31214 cbt phase II report

Although the project is still in its initial steps, the authors would already like to acknowledge the kind participation of tour operators and visitors in the survey as well as the welco

Thoải mái (Make yourself at home.)

CbT Development Review Phase I and Working Proposal Phase II

Sài Gòn/ Đồng Hới, 3rd September 2012

i

Figures and Tables ii

1 Introduction 1

2 Objectives and Methods 2

3 Feasibility of CbT Activities 4

3.1 Community Awareness Raising 4

3.2 Site Assessment – A Summary 5

3.3 Market and Market Validation 8

3.4 Stakeholder Engagement – Initial Steps 10

3.5 Summary Phase I and Site Selection 11

4 Planning 13

4.1 Permissions 13

4.2 Working Plan Phase II 13

4.3 Funding and Personnel (Internal Use Only) 13

Bibliography 13

Content

ii

Figure 1 Phase I: summary of surveys carried out 2

Figure 2 Map of PNKB NP and the northern bufferzone 5

Figure 3 Detailed maps of the pilot areas in Dân Hóa and Trọng Hóa 7

Figure 4 Involved and potentially involved stakeholders of CbT in the PNKB NP

buffer zone (based on Sansiri, 2003) 10

Figure 5 Stakeholders involvement and roles 11

Figure 6 Implementation steps of CbT activities development 12

Table 1 Summary of conducted surveys/ interviews 3

FIGURES AND TABLE

1

Within the scope of the GIZ’s project on ‘Nature Conservation and Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in the Phong Nha-Ke Bang National Park Region’, the development of the buffer zone through the integration of local livelihood activities has been delineated as one of the focal points for intervention within the sustainable tourism development component (GIZ, 2011; STDP, 2010) Herein, the development of particularly handicrafts and of Community-based Tourism (CbT) has been identified to hold a medium to high potential to facilitate and/ or strengthen income opportunities for buffer zone communities and to thereby provide alternative, legal ways for income generation

This is the second planning document of a potential series of documents written in the scope of the CbT development process supported by the GIZ in the Minh Hóa district The findings and future planning proposal of these developments are fundamentally based on the preceding ‘initial working proposal’ The planning phase of this proposal started in June 2012 The Annex document (rf separate attachment) as well as this working proposal for Phase II finalize activities carried out during Phase I

This working proposal for Phase II addresses the first two steps (‘site assessment’ and

‘community awareness raising’) out of a range of steps which have been proposed within the initial working proposal Furthermore, issues relating to ‘stakeholder engagement’, ‘local organisation’ as well as to ‘market validation’ are also partially covered in here Details on the results of the surveys as well as on the assessment of the area, however, can be consulted with the Annex document

During Phase I, major efforts have been made to carefully observe and recognize current potentials for CbT development in the two pilot communes, Trọng Hóa and Dan Hóa Yet, an argument will be made herein to initially concentrate on only one of the two communes Consultation with the respective chosen commune of Trọng Hóa and

explanation for the decision to not yet include Dân Hóa (at least not for overnight visits)

still has to be made with the two communes

Although the project is still in its initial steps, the authors would already like to acknowledge the kind participation of tour operators and visitors in the survey as well

as the welcoming and supportive nature of the commune staff, the village heads and the households interviewed and visited

1 INTRODUCTION

2

This document shall facilitate an overview over community and market potentials as well as over current support received by the local commune and by the local community and, generally, over the stakeholders involved in the process so far Indeed, its main objective is then the evaluation of findings for the development of a working plan for the upcoming Phase II

The below figure illustrates the surveys carried out during the course of the Phase I working plan in order to outline a site and a feasibility assessment The former provides

a tourism inventory, including a general overview over the population, distances, infrastructure and access, attractions and activities, images, customs and traditions as well as potential obstacles The latter generally describes households’ infrastructure and perceptions, expectations and experiences of tour operators and domestic and international visitors Both assessments may not be comprehensive, however, they allow for a good enough insight for future decision-making concerning site selection and steps forward

Figure 1 Phase I: summary of surveys carried out

The surveying phase took place between the mid of June and the beginning of August

In total, 10 days were spent in the field Table 1 summarizes the conducted surveys/ interviews

2 OBJECTIVES AND METHODS

site assessment

commune

project staff

feasibility assessment commune

tour operators

visitors

households

3

Table 1 Summary of conducted surveys/ interviews

 Initial visit to local authorities in Trọng Hóa and Dân Hóa

 Survey piloting in 3 households in Trọng Hóa, 1 hamlet leader survey

was piloted

 Launch meeting with local commune staff, hamlet leaders, the

Women’s Union, the Youth Union, Van Xuan Hanidcrafts, PPMU

representative, DPDA representatives, GIZ CTA and project staff

 2 comprehensive commune staff interviews

Yet, the project staff is very confident about some of the ‘things seen, experienced and told about’ during Phase I Furthermore, a major strength that the authors would also like to draw attention to once again is the combination of activities and of resources of handicraft and of CbT developments Nonetheless, there are many challenges ahead; some will be pointed out in section 5

4

The following section reviews the findings of the Annex document with particular reference to community awareness raising, site assessment, market validation and stakeholder engagement

Initial field visits, the launch meeting as well as following informal conversations assured that community members of the potential pilot communes are willing and eager

re-to participate in CbT activities in the future Yet, a number of issues arose with which they do not feel comfortable with: generally, it deemed very difficult to most to describe what ‘tourism’, in fact, is, nor were many able to point out ‘beautiful’ or ‘attractive’ places for visiting This seemed simply, because they hardly needed to think about these terms with reference to nature or culture to date Furthermore, concerns over communication and visitors expectations arose Many of the surveyed households or community members, thus, do not yet feel ready to fully commit to receiving visitors

However, all these issues can and will be addressed during the upcoming Phase II and with the interest and enthusiasm for participation which the community members have already expressed, CbT activities, despite the challenges coming along, seem very promising At the same time, developments should be implemented with great care, neither causing ‘too much’ or ‘too fast’ of a change Accommodating visitors for a fee is

a very new concept which yet needs to be understood by the community members

‘Have what eat what’ is a phrase often mentioned by the villagers, referring to an overwhelming hospitality Great care must be taken that this hospitality is not being exploited

A few issues and ideas are highlighted which need to be elaborated upon or which need

to be clarified for community awareness raising during Phase II:

 commune, hamlet leaders and project staff should select relevant stakeholders of future CbT activities to join the field/ study trip (max number of participants and study site to be announced; only those are to join who are involved in the target site for future CbT development)

 organize the field/ study trip with involved stakeholders and chose an appropriate study site (in close collaboration with handicraft development team)

 pre-study trip meeting with the participants: expectations on the study trip and delineation of tasks + follow-up meeting/ activities and expectations on participants (e.g think/ question: success factors, obstacles, changes to come, comprehension of tourism and CbT, community organisation, similarities and differences between the community visited and the

 post-study trip: organize a full-day workshop for the participating villages/ villagers and relevant stakeholders either at the hamlet leader house or at the CPC building, topics should include (these should be initially thought about and decisions should

be made after the field trip):

3.1 COMMUNITY AWARENESS RAISING

3 FEASIBILITY OF CbT ACTIVITIES

5

 to develop an objective/ one common goal with and for the involved CbT communities

 waste management awareness raising

 consensus building between the parties

 responsible/s in the village

The Dân Hóa commune is located around a 75mins car drive from Phong Nha township It is the westernmost commune of the Minh Hóa district and encompasses 12 villages/ 670 households (most of which are located along or close to Highway 12A) The Trọng Hóa commune is located around a 60 mins car drive from Phong Nha township (rf Figure 2) It is the northernmost commune of the Minh Hóa district and encompasses 16 villages/ 640 households Unlike in Dân Hóa, many of the villages are yet located off the Highway 12A, with Lom K Chom possibly being the furthest off with around a 30-40 mins drive by car In March 2012, major road constructions were finalized connecting the formerly more secluded mountain villages to the Highway 12

Figure 2 Map of PNKB NP and the northern bufferzone

3.2 SITE ASSESSMENT – A SUMMARY

6

While the highways are of a good quality, some of the villages may lie a bit off the beaten track, requiring the use of a 4-wheel drive vehicle There are a few critical access points when entering some of the villages However, these can be easily passed with slow and careful driving Access to some of the villages may furthermore be restricted during the rainy season

Water access and connectivity to a grid and the mobile network are, with exceptions, generally given in the two pilot communes:

 villages either feature 6-7 public taps, including a pipe system If no public tap systems is used, community members access upstream river water (streams usually within an acceptable walking distance) Water shortages may arise due to reduced water levels for those villages with a pipe system in the dry months 3-7) In several villages, the public tap was broken and plans often existed for repairing or upgrading the system which was not yet realized due to a lack of financial resources

 In Trọng Hóa there are around 6 villages which are not connected to the grid and which feature weak mobile phone signals due to the location in the valley Only few households may have been able to afford hydro-generated power

 Besides, none of the villages has a waste water treatment system in place (and many households do not feature an earth toilet)

2 Attractions/ Activities

The bufferzone area of the Minh Hóa district features a rich nature The following is a selection of natural and historical attractions available in the communes (Figure 3):

Dân Hóa

 Walking paths to the fields and along mountains slopes

 Night views on the illuminated villages

 Po Muc/ Dream Waterfall

 Community Forest

 Bai Dinh Historical Site

 Hill 35/37, Historical significance

 Heaven’s Gate

 En Cave/ Swallow Cave

 Local market taking place on every 3rd

, 13th, 23rd, 8th, 18th and 28th of the lunar month

Trọng Hóa

 Walking paths to the fields and along mountains slopes

 Night views on the illuminated villages

 Khe Laat La-An waterfall

7

Figure 3 Detailed maps of the pilot areas in Dân Hóa and Trọng Hóa

3 Customs/ Traditions and Households

Dân Hóa and Trong Hóa are considered to be (almost) 100% ‘ethnic’, i.e all villages comprise of ‘ethnic minority households’ only, with exception of a few Kinh households who often maintain (informal) businesses in the villages Most of these belong to the Khùa (a sub-group of the Vân Kiều) and to the Mày (sub-group of the Chứt) The culture of these minority groups is rich, despite the influence exerted by the Kinh at times Potential visitors could observe or engage in activities like story-telling, handicraft production and events like the Lễ côt tay (‘lucky praying ceremony’ or the Lễ Giáng Sơn (‘nature praying ceremony’), or learn about the daily life and the moon calendar, farming and husbandry activities, about marriages, funerals, family and village structures and, indeed, about food and drinks

The housing remained also fairly traditional and simple All houses are built on stilts and the floor plan is based upon a strict structure for the sleeping-berths, for the eating, sitting and visitor area as well as for the kitchen Toilet facilities (most often earth wholes) can be found, if available at all, separately from the house These may belong to the household only or may be shared

A few issues and ideas are highlighted which need to be elaborated upon or which need

to be clarified for the site assessment during Phase II:

 Detailed maps of the potential CbT area/ village based on GPS data

 Consider a map of the village and surrounding points of interest/ services

 Consider a detailed map of the village households highlighting those involved in

CbT activities

 Consider a map of the area and points of activities/ attractions

 Consider an assessment of hiking paths/ tracks as well as of attractions/ activities

3 Viewing points and waterfalls

4 Viewing point and stream

1 Cha Lo Historical Site

2 Heaven’s Gate Historical Site

3 En Cave

4 Bai Dinh Historical Site

5 Po Muc/ Dream Waterfall

8

 Elaborate on interpretative material: particularly on information on the history of the area should be gathered (most of it is known by oral tradition), on villages and village structures, on the language and on the history of the minority groups in

general (consultation of Department of Tourism, Province library, local knowledge)

 Selection of suitable households by the hamlet leader, the commune, tour operators

and project staff (rf also section 3.5.)

 Capacity building workshops and field visits

 Cooking/meals, hygiene, service

 Hosting tourists

 Waste management

 Basic language training/ facilitation of simple translation hand-outs

 Communication and networking

 Environmental awareness and benefit sharing

 Local tour guiding

 Planning the day

 Training through delivery!

 Consider to support in upgrading simple facilities

 Toilet/ earth hole facilities, including a privacy shield

 Provide a fixed number of mattresses per participating household which are only

to be used for visitors

 Potentially some equipment to use for visitors to the village, e.g bikes (including repairing material), binoculars, walking sticks, bamboo mattresses,

sleeping bags, mosquito nets, pillows or first aid kids

In the scope of Phase I, visitors as well as tour operators, i.e the direct potential

‘customers’ of the communities, were asked for their expectations, needs and/ preferences, if considering a stay or operating a tour to the area This is not only to prepare for the potential demands, but also to delineate whether or not communities are able to meet the requirements However, it must also be carefully considered, if they should and ‘need’ to comply with unrealistic expectations at all Those implementing activities should think beyond the ‘what’ can be sold to ‘what’ and ‘how’ the community wants to sell On the other hand, it must be ensured that a stable number of tourists arrives to the local communities and, thus, relationships with tour operators as well as the experience and according advice of these, play an important role during the CbT development

Major points highlighted in the surveys:

1 Tour Operators

 selection criteria for homestay/ community-based tourism activities: scenery/ landscape, available activities, friendliness of hosts, bathroom and sleeping facilities (though demanded standards differ), safety, hygiene/ cleanliness, access, local culture, permissions, new/ unexplored/ authentic destination, family

interaction

3.3 MARKET AND MARKET VALIDATION