Co-management for tourism development and community wellbeing: the case of Hill Tracts, Bangladesh : A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Lincoln University

A broad view of sustainable tourism development is becoming increasingly apparent whereby the discourse of sustainability has been extended to include notions of tourism/community capitals, sustainable livelihoods, quality of life (QoL), and community wellbeing. A literature review of the existing Sustainable Livelihoods Framework for Tourism (SLFT) finds the literature largely fails to identify ‘transforming structures and processes’ as implementation pathways. Adopting a process-oriented, or mediated, view is necessary to ensure multi-level stakeholder viewpoints are incorporated within resource decision-making and subsequent implementation. Accordingly, a Capitals Co-management for Sustainable Livelihood Framework (CCSLF) in tourism is proposed to contribute to the existing sustainable tourism development literature by introducing co-management as a balanced decision-making tool (representing transforming structures and processes) for destination resources (referred to as capitals). At the outcome level, CCSLF proposes more precise mutual outcomes of both community wellbeing and sustainable tourism development through the protection of resources. Community wellbeing is perceived as an integrated concept and covers the requisite livelihood outcomes specified in the different sustainable livelihood models. In general, the governance dimension of tourism destination resources has been underscored in this thesis with a view to generating sustainable livelihood outcomes. The framework was then tested within a case study of the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHTs), Bangladesh. In this regard, the particular research strategy was followed as a single case study (CHTs) with two embedded units of analysis (Bandarban Sadar and Rangamati Sadar). This thesis utilises both primary (interviews, focus groups and participant observations) and secondary (document analysis and framing analysis) methods to generate findings including a revised CCSLF. Based on the stakeholder theory and given the research focus, the participants in this research were divided into two broad segments of community residents and institutional representatives. In total, 52 semi-structured interviews and five focus groups were conducted along with participant observation techniques. In order to overcome the shortcomings within the relevant literature, a framing analysis technique was followed to complement other methods including document analysis. Framing analysis was particularly used to analyse mass media (print and video) materials. Alongside these, visual mateirals were also analysed to add interpretative colour to findings. Findings show that power structure and politics play the central role in resource decision-making, which hinder broader stakeholder (especially community) involvement in the decision-making process. In a developing tourism destination with diverse cultural groups and in-built situational factors, the applicability of a CCSLF with a macro-level focus is limited. On this note, a lower level of trust was found between Bengali and indigenous communities. Furthermore, trust issues were also unfavourably evident across indigenous communities in relation to their size (reflecting the breadth of social capital). Therefore, a particular site or micro-level orientation is advocated. Hence, the strength of social capital (with a special focus on bonding capital) can play a significant role in establishing a destination tourism and community resources management structure (co-management) through which the community should be given resource ownership. Formal institutional involvement must then be ensured to supply specialised expertise and consultation. Moreover, institutional involvement is inevitable on the grounds of minimising vulnerabilities to resource decisions and to provide insights for policy implications at all scales. The broader implication is to ensure a participatory approach that facilitates benefit-sharing among communities, and equitable involvement of key stakeholders in resource decision-making processes. This desired approach is assessed positively for its potential to create sustainable livelihood outcomes in the form of ‘community wellbeing’ as well as ‘sustainable tourism’. Community wellbeing is conceptualised in this research as meeting the subsistance and basic needs of community members, with a strong future-oriented emphasis on education to enable a broder range of future options. The connecting link between community wellbeing and sustainable tourism is identified principally via a socio-economic lens in which a mutually-inclusive relationship between these outcomes is reported. The nature of such a relationship is elaborated in a way that increased income and employment (material wellbeing) resulting from tourism development will facilitate meeting the basic needs of community members, which in turn enables wider acceptance for tourism development among destination communities. From an operational perspective, the revised CCSLF encourages policy-makers to consider an alternative decision-making process and structure at the destination level concerning tourism resource decisions. By involving and incorporating key stakeholders’ views into the process, the revised CCSLF is targeted to build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at destination (local) level.