CONTRIBUTION OF COMMUNITY BASED TOURISM TO LIVELIHOOD
IMPROVEMENT IN BUNGOMA COUNTY KENYA
BY
WANYONYI A BARASA
10/K/3154/PS
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE SCHOOL OF FORETRY,
ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL SCIENCES IN PARTIAL
FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIEMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR
OF TOURISM OF MAKERERE UNIVERSITY.
OCTOBER, 2014
DECLARATION
I declare that this dissertation is my own unaided work. It has not been submitted in any
other university other than Makerere University for academic credit. All the sources that
have been used or quoted have been duly acknowledged by means of complete reference.
I further declare that I followed all the applicable ethical guidelines in the conduct of the
research.
Signed____________________________ Date________________
Wanyonyi A Barasa
This work has been submitted to the School of Forestry, Environmental and Geographical
Sciences with approval of my supervisor:
Signed____________________________ Date________________
Mr.Enock Ssekuubwa
i
DEDICATION
This dissertation is lovingly dedicated in memory of my grandmother Robai Musamali
who inspired my life through her determined strength, enduring faith and boundless love.
A special feeling of gratitude to my loving parents, Sammy Musamali and Carolyn
Nanjala whose words of encouragement and push for tenacity ring in my ears. I dedicate
it also to my brothers and sisters Joseph,Faith,Victor,Oscar,Prayer,Godwill and Job who
have never left my side and are very special.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my parents for all the sacrifices they have made to make sure that
my siblings and I are educated. I would also like to thank my supervisor Mr. Enock
Ssekuubwa for his guidance and support. It was a pleasure working with you.
I would also like to thank my respondents whose contribution transformed this research
report in to what it is. I would like to express my innermost gratitude to my colleagues
and friends for their assistance in completing this work as well as s their support in
general.
iii
LIST OF ACRONYMS
CBT
Community-Based Tourism
NGO
Non-Governmental Organization
KNBS
Kenya National Bureau of Statistics
UNWTO
United Nations World Tourism Organization
WTTC
World Travel and Tourism Council
WTO
World Tourism Organization
CBO
Community Based Organization
GDP
Gross Domestic Products
iv
ABSTRACT
This research discusses local community is involved in community based tourism and
how it has improved their livelihood a case study of Bungoma County. Poverty
alleviation and socio-economic growth are critical components of the era development
goals and the recently launched vision 2030 by the Kenyan government, community
tourism can play a significant role towards their apprehension and improvement of the
socio-economic welfare of the communities living in areas with immense tourism
potential. The objectives of this study were therefore to find out how Community Based
Tourism is helping to improve the livelihood of community members, whether there were
challenges facing development of community tourism and how local community support
and participate in tourism. The information was obtained from 120 respondents,
structured questionnaires were administered to 100 local residents and 20 people were
interviewed. The primary finding of this study shows that Community Based Tourism has
led to creation of tourism enterprises; creation of jobs and through these poor families
gets a source of earning. Insecurity also emerged to be another serious problem; the study
revealed that the Bungoma County Community supports the idea of Community Based
Tourism and many are willing to take up responsibilities like local guides and
interpreters. In conclusion, it was established that the County has a variety of landscape
based and culture based attractions which if well-developed can be used to alleviate
poverty and improve socio-economic conditions of the Bukusu people. The proposed
recommendation is that an integrated approach to rural resource development is therefore
essential if sustainable development is to become more than wishful thinking,
sensitization and education are also important to bring out the problems and concerns and
determining the available options before decisions and actions are taken.
Keywords: Community based tourism, Community participation, Tourism development,
poverty alleviation
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION.............................................................................................................................. i
DEDICATION ................................................................................................................................ ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iii
LIST OF ACRONYMS .................................................................................................................. iv
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... v
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... vi
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1
1.1 Background of the Study ....................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Statement of the research problem ........................................................................................ 4
1.3 Objectives of the Study ......................................................................................................... 5
The research questions were:....................................................................................................... 5
1.4 Significance of the Study....................................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW.................................................................................. 7
2.1 Community Based Tourism................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Community Participation in Tourism Development ............................................................. 7
2.2.1 Passive participation ....................................................................................................... 8
2.2.2 Participation in information giving................................................................................. 8
2.2.3 Interactive participation .................................................................................................. 9
2.2.4 Functional participation .................................................................................................. 9
2.2.5 Participation by consultation .......................................................................................... 9
2.2.6 Participation in information giving................................................................................. 9
2.3 Barriers to Community Participation in Tourism ................................................................ 10
2.4 Factors Influencing Community Participation .................................................................... 11
vi
2.5 Tourism Benefits-Sharing Schemes .................................................................................... 12
CHAPTER THREE: STUDY AREA AND METHODS .............................................................. 13
3.1 Study area ............................................................................................................................ 13
3.1.1 Location ........................................................................................................................ 13
3.1.2 Climate ......................................................................................................................... 13
3.2 Research Design .................................................................................................................. 13
3.3 Types of study data collected .............................................................................................. 14
3.4 Data Collection .................................................................................................................... 14
3.4.1
Questionnaires ....................................................................................................... 15
3.4.2 Observation................................................................................................................... 15
3.4.3
Interviews .............................................................................................................. 15
3.5 Sampling procedure ............................................................................................................. 15
3.6 Data analysis........................................................................................................................ 16
3.6 Ethical issues ....................................................................................................................... 16
3.9 Limitations to the Study ...................................................................................................... 16
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS ...................................................................................................... 17
4.1 Socio demographic characteristics of respondents .............................................................. 17
4.2 Local People’s Participation in Tourism Development ....................................................... 18
4.3 Contribution of Tourism towards Poverty Reduction ......................................................... 19
4.6 Benefits sharing schemes .................................................................................................... 19
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION ................................................................................................. 21
5.1 Local peoples participation in rural development ............................................................... 21
5.2 Contribution of tourism towards poverty reduction ............................................................ 22
5.3 Benefits sharing schemes .................................................................................................... 24
5.31 Social Benefits ............................................................................................................... 24
5.3.2 Economic benefits ........................................................................................................ 25
vii
5.3.3 Environmental benefits ................................................................................................. 27
CHAPTER SIX: CONLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ................................................... 28
6.1 Conclusion ........................................................................................................................... 28
6.2 Recommendations ............................................................................................................... 28
REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................. 29
APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................... 33
RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE TO COMMUNITY OF BUNGOMA COUNTY ................... 33
Demographic characteristics of respondents ............................................................................. 33
Contribution to livelihood ......................................................................................................... 33
Impact of Community Based Tourism ...................................................................................... 35
viii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
The concept of Community-based Tourism (CBT) can be found in the work of Murphy
(1985), where we get aspects concerning tourism and developing local communities are
analysed, and in a further study by the same author in 2004 (Murphy and Murphy, 2004).
Along with these two studies, there are several other research papers analysing the
relationship between tourism and local communities (such as Richards and Hall, 2000).
This concept paves the way for new lines of investigation and for the possibility of
tourism development together with other alternatives.
CBT thus can provides important opportunities to take advantage of the increasing
demand for ecotourism products in order to create environmental and socio economic
benefits at national ,regional, and local levels. Achieving this depends principally on
ensuring that benefits from resource are generated and captured by rural communities.
Although tourism in Western Kenya remains primarily focused on conventional
destinations within state-managed National Parks, as the industry grows and pressures to
diversify increase there is a growing demand for CBT in collaboration with local
communities. Bungoma County is currently constrained due to lack of knowledge.
The World Tourism Organization (2002) points out that rural tourism developed in
certain geographical areas may become a fundamental tool in the economic development
of and the reduction of poverty in certain areas. It is possible to create businesses selling
goods and services by means of the area´s own cultural and environmental resources,
offering low scale opportunities for job creation, especially for women and young people.
This would always be a complementary activity and never a substitution for primary
sector activities. In this respect, the literature claims that promoting tourist exploitation of
underdeveloped rural areas in Developing Countries is not, a priori, good or bad, but
depends on different political, cultural, social, economic and environmental factors.
1
Any successful tourism development, whether rural or not depends on commercial and
economic issues such as the quality of the product, accessibility and infrastructure of the
destination, availability of skills, and interest of investors. In most of these aspects, rural
areas may well be at a disadvantage compared to urban developed areas. These
challenges may be compounded by political and institutional obstacles, particularly in
developing countries like the administrative complexity of dealing with low populated
areas, the lack of policy coordination between rural development and tourism
development, and low priority that is provided to rural areas by central governments.
Thus, ways to deal with these challenges are needed.
Community based tourism takes many different forms and is pursued for different
reasons. There are developmental reasons to promote tourism as a growth pole like
regeneration due to diversification of a remote marginal agricultural area into adventure
tourism or cultural tourism. Moreover, rural tourism preserves some depth to a world
increasingly being flattened out by the forces of globalization (Tanahashi, 2010),
development of the tourism product such as diversifying a country image.
Kenya is one of the world’s most popular tourism destinations attracting millions of
tourists over the past years. The country is endowed with attractive tourist sites, rich
culture, striking geographical diversity and landscapes ranging from beautiful beaches, to
animal parks and archaeological sites. The tourism sector still remains critical in terms of
its contribution to economic growth and Gross Domestic Product. It is the most important
export service for the Kenyan economy and one of the most leading tourism destinations
in East Africa. In 2011 the total earnings from the sector rose to Ksh 97.9 billion from
Ksh 73.7 billion in 2010. Hotels and Restaurant sector recorded growth of 5% in 2011
compared to4.2% in 2010.
This growth was mainly due to increased international tourist arrivals, activities,
conference and the high number of tourist arrivals in the year 2011. The earnings were
also boosted by a depreciation of the Kenya shilling in this second half of 2011 (Kenya
2
National Bureau of Statistics, 2012). The Kenyan tourism sector through Kenya Tourism
Board and Ministry of Tourism is very sensitive to fluctuations in Kenya’s international
image. For instance, due to the 2008 post-election violence, there was a substantial
decline in the tourism arrival to Kenya. Revenues from this sector were affected in as a
result of pre-election violence in August 2012 that led that saw several travel advisories
being issued against Kenya.
In Kenya today the benefits of community based tourism cannot be judged in terms of
economic benefits alone but also social and cultural benefits because it encompasses not
only economic benefits. The Bukusu community has vast of tourism resources and a
landscape and farmland spread by traditional houses. The Bukusu people and Tachoni
still maintain their unique traditional circumcision, music and customs. These resources if
are properly managed they will alleviate poverty which is evident in the region. In 2012
Tanzania tourism performance was incredible and it made them number one in East
Africa. The tourism sector outstripped all other sectors including gold mining which had
claimed top spot in the year 2011 amid record high gold prices at the time.
In Kenya the tourism sector continued to register possible results with 2011 hitting the
two million mark in terms of cross border arrivals .In 2012 the tourist arrivals in Kenya
dropped due to insecurity in the country as its main tourism source markets like United
Kingdom, United States, Italy and Germany recorded a drop in performance. Regionally,
Uganda is the highest source market for Kenya. Uganda received 1,196,000 visitor
arrivals in the year 2012 up from 1,151,000 visitor arrivals in the year 2011 representing
an increase of 4%.The Visitor exports generated $1,003million (23.9% of total exports)
in 2012 increasing from $806m in 2011.
At the global perspective tourism is the largest and fastest growing industry. A total of
one billion arrivals were recorded in 2012 (UNWTO) 2012, of which Africa shared 5.1%
(50 million arrivals). The economic contribution of the tourism sector to global GDP has
increased from US$6 trillion in 2006 to US$ 6.3 trillion in 2011 and is forecasted to reach
3
US$ 10 trillion in 2022 according to World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC), 2012).
Africa received about 50 million arrivals in 2011 and Sub-Saharan Africa received 33
million of these arrivals. It should be noted that most of the arrivals to Africa are shared
amongst a few countries including Kenya.
1.2 Statement of the research problem
The 2008 general elections marked a gradual change in the operation of the hospitality
and tourism sector in Kenya. They caused many changes that affected every aspect of life
especially businesses which had to undergo a fundamental change in terms of principles
and practices including the tourism industry. In Kenya 70% of their exports is from the
agricultural sector (Pearson 1995). In most of the areas where people reside and where
cultural tourism and heritage tourism take place, real involvement of the local people is
rare. In Bungoma County, poverty is widely spread among the rural communities.
Many researchers have carried around research on agricultural productivity and its role in
improving livelihoods, and have not paid attention to the tourism sector. However,
agriculture has failed to improve people’s livelihood. Thus there is need to for tourism
research that shows how local communities benefit from rural tourism. Many people in
Kenya lack the basic needs which can lead them to an ideal livelihood. Majority are
living is miserable poverty and in poor health. To many ideologies of life sustenance,
self-esteem and freedom are more of a parable than a reality of life in the county. This is
a big gap and clear manifestation of underdevelopment. The conservative tradition of
reliance on agriculture whereby local people practice cane and maize growing have failed
to address poverty. It is mainly subsistence and very liable to the market instabilities and
price fluctuations.
It is important for diversification of the economy of such communities so as to reduce
poverty among the locals people. It is not necessarily that they should eliminate
agriculture but applying an integrated approach that will yield more benefits to the local
communities as agriculture has failed to address the issue. It is thus the aim of this
4
research that will help to appraise the potential of Community Based Tourism as an
engine to improve the livelihood of the locals in Kenya.
1.3 Objectives of the Study
The general objective of the study was to assess how community based tourism has
contributed to livelihood improvement to the community using Bungoma County in
Kenya as a case study.
The specific objectives of the study were:
1. To assess the extent of local people’s participation in the tourism development
decision making process.
2. To assess if tourism business in the area has developed benefit-sharing schemes.
3. To examine local people’s views about the contribution of tourism towards
poverty reduction.
The research questions were:
1. Have you ever been involved in tourism development and decision making
process in your area?
2. What are the possible benefits of community based tourism to the residents of the
county?
3. How has community Based Tourism helped to alleviate poverty?
4. How are benefits if any distributed amongst the community?
1.4 Significance of the Study
The study will be of great importance to the host community in Bungoma County and the
entire community. The relevance of this study can be looked at in three perspectives that
are in terms of policy, scientific and practical relevance; the research will help identify
the potential areas for investment in the tourism industry. It will help in policy
formulation and regional development like resource allocation for development plan. It
will help in identifying priory areas for development.
5
The study will serve as a source for other academicians to go on board on future research
especially in the field of local tourism. It will also help show cause for conservation
campaigns to sustain stability between nature and economic benefits. The study may act
as a guide to host community to help them diversify their economies and improve their
livelihood. It will help them to know potential community tourism to launch them on the
road to development.
6
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Community Based Tourism
CBT is based on the active participation of the local community. This is why the creation
of community events which may favour this type of tourism, while at the same time
helping to create a relationship between the local community and visitors, is so important.
To facilitate this, different public administrations, Non-Governmental Organizations
(NGOs), private institutions and the local community itself should get involved and work
together. According to Nyaupane et al. (2006), the main limitations local communities
have to face when implementing tourism projects are the following: lack of financial
resources, infrastructure or know-how; limitations of a cultural kind; and potential
conflicts between the different public administrations.
At the same time, the following factors are described as being highly important for CBT
implementation (Kibicho, 2008): the inclusion of stakeholders, the evaluation of
individual and collective benefits, the setting of objectives, and analysis of decisions to
be implemented. The main benefits of community tourism are the direct economic impact
on families, socioeconomic improvements, and sustainable diversification of lifestyles
(Manyara and Jones, 2007; Rastegar, 2010). CBT is certainly an effective way of
implementing policy coordination, avoiding conflicts between different actors in tourism,
and obtaining synergies based on the exchange of knowledge, analysis and ability among
all members of the community (Kibicho, 2008).
2.2 Community Participation in Tourism Development
Murphy (1985) stressed the importance local involvement in tourism development. He
indicated that the success of tourism relies on the goodwill and cooperation of local
people because they are part of the tourism product. He argues that if tourism
development and planning does not match with the local aspirations and capabilities, this
can destroy the industries’ potential. However, there are various ways in which local
communities can be involved in tourism activities. Thus, while there is little discussion as
7
to whether or not locals should be involved in tourism development, there is discussion
about how they should be involved (Mowfort & Munt, 1998). Because local participation
is generally regarded as a contributing factor in the success of development projects, it is
now incorporated in policies of many NGOs and governments (Pretty, 1995). Many
organizations talk about having locals participate in their programmes, which makes their
projects look good on paper. In reality however, there is not one form of participation,
and therefore the term may sometimes be used inappropriately. Mowfort and Munt
(1998) indicate that it is the uncritical manner in which participation is conceptualized
and practiced that draws increasing attention.
Several authors have discussed the different ways in which local communities can be
involved in tourism activities. Timothy (1999), for instance, has made a distinction
between participation in the decision making process and the involvement in the benefits
of tourism. Pretty (1995) has created a more refined typology of participation in
development projects, mainly focusing on the agricultural sector. This has been useful in
many (rural) development projects (Mikkelsen, 2005). Pretty’s typology has later been
adapted by France (1998) to fit the context of tourism development. The following are
Pretty’s typologies of participation;
2.2.1 Passive participation
People participate by being told what is going to happen or has already happened, with no
ability to change it. The information being shared belongs only to external professionals.
2.2.2 Participation in information giving
People participate by answering questions posed by extractive researchers and
developers. People do not have the opportunity to influence proceedings, as the findings
of the research are neither shared nor checked for accuracy.
8
2.2.3 Interactive participation
Residents contribute to planning. Groups take control of local decisions. Hotels owned by
local people or groups of local people. Locally owned taxis, tour agencies, and
restaurants. Maintenance of cultural events for the benefit of residents and tourists.
2.2.4 Functional participation
Participation seen by outsiders as a way of achieving goals. Major decisions are external.
Increasing use of local technology, capital and expertise. Some small, locally owned
hotels. Minority elites often the most likely to participate. In larger hotels, some decisions
made locally, but according to external forces.
2.2.5 Participation by consultation
People participate by being consulted, and external people listen to views. External
professionals define both problems and solutions, and may modify these in the light
people’s responses. The consultative process does not concede any share in decision
making, and professionals are under no obligation to take on board people’s views.
2.2.6 Participation in information giving
People participate by answering questions posed by extractive researchers and
developers. People do not have the opportunity to influence proceedings, as the findings
of the research are neither shared nor checked for accuracy. Today various development
initiatives request the participation of all concerned stakeholders at the relevant level, not
only for the sake of efficiency and equity of the programmes, leverage of donors and
demands of local communities but also for sustainability of these initiatives (Ribot,
2004). Scholars believe that there is a correlation between community participation and
pro-poor tourism hence there is a need to unpack this. Pro Poor Tourism interventions
aim to increase the net benefits for the poor from tourism, and ensure that tourism growth
contributes to poverty reduction.
9
2.3 Barriers to Community Participation in Tourism
In many insular and less-developed regions, tourism has been developed and controlled
by large, multinational tour companies who have little regards for local socio-cultural and
economic conditions (Timothy & Ioannidas, 2002). This is due to the fact that most
developing destinations and microstates lack the wealth and political power, which make
them prone to decision-making that is beyond their control (Timothy & Ioannidas, 2002).
In some cases, a country that is in control of tourism development may lose the power of
decision making to a few prominent individuals who control the wealth and political
strength (Bianci, 1999:273). Autocratic power systems have kept grassroots involvement
from flourishing in some parts of the world where representation of democracy has been
discouraged (Timothy, 1999).
There have been a number of inter-related barriers that prevent effective local
communities’ involvement and participation in the tourism industry. The overall outcome
of such barriers is often the communities’ limited enthusiasm towards the industry
thereby resulting in little benefits that trickle down to the grassroots. Tosun (2000)
categorized them into operational, cultural and structural limitations. Most of these
limitations occur in developing countries although they do not exist in every tourist
destinations. Operational limitations include centralization of public administration of
tourism, lack of co-ordination and lack of information. For structural limitations, the
items include attitudes of professionals, lack of expertise, elite domination, lack of
appropriate legal system, lack of trained human resources and relatively high cost of
community participation and lack of financial resources.
Tosun (2000) accepted that the limitations may be due to the political, social and
economic structure in developing countries, which prevent them from achieving higher
level of development. Low public involvement in the tourism development process is
obvious as people are not well-informed. Those categorized as structural impediments
include institutional, power structure, legislative, and economic systems. They mostly
impact negatively on the emergence and implementation of the participatory tourism
development approach. Whereas those identified as cultural limitations include limited
10
capacity of the poor to effectively handle development. The fact that the majority of
people in developing countries struggle to meet their basic and felt needs and that mere
survival occupies all their time and consumes their energy, implies that getting closely
involved in issues of community concern such as community participation in the tourism
development process which often demands time and energy.
2.4 Factors Influencing Community Participation
Community participation has been the most common strategy that has been used to
achieve the goal of sustainable development over the last decade. Some people call them
participation decades (Bortes & Van Rensburg).While much literature has highlighted the
benefits and importance of local peoples involvement (Li, 2004; Tosun, 2000).There have
been few studies that identify factors that influence this involvement in development
projects. Community participation via decision making is a crucial determinant to ensure
that the benefits local communities get from tourism are guaranteed and their lifestyles
and values are respected. However, this approach is rarely found in developing countries
(Tosun, 2000; Li, 2005).
Building on the same argument, Kibicho (2003) in his study about community tourism in
Kenya, further noted that local communities had the feeling that they were not fully
involved in their country’s coastal tourism, especially in decisions regarding its
development, despite the fact that the industry has impacts on their wellbeing. In his
study about the nature of community participation expected by the local community in
Turkey, Tosun (2006) observed that the local community needs to be part and parcel of
the decision making body through consultation by elected and appointed local
government agencies or by a committee elected by the public specifically for developing
and managing tourism.
Community participation via employment opportunities as workers or as small business
operators can be a catalyst to the development of tourism products and services, arts,
crafts and cultural values especially through taking advantage of abundant natural and
cultural assets available in communities in developing countries (Scheyvens, 2007),
11
Tosun (2000) stressed that community participation through working in the tourism
industry has been recognized to help local communities not only to support development
of the industry but also to receive more than economic benefits.
2.5 Tourism Benefits-Sharing Schemes
Sharing tourism benefits with local communities has always been seen as one of the
various modes of community participation in the industry. In other words, participation of
local communities through sharing the benefits of tourism is one of the major viewpoints
or community participation in tourism (Timothy. 1999; Tosun, 2000; Li, 2004). Various
studies and numerous different international development agencies have established that
tourism is one of the powerful tools for poverty alleviation, especially due to its
associated potential economic gains and due to the fact that tourism is a significant or
growing economic sector in most countries with high levels of wide spread poverty
(Wilkerson, 1996; Chok and Macbeth, 2007; Zhao and Ritchie, 2007, Scheyvens, 2007).
Although there is no standard method for assessing the adequacy of community
participation levels (L, 2005), the way benefits from the tourism industry are shared has
been argued to be the focus of community participation. This however, simply implies
that communities can be involved or attracted to participate in the tourism industry
through sharing with them the benefits obtained from the industry and one precondition
for a successful community tourism programme according to Songorwa (1999), is that
equitable benefits of tourism “must remain in the hands of the majority community
members in an open and easily understood manner.
There are many other similar programmes in various protected areas in Africa that aim to
benefit local people through development projects. Many of these programmes have a
well stipulated tourism benefit sharing mechanism with “poor” neighbouring
communities. An exception is Meyer (2007) who devised a workable concept framework
of linkages between the accommodation sector and the poor neighbouring communities
in developing countries.
12
CHAPTER THREE: STUDY AREA AND METHODS
3.1 Study area
The study was conducted in Bungoma County because it has various tourism attractions
ranging from natural to manmade that are not developed and they can help alleviate
poverty in the community. The county capital is Bungoma Town. The dominant
community that resides in this area are the Bukusu who occupy most of the county.
3.1.1 Location
Bungoma County is located in Western Kenya along the border with Uganda. It covers an
area of 3,032.2 sq. km with temperatures ranging from between 15 – 30 degrees
depending on the season. According to census that was carried out in 2009, the
population in Bungoma County is approximately 1,375,063 people with about 298,696
people living in the urban areas. The rest of the population is found in the rural areas
where most of the agricultural activities take place.
3.1.2 Climate
According to Kenya Meteorological Centre Database, the temperatures in the area range
between 15 to 30 degrees Celsius. In January which is the hottest month the temperature
rises up to 30 while in the coldest month the temperature is usually 15 degrees Celsius on
average. Parts of Bungoma County are located on the slopes of Mt. Elgon and this
contributes to weather patterns in the county. The county also enjoys well drained soils
that are rich in all the major nutrients required by the crops. The soils are able to support
crops such as maize, wheat and finger millet.
3.2 Research Design
A case study design was used. This design was preferred because it is a time honoured
traditional approach recommended for scientific, management and social researches. It
was appropriate for this academic research because it was time bound and more so calls
for in-depth understanding of the subject under study (reference).
13
3.3 Types of study data collected
This research project is enriched by the use of both secondary data and primary data.
Halarambos and Holborn (1995) define primary data are data collected by researchers
themselves in the course of their work and secondary sources as those consisting of data
that are already exists. Interviews with the local stakeholders and community were held
in order to ensure that the aims of the research are met. This data collection technique
was chosen in order to increase the responsive rate and also ensure that respondents
understand the questions asked and researcher is able to obtain the necessary information
that the research seeks to obtain. Secondary sources that were used include published
books, journals, unpublished reports, newsletters, and government reports.
The research made use of a case study (Bungoma County).According to Barbie (1998), a
case study is an idiographic examination of a single individual, group or society.
Haralambos and Holborn (1995) defined case study as detailed examination of a single
example of something and it may involve the study of a community, institution social
group, historical event or a single social action. They insist that with a case study it is
challenging to generalize the basis of its findings. However, this is not a problem because
the study does not intend to generalize but get a clear picture on how the community of
Bungoma County are benefiting from Community Based Tourism.
3.4 Data Collection
Qualitative data was used. This involves the use of descriptions and classification.
Kitchin and Tate (2000) refer to description as portrayal of data in a form that can be
easily interpreted. In this case this will be a written account of the discussions and
interviews. The main reason for using description is to produce more thorough and
inclusive description of the subject matter (Kitchin &Tate, 2000). Classification on the
other hand refers to the breaking up of data into constituent parts and then placing them
into similar categories (Kitchin and Tate, 2000). In this research, this involved
classification of data into responses given by respondents during interview. The
following were the study tools that were used in this research;
14
3.4.1 Questionnaires
The main part of data collection in this study is formed by the questionnaires. The
questionnaire in (Appendix) consists of three parts. First, background characteristics of
the respondents such as age, occupation and income. These background characteristics
serve as control variables in the analysis. The second part is about the contribution of
Community Based tourism in livelihoods. The final part of the questionnaire concerns
peoples’ opinion about the impact of tourism on their community. The Likert scale
system was employed to set structured questions. The questionnaire technique was opted
because it is easier to use more especially when collecting data from a wide range of
respondents in the shortest time possible. It also gave independence to the respondent
more so when filling by him/herself.
3.4.2 Observation
Observation is a technique that involves systematically selecting, watching and recording
behaviour and characteristics of living beings, objects or phenomena. Judd et al (1991)
defines systematic observation as the selection, recording and encoding of a set of natural
behaviours or other natural occurring phenomena. Peil (1995) defines observation as the
classic method of observing; systematic observation involves looking at what is going on,
listening and asking questions and often participating in the activities of the group to get
first-hand experience of what daily life involves.
3.4.3 Interviews
Interviews form the qualitative part of the research methods. They were held with
different actors of tourism development in the County. In total twenty interviews were
completed in Bungoma East and Bungoma South sub counties.
3.5 Sampling procedure
The research was carried out in Bungoma County in two sub counties; Bungoma east and
Bungoma south that were chosen randomly. i n this sub counties Ndivisi and Kanduyi
division were selected. Miu and Kanduyi locations were selected from the divisions
15
whereas chetambe, makuselwa, south kanduyi and south sameta sub-locations were also
selected from the locations.
3.6 Data analysis
The data gathered was sorted and coded. It was then entered in the Statistical Package for
Social Scientists (SPSS) and analysed. The SPSS package was opted for because it
handles a large number of variables. In order to measure the relationship between the two
variables and correlations analysis were done and thereafter, the results were presented in
tables. Qualitative data was sorted and reduced. It was then analysed based on themes as
conceived from the research questions. Descriptive Statistics were used to summarise the
characteristics of the respondents such as their gender, marital status, education,
qualification and number of years lived in Bungoma community.
3.6 Ethical issues
The researcher obtained a letter of introduction from the Department of Forestry,
Biodiversity and Tourism at Makerere University for introductory purposes to the
community leaders of Bungoma community in Kenya. Privacy of the respondents was
adhered to and strict confidentiality of the information provided by assuring them in
advance.
3.9 Limitations to the Study
The researcher experienced the limitations;

Limited resources at the researcher’s disposal; given that the study was carried out
in Kenya it required a lot of funds to collect the required data. The researcher tried to
mitigate this by using cost-effective means of data collection in order to ensure that
the cost were not a serious challenge to the study.

Weather changes; the research was carried out during a rainy season this therefore
hinged on the researcher’s plan however; the results of the study were not
compromised anyway.

Time factor; the study was time-bound. To manage time, the researchers stuck and
adhered to his plan.
16
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
4.1 Socio demographic characteristics of respondents
The study revealed that most respondents were male (55%) while the females only
comprised 45%. On the other hand, the majority of respondents were aged between 20-29
years of age. 25% of the respondents were aged 30-39 years, whilst 9% were in the age
group 50-59 years.
Table 1: Socio demographic characteristics of respondents
Variable
Sex
Female
Male
Age (years)
% response (N = 50)
20 –29
30 - 39
40 –49
50 – 59
60 and Above
57
25
8
9
1
Marital status
Single
58
55
45
Married
Divorced
Engaged
Education level
Primary
38
2
2
Secondary
College
20
36
University
No formal education
Occupation
Farmer
Private sector
Service industry
Retired
Unemployed
Other (Specify)
Self employed
31
1
12
8
17
19
2
18
22
1
17
8% of the respondents were aged between 40 and 49 years. Only 1% of the respondents
were 60 years and above. The data revealed that majority of the respondents were singles
(58%) followed by the married (38%) with only 2% of those divorced and 2 % engaged.
The results above also indicate that 20% of the respondents had ended in secondary
whilst another 36% had college education. 36% were university graduates, 12% ended in
primary and 1% no formal education.
4.2 Local People’s Participation in Tourism Development
Table 2 shows how the local community is participating in tourism development in the
county.21% of the respondents have not ben given the oppurtunity to participate in
tourism development,3.2% have participated through constucting of onds within the
locality whilst 8.1% have given ideas about CBT.Only 3.2% have been invloved in
decision making,19.4% have negative attitude towards tourism,9.7% have participated
through teaching students in school about CBT,3.2% by planting trees,14.5% have no
idea about cbt,8.1% have encouraged people to engage in local tourism and 9.7% have
participated through conservation of natural resources.
Table 2. Local community tourism development
Variable
Response (%)
Have not been given opportunity or mandate to participate
21
By constructing fish ponds in the locality
By giving ideas since CBT is limited in the area
Yes I am involved in decision making
Unwilling, have negative attitude
Teaching students in schools about CBT and its benefits
By planting more trees and other plants
No such services in my locality
By encouraging people to engage in local tourism
Yes; through conservation of natural resources
3
8
3
19
10
3
15
8
10
18
4.3 Contribution of Tourism towards Poverty Reduction
Table 3 presents findings on the contribution of community-based tourism on livelihood
of the people of Bungoma in Kenya. While a positive relationship between participation
in the tourism industry and the perceived impact is expected, it seems to be the most
logical for on people’s livelihood. This is because participation in the tourism industry
frequently results into direct economic benefits such as a job and an increase in income.
The direct correlations between participation and economic impact were significant and
positive. People who were ignorant have been educated on how to use the available
resources. Some respondents also say that now people are able to pay school fees for their
children and it has created employment to locals. Others asserted that some locals are still
poor; people are not willing to participate in tourism development whilst some have
never observed any change.
Table 3. Livelihood improvement
Variable
Response (%)
It encourages people on how to generate income and work hard
5
17
21
People are not willing to participate in tourism development
The levels of education don’t matter for job acquisition
7
3
People are able to pay fees for their children
No people are still poor. They lack more education
Some tourists give assistance to locals to develop/improve their livelihood
Local places are now accessible through improved infrastructure
A lot of provisions are designed in terms of amenities
No, not observed
7
30
3
5
3
3
Yes, people have been educated on how to utilize the available resources
It has created employment
4.6 Benefits sharing schemes
The community has enjoyed social, economic and environmental benefits (Table 6).
Their market for their products, it has added house hold incomes to the locals, purchasing
power of the community has increased, education sector has also been improved and
other facilities have been constantly improved. They have also been able to get rural
19
electrification. Some respondents
noted that they have never been given employment
and others asserted that CBT has not met the requirements of local people. From the
results above majority of the respondents indicate that they have greatly benefited from
CBT.
Table 4. Benefit sharing schemes
Variable
Due to the waterfalls, it attracts tourists hence work for the local people
around
White color jobs are now available
People are self-employed
It has created market for the products produced
It has not met the requirement of local people
No – never established or witnessed any
No – many people are poor, no employment we have been given yet
It has created employment opportunities in the tourism industry
Total
Response (%)
5
10
22
24
26
4
3
2
4
100
20
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION
5.1 Local peoples participation in rural development
The study revealed that the Bukusu community supports the idea of community tourism
and many are willing to take up responsibilities like local guides and interpreters. The
local community has a right to the local resources in the area and therefore they have to
be involved because after all it is the community that will pick up the pieces when the
tourist has gone (Sharply, 1995, Murphy 1998). It was found that despite the constraints,
community members are confident that they are in control over the tourism development
in their village. Overall, most of the respondents agreed that the community has control
over tourism development in Bungoma community.
It was also noted that there is an active community based tourism group in Bungoma,
which consists of home stay members, guides, coordinators, and people who are involved
in any of the occupational groups such as traditional dancing. Members are spread around
the entire village. Some families in the community are taking part in the home stay
program alone, and although they do not receive many tourists in their homes, they are
very much involved with tourism in the community. The members of the communitybased tourism group regularly meet to discuss new developments in their community. A
large part of the community is thus actively involved in tourism development in
Bungoma.
Even though there are some constraints to full local participation, we can see that these
problems mainly occur with the communication between the community and outsiders.
Within the community however, community members seem to be very involved with
tourism development. .Despite the constraints, community members seem to be confident
that they are in control over the tourism development in their County. Some respondents
revealed that they even have contact with tourists, though rarely community with them.
This indicates that tourism is more on the background for most of the community
21
members. A lot of the home stay members actually had rare contact with tourists simply
because they are with a large group and only few tourists make use of the home stays.
Some other respondents however, indicated that they have never been involved in any of
the above mentioned activities at all. One of the founders and promoter of a community
based tourism project explained that anyone can become a part of the CBT group when
he or she would like to. Villagers can easily join the home stay.
One other respondent informed this study there is a remarkable difference between a
community member who is not a member of the CBT group and a community member,
especially that one who is in the CBT group; members of the group benefit a lot from
tourism development. He had however, never participated in any of the tourism planning
and development, or was informed, but still he says he can notice that the tourism group
is doing very well, and that tourism benefits the community. Therefore he sometimes
thinks of joining the group, or more specifically the traditional medicine group, as he
already has the knowledge.
The variable overall participation shows the sum of the different variables concerning
local tourism participation. Going forward, most of respondents indicated that there are
people who are not involved at all. They do not work in the tourism industry, they have
never participated in meetings concerning tourism planning, were never informed about
the decisions taken, were never asked their opinion and never have direct contact with
tourists. The implication of these findings is that most of the people in Bungoma
community participate in some way in tourism development.
5.2 Contribution of tourism towards poverty reduction
Tourism initiatives has led to creation of jobs, through employment the poor families get
a source of earning which means that the employees are able to sustain themselves
and their dependants, policies that encourage age the employment of local people
should open up opportunities for the poor, the advantage of addressing poverty through
existing tourism is that it enables the poor to benefit from the entrepreneurial skills,
22
issues like having proper contracts and fair pay conditions, providing part time work,
seasonality and the need to provide more year round opportunities, choice of location of
new developments, making it accessible to poor communities who could supply labour
should needs to be addressed.
Business operators with income generating activities realize booming activity with
ready market for agricultural products like cabbage and bananas, some sold directly by
the villagers or small scale farmers, sale of non-agricultural products has also in
increased. Hawkers, stage vendors, wholesalers, artisans get more income, supply of
goods and services by the community occur at any point of the tourism supply chain in
including goods and services
provided to hotels such as food, handcraft, building
services at construction stage among others. Majority of the respondents indicated that
tourism had improved people’s livelihoods in Bungoma.
Charitable giving by tourism enterprises and tourists is another way in which
community tourism is helping to alleviate poverty in the area, this s includes
payments into general charities and programs such as HIV/AIDS programs by
tourists and tour operators or more specific support for projects in areas
visited.
Investment in infrastructure stimulated by tourism has enabled the community residents
to get good drinking water, electricity and road network. It is easy to transport locally
produced goods to the market.
Direct sales of goods and services to visitors by the community thus the informal
economy and includes selling food and handcrafts, pottery, transport and informal
accommodation like camping. This sector is hugely important in the area and is one
of the most
direct ways of getting visitors spending into the
hands of the
community.
Establishment of tourism enterprises by the community, this ranges from micro, small to
medium sized enterprises or community based enterprises, compared to working in
23
the formal economy that has enabled the community to develop long term projects
hence obtain profit for a longer period. Tax or charge on tourism income profits
is directed to poverty reduction programs. This has the advantage of enabling the
resources to be channelled to the neediest people and community members without
requiring their direct involvement in tourism activity.
Lastly, it is however reported by some respondents that people’s participation in tourism
does not guarantee one’s significant improvement in livelihood because, it is possible for
someone to participate in the industry but when he/she has no influence and therefore,
may not command a significant economic benefit. It was thus summed up by another
respondent that in Bungoma people’s participation in community-based tourism has
greatly impacted on their livelihood. This is more so for those community members who
are more involved in tourism development.
5.3 Benefits sharing schemes
5.31 Social Benefits
On the social construct, one of the positive benefits, which were frequently mentioned by
respondents, is that tourism had caused a revival of the local culture. For example
traditional dances are performed for tourists, and the local population enjoys doing this.
Also some traditional products, like woven scarves, are made more frequently for
tourists. Tourists are interested in these traditional activities and the local population
enjoys doing it, a win-win situation. One of the coordinating members of the CBT group
also explained that the community had started to recover and reuse some traditional tools
mainly for the purpose of teaching tourists about the local traditions, but because they
were recovered now also function again.
One respondent revealed that because of tourism, locals have more pride in their way of
living. This confirmed by some respondent who reported that tourism had promoted pride
in the local culture, as well as cultural restoration and conservation. Another great benefit
pointed out was that tourism had united various groups of people in the community. This
24
also became clear with several respondent’s views which indicated that the revival of old
traditions had made the community closer. The traditional dance performances, for
instance, are too good opportunities for the locals to come together.
On the other hand, respondents lamented that because the community has won public
attention because of its tourism potential, this alone draws attention of some
organizations who wanted to become involved and help. However, they some of these
organizations dampen the local culture. It was also reported that many of these
organizations come with certain projects not necessarily needed in Bungoma community.
A senior member of the community informed this study that tourism had brought
education to Bungoma in various ways. He argued that at first the education was directed
specifically to the tourism professionals and specialists for sustainable tourism
development, but now, members of community-based tourism groups, staff of CBOs and
NGOs and schools have visited the village and gave other types of training to community
members related to agriculture and sustainable development activities. Community
members for instance received training about diversification on their field and about food
preparation. It is unlikely that these NGOs would have come to the village if it was not
the current developments in the tourism sector.
5.3.2 Economic benefits
This study learnt that tourism in Bungoma has had very positive economic benefits on
people’s livelihoods. A number of respondents reported that the tourism industry has
obviously created a lot of employment and has therefore also increased the income of
many residents. For example, one respondent stated that for people who take part in the
home stay program, tourism is usually just an extra income, next to for instance fishing or
working on the oil refinery. For Bungoma community members, tourism diversifies the
local economy meaning that residents are not only dependent on the money they receive
for their agricultural produce which fluctuates highly.
25
One respondent explained that he tries to have as many people on board in his network so
as to benefit from tourism development. When he takes tourists on a tour around the
community he stops at some places which are otherwise not frequently visited by tourists.
These places include local shops, special restaurants and village farm, where tourists can
drink fresh milk and juices, eat fresh fruits. All of these places are owned by locals. This
way the tourist can enjoy something different, and at the same time local businesses are
supported. Also the home stay members are supported to take tourists to a locally owned
restaurant once during their stay (the other meals are mostly traditionally home cooked.
Going forward, the study learned of a negative economic impact of tourism to people’s
livelihood. Respondents lamented of the problem of increasing prices. One respondent
indicated that prices for food had been rising in rapid rate. This was also related to a
higher standard of living by another respondent.
Most of the respondents indicated that the problem of rising prices was not only caused
by tourism development in the community, but moreover, because of the booming
tourism industry in places around Bungoma. Some respondent informed this study that
residents from neighbouring communities frequently visit the market or shops in
Bungoma and can feel the effects of tourism inflation. Tourism thus creates income and
at the same time inflation in Bungoma.
Some respondents informed this study that this is an effect that is caused by tourism in
general, and not specifically by community-based tourism in Bungoma, which is too
small scale. Most respondents however, were more positive than negative towards the
effects of tourism on the economy. One of the respondents – a teacher who also stated
that he noticed that there has been an increase in consumerism. “People in our country
used to live simple lives, but now have to compete more.” The economic benefits of
community-based tourism in Bungoma County have been positive on people’s livelihood
than the perceived negative effects.
26
5.3.3 Environmental benefits
The researcher’s interest in this section was to examine how community-based tourism
development in Bungoma has helped in environmental conservation, control on land
degradation and pollution. Unlike general impact patterns in the tourism industry, the
community members of Bungoma have mostly registered positive environmental effects
from tourism development. Most notable is that people actually see that the streets in the
village become a lot cleaner every now and then since tourists structurally come to visit.
It was found by this study that community members try to keep their village clean for
when tourists visit. The local government has also introduced a better waste management
system and villagers monitor to control unnecessary garbage disposal on the streets. As
one respondent reported that community leaders gives regular warnings during their
meetings and speeches to the villagers through on improper waste disposal and indicate
penalties. This was made clearer by another respondent who said “our community leader
sometimes talks directly and asks community members to keep the streets clean to
welcome tourists.”
Some respondent reported that because of a high tourism potential in Bungoma, streets
are better maintained and forest around the village are protected against cutting and
destruction. “The cutting of trees used to be a large problem in the area. Most trees were
cut by locals who were looking for wood but, since the tourism industry has been
growing and villagers have received training, the local population is more aware of the
importance of nature conservation”.
It was also revealed that the local guides are made responsible for the conservation of the
forest. One of the respondents who was actually a guide explained that he now knows the
forest so well that he would notice when any of the trees is cut. He states that “nowadays
no more trees are cut down.” While the community in general has a positive attitude
concerning the environmental impact of tourism development, the scores on the
statements in Table IV are a little lower than for the social and economic impact.
27
CHAPTER SIX: CONLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
6.1 Conclusion

Tourism enterprises are supposed to initiate labour intensive projects and
encourage active local participation as well as project ownership by the local
community in order to ensure that tourism projects are sustainable

Tourism development has the potential to enhance culture and the economic
base of the local community; indeed, it is a primary goal in modern tourism
development for indigenous communities (Harrison, 191992 and Gunn, 1994).
The main attractions of the region include rural landscape, cultural
resources and captivating scenarios.

More education to the locals is needed and all the youth are to be encouraged to
participate in community based tourism. The county government should provide
security to tourism attractions.
6.2 Recommendations

Sensitization and education are therefore required to bring out the problems and
concerns to determine the available options before decisions and actions are
taken.

Community-based support programs can help communities identify their
problems and priorities, increase their awareness of what can be done and help
them select from a range of components.

An integrated approach to rural resource development is therefore essential if
sustainable development is to become more than wishful thinking.

To succeed effectively in economic, social and environmental terms tourism
requires specific conditions which meet market needs and current taste and
preferences.
28
REFERENCES
Akama J. (1996). Western Environmental Values and Nature-based Tourism
in Kenya.
Akama, S. (1999). The Evolution of Tourism in Kenya. Journal of Sustainable
Development, 7(1), 6-25
Ashley, C. (2000). The impacts of tourism on rural livelihoods: Namibia’s experience
(Working Paper128). London: Overseas Development Institute
Ashley C. & Maxwell S. (2001) Rethinking Rural Development. Development Policy
Review, 19(4):395-425 London: Blackwell Publishing
Hall, C.M. (1994): Tourism and politics: Policy, power and place. London:
John Wiley and Sons.
Hall, C.M. (2000). Tourism Planning: Policies, Processes and Relationships.
Harlow:
Hall, M. C., & Lew, A. A. (2009). Understanding and managing tourism impacts:
An integrated approach. New York: Routledge.
Haralambopoulos, N. and Pizam, A. (1996). Perceived Impacts of Tourism: The Case of
Samos. Annals of Tourism Research 21(3): 503-526
Jones, C.M. 2001. Wildlife Conservation Act, 1974 and the Wildlife Policy of Tanzania:
Kibicho, W. (2003). Community tourism: a lesson from Kenya’s coastal region,
Journal
Li, Y., Xu, Z., & Cheng, H. (2009). The role of social resource of indigenous people in
local ecological resource management in China: A preliminary case in Zhangye,
North.
Manyara, G. & Jones, E. (2005). Policy Options for the Development of an Indigenous
Tourism-SME Sector in Kenya. In E. Jones & C. Haven Tourism-SMEs, Service
Quality and Destination Competitiveness: International Perspectives (pp. 59-72).
29
Manyara, G. & Jones, E. (2007). Community-based Tourism Enterprises Development in
Kenya: An Exploration of Their Potential as Avenues of Poverty Reduction.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(6), 628-644
Manyara, G., Jones E. & Botterill D. (2006). Tourism and Poverty Reduction: The Case
for Indigenous Enterprise Development in Kenya. Tourism, Culture &
Communication, 7(1), 19-38
Mbaiwa, J.E. (2004). The success and sustainability of community-based natural resource
management in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. South African Geographical
Journal, 86(1), 44–53.
Mitchell, R. E. & Reid, D. G. (2001). Community Integration: Island Tourism in Peru.
Annals of Tourism Research, 28(1), 113-139
Murphy, P.E. & Murphy, A.E. (2004). Strategic management for tourism communities:
Bridging the gaps. Clevedon, Aspects of Tourism Series Channel view
Publications.
Murphy, P.E. (1985). Tourism: A community approach. London, Methuen of Vacation
Marketing, 10 (1) 33-42
Nyaupane, G.P., Morais, D.B. & Dowler, L. (2006). The role of community involvement
and number/type of visitors on tourism impacts: A controlled comparison of
Annapurna, Nepal and Northwest Yunna, China. Tourism Management,
Vol. 27, No. 6, pp.1373-1385
Pretty, J. (1995). Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture. World Development
23(8), 1247-1263.
Scheyvens, R. (2002). Tourism for Development: Empowering Communities. Essex:
Pearson EducationLtd.
Scheyvens, R. (2008). Tourism and poverty reduction: issues for Small Island States,
Scheyvens, R., 2002: Tourism for development: Empowering communities,
Prentice Hall, London
Scheyvens, R. (1999). Ecotourism and the empowerment of local communities. Tourism
management, 20(2), 245-249.
30
Scheyvens, R. (2003). Local Involvement in Managing 12 Tourism. Tourism in
destination communities, 229.
Sharpley, R. & Sharpley, J. (1997): Rural Tourism: An Introduction. London:
International Thomson Business
Sharply, R., & Telfer, D. J. (2002). Tourism and Development: Concepts and Issues.
Channel view Publications
Sibanda B. M. C. & A. K. Omwega (1996). Some Reflections on Conservation,
Sustainable Development and Equitable Sharing of Benefits from Wildlife in
Africa: the Case of Kenya and Zimbabwe. South African Journal of Wildlife
Research 26 (4), 175-181.
Sindiga, I. (1999). Tourism and Africa Development: Change Challenge for Tourism in
Kenya. The Hague: Centre for African Studies
Sindinga, I, 1999: Alternative tourism and sustainable development in Kenya, Journal of
sustainable tourism, 7, 2, 108-127
Southgate, C. R. J. (2006). Ecotourism in Kenya: The Vulnerability of Communities.
Journal of Ecotourism, 5(1&2), 80-96
Sharply, R., & Telfer, D. J. (2002). Tourism and Development: Concepts and Issues.
Channel view Publications.
Telfer, D. J., & Sharpley, R. (2008). Tourism and development in the developing world.
New York: Routledge.
Timothy, D. J. (1999). Participatory planning: a view of tourism in Indonesia, Annals
of Tourism Research, 26 (2) 371-391
Tosun, C. (1999). Towards a Typology of Community Participation in Tourism
Development Process. An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality
Research, 10(2), 113-134
Tosun, C. (2000). Limits to Community Participation in the Tourism Development
Process in Developing Countries. Tourism Management, 21, 613-633.
Tosun, C. (2006). Expected nature of community participation in tourism development.
Tourism Management 27, 493-504.
31
Tosun, C., & Jenkins, C. L. (1998). The evolution of tourism planning in third world
countries: a critique. Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research 4(2),
101-114.
Tosun, C. (1998). Roots of unsustainable tourism development at the local level: The
case of Urgup in Turkey. Tourism manage-ment, 19(6), 595-610.
United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). 2007. Tourism Highlights
UNWTO (2006). Tourism Highlights: 2006 Edition. Retrieved August 23, 2007,
from
http://www.unwto.org/facts/eng/pdf/highlights/highlights_06_eng_hr.pdf.
Vincent, V. C. and Thompson, W. (2002). Assessing community support and
sustainability for ecotourism development, Journal of Travel Research,
41 (2)153-160
Western China. Sciences in Cold and Arid Regions, 1(3), 277-285
World Tourism Organization. (2002). Tourism and poverty alleviation. Madrid,
World Tourism Organization
World Tourism Organization. (2010). UNWTO Tourism Highlights 2010 Edition:
The World Tourism Organization (UNWTO).
World Travel & Tourism Council (2012). Travel & tourism economic impact 2012
Thailand. London, UK: World Travel & Tourism Council.
Zhao, W. and Ristchie J.R. (2007). Tourism and poverty alleviation: an integrative
research framework, Current Issues in Tourism, 10 (2&3) 119-143
32
APPENDIX
RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE TO COMMUNITY OF BUNGOMA COUNTY
The information asked is for research purposes only and it will be treated as confidential.
Please feel free to express your views honestly.
Demographic characteristics of respondents
1. Gender
Male
Female
2. Age group
20-29
30-39
40-49
5 50-59
60+
3. What is your marital status?
Single
Married
Divorced
Engaged
Widowed
4. What is your highest level of education?
Primary
Secondary
College
University
no formal
education
5. What is your occupation?
Farmer
Private sector
Self-employed
Service industry
Retired
Unemployed
other
6. How long have you been living in this community?
Since birth
less than 5 years
More than 10 years
20 years and
above
7. What is your average monthly income?
Lees than Ksh4, 000
30,000
Ksh 4,001-7000
Ksh 7,001-10000
Ksh 10,001-
Above 30,000
Contribution to livelihood
8. Has community based tourism improved the local economy?
Yes (how)
No (why)
Comment………………………………………………………………………………
9. Has Community Based Tourism created employment opportunities?
Yes (which type)
No
Comment ……………………………………………………………………………
33
10. Has Community Based Tourism improved the quality of life?
Yes (please specify how)
No (why)
…………………………………………………………………………………………
11. Has tourism helped in protection of natural resources? If yes how?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
12. Do you think Community Based Tourism hasbeen a success in poverty eradication?
Yes
No
Comment ……………………………………………………………………………...
13. Do you think Community Based Tourism has led to improvement in welfare services?
Yes
No
Comment ……………………………………………………………………………
14. Has the culture of the community promoted due to Community based tourism?
Yes (how)
No
Comment ……………………………………………………………………………
15. What are the major tourism resources in BungomaCounty? (Please rank in order of
importance)
Cultural attractions
Lakes and rivers
Wild life
Mountains
Hotels
Others
16. Do you think more should be done to foster tourism development?
If yes how?
Yes (how)
No (why)
…………………………………………………………………………………………
17. Are there any Community Based Organizations in BungomaCounty?
Yes (please specify)
No
…………………………………………………………………………………………
18. In 17 above, does the local authority support their sustenance? If yes specify the type
of support
……………………………………………………………………………………………....
34
19. Have you been involved in any type of meeting where you discussed tourism
development in your community?
Yes (how many times)
No
…………………………………………………………………………………………
20. Have you been asked about your opinion on tourism by those who plan for tourism
development?
Yes (how many times)
No
…………………………………………………………………………………………
21. Do you participate in developing Community Based Tourism in your area?
Yes (how)
No (why)
…………………………………………………………………………………………
Impact of Community Based Tourism
22. Does Community Based Tourism cause vegetation destruction? If yes, how?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
23. Is degradation of landscape as a result of development of community based tourism?
Yes (how)
No
Comment …………………………………………………………………………..
24. Has Community Based Tourism led to loss of indigenous culture?
Yes (how)
No (why)
Comment ……………………………………………………………………………
25. Is it true that tourism has caused environmental pollution? If yes, how?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
26. Has Community Based Tourism provided long term rural development?
Yes (how)
No (why)
…………………………………………………………………………………………
27. Has agricultural land change a result of community based tourism?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
28. Does tourism lead to increase in conflicts between the host and guest community?
…………………………………………………………………………………………
Thank you for participating in this survey
35