Tourism Policy and Development

• Stakeholders in tourism destination may refer to tourists (as the consumer), industries (as the supplier) and the host (the local community and environment).
• Stakeholders may also refers to sectors, such as business sector, non- profit sector and public sector.
• Stakeholders in sustainable tourism development are divided into three categories: the tourism industry, environmental support and the local community/government.
• Stakeholder participation is also embodied in the United Nations Agenda 21
• The word “groups” is mentioned 155 times in the 351-page document.
• Stakeholder participation has been institutionalized in the policy formation and planning process governments, such as in the crafting of the National Tourism Development Plan of the Philippines.
• Muganda, Sirima, and Ezra (2013) pointed out the importance of involving local people who are affected by tourism in both the planning and implementation stages. One possible outcome is that the development matches the needs of the local community. Another is that it secures local support for the implementation of the plan. Lastly, it encourages compliance with laws that support sustainable tourism development.
• Local people can help determine vision, goals, and objectives that reflect their own aspirations. It is important to note that the outcome reflects their concerns. Sometimes tourism may not be perceived by the community as the best strategy for achieving their aspirations. This should be respected and tourism should never be forced on them.
• Alberta Tourism (n.d) emphasize that tourism developers have a social responsibility to work within the “boundaries” of the environment and community.
• The World Bank recommends undertaking a stakeholder analysis (SA) to determine such stakeholder attributes as (a) their position on an issue, (b) their level of influence or power, (c) the level of interest they have in a specific issue, and (d) the group/coalition to which they belong.
•  level of influence is a function is a function of the quantity and type of resources and power the stakeholder can marshal to support its position on a plan.
•  These two attributes when combined make up a stakeholder’s “effective power”.
• Effective power determines the ability of that stakeholder to support or thwart a plan, form a coalition of support or opposition, and dictate the direction and intensity of direction on a particular plan. 
•  stakeholder analysis, major concerns about the impact of a particular plan, opposing viewpoints, power dynamics among the stakeholders, can be identified and possible strategies for negotiating with the opposing stakeholders can be devised.
• Aubrey Mendelow’s power-interest grid. Mendelow (1991) divided stakeholders

  Promoter-

  Defenders-

  Latents-

  Apathetics
• a. Promoter- stakeholders who attach a high priority to the plan and whose actions can have an impact on the implementation of the plan. Classification of stakeholders seems to refer to promoters: advocates or idea- creators, designers: champions or leaders of change; supporters; decision-makers; and opinion leaders or decision-swayers.
• a. Defenders- stakeholders who attach a high priority to the plan but whose actions cannot have an impact on the implementation of the plan.
• a. Latents

  -stakeholders whose actions can affect the implementation of the plan but who attach a low priority to this plan.
• a. Apathetics

  -stakeholders whose actions  cannot  affect  the implementation of the reform policy and who attach a low priority to this policy.
•  level of interest is the likelihood of stakeholder taking some sort of actions to exercise his or her power.
• The power-interest grid can help determine appropriate strategies to help get a plan pushed through, such as knowing which stakeholders to target for negotiations and trade-offs or which to reinforce with resources and information, etc.
• 1. Minimum effort; monitor- Apathetics (D)

  “Their lack of interest and power makes them open to influence. They are more likely than others to accept what they are told and follow instructions.”
• 1. Keep informed – Defenders (B)

  “These stakeholders are interested in the strategy but lack the power to do anything. Management needs to convince opponents to the strategy that the plans are justified; otherwise, they will try to gain power by joining the Latents and the Promoters.
• 1. Keep satisfied- Latents (C)

  “This could involve reassuring them of the outcomes of the strategy well in advance.”
• 1. Manage closely – Promoters (A)

  “These stakeholders are the major drivers if change and could stop management plans if not satisfied. Management, therefore, needs to communicate plans to them and then discuss implementation issues.”
• The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration suggests the following steps in the stakeholder consultation process:

  1. Identify key stakeholders and potential participants.

  2. Organize the community.

  3. Involve the community from the beginning.

  Information dissemination, education, and community must be continuous.
• § Non-participation. The real objective is not to enable the people to participate but to “educate” and “cure” them. It is to make the people believe and follow whatever is told them. This includes manipulation and therapy.
• § Tokenism. Local people can listen and be heard but they do not have real power to ensure that their opinions are taken into account in crafting any plans. This includes informing, consultation, and placation.
• § Citizen Power. People secure decision-making powers and even full managerial control. This includes partnership, delegated power, and citizen control.
• 1. Passive participation. People are simply told about what is going to happen to their community and their inputs are not considered.
• 1. Participation in information giving. People are asked to give information in response to questionnaires or surveys designed by external agents; the findings of the research are not shared with them.
• 1. Participation by consulting. People are consulted but their views on the matter may or may not be taken into account by the planners.
• 1. Participation for material incentives. People participate by contributing resources, such as by working in exchange for food, cash, etc.
• 1. Functional participation. People participate by forming groups to meet specific objectives related to the project; may be interactive but happens
• 1. Interactive participation. People actively get involved in joint analysis, development of action plans, and creation or strengthening local institutions; participation is seen as a right and not only as a means of achieving project goals. Local groups tale control of decision making and appropriating resources.
• Self-mobilization. People take initiatives independent of external institutions or change systems, develop contacts with external institutions for advice and resources, but retain control of how resources will be used.
• 1. Information- telling people what is planned.

  ;
• 1. Consultation offering a number of options and listening to the feedback.
• 1. Acting together- besides deciding together what is best, this entails forming a partnership to carry it out.
• 1. Supporting independent community initiatives- helping others do what they want; perhaps within a framework of grants, advice, and support provided by the resource holder.