Pro-Poor Tourism: Development, Sustainability, and Poverty Alleviation

Introduction

Private, non-governmental, government, and international organizations are increasingly paying attention to the concept that tourism can be a tool of poverty alleviation. According to the UN World Tourism Organization, tourism is the top job creator in the world and a leading export sector, especially in developing nations, where it has the potential to assist in achieving the Millennium Development Goals (Spenceley, Habyalimana, Tusabe, & Mariza, 2010). Proponents of tourism argue that poor communities can benefit from infrastructure and services developed for tourists, such as communication networks, roads, sanitation, and health services. The linkage between poverty eradication and the Millennium Development Goals led to the emergence of "pro-poor tourism" theory (Harrison, 2008). Pro-poor tourism is gaining traction across the globe, creating a need to investigate the applicability of the concept.

The concept is spearheaded by a partnership between the UK-based pro-poor tourism agency, the ICRT, the Overseas Development Institute (ODI), and the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) (Harrison, 2008). This research investigates the concept of pro-poor tourism in terms of the use of the term "pro-poor" and its differentiation from broader economic development. It begins by describing the concept and theory behind pro-poor tourism — defining, describing, and establishing a theoretical basis for the idea. This is followed by an evaluation of the theory in terms of poverty eradication, contribution to sustainable development, and the benefits to poor communities. Real-world examples from different parts of the world are used to reveal pro-poor tourism's positive and negative impact among communities. In addition, focus is placed on the participation of local communities in pro-poor tourism efforts and related debates.

In tourism discourse, pro-poor tourism is contrasted with, and often confused with, poverty tourism. Pro-poor tourism is a concept created and advanced by Deloitte and Touche in On Sustainable Tourism and Poverty Eradication, commissioned by the UK's Department for International Development. At the time, the goal was to maximize economic benefits from tourism through employment and micro-enterprise opportunities to alleviate poverty (O'Brien, 2011). The report also indicated the negative impacts of tourism, including environmental, social, and economic harms, but found that tourism generated higher net benefits for the poor than costs. This marked the beginning of pro-poor tourism as a tool for unlocking opportunities for poor communities through government action, rather than simply expanding the overall tourism sector. According to Nevin (2007), pro-poor tourism is a way of bringing the poor into tourism development in emerging or developing economies. Pro-poor tourism aims at putting "poverty at the heart of the tourism agenda," and the pro-poor tourism partnership was formed to pursue this goal (Nevin, 2007). Pro-poor tourism is therefore a concept focused at the micro-level of the economy and society, and is applied to all forms of tourism, including mainstream tourism.

Pro-Poor Tourism and Poverty Alleviation

Tourism as an industry is recognized by international, government, and non-governmental organizations as a potential tool in poverty eradication. The travel and tourism sector is the fastest and largest growing industry in the world, with average growth of 7% per annum over the last decade (Marx, 2011). Forecasts by the United Nations World Tourism Organization project that tourism will contribute significantly to the global economy, rising to $2 trillion by 2020, with 1.6 billion international tourists visiting different parts of the world (Marx, 2011). In addition, the World Travel & Tourism Council predicted that the tourism and travel industry would be among the fastest growing industries in the world between 2011 and 2021, creating 66 million jobs and accounting for 9.6% of global GDP (Leclercq & Buchner, 2011). These figures prompted international agencies to identify impact-driven and practical methods of using tourism to alleviate poverty by creating net benefits for the poor (Marx, 2011). This gave rise to pro-poor tourism as a market-led approach to facilitating the effective participation of poor people in product development processes, and as a means to improve economic development in developing nations.

Pro-poor tourism is regarded as a key tool in fighting poverty and achieving development in developing nations, especially in Africa, where tourism contributes significantly to national economies. By 2003, the industry accounted for 11% of total exports and between 20% and 30% of exports for countries exceeding a modest threshold of 500,000 foreign visitors annually (Gossling et al., 2004). Tourism is particularly important for Africa compared to other regions, representing 1.6% of the world's GNP and 4.1% of international arrivals. Pro-poor tourism is vital for African development, given that tourism is the continent's fastest growing industry and accounts for 12% of African exports of goods and services, with its global market share increasing rapidly (Akyeampong, 2011).

Tourism as a poverty alleviation tool for Africa is also viable because the industry is free from the price supports typical of tariff-controlled trade in manufacturing and agriculture. The industry is increasingly competitive and operating within a liberalized and sophisticated environment. Africa's long-term tourism prospects are positive, given its comparative advantage in wildlife and wilderness — assets whose global scarcity only increases their value (Gossling et al., 2004). Pro-poor tourism efforts can further leverage unique cultural heritage assets, such as those related to the history of the transatlantic slave trade in West Africa.

According to the World Tourism Organization, international tourist arrivals in developing nations have increased steadily, reinforcing tourism's prominence as a driver of development, jobs, and exports (Leclercq & Buchner, 2011). Pro-poor tourism is not a niche sector or specific product; rather, it is a set of strategies whose aim is to facilitate the trickle-down of tourism's benefits to poor and vulnerable communities (Akyeampong, 2011). It therefore enhances the business of tourism while enabling poor people to contribute to poverty reduction.

Benefits and Challenges for Local Communities

Pro-poor tourism presents both positive and negative outcomes for communities and nations. On the positive side, pro-poor tourism can reduce poverty since most tourists increasingly visit natural and cultural attractions located in rural areas, thereby expanding the scope of poverty alleviation in local communities (Leclercq & Buchner, 2011). This is particularly significant given that two-thirds of the world's extremely poor live in remote and rural areas, as reported by the International Fund for Agricultural Development's Rural Poverty Report (2011). Moreover, because tourism is labor-intensive, it creates job and employment opportunities for low-skilled workers. For example, the International Trade Centre (ITC) launched a tourism project in Brazil at the Coconut Coast in 2003, based on capacity-building activities in arts and crafts, organic agriculture, computer science, English, hotel business, design, apiculture, and environmental education (Leclercq & Buchner, 2011). These elements benefited the local community, along with the installation of an organic waste processing plant that also provides fertilizer to local farmers.

Pro-poor tourism has also led to the growth of community-based tourism as tourists seek new destinations, and has immensely benefited local communities. According to Lopez-Guzman, Borges, and Castillo-Canalejo (2011), pro-poor tourism has benefited communities such as those on the island of Cape Verde, where tourism has become a key driver of economic development. Wealth is generated in the community through tourist products created by locals, as well as through entertainment, hospitality, and accommodation facilities. Residents are able to sell farm produce, artifacts, and handiwork, and gain employment. University education programs also attract students visiting mainly from the U.S. and Europe, while leisure tourists generate income through sporting activities and tour guiding. The pro-poor tourism industry in Cape Verde is considered a success, as many visitors make return trips due to the quality of treatment and accommodations (Lopez-Guzman, Borges, & Castillo-Canalejo, 2011).

It is important to note that the net benefits of pro-poor tourism extend beyond economic gains to encompass environmental, social, and cultural benefits (Spenceley, Habyalimana, Tusabe, & Mariza, 2010). Pro-poor tourism facilitates the rapid diversification of tourism products, as communities are driven to identify tourist interests, and tourists in turn demand cultural, social, and environmental experiences (Akyeampong, 2011). Pro-poor tourism thus becomes a flexible and alternative form of creating sustainability, combining ecological sensitivity with socio-cultural and economic considerations (Torres & Janet, 2004). It calls for more sustainable management of natural resources and the environment, while stimulating the development of human and social capital. In this way, pro-poor tourism becomes sustainable tourism — promoting social, economic, aesthetic, and environmental development while maintaining cultural integrity, ecological systems, and biological diversity.

However, pro-poor tourism also presents significant challenges. The tourism sector is volatile, vulnerable, and highly competitive, with risks including natural disasters and political instability that can reduce or eliminate tourist arrivals to a given community (Leclercq & Buchner, 2011). A study of Lang Co, a town on the central east coast of Vietnam, illustrates both the opportunities and barriers created by pro-poor tourism. While the industry has stimulated the supply and use of locally produced products, Redman (2009) finds many negative outcomes for poor and local communities in the region.

In Lang Co, poor residents are often limited in their ability to participate in the tourism industry as investors or major players. They lack access to credit or loans, have low levels of education and training, and lack knowledge of how to access tourism opportunities (Redman, 2009). They also face serious challenges in creating new tourist attractions, as the natural resource base is declining (Ashley & Haysom, 2006). Furthermore, they lack awareness of and participation in local government and non-government planning for tourism, leaving them on the sidelines of policy, decision-making, and implementation (Redman, 2009). Overall, poor communities in Lang Co miss pro-poor tourism opportunities because the tourism industry remains largely driven by large-scale infrastructure development, which conflicts with the principles of pro-poor tourism and the capacities of local communities.

Conclusion

The research finds that the interaction of tourists with marginalized and poor populations in developing nations is a widely researched phenomenon. There is evidence that pro-poor tourism efforts are increasing, as the tourism sector is incorporated into local and mainstream development strategies. Of particular importance is the ability of authorities to increase the participation of marginalized groups in tourism activities. The examples of Cape Verde and Lang Co, Vietnam, illustrate that pro-poor tourism activities tend to generate greater positive effects than negative ones, though the balance depends heavily on how well communities are engaged and supported.

Tourism activities at the community level promote infrastructure development, including roads, electricity, telecommunications, water, and drainage facilities. They also support the development of social amenities such as waste management, healthcare provision, and security. Moreover, tourism activities in local and remote areas encourage the conservation and protection of social, cultural, and environmental heritage. Overall, when pro-poor tourism strategies are implemented with genuine community participation and inclusive policy frameworks, they represent an effective and sustainable tool for local economic development and poverty alleviation.

References

Akyeampong, O. (2011). Pro-poor tourism: Residents' expectations, experiences, and perceptions in the Kakum National Park Area of Ghana. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(2), 197–213.

Ashley, C., & Haysom, G. (2006). From philanthropy to a different way of doing business: Strategies and challenges in integrating pro-poor approaches into tourism business. Development Southern Africa, 23(2), 265–280.

Choudhury, B., & Goswami, C. (2012). Community participation in minimizing leakage: A case study in Manas National Park. International Journal of Marketing and Technology, 2(2), 133–147.

Gossling, S., Schumacher, K., Morelle, M., Berger, R., & Heck, N. (2004). Tourism and street children in Antananarivo, Madagascar. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 5(2), 131–149.

Harrison, D. (2008). Pro-poor tourism: A critique. Third World Quarterly, 29(5), 851–868.

Leclercq, F., & Buchner, A. E. (2011). Pro-poor tourism: Expanding opportunities. International Trade Forum, (2), 21.

Lopez-Guzman, T., Borges, O., & Castillo-Canalejo, A. (2011). Community-based tourism in Cape Verde — a case study. Tourism and Hospitality Management, 17(1), 35–44.

Marx, S. (2011). Community-based & pro-poor tourism. International Trade Forum, (2), 22.

McIntyre, K. (2011a). 2011 WEDF: Sustainable tourism development. International Trade Forum, (2), 9–11.

McIntyre, K. (2011b). The big picture: Tourism & sustainable development. International Trade Forum, (2), 6–8.

Muhanna, E. (2007). Tourism development strategies and poverty elimination. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 5(1), 37–49.

Nevin, T. (2007). What is pro-poor tourism? African Business, 336, 50–52.

O'Brien, P. W. (2011). Business, management, and poverty reduction: A role for slum tourism? The Journal of Business Diversity, 11(1), 33–46.

Redman, D. F. (2009). Tourism as a poverty alleviation strategy: Opportunities and barriers for creating backward economic linkages in Lang Co, Vietnam (Master's thesis). New Zealand.

Rogerson, C. M. (2004). Regional tourism in South Africa: A case of 'mass tourism of the South.' GeoJournal, 60(3), 229–237.

Spenceley, A., Habyalimana, S., Tusabe, R., & Mariza, D. (2010). Benefits to the poor from gorilla tourism in Rwanda. Development Southern Africa, 27(5), 647–662.

Torres, R., & Janet, H. M. (2004). Challenges and potential for linking tourism and agriculture to achieve pro-poor tourism objectives. Progress in Development Studies, 4(4), 294–318.