Doctoral Degrees (School of Public Leadership)
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Browsing Doctoral Degrees (School of Public Leadership) by Author "Banda-Thole, Chikondi Hansini"
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- ItemA study of the factors influencing tourism performance in national parks : a comparative study of Kafue and South Luangwa National Parks(Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2022-12) Banda-Thole, Chikondi Hansini; Muller, Kobus; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences. School of Public Leadership.ENGLISH SUMMARY: The Kafue National Park is the largest of Zambia’s 20 national parks, covering 22,500 km². It is followed in size by South Luangwa National Park, which covers an area of 9,050km². Although Kafue National Park was given its status in 1950 by Zambia’s colonial administration, it was designated a national park together with south Luangwa in 1971 by the new post-colonial administration. Both parks have been recognised as tourist destinations and both fall into Zambia’s ‘Revenue Generation’ National Park category together with Mosi-O-Tunya and Lower Zambezi National Parks. This implies that both are meant to demonstrate their economic viability. National parks are meant to attain both natural resource conservation objectives and those related to recreation and tourism. However, tourism is the main source of revenue to support the viability of national parks and their character as tourist destinations. Tourist arrival data from 1959 to 2017 highlights that the Kafue has received 203, 242 tourists, whilst data from 1964 to 2017 indicate that South Luangwa hosted 688, 509 tourists. Data on revenue generated from the two national parks reveal that Kafue generates less than half of South Luangwa’s earnings. Tourist arrivals and revenue generated are key indicators of the tourism performance of a destination. Therefore, this study investigated the factors that have influenced the differences in the performance of the Kafue and South Luangwa National Park. This study situates itself in the field of studies on Southern African national parks and wildlife tourism. The few studies in this area place the emphasis on how national parks attain different sets of objectives that have developed over the past century or on how they maintain a high quality of attractions, basic infrastructure and services, and a supportive environment for tourism to thrive. Another study looked into their ability to gain an international reputation as a World Heritage Site. This study highlights the national parks’ ability to attract tourists and generate revenue to sustain their viability. The conceptual basis for the study combined destination development theories by Richard Butler in the Tourism Area Life Cycle, with environmental governance theory. Destination development theories associated with tourist demand and subsequent spatial growth of destinations provided a basis for investigating the stages of growth and development of the parks under study. The Environmental Governance Systems Framework by Arild Vatn highlights institutional responses to the state, and the use of natural resources, which are fundamental to the conservation objective of national parks. The dissertation reviewed other studies investigating national parks ‘tourism performance and describes eight (8) factors to study performance: Tourist Infrastructure and Services; Natural Resources; Management and Planning; Gateway Communities; International Recognition and Reputation; Private Sector Cooperation; Geographic Location and Secondary Attractions. The study has also provided a background to wildlife tourism in Zambian national parks. A critical review of the tourism policies and legislation was conducted to draw out the main themes since Zambia’s independence up until 2015 (the date of the most recent policy). Four areas were selected, namely conservation, economic efficiency, re-distributional equity and stakeholder collaboration. The study also reviewed documents, articles and websites with information on, and the history of, Kafue and South Luangwa National Parks. Primary data were collected from a survey among ten tourism accommodation businesses operating from Kafue National Park and 22 tourism accommodation businesses operating from South Luangwa National Park. A total of 969 tourists were also surveyed, with 454 who visited Kafue and 515 who visited South Luangwa National Park. Interviews were also conducted with 28 people with work experience promoting conservation and tourism in the national parks during various periods from 1964 to 2019. This study makes an applied contribution to tourism development, where theory is tested in the contexts of two African national parks- Zambia’s Kafue and South Luangwa National Parks. The analyses and discussion of the findings addressed the three objectives of the study. The first two objectives were focused on qualitative data from all three participants (i.e. Tourists, Tourism Businesses and Key Informants), validated by secondary data from documents and records. In the first, Butler’s (1980) Tourism Area Life Cycle model was applied to the tourist trend data from both national parks. Findings confirmed that Kafue National Park has underperformed as a destination. For the second objective, the analysis examined the responses of tourists and tourism businesses according to eight (8) factors drawn from the literature review, as indicated above. Findings validate the relevance of comparing the performance levels of the two national parks under study. The third analysis was quantitative and examined the conceptual framework of the study. Five (5) hypotheses propositions are analysed and interpreted using the qualitative data analysed in the first two objectives. The five propositions significant for tourism performance in national parks are: State of the Resources, Quality of Infrastructure, Promotion of Tourism Policy, Government Support and the Type of Tourists frequenting the national park. Four of these were significant to South Luangwa, except the Quality of Infrastructure. Kafue National Park had lower ratings in all five factors. Interviews amongst Key Informants brought out a wide variety of responses, as did the open-ended portions of the tourist questionnaire. However, the main factors that have led to the differences in tourism performance of the Kafue and South Luangwa national parks are (in no particular order of importance): 1. The extended periods of funding and support from donor agencies and non-governmental organisations; 2. The type of private sector investors operating from the park 3. The levels of infrastructure development to meet tourist demand; 4. The density of wildlife resources; 5. International recognition and reputation; 6. Tourism cooperation and collaboration among private sector actors; 7. Ease of accessibility, particularly for international tourists; 8. Type of tourists frequenting the park; 9. The socio-economic context of game management area communities; 10. The extent of promotion of tourism policies; 11. Governance and management issues: Those that have hindered the Kafue National Park’s tourism development include the following: a) The national park’s proximity to Lusaka, which is the national centre of the illicit wildlife trade; b) The national park has high investment costs for tourism businesses; c) Human encroachment; d) The deliberate plans to limit tourism development in the national park; e) Inadequate support from government; f) The national park is too big for effective management. Those that have influenced South Luangwa National Park’s better performance and growth include the revolving fund model for management initiated by the 1982 Luangwa Integrated Resource Development Programme (which was later named the South Luangwa Area Management Unit in 1995) and better control of the park with regard to the numbers of wildlife officers and implementation of General Management Plans; 12. Park promotion by influential individuals. The study demonstrates that investigating tourism performance in national parks should take into account: i. The history of the national park to understand its stage of development as a tourist destination; ii. Identifying the similarities in tourism performance in national parks based on cultural values from developing countries; iii. Identifying the role of different actors to tourism development (through the application of Butlers’ Tourism Area Life Cycle) and conservation agendas of National Parks (through Vatn’s Environmental Governance Systems framework); iv. National tourism policy aspirations.