Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
2005). Overall the PROFIT study concluded that the influence of government
departments on community tourism development had been minimal.
A wide range of international and local NGOs and bilateral and multilateral
donors have assisted the development of community enterprises in tourism and
crafts with mixed results. These include African Parks Conservation, African
Wildlife Foundation, Choma Museum and Crafts Centre Trust Ltd.,
Conservation Lower Zambezi, Kasanka Trust Ltd., North Luangwa
Conservation Project, Source Connection Foundation, West Lunga Trust,
Wildlife Conservation Society, WWF Zambia, Danish International Development
Agency, USAID and the World Bank.
The Fifth National Development Plan 2006-2010 reviewed past perform-
ance and acknowledged that '
although tourism has been identified as a form of rural
development, the interests of the local communities have not been fully incorporated
'
(GRZ, 2006, p89). The plan presents 13 programmes for tourism and 1 is
community tourism development. The objective is '
to promote local community
participation and ownership in tourism
' through encouraging community participa-
tion in joint ventures by using land as equity, promoting public-private and
community partnerships and facilitating access to development funds by commu-
nities (GRZ, 2006, p91). It remains to be seen how this objective will be
implemented.
Inventory and the impact of community tourism
in Zambia
Twenty-five community tourism enterprises were identified in six out of nine
Provinces with over ten more enterprises under consideration. The highest
concentration of existing enterprises was located close to Livingstone followed by
clusters along the borders of South and North Luangwa National Parks and the
route between Kasanka National Park and Bangweulu wetlands. Several were
identified in Lusaka, Lower Zambezi, Liuwa Plains National Park and Kafue
National Park. No community enterprises were identified in North-Western,
Copperbelt and Luapula Provinces which are marginal holiday destinations. Most
community enterprises were located in GMAs bordering national parks (11
enterprises), followed by rural villages outside GMAs (8), a national park (5) and
an urban area (1). It was surprising that one-fifth were located within national
parks as legally the community institutions cannot own the physical assets such as
the campsite facilities the tourism is based on. Overall, 52 per cent of the enter-
prises offered cultural products such as a village walk and 48 per cent were based
on non-consumptive forms of wildlife tourism.The enterprises provided camping
(16 enterprises), chalet accommodation (12), village tour (7), wildlife walk (7),
entertainment (7), curio market (3) and a guesthouse (1).
The enterprises featured a range of organizational structures. The most
prevalent was the CRB (8) but many were simply comprised of an informal
committee (7). Most were, however, registered with the local council as a commu-
nity-based organization. A few were membership associations or registered as a
Search WWH ::
Custom Search