Backpacker tourism and economic development

\

Pergamon

Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 639±660, 1998 ‰ 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved Printed in Great Britain 0160-7383/98 $19.00+0.00

PII : S0160±7383(98)00021±8

BACKPACKER TOURISM AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Mark P. Hampton University of Portsmouth, UK Abstract: International tourism is often perceived by LDC (Less Developed Country) government tourism planners as an engine of economic growth, but the focus is commonly upon mass tourism while ignoring the subsector of backpacker tourism. The case study of Gili Trawangan island in Lombok, eastern Indonesia, indicates that the encouragement of backpacker tourism may alleviate some of the excesses of international mass tourism. Backpacker tourism is compared with conventional mass tourism, discussing the leakage of foreign exchange earnings, issues of local control, ownership and participation, and the political economy of who gains or loses from tourism in less developed countries. Keywords: backpackers, budget tourists, smallscale tourism, socioeconomic impacts, island tourism, strategies, planning, Indonesia, Southeast Asia. ‰ 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. ¬sume ¬: Le tourisme des randonneurs et le de ¬veloppement ¬ Re economique. Dans les pays en voie Àu par les planiÆcateurs du tourisme ¬veloppement, le tourisme international est souvent perc de de ¬veloppement ¬ nationaux comme un moteur du de economique, cependant l'accent est habitu¬ sur le tourisme de masse plutot que le tourisme de petite ¬ ¬tude de cas ellement place echelle. L'e ¬sie orientale, indique que le soutien au de l'ıle de Gili Trawangan au Lombok, en Indone ¡ ¬veloppement de ce secteur repre ¬sente un moyen de limiter les problemes associe ¬s au tourisme de de masse. L'article compare le tourisme de petite ¬ echelle avec le tourisme de masse classique, ¡ ¬te ¬ et de participation, et discute les problemes de fuites de devises, de controle local, de proprie ¬s: ¬conomie politique du tourisme dans les pays en voie de de ¬veloppement. Mots-cle ainsi que l'e ¬conomiques, randonneurs, touriste avec petit budget, tourisme de petite ¬ echelle, impacts socio-e ¬gies, planiÆcateurs, Indone ¬sie, Su-Est asiatique. ‰ 1998 Elsevier tourisme insulaire, strate Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION When a place becomes popular through a travelers' guidebook like Lonely Planet's, it changes everything. . . Tourists expect it to be exactly as it has been described. . . People just believe the books–even if they are Æve years old–and they Æght about the prices with local people (Indonesian tour guide, quoted in Wheat 1995:50).

Throughout South East Asia, young Western tourists with large backpacks can commonly be observed clambering out of cycle rickshaws or local buses and peering reverently at a battered copy of a Lonely Planet guidebook as they search for cheap accommodation or details about ancient temples. However, despite their numbers in the region and undoubted economic, social, cultural, and environmental impacts, this international tourism sector (broadly deÆned as people who travel with backpacks) has yet to receive serious academic study.

Mark Hampton is Senior Lecturer in the Department of Economics at the University of Portsmouth (Southsea, Hampshire PO4 8JF, UK. Email [email protected]). He holds a Ph.D. in Development Studies from the University of East Anglia, Norwich. His research focuses on the role of international service industries in economic development with particular reference to Southeast Asia and small island economies.

639

640

BACKPACKER TOURISM

In addition, government planners in most South East Asian countries, while targeting foreign tourism as the engine of rapid economic and social development strategies, appear to focus their attention solely upon international mass tourism. In contrast, the backpacker sector is at best tacitly ignored, or at worst actively discouraged in ofÆcial tourism planning (Richter 1993:185). It appears that the lack of baseline data and detailed research on the economic development impacts of backpacker tourists has contributed to the continuation of somewhat prejudicial attitudes towards these ``hippies'' or ``drifters'' by ofÆcials in some less developed countries (LDCs) (McCarthy 1994; Wilson 1997). In general, rising disposable incomes in many developed countries (DCs) and the falling real price of long-haul jet travel since the 60s has encouraged a boom industry of international tourism, creating a nexus of transnational (TNC) hotels, tour operators, and airlines. It has been widely predicted that tourism will be the largest industry in the global economy, usurping the oil and car industries by the year 2000 (O'Hare and Barrett 1994), with predicted receipts of $621 billion from international tourism (WTO 1996). Overall, despite the increasing importance placed on this trade in the economies of many LDCs, the academic ``journey'' of tourism studies has resulted in some serious omissions. There is a steadily growing literature linking international tourism and development in LDCs, but research appears to be concentrated in certain regions or countries such as the Caribbean islands, Bali, or the Annapurna project in Nepal (Parker 1995). Although the early work on tourism was broadly economic, the majority of the recent literature has not beneÆted fully from the depth of debate within the last 40 years of development discourse. In 1979 de Kadt's edited collection posed the central question in its title ``Tourism: Passport to Development?'', but lacked real answers. Recent case studies of LDC tourism are exempliÆed by Dieke (1993) on tourism development in The Gambia, O'Hare and Barrett (1994) on Sir Lanka, Wilkinson and Pratiwi (1995) on gender and tourism in Java, Forsyth (1995) on agriculture and tourism in Thailand, and Wilson (1997) on Goa. Caribbean tourism, having been studied since the early 70s (Bryden 1973), has a large literature exempliÆed by Wilkinson (1989) and Weaver (1990, 1995). More recent work includes the useful overview by Pattullo (1996). Some of the themes identiÆed in the Caribbean region, such as issues of ownership, foreign exchange leakage, and employment are common to many LDCs. More speciÆcally, for South East Asia, the collection edited by Hitchcock, King and Panwell (1993) brought together various themes including environmental and cultural aspects of tourism, but omitted backpacker tourism. This has been explored by few writers for South East Asia. The work of Rodenburg (1980), Cohen (1982), and Hamzah (1995) will be discussed later. For most LDC governments, the main focus has been upon international mass tourists. Recently, more emphasis has been placed on understanding and planning for various sectors such as high spending so-called MICE (meetings, incentives, conventions and exhibitions) tourists and ecotourism. However, backpacker tourism is, with recent

MARK HAMPTON

641

exceptions of the Australian initiatives (Government of Australia 1995; Loker-Murphy and Pearce 1995), largely ignored by government development planners and international agencies such as the World Bank. Nevertheless, in the burgeoning tourism literature, it has been argued that alternative tourism may be more appropriate for LDCs than traditional mass tourism (Britton and Clark 1987; Weaver 1995). Alternative tourism has been deÆned as small-scale, having more local opportunities for employment, less economic leakages and overall less negative impacts. These and other propositions require further exploration. Rodenburg's notion of ``craft tourism'' (1980) was proposed as the opposite of large-scale ``industrial tourism''. Other terms used include ``drifter'' (Cohen 1973), ``wanderers'' (Vogt 1976), ``budget travelers'' (Riley 1988) and, mostly recently, ``backpackers'' (Government of Australia 1995; Loker-Murphy and Pearce 1995; Pearce 1990; Wilson 1997). Riley (1988), developing the work of Adler (1985) on the historical context of youth travel, draws an interesting parallel between contemporary budget tourists and ``tramping'' which was applied earlier in the century. Riley argues that the former is a wealthy society's modiÆcation of the latter. She agrees with Graburn (1983) that present budget traveling is a type of rite of passage of ``self-testing tourism'' (Riley 1988:318), but disagrees with Cohen's category of ``drifter'' and argues that budget tourists, unlike his ``drifters'' or hippies of the late 60s, generally do not steal or beg, are not part of the Western counter-culture, and their drug use is comparable with youth in their home countries. This point appears to have escaped the notice of LDC tourism planners. Riley deÆnes budget tourists as ``people desirous of extending their travels beyond that of a cyclical holiday, and, hence the necessity of living on a budget. . . they are escaping from the dullness and monotony of their everyday routine, from their jobs, from making decisions about careers, and the desire to delay or postpone work, marriage, and other responsibilities'' (Riley 1988:317). More recently Hamzah (1995) found the same motivations in his research on resorts in peninsular Malaysia. Bradt (1995) sets out Æve characteristic ``badges of honor'' of experienced independent tourists who survive on under $15 per day, use local transport, carry all their belongings on their back, bargain for goods and services while guarding against rip-offs, and get away from crowds and discover new places. She argues that the Ærst point reduces or removes the need for many services in LDCs such as taxis, local guides, and chambermaids. In addition, Bradt argues that many LDCs have overcrowded public transport so that tourists take up precious space instead of locals. This second point may be less signiÆcant in the case study of Indonesia as it has its own oil reserves so that public transport is cheaper than in non-oil LDCs. However, her point may be more applicable to other non-oil producing LDCs. As a subsector of international tourism, backpacker tourism has developed certain characteristics: communication networks; demand for cheap accommodation; and a parallel structure of transport, restaurants, accommodation, and support services. The communication networks have nodes in the various backpacker ``ghettos'' across South

642

BACKPACKER TOURISM

East Asia, areas of cheap restaurants and accommodation such as Bangkok's Kao San Road, and Jakarta's Jalan Jaksa or around Jalan Chulia in Penang. The author has seen local information on informal notice boards containing obscure ferry timetables and recommendations for other small resorts. In addition, word of mouth and various published guidebooks such as the Rough Guides or Lonely Planet's ``Southeast Asia on a Shoestring'' (Wheeler 1992) are also used. This tourist type is not so concerned about amenities (e.g., plumbing), restaurants (e.g., Westernized food), and transportation (e.g., air conditioning) geared especially for the tastes of the mass tourist. If a budget traveler place has an appeal to Western tastes (e.g., banana pancakes), it requires minimal infrastructure (Riley 1988:323).

However, it may be more accurate to describe this as being ``minimalist'' infrastructure as it is less capital-intensive than the accommodation, transport, and dining facilities demanded by mass tourism. Moreover, both Cohen and Riley noted the existence of a developing parallel structure that includes private buses (examples being the nonstop minibuses from Padangbai harbor to Ubud in Bali, or Lembar port in Lombok to Senggigi beach/or the Gili islands); restaurants and coffee houses, English language second-hand bookshops, and sometimes specialist agencies selling cheap tickets and reconÆrming Øights. Backpackers in South East Asia often follow well-trodden paths through the region. A typical route starts with a cheap Øight to Bangkok, through south Thailand and peninsular Malaysia, to Singapore (or across to Sumatra), Java, Bali, eastern Indonesia, and Australia. Sometimes the route is reversed or may have some variation such as side trips to Vietnam, Sulawesi, or the Philippines. Overall, the common routes can often result in backpackers meeting the same people in many different locations (Pearce 1990). This paper opens up the under-researched area of backpacker tourists by examining their characteristics, the infrastructure that has emerged to service them, and the economic development impact of this international tourism sector on its host country. A case study of backpacker tourism in the Gili Islands off the coast of Lombok, eastern Indonesia, is used to illustrate some of the interrelated issues stemming from the development and accommodation of this market. The paper argues that in the local economy, the encouragement of responsible tourism has the potential of alleviating some of the perceived excesses of the industry. It compares the backpacker sector with conventional mass tourism by discussing the leakage of foreign exchange earnings, issues of local control and ownership, and the wider political economy of who gains and who loses from international tourism in less developed countries. BACKPACKER TOURISM IN INDONESIA The island of Lombok has a population of around 2.4 million and an area of 5,435 square kilometers. Politically it is part of the Indonesian

MARK HAMPTON

643

province of Nusa Tenggara Barat (West Nusa Tenggara). It is of comparable size and population to Bali–its well-known neighbor to the west–but Lombok is drier than Bali. It has a tropical climate, white sand beaches, and coral reefs, plus some rice lands in the central area. The north of the island is dominated by Mount Rinjani, a live 3,720 meter volcano. Unlike Bali, Lombok is predominately a Muslim island and the majority of its population are Sasak with some Balinese settlers and other cultural groups such as Chinese and Arabs. Bali–once a premier node on the hippies' Asia route in the early 70s–became a mass tourism destination through the 80s. Backpackers then ``discovered'' Lombok. Arguably, this led to increasing interest and eventually to investment in the so-called ``new Bali'' especially at Senggigi resort. By the late 70s and early 80s, tourism ``had gone beyond Kuta, to Ubud, Candidasa and Lombok in search of the `authenticity' (and `value for money') that the commodiÆcation of Kuta has `destroyed': it has been displaced to the periphery and beyond'' (Connell 1993:658). By 1991, Lombok had 56,000 visitors, of which approximately 80% were foreign tourists, whereas Bali had 1,850,000 visitors (1990) of which 60% were foreign tourists (Wall 1996b:9). It is unknown what proportion of these international tourists were backpackers. The only major study of this tourism sector, from Australia, shows they comprised 6.5% of their international visitors (Government of Australia 1995). With the exception of Bali, existing literature is scarce on tourism in eastern Indonesia. Research is particularly lacking on the island of Lombok. In addition, ofÆcial statistics are somewhat problematic as, unlike nearby Bali, Lombok is not a province itself but falls within Nusa Tenggara Barat so that some levels of ofÆcial statistics cover the entire province. One of the few writers on Lombok, Wall (1996b) draws an interesting comparison between tourism development in Kuta beach, Bali and its namesake in southern Lombok, arguing that Bali, especially the Nusa Dua luxury hotel enclave, is being used uncritically as a model for Lombok's southern development. In terms of national tourism planning, the Indonesian central government has seen tourism as an increasingly important development strategy to replace foreign exchange earnings from declining fossil fuel and timber exports (Booth 1990). The most recent Repelita (Five Year National Development Plan) for 1993±98 sees tourism as one of the main drivers of the Indonesian economy with a planned target of 4.5 million international tourists by 1998 (SoÆeld 1995). However, visitor numbers have increased faster than expected so that by late 1996 the 1998 target has already been reached. The latest plan speciÆcally for tourism–a ten year National Tourism Development Plan–examines each of the 27 Indonesian provinces. This plan places West Nusa Tenggara at the ``development'' stage along Butler's resort cycle S-curve (Butler 1980). Regarding Lombok tourism, Wall (1996b) argues that this development is in the involvement or early in its development stage, but notes that it is hard to apply an unmodiÆed model as foreign investment has taken place at early stage. At the provincial level, various plans were produced during the 80s: in 1981 WTO and UNDP published a tourism plan for Nusa Tenggara, in

644

BACKPACKER TOURISM

1986 a village tourism development plan. Further, in 1987 Japanese consultants JCP Inc. drew up a more detailed tourism development plan for the province. In addition, at the regency level, the local governments have their own plans for tourism in Lombok. At present, Lombok has three main tourism centres: Senggigi beach on the west coast, Kuta beach on the south coast, and the Gili islands offshore from the north west coast. Lesser centers are found in Mataram and the central hill villages for trekking around Mount Rinjani. Senggigi is the largest resort, having rapid growth of international mass tourism with franchised hotels such as Sheraton and Holiday Inn. Senggigi lies only 20 minutes by coach from the small airport near Mataram. Kuta beach has been planned to be an enclave type ``integrated resort'' development like Nusa Dua in Bali, but has run into some difÆculties and local protest (McCarthy 1994; Wall 1996b). At the time of writing it consists mainly of losmen (small guesthouses) for tourists, but the building program is underway. Communications are slow as the roads to reach the site are poor, although they are being upgraded. The planned international airport at Praya in south Lombok will be convenient for Kuta. One interview respondent saw south Lombok as the new growth pole and Senggigi as being increasingly marginalized, and by implication, the Gili islands too, the focus of this study. If so, this might safeguard the islands' small-scale tourism and discourage plans for new, large hotels. The three small islands of Gili Trawangan, Gili Meno, and Gili Air can only be reached by small boat (usually an outrigger with an outboard motor) taking around 45 minutes from Bangsal harbor in northwest Lombok. Boats to the mainland run all day until dusk and land on the beach by the main village on the east coast of Gili Trawangan. The islands have simple tourism facilities and limited fresh water supplies. The accommodation is chalet type huts, usually wood-framed on stilts, with palm thatch and woven bamboo screen walls. The facilities are basic at present although the Lombok government plans to develop a four-star resort. Most restaurants provide Indonesian dishes, seafood, and international budget specialities such as banana pancakes, jafØes (toasted sandwiches), fruit lassi, and French toast. Gili Trawangan is approximately 3 by 2 kilometers and low-lying with a small hill to the south, Bukit Trawangan, rising to 72 meters above sea level. The majority land use is coconut plantation, plus some small Æelds of beans, corn, and bananas, with some chickens, goats, and cattle near the main village. Tourism appears to be the dominant economic activity, and the main season is July±August with smaller peaks in December, January, and February. The latter month–within the southern hemisphere's main summer-holiday– was nicknamed bulan Australi (Australian month) by some survey respondents of this study. The local resident population is around 400 with a small primary school and mosque in the village. The main tourism beach runs along the island's east coast, with a fringing reef of coral. Island transport is not motorized: bicycles and around 30 cidomo (horse-drawn traps) use the main pathways consisting of unsealed dirt tracks. The island

MARK HAMPTON

645

Figure 1. The Island of Lombok, Indonesia

has a diesel-powered electricity generator to the north, an international telecommunication ofÆce with satellite dish near the boat landing area, and weekly mail services to the mainland. The other two Gili islands are broadly similar to Trawangan and thus of similar interest to backpacker tourism. Gili Air also has a pearl farm and small harbor. Study Methodology This paper is based upon Æeldwork in Gili Trawangan and mainland Lombok in August 1995 and March 1996 using ``fast and dirty'' Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) techniques. In line with suggested PRA Æeldwork guidelines (Theis and Grady 1991; Sarch 1996), the visits were brief with each lasting two weeks. Alternatively, following Michaud (1995:682) this could perhaps be termed pre-Æeldwork. Depending upon further funding, it is hoped to continue the project with return visits to gather more information for a longitudinal study

646

BACKPACKER TOURISM

as the resort changes over time. The Æeld visits utilized a variety of generally qualitative techniques to gather information, including a series of semi-structured informal interviews (n = 33), detailed repeat interviews with key informants, mapping and surveys of the resort, direct observation, and a brief questionnaire survey. These techniques were used to conÆrm Ændings, a vital check for such qualitative-based Æeldwork. Certain baseline information was required which would help build the picture, including occupation, age, nationality, tourism motivation, duration of stay, number in party, and weekly expenditure. Although a pilot questionnaire (n = 47) was undertaken in 1996, until a greater number of respondents are surveyed, no deÆnitive statements can be made, given the problem of bias due to the small sample size. Hamzah (1995), who researched the small Perhentian islands off the east coast of peninsular Malaysia, found that the majority of foreign tourists sampled (n = 116) were students (48%) of professionals (31%). Given the need for more comparative data on backpackers, it would be useful to undertake a similar sized survey to Hamzah's in Gili Trawangan and then compare results to consider demographics, motivation, and expenditure patterns. Table 1 is a Ærst attempt to begin to compare Ændings with Hamzah (1995) to examine backpacker occupational groups. But it should be noted that this pilot study had a signiÆcantly smaller sample size than Hamzah's and, therefore, is not statistically robust enough for conclusive Ændings. Gili Trawangan appeared to have a lower proportion of students than either the Perhentian islands or Cherating. This suggests that the backpacker category may not be comprised mainly of students but has an increasing proportion of professional people and the self-employed. If so, this has implications for expenditure patterns and other economic impacts, awaiting further research to disaggregate occupational groups of backpackers.

Table 1. An Initial Comparison of Small Occupational Tourism Groups Occupational Grouping

Perhentian Islands, Malaysiaa (n = 116)

Cherating, Malaysiaa (n = 77)

Gili Trawangan (n = 47)

Studentb Professional Self-employed Other

48% 31% n.a. n.a.

18% 30% 5% n.a.

19% 38% 19% 24%

a

Adapted from Hamzah (1995). Backpacker guidebooks advise that it can be useful to call oneself a ``student'' in South East Asia given the local bureaucracies' attitudes: ``. . . remember that `student' is a very respectable thing to be and if your passport has a blank space for occupation you are much better off having `student' there than something nasty like `journalist' or `photographer' '' (Wheeler 1992:18). Thus, the number of registered students may be lower than those who term themselves student.

b

MARK HAMPTON

647

Study Findings Accommodation. In March 1996 in Gili Trawangan 170 bungalows were already built, with around 15±20 more under construction. Most were grouped in units of 5, occasionally 10 bungalows, plus usually a small attached restaurant. The vast majority were single storey. Assuming twin occupancy, then total present island bed space is around 340 beds (allowing for some triples, an estimate of around 400 seems reasonable). This was conÆrmed by local respondents and 350± 400 beds was said to be the right Ægure. In both visits the remains of broken huts near the prime beach were observed. Many respondents talked of repeated army visits in May and December 1995 when the huts were demolished. This was conÆrmed by several respondents. Islanders talked of having land tenure problems, speciÆcally not having formal ownership certiÆcates to land by the main beach. The regional government has published plans for a four-star resort development by the main beach and appears to be using physical demolition of ``unauthorized'' tourism accommodation and restaurants to dissuade unplanned development in the area slated for luxury accommodation. A similar process of ``discouragement'' has also been documented between 1992 and 1995 in the area around Kuta beach, Lombok, where local villagers without formal land ownership certiÆcates have been forcibly removed and their homes demolished to make way for the large hotel complex (IRIP 1996; McCarthy 1994; Wall 1996b). Recently, however, it has been reported that, following negotiations, villagers in Gili Trawangan have now received ``fairly substantial compensation'' from the government (IRIP News Service 1996:1). Restaurants. In Gili Trawangan the restaurant owners do not formally agree on prices among themselves. However, they take keen notice of competitors' prices and are willing to adjust pricing as a result. In Cohen's (1982) work on the southern Thai islands, he noted that restaurants although proÆtable, are labor intensive and thus less attractive, to outside investors, than accommodation. Moreover, because they require less initial investment than bungalows, it is possible for local villagers to enter the restaurant business. He observed that food and drink prices are Æxed at a meeting of resort owners on Ko Samui: Socially the resort owners, co-members of nearby villages, tend to avoid open competition or at least attenuate it by preventing price differentials . . . Disposing of very limited resources, the owners do not possess the means for radical innovations, nor the will to take the risks which any attempt at ``leading the market'' would involve. (1982:203)

In Kuta, Bali, by 1983 approximately 44% of the bars and restaurants were foreign-owned (Hussey 1989:319), arguably the easiest way to get around Indonesian laws about selling land to foreigners. However, in Gili Trawangan, national ownership was the norm, with a discernable movement of increasing non-island control by Balinese, Bugis, and Overseas Chinese. The local ownership by non-islanders

648

BACKPACKER TOURISM

appeared concentrated in the immediate beachfront, typiÆed by small, open-sided restaurants built of wood and bamboo with palm thatch. In the seven-month gap between Æeld visits, a new large restaurant had been opened in the main village. This had been opened in December 1995 and was approximately four times larger than most restaurants in the island, having 18 tables, each seating four (most of the small beachfront places having four to six tables). It had a tiled roof, concrete paved paths, concrete pillars painted in Bali ``mock red brick'' style and a manicured garden and was similar to those found in Balinese resorts such as Candidasa. Food and drink were stored in a large refrigerator unlike the small beachfront places which used an insulated polystyrene barrel containing ice. Connell (1993) describes emerging hierarchies of food and drink as Kuta progressed through its stages of tourism from few tourists through to mass tourism: Balinese local food, to Indonesian cuisine which was then itself displaced by international cuisine and the arrival of global chains such as Burger King and Pizza Hut. Australian beer brands (such as Fosters and XXXX), were demanded, replacing Indonesian Bir Bintang. Connell argues that even in terms of cigarettes, this internationalization and commodiÆcation led to locally produced Kretek clove cigarettes smoked by backpackers being replaced by demand for global brands. In Gili Trawangan, this process appears to have started as the resort is being pushed upmarket. At present most food supplies are brought over from markets in mainland Lombok: rice, vegetables, fruit, eggs, meat (although there are some chickens on the island), and all processed foods such as biscuits, krupuk (prawn crackers), and beverages. As noted earlier, the island produces coconuts, few vegetables, and some bananas and the inshore waters are Æshed mainly using traditional methods. The Æshermen supply the losmen and restaurants directly in the early morning. Economic Development Impacts In 1976, the Indonesian Director General of Tourism, according to Rodenburg (1980), listed the objectives of tourism development as increased earnings through employment; increased job opportunities; increased foreign exchange; increased investment; increased production; increased entrepreneurship; increased infrastructure; and the minimization of adverse social and cultural effects. Rodenburg showed that industrial mass tourism can be usefully compared and contrasted with his category of ``craft'' tourism. It is useful to go through some of the stated government objectives in detail, as his argument can be reviewed, and used to compare existing backpacker tourism in Lombok with the planned huge resort development at Kuta, Lombok. In doing this, one can start to explore whether or not there is a case for the encouragement of small-scale tourism in LDCs rather than conventional mass tourism. Clearly, backpacker tourism is not the only type of small-scale tourism that might be broadly beneÆcial for LDC local economic development. Other forms, such as some types of ecotourism or special interest tourism, for example, might comprise part of a diversiÆed product mix.

MARK HAMPTON

649

Foreign Exchange. Rodenburg contended that although large-scale tourism creates greater gross annual foreign exchange earnings per room than smaller types, the foreign exchange needed for the construction and operating costs of large hotels creates large import leakages (1980:187). In comparison, the smallest-scale development, such as backpacker tourism, has virtually no foreign exchange requirements for its construction or operation. The initial Ændings from Gili Trawangan agree with Rodenburg's, as the majority of bungalows for backpackers were built of local wood (bamboo from Lombok), and the concrete blocks for foundations and steps were manufactured in the village. However, the majority of new bungalows were being built of different materials, using concrete blocks, tiled roofs, and glass louvres in the windows. The small amount of furniture and furnishings was locally sourced: bamboo chairs and tables from Rembiga craft district in Lombok, ikat fabric curtains and bedclothes, etc. While foreign exchange leakages due to backpacker tourism are not known, Wilson (1993), using input±output analysis, demonstrates that the leakages for aggregate international tourism are in the order of 20±22% for Malaysia; 22±34% for Thailand; 13±17% for the Philippines; and 23% for Indonesia (Table 2). Based on the Æeld observation, the amount for the backpacker tourism can be less. Employment. Backpacker tourism may offer signiÆcant advantages over large-scale operations. Although employees in large-scale properties receive higher average salaries than those in small operations, Rodenburg argued that the beneÆts are highly concentrated in the enclave rather than dispersed throughout the local economy. Smaller scale tourism can also succeed with smaller numbers of tourists and may ``represent the best opportunity for providing earnings potential in the hinterland'' (Rodenburg 1980:186). This assertion requires further discussion. It could be argued that in such a small island, if

Table 2. Estimates of Foreign Exchange Leakage from International Tourism

Country

Study

Indonesia Malaysia

Tucker (1984) n.a. Tucker (1984) Asian Institute of Tourism Tucker (1984) TAT (1985) Tucker (1984)

Philippines Thailand

I-O Data from

Leakage Estimate for

Foreign Exchange Leakage from International Tourism (%)

1975 1978 n.a. n.a.

1980 n.a. n.a. 1978

23% 22% 20.4% 17%

n.a. 1980 n.a.

n.a. 1983 n.a.

13.9% 34.26% 22.8%

Sources: Tucker, Seow and Sundberg (1984); data from Tourism Authority of Thailand (TAT) in 1985; data from Asian Institute of Tourism; all cited by Walton (1993:219±220).

650

BACKPACKER TOURISM

local Lombok people were employed, the beneÆts may be transmitted back to their home villages as remittances (as shown by Wall 1996a:132), or that the relatively high salaries might be spent on local goods and services, thus beneÆting the local economy. Alternatively, salaries might be spent on imported consumer goods such as television sets which would affect foreign exchange. However, according to Rodenburg, unlike manufacturing industry, increasing size of industrial tourism actually employs more labor per room than smaller operations. In Bali, the largest hotels employed 2 per room compared with ``homestay'' accommodation Ægures of 0.47 per room, although this excludes unpaid family members. Thus, just using a simple jobs per rooms criterion, industrial mass tourism appears to fulÆl one major government planning objective. Apart from accommodation, there is associated employment in restaurants, transport, construction and maintenance. On Lombok there is some employment for locals as minibus drivers and guides. In the Gili islands, the only transport is cidomo (horsedrawn buggies) driven often at high speed over the islands' dirt tracks. There are also some employment opportunities crewing outrigger shuttle boats from the mainland. In addition, hawkers have started to appear on the main beaches. Although this falls outside the main focus of this paper, interviews with hawkers revealed that they commuted each day to the islands from Lombok to work the main beaches. In comparison with the Ændings of Cukier and Wall (1994) that over 73% of vendors in both Kuta and Sanur, Bali, were not local Balinese but were from Java (1994:465), here the majority of the vendors on Gili Trawangan were from Lombok. The construction of a large hotel will clearly provide a large number of jobs in comparison with backpacker accommodation which is often built by the owners or family members. Though in some cases local builders or carpenters are paid to undertake more skilled parts of the process, overall small-scale tourism does not result in the employment of large numbers of people. This raises the question of the type of job opportunities created by international mass tourism, such as the difference between being a cleaner in a large international hotel compared with being the owner of a small losmen, cooking and serving at tables in their own place. In the small island of Ko Samui in the early 80s, immediate family or relatives were the main employees in small operations. The study found the same for Gili Trawangan. In comparison, in larger resorts such as Phuket or Senggigi, absentee owners hired outsiders (mainlanders or people from the urban center) plus relatives. However, by 1989 only 20% of local islanders on Ko Samui were employed in tourism (Parnwell 1993:295), again suggesting that local control was diminishing as the island was moving up the resort cycle S-curve. Nevertheless, for areas of high underemployment or unemployment, even small amounts of employment may be welcome. Investment. Clearly, large-scale international standard hotels require massive capital investment. Rodenburg (1980) argued that if investment per room and investment per job created are used as

MARK HAMPTON

651

proxies, then largest hotels have the highest cost per room, so that smaller projects generate more rooms and more jobs for a given investment. However, his investment Ægures included the signiÆcant cost of the infrastructure built at the Nusa Dua enclave, which is not such a persuasive argument if applied elsewhere. In fairness, it can be argued that luxury international standard hotels are never ``free standing'' in LDCs as they demand piped water, constant electricity supplies, and paved road access. This argument of the high real cost per job created could also apply to Kuta, Lombok, especially given the cost of water provision and road improvements (Wall 1996b). Furthermore, there is an argument whether opportunity costs result in less investment in other sectors or regions. Walton disagrees, arguing that it is necessary Ærst to create large industries such as mass tourism facilities from which wealth can be channeled via taxation into welfare spending by the government (1993:217). However, this appears merely to be a reworking of the neoclassical ``trickle down'' theory of distribution by another name (Mehmet 1995). In addition, there appears to be some connection to the motivation behind the building of such large-scale, impressive projects in LDCs (Wood 1984). The questioning of LDC government enthusiasm for large modern symbols is a common theme across the development literature of the last 20 years going back to Schumacher's (1973) ``small is beautiful'' concept. The ideological roots of this reach back even further to the 19th century populist critiques of industrialization (Kitching 1982). In Bali, Indonesian academics have also commented upon the New Order's obsession with imposing, large-scale ``mega projects'' (Warren 1996). In comparison with large-scale development, backpacker tourism needs only cheap, simply constructed accommodation requiring relatively low investments. Owner construction also lowers initial costs. The same applies to restaurants, even with even simpler construction, which also have low entry costs. Regarding the proÆts from investment, Cohen (1982) argued that the level of proÆts were lower for backpacker than for mass tourism but were higher than average farming proÆts. The small number of local owners (less than a dozen out of a village of several thousand), and the small size of their enterprises had a limited effect on the village economy. ProÆts were either reinvested in improvements or spent on consumer goods. This aspect clearly requires more research in the Æeld. Nevertheless, according to Cohen, although the larger resorts had higher proÆts yielding several times more than smallerscale tourism, these were transmitted to the urban center and do not appear to have beneÆtted the village economy. This implies that small-scale tourism may be preferable to its larger cousin, and in terms of returns on investment, more proÆtable for villagers than agriculture. It is argued that Balinese and other Indonesian entrepreneurs could learn from Kuta, Bali's ``school of ideas and experience'' (McTaggart 1980:464) with its low initial capital entry costs in the late 70s. For example, between 1977 and 1980 over 40% of new investments in Kuta were by non-local investors (Hussey 1989:319). However, by the early 80s this had started to change, and foreign ownership was increasing in Kuta with growing numbers of bars

652

BACKPACKER TOURISM

and restaurants geared to mass tourism (especially from Australia), illustrating the shift away from backpackers. Linkages. Unlike mass tourists, backpackers generally consume locally-produced goods and services. Rodenburg (1980) focused on links to local agriculture, noting that in comparison, large hotels demand internationally sourced food and beverages whereas smallscale tourism adapts menus to available supplies. However, this generalization needs further examination. Telfer and Wall (1996) studied the initiatives of the Senggigi Sheraton Beach Resort to encourage locally-sourced seafood and vegetables. However, this attempt to create backward linkages into the local economy was heavily dependent upon one key individual (the executive chef) within the hotel. Nevertheless, it highlights the possibilities of some linkages between international hotels and local economies in LDCs. In the southern Thai islands, Cohen observed that virtually all goods are made in Thailand but ``nearby villages play a negligible role in supplying the beaches. They sell the restaurants a few fruits, such as lemon, papaya and pineapple, but little else''. In addition, he found that restaurant owners do not get Æsh or seafood from villages (the supply was limited and unreliable), but rather from the urban center on Phuket. On Ko Samui, tourism demand pushes prices up of a few products and by increasing imports ``reduces the islands economic autarky'' (1982:218). Overall, Cohen was pessimistic, and argued that the nearby villages were not the principal beneÆciaries of tourism development and ``as yet had no noticeable transformational effect on their economy'' (1982:224). As already noted, although the restaurants on Gili Trawangan bought their supplies from the large market on the mainland (Lombok), it was local produce with the exception of some bottled soft drinks. It is possible that backpacker expenditure may have a different income multiplier compared with mass tourism. Backpackers tend to have a lower weekly spend than mass tourists, but it is spread over a longer period (McCarthy 1994:18). As discussed earlier, backpackers have a demand for local goods and services, rather than imported goods. In the Australian case, the total backpacker expenditure was almost three times that of other visitors, and backpackers spent twice as much money as other tourists (Government of Australia 1995:5). Initial work by Indonesian economist Erawan (1994, 1995) in Bali supports this and suggests higher multipliers for the unclassiÆed end of the accommodation scale than for four-star hotels (cited by Warren 1996). Therefore, the backpacker sector, despite its image, deserves closer attention, including the need to construct disaggregated multipliers. Local Ownership and Participation. When considering investment, the low entry costs from minimal capital requirements for smallerscale tourism allow more local participation. According to Cohen, ``Local ownership implies that economic success for the entrepreneur results in beneÆts to the local community'' (1982:190). Wall notes that local participation is vital around south Lombok and warns

MARK HAMPTON

653

``unless ways are found to involve local people in meaningful ways, they may not beneÆt from the tourism development which is occurring, literally in some cases, on their doorsteps'' (1996b:22). Large ``integrated'' resorts such as Nusa Dua (and one could substitute the new Kuta Lombok complex) are ``a classic example of investment infrastructure, the physical framework for development, that does not also beneÆt the local people'' (Rodenburg, 1980:191). That is, investment should also serve local needs as well as those of the tourism industry. Rodenburg drew back from grasping the nettle of the political economy question: in other words, who within the nebulous concept of the ``tourism industry'' might gain from large-scale mass tourism investment, and what is their relationship with both local and central governments? Relevant relationships to scrutinize include those between World Bank project donor, international investment via TNC construction and hotel groups, local business elites, and Jakarta government elites and their families. Brohman discusses tourism in LDC strategy as an NTE (Non Traditional outward-orientated Export) industry with winners and losers. He calls for increased local participation, more selective state planning, and increasing local control over development but notes: much depends on the way that tourism meets the needs and interests of the local population and how that Æts together with broader social goals of development. Moreover, if tendencies towards polarization are to be avoided, mechanisms will need to be created to ensure a more equitable distribution of the costs and beneÆts of tourism. . . tourism-led development needs to be planned according to such goals (i.e., distributional equity, environmental sustainability, community participation, and local control) if it is to meet the long term interests of the popular majority rather than the immediate objectives of an elite minority (1996:63, 66).

This all sounds highly commendable, but does the institutional capacity for this exist in Indonesia, especially given the present perceived bias towards large projects plus links to external funding and foreign direct investment? Like Rodenburg before him, Brohman avoids the explicit political economy question. Although the existence of LDC elites is noted, his study pulls back from direct criticism of them. With frequent use of ``ought'' and ``should'', the article creates a sense of wishful thinking rather than full recognition of the existing political economy of power structures and unequal relationships in most LDCs, a point which can be illustrated by considering land use and tenure. In resorts in Bali and Thailand, the sale or lease of beachfront properties to non-local entrepreneurs has become problematic for local villagers. Initially low selling prices and rents have increased several times, so that on Phuket island, the original local owners sold and, in general, outsiders rather than locals beneÆtted from the rapid price increases. Villagers tended to use the proceeds of land sales to buy agricultural land rather than to enter the tourism sector. In Kuta, Bali, beachfront land prices rose between 1970 and 1984 from $12 per are (100 square meters) to $10,000, whereas rice land (once the highest valued land) only rose from $150 per are to $400 for the same period

654

BACKPACKER TOURISM

(Hussey 1989:317). Cohen (1982:201) found that on Phuket local villagers did not at Ærst appreciate the tourism potential of their beachfront land which they sold or rented for ``a pittance'' to nonisland entrepreneurs. These business people were often from the urban area of the island and many were Overseas Chinese, a regional business elite in South East Asia. Thus, when tourism developed, the land was already owned or controlled by outsiders. However, in lessdeveloped Ko Samui, local people retained control of the beach land in the early stages of tourism. A similar process was described in Kuta, Bali, by Hussey (1989) and Mickler (1995) who noted that villagers in the 70s often sold beach land (that they perceived as wasteland and also spiritually impure) to buy agricultural plots in the interior. This way, ownership of the immediate beachfront area swiftly passed to non-villagers, some of whom were not Balinese but from Java, especially from Orang Jakarta (the capital). In Aditjondro's (1995) memorable phrase, the island is now ``Bali, Jakarta's Colony''. As Oppermann points out, care is needed so that the Outer Island tourism ``is not dominated or controlled by Javanese and Balinese'' (1992:36). This appears to be necessary not just for reasons of equity, but also to start to redress the regional imbalances (such as income distribution) within Indonesia. Warren (1996) clearly spells out the signiÆcance of regional/central tensions within the country; and others such as Vatikiotis (1994) and BBC (1996) note the role of a small network of family members and close friends of President Suharto in the New Order economy. For example, President Suharto's second son reportedly controls one of the companies heavily involved in the Kuta, Lombok resort development (Reuters 1991). CONCLUSION What then, are the implications from this Indonesian study for other LDCs? Backpackers are often seen as part of an almost inevitable tourism development sequence as the advance guard, pioneers of a resort cycle (Butler 1980; Cochrane 1996). Historically, in many LDC resorts this has been the case–Kuta, Bali, exempliÆes this process. However, as a resort moves up the S-curve, increased marginalization of the poorest often takes place. Southern Lombok illustrates this process where, for example, Æshing villages and dryland farmers that had coexisted with small-scale tourism have been displaced by the new large resort development, their homes have been bulldozed, and they have become homeless refugees in the city (IRIP 1996; McCarthy 1994; Mucipto 1994). This paper raises the question whether this need be the case. Does backpacker tourism need to be just one stage in the somewhat unseemly rush towards international mass tourism, or, is it possible to stop at this point? Wilkinson and Pratiwi in their study of the growth of the Pangandaran coastal resort in Java comment that: The result has been a form of development that is directed by top-down decision making and assumptions about how to create a major tourism

MARK HAMPTON

655

destination designed around international (Western) standards of tourism facilities–which might have been inevitable once large-scale tourism was selected as the development path. This seems, however, to contradict the normative purposes of development–the improvement of the social condition of people, particularly lower-class local people (1995:296).

In contrast, this study indicates that there are beneÆts that can accrue to the local economy and poorer people in the area. Given the political will to constrain the larger players, backpacker tourism could increase local participation in real development, part of a more sustainable long-term strategy which attempts to balance local economic development needs against powerful interests wishing to build large international tourism resorts. This could perhaps be dubbed ``trade-off tourism''. Nevertheless, despite the emerging economic argument that supports small-scale development–particularly the reduced foreign exchange leakage, linkages to local production, and increased local participation–the power of vested interests of local elites, tourism TNCs, and international aid donors is clearly recognized in Indonesia as in other countries. For LDCs struggling with nation-building across large areas with diverse populations, religions, and ethnic groups, such as Indonesia, there may be unease with the idea of uncontrolled backpackers interacting with local people, compared with the control and containment of a tourism enclave. Rodenburg emphasized the planning concept of enclosure of international tourists in Nusa Dua enclave: They [government planners] wished to concentrate and isolate tourists, like any other industrial efØuent, to minimize social and cultural pollution. They felt (emphasis in original) that the adverse effects of their project would be more limited than those tourist enterprises on a smaller scale (1980:192).

As noted earlier, in Bali's case, local social scientists' expressed resistance to this isolation argument. Warren's incisive study (1996) clearly links the contribution of the outspoken Bali Post newspaper and the role of local opinion formers in the construction of a political space for debate. However, in the different political economy of Lombok, there appear to be less editorially independent news media and perhaps a lower level of separate Lombok identity in comparison with strongly Hindu Bali. It can be argued that Bali's position in the Indonesian nation state has been partly created by its strong sense of its own Balinese identity, magniÆed by being a minority within the predominantly Muslim republic and its historical regional dominance over parts of Nusa Tenggara. In contrast, Lombok as an arguably marginal part of the country, historically subject to constant military domination by Bali and having a more diffuse mixture of Balinese, Sasak, and other peoples, may not have the same strong sense of resistance to central government policy. Politically, Nusa Tenggara has until recently been viewed as a backwater: poor, remote, and marginal. While there may not be the strong sense of autonomy felt in neighboring Bali, at the village level a case can be made that social cohesion is just as strong. Cohen (1982) argued that a tight local community will slow the

656

BACKPACKER TOURISM

take-over of tourism by outsiders which might partly account for the resistance in the Gili islands and Kuta, Lombok, to outsiders' control. Concerning investment, Cohen (1982) argued that in Ko Samui, the bungalows were undercapitalized, and the owners could not afford to expand and upgrade facilities as they faced rising real costs partly due to the rapid expansion of the Thai economy and associated inØation. This may apply to owners in Indonesia as well as the country's economy continues its rapid growth. One suggestion might be the formation of Grameen Bank type credit institutions that can offer directed local lending for small-scale tourism projects (de Kadt 1996; Bennett, Goldberg and Hunte 1996). Directed lending might allow basic amenities to be built such as simple showers compared with traditional mandi (a scoop-and-throw washing technique) or the encouragement of local tourism cooperatives (Parnwell 1993). Environment aspects could also be programed to encourage small loans to purchase renewable energy equipment for tourism accommodation, such as solar or wind power, alleviating Indonesia's reliance on its rapidly declining stock of non-renewable fossil fuels. In addition, part of regional development funds could be targeted at making existing small-scale tourism eco-friendly. For example, better understanding of the local environments (funding integrated management plans and habitat surveys); interpretation of the local environment (i.e., information boards and leaØets) to safeguard vulnerable coral reefs, mangroves, or forest; or the Ænancing of start-up costs for recycling of plastic water and sunscreen bottles, used batteries, etc. Here, local and regional links could be built, or further strengthened, between environment and development Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) as a recognition of the interconnection of interests in a similar manner to the United Kingdom's Real World Coalition of 30 NGOs (Real World 1996). Nevertheless, in Indonesia, they have to tread carefully for if they criticize the way government or big business push tourism ``mega projects'' (regardless of their sustainability or not), they risk accusations of being anti-development which, in this country's context, may equate with being seen as unpatriotric or worse, anti-state and thus subversive (Ecclestone and Potter 1996; Mucipto 1994). The potential of backpacker tourism as a tool for real economic development and poverty alleviation requires thorough evaluation by LDC government planners (both central and regional) and international development agencies and donors. This should include, at the very least, the funding of baseline research. Suggestions for future research include detailed longitudinal studies of backpacker resorts (including environmental, social, and cultural aspects); surveys of local participation in small-scale tourism; further work on economic impacts including backpacker multipliers; and an examination of whether the sector itself goes through various stages (for instance, when do the parallel structures and specialist services start to appear such as private buses rather than purely local transport. The nature of the relationship between small-scale domestic tourism in LDCs and the emergence of backpacker accommodation and other services also requires analysis as little is known at present.

MARK HAMPTON

657

Such research would clarify whether or not backpacker tourism has the potential to be part of the policy toolkit for LDC economic development. Clearly, in terms of total international tourist numbers, the small size of backpacker tourism relative to conventional mass tourism, means that it is unrealistic to expect it to replace the latter. Nevertheless, the study Ændings indicates that backpacker tourism could play a signiÆcant role in the total picture and this has implications for government policymakers and tourism planners for many LDCs in South East Asia and elsewhere. At present, however, international mass tourism is king in most less developed countries, and the backpacker sector is not even a footnote on the main tourism development agenda.   Acknowledgments–The author thanks Wiendu Nuryanti, Moeljarto Tjokrowinto, and colleagues at Gadjah Mada University's Center for Tourism Research and Development for discussing his ideas on this subject. Helpful comments of Amran Hamzah, Paula Holland, and Peter Scott on earlier drafts of this paper are also appreciated. However, the usual disclaimers apply. Funding support from the Portsmouth Business School Research Committee is gratefully acknowledged.

REFERENCES Adler, J. 1985 Youth on the Road: ReØections on the History of Tramping. Annals of Tourism Research 12:335±354. Aditjondro, G. 1995 Bali, Jakarta's Colony: Social and Ecological Impacts of Jakarta-based Conglomerates in Bali's Tourism Industry. Asia Research Centre Working Paper No. 58. Perth: Murdoch University. Bennett, L., M. Goldberg, and P. Hunte 1996 Ownership and Sustainability: Lessons on Group-based Financial Services from South Asia. Journal of International Development 8:271±288. British Broadcasting Corporation 1996 Assignment: Empire of the Sons and Daughters. Documentary broadcast on BBC-2, 8 November. Bennett, L., and C. Cuevas, eds. 1996 Special Issue on Sustainable Banking with the Poor. Journal of International Development 8(2). Booth, A. 1990 The Tourism Boom in Indonesia. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 26(3):45±73. Bradt, H. 1995 Better to Travel Cheaply? The Independent on Sunday magazine (February 12):49±50. Brohman, J. 1996 New Directions in Tourism for Third World Development. Annals of Tourism Research 23:48±70. Britton, S., and W. Clarke, eds. 1987 Ambiguous Alternative: Tourism in Small Developing Countries. Suva: University of the South PaciÆc. Bryden, J. 1973 Tourism and Development: A Case Study of the Commonwealth Caribbean. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Butler, R. 1980 The Concept of a Tourist Area Cycle of Evolution: Implications for Management of Resources. Canadian Geographer 24:5±12. Cochrane, J. 1996 The Sustainability of Ecotourism in Indonesia: Fact and Fiction. In Environ-

658

BACKPACKER TOURISM

mental Change in South-East Asia, M. Parnwell and R. Bryant, eds., pp. 237± 259. London: Routledge. Cohen, E. 1973 Nomands from AfØuence: Notes on the Phenomenon of Drifter Tourism. International Journal of Comparative Sociology 14:89±103. 1982 Marginal Paradises. Bungalow Tourism on the islands of Southern Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research 9:189±229. Connell, J. 1993 Bali Revisited: Death, Rejuvenation and the Tourist Cycle. Environment and Planning D, Society and Space 11:641±661. Cukier, J., and G. Wall 1994 Informal Tourism Employment: Vendors in Bali, Indonesia. Tourism Management 15:461±476. Dieke, P. 1993 Tourism in the Gambia: Some Issues in Development Policy. World Development 21:277±289. de Kadt, E., ed. 1979 Tourism, Passport to Development? Oxford: Oxford University Press. de Kadt, E. 1996 Tourism Policy Management after Structural adjustment. In Tourism and Culture: Global Civilization in Change? W. Nuryanti, ed., pp. 253±269. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press. Eccleston, B., and D. Potter 1996 Environment NGOs and Different Political Contexts. In Environmental Change in South East Asia, M. Parnwell and R. Bryant, eds., pp. 49±66. London: Routledge. Forsyth, T. 1995 Tourism and Agricultural Development in Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research 22:877±900. Graburn, N. 1983 The Anthropology of Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 10:9±33. Government of Australia. 1995 National Backpacker Tourism Strategy. Canberra: Australia Government Publishing Service. Hamzah, A. 1995 The Changing Tourist Motivation and its Implications on the Sustainability of Small-scale Tourism Development in Malaysia. Paper read at World Conference on Sustainable Tourism, Lanzarote, Spain, April 24±29. Hitchcock, M., V. King and M. Parnwell, eds. 1993 Tourism in South-East Asia. London: Routledge. Hussey, A. 1989 Tourism in a Balinese Village. The Geographical Review 79:311±325. IRIP News Service 1996 Beaches and Broken Homes. Internet extract on Indonesia Daily News, http://www.uni-stuttgart.de/indonesia/news. Kitching, G. 1982 Development and Underdevelopment in Historical Perspective. London: Methuen. Loker-Murphy, L., and P. Pearce. 1995 Young Budget Travelers: Backpackers in Australia. Annals of Tourism Research 22:819±843. McCarthy, J. 1994 Are Sweet Dreams made of This? Tourism in Bali and Eastern Indonesia. Melbourne: IRIP. McTaggart, W. D. 1980 Tourism and Tradition in Bali, World Development 8:457±466. Mehmet, O. 1995 Westernizing the Third World. The Eurocentricity of Economic Development Theories. London: Routledge. Mickler, M. 1995 Tourism, Environment and Development in the Coastal Zones of Indonesia: The Sinking of the Island of Bali. Unpublished paper, Curtin University of Technology.

MARK HAMPTON

659

Michaud, J. 1995 Questions about Fieldwork Methodology. Annals of Tourism Research 22:681±687. Mucipto, I. 1994 Experiments in Collaboration between Indigenous, Business and NGO Communities to Achieve Sustainable Ecotourism: The Case of Lombok. Unpublished paper, WAHLI (Indonesian Environment Forum). O'Hare, G., and H. Barrett 1994 Effects of Market Fluctuations on the Sir Lankan Tourist Industry: Resilience and Change, 1981±1991. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale GeograÆe 81:39±52. Oppermann, M. 1992 Regional Aspects of the Indonesian Tourist Industry. The Indonesian Journal of Geography 22:31±44. Parker, S. 1995 Annapurna Conservation Area Project: In Pursuit of Sustainable Development? Paper read at Development Studies Association annual conference, Dublin, September 7±9. Parnwell, M. 1993 Environment Issues and Tourism in Thailand. In Tourism in South-East Asia, M. Hitchcock, V. King and M. Parwell, eds., pp. 286±302. London: Routledge. Pattullo, P. 1996 Last Resorts. The Cost of Tourism in the Caribbean. London: Cassell. Pearce, P. 1990 The Backpacker Phenomenon: Preliminary Answers to Basic Questions. Townsville: James Cook University of North Queensland. Real World Coalition, eds. 1996 Politics of the Real World. London: Earthscan. Reuters 1991 Indonesia Plans International Airport in Lombok. Dateline Jakarta (March 5). Riley, P. 1988 Road Culture of International Long-term Budget Travellers. Annals of Tourism Research 15:313±328. Richter, L. 1993 Tourism Policy-making in South-East Asia. In Tourism in South-East Asia, M. Hitchcock, V. King and M. Parnwell, eds., pp. 179±199. London: Routledge. Rodenburg, E. 1980 The Effects of Scale in Economic Development: Tourism in Bali. Annals of Tourism Research 7:177±196. Sarch, M. T. 1996 Participatory Research Methods: A Toolbook. Portsmouth: CEMARE, University of Portsmouth. Schumacher, E. F. 1973 Small is Beautiful: A Study of Economics as if People Mattered. London: Abacus. SoÆeld, T. 1995 Indonesia's National Tourism Development Plan. Annals of Tourism Research 22:690±694. Telfer, D., and G. Wall 1996 Linkages between Tourism and Food Production. Annals of Tourism Research 23:635±653. Theis, J., and H. Grady 1991 Participatory Rapid Appraisal for Community Development. London: IIED. Tucker, K., G. Seow and M. Sundberg 1984 ASEAN-Australia Trade in Tourist Services. Kuala Lumpur and Canberra: ASEAN-Australia Joint Research Project. Vatikiotis, M. 1994 Indonesian Politics under Suharto. Order, Development and Pressure for Change. London: Routledge.

660

BACKPACKER TOURISM

Vogt, J. 1976 Wandering: Youth and Travel Behaviour. Annals of Tourism Research 4:74± 105. Wall, G. 1996a Perspectives on Tourism in Selected Balinese Villages. Annals of Tourism Research 23:123±137. 1996b One Name, Two Destinations: Planned and Unplanned Coastal Resorts in Indonesia. In Issues in Tourism: Case studies in Planning, Development and Marketing, L. Harrison and W. Husbands, eds., pp. 41±57. Chichester: Wiley. Walton, J. 1993 Tourism and Economic Development in ASEAN. In Tourism in South-East Asia, M. Hitchcock, V. King and M. Parnwell, eds., pp. 244±233. London: Routledge. Warren, C. 1996 Tanah Lot: The Cultural and Environmental Politics of Resort Development in Bali. In Reclaiming Resources: The Political Economy of Environment in South East Asia. P. Hirsch and C. Warren, eds., London: Oxford University Press. Weaver, D. 1990 Grand Cayman Island and the Resort Cycle Model. Journal of Travel Research 29(2):9±15. 1995 Alternative Tourism in Montserrat. Tourism Management 16(8):593±604. Wheat, S. 1995 Interview with a Tour Guide. The Independent on Sunday Magazine (February 12):5. Wheeler, T., ed. 1992 South-East Asia on a Shoestring (7th ed). Hawthorne, Victoria: Lonely Planet. Wilkinson, P. 1989 Strategies for Tourism in Island Microstates. Annals of Tourism Research 16:153±177. Wilkinson, P., and W. Pratiwi 1995 Gender and Tourism in an Indonesian Village. Annals of Tourism Research 22:283±299. Wilson, D. 1997 Paradoxes of Tourism in Goa. Annals of Tourism Research 24:52±75. Wood, R. 1984 Ethnic Tourism, The State and Cultural Change in Southeast Asia. Annals of Tourism Research 11:353±374. World Tourism Organisation 1996 International Arrivals Top 1 Billion by 2010. Press Release (June), Internet edition, http://www/world-tourism.org/topnews.htm. Submitted 21 March 1997 Resubmitted 15 August 1997 Accepted 6 October 1997 Refereed anonymously Coordination Editor: Geoffrey Wall