing factors, there are three main aspects: (1) elements leading to ecotourism development (Jamal et al., 2006); (2) elements affecting effectiveness of ecotourism development (Fennell,
Trang 47
of local people participating in ecotourism development (Shemshad and
Mohammadi, 2012; Kombo, 2016)
2.2.2.4 Studies on participation of relevant stakeholders in the
development of ecotourism
Stakeholders of ecotoursim development is also a “topic” for
different researchers (Honey, 1985; Drake, 1991; Brandon, 1993; Wood,
2002; Drumm and Moore, 2005…) Among previous studies, the model
of essential partners for the success of ecotoursim development given by
Drumm and Moore (2005) is mentioned much more than others In this
model, the authors emphasized the participation of main subjects such as
non-governmental organizations, local authorities, tourism businessmen,
local people and other supporting groups/organizations
2.2.2.5 Studies on the role of local people in the development of
ecotoursim
The participation of the community is the bottom – up approach to
promote the positive role if local people who are provided with the right
to explore, manage and develop ecotourism (Kiss, 2004; Nelson, 2004;
Boonzaaier and Philip, 2007; O’Neill, 2008; Mensahet al, 2013) The
participation from normal role to managers, investigators owners of the
resources and activities of ecotoursim development can not only bring
about great benefits in terms of socio-economy, environment, social
welfare; but also provide “added” benefits for stakeholders Especially,
the provision for local people with those rights would help to improve
their position, voice and benefits (Salafsky and Wollenberg; 2000;
Sultana, 2009)
2.2.3 Factors measuring benefits of local people in ecotoursim
development
Political benefits of local people when they participate in ecotourism
(according to Scheyvens (1999), Jones (2005)) are chances to raise their
voice and solve mutual problems as fairly as possible; give their ideas in
making decision in the mutual forusm of the community
Economic benefits: are physical beneits (converted to money, items,
assets, etc) reflecting the purpose and objective motivation of the
community in joining the development of ecotourism The most direct
economic benefits are prodiving jobs and increasing income as well as
improving infrastructure for local people (Yacod et al, 2008; Kiper et al,
2011; Scheyvens, 1999)
Socio-cultural benefits not only help to preserve local cultures but
also bring about other benefits: jobs, social welfare (education,
healthcare, etc), raise awareness of the community and promote the
cooperation within the community as well as social networks
8
Environmental benefits, from the perspective of researching local
people’s benefits in ecotourism development, environmental benefits are helping local people to gain more knowledge or having behavior, initiatives protecting the environment (Tran and Walter, 2014)
2.2.4 Studies on the effects of social capital on local people’s benefits
in the development of ecotoursim
Social capital has an influence on the benefits of local people in the development of ecotourism In fact, previous studies (Foucat, 2002; Sawatsky, 2003; Liu et al, 2005; Jones, 2005; Zhao et al, 2011; Park et
al, 2012…) proved that in order to develop ecotourism, it would be essential to effectively cooperate between local people and stakeholders This cooperation was considered as the “central” factor ensuring the success of cooperation network The main objectives of ecotourism development are preserving resources and bringing about benefits to the community To achieve those objectives, it is essential to obtain the belief
of local people in local authorities and stakeholders as well as the support, sharing and cooperation between them The development is in the long run only when these relationships are based ont trust and commitment to respect rules and norms of the society/community In any community, if local people strongly cooperate and join in social networks, it will receive many more benefits from tourism than the community, in which people are incooperative or restricted to group activities and there are no supporting associations/organziations for local community development (Claiborne, 2010) A community with low background knowledge would “prevent” local people from gaining objectives and benefits from ecotourism development (Kamuti, 2014) Therefore, communities with advanced knowledge will have more conditions, favors and benefits from tourism development
In order to provide the influencing relationship between social capital and benefits of local people in ecotoursim development, this thesis consolidated relevant studies (diagram 2.4) to reveal this relationship with different results in different contexts and objectives Along with the basement of previous theories, in-depth interviews with experts and local people in National parks, the author created the research frame, in which, there is a new element/ scale identified based on this study entitled
“Particiaption in implementing regulations on operational management of ecotoursim in National parks”
2.5 Research frame
Based on analysis, comments and evaluation on good and bad points of each study; research subject, scope covering the exploration,
Trang 59
people’s benefits in ecotourism development in National parks of Red
river delta and north east coast; and selection of experts’ contributions,
the author designed research frame as presented in diagram 2.4
Diagram 2.4: Research model on effects of social capital on local
people in ecotourism development in National parks of Red river and
north east coast
Source: Compiled and designed by the author
Table 2.5: Research hypothesis
H1: Social capital has positive effects on benefits of local people from
ecotourism development
H1a Social capital has positive effects on political benefits
H1a1 Trust has parallel effect on political benefit
H1a2 Sharing has parallel effect on political benefit
H1a3 Norms have parallel effect on political benefit
H1a4 Cooperation has parallel effect on political benefit
H1a5 Social networks have parallel effect on political benefit
H1a6 Participation in implementing regulations on operational management
of ecotourism in National parks has parallel effect on political benefit
H1b Social has positive effects on economic benefits
H1
BENEFITS OF LOCAL COMMUNITY FROM ECOTOURISM DEVEOPMENT
Politcial benefits
Economic benefits
Socio-cultural benefits
Environmental benefits
H1a H1b H1c H 1d
SOCIAL CAPITAL
- Trust
- Sharing
- Norms
- Cooperation
- Social networks
operational management of
ecotourism in national parks
H2a,b,c,d
Demographic features: age,
knowledge, main job, average
income
10 H1b1 Trust has parallel effect on economic benefit H1b2 Sharing has parallel effect on economic benefit H1b3 Norms have parallel effect on economic benefit H1b4 Cooperation has parallel effect on economic benefit H1b5 Social networks have parallel effect on economic benefit H1b6 Participation in implementing regulations on operational management
of ecotourism in National parks has parallel effect on economic benefit
H1c Social capital has positive effects on socio-cultural benefits
H1c1 Trust has parallel effect on socio-cultural benefit H1c2 Sharing has parallel effect on socio- cultural benefit H1c3 Norms have parallel effect on socio- cultural benefit H1c4 Cooperation has parallel effect on socio- cultural benefit H1c5 Social networks have parallel effect on socio- cultural benefit H1c6 Participation in implementing regulations on operational management
of ecotourism in National parks has parallel effect on socio- cultural benefit
H1d Social capital has positive effects on environmental benefits
H1d1 Trust has parallel effect on environmental benefit H1d2 Sharing has parallel effect on environmental benefit H1d3 Norms have parallel effect on environmental benefit H1d4 Cooperation has parallel effect on environmental benefit H1d5 Social networks have parallel effect on environmental benefit H1d6 Participation in implementing regulations on operational management
of ecotourism in National parks has parallel effect on environmental benefit
H2: Demographical features of local people which have controlling influence on benefits of local people from ecotourism development
H2a Demographic features have controlling influence on political benefit H2b Demographic features have controlling influence on economic benefit H2c Demographic features have controlling influence on socio-cultural benefit
H2d Demographic features have controlling influence on environmental benefit
Source: Compiled by the author
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODS 3.1 Research design
3.1.1 Selection of research methods
This thesis combines both qualitative and quantitative methods In
Trang 611
related to features of social capital, status and development benefits of
ecotourism under the context of research context; identifying brief
compatibility within scales and their relationships; collecting information
to give comments and explain research results Quantitative methods aim
at analyzing the reliability of the scales and the exporatory factor, and
testing research model and hypothesis
3.1.2 Research process
Diagram 3.1: Research process map
Source: Compiled and designed by author
Phase 2
Pilot
study
Phase 1
Theore
tical
overvie
w
Step1: Theoretical overview of
social capital and benefits of
local people from ecotourism
development
Step4: Pilot study at
national parks
Step 2: Initial model and theory construction
Step 3: Design of qualitative question and planned questionnaire
Step5: Interview with experts, determination of new
scale
Step 6: Official research model and survey questionnaire
Phase 3
research
Step7a: Official
quantitative
survey (n = 323)
Step7b:
Analysis into reliability of scale
Step7c:
Exporatory factor analysis (EFA)
Step 7e: Regression
Deletion of variables with low correlation (<0.3)
Delete low factors loading item (<0.5)
Model and hypothesis testing
Step8: Comment on research results and propose solutions and recommendations
Step7d: Adjusted model and hypothesis
Qualitative
quationnaire
to interview
expert and
local people
to explain
research
results more
12
3.2 Qualitative research
- Qualitative methods: the thesis applies: observation, interview with
focus group and in-depth interview
- Interviewees: these are local people participating in activities of
ecotourism in National parks in Ba Vì, Cúc Phương and Cát Bà (18 interviewees) Also, there are interviews with representatives of Board of management of national parks, local authorities (6 interviewees) and interviews with experts (11 researchers related to ecotoursim and social capital) Focus group interview is carried out with 03 groups, each of which has 06 poeple who are local ones in research places
- Data analysis: All information is collected based on each specific
content (encoding) to give a mutual conclusion; results are gathered and compared with the theoretical model to build up the official model and hypothesis, at last, the qualitative results are used to present explanation
to the effects and complex relationships which are not explained by the quantitative model
3.3 Quantitative research
- Research sample: This thesis uses the convenient sampling method
with selection and categorization The sampling is carried out based on criterion of exporatory factor analysis and multiple regression; the research sample’s size is 323
- Measuring scale:
+ Social capital measuring scale (independent variable): trust, reciprocity and sharing, norms, cooperation, social networks and participation in the implementation of operational management regulations on ecotourism at National parks
+ Benefit measuring scale (dependent variable): benefits of politics, economy, socio-culture and environment
+ Demography measuring scale (control variable)
- Data analysis: SPSS 23.0 is used to insert data and analyze research
model through different steps: reliability test (Cronbach’s alpha - CA),
convergent valiadity and discriminant validity (EFA), multiple regression
to test the relationship and effects of social capital and control variable of demography on benefits of local people in the development of ecotourism
CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH RESULTS 4.1 Sample description
Initially, the research design expected sampling size of 323 with collected data from local people joining ecotourism in National parks of
Trang 713
Cuc Phuong, Cat Ba and Ba Vi The gathered data covered 318 qualified
responses (97,3%) to be officially analyzed
4.2 Evaluation on measuring scales by Cronbach’s alpha
The results of testing the scales’ reliability show that all scales are
qualified with CA from 0.631 to 0.800 However, 02/47 of observed
variables are excluded due to low correlation with general variable
(<0.3)
4.3 Exporatory factor analysis (EFA)
Table 4.5: EFA into measuring scales of social capital
Observed
variable
(*new name/variable)
Trust
Reciprocity and sharing
Rule based norms*
Norms
norms*
Cooperation
implementation of operational management regulation in National parks*
QC2
14
The analysis shows that there are 07 factors extracted with cumulative of variance: 60,8% (the model is compatible with data variations) However, there are 03/25 observed variables loaded with 2 factors at factor loading variance < 0.3, so, they are excluded, the rest 22 variables are qualified with factor loading from 0.602 to 0.867 and devided into 07 groups Norms are devided into 2 specific groups under new names The factor of particiaption in the implementation of operational management regulations in National parks is a new qualified variable with quite high factor loading (>0.8)
Table 4.7: EFA into benefit measuring scales of local people in the
development of ecotourism Observed
variables
(* new name)
Political benefits
Economic benefits
benefits of individual/
household*
Socio-cultural benefits
benefits of community*
Environmental benefits
Source: Results from survey, observation by the author
Data analysis shows that 05 factors are extracted with cumulative
of variance: 64,77% However, 03/20 variables are excluded, the rest 17 are qualified with factor loading from 0.6016 to 0.808 and devided into
05 groups Factor of socio-culture is devided into 2 specific groups and given new names
Trang 815
4.4 Adjusted research model and hypothesis
After the measuring scales’ reliability is tested and the exporatory
factor is analyzed; the research model is adjusted as the following:
Diagram 4.1: Adjusted research model of effects of social capital on
ecotourism development in National parks in Red river delta and
north east coast
Source: Compiled and designed by author
Hypothesis for the adjustment of measuring scales for norms and
socio-cultural benefits is presented in table 4.8 of the thesis
4.5 Regression analysis (hypothesis testing)
4.5.1 Population regression test
Evaluation on effects of social capital on local people’s benefits in the
development of ecotourism (LY), result:
LYi = 0.511 (VXH)i + ei
So, meaning of 5% shows that social capital has positive effect on
local people’s benefits in the development of ecotourism
4.5.2 Test on model of social capital’s effects on political benefits
H1a H1b H1c H 1d
H 1e
SOCIAL CAPITAL
- Trust
- Sharing
- Regulatory norms
- Social norms
- Cooperation
- Social networks
regulation on ecotourism in
National parks
H1
H2 a, b, c,d,e
Demographic features:
main job, average income
BENEFITS OF LOCAL PEOPLE IN DEVELOPMENT
OF ECOTOURISM Political benefits
Economic benefits
Socio-cultural benefits for individual/ household
Socio-cultural benefits for community
Environmental benefits
16
Evaluation on effect of social capital on political benefits of local people in the development of ecotourism (LY1), result of regression: LY1i = 0.150 (LT)i + 0.165 (HT)i + 0.273 (ML)i + 0.136 (QC)i + ei Meaning 5% shows that LT (trust), HT (cooperation), ML (social network) and QC (participation in implementing operational management regulations on ecotourism in National parks) have effects on LY1 (political benefits) All of these effects are positive with top down ranking as ML, HT, LT và QC
4.5.3 Test on model of social capital’s effects on economic benefits
Evaluation on effect of social capital on economic benefits of local people in the development of ecotourism (LY2), result of regression:
LY2 i = 0.231 (QC) i + e i
Meaning 5% shows that only QC (participation in implementing operational management regulations on ecotourism in National parks) has positive impac on LY2 (economic benefits)
4.5.4 Test on model of social capital’s effects on socio-cultural benefits for individual/household
Evaluation on effect of social capital on socio-cultural benefits of individual/household in the development of ecotourism (LY3), result of regression:
LY3 i = 0.268 (LT) i + 0.165 (HT) i + 0.139 (ML) i + e i
Meaning 5% shows that only LT (trust), HT (cooperation) and social networks (ML) have impacs on LY3 (socio-cultural benefits for individual/household) All of these effects are positive with top down ranking as LT, HT và ML
4.5.5 Test on model of social capital’s effects on socio-cultural benefits for community
Evaluation on effect of social capital on socio-cultural benefits of community in the development of ecotourism (LY4), result of regression:
LY4 i = 0.249 (HT) i + 0.159 (ML) i + 0.188 (QC) i + e i
Meaning 5% shows that HT (cooperation), ML (social networks) and QC (participation in implementing operational management regulations on ecotourism in National parks) have effects on LY4 (socio-cultural benefits of community) All of these effects are positive with top down ranking as HT QC and ML
4.5.6 Test on model of social capital’s effects on environmental benefits
Evaluation on effect of social capital on environmental benefits of community in the development of ecotourism (LY5), result of regression:
Trang 917
Meaning 5% shows that LT (trust), CMQT (regulatory norms), CMXH
(social norms), QC (participation in implementing operational
management regulations on ecotourism in National parks) have effects on
LY5 (environmental benefits) All of these effects are positive with top
down ranking as QC, CMQT, CMXH và LT
Table 4.15: Results from regression analysis into tests of effects of
social capital on benefits for local people in the development of
ecotoursim
No
Factors
of social
capital
Effects of
social capital
on benefits
Beta for benefit standard
Politics Economy
Socio-cultural for individu al/house hold
Socio-cultural for community Environment
VXH 25,9 % 430 260 272 360 306
Source: Research results by author
4.5.7 Test on effects of demography variable
The research uses regression model with dummy variables to test
the level and direction of social capital’s effect on local people The
results show that 04 factors of demography having effects are ethnic,
knowledge, income and main job Age and gender do not have any effect
Factors of demography having control effect on 04 groups of benefits
which are politics, economy, socio-culture of the community and
environment, whereas they do not have effect on benefits of socio-culture
for individual/household Noticeably, effect of income on political and
socio-cultural benefits are contrastive, which is also the influencing
direction of income on environmental benefits The research uses
ANOVA tool to compare influencing level of demographic groups on
different benefits (Detailed results are presented at 4.5.7.2 of the thesis)
4.5.8 Analysis and comparison of social capital’s effects on local
people’s benefits in National parks in Cuc Phuonng, Cat Ba and Ba Vi
The research conducts regression with each data file of a National
18
for local people in National parks The results are presented in diagram
4.3
Diagram 4.3: Influecing level of social capital on benefits for local people in the development of ecotourism in National parks in Cuc
Phuong, Ba Vi and Cat Ba
Source: Research results by author
In general, national park has the highest effects on benefits for local people in the development of ecotourism is in Ba Vi (28,8%), the lowest number is in Cuc Phuong (13,3%), the number in Cat Ba is similar to that
of Ba Vi (25,1%).However, specific effects of social capital’s factors on local people’s benefits in the development of ecotourism in different national park is different (Results are presented at 4.5.8 of the thesis)
CHAPTER 5: RESEARCH RESULTS DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS, SOLUTIONS
5.1 Research results discussion
Based on the research results, following conclusions are given:
- There are 06 factors of social capital, which have effect on benefits for local people in the development of ecotourism in National parks in Red river delta and north east coast These factors are trust, regulatory norms, social norms, cooperation, social networks and participation in implementation of operational management on ecotourism in national parks Benefits for local people in developing ecotourism with effects from social capital cover benefits of politics, economy, socio-culture of individual/household, socio-culture of community and environment
- Influencing level of factors of social capital on local people’s benefits in developing ecotourism is arranged with the top down order of
Trang 1019
(1) Social networks, (2) Cooperation, (3) Trust, (4) participation in
implementation of operational management on ecotourism in national
parks, (5) social norms, and (6) regulatory norms It is notified that
research results for not record that sharing and reciprocity has effect on
local people’s benefits in the development of ecotourism
- Influencing factors have differences among groups of benefits:
• Social capital’s factors with top down influence on political
benefits are social networks, cooperation, participation in
implementation of operational management on ecotourism in
national parks and trust
• Except for the factor of participation in implementation of
operational management on ecotourism in national parks, other
factors have no effect on economic benefits
• Trust, coopeation and social networks have effect on socio-cultural
benefits for individual, household
• Factors putting effects on socio-cultural benefits for the community
implementation of operational management on ecotourism in
national parks
• Factors putting effects on environmental benefits are trust,
regulatory norms, social norms and participation in implementation
of operational management on ecotourism in national parks
5.2 Solutions to improve social capital in order to increase benefits
for local people in the development of ecotourism in national parks in
Red river delta and north east coast
5.2.1 Promoting cooperative relationships in the community
- In addition to encouraging and supporting local people to actively
participate in doing tourism business, Management Boards of National
parks should have direction and tool to help them change their mindset,
apply their advantages, actively cooperate with tourism enterprises to set
up tour on environmental education, natural exploration, ethnic speciality
discovery, etc in order to widely serve domestic and international tourists
Relationships with business, NGOs and community supporting agencies
should be kept in touch through a regular connective network, which
helps to update information thanks to a leader being in charge of
developing relationships to create continuous cooperation
- Specific solutions to enhance cooperative network and promotion are
establishing agency for advertising, ecotourism association in national
parks in Red river delta and north east coast which should have flexible
mechanism, connect with specialized units of local and central areas in
terms of toursim and forestry management
20
5.2.2 Enhancing cooperative social networks with relevant partners
- In order to promote cooperation in the community, firstly, it is essential to increase job opportunities and creat chances for local people
to exchange and share their ecotourism business
- In order to increase job opportunity and income for local people, at first, Management Board of national parks have to actively support local people with joining in tourism business, involving in management board and gaining market orientation, receiving investment in tourism product based on the improvement of unique tourism values of national parks
- Second, in order to provide local people with chances to cooperate,
share information through ecotourism activities, it is suggested to expand tourism business to potential areas in Natioanl parks and approve mechanism for household to cooperate to supply toursim service and product
5.2.3 Better applying management regulations in National parks
- Management boards in national parks should more effectively use these regulations to achieve double objectives in improving business performance of ecotourism in national parks and living standard of local people This is the aspect that can bring about a lot of benefits concerning economy, environment for the community and partially promote benefits
in terms of socio-culture and politics
- During the process of applying mechanism, national parks should have policies on encouraging local people to develop ecotoursim However, business cooperation in spending forest for rent has not been consistently implemented, which requires more detailed and open instructions At the same time, management boards should be stricter in enhancing private sector of ecotourism within the allowance of preservation rules A big disadvantage of national parks is their limited plans on training human resource, so, the quality of labor is quite low Thus, boards of management, authorities and local people should cooperate with training departments and experts on tourism to organize conferences, workshops and training courses for local people; support local people to apply for foreign sponsorship to implement programs improving community competence
5.2.4 Some other solutions
- In addition to the above solutions, maintaining trust and ensuring respect for principles and standards in the community will continue to be given adequate attention