Alternative to mass tourism in Dominica

A7umil qf?bunm Reseanh, \‘ol. 18. pp. Printrd in the GS.4. All nghts resrx-vrd.

414-432,

1991 Copyright

0

0160-7383/‘11 $3.00 1991 Pergnrnon Press 1’11 andJ

+ .oo J&n

ALTERNATIVE TO MASS TOURISM IN DOMINICA University

David B. Weaver of Regina, Canada

Abstract: An analysis of tourist accommodations, market, and economy on the island of Dominica reveals a tourism industry that represents an appropriate and viable alternative to the conventional varieties of mass tourism dominant in the Caribbean. Dominica started out as a “circurnstantial” Alternative Tourism (AT) destination, where the desire to develop large-scale tourism was constrained by unfavorable environmental and political conditions. However, the island since 1971 has moved in the direction of a “deliberate” AT policy, emphasizing the attractixreness of its mountainous and forested interior to a, growing ecotourist market. Current tourism growth and development m Dominica appears to be occurring in a way that conforms with the philosophy of deliberate AT. Keywords: alternative tourism, Dominica, ecotourism. R&urn&: Tourisme de masse et tourisme alternatif 2 la Dominique. Une analyse de l’hkbergement touristique, du marcht et de l’tconomie sur l’ile de la Dominique rCv&le l’existence d’une industrie touristique “deuce” qui pourrait ?tre preferable au tourisme de masse qui domine dans la rtgion des Carai‘bes. Au d&but, le tourismc alternatif g la Dominique ktait le rtsultat des circonstances, parce que le dtsir de d&elopper lc tourisme de masse a ttC contraint par des conditions politiques et environnementales d&favorables. Toutefois, depuis 1971, l’ile suit une politique intcntionnelle de tourisme alternatif, en mettant en valcur la beautk des montagnes ct des forets pour le march; croissant de 1’Ecotourismc. Le devcloppemcnt actuel du tourisme 5 la Dominique semble ctr-e en conformitt! aver la philosophie du tourisme alternatif intentionnel. Mots-cl&: tourismc alternatif, Dominique, Ccotourisme.

INTRODUCTION The concept of Alternative Tourism (AT) has received considerable attention in the literature since 1980 (e.g., S. Britton 1987; Butler 1990; Gazes 1989; Cohen 1989; Dernoi 1981; Jenkins 1982). The main purpose of this article is to analyze the tourism industry of Dominica, which may be described as an AT-oriented destination. Initial contextual information will include a theoretical discussion of the nature of

David Weaver rcccived his Ph.D. in Geography at the University of Western Ontario in 1986 and currently holds the position of Assistant Professor of Geography Saskatchewan S4SOA2, Canada). at Luther College (University of Regina, Regina, He specializes in the tourism mdustry of underdeveloped regions, and has traveled to the Caribbean many times to conduct research. 414

DAVID

WEAVER

415

AT, and a short geographical description of Dominica. The analysis itself will commence with a brief historical outline as to how and why that form of tourism emerged in Dominica. This will be followed by an examination of the present tourism industry with respect to selected attributes of accommodation, market, and economy. Whether or not the existence of AT in Dominica is deliberate, or merely reflective of an early state of development prior to a more conventional variety of tourism, will be considered. Conclusions and policy recommendations will be derived from this analysis. Nature of Alternatiue Tourism

If the evolution of tourism research, as it applies to small developing destinations, can be seen as a dialectical process, then the concept of AT is emerging as the antithesis to conventional mass tourism, which has endured sustained criticism over the past 20 years on economic, sociocultural, and environmental grounds (R. Britton 1980; S. Britton and Clarke 1987; Bryden 1973; Erisman 1983; Hills and Lundgren 1977; Lea 1988; Turner and Ash 1975). Perhaps because its conceptual origins are so recent, no consensus has yet emerged as to the precise nature of AT (Pearce 1989), and the concept remains ambiguous, confusing, and of little use i-n scientific discourse, despite its wide currency (Butler 1990; Conference Report 1990). The most appropriate way of perceiving AT, therefore, is as a generic term encompassing a range of tourism strategies (e.g., “appropriate,” “eco-,” “soft,” “responsible, ” “people-to-people,” “controlled,” “small-scale,” “cottage,” and “green” tourism), all of which purport to offer a more benign alternative to conventional mass tourism in certain types of destinations (Conference Report 1990). Cazes (in Pearce 1989: lOl), alluding to intrinsic values of spirit, associates these various AT options with the “concepts of emancipation and self-determination and the search for spontaneity, enhanced interpersonal relations, creativity, authenticity, solidarity, and social and ecological harmony.” Despite this evident vagueness, it is possible to identify concrete structural traits that tend to characterize AT-oriented destinations. Table 1 focuses upon Table 1. Characteristic Tendencies: Conventional and Alternative Tourism” Variable

Conventional

Mass Tourism

Mass Tourism

Alternative

Tourism

Accommodations Spatial Pattern SC& Ownership Market VlJllJmL? Origin segment Activities Seasonality Economy status Impact

Coastal, High Density Larger-scale, Integrated Foreign, Multi-national

Dispersed, Low Density Smaller-scale, Homestyle Local, Family, Small business

Higher One dominant market Psychocentric-Midcentric Water/beach/nightlife Winter high season

Lower No dominant market Allocentric-Midrentrc Nature/culture No dominant season

Dominant Sector High Import Sector Repatriated profits

Supplementary Sector Low Import Sector Retained profits

n A more detailed list of contrasts

is found m Butler (1990).

416

ALTERNATIVE

TO MASS TOURISM

IN DOMINICA

the differences between conventional mass tourism and AT with regard to 10 significant and, for the most part, quantifiable variables related to accommodation, market, and economics. These variables will form the basis for the present analysis of Dominican tourism. The pairings of characteristics, it must be emphasized, are not intended to represent inflexible or diametrically opposed extremes, but rather should be taken as tendencies. The prevalence of AT is difficult to establish, in part because of the ambiguity of the concept, and also because of the consideration as to whether the label should include “circumstantial” as well as “deliberate” AT destinations. “Deliberate” AT destinations are those that through policy and planning consciously pursue the goals and values cited earlier by Gazes. Examples from the Third World include the “cultural” village tourism of Senegal’s Lower Casamance region (Saglio 1979), the “Meet-the-People” program of Jamaica (cited in Dernoi 1981), the Tufi guest houses of Papua New Guinea (Ranck 1987), the small-hotel policy practiced on the Guadeloupean out islands of Desirade, Les Saintes, and Marie Galante (Pearce 1989), and the nature-oriented tourism practiced in such places as Chitwan National Park in Nepal; St. Anne National Marine Park in Seychelles; and Tai Island, Fiji (McNeely and Thorsell 1989). This sampling indicates a spatial pattern of isolated, local-scale nodes of activity scattered throughout many regions of the world. Much rarer are deliberate AT strategies applied to entire countries. This author maintains that Dominica represents such a case. A deliberate AT policy was also intended for the Caribbean island of St. Vincent under the first premiership of James Mitchell (1972), although its implementation was thwarted by Mitchell’s electoral defeat. “Circumstantial” destinations appear superficially to conform with AT, but only because the destination is experiencing an incipient stage of tourism that may eventually be followed by a more intensive, larger-scale level of development. Butler (1980), in his resort cycle model, asserts that many destinations pass through a predictable sequence of stages as they evolve from obscurity to full-fledged resort. and “involvement”) are characterThe early phases (i.e., “exploration” ized by low visitation levels, low impacts, local ownership, and other traits that are characteristic of AT. However, as the destination becomes more popular and attracts increasing amounts of outside capital, a transformation to conventional mass tourism begins. The notion of “alternative” tourism is somewhat misleading in these instances, as that type of activity is not deliberately cultivated as an alternative to conventional mass tourism, but exists as its prelude. Circumstantial AT destinations are numerous and spatially extensive, although there is no guarantee that all these areas will inevitably reach the mature phases of the resort cycle. The tourist industry of Belize may represent a good example of circumstantial AT, as its current small-scale level of activity is likely to be superseded soon by large-scale development and a concomitant influx of tourist arrivals (Pearce 1984). This does not, however, preclude the possibility that certain parts of Belize will be designated as deliberate AT destinations.

DAVID WEAVER

417

Geographic Description of Dominica The path of development followed by the Dominican tourist industry can be better understood within the context of the island’s geography and history. Dominica is a former British colony in the eastern Caribbean situated between the French Overseas Departments of Guadeloupe and Martinique. The 754-km* island (Figure 1) consists almost entirely of rugged, mountainous terrain of volcanic origin. Large amounts of orographic rainfall have fostered a thick tropical forest cover in the interior. Highly vulnerable to hurricane activity because of its location on a major cyclone track, Dominica was devastated in 1979 by Hurricane David, which left 37 dead, 5,000 injured, and three-quarters of the population homeless (Honychurch 1984:209-12). On September 17- 19, 1989, Hurricane Hugo destroyed 70-80 % of Dominica’s banana crop and caused approximately US$5 million damage to the island’s property and infrastructure (Day 1990). With a mainly black population of 80,000 and a density of approximately 100 persons per square kilometer, Dominica may be considered a rather sparsely populated island by Caribbean standards. However, most of

Figure

1. Tourism

Facilities

and Protected

Areas in Dominica,

1988

418

ALTERNATIVE

TO MASS TOURISM

IN DOMINICA

this population is concentrated in small villages along the coast, while the interior is only sparsely inhabited. The economy is based mainly upon export agriculture, and the 1985 per capita income of US$1,150 (Bissio 1988:251) ranks Dominica as an economically underdeveloped country. Because of its inhospitable terrain, Dominica was among the last of the Lesser Antilles to be permanently colonized. Self-government was achieved in 1967 (with the attainment of “Associated State” status), and the island became a fully sovereign State in 1978. TOURISM

IN DOMINICA

The island of Dominica has been regularly characterized in the travel literature as a remote, rugged, verdant, scenic, undeveloped, and somewhat offbeat destination infrequently visited by tourists (Aspinall 1911; de Leeuw 1937; Fermor 1950; Ober 1908; Verrill 1917; Ward 1972; Waugh 1949). Most sources, while praising the physical beauty of Dominica, recognized that the prospects of large-scale tourism development were hindered by its physical geography and lack of facilities. For example, assessing the potential of tourism as a postwar option for the Caribbean region, the Anglo-American Caribbean Commission (1945:85) d escribed Dominica as “just the place for husky young people who wish to take two or three-day rough camping trips on foot or horseback through grand and shady forests with marvellous scenery. ” The Commission stated that the possibilities for Dominica to capitalize on the anticipated expansion of the tourist market were severely curtailed by the limited supply of accommodations, and by the absence of a suitable harbor and airplane landing strip. Dominica no doubt would have pursued a policy of large-scale tourism development if this had been feasible, given the underdevelopment of the island, the reliance upon agriculture, and the favorable attitudes toward tourism held by most Caribbean governments following World War II. To this extent, the island could be described as a circumstantial AT destination during its early stage of tourism development. The difficulties of inaccessibility that militated against increased tourism development were, however, both created and compounded by various geographic and social factors. With respect to the former, Dominica’s mountainous terrain and thick forest cover have presented a formidable obstacle to the development of an adequate internal transportation flat and infrastructure system (Blume 1974). Th e scarcity of relatively land has also hindered the construction of an airfield large enough to accommodate an appreciable volume of tourist arrivals. Favorable terrain in the northeast led to the siting of Dominica’s first major airfield at Melville Hall, but the remoteness of this location from Roseau, the capital city, eventually necessitated the establishment of a new airport at Canefield, just north of Roseau (Figure 1). Barring major landscape manipulations and capital investment, Canefield Airport will remain incapable of accommodating large aircraft, and will continue to be used only by a small number of local and regional carriers such as LIAT (Leeward Islands Air Transport). The present government of Dominica is currently planning to upgrade the Melville Hall Airport to accommodate jet aircraft by late 1991, pending the

DAVID

WEAVER

419

provision of funds from foreign sources. This expansion is apparently motivated as much by the desire to facilitate the export of agricultural commodities as by the desire to attract a higher volume of tourist arrivals (1990 personal communication with the Dominican National Development Corporation). The development of mass tourism has been further deterred by the absence of white-sand beaches, the quintessential raw material of the sunlust resort. Dominica does contain a number of dark-sand beaches as a consequence of its volcanic origins, but only a few of these are situated on the protected western leeward coast (Figure 1). Heavy precipitation and frequent cloud cover, particularly during the JuneDecember rainy season (James 1988), have also dissuaded tourists from visiting the island. More serious is Dominica’s aforementioned vulnerability to hurricanes. The exposure of Dominica to Hurricane David in 1979 resulted in extensive damage to the island’s few tourist facilities, and contributed in the longer term to the island’s image as an investment risk. Problems of physical geography have been compounded by unfavorable political and social developments. A vocal “Black Power” movement during the late 1960s and early 1970s fostered a negative tourist perception of Dominica. Antiwhite protests, and incidents such as the burning of a Canadian flag in downtown Roseau, received substantial press coverage in the foreign media. The murder of a tourist in 1974, and the violent activities of the antiwhite “Dreads” during the late 1970s further alienated the tourist market (Honeychurch 1984: 186194). The fact that such incidents did not reflect the attitudes or activities of most Dominicans attests to the vulnerability of tourism to the unrest generated by a relatively small minority of agitators. At a political level, Dominica has also suffered with an image of instability associated with the regime of Patrick John, and with two coup attempts during 1981, one of which involved the interception in New Orleans of US and Canadian mercenaries who were embarking on an invasion of the island (Honychurch 1984). The political reputation of Dominica has improved somewhat during the conservative premiership of Mary Eugenia Charles, who was first elected in 1980 and narrowly reelected to a third term in May 1990. In light of the conditions outlined earlier, it is not surprising that Dominica has maintained the status of “poor sister” to Eastern Caribbean islands of comparable land mass, as far as volume of tourist arrivals is concerned. Table 2 shows that Dominica has always occupied the lowest tier of the tourism hierarchy within this group, below Grenada and St. Vincent. Like a number of other Caribbean destinations, Dominica has attempted to attract tourism development through favorable government legislation. The Hotel Aids Ordinance of 1958 (Dominica 1958) offered a lo-year tax holiday for hotels containing at least 10 bedrooms, and waived duty charges on goods imported for the construction of these hotels. These incentives met with limited success, and it became clear by the late 1960s that Dominica was unsuited for the large-scale forms of tourism successfully pursued by some of its neighbors. A turning point of sorts occurred with the reiection of the Shankland Cox report of 1971 (Shankland Cox and Associ-

420

ALTERNATIVE

Table

2. Tourist

Destination Antigua Barbados DOMINICA Grenada St. Lucia St. Vincent

Stayover

Area280 431 790 345 603 389

mm2)

TO MASS TOURISM

Arrivals:

Selected

Stayover

Arrivals

1959b

197oc

1979d

16 30 2 1 5 6

63 156 13 30 30 16

99 371 20 32 80 33

IN DOMINICA

Eastern

(000’s) 1988-3 187 451 32 62 125 64

Caribbean

Destinations

Tourism Receipts of exrmrt re”enue

as % 19tw

624’ 265 24f 104 88f 338

aBlume 1974; bCaribbean Tourism Association 1960; ‘Waters 1980; dHolder 1979; eWorld Tourism Organization 1989; ‘1966 data (World Tourism Organization 1989); gTourism receipts as % of Gross National Product.

ates 1971). This report advocated an unrealistic policy of large-scale expansion, and its rejection by the government set in motion the search for practical tourism alternatives. A subsequent study, the Kastarlak Report (Kastarlak 1975), acknowledged the realities of the Dominican tourism product, and recommended a policy based on the promotion of the island’s environmental assets. The United Nations-sponsored report suggested that the strength of Dominican tourism was found in its interior, and that a concerted effort should be made to market specialized groups such as environmentalists (Kastarlak 1975 : 19, 25). While rejecting many of the Report’s specific recommendations, the government did adopt the new philosophical perspective. Stimulated in large part by the emergence of the modern environmentalist movement and the overall deterioration and decline of unspoiled natural this new approach entailed a shift in perception and a basic spaces, redefinition of the island’s tourism resource base. Dominica’s physical geography, hitherto maligned as a tourism liability, would henceforth be marketed as the major tourist asset of the island. The release of the Kastarlak Report in 1975 coincided with the formal establishment of Dominica’s first national park (Dominica 1975). Comprising approximately 63 km2 of land in the mountainous southern interior (Figure l), Morne Trois Pitons (“Mountain of Three Peaks”) National Park was created primarily to protect watersheds and to preserve certain outstanding natural phenomena (James 1988; Thorsell and Wood 1976; Wright 1985). With regard to the former, the idea of establishing a national park was originally motivated by the activities of Dom-Can, a Canadian lumber company, whose cutting of the mountain rain forest during the 1960s resulted in widespread erosion in the vicinity of the present park. Disappointing economic results from this project also attested to the impracticality of commercial forestry in the fragile interior. The subsequent efforts of local conservationists and the lobbying of various international organizations, such as the American Geographical Society and the Nature Conservancy, led to the preservation of the area. Watersheds in the northern interior had already received a high degree of protection with the establishment of the Northern and Central Forest Reserves (Figure 1). Significant natural resources embraced by the National Park include two freshwater lakes, a “boiling lake,” about 50 fumaroles and hot springs, and large relatively undisturbed tracts of rain forest and montane forest habitat. The actual establishment of the park was carried out by the

DAVID WEAVER

421

Canadian Nature Federation, with assistance from Parks Canada, the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), and other bodies (Thorsell and Wood 1976; Wright 1985). Although the formation of the park was not motivated to any significant extent by tourism considerations (Wright 1985), some provision was made in the incipient park plans to accommodate a low level of tourist visitation. A second national park has since been established at the more accessible Cabrits headland in northwestern Dominica (Figure 1). Unlike Morne Trois Pitons, this park emphasizes history and features the long-term restoration of Fort Shirley, a British fortress of the Imperial era. Cabrits National Park is expected to emerge as a major tourist attraction after the completion in January 1991 of an adjacent cruise ship docking facility (1990 personal communication with the Dominican National Development Corporation). In the 15 years since the release of the Kastarlak Report and the formation of the National Park, Dominica has generally pursued a deliberate AT tourism strategy emphasizing its natural environment. During this time, several schemes to introduce large-scale tourism and related activities to Dominica were proposed, although none met with any success in the face of widespread local opposition. One especially questionable project supported in 1979 by then Prime Minister Patrick John would have entailed the establishment of a “Free Port” (including oil refineries, casinos, etc.) on about 100 km2 of land in northern Dominica, which was to have been leased to an obscure foreign company for an annual fee of $100 (Honychurch 1984:203-205). During the subsequent premiership of Mary Eugenia Charles, the emphasis on an AT approach has been retained, despite her conservative, proinvestment reputation (1990 personal communication with the Dominican National Development Corporation). Assessments of accommodations, markets, and economics will assist in gauging the extent to which the AT pattern is actually followed in the contemporary Dominican tourism industry. Accommodations In the “ideal” Caribbean AT model, accommodations consist of small-scale, locally owned facilities dispersed at low densities throughout the destination. Conventional mass tourism, by contrast, emphasizes large-scale, heavily foreign-owned facilities concentrated along the coast at much higher densities (Table 1). With respect to spatial pattern, Dominican accommodations may be divided into three distinct sectors: urban/semi-urban, beach, and interior. The urban/ semi-urban node incorporates the hotels and guest houses of downtown Roseau, the “strip” of hotels situated along the main road south of Roseau, the airport-oriented facility at Canefield, and Reigate Hall in the suburban hills just above Roseau (Figure 1). Altogether, this area accounts for approximately one-half of all accommodation units in Dominica. Beach-oriented facilities are restricted to the western leeward coast, with nodes at Portsmouth Bay in the north (generally regarded as the best beach area on the island), and Mero, midway between Portsmouth and Roseau. Four hotels in this sector account

422

ALTERNATIVE

TO MASS TOURISM

IN DOMINICA

for about 40% of all accommodation units. Finally, six hotels and guest houses with 10% of all accommodation units constitute the interior sector. Most of these latter facilities are located on the outskirts of Morne Trois Pitons National Park, although the Carib Guest House on the east coast and the Layou Valley Inn in west-central Dominica are included because of their strong nonbeach orientation. The spatial pattern of Dominican accommodation does not appear to conform comfortably to either AT or conventional mass tourism, given its concentration in the Roseau area. However, it is difficult to gauge the significance of this characteristic alone, without examining the related patterns of scale and ownership. Table 3 reveals a definite tendency toward AT with respect to these latter characteristics. Only about one-half of all units are found in the four facilities with 25 rooms or more, while the largest hotel (the Portsmouth Beach, in Portsmouth) contains only 91 units. (The impression of crowding around Roseau created by Figure 1 is thus due more to the size of the cartographic symbols and the map scale than to any actual agglomeration, although some minor semblance of a hotel “strip” is discernible along the coast just south of Roseau, where two of the largest facilities are situated.) Significantly, all accommodations in the interior sector contain less than 10 units, suggesting that facilities in this area are especially conformable to AT. With respect to ownership, Dominicans wholly control 62 % of facilities and 70% of units, while partially controlling 19% of facilities and 15% of units. This pattern of local control, unlike most small Caribbean destinations, extends to the largest facilities (Table 3). Furthermore, the 19% of accommodations that are wholly owned by foreign interests are not held by a single market source, but are dispersed among a variety of nationalities, including German, Canadian, US, and Swiss. The high degree of private local ownership is attributable in large part to the small size of Dominican facilities. Given the limited indigenous capital available in a microstate such as Dominica, large resorts (i.e., 100 rooms or more) would more likely be controlled by and few private citizens would foreign interests or by government, have the opportunity to participate competitively as hotel operators. The Division of Tourism, while desiring to increase the number of units from the current level of about 400 to approximately 1,000 units within the next three or four years (1993 or 1994), believes that an emphasis on small-scale, locally controlled facilities should be retained

Table 3. Dominica:

Ownership

Size of Facility (No. of Units)

100% Dominican Facilities Units

Over 25 lo-24 5-9 Total % of Total

3 6 4 13 62

and Size of Accommodations

ForeigdDominicana Facilities Units

160 11 28 265 70

a Ownership varies from 60.75% foreign. Source: Caribbean Tourism Organization National Development Corporation.

0 3 1 4 19

100% Foreign Facilities Units

0 50 7 57 15

1989;

1990

1 1 2 4 19

Personal

27 16 14 57 15

communication

in 1988

Total Facilities 4 10 1 21 100

wth

Units 167 143 49 379 100

the Domimcan

423

DAVID WEAVER

(1990 personal communication ment Corporation).

with the Dominican

National

Develop-

Markets Table 2 reveals the low absolute volume of tourist arrivals to Dominica as compared with other similarly sized islands within the eastern Caribbean. However, a detailed profile of stayover arrivals (Figure 2) indicates a consistent upward trend, which superficially suggests that Dominica is entering the early “development” stage of the resort cycle. If true, this would imply that Dominican tourism may be on the verge of many radical transformations associated with Butler’s (1980) “development” stage. Several considerations should, however, generate scepticism as to the likelihood of this scenario. First, while the government is supporting a significant addition to the supply of accommodations, it is intended that this expansion will occur within the context of AT (see previous section). Second, the increase in arrivals may be associated with the current popularity of environmentalism, which might suggest a limited long-term market potential. Dominica’s lack of the beach-centered resource base upon which conventional large-scale resort tourism relies should again be noted. Third, even if environmentally based tourism could stimulate an influx, Dominica does not yet

Figure 2. Annual Tourist Arrivals in Dominica,

1963-1988

424

ALTERNATIVE

TO MASS TOURISM

IN DOMINICA

possess the airport facilities or airline connections required to accommodate the increased traffic. There is, therefore, nothing inexorable about the standard resort cycle, which seems to operate best in whitesand destinations such as Antigua (Weaver 1988), or in more urbanized locales. This is not to say that the government of Dominica would not welcome a higher level of tourist arrivals, providing that this does not compromise the present environmentally oriented product, or generate unacceptable social and infrastructural stresses. With respect to excursionists arriving by cruise ship, Figure 2 reveals greater irregularities in the visitation pattern. The completion of the Cabrits docking facility in early 1991 should, however, stimulate a significant increase in this particular sector. With respect to tourist origins, conventional mass tourism often fosters a reliance on a narrow range of market countries, whereas AT strives to diversify the market base as much as possible. The disadvantages of overreliance include vulnerability to external factors occurring in the dominant market (e.g., political or economic difficulties) that may negatively affect the flow of tourists from that point of origin. As well, dependence on a dominant market may expose a destination to undue political and economic influences or interferences from the government of the generating market. A diversified market, in contrast, helps to reduce the impact of those negative external factors that are confined to specific countries of origin. It is recognized, however, that market diversity does not shield a destination against a decline in arrivals if problems occur within the destination itself (e.g., Hurricane David, coup attempts), or if the external factors are regional or global in character (e.g., 1980/81 Recession, 1973 “oil crisis”). A cumulative analysis of stayover origins between 1984 and 1987 indicates that Dominica conforms to AT expectations (Figure 3). Arrivals from metropolitan countries, which usually account for most of the market in conventional mass tourist destinations (particularly during the winter), constitute less than one-half (45%) of the Dominican tourist flow. A diverse range of origins is represented within this sector, with the United States contributing the largest single share (19.1% of the total flow) because of its size, wealth and proximity. The large arrivals from the United Kingdom (9.3%) may be attributed to longstanding economic, political, and cultural (e.g., migration) links, while Canada’s significant share (5.6%) d erives from historical and economic links. Intraregional (Caribbean) points of origin account for an almost as the metropolitan countries. The equal portion of the market (44%) high proportion of visitors from the French West Indies (20.9%) is explained by proximity, relative affluence, and linguistic affinities with Dominica. The Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) (12.3%) and other Caribbean Community (CARICOM) (10.8%) have a spatial proximity and common “British” heritage that foster strong intergroup relationships and movements of people. While intraregional tourists tend to spend less money, avoid large hotels, and stay for a shorter period of time than their metropolitan counterparts, their presence may bc considered positive from a social and cultural perspective, as well in some respects from an economic viewpoint. Unlike most tourists from metropolitan markets, Caribbean

DAVID

WEAVER

'OECS = Organizationof Eastern CaribbeanStates PCARICOM- CaribbeanCormunity

425

Source: CaribbeanTourism Organization19d9

Figure 3. Stayover Arrivals in Dominica by Area of Residence, 1984-1987

visitors share many cultural and social traits with their Dominican hosts, and their presence may help to ameliorate the negative “blackwhite” dichotomy that usually characterizes conventional mass tourism in the Third World. Intraregional arrivals are also more likely to consume local goods to which they are accustomed, thereby contributing to a positive multiplier effect within the local economy. Because of their geographical proximity (which implies lower travel costs), they are also more likely to travel to destinations such as Dominica even in the event of an economic downturn. Allusions have already been made to the tourist product of Dominica, and by extension, to the segment of the tourist market that the country is likely to attract. In general terms, Plog (1972) has envisioned a bell curve continuum of tourists based on attitudinal criteria. Occupying one extreme and small in number are the extremely adaptable true “allocentrics,” who seek adventure, risk, and new experiences. At the other extreme are the true “psychocentrics,” who find solace in familiarity and certainty, and who seek to minimize risk. In the middle are the majority “midcentrics,” or “average” tourists. Although no detailed analysis of Dominican tourist types has yet been produced, personal experience of the author and inference from the product offered strongly points to an allocentric-midcentric clientele, particularly among tourists from metropolitan places of origin. Uncertainty and a sense of adventure pervade a trip to Dominica, which is relatively difficult to reach because of the absence of direct flights from North America or Europe. Once on the island, the tourist is confronted by a lack of the “luxuries” prevalent in more conventional destinations. By their nature, however, allocentrics tend to prefer the ambience of a small hotel or guesthouse, and attempt to immerse

426

ALTERNATIVE

TO MASS TOURISM

IN DOMINICA

themselves in what they perceive to be the authentic local lifestyle. While lounging on the beach is not precluded, these tourists orient a major part of their activity time toward the interior, engaging in “unconventional” (for the Caribbean) activities such as hiking, birdwatching, touring, and horseback riding. Virtually all hotels offer means by which their guest may visit the natural attractions of the island, although only a handful of accommodations are actually available within the interior itself. The government of Dominica deliberenvironmentally oriented image in its ately encourages an “offbeat,” promotional efforts, touting itself as the “Nature Island of the Caribbean.” A remarkable comparison in advertising strategy can be made between Dominica, which boasts of “365 rivers,” and Antigua, which makes the claim of “365 beaches.” Each respectively represents perhaps the best example of AT and conventional mass tourism within the region, and accordingly makes the appropriate apocryphal claim to its targeted market. To attract tourists into the interior, a controlled system of trails and shelters is being developed in Morne Trois Pitons National Park, as well as in the Northern and Central Forest Reserves (1990 Personal communication with the Dominican National Development Corporation). Conventional mass tourism on islands such as Antigua is characterized by a discernible seasonality, with the “typical” metropolitan tourist seeking out sea, sand, and sun during the winter months, and intraregional arrivals increasing during the months of summer vacation. This cycle of hotels characterized results in an annual “deluge-drought” by overutilization in the winter and underutilization in the summer. Theoretically, AT is not as vulnerable to seasonality, since “escaping the cold” is not a primary travel motivation of the “eco-tourist.” “Offseason” timing offers the further inducements of dramatically reduced costs and local environmental conditions that may not be available in the winter (e.g., the presence of certain species only in the summer). Figure 4 depicts average monthly stayover arrivals to Dominica based on a four-year (1984- 1987) average. While the pattern is far from perfect stability, it shows that fluctuations do not occur as structural consequences of differential winter-summer preferences. The peak month (August) occurs during summer holidays, while the slumps (March-June, September-November) take place during periods of however, do not deviate to any seasonal transition. These slumps, radical degree from the overall five-year monthly average of 1,974 arrivals. The conclusion with respect to seasonality is simply that the nature of the product and the market encourages a more balanced and predictable visitation pattern under normal conditions, and that this is desirable in terms of balanced employment, revenue, and infrastructural utilization patterns. ECONOMIC

CONSIDERATIONS

The economies of many small Caribbean islands eventually become dependent upon revenues derived from conventional mass tourism. This is due in part to the inherent spatial limitations of these destina-

DAVID

WEAVER

427

J

Figure 4. Average Stayover Arrivals in Dominica by Month, 1984-1987 tions, which severely restrict the range of available economic options. In some cases, the problem may be further attributed to the heritage of plantation-based economies and lifestyles, which has given rise to a structure of single-sector dependency. Both factors have influenced Antigua, where the economy has shifted from a dominant estate agriculture sector (about 70% of the GNP) throughout most of its European historical phase, to an emphasis on tourism (about 70% of the GNP, or 624% of export earningssee Table 2) since the 1970s (Weaver 1988). Alternative tourism, in contrast, promotes the development of tourism as one supplementary component within a multisectoral economy. Advantages of such diversity include the nondisruption of “traditional” activities, and the opportunity to integrate these with tourism in a mutually beneficial way. In addition, a single-sector economy would be severely disrupted if that particular sector were to suffer problems, while a more balanced and diverse economy has other options to fall back on if one sector should fail. Table 2 shows that tourism revenues equal approximately 24% of Dominican export earnings, which are derived largely from agricultural products. Unlike cases of extreme dependency, such as Antigua and St. Lucia, tourism in Dominica enhances, but does not dominate, the local economy. Commensurate with anticipated increases in accommodations and visitor arrivals, the Division of Tourism would like to increase tourism’s share of the Dominican GNP from 1.5 % to 5 % within the next several years (1990 communication with the Dominican National Development Corporation). This target, while modest by regional standards, indicates a desire to foster a multisectoral economy dependent on no single activity. While specific studies again are lacking, it appears as if the emphasis on local food and building materials in Dominican accommodations has encouraged the formation of structural linkages between tourism

428

ALTERNATIVE

TO MASS TOURISM

IN DOMINICA

and the local primary sector (agriculture, fishing, and forestry). Although visitors to Dominica spend less money than their counterparts on other islands (The Economist Intelligence Unit 1989:65), it is likely that a higher proportion of these expenditures are retained in the local economy, leading to a relatively high multiplier effect. This of course is abetted by the high degree of local control, which discourages the expatriation of hotel profits. In contrast, conventional mass tourist destinations, such as Antigua, cannot supply the quantity and type of goods (e.g., “North American” cuisine) demanded by that particular clientele, and must import most of the goods required by the tourism sector. As well, the dominance of foreign interests leads to the largescale repatriation of profits. Although visitors to Antigua are characterized by a high level of expenditure (The Economist Intelligence Unit 1989:65), a very low proportion of these expenditures is retained by that island, and the multiplier effect is very weak. In summary, Dominica might be characterized as a “low-revenue -low-leakage” destination, while Antigua may be described as a “high-revenue-high-leakage” island. Therefore, the apparent advantage of conventional mass tourist destinations in attracting more revenue may be somewhat illusory, as net revenues are not as dissimilar as the gross expenditures per visitor would indicate. Rodenburg (1980) demonstrated in the case of Bali, Indonesia, that small-scale facilities, while generating low gross revenues, did indeed produce higher net revenues than large resorts, because of the import and profit leakages.

SUMMARY

AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

Dominica started out as a circumstantial AT destination; it could not develop a conventional mass tourism industry because of its disadvantages of terrain, isolation, and climate. During the early 197Os, and in particular with the rejection of the Shankland Cox report of 1971, Dominican policy began to move toward deliberate AT. This change in direction came about in part with the realization that the island was unsuited to mass tourism. However, the new policy also recognized the emerging potential of ecologically based tourism as a viable, if limited, long-term option for Dominica. The tourism resource base thus experienced a redefinition, as former liabilities were now perceived as assets, and the newly established Morne Trois Pitons National Park emerged as a major tourist attraction. An analysis of the contemporary Dominican tourist industry would suggest that the AT option has been appropriate for the island, given the nature of its physical characteristics. Several recent initiatives, such as the construction of the Cabrits docking facility, the proposed and the increase in the number of Melville Hall airport expansion, accommodation units, could generate some scepticism about the desire to pursue a deliberate AT strategy (and thus imply that Dominica has perhaps been, after all, a circumstantial AT island). However, when the circumstances of these projects and proposals are examined, it appears as if the growth is intended to be managed within the limits of

DAVID

WEAVER

429

deliberate AT, which remains the priority of the Dominican government. Several general recommendations emanate from this case study. The experience of Dominica indicates that AT strategies represent viable options for many small destinations, and that such options should, therefore, be seriously considered by destinations wishing to promote their tourism sector without launching into large-scale developments of questionable local benefit. There is nothing inexorable or deterministic about the resort cycle, and circumstantial AT destinations can choose to become deliberate AT destinations if this is perceived by governments to be in the best interests of their countries. This may be achieved and sustained under government auspices through policies that protect and promote the environment as a tourist attraction, support locally owned, small-scale accommodations, and encourage arrivals from a wide array of market countries. Some growth is possible, although destinations should ensure that this expansion occurs slowly and does not compromise the nature of the AT product by exceeding local carrying capacities. Many diverse cultural or natural resources can form the basis of a deliberate AT strategy. The “foundation assets” of Dominican AT emphasize the natural environment, but other destinations may focus more upon cultural and historical criteria, depending on their own individual strengths. The long-term success of AT is probably enhanced when a destination is successful in emphasizing and marketing its individuality (i.e., in presenting itself as a unique place unlike any other destination). Finally, it is proposed that academics and practitioners should retain the term “Alternative Tourism” as a flexible, generic label incorporating the diverse range of related strategies that may offer some kind of viable alternative to conventional mass tourism. Without such a label, the larger values and commonalities uniting concepts such as “green,” “small-scale,” or “cottage” tourism may go unnoticed. If the tourism debate is dialectical in character, then the term is useful as a banner under which the opposition can unite. 0 0

REFERENCES Anglo-American Caribbean Commission 1945 Caribbean Tourist Trade: A Regional Approach. Washington DC: The Anglo-American Caribbean Commission. Aspinall, Sir Algernon E. 1911 The Pocket Guide to the West Indies. New York: E. P. Dutton. Bissio, Roberto 1988 Third World Guide 89/90. Montivedeo, Uruguay: Third World Editors. Blume, Helmut 1974 The Caribbean Islands, London: Longman. Britton, Robert 1980 Shortcomings in Third World Tourism. In Dialectics of Third World Development, I. Vogeler and A. de Souza, eds., pp. 241-248. Totowa NJ: Rowman and Allanheld. Britton, S. 1987 Tourism in Small Developing Countries: Development Issues and Research Needs. In Ambiguous Alternative: Tourism in Small Developing Countries, S.

430

ALTERNATIVE

TO MASS

TOURISM

IN DOMINICA

Britton and W. C. Clarke, eds., pp. 167-192. Suva, Fiji: The University of the South Pacific. Britton, S., and W. C. Clarke, eds. 1987 Ambiguous Alternative: Tourism in Small Developing Countries. Suva, Fiji: The University of the South Pacific. Bryden, John 1973 Tourism and Development: A Case Study of the Commonwealth Caribbean. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Butler, Richard 1980 The Concept of a Tourist Area Cycle of Evolution: Implications for Management of Resources. Canadian Geographer 24( 1):5-12. 1990 Alternative Tourism: Pious Hope or Trojan Horse? Journal of Travel Research 28(3):40-45. Caribbean Tourism Association 1960 Review of Members. New York: The Caribbean Tourism Association. Caribbean Tourism Organization 1989 Miscellaneous Statistical Information on Dominica. New York: Caribbean Tourism Organization. Cazes, G. H. 1989 Alternative Tourism: Reflection on an Ambiguous Concept. In Towards Appropriate Tourism: The Case of Developing Countries, T. V. Singh, H. L. Theuns, and F. M. Go, eds., pp. 117-126. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Cohen, E. 1989 Alternative Tourism-A Critique. In Towards Appropriate Tourism: The Case of Developing Countries, T. V. Singh, H. L. Theuns, and F. M. Go, eds., pp. 127-142. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. Conference Report 1990 Theoretical Perspectives on Alternate Forms of Tourism. Journal of Travel Research 28(3):39. Day, Alan, ed. \’ 1990 The Annual Register: A Record of World Events 1989. White Plains NY: Longman. de Leeuw, Hendrik 1937 Crossroads of the buccaneers. Philadelphia: I. B. Lippincott Dernoi, L. A. 1981 Alternative Tourism: Towards a New Stvle in North-South Relations. International Journal of Travel Research 2(December):253-264. Dominica 1958 Hotel Aids Ordinance. Roseau, Dominica: The Government Printery, June 5. 1975 The National Parks and Protected Areas Act. Roseau, Dominica: The Government Printerv. August 6. The Economist Intelligence Unit 1989 EIU International Tourism Report: The Windward and Leeward Islands. The Economist Intelligence Unit No. 1:57-76. Erisman, H. M. 1983 Tourism and Cultural Dependency in the West Indies. Annals of Tourism Research 10(3):337-361. Fermor, Patrick Leigh 1950 The Traveller’s Tree: A Journey through the Caribbean Islands. New York: Harper and Row. Hills, T. L., and J. Lundgren 1977 The Impact of Tourism in the Caribbean: A Methodological Study. Annals of Tourism Research 4(5):248-267. Holder, Jean, ed. 1979 Caribbean Tourism: Policies and Impacts. Bridgetown, Barbados: Caribbean Tourism Research and Development Centre. Honychurch, Lennox 1984 The Dominica Story: A History of the Island. Roseau, Dominica: The Dominica Institute.

DAVID

431

WEAVER

James, Arlington 1988 The Lake District of Dominica. Roseau, Dominica: Forestry and Wildlife Division, Ministry of Agriculture. Jenkins, C. L. 1982 The Effects of Scale in Tourism Projects in Developing Countries. Annals of Tourism Research 9(2):229-249. Kastarlak, Bulent 1975 Tourism and its Development Potential in Dominica. St. Lucia: United Nations Development Program. Lea, John 1988 Tourism and Development in the Third World. London: Routledge McNeelv, I., and 1. Thorsell 1989 Jungles, Mountains, and Islands: How Tourism Can Help Conserve the Natural Heritage. Recreation and Leisure 31(4):29-39. Mitchell, James. F. 1972 To Hell with Paradise: A New Concept in Caribbean Tourism. Kingstown, St. Vincent: Government Printer. Ober, Frederick 1908 A Guide to the West Indies, Bermuda and Panama. New York: Dodd, Mead. Pearce, Douglas 1984 Planning for Tourism in Belize. Geographical Review 74(3):291-303. 1989 Tourist Development (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley. Perez, Louis A., Jr. 1973-74 Aspects of Underdevelopment: Tourism in the West Indies. Science and Society 37(4):473-480. Plog, Stanley 1972 Why Destination Areas Rise and Fall in Popularity. Unpublished paper presented to the Southern California Chapter, The Travel and Tourism Research Association. Ranck, Stephen 1987 An Attempt at Autonomous Development: The Case of the Tufi Guest Houses, Papua New Guinea. In Ambiguous Alternative: Tourism in Small Developing Countries, S. Britton and W. C. Clarke, eds., pp. 154-166. Suva, Fiji: The University of the South Pacific. Rodenburg, Eric E. 1980 The Effects of Scale in Economic Development: The Case of Bali. Annals of Tourism Research 7(4):177-196. Saglio, C. 1979 Tourism for Discovery: A Project in Lower Casamance, Sengal. Zn Tourism: Passport to Development? E. de Kadt, ed., pp. 321-335. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Shankland Cox and Associates 1971 Dominica: A Tourist Development Strategy (3 ~01s.). Liverpool, England: See1 House. Thorsell, J. W., and George Wood 1976 Dominica’s Morne Trois Pitons National Park. Nature Canada 5(4):14-16, 33-34. Turner, L., and J. Ash 1975 The Golden Hordes: International Tourism and the Pleasure Periphery. London: Constable. Verrill, A. H. 1917 The Book of the West Indies. New York: E. P. Dutton. Ward, Fred 1972 Golden Islands of the Caribbean. New York: Crown. Waters, Somerset R., ed. 1980 The Big Picture: World Travel Trends and Markets. New York: ASTA News. Waugh, Alex 1949 The Sugar Islands: A Caribbean Travelogue. New York: Farrar, Straus. Weaver, David 1988 The Evolution of a “Plantation” Tourism Landscape on the Caribbean Island of Antigua. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geogratie 79(5):319-331. ”

\

I

432

ALTERNATIVE

TO MASS

TOURISM

IN DOMINICA

World Tourism Organization 1989 Compendium of Tourism Statistics (10th ed.). Madrid: World Tourism Organization. Wright, R. Michael 1985 Morne Trois Pitons National Park in Dominica: A Case Study in Park Establishment in the Developing World. Ecology Law Quarterly 12(4):747-778. Submitted 10 July 1990 Revised version submitted 15 November Accepted 24 November 1990 Refereed anonymously Coordinating Editor: Douglas G. Pearce

1990