Brigitta Hauser-Schäublin (dir.) World Heritage Angkor and Beyond Circumstances and Implications of UNESCO Listings in Cambodia Göttingen University Press New Chances for Local Farmers and Artisans? Efforts and Strategies to Change the Existing Structures of Tourism Supply in Siem Reap Brigitta Hauser-Schäublin Publisher: Göttingen University Press Place of publication: Göttingen University Press Year of publication: 2011 Published on OpenEdition Books: 12 April 2017 Serie: Göttingen Studies in Cultural Property Electronic ISBN: 9782821875432 http://books.openedition.org Electronic reference HAUSER-SCHÄUBLIN, Brigitta. New Chances for Local Farmers and Artisans? : Efforts and Strategies to Change the Existing Structures of Tourism Supply in Siem Reap In: World Heritage Angkor and Beyond: Circumstances and Implications of UNESCO Listings in Cambodia [online]. Göttingen: Göttingen University Press, 2011 (generated 10 septembre 2020). Available on the Internet: <http:// books.openedition.org/gup/315>. ISBN: 9782821875432. New Chances for Local Farmers and Artisans? Efforts and Strategies to Change the Existing Structures of Tourism Supply in Siem Reap Brigitta Hauser-Schäublin Introduction: World Heritage and “The Lucrative Global Tourism Pie” Studies on the implementation and the effects of monuments listed as UNESCO World Heritage Sites (WHSs) reveal that – with only few exceptions – the tourism industry rapidly develops (Hitchcock, King and Parnwell 2010). Tourism is located at the interface between economic development (boosting tourism) and conservation of cultural artefacts (keeping them intact and unaffected by visitors). This convergence is, in many cases, conflicting and paradoxical, and includes Angkor (see Miura 2004 and the chapters by Miura in this volume). Or, as Winter puts it: “Tourism looks in both directions: It restores and promotes the past while promising future prosperity” (2007:2). Behind the conflicting convergence of conservation and development are the 178 Brigitta Hauser-Schäublin diverging interests of different actors equipped with varying power according to their position. Therefore, the balance between “development” and “conservation” is continuously in motion and economy is often ahead of the game: Nevertheless, tourism in Siem Reap is foundational to the economy on various fronts whether as a primary source for foreign currency or Angkor’s status as a global and national icon. (Esposito and Nam 2008:III-35) The effects of the UNESCO listing seem to be almost the same everywhere: Private and public sectors worldwide […] are converting cultural heritage resources into destinations and attractions in a bid to obtain a piece of the lucrative global tourism pie. The money visitors spend on admission fees, souvenirs, transport, food, and accommodation contributes billions every year to the global economy and employs millions of people directly or indirectly. (Salazar 2010:130) What takes place is a boost of the numbers of tourists visiting the site and, simultaneously, a springing-up of a wide range of tourist accommodation and attractions, and consequently the increase of revenues. In fact, UNESCO acknowledged tourism as a welcome side-effect of the listing of WHSs in its 1972 convention. In recent years, it has become clear that tourism needs to be “domesticated”, not only for the sake of the monuments1, but also in a way that will be ecologically and socially sustainable. It is for this reason that UNESCO developed a “Sustainable Tourism Programme in 2001”. A practical manual on tourism management should serve as a guideline for those responsible for the management of WHSs (Pedersen 2002). However, the particular ways in which the degree of tourism development has to be assessed when it transgresses the border of sustainability, and in which way and by whom excessive tourism can and will be efficiently “tamed”, are difficult questions to answer in a general or even binding way. One of the main obstacles to such efforts consists of the fact that WHSs have an enormous socio-economic value, implying that they are targeted as commercial resources (Starr 2010:147). Salazar puts it even more sharply when he writes: “There is a striking complicity and circularity in the relationship between transnational tourism and (neoliberal) globalisation” (2010:132). 1 “Mass tourism is overrunning the archaeologically fragile site, with millions every year climbing unabated on the monuments”, said Global Heritage Fund executive director Jeff Morgan with regard to Angkor (quoted after Phnom Penh Post October 17, 2010). New Chances for Local Farmers and Artisans? 179 Fig. 1: The construction boom of hotels and shopping malls is still continuing (2011). Therefore, heritage preservation, social and ecological sustainability, and the economic exploitation of a WHS do not easily go together; they are agents in a conflicting relationship. The example of Angkor shows how difficult and complex this relationship is. The masses of tourists climbing on the monuments (often even in areas which are indicated as restricted) apparently do a lot of harm to the monuments (Califano 2005; Tyler 2007). Another consequence of mass tourism consists of the groundwater level which has drastically dropped over the past few years due to the abundant consumption of water. This led to the situation that the official water supply of Siem Reap had to be cut from one to three hours per day during the dry season (Kaliyann and Sloan 2011:11). Apart from the many other consequences this may have, even the monuments of Angkor Park – the WHS – seem to be endangered: The stone monuments gradually lose their stability because of the drop in ground pressure. Thus, tourism development, at least in this respect, seems to have already transgressed the boundary of sustainability since the natural resources, first and foremost water, are endangered (The Independent March 14, 2008; Doherty 2010; see also the paragraph on the ecosystem of Siem Reap-Angkor, especially with regard to water, in Esposito and Nam 2008:V-68-78). Tourism has been recognized as an agent of socio-cultural change – and development. However, since profit is one of the main purposes of those who successfully participate in the creating and the selling of a WHS as a multi-facetted 180 Brigitta Hauser-Schäublin product, only particular agents (mainly of national and transnational/international origin) are thriving. There are winners (the elite), who profit from the newly created economic growth, and there are losers or left-behinds. The disadvantaged – usually the poor and powerless – are those people (mostly in rural areas) or segments of society whose strategic situation or position in the international game of getting a fair share of the tourism economy is, for many reasons, unfavourable. In any case, the rural poor participate only marginally in the economic development of the province. It is certainly a structural problem, which is inherent in the globalised neoliberalism, since, due to its rules, not everybody can be a winner in such a game (see Samuels 2010). The “spin-off” of tourism, therefore, does not automatically contribute to an equal development of all strata or members of society (UNDP 2007; see also Neth, this volume), on the contrary.2 However, structural problems cannot be rapidly solved in a fundamental way. To improve the situation of the poor – and the following paragraphs show that the poor have already been marginalized, recently increased through the forces of the international tourism market – is a humanistic demand and challenge. This goal is on the agenda of development programmes of the many states and their agencies, including NGOs, engaged in the preservation and/or promotion of WHSs. The local presence of a multitude of foreign aid organizations with a wide range of programmes is – at least partly – a “spin-off” of the listing of WHSs, especially in countries in “the south”.3 The target group of the GIZ RED programme are the rural poor in Siem Reap Province4: small farmers (possessing less than 3 ha), small manufacturers, landless people, and casual workers (GTZ 2010a:2). Unequal Participation in Economic Growth Cambodia has a remarkable economic growth rate (7%) due to tourism and the textile industry (mostly the garment industry) from which the urban areas especially benefit. However, the percentage of the poor in rural areas is only slowly diminishing. The gap between better-off people in urban areas and the poor in rural areas is gradually increasing. Siem Reap is still one of the poorest provinces: The third poorest in 2 “The poor are described as those with little or no land, with little or no livestock, especially large livestock, and a poor labour to non-labour ratio in the household (‘too many mouths to feed’). This leads in turn to severe rice shortages (partially made up for by ‘lesser’ starches such as cassava), very poor quality housing, debts, distress sales of limited assets including land, and inability to recover from economic shocks such as major harvest losses and serious health problems. Households more likely to belong to the poorest category are women-headed, those with family members with disabilities (mine victims, for example) and child-headed (orphans)” (Gebert et al. 2007:9). 3 Though one has to add that the manifold motives behind these projects, the trajectories and means to achieve this goal, are different and need to be carefully assessed. 4 Siem Reap Province consists of 12 districts, 100 communes and 921 villages, with a largely rural population of 884,537. The number of households in the province is 163,803 with an average household size of 5.4 (GTZ 2010b:6). New Chances for Local Farmers and Artisans? 181 Cambodia in 20075 and an estimated 52% of the population in this province live below the national poverty line (~2,000 Riels or USD 0.50 per day). According to figures the GIZ made available, only about 20% of the salaries paid for jobs in the tourism economy in Siem Reap go to employees from a poor family background. The illiteracy rate for rural Siem Reap exceeds 60% (GTZ 2006a:1), thus, education programmes have not yet effectively reached people there.