Publications> Working Papers > Working Paper 10

Abstract: "Ecotourism and Community-based Ecotourism in the Mekong Region" Complete Paper (pdf 327KB)

Tourism has been strongly promoted in theMekong Region, particularly since the socialist and communist countries there transformed to market-based economies; economies that have only recently opened the door to private sector investment in tourism, services and other sectors. In contrast, Thailand has promoted tourism for a much longer period of time within an open economic framework. Even though Thailand is a regional leader in tourism development, the country has faced many problems and impacts from such development. Solutions to these problems have been found in both mainstream and alternative approaches. Increased cooperation among Mekong countries allows them to learn from one another’s experiences, particularly from Thailand, both in terms of success and failure. In the era of sustainable development, alternative and sustainable tourism have become a greater concern for tourism policy makers in this region. Nevertheless, the economic benefits of tourism continue to be the most significant driving force in most countries.

The Asian financial crisis in 1997 affected investment and travel to and within Asia. It affected tourism, both inbound and outbound. In response to this crisis, Thailand, for example, has promoted tourism through campaigns such as ‘Thai travel in Thailand’ for domestic and ‘Amazing Thailand’ for international tourists. The crisis has had ambivalent results for the main direction of Thai tourism policy. On the one hand, it would appear to be a good time for sustainable tourism, with a rethinking and adjustment of the development process, particularly through ecotourism that supports the self-reliance economic campaign for rural communities. On the other hand, economic recovery and the need to earn foreign currency have encouraged a reversion on the part of government to focus on conventional tourism promotion.

This situation was further hit by global crises at the beginning of the 21st century, which include the post 9/11 events, war in Afghanistan, war in Iraq and SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome). These have affected travel and leisure in many places around the world including the Mekong Region. The number of international tourists has been reduced. Many service providers face a critical time for investment. This has stimulated Thailand to promote measures and activities that could attract tourists. Many controversial projects have been proposed, such as Emerald Triangle Tourism Development, Ko Chang Development, and the Regal Casino initiative. This may exacerbate unsustainable tourism development in the country.
Ecotourism (ET) is a form of sustainable tourism and Community-based Ecotourism (CBET) is ecotourism where local communities are the main actors. Some see ecotourism itself as a contradiction in terms. Others simply misunderstand and misapply the concept, leading to many critical problems. Ecotourism promotion in rural communities in Thailand is still a focus of many agencies, both governmental and NGO, and some private sector operators.

Other Mekong countries have also been developing tourism and ecotourism for economic reasons, while being aware of the impacts of such development. Most governments and almost all tourism development projects are still following conventional paths of tourism in which mass tourism is still playing the major role for tourism income. The rhetoric of ET and CBET has also been adopted at the forefront of tourism development policy. Ecotourism development is, however, starting at a very small scale and with limitations regarding participatory process. Again, experience from Thailand has shown significant limitations in management and marketing of ecotourism, reducing its role in fostering a more sustainable tourism approach overall. Most ecotourist attractions are located in Protected Areas (PA), which limit the accessibility of local people to manage and control it.

This working paper examines Ecotourism and Community-based Tourism practices of each country in the Region. Learning from the experiences of some countries, especially Thailand, could be beneficial for the others. The aims of this paper are to gather information about ET/CBET in Mekong countries, their experiences in developing and managing ET/CBET, the lessons learned from those experiences and to make some observations and recommendations for ET/CBET development in the future.

© 2005 Australian Mekong Resource Centre