Relationship between tourism in national parks and community-based conservation: a case study of West Bali National Park, Indonesia

Pervasive, excessive exploitation of biodiversity to meet the ever-increasing population demand worldwide has accelerated species extinction which in turn threatens humankind’s existence and survival in this finite earth. To anticipate the worst case scenario, Parks and protected areas have been established throughout the world to conserve biodiversity. However, although this approach has been considered a key instrument in conservation of biodiversity, employing Parks and their networks as vehicles for conserving biodiversity in developing countries is challenging. Parks depend on the support of local people for their long-term existence but protracted conflict is often a mark of relationships with associated communities. Reconciling such troubled relationships is imperative for achieving conservation goals. Tourism, especially ecotourism, has been proffered as a way to address these problems. Through tourism, economic opportunities and benefits for local people can be generated to help address land-use incompatibilities so that pressures on the Park could be reduced and local people would become guardians of biodiversity. At the same time Park authorities would have an incentive to improve and strengthen their capacity for conservation. This study of the West Bali National Park, Indonesia, aimed to explore the relationships between tourism and the National Park’s capacity to engage local communities in conservation. A multi-method approach was used. Data were gathered through semi-structured and structured interviews of semi-randomly selected respondents from three villages situated just outside the Park boundary, semi-structured interviews with Park officials and tourism operators, and analysis of various documents and newspapers/magazines. Results show that top-down imposition of the Park was associated with attempts to relocate local people and with reduction of their access to resources in the Park producing sour relationships between the Park authority and local communities. Nepotism and malfeasance in establishing tourism enterprises, and complications arising from decentralization of governance caused further deterioration of relationships and a prolonged atmosphere of mutual suspicion, resentment and distrust followed. The advent of tourism actually had negative effects on the Park and the Park authority. It forced a reduction in size of the important core and wilderness zones to accommodate private business interests, established activities that were incompatible with the Park objectives and caused loss of complementary incomes that had been enjoyed for many years by Park employees. For local communities, the positive effects of tourism through employment opportunities and generation of alternative livelihoods primarily benefitted local elites and their relatives, igniting already tense intra-village and inter-ethnic relations. Furthermore, the establishment of tourism resorts, one of which exploited the existing poor relationships for its own interests, triggered general feelings that local people were being unfairly treated by the Park authority which appeared to favour outside tourism organisations. Declining respect for the Park meant that local people, in spite of having good knowledge of conservation and its importance, actually increased pressure on it as a resource for provision of firewood and fodder. Despite the unfavourable situation, a partnership involving local communities and tourism operators has been established to help the Park manage its coastal and reef environment. Additionally, a proposal to create a new traditional use zone in the Park and plans to implement community-based forestry management to reduce pressures upon the Park’s terrestrial environment have been developed. While these initiatives could be seen as affirmative gestures to reduce pressures on the Park and to foster better relations between the Park authority and local people, the outcomes remain to be seen. It can be concluded that tourism did not improve the West Bali National Park authority’s capacity to engage local communities in conservation, but, instead, the advent of private tourism operations has added a further burden to Park management. This might have been avoided if greater attention had been paid to addressing the socio-political situation at the local level and employing pro-poor tourism to give local people more control in planning and developing tourism operations and to help reduce widespread poverty.