ECOTOURISM AS A MEANS TO ALLEVIATE POVERTY; A CASE OF MASAI MARA

ECOTOURISM AS A MEANS TO ALLEVIATE POVERTY; A CASE OF MASAI MARA



By
…Eric m. manthi…


A Research Proposal Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Award of the Degree of Masters in ……………….University





October 2009
DECLARATION
Declaration by the Candidate
This proposal is my original work and has not been presented to any other institution. No part of this project may be reproduced without prior express permission of the author and/or University

__________________________ ____________________
Signature Date


Declaration by the supervisors
This proposal is submitted for examination with our approval as University supervisor(s).

__________________________ ____________________
Signature Date
Tables of Contents
Declaration i
Abstract iii
Introduction 1
Background 1
Statement of the problem 3
Significance of study 6
Research Objectives 6
Research Design 7
Target population 8
Data Collection Instruments 8

Data Analysis 9
LITERATURE REVIEW 10
Pro Poor Tourism 10
Tourism is pro-poor if it provides 10
Contribution of Tourism at Local Level 11
Review of Past Studies in The Area of study 16
Summary 19
Ethical Considerations 20
Informed consent 20
References 21

ABSTRACT
Poverty alleviation is currently a major concern for many developing countries including Kenya. Higher economic growth rate that is pro-poor is a prerequisite in the process of poverty alleviation. During the last one and half decades of socio-economic reforms in Kenya, rapid growth rate in the tourism sector has been recorded in terms of tourist arrivals, tourism activities (services) and earnings. However, tourism is a complex industry, which is driven by the private sector and often by large international companies, which may have little or no interest in ensuring that poverty is alleviated among the locals. It is also possible that with the current technological development that tourism earnings remain outside the destination country due to leakages. In addition, tourism can cause negative impacts such as environmental problems, cultural pollution and immoral behavior including that of prostitution.

This study will seek to answer the following objectives; the trends in a number of establishments, employment and incomes of from tourism related sectors , find out the costs and benefits involved in tourism investment, to establish through income and employment sources, the impact of tourism on poverty alleviation and to establish the linkages between tourism and other sectors of the economy; and identify factors, which could help Kenyans to maximise economic gains from tourism and minimise economic losses from tourism sector.

The study will be study of Masai Mara using a descriptive survey design. The target population will be tourism facilities in the park and the communities living around the park. The study will benefitboth stakeholders and government in effort to alleviate poverty and achieve the vision 2030 goals.
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
Tourism represents a very complex and multidimensional phenomenon that produces numerous positive economic as well as non-economics effects in the receptive tourist countries. As a result of the positive effects, the sustainable tourism can be treated as a means for eliminating poverty and increasing the standard of life, especially on long term. The sustainable tourism can bring higher and faster economic development and decrease poverty in more ways. That can be extremely important for all the countries in the world, especially for the least developed ones, Ashley, (2000).

Poverty alleviation is of a major concern for many developing countries Kenya being one of them. Poverty can be alleviated mainly through achieving higher sectoral growth and ensuring that the poor have a share in that growth. There is evidence that tourism contributes a lot to the economic growth of even countries with poor economies through foreign exchange earnings, creation of employment opportunities and provision of public revenues. With proper interventions, such economic benefits can play a crucial role in the process of poverty alleviation. In general, tourism has become a significant industry in both poor and rich economies because of its important impacts on economic, livelihoods and socio-cultural development (Shah 2000). This study shows that apart from economic impacts, ecotourism affects the livelihood of the poor and that, if properly harnessed the positive impacts from the sector can contribute towards poverty alleviation.

As a result of its positive effect, sustainable development of tourism is considered to be a tool for eliminating poverty and enhancing the standard of life, especially on long term. Sustainable tourism is very important for the development of developing countries, especially for the least developed ones. Having in mind the positive effect of sustainable development of tourism, the basis of project ST–EP (Sustainable Tourism - Eliminating Poverty) have been established at The World Summit on Sustainable Development held in Johannesburg in 2002, with the main goal of decreasing poverty in the world up to for 50% until 2015.

As a sector of the economic growth, tourism has several advantages for the poor countries:
 The consumer travels to the destination, providing opportunities for the sale of additional goods and services.
 Tourism creates important opportunities to diversify the local economy. It can often be developed in poor and marginal areas with few other export and diversification options. Tourists are often attracted to remote areas because of their high cultural, wildlife and landscape values. One of the assets of the poor is their cultural and wildlife heritage; and tourism presents opportunities to capitalize on those assets.
 Tourism offers better labour-intensive opportunities than all sectors except agriculture.
 Tourism helps promote gender equality, employing higher proportion of women than other sectors.

Statement of the problem
Earnings from tourism look impressive, but one would like to know more about its economic implications before concluding that this is a positive development that should be promoted. One would like to know the net (national) benefits from tourism, deducting extra cost from gross revenues, and also who benefits from these net earnings. And whether such economic earnings have anything to do with poverty alleviation. Until recently, Kenya has been a popular tourist destination in Africa receiving over 6% of the total international tourist arrivals to the continent, Briedenhann, (2000). Most of the country’s tourism is based on wildlife safari. About 10% of the country has been set aside for the conservation of the African savanna wildlife and the promotion of safari tourism. In most of the country’s national parks and reserve s, hotels, camping and other forms of accommodation facilities have been developed that allow visitors to at least, stay overnight before and/or after conducting a guided game drive and sight-seeing in the expansive wildlife parks and reserves. Over the years wildlife safaris have become a lucrative business for both the public and private sector. Currently, tourism is Kenya’s second largest economic sector after agriculture, contributing over 12% to the country’s Gross Domestic Product. However, defying government and expert projections, Kenya is still languishing in poverty. In this connection, this study will seek to establish ecotourism as a means of alleviating poverty case study of Masai Mara National Park.

Table 1: Number of visitors to parks and reserves in the period between 1994 and 1998
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998
Nairobi NP 163200 113500 158300 149600 122300
Animal orphanage 182000 212100 210600 193700 164800
Amboseli 159500 114800 109100 117200 62900
Tsavo West NP 105400 93100 93600 88600 54900
Tsavo East NP 132400 228800 137500 123200 66900
Aberdare NP 60200 70100 60200 59000 47900
Lake Nakuru NP 164300 166800 156900 132100 111000
Maasai Mara NR 138200 133200 130300 118300 100400
Bamburi Nature park 98900 109200 107000 86800 77900
Malindi Marine Park 39400 38800 39300 27000 13700
Lake Bogoria 43200 14200 14200 24500 20600
Meru NP 7900 7300 7800 4100 1800
Shimba Hill 31600 20000 23400 22500 16800
Mount Kenya 17200 17200 17100 14800 10200
Samburu 9200 9100 9100 8300 7000
Kisite/Mpunguti 34800 32400 39900 35100 29200
Mombasa Marine 4800 23900 21700 15200 16200
Watamu Marine 32100 16100 20200 19400 18300
Hell’s gate 44900 50100 52100 47200 57100
Others 15100 22400 14800 15500 13900
Total 1527500 1493100 1488700 1364500 1079400
% 21.97 21.47 21.41 19.62 15.52

Source: Kenya Government (1999).

The table shows that there has been drop in the number of visitors over the years which may imply that the sectors is being under-utilized or the services has dropped from the previous years.

Significance of study
The significance of the problem arises from the intended goal of trying to quantify the economic effects of tourism in Kenya and their contribution towards poverty alleviation. In so doing, the study sheds light on what the government can do to maximise economic benefits and minimise costs. This is in line with the government’s objective of trying to ensure that the tourism industry is elevated to a giant contributor to the national economy by not just realising high income figures but also making sure that the host country benefits. The study is also significant due to its endeavour to identify and suggest ways in which ecotourism can be used to contribute towards poverty alleviation. This study also is an attempt to analyse how a growing sector like tourism can be utilised for poverty alleviation.

Research Objectives
General Objective
The main objective of the study will be to analyse how ecotourism can be used as a means to alleviate poverty. Being the fastest growing sector in the economy, one would like to know more about the net benefits to the society at large and in particular to the poor.

Specific Objectives
The specific objectives of the study will include attempts to:
i) To establish trends in a number of establishments, employment and incomes from tourism related sectors in Masai Mara region
ii) To find out the costs and benefits involved in tourism investment around Masai Mara
iii) Establish through income and employment sources, the impact of tourism on poverty alleviation in Kenyans lives around Masai Mara
iv) Establish the linkages between tourism and other sectors of the economy; and identify factors, which could help Kenyans to maximise economic gains from tourism and minimise economic losses from the sector.

Research Design
A research design is a plan, structure and strategy conceived so as to obtain answers to research questions and control variable Fraenkel and Warren (2000). A research design helps to control the experimental, extraneous and error variables of a particular research problem being investigated. According to Kerlinger (1978) research designs are invented to enable answering the research questions as validly, objectively, accurately and as economically as possible. For purposes of this research, a descriptive survey case design will be adopted .This owes to the nature of the topic which is an in-depth empirical inquiry that investigates the effects of a phenomenon within its real life context. It applies to policy and has many variables at play. It also relies on multiple sources of information which includes use of Documentation, questionnaires, Use of informants and Observations

Target population
The target population will be facilities within the park and the communities benefiting directly or indirectly from tourism services in Masai Mara National Park.
Data Collection Instruments
The following instruments will be used for data collection:
i) Documentation: This will involve collecting information and data from existing reports and documents on tourism.
ii) Structured Questionnaires: This will be used so as to generate information and data, which subsequently will be for both qualitative and quantitative analysis. Specific questionnaires for each group will be designed. This will involve designing questionnaires to answer specific objectives
iii) Checklist of Leading Questions: These questions will be designed to guide researchers in conducting dialogue with a range of stakeholders in the tourism sector. The aim will be to enable collection of the views of officials in the tourism sector, for instance, on local costs, benefits and tourism policies.
iv) Use of informants: This instrument will be used to capture specific changes. Elders and leaders in the areas of study for example, narrated historical information and other changes that has been realized as result of tourism.
v) Observations: Observations during the fieldwork will be used mainly to assist to probe on issues beyond those which are covered in the structured questionnaire and interview checklist.

Data Analysis
Three levels of analysis will be undertaken:
i) Descriptive statistics including frequency, tables, percentages and ratios;
ii) Inferential statistics Computation and interpretation of relationship between tourism and poverty alleviation i.e. using regression, ANOVA and correlation tests
iii) Computation and interpretation of linkages between tourism development and community living standards
LITERATURE REVIEW
Pro Poor Tourism
Development economists and policy makers use the language of pro-poor to differentiate between economic developments in general and forms of economic development which impact positively on the lives of poor people and which enable them to rise out of poverty. Pro-poor tourism is used to refer to interventions that specifically focus on addressing poverty – which move beyond “trickledown” theory and generates net benefits for the poor. Pro-Poor Tourism (PPT) is not a specific tourism product or sector, it is an overall approach designed to unlock opportunities for the poor, Getz, (1997).

Tourism is pro-poor if it provides
 Economic gain through the creation of full or part-time employment or the development of SME opportunities through sales to tourism businesses or to tourists.
 Other livelihood benefits such as access to potable water, roads which bring benefits to poor producers through, for example, improved access to markets, improved health or education etc.
 Opportunities and capacity for engagement in decision-making in order that the poor are able to improve their livelihoods by securing better access to tourists and tourism enterprises
Contribution of Tourism at Local Level
Before initiating the discussion on how (eco)tourism can help in reducing poverty, a practical definition of poverty (IMF and IDA cited in WTO, 2002) is presented here. Tourism can increase opportunities for the rural poor in their own communities. It also has the potential to help reduce rural outmigration to urban areas, increase employment opportunities for the urban poor, and give them additional income to provide for their families in the rural areas. Also, tourism related skills gained by the urban poor can be applied in rural areas, helping to reverse the migration process (NTB, 2003). Tourism provides employment opportunities by diversifying and increasing incomes that help reduce the vulnerability of the poor. Through increased national income (foreign exchange earnings and taxation), additional funds can be diverted to poverty reduction programs. The following are listed as inherent characteristics of tourism (WTO, 2002) that mark it as an industry that contributes to the welfare of the poor:
 Tourism is consumed at the point of production increasing opportunities for individual and micro-enterprises to sell additional products or services.
 The restriction of access to international markets faced by traditional sectors in developing countries is not applicable to tourism.
 Tourism depends not only on financial, productive and human capital but also largely on natural and cultural capital which are often assets possessed by the poor.
 Tourism is labour-intensive providing the poor, who have large labour reserves, with opportunities.
 Tourism thrives on diversity, drawing from a large resource base, which increases scope for wider participation.
 Tourism provides important opportunities for women to find employment.
 Tourism directly responds to poverty reduction objectives since it:
 unlocks opportunities for pro-poor economic growth by providing formal and informal employment.
 creates profit and collective income from locally owned enterprises.
 facilitates social development by increasing access to infrastructure, providing local people with the opportunity to access tourism infrastructure.
 helps increase participation of local communities in decision making as tourism products are often owned by the poor.
 reduces vulnerability by helping to diversify income opportunities
 as natural and human environment are the lifelines of tourism development, it promotes environmental protection.

However, the earlier assumption that benefits automatically trickle down to the poor with economic development is not happening. Rather poverty reduction is possible only if the benefits of growth are redistributed to the poor through appropriate access and benefit sharing mechanisms. Further, it is possible only if the poor themselves are involved in the economic activity either through employment or entrepreneurial skills (WTO, 2002).

The WTO (2002) suggests that tourism is not much different from other productive sectors but has the following additional advantages in terms of its potential for poverty alleviation:
 It has high potential to maintain forward and backward linkages.
 It is relatively labor intensive and employs a high proportion of women.
 It has potential in poor countries and areas with few other competitive exports.
 Tourism products can be built on natural resources and culture, which are assets, that some of the poor have.
Other benefits include increased demand for local accommodation and food, and beverage outlets. This will lead to improved viability of both new and established hotels and guest houses. Additional revenue for local business such as souvenir shops can be anticipated from tourists. Ecotourism is also expected to increase the market for local products such as locally grown food grains, vegetables and fruits (Wearing and Neil, 1999). Ecotourism is accepted as a means that can satisfy both local people in need of gainful economic activity as well as conservationists. “It provides a means of empowerment to disadvantaged groups such as many native people (including women) by opening an economic and management role for them in ecotourism” (Gauthier, 1993).
Tourism can contribute in other significant ways to poverty reduction. For instance, it can help communities to reclaim their cultural pride, sense of ownership and control over local development, reduce vulnerability through diversification and develop skills and entrepreneurial capacity (WTO, 2002).

 













Source: WTO (2000) cited in UNEP, 2001.
Figure 1: Ecotourism's Economic Impact and Leakage

Review of Past Studies in The Area of study
Declining economic activity, restructuring of the agricultural sector, dwindling rural industrialization and out-migration of higher educated youth, has led to the adoption, in many western nations, of tourism as an alternative development strategy for the economic and social regeneration of rural areas (Pompl & Lavery, 1993; Williams & Shaw, 1991; Hannigan, 1994a; Dernoi, 1991; Wickens, 1999). In Eastern Europe, where events of the last decade have triggered a rapid rise in rural unemployment, tourism has been identified as a catalyst to stimulate economic growth, increase the viability of underdeveloped regions and improve the standard of living of local communities (Ratz & Puczk, 1998; Kombol, 1998; Simpson, Chapman, & Mahne, 1998).

In less developed countries of sub-Saharan Africa, afflicted by debilitating rural poverty, tourism is perceived to be one of the few feasible options for development. Compelled by the pressures of restructuring, and driven by demands for economic growth and job creation, governments in developing countries however frequently fall prey to the dangers of random, ad hoc development, without due regard to the economic and cultural well-being of rural communities, the conservation of the environment or the inclusion of local residents in decision-making (Britton, 1991; Drake, 1991; Evans & Ibery, 1989; Getz, 1983; Long, Perdue, & Allen, 1990; Marsden, 1992; Prentice, 1993).

Whilst governments are generally of the opinion that tourism development will generate new jobs, enhance community infrastructure and assist in revitalising the flagging economies of rural areas, tourism as a development option has come under increasing censure due to the alleged paucity of revenues, the inequity of benefit distribution and the perceived social costs to resident communities (Jud & Krause, 1976; Whelan, 1991; Hitchcock, King, & Parnwell, 1993; Din, 1993), which belive the very objective for which the development is initiated. ‘If social and economic development means anything at all, it must mean a clear improvement in the conditions of life and livelihood of ordinary people’ (Friedmann, 1992). Still, tourism frequently remains the preferred development option; especially in rural communities where people are so desperate that they will accept any proposal, which portends to offer economic growth, with little or no consideration of future detrimental impacts (Kinsley, 2000)

Driven by demands for economic growth and job creation, governments in developing countries however frequently fall prey to the dangers of random, ad hoc development, without due regard to the economic and cultural well-being of rural communities, the conservation of the environment or the inclusion of local residents in decision-making (Britton, 1991; Drake, 1991; Evans & Ibery, 1989; Getz, 1983; Long, Perdue, & Allen, 1990; Marsden, 1992; Prentice, 1993). Whilst governments are generally of the opinion that tourism development will generate new jobs, enhance community infrastructure and assist in revitalising the flagging economies of rural areas, tourism as a development option has come under increasing censure due to the alleged paucity of revenues, the inequity of benefit distribution and the perceived social costs to resident communities (Jud & Krause, 1976; Whelan, 1991; Hitchcock, King, & Parnwell, 1993, Din, 1993), which believe the very objective for which the development is initiated. ‘If social and economic development means anything at all, it must mean a clear improvement in the conditions of life and livelihood of ordinary people’ (Friedmann, 1992).

Tourism stimulates cooperation and partnerships between communities in local and neighbouring regions and serves as a vehicle for the stimulation of economic development through tourism. A brief commentary on tourism routes in general, is followed by an interrogation of the proposed utilisation of tourism routes as a strategy through which to ‘rapidly optimise the synergies between job creation, tourism and conservation in Africa’ (Open Africa, 2002).
Throughout the world, developing countries, with a rich resource base of pristine natural and cultural treasures, hold significant comparative advantage in their potential to attract tourists in search of authentic new experiences (Wahab, 1974). The potential for tourism development in sub-Saharan Africa is however under threat given that the alleviation of rampant, debilitating rural poverty must perforce take priority over resource conservation thus ‘precipitating a downward spiral in which both communities and their best chance of recovery, is steadily diminishing’ (Open Africa, 2002). Redclift (1992) echoes this opinion, arguing that ‘poor people often have no choice but to choose immediate economic benefits at the expense of the long term sustainability of their livelihoods. The concern of the study is that while earnings from tourism may look impressive, one would like to know more about its impact on the livelihoods of the locals before concluding that this is a positive development that should be promoted. This is particularly, because, as with all modernization efforts leading to economic growth, there are costs and benefits implications. Thus, as Kenya is rapidly becoming a major tourist destination, it is worthwhile to examine the effects of this industry on poverty alleviation through the enhancement of the nation’s economy and the improved livelihoods of the people in tourist areas.

Ethical Considerations
In order to conduct research in an area as Masai Mara or any government organization, approval for conducting the research should be obtained before any data is collected (McMillan and Schumacher 1993). In this study, the researcher will seek permission from the Ministry of Tourism and area District Officer.
Informed consent
Participants will be given enough information pertaining to the study before data collection (Schulze 2002). In this study, the participants will be given adequate information on the aims of the research, the procedures that would be followed, the possible advantages and disadvantages for the participants, the credibility of the researcher and the way in which the results will be used. This will enable participants to make an informed decision on whether they will participate in the research or not. No form of deception will be used to ensure the participation of the participants (De Vos et al 1998).
References
Ashley, C. (2000). “The Impact of Tourism on Rural Livelihoods: Namibia’s Experience”, London: Overseas Development Institute (ODI) Paper128.

Ashley, C., C. Boyd and H. Goodwin (2000) ‘Pro-Poor Tourism: putting poverty at the heart of the tourism agenda’, Natural Resource Perspectives 51, Overseas Development Institute, London.

Ashley, C., D. Roe and H. Goodwin (2001). Pro-Poor Tourism Strategies: making tourism work for the poor, Pro-Poor Tourism Report No. 1. Centre for Responsible Tourism and Overseas Development Institute.
Briedenhann, J. (2000). An integrated tourism policy for South Africa: Problems and challenges, unpublished masters dissertation. High Wycombe: Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College.
Britton, S. (1991). Tourism, capital and place: Towards a critical geography of tourism. Environment and Planning, D9, 451–478.
Dernoi, L. (1991). Prospects of rural tourism: Needs and opportunities. Tourism Recreation Research, 16(1), 89–94.
De Vos. A. S., Strydoin, H., Fouche. C. B., Poggenpoel, M., Schurmk, E. and Schurink. W. (1998). Research at Grassroots: A Primer for the Caring Professions. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
Din, K. (1993). Dialogue with hosts: An educational strategy towards sustainable tourism. In M. Hitchcock, V. King, & M. Parnwell (Eds.), Tourism in South-East Asia (p. 328). London, New York: Routledge.
Drake, S. P. (1991). Local participation in ecotourism projects. In T. Whelan (Ed.), Nature Tourism: Managing for the Environment (pp. 132–163). Washington: Island Press.
Environmental and Development Agency Trust. (EDA) (1999) How Can LDOs/IDPs Work for Local People and Achieve Development Goals? Johannesburg: EDA.
Evans, N. J., & Ibery, B. W. (1989). A conceptual framework for investigating farm- based accommodation and tourism in Britain. Journal of Rural Studies, 5(3), 257–266.
Friedmann, J. (1992). Empowerment: The politics of an alternative development. Oxford: Blackwell.
Fraenkel and Warren (2000). Reliability in Research Instruments; A Concept Note. Paris: New-way Publishers.
Getz, D. (1983). Capacity to absorb tourism: Concepts and implications for strategic planning. Annals of Tourism Research, 10(2), 239–263.
Getz, D., & Page, S. J. (1997). In S. J. Page, & D. Getz (Eds.), The business of rural tourism: International Perspectives (pp. 191–205). New York: International Thomson Business Press.
Hannigan, J. (1994a). A regional analysis of tourism growth in Ireland. Regional Studies, 28(2), 208–214. Jud, G. D., & Krause, W. (1976). Evaluating tourism in developing areas: An exploratory enquiry. Journal of Travel Research, 15(2), 1–9.
Kerlinger, F.N. (1978). Foundations of Behavioral Research. New York: Surjeet Publications.
Kinsley, M. (2000). Economic renewal guide: A collaborative process for sustainable community development, snowmass. Colorado: Rocky Mountain Institute.
Kombol, T. P. (1998). Rural Tourism and Croatia’s Islands. Paper Presented at the Rural Tourism Management: Sustainable Options International Conference, Auchincruive, Scotland, Sep 1998.
Marsden, T. (1992). Exploring rural sociology for the fordist transition: Incorporating social relations into economic restructuring. Sociologia Ruralis, 32, 209– 230.
McMillan, J. H. and Schumacher, S. (1997). Research in Education: A Conceptual Introduction. Fifth Edition. New York: Harper Collins College.’
Open Africa (2002). Information Relating to the African Dream Project. Cape Town: Open Africa.
Pompl, W., & Lavery, P. (1993). Tourism in Europe: Structures and developments. Wallingford: CAB International.
Prentice, R. (1993). Community-driven tourism planning and residents’ preferences. Tourism Management, 14, 218–227.
R!atz, T., & Puczk. o, L. (1998). Rural Tourism and Sustainable Development. Paper Presented at the Rural Tourism Management: Sustainable Options International Conference, Auchincruive, Scotland, Sep. 1998.
Redclift, M. (1992). The meaning of sustainable development. Geoforum, 23(3), 395– 403.
Whelan, T. (1991). Ecotourism and its role in sustainable development. In T. Whelan (Ed.), Nature tourism: managing for the environment (pp. 3–22). Washington, DC: Island Press.
Williams, A. M., & Shaw, G. (Eds.), (1991). Tourism and economic development: Western European experiences (2nd ed.). London: Belhaven Press.
WTO (1999a), ‘Tourism Highlights 1999’, (May).

WTO (2002), ‘Compendium of Tourism Statistics 1993-1997’, Nineteenth
Edition (Madrid).
World Bank (2003). Inequality and Economic Development in Brazil, Brazil Country Management Unit, World Bank: Washington D.C.
World Bank (2005). World Development Indicators CD-ROM. World Bank: Washington D.C.
World Tourism Organisation (2005). International Tourist Arrivals & Tourism Receipts by country. WTO: Madrid.
QUESTIONNAIRE FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS
Instructions
 Please kindly respond to all items in these questionnaire
 Put a (Tick) alongside the option that is most applicable to you or fill in the spaces provided
 Do not need to write your name in this questionnaire

What are the strategies adopted by the government to ensure overall economic benefits (please tick where it applies)
strategies
Growth and selection: attracting more of the most appropriate market segments
increasing tourist length of stay
increasing visitor expenditure
developing complementary products in the tourist destination
spreading the benefits of tourism geographically
infrastructure and planning gain
local management of tourism and partnerships
SMME development
reducing seasonality
employment and training


What are some of the mechanisms which can enable reduction of poverty through ecotourism in the region? Please tick
Mechanisms
employment of the poor in tourism enterprises
supply of goods and services to tourism enterprises by the poor or by enterprises
employing the poor
direct sales of goods and services to visitors by the poor (informal economy)
establishment and running of tourism enterprises by the poor - e.g. micro, small
and medium sized enterprises (MSMEs), or community based enterprises formal
economy);
tax or levy on tourism income or profits with proceeds benefiting the poor
voluntary giving/support by tourism enterprises and tourists
investment in infrastructure stimulated by tourism also benefiting the poor in the
locality, directly or through support to other sectors

Do you agree with the roles that each of the following should play?
Roles
Governments have crucial role creating and accomplishing strategies, policies, regulations, as well as ensuring coordination between stakeholders
The private sector is an essential player, as partner, facilitator, customer, marketing channel and advisor
The Poor have roles as producers, suppliers, workers, participants and decision makers
Civil Society (educational institutions at all levels, trade associations, journalists,
community-based organisations) has an important part to play to facilitate inclusion by the poor
Donors must provide technical assistance, source funding to enable the further
development of projects and expertise


Service quality gap between tourist’s perception and expectation Masai Mara National Park
Perception SD D U A SA
Attractive and appealing natural attractions
Good and appealing physical facilities and equipment
Uncrowded and unspoiled park
Information centre with information about the park’s natural and physical facilities
Modern looking equipment and facilities
Good and adequate transport system
Access of physical facilities and natural attractions
Neat appearance of the park’ staff
Staff giving prompt services to the tourists
Staff meeting their promises on time
The willingness of the staff to listen and provide accurate and correct information
Staff’s willingness to help the tourists
Staff not being busy to respond to the tourist’s requests
Staff keeping the tourists informed about the park
Staff and secure park
Easy to use facilities
Staff’s constant courteousness with the tourists all the time
Staff’s knowledge to answer the tourist’s questions
Adequate safety facilities
Convenient opening hours to the tourists
Staff giving personal attention to the tourists
Staff’s understanding of the specific needs of the tourists
Conveniently located facilities and equipment
Comfortable and good view accommodation facilities
Clean and adequate water
Reasonable prices charged by the park
Service quality worth the money paid
Cheap accommodation and catering facilities
Cheap entertainment/recreational facilities

What are benefits that you have gotten from tourism?
Income [ ]
Acquire other assets [ ]
Communication/External Links [ ]
Gain experience/skills [ ]
Increase employment opportunities [ ]
Accessibility to social services [ ]

What are the problems that are faced in tourism industry in Masai Mara?
Insecurity/Theft [ ]
Language problem [ ]
Transport/Communication [ ]
Lack of customers [ ]
Competition [ ]
Lack of capital [ ]
Seasonality of business [ ]
Culture distortion [ ]