Tourism and Environmental Quality in Si Phan Don, Champasak Province, Lao PDR
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Trade-off Analysis: Tourism and Environmental Quality in Si Phan Don, Champasak Province, Lao PDR Kaysone Chansina, Bounthom Sisoumang, Chansamone Vongphaisit, and Keuangkham Sisengnam Published by WorldFish (ICLARM)– Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA) EEPSEA Philippines Office, SEARCA Bldg., College, Los Baños, Laguna 4031 Philippines Tel: +63 49 536 2290 loc. 4107; Fax: +63 49 501 3953; Email: [email protected] EEPSEA Research Reports are the outputs of research projects supported by the Economy and Envi- ronment Program for Southeast Asia. All have been peer reviewed and edited. In some cases, longer versions may be obtained from the author(s). The key findings of most EEPSEA Research Reports are condensed into EEPSEA Policy Briefs, which are available for download at www.eepsea.org. EEPSEA also publishes the EEPSEA Practitioners Series, case books, special papers that focus on research methodology, and issue papers. ISBN: 978-621-8041-45-5 The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of EEPSEA or its sponsors. This publication may be reproduced without the permission of, but with acknowledgement to, WorldFish-EEPSEA. Front cover photo: Don Det Island, Lao PDR Photo by Wikimedia Commons Suggested Citation: Kaysone Chansina; Bounthom Sisoumang; Chansamone Vongphaisit; and Keuangkham Sisengnam. 2017. Trade-off analysis: tourism and environmental quality in Si Phan Don, Champasak Province, Lao PDR. EEPSEA Research Report No. 2017-RR22. Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia, Laguna, Philippines. Trade-off Analysis: Tourism and Environmental Quality in Si Phan Don, Champasak Province, Lao PDR Kaysone Chansina Bounthom Sisoumang Chansamone Vongphaisit Keuangkham Sisengnam May, 2017 Comments should be sent to Assoc. Prof. Dr. Kaysone Chansina National Academy of Politics and Public Administration Thagnone Village, Xaythani District, Vientiane, Lao PDR Tel: +856 20 95359898 Fax: +856 21 752030 Email: [email protected] The Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA) was established in May 1993 to support training and research in environmental and resource economics. Its goal is to strengthen local capacity in the economic analysis of environmental issues so that researchers can provide sound advice to policymakers. To do this, EEPSEA builds environmental economics (EE) research capacity, encourages regional collaboration, and promotes EE relevance in its member countries (i.e., Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam). It provides: a) research grants; b) increased access to useful knowledge and information through regionally-known resource persons and up-to-date literature; c) opportunities to attend relevant learning and knowledge events; and d) opportunities for publication. EEPSEA was founded by the International Development Research Centre (IDRC) with co-funding from the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) and the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). In November 2012, EEPSEA moved to WorldFish, a member of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) Consortium. EEPSEA’s structure consists of a Sponsors Group comprising its donors (now consisting of IDRC and Sida) and host organization (WorldFish), an Advisory Committee, and its secretariat. EEPSEA publications are available online at http://www.eepsea.org. ACKNOWLEDGMENT We would like to express our sincere gratitude to the following people who made this research possible: to Dr. Herminia Francisco of EEPSEA, for her useful comments that helped shape this research; to Dr. Orapan Nabangchang, for her significant comments, valuable suggestions, guidance, and recommendations for the literature, and for supporting this project. We also would like to express our sincere gratitude to the Dean of the Faculty of Politics, Economics, and Business Administration, National Academy of Politics and Public Administration, and the Dean of the Faculty of Economics and Business Management, National University of Laos for their support; to Mr. Sanan Siphaphommachanh, Chief of Khong District, Champasak Province and key staff in the District Office for their significant contributions in the data collection process and for providing useful reference sources; and to the EEPSEA participants at the Bandung and Penang workshops who, during the interaction in the workshop, asked relevant questions and shared their helpful insights about the research. We also would like to express our sincere gratitude to the research team at Champasak Universityfor their significant contributions in the data collection, which made it possible to finish this research on time; to the staff at the Provincial Tourism Unit who also contributed to the project through their valuable support in data collection; and most of all, to our family members for their unending patience, moral support, and encouragement to complete this research; without whom we would not be able to achieve all of this. TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Description of the Problem 1 1.2 Research Objectives 6 1.3 Scope of the Study 6 2.0 METHODS 7 2.1 Travel Cost Method 7 2.2 Trade-off Analysis Approach 10 2.3 Research Process 11 3.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 13 3.1 Variable Summary and Descriptions 13 3.2 Trade-off Analysis for Si Phan Don 20 4.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 26 REFERENCES 28 APPENDIX 31 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Variable descriptions and expected signs for travel cost method 9 Table 2. Criteria for trade-off analysis 11 Table 3. Statistical summary of variables 14 Table 4. The estimate result of the ordinary least square (OLS) regression 16 Table 5. Results of the negative binomial model 17 Table 6. Estimated consumer surplus (USD per trip) 19 Table 7. Profile of local residents interviewed 21 Table 8. Profile of businesses interviewed 23 Table 9. Perceptions of stakeholders to environmental issues in Si Phan Don 26 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Map of the study area 2 Figure 2. Foreign tourists’ perceptions of the environmental issues (%) 19 TRADE-OFF ANALYSIS: TOURISM AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IN SI PHAN DON, CHAMPASAK PROVINCE, LAO PDR Kaysone Chansina, Bounthom Sisoumang, Chansamone Vongphaisit, Keuangkham Sisengnam ABSTRACT This study analyzed the recreational value of Si Phan Don, a tropical wetland, located in the southern part of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Lao PDR); assessed stakeholders’ perception of water quality and tourism in the study area; and applied trade-off analysis in the case of tourism and environmental quality. Stakeholders included foreign tourists visiting Si Phan Don, local residents, local government authorities, and local businesses at the site. The travel cost method was employed to estimate the recreational value of the site, and the trade-off analysis was used to assess tourism and environmental quality in order to understand the different scales at which policies should target components of managing the area. Results of the travel cost study indicate that the recreational value of Si Phan Don is estimated between USD 4.1 million and USD 4.6 million, which means that tourism at the site would be profitable. Most local residents and businesses support tourism in their area as it can create job opportunities and increase their income. 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1. Description of the Problem Si Phan Don is located in Khong District, in southern Champasak Province (Figure 1). It is about 131 kilometers (km) from Pakse, the capital city of the province. Si Phan Don covers an area of about 150 square kilometers (km2), where the Mekong River flows through and down into Cambodia. The site has perennial and seasonal river channels, rapids, waterfalls, river banks, beaches, and sand bars. The area has more than four thousand channels and islands of which, Don Det and Don Khon islands (the study sites) are the principal and most popular islands for tourism. Si Phan Don is part of an important tri-border biodiversity corridor that straddles Lao PDR, Cambodia, and Thailand. The climate in the area is affected by the monsoon cycle, including the southwest monsoon (humid-hot) from late March to October and the northeast monsoon (dry-cold) from November to early March (Department of Meteorology and Hydrology 2013). The dry season, which is also the peak season for tourism, is from December to April, while the rainy season, brought by the southwest monsoon, is in May to October. According to a Khong District Report (2013), the population density in the area is very high, ranging between 200 and 500 persons per km2. This is due to the scarcity of land and the fact that around 40 percent of the total area of the inhabited islands is used for rice cultivation. The whole district has 114 villages with a total population of 86,505 people or 14,824 households, of which, Don Khon, has three villages with a population of 1,336 people and Don Det has two villages with a population of 1,090 (Khong District Report 2013). In addition, the district has 80 schools, which are mostly located on the mainland. Of these, 60 schools are classified as primary schools, 13 are secondary, and seven are high schools, but their buildings are in poor condition. There is only one primary school in Don Khon and one in Don Det. The Asian Development Bank (ADB 2010) indicated that 58.8 percent of the population in Khong District finished primary school, 25.5 percent finished secondary school, and about 15.8 percent are illiterate. Figure 1. Map of the study area Source: Department of Meteorology and Hydrology (2013) Moreover, since Si Phan Don is a predominantly rural area, infrastructure is minimal and few households have access to power and water supply. Poor communities living close to Si Phan Don also depend on it for food security and livelihood. Most residents are predominantly engaged in agriculture and fishing as their main livelihood and are dependent on the wild capture of fish for both food and income security (TDD 2008).