96 Joint Management: A boriginal Involvement in Tourism in the Kakadu World Heritage Area Recognition of Bininj/Mungguy interests'. As freehold landowners of much of the land in
the park - and claimants to land in the rest of the park - the Aboriginal people of Kakadu have rights and expectations; including the right to hunt and forage, and for economic and community development. The plan aims to support these rights and aspirations as much as possible.
Caring for Country: The plan aims to recognize that conserving the special natural and cultural heritage of the park is fundamental to managing the park. The plan also acknowledges Kakadu as a cultural landscape and the important role indigenous landowners have in Caring for Country and maintaining the park's World Heritage values.
Tourism: The plan recognizes that Kakadu is an important place for tourism and recreational use and that traditional owners are proud to share their country with visitors, especially those interested in learning about their culture and their land. It is also said that tourism is not to become more important than caring for country and looking after Bininj/Mungguy interests.
Telling people about the park: The plan is clear that is important that a programme to communicate the parks heritage and the values of the park to visitors and the broader community be an integral part of management.
Hill and Press (1992) have described opportunities for the direct involvement of Aboriginal people in day-to-day decision-making in the park as the 'backbone' of the success of the joint management arrangement. Approximately 40% of the 75 staff members in the park are Aboriginal people, most of whom have a traditional cultural attachment to the park. In addition all park staff members are encouraged to develop and maintain relationships with the local community so that, in effect, all staff share in the responsibility to liaise with the local community.
Joint Management: Aboriginal Involvement in Tourism in the Kakadu World Heritage Area 97 so they play more of a role in servicing park visitors but questions remain how best to manage the transition and flow of benefits and costs.
Traditional owners have an array of issues of concern, including an overarching concern that all the economic activity flowing from tourism in the park leads to little net benefit to them. In 1997, the Kakadu Region Social Impact Study (KRSIS, 1997) found that, despite best intentions and arrangements put in place ensure local Aboriginal people were not disadvantaged by development in the region, local Aboriginal people had not benefited as they should have.
A further key issue has been that, to date, most traditional-owner benefit from tourism has been passively derived from their investments in tourism properties in the park and share of park use fees. The traditional owners' share of park fees has averaged AU$940,000 per annum over the period 2000-2004. (In mid-2004 the Australian government announced its intention to abolish park use fees, as a device to re-vitalize tourism interest in Kakadu.
The government also gave an assurance that traditional owners would not be financially disadvantaged by that decision.)
Another key issue has been the potential for cultural tourism to support young people valuing and maintaining their language, stories of country and traditional knowledge. Older traditional owners look to tourism activity as a way for young people to benefit from the western cash economy but also to stay on country - maintaining linkages between people and land.
Lastly traditional owners look to being more involved in tourism to ensure that visitors have happy and safe travels on their traditional lands - fulfilling a 'duty of care' obligation to visitors to their land.
All of these objectives of the traditional owners link neatly with the promotion of the World Heritage values of the park; however, greater capacity-building is essential to enable tourism operators to engage actively in tourism enterprises.
Actions
In response to all these issues, and industry and government pressure to have a clearer vision for tourism futures in the park, the Director of National Parks and traditional owners have had many discussions about re-shaping and enhancing tourism futures to benefit the regional economy, the park and the well-being of the park's traditional owners. A key task has been how to deliver this, at the same time protecting and promoting the parks World Heritage values and ensuring that plans develop at a pace, and in a way, that traditional owners are comfortable with.
During 2002/2003 the focus was on some core actions:
Reservation of core business opportunities for local traditional owners to either operate directly or via a joint venture with established tour operators. The Guluyambi boat tours on the East Alligator River, showcasing the natural features of the riverine landscape and traditional beliefs relating to the creation of the landscape, is a very successful example.
Taking advantage of traditional owners' capacity to offer exclusive access to sites.
Traditional owners have used their decision-making power about access to land in the park to good effect. They have the capacity to offer sole access to sites in the
98 Joint Management: A boriginal Involvement in Tourism in the Kakadu World Heritage Area park thereby giving tours a marketing edge on competitors, for example the Magela Cultural and Heritage Tours, operating in the northern part of the park, showcase rock art sites, stories and indigenous knowledge of plants and other resources.
Encouraging joint ventures. Parks Australia has sought to maximize opportunities for connecting land and 'tourism resource' owners (traditional owners) with potential joint venture partners, through sponsoring traditional owner participation in forums designed to raise understanding of business-critical issues for the tourism industry, tourism trade shows and tourism conferences. This includes training and exchange opportunities with other indigenous communities and professional bodies involved in tourism. Former park staff have been recently engaged as consultants and advise on tourism and business management opportunities for indigenous business enterprises such as the Kakadu Tourism Association.
Tours that change according to the season. Being mindful of the highly seasonal nature of tourism in the park, and the impact this has on businesses, Parks Australia and traditional owners have been promoting the idea of changes to tour content and itineraries to reflect the local indigenous seasonal calendar for Kakadu.
This also provides opportunities for local Aboriginal people to present and promote the park in a different way - helping visitors to see the park in different ways and how local indigenous people harvest resources at different times according to their 'calendar'.
Employing local indigenous people as 'experts'. Parks Australia and traditional owners have been encouraging more participation by local indigenous people in the park's own seasonal ranger programmes and providing training and encouragement for traditional owners taking up work as tour guides. In one part of the park an award-wining tour, Animal Tracks, presents a wildlife 'safari' and wetland tour through the eyes of a local indigenous woman. At Twin Falls young indigenous people are working as tour guides, interpreting Twin Falls as a reverent cultural place - imbued with stories and meaning; previously tourists mostly saw it as a scenic place for a swim and frolic in the sun.
More recently the Director of National Parks, the Northern Territory government and the Kakadu Board of Management engaged a highly respected tourism expert, John Morse AM, former head of the Australian Tourist Commission, to define a new tourism vision for the park in consultation with tourism operators and the Board of Management (Morse et al., 2005). This work has now been completed and a number of recommendations to progress tourism futures are being considered for inclusion in the new park Plan of Management currently in preparation.
In creating the shared tourism vision, ten key principles were identified and all subsequent actions will need to be reflective of these principles:
Kakadu is first and foremost home to Bininj/Mungguy. They will influence, manage, encourage and participate in the development of tourism from which they gain economic and social benefit, at a pace and level they determine.
Bininj/Mungguy have leased their land to the Australian Government to be jointly managed as a national park to protect and manage its priceless natural and cultural heritage.
Joint Management: Aboriginal Involvement in Tourism in the Kakadu World Heritage Area 99 All parties will recognize and enhance the protection of Kakadu's diverse landscapes, internationally important wetlands and spectacular plants and wildlife.
Tourism should not be 'boss of country'. The progress and development of tourism will be undertaken in accordance with the wishes of the Traditional Owners and at a pace which is consistent with their own values and aspirations.
All parties will respect the wish of Bininj/Mungguy that tourism develop at an agreed pace and level which harms neither nature or culture.
Respect for customary law and traditions will underpin all tourism decisions.
All parties will respect the need for Bininj/Mungguy to retain their privacy, to use their land for hunting, fishing and ceremony and to protect and hold private their sacred stories and sites.
Aboriginal culture and the land on which it is based will be protected and promoted through well-managed tourism practices and appropriate interpretation.
The travel and tourism industry will have security of tenure, profitable investment and the opportunity to provide authentic and memorable visitor experiences, within the context of a commitment to respecting culture and country.
Kakadu National Park will be recognized as one of the most significant natural and cultural World Heritage areas, offering visitors a range of enriching and memorable experiences.
Summary and conclusions
Kakadu National Park was established as part of a package of land use decision-making built around the concept of a large regional national park, owned by indigenous people and managed in a formal joint management partnership with a national park management authority.
A key lesson learnt through the 20-year history since the park's establishment is that neither the park itself nor the traditional owners have been proactive in determining its tourism futures. Rather they have been the reactive managers of land used by an active, but fragmented, local tourism industry responding to tourism market demands. As time has progressed these 'demands' have started to drift away from the vision that traditional owners themselves had for the future of their land. There have also been missed opportunities for people to promote and market cultural tourism to Kakadu and the presentation of the World Heritage values of the park.
Generation change - and the desire of current decision-makers to set tourism futures straight - as well as faltering tourism economies and the goodwill of well-minded governments, has meant that government, traditional owners, park managers and the tourism industry are now working together more closely to develop stronger, more relevant and sustainable tourism futures for the park.
A key goal of the new vision document is the active involvement of traditional owners in the development of tourism businesses and their employment as tour guides, celebrating the parks World Heritage values. It is the belief of all involved that this new approach offers the promise of greater sustainability, more benefits for the park and more opportunities for traditional owners to feel actively involved in management decision-making for their country as well as improved social and economic outcomes for their families. The formal joint management arrangements, with traditional owners constituting a majority on the key
100 Joint Management: A boriginal Involvement in Tourism in the Kakadu World Heritage Area park decision-making body, the Board of Management, make this possible. An important role for traditional owners, through the Board of Management, is emerging: the development of the park Plan of Management and the ability to regulate (through licensing and permit schemes) access to land for tourism purposes.
References
Braithwaite, R.W. and Werner, P.A. (1987) The biological value of Kakadu National P ark. Search 18(6): 296- 301.
Fox, R.W., Kelleher, G.G. and KerrC.B. (1977) Ranger Uranium Environmental Inquiry Second report.
Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
Graham, A., Press, A. J., Lea, D. and Webb, A. (eds) (1994) Kakadu: The natural and cultural environment and its management. North Australia Research Unit and Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Darwin.
Hill, M.A. and Press, A.J. (1992) Kakadu National Park: An Australian experience in joint management. Paper presented at a Community Based Conservation Workshop. The Liz Claiborne Art Ortenberg Foundation, Virginia, USA.
Hill, M.A. and Press, A.J. (1994) Kakadu National Park - a history. In: Longmore, R. (ed.) Biodiversity - Broadening the debate 2. Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra.
Kakadu Board of Management and Parks Australia (1991) Kakadu National Park Plan of Management. ANPWS, Canberra.
Lawrence, D. (2000) Kakadu - The making of a national park. Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.
Morse, J., King, J. and Bartlett, J. (2005) Kakadu - Walking to the Future Together. A shared tourism vision for tourism in Kakadu National Park. Australian Government, Canberra.
Roberts, R.G., Jones, R. and Smith, M.A. (1990) Thermoluminescence dating of a 50,000 year old human occupation site in northern Australia. Nature 345: 153-156.
Woodward, AE. (1973) Aboriginal Land Rights Commission. First report, Parliamentary Paper No. 138 of 1973. The Government Printer of Australia, Canberra.
Chapter 7
Tourism as a Tool for Community-based Conservation and Development
Penelope Figgis and Robyn Bushell
When the Outcome of Nature Conservation is Community Loss
Two buses of World Park Congress delegates, well togged up in safari gear and cameras, dodged the potholes approaching the famed St Lucia Wetlands World Heritage Area. From the bus we could see small roadside stalls selling elaborate, decorative root systems and carved animals. When we dismounted briefly at a river to see hippos, a gaggle of small boys clutching some charming, but crudely carved, rhinoceroses began a vigorous sales pitch which descended into pleading when a sale seemed unlikely. We questioned our guide about the souvenir trade and he regretted that whole trees died in harvesting the roots and that the need for carving wood was decimating the local forests outside the park. The small amount of money for the hours of work involved, the ethical and social dissonance of a poor black child begging affluent Europeans, the environmental damage - surely this was not an example of a protected area delivering sustainable 'benefits beyond boundaries' to local communities.
Yet too often this has been the pattern of tourism in high conservation value areas, especially in the developing world. Local communities have often endured resource loss through the declaration of the protected area, profited little from its development for tourism and then been left to try to extract some small value from the influx of visitors.
More often than not this has occurred in a manner which has further damaged their environment, degraded their resource base and harmed their social fabric.
In discussing such potentially adverse impacts, Eagles et al. (2002) write:
The dangers are all the greater where there is a sharp contrast between the wealth of the tourists and the poverty of the host community. Where this occurs, local communities are potentially vulnerable to exploitation and their voice may go unheard. Both the protected area manager and the tourist provider have a special responsibility in such circumstances to ensure that the community is listened to, and its views allowed to help shape the form of tourism that takes place.
However, the Durban Congress underscored that tourism will often occur in such lands of 'sharp contrasts'. Much of the remaining lands of high conservation value and of most attraction to tourism are in the developing world and many, if not most, protected areas will
© CAB International 2007. Tourism and Protected Areas: Benefits10 Beyond Boundaries (eds R. Bushell and P.F.J. Eagles)
101
102 Tourism as a Tool for Community-based Conservation and Development
have neighbouring or resident communities living in poverty. Tourism is the principal export of the 49 least developed nations on earth and the premier exchange earner for 35 (UNEP, 2003). Indeed many high conservation lands are actually owned by indigenous communities or held under various forms of community title. Hence, the need for both conservation and tourism managers and tourism operators to make strong progress on the issue of finding appropriate forms of tourism which deliver genuine social and environmental benefits to local communities has never been more pertinent.
The pressure for tangible progress is coming from building pressures on both the conservation and tourism sectors. First, there is pressure on the conservation community to address issues of social justice and delivering benefits from conservation, both as a moral obligation and also as a pragmatic imperative to make conservation more effective. Second, is the cumulative pressure brought to bear on the tourism industry to address past issues of detrimental impacts.