Capacity building for sustainable tourism initiatives project
This final report covers the period of extension of the Capacity Building for Sustainable Tourism Initiatives Project - from October 1999 to the end of March 2000. Rather than repeating the content of Mid-term (October 1997-October 1998) and Interim Reports (October 1998 - October 1999), it covers specific activities in the final six months.
Capacity Building
for
Sustainable Tourism Initiatives Project
Final Report
(For the period October 1999 – March 2000)
Annalisa Koeman
Hanoi 3rd April 2000
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acronyms 3
Foreword 4
1 Networking and Information Exchange 6
a. Establishment of Sustainable Tourism Resource Centre (STRC) 6
b. Translation, publication and dissemination 6
c. Posting of outputs from STP on Mekong Info website 7
d. Strategic Linkages 7
e. Participation in International and National Fora 7
f. Publications, Referrals etc 8
Assessment of Benefits/Outcomes 9
2 Research and Analysis 10
a. Sa Pa Research 10
b. Research on Vietnam’s Tour Operators 10
c. Advice, Information, Contacts 10
Assessment of Benefits/Outcomes 11
3. Education and Training 12
a. Ecotourism Training for National Park and Protected Area Managers and 12
Staff
Assessment of Benefits/Outcomes 13
4. Support for a Pilot Project 14
a. "Support to Sustainable Tourism in Sa Pa District, Lao Cai Province" 14
Project Proposal
Assessment of Benefits/Outcomes 14
5. Advocacy and Awareness Raising 16
a. Proceedings for Workshop on Development of a National Ecotourism 16
Strategy for Vietnam
b. Sabah World Ecotourism Conference and Field Seminars 16
c. Responsible Travel Booklets 16
d. Review of Tourism Development Master Plan for Vietnam 17
e. Community Based Ecotourism Concept 17
Assessment of Benefits/Outcomes 17
6. Project Extension 19
a. "Sustainable Tourism Project Phase II (Technical Assistance for 19
Sustainable Tourism)"
Assessment of Benefits/Outcomes 20
7. Conclusion 21
a. Progress made in achieving project goals 21
b. Constraints 21
c. The Future 22
Annexes
Annex I Documents produced and/or translated by the Sustainable
Tourism Project
Annex II Ecotourism Training Course Outline, List of Participants and
Reports
Annex III World Ecotourism Conference and Field Seminars - Reports
Annex IV Final Audit
Acronyms
ACTI Australian Conservation Training Institute
BftW Brot fur die Welt (Break for the World)
CRES Centre for Natural Resources and Environmental Studies
DFID Department for International Development (UK)
ESCAP Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
FF The Ford Foundation
FPD Forest Protection Department
GMS Greater Mekong Subregion
GOV Government of Vietnam
GTZ German Technical Cooperation
HGRC Human Geography Research Centre
ICCO Interchurch Organisation for Development Cooperation
ITDR Institute for Tourism Development Research
MARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
NEA National Environment Agency
SEMA Strengthening the Environmental Management Authority Project
SNV Netherlands Development Organisation (Vietnam)
STP Sustainable Tourism Project
STPII Sustainable Tourism Project Phase II
STRC Sustainable Tourism Resource Centre
TES The Ecotourism Society
TMI The Mountain Institute
TTC Tourism Training Canada
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
VNAT Vietnam National Administration of Tourism
WEC World Ecotourism Conference
WTO World Tourism Organisation
CAPACITY BUILDING FOR SUSTAINABLE TOURISM INITIATIVES PROJECT
Project Goal
To identify and raise awareness of the negative socio-economic, cultural and
ecological impacts of tourism, and contribute to the development of sustainable
community-based models of tourism that can generate sustainable income for
some of the country’s poorest and least advantaged communities, while at the
same time helping to maintain Vietnam’s cultural and biological diversity.
Project Objectives
1. Networking and Information Exchange
2. Research and Analysis
3. Education and Training
4. Support for a Pilot Project
5. Advocacy (and awareness raising)
FOREWORD
This final report covers the period of extension of the Capacity Building for
Sustainable Tourism Initiatives Project - from October 1999 to the end of March
2000. Rather than repeating the content of Mid-term (October 1997-October
1998) and Interim Reports (October 1998 - October 1999), it covers specific
activities in the final six months.
For those only recently introduced to the Project - commonly called the
Sustainable Tourism Project or STP - we recommend you read the Midterm and
Interim Reports to gain an understanding of progress made with activities over
the two and a half years.
It is with mixed emotions that I write this final report, as I leave with certain tasks
incomplete despite the best of intentions and efforts, while other activities are
100% complete and have been acknowledged as a success and a valuable
contribution to the advancement of sustainable tourism in Vietnam.
From the beginning STP has been a challenge. We started with an 'open slate'
and a number of objectives to guide us, but little specifics about project activities.
The project team was charged with identifying priorities and key issues for
Vietnam with respect to sustainable tourism, and then designing project activities
to address these priorities. As the first project implemented in Vietnam dedicated
solely to sustainable tourism, we were charting the first steps and hence such an
open and flexible approach was necessary. This flexibility allowed us to be
creative.
Given the stage of development and focus of Vietnam's tourism industry; the
economic transition underway; the rapid changes in society; the increasing
severity of threats to the environment, and the greater accessibility to remote
areas of the country (amongst other factors), we were presented with no
shortage of ideas and areas requiring concerted action. It is natural then that we
attempted a programme of activities that was highly ambitious. With a permanent
team of two and a part time assistant, we strove to make an impact and reach a
variety of stakeholders.
Unfortunately, but inevitably, we were not able to transform many of our ideas
into concrete activities (eg: a retreat for high level decision makers to discuss
sustainable tourism in Vietnam; training manual for sustainable tourism for
provincial and district level authorities; posters with responsible travel information
for national parks; documentary on tourism and environment). Some of our
concepts and proposals were relatively well developed, but we were
unsuccessful in securing funding. I hope that these will remain 'actively on the
shelf' for IUCN Vietnam to follow up with in the future. For example: "Tourism and
Environment in Vietnam: a story of the goose and the golden egg", our idea for a
documentary film and educational video for domestic and international screening,
and the production of responsible travel booklets - "Treading Softly: A Guide to
Ecofriendly Travel in Vietnam" (English) and "Travel One Day, Perfection the
Next" (Vietnamese).
Overall, we were successful in implementing a broad range of activities, at local,
sectoral, national and international levels, and we can be proud of our results.
Some of our ideas were a bit too early for Vietnam, but I hope we have planted a
few seeds that will germinate in the coming years.
We have two concrete outputs for follow up activities - "Support to Sustainable
Tourism In Sa Pa District, Lao Cai Province", which we jointly developed with
SNV Vietnam - and "Sustainable Tourism Project II: Technical Support to
Sustainable Tourism". These will be followed up by SNV and IUCN Vietnam.
In seeing substantive sustainable tourism initiatives implemented in Vietnam as a
result of STP, a specific area of concern is the absence of sustainable tourism on
the list of Government of Vietnam priorities for ODA. In hindsight perhaps STP
should have spent more time advocating more strongly for a change in the
priority accorded sustainable tourism. Certainly we could have benefited from
finding a prominent 'champion' or 'patron' for the cause of sustainable tourism.
I hope that our counterparts, colleagues, partners, collaborators, donors and
contacts consider our project a worthwhile initiative and will support IUCN
Vietnam and our partner, the Vietnam National Administration of Tourism, in a
second more focused, larger scale (and again ambitious) sustainable tourism
project. After all our dedication it would be tragic to see the seeds we have sown
lie dormant.
On behalf of ITDR and IUCN I would like to thank all the STP supporters, both
those who have provided additional funding and those who have provided moral
support. Finally, thank you to The Ford Foundation, ICCO and the Oxfam family
in Hanoi for their vision in funding STP. I am glad to have been involved in this
groundbreaking project.
Annalisa Koeman
Project Advisor
April 1st 2000
1. NETWORKING AND INFORMATION EXCHANGE
Activities: achievements, current status and issues
a. Establishment of Sustainable Tourism Resource Centre (STRC)
• Achievement/Current Status: Since November 1999 a librarian has
been cataloguing all materials in the IUCN Vietnam library, including the
materials of the STP (STRC). The complete list of STRC materials will be
available at a later date. The STRC will be advertised on the
MekongInfo Website.
b. Translation, publication and dissemination
• Achievement: Successfully completed translation, publication and first
round dissemination of The Ecotourism Society’s Ecotourism: A guide for
planners and managers Volume II. The SEMA project (Strengthening of
the Environmental Management Authority) of the National Environment
Agency funded the publication of 800 copies. As follow up to the
Ecotourism Training Course for National Park and Nature Reserves (see
section 3), STP also forwarded to all 12 National Parks in Vietnam the
original English language version of Tourism, Ecotourism and Protected
Areas (an IUCN publication) along with a copy of the Vietnamese text-only
version. This was a departing gift from the STP.
• Current status: SEMA will distribute copies of Ecotourism:...Volume II to
the 61 DOSTE and 10 faculties of Environment throughout the country.
STP has distributed over 50 to various universities, protected areas and
tour operators, and IUCN Vietnam will continue this task. Copies will be
provided to visitors to the Sustainable Tourism Resource Centre.
• Following the Ecotourism Training Course for National Park and Nature
Reserves, STP approached the Netherlands Embassy seeking financial
assistance with the publication of Tourism, Ecotourism and Protected
Areas, which STP had translated in 1998. The Embassy agreed to
allocate any remaining funds from the Training Course to the publication.
The IUCN Vietnam Communications Officer and Accountant will be
responsible for following this activity up, including obtaining three
quotations from publishers, and approaching IUCN Publication Services
Unit to obtain the printing plates containing all illustrations from the original
book.
• Problems: Arrangements for printing took longer than anticipated, and the
books were only made available in the second last week of March 2000.
There was some confusion about the signing of the agreement with The
Ecotourism Society, though this was finally resolved in March 2000.
c. Posting of outputs from STP on Mekong Info Website
• Achievement/Current Status: In March the STP discussed with a
consultant on the GTZ "Social Forestry Support Programme" (SFSP) the
placement of outputs from the STP on the MekongInfo Website which is
operated by the SFSP. It was felt that this would be useful in order to more
widely disseminate STP activities and outputs and hence improve and
maintain its 'reach'. A list of documents produced and/or translated by
STP was compiled and forwarded to SFSP for consideration. As the SFSP
is focused on natural resource management, only those documents
pertinent to this subject will be selected. IUCN Vietnam will follow up with
SFSP after the completion of the STP. The list of documents is attached in
Annex I.
d. Strategic Linkages
• Achievement: STP was instrumental in facilitating linkages between
Vietnamese and international organisations, particularly through the
successful implementation of the Ecotourism Training Course for National
Park and Nature Reserves. Charles Sturt University, the Australian
Conservation Training Institute (and Zoological Parks Board) and
Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism were all involved in
the training. It is hoped that links between these institutions and the Forest
Protection Department, and also ITDR, will be maintained.
e. Participation in International and National Fora (also considered part of
Advocacy and Awareness Raising).
• Achievements: Four fora were attended by STP staff between October
1999 and March 2000:
a. The World Ecotourism Conference and Field Seminars: The Right
Approach, held in Sabah, Malaysia, October 17-23 (see section 5);
b. Seminar on Environmental Management for Marine and Coastal Tourism
Activities with ISO14001, Halong Bay, November 22, 1999;
c. Tenth Meeting for the Working Group on the Greater Mekong Subregion
Tourism Sector, and Fourth Mekong Tourism Forum, Vientiane, Lao PDR,
28-30 November 1999, and
d. Second Regional Forum for Southeast Asia of the IUCN World
Commission on Protected Areas, Pakse, Lao PDR, December 6-11 1999.
The World Ecotourism Conference and Field Seminars (WEC) was attended by
Dr Pham Trung Luong (ITDR) and Mr Pham Trong Hien (Forestry Expert,
International Relations, MARD), along with the Project Advisor and Project
Director. The Conference included key note presentations from those in the
forefront of ecotourism planning and development from around the globe, and
particularly from the region. It involved opportunities for questions to the panel of
speakers, and informal fora/discussion sessions. The Vietnamese delegation
participated in the three-day follow-on Eco-lodge Field Seminars, which saw
them visit several locations in Eastern Sabah.
The Project Advisor wrote a paper and made a key-note presentation for the
Halong Bay seminar entitled: "Impacts of Tourism on Coastal Zone
Environments: International Initiatives tackling the problems".
The Project Advisor was invited to participate in the Working Group of the GMS
Tourism Sector by the Director of the Transport, Communications, Tourism and
Infrastructure Development Division of ESCAP. IUCN, along with UNESCO, were
the only organisations present who had a specific focus on and concern with
'sustainable tourism'. The Advisor made several contributions to the Working
Group discussions. The Advisor represented STP and the IUCN Regional
Aquatic Ecosystem Programme at this meeting and the concurrent Mekong
Tourism Forum.
The Advisor and Director prepared a paper in collaboration with Le Van Lanh,
General Secretary of the Vietnam Sub Association of National Parks and
Protected Areas, on "The Economics of Protected Areas and the Role of
Ecotourism in their Management". The Project Director presented a shortened
version of this paper at WCPA in Pakse. The paper will be part of the compilation
of proceedings.
• Problems: The participant nominated by the International Relations
Department of MARD to attend WEC was not considered by STP as an
optimal choice. Unfortunately other persons had been invited (PARC
project, FPD, Head of International Relations) but none were available due
to other commitments.
• The preparation of a paper for WCPA was time consuming, especially for
the STP Advisor. The envisaged collaboration in the writing and
presenting of the paper was only partially achieved. Unfortunately the
Project Director's presentation skills (to international fora) were weak and
feedback on the presentation was poor.
f. Publications, Referrals etc
The Project Advisor's submission to the Mountain Forum Email Conference on
Community-Based Mountain Tourism: Practices for Linking Conservation with
Enterprise (April 13-Mary 18 1998) was included in a synthesis of published
proceedings. It is also used as case study material by the Overseas
Development Institute in production of a monograph on the impacts of tourism at
the local level in a variety of locations throughout Asia. The Project Advisor also
collaborated to write a chapter on Sa Pa for a Univeristy of British Columbia
publication:
Cukier, J., Koeman, A., & Doberstein, B. 1999. "Towards
Sustainable Mountain Tourism: the case of Sa Pa, Vietnam", in
Hainsworth, G. (ed) Towards Poverty Reduction in Vietnam:
Improving the Enabling Environment for Livelihood Enhancement in
Rural Areas, pp: 265-284. Centre for Southeast Asia Research.
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Assessment of Benefits/Outcomes
The STRC is a valuable resource that needs to be managed and supervised, and
advertised more widely. The opportunity to advertise the STRC on Mekong Info,
and also post some documents and outputs from the STP on the Web, should
not be missed.
The books chosen by STP for translation and publication are valuable resources.
Their distribution and benefit/impact can continue (or begin for Tourism,
Ecotourism and Protected Areas) beyond the end of the project.
STP has tried to share information collected, reports and other outputs with as
many individuals and organisations as possible. In some cases it appears the
international recipients and contacts have been more responsive and interested
than the Vietnamese, as indicated by their acknowledgement of receipt and
follow up communications. In some instances STP has received direct thanks
and feedback from recipients in Vietnam, which has been gratifying. This
feedback has come from National Parks, tour operators, forestry planning
institutions, tourism and environment faculties and environmental projects.
Unfortunately the links with some Ministries have been weak, despite the sharing
of information from the STP. It is hoped that this in no way reflects the level of
importance placed on the Project and its activities.
Overall STP has had a significant impact in the area of Networking and
Information Exchange and has attained a significant profile. Both the content of
information shared and the action of sharing itself, has been appreciated by
STP's counterparts, ITDR and VNAT.
It is hoped that IUCN Vietnam will maintain and further develop some of the
contacts established by STP, and that the contacts and links STP has generated
for its partners (ITDR, VNAT and FPD in particular) will be followed up and
maintained.
The WEC was an excellent event, both for the variety and content of
presentations, and the experience and knowledge of presenters and participants
(and hence valuable networking opportunities). The field seminars offered
Vietnamese participants a chance to see Sabah's version of ecotourism and
helped them to critically assess the pros and cons of each development.
In inviting MARD to participate in the WEC, STP was hoping to advocate/raise
awareness within the Ministry of the importance of ecotourism and in 'doing it
right', and provide an opportunity to meet valuable ecotourism and protected area
contacts from the region and further afield. It is unfortunate that MARD's
participation in the WEC may have done little to achieve this goal, largely due to
the position and role of the person chosen.
2. RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
Activities: achievements, current status and issues
a. Sa Pa Research
• Current status: In mid 1999 the Human Geography Research Centre had
approached STP requesting permission to publish the research and
disseminate more widely amongst researchers and academics. In
December the HGRC and IUCN Vietnam met to discuss the text of the
proposed publication, as well as copyright, acknowledgements and other
issues. The authors requested permission to make some editorial changes
to the text, in order to facilitate approval for publication. STP and IUCN
responded to each proposed edit. In January the HGRC informed IUCN
Vietnam that the research would not be published as there were too many
formalities required.
b. Research on Vietnam’s Tour Operators
• Current Status: In December 1999 the STP organised for some editing of
the English version of the research report "Level of Awareness of
Sustainable Tourism and the Impacts of Tourism: Vietnamese Tour
Operators" written by ITDR. The editing was undertaken by a local
international contact who agreed to do the work for a nominal sum only,
given the very limited budget remaining for this activity. The edited English
report was copied and disseminated to a select few organisations and
stakeholders in early 2000.
• Problems: The dissemination of the report has been limited (only 25
institutions/individuals). The STP over-expended on this activity and there
were no remaining funds for large- scale reproduction and dissemination,
both in English and Vietnamese, to different stakeholders. There is a need
to share the research to a greater audience to promote the spirit of
sustainable tourism. The version is available electronically and will
hopefully be placed on the MekongInfo Website in both languages.
c. Advice, Information, Contacts
• Achievement/Current Status: STP continued over the extension period
to provide assistance/information and advice to international and national
students, researchers, academics, protected area staff, tour operators and
INGOs.
• The Project Advisor was asked by Dr Trish Nicholson from the UK to
provide feedback on a chapter in her forthcoming book looking at tourism
at the grassroots. The chapter, 'Cultural Tourism and Culture Change and
Continuity' included the case of Sa Pa.
Assessment of Benefits/Outcomes
It is unfortunate that the Sa Pa research was not published and more widely
disseminated, as the Human Geography Research Centre had proposed. The
research document may, however, be chosen for placement on MekongInfo. The
research is a good base line study for Sa Pa.
The research on Tour Operators did not meet expectations in terms of the quality
of information and analysis, however it does contain some useful information,
and, as the first such study in Vietnam, it also provides a good baseline for future
research. The research should be more widely disseminated amongst
stakeholders. It is not certain the extent to which the conduct of the research
interviews and the distribution of material on sustainable tourism has worked to
raise awareness and knowledge and stimulated operators to look at their
operations in a different light.
Overall the research topics chosen by STP was relevant and the outcomes
useful as baseline research, though the quality of research and analysis and
report writing was poor.
3. EDUCATION AND TRAINING
Activities: achievements, current status and issues
a. Ecotourism Training for National Park and Protected Area Managers and
Staff, 21st February and 17 March 2000.
• Achievement: Successfully organised and convened the one month
Training Course in Hanoi (Thu Do Hotel), in partnership with the Forest
Protection Department of the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development. Participants numbered 25 and came primarily from
Protected Areas throughout Vietnam. After receiving agreed from the
Netherlands Embassy to extend the grant period to March 2000, STP
confirmed the participation of the international training institution. The STP
was responsible for much of the logistical work for the international side.
The Project Director shouldered most responsibility during the Project
Advisor's absence in January and early February, though the Project
Advisor was in email and phone contact and did meet with representatives
of two of the involved international institutions in Australia in January.
• The training was conducted by two lecturers from Charles Sturt University,
representing the Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism,
and two assistant lecturers/recorders from the Australian Conservation
Training Institute (of the NSW Zoological Parks Board). the course
comprised of various activities that attempted to present and transfer, in
an interactive a format as possible, state of the art knowledge on
ecotourism. The course involved three field trips (Tam Dao, Cat
Ba/Halong and Ba Be), several guest lectures (including one presentation
by the STP Advisor), formal lectures, class exercises and presentations,
and use of visual aids such as slides and videos (see Annex II for Course
Outline). The STP Project Director acted as training assistant for the entire
month of the course.
• The course initiated an informal ecotourism network between participants.
• A certificate presentation ceremony was held on the 17th March, at which
the Director of FPD, Dr Nguyen Ba Thu, and the representative from the
Netherlands Embassy, Mr Tran Ngoc Huong, presented all with
certificates. The certificates were signed by Dr Neil Lipscombe from
Charles Sturt University and Dr Jack Giles from the Australian
Conservation Training Institute and were printed on a combined letterhead
of CSU and ACTI, with CRC, FPD and IUCN logos also present.
• STP followed up the training by sending each participant a copy of
Ecotourism: A Guide for Planners and Managers Volume II, and, for all
twelve National Parks, a copy of Tourism, Ecotourism and Protected
Areas. STP made a request to the Netherlands Embassy for assistance
with publishing the latter in Vietnamese, and was informed that the
remaining funds from the course could be put towards this purpose (see
section 1).
• Problems: A few problems were experienced due to division of
responsibilities between FPD and STP and some logistical activities were
not sufficiently supervised. Some problems were experienced with the
limited capacity of the Project Director in the role of training assistant,
which created some unnecessary incidents.
Assessment of Benefits/Outcomes
The Ecotourism Training Course was one of STP's major successes, and was
considered so by all parties involved. Overall the course was well organised and
proceeded smoothly. The STP finished on a very positive note.
All participants were very pleased and stimulated by the training in terms of the
knowledge gained, the friends and network established, and the training methods
used. All completed the course feeling very enthusiastic.
As with all training, further improvement and follow up is needed to consolidate
and further participants' skills, however the benefits and outcomes of the
intensive course will be long lasting. It is very fortunate that the Netherlands
Embassy is interested in continuing to provide assistance in the area of
ecotourism in Protected Areas.
It is hoped that IUCN Vietnam can take a pro-active role in establishing a formal
ecotourism network for Protected Areas and also/later on, other stakeholders.
This could be considered as one activity of a second phase of the project, or a
separate but complimentary activity undertaken by IUCN Vietnam in collaboration
with a Vietnamese organisation.
4. SUPPORT FOR A PILOT PROJECT
Activities: achievements, current status and issues
a. "Support to Sustainable Tourism in Sa Pa District, Lao Cai Province"
Project Proposal
• Achievements/Current Status: Sa Pa People's Council, People's
Committee and Lao Cai Trade and Tourism Department have all
commented on the proposal, and their comments have been incorporated.
Some comments from prospective donors were also considered in editing
the proposal. The budget has been revised downwards and is in the final
stage of review.
• The proposal was submitted to a number of donors in December, along
with the draft proposal for Sustainable Tourism Project II (STPII) (see
section 6). Most replied that their priorities were elsewhere. The Ford
Foundation indicated its interest in providing part funding for either Sa Pa
or the continuation of the STP (STPII). In early 2000, the proposal was
submitted to Bread for the World (BftW) and the first round of the newly
launched "Tourism Challenge Fund" of the Department for International
Development (DFID) in the UK. BftW will consider the proposal and reply
whether it is interested in committing to the project (co-financing) by the
end of April 2000. If so, the proposal will go to the BftW Board in mid
2000. If the proposal is successful in the first round of the Tourism
Challenge Fund, a six page concept will have to be prepared for
submission.
• STP and SNV agreed to pursue two avenues for the proposal: a) to
continue to try to sell Sa Pa as part of, and along with, the larger national
STPII proposal, and b) to pursue independent funding for a stand alone
project, though attempting to make sure that national-local-national
linkages are incorporated.
• SNV committed to providing the CTA for the project (and funding the
position). A first round internal recruitment was initiated by SNV for the
CTA position, but no applicants were received. A second round
recruitment process will be held externally.
• Problems: The attempts to find interested donors have largely been
unsuccessful;it took some time for Sa Pa and Lao Cai to respond with
their comments; the progress in finalising a proposal for STPII has also
been slow and hence it is uncertain whether Sa Pa will be part of a larger
national project.
Assessment of Benefits/Outcomes
The benefits and outcomes of the Support Project are only anticipated or
potential. The STP and SNV are convinced, after working in Sa Pa for two years,
that they are achievable.
The broad benefits include: assisting local stakeholders in Sa Pa to achieve an
environmentally, culturally and socio-economically sustainable form of tourism
through participation of all actors or ‘stakeholders’; achieving an equitable
distribution of benefits from tourism, and building capacity of various
stakeholders to plan, manage and implement sustainable tourism. The District
Section of Culture, Information, Sport and Tourism, and its auxiliary body, the
Centre for Culture, Information, Sport and Tourism will benefit directly from being
project owners and implementers and for being the target of specific capacity
building activities.
The Anticipated Outcomes of the Project are:
1. Responsible government agencies ( Section, Centre) have the capacity to
coordinate, plan and manage tourism activities in Sa Pa district;
2. A mechanism is built within the district through which other actors active in
tourism (representatives of ethnic groups, tour operators, hoteliers, mass
organizations and relevant NGOs and women) are participating in tourism
decision making;
3. The Section and Centre are implementing a clear policy on a charge/fee
system to be imposed on tourists visiting the area;
4. The Section and Centre are implementing a clear policy on how the
generated revenues from tourists are to be used for, on the one hand,
general improvements in tourism information, facilities, environmental
management systems, protection of sites/nature reserve etc, and on the
other hand contributions to rural (village) development. This policy will
provide for the active participation of all stakeholders in the decision
making process, including women;
5. A Tourism Information Centre is established, providing general services to
tourists, specific information on culture, environment and responsible
tourism and undertaking training activities for a variety of stakeholders;
6. A clear policy is developed and implemented for the promotion and
facilitation of rural trekking, including development of trails, staying
overnight in villages, etc. Roles and benefits for local guides as well as
villagers are clearly defined.
STP is confident that its SNV colleagues are fully committed to seeing the
implementation of the project, and will work actively, in collaboration with IUCN
Vietnam, to keep the project alive and find funding.
5. ADVOCACY (AND AWARENESS RAISING)
Activities: achievements, current status and issues
a. Proceedings for Workshop on Development of a National Ecotourism
Strategy for Vietnam
• Achievement/Current Status: Successfully published the proceedings
for National Workshop for Development of a National Ecotourism Strategy
for Vietnam, September 7-9. This was organised by ITDR. Only 300
copies were printed, and STP received 37 for distribution. ITDR distributed
to a variety of stakeholders, but no record is available on the recipients.
No significant follow up actions to the workshop have been initiated by
ITDR or VNAT, or the STP (though the STP continues to maintain contact
with the international resource persons and facilitators).
b. Sabah World Ecotourism Conference and Field Seminars
• Achievement: STP invited Dr Pham Trung Luong (ITDR) and Mr Pham
Trong Hien (Forestry Expert, International Relations, MARD) to attend,
along with the Project Advisor and Project Director, the World Ecotourism
Conference and Field Seminars in Sabah, Malaysia 17-23 October. The
conference included key-note presentations from those in the forefront of
ecotourism planning and development from around the globe, as well as
informal fora/discussion sessions. STP also supported the Vietnamese
participants to attend a three-day Ecolodge Field Seminar at the end of
the conference.
• The reports of STP, ITDR and MARD on participation in WEC are found in
Annex IV.
c. Responsible Travel Booklets ("Treading Softly: A Guide to Ecofriendly
Travel in Vietnam", and "Travel One Day, Perfection the Next")
• Achievement/Current Status: Very little progress was made in sourcing
funding for the production of the booklets. The Canada Fund, though fully
supportive of the idea, declined to become involved, saying the booklets
were too expensive per unit.
• The latest Lonely Planet guidebook for Vietnam includes a substantial
amount of text from the booklet, and refers to the STP at IUCN Vietnam.
This followed a couple of visits by the author of the guidebook to the STP
office in which feedback on the draft version of the section on responsible
travel in Vietnam was requested from the Project Advisor. Lonely Planet is
providing STP with a copy of the book.
• Following the World Ecotourism Conference in Sabah, the STP
commenced communications with the regional representative for Tourism
Training Canada (TTC), based in Malaysia. Discussions focused on the
possibility of combining forces to produce the booklets as part of a one-
day series of workshops entitled "Ecohost", a programme which TTC has
been running successfully in Malaysia. The "Ecohost" Programme targets
'frontliners' or tourism operators and their staff and aims to introduce
responsible/eco-friendly tourism practices.
• The representative from TTC will be visiting Hanoi in the first week of
April, and the Project Advisor will assist with arranging meetings with
IUCN, ITDR, Canadian Embassy and others to discuss the possibility of
collaboration.
d. Review of Tourism Development Master Plan for Vietnam
• Achievement/Current Status: The revised proposal for an update of the
Tourism Development Master Plan for Vietnam, prepared by Scott Cunliffe
and renamed "Master Plan for Sustainable Tourism Development", was
approved by VNAT, UNDP and WTO. The revised proposal includes many
of the concerns and issues raised by IUCN STP in its review of the original
proposal. The date of commencement of the WTO mission to produce the
Master Plan has yet to be confirmed. It was hoped that the finalisation of
the STPII Project Document (see section 6) would occur at the time the
WTO team was in Hanoi.
e. Community Based Ecotourism Concept
• Achievements/Current Status: There has been no follow up with the Mai
Chau Women's Union. The concept paper was put to another use in
February, when the STP Project Director improved the concept paper and
presented it as his project presentation during the Ecotourism Training
Course. It was appreciated by many of the participants at the Course,
particularly those from Protected Areas where local people live within the
boundaries. The National Parks of Ba Be, Tram Chim and Tam Dao took
the concept to use as the basis for their own concepts, which were
subsequently sent to GEF for consideration.
Assessment of Benefits/Outcomes
Advocacy and awareness raising has been an active area for STP. Advocacy
and awareness raising has in fact been the intention of many activities that fall
under different project objectives such as networking and information exchange
(e.g.: participation in national and international fora, see section 1).
The NES workshop was a key success of the STP, however its true success is
still to be tested - whether it will influence government and instigate the
development of a National Ecotourism Strategy for Vietnam. Though this was the
intention of the NES Workshop, to date there is no word of progress towards this
goal. It is hoped that ITDR and VNAT, who expressed their intention to pursue
this with the government, will receive support from and work closely with the
participants, who also expressed their commitment to assisting with the process
of developing an NES.
IUCN Vietnam and IUCN International could be pro-active in assisting with NES
development. Indeed, this activity is already included in the proposed second
phase of STP (see section 6).
Unfortunately STP was only able to send out a limited number of copies of the
proceedings to potential donors, counterparts and collaborators.
The World Ecotourism Conference and Field Seminars were interesting and
valuable for all. STP considered participation a very good investment, particularly
for the opportunity it provided the Vietnamese participants to establish contacts in
the region and further afield. The Field Seminars involved a lot of travel, but
provided a glimpse of some key ecotourism and nature based tourism
developments in Sabah. The group discussions led by the seminar leaders
encouraged the Vietnamese to critically analyse each development against
ecotourism criteria.
STP has not met with much success is trying to publish and launch the
Responsible Travel Booklets, though it considers this a very valuable output that
will target the largest stakeholder group, the tourist. In fact, the benefits are
nation wide, for tourists, tour operators, guides, ethnic minority communities,
natural areas and the environment, the industry as a whole. Greater commitment
to and assistance from the tourism authorities could help overcome the current
donor barrier. Potential success lies in collaboration with Tourism Training
Canada. This is an opportunity that IUCN Vietnam should not miss.
STP and IUCN in general gained some profile with UNDP in its consultations and
reviews of the original proposal for a revision of the Tourism Master Plan. The
links between the Environment Unit of UNDP Hanoi and IUCN Vietnam should
be maintained with respect to sustainable tourism issues, as well as the WTO
Master Plan Mission, as the latter has considerable implications for the form and
components of STPII.
Unfortunately time constraints did not allow the Project Director to follow up his
initiative with the Mai Chau Women's Union for presentation to GEF. It is not
known whether the Women's Union has re-submitted the proposal. The concept
did assist some National Parks to prepare their own submission to GEF, and it
will be interesting to see if any are successful in their applications for community
based ecotourism.
6. PROJECT EXTENSION
Achievements, Current Status and Issues
a. "Sustainable Tourism Project Phase II (Technical Assistance for
Sustainable Tourism)"
• Achievements: Since October 1999 the proposal has been revised and
information added, and a draft budget outline started. The proposal, along
with the Support to Sustainable Tourism in Sa Pa, was sent to a number
of donors. No firm expressions of interest were received, though the
Netherlands Embassy expressed some interest in a national level project
that would focus on ecotourism in protected areas, and The Ford
Foundation was supportive of the direction the STPII document was
taking. The Environment Unit at UNDP was also supportive of the
proposed project and its objectives.
• In late 1999 the Project Advisor recommended that an international
consultant be contracted to work with the STP team and a representative
of VNAT to finalise the project document, and that this should, ideally, take
place when the WTO team was in Vietnam. The Ford Foundation
expressed its commitment to assisting with such an activity, as did SNV,
and suggested that a concept be developed for this activity and submitted
by VNAT.
• The STP had to work hard to allay VNAT's concerns with the apparent
overlap between STPII and the WTO mission to produce a Master Plan for
Sustainable Tourism Development. The UNDP Environment Unit was
supportive of STPII and agreed with IUCN Vietnam that the proposal four
year project would be a valuable, complimentary follow up project to the
revision of the Master Plan (6 months). UNDP and IUCN Vietnam thus
met jointly with VNAT to explain the complimentary nature of the
proposals and that every attempt would be made to ensure no duplication.
VNAT agreed with the recommendation to submit a request to The Ford
Foundation for an international expert.
• On a number of occasions STP met with VNAT and ITDR representatives
to confirm their commitment to the proposal and a second phase of STP.
In early 2000, the IUCN Vietnam Country Representative communicated
with VNAT to try to speed up the process of developing a concept for The
Ford Foundation. In the last days of March, the Programme Officer of The
Ford Foundation met with the Vice Director to confirm VNAT's
commitment to a STPII, and to encourage VNAT to submit a request to
Ford as soon as possible.
• Current status: The concept is with the International Relations
Department of VNAT to submit to The Ford Foundation.
• Problems: Delays in, and lack of, communication between members of
VNAT. Very slow and at times lack of response from VNAT, which
required constant follow up by STP. It is unclear whether this was related
to: inefficiencies and work loads (eg: implementation of the State Action
Plan for Tourism); internal management issues; a perception that the STP
was coming to an end, or misunderstandings about STPII and its
relationship to the proposed revised Tourism Master Plan and the
submission to The Ford Foundation.
Assessment of Benefits/Outcomes
The benefits for Vietnam of a focused, four year follow up project to the STP,
working directly with and within the Vietnam National Administration of Tourism,
are significant. This is especially so given the current situation of Vietnam tourism
and the issues and choices and challenges facing the tourism authorities. Thus,
the implementation of a second phase should take place as soon as possible in
order to benefit from the momentum generated by STP and to assist authorities
to take the correct path to sustainability. Any long delays will make it more
difficult to maintain donor interest and link the outputs, contacts, networks,
activities, drive of the STP with a second phase. It will also miss an opportune
time for IUCN and its colleagues to be involved in making a significant
contribution to a sustainable tourism industry in Vietnam.
The STPII aims to establish national-local-national level linkages through the
implementation of a project with the central authorities, while initiating three
'satellite' pilot projects at the local level which involves working from the
grassroots up. The STPII will thus attempt to tackle sustainable tourism from both
ends, and foster two way communication flows. It is vital that practical pilots or
models be developed to show by example the possibilities for achieving
sustainable tourism at the local level.
There is still uncertainty about VNAT's dedication to STPII, for despite the verbal
confirmation of its desire for a second phase, very little effort is being made to
facilitate progress towards this goal. After almost two years it is disappointing for
STP to feel insecure about its partner. Such insecurity has fostered the feeling
within STP that its activities are low on the list of priorities for VNAT, and hence
that its impact has been minimal.
The submission to The Ford Foundation is now the responsibility of VNAT and
IUCN Vietnam.
7.CONCLUSION
a. Progress made in achieving project goals
Over the last six months of the project, the STP continued to work hard, fully
dedicated to achieving the project goals and finalising project activities within
each of the objectives. Though some slowdown occurred at the very beginning of
the year in generating outputs and tying up loose ends, the number of activities
achieved in the extension period was significant.
Many of the activities of STP have fall under several categories, for example
participation in international and national fora lies in both networking and
information exchange and advocacy and awareness raising. In implementing one
activity, STP has achieved more than one project objective.
