Report No. 43373-ZM Zambia Economic and Poverty Impact of Nature-based Tourism December 2007 Economic and Sector Work Africa Region Document of the World Bank TABLE OFCONTENTS EXECUTIVESUMMARY ....................................................................................................................... i 1 INTRODUCTION:MAINOBJECTIVESOFTHESNDY . ................................................................... 1 A.STRATEGICCONTEXT ................................................................................................................. 1 B OUTLINEOF STUDY . .................................................................................................................... 1 2. TOURISMAS A GROWTHSECTOR: CHALLENGESAND OPPORTUNITIES ..................................... 3 A INTRODUCTION . ......................................................................................................................... 3 B.GLOBALTOURISM TRENDS ......................................................................................................... 4 C REGIONALTOURISMTRENDS . ..................................................................................................... 5 D.PROFILEOF ZAMBIANTOURISM ................................................................................................ 7 E PROFILEOF ZAMBIANTOURISTS . .............................................................................................. 12 F IMPEDIMENTSTO GROWTH . ..................................................................................................... 17 3. NATURETOURISM:-CONTRIBUTIONTO THEZAMBIAN ECONOMY .......................................... 27 A INTRODUCTION . ....................................................................................................................... 27 B SURVEY DESIGNAND METHODOLOGY . ..................................................................................... 27 C THETRUE NUMBEROF NATURETOURISTS . ............................................................................... 30 D TOURIST PROFILE . ..................................................................................................................... 30 E ECONOMICIMPACTOF NATURETOURISM . ............................................................................... 31 F INCREASINGTHE ECONOMICIMPACTOF NATURETOURISM . .................................................... 34 G.LINKAGESAND LEAKAGES ........................................................................................................ 35 4. HOUSEHOLDWELFAREAROUNDNATIONALPARKS ................................................................ 38 A INTRODUCTION . ....................................................................................................................... 38 B SURVEY DESIGNAND METHODOLOGY . ..................................................................................... 40 C SURVEY RESULTS . ...................................................................................................................... 43 D.WELFARE................................................................................................................................. 46 E INTERPRETATIONOF RESULTS . .................................................................................................. 49 5. MANAGEMENTOFTHEWILDLIFE ESTATE ............................................................................... 54 A DESCRIPTIONOF THE WILDLIFE ESTATE . ................................................................................... 54 B MANAGEMENTOPTIONS . ......................................................................................................... 56 C THE MANAGEMENTINSTITUTION:ZAWA . ................................................................................. 59 D FINANCINGTHE WILDLIFE ESTATE . ........................................................................................... 63 E THE TRANSFORMATIONAGENDA . .............................................................................................66 6. CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................... 70 2 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 2.1: Existing and projectedgrowth intourist arrivalsto Zambia.............................. FIGURE 2.2: Worldwide tourist arrivals by destinationregion(2005) ................................... 3 4 FIGURE 2.3: Tourist arrivals in south-easternAfrica ............................................................ 5 FIGURE 2.4: Tourist arrival trends in South-Eastern Africa .................................................. ......................... 6 FIGURE 2.6: Availability of nature tourist bednightsby region.......................................... FIGURE 2.5: Availability of nature tourist accommodationunits by region 11 11 FIGURE2.7: Availability of nature tourist bed nightsby accommodationtype .................... 12 FIGURE 2.8: Tourist arrivals to Zambiaby purpose of visit. 2005 13 FIGURE 2.9: Stated purpose of holidayvisit. 2005 .............................................................. ....................................... 13 FIGURE 2.10: Holiday and VFR visitorsto Zambia by source region. 2005 ........................ FIGURE2.11:Holiday-makersin south-easternAfrica by source country (2005) ................14 FIGURE 2.12: Durationof stay by nature tourists................................................................ 15 15 FIGURE 2.14: Meangroup size o f naturetourists................................................................ FIGURE 2.13: Number of sites visited in Zambia by holiday-makers.................................. 16 FIGURE2.15: Number ofvisits to Zambiaby tourists......................................................... 16 17 FIGURE2.16: Tourists' average daily expenditure($) ........................................................ 18 national ruralaverage .......................................................................................................... FIGURE4.1: Comparisonofwelfare ofhouseholds livingaroundnational parkswith FIGURE 4.2: Welfare ofhouseholds in GMAs relativeto those in non-GMA areas.............45 47 FIGURE 4.3: Welfare ofhouseholds living in GMAs in comparisonto the same households iftheir GMA was not designateda GMA .......................................................... 48 FIGURE 4.4: Differencesin welfare between households participatingor not in VAGsICRBs........................................................................................................................ 50 FIGURE 4.5: Welfare ofthe same householdswhether they participateor not in VAGs/CRBs ........................................................................................................................ 51 non-poor households............................................................................................................ FIGURE 4.6: Comparisonof welfare between GMA and non-GMA households for poor and 51 FIGURE4.7: Comparisonofthe welfare ofthe same households in GMAs ifthe GMA effect was withdrawn, i.e. ifits landwas not in a GMA anymore ................................................... 52 FIGURE4.8: Comparisonofwelfare between VAG/CRB participantsand non-participating households ........................................................................................................................... 53 FIGURE4.9: Comparisonofthe welfare ofthe same households whether they participateor not in VAG/CRB ................................................................................................................. .................................... 53 FIGURE 5.2: Willingness to pay conservationfee ............................................................... FIGURE 5.1 :Naturetourist's willingness to pay park entrance fees 64 66 LIST OF TABLES TABLE 2.1: Budgetsand visitor arrivalsof selected African countries(2004)....................... 6 TABLE 2.2: Internationaltourist arrivals. tourism receiptsand ratios ............................................. .................................... 7 TABLE 2.4: Importancerankingof destinationsby principal internationaltour agents ........14 TABLE 2.3: National parks and number of visitors, 2003-2005 9 TABLE 2.6: Progress against objectives inthe Tourism Strategy andAction Plan...............23 TABLE 2.5: Booking materialspreferredby naturetourists and their bookingagents..........20 TABLE 3.2: Distribution oftourists by locationof interview............................................... TABLE 3.1 :Tourism receiptsof selectedAfrican countries. 2003....................................... 27 28 TABLE 3.3: 95%confidence intervalsfor selected indicators .............................................. 29 4 TABLE 3.4: Visitor arrivals 2005: Area of origin by purposeof visit .................................. 29 TABLE 3.5: Number of tourists inthe sample by origin and purpose of visit 30 TABLE 3.6: Nature tourists' overall satisfaction with sites (YO) ........................................... ....................... 31 TABLE 3.7: Naturetourists' average expenditures without airfare ...................................... ...............31 TABLE 3.9: Direct and indirect economic impact ofnaturetourism in2005 ....................... TABLE 3.8: Breakdown of expenditures per naturetourist per trip (non-package) 32 33 TABLE 3.10: Direct and indirect employment content of ZMK 1billion final consumption34 TABLE 3.11: Expenditurefor non-package naturetourist per trip by number of sites..........35 TABLE 3.12: Cost of overseas services (including flights) for naturetourists inZambia TABLE 4.1: Allocation ofhunting revenues ........................................................................ ....35 39 TABLE 4.2: SampledGMAs in park systems (designed for survey purpose) .................................. ....................... 41 TABLE 4.5: Comparisonof communities inGMAs versus non-GMAs ............................... TABLE 4.4: Comparisonof householdsin GMAs versus non-GMAs 44 44 TABLE 5.1: Zambia's managementregionsand Area Management Units .......................... 55 TABLE 5.2: Eco-regionsin relation to Zambia's protectedareas 58 TABLE 5.3: Classification of Zambia's national parks ........................................................ .......................................... ..................................................... 58 TABLE 5.5: Potential revenue from international park visitors, 2005 .................................. TABLE 5.4: ZAWA's financial performance2001-2005 62 65 LIST OF BOXES Box 2.1 What is a Tourist ...................................................................................................... 4 Box 2.2. Livingstone as a Hub? ........................................................................................... 20 Box 3.1. Coffee Leakage .................................................................................................... -36 Box 4.1. Game ManagementAreas...................................................................................... Box 4.3. Direct Benefits from Safari Operators.................................................................... 38 39 Box 4.4 Consumptionas a Measure of Welfare .................................................................... ................................................................... 40 Box 4.5 Female-HeadedHouseholds in GMAs Box 5.1. Trans-Frontier ConservationApproaches.............................................................. 49 68 LIST OFMAPS MAP 2.2: NationalParks and Game ManagementAreas in Zambia...................................................... MAP 2.1:Distributionofmaintourisminvestments.............................................................................. 8 9 MAP 4.1:National Parksystem and GMAs with sampledareas.......................................................... MAP 2.3: Tourist arrival routes ............................................................................................................ 22 41 MAP 5.1: Eco-regions andNationalParks ........................................................................................... 54 5 ABBREVIATIONS& ACRONYMS ADMADE AdministrativeManagementDesign(for GMAs) AFTEN Africa Technical Environment Unit of the World Bank AFTPS Africa Technical Private Sector Unit ofthe World Bank AMU Area ManagementUnit CAS Country Assistance Strategy CBNRM Community-basedNaturalResourcesManagement CRB Community ResourcesBoard cso Central Statistical Office cv Contingent Valuation DRC Democratic Republic ofCongo DSI Development Services& Initiatives ENV Environment Unitofthe World Bank FNDP FifthNationalDevelopmentPlan GDP Gross Domestic Product GEF GlobalEnvironmentFacility GMA GameManagementArea ICDP IntegratedConservationandDevelopmentPrograms IDA InternationalDevelopmentAssociation IO Input-Output ITC InformationTechnology and Communication KAZA Kavango-Zambezi MLE MaximumLikelihood (joint) Estimation MTENR Ministry ofTourism, Environment& NaturalResources NGO Non-GovernmentalOrganization NIUB Net Income of UnincorporatedBusiness NPWS National Parks & Wildlife Service NRCF NaturalResourcesConsultative Forum PCC Per CapitaConsumption PCEXP Per CapitaConsumptionExpenditure PPP PublicPrivatePartnership PPS ProbabilityProportionalto Size PRSP PovertyReductionStrategy Paper PSM Propensity-ScoreMatching SEA StandardEnumerationArea SEED Support for Economic ExpansionandDiversification(project) SME Small andMedium-sizedEnterprise TFCA Transfrontier ConservationArea UNDP UnitedNationDevelopment Program VAG Village Action Group VAT Value Added Tax VFR Visiting Friendand Relatives WTP Willingness To Pay ZAWA Zambia Wildlife Authority ZDA Zambia Development Agency 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Our team comprisedKirk Hamilton(ENV), overallcoordinationandwrite-up; Sushenjit Bandyopadhay (ENV), designand coordination of the GMA HouseholdSurvey and data analysis of both householdandTourismDemandSurvey together with GelsonTembo (consultant, Universityof Zambia); Jean-ChristopheCarret (AFTEN) ledthe initial design; GoodsonSimyenga(consultant, Central StatisticalOffice) and BenjaminGuillon (consultant) organizedthe TourismDemandSurvey; Besa Muwele(consultant, Central Statistical Office) didthe input andoutput analysis to calculate the multiplier; Suzane Mourato(consultant) designedthe Willingnessto Pay Survey; Adam Pope (consultant) carried out the Nature-basedTourismSupply-sideSurvey andcontributed to write-up of Chapter2 andChapter 5; Phyllis Simasiku (consultant) reviewedthe write-up ofthe GMA Household Survey; and ChangaConsulting, contractedby ZAWA, carried out the reviewof progresstowards ZAWA's current strategic plan. This work could not have beencompletedwithout the co-financingby our constructive partners and in particular Winnie Musonda(UNDP), Jacob Jepsen, HansAaskov andMisael Kokwe(Denmark), and Jan-Erik Studsrod, Mosho Imakandoand Odd Arnesen(Norway). All studies were carried out under the umbrellaofthe NRCF under the chairmanship of Dr. Henry Mwima, the coordinationof DavidMulolani and the support of Frank van Dixhoorn, at DSI, and all membersof the NRCF. The Ministry of Tourismo fthe Government ofZambia showed support andattentionto the process and its result underthe leadershipof M.RusselMulele(previous PS MTENR), Justina Wake (Director of Tourism), JohnChiluwe(Tourism)andthe late Davy Siame(Biodiversity). At ZAWA, special thanks for their leadershipandopenness are extendedto Dr. Lewis Saiwana (Director General), HapengaKabeta(previous Director General), Victor Siamudala(Director Planning), VincentNyirenda(headof planning), Tom Mushingwe(previousCommercial Director) and MukelaMuyunda(previous FinancialDirector). The quality control was entrusted to our peer reviewers to whom we are thankful for their time and invaluablecontribution: ShaunMann(AFTPS), Sergio Margulis(AFTEN) and Grant Cummings (private investor). 7 ECONOMIC AND POVERTY IMPACT OF NATURE-BASEDTOURISM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. This study estimatesthe contributionofnature-basedtourism inZambia to economic growth and poverty reductionas well as to the sustainabilityofthe managementof the wildlife estate. Settingthe Stage ii. TheZambianGovernmenthasidentifiedtourismalongwithagriculture,miningand manufacturing as the most important sectors for economic developmentin its various planning documents, includingthe 2007 FifthNationalDevelopment Plan(FNDP). iii. Impedimentstoacceleratedtourismgrowtharerecordedinthesectionabouttourisminthe FNDP.They include:(I)inadequatetourism planning; (2) lack of infrastructure; (3) limited product base; (4) inadequatemanagemento fnational parks; (5) insufficientcountry marketing; (6) lack of government funding; (7) lack of community interestlparticipation;(8) poorly trained and insufficient humanresources; and (9) Zambiabeinga highcost destination.To address these impediments, the FNDP proposesto focus on: (1) the designof a proper national Tourism Master Plan; (2) large-scale development of infrastructure; (3) increasedinvestment in humancapital; (4) country marketing; and (5) tourism data collection. iv. Beingaware ofthe importanceofthe wildlife estate as a maintourismproduct,the Zambian Governmentreformedits protectedarea system inthe 1990s.A pillar of the reformwas the establishmentof an autonomouspublic institution, the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA). ZAWA was createdwith a mandateto rehabilitate the wildlife estate whilst seeking financial sustainability through commercialization oftourism products. This was to be achieved in collaborationwith communitieslivingin GameManagementAreas (GMAs). Sharingof benefitsfrom consumptiveuse of wildlife, inparticular hunting, would contribute to poverty alleviation,and government subsidies and donor-fundedprojects would ensure a gradual reinvestment. v. By 2004, it was clear that the reformwas not deliveringthe intendedenvironmental, economic and social benefits. ZAWA couldonly managea fractionofthe wildlife estate. Governmentsubsidiesdid not materialize and donors continued funding operatingcosts insteadof investments.ZAWA was increasingly dependent on revenuefrom huntinginGMAs. Governance issues surfaced andthe progressmadeduringthe 1990s incommunity-basednaturalresources managementwas largelyarrested. vi. Despite steady growthofthe tourism sector, the Government continuedto view tourism as a foreign-dominatedsector not contributingto the economy.The perception was that pre-paid packages ledto high leakages.At the sametime, the privatesector increasinglycriticizedthe lack of efficiency inthe managementofthe wildlife estate as well as the highcost of doing business.Finally, cooperating partners failedto comprehendwhy the Government's official declarations about the potential intourism were not backedby commitmenttowards makingthe reform a success. vii. This providesthe setting for this study which, through empirical data', seeks to bring reality to the much debatedeconomic potentialoftourism. It is hopedthat this information,which shows the need for more investmentsinthe wildlife sector, will be useful to Zambian decision-makers. ' A totalof three surveys providedata for this report:the ZambiaNature-basedTourism Supply-sideSurvey (carried out by WhydahConsultinginNovember 2005), the TourismDemandSurvey (carriedout by the Natural Resources Consultative Forum in OctobedNovember 2005), andthe Gh4A HouseholdSurvey (carried out by the Central Statistical Office in September2006). 1 viii. This report is organized into three sections: 0 Chapters2 and 3 characterizethe tourism industry and the economic impact of nature tourists. Using a variety o f sources o f information, the two chapters profilethe tourism industry inZambia and analyze the barriers to growth. Chapter 4 investigates the welfare of communities living inGMAs around national parks. These communities are the most likely to suffer from wildlife conflicts and/or benefitfrom economic activities in and around the parks. A household survey comparesthe welfare o f communities living inGMAs with ordinary rural communities. 0 Chapter 5 analyzesthe performance ofZAWA during its first five year of existence, and explores the current state o f the management of the wildlife estate and its potential to contribute to economic growth through tourism. Focus on Nature Tourists ix. This study aims to show the importance o f investments inthe wildlife estate; hence it concentrates on nature tourists, which are international visitors on holiday visiting natural attractions such as the Victoria Falls, wildlife or nature-basedadventure activities. In2005, out of a total of 669,000 international visitors, Zambia received 206,000 holiday-makers, o f which 176,000 can be categorizedas genuine nature tourists2. An Emerging Destination x. The emerging nature oftourism inZambia is demonstratedby the profile ofthe tourism sector. Most tourists visit one site only, usually the Victoria Falls; stay less than three days; and combine their visit with other regional destinations. The industry is so small that a single large investment is sufficient to have a major impact: The Sun International inLivingstone has attracted 60,000 additional tourists to Zambia, equivalent to 10% o fthe total number o f visitors in2005. xi. Inspite of this profile, a survey oftourists conductedduring the preparation ofthis study indicated that nature tourists are satisfied with their experience in Zambia. 84% say they will visit Zambia again, and at least 90% rate the most popular parks (Mosi-oa-Tunya, South Luangwa, Lower Zambezi and Kafue) as good or very good. Actual Economic Contribution xii. Inspite of its emerging character, nature tourism is already a major contributor to the Zambian economy.The average nature tourist spent $1,100 per trip inZambia in2005, adding upto atotal of $194 million or 3.1% of GDP for all the 176,000 nature tourists. If 176,000 nature tourists contributed 3.1% o f GDP, it i s clear that the 669,000 international visitors received in 2005 contributed much more to GDP than officially figured3.Probably, the real contribution o ftourism in 2005 was inthe order o f 6% to 10% o f GDP. Incomparison, mining contributed 8.6%, agriculture 6.5% and manufacturing 10.6% in20054. The economic impact of this subset of the overall tourist populationis a conservativeestimate of the economic impact inducedby the falls and national parks.It does not include the contributionof tourists who declare they are "visiting friendand relatives" or on "business" - despite it beingobviousthat a proportiono f these tourists will visit natural attractions as well. Neither does the sample include domestic"tourists", who in some parks constitute nearly half of all visitors. The official figure for tourism's contributionto GDP was 3.5% in 2003. The Central Statistical Office (2006). ii xiii. When one naturetourist spends $1,100 inZambia, s/he generates nearly $2,300 inGDP (the `tourism multiplier' is therefore 2.1), $1,300 in wages and $420 intax revenue(indirect and corporate taxes). When multiplied by the total number of naturetourists, the overalleconomic contributionis nearly 16%of exports of goods andservices, more than 6% of wages and net income of unincorporatedbusiness, 7% of government revenue(indirect and corporatetaxes) and 6.5% of GDP ($403 million). Incomparison, the direct and indirect impact of the public protectedarea estate in Namibiaconstitutes less than 6% of GDP. Contributionto Employment xiv. The directcontributionto employment ofthe 176,000 naturetourists in2005 was inthe order of 19,000 formaljobs. Notethat this figure is generatedby one quarter of all internationalvisitors in 2005. As a result it compares well with other Zambian growthsectors such as agriculture (56,000 jobs), mining (46,000jobs) and manufacturing(56,000 jobs)5. xv. When indirect impacts are included, calculations show that each naturetourist provides30% o f a full time equivalent formal sectorjob. This equates to nearly 10%of the country's formal sector employment or 55,000 formaljobs. xvi. Encouragingly, tourism is an average generator of informaljobs. Accordingto the Central Statistical Office, 44% of employment inthe hotel and restaurant industry is informalcomparedto 7% inthe miningindustry, 99% inagriculture and66% inmanufacturing. Leakages xvii. Contrary to common beliefs, leakagesfrom tourism are not a source of concernin Zambia. Out ofthe 206,000 holiday-makersthat Zambiareceivedin2005, 30% or 60,000 tourists arrivedon a prepaidpackage.Although overseas services constitute over 70% ofthe total package price, they are not a leakagefrom the Zambianeconomy! Rather, they are paymentsfor services in the sourcemarkets, includingrepresentation,marketing, insuranceand flights; services that are usedto sell the Zambian product, without which there would be no benefit at all to Zambia. xviii. Every holiday-maker, regardless oftheir packagearrangements,spend about $1,100 in Zambia; a figure that comparesfavorably with other countries, e.g. Kenya ($405), Tanzania ($1,105) and SouthAfrica ($879)6.Within the $1,100, about $200is leakedthrough imports. This is money that leavesthe country to pay for a good (e.g. food, specializedequipment, etc.) or service(e.g. expatriate salary) not available in Zambia. Leakage inthe form ofrepatriationof profits is minimal in Zambia, as the tourism sector, moreso than inother countries, is dominatedby small and medium- size operatorswithout the necessary vertical integration(not includingthe Sun InternationalGroup in Livingstone).Genuineleakagessuch as imports and profit repatriationcan only be reducedby encouraginglocal participationinthe tourism industry and support services. Policy intervention should be targeted at buildinga robust supply chain and strong cross-sectorallinkages rather than at pluggingleakages. xix. Zambia is fortunateto have attracteda good number of foreign investors in the tourism sector, who have providedaccess to overseas marketsand inducedgrowth inZambian-owned businesses servingthe sector.Although few Zambian investors haveventured into national parks, inthe Livingstone-Kazungulacorridor,Zambiansown about 65% of accommodation(excludingthe Sun ~nternational)'. The Central Statistical Office (2006). World Tourism Organization-Africa Report 2006. Economic Impactsof Trans Frontier ConservationAreas: Baselineof Tourism inthe Kavango-Zambezi TFCA, ConservationInternational SouthAfrica (2005). iii The Impact of the GMA Effect on Community Welfare xx. While it is encouraging that nature tourism contributes significantly to the country's economy, the scale of its contribution to poverty alleviation in communities is minor and highly variable from site to site. To measurethe welfare o f communities living with wildlife, a household survey was conducted in areas adjacent to some of Zambia's most visited national parks. The survey found that the average annual per capita consumption (PCC) of communities living in GMAs and non-GMA control areas is ZMK 839,0008and ZMK 850,000 respectively. Incomparison, the average rural community inZambia had a PCC of ZMK 1.2 million in20049.Inother words, the welfare o f communities living around national parks is about 70% o fthe national rural average. xxi. While the survey was unable to provide a statistically sound explanation, it can be inferred that households living around national parks are poorer becausethey live inremote areas lacking basic infrastructure. Thus, their access to markets and public services is limitedcompared to householdswho inhabit areas closer to the main roads. Furthermore they are likely to live in less fertile areas, as this is one o f the reasons why game reserveswere demarcatedin the first place. xxii. Certain GMAs fare better than others. Actually, nature tourism in the Luangwa Valley is contributing significantly to poverty alleviation. After 20 years o f community-based natural resourcesmanagement (CBNRM) support, the average PCC in the Luangwa Valley is ZMK 1.18 million in GMAs and ZMK 810,000 in non-GMAs. Inother words, the welfare of communities in GMAs in the Luangwa Valley is similar to the national average. xxiii. Hence, nature tourism has some impact on poverty alleviation. Interestingly, this becomes even more obvious when statisticians analyze what the PCC would have been ifa GMA had not been established.This analysis shows that communities currently living inGMAs would have had a PCC o f about ZMK 280,000 iftheir GMA did not exist. Inother words, they would have been much worse off. Benefits of Community-based Natural ResourcesManagement xxiv. Participation in Village Action Groups (VAGs) and Community ResourcesBoards (CRBs) is used as a proxy for involvement in CBNRM. On average, the PCC o f participatinghouseholds i s ZMK 1.05 million, nearly that o f the national average and 20% more than non-participating households.This is even more pronounced for participatinghouseholdsliving in GMAs inthe Luangwa Valley, where the PCC of ZMK 1.32 million exceeds the national rural average. xxv. However, amongst these households, those with most assets (the less poor) are benefiting more than the very poor by more than 50%. Inother words, it is mostly the non-poor households with a member involved inCBNRM, who benefit from the GMA effect. This indicates a `rent-seeking' behavior by the elite householdso fthe communities. CBNRM as a valid Poverty Alleviation Strategy xxvi. The fact that the welfare o f communities living in GMAs inthe Luangwa Valley is the same as the national rural average is certainly an important achievement of past CBNRM programs. In itself this demonstratesthat CBNRM, under certain conditions, can be a powerful tool for poverty alleviation. Additionally, it indicates that further tourism revenue retention at community level would have a beneficial impact on community welfare - as long as the revenue reaches the poor households inthe community. * $210 at ZMK/$4,000. Zambia Poverty and VulnerabilityAssessment (2007), World Bank. iv xxvii. The questionof sustainabilityof the impact of CBNRM on poverty alleviation must be raised. Naturetourists, whether naturalistsor hunters,will visit GMAs only ifthe wildlife product matches internationalstandards. Unfortunately,nationaltrends show a degradation of wildlife habitat and populationthroughoutthe country's GMAs. Some GMAs suchas Bilili Springs in the Southern Provincehavesuccumbedentirely to agriculture, and a total of 12 out of 34 GMAs are now classified as depleted by ZAWA, in comparisonto none in 1997. xxviii. With this inmind, it is clear that the positiveresults obtained inthe LuangwaValley will not materializefor communitiesliving in other GMAs. In addition, ifnot arrested, habitat destruction in the GMAs will eventuallyreachthe nationalparksthey buffer andthreaten the economic returnof these parks. This suggests the need for a fundamentalreview o fthe current governance, management and revenue-sharingmechanismsin GMAs; a processthat to some degree has beeninitiatedwith the UNDP/GEF reclassificationproject". The Managementof the Wildlife Estate xxix. Since its inceptionin2001, ZAWA has doubledthe revenuestream both from huntingand non-consumptivetourism, launchedmajor donor-funded investmentsintwo national parks and establisheda series of promisingpublic-privatepartnerships in five additionalparks. xxx. However, this study shows that the managementof the wildlife estate fails to match the performance of nature tourism. A reviewofthe implementation o fthe first Strategic Plan (2003- 2007) shows that these results are modest incomparisonto plans. Many nationalparks are unmanaged andwildlife andnatural habitats are underthreat inmost GMAs. Furthermore, ZAWA has been unableto transform its corporateculture inorder to improve its credibility and its financial and conservationperformance.The reviewalso shows that severalofthe external assumptions-upon whichZAWA was createdandthe first Strategic Planwas based-havenot materialized. Two of these key assumptionswere the independenceofZAWA's board from political influenceandthe recapitalizationfrom the nationalbudget. Financingthe Wildlife Estate xxxi. The lack ofbudget support stems from the Ministry of Finance failing to realizethat subsidizingthe management of the wildlife estate is a sound economic strategy. In fact, the economic argumentsto do so are compelling. In2005, basedon a modest subsidy of about $1 million, Governmentreceived fiscal revenuegeneratedby international naturetourists visiting nationalparks calculatedat between$5 million and $7.6 million". As tourists continueto increasein numbers, spend more time in Zambia andvisit more sites, the fiscal revenue- alongwith other economic returnsof naturetourism - will outweigh the financial costs ofmanagingthe country's wildlife estate estimatedat $6 million. xxxii. Direct economic revenue is not the only benefit of the wildlife estate. The main purposeof protected areas is to preserve the natural heritage, biodiversity as well as provide ecosystem services such as watershed protection. xxxiii. The study also demonstratesthe importanceof boosting non-consumptivetourism in national parks. Up until now, non-consumptivetourism revenuehaveincreased in proportionto consumptivetourism to reachalmost 50% in2006, and one major investor,the Sun Internationalin Livingstone, is responsiblefor 12%ofZAWA's non-consumptivetourism revenue. Given the loUnitedNationDevelopmentProgram/GlobalEnvironment Facility: Reclassificationand Effective Managementof Zambia's ProtectedAreas.The mainobjective ofthe project is to strengthenthe enabling policy, regulatory and governance frameworks and institutionalcapacitiesfor managingthe national protected area system with biodiversity conservation as a principal outcome. "Authors' calculations. V positive economic impact that large-scaleinvestments have on the economy in general, and on ZAWA's financial performance in particular, it makes sense to push for large-scale investments in national parks as well. xxxiv. Additionally, tourists may be willing to pay more for conservation.The Tourism Demand Survey showed that nature tourists are willing to pay 50% to 100% higher fees for visiting the Victoria Falls and the national parks, particularly ifimprovements are made. Better Management ofthe Wildlife Estate xxxv. While revenuesare important, equally are costs. Better management efficiencyand delegationof functions would improve both performance and sustainability of the wildlife estate. ZAWA needs to establish credible instrumentssuch as a business plan(basedon a diverse set o f partners, activities and revenues) that demonstratehow investments would lead to sustainedresults. Already now the most efficiently managedprotected areas - interms o f economic and environmental input/output ratio - are managed in public private partnerships (PPPs). Clearly, ZAWA made a sound decision to encouragethese PPPs. xxxvi. The next steps should include low-inpuvhigh-return parks such as the Mosi-oa-Tunya National Park, where a private-led commercial approach would generate sufficient returnto subsidize other protected areas. Inreturn, ZAWA must improve its capacity to establish and regulate PPPs. The improvement o f ZAWA's efficiency must include a review o f the incentive and salary structure for a better corporate culture. Achieving the FNDP Targets xxxvii. Inorder to substantiate the analysis presentedabove it is useful to compare with the FNDP targets. This study establishesthat the sub-set of nature tourism already contributes to direct earnings of about 60% of the FNDP target. Hence, a strategy that focuses on developing nature tourism would achieve - and even exceed - the FNDP targets. The obvious approach would be to improve and develop tourism products in Zambia that will make nature tourists stay longer. For example, if by 2010, nature tourists on average stay another 2 days, the direct earnings would amount to an additional $98 million, thereby reaching 97% of the FNDP target. xxxviii. Persuading more tourists to stay longer inZambia would require a combination of infrastructure investment and better promotion o f Zambian tourism products. xxxix. Already, with.donor assistance, ZAWA has begun improving the attractions inthe Kafue and the South LuangwaNational Parks; two parksthat can competeregionally. xl. Key next steps could be: (1) to improve the managemento f national parks through internal reforms at ZAWA, increasedgovernment support untilrevenues can balance operating costs and establishment of additional PPPs; (2) inaccordanceto the FNDP, to invest inaccess infrastructure, e.g. the Itezhi-tezhiand the Chipata-Mfuwe Roads as well as airstrips and road maintenancewithin national parks; and (3) to attract large-scaleinvestments inthe order of 100 beds or more inthe three flagship national parks: South Luangwa, Lower Zambezi and Kafue. xli. Finally, to ensure that the economic growth is shared, keys next steps could be: (1) to ensure that the statutory instrument of the Tourism & Hospitality Bill establishes a favorable incentive systemto attract potential Zambian investors as per the country's citizen empowerment policy; (2) to invest inthe development o f skills inthe Zambian population along the tourism supply chain through the design of a major tourism skill development program; and (3) to step up the current reclassification processthrough a fundamental review and debate o f the governance, managementand revenue-sharing mechanismsin GMAs. vi 1. INTRODUCTION: MAIN OBJECTIVESOF THE STUDY 1.1 The Governmenthas identifiedtourism as one of four pillarsof economic development (the other three beingagriculture, manufacturing and mining). However, the socio-economic impact of tourism is currently unclear. Additionally, little is knownabout barriersto achievingthe Government's targets for the sector and about managementoptions for improvingthe sector's performance.This study presentsanalyticalwork to estimatethe contributionofnaturetourism to economic growthand poverty reduction inZambia. It contributes to a larger body of work undertaken by a group of donorsI2and partners under the umbrellaofthe NaturalResourcesConsultative Forum (NRCF). Thetarget audience is the Zambian Government,the NRCF, the NationalDevelopment Plan's Sector Advisory Groups, PrivateSector Associations, NGOs and donors. A. STRATEGICCONTEXT 1.2 The past four decades, Zambia's economic developmenthas been dominatedby the decline in the value ofthe country's copper resourcesandthe resultingfall in per capita income. The impact on the poor hasbeen relentless; by the endof the 1990s, about 73% ofthe populationlived belowthe poverty lineandup to 20% were affectedby HIV/AIDS. Inthis context, the World Bank's 2004 Zambia Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) seeks to promote economic growth basedon a diversified and export-orientedeconomy, and investmentsinthe tourismsector havebeenfacilitatedby the InternationalDevelopmentAssociation (IDA) andthe GlobalEnvironmentalFacility (GEF) through the Support for EconomicExpansionandDiversificationProject(SEED). 1.3 The Governmentseeks to see tourism grow from 3.5% in 2003 to 10%of GDP in 10years. As the sector currently is reliant onZambia's natural assets such as nationalparks, it is importantto attract investmentsthat can increase the economic value derived from these assets. Furthermore, as suggestedby the Zambia Poverty ReductionStrategy Paper(PRSP), there is a clear needto "encourage community participationin wildlife conservation" to ensure that tourism contributes to poverty reduction. The analytical work presentedin this report illuminates the scope for growingthe naturetourism sector and for usingit as atool for poverty reduction.The study touches on three key prioritiesfor Zambia andthe World Bank: (I)it buildson CAS and current PRSP concerns, (2) it explores poverty-environment linkagesto feed into the new PRSP, and, importantly,(3) it integrates environment and poverty issues into sectoral planning. 1.4 Ifnaturetourism isto serveas asourceofgrowthandpovertyreductioninZambia, it is important to understandthe potentialvalue ofthe sector andhow to strengthenits capabilityto boost development. This study seeks to provideinformationthat the GovernmentofZambiacan use in practical ways to implement its vision for the sector. B. OUTLINEOF STUDY 1.5 Chapter 2 characterizesthe naturetourism sector in Zambia. Key questions include:How many tourists are visiting Zambiaand what is their contributionto GDP? What do we know about these tourists (country of origin, purposeof visit, length o f stay, etc.)? What are the maintourism assets inthe country?What is the state ofthe businessclimate and what are the impediments to growthinthe naturetourism sector?What is the state of planning inthe tourism sector?Finally, this chapter considersthe key institutionalchallengesinthe sector, including:(1) capacity within relevant agencies, (2) skills development, (3) infrastructure, (4) promotionof the sector, and (5) implementationof a Tourism Master Plan. Donors includeDenmark,Norway, United Nation DevelopmentProgram and the World Bank. 1 1.6 Chapter 3 presentsan analysis ofthe contributionof nature tourism to the Zambian economy. The analysis draws upon a Tourism Demand Survey undertakenin2005 to assess key characteristics of tourists, tourist expenditures, and willingness to pay for tourism activities (using contingent valuation methods). The expenditure data from the survey is usedto estimate the direct plus indirect contribution o f nature tourists to exports, GDP, wages, government revenue and employment. 1.7 The impact of nature tourism on poverty reduction is analyzed inChapter 4. Revenuefrom hunting inGame Management Areas (GMAs) is shared with local communities, and there are potential spill-over benefits from tourism activities in national parks.To understandthe contribution of naturetourism to local economies, a GMA Household Survey was undertaken in 2006 in GMAs as well as comparative non-GMA communities. This chapter reports on the results of quantitative evaluation techniques to assess the net benefitsfrom huntingand related tourism activities in GMAs. 1.8 The management of the main tourism asset, the wildlife estate, is analyzed inChapter 5. This chapter considers the key institutional challenges inthe sector: (1) capacity issues within the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA); (2) financing and capitalization o f the sector; and (3) the importance o f rethinking the governance and incentive framework of GMAs. 1.9 Finally, Chapter 6 summarizes key conclusions and highlights the policy implications o fthe study. 2 2. TOURISM AS A GROWTH SECTOR: CHALLENGESAND OPPORTUNITIES A. INTRODUCTION 2.1 Zambia's tourism industry establisheditself in the 1950s, and despite short interludesof serious investments, particularly inthe 1970s, mid-1980s and from 2000 onwards, it remains an emerging industry.Regardless,the Governmenthasrecently promotedthe sector to one of four pillars of the economy - alongsidemining, agriculture and manufacturing. Under these circumstances it is vital to haveaclear understandingof what targets are beingsought andhow tourism can be developed to meetthe expectationsofthe Government and ofthe sector's investors. 2.2 First, it must be recognizedthat Zambia's tourism industryis developingwithin a context of internationalandregional growth. Globally,tourism is expandingrapidly, fuelledby widespread economic growthand the associatedincreasein disposable incomes. Since 2000, this phenomenonhas startedto benefitsouthernAfrica morenoticeably due to customer demand for new destinations and products. Historically,Zambia's stake inthe industry has been insignificant, but the past five years or so havewitnessed a steady growth inthe tourismsector, projectedto deliver over 1.4 milliontourist arrivals by 2015 (see Figure 2.1). FIGURE 2.1: Existingand projectedgrowth in tourist arrivals to Zambia Total Tourist Arrivals Projectedto 2015 1,600,000 2v) 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800,000 ! *Totall .% L 600,000 400,000 200,000 Years Source: Projectedfrom data from Ministry ofTourism, Environment & NaturalResources. 2.3 It is worth pointingout that the sector has developedwith limited governmentsupport. The recentgrowth correlates with the increasein foreign anddomestic investmentsfollowing the Government's decision to privatizekey tourist assets. The privatizationprocesswas inducedby the markeddeclines incopper revenueand real economic growth characterizingthe 1980sand 1990s, which made it necessaryto consider other sectors, includingtourism as potentialnew sources of economic growth. Inpart, this also built on increasingglobal recognitionof the potential growth and multiplier effects oftourism with regardsto economic developmentand diversification. 3 Paper of 2001. The current Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP) has Box 2.1 What is a Tourist the focus On tourism andfor The World Tourism Organizationdefines an international thefirst time identified specific targets for tourist arrivals, employment and tourist as a personwho travels to and stays in a place outside his usual environmentfor less than one earning~`~. consecutiveyear for leisure, businessand other purposes. However, this document is mostly interestedin the 2.5 Although the new prioritization of holiday-maker,i.e. the tourist who travel for leisure, and tourism should assist the sector, it is then a sub-set defined as nature tourists, Le. holiday- important to address constraints facing the makerstraveling with the purpose to visit natural tourism industry in Zambia including attraction such as the Victoria Falls. national parks and policy, regulatory and businessfacilitation nature-basedad'enture activities. B. GLOBAL TOURISMTRENDS 2.6 The tourism industry worldwide has shown significant and mostly sustainedgrowth over the past five years with total tourist arrivals reaching 789 inillion in2005. Africa attractedthe smallest fraction (4.7%) o f international tourists arrivals (see Figure2.2), but exhibited the highest regional growth (32%) since 2000, secondonly to the exceptional growth inthe Middle East (61%)14. By the endof2006, the World Tourism Organization recorded a further 16.5% increaseininternational tourism to atotal of 842 milliontourist arrivals, with an average growth rate o f4.8% to 2005 (exceeding the projected rate). FIGURE2.2: Worldwide tourist arrivals by destination region (2005) World InboundTourism by Destination Region, 2005 I Source: World Tourism Organization. 13Tourist arrivals to increase from 515,000 (2005) to 736,450 (2010); employment from 19,650 to 30,404 and earnings from $174 million to 5304 million. 14In 1990,the Middle East attracted 63% of Africa's tourist arrivals, but by 2004 it had overtakenAfrica. Clearly, tourism marketing in countries such as Egypt, Syria and the Emiratesis worth studying. 4 2.7 Given the present high levels o f disposable income inmost parts o f the world, these trends are expectedto continue to a projected level of 1.6 billion tourist arrivals by 2020'5. There are provisos, however, including volatility in the oil market, security issues, and that macroeconomic conditions in source regions do not deteriorateI6. 2.8 One interesting feature of tourist arrivals after 2004 is the emergenceo f new trends and niches, inparticular involving greater environmental awareness and cultural interests. This development, which has diversified the tourism industry through the emergenceo f new destinations and products, has benefited Africa. The continent has seen significant growth in2005 and the highest regional growth intourist arrivals in 2006 (8.1% - double the global rate). Within the African region, sub-SaharanAfrica recorded an even higher growth o f 9.4% with South Africa and Kenya as the main beneficiaries. 2.9 Outside Africa, Asia and the Pacific continue to lead with tourist arrivals growing at 7.6% in 2006, inspite of tsunamis and other natural disasters. Within this region, South Asia recorded a 10% growth with Indiaas the main beneficiary. Europe and the Americas are growing more slowly with emerging destinations inCentral and South America showing growth above 5%. C.REGIONALTOURISM TRENDS International Arrivals 2.10 Figure2.3 illustrates international tourist arrivals in south-easternAfrica in 2004; showing South Africa's dominance with 53% of all tourist arrivals inthe region and Zambia's comparatively poor performance (4%). Overall trends indicate that tourist arrivals to the regionwill grow to between 16 million and 20 million by 2010, with the cluster of countries around Zambia, the is Zambia's main competitors, out-performing the region as a whole. ?IGURE2.3: Tourist arrivals insouth-eastern Africa. -_ South-East Africa Tourist Amivals 2004 (Thousands) Malaw 3 Mozambque 0 Namibla 6,815 Source: World Tourism Organization. l5 ''Tourism 2020 Vision, World Tourism Organization, 2005. World Tourism Barometer,World Tourism Organization,January 2007. 5 2.11 Figure 2.4 shows the trends intourist arrivals in Zambia's main competitor countries in south- eastern Africa. Data for South Africa has beenremoved to clearly show the performance o fthe other countries inthe region. Zambia's comparatively small share o f the market is evident, but equally its steady growth pattern. The latter may relate to increasing interest inthe real Africa, Le. low-volume but high-value wildlife destinations, or may representa more complex array of factors. FIGURE 2.4: Tourist arrival trends in South-Eastern Africa South-EastAfrica Tourist Arrivals Trends 1990-2005 - 2,500 , -6- Botswana I U v) =2 -8-Malawi 2,000 2 JtMozambique t 1,500 4 +Namibia 1,000 *g4 +Tanzania 500 +Zambia &Zimbabwe 1990 1995 2000 2003 2004 2005 Years Source: World Tourism Organization. 2.12 Whichever reasonapplies, given Zambia's relatively small budget for tourism marketing(see Table 2.1), this demonstratesthe potential in increasing national marketingefforts to the levels o f competitor countries. Country Annual promotional budget($) Visitor arrivals Botswana Tourism 7 million 1,523,000 NamibiaTourist Board 6 million 700,000 SATOUR (South Africa) 180 million 6,8 15,000 Tanzania Tourist Board 18 million 566,000 , Zambia National Tourist Board 1.5 million 5 15,000" International Tourism Receipts 2.13 Table 2.2 indicates that although Zambia is good at attracting new tourists, it is less successful in securingmaximum financial benefits from those tourists. Inpart this is due to the relatively short average stay o f tourists in Zambia (6.9 days, compared with 8.6 inBotswana and 12.4 inNamibia) but doubtless it also reflects the lack o f depth inthe Zambian tourism infrastructure. The tourism supply chain is short and the ability to move tourists between destinations within Zambia is limited by infrastructure and transport shortcomings. 2.14 As indicated inTable 2.2 there i s a clear discrepancy between the highreceipts for Tanzania and Mauritius on the one hand, and lower receipts for Namibia, Botswana and Zambia on the other. Perhaps not coincidentally the first two countries both have coastal resources. IfZambia could l7According to the WTO, 515,000 internationalvisitors arrived in Zambia in 2004, while the ZambiaNational Tourist Boardrecords610,109 visitors. This variation points to the inadequacy of data in the tourism sector. 6 diversify its supply and value chainto the extent of Tanzania(that receivesa similar number oftourist arrivals), the possibilityexists for tourism earnings to be increasedby as muchas a factor 4. TABLE 2.2: International tourist arrivals, tourism receipts and ratios Country Tourist arrivals Tourist receipts ($ `000) Receipts/ Receipts/ 2003 2004 2003 2004 tourist (%) tourist/day ($) Botswana 1,406,000 1,523,000 457,000 549,000 343 40 Malawi 424,000 471,000 23,000 24,000 53 Mauritius 702,000 719,000 696,000 853,000 1,090 Mozambique 441,000 470,000 98,000 95,000 212 Namibia 695,000 nla 330,000 403,000 503 41 Tanzania 552,000 56.6,OOO 647,000 746,000 1,246 Zambia 413,000 515,000 149,000 161,000 334 52 2.15 Interestingly,Namibia,, BotswanaandZambia all generatetourism receipts inclose proportionto their average length oftourist stay. What differs is that Zambia's receipts per tourist per day are 30% and 27% higher than those for BotswanaandNamibiarespectively.This tends to confirm- not that Zambia's tourism industry is moreeffective- but ratherthat Zambia is a highcost destination. Findingways to reducethe costs oftourism operations is central to increasing market share in the region.On the opportunity side, Table 2.2 suggests that Zambia's tourism supply base has considerablegrowthand diversification potentialat the lower end of the market. D.PROFILE OF ZAMBIAN TOURISM 2.16 The tourismsector inZambia is stronglyorientedtowards naturetourism, yet there are fewer than 250 licensednaturetourismaccommodationproviders countrywide. Map 2.1 shows that major tourismsupply side clusters havedevelopedin only afew key urbanandnationalpark locations18, with a strongbiasto the Livingstoneregion(that offers nearly 40% of all naturetourismbeds). 2.17 Other factors indicativeof a limited base includethe extreme seasonality ofZambia's nature tourism"; the under-capitalization of many of its operations; a restrictedpool oftrained personnel; poorly developednational marketing; and limited policy, legislationand planningfor the sector. TourismAssets 2.18 Zambia's tourism industryis currently basedon two principalassets: the Victoria Fallsand the country's wildlife estate innational parks, GMAs and game ranches.Inpopularity,the Victoria Falls(approximately 106,000 visitors in 2005) outshinesthe safari product (approximately 61,000 visitors in 2005). This is due to the Victoria Fallsbeinga one-timeattraction, a "must see" site that appeals to a large rangeofvisitors as it only requires a short stay and, therefore, can be peggedto weekendgetaways and added on to visitsto the region. 2.19 As a result ofthe "pull" factor ofthe Victoria Falls, tourism activitiesin Livingstoneare relativelywell developedcomparedto other regions inZambia. The area has a large proportionof Zambia's adventuretourism capacity, an excellent museum, interestingold street facades, some culturaltourism, a depthoftourism linkages and easy access to complementaryand competing facilities in Zimbabwe, BotswanaandNamibia.In fact, Livingstonehas partly substituted (in tour operator itineraries) the muchmore developedtown of Victoria Falls inZimbabwe, and it has the potentialto develop intothe preferredregional hub or gateway2'. leThe cities of Livingstone,Lusaka, Ndolaand Kitwe and the South Luangwaand Lower ZambeziNPs. In many national parks limited to a five to seven-monthseason. 7 MAP 2.1: Distributionof main tourism investments 2.20 Nevertheless, Zambia is rich in alternative although scarcely visited natural attractions such as spectacular landscapes (the Luangwa and Tanganyika rift valley escarpments, the upper Zambezi and Kafue flood plains, the gorges on the Zambezi and the montane areas inthe north-east); waterfalls (mainly inthe Northern and Luapula Provinces); and lakes, rivers and associatedwater activities (especially the rift valley lakes, Tanganyika and Mweru; Lake Bangweulu; Lake Kariba; and the major river systems, Zambezi, Kafue, Luangwa, Chambeshi and Luapula). 2.2 1 Zambia also has a rich and well researchedIron Age heritage and an equally rich pre- and post-colonial history, but besides from a few traditional ceremonies(especially the Kuomboka inthe Western Province); cultural, archaeological and historical assets are rarely included in tourist itineraries. Neither is special-interest tourism based on themes such as birding, fishing, railways, etc. Tourism Circuits 2.22 National tourism planninghas identifiedthree potential tourism circuits: a western circuit incorporating the Victoria Falls, the upper Zambezi and the Kafue National Park; a central circuit linkingLusaka, the Kafue Flats, the Lower Zambezi NationalPark andthe Karibashoreline; and an 2" At its peak in the early 1990s,Victoria Falls Town receivedover 800,000 tourists annually. The expectation that Livingstone could grow in a similar way i s valid because the locations are essentially comparable. 8 north-easterncircuit, includingtheNorth and SouthLuangwaNationalParks, extendingnorthwards to includethe BangweuluBasinandthe northern lakes and waterfalls. 2.23 Inrealityonly asingle combined circuit exists, linkingthe Victoria Falls(Livingstone)with the SouthLuangwaand Lower Zambezi NationalParks. Logisticalissues, low densitiesof tourism establishmentsandan absence of real incentives have so far precludeddevelopment of the three circuits. Strategieswill haveto be developedto counterbalancethe current bias on Livingstone,and possibly recognizethe northern lakes and waterfalls as a separate entity. This will require significant levels of analysis and planning, investmentsin air andground infrastructure, andlinkages with regionalpartners(particularly with the southernTanzaniantourism circuit, the four comers region linkingBotswana, Namibia, ZambiaandZimbabwe, andthe Malawi-Zambiacross-borderregion). The Wildlife Estate 2.24 The wildlife estate comprising19NationalParksand 34 Game ManagementAreas (see map 2.2) is the main tourism product after the Victoria Falls. Table 2.3 shows the steady growthin entries in nationalparksbetween2003 and2005. TABLE 2.3: National parks and number of visitors, 2003-2005 I 2003 2004 Lower ZambeziNationalPark 4,413 6,059 6,040 Mosi-oa-TunyaNationalPark 23,497 17,762 19,972 SouthLuangwaNationalPark 19,728 23,929 25,814 KafueNationalPark 3,812 3,789 6,202 LochinvarNationalPark 390 415 Other NationalParks* 700 2,024 2,588 52,540 53,978 61,400 ~ Total international visitors 40,388 38,821 41,964 ITotal localvisitors 12,152 15,157 19,436 Total I 52,540 53,978 61,400 Source: Zambia Wildlife Authority. * North Luangwa, Liuwa, Kasanka, Luambe, West Lunga, Sioma Ngwezi, Sumbu, Chete Island. 2.25 Ofthe 19NationalParks, four are emergingas tourism flagships: e South Luangwa is the most popular park.Nestedinthe LuangwaValley, its products are the classic safari as well as walking safari. Animals are plentiful and sightings are rewarding.It includes endemic large mammals such as Thornicroft's giraffe and Cookson's wildebeest. e Lower Zambezi is popular for its canoe and boat safaris on the Zambezi River.Angling for tiger fish is becomingacentral attraction, andtourists can enjoy largepopulations of hippo and elephantwith the escarpmentas a dramatic backdrop. 0 Kafue is emerging as the last wilderness in southernAfrica. Larger than the Kruger National Park in South Africa, it offers an unmatchedvariety of wildlife. Its main features are Lake Itezhi-tezhiand the BusangaandNanzhila Plains with large concentrations of antelopes and predators including tree-climbing lion. e Mosi-oa-Tunyais a small park adjacentto the Victoria Falls on the Zambezi River. It offers a quick glanceofAfrica's wildlife, includingthe only white rhino inZambia. 9 MAP 2.2: National Parks and Game Management Areas in Zambia Source: Zambia Wildlife Authority (2007). 2.26 Other parks are slowly entering the market as well: 0 Kasankais the only park where tourists are almost guaranteedto observe the elusive sitatunga antelope. Its main attraction, however, is the annual migration of millions of fruit bats by the end of the year. It is located near the Bangweulu Swamps, which harbor large concentration o fthe endemic Black Lechwe. 0 Liuwa Plain i s located on the large flood plains of the Lozi kingdom. Home to the second largest migration of blue wildebeest inAfrica, this park offers vast grasslands teeming with wildlife, and, apparently, some of the largest lions inAfrica. 0 BlueLagoon and Lochinvar, on opposite banks ofthe Kafue River inthe Kafue Flats, are relatively easily accessible from the capital of Lusaka. Both parks feature extraordinary bird life as well as large concentrationsof the endemic Kafue Lechwe. Tourism Supply Capacity 2.27 In2003, the Ministry o fTourism, Environment & Natural Resources recordedatotal of 8,774 tourist beds located in around 340 accommodation establishments countrywide. Recently, Zambia has experienceda significant increasein bed night availability, especially in Livingstone where several new hotels are completed or under construction and others are planned. A 2005 survey2' of the Livingstone region reported 3,802 tourist beds, of which 1,558 were provided by hotels. By way ofcomparison, the Zimbabwean hotel capacity inVictoria Falls was 2,636 in200422. ~~ 21Livingstone Tourism Survey, Support for EconomicExpansionandDiversification Project, Ministry of Tourism, Environment & Natural Resources, Lusaka(2006). 10 FIGURE 2.5: Availability of naturetourist accommodationunits by region National Availability of Nature-Based Accommodation Units, by Region 1 1 19 LivingstoneandRapids Lowr Zambezi 0 Lung4 Kafue,Kafue Flats Lusaka W South Luangwa 0 Western andNorth-Western 30 I Source: ZambiaNature-basedTourism Supply-SideSurvey (2006). 2.28 The Nature-basedTourism Supply-side Survey identifieda total of 229 naturetourism accommodation providers inZambia in2005. Together they offered 4,429 beds and 1,38 1,290 bed nights at an average o f 312 bed nights per bed (Le. many smaller providers are not open all year). Figures 2.5,2.6 and 2.7 show the distribution and capacity o f naturetourism establishments identified in the survey, illustratingthe significantly higher volumes and level of product diversity inthe Livingstoneregion. FIGURE 2.6: Availabilityof naturetourist bed nightsby region Availability o f Bed Nights in Nature-Based Tourism Establishments by Region KaribaLakeside =Livingstone and Rapids OLower Zambezi OLunga,Kafue, Kafue Flats Lusaka Northern South Luangwa Western and North- Western Source: ZambiaNature-basedTourism Supply-sideSurvey (2006). 2.29 Figure 2.7 illustrates the relative paucity o f nature-basedbed nights provided by hotels. Considering the absence of hotels and large lodges in the national parks, this explains the small average group size o f tourists visiting Zambia (see Figure 2.15). The need exists to re-examine the ''Economic Impactsof Transfrontier ConservationAreas: Baselineof Tourism in the Kavango-ZambeziTFCA, Conservation International, South Africa (2005). 11 low volumeihigh value mantra o f tourism is Zambia to accommodatethe high volumes of tourists that are necessary for economies o f scale in the industry. FIGURE2.7: Availability of naturetourist bed nights by accommodationtype 4,320 170,280 Hotels Tourist Lodges 42,480,j / UBackpacker Lodges Tourist Camps Traveller Lodges Self-catering Camps Community Camps OBush Camps Walkinghlobile Camps Large HouseboatsKruiserr 0SmallHouseboatsiCruiseri 289,620 u v 67,320 Camp Sites Source: Zambia Nature-basedTourism Supply-SideSurvey (2006). 2.30 Zambia's tourist products are largely marketedthrough foreign travel agents and tour operators. Only a limitednumber o f local tourism operators exist, many o f which function as safari operators as well. Consequently, local tourism operators are reluctant to interact in a marketing context, and this limits the capacity for creating packages and tailor-made tours inZambia, which, otherwise, could increasethe length o f stay in the country. 2.3 1 Inother words, it is necessary to diversify and strengthenthe product base and supply chain in Zambia. While such initiatives must be demand driven, strategic choices in public sector investment could enhance their success. Basic infrastructure, taxation regimes, and support for training initiatives are three key issues. E.PROFILEOFZAMBIAN TOURISTS Purposeo f Visit 2.32 Establishing the purpose o f visit for tourists depends on the arrival forms filled inby visitors at entry points to Zambia. Figure2.8 demonstratesthat tourists arriving for holiday amount to 30.8% o f all tourist arrivals, but tourists visiting friends & relatives (VFR) are likely to include some holiday time as well. However, holiday-makers are likely to be over-represented inthe statistics, as business people, especially from neighboring countries may well classify their visit as holiday rather than business . 2.33 Figure 2.8 illustrates an opportunity for tourism growth inthe form o f conferencing. Only 1.5% of tourists classified their visit as conferencing, a frequently lucrative business inother countries. Spectacular sites such as the Luangwa and the Zambezi rift valleys would be well suited to this niche market ifaccess was easy and affordable. This would extent the small market already createdprincipally by facilities at the Victoria Falls (Livingstone). 12 FIGURE2.8: Tourist arrivals to Zambia by purpose ofvisit, 2005 40.0% 37.8% 35`0% 30.8% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 16.0% 15.0% 13.9% 10.0% 5.0% 1.5% 0.0% Holiday Business Conference VFR Other Source: Zambia National Tourist Board. 2.34 Figure 2.9 provides more detail on the purpose of holiday visits, indicating that more than half Zambia's holiday-makers (54%) arrive with the intentionof visiting the Victoria Falls and only approximately halfthat number come for Zambia's wildlife attractions (28%). Overall 88% of holiday-makers are nat~re-based~~.What is unclear is the proportionof visitors that visit the Falls as a primary attraction, but also visit one or more wildlife tourism sites, and vice versa. FIGURE2.9: Stated purpose of holiday visit, 2005 Purposeof HolidayVisit Among Sample, 2006 Victoria Falls B Wildlife 0 Adventure tourism Hunting Other ~- Source: Tourism Demand Survey (2005). 2.35 The Nature-basedTourism Supply-side Survey indicated that while North American tour agents showed a major preference for the Victoria Falls in their itineraries, southern African, Europeanand Australasian agents all viewed wildlife destinationswith equal importance. Overall, the 23This proportion may be higher because non-specific reasons for visiting Zambia such as `part of package', `recommended by friend' or `good previous experience' are classified as 'other' in the survey. 13 small sample o f international tour agents surveyed indicated that the Victoria Falls andthe South Luangwa National Park had equal ranking intheir demand-driven itineraries (see Table 2.4). TABLE 2.4: Importancerankingof destinationsby principalinternationaltour agents 1 Others I Y , (state)? 5 1 11 2.36 Nevertheless, what is clear i s that at presentthe availability of bed nights in the Livingstone region(46% o f all nature tourism bednights) compared to other nature tourism destinations inZambia is a responseto current demandpatterns. Other factors, such as accessibility, linkage to regional tour routes, travel cost and marketing effort are likely to have influenced this status. It is changes in the weighting o f these factors that hopefully will changethe current heavy destination polarity over time. Country of Origin 2.37 Figure 2.10 demonstratesthat southern Africa is the primary source area for Zambia's holiday-makers. These data, however, are probably contaminated by inaccurate records of cross- border trade movements in particular with neighboring countries. As previously explained, business people are likely to classify their visit as holiday rather than business. Data for the rest of Africa are exposedto a similar although less significant contamination. FIGURE 2.10: Holiday and VFR visitors to Zambia by source region,2005. Holiday and VFR Amvals to Zambia, 2006 South Africa Southern Africa (other) 0 Total East Africa Total North, West & Central Africa United Kingdom Europe (other) United States o f America Americas (other) 6% 8% Australia Other Asia and the Pacific Source: ZambiaNational Tourist Board. 2.38 The secondlargest source region is Europe, with the UnitedKingdomas the primary country. Other regions such as the Americas, Australasia and Japan are small contributors to Zambia's tourism. 14 FIGURE 2.11: Holiday-makersin south-eastern Africa by source country (2005) W UK 3.2% USA 4.3% 0 Germany2.8?4 W France 2.7% W Italy 1.8% Source: Zambia Nature-basedTourism Supply-SideSurvey (2006). 2.39 When examiningEuropean holiday tourists specifically, figure 2.1 1 illustrates Zambia's need for targeted marketing in source markets. The United Kingdom i s clearly a source market for most o f south-easternAfrica, but the relative proportion of other nationalities visiting East Africa indicates that these are potential markets worth investigating in Zambia. Duration of Stav 2.40 The Tourism Demand Survey indicated that nature tourists stay on averagestay 6.9 days in Zambia (see Figure 2.12). As noted earlier this i s significantly less than incompetitor countries. FIGURE 2.12: Duration of stay by naturetourists. - - _ _ Source: TourismDemand Survey (2005). 45 - ~ 1i 2.41 Usually, the length o f stay is linked either to the diversity o f activities at a specific tourism site, or to the number of sites in that country. Figure 2.13 shows that 84.5% of all nature tourists only 15 visited one site in Zambia in 2005. This is mainly because Zambia is combined with other countries intheregion, typically Botswana(87%), SouthAfrica (80%), Malawi (67%) andNamibia (55%)24 FIGURE2.13: Number of sites visited in Zambia by holiday-makers 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 One Site Two Sites Three Sites Four + Sites Source: Tourism DemandSurvey (2005). Grout, Size 2.42 The other major determinant oftourism earnings is group size. The larger the number of tourists travelling together the larger is the potential earning capacity per tour booking. Figure 2.14 illustrates that nearly half of all naturetourists arrive in groups of two, and that almost 80% of all tourist arrivals are in small groups of four or less. Only 11% arrive in groups larger than six. FIGURE 2.14: Mean group size of nature tourists Mean GroupSize of Nature-Based Tourist Groups singles Doubles 0 3 - 4 0 5 - 6 0 7 - 10 11 - 15 I> 16 2.43 Regional variations in group size reinforce existing perceptions, that the largest percentages of single tourists are associatedwith conferencelocations, particularly Lusaka and the Kariba shoreline. The Kariba shoreline also supports the highest percentageof groups larger than 16 (19%), 24 ZambiaNature-basedTourism Supply-Side Survey, World Bank (2006). 16 which doubtlessreflects conferencing as well. Mid-rangegroups (3 to 6) are more common in driven safari areas. The highpercentage(60%) ofgroups oftwo in the Livingstoneregion reinforces the perceptionthat it is a weekendhhort visit destinationstrongly orientedto couples. 2.44 Encouraginglarger tourists groups will be easiest inthe Livingstoneregionwhere accommodationis reasonablywell developed. Elsewherethe successfulmarketing of larger group sizes will depend onthe determinedpromotionof large-scaleinvestments. IncomeandEducation 2.46 The tourism demandsurvey demonstratesthat the averageZambiantourist is economically active and well-educated. Only 13%oftourists to Zambia are retirees,and 88% havea post-secondary education. 55% oftourists are "top end", 36% middlebracket and9% economy tourists. These results all support the contentionthat Zambia is a high cost destination. Number ofVisits 2.45 Mosttourists to Zambia are first-timevisitors (see Figure2.15), confirmingthe emerging natureo ftourism inZambia. F.IMPEDIMENTSTO GROWTH 2.47 In 2004, international tourists and agents identifiedfive advantages in Zambian tourism: 0 Excellent wildlife, scenic, cultural and adventure resources. 0 Low density, real Afiica imageand adventure tourism capacity. 0 Pricecompetitiveness. 0 Diversedestinationoptions in an emergingtourismmarket. 0 Friendly people. FIGURE2.15: Number ofvisits to Zambia by tourists Numberof Visits to Zambia by SampledTourist Arrivals 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Once Twice 3-5 6-10 > 10 times times times Numberof Visits Source:TourismDemand Survey (2005). 2. 8 Yet, the 2007 Travel and TourismCompetitiveness Index25ranksZambia 94 out of 12 countries.Zambia falls behindsome of its neighboringcompetitors such as SouthAfrica (62), 25The Travel andTourismCompetitivenessReport 2007- Furtheringthe Process of Economic Development, World EconomicForum, Geneva(www.weforum,org/en/initiatives/gcp/TraveIandTourismReport/index.htm). 17 Botswana (70), Namibia (73) and Tanzania (80) -but is ahead of Kenya (98), Uganda (101), Zimbabwe (107) and Malawi (114). The country got its best score (72) for travel andtourism human, cultural and natural resourcesand its worst score (120) for travel and tourism business environment and infrastructure. Specific weaknesses include infrastructure (in particular ground transport and information and communications technology), human resources(wellness, education and training), health and hygiene standardsand low price competitiveness (caused by rising prices in2005/06). 2.49 A recent World Bank studyz6explored reasons for Zambia's relative under-performance in tourism. Two main conclusions were reached: 1) Zambia is receiving far fewer tourists than its first- class nature attractions should do; and 2) the principle reasons for this are its relatively undeveloped infrastructure and business and investment climate, which makes it a high cost destination. Daily expenditure for travelers inZambia is higher than in any other competing country (see Figure 2.16). FIGURE 2.16: Tourists' average daily expenditure ($) 200 Package 150 expendlture per day 100 Independent 50 travel expendlture per day 0 Zambia Tanzania Kenya South Namibia Botswana Africa Source:Expenditure survey data for various years: Namibia(2003), South Africa (2005), Botswana(2004), Kenya(2004), Tanzania (2004), Zambia (2005). 2.50 The study concluded that Zambia could attract 51% more tourists ifit was performingon u pur with South Africa. Inreality Zambia does not have the infrastructure to support arrivals at this level, nor can it be expectedto match the South African economy. Nevertheless, the implications are clear: ifZambia can improve its tourism infrastructure along with the regulatory and other business and marketing aspects o f its tourism industry, there will be a measurable, positive impact on the performance of the sector and the economy. 2.5 1 Some of these impediments are well recognized by the Government and listed in the Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP): Underdeveloped infrastructure. Limited product base relying on wildlife. Inadequatecountry marketing. Insufficient government funding. Lack of community interest and participation. Inadequatemanagemento f natural resources. Shortageo f well-trained humanresources. Zambia i s a high cost destination. 26Services, Trade & Development:the Experienceof Zambia, 2007, PalgraveMacmillan/WorldBank. 18 2.52 Other impediments include: 0 Lack of a realistic vision for the sector alongwith the planningand regulatory functions capableof deliveringthe vision. The tourism industryis markedby out-datedtourismpolicies and inadequatesector planning, partly due to limited public sector managementcapacity, partly due to poor legislativeenvironment. 0 Lack of economiesof scale throughout the supply chain. The tourism industry needsto diversifyacross products, across the country and across borders. The goal is to increase tourist volumes, complement low volume/high value approachesand capture elements ofthe tour packagemarket. 0 Lack of attractive investment environment. The tourism sector needsto consolidate existing investmentswhile actively encouragingnew initiatives, especially domestic investmentsas well as high volume establishments. 0 Lack of consistent statistics and databases. UnderdevelopedInfrastructure 2.53 Internationalaccess to Zambia is limited and expensive. The airfare to Zambia from key markets averages $1,500 which is almost doublethe averageto Kenya. Only British Airways flies direct from Europeto Lusakawith three flights per week. Regional connectionsare available through Johannesburg,Harare, Nairobi, Addis Ababa and Dar es Salaam. 2.54 The recent rehabilitationofthe airport in Livingstonesupportedby the European Development Fundhas provena critical catalyst in realizingexistinginvestments(e.g. the Sun International)andmobilizing supplementary spin-offbenefits. Livingstonenow has moremajor hotel investmentsinthe pipelinetogether with a plethoraofsupportingtourism activitiesand services. Similar initiativesare neededelsewhere inthe country, especiallyto anchor further growth inthe KafueNationalPark as well as inthe three maintourism circuits. 2.55 Ifthe objectiveofZambiantourism remainsabalancedgrowthof all tourism circuits, then strategieswill haveto be developedthat will off-setthe current bias on Livingstone(see Box 2.2). These should includeincentivesthat will reducethe considerablerisk in establishingscheduledair services on new routes inunderdevelopedareas. Fifth, sixth and/or seventh freedom of air opportunities*' couldbe usedto incentivizescheduledair routes into new areas by using business traffic to supporttourism growth. 2.56 Map 2.3 illustratesthe current tourist arrival routes, demonstratingthe service gaps inthe north-eastandnorth-west. Although the development of existingZambian airline and charter businesses need support, new approaches shouldnot be overlooked, e.g. the Livingstone-Mfuwe- Johannesburgand Kasama-Mbeya-Dares Salaam routes. ''5th freedom:the right for an air carrier of country A to pick up revenuetraffic, including passengers in country B destined for country C or vice versa. 6th freedom: a service taking passengers betweencountriesB and C which flies via country A. 7th freedom:a service between countriesB and C operatedby airline of country A - a"free-standing fifth freedom". 19 Box 2.2. Livingstoneas a Hub? An issue worth some considerationis the focus on the Victoria Falls (Livingstone) as a flagship destination. Although this is one of Zambia's most favored tourism destinations, concerns have beenexpressedabout the skewingeffect this is havingon the development of Zambian tourism. Firstly, Livingstone is a short- durationdestination(approximately 2 days) and a typical packagetour will seek cheap extension destinations, currently only available in Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe. Possibly,these neighboring countrieswill benefit morethan Zambia from the recent lengtheningof the runway at Livingstone Airport. Certainly, focusingon Livingstone will make the developmentof other tourism circuits, particularly the north-east, more difficult. The converse argument is that an increasedthroughput of tourists will develop local tourism service industriesand stimulate innovating ideas for re-directing tourists into Zambia. 2.57 Investments inall-weather tourism airfields widely distributed throughout Zambia along with the subsequentmaintenanceofthem needencouragementas an integral element oftourism development. TABLE 2.5: Bookingmaterialspreferred by nature touristsand their bookingagents h 3 & h 2 3G z/I a W -3 % -e 22 % a 5 v1 s I- cli 0 w 4 3 National tourism website 49% 34% 8YO , 40% 33% National tourist brochures 29% 24% 4% 20% 21% Operator websites 83% 62% 100% 100% 78% Operator brochures 51% 62% ,48% 80% 57% Email communication 57% 52% 128% 160% 49% Side Survey (2006). InadecluateCountrv Marketing 2.58 Several studies have identified the need for more effective destination marketing for Zambia. One o f them, the Nature-basedTourism Supply-side Survey, demonstratedthat operator websites and other documentation are the preferred formats for international tourists and agents booking holidays in Zambia (see Table 2.5), significantly exceeding the use o f national tourist websites. Although the survey also recognized that Zambian tourism promotional material was at least on apar with that o f competing countries, the need for a much more significant investment by government in tourism marketingis clearly warranted. Inparticular national, circuit and national park branding needto be introduced more effectively to support the Real Africa label that Zambia already has established. Shortage o f well-trained HumanResources 2.59 Another outstanding issue - and a recommendation o fthe EU-funded Tourism Development Program2' - is the re-organization o f the hospitality training facilities in Zambia. There is a paucity o f fully trained tourism and hospitality staff inZambia, and this will become increasingly critical as the tourism sector continues its expansion, especially outside traditional tourist areas. A significant effort ** Tourism DevelopmentProgrammeiTranstec,1999:Tourism Development Framework, Ministry of Tourism. 20 i s requiredto establish a suitable set of standards,trainingsubject matter andcurriculaandtraining processes.Further efforts are then neededinencouragingthe privatesector to enter this market, which inturnwill requiresomeregulatory structure andcriteria. Zambia is a HighCost Destination 2.60 One ofthe growingareas of concern amongtourismoperators is the risingcost of Zambian destinations.Zambia is further from sea ports and intercontinental airport hubsthan most competitor countries, thus, the landedcosts of importedfuel and goods (on which Zambiantourism is still heavilydependentbecause ofthe country's limited manufacturingsector) are higher. Zambia has also been identifiedas a "high effort" destinationz9with no nearby oceanic tourist coastline. To off-set these disadvantages and successfully competewith itsneighbors, Zambia must ensure effective regulation, good infrastructure andthe clustering of facilities in order to reduce direct transport costs and realize economiesof scale. TourismPlanning 2.6 1 Inthe mid-199Os,the Ministry ofTourism, Environment & NaturalResourcesdevelopeda MediumTerm TourismStrategy and Action Plan. The planwas basedon four pillars, including:(1) establishinga tourism focus for Zambiabasedon the Victoria Falls; (2) linking the Victoria Falls to the KafueNationalParkas Zambia's flagship park; (3) developingthree tourism circuits; and(4) creatinginterlinkinghierarchical tourism facilities within nine coretourism areas. 2.62 The main strategieswere: 1) to usethe branding ofnational parks as a central focus in marketingZambiantourism; 2) to develop domestic tourism; and 3) to build public-privatelinkages in the industry in orderto strengthenimplementation and regulation. 2.63 The Planis a sound document, especially when combinedwith many of the outputs produced by the subsequent Tourism DevelopmentProgram.However, morethan adecade later, the Planis not used as aguide to tourismdevelopmentinZambia. In part the failure is the outcomeof inertiaon finalizingthe TourismandHospitalityBill, which, althoughstartedinthe mid-1990s,remains incompleteandincreasingly questionedby many stakeholderswho believethat the draft by now is outdated. 2.64 InTable 2.6, we examine how the currenttourism infrastructure would scoreagainst the objectives of the Plan.The absence of any widely circulated materialon the status ofthe Plan, or possibly re-definitionof its objectives and goals, reinforces concernsthat tourism planningis not beinggiven the resourcesor the priority it requires.Ifthese resourceswere to be madeavailable it will be necessary to invest heavilyin tourism data collection, analysis as well as storage and retrieval systems as a pre-requisiteto an effectiveplanning and monitoringfunction. 2.65 IfZambia is to developits tourismsector inamorepredictable,geographically balancedand successfulmanner,the primaryrequirement, as recognizedinthe FNDP, is the development of a simple and realistic TourismMasterPlanthat incorporates: Long-termtourism sector targets and milestones (keepingin mindthat commercial developments commonly needat least five years to realize their full potential). Improvedstatistical data collectionandmanagementsystem. 29 Grant Thornton Kessle Feinstein,2003: Study for Developmentand Promotionof Tourism in Zambia. 21 MAP 2.3: Tourist arrival routes Balanced development of Zambia's tourism circuits, especially weak and new circuits (Kafue, western Zambia and the northern waterfalls/lakes). 0 Essential road, air, ITC and power infrastructure (outstanding projects include the Chipata- Mfuwe and Itezhi-tezhi Roads and the Kasama and KasabaBay Airports). The critically important supporting framework of policy and legislation; establishing standards, licensing andtraining capacity; improving marketing(especially national destination marketing); and sector management and regulation. 2.66 The Plan must take due cognizance o f current shortcomings, as well as the more systemic issues. Long lead time issues such as the development of training capacities; the establishment o f physical infrastructure; and the development o f effective country, circuit and product marketing require immediate attention. Issues needing less preparation such as the development o f a planning function; improvements in data collection and management; an overhaul of the standards and licensing functions; and improvements in regulatory functions can be incorporated more flexibly. 22 TABLE 2.6: Progressagainst objectives in the Tourism Strategy and Action Plan No. Item IScore I Reason 1 OBJECTIVES 1.1 Competitive advantage in low 60% Largely individual initiatives rather than a volume, highcost wilderness and coordinated strategy adventure tourism 1.2 Identify target development areas 25% Livingstone only 1.3 Promote domestic tourism 15% ILocal piecemeal initiatives, especially in Livingstone, but no national strategy 1.4 Public-private linkages developed 1 10% ILimited real progress 2 PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT 6 IDEVELOPMENT OF CLUSTERS 6.1 IDevelopment o f hierarchical tourism 1 15% IPractically no planning outside Z A W A ' clusters in each tourism area general management plans, which does not include hierarchical planning 6.2 Tourism area plans and committees 10% Need to develop real public-private partnerships Regulatory Environment 2.67 The inadequacies o f the tourism regulatory environment have been an area o f concern for some time. Zambia still does not possess an effective tourism classification and standards system. Suggestions for such systems were made in the late 1990s under the Tourism Development Program, but have not been followed up adequately3'. The absence o f suitable systems and the capacity to monitor and enforce them is having negative impacts through a failure to reward quality and control compliance avoidance, thereby giving unfair advantages to those that pursue this path. 2.68 Taxation is another concern. The corporate taxation rate of 35% is comparatively higher than that inregional competitor countries. Although tourism is a non-traditional export sector, it does not receive the reduced (15%) corporate tax available to agriculture and other sectors. Furthermore, value added tax (VAT) is not equally applied -with Livingstone being VAT exempted since 1991 while other areas aren't. Also some segments o f the tourism sector are zero rated for tax while others aren't. 30Output reportsof the Tourism Development Program, 1998. 23 2.69 Suggestions have beenmade for a "guillotine" approachto rationalizingand simplifying Zambia's tourism regulatory environment, where regulatory requirements are passedthrough a cascading set o f criteria. Elements that fail to meet the criteria (legally supported, necessary, business friendly, etc.) are passedon for further review and appeal before a final list is approved3'. 2.70 Furthermore it i s vital to strengthenthe commercial management functions in the MTENR and ZAWA, as neither institution is recognized for the excellence of their customer services. In excess of 90% of all responding tourism operators considered regulatory authorities to be either 1) unprofessional and obstructive, or 2) inefficient and ~npredictable~~. 2.71 Ineffect this translates into high costs of setting up and operating tourism enterprises. Tourism operators indicate that the direct cost of regulatory compliance rangesbetween $2,000 and $30,000 per annum and the time cost of obtaining them between $2,000 and $20,000. It i s o f equal interest that operators from different regions declared different licensing requirements (from 2-4 in one areato morethan 12 inthe Livingstone region), reinforcing the concern that regulatory systems are not being applied in a systematic and predictable manner.The Hotel and Catering Association estimatesthat the annual cost of their regulatory compliance is inthe region o f ZMK 9.5 million33. Investment Environment 2.72 Although the public sector has played a very usefulrole in facilitating the growth intourism in Livingstone, generally it is acceptedthat Zambia's improved competitiveness is due largely to private sector initiative, drive and persistence. However, the private sector is sensitive to the overall businessand investment climate (see Box 2.3). 2.73 Zambia's investment climate has improved following macroeconomic and other policy shifts in government since 1999.Nevertheless,the country lags behind international and regional investment areas on a number of important issues, mainly labor management and productivity, taxation and macroeconomic stability. For example, the 2005 Zambia Investment Climate Assessment concluded that Zambian companies use over $12,000 o f capital per unit of labor whereas in East African competitor countries the figure is around $3,50034.Other areas o f disparity included value addition: 23 US cents per unit o f capital inZambia compared with approximately 60 US cents in Uganda; the ratio of labor to value addition is 0.41 inZambia and 0.32 inChina. 2.74 The report concluded that "the future o f private sector-led growth does not lie inselected industry promotion by the Zambian government but rather increating policies and institutionsthat encourage investors to productively and creatively employ their resourcesand people." Accordingly, the Governmentsofthe Netherlands and France are now supporting capacity buildinginthe private sector umbrella organization, the Tourism Council o f Zambia. Furthermore the Ministry o f Tourism, Environment & Natural Resourceshas pledged to encouragetourism investment in northern Zambia, but logistical issues, low density o f tourism establishmentsand an absence o f real incentives has so far precluded developments. 2.75 Other important issuesto address for promoting private sector investments include the encouragement o f strategic larger tourism investments, support to private sector-led community initiatives, further growth insmall-scale suppliers o f accommodation or tourism services, and the rationalization and effective investment intourism marketing. '*Jacobs 3 ' and Astrakhan, 2006; Mattoo and Payton, 2007 ZambiaNature-basedTourism Supply-Side Survey, World Bank. 33 Mattoo and Payton, 2007. 34 Africa Private Sector Group, 2005: Zambia InvestmentClimate Assessment, World Bank, Washington. 24 Box 2.3. PrivateSector Concerns The privatesector lists the following key concerns inthe 2005 Zambia InvestmentClimate Assessment: High cost of financing (especially with high interestrates prevailing until late 2005). Lack of macroeconomicstability (for example the 30%+ Kwacha appreciation in late 2005). High tax rates andthe often unilateral managementof tax collection and administration. Limitedaccess to finance (especially for smaller enterprises). High crime, fraud and disorder rates and limited confidence in the Police. Corruption at all levels. Interruptedelectricity supplies. Poor labour skills and low productivity. Convolutedcustoms and trade legislationand implementationproblemssimilar to the tax sector. Transport inefficiencies andhigh transport costs (andpoor operations on the railway systems). Difficult access to land and often corrupt and slow administrationof titles. Limiting labour regulations(especially terminal benefit provisions). Excessiverequirementsfor business licensingand permits(especially in the tourism sector). Slow and uncertainadministrationby the courts. 2.76 Nevertheless,the recentcreationofa one-stopinvestment office, the Zambia Development Agency (ZDA) should facilitate new investments, providedit is able to secure its powers in key areas such as landacquisition, employment permits, tax benefitsand streamlinedregulatory compliance support.Previously, such initiativeshave all developed into contentious facades that haveultimately removedthe effectiveness ofthe investmentsupport instrument.Furthermore, any existinginvestment licenseneedsto be re-instated- at a considerablefee - a rather obvious fund generator for the ZDA. Lack of Incentives 2.77 Zambia's investment situationimprovedbriefly inthe early 1990s through fiscal andother investment incentivesestablishedunderthe 1993 InvestmentAct. Inthe subsequentyears these incentives havelargelybeen withdrawn or eroded. Ina tourism context there are effectivelyno incentives although macroeconomicplanningframeworks from the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) andthe TransitionalNationalDevelopment Planto the current FNDP all alluded to tourism beingprivate sector-drivenandto beingone of four pillarsofthe economy. 2.78 The 2006 investment legislationapparently limits significantincentivesto investmentsgreater than $500,000. Real tax and other incentives are offered for investmentsofmore than $10 million. Nor are there any incentivesfor smaller domestic investors (who are unlikely to raise $500,000). 2.79 One element that was introduced in 2002 for smaller Zambian tourism investors underthe PRSPwas the TourismDevelopment CreditFacility.This instrumentis administeredby the MTENR. Its effectivenessand credit recovery levels are not widely known, but it has been accessed by a number o fZambian investors. 2.80 The Citizens Economic EmpowermentPolicy andAct, now awaitingpresidential approval andcommencement, introducesthe objective of providingspecific businessadvantagesfor Zambian owned (shareholding) andZambian influenced (management) businesses and for targetedcitizens. Anticipatedopportunities for these groups will include procurementadvantages andaccessto direct or employee shareholding schemes, directorshipsandgreater access to managementpositions. Access to landandto trainingand other forms of empowermentare also intended. 2.8 1 The impact of the Act cannot beaccuratelypredicted, but its successwill doubtless depend heavilyon how pragmatically and effectively it is introduced, the levelof political influence and the performanceofthe economy. Ifcircumstances permit a constructive and positiveimplementation of 25 the policy, it could have significant impacts on empowering, capitalizing and formalizing the informal sector, diversifying the economy through building and deepeningsupply and value chains, especially inrural areas, and on encouraging further domestic and foreign investment inZambia. Mostof all it could be a major catalyst in raisingZambia's productivity levels, thus ensuring sustainability of the policy and achievement of its ultimate objective o f economic growth and prosperity. High Volume Investments 2.82 Although Zambia has adopted a low volumehigh value approachto tourism, in reality it will be necessary for some strategically placed, high volume tourism entities to become part of the tourism plan. These will help to generate the economies o f scale on scheduledair transport routes and to support local charter flight operations - key areas in linking tourists and destinations. The Tourism Strategy and Action Plan anticipated this needinthe form of apex entities within each tourism cluster. Provided the location of these high volume (hotels and large lodges) entities is well planned, their density impact can still be low and limited. 2.83 The needto scale-up investments intourism is illustrated by how the Sun International Group in Livingstonehasresulted in60,000 more visitors, over 1000jobs and an additional $16 million in direct and indirect tourism earnings35.Zambia's tourism cannot grow without further emphasis on attracting large investments. This strategy needsto be linked and supported by an SME linkages development program to increasethe participationo f local firms inthe tourism economy. 35Personal comm. Sun International Management. 26 3. NATURE TOURISM: CONTRIBUTION TO THE ZAMBIAN ECONOMY A. INTRODUCTION 3.1 Statisticsfrom the World Tourism Organization shown inTable 3.1 indicatethat Zambia is solidly inthe middlerank of African tourist destinationswhen it comes to internationaltourism receipts as a share ofGDP. TABLE 3.1: Tourism receipts of selected African countries, 2003 Internationaltourism receipts ($) Percentof GDP Namibia 333 million 7.8% Ghana 414 million 5-4% Botswana 356 million 4.8% Tanzania 450 million 4.4% Zambia 149million 3.5% Senegal 184million 2.9% SouthAfrica 4270 million 2.7% Kenya 339 million 2.4% Mozambique 98 million 2.3% Madagascar 76 million 1.4% Source: World Tourism Organization. 3.2 The goal ofthis chapter is to delve into the contributionthat naturetourism makes to the Zambian economy. The principaltool used for this task is a TourismDemandSurvey carried out by the World Bank in Octoberhlovember 2005. The objectives ofthe survey included:(1) understanding the basic socio-economiccharacteristics of Zambian tourists, (2) identifyingthe purposeof visit, (3) measuringdurationofstay and number of sites visited, (4) recording perceptionsof quality, and (5) measuringwillingnessto pay for visits to nationalparks and for their improvements. 3.3 The resultsofthe survey are combined with an Input-Outputtable in order to estimate the impactsof naturetourists on wages, employment, value added andtax revenue.Theseresultsalso shed light on the muchdebatedleakages. 3.4 Internationaltourists visit Zambia for a variety of reasons, includingholiday, business, visitingfiiends and relatives, etc. Since the Zambian Governmentseeksto maketourism's contributionto the economy grow significantly, this chapter focuseson the portionof the tourist universemost sensitiveto governmentpolicy: holiday-makersand in particularnaturetourists. B. SURVEY DESIGNAND METHODOLOGY SampleDesign 3.5 The Tourism DemandSurvey aimed for a sampleof 1,800 tourists. Inthe end, 1,578 agreed to fill out the questionnaire(see Annex 1). The survey was carried out for aperiodof 25 days usinga cross sectional sampleof tourists. 3.6 The target populationfor the survey consisted of internationaltourists who were interviewed at either internationalairports (Lusaka and Livingstone)or in lodgesandhotels inand aroundnational parks (South Luangwa, Kafue and Mosi-oa-Tunya). Tourists were interviewedat the endoftheir stay inZambia. 27 3.7 For the purposeso f this survey, tourists were stratified into internally homogenous categories based on their respective origin and mode of transport used to visit the country and the sites. This implies that tourists who traveled by air were interviewed at the two international airports whilst self- drive tourists were covered intheir respective lodges and hotels around Livingstone town, Kafue and South Luangwa National Parks. Sample Selection 3.8 Inorder to minimize selection bias, the survey employed a systematic sample oftourists in airports and parks. Inthe case of airports, the interviewer was expectedto interview every i'th tourist that enteredthe departure lounge after immigrationclearance. Inthe parks, every i'th tourist was selectedusing a lodginghedding list providedby the operators. Inthe case o f Kafue and South Luangwa National Parks, the field teams targeted tourists who had completed their park activities. 3.9 The sampling interval was determinedas follows: (SamplingInterval)= (Availablenumberof tourists) (Requireddailysampleof tourists) 3.10 Table 3.2 shows the distribution oftourists by interview location. Roughly 55% of the sample was interviewed in the international airports, with the remainder interviewedat lodges and hotels in Livingstone, South Luangwa and Kafue. Interview Location Number of Tourists Proportion (YO) Lusaka Airport 424 26.9 LivingstoneAirport 460 29.2 LivingstoneTown 306 19.4 South Luangwa National Park 248 15.7 Kafue National Park 140 8.9 Total 1,578 100.0 3.1 1 In2005, 668,862 visitors visited Zambia (see Table 3.4), out of which the survey sampled 1,578 visitors. Even though the sample size may appear to be small relative to the total number of visitors, it is sufficient to provide reliable estimates of the average characteristics of all the tourists visiting Zambia in 2005, as demonstratedby confidence intervals for key variables. 3.12 A confidence interval generates a lower and upper limit for the mean. The interval gives an indicationof how much uncertainty there is inthe estimate o f the true mean. The narrower the interval, the more precise is the estimate. The confidence coefficient of 95% is the proportion of samples o f size N that may be expectedto contain the true mean. That is, ifmany samples o f the same sizeN were collected and the confidence interval computed, inthe longrunabout 95% of these intervals would contain the true mean. 3.13 Table 3.3 shows the 95% confidence intervals for three key variables inthe analysis. For example, the average expenditure for a non-packagetourist inZambia is between $1,038 and $1,146. The number o fdays spent in Zambia by an averagetourist is from 6.4 to 7.4 days. And an average visitor to Livingstone is willing to pay from $26.70 to $28.40 for visiting the Victoria Falls. The narrow range of 95% confidence intervals o f these key indicators implies highdegree o f reliability o f the sample means as estimates o fthe true populationmean. 28 TABLE 3.3: 95% confidence intervals for selected indicators N Mean Low High Average expenditure per tourist trip 558 1092 1038 1146 Numberof days inZambia 1131 6.9 6.4 7.4 Willingness to pay for Livingstone 899 27.6 26.7 28.4 TABLE 3.4: Visitor arrivals 2005: Area of origin by purpose of visit Area of Origin Holiday Business Conference VFR" Other Total South Africa 48,O 10 34,475 2,219 12,108 13,460 110,272 Zimbabwe 16,23 1 69,666 1,632 44,256 16,65 1 148,436 Other Southern Africa 13,640 19,224 1,273 8,781 7,967 50,885 Total Southern Africa 77,881 123,365 5,124 65,145 38,078 309,593 Kenya 2,446 5,227 122 1,659 2,284 11,738 Tanzania 6,120 39,490 463 8,070 11,738 65,881 Other East Africa 2,654 7,838 181 3,390 3,386 17,449 Total East Africa 11,220 52,555 766 13,119 17,408 95,068 Central Africa 7,075 23,032 336 7,393 9,944 47,780 North Africa 700 973 55 429 595 2,752 West Africa 809 3,224 84 1,057 633 5,807 Total West & Central Africa 8,584 27,229 475 8,879 11,172 56,339 Denmark 1,752 1,089 72 528 701 4,142 France 4,609 1,667 85 666 997 8,024 Germany 9,915 4,080 269 1,490 2,006 17,760 Italy 4,168 1,755 90 712 973 7,698 Sweden 2,366 1,570 160 685 957 5,738 UnitedKingdom 23,788 10,761 547 4,066 5,207 44,369 Other Europe 13,056 6,332 457 2,816 3,210 25,871 Other Scandinavian 4,678 1,428 190 670 1,144 8,110 Total Europe 64,332 28,682 1,870 11,633 15,195 121,712 Canada 5,684 2,631 130 1,173 1,612 11,230 South America 1,020 588 120 275 452 2,455 UnitedStates ofAmerica 13,734 4,783 616 1,979 2,783 23,895 Total Americas 20,438 8,002 866 3,427 4,847 37,580 Australia 9,264 3,977 153 1,234 1,708 16,336 India 3,290 2,695 166 1,135 1,372 8,658 Japan 2,146 1,433 118 588 919 5,204 New Zealand 4,529 1,468 87 592 959 7,635 Other Asia 4,29 1 3,552 202 1,069 1,623 10,737 Total Australasia 23,520 13,125 726 4,618 6,581 48,570 Grand Total 205,975 252,958 9,827 106,821 93,281 668,862 Share by purpose 30.8% 37.8% 1.5% 16.0% 13.9% 100.0% Total minus southern Africab 176,104 164,068 6,922 53,784 68,663 469,541 Total minusAfricab 156,300 84,284 5,68 1 3 1,786 40,083 318,134 iource: Zambia NationalTourist Board. a:VFR: Visiting friends and relatives, b: SouthAfrica is includedinthe total. 29 C.THE TRUE NUMBER OFNATURE TOURISTS 3.14 When determining the economic impact o f nature tourism, it is important to define which universe o f tourists should be used inthe analysis. Table 3.4 summarizesthe distribution o f all tourists visiting Zambia in2005, compiled from arrival figures provided by the Zambia National Tourist Board. The data were collected from twelve ports of entry, including Nakonde, Kasumbelesa, Mwami, Chirundu, Kariba North, Kazungula, Victoria Falls, Katima Mulilo borders, andNdola, Mfuwe, Lusaka and Livingstone International Airports. 3.15 FromTable 3.4, we can derive a conservative figure for the total number o f foreign nature tourists of 176,104. SouthernAfrican (minus South African) holiday-makers have been subtracteddue to cross-border contamination caused by businesspeople coding their visit as holiday rather than business. A lot o f ``tourists" from neighboring countries are actually on day trips for commerce. D.TOURIST PROFILE Visitor Origin and Purposeof Visit 3.16 Table 3.5 breaks down the basic information on the tourists sampled inthe survey. O f the 1,578 tourists in the total sample, 1,417 were able to provide both region of origin and purpose o f visit information. The high percentageof holiday-makers reflects the fact that the samplingstrategy for the survey was designed to capture information about holiday-makers primarily. TABLE 3.5: Number of tourists in the sample by origin and purposeof visit Regiono f Origin Holiday Business Conference VFR Other Total Holiday share UK 352 25 3 30 1 411 30.9% Other Europe 367 27 7 57 4 462 32.2% North America 211 27 6 19 0 263 18.5% AsidPacific 119 12 2 14 0 147 10.4% South Africa 79 22 1 9 2 113 6.9% Neighboring SSA' 10 4 1 2 0 17 0.9% Other 3 0 1 0 0 4 0.3% Total 1,141 117 21 131 7 1,417 100.0% Shareby purpose 80.5% 8.3% 1.5% 9.2% 0.5% 100.0% Source:Tourism Demand Survey (2005). a: IncludesAngola, Botswana, DRC, Malawi, Namibia,TanzaniaandZimbabwe. 3.17 The proportiono ftypes of visitors in Tables 3.4 and 3.5 cannot be compared. Still, they show that businesstravelers are under-representedin the sample, which may be linked to individual businesstravelers making multiple visits per year (which a one-shot survey would miss) or to seasonality, or the fact that the city o fNdola was not sampled. Additionally, there is an under-count o f South African holiday-makers which may be seasonalor related to the over-weighting o f international airports inthe sample, as many South Africans arrive by road. Visitor Satisfaction 3.1 8 Visitor satisfaction is an important issue for tourist destinations; it certainly affects whether nature tourists returnagain, and may be influential inthe informal marketingo f a destination by word of mouth. The survey askedtourists to rank the major destinations inZambia according to overall satisfaction as well as specific sub-components: accommodation, food and beverages, transport, safety, value for money and, inthe case o f the parks, wildlife abundance. Table 3.6 reports the overall satisfaction with the major sites. 30 TABLE 3.6: Nature tourists' overall satisfactionwith sites (YO) Good Verygood Livingstone(Victoria FallsandMosi-oa-Tunya) 44 46 South LuangwaNational Park 34 61 Lower Zambezi NationalPark 29 68 KafueNational 54 40 Source: TourismDemand Survey (2005). 3.19 Overall, at least 90% ofnaturetourists were satisfied or very satisfiedwith the destinations they visited(only 5 tourists inthe sample ratedtheir experience as `bad'). Tourists were also asked how likely they would beto visit Zambiaagain, as there may be good reasons for not returning,for example, a desireto see more ofAfrica. However, 84% of naturetourists saidthey would visit again. E. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF NATURETOURISM DistributionofTouristExpenditures 3.20 The key to the economic impact oftourism is the total amount of expenditure incurredby tourists in Zambia andthe distributionofthese expenditures across different goods and services. The tourist survey asked respondentsto break downtheir total trip expenditures both inside and outside the country. 3.2 1 Inidentifyingtourist expenditures an important distinctionhasto be made betweenpackage and non-packagetourism. 51% of holiday-makersinthe survey samplewere nottravelingon a package,meaningthat they purchasedtransport to Zambia, localtravel, accommodation, food, shoppingand activitiesas separate transactions.The remaining49% bought a full package intheir homecountry, with or without airfare, or bought a packageinZambia. Table 3.7 reports the levelsof expenditure for these different categories of holiday-makers. TABLE 3.7: Nature tourists' average expenditures without airfare Per person Average Per person per trip ($) stay (days) per day (!$) Overseas packagebought with airfare (airfare subtracted)' 2,540 5 508 Overseas packagebought without airfare 3,098 7 443 Local package 1,137 6 190 Local non-package 1,092 8 137 3.22 Table 3.7 suggeststhat the averageinternationalpackagetourist paidroughly $2500-$3100, comparedwith roughly$1 100 for tourists who either bought a packagein Zambia or made individual purchases of goods and services in Zambia36.The latter figure is the best estimate of the economic impact of international tourists on the Zambian economy because it excludesoverseas services. 3.23 Finally, the distributionofexpenditureswithin Zambia matterswhen examining economic impact as different sectors(accommodation andtransport for example) may vary intheir employment intensivenessand degree of linkageto the domesticeconomy. Table 3.8 presentsthe average expenditures for non-packageholiday-makers for different categoriesof goods and services. 36Since most SouthAfrican holiday-makersare non-package tourists, the small difference betweenlocal packageandnon-package expendituresin Table 3.7 suggests that the undercountof South Africans in the survey samplewill not have a significant effect on the estimates ofthe economic impacts of tourism in Zambia. 31 TABLE 3.8: Breakdown of expenditures per nature tourist per trip (non-package) Category o f expenditure $ Hotel 583 Transportation 200 Food 240 Shopping 31 Activities 186 Source: Tourism DemandSurvey (2005). Input-Output Table 3.24 As seen inthe section above, the averagenature tourist spends $1,100 inZambia, andthese expenditures are distributed across different goods and services inproportion to the figures appearing inTable 3.8. This information can be combined with the 1998Input-Output(IO) table3' for Zambia to estimatethe impact o f nature tourism on value added, wages, employment, tax revenue and imports. 3.25 IOtables are built around a matrix of inter-sectoral flows detailing how much of the intermediate demand for goods and services ina given production sector is met by other sectors in the economy. Detailed information on value added broken down into wages, indirect taxes and operating surplus complete the productionaccounting system. IO models makethe strong assumption that factor inputs are fixed in proportion, but havethe unique property o f being able to trace sectoral inter- linkages in great detail. 3.26 The methodology employed inthis analysis is to tie the IOtable to households; then a thousandKwacha of expenditure on the output of a sector such as Hotels and Restaurants generates a certain amount o f wage income and net surplus which accrues to households, who then spendthis income by consuming goods and services. Inaddition, when the Hotels and Restaurantssector produces one thousand Kwachaworth of output, it must purchase inputso f food, beverages, water, electricity, communications, manufactures,and so on. These inputs are either imported or produced by other sectors inthe Zambian economy. When all these transactions are added up it is possible to arrive at a total measureo fthe direct plus indirect production, value added, wages, employment, tax revenue and imports required in order to meet this demand38. Impact on the Economy 3.27 Table 3.9 shows the economic impact of one nature tourist inZambia. In rough figures, $1,100 worth of expenditure by a nature tourist generates nearly $2,300 worth of GDP inthe Zambian economy (the `tourism multiplier' is therefore 2.l), $1,300 worth of wages and net income o f unincorporated business(NIUB), $420 intax revenue, and $425 worth o f imports o f goods and services. Every three nature tourists generateone full-time equivalent job inthe formal sector39. 37This IOtable may appear dated for the analysisof tourism in 2005. However, as long as the structural parametersof different sectors (the relative proportionsof intermediateand primary inputs) are fairly stable over time there is no particular issue with regard to the vintage of the IO data. While the copper sector has restructuredsince 1998, it sells none of its output to other sectors in Zambia, thus does not affect the calculation of the direct plus indirect effects of nature tourist demand featuredin this section. Technicallythe re-spendingby households is an `induced' effect, but we will simplify the terminology. 39 Note that this should not be taken literally. Three nature tourists generate fractions ofjobs across the different sectors o fthe economy, and these fractions add up to one full time equivalent job. 32 3.28 Table 3.9 further shows the economic impact of 176,000 naturetourists each spending$1,I00 in Zambia4'. This levelof spendingrepresentsan export value to the economy of $194millionor 3.1% of 2005 GDP. TABLE 3.9: Direct and indirect economicimpactof naturetourism in 2005 Value added $2,288 1 $ 403 million I 6.5% Indirecttaxes $152 $ 27 million 0.4% Corporatetaxes $265 $ 47 million 0.8% Imports $425 $ 75 million 1.2% Wages & NIUB $1,298 $ 228 million 3.7% Employment 0.307 54,000 jobs n/a 3.29 In2005, government revenuewas about 17%ofGDP in Zambia, exports 20% and imports 27%. The story given by Table 3.9 can therefore be portrayed inthe following broadterms: When direct and indirect linkages are included, naturetourism contributesnearly 16%ofZambian exports, over 6% of wages and net income of unincorporatedbusiness4',7% of governmentrevenue, nearly 10%of formal sector employment, over 4% of imports, and 6.5% of GDP (see Figure 3.1). In comparison, the direct and indirect impact ofthe public protected area estate inNamibiaconstitutes less than 6% o f GDP4*. FIGURE3.1: Direct and indirect contribution of nature tourism to the Zambian economy, 2005 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% Exports Govt revenue GDP Wages 8 NIUB Employment Source: Authors' calculations. 3.30 Tourismalso compares favorably with other sectors inthe Zambian economy such as agriculture (6.5% of GDP), Manufacturing(10.6%) and Mining& Quarrying(8.6%)43. 40The impact on the Zambian economy is calculatedusing2005 GDP at Atlas exchange rates of $6.19 billion as the benchmark.Atlas exchange ratesuse a 3-year running average, which dampens out the effects of sharp appreciations such as that experienced by the Kwacha in 2005. 41The wages andNIUB generatedby naturetourists is 3.7% of GDP as reportedin Table 3.9, which represents 6.2% of total wages andNIUB inthe economy. 42Anchor Environment Consultants(2004). 43Central Statistical Office (2005): constant 1994prices. 33 Impact on Employment 3.3 1 As shown in Table 3.9, every three nature tourists generateone full-time equivalent job inthe formal sector44.Accordingly, the direct and indirect contribution to employment o f 176,000 nature tourists is in the order of 54,000 formaljobs (about 19,000 jobs when indirect linkages are excluded). As this is generatedby one quarter of all international visitors in 2005, it compares well with other Zambian growth sectors such as agriculture (56,000 jobs), mining (46,000 jobs) and manufacturing (56,000 jobs)45. 3.32 The Hotels and Restaurantssector, accounting for more than 60% ofnature tourist expenditures (see Table 3.Q is a major contributor to employment. Table 3.10 shows the numbero f direct and indirectformal sectorjobs generatedby different economic sectors in responseto one billion Kwacha o f additional final consumption expenditure. The very low figures for textiles and leather, other manufacturing, and chemicals reflect the high import content of these goods, for example, on average61% o f final consumption expenditure on `other manufacturing' i s imported. TABLE3.10: Direct and indirect employment contentofZMK 1billion final consumption Sector No. ofjobs generated Construction 184 Trade 182 Hotels & restaurants 182 Real estate & business service 158 Forestry 142 Financial institutions & insurance 138 Transport & communications 137 Livestock & fishing 133 Agriculture 132 Community & personal services 123 Mining& quarrying 120 Food, beverages& tobacco 117 Electricity, water & gas 115 Textiles & leather 59 Other manufacturing 47 Chemicals 40 Source: Authors' calculations. 3.33 Interms of direct and indirect employment generation per unit of final expenditure, the key supplier oftourism services, the Hotels and Restaurants sector, is virtually at the headofthe list, equaling wholesale and retail trade and only slightly lagging construction. 3.34 Actually tourism is a low generator o f informaljobs. According to the Central Statistical Office, 44% of employment inthe hotel and restaurant industry is informal compared to 7% inthe miningindustry, 99% in agriculture and 66% inmanufacturing. F. INCREASINGTHE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF NATURETOURISM 3.35 The Tourism Demand Survey found that nature tourists on average stay 6.9 days in Zambia. This is low comparedto competing destinations such as Botswana (8.6 days), Kenya (13.4 days), 44Note that three nature tourists generate fractions o fjobs across the different sectors o f the economy, and these fractions add up to one full time equivalentjob. 4sThe Central Statistical Office (2006). 34 Namibia (12.4 days), South Africa (12 days) and Tanzania (14.2 days). One ofthe most direct ways to increasetourism receipts in Zambia is to increasethe number of days that nature tourists spend in the country. 3.36 Increasing the lengthof stay to match the equivalent figure for Botswana is a reasonablegoal, at least inthe short run.This would imply an increase of about 2 days and extra expenditures o f $190 per day (see Table 3.7). Multiplying these figures by 176,000 nature tourists leads to an increased value o ftourism exports of $67 million or an additional 1.1% of direct GDP. When indirect linkages are included through the tourism multiplier, the overall impact could be as large as 2.2% o f GDP. 3.37 The lengthof stay is often closely linked to the number o f sites that a tourist TABLE 3.11: Expenditure for non-packagenature tourist visits. As reported in Chapter 2, 84.5% o f holiday-makers in Zambia visit one site only, usually the Victoria Falls. Table 3.1 1 shows the average expenditure per tourist Two Sites 12.0% 1,258 per trip broken down according to the Three Sites 3.o% 1,447 number of sites visited. On average each Source: Tourism DemandSurvey (2005). additional site adds $200 to expenditures Datafor 4+ sites not shown owing to small sub-sample size. inZambia perpersonper trip. 3.38 The other way to increasetourism receipts inZambia is to attract more visitors through better promotion of Zambia as a tourist destination. However, the limitations o f infrastructure and transport inZambia would act as a bottleneck intourism sector expansion.As discussedinChapter 2, improvingtourism receipts will likely require actions on several fronts, including (1) increased promotion of Zambian tourism in source markets, (2) infrastructure investments, particularly in transport, and (3) scaling up o f private sector investment inhotels and lodges as well as local tour operators who can promote multi-sitepackages. G. LINKAGESAND LEAKAGES 3*39 A concern that is commonto many tourist destinations is the TABLE 3.12: Cost of overseas services (includingflights) for question o f financial leakages.In naturetourists in Zambia most all-inclusive package tours, up to 80% o ftravelers' expenditures go to airlines, hotels and other 1,100 international companies with headquartersinthe source markets, and not to local businesses. The good Source: Tourism DemandSurvey (2005). news is that out of the 206,000 a: $1,100, equivalentto the average of local packageand local holiday-makers that Zambia received non-package is the best estimate of overseas package in 2005' mostarrive On tourists' expenditures in Zambia. tailored holidays. Either they b: $1,527 is the averageairfare reportedfor holiday-makerswho purchasetravel, accommodation, have purchasedtheir own flight to Zambia. food, shopping and activities as separate transactions - in Zambia - or they buy a local package- in Zambia. Only 30% or 60,000 tourists arrived on an overseas packagewith overseas services (including flights), constituting over 70% o fthe packageprice (see Table 3.12). 3.40 Contrary to common beliefs these overseas services are not a leakagefrom the Zambian economy! Rather, they are payments for services in the source markets, including representation, marketing, insuranceand flights; services that are usedto sell the Zambian product, without which there would be no benefit at all to Zambia. Instead it makes more sense to compare tourism with other export industries; i.e. regarding overseas services as a leakage inthe Zambian tourism industry is like 35 suggestingthat Kenyashould not be exporting coffee because the `leakage' rate when an American buys a tall coffee at Starbucks is 99.4% (see Box 3.1). Box 3.1. Coffee Leakage According to information from Global Exchange, the price paid for raw coffee at auction in New York averages $0.50 per pound, while the price paidto the farmer in Kenya averages about $0.30per pound. The difference represents local processing costs, wholesalingmargins andtransportationcosts. When an American consumer buys a poundof coffee at retail they may pay $10-$12for a poundof roastedcoffee beans. The differencebetweenthis price andthe New York raw bean priceconsists of processing, roasting, packaging, transport, wholesaleand retail margins. When this same consumer buys atall coffee at their local Starbucks, they pay $1.75 for an amount of coffee beans that they could buy at retail for $0.35. Herethe difference inprice consists of renting retail space, hiring servicestaff, paying for expensive coffee-makingequipment, marketing, providing cream and sugar, and so on. The Kenyanfarmer who grew the coffee beans in questionwould have received, on average, $0.01 for them. So the leakage rate on a coffee at Starbucks is 1- 1/175 or 99.4%. Underfair trade schemes, the farmer is paid $1.00-$1.20for the same poundof beans that previously fetched $0.30. This means that the farmer is receiving $0.03-$0.04for the beans inthe tall coffee purchasedfor $1.75 at Starbucks, and the leakagerate is thereforeabout 98%. 3.41 It is a common misconception that a host country is entitled to capture the entire value chain betweensource and destination markets. Rather, decision-makers should focus on the portion of the global value chain that is accounted for inZambia. Then, leakagecomprises imports, expatriate salariesand profit repatriation. 3.42 Every holiday-maker, regardless o ftheir package arrangements, spend about $1,100 in Zambia; a figure that compares favorably with other countries, e.g. Kenya ($405), Tanzania ($1,I05) and SouthAfrica ($879)46.However, within the $1,100, about $200 is leaked through imports. This is money that leaves the country to pay for a good (e.g. food, specialized equipment, etc.) or service (e.g. expatriate salary) not available in Zambia. It is unlikely, however, that the tourism sector is worse than other export industries such as mining. 3.43 Repatriation of profits is often mentioned. Commercial enterprises pursueprofit optimizationrather than a host country's development objectives, and profit repatriation to the parent company often comprise an essentialcontributionto overheadcosts and corporate profits. Barriers to profit repatriation will therefore deter many overseas investors. Rather, reinvestment should be encouragedthrough a combinationo f incentives and competition. Markets with many operators tend to limit profit repatriation, as the degreeo f reinvestment is regulated according to demand. 3.44 InZambia, however, there is very little leakage inthe form ofrepatriation ofprofits, as the tourism sector, more so than inother countries, is dominated by small and medium-size operators without the necessary vertical integration. With the exception of the Sun International, Zambian tourism enterprises are therefore heavily reliant on overseas service providers. 3.45 Although overseas services, as pointed out previously, not can be considered a leakage, they can be reduced by encouraging local participation inthe tourism industry and support services. This will require significant commitments o f resourcesto capacity building and skills development. It will also be vital to ensure financial resourcestargeted specifically at providing credit to local entrepreneursto improve existing enterprises and enable new businesses to open, and to ensurethat they can operate successfully in the long run. 46World Tourism Organization-Africa Report 2006. 36 3.46 Inorder to increase the scale of accommodations andthe number of localtour operators with the capacity to move large volumes oftourists aroundZambia, it is necessary to address infrastructure impediments, as well as the limited operating seasoninZambia. The Masai Mara inKenya receives 50% morerainfall than SouthLuangwaor KafueNationalPark, but the operatingseason i s 11 months, and the Tanzanian government has extendedthe season in the Serengetifrom 6 months in 1990to 12 months in2000 by upgradingkey access roadsto all-weather standard. 3.47 Zambia is fortunateto have attracteda goodnumber of foreign investors in the tourism sector, who have providedaccess to overseas markets.As a result ofthe increasein foreign investmentsthere has beensubstantial growthinZambian-ownedbusinesses servingthe sector. Although few Zambian investors have ventured into nationalparks, inthe Livingstone-Kazungulacorridor,Zambians own about 65%of accommodation(excludingthe Sun Internati~nal)~'. 3.48 To further this development, it is essential that decision-makersfocus on building new linkages within the economy rather than on pluggingleakages.Linkagesbetweentourism andthe localeconomy can be boostedby improvingthe safety, health, education of populationandthe businessenvironment. Policy interventionshouldbe targeted at building a robust supply chain and strong cross-sectorallinkages. 47Economic Impactsof Trans Frontier ConservationAreas: Baselineo f Tourism in the Kavango-Zambezi TFCA, ConservationInternational South Africa (2005). 37 4. HOUSEHOLD WELFARE AROUND NATIONAL PARKS A. INTRODUCTION 4.1 The Government o f Zambia identifies tourism as an economic growth pillar. Several initiatives have been introduced inthe areas around the national parks designated as Game Management Areas (see Box 4.1). However, the effectiveness o f these initiatives and their impact on households' living conditions remain unknown. This knowledge is key to identifying strategies necessary for increasing the contribution o f nature tourism to the GDP. complemented by community-based programs in many countries. Community-based natural Box 4.1. Game Management Areas resources management emerged as a result o f greater awareness o f the difficulties o f Game ManagementAreas (Gh4As) were createdmainly achievingconservation withoutengaging the to serve as bufSeer zones betweennational parks and local communities, It has the added advantage farming areas. Not only were they to provide that it frees state resources and allows for opportunitiesfor hunting, but also to containthe decentralization. Over the years, i ~ ~ ~ r n a t i o n a lof political, administrative and fiscal mammalianhosts of the tsetse fly to preventthe spread domestic livestock diseaseinto farming areas. Gh4As organizations and governments have invested are communal areas in which people generally live by semi-subsistence agriculture, coexisting with wildlife. in various community-based programs and Other land uses such as fishing and harvest of forest institutions to help manage natural resources4*. products are permitted. Cash crop production and out- grower schemes supportedby multinational companies 4.3 Most community-based programs try are also emerging, althoughcommercial agriculture and to meet at least two complex goals: (1) other extractive land uses are restricted. conservation o f nature, and (2) economic 4.4 The CBNRM program in Zambia instructs the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) to share its hunting revenues (see Table 4.1 and Box 4.2) and wildlife management responsibilities with the communities living in Game Management Areas (GMAs).The communities allocate the revenue between employment o f village scouts, social infrastructure and development projects through community institutional structures called Village Action Groups (VAGs) and Community Resources Boards (CRBs). 48USAID, 2003, UNDP-GEF, 2004, Shyamsundar et al., 2005, Emertonet al., 2005. 49Wells and Brandon, 1992. 38 TABLE 4.1: Allocation of hunting revenued' Zambia Wildlife Authority 50.00% I 80.00% Village Scouts 20.25% 6.75% Chiefs 5.00% 5.00% CRB administration 9.00% 3.00% Community projects 15.75% 5.25% Total 100.00% I1 loo.ooo/o ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ BOX 4.2. HUNTING (CONSUMPTIVENATURETOURISM) Safari hunting is permittedin GMAs on game ranchesand in the so-calledopen areas of Zambia, provided hunters posses valid firearm and trophy licenses. Safari hunting is primarily carriedout by international clients in GMAs and on game ranches, raising around90% ofthe Zambia Wildlife Authority's hunting revenue from approximately 10%of the available hunting quota, with a hunting season running from June to December. The hunting industry as a whole generates revenue in the range of $3.2 million per annum (average 2004 and 2005). Revenueis derivedmainly from two sources: concession fees (paid for access to a hunting areas, normally for 5 years), and trophy fees (differential payments for different species according to rarity and importanceto safari and local hunters). Other chargesare levied for bird hunting licenses, CITES permits (for restrictedspecies), trophy export permitsandso on. Local hunters can obtain cheaper hunting licenses in GMAs innon-prime months, in open areas and in community areas. 4.5 The CBNRM program inZambia evolvedout ofthe AdministrativeManagementDesign Programfinanced by USAID inthe 1990s.By 1997 tlie current institutionalcommunitystructures were established. Inthis system, VAGs are composedof five to ten elected representativesfrom a cluster of villages of populations of 500-1,000. EachVAG elects its representativeto sit onthe CRB. EachCRB consists of 9-10 membersand elects achairperson.A ZAWA officer is assignedto a GMA under a CRB, as its unit leader. 4.6 The increasein naturetourism in Zambia begs the question whether this kind Box4.3. Direct Benefitsfrom SafariOperators oftourism has any impact on the welfare of The direct contribution of lodge operators and the communities andhouseholds living in hunting industry to welfare of GMA residents is far GMAs. Lodgesandcamps may employ from insignificant. Safari operators contribute to social local labor; increaseddemandfor handicraft infrastructure; water, clinics and schools; they create and other nature-basedproducts may employment; andthey give financial and material providenew enterprising opportunities; support to other activities such as skills development; traditional entertainment and culturemay e.g. carpentry, constructionand farming. The overall increase revenuepotentialfrom tourists - magnitudeof these benefits is unknown. The survey andthis survey seeks to measure these does not assess revenue and benefit streams; thus, potentialwelfare benefits(see Box 4.3). cannot differentiatethese benefits from others such as ZAWA revenues, but as they contributeto the overall household welfare, they are measuredby the survey. Animal fees, including trophy andall hunting licenses, are shared betweenZAWA (50%), chiefs (5%) and CRBs (45%). Concession fees are shared ZAWA (80%), chiefs (5%) andCRBs (15%). Both CRB portions are distributed20% to CRB administration,45% to village scouts and35% to community projects. 39 Box 4.4 Consumption as a Measure of Welfare This study measures welfare in terms of per capitahouseholdconsumptionexpenditure.It includesfood and non-foodconsumption. Own producedgoods as well as naturalresources collectedand consumed are included in this measure.An alternative indicator of welfare is householdor per capita income. However, since income i s more volatile than consumptionand i s reportedless accurately in surveys, we use consumption-based measureof welfare and asset-based measureof wealth and poverty. 4.7 This chapter thus focuses on the economic welfare of households living inGMAs.A survey o f householdsand communities in GMAs and other areas near national parks (non-GMAs) was carried out inAugustBeptember 2006. The survey seeks to measuredifferences in welfare, measured as per capita consumption expenditure (see Box 4.4) between poor and non-poor households5'that may be attributable to residing in GMA and participatingin VAG/CRB activities. Estimations of differences inwelfare benefits between the poor and non-poor allow us to measure the possibility and extent o f elite capture o f benefitsderived from the GMAs. B. SURVEY DESIGNAND METHODOLOGY Survey Objectives 4.8 The overall goal ofthe survey is to determine the impact on household welfare ofthe current GMA-specific policies and regulations, including VAGKRB participation. 4.9 Accordingly, the survey aims to address three objectives: (1) identifyand quantify the factors characterizing the households in GMAs incomparison to household living outside GMAs, (2) identify factors that influence households in GMAs to participate inmeetings and decision-making inVAGs and CRBs as aproxy measurefor involvement inCBNRM, and (3) determine the overall impact of living in GMAs on the welfare of their households; the so-called "GMA effect". 4.10 Ifthe GMA effect has impact on welfare, the survey further seeks to establishhow these benefits are shared between the poor and non-poor households. Subsequent researchobjectives are: (1) whether welfare is evenly distributed betweenparticipatingand non-participating households in VAGs and CRBs, (2) whether higher welfare is associatedwith participationin VAGs and CRBs, (3) whether the poor and non-poor are better or worse off when living in GMAs, and (4) whether the poor and non-poor are better or worse off when participatingin VAGs and CRBs. Sample Design 4.1 1 Dueto logistical and fundingconstraints, the GMAs inthe north andnorth-western parts of the country were omitted. Given the proportionof GMAs sampled, this omission is unlikely to influence the national conclusions inferred from the survey. The remaining GMAs were grouped around national parks or groups o f national parks into four park systems (see Table 4.2). 5 'The poor are definedas households in the bottomtwo quintiles with respect to consumer durable asset values. Conversely,the top three quintile asset-owninghouseholds are considerednon-poor. This asset-basedindicator of poverty is basedon indicatorsof householdwealth as opposedto householdincome or consumption. 40 TABLE 4.2: Sampled GMAs in park systems (designed for survey purpose) Park system Associated national parks Sampled GMAs Control areas Bangweulu KasankaNP Kafinda Lavushi MandaNP Bangweulu Chambeshi Luwingu Kafue KafueNP Mumbwa Kaindu BlueLagoonNP Kasonso Busanga Mufunta LochinvarNP KafueFlatsNorth& South LungaLuswishi Lower Zambezi Lower ZambeziNP Chiawa Rufunsa Luangwa SouthLuangwaNP Lupande North east LukusuziNP Lumimba Munyamadzi Chisomo 4.12 Eachof these park systemswas regardedas a reportingdomain in the sampling process.A stratifiedtwo-stage sampling procedurewas used, involving selection of standard enumeration areas (SEAs) inthe first stage (see map 4.1) and selection ofsamplehouseholdsfrom each SEA inthe secondstage. The sampling frame of SEAs was drawn by selecting all SEAs locatedin GMAs (digital GMA maps from ZAWA were overlaidon digital SEA maps from the Central Statistical Office). MAP 4.1: National Park system and GMAs with sampled areas Dark Gray: NationalParks White: GameManagementAreas Black: StandardEnumerationAreas (GMA) % * Sl_ Source: GMA Household Survey, map by Central Statistical Office. 41 huntingactivities). Two specialized GMAs also exist where Lechwe and unusual species may be hunted, and Stratum Area some GMAs have been categorized as completely .Prime depleted.To control for variations arising from Secondary GMAs differences inquantity andtype o f key species harvested, Specialized the frame o f GMA SEAs was therefore subdivided into Understocked Non-GMA 4.14 A sample o f 139 SEAs was drawn from the frame described above using probability proportional to size (PPS) sampling scheme, where the size i s based on the 2000 Census of Population and Housing. The secondstage of sampling was implemented using a list o f householdsgenerated through a listing exercise, and a systematic probability sampling scheme. A total o f 2,649 households were interviewed with about half of the sample (49 percent) living incontrol areas inthe survey. 4.15 The non-GMA areas sampledwere chosenonthe border of the national parks to enablethe sampling o f communities who are exposedto a GMA-similarenvironment, generally of low human density and comparable quantity and quality o f natural resources. 4.16 Some observations were lost due to non-responseproblems. Data were collected using household and community questionnaires (see Annexes 2 and 3) pre-testedin one non-sample GMA (Luano) and one non-sample non-GMA (east o f Chongwe). Inadditionto the initial training, the enumerators and supervisors were kept on track through carefully preparedenumerator and supervisor manuals. Selection Bias 4.17 Many factors affect household welfare, and living in GMAs and participating inVAG/CRB activities are but some o f them. Other factors include socio-demographic characteristics, for instance whether the household is female headed; size, age and sex composition of the members; highest level of education within the household; etc. Yet other factors have community-wide effect on household welfare such as levels of physical capital in infrastructure, social capital in community-based organizations and access to markets. Under these circumstances, it is important to break up the effects o f the various factors, especially because many o f the factors vary dependingon whether a household lives ina GMA or not, and because the same factors influence whether a household in a GMA participate in VGAs and CRBs. 4.18 Some selection bias arises because some householdsreside in GMAs because o f their own choice and others because of social, economic or other conditions. Additionally, households in GMAs self-select themselves to participate, or not, in VAGs and CRBs. 4.19 Historical factors for creating controlled hunting areas, later converted into GMAs, as well as criteria used by ZAWA to create recent GMAs are not always available inquantitative form usable in the analysis. Such unobserved factors may also result inselection bias. 4.20 One of the important implications o f selection bias is that the simple differences in average per capita consumption between households living in and outside GMAs, or between participants and non-participants o f VAGs and CRBs are not an accuratemeasureo f respective impacts. We refer to such comparison o f simple averages as "unconditional comparison" inthe survey results section below. Fortunately, a number o f empirical techniques have been developed to help minimize this bias 42 for cross-sectionaldata, includingpropensity-scorematching(PSM) and Maddala's treatment regression(two-stage orjoint estirnati~n)~~. 4.21 With only cross-sectionaldata from householdsand communities in GMAs and non-GMA areas, this study used Maddala's treatment regressiontechniquess3to estimate impacts. Althoughthe treatment regressioncan be estimatedintwo stages, we estimatethe two relationships- participation and welfare regressionequations-jointly by usingmaximum likelihoodtechniques.Treatment regressionestimationcorrects for selection biases from observeddatainthe model as well as bias resultingfrom unobservedand unknownfactors. Maximumlikelihoodjoint estimation of participationand outcomeequations allowsusto test whether selectionbiasesfrom unobservedand unknown factors are statisticallysignificant. 4.22 The results of the maximumlikelihoodjoint estimationwere corroboratedby also estimating the impact usingpropensity-scorematchingbasedon a Gaussiankernel functionandbootstrapped standarderrors. Ifthe effect of selection bias from unobservedandunknownfactors is not statistically significant, treatmentregressionandpropensity-scorematchingestimations should be closeto each other. Where selectionbias from unobservedand unknown factors are statisticallysignificant,the propensity-scorematchingestimations would be biasedand the differences betweenthe estimates usingtwo methods should depend on the directionofthe bias. We found significantselection bias from unobservedand unknown factors usingtreatment regressionmaximum likelihoodjoint estimationapproachin some of the estimation results. Inthese situationsthe propensity-score matchingestimations were different as expectedfrom the direction of the bias. Where the bias was not statisticallysignificantthe estimations results from the two methodswere very similar. Thus, we only report the treatmentregressionresults below. 4.23 The modelsin boththe PSMapproachandthe MLEjoint estimationwere conditioned on the relevant householdandcommunitycharacteristics. C. SURVEY RESULTS DescriptiveStatistics 4.24 Tables 4.4 and4.5 presentsthe descriptive statistics for the variables used in the analysis basedon the full sample andthe non-GMA and GMA sub-samples.On average, atypicalsampled householdhas a per capitaconsumptionexpenditure(PCEXP) of ZMK 846,000 per annum. When analyzedby sub-sample,PCEXP is 1.7 percent higher in non-GMAsthan inGMAs. However, the difference is not statisticallysignificant. Other than PCEXP anda few distance variables, the rest of the variables are significantlydifferentbetweennon-GMAsand GMAs. 52Maddala, 1983. 53Maddala, 1983; BandyopandhyayandShyamsundar,2004; StataCorp, 2003. 43 National Full Non- average sample GMA GMA rural population Numberof samplehouseholds 2,649 1,289 1,360 Per capita consumption expenditure (ZMK) 846,33 1 353,750 839,359 1,209,384 Age of household head(years) 42.42 43.6 41.29 *** 41.20 Female headedhousehold (%) 25% 22% 28% *** 22% Education o f most educatedhhmember (years) 6.87 7.45 6.33 *** 6.82 Numberof children below 15 years 2.55 2.66 2.44 *** 2.23 Number female members 15-60 years 1.27 1.30 1.24 1.25 Number o f male members 15-60years 1.19 1.22 1.15 *** *** 1.22 Number o f adults above 60 years 0.26 0.30 0.23 0.34 Distance to nearestall-weather road (km) 5.25 3.58 6.86 *** 3.65 Distance to nearestbasic school (km) 4.88 4.96 4.80 I Distancefto nearesthealth center (km) 11.52 11.27 11-77 Value o consumer durable assets (m ZMK) 0.44 0.58 0.30 *** ng Index !004. Statistical significance: *=significance at lo%, **=significance at 5%, *=sigr TABLE 4.5: Comparison of communitiesin GMAs versus non-GMAs I Description Sub-samples Full Non- sample GMA GMA Numberof sample communities 133 65 68 Number of projects inthe community 2.01 1.84 2.16 *** CRB generatedand got funds from ZAWA past three years (YO) 9yo 5yo 14% *** Household participation in VAGiCRB (%) 9% 6% 13% *** Household participation inagricultural cooperatives (%) 15% 19% 11% *** 4.25 An average rural community inZambia has an annual per capita consumption o fZMK 1.2 million54.As illustratedin Figure 4.1, this is much more than the annual per capita consumption o f communities living around national parks o f ZMK 854,000 innon-GMA and ZMK 839,000 in GMA. Inother words, on average, the welfare ofcommunities living around national parks is about 70% of the national average for rural areas. 4.26 Although there is some CBNRM activity in non-GMAs, it is more intense in the GMAs. Proportionately, VAG/CRB participation in non-GMAs (6%) is about half o f that in GMAs (13%). It is not surprising, therefore, that the proportion o f householdswith a member participating in VAGs or CRBs that have received hunting proceedsfrom ZAWA is almost three times as highin GMAs than inthe control areas. 54 ZambiaPoverty and vulnerability Assessment (2004), World Bank. 44 FIGURE4.1: Comparison ofwelfare of householdslivingaround national parks with national rural average I Per capita Annual Consumption in ZMK I 1400000 1200000 1000000 000000 Per capita Annual 600000 Consumption in ZMK 400000 200000 0 Household Household Amrage in GMA not-in Zambian GMA Rural Household Source: GMA HouseholdSurvey. Characteristics of GMA Households 4.27 Whether a sampledhouseholdlives ina GMA or not; and whether a GMA-based household participates in naturalresourcesmanagementthrough VAGs and CRBs; both are influencedby the circumstancesthat the householdfaces bothwithin the householdand inthe communityss.Tables 4.4 and 4.5 show that, comparedto non-GMA controlareas, householdslivinginGMAs: 0 Haveyounger headsofhouseholds. 0 Have a higher probabilityofbeingfemale-headed. 0 Haveless educatedmembers. 0 Have less consumerdurables. 0 Tend to be further away from the main roads. 0 Tend to participate less in community-basedorganizations. 4.28 Also, the larger the number of projects inthe community andor the higher the number of householdsliving inthe GMA, the higher the likelihood of any householdpicked at random beinga GMA-basedhousehold.A householdis likely to be ina GMA ifZAWA shares huntingrevenuewith the CRB inthe areawhere the householdlives. 4.29 ParticipationinVAGICRB activitiesis influencedsignificantlyby a number of demographic and other factors (see Table 1 in Annex 4): The household's probabilityofparticipatingin VAGs and 55Several factorswere considered and the significanceof their contributionstowards explaining the realities tested (see Annex 4). Column 1 of Table 1in Annex 4 presentsthe coefficient estimates from a probit analysis of the binary decisionto be or not to be in the GMA, whereas Column 2 presentsthe probit estimatesof the factors affecting the probability of participation inVAGs and/or CRBs. These probit modelswerejointly estimated with the outcome regression modelsusing maximum likelihood techniques. The estimates of welfare impact of GMA andparticipation in VAGs and/or CRBs and other factors are presented in Columns 1 and 2 of Table 2 in Annex 4. Both tables identify amongthe listed variables the ones that were statistically significant (indicatedwith asterisks). 45 CRBs increasesifthe level o f education o fthe most educatedmember is increased by one year. A householdthat is involved in other cooperatives in the GMA is more likely to participate in VAGs and CRBS. Access to Markets 4.30 The sample frame o fthe non-GMA control areas were carefully selectedto only include areas adjacent to national parks, however, householdsin the control areas were found to be different from those inGMAs inone key factor; distanceto the nearest all-weather road. The average non-GMA household lives 3.3 km from the nearestall-weather road, whereas the average GMA household lives 6.3 km away. 4.3 1 Longer distancesmay imply that the household is more isolated and has less access to various input and output markets. Such isolation from markets may constrain the economic productivity o fthe household. The study finds that each extra kilometer of distance from the nearestall-weather road is associatedwith 0.5% less consumption welfare for the average household inthe sample. 4.32 The study also finds that aGMA household is more likelyto participate inVAGs and CRBs the farther away it is from the nearest all-weather road. One interpretation ofthis result may bethat remote and isolated householdsthat are closer to wildlife might be more interested in conservation. However, VAG/CRB participation is also associatedwith higher consumption welfare for the households. Thus, higher probability o f isolated householdsmay result from possible welfare gains from VAGs and CRBs in the absence o f access to markets and economic opportunity. 4.33 An averageGMA household near the Lower Zambezi National Park is 3 km away from the nearest all-weather road. Future comparative studies betweenGMAs near the Lower Zambezi National Park and those in other park systems may address the issue of the impact o f better access to roads on wildlife populations. The data for the present study did not include a survey o f wildlife population, so it cannot address this question. D.WELFARE Comparison o f GMA and non-GMA Households 4.34 Figure 4.2 shows the average per capita consumption expenditures o f households inGMA and non-GMA areas inthe four sampledpark systems as well as for the whole sample. Average per capita consumption is slightly higher inthe non-GMA areas of all park systems except for Luangwa. Inall cases, the difference between non-GMA and GMA areas are not statistically significant. Impact of the "GMA effect" 4.35 The picture is even clearer when adjusted for the "GMA effect". To measurethe net impact o f GMAs (the GMA effect) on household welfare, we compared the welfare o f GMA householdswith the welfare ofthe same households inthe same location ifthat location was not a GMA anymore. Estimation of the counterfactual o f GMA households living inthe same location but not designated as GMA is basedon the results of the maximum likelihood treatment regression inAnnex 4 (Table 2). 4.36 Substantial differences between the actual and the counterfactual average per capita consumption expenditures o f households in GMAs near Bangweulu and Luangwa park systems, as well as for the overall sample show significantly greater welfare for households ina GMA, due to its GMA effect. 46 FIGURE 4.2: Welfareof households in GMAs relative to those in non-GMA areas Per caplta consumption expenditure: Unconditlonal 1400000 12ooooc 1000001 8OOOW :MK 60000C 40000( 2000M 0 Bangweulu Kafue Lower Luangwa Total Zambezi Park System m Non-GMA GMA Source: GMA HouseholdSurvey. 4.37 For the overall sample, out o f ZMK 840,000 average per capita consumption expenditure, ZMK 560,000 may be attributable to the GMA effect (see Figure 4.3). Unconditional comparison o f welfare o f households living in GMA and non-GMA areas hide this relatively large benefit as other household and community characteristics o f GMA households make them worse o f relative to households in non-GMA areas. The estimation results inAnnex 4 (Table 2) show these factors and their effects on household welfare. 4.38 The above analysis together with Figures 4.2 and 4.3 show that around Kafue and Lower Zambezi park systems, there is no difference in the welfare o f household whether they are ina GMA or not. Because household in most GMA have limited access to classic economic activities such as agriculture, it can be inferredthat the wildlife revenue exactly compensate these household for the opportunity cost o f unfavorable conditions restricting classic activities 4.39 InBangweulu park system to some extent, but mostly in Luangwa park system, it is clear that the GMA effect is beneficial overall. This may be due to the fact that the Luangwa Valley has had a long history o f CBNRM; that it includes the GMAs where most o f ZAWA's revenue from huntingis accrued; and that it is a famous destination for nature tourists Impact o f Household and Community Factors 4.40 As earlier postulated, household welfare (measured by per capita consumption expenditure) is influenced by a variety o f household and community factors. The results in Annex 4 indicate that the majority o fthe factors postulated to be associated with welfare are strongly significant: 0 An additional year o f education for the most educated member would raise the household's per capita consumption by 2-4%. An additional one million Zambian Kwacha o f consumer durables would raise the household's per capita consumption by 4-10%. 47 FIGURE 4.3: Welfare of householdslivingin GMAs in comparisonto the same households if their GMA was not designateda GMA Percapita consumptionexpenditure: Conditional 1400000 1200000 ' 1000000 800000 600000 400000 200000 0 Bangweulu Kafue Lower Zambezi Luangwa Total Parksystem If not GMA GMA Source: GMA Household Survey. Householdsthat participate in cooperatives have 23.7% (GMA sub-sample) and 35.7% (full sample) more per capita consumption expenditure thannon-participating households. Since cooperatives inGMAs are founded on agricultural activities, the results imply that agriculture makes a significant contribution to per capita expenditure. As most respondents cited farming as their main economic activity, the unfavorable ecological conditions of GMAs and policies unfavorable to farming are likely to contribute to the low welfare inGMAs. Female-headedhouseholdshave 15% (GMA sub-sample) and 18.6% (full sample) less per capita consumption expenditure than their male-headedcounterparts (see Box 4.5). Every additional kilometer from the main road or health center is associatedwith 0.2-0.6% less per capita consumption expenditure. The results also seem to imply that larger household sizes are associatedwith lower welfare levels, regardlesso fthe household's composition. This is shown and confirmed by the unambiguously negative effects of additional members in all the four agehex groups. The fact that additional working-age adults (15-60 years) have an adverse effect on welfare may imply that there are limitedincome-generating opportunities inthese areas. However, children under 15 years and adults over 60 years have greater welfare-depressing effects than the working- age groups. Box 4.5. Female-HeadedHouseholds in GMAs 28% of the households in GMAs are female-headedcomparedto 22% in the non-GMA control areas. The study suggests that, on average, female-headedhouseholds living near nationalparks, either in GMAs or in non-GMAs, enjoys 19%less per capita consumptionthan male-headedhouseholds, after controlling for other factors. Ifwe consider households in GMAs only, the loss in welfare attributableto female headedness is slightly lower at 15 percent. Why there are relatively more female-headedhouseholds in GMAs and why such households are worse off as comparedto their male-headedcounterparts were discussedat three regional stakeholder consultative workshops in Mpika, Mfuwe and Mumbwa. Several hypotheses emerged from these discussions: Higher rates of polygamousrelationshipsin remote areas such as GMAs may result in higher incidences of female-headedhouseholds ifdifferent wives live in separate households. Male heads may be spendinglong periodsaway from home while engagingin illegal hunting resulting in the housebeingheadedby the female spouse. The survey data were unableto provide useful information about illegal hunting as an economic activity of householdmembers. Relatively long periods of separation during the male head's absence in GMAs may result in higher divorce rates. Higher rates of promiscuity in the GMAs may have resultedin more males dying mainly due to HIVIAIDS relatedcauses leaving their widows as householdheads. Lower levels of educationfor girls in GMAs may be responsiblefor more teenagepregnancies and single-motherfamilies. The more educated men may leave GMAs in search of better economic opportunitiesleaving female-headedfamilies behind. Some of these hypothesesare testable with the survey dataand future research may help understand the phenomenonbetter to enable policy-makerstargetingthis disadvantagedgroup of households. E. INTERPRETATIONOFRESULTS DoesVAG/CRB Participationmake a Difference? 4.41 IfVAGs andCRBsusethe huntingrevenueto providebroadsocial infrastructures,we would expect all householdsin a GMA to gain inwelfare. However, active participants in VAGs and CRBs are reportedto havereservedprivilegesin terms of access to information,meatcontributionsand services from safari huntingoutfitters,and ZAWA disbursementsin form of allowances for CRB and VAG activities. 4.42 Figure4.4 shows the differences inper capitaconsumption expenditurebetween household participatingin VAGs andCRBs andthosethat do not.The welfare ofthe non-participating householdsis slightly lower than that ofthe participatinghouseholdsin all park systemsexcept Kafue. Higherwelfare levels of participants relativeto non-participants is expectedas participating householdsare more educatedandare likely to havebetter access to informationand otherwise have moreeconomic opportunities. 4.43 Consultations duringthe disseminationofthese survey findingsrevealedthat active participantsand leaders in CRBs andVAGs are predominantly educatedand retiredpersonswho have decidedto settle inGMAs after active employment inurbanareas. It was reportedthat communities increasingly are electingeducatedpersonsto positions indevelopment projects, includingVAGs and CRBs, believingthat these have greater awareness and are likely to comprehendnew messagesand interact because of their ability to readandwrite English. Perhapsthis explains the study findingsthat most participantsofVAGs and CRBs also are active participantsofother community organizations such as cooperatives. 49 FIGURE4.4: Differences inwelfare betweenhouseholdsparticipatingor not in VAGs/CRBs Participation in VAOs and CRBs in QMAs 1.eoo.000 1.400.WO 1,200.000 11.000.w0 aoo.ooo 900.000 400 000 200 000 0 Banpweulu Kafue Lwer Zamberi L"."W. Total 1 P.rk syn.m. Non-partlclpanl Palticlp.nl I Source: GMA HouseholdSurvey. 4.44 Figure 4.5 shows the welfare o fthe participatinghouseholds and compares it with that of the same householdsif it did not participate in VAGs and CRBs. Figure 4.5 is surprisingly similar to Figure 4.3 in terms o f welfare impacts inthe four park systems.As we saw in Figure 4.3, households in the GMA areas of Kafue and Lower Zambezi park systems obtain no welfare gains from the GMA effect. Similarly, participatinghouseholdswithin GMAs do not seem to obtain significantbenefits from participation in VAGs and CRBs in these park systems. Conversely, the residents of the GMAs near the other two park systems seem to obtain significant benefits from participation in VAGs and CRBS. Who Gets the Benefits of Living in a GMA? 4.45 Figure 4.6 presentsthe results of an unconditional comparison of household per capita consumption between households located in GMAs and those located innon-GMA areas. 4.46 Although there is a slight difference in welfare levels between asset-poor householdsliving in GMAs and asset-poor households livingoutside GMAs, that difference is very small and statistically insignificant. Inthe asset non-poor group, there is virtually no difference inthe average per capita consumption expenditure. Indeed, the non-existence o f observable differences between GMAs and non-GMAs is clearly visible even inthe full sample. Does this meanthat the GMA effect has no impact? 50 FIGURE 4.5: Welfare of the same householdswhether they participateor not in VAGsKRBs. ~~ ~ Per Caplta consurntlonciponditure for households In QMA parllclpatlng In VAQICRB BmgyI.YIY KNUe L o w 1Zamberl LY."IW. TOt.1 P.* sy.t.m. 1sIf not pan1cipant IPanlclpmtI source: GMA HouseholdSurvey. FIGURE 4.6: Comparisonofwelfare between GMA and non-GMA householdsfor poor and non-poor households Per capita consumption expenditure Unconditional 1,000,000, 900,000 800.000 700,000 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200.000 100,000 0 Poor Nonpoor Total Wealth Status of Household I mNon-GMA GMA Source: GMA HouseholdSurvey. 4.47 Ifthe GMAeffect isremoved, itappearsthat the households inthe GMAswouldbecome substantially worse off (see Figure 4.7). This effect is visible inthe full sample and in the sub- sample o f asset non-poor households. There is, however, no effect on the asset-poor households. This seems to identify the existence o f several non-GMA factors such as poor soil fertility or less access to basic education that would make the households inthose areas worse off in the absence o f the GMA-related interventions. 51 FIGURE 4.7: Comparisonof the welfare of the same householdsin GMAs ifthe GMA effect was withdrawn, i.e. if its landwas not in a GMA anymore. Percapita consumptionexpenditure: If not GMA 1,000000 , - ... ... 900 000 800 000 700 000 600 000 = (I ! 500000 Y 400000 300 000 200 000 100000 0 Poor Nonpoor Total Wealth Status of Household 1 If not GMA GMA Source: GMA HouseholdSurvey. 4.48 This shows that the Gh4A effect is benefitingthe non-poor andis neutralto the poor. Inother words, it does not make any difference for a poor householdresidinginthe vicinity of a nationalpark whether the landit liveson is inside or outside a GMA. Who Getsthe Benefits o f Participatingin VAGs and CRBs? 4.49 Figure4.8 comparesthe welfare levels betweenthe householdsthat participateinthe VAGsiCRBs with those that do not. It shows that the non-poorare gettingsubstantially larger benefits than the poor. While participatingnon-poor householdsare gettingclose to ZMK 1,200,000 per capita consumptionexpenditure, the poor are gettingjust about two-thirdsof this. 4.50 Ingeneral, participants are unambiguously better offthan non-participants, regardlessof whether one is lookingat the full sample or the sub-samplesof poor and non-poor households. However, the magnitudeofthe differencesdiffersacross these samples. For example, the difference amongpoor householdsis less than a third ofthe difference amongnon-poor households. 4.5 1 For the householdsthat participate inVAGs/CRBs, Figure4.9 shows how their welfare would be ifthey were not participatinginthese activities. Whilethere is virtually no changeinwelfare level amongpoor households,the non-poor householdswould losemorethan half oftheir current consumption welfare level. 4.52 Hence, GMAs (and, by extension, huntingrevenuesharing) may not be an effective means of poverty alleviation.The benefit distributioninstitutionssuch as VAGs andCRBs needto be reformed so that the revenuereaches the poor households inthe community 52 FIGURE 4.8: Comparison of welfare betweenVAG/CRB participantsand non- participatinghouseholds Average per capita consumptionexpenditure Unconditional 1,400,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 800.000 J! 3 :: 600,OW 400,000 200,000 C Poor Nonpoor Wealth Status of Houowholds I aNonparUcipant mParticlpantj Source: GMA HouseholdSurvey. FIGURE 4.9: Comparisonof the welfare of the ~amehouseholdswhether they participateor not in VAG/CRB 1,ooo,ow 800,OW f3 (1 6W,OW 400,000 200,000 0 Poor Nonpoor Total Wealth Statusof Houseshold I l f not participant IParticipant 1 Source: GMA HouseholdSurvey. 53 ANAGEMENT OF T LIFE ESTATE 5.1 As longas Zambia's tourism remains based on natural resourcesand wildlife inparticular, the health and sustainability ofthese resourcesmust be recognized as beingvital to the success o f any plans for the future growth, prosperity and economic contribution o fthe tourism sector. A. DESCRIPTION OF THE WILDLIFE ESTATE 5.2 Zambia's wildlife estate consists of 19National Parks and 34 Game Management Areas (GMAs), which are widely distributed and reasonably well matched against areas of ecological interest, as shown schematically in Map 5.1. MAP 5.1: Eco-regions and National Parks Source:ZambiaNature-BasedTourism Supply-SideSurvey (2006). 5.3 The wildlife estate is managedby the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA), previouslythe National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS). Under NPWS, protected areas were arranged under nineprovincial units. One ofZAWA's key strategiesfor improvedmanagementwas to reducethe complexity of the organizational structure (and administrative staff) to four management regions only (see Table 5.1). Each managementregionoversees several clusters o f national parks and GMAs grouped into Area Management Units (AMUs). Each AMU reports to headquartersthrough their respective management region. 54 TABLE 5.1: Zambia's management regions and Area Management Units Region AMU Associated national parks Associated GMAs Eastern region South Luangwa South Luangwa Lupande Sandwe West Petauke East Luangwa Lukusuzi East Musulangu 1 Luambe Nyika Central region Lower Zambezi Lower Zambezi Rufunsa Chiawa Luano Machiya-Funguluwe Kafue Flats Lochinvar Kafue Flats Blue Lagoon Mosi-oa-Tunya Mosi-oa-Tunya Sichifulo Mulobezi Western region Chunga Kafue (north) Kasonso-Busanga Lunga-Luswishi Mumbwa Namwala Ngoma Kafue (south) Nakala Bilili Springs West SiomaNgwezi West Zambezi (upper and Liuwa Plain lower) Lunga West Lunga Lukwakwa Chibwika-Ntambu Musele-Matebo Chizera Northernregion Bangweulu North Luangwa Munyamadzi Lavushi Manda West Musalangu Isangano Mukungule Bangweulu (part, incl. Chikuni) Nsumbu Sumbu Kaputa Mweru wa Ntipa Tondwa Mansa LusengaPlain Chisomo Kasanka Kafinda Bangweulu (part) Kalasa Mukosa I Luwingu Chambeshi Source: Authors' compilation based on various ZAWA sources. The Role ofGMAs 5.4 GMAs were createdmainly to serve as buffer zones betweennational parks and farming areas. Not only were they to provide opportunities for hunting, but also to contain the mammalian hosts of the tsetse fly within designated areas, thus preventing the spread of the domestic livestock disease Trypanosomiasis into farming areas. Tsetse fly cordon areas were establishedto separate settled farming areas from wildlife habitats. However, settlements and related human activities have since passedover these cordons as human encroachment into animal habitats continues. 55 5.5 Therefore, from the early 1980s, it was progressively recognized that GMAs can achieve this objective only ifthe resident communities can balancethe disadvantages of supporting wildlife populations with benefits derived from conservation. Efforts were made to create a wildlife utilization cycle that incorporated financial benefitsto communities inGMAs.There has been substantial government and donor support over the subsequent 20 years to community-based natural resources management (CBNRM) inthe GMAs. But there is still a long way to go to develop this concept into a viable working system. 5.6 The rationale for the establishmentof GMAs was the prioritization of wildlife-based landuse practices as a viable alternative to commercial agriculture in areas o f low agricultural potential. However, from the early 1980s, it was progressively recognized that GMAs can only fulfill this role if the resident communities can balancethe disadvantagesofsupporting wildlife populations with the benefits derived from their contribution to conservation. Such benefits should, theoretically, be o f sufficient magnitude to discouragedestructive subsistence foraging and cultivation as well as other land uses and unplanned developments in conflict with conservation efforts. 5.7 Therefore, from 1982, efforts were made by NPWS to create a wildlife utilization cycle that incorporated the feedback o f financial benefits to communities in GMAs. There has been substantial government and donor support over the subsequent 20 years to Zambia's Administrative Management Designfor Game Management Areas (ADMADE)program and other similar methodologies for community-based natural resourcesmanagement (CBNRM) inGMAs, but a viable working system is still a long way off. One conceptual issue that has negatedmany otherwise useful initiatives i s that the fundamental concept o f `community' has proved to be an increasingly elusive commodity, as market forces and the associateddynamics of development progressively take hold inrural areas. B. MANAGEMENTOPTIONS 5.8 Wildlife estate management increasingly needs to take cognizance of the economic landscape as a whole. Wildlife and wildlife areas no longer can be viewed in isolation. Land is an increasingly precious commodity, and resourceson, or below this land, are increasingly inter-competitive through smaller and smaller variances ingross margins offered to potential investors. Wildlife areas at the very least have to compete inreturn of land rentals; ineconomic terms, ifnot in direct financial returns. The EcosvstemContext 5.9 The concepts o f eco-regions and conservation complexes are gradually transforming protected area managementapproachesworldwide. Eco-regions are land areas within one or a cluster of linked ecosystems.Conservation complexes are groupings o f different protected areas that have the same ecosystem managementapproach. Biodiversity researchhas identified 10 eco-regions inZambia (see Table 5.2)56. 5.10 Originally, Zambia's protected wildlife areas were structured so that one or more national parks formed a core conservation area, surrounded by one or more GMAs. This configuration was basedon the concept o f a national park protecting a core range and breeding area for game animals, while the adjoining GMAs were buffer zones separatingwildlife areas from commercial farming areas and were areas where the wildlife resourcescould be harvested. 5.11 At the time o f inception, this concept appearedsensible. However, once a wider, more dynamic eco-systemperspective is considered (where there is no convenient separation betweenwhat an animal does or needs in a national park, and what it may find essential for its survival inthe adjoining GMA), the simplistic GMA buffer zone concept loses some o f its appeal. Then a more 56WWF, 2002: Miombo Eco-regionsReport, Harare. 56 complex protected area system plan is neededto create biological and managementcoherence over a mosaic of individual protected areas. 5.12 ZAWA introduced the concept of conservation clusters to overcome structural constraints in the rigid national parWGMA system. Conservation clusters offer an ecological basis for conservation management by specifically identifying and linkingdifferent forms of protected areas under a single management approach. This also helps to focus Zambia's responsibilities under international conservation conventions and permitsthe participationof land owners in adjoining areas to contribute to the overall management approach. Protected Area DesigninZambia 5.13 Geographically, Zambia's wildlife estate falls into ten clusters, although two small national parks: Nyika in the north-east and Mosi-oa-Tunya inthe south-west are rather removed from neighboringprotected wildlife areas. Table 5.2 reveals a good match betweenthe Zambian protected area clusters and the country's eco-regions. The mismatches or gaps are inNorth-Western Province where the West Lunga National Park and its associatedGMAs are remote from both the biodiversity- rich Zambezi source area and the upper Zambezi floodplain, and do not really share their biodiversity. Furthermore, the Kafue National Park does not fall within any individual regional biodiversity complex. 5.14 InGMAs there are other representationproblems. While these areas are important in a commercial context, their fimction in biodiversity conservation is limited because their main purpose is the controlled huntingo f game animals. Moreover, GMAs that are not directly linked with a national parktendto becomeneglected and vulnerable. There i s need to redefine the functions of GMAs, recognizing the economic value ofall natural resources, the dynamic land uses and the need to quickly protect general biodiversity and particular species threatenedwith extinction. Wildlife EstateManagement Strategy 5.1 5 Preparatory work done inthe lead-up to the establishment of ZAWA includedthe production o f a DraR Master Plan57for the management o f the wildlife estate. This document worked from the premisethat restoring effective management inall 19national parkswas not possible inthe short term. Consequently national parks were prioritized for management purposes under a four category classification, based on three classifying parameters: (1) conservation and heritage values; (2) economic and recreational values; and (3) the feasibility o f management implementation. 57EDF/National Parks and Wildlife Service Project, 1998:Draft Master Plan, Transtec. 57 -1 TABLE 5.2: Eco-regions in relation to Zambia's protected areas Neighboring Zambian Conservat bn cluster countries portion National parks Angola Large None DRC Angola Large West Lunga Liuwa Plain Kalahari "4 corners" Botswana Marginal Sioma Ngwezi West Zambezi Namibia Mosi-oa-Tunya Zimbabwe Kafue floodplain None Exclusive Blue Lagoon Lochinvar Mid-Zambezi valley Mozambique Marginal Lower Zambezi 2 GMAs Zimbabwe I Luangwa-Luano rift None 1 Exclusive I North Luangwa 9 GMAs complex South Luangwa Luambe Lukusuzi Chambeshi-Bangweulu None Exclusive Isangano 7 GMAs I basin Kasanka c Lavushi-Manda I Luapula-Mweru Wantipa DRC Large Mweru wa Ntipa 2 GMAs Sumbu Lusenga Plain Lake Tanganyika DRC Large Sumbu Tanzania Nvika massif Malawi Marginal Nyika NOW Eucliisive Kat`uc 8 GMAs Source: .uthors' compila 5.16 Onthe basis ofthis classification the 19 national parks were classified as shown inTable 5.3 indeclining order. TABLE 5.3: Classificationof Zambia's national parks South Luangwa Mosi-oa-Tunya Lower Zambezi Kafue North Luangwa Kasanka Lochinvar BlueLagoon Chikuni (proposed) Liuwa Plain Sioma Ngwezi Lavushi Manda Nyika Lukusuzi Priority 4: Review parks Luambe Mweru wa Ntipa Lusenga Plain Isangano 58 5.17 RevenueDarks were consideredcapableof recoveringtheir managementcosts. Conservation were seen as important wildlife species areasjustifying some continuinginvestment. SDecial/contractparkswere identifiedfor possible contracting out to private developers to remove necessaryinvestment needs from ZAWA's own budget. And reviewDarks were consideredto be significantlydegradedand were recommendedfor studiesto identi@alternativelanduses. 5.18 Another consideration, especially in remoteandpoorly settled areas, is to raisethe protected area status of selectedparts of GMAs to nationalpark, or, alternatively, an intermediary status that might be classifiedas a wildlife reserve.A UNDPIGEFproject is currently examining possible reclassificationof protectedareass8,includingthree previouslyidentifiedareas: 0 The south-easternBangweuluSwampareato protectthe primebreedingarea ofthe Black Lechwe, Tsessebe and Shoebill Stork. 0 The three GMAs in the southern Luangwa-Luanorift complex (Chisomo, West Petaukeand Luano GMAs) as a remote, low humanpopulationdensity, refuge area for large mammal species. 0 An area generally agreedto require additionalprotection due to its locationin a high rainfallhich biodiversityregionalongthe north-westernboundarywith the DRC, including the Zambezi River source. C. THE MANAGEMENTINSTITUTION:ZAWA 5.19 The Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) was createdin2000, following a drawn-out period oftransformation from its antecedentinstitution,the Departmentof National Parks and Wildlife Service". That institutionhadsufferedinter alia from a progressivedecline in government support from 13.8%of the government budget in 1954to 0.45% in200260. The First Strategic Plan 5.20 Inearly 2002, ZAWA was sufficientlyestablishedto formulate its first Strategic Plan(2003- 2007), firstly to defineobjectives for the institution, and secondly to guide its developmentthrough the subsequentfive years. 5.2 1 This planenvisagedachieving excellenceinwildlife managementby developing innovative new approaches and partnershipsthat embodied best practiceand completetransparency. The practicalobjective was to transform ZAWA into a respectedand professionalconservationagency, but also one that would move systematicallytowards financialself-sustainabilityover a periodof eight to ten years. 5.22 The first Strategic Plandrew on principlesfrom several reports6'that hadan important bearingon boththe treatment o fthe wildlife sector inthe economy andthe mechanismsby whichthe sector managementmandatecouldbe achieved. These principleswere: '*UnitedNationDevelopmentProgram/GlobalEnvironmentFacility: Reclassificationand Effective Managementof Zambia's ProtectedAreas. The mainobjectiveofthe project is to strengthenthe enabling policy, regulatoryand governance frameworks and institutionalcapacitiesfor managingthe nationalprotected area system with biodiversityconservationas a principal outcome. 59The process startedin 1992 with the commissioningof a report on possiblemechanisms for change (Child and Lee, 1993:Reorganizationand Restructuringthe DepartmentofNationalParks and Wildlife Service, WWF). 60ICC, 2002: Zambia Wildlife Authority Five-YearStrategic Plan2003-2007, Main Report, Chilanga. Child, 2004: A Financialand Economic Analysis of the Costs and Benefitsof Managingthe ProtectedArea Estate.ARCA Consulting, 1998: FromNPWS to ZAWA - ManagementRestructuringReport, EDFMPWS 59 Wildlife as a resourceshould be valued by government and have similar access to subsidization and long-term investments as other growth sector such as agriculture. 0 All national parks should have working managementplans. 0 Conservation and management of wildlife should be subject to wide, grassroots debate and consensus in order to build ownership among those that live and work with or invest inthe wildlife resource. 0 ZAWA should: (1) become commercially better at capturing the real value of wildlife assets, but in a transparent and sensitive manner and without undermining conservation objectives; (2) be devolved to regional, sectoral and lower order units; (3) identify innovative ways to managethe wildlife estate affordably, probably through a prioritized classificationo f protected areas; (4) carry out a skills andtechnology gap analysis as well as training, service, information flow andtechnology investments; and (5) develop a credible, respectedand more popular image as part o f creating a new, effective institution. 5.23 From these principles, the following eight pre-conditions were identified as being crucial to the success ofthe first Strategic Plan: Development o f policy and regulatory structuresthat would realize the advantages of ZAWA's semi-autonomous financial and management status. Establishment of a governance framework for the board and managementteam based on political independence, financial transparency and professionalism. Development o f an ecosystem-basedconservation management approach drawn from an apex ProtectedArea System Plan, a middle tier Management Master Plan and area management plans. Working up ZAWA's humancapital basethrough improved communications, devolved responsibility and authority, improved systems and technologies, training and competitive and rewarding working conditions. Improving ZAWA's commercial performance ina non-conflicting manner through better systems, innovative new products and an effective marketing approachto attract new investments. Developing clear and functional working relationships with community entities with a view to progressivedevolution o f managementresponsibilities inthese areas. Re-establishing a respected, but cost-effective and stakeholder-sensitive law-enforcement system. Linking all these activities to the public through a coherent, visible and effective public relations system in order to enhance understanding and respectof the institution. Performancesince the First Strategic Plan 5.24 In2006, leading upto the formulation of its secondStrategic Plan, ZAWA commanded an independentreview o f its performance in implementingthe first Strategic Plan. The review Project, Chilanga. Department of National Parks and Wildlife Service, 1998: Draft Master Plan, EDFMPWS Project, Chilanga 60 demonstratedthat ZAWA hadmanagedto establishitself as a fully fledged institution andhadbuilt all the internal mechanismsrequired for its functions. Inaddition, ZAWA had leveragedfunding from severaldonors and establishedseveral partnerships.The following achievements, inparticular, must be recognized: 0 Reorganizationof huntingoperations inall GMAs. Establishment of PPPsin severalnational parks. 0 Implementationof two major investmentprograms in South Luangwa and KafueNational Parksand less ambitious programsin LowerZambezi and Mosi-oa-Tunya. Doublingoftourismrevenuethrough concessionsinseveral nationalparks. 0 Preparationof 12 managementplans, 5 of which are ratified by the Board. 5.25 Unfortunately,the review also demonstratedthat very few ofthe eight pre-conditions for a successful implementationof the first Strategic Planhadbeenput in placeby either Governmentor ZAWA6*,andthat the institution's performancehadbeen seriously constrainedby financial issues (see Table 5.4). 5.26 Since2002, the Governmenthas subsidizedZAWA, initially with around $2 millionper year and by 2005 inthe order of $1 million. Table 5.4 shows that even though ZAWA's financial performancehas been improving,creditors have been increasingat asimilar rate. 5.27 As can be seen inTable 5.4, the commercial revenuestreamsare almost balancedbetween huntingsources inGMAs (about 57% in 2005) and non-consumptivetourism in nationalparks. When GMAs are comparedto national parksinterms of revenue, non-consumptivetourism returnstwice as muchper hectareas safari hunting. 5.28 When economic factors are considered,the multiplier effect of non-consumptivetourism can expectto generateasignificantlyhigher economic impactthan hunting.Chapter 3 demonstratedthat 176,000 naturetourists generatedabout $74 millionincorporate and indirecttaxes in2005. 28% of these tourists arrive inZambiato visit the country's nationalparks (see Figure 2.9). Ifassuming, conservatively,that park visitors spend two to three days ina park, the direct and corporatetax revenuesgeneratedby nationalparks lie inthe range of $5 millionto $7.5 million63. 5.29 These figures demonstratethat the economic and fiscal benefits far surpass the potential financialcost of subsidizing the national park system; amounting to about $1 million in 2005, and estimatedat $9 million annually under a worst-casescenario64. Changa ManagementServices, 2007: Draft StrategicPlan 2008-2012, Zambia Wildlife Authority, Chilanga. 63Author's calculations. 64Child, 2004: A Financial and EconomicAnalysis of the Costs and Benefits of Managing the ProtectedArea Estate. 61 TABLE 5.4: ZAWA's financialperformance2001-2005 Description 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Income K'm K'm K'm K'm K'm Hunting, license and concessionfees 278 909 7,8 12 12,610 13,771 Park income 5,306 6,156 7,952 9,92 1 10,262 Donor grants 1,380 4,578 10,573 5,420 11,150 Government subsidies 7,757 12,293 3,884 4,465 4,572 Exchange gains & other income 873 993 1,749 2,283 4,369 Total Income 15,594 24,929 32,269 35,960 44,124 Expenditure Establishment expenses 13,470 14,385 20,878 25,296 24,385 Administration expenses 6,411 7,014 8,181 16,008 17,110 Field operation expenses 2,125 1,593 4,260 7,884 8,899 Total expenditure 22,006 22,992 33,319 49,188 50,394 I% of field operating costs to total costs 10% 7% 13% 16% 18% Surplus/ (Deficit) (6,4 12) 1,937 (1,050) (13,228) (6,270) Source: Final technicalreport: Assessing the Current Status of ZAWA Strategic Plan Implementation,Changa Management, 2006. In2006, 1US$was equivalentto 4000 Kwacha. The Second Strategic Plan 5.30 In2006, ZAWA drafted its secondStrategic Plan (2008-2012). This plan recognized that little progress had been made since the first Strategic Plan. ZAWA had failed to transform itself into a more successful institution due to two principal constraints: (1) a lack of change in corporate culture from the perceived security of the original departmental system, and (2) a failure by government to appreciatethe role that ZAWA plays in generating national economic benefits, and that these benefits only can be achievedthrough significant financial investments and less political involvement (that should be channeledthrough board structuresrather than directly through management). 5.3 1 Neither of the two Strategic Plans has addressedthe following five concerns: The government must endorsethat ZAWA is an important public service provider of both an economic asset (tourism product) and o f environmental services (watershed protection, pollution buffer, biodiversity, etc.) - and that these services require investments to materialize. ZAWA will have to take concrete andtime-bound steps to create a new corporate culture. Some doubt remains whether ZAWA fully supports this intention, especially considering the limited adoption of the first Strategic Plan. Changing the corporate culture is not necessarily the same as improvements to the constituent elements o f the corporate system. How the resistanceto change and associatedjob insecurity can be addressedthrough a proper humanresourcesmanagement strategythat makes ZAWA, as an employer, competitivewith the labor market. b How leadership skills, authority and responsibility can be applied to drive and support the transformation process at the various organizational levels. b The needfor a realistic time frame required to achievethe objectives ofthe Strategic Plan that matches capacity, availability o f investment financing and partnerships. 62 D.FINANCINGTHE WILDLIFE ESTATE 5.32 As demonstratedabove, ZAWA's performancehas beenseriously constrained by financial issues. Furthermore, pressureis increasingfor ZAWA to delegatemoreresponsibilityand revenueto Community ResourcesBoards (CRBs) in GMAs.Ifa major component ofthis revenueis to be transferred out of ZAWA's control, without first securingalternative financing, it would further compromisethe institution'sfinancial base. 5.33 One strategy may consist of the identificationof services that ZAWA could offer to CRBs, includinglaw enforcement, planning, huntingadministration, etc. But serviceswill haveto be offered in a competitivemanner, which inturn requiresZAWA to ensure that its skills and experienceare competitive. Another strategy may includea longoverdueoverhaul of the huntingsector, as hunting revenueinZambia are a fraction ofthose generatedin regional competitor countries. 5.34 Inthe mediumterm, ZAWA's success indevelopingandmaintaininga world class tourism product inits entire wildlife estatedepends on: 0 A soundinvestment programbasedon: (1) government subsidies, (2) cooperatingpartners investmentprojects and(3) privateor NGOpartnersthrough PPPs. 0 The maintenanceof a permanentflow of resourcesfor operationalcosts obtained from (1) non-consumptivetourism, (2) governmentsubsidies, (3) privateor NGO partnersthrough PPPs and (4) a conservation fee leviedon international tourists. 5.35 Notethat it will take several years for ZAWA to achievea sustainablefinancial position based on non-consumptivetourism, and appropriatetime must be allowedfor the processof devolvingGMA responsibilitiesand revenueto CRBs. It may even be necessary to outsource the GMA/communityliaison functionto appropriate organizations, trusts or private-community partnershipswith experience in, and drive for, community development matte#. Survey of Willingness to Pay 5.36 New avenues for financingofthe wildlife estate needto be explored, andan importantpart of the TourismDemandSurvey was aseries of questionson tourists' willingnessto pay: (1) to enjoy the national parks as they stand, (2) for specific improvements inthe nationalparks, and (3) for a conservation fund to improve protectionand managementofthe environment inZambia (see questionnaire in Annex 1). 5.37 The important considerationsin the willingness to pay (WTP) portionofthe questionnaire include:(I)tourists were interviewedafter they hadenjoyedtheir trip to a national park to makethe questionsseem less hypotheticalto the respondent; (2) the scenariosusedto elicit willingnessto pay are described in preciseterms to rootthem inthe experiencethe respondenthasjust had; and (3) the meansof eliciting willingness to pay was through a payment card, giving the respondentamenu of potentialamountsto pay for the experiencejust enjoyed(or enhancementsto the experience)-the questionsare couchedinterms of maximum willingness to pay. 5.38 The survey used five out of six guidelinesfrom the "Report on theNOAA Panelon ContingentValuation"66.The survey usedpersonal interviews, probabilitysampling, carefulpre- 65The issue of CBNRM remains off ZAWA's active agenda. It warrants a solid independent review, preferably with the injection of regional and internationalmodels that haveworked. The findings must be mindful of the absence of businessservices in remoteGMAs; the dynamics in rural communities; the high diversity in Zambia; and the impact of rapidly changing market economies in these hitherto marginalizedareas. The output needsto state ZAWA's real responsibilitiesin these areas; how it might adapt to the new revenue and management circumstances; and what market opportunitiesexist for the organization in supportingthe transition. 66Arrow et al, 1993,Randall, 1997. 63 testing, and reminderso f budget constraints and the availability o f substitutes. A common criticism of Contingent Valuation (CV) analysis is that CV estimatesare gross overestimates. Studies show that, under plausible conditions, when askedto value quasi-public goods where the effectivetrade-off is a quality change against a cost change, and public goods to be provided by means of an increasedtax, it i s in the strategic interest o f the respondentsto truthfully reveal their WTP6'. The survey used a menu of multiple choices in payment cards.This question format is likely to bias WTP responses downwards for three reasons68:(1) the optimal strategy for respondentswhose WTP is less than the expected cost is to state a WTP o f $0; (2) open-ended and payment card questions indicate uncertainty about future costs for the respondentand result in a lower WTP response; and (3) ifthe respondent believes that the government is capable o f capturing part of any available surplus for unproductive purposes, the WTP reported would be lower. Thus, WTP reported in the survey may be lower than the actual WTP of the respondents. Willingness to Pay to visit National Parks 5.39 Figure 5.1 illustrates the results of the WTP questions for the main parkdsites. Respondents were reminded of the current park fee before they answeredthe questions. The figure shows that untappednature tourists' willingness to pay to enjoy the national parks intheir current state is roughly two-third higherthan current park entrance fees. When specific improvements inthe national parks are part of the scenario, willingness to pay climbs to roughly twice the level o f current fees. 5.40 Note that even at the highest fee level, an individual park fee would represent less than 1% o f - the total trip price for a typical international tourist (see Table 3.7). Ifthe elasticity o f tourism demand i s 1, the reduction in demand for visits to national parks would be 1% -however, the price elasticity of total tourist spending is low (0.39)69and so is price elasticity of demand for hotel rooms (0.44)70. Increasing park fees would therefore not deter international tourists. FIGURE5.1: Nature tourist's willingness to pay parkentrance fees 50 1 45 - 40 - 35 0 '6830 I 20 25 2 15 10 7i 5 i 0 4 Livingstone South Luangwa Lower Zarnbezi Kafue Source: Tourism DemandSurvey (2005). 5.41 Table 5.5 displays the current and potential revenues for the most popular national parks in Zambia, drawing uponthe data displayed inFigure 5.1, Iftourists' willingness to pay was tapped through higher fees; park revenue, currently amounting to $2.2 million, could increaseto between $3.9 million and $5.1 million. 67 Carson et al, 1999. Carson, 1997. 69 Crouchand Shaw, 1991. ' O Hiemstra and Ismail, 1992, 1993. 64 TABLE 5.5: Potential revenue from international park visitors, 2005 Park Scenario Fee No. of nature tourists Revenue (%) Livingstone Current fee 15 105,879 1,588,185 (Victoria Falls and Mosi- No imurovement 27 2,858,733 . . oa-Tunya) With improvement 36 3,811,644 South Luangwa Current fee 20 22,688 453,760 No improvement 36 816,768 With improvement 45 1,020,960 Lower Zambezi Current fee 20 5,177 103,540 No improvement 32 165,664 With improvement 40 207,080 Kafue Current fee 15 2,003 30,045 N o improvement 24 48,072 Withimprovement I 2 9 I 58,087 TOTAL IICurrent fee 2,175,530 No improvement 3,889,237 With improvement 5,097,771 5.42 It is important, however, that new park fees are introduced gradually to reducethe effect of `sticker shock' (although studies show that tourists are fairly price-insensitive). Increasesshould also be made in full consultation with the private sector, as any sudden increasein park fees (which are typically built into the package price paid by a tourist) would adversely affect operator revenue. Willingness to Pay for Conservation 5.43 Figure5.2 showsthat the meanwillingnessto pay a conservation fee for the different categories oftourists in Zambia is $20 per personper visit". As can be seen inAnnex 1, this willingness to pay is linkedto a specific scenario includingthe establishment ofa conservationfund. 5.44 It is important to bear inmindthat a conservation fee is atax oftourists, not of operators (that already are burdenedwith various taxes). Sincethe conservation fee in principle would be paid by all visitors, the relatively low variation in willingness to pay across different types of visitors is important (note that conference and `other' visitors, the categories with the lowest willingness to pay, are small proportions ofthe total number oftourists). 5.45 A conservation fee of $20 levied on all South African and non-African visitors, Le. the true holiday-makers, would generate more than $4 million per year. The fact that Zambia is a high cost destination meansthat $20 constitutes a very small proportion ofthe total package. As the demand for tourism is quite price-inelastic, a conservation fee is unlikely to be a deal-breaker. "Themeanfeeof$20iscalculatedasaweightedaverageacrossthedifferentcategoriesofvisitorstoZambia. 65 FIGURE5.2: Willingness to pay conservation fee 1 I I 20 Y) f .= i o i 15 e 5 0 Holiday Business Conference VFR Other Source: Tourism Demand Survey (2005). VFR: Visiting friends and relatives. Implicationsof WTP Figures 5.46 Nature tourism in Zambia generatespotentially enormous economic rents - with the primary beneficiaries being the tourists. Contrary to resourcessuch as sun, sea and sand, which many destinations can offer, Zambia has one resourcethat is absolutely unique (the Victoria Falls) and another (wildlife) that is extremely scarce and getting scarcer. As these assets belongto Zambia, it is appropriate for the Government to capture the available rents. Ifno attempt is made, then a bunch o f foreign tourists are simply flying away with the rents intheir pockets (inthe form of untapped willingness to pay). 5.47 However, the Government needs to understandthat if it chooses to introduce higher park fees and/or a conservation fee, then it is entering into a contract with the tourist, who expects that the fees actually are used for conservation and improved managemento fthe wildlife estate. Ifthe government fulfils its part ofthe deal, total fee receipts couldtotal as much as $11.5 million per year, with $3.4 million of that coming from visitors to the Victoria Falls. 5.48 Increasing fees should not be seen by the Government as a way of, once and for all, terminating its support o f ZAWA on the grounds that ZAWA can generate funds to sustain itself. Fees should be earmarked for ZAWA, but on the basis o f a contract that requires reforms in governance, management and technical capacity. Without significant reforms to ZAWA, tourism will continue to under-perform. E.THE TRANSFORMATIONAGENDA 5.49 The agenda for the transformation of ZAWA has to be ambitious, and a preconditionto any action must be the realizationthat it can only be accomplished by a carefully orchestrated and well- managedseries o f particular steps. 5.50 The first step is to address the Government's concerns regardingZAWA. As longas the Government continues to adopt a piecemeal and ad hoc approachto ZAWA, it facilitates political interference, an insecure financial platform, inadequateperformance from the institution as a whole - and generates the vicious circle o f reducing financial returns and the more serious progressive erosion of the resourcebase. 66 5.51 Inorder to convincethe Governmentthat ZAWA hasthe financial robustnessandnecessary vigor to carry the mission forward and generatedue economic multiplier effects, in such as way that it i s worth additional supporting investment, the next steps include the implementation ofthe following key inputs: 0 A protectedarea planbased on a comprehensive conservation planand an affordable and appropriate managementsystem. A humanresourcesplanthat takes due cognizanceof necessary organizational changes, especially management`corporate culture development. 0 A financingplanthat includes greater flexibility inthe settingof fees, guided by willingness to pay as income. CorporateCulture 5.52 A core assumption inestablishingZAWA as a viable conservation agency was to developa motivated, productiveandcustomer-orientedstaff. This was intended simultaneouslyto break the antecedent imageof a largely moribundorganization, and to realizethe productivityandmotivation advantagesand operationalflexibility offered by its status as a statutory agency. 5.53 In keepingwith this, ZAWA, in its first Strategic Plan, identifiedthe needto establish itselfas a customer-and performance-orientedinstitutionby: (1) identifyingand profiling the customer base and its needs; (2) assessing current performanceagainst those needs; and (3) developing performance indicators for attainingcustomer requirements. 5.54 Inturnthis would result inthe development of managementsystemsthat would: (1) match internaland customer needs; (2) identify skills gaps neededto servicethe customer base; (3) recruit humanresourcesneededto meetexpectations; (4) improveworkingconditions; and (5) establish trainingprograms and a performance-basedemployment systems to sustain and motivatestaff. 5.55 Importantelements of the institutionalculture change should includeestablishinga board with the skills and independenceto championand direct the new approach". 5.56 Intheory, the performanceofZAWA's staff shouldmatchthat ofthe privateindustry.In practice, becausethe salary scale is un-competitive, ZAWA has difficulties attractingqualifiedstaff. As a consequence, the individual performanceis extremely variable. A revisionofthe salary scale is therefore necessary.At this stage, givenZAWA's financial constraints,this can only be achievedwith support from external or alternativeresourcesor additional government subsidies. 5.57 ZAWA's performancewould significantly improve if it couldrecruit, from the privatesector, a limited number of highly qualified candidatesto develop, market andadministerthe important commercialfunction as well as drive and coordinatethe protectedarea planningfunction. The desired qualificationsand experiencefor these functions must be identifiedso that curriculain localtraining institutionsare progressivelymodified.This will make appropriately trained staff locally availableto ensure long-termsustainability. '*Zambia Wildlife Authority, 2002: Five-Year Strategic Plan 2003-2007, Volume 2 ImplementationPlan, Chilanga. 67 Decentralization 5.58 There is need to develop an effective, decentralized management structure with appropriate communications and reportingsystems to support it. Rolling out a decentralized budgeting and accounting system would substantially improvethe opportunities for excellence within ZAWA. It will require considerable training, the subsequentdevolution of real responsibilities and authority, and a financial and physical performance management and audit system, but it is feasible if implementedin manageablestages. The outcome would permit ZAWA to play a constructive role ineffecting government's decentralization policy inthe wildlife sector. More importantly, it would offer field managersthe opportunity to take an active role in wildlife resourceplanningand management at the district level. Public Private Partnerships 5.59 A major conundrum facing Zambia inrecent decades has beenhow to pay for its extensive protected areas. Inthe wildlife sector interest has grown inrecent years for the development o f PPPs as a mechanism for achieving this, effectively passingon to the private sector, Le. investors andor international NGOs, the day-to-day cost o f managing wildlife areas. 5.60 The first Strategic Plan statedthat until every effort had been madeto develop a holistic plan for the whole wildlife estate, no national parks should be removed from the protected area system. It was inthis context that Public Private Partnerships(PPPs) were introduced for low priority parks. 5.61 PPPs have rightly been advanced as a viable mechanism for reducing the direct costs to ZAWA of managing the wildlife estate, while also increasing the number of protected areas under effective management. However, it pre-supposesthe existence of the following components: A protected area management systemthat permitsthe considered delegation ofprotected areas to partners, with limitedrisk o f collateral damageto other elements o f the estate or to other biological or commercial relationships. General, financial and commercial management systemsthat are capable of determining the value o f proposed PPPs to ZAWA's managementand of negotiating satisfactory agreements. Management and communication systems that will permit the effective incorporationof a given PPP into the wildlife estate management system. PPPs should not operate independently of the overall strategies for the wildlife estate. 5.62 To date, ZAWA has had some success in establishing PPPs o f - Box 5.1. Trans-Frontier ConservationApproaches types*Buteach negotiation is still undertaken on a one-off basis, ZAWA is currently pursuingtrans-borderagreements in three areas: (1) inthe upper Zambezi in the format ofthe Kavango- I W F I Y because insufficient demand Zambezi Trans-frontier ConservationArea (KAZA), (2) in the exists at this stage for a more middle Zambezi, and (3) and Lukusuzi-Kasungu-Nyika Trans- competitive approach.To improve its frontier ConservationArea sharedwith Malawi. These initiatives PPPs, ZAWA intendsto address have the advantagethat they assist in sharingconservationcosts shortcomings such as: (1) the needto while also creatingwider benefitsthrough expanding areas under placewithintheframeworkofa pppS effective conservationmanagement.The PPP approach is also specific strategy for them; (2) possiblein this context and initial linkages(still to be finalized) developing negotiation astance for PPPs; (3) standard and exist for the SiomaNgwezi National Park inthe KAZA area and for the Nyika National Park in the Zambia-Malawi trans-frontier establishing PPP performance targets; zone. 68 Credible BusinessPlan 5.63 To convince the governmentofthe financial andeconomic argumentsfor investingin ZAWA, accordingto the reviewof the first Strategic Plan, three financial componentsneed immediate e~amination'~: Removingthe accumulating(mainly statutory) creditors on ZAWA's balancesheet. Generatingmedium-termworking capital to improve the cash flow position. Quantifyingwhy governmentshould invest inthe protectedarea systemsin order to sustain future economic benefits. 5.64 This requiresfinancial restructuringactions by governmentthat will permitZAWA to access financeto cover someof its medium-term workingand investmentcapital requirements. Financial restructuringshould be linkedto an annual performance-basedcontract betweengovernment and ZAWA, which at least covers elements ofthe organization's biodiversityconservation obligations. 5.65 A fourth component is equally urgent to address: ProvidingZAWA with the necessarycommercial flexibility to manage its commercial resourcesina businesslike manner. 5.66 Thisrequires severalactions, includingde-linkingZAWA's fee-settingfrom the statutory instrumentprocess, which is so cumbersomethat realistic and timely commercial chargesare almost impossibleto maintain, andraisingthe level of innovationinthe commercial sector. 5.67 Possiblenew income streams include: (1) services to Community ResourcesBoardsand other privatesector clients; (2) publications and public relations materials; (3) PPPs; (4) a reclassificationof GMAs to permita greater diversity oftourism activities(withoutcompromising livelihood options for residentcommunities, the sustainabilityof wildlife populations, or underminingthe earning capacity of any one landuse); and, most importantly,(5) a reorganizedhuntingsector that couldrealize improvedreturns per square kilometer of huntingarea through the developmentof more innovative productsandproductmarketing. 73Changa Consulting, 2006. 69 6. CONCLUSIONS 6.1 The preceding chaptershave presentedan array of information about the nature tourism sector, the constraints that it faces, the assets that underpinnature tourism, the limitations o fthe management o f these assets, the economic impact of nature tourism, and the benefits associatedwith living in a Game Management Area next to a key tourism asset, a national park. Below are outlined the major conclusions ofthe report: Zambia constitutes an emerging Destination 6.2 Eventhough Africa only receivesabout 4.5% of all international tourists, its 8.1% expansion rate is among the fastest inthe world. Zambia, while steadily performing, remains an emerging player with no more than 4% of sub-SaharanAfricantourists. 6.3 The emerging nature ofZambia's tourism is demonstrated, firstly, by the profile of a typical tourist: Most tourists visit Zambia for the first time, visit one site only (usually the Victoria Falls), stay less than sevendays, travel in small groups and arrive on packagesincluding other countries in the region. Secondly, major tourism supply side clusters have developed only ina few key urban and national park locations, with a strong bias to the Livingstone region. 6.4 The emerging nature is by no means an impediment; rather it demonstratesthat the tourism potential in untapped. Zambia's Tourism Profile 6.5 More than half of Zambia's holiday tourists (54%) arrive with the intention of visiting the Victoria Falls, and only approximately half that number, come for Zambia's wildlife attractions (28%). At least 88% of all holiday-makers are nature tourists, who visit the falls, wildlife or nature- basedadventure activities. In2005, atotal o f 176,000 nature tourists visited Zambia. They were satisfied with their Zambian experience, as 84% say they will visit again, and at least 90% rate the major parks(Mosi-oa-Tunya Falls and National Park, South Luangwa, Lower Zambezi and Kafue National Parks) as good or very good. The Economic Imuact o fNature Tourism 6.6 Nature tourism is currently making a major contribution to the Zambian economy. The overall (direct and indirect) economic impact of 176,000 nature tourists visiting Zambia in 2005 amountedto nearly 16% of Zambian exports, 6.5% of GDP, over 6% o f wages and net income of unincorporated business, 7% of government revenue and nearly 10% of formal sector employment. 6.7 Hotels and Restaurants,the largest provider o ftourism services, is the second-most employment intensive sector inthe economy. The direct and indirect contribution to employment of 176,000 nature tourists is inthe order o f 54,000 formaljobs (about 19,000 jobs when indirect linkages are excluded), which compares favorably with other Zambian growth sectors. Increasing the Economic Imuact o fNature Tourism 6.8 This report has demonstratedthat Zambia easily can increaseits tourism receipts by focusing on naturetourism. The average duration o f stay inZambia by a nature tourist is 6.9 days, which is low comparedto Botswana (8.6 days) or Namibia (12.4 days). Increasing the length of stay by 2 days (to roughly match the figure for Botswana) would increasenature tourism's contribution to direct GDP with an additional 1.1% and exceedthe FNDP targets. 70 Linkages rather than Leakage 6.9 Contrary to commonbeliefs, leakage from tourism is not a sourceof concern inZambia. Overseas services such as flights, travelagents andtour operators are valuethat is addedinthe source market countriesto sell the Zambian product, without whichthere would be no benefit at all to Zambia. Genuine leakageinthe form of imports (of specialized goods or servicesnot available in Zambia) andto a lesser extent profit repatriations(limited by a tourism sector dominated by small operators) can only be decreasedthrough improved local participationinthe tourism sector and its support services. Tourists can HelD to FinanceConservation 6.10 Contrary to resourcessuch as sun, sea and sand, which many destinationscan offer, Zambia has one resourcethat is absolutely unique(the Victoria Falls) and another that is extremely scarce and gettingscarcer (wildlife). As these assets belongto Zambia, it is appropriate for the Governmentto capturethe available rents. 6.11 Naturetourists are willing to pay 50% to 100%greater fees for the falls and parks they have visited, particularlyif improvementsare made.Tapping naturetourists' willingness to pay could increaseproceedsat the gates (ofthe falls andthe major parks) from the current $2.2 millionto between$3.9 millionand $5.1 million, dependingon whether improvementsare implementedor not. 6.12 Tourists would also bewillingto pay a conservation fee of $20per visit ifthe fee was usedto improve andextendthe natural areas under protectioninZambia. Ifchargedto South African and non-Africanvisitors, Le.the genuine holiday-makers,a conservation fee couldraise as much as $6.4 millionper year. 6.13 Increasingfees should not be seen by the Governmentas a way of, once and for all, terminatingits support ofZAWA on the grounds that ZAWA can generatefunds to sustain itself. Fees shouldbe earmarkedfor ZAWA, but on the basisof a contract that requiresreforms in governance, managementandtechnical capacity. Performanceofthe Wildlife ManagementInstitution(ZAWA) 6.14 After afew years ofoperations, Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) has managedto launch major investment programs in several parks, producemanagementplans for severalparks, double the revenuestream bothfrom huntingandnon-consumptivetourismandto establisha series ofpublic privatepartnerships(PPPs). 6.1 5 However, the review of the first Strategic Plan(2003-2007)shows that the above results are modestin comparisonto plans. This is mainlybecauseseveral ofthe external pre-conditions upon whichthe first strategic planwas based(e.g. independenceof board and government capitalization) did not sufficiently materialize.As a consequence, ZAWA has not been able to convert to a corporate culture which would improve its credibility and multiply its financial and conservation performance. 6.16 At this stage it seems risky to proceedwith the secondStrategic Plan(2008-2012). Especially because it is unclear whether the government appreciatesthat ZAWA plays an importantrole in generatingsustainable, nationaleconomic benefits-andthat these benefitswill materialize only through significant financial investments.Conversely, ZAWA needsto establishcredible instruments such as abusinessplanbasedonmodernand forward-lookingpartners, activitiesand revenuesthat demonstratehow a major capitalizationwould generateeconomic growth. 6.17 This report shows that financingZAWA's investment program and operations is within reach given several policy decisions: (1) improvingZAWA's efficiencythrough change of corporate culture, better planninginstrumentsand managementsystems includinghumanresources 71 development, (2) implementinga greater number o f PPPs, (3) rethinkingthe governance and management o f GMAs and hunting, and (4) mobilizing visitors' willingness to pay for conservation. Conservation as a Tool to Povertv Reduction 6.18 On average, the welfare o f communities living around national parks is about 70% of the national rural average. Household welfare is about the same in Game Management Areas (GMAs) as in non-GMA areas inthree ofthe four surveyed park systems (i.e. Bangweulu, Kafue and Lower Zambezi), whereas Luangwa park system, with a long history o f community-based natural resources management,can show a higher welfare in its GMAs than in its non-GMA areas. 6.19 When adjusting for the "GMA effect" (by comparing the welfare of a GMA household with the welfare ofthe same household inthe same location ifthat locationwas not aGMA anymore), it becomesobvious that for poor households, there appear to be neither welfare gains nor losses associatedwith living in GMAs. However, non-poor householdsinGMAs would be significantly worse off iftheir GMA had not been declared a GMA. 6.20 Similarly, there appear to be neither welfare gains nor losses associatedwith participating in community-based natural resourcesmanagement, i.e. Village Action Groups (VAGs) or Community Resources Boards (CRBs) for poor households. However, non-poor households inGMAs who participate in VAGiCRB activities, would be significantly worse off ifthey did not participate. 6.21 Hence, GMAs (and, by extension, hunting revenue sharing) may not be an effective means o f poverty alleviation. The benefit distribution institutions such as VAGs and CRBs needto be reformed so that the revenuereaches the poor householdsinthe community. Factors Hamuerinrr the Tourism Industrv 6.22 As tourism is aprivate sector-led industry, it is very sensitive to the over-all business climate. Impediments to the tourism sector in particular are already listed inthe Fifth National Development Plan (FNDP). They include: (I) inadequatetourism planning; (2) insufficient infrastructure; (3) limitedproduct base; (4) inadequatemanagementof national parks; (5) insufficient country marketing; (6) lack ofgovernment funding; (7) lack of community interest or participation; (8) poorly trained and insufficient human resources; and (8) Zambia being a high cost destination. 6.23 These impediments result in highcosts of setting up and operating tourism enterprises. The Hotel and Catering Association estimatesthat the average annual cost of the regulatory compliance o f each of their members is inthe region of ZMK 9.5 million ($2,300) and involves up to 74 individual licenses. Operators from different regions indicate different licensing requirements (from 2-4 in one area to more than 12 in Livingstone), and they estimate that the direct cost o f regulatory compliance ranges between$2,000 and $30,000 per annum(with the time cost ranging between $2,000 and $20,000). 6.24 Zambia is failing to secure maximum financial benefits from its tourists, partly because of the relatively short stay of tourists inZambia, partly becauseo fthe lack o f depth inthe country's tourism infrastructure. Zambia needs to develop a Tourism Master Plan that addresses policy, legislation and planning for the sector, including development o f training capacities, physical infrastructure, country marketing, data collection and management, and standardsand licensing requirements. 72 7, WAY FORWARD A. BASICPOLICY AND INVESTMENTREQUIREMENTS 7.1 A range of actions are neededto secure Zambia's tourism industry inthe regional market. Most are already known andplannedas part ofthe Fifth NationalDevelopmentPlan(FNDP) and include: Developinga realistic vision for the sector and creatingplanning, investment facilitation and regulatory functions capableof deliveringthis vision. Developingstrategies for tourism growththat are more balancedacross the country. Establishingmarket niches worthy of investmentand then diversify andbuildingtourism supply and value chains. StrengtheningZambia's internal tourist linkagesas well as bilateral andregional initiatives. Developingand implementingmore effective brandingand marketingfunctions, especially at nationallevel. Consolidating existing investmentswhile activelyencouragingnew domestic and foreign initiatives. Identifyingways of complementinglow volume/highvalue approacheswith strategiesaimed at increasingtourist volumes and capturing elements ofthe tour packagemarket. Usingincreasedtourist volumes and lengthof stay to develop economiesof scale across the supply chain, thus enhancingaccessibility to and affordabilityof products. StrengtheningTourism Planningand Policv 7.2 The primaryprerequisitefor a thriving tourism sector is to develop a simple and realistic Tourism MasterPlanthat incorporates: 0 Objective tourism sector targetsandmilestones. 0 An improvedstatistical data collectionand managementsystem. 0 Mechanisms for the balanceddevelopment of Zambia's existingtourism circuits and developmentof new circuits (Kafue, westernZambia andthe north-easternwaterfalls and lakes). 0 Plansto invest inkey infrastructure. Infrastructure 7.3 Acceleration of growth inthe tourismsector is completely dependent on largepublic investment in infrastructure. The government needsto invest inthe essential road, air, telecommunications andpower infrastructure, includinglongoverdue projects such as the up-grade of the Chipata-Mfuweand Itezhi-tezhiroads, Kasamaand KasabaBay airports, etc. 73 Tourism Promotion 7.4 Zambian tourism promotional materials are at least on apar with the regional competition, but there is a need for a much more significant investment intourism marketing. Inparticular national, circuit and destination (national park) branding need to be introduced more effectively to support the Real Africa label that Zambia has established. Building Human Capital 7.5 The Tourism Development Program recommended reorganizing tourism and hospitality training facilities inZambia. This still has to be implemented and as a consequencethere is a p_aucity of fully trained tourism and hospitality staff. This will become increasingly critical as Zambia's tourism sector continues its expansion, especially outside traditional tourist areas. A significant effort will be required to establisha suitable set o f standards, training subject matter and curricula and training processes. Further efforts are then needed inencouraging the private sector to enter this market -which inturn will require some regulatory structure and criteria. Better Tourism Data 7.6 The conservative estimate of export revenue from nature tourists presentedinChapter 3 is roughly as large as the World Tourism Organization's figures for all tourists, derived from Zambia's balance o f payments accounts. Since nature tourists are a subset (albeit an important subset) o f all tourists, this suggests that data on numbers and expenditures o f tourists are fairly weak inZambia. Strengthening these data systems will be critical for the implementation o f any Tourism Master Plan that the government may wish to pursue. B. EXCEEDINGTHE FNDPTARGETS 7.7 The tourism section ofthe FNDP un-ambitiously seeks, by 2010, to attract 740,000 visitors annually, employ 30,000 people and earn about $304 million (direct contribution). 7.8 Already in 2005, 176,000 naturetourists had a direct contribution of $194 million, and they contributed to direct employment of 19,000 people. If 176,000 nature tourists had such an impact, the 669,000 international visitors of 2005 had an impact that far exceeds the 2010 FNDP targets for jobs and earnings-despite Zambia being an emerging destination where holiday-makers' length o f stay is among the shortest in the region and most of them limit their visit to one site, usually the Victoria Falls. 7.9 Consequently, this report suggests that it is on this "policy sensitive" segment that the Government and the Ministry o f Tourism, Environment & Natural Resourcesneedto focus to accelerategrowth. 7.10 To illustrate this point, Chapter 3 showed that an additional 2 days spent inZambia, assuming no increase inthe number o f tourists, leads to an increase intourism earning o f $67 millions. As this would be supplemented by the increaseinthe number o f tourists, which has grown annually by 10% for the past years, 2 extra days would amount to addedearnings o f $98 million by 2010. 7.1 1 Inother words, by ensuring that naturetourists stay longer inZambia (visiting more sites), Zambia would not only succeed inexceeding its 2010 targets, the Government would also position the tourism sector more prominently as a growth pillar. 7.12 Accordingly, this report advices the Government to aggressively develop access, ensure better management and stimulate private sector investment in accommodations inthe three flagship national parks, South Luangwa, Lower Zambezi and Kafue, through the following tools: 74 e Stimulate large-scaleinvestmentssimilarto the Sun Internationalin at least two ofthese parks, maybethrough special incentives. Scaleup investment in all weather roadswithin each ofthese parksto increasethe length of thetourismseason. e Constructa rapidaccess gravel/tarred roadand airstrip ineach ofthese parks with focus on the Chipata-MfuweandItezhi-tezhiRoads. e Mobilize sufficient funding, government or otherwise, to ensure that the cost of management (resource protection, monitoringandmaintenance) is secured until commercial revenuecan fully cover operations. e Focus ZAWA's investments,humanresourcescapacity and managementon the development ofthese three parks while delegating, or partneringwith others, for the development of other parks in order to gradually establishthem as new products able to increasethe lengthof stay oftourists in Zambia. Particular focus is neededon the northern national parks, which rightfully are seen as a priority inthe FNDP. Develop market mechanismsandtrainingsystems targeted at these three parks to create incentive for Zambian investors to invest intourism accommodations. C.MANAGINGTHE WILDLIFE ESTATE 7.13 Achievingthe FNDPtargets through investmentsinthe flagship parksraises the issueof how to optimizethe managementofthe wildlife estate interms of financing, conservation performance and community benefits. Improvingthe Managementof the Wildlife Estate 7.14 Boththis report andthe recent review of ZAWA's first Strategic Planhaveput forward a long list of issues in need o f reform ifZAWA is to become a moreeffectivestewardofthe key tourism assets inZambia. These issues are not a primary focus ofthis study, but clearly they are extremely important for increasingnaturetourism's contributionto economic development in Zambia. 7.15 Internalreforms inZAWA is a matter of priority, andwould involve:(I)acquiringa corporateculturecommensuratewith the complexityof the mission, (2) investingin humanresources and adaptingtheir skills to the need ofthe organization, (3) developinga business planthat is convincingto the Ministry of Finance, (4) improvingmanagementsystems and controls with a focus on decentralizationand field operations, and(5) aggressivelyestablishing public privatepartnerships. RethinkingGMA Governanceand Management 7.16 GMAs can play a major role inthe success of the protectedarea system. Chapter 4 has providedconcreteevidencethat there are welfare benefits associatedwith livingin some GMAs. Conversely, there is also evidence for `elite capture' inthe GMAs, with non-poor households benefitingdisproportionately. This report advisesthe governmentto initiate a full reviewofthe governanceandmanagementof GMAs andtake opportunities ofcurrent trends such as administrative decentralization, commercialdiversificationand public privatepartnerships. 7.17 Experienceselsewheredemonstratethat there is potential to establish a better equilibrium betweencommunities, privatesector and public institutionsfor the greater economic benefitof all and better managementofbiologicalresources. 75 IncreaseCommunity Benefits o f Conservation 7.18 A greater proportion of huntingrevenue should probably be sharedwith communities in GMAs. Although this would affect the revenue stream for ZAWA's operations, it could reducethe inherent conflict of interest that ZAWA faces betweengenerating revenueon the one hand and conserving wildlife on the other. Similar conflict will be experienced as long as dependenceon hunting i s continued even under new managementarrangements. 7.19 However, revenuesharing on its own is likely to beneficial to the non-poor section of the communities only. Ifconservation is to play a role in poverty reduction there is a needto look at ways to spread the benefits o f living inGMAsmore widely. These may include: (1) sensitization activities to enhance participationo f residents in development activities regardless o f their economic status, and (2) identification and promotion o f livelihoods that would provide alternatives to illegal harvesting andtrading innatural resources. Financing Conservation 7.20 The findings on tourists' willingness to pay for parks and conservation are clearly important when the question of finance to sustainthe basis o f nature tourism, the protected areas o f Zambia, is considered. However it is important not to rushto judgment on the figures presentedinthis study. Questions of phasing, the appropriatenesso f earmarking (hypothecation), and the capacity o fthe key institution, ZAWA, and other environmental management institutions, needto be addressed. There is a clear need for providing annual support to ZAWA until revenues balance expenses and for significant investment in ZAWA if it is to become an effective manager of the wildlife estate. Beyond this, the willingness to pay figures presentedinthis study indicate that there is substantial potential for the sector to becomemore self-financing. 76 ANNEX 1 TOURISM DEMAND SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE 1 Questionnaire number ZAMBIA VISITOR SURVEY FinalVersion 2 Interviewer code 3 Date : I I2005 4 Day: M o n = l 1Tue=2 I Wed=3 I Thu=4 I Fri=5 I Sat=6 ISun=7 1 5 Weather conditions (circle the correct response, one in each box) 5.1 I 5.2 I 5.3 I5.4 Sunny Very hot (>3OoC) 1 1 Dry 1 Calm 1 Brokencloud 2 Driulelshowers 2 Hot (2loC-3O0C) 2 Breezy 2 Overcast 3 Persistentrain 3 Warm (15-2OoC) 3 Cool (10-15OC) 4 Windy 3 Lusakaairport 1 LivingstoneI Victoria Falls/ Mosi Oa Tunya 2 Livingstoneairport 3 LowerZambeziI Lake Kariba 4 South Luanawa 5 IMfuweiirDort II 6 7 II North Luangwa 8 Kasanka 9 INsumbuI Lake Tannanvika I 10 I 7 Air flight number (if applicable): 8 Time started (24 hour clock): 9 Time ended (24 hour clock): 10 Total time taken: minutes 77 INTERVIEWER INSTRUCTIONS ASK THE VISITOR IF HUSHE HAS ALREADY BEEN INTERVIEWED IN ANOTHER SITE. IF YES, THEN WITHDRAW POLITELY; IF NO, THEN PROCEED Hello, my name is ................AndI am doing a survey for the Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources of Zambia. I would be very grateful if you would answer a few questions about your visit to Zambia. This is not a marketing or sales survey. We are doing the survey to have a better understanding of what tourists want from their trip to Zambia and what experiences and natural resources they value the most. The survey should not take more than 30 minutes. The questions are really easy to respond to. Any information you provide will be kept strictly confidential. Would you be prepared to answer some questions? IF YES, THENPROCEED; IF NO, THEN WITHDRAW POLITELY A. SOCIOLOGIC DATA Male 1 Female 2 IIIIIII18-24 years 1 25-34 years 2 35-44 years 3 45-54 years 4 55-64 years 5 65-74 years 6 75 or more IIIIIII 7 IIIIIII 13 What isyour nationality? Circle one only. II American Zambian 1 (USA) 2 II II Australian 3 British 4 rcanadian IIIII 5 III ____ ~ Chinese 6 Danish 7 Dutch 8 French 9 German 10 Indian 11 Italian 12 IIIII Japanese I 13 Kenyan 14 II New Zealander 15 South African 16 Swedish IIII 17 III II Zimbabwean Tanzanian II 18 19 II Other Pleasespecify: 79 Yes 1 No 2 15 Which level best describes the highest level of education you have attained until now? Circle one onlv. 1IIIINo formal education 1 Primary school (up to 11 years old) 2 Lower Secondary school (up to 15 years old) 3 Upper Secondary school (up to 18 years old) 4 Professional qualification or diploma 5 II Higher College degree 6 degree (MSc or PhD) IIIIIII 7 IIIIIII Self-employed 1 Employed full-time (30 hours plus per week) 2 Employed part-time (under 30 hours per week) 3 Student 4 Unemployed 5 Looking after the home full-time I housewife/husband 6 1 Retired 7 III Do not work: private means I a Unable to work due to sickness or disability 9 Unpaid voluntary work II 10 III Other work status Please specify: 17 What is your yearly gross (personal) income? (If the interviewee is reluctant stress that the survey is anonymous and the information will be kept strictly confidential) Use the income card with the relevant currency I Record currency I Record income 17.1 17.2 Currency Dollar = I Rand = 4 Euro = 2 Kwacha = 5 Pound = 3 80 18 Doyou have any children (including independent children)? Circle one only. 19 How many people are in your travel party, including yourself? Record response. Numberof people IF ANSWER IS 1 GO TO QUESTION 22 20 Record the people the tourist is travelling with. Circle one only. Family 1 Friends 2 I Family and friends I 3 I Work colleagues 4 Male Female Up to 5 years 21.1 21.2 I 6to 15years I 21.3 I 21.4 16 to 60 years 21.5 21.6 60 to 75 years 21.7 21.8 Over 75 years 21.9 21.10 81 22 What is your country of residence? Circle one only. II Zambia 1 USA II 2 ~~ ~ Australia 3 UK 4 ~ Canada 5 China 6 Denmark 7 France 8 Germany 9 Holland 10 India 11 Italy 12 Jaoan 13 I Kenya I 14 IIINewzealand 15 I South Africa 16 Sweden 17 II Zimbabwe Tanzania IIIII 18 19 II Other country of residence Please specify: IF ANSWER IS NOT ZAMBIA, THEN GO TO SECTION C 82 FOR RESIDENTS ONLY B. GENERAL RESIDENTTRIP INFORMATION I 23.1 Visited Not visited Botswana 1 2 123.2 Kenya I 1 1 2 1 I 23.3 Malawi I 1 1 2 I 23.4 Namibia 1 2 23.5 South Africa 1 2 I 23.6 Tanzania I 1 1 2 1 23.7 Uganda 1 2 23.8 Zimbabwe 1 2 24 Fromwhich provinceand city did you start this trip to the parks? Record responses. Exclude transit provinces and cities. 1 24.1 Province 24.2 City I Town I Province city Central = I Chipata = I Lusaka = I 1 Copperbelt = 2 Chirundu = 2 Ndola = 12 Eastern = 3 Choma = 3 Mansa = 13 Luapula = 4 lsoka = 4 Mazabuka = 14 Lusaka = 5 Kabwe = 5 Mkushi = 15 Northern = 6 Kafue = 6 Mongu = 16 North-western = 7 Kapiri Mposhi = 7 Mpika = 17 Southern = 8 Kasama = 8 Mpulungu = 18 Western = 9 Kitwe = 9 Siavonga = 19 Livingstone = I O Solwezi = 20 Other city: please specify GO TO SECTION E 83 FOR NON RESIDENTS I FOREIGNERS ONLY C. GENERAL INTERNATIONALTRIP INFORMATION 25 How many times in total have you visited Zambia (including this trip) in the last ten years? Circle one only. 1 (it is my first time) 1 2 2 3-5 3 II6-10 4 Over 10 II 5 II 26 Which countries in Sub-Saharan Africa have you ever visited? Circle the response, only once per row. Visited I Not visited 26.1 Angola 1 1 2 26.2 Botswana II 1 1 2 26.3 Kenya 1 2 26.4 Malawi 1 2 26.5 Mozambique 1 1 1 2 26.6 Namibia 1 2 26.7 South Africa 1 2 26.8 Tanzania 1 2 26.9 Uganda 1 1 1 2 26.10 Zimbabwe 1 2 Record number of days spent. 84 28 What is the main reason you came to visit Zambia? Circle the main one only. IIII I came for business reasons 1 I came for a conference 2 Iwanted to visit Victoria Falls 3 I am on a huntina trip IIII 4 IIII ~~ I came for an adventure trip (rafting, boating, bungijumping) 5 I came for a cultural trip (heritage sites, villages) 6 I came for viewing and photographing wildlife 7 Iwanted to visit friends or family 8 It was included in my packaged tour 9 It is close to where I live 10 It was recommended by friends/ relatives/ book 11 I I had a really good experience during my previoustrip I 12 I Other reason Pleasespecify: 29 From which country, province and city did you come into Zambia? This refers to the country, province and city you were before coming into Zambia. Exclude transit countries, provinces and cities 29.1 Record country I 29.2 Record province 29.3 Record city Country: Angola = I India = 10 Sweden = 19 Australia = 2 Italy = I 1 Tanzania = 20 Botswana = 3 Japan = 12 Uganda = 21 Canada = 4 Kenya = 13 UK = 22 China = 5 Malawi = 14 USA = 23 Denmark = 6 Mozambique == 16 15 Zimbabwe = 24 France = 7 Namibia Other country: Please specify Germany = 8 New Zealand = 17 Holland = 9 South Africa = 18 85 30 What is the principal mode of transport that you used to come into Zambia from this previous destination? Circle one only. Aeroplane 1 Car 2 Coach 3 Taxi 4 IF THE RESPONSE IS NOT 1 GO TO QUESTION 32 31 Which Airline did you fly with? Record the airline Airlines Air Malawi = 1 Ethiopian Airways = 5 Nationwide Airlines = 9 Air Zimbabwe = 2 InterAir = 6 Regional Air = IO British Airways = 3 Kenya Airways = 7 South African Airways = 11 Comair = 4 KLM = 8 Other airline: Please specify Lusaka Airport 1 LivingstoneAirport 2 Mfuwe Airport 3 Ndola Airport 4 Chirundu border 5 Nakonde 6 Mwami 7 IIKasumbalesa a Kariba / Siavonga II 9 IIKazungula 10 Katimamulilo II 11 lIII Other entry point Pleasespecify: 33 Is this visit to Zambia part of a packaged tour? Circle one only: I Yes 1I 1 I 2 I GOTOSECTIONE I 86 FOR NON RESIDENTSI FOREIGNERS ONLY D. INTERNATIONALPACKAGEDTOUR INFORMATION 34 From whom did you purchase your tour? 34.1 Record name 34.2 Record the name of the tour (if any) Price per person Price for the group Currency 35.1 35.2 35.3 Currency: Dollar = 1 Rand = 4 Yen = 6 Euro = 2 Kwacha = 5 Other currency: Please specify: Pound = 3 36 Which of these other items are included in the price of your tour? Circle the response, only one per row I If not Currency included Included Not included amount spent on 1 round trip ;;:& 1 36.1 International air fares (from 36.2 36.3 home to origin city of tour and 2 back) Transfers 2 Inland transportation 2 Accommodation 2 36.7 Breakfast I 1 2 36.8 Lunch 1 2 36.9 Dinner 1 2 36.10 Drinks 2 36.11 Parksentry fees 1 1 2 No 2 GO TO QUESTION 39 a7 38 How long did it take you to travel to Zambia from your home? Record the time spent in hours. I I GO TO QUESTION 45 Yes 1 GO TO QUESTION 41 No 2 40 How much did you spend in total on international airfare/travel cost between countries in the package tour? Record the amount I Record the currency Currency: Dollar = I Kwacha = 5 Euro = 2 Yen = 6 Pound = 3 Rand = 4 Other currency: Please specify 41 Is Zambia your first destination? Circle one only. Yes 1 No 2 GO TO QUESTION 43 42 How long did it take you to travel to Zambia from your home? Record the time spent in hours. GO TO QUESTION 45 43 From which country, province and city did you start your tour? 43.1 Record country 43.2 Record province I 43.3 Record city I I Country: Australia = I India == IO 9 Sweden = 17 Botswana = 2 Italy Tanzania = 18 Canada = 3 Japan = 11 Uganda = 19 China = 4 Kenya = 12 UK = 20 Denmark = 5 Malawi = 13 USA = 21 France = 6 Namibia = 14 Zimbabwe = 22 Germany = 7 New Zealand = 15 Other country; Please specify Holland = 8 South Africa = 16 88 44 Which countries are also included? Which are the specific tourism sites in these countries that are included in your packaged tour? Time spent to go Country Mode of to this country transportation from the previous Sites visited /to be visited country in hours 44.1 44.2 44.3 44.4 First country from home 44.5 44.6 44.7 44.8 44.9 144.10 1 44.11 44.12 44.13 44.14 44.15 44.16 44.17 44.18 44.19 44.20 Back to your count Country Mode of transport Botswana = I Tanzania = 6 Plane = I Kenya = 2 Uganda = 7 Car = 2 Malawi = 3 Zambia = 8 Coach = 3 Namibia = 4 Zimbabwe = 9 Taxi = 4 South Africa = 5 Other country: Please specify Other mode of transportation: Please specify: 45 How many days does your packaged tour last? Record total number of days( including days in other countries) I I The following questions are now only related to the Zambian part of your trip. 89 I Cur. cd d cd rd d d 1 m 2 0 2 d t m 7 2 Cur. cd Q) d Q CO m 7 2 2 d d 0 2 f- 2 d d s 7 N 7 cd d cd d d -0 f r- E 2 98 d 0 Q m cd d m cd d sh! 2d d m Cur. ; Q) m 7N CO m 2 0 2 f- 2 d d d m 2 d c a N r i7j ui 2 d d *; 0 E. NON INTERNATIONALPACKAGEDTOUR INFORMATION IF THE TOURIST IS A ZAMBIAN RESIDENTTHEN SKIP TO QUESTION 54 47 Will you visit ONLY Zambia during your trip? Circle one only. Yes 1 No 2 GO TO QUESTION 50 I 48 How long did it take you to travel to Zambia from your home? Record the time in hours. I I 49 How much did you pay per person and for the whole group for travelling into I Zambia?the I Record price per person IRecord the price for the group Record the currency I 49.1 I49.2 149.3 1 Yes 1 I No I 2 IGO TO QUESTION 51 I 50.a) Howlong did it take you to travel to Zambia from your home? Record the time spent in hours. GO TO QUESTION 53 51 From which country, province and city did you start your tour? 51.I Record country 51.2 I Record province 51.3 Record city I I Country: Australia = I India = 9 Sweden = 17 Botswana = 2 Italy = 10 Tanzania = 18 Canada = 3 Japan = I1 Uganda China = 4 Kenya = 12 UK ==== 19 20 Denmark = 5 Malawi USA 21 France = 6 Namibia == 13 14 Zimbabwe 22 Germany = 7 New Zealand == 16 15 Other country: Please specify Holland = 8 South Africa 92 52 Could you then provide me more details on your multicountry trip? Record the re jonses in order of visit Country Mode of transport- Time spent to Cost of the Cur. sites visited/to ation go to this transportatio be visited country from n from your your previous previous country in country hours 52.1 52.2 52.3 52.4 52.5 52.6 First country from home 52.7 52.8 52.9 52.10 52.11 52.12 52.13 52.14 52.15 52.16 52.17 52.18 52.19 52.20 52.21 52.22 52.23 52.24 52.25 52.26 52.27 52.28 52.29 Back to your I home country 52.30 52.31 52.32 52.33 Total time and cost Country Mode of transport Currency Botswana = I Plane = I Dollar = I Kenya = 2 Car = 2 Euro = 2 Malawi = 3 Coach = 3 Pound = 3 Namibia = 4 Taxi = 4 Rand = 4 SouthAfrica = 5 Other mode of transportation: Kwacha = 5 Tanzania = 6 Please specify: Yen = 6 Uganda = 7 Other currency: Zambia = 8 Please specify: Zimbabwe = 9 Other country: Pleasespecify 53 How long intotal will your multi-country trip last? Record number of days 93 54 Which of these sites in Zambia have you visited during this trip? Circle the response on the table below, only one per row. 55 Do you know what the entry price to the sites you visited is? Record the response on the table below. Response: I am not sure, it is ... I don't remember// don't know = 1 =2 Of course, I know if is... = 3 56 If yes could you give use the amount you paid Record the amount paid if given on the table below. Currency: Dollar = I Rand = 4 Euro = 2 Kwacha = 5 Pound = 3 Yen = 6 Other currency: Please specify Question 54 Question Response Question 56 57 Visited visited Not to 55 Amount Cur. Number of time 54.1 Livingstone I 55.1 56.1 56.2 57.1 Victoria Falls I 1 2 Mosi Oa Tunya 55.2 56.3 56.4 57.2 54.2 South Luangwa 1 2 54.3 Lower Zambezi I 55.3 56.5 56.6 57.3 94 58 Didyou buy an organizedtour for visiting sites in Zambia? Yes 1 I No 2 I GO TO QUESTION 61 Price per person Price for group Currency Sites covered 59.1 59.2 59.3 59.4 60 What was includedin your organizedtour? Circle the response 1 I Included Not I Travel to site 1 2 Accommodation 1 2 Breakfast 1 2 Lunch 1 2 Dinner 1 2 Drinks 1 2 Parks entry fees 1 2 Activities 1 2 95 I hl Cur. k 7 I; 7 (D (D In 0 7 k '? r r (D (D I Cur. 7 0 I S 43 (9 c hl -_ (D 7 (9 7 I 7 (D (D r Cur. (9 7 I % (D S 03 (D n! (D 7 n! b In t 0 (4 7 7 7 7 (D (D (D (D r 7 (D (D k n! In 0 7 (9 r - 7 (D co If 7 (D Cur n! d 7 7 7 (D (D (D 5m 4E Q) v! 7 gC (D '5 c a, Is 43 v) t v! c a, 7 t, (D - c 0 $ P I- I n! 0 n! 7 - 7 (D (D In a, v! CI - 7 7 i7j (D (D I I I I :s II I I I I I I P, L 8 3 \r 9) F. PERCEPTIONSABOUT NATIONALPARKS People who visit benefit directly (recreation, enjoyment, education, etc) 1 Peode who do not visit can benefit indirectlv (documentaries. books etc) 2 It ensures that we all have the option of visiting in the future 3 It is important for the sake of the animal and plant life, regardless of its current or future use 4 It is important for the local population (part of their culture and identity) 5 It is important for future generations 6 It contributes to the country economy through local livelihoods, employment, tourism, business, etc 7 63 Approximately how many wildlife parks have you visited in the last 5 years, anywhere in the world and in Sub-Saharan Africa? I I Record number of parks in Sub-Saharan Africa Record number of parks anywhere in the world 64 Approximately how many natural sites of outstanding beauty, excluding wildlife parks, have you visited in the last 5 years, anywhere in the world? Record number of sites 98 65 I am now going to read out a number of features of a visit to Zambian natural sites. Please rank them using a scale that ranges from 1 `very bad' to 5 = `very good', to classifythe quality of each of these features, according to the experience you had. I 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I Insert answer code from the scale. Site visited Livingstone Victoria Falls /Mosi Oa Tunya= 1 North Luangwa = 5 South Luangwa = 2 Nsumbu / Lake Tanganyika = 6 Lower Zambezinake Kariba = 3 Kasanka = 7 Kafue = 4 Other site visited: please specify 99 I 66 What features would you like to see improved or introduced? 1Record improvement or introduction ~~~~~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 Site visited Livingstone VictoriaFalls / North Luangwa = 5 Mosi Oa Tunya = I Nsumbu /Lake Tanganyika = 6 South Luangwa = 2 Kasanka = 7 Lower Zambezinake Kariba = 3 Other site visited: please specify Kafue = 4 67 Do you plan to visit Zambian natural sites again in the future? Circle one only. IIYes 1 No II 2 68 If the park(s) you visited had been closed to tourism this year and you had known this in advance, what would you have done instead? Circle one only: Visit other natural sites in Zambia 68.1 Please specify: 1 Visit other places (not natural sites) in Zambia 68.2 Please specify: 2 Visit other natural sites in other countries 68.3 Please specify: 3 Visit other places (not naturalsites) in other countries 68.4 Please specify: 4 I Stay at home I 5 I 100 G. VALUATION SECTION IF THE TOURIST HAS EVERVISITED LIVINGSTONE,THEN PROCEED IF NOT SKIP TO THE SOUTH LUANGWA NATIONAL PARK SUB SECTION LIVINGSTONESUB SECTION Identify and circle entry fee paid by Entry feelpersonlday Citizens Residents Non-residents Victoria Falls and Mosi Oa Tunya K 40,140 K 50,220 US$15 While staying in Livingstone, you can see the Victoria Falls, watch wildlife in Mosi Oa Tunya, and cruise at sunset on the Zambezi River. The current price charged to access this site is (see fable). I am going to ask you several questions related to how much this experience is worth to you. First imagine the following situation. While you were planning your trip to Livingstone you learned that the entry fee had increased. What is the maximum fee you personally would be prepared to pay to visit Livingstone (Show the payment card)? This is the amount above which you would choose not to visit this park at all. 69 Please do not agree to pay an amount that you cannot afford, that you are unsure about, or that you feel would be better spent in other things. Please also Iassume you would not change the duration of your visit. Record the fee Currency I Currency Dollar = I Euro = 2 Pound = 3 Rand = 4 Kwacha = 5 Other currency Pleasespecify: IF THE AMOUNT INDICATED IS MORE THAN THE CURRENT FEE: GO TO QUESTION 71 70 What are the main reasons why you are not willing to pay any more than the current fee to visit Livingstone? 101 Record the fee Currency Currency Dollar = I Euro = 2 Pound = 3 Rand = 4 Kwacha = 5 Other currency Pleasespecify: IF THE AMOUNT NDICATED IS MORE THAN THE PREVIOUS MAXIMUM WILLINGNESS TO PAY, GO TO NEXT PARK VISITED 72 What are the main reasons why you are not willing to pay any more to visit Livingstoneif the changesdescribed had been implemented? 102 SOUTH LUANGWA NATIONAL PARK SUB SECTION IF THE TOURIST HAS EVER VISITED SOUTH LUANGWA NATIONAL PARK,THENPROCEED IF NOT SKIP TO THE LOWER ZAMBEZI NATIONAL PARK SUB SECTION Identify and circle entry fee paid by IEntry feelpersonlday I Citizens I Residents I Non-residents I South Luangwa National Park K 25,020 K 31,320 US$20 The South Luangwa National Park is acknowledged as one of the greatest wildlife sanctuaries. The concentration of game there is among the most intense in Africa. Whilst staying in South Luangwa National Park, you can experience a walking safari, that allows you to get as close as possible to elephants, hippos or even lions. The current price charged to access this site is (see table). I am going to ask you several questions related to how much this experience is worth to you. First imagine the following situation. While you were planning your trip to South Luangwa National Park you learned that the entry fee had increased. What would be the maximum fee you personally are prepared to pay to visit South Luangwa National Park (Show the payment card)? This is the amount above which you would choose not to visit this park at all. 73 Please do not agree to pay an amount that you cannot afford, that you are unsure about, or that you feel would be better spent in other things. Please also assume you would not change the duration of your visit. IRecord the fee Currency Currency Dollar = I Euro = 2 Pound = 3 Rand = 4 Kwacha = 5 Other = 6 1.l.cPlease specify: IF THE AMOUNT INDICATED IS MORE THAN THE CURRENT FEE: GO TO QUESTION 75 74 What are the main reasons why you are not willing to pay any more than the current fee to visit South Luangwa National Park? 103 Record the fee Currency 1 Currency Dollar = I Euro = 2 Pound = 3 Rand = 4 Kwacha = 5 Other = 6 1.3.c Please specify: IF THE AMOUNT INDICATED IS MORE THAN THE PREVIOUS MAXIMUM WILLINGNESS TO PAY, GO TO NEXT PARK VISITED 76 What are the main reasons why you are not willing to pay any more to visit South Luangwa National Park if the changes described had been implemented? 104 LOWERZAMBEZI NATIONAL PARK SUB SECTION IF THE TOURIST HAS EVERVISITED LOWER ZAMBEZI NATIONAL PARK, THEN PROCEED IF NOT SKIP TO THE KAFUE NATIONAL PARK SUB SECTION Identify and circle entry fee paid by I Entryfeelpersonlday I Citizens 1 Residents I Non-residents I I Lower Zambezi NationalPark I K25,020 K I K31,320 I US$20 I The Lower Zambezi National Park is one of the most spectacular park in Africa where you can get close to game that wanders around. You can see enormous herds of elephants, lions and leopards amongst a profusion of birdlife. The current price charged to access this site is (see table). I am now going to ask you several questions related to how much this experience is worth to you. First imagine the following situation. While you were planning your trip to Lower Zambezi National Park you learned that the entry fee had increased. What would be the maximum fee you personally are prepared to pay to visit Lower Zambezi National Park (Show the payment card)? This is the amount above which you would choose not to visit this park at all. Please do not agree to pay an amount that you cannot afford, that you are unsure about, or that you feel would be better spent in other things. Please also assume you would not change the duration of your visit. 77 Please assume you would not change the duration of your visit. Please do not agree to pay an amount that you cannot afford, that you are unsure about, or that you feel would be better spent in other things. Record the fee Currency IF THE AMOUNT INDICATEDIS MORE THAN THE CURRENT FEE: GO TO QUESTION79 78 What are the main reasons why you are not willing to pay any more than the current fee to visit Lower Zambezi National Park? 105 79 Now imagine another situation. There have been proposals to improve the quality of the visit to Lower Zambezi National Park for tourists and raise more revenue for natural resources management. These include: i) Road improvement (show the pictures) and increase in the number of lodges. ii) Increasing the abundance of animals in Lower Zambezi National Park; The visitors will be then sure to see elephants, zebras, giraffes, antelopes and monkeys during each visit they make. The number of big cats will also be increased, so that people can expect to see at least one of them during a week stay. Record the fee Currency Currency Dollar = I Euro = 2 Pound = 3 Rand = 4 Kwacha = 5 Other = 6 I.3.c Please specify: IF THE AMOUNT INDICATED IS MORE THAN THE PREVIOUS MAXIMUM WILLINGNESS TO PAY, GO TO NEXT PARK VISITED 80 What are the main reasons why you are not willing to pay any more to visit Lower Zambezi National Park if the changes described had been implemented? 106 KAFUE NATIONAL PARK SUB SECTION IF THE TOURIST HAS EVER VISITED KAFUE NATIONAL PARK,THEN PROCEED IF NOT SKIP TO QUESTION 90 Identry and circle entry fee paid by IIEntry feelpersonlday Citizens Residents Non-residents Lower Zambezi National Park II K20,160 1I K25,200 II US$15 II The Kafue National Park is the second largest national park in the world, and about the size of Wales. You have seen really rare antelopes like Sable and Roan, you did probably photograph zebras, thousand of red Lechwes. The wealth of game on the plains is also a big attraction for predators, leopards, cheetahs and up to 20 lions. The current price charged to access this site is (see table). I am now going to ask you several questions related to how much this experience is worth to you. 81 First imagine the following situation. While you were planning your trip to Kafue National Park you learned that the entry fee had increased. What would be the maximum fee you personally are prepared to pay to visit Kafue National Park (Show the payment card)? This is the amount above which you would choose not to visit this park at all. Please do not agree to pay an amount that you cannot afford, that you are unsure about, or that you feel would be better spent in other things. Please also assume you would not change the duration of your visit. Record the fee Currency IF THE AMOUNT INDICATED IS MORE THAN THE CURRENT FEE: GO TO QUESTION 83 82 What are the main reasons why you are not willing to pay any more than the current fee to visit Kafue National Park? 107 83 Now imagine another situation. There have been proposals to improve the quality of the visit to Kafue National Park for tourists and raise more revenue for natural resources management. These include: i) Improve the accommodation supply with more bush camps ii) Open new areas for tourist visit that will allow you see different landscapes and more wildlife. What would be the maximum fee you personally are prepared to pay to visit Kafue National Park in this case? (Showpayment card). Please assume you would not change the duration of your visit. Please do not agree to pay an amount that you cannot afford, that you are unsure about, or that you feel would be better spent in other things. Record the fee Currency Currency Dollar = I Euro = 2 Pound = 3 Rand = 4 Kwacha = 5 Other = 6 I.3.c Please specify: IF THE AMOUNT INDICATED IS MORE THAN THE PREVIOUS MAXIMUM WILLINGNESS TO PAY, GO TO QUESTION 85 84 What are the main reasons why you are not willing to pay any more to visit Kafue National Park if the changes described had been implemented? 108 Record the fee Currency Currency Dollar = I Rand = 4 Yen = 6 Euro = 2 Kwacha = 5 Other currency: Pound = 3 Pleasespecify IF THE AMOUNT INDICATEDIS NOT ZERO GO TO SECTION H 86 What are the main reasons why you are not willing to pay for the re-stocking and re-openingof 3 additional national parks? GO TO SECTION H 109 FOR RESIDENT ONLY: 87 Finally, consider a third situation. In Zambia, tourists mainly visit three nature- based sites Livingstone, South Luangwa, Lower Zambezi. Suppose that the government is considering doubling the number of such tourism sites by also equipping Kafue National Park, Kasanka and Lake Tanganyika. This will imply re- stocking some of the wildlife that has been lost to poaching in these sites and providing adequate tourist facilities. The additional sites have some distinguishing features. Kafue will be the largest wildlife area in Africa. Kasanka will provide tremendous bird watching opportunities and Lake Tanganyika is the deepest lake in the world and harbour a huge crocodile population, some of them are reaching more than 6 meters length. These sites will provide different attractions and experiences not found in Livingstone, South Luangwa, or Lower Zambezi. If this project takes place, it would then increase the choice of natural destinations for tourists in Zambia. While part of the expenses would be funded by international donor organizations, it is most likely that funds would still have to be raised in the country. One option would be to raise an additional tax to be added on the electricity bill (just like the National Broadcasting tax). What is the maximum conservation tax you personally would be prepared to pay in order to have the option of visiting these three additional sites? (Show payment card) Please do not agree to pay an amount that you cannot afford, that you are unsure about, or that you feel would be better spent in other things. Record the fee Currency Dollar = I Rand = 4 Yen = 6 Euro = 2 Kwacha = 5 Other currency: Pound = 3 Please specify IF THE AMOUNT INDICATED IS NOT ZERO GO TO SECTION H 88 What are the main reasons why you are not willing to pay for the re-stocking and re-opening of 3 additional national parks? 110 H. MISCELLANEOUSQUESTIONS Finally, these are the last few questions. 89 What will you remember most vividly about your visit to Zambian natural sites? This might be a good or a bad thing! Recordmemory 90 Last of all, what did you think of this questionnaire7 Circle allthat apply: Ilnterestina I 1 ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ Too long 2 Difficultto understand 3 Educational 4 Unrealistic/not credible 5 111 INTERVIEWERDECLARATION (SIGN EACH QUESTIONNAIRE) Date: This interviewwas conductedface to face with a respondentwho is unknownto me Pleaseprint your name: Signature: 112 ANNEX 2 GMA HOUSEHOLDQUESTIONNAIRE u REPUBLIC OF ZAMBIA QUESTIONNAIRE NO: CENTRAL STATISTICAL OFFICE OF P.O. BOX31908, LUSAKA,ZAMBIA TEL Nos. 251377/251370/253609/251385/253908/ ~5346a/t56520 FAX Nos. 253609/250195/253468/253908/256520 email: Info @Zamstats.gov.zm Website: www.zamstats.gov.zm IMPACT OFGAME MANAGEMENT AREAS ON HOUSEHOLD WELFARE SURVEY WII. " . w CODENUMBER 1. PROVINCENAME 0 2. DISTRICTNAME un 3. CONSTITUENCYNAME 4. WARD NAME m 5. CSA NUMBER m 6. SEA NUMBER 0 7. STRATUM 1. Prime 2. Secondary 3. Specialised 4. Under stocked 5. NonGMA 0 8. NEARESTNATIONAL PARK 1. Bangweulu(Kasanka, Lavushi, Isangano) 2. Kafue (Kafue, Blue lagoon, 0 Lockinvar) 3, LowerZambezi 4. Luangwa System 9. HOUSEHOLDNUMBER (HHN) Originally selected un Name of Head........................................................................................ 10. VILLAGE NAME 11. HOUSEHOLDSELECTIONSTATUS: 1. Originally selected household>> 14 2. Replacementhousehold cl 12. IF REPLACEMENTHOUSEHOLD, REASON FOR REPLACING: 1.Refusal 2. Non-contact 3. Householdmovedout 4. Others specifV 13. HOUSEHOLDNUMBER (Replacementhousehold) Nameof Head........................................................................................ 14.NAME OF MAlN RESPONDENT SERIALNUMBER FROM .......................................................................... m HOUSEHOLD ROSTER m 15.TOTAL NUMBER OF PERSONS WHO LIVE INTHIS HOUSEHOLD (INCLUDE USUAL MEMBERS mmm ABSENT) 16. ENUMERATOR'S NAME............................................ DATE OF INrERVIEW 17. SUPERVISOR'S NAME................................................ DATE OF CHECKING mmm INTRODUCTION: Iwould like to start the interviewby askingyou questions about yourself and other usual membersof the household 1 2 3 SERIAL Please give me the names of all persons who usually live with this How old is.......,.now? NUMBEROF household.Start with the headof the householdand excludevisitors. HOUSEHOLD Include usual members, who are away visiting, in hospital, at boarding RECORDAGE IN COMPLETEDYEARS. MEMBER (PID) IF LESSTHAN 1YEAR. RECORD00 schools or collegeor universityetc. Also include visitors who have lived I m m with the householdfor six months or more. AGE m m a m m m I m m m m m m m m U l m m m D m m m D m m m m 114 5 What is the relationship of ...,..to the head of the I s..............male or FORTHOSE AGED 12 YEARS AND FOR THOSE AGED 5 YEARS AND household? female? ABOVEONLY ABOVE ONLY HEAD 01 SPOUSE....................................... 02 What is the marital status o f ........? What was the highestgrade.....attained? OWNCHILD.................................. 03 MALE...,. .., 1 . ... NEVER MARRIED................ I [REFERTO THE CODES AT THE FEMALE........2 MARRIED..................... 2 ENDOFTHE QUESTlONNAIREl PID GRANDCHILD............................... 05 SEPARATED........................ 3 BROTHER/SISTER.......................... 06 DIVORCED.......................... 4 NIECEMEPHEW............................. 07 WIDOWED.......................... 5 BROTHEWSISTER-INLAW............... 08 PARENT 09 PARENT-IN-LAW ...........................10 OTHER RELATIVE..........................11 MAIDMANNYiHOUSE-SERVANT.,. 12 .. NON-RELATIVE............................ 13 D o mj m 0 0 m m 0 0 m ml m 0 0 m m 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 m m 0 0 m m 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 115 ... . 3 SECTfON2:ECONOMICACT M T Y FORALLPERSONSACED5YEARSANDABOVE - I.. i . i . i - 3 INTRODUC'I )N: Iam now going to ask about the economic activify itus of some members of the ho PID What is.........& economic (activity)status? Who is .,.,..,.,, mainemployer? To what does .......'s mainemployer/ businessrelate most? [ENTER MOST IMPORTANT ONLY] INWAGE EMPLOYMENT ............................ 01 SELF EMPLOYED .................. 01 COMMUNITY CAMPSITES ................................ 01 RUNNING A BUSINESSiSELFEMPLOYED......02 ZAWA ...02 PRIVATE LODGES AND CAMPS FARMING ................................................. 03 CENTRAL GOVT (OTHER THAN LICENSED GAME HUNTING ..,., FISHING................................................... 04 ZAWA)................................ 03 UNLICENSED GAME HUNTING ......................... 04 CRB ................................... .04 SAFARI HUNTNG.............................. os PIECEWORK........................................... ..06 VAG.................................... OS PHOTO SAFARI ............................................. 06 UNPAID FAMILY WORKER 07 LOCAL GOVT ...................... 06 RECREATIONAL FISHING NOT WORKING BUT LOOKING FOR W O W PARASTATAL ..................... 07 NONRECREATIONAL FISH MEANS TO DO BUSINESS ........................... OS PRIVATE SECTOR NON TOURISM LIVE GAME SALE ........................................... 09 NOT WORKING AND NOT LOOKING FOR W O W ......................................... .08 CRAFT PRODUCTION ....................................... I O MEANS TO DO BUSINESSBUT AVAILABLE OR PRIVATE SECTOR TOURISM .09 CULTURAL ENTERTAINMENT. WISHING TO DO SO.................................. 09 NGO ................................. I O TIMBER/ POLE COLLECTING.. FULL TIME STUDENT............................ ..IO Q 4 PRIVATE HOUSEHOLD .........I1 FUELWOOD COLLECTING ..,.. RETIRED................................................. I1 OTHER(PEC1FY) ..................I2 CHARCOAL MAKING ....................................... I 4 TOO OLDIYOUNG TO WORK..................... ...I2 WILD HONEY COLLECTING .............................. I S OTHER (SPECIFY)..................................... 13 GATHERING ANTS AND CATERPILLERS .............16 OTHER TOURISM /WILDLIFE / FOREST RELATED (SPECIFY) ........................... 17 BREWING BEEWNON-ALCOHOLIC DRINKS FOR SALE .............................. 18 CARPENTRY................................................... 19 BAKING .......................... 20 rr ANY OTHERACTIVITY (SPECIFY) ........21 mm rn mm rn r rn m m U m m rnmn rn rn m m U m m mrn U rn m m U rn rn mm m rn mm r-r m rn U m m U l rn rr U U l m m m U U 116 PID s.... engaged in nny/other income who is...........s otheremployer? To what does ..,., .'s other employer/ businessrelate , :eneratingactivity? most? SELF EMPLOYED ......................................... 01 [ENTERMOST IMPORTANT ONLV] YES........I ZAWA ....................................................... 02 VO.........2 >>NEXT SECTION CENTRAL GOVT COMMUNITY CAMPSITES ......................... 01 (OTHER THAN ZAWA). ............................ 03 PRIVATE LODGES AND CAMPS .................02 CRB ....................................................... 04 LICENSED GAME HUNTING ...................... 03 UNLISENSIED GAME HUNTING .................. 04 SAFARI HUNTNG................................... 05 PARASTATAL ........................................... 07 PHOTO SAFARI ..................................... 06 PRIVATE SECTORNON TOURISM ................ 08 RECREATIONAL FISHING ........................ 07 PRIVATE SECTORTOURISM....................... 09 NONRECREATIONAL FISHING.............. 08 N M....................................................... I O LIVE GAME SALE .................................... 09 PRIVATEHOUSEHOLD II CRAFT PRODUCTION OTHER SPECIFY) ....................................... I2 CULTURAL ENTERTAINMENT ...................II FUELWOOD COLLECTING ........................ 13 CHARCOAL MAKING ............................... 14 WILD HONEY COLLECTING ..................... ..I5 GATHERING ANTS AND CATERPILLERS ......16 OTHER TOURISM / WILDLIFE / FOREST RELATED (SPECIFY) .............................................. 17 BREWING BEERMON-ALCOHOLIC DRINKS FOR SALE ..................................................... 18 CARPENTRY............................................ I9 BAKING .................................................. 20 ANY OTHER ACTIVITY m m m JSPECIFY)............................................... 21 m 0 o m m m m U l m m m m m 0 m m 0 m m m m 0 m m 0 m m m m m m rn m 0 m m rn m m 0 mm 0 rn 117 SECTION3: INCOMEFORALL PERSONSAGED5 YEARSAND ABOVE {Cont'd)" Iamnowgoing toaskforeachmemberofthehouseholdabouttheirincomeearnedindividually,Howmuchincomedid ..........receivefrom the N KWACHA1 1, Non farm main business in the last one 2. Non farm other businesses, in the last 3. How much is ..... regular gross monthly , month? one month? salary/wageincluding regular allowancessuch as housingandtransport allowances,regular overtime, retention allowance, from the main I18 PID 4. How much non regular allowances did 5. How much i s .......'s regular gross 6. How much non regular allowances did . .. t . ...... receive, overtime payments, monthly salary/wageincludingregular receive , overtime payments, subsistence subsistence allowances, bonuses, etc from allowancessuch as housingand transport allowances,bonuses, etc from the secondjob in mainjob in the last I month? allowances, regular overtime, retention the last 1 month? allowance, from the second.job? 119 SECTION3: INCOMEFQ ' 3 8 7. How much income in-kind did.,.. receive 8. How much rent did.,... receive per 9. How much remittances did ....,. receivelast per month e.g.bags of mealie meal, month from houses,other buildings,non- month? charcoal,etc from the job/s? agric equipmentand non-agriculturalland he/sheowns? [RECORDONLY FORTHE PERSONWHO [CONVERTTO KWACHA ACTUALLY RECEIVEDIT] .m m .m m ,m m m m m m m m m m m 120 .j .,.;:: :i). . . . . , . . ; .- .*, . ON3: MCOMEFORA UPERSONSAGED5 YEARS Ap PID 10. How much did .....receiveas pension 1 1 . How much in gifvgrants did.... receive 12. How much income did .....receive from any payment per month? per month (bothcash and in-kind) other sourceslast month? ICONVERT IN-KIND TO CASH] [PLEASESPECIFY1 m m ..................................................................... 1111111111 m ..................................................................... m ..................................................................... LImmmn a ..................................................................... m ..................................................................... 1111111111 a a a ..................................................................... m m a ..................................................................... EImmmn m ..................................................................... l z l n a n n m 1111111111 m 121 s m m r t3: INicomFORm,P E w mAGED5 YEAMmABOVE ~ C L U DA~ G R ~ c u L ~ G INCOME , . 16. Didany memberofthis householdsellany crop fromownproductioninpast 12months? Yes ...1 No ....2>>NextPaae 0 17 How much incomedid all members of your household (combined) receive in the last 12 monthsfrom sale of own produced........? FOOD CROPS AMOUNT INWORDS (KWACHA) AMOUNT IN FIGURES(KWACHA) I 1 Hybrid Maize I I I 2 LocalMaize I I I 3 Cassava I I 4 Groundnuts I I , 5 Rice I I 6 Millet I I 7 Sorghum ! I 8 Beans I I I II I I I I I I I I I 9 Soyabeans I I 10 Sweet Potatoes I I 11 Irish Potatoes I I I 12 Vegetables 1 13 Other Food I Crops I NON-FOOD AMOUNT INWORDS (KWACHA) AMOUNT INFIGURES(KWACHA) I I . 14 Cotton I I 15 Tobacco I I I ,I I I I I I I I I I 16 Sunflower I I 17 Paprika I Other non-food I 18 crops 122 18 Did any memberofthis household own........inthe last 12months? Yes ....lNo .....2>>NextLivestock/ Poultry LIVESTOCK NUMBER NUMBER INCOME FROMLIVE SALES NUMBER INCOME FROM SLAUGHTER Yes.....1 No 2 .... CONSUMED SOLD LIVE IMKWACHA] SLAUGHTERED SALES IMKWACHA] I 19I POULTRY I NUMBERCONSUMED I NUMBER SOLD I INCOME FROMSALES I 1 Chicken n u n nEImIaII , 2 Guineafowls 3 Ducks and geese n u n UmIn LIImnn 4 Turkeys n u n uIIIn E I I m n n 123 INTRODUCTION: Iam now going to ask you questionsabout whether or notyour household owns the following items IDoesh shouseholdown 2 How many 3 Ifyou were to sell all the (s) today, how any now? does this household much would you get? ASSETS I YES O w n 7 2 NO>>NEXT m E I a I m B E T IADD VA-N 11 m I Plough 0 2 Crop sprayer I I I I 3 Boat 14 Cellular phone (active) U I S Sewing machine 16 Scotchcart I I 124 any......now? the household own? today, how much would you get? I....YES 2. ...NO 22NEXT )DUCTION: Iam now going to ask vou about Your :urrent and previous residence status OUESTlON CATEGORYAND CODE CODE Where was your householdresiding 5 years ago? SAME DWELLING ............................ 1 DIFFERENTDWELLING, SAME LOCALITY/SAME DISTRICT............... 2 DIFFERENT LOCALITYiSAME DISTRICT........................................ .3 DIFFERENT DISTRICT SAME PROVMCE.................................... 4 DIFFERENT PROVINCE .................... S DIFFERENTCOLTNTRY..................... 6 NEW HOUSEHOLD.......................... 7 125 !SErnION6 HOUSEHOL; 1 What kind of building materialsidare the ......of (A) ROOF the maindwelling madeof? [IFA MULTI- ASBESTOS SHEETS I TILES 2 STOREYKINIT BUILDING RECORD IRON SHEETS 3 BUILDING MATERIALS OF THE OUTER GRASSiSTRAWfTHATCH 4 I ROOF (ROOF TOP) AND OUTER WALL]. C0NCRETE 5 OTHER6PEClFY) .... , . ~.....6, (e) WALLS PAN BRICK 01 BURNT BRICK 02 MUDBRICK 03 CONCRETE BRICK 04 CONCRETE BLOCK 05 CONCRETE 06 m POLE 07 POLE & DAGGA 08 m 09 GRASWSTRAW I O IRON SHEETS II ASBESTOS SHEETS 12 HARDBOARD 13 A MIXTURE OF HARDBOARD, TIN SHEET, PLASTIC, ETC - 14 QTtlF;BLSPECIFW ....................., I 5 2. a) What is the mainsource of drinking water for DIRECTLY FROM THE RIVEW WET SEASON this householdduringthe wet season? LAKEISTREAMIDAM I UNPROTECTED WELL 2 0 P W E D (PIPED) FROM THE b) What is the mainsource of drinking water for R I v E R n m A M 3 DRY SEASON this householdduringthe dry season? PROTECTED WELL 4 BOREHOLE 5 0 TAP 6 BOTTLED MINERALWATER 7 QTHER(SPEC1FY) , . . , . 8 3. HOW far IS this source of drinking water duringthe season? Wet Season [IFLESSTHAN ONE KILOMETRE ENTER Dry Season 4 HOWis water treatedby the householdduringthe Boil 1 Wet Season ......... season? Add chlorine 2 0 Other treatment 3 DrySeason Don't treat 4 0 5. What is the main type of energy used for lighting in KEROSINEiPWFIN 1 your household? ELECTRICITY 2 CANDLE 3 DIESEL 4 OPEN FIRE 5 TORCH 6 SOLAR PANEL 1 OTHER (SPECIFY) 8 NONE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 ~ m 6. What is the main type of energy that your 2OLLECTED FIREWOOD 01 KEROSINEPARAFFIN 06 householduses for cooking? 'URCHASED FIREWOOD 02 GAS 07 ZHARCOAL OWN PRODUCED 03 ELECTRICITY 08 2HARCOAL PURCHASED 04 CROP/LIVESTOCK RESIDUES 09 :0AL 05 OTHER (SPECIFY) I O 7 What is the main type of toilet facility for this FLUSHTOILET I household? ORDINARY PIT LATRINE 2 VIP PIT LATRINE 3 0 N O N E . 4 126 INTRODUCTION: Iam now g ng to ask YOU questions about distances to various facilities I 2 Doyou know How far is it to the nearest..............? where the nearest [READOUT FACILITIES] .,..is located7 IF DISTANCEMORE THAN IKILOMETER GIVE DISTANCE m KM. YES.. 1 IFLESSTHANA KILOMETRE ENTERIN DECIMAL N0..2>>next IF MORETHAN 90 KMENTER 90.0 IFDON'T KNOW PROBE USINGTIME TO WALK @ facility Skmh 1.1 Food Market 0 1.2 PostOfticeipostal agency 1.3 Community School - n -I.4 Lower Basic School (I- 4) n I S Middle Basic School(I- 7) n 0 1.6 Basic School(1 - 9) 1.7 Secondary school - 0 1.8 HighSchool 0 1.9 Health Facility (Health - centericlinicihospital) 0 1.10 Hammer mill n U 0 1 . 1 1 Input market (for seeds, fertilizer, agricultural - implements) 1.12 Police statiodpost 1.13 Bank 1.14 Public aansport (road, or rail, 0 - or water transport) 1.15 Public Phone 1.16 ZAWA oftices - 1.17 Tarred Road 0 1.18 All weather motorable road 0 1.19 Agriculture Extension D U Ofticer 0 1.20 Community ResourceBoard 0 127 NO. QUESTION CATEGORY CODE 1 Hasany member ofthis householdbeenemployedas village scout by CRB? Yes....I No.....2 0 2 Hasany member ofthis householdbeenemployedas village scout by Yes....1 ZAWA? No.....2 0 3 Hasany member ofthis householdbeenemployedas Labourerby CRB? Yes....1 No.....2 0 4 Hasany member ofthis householdbeenemployedas Labourerby ZAWA? Yes....1 No.....2 0 5. Is any 6. How long 7. Is this 8. How muchdid member(s) 9. Did the 10. How much incomedid this person(s) receivefrom member of has this person(s) pay as fees for this club in last household the ........ during the last 12 months? this person@) paid up 12 months? receive any member(s) householda been a ? income GROUPSKLU member of memberof from ... BS the.....? ,.....7 YES .......l duringthe MMONTHS NO.,, .2 ..,, last 12 YES I >> months? NO 2>> Que NEXT 9 CLUBiGROUP Yes. ....1 No......2 >>Next Club I.Farmers 0 un0 Group L I I 1 I I I I ' I 0 2. Fishery 0 uno Group 3. Bee Keeper's 0 un0 Group 4. Women's 0 u n0 Club 5. CreditGroup 0 un0 6. Hammer Mill 0 un0 Club 7. AIDS awareness 0 un0 Group 128 129 IUCTION:Iam 9. How often do you get invitations to attend ...... general meetings? Once a 01 Twice a 7.Does year 02 Threetimes a any year 03 member of Four times e this a. DO YOU year 04 IO. Did you or 6. Did any household know if the Every 2 anyone 1. Have you ever 5, Do member of belong to , ,, ,,,leaders months OS else from this heard o f the., ,, in 2. Is any 4. Do YOU this @JY call for Every household your area? member o f YOU know If household elected general month 06 attend the this know the the vote in the body or meetings Every general Yes...l household a name ....leade last election committee where all the week 07 meeting No 2>> Next ... member of of..... r was for that households When m needed 08 inthe last Item the.. ......? leader? elected ? the.. ..leader represent are invited? Irregularly 12 months? ? the......? 09 IFCRB-2 GO Yes ....1 Yes ....l ....l Yes Yes ....I Never TO No .....2>> No ......2 No ......2 Yes ....1 Yes....1 No......2 >> I O Yes.. ..1 00 m NEXT SECT MONTHS No ......2 No ......2 011 VAG - 0 0 o 0 CRB 0 0 o o l o m 0 __ ~ YES....1 II In the last three years, has the CRB implementedany developmental activitiesin NO....2 >>Q 13 YES.,..1 12. Has this benefitedyour householdinanyway? NO....2 YES....I 13. Inthe last threeyears, hasthe CRB formed any ClubsI Trusts/ Groups inthis NO....2 >>Q 15 0 YES., 1 .. 14. Has this benefitedyour householdinanyway? NO....2 YES....1 15. Do you h o w if in the lastthree years the CRB has received any funds from NO....2 >> Next sect 0 Do you think the amount of funds the CRB gets from ZAWA is relatedin some YES..................1 16. way to the number of Game found in this GMA? NO...................2 DON'T KNOW.....3 Do you think the amount of funds the CRB gets from ZAWA is relatedin some YES.. ................1 17 way to the number of tourists comingto this GMA? 0 DON'T KNOW.....3 NO...................2 YES....I 18. Do you believethe CRB spends the funds in away that benefits this household? NO....2 130 YES...I I. DoesanymemberofthishouseholduseanylandinsidetheGMA? NO....2 >> Q7 YES. ...I 2. Are you aware of any land use restrictions within the GMA? NO....2 -46 YES....1 3. Do these restrictions stop you from usingthe landthe way you want to? NO....2 YES.. ..I 4. Do these restrictions stop you from usingenough land for the needof this household? NO....2 0 - YES.. ..I 5. Doyou find these restrictions beneficialto you? NO....2 Comparedto threeyears ago, does this householduse more, the same, or less More.,...........l N/A.,...........4 6. land within GMA now? I Same ...............2 I U Comparedto three years ago, does this householduse more, the same, or less More.,........... 1 N/A.............4 7. landoutside GMA now? Same ...............2 l o YES....I 8. Does your householdfind it advantageousto live in or near GMA? NO.,..2>> Q 10 0 9. Ifyes, tell methe mostimportantadvantage/ benefit for your householdto liveinor nearGMA.... 2..,.Job opportunities 0 3.. .. Availability of game meat, honey, fruits, etc 4....Other (Specify) YES....I I O . Are there any disadvantages to living in or near GMA? NO....2>>Nextsect Ifyes, tell methe mostimportantdisadvantagefor your householdto livein or near GMA.... 1.., Restrictionsto land use ,. 11. 2.....Destructionof crops/livestock by wild animals 0 3..,.. Markets/schools/clinicsetc, too far 4. ....Other (Specify)................................................................................................... I 131 Did any member of this householdgrow any crops in the agriculture (2004/5) season? I YES.....I I PRODUCTION 2. Did any 3 . Area under crop? 4. Whatquantityof .....did 5. What quantity of.. .... did 6. How much was realised member of this all the members of the the householdsell? from the sell of.. .? ... household grow LIMA....................... 1 householdharvest? any.,.... during ACRE....................... 2 CODES FORTHE UNIT CODESFOR THE UNIT CROPS the agriculture HECTARE.................3 KG....................... 1 KG....................... 1 (2004/05) 20 Ltr TIN..............2 20 LtrTIN..............2 season? 25KG Bag..............3 25KG Bag..............3 YES ..I 50KG Bag..............4 50KG Bag..............4 NO...Z-aext 90KGBag..............5 90KG Bag..............5 [TOTALVALUE IN crop KWACHA] UNIT AREA UNIT QUANTITY UNIT QUANTITY 0 1.Local Maize 2, Hybrid Maize 3. Cassava (flour) 0 4 Millet (Threshed) 0 5. Sorghum 0 6. Rice (Paddy) 0 1.Mixed beans 0 8. Soyabeans 0 9. Sweet Potatoes 7 n n 0 10. Irish Potatoes 7 m o 11 Groundnuts (Shelled) 0 12. Cotton 0 13. Tobacco 0 14. Sunflower 7uInn 0 15. Paprika 7uIno 0 16. Hoticultural 132 2. Schooluniforms including shoes, socks, ties, materialsfor makinguniforms CLOTHINGAND FOOTWEAR 2 How much was spent on.,,.duringthe last 12 months? IEXCLLJDINGSCHOOL UNIFORM1 I.Chitenges...................... ................ ...... 2. Clothing................................................................................. 3. Fabrdmaterial.......................................................................... 4. Tailoring charges.,............................................................ 5. Footwear (shoes, sandals, slippers, patapata, sofias, etc).. ........................ 3. BEDDING 1. Blankets.................................................................................. _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2. Bed sheets............................................................................... 3. Pillows.................................................................................. I33 How much was spent on ........duringthe last one month [AMOUNTINKWACHA] [AMOUNT INKWACHA] I clnmIl and during the last 3 months? Last one month Last3 months 1. Medicines...................................................... K[1777777 2. Fees to Doctor / HealthAssistant/ Midwife /Nurse / Dentist, etc............. 3. Fees to Traditionalhealer....................................... 4. Payment to hospitalhealthcentre/surgery How much was spent on ........duringthe last one month [AMOUNT INKWACHA] [AMOUNT INKWACHA] and duringthe last 3 months? Last one month 1.Rent............................................................... 2. Water............................................................ 3,Electricity......................................................... 4. Candles.................................... 5. Paraffin.................................... 1 6. Diesel (for lightingand cooking only).,.,., , ,,,.,,,,,,, 7. Charcoal.................................................. QUANTITY m. Q U A N T I T Y m .0 [SO KG BAG] K LlmIIn 8. Firewood...................................................... K UImIIl 9. Home repairs (plumbing, painting, etc)..................... I O . Telephone...................................................... 1I.Cable/pay TV (DSTV, CASAT, MNET, SATELITE, ZNBC) etc. How much own aroducedcharcoaldid you consume ....... [SO KG BAG] QUANTITY 171. 0 K 11111111 How much own uroducedfirewooddid you consume ...... n How much was spent on cash remittancesduringthe last one month and duringthe last 3 months? 134 9. What is the cash value of remittancespaid in-kind in the last 4MOUNT INKWACHA AMOUNT MKWACHA one month and duringthe last 3 months? Last one month Last 3 months K 10. During the .,..,how much was spent on public transport: , 1..To and from work 2.. To and from school including boarding school and abroad 3... Other transport expenses (to church, to visit. etc) 11. And how much was spent on .......for personal transport duringthe last one month and duringthe last 3 months? I...Petrol/diesel/oil.......................................... 2. ... Vehicle maintenanceand repairs........................ 3.... Motorbike repairs (tyres, tubes, oil, etc).................. 4.... Bicycle repairs(tyres, tubes, solution, etc)............... 5. ... Boat/ canoe repairs........................................ 12. How muchwas spent ........ duringthe last one month and duringthe last 3 months? 1. Toiletries(Wash soap, bathsoap, toothpaste, tissues, shampoos, Vaseline, sanitary towels, cotton wool, etc.) 2. Cosmetics(lotions, complexion creams, make-up, glycerine, etc................................................ 3. Hair dressing(Perming, shampooing, conditioning, braiding, hair cuts, etc........ 4. Laundry service (Dry cleaning, etc)............................................ 5. Entertainment,excluding drinking alcohol only (Cinema, video hire, disco, watching soccer, etc). ................ 6. Cobra/ polish, brooms, mutton cloths, cleaningagents e.g. Ajax, floor cleaners, dishwashingsoap, etc........ 7. Batteriesfor radio, torches, watches, etc.. .................... 8. Stamps, parcel post, envelopes, writing pads, etc............ 135 - __I_-- ____I SECTION 12: IlOUSEHOI,D EXPENDITURE(CONT'D) tuldliketo Eadout ebout how much t&r housebold oxnt on food and how much was ronsumcd 13 How much was spent on .............duringthe last one month? 1 . Breakfastmealie meal 2 Roller mealie meal K l . I u E l 3. Hammermilledmealiemeal 4.- Maize grain.................................................... 5 Grindingcxpcnses 14. How much was spent on 15. How much .....was 16. How much .....was cash purchases on ......inthe consumedfrom own production received as gifts in the last 2 .I-_last2\reeks? in the last 2 w e k s ? weeks? 1. Maize grain.................... . I.__. __- .. K muInn K 2. Cassava........................ K 3. Millet.................. K ~ I K m 4. Sorghum......... 5. Rice............................. KmlKm 6. Sweet Potatoes 7. Irish Potatoes.................. 136 14. How much was spent on 15. How much .....was 16. How much .....was cash purchases on......inthe consumed from own production receivedas gifts in the last 2 last 2 weeks? inthe last 2 weeks? weeks? 8. Groundnuts K K m K UInn 9. Kapenta(Driedfresh) 10. Fish(Driedfresh) 1I.Beef(Driedfresh) 12. Goat meat (Driedfresh) 13. Sheep meat (Driedfresh) 14.Pigmeat (Driedfresh) 15.Game meat (Driedlfresh) 16. Chickenand other poultry (Guineafowl, turkey, ducks, Km Km geese, pigeons, rabbits) 17. Beans (Driedfresh) 18. Tomatoes 19. Onions 20. Other vegetables (Rape, cabbage, pumpkinleaves, Km Km carrots, okra, impwa, cucumber, green beans, peas, etc) 21. Breadhead rolls/buns/fritters 22. Fruits (Oranges, bananas, pineapples,lemons, masuku, avocados, apples, pears, etc) 23.Eggs 24. Milk (Fresh) 137 14.How muchwas spent on 15. How much.....was 16.How much .....was cash purchases on......inthe consumedfrom own production receivedas gifts in the last 2 last 2 weeks? weeks? 25. Milk (Powdered excluding - baby milk) K K 2 6. Butter/Margarine/Cheese/ jam, etc 27. Sugar 28. Honey 29. Salt 30. Cookingoil 3I.Non alcoholicbeverages (Juices, soft drinks, munkoyo, 32. Tedcoffeekocodhot chocolate/milo 33. Alcoholic beverages 34, Cigarettes/tobacco 35. Baby foods (Cerelachaby milk, etc) 36. Rodents 37. EdibleAnts 38. Caterpillars 138 I NO. I OUESTION 1. Which social and economic facilities would you like providedor improvedin this community including what directly affects your household?Please list them CHOICE 2.............................................. in order of importance CHOICE 4............................................. 2. Havethe following projects or changes occurredin your community 3. Was any memberof your household involvedin decisionto in the last five (5) years? undertake............? YES ........1 NO..........2 >>NEXT PROJECTKHANGE N/A.........3 >>NEXT PROJECT/CHANGE YES.......I CODE 2.1. Buildingof school IO 2.2. Rehabilitatingof school IO 0 2.3. Buildingof healthfacility IO 0 2.4. Rehabilitatingof health facility IO 0 2.5. Buildingof new road (Tarredor gravel) IO 0 2.6. Grading of gravel road IO 0 2.7. Tarringofroad IO 0 2.8. Sinkingof well (Protected) 0 2.9. Sinkingof borehole 0 0 2.10. Pipingof water 0 I39 2. Havethe following projects or changesoccurredin your community 3. Was any memberof your household involved in decision to undertake inthe last five (5) years? .................7 YES ........1 NO..........2 >> NEXT PROJECT/CHANGE N/A.........3 >>NEXT PROJECT/CHANGE YES .....I ... :ODE 2.11. Water supply rehabilitatedor improved 0 0 2.12. Provisionof hammermill 0 U 2.13. Transport serviceprovided/improved 0 U 2.14. Sanitationprovided/ improved U 2.15.Agricultural inputs providedon credit 0 0 2.16. Buyersof agriculturalproduceavailable/increased 0 0 2.17.Consumergoods now available 17 2.18.Credit facility now beingprovided 0 0 2.19. More employmentopportunities available 0 0 2.20. Police services now available/improved 0 0 2.21. Agriculture extensionservice availableor improved 0 0 2.22. Veterinary services now providedor improved 0 0 2.23.Agricultural inputs now more readilyavailable 0 0 2.24. Radio receptionnow availableiimproved 0 0 2.25.Radio station built 0 0 2.26. Televisionreceptionnow available/improved 0 0 2.27. Tourist Lodge built/ 0 0 improved 2.28. Bridges builthehabilitated o n 2.29. The Area electrified n 140 VELQPMEMTALISSUESAMI SOCIALFUNDIMPA"CT ICont'dl . ' 2 . % / Havethe following projectsor changes 4. How has this activity/ 5 . Did any member of your 6. Who financed this project/ occurred in your community inthe last project improvedthe way householdparticipate inprovision activity? five (5) years? you live? [MOST of materials, labour, management IMPORTANTONE] or finds to the project? ZAMSIF........................... I YES ........1 MICROPROJECTUNIT .......2 NO..........2 >>NEXT PROJECT/ SAVED YES, MATERIALS ..........1 GOVERNMENT................. 3 CHANGE TIME..................... 1 YES, LABOUR...............2 NGOs............................. .4 N/A.........3 >>NEXT PROJECT/ COSTS YES,MANAGEMENT......3 UNITEDNATIONS ............5 SOMEOTHER INSTITUTION CHANGE REDUCED...............2 YES, FUNDS................ ..4 QUALITY OF THE SERVICE YES, COMBINATION OF MORE (SPECIFY BELOW) ............6 IMPROVED....................... 3 THAN ONEOFTHE AN INDIVIDUAL... ............7 INCOMEINCREASED.........4 ABOVE......................... 5 CRBIVAGIZAWA.. ............,8 MORECOhlMUNITY NO,............................. .6 DON'T KNOW...................9 TOGETHERNESS............... 5 REDUCEDMY/OUR CODE WORRIES....................... .6 INCREASED EMPLOYMENT................ 7 NO IMPROVEMENT ......... o I I l 2.18.Credit facility now being 0 0 provided 2.19. More employment opportunitiesavailable 0 0 0 0 2.20.Policeservices now 0 available/improved 0 0 0 2.21. Agriculture extension 0 service available or improved 0 0 0 2.22. Veterinary services now 0 providedor improved 0 0 0 2.23. Agricultural inputsnow 0 more readily available 0 0 0 2.24. Radioreceptionnow 0 availableiimproved 0 0 0 2.25. Radio station built 0 o 2.26. Television receptionnow 0 o 2.27. Tourist Lodgebuilt/ 0 0 142 1. Have there beenany deaths inthe household(of usual members) in the last 12 months? 1 YES U 2 NO >>NEXT SECTION 2. How many householdmembers died in the last 12 months? NUMBER OF DEATHS m 3. How old was the deceased 4. What was the cause of death? 5. Did the deceasedhavethe following symptoms? YES.. .I NO... 2 and what was the sex? Disease .....,......1 - [RECORDAGE IN p COMPLETEDYEARS] orr 5 [RECORD00 IF LESS THAN 1 YEAR] MALE.. ... .,....1 FEMALE ,,.2 ... mu AGE SEX mu DECEASED 1 7 mu n o DECEASED 2 0 0 0 mu n u DECEASED 3 mn DECEASED 4 171 mu n u DECEASED 5 0 171171 DECEASED 6 0 I 143 How muchdid all members ofyour household(combined) collect, sell and receiveas incomefrom the followina sources in the lasttwelve (12) months? WILDLIFE / QUANTITY INCOME FROMSALES I I FORESTPRODUCTS COLLECTED CONSUMED SOLD [KWACHA1 I. EdibleAntsandCaterpillars m 2. Wild Fruits m UIn m m 3. Wild Honey 4. Mushrooms UIn Other edible forest products UIn 5, ____-_______________________ 6. Poles and Timber Fuelwood(excluding 7. charcoal) How much did all members of your household(combined) collect, sell and receiveas income from the following sources in the last 3 months? Charcoal 8. I I I I I $0 ku hnu 144 YES.....l Inthe courseofyour regularactivities do you see any wildlife? NO......2 >> NEXT SECT More.. ...........l Comparedwith three years ago, do you think the number of wildlife in this area is more, Same ...............2 0 2. the same, or lessnow? Less .............3 In how manydays inthe one monthhaveyou seen .. ...? .. LAST 30DAYS 3 3.1 Lechwe m 3.2 Impalas m 3.3 m 3.4 m 3.5 m 3.6 m 3.7 m 3.8 m 3.9 m 3.10 m 3.11 m 3.12 m m ~ ~~~ 3.13 Warthogs 3.14 Wild Pigs m 3.15 Porcupine m 3.16 Baboon m 3.17 Monkey m 145 In how many days inthe one month have you seen . . ..? . . LAST 30DAYS un 3.18 Caracal 3.19 Cheetah 1111 3.20 Leopard m m 3.21 Lion 3.22 Hyena un 3.23 Wild Dog un 3.24 Rhinoceros C I n 3.25 Elephant C I n un 3.26 Giraffe 3.21 Hippopotamus 146 1. Were any of the crops your householdplanted in the last 12 months damaged by wild animals? I n Y E S.......1 NO ........2 >>NEXT SECTION U Z..Was..... one of the crops that was 3. What area plantedunder 3. Which animals damagedthe.. ....... most? destroyed? .....was damagedl destroyed? CODE: YES., ,1 . ANTELOPES (Impala, Wildebeest etc.)............... .01 NO....2 >>Next crop UNIT RHINOCEROS ............................... LIMA.............1 ACRE.............2 .................................... .04 HECTARE.......3 ELEPHANTS .............................................. 05 GIRAFFES................................................. 06 HIPPOS ................. WARTHOGS WILD PIGS ................................................. 09 MONKEYS ................................................ 10 BIRDS........................................................ I 1 OTHERS (Specify)......................................... 12 2.1, HybridMaize 0 a 2.2. LocalMaize n m u m 2.3. Cassava n a Y 2.4. Millet o 2.5. Sorghum 0 a 2.6. Rice n m m u 2.7. Mixed Beans 0 2.8. Soyabeans 0 m 2.9. Sweet Potatoes 0 a 2.IO. lrish Potatoes n m m u 2.11. Groundnuts o 2.12. Cotton n m m a u 2.13. Tobacco n Y 2.14. Sunflower 0 2.15. Paprika n m u m 2.16. Other n u 147 one ofthe animals that was hunted? YES 1NO 2 2.1 Lechwe 2.1I Buffaloes 2.20 Leopard 0 2.2 Impala 2.21 Lion ,2.12 , Zebras 0 0 2.3 Kudu 2.13 Warthogs 2.22 Hyena 0 0 2.4 Duiker 2.14 Wild Pigs 2.23 Wild Dog 0 0 0 2.5 Eland 0 2.15 Porcupine 2.24 Rhinoceros 2.1 Puku 0 0 0 2.16 Baboon 2.25 Elephant 2.8 Sable 0 2.17 Monkey 2.26 Giraffe 0 2.9 Water Buck 0 2.18 Caracal 0 2.10 Wildebeest 2.19 Cheetah 148 3 1. Did any member ofthis householdown any.....duringthe last 2.How many .......... 3. Were any of the 4. How many .......... 11. 12 months? does this householdown .........killed / were killed/ injured in now? injured by wildlife the last 12 months? TYPE OF LIVESTOCK YES.. ..1 , in the last 12 NO......2>>NEXTANlMAL months? YES... ..1 NO......2 >> NEXT ANIMAL Cattle o UIn UIn Goats 0 UIn 0 Pigs 0 UIn Sheep 0 UIn UIn Chickens 0 Ducks& geese 0 Guineafowls 0 Any other poultry (e.g turkey, rabbits, pigeons) UIn Does ZAWA control the problemiflwhen you report wildlife causing damage to crops and/or livestock? 0 YES .....1 NO.......2 -0 7 How soon after reportingdoes ZAWA controlthe problem 1.......One day 2 . .....Less than aweek 3... .... One-two weeks 4... ....Three-four weeks 0 5....... More than a month I. Are you or any other member of this householdengaged in fish farming? YES ..........1 NO............2 >> NEXT SECTION m 0 m How many fish pondsdoes this householdown? How many of these fish ponds are currently operational? What was the quantity of fish (INKILOGRAMS)harvested in the last 12 months? 149 WILDLIFE 1. How many ..... 2. What proportionof 3. How much did all members ofyour were huntedby ...... did the household(combined) receiveas income this householdin household sell ? from the sale of........ in the last twelve the last 12 (12) months? months? Code None .................1 Less than Half.,,,,.2 Half ...................3 More than Half .....4 All ..................5 Lechwe 0 Impalas 0 1111111111 Kudus 0 Diuker 0 Eland 0 Hartebeest Puku 0 Sable Water Buck 17 Wildebeest 0 Buffaloes Zebras m Warthogs Wild Pigs n 1111111111 Porcupine n 0 Baboon no Monkey 0 I50 N20: WILDLIFE(Cont'd] WILDLIFE 1. How many ..... 2. What proportionof 3. How much did all membersof your were huntedby ...... did the household(combined) receiveas income this householdin household sell ? from the sale of........ in the last twelve the last 12 (12) months? months? Code None ................. 1 [RECORD INKWACHA] Less than Half......2 Half ...................3 More than Half .....4 All .................,S I 18 Caracal 19. Cheetah ml 20. Leopard 0 21. Lion 0 22. Hyena 0 23. Wild Dog um 0 24. Rhinoceros 1111111111 25. Elephant 26. Giraffe 27. Hippopotamus 151 codesfor section Iquestion7 - Date Before1956 1956-65 1966-80 1981to Date CODESTO ENTERED Sub-standardA Sub standard Grade 1 Grade 1 01 Sub-standard B Sub-Standard Grade I Grade 1 01 Standard I Standard1 Grade2 Grade 2 02 Standard2 Standard2 Grade 3 Grade 3 03 Standard3 Standard3 Grade4 Grade 4 04 Standard4 Standard4 Grade 5 Grade 5 05 Standard5 Standard5 Grade 6 Grade 6 06 Standard6 Lower Grade6 Grade 6 06 Standard5 Standard 6 Upper Grade 7 Grade 7 07 Standard6 Form 1 Form 1 Form 1 Grade 8 08 Form2 Form2 Form2 Grade9 09 Form 3 Form3 Form 3 Grade I O 10 Form4 Grade I 1 11 Form4 (GCE) Form4 Grade 12 12 ( K E ) GCE (0) Form6 Lower Form6 Grade 12 12 (Lower) GCE (0) Short Courses 13 Form6 Upper Form6 Form 5 Grade 12 14 Upper GCE (A) GCE (A) DiplomdCertificate 14 UndergraduateUniversity 14 Bachelors' Degree 15 Post Graduate Diploma 16 Master Degree 17 Doctorate and above 18 Economic Facility Code (Section 13) 01. Buildingof schools 11. Water supply rehabilitated or improved 20. Police services made available/improved 02. Rehabilitationof school 12.Provisionof hammer mill 21. Agriculture extensionservice made 03. Buildingof healthfacility 13.Transport serviceprovidedimproved available or improved 04. Rehabilitationofhealthfacility 14. Sanitationprovided improved 22. Veterinary services providedor improved 05. Buildingof new road (Tarred or gravel) 15. Agricultural inputsprovidedon credit 23. Agricultural inputs made more readily 06. Gradingof gravel road 16.Buyers of agriculturalproduce available 07. Tarringof road availablelincreased 24. Radio receptionmade available/improved 08. Sinkingof well (Protected) 17.Consumer goods made more available 25. Radio station built 09. Sinkingof borehole 18. Credit facility beingprovided 26. Televisionreceptionmade 10. Pipingof water 19.More employment opportunities available available/improved 27. Tourist Lodgebuiltl improved 28. Bridges built or rehabilitated. 29. The area electrifi 152 ANNEX 3 GMA COMMUNITY QUESTIONNAIRE no. REPUBLICOF ZAMBIA m] QUESTIONNAIRE NO: CENTRAL STATISTICAL OFFICE P.O. BOX31908,LUSAKA,ZAMBIA FORM: TEL Nos. 251377/251370/253609/251385/253908/ 253468l256520 FAX Nos. 253609/250195/253468/253908/256520 email: Info @Znmstats.gov.zm Website: www.zarnstats.eov.zm IMPACT OF GAME MANAGEMENT AREAS ON HOUSEHOLD WELFARE SURVEY 1. PROVINCE NAME 0 2. DISTRICTNAME U n 3. CONSTITUENCYNAME 4. WARD NAME m 5. CSA NUMBER m 6. SEA NUMBER n 7. ESTIMATED NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS 8. ESTIMATED TOTAL POPULATION 9. STRATUM 1. Prime 2. Secondary 3. Specialised 4. Under stocked 5. Non GMA 10,NEAREST NATIONAL PARK 1.Bangweulu(Kasanka, Lavushi, Isangano) n 2. Kafue (Kafue, Blue lagoon, Lochinvar) u 3. Lower Zambezi 4. Luangwa m 5 Nsumbu 11, NAME OF GMA OR NON GMA (code?) 12. NAME OF AREA 13. SUPERVISOR'SNAME................................................ DATE OF INTERVIEW 14. MASTERTRAINER'S NAME ............................................................................... mmm 153 SECTION1: CompositionofInterview: The interviewwill includekey informantsfromamongthe following: The villageHeadman. VAG Members,ZAWA Officials, NGOworkers andNurse/Health worker. The groupshould includewomen. I I TITLE I I I I NUMBER INATTENDANCE I NUMBER INATTENDANCE I I. Headmen m 2. VAG members m m III 3. Other VAG members m m 4. ZAWAofficials m m 5. NGO workers m m 6. III Nursehealthworkers m m School Headmaster I m m m m Other School Teachers 8. Agricultural ExtensionOfficer m m II 1 9 m lo Other (specify: ............................... m m D Other (specify: ........................... .........)II I I 1 1s there a VAG in this community? YES......1 NO.....2>> NEXT SECTION 0 2 What is the name of this VAG? 3. Doesthis VAG benefit from the GMA? YES......1 0 NO.......2 4. Didthe VAG obtain anv fhds from ZAWNCRB last YES ...... 0 1- year? NO.......2 >>Question 7 5 How much did the VAG receive the oast 12 months? 6. What was this money soent on mostly? Dividends..........1 0 Infrastructure...... 2 Salaries/wages.,... 3 Other (specify)..,..4 I. Does this VAG haverepresentationin aCRB or Community YES......I 0 DevelopmentCommittee NO.......2 8. Doesthis VAG have an electedexecutiveCommittee? YES......I NO.......2>>> NEXT SECTION 0 9. How many members are there in the Committee? No.OF MEMBERS D 10. How many of these membersare women? No.OF MEMBERS m 11 What is the sex of the VAG Chairperson? n I 1 ............................... MALE 2.............................. u FEMALE 154 12. How often does the VAG committee hold meetings? 1 . . Twice a month . 5.. Twice ayear . 2... Once a month 6.. Once ayear . 3.,, Once in hvo months 7... Irregularly 0 4.. . Once in 3 months 8 . .. Never 13. What were the discussionsmainly about in the last VAG 1 =Conflict resolution committeemeeting? 2 = Resourceallocation 3 =Wildlife conservation 0 4 =Wildlife movementsacross the GMA - 5 =Other (specify ) 14. Organizations 14.1Does this VAG haveany conflict 14.2 Was VAG able to resolve this conflict with with... .....? ,, , ..... .....,7. 1 = Yes; 2 = No --->Next organization 1 =Yes; 2=No 1.. . Other VAGs/CRBsRrust 0 0 2..ZAWA n u 0 3... Safari operators n n u u 4.. Other NGOs . n Y 0 5. Lodge operators n u 0 6..Wildlife ConservationSociety n u 0 6... Other (Specify 0 n 15. How many village scouts does this communityNAG have? SECTION3: Migration m m I I 1 How many householdsmoved into this Communityin the last 5 years? 2 How many householdsmoved into this Communityin the last 12 months? 3 How many householdsmoved out of this Communityin the last 5 years? m m 4 How many households movedout of this Community in the last 12 months? 155 SECTION4: PhysicalInfrastructure Type of 1, I s there 2.Which organisations 3. What type of 4. Inwhich year did this 5. What did the 6. Inwhat state is......7 infrastructure any... in helpedwith the construction contribution did organizationstart community contribute I...Newor functional this rehabilitatiodexpansion of this organisation helping with the towards the construction needingno repair Community make? constructionof ......? of ....1 Z...Functional but needs ? l=Labour only some repair YES....I I.... Gov? 1 , Construction ... 2=Materials only 3., Dilapidated, unusable . NO .....2>> 2.....cRB 2,.,, Rehabilitation 3=Cash only without repair NEXT 3.,..WorldB a M G O 3,... Expansion 4=Labour and materials 4.,.Unusable, under ITEM 4.. .Zamsif/micro project only constructionor repair 5 , . .RIF . 5=Labour and cash only 6......Plan International 6=Materials and cash only 7..,..JAICA 7=Labour, materials and 8.....worldvision cash 9 . ....Local businessman 8=Nothing I O....Other (Specify) 9=Other (specify) m II None .... I Primary school 0 0 0 -classrooms m 0 0 m block 0 o m o 0 2 Rimary school - 0 L n U 0 staff houses m n u 0 m o m n u - 3 Secondary 0 m 0 m 0 school- classrooms m o m - 4 Secondary 0 m o m school -staff n houses Y m I= n Y m 0 156 SECTION4: PhysicalInfrastructure(Continued) ~~ ~ Type of 1, I s there 2.Whichorganisations 3. What type of 4 Inwhich year did this 5. What did the I6. In what state i s.....,? infrastructure any... in helpedwith the construction contribution did organizationStart community contribute 1 ... New or functional this rehabilitatiodexpansion of this organisation helpingwith the towards the construction needingno repair Community .? make? constructionof 7 of ....? 2...Functional but needs ? l=Labour only some repair YES....1 I.... Goa 1..,, Construction 2=Materials only 3..,Dilapidated, unusable NO.....2 >> 2,....cRB 2..,, Rehabilitation 3=Cash only without repair NEXT 3....WorldB a M G O 3.. Expansion ., 4=Labour and materials 4,.,Unusable, under ITEM 4...Zamsiflmicro project only constructionor repair 5 . ...RIF 5=Labour and cash only 6... ...Plan International 6=Materials and cash only 7..,..JAICA 7=Labour, materialsand 8 . ,,..worldvision cash 9.....Local businessman 8=Nothing I O....Other (Specify) 9=Other (specify) 1I, ..None m , 5 Health centre 0 0 UIn 0 m 0 0 I 0 m 0 0 I - o UIn 6 Health staff 0 0 11171 houses m 0 11171 m o 0 m 0 mn 0 0 - 0 11171 7 Market 0 m 0 0 0 m 0 11171 0 0 m m 0 mn 0 8 Post Office 0 m 0 0 0 157 SECTION4: PhysicalInfrastructure(Conmued) Type of 1. I s there 2.Which organisations 3. What type of 4. Inwhich year did this 5. What did the 6. Inwhat state is......? infrastructure any...in helped with the construction contribution did organizationstart community contribute 1,.. New or functional this rehabilitationiexpansionof this organisation helping with the towards the construction needingno repair Community ......? make? constructionof ......? of ....? 2...Functionalbut needs ? I=Labour only some repair YES....I I.... GOM I....Construction 2=Materialsonly 3...Dilapidated, unusable NO.....2>> 2..,..cRB 2.... Rehabilitation 3=Cash only without repair NEXT 3.. ,WorldBan!v'NGO . 3.., ,Expansion 4=Labour and materials 4...Unusable, under ITEM 4...Zamsif/micro project only constructionor repair 5 . ...RIF 5=Labour and cash only 6......PlanInternational 6=Materials and cashonly 7 , ,,..MICA 7=Labour, materials and 8.....world vision cash Post Ofice 0 UIn u -Staff houses 1 9.....Local businessman 8=Nothing I O . , , . Other (Specify) 9=0ther (specify) II..,.None 0 m l o UIn m 1 0 UIn 0 0 Police 0 0 0 11 Police 0 UIn 0 0 m 0 0 stationipost - Staffhouses UIn m l o UIn 0 m o - UIn - U 12 Forest guard 0 UIn 0 U 0 station u 0 0 m l o UIn U o 158 3ECIION4: PhysicalInfmstructure(Continued) Type of 1, I s there 2.Which organisations 3. What type of 4. In which year did this 5. What did the 6. In what state is.., ,..? infrastructure any... in helpedwith the construction contribution did organizationstart community contribute 1... New or functional sm this rehabilitatiodexpansion of this organisation helping with the towards the construction needingno repair Community .,.,...7 make? constructionof , , , . . .? of ....? 2...Functionalbut needs ? I=Labour only some repair YES....I I.... Govt I.,,Construction , 2=Materials only 3,..Dilapidated, unusable NO.....2 >> 2..,..cRB 2.... Rehabilitation 3=Cash only without repair NEXT 3....WorldBanWNGO 3....Expansion 4=Labour and materials 4. ..Unusable, under ITEM 4...Zamsif/microproject only constructionor repair 5 . . .RIF . I S=Labour and cash only 6......Plan International 6=Materials and cash only 7.....JAICA 7=Labour, materialsand 8.....worldvision cash 9.....Localbusinessman S=Nothing I O.... Other(Specify) 9=Other (specify) m 11 None 13 Forest guard 0 station - Staffhouses m m - m 14 Tourist Lodge 0 L m m m 15 Tourist Lodge 0 m - Staffhouses m 0 IUIn m 0 UIn m - 16 Borehole(s) 0 m m m m 159 SECTION4: PhysicalInfrastructure(Continued) Type of 1. I s there 2.Which organisations 3. What typeof 4. Inwhich year did this 5. What did the 6. Inwhat state is.. . ..? . infrastructure any... in helpedwith the construction contribution did organizationstart community contribute I,,Newor functional . SN this rehabilitatiodexpansion of this organisation helping with the towards the construction needingno repair Community ......1 make? constructionof ...,,.? of ....? 2...Functional but needs ? l=Labour only some repair YES. ,I l....Govt .. I....Construction 2=Materials only 3.,,Dilapidated,unusable NO.....2 >> 2 . ....CREI 2....Rehabilitation 3=Cash only without repair NEXT 3....WorldB W G O 3.,, Expansion , 4=Labour and materials 4...Unusable,under ITEM 4...Zamsif/micro project only constructionor repair 5....RIF 5=Labour and cashonly 6......PlanInternational 6=Materials and cash only 7..,..JAICA 7=Labour, materialsand 8..,..worldvision cash 9.....Local businessman I=Nothing I O . .,. Other (Specify) 9=Other (specify) - 17 Well (Protected) o 100 11,,,.None 0 m 0 m UIn 0 0 - m o 0 0 18 Dip tank o 0 m 0 0 (Public) m mn o 0 m 0 0 m l o m 0 0 19 Other (specify) 0 m 0 0 m l o m o 0 m o m I o m 0 l o 0 o 20 Other (specify) 0 m m 0 0 m 0 0 m o m ll o m 0 0 m 0 o - o UIn 160 i5:NaturalResources 1 Are there any community/group/clubfish ponds in this area? YES..... 1.2 IfYES howmanyfish pondsarethere? NUMBER OF PONDS Who operatesthe fish ponds? YES...................1 NO.........2 Communitymembers......................l Women's club............................. ..2 l o CRB.......................................... .3 Care taker hiredby community............4 I 0 Other (Specify) ............................. . 5 0 Do you generate any incomefrom these ponds? YES..... .I NO.,.....2>>>Question 5 0 Do .....benefit from this income? YES......1 NO.......2 Members...................................... 1 Whole community.......................... .2 n n I u The Chief/ Headmen....................... .3. n I u Other (Specify).............................. .4 IIII u 5. Does the community have a land use plan? YES..... .l o NO.......2 6. Hasthe community set aside any areaof landspecificallyfor wildlife YES.,,,..I 0 migrationor habitat? NO.......2 >>>Question7 6.1. IfYES, is this areaset asidefor wildlife usedby somehouseholdsfor...... YES.........I NO........2 1.. , .. Grazing 0 2..,.. Plantingcrops 0 3,.... Cuttingtrees for fuel wood 0 4..,.. Cuttingtrees for making charcoal 0 0 5..... Cuttingtrees for timber 7. Do you receive any tourists in your community? YES......1 8. Roughly, how many tourists does this community receive duringthe dry season? 9. Roughly, how many tourists does this community receive duringthe wet season? 10. What is the mainpurposefor which the tourists come? 1,. Photosafari 2.. Game hunting 3.. . Recreationalfishing 161 SECTION6: SocialCapital 1. Are there any.........s active inthis community? 2. How many membersdoes this.,,.. (group) 3. In whichyear was this...,.. started? YES.....1 have? NO......2 >>NEXT ITEM YEAR No. OF MEMBERS I.FarmeMAgroClub UIn 2. FisheryClub 0 3. Beekeeper'sClub ID I UIn 4. Women's Club 5. CreditClub 0 6. Peer Educators ID I 7. DramaClub UIn 8. FootballClub 9. Other (Specify) mn 162 RialCapital(Continued) NGOs 4. I s.... 5. Sincewhich year 6. Does .....support 7. What is the most 8. Does .... , 9. What is the IO. Does ..... 1 I,What is active inthis has .......been any User Groups? importanttype of support any most important support any the most community? active in the YES..... 1 User Group Income Income Training important YES,. ,. 1 . community? NO ......2>> Q 8 supported by..... ? Generating Generating Activities? Training NO ......2 Activites? Activity YES..... 1 Activity >>Next See codesbelow YES., . 1 , , supported by NO .....,2>> supported NGO NO ...,.2 x- , .., ? ., Next NGO by.....? Q 10 See codes See codes below 1.PAM 2. WVI 0 3. Oxfam 0 4. Plan 0 International 5. Care 0 International 6. CLUSA 0 7. MMCI 0 8. Catholic Relief 0 m o m 0 Services (CRS) 9. ADRA o m 0 m o m 0 I O . LWF o m 0 m o m 0 11.wcs O U I n 0 m o m 0 12.Other (specifv) o m 0 m o m 0 b Codes for Question7: Most Codes for Question 9: Most important Codes for Question 11: Most important training important type of user group incomegenerating activities activity ]=Farmer group/agro club 1=Agriculhlral production I=Financial Management Training 2=Fishery club 2=Business / Enterprise Training 2=Agricultural marketing 3=Natural Resource Management Training 3=Bee keepers' club 3=Agriculhlral processing 4=Tourism Training 4=Women's club 4=Business development(general) 5=Other, specify 5Credit club 5=Tailoring 6=Peer educators 6earpentry 7=Drama club 7=Black smithing 8=Football club S=Kniting 9=Other (specify) 9Crafts ]&Other (specify) 163 i 7:Empowerment Does ,,,.. participatein deciding which community 1.., Government developmentprojectto take placewithin this community? 2....ZAWA YES..... I 3.. , Chief/ Headmen NO...... 2 4... CommitteeMembers S., .TheCommunity 6.... NGO financingthe project 7...Other (Specify) ...............,................ Do community leaders hold regular meetingswith the YES....., 1 households? NO.......2 >>NEXT SECTION How often do the community leadershold meetings? I,,, Twiceamonth 2.,. Once a month 3.,. Once in two months 4.. . Once in 3 months S . . . Twiceayear 6.. . Onceayear 7.., Irregularly 164 Event Has ... taken placeheenconstructedin In how many of the In which year did ... What proportion this community in the past 10years? past 10years has last occur? (YO)of the Yes....1 ... takenplace? community was 1 = Drought 2 = Flood 3 = Crop disease/pests l o 4 = Livestockdisease 0 5 = Humanepidemic disease 0 m UIn C I n 6 = Sharp changesin prices 0 7 = Massivejob lay offs 0 8 = Loss of key social services l I I 9 = Other (specify) I no 11 = Development project o 12 =New employment opportunity 0 13 =New health facility I n 14 =New road O 15 =New school o I m lmlm 16 = Other (specify) o THE END OF INTERVIEW 165 ANNEX 4 TABLE 1: Factorsaffectingthe household'sprobabilityto livein the GMA and, once in the GMA, the probabilityto participatein the VAG/CRB Probit models for the household'sprobability to Participateinthe Variable Variable description Live in the GMA VAGICRB" (1) (2) cons Intercept 0.707 ** -2.612 *** (0.279) (0.262) Park2 Kafue dummy variable -1.099 *** -0.247 (0.332) (0.190) park3 Lower Zambezi dummy -0.523 -0.123 (0.330) (0.106) park4 Luangwadummy -0.512 -0.336 *** (0.340) (0.121) hage Age ofthe householdheadin years -0.006 * 0.001 (0.003) (0.006) fhhh Female-headedhousehold dummy 0.193 ** -0.018 (0.088) (0.138) maxedu Educationof the most educated household -0.033 ** 0.034 ** member inyears (0.0 13) (0.015) cot014 Number of children below 15 years -0.026 0.015 (0.0 19) (0.030) f15to60 Number of female members 15-60years old 0.009 0.071 (0.039) (0.076) ml5to60 Number of male members 15-60years old 0.058 0.055 (0.036) (0.071) m6lplus Number of members older than 60 years -0.062 -0.125 (0.075) (0.158) kroad Distanceto the nearest main road in km 0.008 * 0.008 *** (0.004) (0.002) kbsch Distanceto the nearestbasic school in km 0.004 -0.011 (0.o10) (0,010) kheal Distanceto the nearets health centre in km -0.002 0.006 * (0.004) (0.004) vacast Value of consumptionassets in ZMK -0.020 ** -0.003 (0.008) (0.018) dcoop Participation in cooperatives dummy -0.388 *** 0.552 *** (0.098) (0.157) nproj Number of projects in the community 0.042 ** 0.055 *** (0.019) (0.017) dcfnd CRB funded dummy variable 0.617 *** 0.829 *** (0.159) (0.155) npart Number of participantsin the CRBNAG 0.097 * 0.203 *** (0.058) (0.019) "Based only on the sub-sample of householdsthat are locatedin the GMAs Level of significance: *=Significant at 10%; **=Significant at 5%; ***=Significant at 1% Values in parenthesesare standard errors 166 TABLE2: Impact of livinginthe GMA and, onceinthe GMA, of participatinginthe VAG/CRB Treatregmodels for the impact on per capita consumptionexpenditureof Participating in Variable Variable description Living in GMA" VAGICRB~ (1) (2) cons Intercept 13.020 *** 13.580 *** (0.209) (0.086) park2 Kafue dummy variable 0.400 *** 0.192 ** (0.143) (0.088) park3 Lower Zambezi dummy variable 0.416 *** 0.217 *** (0.127) (0.063) park4 Luangwa dummy variable 0.434 *** 0.537 *** (0.100) (0.096) hage Age of the householdhead -0,001 -0.001 (0.001) (0.002) fhhh Female-headeddummy -0.186 *** -0.150 *** (0.047) (0.054) maxedu Educationof the most educated member 0.043 *** 0.022 ** (years) (0,010) (0.010) cot014 Number of children less than 15 years old -0.132 *** -0.145 *** (0.011) (0.011) f15to60 Number o f female members 15-60years -0.063 ** -0.091 *** (0.025) (0.029) m15to60 Number of male members 15-60 years -0.100 *** -0.090 *** (0.022) (0.022) m6lplus Number of membersolder than 60 years -0.140 *** -0.186 *** (0.037) (0.051) kroad Distanceto the nearest main road in km -0.005 *** -0.006 *** (0*002) (0.002) kbsch Distanceto the nearestbasic school in km 0.001 0.010 *** (0.003) (0.003) kheal Distanceto the nearesthealthcentre inkm -0.002 -0.004 *** (0.002) (0.002) vacast Value of consumptionassets in ZMK 0.045 *** 0.107 *** (0.014) (0.024) dcoop Participation in cooperativesdummy 0.357 *** 0.237 *** (0.051) (0.066) gma or Participationdummy variable"" 0.665 *** 0.438 ** dvcrb (0.237) (0.205) Number of observations 2,209 1,112 Log-likelihood value -3,405 -1,333 Goodnessof fit Chi-square 297.73 *** 407.06 *** Rho -0.583 *** -0.301 * "Participation dummy variable refers to the GMA dummy, equal to 1if the householdis locatedina GMA bTheparticipation dummy variable refers to the CRBNAG dummy, equalto 1ifthe householdparticipates inthe VAG/CRB. This model usesa sub-sample of householdsthat arelocatedinthe GMA Significance: *=Significant at 10%; **=Significant at 5%; ***=Significant at 1% Values in parenthesesare standard errors 167 REFERENCES Africa Private Sector Group, 2005: Zambia InvestmentClimateAssessment, World Bank, Washington. Anchor EnvironmentConsultants, 2004, EconomicAnalysisand FeasibilityStudy for FinancingNamibia's ProtectedAreas, GEF-UNDP-GovernmentofNamibia. ARCA Consulting, 1998: FromNPWSto ZAWA -Management RestructuringReport, EDF/NPWSProject,Chilanga Arrow K., Solow R., Portney P.R., Learner E.E., Radner R., SchumanH., 1993 "Report ofthe NOAA Panelon ContingentValuation." FederalRegister 58: 4601-14. Astle, W.L., 1999.A history o fwildlife conservation and management inthe mid Luangwa Valley, Zambia, British Empire& commonwealth Museum. Bandyopandhyay, S. and P. Shyamsundar. "Fuelwood Consumptionand Participationin CommunityForestry in India." World Bank PolicyResearchWorking Paper 3331, June 2004. Blanke, Jennifer and Thea Chiesa, 2007: The Travel andTourismCompetitivenessReport 2007-Furtheringthe Processof EconomicDevelopment, World EconomicForum, Geneva CarsonR.T., 1997 "Contingent Valuation:TheoreticalAdvances and EmpiricalTests since the NOAA Panel." AmericanJournal ofAgriculturalEconomics, 79(5): 1501-7. Carson, R.T., Groves T., MachinaM., 1999, "Incentiveand InformationalProperties of PreferencesQuestions." Plenary Address, EuropeanAssociationof Environmentaland Resource Economists, Oslo, Norway. Changa Management Services, 2007: Draft Strategic Plan2008 -2012, ZambiaWildlife Authority, Chilanga Child, G. and D.Lee, 1993:ReorganisationandRestructuringthe Department ofNational Parksand Wildlife Service, WWF, Lusaka). CentralStatisticOffice, 2004: Living ConditionsMonitoring Survey Report, Republicof Zambia. CentralStatisticOffice, 2006: FormalSector Employmentand EarningReport, Republic of Zambia. CentralStatistic Office, 2006: NationalAccounts Statistical Bulletin N.9 1994-2005, Republicof Zambia. Crouch, G., and R. Shaw. 1991. "InternationalTourism Demand: A Meta-Analytical Integrationof ResearchFindings."ManagementPaperNo.36. Graduate School of Management,MonashUniversity,Australia. 168 DCDM Consulting, 2006: Livingstone Tourism Survey, Support for Economic Expansion and Diversification Project, Ministryof Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources, Lusaka EDFmationalParks and Wildlife Service Project, 1998: Draft Master Plan, Transtec Grant Thornton Kessle Feinstein, 2003: Study for Development and Promotion of Tourism in Zambia. Grant Thornton Associates, Contour Project Managers, and BiconZambia, 2005. Audit of Zambia Wildlife Authority's (ZAWA's) Current Capabilities & Development of Project proposalsfor Institutional Capacity Developmentover a Five Year Period (2004-2008), Zambia. Hiemstra, S. and J. Ismail. 1993. "Incidence ofthe Impacts of Room Taxes on the Lodging Industry." Journal of Travel Research, Spring, pp.22-26. International Capital Corporation, 2002: Zambia Wildlife Authority Draft Five-Year Strategic Plan2003-2007, Main Report, Chilanga. Jacobs, S. and I.Astrakhan, 2006: Effective and SustainableRegulatory Reform: The Regulatory Guillotine inThree Transitional and Developing Economies, Jacobs and Associated, Washington, DC. Ministry o fTourism, Environment and Natural Resources, 2005 Mattoo, Aaditya and Lucy Payton (Eds.), 2007: Services, Trade & Development, The Experienceof Zambia, PalgraveMacmilladWorld Bank MinistryofFinanceandNational Planning,2006: FifthNational DevelopmentPlan, Zero Draft MinistryofTourism, 1995:Medium Term Tourism Strategy andAction Plan, Lusaka Pitman, Col. C.R. S., 1934: Report on the Faunal Survey ofNorthern Rhodesia. Ravallion, M.2001. "The Mystery of the Vanishing Benefits: An Introduction to Impact Evaluation." The World Bank Economic Review, 15 (1): 115-140. Ravallion, M.2005. "Assessing the Poverty Impact of an Assigned Program." Tool Kit, Chapter 5, World Bank, Washington DC. Robins DevelopmentAssociates, 2005: Analysis Report on Tourism Sector Trends in Zambia, JICA, Lusaka. Sinyenga, G, Muwele, B and Hamilton, K, 2007: Draft Report on The Contribution ofNature Tourism to the Zambian Economy, World Bank, Washington 169 Suich, Helen, Jonah BuschandNathalie Barbancho, 2005: Economic Impactsof Transfiontier ConservationAreas: Baseline ofTourism inthe Kavango-ZambeziTFCA, ConservationInternational, South Africa Tourism DevelopmentProgrammeR'ranstec, 1999: Tourism DevelopmentFramework, Ministry of Tourism. Tourism Development Programme, 1998:Output reports Whydah Consulting, 2006: ZambiaNature-basedTourism Supply-side Survey, World Bank, Lusaka World Tourism Organisation,2005:Tourism 2020 Vision, Madrid. World Tourism Organizationwebsite World Tourism Organization, World Tourism Barometer, January 2007. World Wide Fundfor Nature, 2002: Miombo EcoregionsReport, Harare ZambiaNational Tourist Board, 2006 Zambia Wildlife Authority, 2002: Five-Year Strategic Plan2003-2007, Volume 2 ImplementationPlan, Chilanga 170