Responsible Tourism

Category: Responsible Tourism

19 February, 2013

Architecture learning from Responsible Tourism

“The Role of Architecture in Responsible Tourism” was first published in FuturArc Magazine, Issue No. 4Q 2012, p.86. The following text has had the first four paragraphs of the original edited down to two and the sidebar about Arkitrek removed. In all other respects the text is identical to the FuturArc article.

Exotic cultures and outstanding natural beauty are the social and natural capital of a large sector of the tourism industry. An emphasis on economics, society and environment is now enshrined in global responsible tourism standards . Green Building standards, focussed largely on technical issues, can learn a lot from the social gains derived from responsible tourism.

This article looks at architecture which develops infrastructure on the RT ethos of protecting natural resources and creating models for social return. This includes social infrastructure and returns to the local and wider community. Educating designers to work in such a mindset is imperative to the sustainability of the concept itself.

Extending social gains through design and education

Design-Build

In May 2012 Arkitrek, a Malaysian design company, asked a team of students to build a bunkhouse on the island of Mantanani in Sabah. The students’ design brief came from Camp Mantanani, a community based tourism operation on the island. They were asked to respond to the environmental issue of groundwater contamination and over extraction. The team was facilitated on-site by David Arnott (28) a UK architect who had himself, participated in a similar programme the year before. The Mantanani Bunkhouse team rose to the challenge with quiet confidence and crafted a building of sophisticated details and inventive material specifications.

The participants learnt first and foremost about design and construction. Anna Nicholls (21) an architecture student from University of Sheffield, UK had a startling realisation:

“The project heightened my sense of special perception and awareness in comparison to just designing through drawings in an office or studio. I have realised that even small differences in dimensions can make a large difference to how it feels to inhabit a space”

Project workshops teased out a design for which there was no sole ownership. The team learnt collaborative design techniques that ensured that every team member made a valuable contribution. Another lesson came from the brief itself: how architecture can both raise the awareness of and provide a solution to an environmental issue. In this case it was through prototyping rainwater harvesting systems and running awareness workshops with the local community and school children.

More subtle lessons were learnt as well; the island’s natural beauty inspired a desire to protect and make wise use of the islands natural resources. For example, participants were keen to use driftwood and employ local labour to machine it, rather than importing resources that would have no direct impact on the community. And, when looking for a façade material, the labour intensive process of weaving palm leaves was chosen. Not only is it a readily available resource, it also provides opportunities of enterprise amongst the community. The fact that these materials have a quicker delivery time, no transportation cost and support the local community made it an easy decision and fostered the principle of searching the locality, be it rural or urban, for materials and skills that could be adapted or reinvented.

The result was a sophisticated design-build- an exploration of rational design with natural, unrefined materials that integrate environmental conservation methods with social returns which provides a precedent for further development.

“This truly has changed my perception of architecture. I didn’t think it would, and I’m not one for radical shifts in my thinking. However, being back with people that are so passionate about design is infectious. The greatest thing about the camp is that I have rediscovered my love for architecture and I am going to work very hard to let this inform all my work back in Scotland.”

David Arnott, Arkitrek Camp Participant May 2011

The Mantanani community is isolated from the rest of Sabah with little education or awareness of pressing environmental issues. However, from working alongside the students, the Mantanani islanders have come to acknowledge that foreigners value things that they do not. For example, that driftwood can be beautiful in its natural state and that handcrafted materials, such as bamboo or palm weave, can make a respectable building facade. They also learnt that tourists use a lot of water and therefore have grudgingly accepted bizarre practices such as collecting rainwater and recycling waste water.

The fact that this design-build programme operates within a responsible tourism operation is no accident. Tourism provides the financial returns that make investment in people and buildings possible. The approach taken by these students to adapt local skills and materials is not always easy, there are cultural hurdles to overcome and in isolated and conservative communities these can be significant.

Tourism also provides a long-term relationship with the community and the commitment to establish sustainable operations. Camp Mantanani is one of three tourism operations set up by UK based Camps International to develop tourism infrastructure within rural, under-developed communities. On land rented from community, with a staff almost entirely from the same community, they cater mostly to school groups and gap year volunteers. The volunteers get an authentic, off-the-beaten-track experience of rural Borneo and in return the communities get responsible tourism on their terms. Since Camps International started operations on Mantanani, the local staff have learnt English; become more informed about environmental issues and gained confidence in interacting with foreigners. They have on their own initiative reinvigorated traditional dance and handicrafts and received training to become dive-masters and managers.

Volunteer Tourism in Nature Conservation

In another example of hands-on tourism the Borneo Sun Bear Conservation Centre (BSBCC) engages volunteer tourists to assist in construction projects. BSBCC aims to enrich the welfare, rehabilitation, education and research concerning the Malayan Sun Bear, a totally protected species in Malaysia. Although the BSBCC buildings and major infrastructure are carried out by professional contractors, volunteer tourism has been used in the design and construction of peripheral infrastructure. The Bear Action Teams (BATS) programme engages groups of volunteers in small design and construction projects, that are supervised and facilitated by architectural students.

The programme has already built an entrance bridge and disabled access ramp, screening between public and private areas, forest enclosures and perimeter boardwalks. Currently the BATS programme is designing and constructing sun bear enrichment installations for the forest enclosures. All of these elements have been constructed from reclaimed hardwoods, rather than newly logged hardwoods.

To date, more than 33 groups of volunteers have participated in the programme, and over 700 individuals have directly contributed skills, time and resources to the bears. The advantage of this model is a higher social return of direct involvement of individuals in conservation, in the belief that this will make them stronger advocates for sustainable development. The model itself is instrumental in that it allows large number of people to get involved in environmental projects.

Development of locally produced natural materials

Both of these tourism models are based on low environmental impact while creating opportunities for high social impact. Can this model can be applied to the specification of material, an intrinsic element of sustainable design?

Lime:natural fibre composite concrete, or bio-crete, is a concrete-like material with a low carbon footprint and efficient insulating and hygroscopic properties. ‘Hempcrete’, a proprietary biocrete product is now enjoying widespread use in Europe. Biocrete has the potential to create social gains by adapting the material to use locally available natural fibres and open-sourcing the mix and methodology. By developing the material with local natural fibres it not only reduces embodied energy of transportation, but it also has the great potential of providing an opportunity for enterprise in remote communities; ranging from fibre collection and preparation to dry mix production and marketing. Open-sourcing the research extends these opportunities to more people and more villages. Locally sourced natural fibres such as rice-husk, coconut coir and palm plantation waste fibre are being integrated in concrete mixes with great success.

In another direction, Sabah has a tradition of high quality bamboo and rattan weaving for handicrafts. However, the transition of this traditional skill into construction is rarely seen. In a design that came from an architecture student watching village ladies sifting rice in the traditional bamboo weave winnowing trays, thin strips of bamboo are woven into panels and bound in a frame. The panels have been developed as a facade system for a community learning centre on Mantanani Island and have further application for fencing and screening. The design is a collaboration between a village in the north of Sabah and architectural students. Through reinventing traditional weaving skills for the construction industry the opportunities for enterprise within the village have been broadened.

The weave of the panels are designed in response to the requirements of privacy, light, ventilation and aesthetics. In the learning centre the panels create a collage of weave patterns that become more open towards the top of the elevations. This provides privacy at low level, where the sun is also the harshest, and allows cool breeze to filter through under the shade of the roof overhangs. The bamboo programme is now being extended to other villages around Sabah, extending the opportunities for enterprise to other villages while also extending the breadth of expertise involved in the development process.

In the same manner that responsible tourism seeks to protect the intrinsic value of an unspoilt natural environment, these materials should protect the source of the natural material by its very demand for it. As responsible tourism should not harm societies, but provide support for existing cultures, these materials provide new markets for traditional skills and pride in the people who produce them. The programme has so far involved architecture students, engineering students as well as volunteer tourists and communities. The social returns are immediately apparent in the same manner as they are at BSBCC; through the large numbers of people directly learning and benefiting from the project.

In the future, sustainable design and green buildings, be it rural or urban, will come to mean much more than a technical fix. The architecture of sustainable design will be about building a social infrastructure of jobs, skills, culture and pride. It is about sharing the benefits of development with as many participating people as possible. In other words, it will be very similar to the principles already enshrined within the ethos of Responsible Tourism.

28 July, 2011

Batu Batu Reef & Islands Study Centre

Text: by Ian Hall
Photos: by Ian Hall and Fauzan Aris

Pulah Babi Tengah (Middle Pig Island!) off the coast of Johor, Malaysia used to be a refugee camp run by UNHCR back in the 70’s. I’m not sure how idyllic a refugee camp could be but former interns, mostly Vietnamese, now Australian, seem to have fond recollections of the place. Stepping out of the glare of the sun and into the cool shade of the casaurina grove, you don’t have to look far to find relics of the refugee camp. The design team for the Batu Batu Reef and Island Study Centre (BRISC) pause to spread out their kit atop a concrete well, one of a network of wells which supplied water to the island’s former transient residents.

The BRISC big idea is to link beach tourism with marine conservation, in this case facilitated by a partnership between Batu Batu Resort and Wild Asia. This partnership will inspire others to adopt principles of responsible tourism. After all, the tourism product in this case is crystal clear sea, clean beaches and abundant marine life. It makes good sense to protect this resource.

Swatting troublesome mosquitoes and sand flies we debate where the living, working, chilling and dive centre functions of the BRISC should go. Someone told me once that casaurinas are colonial trees, as in, they grow in colonies. Their encircling trunks enclose a soft floor of needles, a shady and natural gathering place. Two such groves form the starting point for our site layout design concepts.

There will be a beach bar, naturally, on the beach. It will close shortly after sunset and the lights turned down to give those turtles a chance to navigate without distraction. There’s a gap between the casaurina groves which is an obvious place to connect the beach bar with the living and working areas under the trees.

Our intern Fauzan Aris, an architecture graduate from University of Malaya, is measuring the depth of a UNHCR well with a tape measure. Dr Reza Azmi, founder of Wild Asia is dangling a water sampler into the same well to test it’s salinity amongst other things. I’m looking at an Asian Brown Flycatcher through my binoculars.

There is a cluster of three wells on our site and the BRISC living and working areas will be built around them. The thick screen of vegetation at the beach edge will be retained. Those thick waxy leaves of Barringtonia and Terminalia trees are adept at retaining water in this harsh environment. They’re also pretty handy at providing shade and screening.

Other areas of the site are characterised by clumps of hibiscus and the leaning knobbly trunks of a leguminous tree species. It is in the legumes that I am watching the flycatcher and from their canopy comes the constant cheep-cheep of sun birds and flowerpeckers. Using illustrations in sketchbooks perched on the well covers we discuss how to retain this ecosystem.

Some trees will have to go of course but we can move the buildings around to protect and integrate larger trees and clumps of trees. We can also translocate the forest floor by about 6m vertically to the green roofs of the BRISC living, working and dive centre areas. Even the beach bar, poking out over the sand, can have a green roof. They’re very tenacious those casaurina and terminalia saplings. Can grow anywhere, although on the beach bar roof they may need to be kept trimmed so as not to overgrow the photo-voltaic panels.

Slap, slap, splat….scratch, scratch. Sand flies win and we adjourn to the beach now that the sun is going down. Our minds are buzzing and architect Leong Seng Kheong engages Reza in a furious sand etcha-sketch one-on-one battle. A sweep of the hand erases the previous sketch and simultaneously prepares a clean canvas for the next. Fingers etch out blobs and squares and lines and voila! A site layout design concept.

When BRISC is up and running the day to day activities will include monitoring changes in natural resources, including biodiversity. This data will provide evidence for how well the tourism operation is safeguarding the environment and allow it to adjust appropriately. The presence of naturalists and environmental science type fellas on the island will add value to the tourists’ experience and understanding of their impacts on the environment.

The presence of the dive centre will allow these studies to focus on the marine environment, although hopefully there will still be space for those who prefer binoculars to snorkel masks.

%RELATEDPOSTS%

21 February, 2011

PATA Conference, Nepal

Text and photos by Ian Hall

“Don’t let tourism become the boss” advised John King of Global Tourism and Leisure, Australia. King was speaking in a forum at the PATA Adventure Travel and Responsible Tourism Conference in Pokhara, Nepal. The subject of this particular forum was ‘Indigenous Tourism’ and it sparked a lively debate. I’ve noticed a similar trend at Wild Asia’s Responsible Tourism Award forums in recent years where Community Based Tourism seems to arouse the most emotion. Much community based tourism is also indigenous tourism (although the converse shouldn’t be true).

King’s comment about tourism becoming the boss was in the context of indigenous people being full participants in the tourism industry. A question from the audience asked ‘what happens if tourists overstay their welcome?’ The answer of course is that if indigenous people are full participants in the industry then the product they sell will be on their terms and if tourism is not the boss then they won’t be under pressure to accede to more than they are comfortable with.

In the same forum Steve Harbert of Mountain Kingdoms, UK presented a personal experience of visiting a Berber cave dwelling community in Tunisia. In this case the community were not full participants and depended for tourism income on tipping from tourists whilst the tour operator took all the fixed tour fees.

The challenge for Indigenous Tourism, explained King, is to develop tourism products based on indigenous culture which does not relegate them to providing ‘background light and colour’. For example, with full participation a tourism product could be developed around indigenous philosophy on nature and natural resources. This is something that mature urban cultures are missing and want. In doing so, background light and colour will come more naturally and genuinely anyway.

It is exactly these kind of forums that I most enjoy at tourism conferences, the chance to engage in debate and inspire new trends in more responsible tourism.

Sadly I missed the first day of the conference due to a cancelled Nepal Airlines flight (a good advert for Nepal Tourism Year 2011?). Judging by feedback however, all the speakers gave inspirational presentations on the Responsible Tourism (RT) theme and the forums were well attended by knowledgeable delegates.

It is perhaps to be expected that the practice of responsible tourism has yet to catch up with the preaching. The sellers’ booths were dominated by good old adventure travel with RT not getting much of a leg up. There were one or two notable exceptions however.

3 Sisters Adventure Trekking Company of Nepal are going for the big social issue of empowerment of women by providing all female trekking guides.

The Explore Nepal Group got into the spirit by decorating their booth with a wall painting and banner promoting RT principles and offer a range of products with an emphasis on architectural heritage, nature tourism and promoting locally sourced organic food.

Although not officially part of the conference, Socialtours of Nepal made a splash by instigating a fringe meet organised and sponsored by Tiger Mountain.

Social Tours have excellent RT pedigree coming as they do from the same stable (The Green Circuit) as two previous Wild Asia RT Award winners; Spiti Ecosphere and Sundarbans Jungle Camp.

Sociatours’ founder, Vishwaraj (Raj) Gyawali invited local tourism students to the fringe meet – surely a smart move to inspire the next generation of RT practitioners! You can read a more detailed account of the fringe meet on the socialtours blog

Education was a strong theme for me at the conference. Feedback on the presentation that I gave about Arkitrek focussed on this issue. About how Arkitrek engages architecture students to deliver community and nature based projects and at the same time provide experiential learning to all participants.

We’re also all still learning about Responsible Tourism and in this respect the conference was an outstanding success in that it brought together thinkers, practitioners, verifiers and promoters in the field. I found it encouraging that there is both consistency in understanding the principles of RT and huge diversity in how to implement it.

19 July, 2010

Responsible Tourism Awards 2010 Finalists

By Ian Hall

Wild Asia has announced the finalists for the 5th Responsible Tourism Awards 2010! We shortlisted several operators from across Asia in each category for their outstanding responsible tourism practices. Arkitrek’s Ian Hall is a judge for the awards and has also helped to refine the checklists and questionaires that are our tools for identifying best practice.

The shortlisted hotels and tour operators were reviewed and extensively researched by our judging panel which comprised of responsible tourism (RT) experts, academics, conservationists, and eco-consultants. Wild Asia’s judging panel first examined all of the completed checklists submitted by the operators, which outlined their best management practices and specific RT efforts undertaken by them. Then, through a scoring system, the panel analyzed and ranked each answer from the advanced entry forms in order to determine the finalists.

Between the months of August and September, a team of fact finders and media from Wild Asia will conduct site visits to verify the submitted self-assessment checklists and photo-document unique best practices.

Winners will be announced on 21 October 2010, during the Responsible Tourism Awards ceremony held in conjunction with the ITB Asia Trade Show in Singapore, which runs from 20 – 22 October 2010.

To find out this year’s finalists go to the Wild Asia website!

4 November, 2009

Responsible Tourism Awards Winners

Last week Wild Asia announced the winners of the 2009 Responsible Tourism Awards. The Awards are an opportunity to verify some of the claims being made by accommodation operators and to share and promote their best ideas.

Of this year’s winners, the large hotel category was won by ITC Muhgal India who were particularly impressive with the degree to which they had internalised their RT effort over some ten years of operation.

The medium sized category was taken by El Nido Resorts of the Philippines. Pipped to the post last year by Six Senses, El Nido rebounded this year with a demonstration of humility and integrity in their interaction with both local people and their natural environment.

Extending the winning run for India, Sundarbans Jungle Camp narrowly ousted Andaman Discoveries in the Community Based & Homestay bracket. This success is another feather in the cap for a network of operators which includes Spiti Ecosphere, last year’s unanimous winner in this category.

As the dust settles, our thoughts naturally turn to next year’s Awards and how they can help more would-be RT operators to get to grips with the subject. Reflection on this year’s assessment, judging and feeback process gives some pointers.

Firstly the assessment process is not meant to be an RT consultancy service but the finalists understandably want constructive feedback on their performance, particularly those who did not win.

Then there is the odd dynamic of site assessments where the vibe can be like an audit with the subject feeling defensive about their hard work and good intentions coming under scrutiny.

Filling in the RT checklists and subsequently submitting to the factfinders’ clip boards is hard work and operators need some kind of reward for their effort.

At last year’s RT workshops we talked about marketing benefits but at this year’s worshops we learned how consumers are loosing faith in ‘green’ marketing as a result of a deluge of greenwash.

Responsible Tourism is gathering momentum to the extent where it is no longer a ‘pissing into the wind’ effort to simply convince operators to go down that path. Instead operators are coming forward and saying “we want to do RT but we need some help to do it well and then we need to be able to evaluate our progress”.

The benefits to the operator of participating in the competition are that the process neatly ticks both of these boxes.

Constructive feedback and criticism is inherent in the assessment process and progress can be measured against other finalists. The whole thing makes sense if it is done in the spirit of learning, sharing and collaborating.

%RELATEDPOSTS%