Effective governance in tourism development – An analysis of local perception in the Huangshan mountain area

Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 112–123

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tourism Management Perspectives journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tmp

Effective governance in tourism development – An analysis of local perception in the Huangshan mountain area Cheng Qian a,b,⁎, Nophea Sasaki a, Ganesh Shivakoti a, Yuanjie Zhang c a b c

Natural Resources Management, School of Environment, Resources, and Development, Asian Institute of Technology, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand Wuhan Institute of Technology, Hubei, 430205, China AgroParisTech, 16 rue Claude Bernard, F-75231 Paris Cedex 05, France

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 16 July 2016 Received in revised form 8 August 2016 Accepted 13 August 2016 Available online xxxx Keywords: Institutional arrangement Community-based on tourism Lease-operation tourism Local livelihood Efficiency Equality Accountability Adaptability

a b s t r a c t Effective governance is important for sustainable tourism development, especially in China, where local tourists have sharply increased over the last 20 years. This study aimed to assess the two different governance systems, the community-based tourism (CBT) and Lease-Operation Tourism (LOT) currently implemented in the Jade and Phoenix Valley near the Huangshan Mountain World Heritage Site. We conducted household-level interviews and questionnaire surveys for all households living in these valleys and compared the outcomes of the different institutional arrangements through analysis of efficiency, equality, accountability and adaptability according to several evaluation indicators. The results indicated that CBT governance has considerable advantages compared to that of LOT because CBT has largely improved the local households' livelihoods and increased local awareness of the nature conservation. The findings clearly demonstrated that CBT can yield great economic, ecological and social benefits and therefore it is the most effective governance system in tourism development. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Over the last 20 years, China has experienced fast economic growth despite many countries in the world were in the opposite directions. Gross Domestic Products in China increase about 10% annually between 1995 and 2015, compared to 2.4% in the USA, 1.90% in EU, 0.4% in Japan (World Bank, 2016). Fast economic development has negative and positive impacts on the Chinese society. Sustained economic development growth has resulted in more Chinese being rich and their lifestyle has greatly improved over the past 20 years (China Statistical Yearbook, 2016). As lifestyle improved, people began to appreciate the nature. This is particularly true for China, where Chinese travelers have increased sharply about 10.5% inside the country and about 19.5% for oversea travel between 2013 and 2015 (China National Tourism Administration, 2016). The world heritage sites have been much more attractive for Chinese tourists (China Statistical Yearbook, 2015). Such increase of tourists has provided more opportunities for local people to generate additional incomes from tourism development. If governed effectively, tourism has been regarded as an ideal tool for sustainable development as it can contribute to both development and conservation of natural resources (Binns & Nel, 2002; Torres-Delgado & Palomeque, ⁎ Corresponding author at: Natural Resources Management, School of Environment, Resources, and Development, Asian Institute of Technology, P.O. Box 4, Khlong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand. E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Qian).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2016.08.003 2211-9736/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

2012). Previous studies suggest that governance has important role in sustainable development of tourism (Erkus-Ozturk & Eraydln, 2010; Bramwell, 2011; Estol & Font, 2016). Governance under the community-based tourism (CBT hereafter) involves the participation of local communities in the management of tourism. CBT has provided two major types of benefit, namely the community's unique background and partnership. The former is important for solving the complex problems of tourism development while the latter can lead to more equitable allocation of benefits for long-term achievement of sustainable development goals (Lemos & Agrawal, 2006). Previous research on CBT planning (Murphy, 1988; Jamal & Getz, 1995; Reid, Mair, & George, 2004; Wan, 2013., Bello, 2015), community participation (Simmons, 1994; Tosun, 2000; Li, 2006; Ying & Zhou, 2007; Wang, Long, & Zheng, 2015) and community attitude toward tourism management (Teye, Sirakaya, & Sönmez, 2002; Andereck, Valentine, Knopf, & Vogt, 2005; Choi & Murray, 2010; Yu, Chancellor, & Cole, 2011; Jia & Wang, 2015) found that active community participation and partnership with relevant stakeholders are important for the CBT development. Nevertheless, other research has questioned the long-term results from the CBT. Although Roberts and Hall (2001) found that CBT development has spurred economic, ecological and societal development, Zapata, Hall, Lindo, and Vanderschaeghe (2012) argued that CBT development ignored the economic assessment caused by social and environmental impacts. Nunkoo and Ramkissoon (2010) suggest that communities are likely to suffer from traffic congestion, increasing crime rates, waste water generation, and increasing cost of living under the

C. Qian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 112–123

governance of CBT CTB. Nevertheless, the role of government in the CBT development directive is still debatable by many Chinese tourism academics and government professionals. For example, Xidi Village in the Yi County of the historical Huizhou region of Anhui province is successful for their CBT development (Song & Li, 2014), but the regular conflicts between outside enterprises and local community have frequently occurred in the Hongcun Village of the same county (Ying & Zhou, 2007). Another governance of tourism development is the governance under the lease-to-operate tourism (LOT hereafter). Under the LOT, commercial company is entitled to develop the tourism in the community. LOT has resulted in increased revenues in some locations such as in South Antalya, Turkey (Göymen, 2000); Belek, Turkey (Yüksel, Bramwell, & Yüksel, 2005); Minakami,Japan (Zhu, 2008), Hailuogou, China (Xu, 2008), and Wuzhen, China (Ryan, Pan, Chou, & Gu, 2014) but low revenues in other locations such as in PRODETUR-NE, Brazilian Northeast (Bartholo, Delamaro, & Bursztyn, 2008) and Maling River, China (Huang, 2010). Li, Ryan, and Cave (2016) found that although LOT has been developed more than 30 years in the Qiyunshan of the Anhui province, actual investment was undertaken only in 2013 and therefore, LOT in the Qiyunshan still remains in its early stage of tourism development. Li et al. (2016) further found that contracts between the operating companies and the provincial authority have been broken many times due to management losses and mismanagement by the contracted companies (Fang & Zhang, 2011). LOT was found to result in ease of management in some location in Bifeng Valley China (Xu, 2005), Jiuzhaigou, China (Yue & Ran, 2005), Taragire, Tanzania (Tanzania National Parks, 2016) and Masai Mara National Reserve, Kenya (Zhang, 2003) but not in other locations such as in Taoping, China; Amboseli Park, Kenya (Zhang, 2003) and Costa Rica (Campbell, 1999, Dong, 2011, Basurto, 2013). As their rights have been ignored, local community blocked the tourism way within the scenic area in Emei Mountain in 2014 (Zuo, 2016). Furthermore, LOT was found to violate the rights of the local people because local people were not part of any decision making processes, even people died during the conflict between outside investor and local people (Fei, 2008). As Chinese tourists for World Heritage sites in the country have sharply increased over the past 20 years and given that CBT and LOT are being implemented in various tourist sites, understanding the governance system appropriate for a particular situation will provide better-informed information for tourism development. Therefore, effective governance under CBT and LOT need to be assessed so that appropriate policy interventions can be introduced for sustainable development of tourism in China. This study is designed to assess the effective governance systems for tourism development in China with particular focus on tourism development and local perceptions at the Huang Mountain World Heritage Area using the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework developed by Ostrom (2011). The results of this study will form an important part for policy interventions regarding governance of tourism development in China. 2. Materials and methods 2.1. Study sites and governance systems In the current case study site, 6 of the 13 natural villages have developed their own tourism. Two of these natural villages were selected for the present study. As it shows in Fig. 1, the local community in Jade Valley (J) has conducted its own CBT, while the Phoenix Valley (P) has a Lease-Operation Tourism (LOT) that their tourism is managed by an outside private corporation. Both of these valleys are in close proximity at the foot of Mountain Huangshan; the distance between them is approximately only 3 km. The advantages of having association with the World Heritage Site—Mountain Huangshan are obviously. First, these valleys do not need to worry about tourists' resources. Second, the tourism-related natural resources have been strictly protected by multiple laws and

113

policies. These valleys have established their own tourism businesses under strong centralized governance concerning natural resource protection. 2.2. Research methods This study adopted the Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework (Ostrom, 2011) to assess the effectiveness governance for tourism development. This framework provides a useful approach to understand a wide variety of institutional arrangements. The IAD framework relies on four evaluating criteria to assess the overall performance of institutional arrangements (Ostrom, Schroeder, & Wynne, 1993; Imperial & Yandle, 2005). Institution here refers to CBT and LOT. Each criteria is followed by evaluate indicators and each indicator has many sub-indicators. Because tourism governance is a complex system that includes economic, natural and social dimensions, we selected the sub- indicators as described in Table 1. 1) Three sub-indicators are used to assess the economic efficiency, ecological efficiency and administrative efficiency. 2) Equity efficiency concerns fiscal equivalence and redistribution equity. 3) Accountability efficiency includes internal accountability and external accountability, which are embodied in the transparency of the governance and the trust in its performance. 4) Adaptability reflects the capacity to respond to challenges and “learn by doing”. It includes internal adaptability such as capacity building, rules and strategy adjusting. Still, the external adaptability is focus on tourism culture and public relation. Data from 2012 and 2014 household surveys in Jade Valley and Phoenix Valley were used to evaluate in local livelihood according to various institutional arrangements concerning tourism development and indigenous people's attitudes toward tourism development. This fieldwork mainly included house surveys, open-ended interviews with local residents, officials and key informants and non-participant observation. Because the number of local households in each of the case study sites did not exceed 50, we aimed to investigate every household. However, 35 of the 46 households in Jade Valley and 36 of the 38 households in Phoenix Valley effectively completed questionnaires. Of these questionnaires, one household from Jade Valley and one household from Phoenix Valley only answered the questions concerning livelihood status, with no evaluations of tourism governance. Thus, the current study included 34 households in Jade Valley and 35 households in Phoenix Valley. This study also conducted interviews by means of a checklist with the key informants, local government officials, external investor, and the manager and staff of CBT and LOT Company. Of note, all of the 8 interviewees in Jade Valley were staff of CBT. Of these eight interviewees, only one assistant of the chief manager was not a local resident. The interviews included the following topics: the history of tourism development, the evolution of institutional arrangement, the main responsibility and welfare as the local staff, the relationship between the CBT Company, local community and local households, the large events associated with the tourism business, etc. In Phoenix Valley, interviews were conducted with three members of the LOT Company. Because none of the interviewees were local residents, they had limited knowledge about local households' livelihood and the history of local tourism development. Thus, we attempted to obtain additional information from two key informants of the local people, the former head of the community (now, a dooly carrier in the scenic area) and a former manager of the company (now, unemployed). To assess livelihood status and the perception of the local people toward different tourism governance, the following questions were asked and the answers were scored accordingly (Table 2).

114

C. Qian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 112–123

Fig. 1. Location map of study sites.

2.3. History of tourism development in case study area 2.3.1. CBT in Jade Valley Jade Valley is located in the famous East gorge of Mountain Huangshan. It spans a total of 30 km and has been exploited for only 3 km. Before 1980, the average income was approximately 150 Yuan RMB and depended on agriculture and the forest. The tourism development began in 1987. Because Mountain Huangshan is known for its beautiful landscape, a continuous stream of tourists visits from all countries. As the neighbor of Mountain Huangshan (and with excellent scenery of mountains, valleys, pools, falls, picturesque rocks and bamboo forest), even without any advertising, most tourists visit the Jade Valley during the tour of Mountain Huangshan. Thus, the local people established a collective-owned enterprise for tourism development. With 60,000 Yuan RMB, the local villagers registered for their company. Half of this capital was collected from local households and half was paid through a bank loan. Every household contributed time and labor to the basic tourism infrastructure. Although the admission fee was only 0.5 Yuan RMB at that time, the local people gained 4500 Yuan RMB from tourism in 1987. Not only was the loan paid off, each

local individual received 10 Yuan RMB for the benefit sharing. Thus, the villagers were inspired by their tourism exploitation. Later, Mountain Huangshan was listed as a World Natural and Cultural Heritage Site. This stimulated the local people's enthusiasm for developing their tourism business. As more tourists visited, more opportunities and challenges emerged during the process of tourism development. There was a great opportunity for local tourism development in 1991. A large state institution arrived to build a hotel that adjoined Jade Valley. The institution donated 510,000 Yuan RMB to promote the tourism infrastructure of Jade Valley. Since then, the revenue from tourism has been rapidly increasing every year, for example, from 750,000 Yuan RMB in 1995 to 3 million RMB in 1997. Due to the exorbitant price of the accommodations on the top of Mountain Huangshan, there is a large demand for lower priced accommodations at the mountain foot area. Thus, the local community created the happy farmer house program, which involves guesthouses for the local households to supply accommodations at a low price and for the tourist to experience the home stay and relax after climbing Mountain Huangshan. In 1999, with the support of every household, the leader of the local community made the decision to reconstruct all of the

C. Qian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 112–123 Table 1 Evaluation criteria, indicators, and sub-indicators used in our analysis. Evaluation criteria

Evaluation indicator

Evaluation sub-indicator

Efficiency

Economic efficiency

Household income Living condition Tourism facility Ecological quality Energy structure Integrate planning and budget Collaboration and partnership Internal review External audit Contribution toward tourism (money, time, labor) Dividends from tourism company Wage and welfare Employment opportunity Tenure and service Competencies of leaders and members Adequacy of planning and implementation Transparency (account publish) Monitor and sanction (committee and assembly meeting) Training for capacity building Modify the rules promptly Adjust business strategy timely Promote public relation Foster a good and healthy tourism culture

Ecological efficiency Administrative efficiency

Equity

Fiscal equivalence Redistribution equity

Accountability Internal accountability External accountability Adaptability

Internal adaptability External adaptability

dwellings. The community entrusted the professional institute with the design and the new housing development was completed after two years. There are 48 household buildings, one management building, and one senior apartment. The buildings appear as vocational villas that are scattered on the hillside and include amenities such as tap water, cable TV, Internet, telephone, road lamps and yard gardens. Typically, a local household lives in one or two rooms on the ground floor and the other rooms are guestrooms. A total of 242 rooms are registered in the happy farmer house program. Nearly every household devotes all of its family members to the guesthouse. With the same standard as a hotel facility, the lower price strategy satisfied the demands of a great number of consumers. A strict system of guesthouse management rules that regulated a unified standard, unified price, unified allotted guests and concentrated toll was a success. Local households must sign a warranty and pay 2000 Yuan RMB as a deposit. Then, the tourists are allocated to the guesthouses. At the end of each season or each month, each household can receive their benefit from the sub-company. If there are any complaints against a guesthouse, the household runs the risk of losing its deposit or disqualification. This rule system mitigated the conflicts and increased the service quality. Hence, tourists' satisfaction has been greatly enhanced. The villagers named the business “happy farmer's house”. This business became an ideal guesthouse model in An Hui province and the entire country. The guesthouse operation resulted in earnings of 2.8 million Yuan RMB in 2005, with households earning approximately 40 to 50 thousand Yuan RMB on average. The company's assets were approximately 45 million Yuan RMB, the register assets were 18 million Yuan RMB, and the annual profit and taxes were approximately 2 million Yuan RMB in 2005. Since 2006, the collective-owned company has adopted standardization management. The shares are divided as follows: 5% belongs to the state, 5% belongs to the local community, and the remaining belongs to the company. The agent of the state only oversees the lawful operation of the business and does not receive shares from the company. The local community can monitor and receive dividends. The company must report to the local committee every month and submit an operational report every year.

115

Table 2 List of questions, answers and scores. Questions

Answer and scores

1. Does tourism improve local people's livelihood or not?

1 = absolutely no, 2 = no, 3 =

2. Are you satisfied with your income?

3. What is your opinion on the tourism facility?

mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely yes. 1 = extremely no, 2 = no, 3 = mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely yes. 1 = extremely poor, 2 = poor, 3 = mediate, 4 = good and 5 = very good. 1 = extremely no, 2 = no, 3 =

4. Has tourism changed the traditional consumption mode of extracting forest? mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely yes. 5. What is your perception of the 1 = extremely poor, 2 = poor, 3 = ecological quality? mediate, 4 = good and 5 = very 6. Has your company integrated their planning and budget efficiency?

good. 1 = extremely no, 2 = no, 3 = mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely yes. 1 = extremely poor, 2 = poor, 3 =

7. How are you feeling about the collaboration and partnership with your mediate, 4 = good and 5 = very company? good. 8. Did your company always inspect the 1 = extremely no, 2 = no, 3 = daily work and settle the matter mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely promptly? yes. 9. Did your company always responsiveness to local needs? Does every local household bear the burden and share the benefit equally from tourism development? 10. Did you satisfied with dividends from company? 11. Did you satisfied with your wage and welfare? 12. Do you have opportunities to be employee of company? 13. Did your leaders being servants of the people? 14. What is your opinion of the leader's ability? 15. Did your company has proper utilization of the monthly federal allocation of funds and no waste of both human and material resources? 16. Did your company have published the account regularly? 17. What is the frequency of committee and assembly meeting? 18. Are you satisfied with the opportunities for decision-making and capacity building? 19. How fast did your company recover from vulnerability context? 20. How is the relationship between your company and the local government, tourism agency and others? 21. How is your feeling for your tourism culture in your valley?

1 = extremely no, 2 = no, 3 = mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely yes. 1 = extremely no, 2 = no, 3 = mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely yes. 1 = extremely no, 2 = no, 3 = mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely yes. 1 = extremely no, 2 = no, 3 = mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely yes. 1 = extremely no, 2 = no, 3 = mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely yes. 1 = extremely no, 2 = no, 3 = mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely yes. 1 = extremely bad, 2 = bad 3 = mediate, 4 = good and 5 = definitely good. 1 = extremely no, 2 = no, 3 = mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely yes. 1 = extremely no, 2 = no, 3 = mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely yes. 1 = never, 2 = few.3 = normal,4 = a few,5 = a good few 1 = extremely no, 2 = no, 3 = mediate, 4 = yes and 5 = definitely yes. 1 = very slow, 2 = slow,3 = normal, 4 = fast,5 = very fast 1 = extremely poor, 2 = poor, 3 = mediate, 4 = good and 5 = very good. 1 = extremely poor, 2 = poor, 3 = mediate, 4 = good and 5 = very good.

The livelihood and welfare of the indigenous people have been substantially promoted. The people are also proud of their collective decisions throughout the tourism development process. Most of them are very satisfied with their livelihood.

C. Qian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 112–123

The population in Jade Valley is 246. Of these individuals, 110 are employees of the company. Every household has at least 2 quotas as a member of the company staff. The other residents conduct business that is related to the guesthouse. Those who are above the age of 60 and disabled have a pension of 300 RMB per month or can live in the senior center without charge. 2.3.2. LOT in Phoenix Valley Phoenix Valley is only 2 km apart from Jade Valley, and their natural resources have the same characteristics. The local community conducted their own tourism business since 1987. However, due to shortage of funds and capacity, the local community always came to nothing at last no matter who will be the leader. An outside private investor arrived in 2001. Following discussion and negotiation with the local people, a contract between the investor and local community committee was signed. They established a tourism company (Lease-Operational company) to operate the tourism business in Phoenix Valley. The contract terms seems reasonable for the local people. The operational right to natural resources in Phoenix Valley was substituted with a 5% share in the tourism company. The local people no longer pay toward the tourism infrastructure, and they can share the bonus with the company every year. According to their contract, in the beginning of the first five years, the company paid 5000 Yuan RMB to the local community, which equaled 5% of net income. Each local individual only received 500–600 Yuan RMB per year from 2002 to 2007. For the next 10 years, the payment increased to 10% of net income. Thus, every community member now receives 700 Yuan RMB per year. In the last ten years, the investor must pay 15% of net income for the rent. Finally, after 30 years of tenure, all of these infrastructures will belong to local community. It seems that the local people can benefit from tourism development without taking investment risks. Because the villagers were suffering from poverty at that time, they regarded the investor as a benefactor. Without any argument, the investor obtained tenure for 30 years. At first, the local people collaborated for land acquisition and even served as volunteers to construct the tourism facility. They hoped that the outsider would help them eliminate the poverty as soon as possible. The investor registered his company in 2002 with the capital assets of 560,000 Yuan RMB. Based on the collaboration, the infrastructures included road, bridge, dam, parking lot and management house, which were completed on schedule. This seems to be a good start for the tourism development in Phoenix Valley. According to the contract, all of the residents have the same opportunity for employment, but the only positions include carrier of dooly, cleaner, security guard and storekeeper. Approximately 95% of the local residents queued up on the waiting list; every household might obtain one job for every 4–5 years or even longer. In addition, the average salary for a cleaner and security guard is 20 thousand Yuan RMB per year; the dooly carrier and shopkeeper must support them through tourism service within the scenic area. Currently, only 20 households in the valley are involved in the tourism activity related to the investor. Approximately 12 households are affiliated with a different travel agency and provide transportation with their private vehicles. 3. Results 3.1. Social-economic conditions in the study sites Totally, 69 households were successfully interviewed; 34 in the Jade Valley and 35 in Phoenix Valley (Table 3). The percentage of men is less than women, though the moderate proportion distribution of all ages groups, the older interviewers (above 60 years old) of Phoenix Valley is much more than that in Jade Valley (respectively 54.3% and 5.9%). In terms of education, households in the Phoenix Valley has much lower education than that in Jade Valley, suggesting that any introduction of

Table 3 Socio-economic conditions in the Jade and Phoenix Valley. Basic information

Description

Gender

Male Female Total Under 23 23 to 60 Above 60 Married Single No more than 3 4 5 6 Above 7 University High school Middle school Primary school Illiteracy

Age

Marital status Household size

Degree of education

Jade Valley

Phoenix Valley

Number of surveys

%

Number of surveys

%

16 18 34 2 30 2 29 5 12

47.1 52.9 100 5.9 88.2 5.9 85 15 35.3

7 28 35 0 16 19 33 2 7

20 80 100 0 45.7 54.3 94.3 5.7 20

9 8 4 1 0 14 15

26.5 23.5 11.8 2.9 0 41.2 44.1

6 11 7 4 0 3 9

17.2 31.4 20 11.4 0 8.6 25.7

3

8.8

14

40

2

5.9

9

25.7

the tourism governance system should be undertaken carefully as long as their support is concerned. Surprisingly, about 44.1% of households are the employee of the CBT Company, while no household is employed by the LOT Company in Phoenix Valley. As a result, males in the Phoenix Valley need to find jobs outside their community and 80% of the households interviewed in the Phoenix Valley were female compared to just about 52.9% in the Jade Valley (Table 3). 3.2. Economic efficiency According to Ostrom (2011), economic efficiency is determined by the magnitude of net benefits associated with an allocation of resources. For Jade Valley, the original registered capital was only 60,000 Yuan RMB (the owned capital was only 3000 Yuan RMB) in 1987, and it strikingly grew to 18,000,000 Yuan RMB in 2005. Furthermore, there was a positive contribution on profit and tax of above 2,000,000 Yuan RMB per year since 2005. The admission fees stably increased from 2000 to 2014, even with shocks such as SARS in 2003 and the economic crisis in 2008. As it shows in Fig. 2, the dividends of the local individual sharply rose from 10 Yuan RMB in 1987 to 11,500 Yuan RMB in 2014. The average annual 160000 140000

Annual Incomes (Yuon RMB)

116

120000 Phoenix

100000

Jade

80000 60000 40000 20000 0 Average annual income

Income from tourism

Dividend

Income from guesthouse

Fig. 2. Average annual incomes of Jade Valley and Phoenix Valley in 2012.

C. Qian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 112–123

income per household is 131,974.6 Yuan RMB and among it 95.6% (about 126,141.3 Yuan RMB) came from tourism in 2012. The average annual income from guesthouse is the most profitable item which taken 46.98% (about 59,264.7 Yuan RMB) of tourism income. In addition, both the tourism infrastructure and housing condition were significantly promoted; thus, the local people scored these items as 3.88, demonstrating a degree of satisfaction with this issue. In the Phoenix Valley, the villagers only scored economic efficiency as 1.60. The original registered capital was 590,000 Yuan RMB in 2002; only the tourism infrastructure was improved to a great extent. There was no change in the local people's housing condition, and the dividends of the local individual have been only 700 RMB per year since 2001. The average anural income per household is 19,083.3 Yuan RMB and among it 43.8% (about 8361.3 Yuan RMB) came from tourism in 2012. The other main sources of income are plantation (34.6%) and remittance (21.5%). The dividend from LOT is the most important income come from tourism which takes 37.2% (about 3111 Yuan RMB per household) of tourism income. Although the dividends from LOT are much less than that in Jade Valley, it still occupied 16.3%. And they have no harvest from guesthouse. The local villagers' benefits from tourism have not changed. Thus, the efficiency in Jade Valley is much greater than that in Phoenix Valley. Ecological efficiency refers to the tendency for natural resource consumption and the maintenance of environmental quality during the process of tourism development. According to documents of the local governments' agency, the forest coverage grew and reached 95% in this area. Most of the local people in Phoenix Valley complained about the noise and worried about the water quality. Their energy structure differed as well. The common popular energy consumption patterns in Jade Valley included gas, electricity and solar power, whereas those in Phoenix Valley were coal, electricity and firewood. Thus, tourism development has reduced the dependency on forest products in Jade Valley to a greater extent than in Phoenix Valley. It is also important to consider administrative efficiency. Neither Jade Valley nor Phoenix Valley received a high score on this issue. The local villagers only scored 2.98 and 1.29 for administrative efficiency at CBT and LOT, respectively. This shows that Phoenix residents were extremely unsatisfied with this issue. Furthermore, much work must be performed to improve the administration level in Jade Valley. The Phoenix residents only reported a very low score for collaboration and partnership 1.29. In terms of the other questions, they were extremely dissatisfied because they did not have any hold information concerning the budget and plan for LOT and had no opportunity to review or audit the performance of LOT. Thus, they provided no answer concerning it. The residents of Jade reported a score of 3.68 on collaboration and partnership, and most of them reported anxiousness concerning the CBT plans and budget. Sharply divided views emerged on a new project that was suggested by the leader group and consulted by local people. Some of the local people were concerned about how to strengthen the internal review and external audit. Those local people do not like the other Jade residents because they only focus on operating their own business and are satisfied with the growing dividends; however, all the residents are worried about corruption and rent-seeking. Thus, the other items only received a score from 2.56 to 2.94. 3.3. Equity According to Ostrom (2011), equity includes two aspects, fiscal equivalence and redistribution equity. 3.4. Fiscal equivalence There are two principle means of assessing equity from the perspective of horizontal or vertical equity. One assessment is based on the equality between individuals' contributions to an effort and the benefits that they derive. The other assessment is based on differential abilities

117

to pay (Ostrom, 2011). The fiscal equivalence holds that those who benefit from a service should bear the burden of financing that service. There are important differences among the CBT and LOT. In Jade Valley, at the beginning of tourism development, all of the forestland of local households was collectivized and every household contributed time and labor to construct the initial tourism infrastructure. Thus, every member of the local community had a share of tourism development. Thus, they reported a high value 4.47 for this item. According to members of Phoenix Valley, the outside investor paid all of the costs of capital. Some local households were not allowed to extract from their forestland because it was located within a scenic spot and some farmland was taken over for tourism use, such as parking lots. However, these local households shared the same benefit from tourism as those local people who did not bear any burden. The very lower score of 1.66 seems to reflect the conflicts that existed between the local people and the investor. 3.5. Redistribution equity Although efficiency dictates that scarce resources are used where they produce the greatest net benefit, policies that redistribute resources to poorer individuals are of considerable importance (Ostrom, 2011). Both Jade Valley and Phoenix Valley had their own standard of reallocating dividends, welfare and employment opportunities; all individuals within these communities seemed to be treated equally. However, the distribution could not meet the demand for the poor households to maintain their basic subsistence in Phoenix Valley. The CBT Company has 110 staff totally; among them 105 are local villagers. By contrast, the LOT Company has 24 people only 2 of them are local villagers. The data show that the Jade Valley people were very satisfied with dividends and employment opportunities, with a score of 4.79 and 5.00, respectively, for their substantial benefit from tourism. And the scores of those in Phoenix Valley were only 1.49 and 1.26 for their few bonus and opportunities, respectively. Similar to the Phoenix people, most of the Jade people complained about the lower wage; however, their welfare was much better than that of those in Phoenix. Seniors who are above 60 years old can receive 300 RMB per month and have all of the insurance paid by their company. Moreover, all community members have the same chance to travel across the country twice every year. The LOT Company in Phoenix Valley did not improve the local community's welfare. 3.6. Accountability As a basic aspect of governance, accountability is the acknowledgment and assumption of responsibility for every activity, action, product, decision, and policy including the administration, governance, and implementation within the scope of the role or employment position. Furthermore, it encompasses the obligation to report, explain and answer for the resulting consequences. A CBT Company manager should be responsible to community members for the development and use of collective-owned facilities and tourism natural resources. To reduce conflict between accountability and efficiency, information about the residents' preferences must be available to decision-makers. Institutional arrangements that effectively aggregate this information assist in realizing efficiency, increasing accountability and promoting the achievement of redistribution objectives. The accountability in CBT systems is more problematic and depends on the social processes that are used to develop rules and whether there is a mechanism that holds the community accountable to the larger society. Most of the local people in Jade Valley supported their leader group and reported high scores (all above 3.50) on this issue. However, some of the people believed that it is necessary to enhance the transparency and supervision for their CBT governance to prevent corruption and rent-seeking. In terms of Phoenix Valley, local residents vented their grievances concerning the asymmetric information. They felt that they were excluded from

118

C. Qian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 112–123 Efficiency 5

rules-planning and community participation. This issue received the lowest score in the study, with a score of only 1.00 for transparency and 1.06 for monitoring in Phoenix Valley.

4.5 4 3.5 3

3.7. Adaptability

2.5

The accurate understanding of rules requires a length of time. Unless institutions have the capacity to respond to changing environments and information, institutional performance is likely to suffer. In Phoenix Valley, the local community's requirements concerning public hearings and comment made it easier for the investor to apply political pressure. The local government aimed to stabilize tourism-derived economic development. Therefore, the investor's pressure made it difficult for government officials and decision-makers to change rules. Thus, the villagers of Phoenix Valley reported dissatisfaction with their contract. By contrast, there are many vulnerable contexts that provoked adaptation and change during the tourism development in Jade Valley, such as enhancement of the capital and the improvement of dividends. In the past, managers considered how to promptly adjust their rules to resolve problems that emerged. Now, they attempt to predict the trend for the future and manage it in advance. They changed their perception from passive resistance to proactive action, which will aid in sustaining tourism development. The development strategy is constantly changing. There are now designs for a new ecological tea garden project and high-rise buildings to move the residents out of the happy farmer houses area so that the CBT Company can rent all of the rooms in the houses for collective operation in the future. A hot debate arose surrounding this issue, with many people voicing absolute objection. However, this item obtained a score of 3.97 in Jade Valley, whereas it was scored as 1.12 in Phoenix Valley. Furthermore, the leader group had a long-term vision concerning the public relationship with the travel agency and multiple levels of government and fostered a specific tourism culture of love. This tourism culture will aid in sustainable tourism development. Thus, the villagers reported a high score of 4.74 in Jade Valley, whereas that in Phoenix Valley was only 1.66. Most Phoenix residents complained that the only thing that the LOT Company can do to attract more tourists is reduce the admission fee and provide the guides with a discount. 3.8. Overall assessment according to individual evaluation criteria The comparison of evaluations (see Table 4 and Fig. 3) shows that the local villagers' perception of the institutional arrangements of their distinct tourism governance model largely differed. In terms of efficiency, the Jade Valley has higher value 3.59 compared to 2.24 (STDEV

Table 4 Efficiency, equity, accountability, and adaptability by evaluation indicators in the two valleys. Evaluation criteria Efficiency t-Test 18.22 Equity t-Test 49.05 Accountability t-Test 34.43 Adaptability t-Test 40.94 Overall t-Test 46.10

df 67

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00

df 66

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00

df 62

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00

df 65

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00

df 62

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.00

Mean STDEV Mean STDEV Mean STDEV Mean STDEV Mean STDEV

Jade Valley

Phoenix Valley

3.59 0.30 4.04 0.21 3.98 0.37 4.25 0.31 3.97 0.22

2.24 0.33 1.35 0.25 1.21 0.29 1.37 0.28 1.54 0.17

Note: Total households are 34 and 35 for Jade and Phoenix Valley, respectively. STDEV is standard deviation of the mean. df is degrees-of-freedom.

2 1.5 1 0.5 Adaptability

0

Equity

Evalutaion of Jade Valley Accountability

Evalution of Phoenix Valley

Fig. 3. Evaluation of the institutional arrangement in Jade Valley and Phoenix Valley.

0.30, 0.33) in the Phoenix Valley. Villagers were satisfied with economy (100%) and ecology (100%) in the Jade but almost 100% of the interviewed villagers were dissatisfied in the Phoenix. The data show that peak value 5.00 in Jade Valley indicated opportunities of employment and dividends from tourism; the minimum value 1.91 was reported for wage and welfare. In the Phoenix Valley, the maximum value related to satisfaction with tourism facilities, which reached 3.89, and the minimum value was transparency and wage or welfare, with the value of 1.00. As seen in Fig. 3, Jade Valley has higher values of efficiency, equity and accountability, and adaptability than that in the Phoenix Valley. These findings suggest that CBT is more favor by local community. 4. Discussion Our results suggest that CBT governance is much in favor of the local community than the LOT governance. There are various reasons that need to be discussed. 4.1. Advantages of CBT governance arrangement The CBT Company, which conducts the tourism business in Jade Valley, has been awarded national 4 A-Class Scenic Designation. It is now working toward the honor of 5 A-Class Scenic Designation. It has its own management system and designs all aspects of tourism according to serial standards. Compared with the LOT Company in Phoenix Valley, there are many distinct characters that exert a positive influence on tourism development. These characters include. 4.1.1. Collective choice arrangements The most distinct difference between CBT governance and LOT governance relates to whether the local people are actively involved in collective choice during the process of tourism development. When the indigenous people in Jade Valley realized the importance of being the free rider of World Heritage Sites, they established their own tourism business for collective choice on commercialized management and the marketable operation. The CBT Company mainly depends on meritocracy, which is determined by personal capacity. At the beginning of the tourism business, the local people elected an individual who was recognized as capable of managing the company. Then, with the cooperation of the local community and support of the local governments,

C. Qian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 112–123

an increasing number of local people became members of the leading group. This group formulates the company's rules, stipulates its organization and manages and operates the business. The leaders discuss and reach a consensus regarding all matters, regardless of whether it is important or trivial. Then, they publicize the bylaws and significant matters in direct relation to the real benefits of the workers or inform the local households. Local individuals have a right to present their opinion on all matters. For the greatest benefit, the local people desired a leading body that was run with efficiency, equity and accountability. There are several channels for local people to express their opinions. There are regular assembly meetings for local people to discuss major issues such as how to allocate the benefits, how to provide incentives and punishments, etc. Every proposal is reviewed and determined by a vote. In addition, the congress of staff and workers provide the opportunity for local staff to claim their rights on many important matters. When the drafts of the collective contract or distribution plan are submitted to the general meeting or representative meeting of local people for discussion and adoption, they can deny it. Moreover, the local people have the right to recruit members and appoint leaders. Thus, this system may ensure the local people's right to democratic elections, decision-making and oversight. All of these measures have guaranteed the healthy development of tourism in Jade Valley. 4.1.2. Congruence between appropriation and provision rules with local conditions The second positive feature is that all of the CBT governance rules are derived from local conditions. The rules change as the livelihood of the local households improves. When the local people began their pioneering work, their money, labor and time was contributed as the initial investment due to poverty in 1987. A total of 700 acres of forestland became collective ownership that was managed by the CBT Company, which takes a 5% share of the Company. Furthermore, customs and rules concerning the use of natural resources are in place. Currently, timber is strictly forbidden, but the local people can obtain other natural resources from the forestland, such as wild vegetables, baby bamboo, medicinal herbs and other economical forest products. There are also many regulations to prevent forest fires, theft and other damage. Hunting has been illegal for approximately twenty years; thus, the species and population as well as biodiversity have stably increased. When the autumn arrives, wild animals such as wild boars would destroy the households' harvest. Thus, the community discussed if it was necessary to set up guardians. When they obtained permission from the local government, they equipped with shotguns and patrol the mountain in August and September. To protect the environment, the local people in Jade Valley do not allow households to raise livestock and poultry. They also do not allow swimming in the upstream because their tap water comes directly from the valley. The local people agreed to all of these rules and promote the voluntary compliance of tourists. 4.1.3. Graduate sanction The CBT has its own incentive and sanction system. Company staff members have personal regulations and community members have villager conventions. Every rule is drafted and modified by the staff. They discuss the rule and then test it. The rule can then be popularized as a formal regulation without objection. For example, if an individual is late for work, he is fined 20 RMB; if he skips work without a good reason, he is fined 100 RMB. The multiple governments also have a mechanism for incentives and sanctions. For instance, if local people scramble for the tourists and abuse each other, they are fined 300–500 RMB. Furthermore, if a tourist complains about forced transaction, the violator is punished 1000 to 3000 RMB and administrative detention. The local people agree with the incentive and sanction rules and voluntarily implement them.

119

4.1.4. Monitoring The committee of local community, the local households, and the local governments has the right to monitor the CBT Company's operation. The local governments supervise the lawful operation; the committee focuses on the performance of the CBT Company and the redistribution and personnel appointment and systems; and the local households and local individuals monitor nearly all matters. Committee members can participate in the CBT meetings and have the right to consult about the leaders' work reports and audit the account documents. If a local individual finds an error, he/she can propose an assembly meeting and find a resolution after collective discussion. Because of the substantial benefit of tourism development, the exleading group of the company had many problems, such as corruption, bribe-taking, and illegal profit. These problems largely damaged the community's benefit. The tourism governance can suffer from being run by local elites. Risks that are triggered by insufficient monitoring of meritocracy undermine the tourism development and the local households' livelihood. In 2006 to 2007, many committee members and local individuals appealed for interventions from higher governments. Finally, the violators were suspended from their duty and punished. 4.1.5. Conflict resolution mechanisms The CBT has an effective mechanism of coping with conflicts, both between community members and the company and among the community members. Because competition is involved in the tourism business, the guesthouse operators stood in the entrance of the valley and persuaded tourists to accept their service. Therefore, conflict arose among the local households. This conflict destroyed the harmonious neighborhood relationship. Following collective decision-making, the local people established a new sub-company to address the guesthouse issues. Every guesthouse must submit a deposit of approximately 2000 RMB to ensure lawful operation and obtain membership with the subcompany. All of the tourists who arrive with a group tour are allocated to guesthouses according to a rotation designed by the sub-company. Local people no longer attempt to attract or canvass for tourists. Rather, they wait at home and the guide sends tourists to their room according to the assignment paper. This mechanism greatly improved the efficiency and service quality and eliminated the conflict within the valley. 4.1.6. Minimal recognition of rights to organize Because the people of Jade Valley developed their tourism without investment from the government, they effectively tackled poverty. Moreover, tourism became the backbone of the local economy development. Thus, the institutional arrangement of tourism development in Jade Valley has been supported by multiple governments. The CBT Company has 90% property right and 100% right of management. The governments allow the local community to govern tourism, and the multiple levels of government serve as supervisor to protect lawful business operation and protect tourists' rights. The CBT only has the right to manage tourism; the community committee manages all of the local issues except the tourism business. 4.1.7. Nested enterprises The CBT Company of Jade Valley has its own institutional arrangement, appropriation, provision, monitoring, enforcement, conflict resolution, and governance activities that are organized in multiple layers of nested enterprises. The company is conducted with a market-oriented operation. Although the structure of the company operates within its own constraints, it must abide by the laws and policies of multiple levels of government, such as the “National Tourism Law”, “Forest Conservation Act”, “Wildlife Conservation Law”, Natural Reserve Ordinance”, “Water Resource Protect Law”, “Tourism Develop Planning” and other policies. Furthermore, the laws, policies and regulations of the multiple levels of government are UNESCO unity guidelines that are widely endorsed by international communities. Every component of this nested

120

C. Qian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 112–123

system played an important role during the process of tourism development. In addition, clearly defined boundaries cannot be ignored. During the interviews, most of the elderly people could clearly describe the location and size of their forestland. There are distinct intergroup and intragroup boundaries. In this area, when Mountain Huangshan was labeled as a World Heritage Site, all of the forests within the Mountain Huangshan scenic spot belonged to the state. Daily extraction from these forests is forbidden. All of the forests in the back garden of Mountain Huangshan belong to the different communities, including the Jade Valley and Phoenix Valley. According to the season, the residents can obtain harvest from their forestland, but cutting down trees is strictly prohibited in the whole area. For the forestland of bamboo outside of the scenic area, the community committee gives permission for longterm rotation. Most of the households in Jade Valley do not have time to harvest from forestland because they are busy operating their guesthouses. Therefore, the young people do not know the exact location and proportion of their land. In recent years, with the extension of multiple laws and policies, the management of forestland in this area has become more scientific. As demonstrated in the above discussion, the CBT governance meets the specifications of Ostrom's (1990) basic design principle. This suggests that groups that follow these eight design principles are able to successfully organize and govern their behaviors.

4.2. Disadvantages of the CBT governance arrangement The interviews suggested new issues that might be barriers for tourism development and the sustainable livelihood of CBT. Because the rural area of China has remained relatively closed, its information transfer and human capital have been limited. Although the system was designed to provide all indigenous people with opportunities to participate in the decision-making, nepotism resulting from meritocracy has undermined local residents' benefit and gradually decreased their satisfaction with tourism. Based on the meritocracy, several marriage relation or blood relation ties exist in the local community. These ties seem to accelerate the efficiency of tourism development. However, nepotism will exert a negative influence on the modern enterprise system and result in inequality in employment, income distribution, etc. According to the interviews, most friends and relatives of leaders occupied positions that had a greater opportunity to receive commission on sales, gray income and bribes. Even with the distribution of the guesthouses, the relatives received more tourists. For example, there are several restaurants in Jade Valley; the largest restaurant belongs to the community company and the others belong to community members. According to common practice, all of the meals of group tours should be arranged in the collective owner's restaurant. The private owner restaurants are aimed at the DIY tourists. However, all of the guests of group tours are arranged in a private restaurant that belongs to a leader's relative. The largest restaurant remains empty and is only used for banquets that are purchased with public funds. Thus, the relative earns more money than the other restaurant owners, and the collective restaurant owner continues to lose money. The domination of the elite has exerted negative effects on the implementation of some of Ostrom's principles and jeopardized tourism sustainability development and the local households' well-being. According to the data, residents were most dissatisfied with the low salary, insufficient internal review and shortage of external audit. The wage of grass-roots staff is 1200 RMB per month. Although there is an intensive pay system, they can receive some additional income such as full-attendance bonus and other prizes; however, most staff complains about their hard work and lower salary. Because the trust between the CBT Company manager and other local residents has decreased, some of the local residents have doubts about transparency and distrust the

strategic planning. If this resentment is not mitigated, it will hinder sustainable tourism development. 4.3. Lessons of the LOT governance of Phoenix Valley Because most of the local people earn a living on the farmland and forestland, they know the exact location and proportion of their land. Furthermore, they receive benefits from the forest every year. The LOT Company in Phoenix Valley only has the right to operate tourism for 30 years in the scenic area. Thus, the leader of the company only considers how to quickly return his investment and make as much profit as possible in the lease term. Although the local community has a 5% share in the company, the local people are excluded from decisionmaking. Nearly all of the interviewees, including the LOT Company staff, complained about the investor's dictatorship governance. The indigenous people believe that there should be a partnership between the investor and local people. However, when local people obtain a job or share the interest from the LOT Company, it appears more as charity than partnership. The investor became an invader with autocracy in tourism development of this valley and a lack of support for local people. Although the benefit of the local people has been damaged for the sake of economic stable increase, the multiple governments do not proactively intervene. Without consensus on tourism management, the local people cannot express themselves; thus, the conflict has intensified. In addition, the monitoring in Phoenix Valley is insufficient. The discontent local people became potential violators of the LOT Company's rules and policies. The key informants reported that a few indigenous once rushed into the LOT Company's office and quarreled with the investor. The investor called the police assistance to expel them. After that incident, to evade conflict, the investor has not remained in his office. The LOT Company has not yet found a resolution. Thus, the management of tourism in Phoenix Valley is in a chaotic situation. Nearly the staff must contact the investor via telephone for almost every daily work. 4.4. Local people's perception of tourism governance The local residents' attitudes toward tourism governance and livelihood cannot be ignored during the process of tourism development. Based on the current investigation, the leaders, managers and villagers have different attitudes, even toward the same goals. The villagers of Phoenix Valley have not been given access to decision-making or capacity-building, and their employment opportunities are insufficient. Without effective communication with each other, the local people's attitude is defensive. The local community understands the significance of tourism resource protection for their livelihood and future. However, without outside support in fulfilling their basic demands, civil disobedience is popular among villagers. They do not deny their responsibility according to the contract, but they are inactive in their duty. The indigenous people and the investor are rather interconnected in tourism development; thus, they must respect each other and negotiate with each other. If the rules are proclaimed only by the company and incongruent with local conditions and the local residents' attitude is “they want me to comply” rather than “I want to follow the rules”, long-term sustainability may not be achieved. In Jade Valley, the CBT has provided a great number of benefits to the local community, but the local people have different attitudes toward the CBT Company and their future. The company has a new plan to move the entire community to a modern tower and lease every house in the valley for hotel business, without disturbing the local people's daily life, to give the indigenous people more privacy and improve the tourism service quality. The leader group explained that there are widespread weaknesses in the guesthouse business. First, local people have not fully developed professional skills and

C. Qian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 112–123

knowledge of their tourism business. Second, they have not fostered the spirit of innovation. Many residents are very satisfied with their current condition; they do not want to increase their business for greater benefit. Many students in Jade Valley only graduate from high school and then work in their family's tourism business. The leader group believes that scarce professionalism will limit the people's potential growth or prosperity. Thus, the leader group aims to move all of the villagers. Then, the CBT Company can hire local residents as housekeepers in their old house. Many people seem to approve of this proposal, but others strongly object. The latter individuals complain that the company aims to deprive their autonomy. Furthermore, they are concerned that nepotism, which deeply impacts the current economic situation, will form a barrier that limits economic growth. Therefore, it is important for the company to constantly improve the dialogue channel, diagnose and resolve problems in a timely manner, and mitigate the tension. Furthermore, the company must encourage active community participation and provide additional capacity-building opportunities. All of these measures will aid in sustainable tourism development.

4.5. Challenges of CBT governance Jade Valley's local economy was simplified during tourism development. However, it is overly dependent on admission fees and guesthouse incomes. With the formulation and promulgation of national tourism law, the admission fee will be strictly controlled and the scenic area's carrying capacity will be set according to a threshold. Moreover, nearly every neighboring community will reconstruct accommodations. Thus, the competition in Mountain Huangshan area will intensify, and it will be difficult to consistently improve tourism revenue with the same admission fee and a particular number of tourists within a more competitive area. Jade Valley does not have a large souvenir selection. The selection includes postcards and photo album, but there are no crafts or food products with the local communities' identities. Although the area has conducted distinctive activity-group weddings for seven years, the scale effects are insufficient. The number of new couples decreased from 100 in 2007 to 13 in 2013. The PR executive of CBT has travelled to every potential target market city to tap new customers. However, without innovation to the traditional management, the dilemma cannot be resolved quickly. The leader group must find a new approach to income generation. Therefore, various measures have been taken to promote tourism development in Jade Valley. In every visit to Jade Valley, we found new progress. Every Valentine's Day and Chinese Valentine's Day (also named Double Seven Day, it is 7th of July according to Chinese Lunar Calendar) is a peak season for Jade Valley. A great number of couples and lovers visit Jade Valley to search for their true love. Thus, the CBT leader group created a new hook to attract tourists. The group established a love post office in the valley on August 27th, 2012. Guests can purchase the “lover passport” which they can design different signatures or print on special dates such as anniversary day. Additionally, a special stamp and unique covers made it became a fashion for the tourists. Moreover, the CBT Company invested 150,000 Yuan RMB to create an 18-minute microfilm to promote its marketing strategy. Furthermore, it attempted to develop a new bamboo handcraft in 2012. All of these innovations will improve profits and increase brand awareness in the future. Comprehension of the environmental context to connect tangible (physical and material aspects) and intangible (perceptual, tradition or living heritage) factors could aid in the development of a suitable and a holistic policy to tackle tourism inconveniences. A sustainable tourism destination strategy requires collaborative and inclusionary consensus-building practices.

121

4.6. Xi Jinping's Chinese-dream policy Chinese President Xi Jinping's “Chinese dream” is to build a moderately prosperous society and to realize national rejuvenation with the main target of reducing the rural poverty. Xinhua,(2016) Under this policy, government provides direct and indirect assistance to the government-owned tourism companies, including redirecting of resource to new industries (Zhang, 2016). As an example of indirect governmental involvement is the Golden Peacock Company that has operated in ethnic villages in Xishuangbanna. Golden Peacock Company is a subsidiary of the Yunnan tourism company. The company has expanded remarkably to become a largest tourism company in Banna (Li & Geoffrey, 2016). The same situation in the water town of Wuzhen, where Wuzhen Tourism Co. Ltd. was granted by the government to manage tourism development. Wuzhen Tourism Co. Ltd. has two major shareholders, the China CYTS tours holding Co. Ltd. and the government, the latter has 35% shares. These initiatives under the Chinesedream policy are designed to attract corporate capital and to improve management structures by reducing the bureaucracies of government departments (Yang, Zhang, & Ryan, 2016). This Chinese-Dream Policy is likely to improve the CBT and LOT development, but its long-term success depends on how the government-owned or directed companies work with local community in a transparent way. 5. Conclusion This study purposively sampled local households in Jade Valley and Phoenix Valley to compare their perception toward tourism governance under Community-based tourism (CBT) and Lease-operation tourism (LOT) in the Huangshan Mountain Area according to 4 evaluation criteria, 9 evaluation indicators, and 23 evaluation sub-indicators. In terms of economic efficiency, Jade Valley had higher incomes from the tourism management compared to that in the Phoenix Valley. With regards to equity (fiscal equivalence and redistribution equity), our study found that CBT had higher values than that of LOT. Subsequently, values of accountability and adaptability were higher under the CBT than under the LOT. Overall for all four evaluation criteria, CBT had higher values than that under the LOT, suggesting that CBT is the most acceptable governance system in the Huangshan Mountain Area. We conclude that the institutional arrangement of CBT is more efficient, equitable, accountable and adaptable than that of LOT in the case study area and the benefits of CBT to the local people are substantial. As a key building block, tourism development in the rural area of China should carefully consider good governance by recognizing the rights of local people in any decision making in addition to adopting a transparent system of revenues generation and benefit sharing. Therefore, the community-based tourism development should be given priority for further development of tourism in China because it is a more efficient, equitable, accountable, and adaptable governance system, which will eventually result in achieving sustainable tourism development, economic, ecological, and social benefits to local people and the governments at various levels in China. Although the Xi Jinping's ChineseDream Policy provides a new perspective of tourism development in China but further study on local perception to the tourism management by the government-directed companies needs to be undertaken. Acknowledgement This study was funded by the research grants from Ford Foundation. We would like to that Yinsheng Jia, Mount Huangshan Scenic Area Administrative Committee, Jingjing Chen of the Huangshan University, Chunwei Guan & Jing Miao of the Wuhan Institute of Technology for their assistance and facilitation during the fieldwork. Arun Agrawal from University of Michigan and Hong-gang Xu from Sun Yat-Sen University are also thanked for their comments on the draft manuscript.

122

C. Qian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 112–123

References Andereck, K. L., Valentine, K. M., Knopf, R. C., & Vogt, C. A. (2005). Residents' perceptions of community tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(4), 1056–1076. Bartholo, R., Delamaro, M., & Bursztyn, I. (2008). Tourism for whom? Different paths to development and alternative experiments in Brazil. Latin American Perspectives, 35(3), 103–119. Basurto, X. (2013). Linking multi-level governance to local common-pool resource theory using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis: insights from twenty years of biodiversity conservation in Costa Rica. Global Environmental Change, 23(3), 573–587. Bello, F. G. (2015). Local communities and tourism development in protected areas in Malawi: Investigating community involvement (Thesis, Doctor of Philosophy). University of Otago. [www page]. URL. http://hdl.handle.net/10523/6013 Binns, T., & Nel, E. (2002). Tourism as a local development strategy in South Africa. The Geographical Journal, 168(3), 235–247. Bramwell, B. (2011). Governance, the state and sustainable tourism: A political economy approach. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(4–5), 459–477. Campbell, L. M. (1999). Ecotourism in rural developing communities. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(3), 534–553. China National Tourism Administration. (2016). [www page]. URL.http://www.cnta.gov. cn/zwgk/lysj/ Choi, H. C., & Murray, I. (2010). Resident attitudes toward sustainable community tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(4), 575–594. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 09669580903524852. Dong, X. (2011). Tourism conflict research on scenic sport – Case study in Laoshan scenic sport of China. Qingdao University Master thesis. [www page].URL. http://www. doc88.com/p-418726824772.html Erkus-Ozturk, H., & Eraydln, A. (2010). Environmental governance for sustainable tourism development: Collaborative networks and organization building in the Antalya tourism region. Tourism Management, 31(1), 113–124. Estol, J., & Font, X. (2016). European tourism policy: Its evolution and structure. Tourism Management, 52, 230–241. Fang, L. S., & Zhang, W. (2011). Qiyunshan zhi. Huangshan: Huangshan Publishing House. Fei, T. T. (2008). Traveling destination developing research based on the community theory. Southwest University of Science & Technoloty Master Thesis. [www page].URL http://www.doc88.com/p-179109986454.html Göymen, K. (2000). Tourism and governance in Turkey. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(4), 1025–1048. Huang, H. Z. (2010). Analysis of system root of failure remise of operational right–Taking Maling river scenic areas in Guizhou as an example. Resource Development & Market, 1, 031. Imperial, M. T., & Yandle, T. (2005). Taking institutions seriously: using the IAD framework to analyze fisheries policy. Society and Natural Resources, 18(6), 493–509. Jamal, T. B., & Getz, D. (1995). Collaboration theory and community tourism planning. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), 186–204. Jia, Y., & Wang, D. (2015). Changes in residents' perceptions of impact and attitudes towards tourism development over time. Tourism Tribune, 30(5), 65–73. Lemos, M. C., & Agrawal, A. (2006). Environmental governance. Annual Review of Environmental Resource, 31, 297–325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.energy.31. 042605.135621. Li, W. J. (2006). Community decision making participation in development. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(1), 132–143. Li, Y., & Geoffrey, W. (2016). Planning for ethnic tourism. Routledge Taylor and Francis Group, 157. Li, P., Ryan, C., & Cave, J. (2016). Chinese rural tourism development: Transition in the case of Qiyunshan, Anhui. 2008–2015. Tourism Management, 55, 240–260. Murphy, P. E. (1988). Community driven tourism planning. Tourism Management, 9(2), 96–104. National Bureau of Statistics of the P.R.C. (2016)). Anunual data.China Statistical Yearbook. [www page]. URL. http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/zxfb/201602/t20160229_1323991. html. Nunkoo, R., & Ramkissoon, H. (2010). Small island urban tourism: a residents' perspective. Current Issues in Tourism, 13(1), 37–60. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons. New York, USA: CambriZdge Univ. Press. Ostrom, E. (2011). Background on the institutional analysis and development framework. Policy Studies Journal, 39(1), 7–27. Ostrom, E., Schroeder, L., & Wynne, S. (1993). Institutional incentives and sustainable development: Infrastructure policies in perspective. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Reid, D. G., Mair, H., & George, W. (2004). Community tourism planning: A self-assessment instrument. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(3), 623–639. Roberts, L., & Hall, D. (Eds.). (2001). Rural tourism and recreation: Principles to practice. CABI Publishing. [www page]. URL. http://www.cabi.org/cabebooks/ebook/ 20013121169 Ryan, C., Pan, S., Chou, C., & Gu, H. (2014). Water town communities and tourism impacts - Former residents as employees and cast characters. Tourism and the Chinese dream, G20 conference. Griffith University, 13-15th November 2014. Simmons, D. G. (1994). Community participation in tourism planning. Tourism Management, 15(2), 98–108. Song, X. Y., & Li, H. N. (2014). An analysis on rural tourism development model in Yi County of Huangshan City. Asian Agricultural Research, 6(12), 63–68. Teye, V., Sirakaya, E., & Sönmez, S. F. (2002). Residents' attitudes toward tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(3), 668–688.

The official website of Tanzania National Parks (2016). [www page]. URL. http://www. tanzaniaparks.com/tarangire.html Torres-Delgado, A., & Palomeque, F. L. (2012). The growth and spread of the concept of sustainable tourism: The contribution of institutional initiatives to tourism policy. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 1–10. Tosun, C. (2000). Limits to community participation in the tourism development process in developing countries. Tourism Management, 21(6), 613–633. Wan, Y. K. (2013). A comparison of the governance of tourism planning in the two special administrative regions (SARs) of China-Hong Kong and Macao. Tourism Management, 36, 164–177. Wang, H., Long, H., & Zheng, Y. F. (2015). Community tourism of Duanshi village: The contract dominant community participation and its empowerment practice. Human Geography, 5, 017. World Bank (2016) GDP growth (annual %). [www page]. URL. http://data.worldbank. org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG Xinhua (2016). China unveils proposal for formulating 13th five-year plan. [www page].URL http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2016lh/2016-03/17/c_ 1118366322.htm Xu, S. L. (2005). On significance of Bifengxia tourist development pattern. Journal of Sichuan Normal University, 32(1), 41–47 social science edition. Xu, K. J. (2008). Comparison and analysis of tourist development models in Gr and Shangri-la region. Progress in Geography, 27(3), 134–140. Yang, J. J., Zhang, L. Y., & Ryan, C. (2016). Social conflict and harmony: tourism in China's multi-ethnic communities. Wagon Lane, Bingley BD161 WA, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited Howard House, 76. Ying, T. Y., & Zhou, Y. G. (2007). Community, governments and external capitals in China's rural cultural tourism: A comparative study of two adjacent villages. Tourism Management, 28(1), 96–107. Yu, C. P., Chancellor, H. C., & Cole, S. T. (2011). Measuring residents' attitudes toward sustainable tourism: A reexamination of the sustainable tourism attitude scale. Journal of Travel Research, 50(1), 57–63. Yue, Y. H., & Ran, Q. H. (2005). An exploration of the management innovation in developing Jiuzhaigou's tourism resources. Journal of Mianyan Normal University, 24(5), 93–97. Yüksel, F., Bramwell, B., & Yüksel, A. (2005). Centralized and decentralized tourism governance in Turkey. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(4), 859–886. Zapata, M. J., Hall, C. M., Lindo, P., & Vanderschaeghe, M. (2012). Can community-based tourism contribute to development and poverty alleviation? Lessons from Nicaragua. Current Issues in Tourism, 14, 725–749. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2011. 559200. Zhang, J. P. (2003). Ecotourism and the benefit of local residents—An analysis of successful experience of Ecotourism in Kenya. Tourism Tribune, 18(1), 60–63. Zhang, Y. (2016) Xi highlights rural poverty relief. China Daily, 3rd February [www page]. URL http://www.Chinadaily.com.cn/China/2016-02/03/content_23385143.htm Zhu, C. F. (2008). The tourist exploitation and the management of hot spring in Japan. Journal of shanxi university, 31(5), 88–91. Zuo, B. (2016). Distributive justice: Interest games and equilibrium in tourism development. Tourism Tribune, 31(1), 12–21.

Cheng Qian, PhD candidate at the Natural Resources Management, Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand and Associate Professor of School of Law & Business at the Wuhan Institute of Technology, China. Her areas of research include enviromental law,natural resouces management, tourism management, institutional arrangement, sustainable tourism development, tourism governance.

Nophea Sasaki, Associate Professor and head of the Natural Resources Management field of study, Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand. His areas of research include evaluation of ecosystem services, natural resources governance and management, eco-tourism, ecological economics, and rural sustainability.

C. Qian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 20 (2016) 112–123 Ganesh P. Shivakoti, Adjunct Professor, Natural Resources Management, Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand. His areas of research include natural resources economics, common property resources, natural resources management policy analysis, and watershed management.

123

Yuanjie Zhang is PhD candidate in comparative agriculture and agricultural development, AgroParisTech, Paris, France. Her areas of research include rural and regional development, comparison of agricultural systems and agricultural project, especially the rural and agricultural development in the mountain area.