Transnational Corporations Review Volume 6 Number 3 September 2014

www.tnc-online.net [email protected] 228-237

Community Based Tourism Development in Sikkim of India

– A Study of Darap and Pastanga Villages

Manjula Chaudhary and Rinzing Lama

Abstract: The Community Based Tourism Development is based on the engagement

of local communities as the central stakeholder in tourism development. However, for most
of the times, this concept of the bottom up planning is usually given in the top-down
manner because of lack of awareness on the part of communities. The communities
participated from planning to execution level are often catalyzed by external forces such as
non-governmental organizations‟ encouragement to the local communities, and there has
been little exploration of what communities think of their roles in tourism development. This
paper studies this aspect in the Darap and Pastanga villages in Sikkim of India. The focus of
the research is to understand the perspective of the local communities at a point when
tourism has developed with the intervention of outside agencies that have involved locals in
many roles.

Keywords: Community-based tourism development, rural tourism, tourism in Sikkim

1. Introduction

The development of tourism as an alternative industry for development was aptly described
by Butler (1998) that, “as traditional industries are challenged by mechanization, resource
Page | 241
scarcity and international influence, economic planners are looking for new industries
based on these some resources, but which are not facing the same challenges”. Reid (2003)
suggested that often tourism is considered an option because its development relies on areas
cultural, historic, ethic, geographic, and natural uniqueness. The situations and context that
gave prominence to tourism vary from place to place but the common point is that it has
fuelled economic growth raising the concerns about equitable distribution of its benefits.
This led to spread of tourism to rural and other distant areas and engagement of local
communities in tourism. Rural areas became the focus of tourism development for their
uniqueness as suggested by Butler (1998) that rural areas provide a special appeal to tourists
because of the mystique associated with a rural environment, its distinct culture, history,
ethics and geographic characteristics.

Community participation and tourism for community development was difficult to be

ignored in rural areas that have close knit community systems. The community based
tourism concept has been at the forefront of the promotion of rural development, both in
developed and developing countries (Honey,

2008). The theoretical premises of community tourism have a long history, originating
for the participatory and empowerment development models that emerged as a new
paradigm in development discourse in the 1970s (Cornelissen, 2005). Globally, within the
general tourism sector, the focus on community based tourism as a means of enhancing
community development, poverty alleviation, cultural heritage, and conservation is
increasing (Equation, 2008). In an area of rural setting, the economic well- being and
employment opportunities for the local residents may very much depend on tourism industry
(Briedenhann and Wickens, 2003: Riz-Molina, Gill-Saura and Moliner-Velazquez, 2010).
Telfer and Sharpley (2008) added that community based tourism should respect local
culture and find ways to enhance and rescue local culture and heritage.

Although community based tourism has been the subject of increased literature (Beeton,
2006), it does not have a clear definition (Flacke-Naurdofer, 2008). According to Ndlovu and
Rogerson (2003) the term community based tourism is contested and often means
different things to different people. The community based tourism concept is becoming

Page | 242
increasingly relevant in developing countries, especially in so far as it endorses strategies that
favour greater benefits for the control by local communities. It can take a variety of forms,
ranging from communally shared systems to individually owned village stays and can be
linked to entities outside the community (for example, tour operators or NGOs), especially
when it comes to promotion. Community based tourism can be seen as a way of linking
the need to reduce poverty with the breaking of structural dependencies based on hegemonic
control of the sector by tour operators or the wealthy elite (Timothy, 2002). Importantly,
international cooperation and community based tourism for community development in many
developing countries are linked because “international agencies increasingly promote tourism
and specifically community based tourism as a means to reduce poverty in developing
countries” (Spenceley, 2008).

Community Based Tourism in developing countries “tends to inevitably be located in rural

areas” (Equation, 2008). India opened for tourism a little late compared to global trends and
is discovering and opening more and more destinations in remote and small areas. Tourism
Policy of 2002 of Government of India considered the dynamics of rural and community
based tourism and introduced the concept of rural tourism to show case the rural life of
Indian country side to visitors. Since then the scheme has been implemented in 107 villages
across the country and the results have been mixed, but the success stories indicate that
wherever successful; host communities‟ involvement was an important factor (Ministry of
Tourism, Government of India, 2012).

2. Community-based tourism development

The eastern Himalayan state Sikkim provides suitable backdrop for the promotion of rural
and community based tourism with its predominantly rural setting (75.3 per cent rural
population, Census of India 2011) and beautiful natural scapes. The physical features of the
state include rugged mountains, deep valleys and dense forests consort with raging rivers,
lake and waterfalls. The state has the steepest rise in altitude over the shortest distance and
has within its 7,096 sq. kms the entire climatic range, from tropical to temperate to alpine.
Sikkim covers 0.2 per cent of the geographical area of the country and has
tremendous biodiversity and has been identified as one of the hot spot in the Eastern

Page | 243
Himalayas. Sikkim falls under Himalayan (2) Bio-geographic zone and Central Himalaya
(2c) biotic province (Champion and Seth, 1968).

The cultural diversity of the state comes from its three major tribes of Lepcha, Bhutia and
Nepalese. The Lepchas were the original inhabitants of Sikkim. The Lepchas are
predominantly the Buddhists but many of them are also Christians. But before adopting
Buddhism or Christianity as their religion, the earliest Lepcha settlers believed in the bone
faith. The Bhutias originally belong to the Tibet. These people migrated to Sikkim after the

15th century and settled in North Sikkim. The Nepalese migrated in large numbers in
Sikkim from Nepal. They introduced the terraced system of cultivation. Today, the Nepalese
constitute more than 80 per cent of the total population of Sikkim. Nepalese are sub divided
into Limboo, Tamang, Chettri, Rai, Gurung, Newars, Sherpa and Bhawan. They are Hindus
except the Tamangs, Gurungs and Sherpas, who are Buddhists.

Tourism plays a significant role in the economy of Sikkim and it is Sikkim‟ s one of the
largest revenue generating sector after agriculture, mining and forest (Information and Public
Relations Department, Govt. of Sikkim).

The natural strength of Sikkim has been aptly supported by the government policies and
Sikkim is the first state to have a policy on ecotourism and it‟ s strictly enforced. The
concepts of rural tourism, ecotourism, adventure tourism and homestays have become
popular here. There are a number of villages in Sikkim where community based tourism and
rural tourism is being promoted.

Ministry of Tourism, Government of India is promoting 11 villages under Rural

Tourism project in Lachen in north; Chumbung, Tingchim, Maniram Bhanjgyang, Rong,
Srijunga Martam and Darap in west; Pastenga, Pendam Gadi Budang and Tumin in East and
Jaubari in South Sikkim.

The UNESCO project for the development of Cultural Tourism and Ecotourism in the
Mountainous Regions of Central and South Asia is sponsored by the Norwegian Government
which aims to promote cooperation between local communities, national and
international NGOs, tour agencies in order to involve local populations fully in the

Page | 244
employment opportunities and income generating activities that tourism can bring in form of
rural tourism and village tourism. The following are the villages supported under UNESCO
project Dzongu, Kewzing, Yuksom, Uttarey, Darap, Hee-Bormiok, Lachen, Assangthang,
Kabi, Chumbong and Rey Mindu.

Two villages, Darap in west and Pastanga in east have been chosen for the study to find out
the local community perceptive on Community Based Tourism Development. These villages
were identified as successful case studies of rural tourism in the evaluation studies of
Government of India (Ministry of Tourism, Govt. of India 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013). The
rural tourism projects of Government of India are based on community participation.

3. Literature review

Interest in community based tourism grew with the developments of sustainable and
participative approaches in tourism and same is reflected in researches as well. The
relationship between tourism and local communities was explored by Murphy (1985,
2004), Richards and Hall (2000) etc. Further researches will be explored linking of
tourism with the benefits of community such as Pro Poor Tourism; Community Benefit
Tourist Initiatives (CTBIs) (Slimpons, 2008); or Comunity Based Enterprises (CBEs)
(Manyara and Jones, 2007).

Several case studies of Community Based Tourism have been studied in their
contextliterature in Africa (Lepp, 2007; Manyara and Jones, 2007; Kibicho, 2008), Asia
(Nyaupane et al., 2006; Okazaki, 2008; Kayat, 2010), Oceania (Dyer et al., 2003), in
different countries of Latin America; such as Brazil (Guerreiro, 2007), Ecuador (Ruiz et al.,
2008), Mexico (Bringas and Israel, 2004) and Peru (Zorn and Farthing, 2007).

Different researches on Community Based Tourism stresses active participation of the

local community and fostering of a relationship between local community and visitors.The
role of different public administrations, Non-governmental Organizations (NGOs), private
institutions can be of facilitators. The main limitations of local communities in the
implementation of tourism projects are; lack of financial resources, infrastructure or know-
how; limitations of a cultural kind; and potential conflicts between the different public

Page | 245
administrations (Nyaupane et al. 2006). For Community Based Tourism (CBT)
implementation; inclusion of stakeholders, evaluation of individual and collective benefits,
setting of objectives and analysis of decision to be implemented are highly important
(Kibicho, 2008). The main benefits of community tourism are the direct economic impact on
families, socioeconomic improvements, and sustainable diversification of lifestyles (Manyara
and Jones, 2007; Rastegar, 2010).

Perception of tourism is based on the evaluation of the local community‟ s attitude

(including the environment, infrastructure and events); the participation model of people in
the local community exerts a powerful influence on the tourist‟ s experience; and tourism
planning effects the community as a whole (Briedenhann and Wickens, 2004).

Almost all the countries are planning to promote Community Based Tourism, especially in
rural areas for the well-being of local people. Even rural India has immense potential for
Community Based Tourism as the rural community based tourism as the rural India is still
unexplored (Kumar, R. K. 2007).

4. Case studies

The present study is based in two villages of Darap and Pastanga where Community Based
Tourism Development has been implemented. The data through interviews were collected
from local communities, the State Government agencies and NGOs. The identified villages
provide good case studies on account of their unique backdrop.

Darap: Darap is a small village in west Sikkim at an altitude of 5,100 feet or 1554.48 meters
above sea level. The word Darap has its origin from the Limboo (Tribal) word “Tan-
lop/Therap” which literally means a flat land. This valley is exposed to temperature
variations of 05 degree centigrade to 28 degree centigrade. This makes Darap storehouse of
various rare and endangered species of flora and fauna and various unique and rare aspects
of the Limboo culture are preserved in this valley. The village is inhibited by 95 per cent
Limboo population occupies a place of pride in one of the richest limboo culture heritage of

Sikkim. Darap has towering Khanchendzonga – 3rd highest peak (also the guardian deity)
and is just 7 kilometers from the tourist hub of Pelling offering peaceful environment

Page | 246
similar to Pelling. The village has come up in recent years as one of the major village
tourism and offbeat travel destination of Sikkim for its sustainable tourism practices through
Community Based Tourism Development.

The initiative to develop the village as a tourist destination by using local resources was
taken up by local NGO named Darap Eco Development Committee which was formed in the
year 2005. They organized the families and helped develop homestays in the village
houses. They also identified potential destinations for visitors and created an infrastructure
to develop the tourist spots. Currently 20 homestays and house owners are registered with
the NGO but each family in the village is reaping the benefits of the tourism initiative. Each
family has two-three single or double bed rooms to accommodate the tourists. For
homestay facilities the visitors have to pay USD 30 – 35 per person, per night including
breakfast, lunch and dinner. The guides are paid USD 5 per day per group. They have
different rates for trekking, excursion and other adventure activities.

Tourists in Darap can pick and choose from an array of products ranging from trekking to
picnic to meditation and farming. They can also arrange mountain biking and learning the
local language and cooking. The local resident of Darap and President of Darap Eco-tourism
Committee received award for State best tourism development committee in 2010 by
department of tourism, Government of Sikkim and he is also recognized as “Top 10 locals

in tourism in the world” by leap local published in guardian U.K on 19th june 2012.

Pastanga: Pastanga in Lingzey is a small village in the East Sikkim at an altitude of 4676
feet or 1425 meters. It is just a two hour drive and 28 kms from Gangtok (Capital of Sikkim).
The village name is derived from its older names “Pa-Sing-Tel” in Kulung Language
meaning “forefather‟ s wood collecting place” and “Pasing Tengkha” in Bhutia language
meaning “below bamboo forest” that gradually changed to Pastanga. More than twelve
varieties of bamboo thrive in the area and the nearby hills.

Attractions include orchids and rhododendrons and various species of birds. The village is
inhabited by three ethnic communities namely Rai, Bhutia and Lepcha. The majority
population is of farmers and earn the livelihood through traditional organic agriculture,
horticulture practice and dairy farming. The village is one of the main producers of large
Page | 247
cardamom and ginger. The village has total of 95 households constituting the population
around 500 people.

The majorities among the population are Rai followed by Bhutias and Lepchas.
Tourists are rotated among the ten members of KEEP (Khedi Eco-Tourism and Eco-
Development Promotion) local NGO, who have homestay facilities, and pay between USD
24 to 26 (depending on the size of the group and type of visitors) per night, of which from
2% to 10% is deposited with the organization for village development, tourist amenities
development, conservation activities, operation and maintenance of office and
maintenance of office and programs and the rest is paid to the homestay operators, guides,
porters and cultural dancers. The guides are paid USD 2 per day per group.

Tourists can also trek to Khedi on the Malinggo trail, a three to five night adventure for
which they pay USD 42 per night, and there are plans to offer mountain biking.

5. Role of the local community

The local communities play pivotal role in Community Based Tourism Development with
the support of local NGO‟ s. Villagers participate in tourism by playing host; offering
home stays and arranging participation of tourists in village and tourism activities such as
basket weaving, planting rice, milking cows, preparing local food, day hikes to pilgrimage
sites, mountain biking and cultural shows etc. Their friendly demeanours and traditional
ways add value to the experiences of tourists.

Community members work as a team to manage tourism facilities and tourist resources in a
proper manner. The different works of facilitation of tourists are divided among
community members that work cohesively for a fine tour experience.

Local NGOs;Khedi Eco-Tourism and Eco-Development Promotion (KEEP) in Pastanga and

Darap Eco- Tourism Committee (DEC) drive tourism in both the villages..

These have sensitized villagers to tourism and trained them to manage tourism
establishments. State government, union government and international organizations have
supported these efforts of NGO‟ s through different schemes.

Page | 248
80 per cent in Darap and 75 per cent in Pastanga villagers believes that Community Based
Tourism has created jobs in the village and jobs are good. They believe that the incomes of
the villagers have increased with the growth of tourism but general prices have increased too.
Villagers derive their incomes from accommodation, providing guides, porters, selling
handicrafts, hot stone baths, etc.

70 per cent villagers in Darap are unhappy with the transport facilities and poor road
condition from Siliguri to Darap. The villagers in Pastanga are happy with the transport
facilities and the road condition (85 per cent). 90 per cent people from Darap and Pastanga
says the toilets facilities are not developed for tourists. Both the villages have good
recreational facilities in their villages. Both the villagers of Darap and Pastanga strongly
believe that tourism has helped them to preserve and promote their uniqueness and they take
pride for developing their villages for Community Based tourism. 90 per cent villagers from
Darap and Pastanga say that tourism is not disturbing our age old traditions is helping in the
promotionof their traditions and culture to the world.

Both the villagers believe that their village has good potential to attract tourists, as their
tradition, culture and location are different from other villages offering CBT. In Darap, most
of the local community members have built the separate home for tourists with good wash
room facility. Good hygiene and cleanliness are well taken care of and in Darap and 70 per
cent residents participate in the twice-monthly garbage clean-up initiated by Darap
Ecotourism Committee. Garbage management facilities are clearly visible in and around the
village.

In Pastanga, most of the local communities shared their rooms with the tourists with separate
washroom facilities. In Pastanga, the local community now participates in the garbage clean-
up initiated by Khedi Eco-Tourism and Eco-Development Promotion. However, the 80
per cent people think the level of awareness is still low among local community.
Members of Khedi Eco-Tourism and Eco-Development

Promotion, KEEP also conducts a 3 days cleaning campaign in Khedi, during which
they urge independent tourists to dispose of their garbage in a responsible manner.

Page | 249
However there are certain areas of concern such as low participation of youth in the CBTD
scheme, dropping of members from the scheme or trying to venture on their own once they
develop contacts with tourists. The shift from community focus to self might disturb the
scheme in the long run.

6. Conclusions and suggestions

This study looks at two cases of Community Based Tourism Development with similar goal.
Both the villages in Darap and Pastanga have the major problem training of villagers in a
proper manner. Villagers have received training from local NGO‟ s and government but the
primary survey of the villages revealed many gaps in the training. The participation of youth
(20-25 years) of the villages in community based tourism is low and 60 per cent of the youths
are not involved in Community Based Tourism. They must be encouraged for sustainability
of CBTD in future.

There are still areas where these NGO‟ s can venture to bring more professionalism in their
activities such as joining hands for marketing and using travel agents to build a distinct
visible image of these villages. A uniform pricing system (adjusted to allow for differences
in access and local costs) and system of payment to service providers could be great help.
Language is still a major obstacle for tourists coming to these villages and tourists are often
dependent on the guide for interpretation, but the guide is not always readily available.

The inputs from Reid model (2003) of Community Based Tourism Development can be
used to remove the sore areas in study villages.

Applying community based tourism development model to Darap and Pastanga Reid‟ s
(2003) has suggested a community based tourism development planning model (figure
1) that can be used for further improvising tourism in the study villages.

The process begins through an individual catalyst that provides initial leadership to the
planning process; often times this requires the inclusion of an outside expert to facilitate the
community group. A task force (or action committee) is then struck, comprised of
individuals who have technical expertise, vested interests in the eventual products of the
plan and are concerned about the interests of the community more broadly.
Page | 250
This has been well taken care of in the study villages where NGO‟ s and government act as
catalysts and community members were given initial sensitization and training. Interested
community members were included in the local committees.

The next phase involves raising community awareness about the issues of tourism
development and to seek the involvement of the community in determining the essence of
the final product. It is this stage that deviates from traditional entrepreneurial approach to
tourism planning as it integrates community residents in visioning and planning for their
community‟ s future in relation to tourism developments. This

phase requires, “great skill in the subject area of community development and group
facilitation. The implementation of this stage of the process demands time and energy in
organizing the community to take charge of the process” (Reid 2003: 133). The skills that are
learned by community members during this process should be transferable to other
community development projects (thus contributing to the social learning and transformation
process previously discussed).

Figure 1. Community based tourism development planning model

Page | 251
 Source: Reid 2003.

At this stage improvisation is required in the study villages that are still dependent on
external support for running tourism after 10 years of implementation of project.

The next stage of model is of monitoring and evaluation. Hereto the study villages require
more inputs. Currently the projects are monitored through regular surveys on the basis of
initial set targets but this need to move in an iterative mode through a self- evolving
mechanism driven more by locals at every successive stage.

References

Agrawal, A. and Gibson CC. (1999). Enchantment and disenchantment: The role of
community in natural resource conservation. World Development, 27:629-649.

Akter, et.al. (2011). Trustworthiness in Health Information Services: An Assessment of a

Hierarchical Model with Mediating Effects Using Partial Least Squares (PLS). Journal
of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(1):100-116.

Andriotis. K. (2005). Community Groups Perceptions and Preferences for Tourism

Development, Evidence from Crete. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research.

Ap, J. (1992). Residents‟ perceptions on tourism impacts, Annals of Tourism Research,

19(4):665-690.

Boyd, S. W. and Singh S. (2003). Destination Communities, Resources and Types. In S.

Singh, D. J. Timothy, R. K. Dowling, (Eds.), Tourism in Destination Communities, (pp
19-33), Oxford, England.

Butler, R. (1998). „Rural recreation and tourism‟ B. Ilbery (Ed) The Geography of
Rural Change (Essex UK: Longman), 211-232.
Page | 252
Champion H. G. and Seth S. K. (1968). A revised survey of forest types of the India.
Manager of Publication, Government of India Press, New Delhi.

Cornelissen, S. (2005). The global tourism system: governance, development, and

lessons from South Africa. Aldershot: Ashgate.

De Kadt, E. (1979). Tourism: Passport to Development? Perspectives on the Social and

Cultural Effects of Tourism in Developing Countires, New York, Oxford University
Press.

Dreier, P. (1996). Community Empowerment Strategies, Limits and Potential of

Community Organising in Urban Neighbourhood. Cityscape, a Journal of Policy
Development and Research, 2.2:121-159.

Equations (2008). Community-based rural tourism in developing countries. Some insights &
lessons from the Endogenous Tourism project in India. In making a difference. Dossier
on community engagement on nature based tourism in India, Equation, 2009.

FICCI (2001). International Conference and Exhibition on Rural Tourism in India, Sept., 8,-
12.

Honey, M. (2008). Ecotourism and Sustainable Development Who Owns Paradise?

Washington D.C.: Island Press. Kumar. R. K. (2004). Rural Tourism: Best Solution for
Environment Preservation & Rural Development, (Eds.)

Tourism Development and Strategies by Chaudhary. M, Kamra, K. K., New Delhi, Anmol
Publication.

Landford, S. (1994). Attitude and Perceptions towards Tourism and Regional

Development, Journal of Travel Research, 3:35-43.

L‟ Allier. 2005. Built Environment for Sustainable Tourism, Conference, Sultanate of Oman.

Mc Cool, S. F. and Moisey, R. N. (2001). Introduction: pathway and pitfalls in the search for
sustainable tourism. In S.F. McCool and R. N. Moisey (Eds.), Tourism, recreation and
sustainability: Linking culture and the environment (pp.1-15). New York: CABI.
Page | 253
Murphy P. E. (1980). Tourism Management in Host Communities, Canadian Geographer,
24(1):1-2.

Raj, A. and Parihar, P. (2007). Community Attitude towards Tourism: A Guest Host
Relationship, Indian Journal of International Tourism and Hospitality Research, 1:41-54.

Reid, D. (2003). Tourism, Globalization and Development: Responsible Tourism Planning

(London: Pluto Press). Rural Tourism: Evaluation cum impact study, 2012. Ministry of
Tourism, Government of India.

Sharma, B. and P. Dyer (2009). Residents‟ involvement in tourism and their

perceptions of tourism impacts. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 16(3):351-
371.

Simpson (2008). Community Benefit Tourism Initiatives, A Conceptual Oxymoron, Tourism

Management, 29. Telfer, D. J. and Sharpley, R. (2008). Tourism and Development in the
Developing World. London: Routledge.

Twyman, C. (2000). Participatory Conservation? Community Based Natural Resource

Management in Botswana, The Geographical Journal, 166:323-335.

UNDP. India, Endogenous Tourism for Rural Livelihood, Govt. of India, Country Programme
2003 -2007. United Nation World Tourism Organization. 2004. Indicators of Sustainable
Development for Tourism.

Zhang, X., Song H. and Huang, G. (2009). Tourism Supply Chain Management, a New
Research Agenda, Tourism Management, 30:1-14.

Page | 254
 Indian Journal of International Tourism and Hospitality Research
Kurukshetra University

Community Empowerment and Resource Management

through Community Based Tourism Development
A Case Study of Sikkim

Manjula Chaudhary and Rinzing Lama

Abstract
Tourism researches across time and space have examined value of tourism in rural
communities (Reid 2003; Jamal & Getz 1999; Reed 1997; Butler 1998) and suggested that

Page | 255
community based tourism (CBT) development provides an opportunity for sustainable
tourism. Community based tourism has evolved as a bottom-up approach to tourism planning
and development that incorporates local individuals in the planning process in a meaningful
way. It is participative, engaging and promotes tourism in harmony.

This paper is an attempt to assess community empowerment and resource management

through community based tourism development in two villages of Rey Mendu and Kewzing
in Sikkim and finds that tourism has integrated with community empowerment and resource
management in these communities.

Keywords: Community participation, resource management, community based tourism

development.

Introduction
Global economies are driven by services as these develop and mature. India is also
experiencing this trend, travel and tourism is an important contributor to services that
generates both directly or indirectly USD121 million at 64 per cent of India‟s GDP in 2011
(WTTC). The oxford economics global industry model predicts (2011), India‟s annual
average growth of 7.7 per cent of Travel and Tourism GDP over the next decade.

While the contribution of tourism to the economy is an unquestioned fact, issues regarding its
efficacy in terms of distribution of benefits to host populations and equitable spread are often
raised and researched. This becomes important in a country like India that opened for tourism
a little late compared to global trends and is discovering and opening more and more
destinations in remote and small areas. An argument that becomes important here is to
promote tourism for development of infrastructure at the destinations to propel tourism in
sync with local development that benefits host communities. Tourism Policy of 2002, of
Government of India considered this and introduced the concept of rural tourism to show
cases the rural life of Indian countryside to visitors. Since then the scheme has been
implemented in 107 villages across the country and the results have been mixed, but the

Page | 256
success stories indicate that wherever successful host communities‟ involvement was an
important factor (Ministry of Tourism, Government of India, 2012).

Community is the strength of any state and the empowerment of local community also means
empowerment of the region and state. The present study focuses on the role of community
empowerment and resource management in terms of Community Based Tourism
Development.

Community Empowerment and Resource Management link

Building a symbiotic linkage between local resource management and community
development is a challenge in a country like India with widely diverse social systems,
different traditional rights over resources and big range of empowerment of local bodies. But
community empowerment with its people centric focus involves giving power, confidence,
and skills to the communities to shape and influence what public bodies do for them
(Nottingham, 2007). Government agencies have tried to involve the local communities in
every activity including tourism in order to better manage the local resources The main
objective of community empowerment is to create awareness among the people/members
about the opportunities and optimal utilization of resources, enhance their skills, building
capacity among the community members and improving cohesion and understanding among
the members. It also aims to strengthen the local leadership and improve the local resource
base. As per FICCI (2001) report, significant improvement can be made in the income and
living standards of the people in of the region or the locality.

Community empowerment ensures accountability of implementation of schemes. Studies like

The contribution of Community Based Tourism to community empowerment and capacith
building lesson learned from Ban Huay Hee community Mae Hong Son Provience, Thailand
(REST, 2005), Community Based Tourism: A success (Harold Goodwin and Rosa Santilli,
2009) and Community Based Tourism and local culture: the case of the amaMpondo, South
Africa, 2012), indicates that success of various development activities depend on a number of
factors such as level of involvement of the local community, commitment of the

Page | 257
organisation, viability of such projects in the selected region, the extent of change brought by
such projects to the locality and the role of nongovernmental organisations.

The case of Sikkim for development of tourism through community empowerment

Community is the strength of any state and the empowerment of local community also means
empowerment of the region and state. The present study focuses on the role of community
empowerment and resource management in terms of Community Based Tourism
Development.

Sikkim is a small state in India s located in the Eastern Himalayas with a rich biodiversity
and physical features. The Tibetan plateau marks the border in the north, Chumbi Valley and
Kingdom of Bhutan in the east, Nepal in the west and West Bengal in South. People of
Sikkim belong to three main tribes. Lepcha, Bhutia and Nepalese. Lepcha tribes are said to
be the original inhabitants of Sikkim. They worship spirits of mountains, rivers and forests
and coexist with the nature in a harmonious manner. At present Lepchas are a minority in the
state and are mostly settled in Central Sikkim. Lepcha‟s follow Buddhism and a fraction now
belongs to Christianity. Bhutia tribes had migrated from Tibetan Plateau and they are settled
in North and South Sikkim. Bhutias are identified by their dress code as it distinct them from
the other people. Nepalese tribe are migrated from Nepal and they are settled in almost all the
parts of Sikkim. Sikkim is the only state in India with an ethnic Nepali majority. The local
language in Sikkim is Nepali.

Sikkim is the first state which came up with a public policy on ecotourism at the national
level and strictly enforcing its principles. Here the concepts of village tourism, homestays are
becoming popular. The cultural and social life of Lepchas, Bhutias and Nepalese are one of
the main reasons of promoting Community Based Tourism in this region. As they are ethnic
tribes of Sikkim and their cultures, traditions, food habits, language and customs are different
from each other. There are a number of villages in Sikkim where community based tourism
is being promoted such as Yuksom in west, Lachen in North, Kewzing in South and Rey
Mindu in East.

Page | 258
Two villages‟ viz. Kewzing and Rey Mindu have been chosen for study based on the
observations of the role of local community in tourism promotion.

Objectives of the Study

The study is proposed with following objectives.
1. To understand the issues in community based tourism development.
2. To suggest a framework for the empowerment of local community and resource
management in Community Based Tourism Development.

Review of Literature
Community empowerment is an important aspect of governance and involving community in
resource management integrates the efforts of the community in the overall scheme. The idea
behind this form of management is to have more sustainable and inclusive model of
development. Particularly in tourism the traditional approach of managing tourism puts
control in the hands of outsiders where locals are marginalised for many reasons. This
isolation of host communities finds expression either in the non acceptance of guests by the
hostile community or in the commercial use of resources to the extent of tourism killing
tourism.

Tourism is an industry that uses community as a resource and sells it as a product and in the
process affects everyone (Murphy 1980). Landford (1994) asserts that various community
groups have diverging perspectives on tourism and its impacts. The different impacts and
divergent perspectives notwithstanding, the concept of sustainable development was coined
by Brundtland commission by favouring the idea of sustainable growth in all sectors.
Sustainable development became a common phrase after the UN meeting held on Sustainable
Development in Johannesburg (Paul.S). The concept of sustainability was adopted in tourism
that stressed on the the participatory management of local resources and sharing of the
benefits among the local community in best possible manner. Tourism like any new
development can bring both benefit and problems (UNWTO, 1994).

Page | 259
The conceptual definition adopted by UNWTO on sustainable tourism clearly defines the
role of local community. Its main points are:
1. Optimal use of environmental resources that constitute a key element in tourism,
development, maintaining ecological processes and helping to conserve natural, built
heritage and biodiversity.
2. Respect the socio cultural authenticity of host communities, conserve their built and
living cultural and traditional values, and contribute to inter cultural understanding
and tolerance.
3. Ensure viable, long term economic operations, providing socio economic benefits to
all stake holders that are fairly distributed including stable employment, income
earning opportunities, and income earning opportunities and social services to host
communities.
Community based tourism is based on the concept of ownership, management and control of
tourism projects (Lea 1988, Suansri 2003). Communities are a basic element in modern
development (Godfrey & Clarke, 2000). Mc Cool and Moisey (2001) suggest that tourism
should be seen as a tool for development not as end itself. Community involvement in
tourism was widely appreciated among the planners, academicians, and policy makers (Boyd
and Singh, 2003, UNWTO, 2004). Andrioits (2005) suggested that the acceptance of tourism
development can be measured by the host perception on tourism development. Simpson
(2008) came up with the concept of Community Based Tourism Initiatives (CBTI).
Community participation integrates right from planning tourism projects and incorporate
their efforts to operationalize these projects and at the end the outcome as income/profit/loss
equally shared among the participants. Murphy (2004) proposed the surrounding relationship
between tourism, community, and development.

Recent works in community tourism focus tourism as an agent of change and source for
livelihood. Tourism may dominate many destination but it is not the only source of income
for the community. The concept of sustainable livelihood describes the way individuals and
communities are sustained through multiple livelihood strategies. (Tao, Wall 2008). Though
the benefit of tourism has not reached the rural in India, efforts are on from government,
NGOs etc. Sustainable tourism is the major highlight of the recent years but lack of clear
Page | 260
implementation programmes, vague strategies invited criticism from many corners (Wall,
2002). Tourism helps to energize the rural economy and plays an important role in value
addition process, (Liu, 2006). Rural India has immense potential for Community Based
Tourism as the rural community based tourism as the rural India is still unexplored (Kumar,
R.K. 2007).

Methodology
The present study is based on a single sample unit. The survey was undertaken in the month
of February 2013, by direct interview method. The study has been done by collecting data
from the Government agencies, NGOs who are associated with tourism development
activities in the state. Interviews were taken from the Rey Mindu local community and
Kewzing local community, which are the two villages where Community Based Tourism is
implemented.

a. Rey Mindu Tourism Project

Rey Mindu is located on the out skirts of Gangtok city (capital of Sikkim). This project was
launched in 2007 as a pilot project to involve Lepcha Community in tourism activities. 15
Lepcha families staying in this village formed a unit and offered tourists a perfect experience
of Community Tourism. The scenic village background along with traditional houses of the
community members, promise tourists a different experience. The project was launched
initially to attract day visitors who look for a different experience in Gangtok. The initial
package included receiving guest at the village entrance, i.e., the Buddhist Monastery, taking
them to village tour, showing them the farming activities and local living conditions, offering
Lepcha cuisine and cultural programmes. This project is launched with greater care in order
to understand the response of the local community and responses of the local community and
the attitude of the visitors. Once it started it giving a chance to earn additional income to the
community members, the unemployed youth in the village also got a chance to interact with
the visitors. The number is restricted to 15-20 visitors a month in order to understand the way
the concept is accepted by the visitors.

Page | 261
As it got noticed among the services‟ providers as an innovative project lot of queries started
coming in. Form the response it is obvious that the concept was well accepted. The novelty
of this project is that each family of the village gets involved in the project one way or other.
The authentic village experience and traditional living of Lepcha Community is the centre of
attraction of the project. It indirectly tailors all aspects of community based tourism like
tourism supply chain management and 100 per cent involvement of local community. The
money spent by the tourists goes into different hands such as the farmer who offer the
vegetables and fruits, local craft men by selling handicrafts as a souvenir and local escort,
taking guest for village tour in this manner every family in the community gets benefited by
the project.

Microfinance is also tailored with this project in order to develop saving habits among the
people. The long term goals include developing village tourism with 100 percent community
involvement and making it as a working model in community tourism. Ecotourism and
Conservation Society of Sikkim, ECOSS (local NGO), which initiated this project with the
financial help of National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, NABARD (National
bank) for financial assistance. The community members have undergone special training
through different capacity building programmes aimed at enhancing the skill of the people
who are directly associated with the project.

b. Kewzing Tourism Development

Kewzing is a scenic village located an altitude of 2200 meters, 85 k.m away from Gangtok
city. Surrounded by hills, and very close to Pelling view point of Mount Kanchendzonga.
Kewzing is hardly 10 k.m from Ravangla, a beautiful rural area, where the population mainly
consist of Tibetans. The route to Kewzing is featured by Buddhist prayer flags, and
monasteries. Kewzing Tourism Development Committee (KTDC) is a community tourism
project established in the year 2002 with the help of an NGO, Sikkim Development
Foundation (SDF). In 2004 ECOSS (NGO based in Gangtok) has formed a committee for
promoting community tourism. This committee consists of 15 Bhutia families staying in
Kewzing village at Ravangla in South Sikkim. The conceptualization of Community Tourism

Page | 262
is one of the key motivating factors of the establishment of this project. The committee is
headed by President, Vice President and General Secretary.

Out of 15 Bhutia families, 10 families had a regular source of income and remaining 5
families had no regular employment at the time of initiation of the project. With a small
financial assistance from SDF (Sikkim Development Foundation) and individual investments
KTDC (Kewzing Tourism Development Committee) supported each member of the
community to modify their houses with basic amenities. The members of the community
were given a comprehensive training on hospitality, guest handling and preparing traditional
cuisines. The packages were marketed through a travel agency based in Gangtok and two
main website (sikkimhomestay.com and sikkimtourism.gov.in). The operating principle of
this community project is a holistic one. When tourists arrive, they are first received by the
monk and the community members in the monastery located in the village. After the
traditional welcome they are escorted to the concerned family‟s house where the guests
would be staying. The guests are encouraged to join the Bhutia family in farming, cooking
etc. The package has options such as to have traditional dance form “Bhutia Dance”, spa
treatment, soft trekking, village walk etc. the unemployed youths of this committee are given
opportunities to guide the tourists.

The revenue sharing mechanism among the committee members gives a clear picture of how
committee members benefit out of this project. 25 percent of the published tariff goes as the
agency‟s margin. 10 percent is towards the maintenance and development of the Monastery
and 10 percent is towards the committee fund. Rs 700/- is given to the family for one night
stay of the guest. The family members are selected on rotation basis, in order to give equal
chance to every family involved in the committee. The family members acknowledge that the
interaction with foreign and domestic tourists helped them to understand and share various
cultural life, differences in behaviours etc. It also helped them to gain knowledge and
motivated them to learn foreign languages.

Result and Discussion

1. To understand the issues in community based tourism development
Page | 263
Both the surveyed villages have adopted Community Based Tourism and were found to be
successful in operationalzing the scheme. Both the villsges have different ethnic communities
with different culture, tradition, life style; food and customs are different but have adopted
well to host tourists. Both the villages started this venture through homestay and they involve
their tourists into various activities. They showcase their cultures and villages in a unique
manner. All the local residents in the villages are equally benefited and the revenue generated
from tourists is equally shared among them. Rey Mindu and Kewzing villagers are getting
some support from local residents, local NGOs, State NGOs and the National NGOs. 90 per
cent of villagers in both the villages are willing to work in a team. They have been trained by
the local and state NGOs in various fields like how to handle tourists, how to maintain
hygiene and how to behave in front of the tourists.

The study of working of operational aspects of tourism also revealed need for more
awareness and training. Moreover tourism was found to be a seasonal business and village
require multiple options for round the year occupation.

2. To suggest a framework for the empowerment of local community and resource

management in Community Based Tourism Development.

Villagers in the study area believe that roads, toilets and recreational facilities have also
come up in the villages and created jobs because of tourism. 60 per cent locals from
Kewzing agrees that CBT project created jobs in the village and 50 per cent local from Rey
Mindu village agrees that Community Based Tourism Project created jobs. 50 per cent
villages from Kewzing and Rey Mindu believe after Community Based Tourism project jobs
created are good and satisfied.

20 per cent of the villagers in two villages believe Community Based Tourism Development
project are good for their villages but there are many who think that the prices of local
vegetable, fruits and other items have risen and tourism is disturbing their age old traditions.
They could see fall out of tourism such as crowding thefts, alcoholism, drug abuse, garbage
and vehicular pollution etc. They also complained of non sensitive behaviour of tourists.
Many of the above problems are common at tourist places and could be averted through
proper planning. The success of any community based project is based upon how it tailors to
the needs of the local community and how efficiently the services can be offered. The model
Page | 264
of Community Based Tourism Development is suggested consisting of pre-project stage,
project in progress and the further aspects.

In the pre-project stage, selection of the beneficiary is critical. A detailed survey and study of
other secondary data sources are important to finalize the list of beneficiaries. It also includes
consultation of the community members to know their interest to participate in the project.
Since it involves the intrusion of the private space to certain extent by opening its doors to
strangers, and the attitudinal change required to attend the guests and offer them their own
home, this stage involve lot of risk and time. Awareness campaigns, capacity building
training play a critical role to motivate the members of the community to create a positive
impression. Question of anxiety also play a crucial role since the community is uncertain on
the benefits arising out of the programme. In the project progress stage, various problems
arising out are maintaining the level of coordination with the community members and the
sharing of revenue in a fair manner. Continuing interest among the community members
which always question the basic objective of the project itself. Finally the future prospects of
tourism completely depend on it acceptability among the tourists. Hence the success is
counted in terms of the demand of tourists to experience the village tourism concept.
Community has a lead role to play to utilise the tourism resources effectively and minimise
the negative impacts. As opined by the local residents of Rey Mindu and Kewzing Village
tourism is a pleasing job as everyday they come across new faces, new experiences. As there
are several other destinations, competing for limited resource, innovative strategies,
involvement of locals, management of local supply chains etc, can be imperative for tourism
promotion in the country itself. In a world, where the traditions are in a stage of extinction
and the cultural life is transforming day by day, community has a greater role to play and
tourism can be one of the vehicles to preserve it. Additional revenue and job creation will
attract local community to manage resources, up to certain extend, but value based service is
the only option to have a long term sustained growth of tourism in the region.

Stage 2

Page | 265
  Participation  Operation  Resource management
 Resource sharing  Ownership  Future

Stage 1 Stage 3

Figure1. Model developed by the Researcher

The diagram represents various stages involved in capacity building and community in the
initial stage, emphasis is on to ensure participation of the community. It also involves
identifying and sharing of local resources. Once the community is aware of opportunities,
initiating interest to participate, imparting managerial skills and creating a sense of
ownership of the project for regular operation comes. Stage 3 involves management
resources for future generation and involves sustainable development. Capacity building also
involves soft skill and technical skills as well. “If empowerment of local people is to become
more than just a buzzword or hopeful sentiment, it clearly requires the participation of local
communities, in partnership with the stage, its agencies and large operators, rather than being
a passive host community that happens to have a major attraction on its doorstep” (Nigam
and Nerula, 2007.

REFERENCES
Murphy P.E. (1980), Tourism Management in Host Communities, Canadian Geographer,
Vol. 24 (1), 1-2.

Boyd, S.W., Singh S.(2003) Destination Communities, Resources and Types. In S. Singh,
D.J. Timothy, R.K. Dowling, (Eds.), Tourism in Destination Communities, (pp 19-33),
Oxford, England.

Page | 266
Simpson. (2008), Community Benefit Tourism Initiatives, A Conceptual Oxymoron,
Tourism Management, 29.

Andriotis. K, (2005) Community Groups Perceptions and Preferences for Tourism

Development, Evidence from Crete. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research.

Binns, T. And Nell, E. (2002) Tourism as a Local Development Strategy in South Africa, the
Geographical Journal, Vol.168.3 235-247.

Lea (1988), Tourism Development in the Third World, London.

FICCI. 2001), International Conference and Exhibition on Rural Tourism in India, Sept., 8,-
12.
Raj, A. & Parihar, P. (2007). Community Attitude towards Tourism: A Guest Host
Relationship, Indian Journal of International Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol.1,
41-54.

Landford, S. (1994), Attitude and Perceptions towards Tourism and Regional Development,
Journal of Travel Research, Vol.3, 35-43.

Dreier, P. (1996) Community Empowerment Strategies, Limits and Potential of Community

Organising in Urban Neighbourhood. Cityscape, A Journal of Policy Development and
Research, Vol. 2.2, 121-159.

L‟Allier, (2005) Built Environment for Sustainable Tourism, Conference, Sultanate of Oman.

Twyman, C., (2000), Participatory Conservation? Community Based Natural Resource

Management in Botswana, The Geographical Journal, Vol. 166, 323-335.

Zhang, X., Song H., and Huang, G. (2009), Tourism Supply Chain Management, a New
Research Agenda, Tourism Management Vol. 30, 1-14.
Page | 267
Mc Cool, S.F., & Moisey, R.N. (2001). Introduction: pathway and pitfalls in the search for
sustainable tourism. In S.F. McCool, & R. N. Moisey (Eds.), Tourism, recreation and
sustainability: Linking culture and the environment (pp.1-15). New York: CABI.

R.K.Kumar, (2004), Rural Tourism: Best Solution for Environment Preservation & Rural
Development, (Eds.) Tourism Development and Strategies by Chaudhary. M, Kamra,
KK., New Delhi, Anmol Publication.

de Kadt, E. (1979), Tourism: Passport to Development? Perspectives on the Social and

Cultural Effects of Tourism in Developing Countires, New York, Oxford University
Press.

UNDP, India, Endogenous Tourism for Rural Livelihood, Govt. of India, Country
Programme 2003-2007.

United Nation World Tourism Organization, Indicators of Sustainable Development for

Tourism.

Page | 268