Introduction
Tourism policy provides an overall guideline within which a destination ’s tourism typically operates. Hall and Jenkins (2004: p. 527) state that “Policy-making is a political activity, influenced by (and constitutive of) the economic and social characteristics of society, as well as by the formal structures of government and other features of the political system. The nature of the policy-making process in any nation-state varies over space and time, and varies among policy sectors or policy communities”. Accordingly, policy contents vary from country to country and within a country from region to region. This is particularly important in tourism policy since tourism experiences happen at (local) destination level for which the reality may far different from the broader national context. The Chittagong Hill tracts (CHTs) ideally portrays such a situation. As a destination , CHT exhibits unique landscape (in-country perspectives), cultural representations, and diverse governance structures. These altogether isolate the CHT as a distinct destination , which requires special attention in terms of development and execution of tourism policy guidelines.
This research attempts to evaluate critically the National Tourism Policy of Bangladesh while scoping the significance for a region-based tourism policy to address complexities in a distinct destination (CHT). In doing so, the researcher employs a qualitative research approach and collects data using both the primary and secondary sources. In particular, the research utilizes desk-based literature review and expert-opinion techniques to conclude the findings. In summary, tourism policy objectives should acknowledge spatial aspects of destinations and accommodate a framework to encourage public private partnerships so as to direct and guide key stakeholders to resolve tourism development issues in an interactive setting.
Tourism Policy and National Tourism Policy of Bangladesh
The critical role of a tourism policy to ensure successes of a destination is irrefutable since it provides a general guideline to uphold destination stakeholders’ interests while minimize negative impacts. Goeldner and Ritchie (2009: p. 414) define tourism policy as “a set of regulations, rules, guidelines, directives, and development /promotion objectives and strategies that provide a framework within which the collective and individual decisions directly affecting long—term tourism development and the daily activities within a destination are taken”. Hence, a tourism policy or policy in general leads to actions that eventually influence the outcomes achieved.
Tourism governance literature identify tourism policy as a domain of “public policy” with specific reference to the preparation, ratification or authorization by government agencies (Hall and Jenkins 2004: p. 526). Hall (2011) identifies four different types of governance (e.g., hierarchies, markets, networks and communities) while analyzing tourism policy . The typology of governance is influenced by the balance of power between public and private actors, and “steering modes” indicating the concentration and flow of regulations. Development of a tourism policy pervades usually a broader scale of destination such as national or regional. Briassoulis and Vander Straaten (1992) emphasized the necessity of regional tourism policy in order to ensure sustainable development through grass roots involvement and cooperation across destination stakeholders. Tourism policy however remains contested on the ground of differing perceptions at varying layers and/or levels of tourism destination ’s governance (Dredge and Jenkins 2003: p. 401). Aside the spatial aspects, the development should be guided by macro level policies and government strategies at national as well as regional levels with a strategic focus (Hall and Jenkins 2004).
In 1992, Bangladesh received her first National Tourism Policy (NTP). In order to ensure planned and integrated tourism development, the NTP of 1992 was further revised and amended, in 2010. The policy predominantly provides a narrative on Bangladesh’s tourism but with a very limited focus on setting guidelines. The policy was developed in Bengali and included six chapters (Ministry of Civil Aviation and Tourism 2010). The first chapter briefly discusses the background, identifies the prospects and rationalises the development perspectives for tourism. At this point, the policy agrees that there are huge prospects for tourism in Bangladesh but the country fails to benefit from this sector. The second chapter outlines the goals and objectives of the NTP where it emphasizes sustainable tourism development through local communities and local governments’ institutional involvement. The third chapter explores different key considerations of the Tourism Policy . This chapter highlights different types of tourism while contemplating destination resource realities. The fourth chapter is about the strategies for implementing a tourism policy . This chapter develops a practical bureaucratic viewpoint; for example, it suggests coordinating activities among 15 different ministries to realize sustainable tourism. It also discusses five different structures and committees (four at the central/national level and one at the district level), which indicate the long time-frame of the tourism decision-making processes. Chapter Five generalizes initiatives for implementing the NTP . This chapter reflects the ideas of the previous chapters in a superficial way. The final chapter underscores different activities with a particular emphasis on marketing and promotion . In this chapter, the need for a master plan is highlighted in a very shallow way.
Chittagong Hill Tracts as a “Distinct” Destination
Map of the CHT region. (Source: Tripura 2014)
The CHT region represents 10% of the total land area of Bangladesh and shares land borders with two neighbouring countries: India and Myanmar (Burma). Thus, the region carries significant geo-political values. Although the CHT occupies one tenth of the total land area, all the land is not equally suitable for cultivation or living. Historically, CHT remains the ancestral home of indigenous populations who are also simultaneously identified by several other terms, such as “Adivasi”, tribal, “Pahari” (people who live in hills) and small ethnic communities (as used by the Bangladeshi government ). Shelly (1992: pp. 44–45) identifies 13 indigenous communities, including Chakma, Marma, Tripura, Tanchangya, Chak, Pankhu, Murang, Bawm, Lushai, Kyang, Khumi, Riang, and Mro. Each separate group has its own distinctive culture, physical traits, language, religion, attire and farming methods. However, the government has an opposing view regarding the existence of indigenous people and acknowledging their status, which has been demonstrated by addressing these groups as small ethnic communities in various government documents. Beside these groups, mainstream people, as indicated above, who usually live close to the business and administrative centres, also reside there. Thus, the CHT presents both unique landscapes and high cultural diversity within the context of the country of Bangladesh.
In general, the researcher found the overall administrative structure of CHT was confusing and, to some extent, with overlapping administrative structures. There were no meticulous sources found to report with an explicit structure or organogram that could essentially clarify the reporting structures and the territories of organisational duties and responsibilities within CHT. Keeping aside the military administration, at least three administrative structures are noticeable in the CHT. The very basic one represents the usual district administration set up that prevails in other districts in the country. The second one represents a local government structure in the name of ‘Hill District Council’ as an outcome of the CHT Peace Accord 1997, which was followed by years of unrest between the central government and regional indigenous political groups. The third one confirms a traditional indigenous administration headed by a circle chief or ‘King’ for each of the three districts. Although the development and supervision of tourism remains within the jurisdiction of Hill District Council, the involvement of military and conventional district administration is noteworthy. Chakma (2012: p. 135) finds “[T]he hill people perceive the Bangladesh military to be the main source of their insecurity.” The military presence in this region has historical roots. During the British era, in the 1870s, the ratio of military policeman to CHT residents was 1:96, whereas, after liberation, in 1977, the ratio went up to 1:5 (Faiz and Mohaiemen 2010; Mey 1984). Over time, the policy for the deployment of the military remained the same but the strategy and purposes changed. The deployment of large-scale armed forces limits the practice of political and legal rights by the residents, especially the indigenous people (Gray 1994; Zaman 1982).
The unique landscape (in-country perspectives), cultural representations, and diverse governance structures altogether have left the CHT as a “distinct” (highlighting the uniqueness) destination to visit. These features raise the prospect of tourism while creating confusion in respect to the management of destination resources.
Tourism is still at the very early stages in the CHT in comparison with other tourism destinations in Bangladesh. This is partly because this region undergone security threats for long periods during the insurgency, which affected accessibility to the region badly. After the signing of the Peace Accord, tourist movements, especially domestic tourists, dramatically increased. There are no formal statistics recorded to explain this increase, the conclusion is drawn based on a rough deduction from the number of tourism-based superstructures (mainly accommodation) being built before and after the period. Previously, there were only Parjatan motels, government rest houses, and a few private boarding houses. From the early 2000s, this changed with private investment establishing new forms of accommodation, including luxury hotels and resorts. The number of quality restaurants also started to increase. However, the increase of facilities in CHT is being decided by the market, based on the area’s natural appeal rather than being backed by pro-active planning and policy guidelines from local governments, both regional and central. Within the CHT tourism context, the researcher’s observations confer that the destination , in general, is experiencing ‘curious’ tourists in an utterly unmanaged environment.
Research Method
This study has been exclusively guided by qualitative research approach. The data collection strategy encompasses both primary and secondary techniques. Under the purview of secondary techniques, a desk-based literature review has been conducted within the frame of reference including tourism policy and governance. Alongside, a broad range of ‘grey literature’ was compiled and analysed to derive the conclusion. In order to enhance the validity of this research and complement findings from the secondary sources “expert-opinion” technique has been employed. This technique is particularly suitable in situations when data are not available and the issue involves specialized knowledge or requires interventions of specific authorities (Sheldon and Var 1985; Hasson and Keeney 2011) Since this research incorporates a policy review perspective, the formation and execution of such policy is usually carried out by the public bodies following different approaches. For example, the NTP of Bangladesh has been developed by top officials from the Ministry of Civil Aviation and Tourism.
The experts’ opinions in this research were generated through a “Delphi Group Meeting” forum (Hasson and Keeney 2011) where six members were present as the panellists. The targeted panellists were directly involved in the policy-making (NTP 2010) processes and CHT affairs. Accordingly, representations in the group conform the experts from Ministry of Civil Aviation and Tourism (two personnel), Bangladesh Tourism Board (one personnel), Bangladesh Parjatan Corporation (one personnel), Ministry of Chittagong Hill Tracts Affairs (one personnel), and Bandarban Hill District Council (one community representative). The meeting was conducted in July 2019 covering an hour time period. The researcher facilitated the meeting in a “participatory policy analysis” setting and encouraged “collaborative method of inquiry” (Fischer 1993).
The collected data have been further analysed using a “discourse analysis” technique (Gasper and Apthorpe 1996; Hajer 2002; Leipold et al. 2019). This technique is purposefully selected given the research context coupled with an ontological foundation of ‘social constructivist’. The basic assumption of social constructivist approach in discourse analysis follows that “reality is constructed through processes of social meaning-making, relying on the use of language as well as social practices” (Leipold et al. 2019: p. 447). On this note, critical importance of the social and physical contexts is acclaimed to give meaning to the studied phenomenon.
Discussions
Tourism was acknowledged in Bangladesh from right after independence. In 1972, Presidential Order-143 created a national body named the Bangladesh Parjatan Corporation (BPC) to oversee all tourism sectors in Bangladesh. The government of Bangladesh also recognised tourism as an ‘industry’ in 1999. The government eventually declared 2016 as “Tourism Year”, which shows the government ’s interest in the tourism sector. Moreover, the government has started a separate allocation for tourism development in the national budget, albeit inadequate, as remarked by industry stakeholders (Islam 2015); but it does, nevertheless, reflect a commitment from the government .
Simply acknowledging the potential or giving recognition is not enough for developing a dynamic and ever-changing industry, such as tourism. It requires a clear vision backed by effective policy guidelines and planning to coordinate diverse resources to produce the desired outcomes. This is the point where the country fails, even after 48 years of independence. There is a ministry (Ministry of Civil Aviation and Tourism), a couple of national level organisations (BPC and Bangladesh Tourism Board) and a few bureaucratic structures at national and local (district-level) levels working for the development of tourism. It is a collective failure that even after having many institutional platforms and structures, Bangladesh still does not have a master plan to manage tourism resources for sustainable development. Moreover, the presence of multiple institutional structures is creating coordination problems while competing for resource allocations in the same sector. The impact is realised accordingly in terms of insignificant contributions to national income or Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In 2014, tourism contributed merely 2.2% of the total GDP and offered three million jobs (Khondker and Ahsan 2015: pp. 7–9). A high volume of inbound tourism remains a precursor for optimizing tourism’s contribution to GDP (Russel 2017). Attracting a large number of inbound tourists seems challenging particularly when the country lacks an effective tourism policy and master plan at neither the national or regional or local destination level.
A critical observation about the National Tourism Policy-2010 is the lack of tourism expertise to provide research supports to formulate policies, plans and strategies that would assist broader tourism stakeholders. Until the early 2000s, the National Hotel & Tourism Training Institute (NHTTI), a wing of BPC , was offering limited certificate courses in various aspects of tourism and hospitality studies. From the mid-2000s onwards, a number of public and private universities have started offering fully-fledged Bachelor and Master level courses. Hence, studying and researching tourism is a recent inclusion into the academic environment of Bangladesh. The views generated in the expert-opinion method equally identify shortages of quality human capitals to respond proactively towards policy formulation and implementation. An individual expert (Bangladesh Tourism Board) emphasized ‘theoretical orientation’ for policy formulation and “practical exposures” to implement policy guidelines. Accordingly, a participative and integrative structure of policy-making body has been suggested to adapt rapid changes in the broader environment.
The National Tourism Policy largely fails to set directives about how to manage tourism destination resources and prioritize the resource allocation needed for tourism development. It holds sustainable tourism development as its goal but the implementation strategies and initiatives mostly centre on bureaucratic decision-making structures alone. An absence of community perspective is noticeable in reference to tourism resource decisions and their subsequent implementation (similarly applicable for Chittagong Hill Tracts). Within the framework of participative and integrative structures, inclusion of community is highly recommended by the panellists considering the importance of local knowledge. Such an observation again raises the significance of developing policy at lower destination scale or at least regional level within the country. It was agreed that local communities must be involved at every stage starting from policy-making, processing, project development , implementation, monitoring and evaluation. One expert (BHDC community representative) expresses the inevitability of community involvement in tourism policy development by highlighting the contribution of community and asserts that “I will say our achievement of current development is not because of government policy rather changes in the mind set of local people at destinations”. However, the other experts somehow remain sceptical and claim that it is not possible to implement a (tourism) policy instrument without government intervention and/or assistance. Thus, the “networks” typology of governance is found to be an appropriate match to administer (regional) tourism policy in which public-private partnerships form the basis of policy formulation and implementation (Hall 2011). This in turn is necessary to get rid of status conflict and complexities while bring consensus in policy-making (Stevenson et al. 2008).
The ineffectiveness and vagueness of the current policy has been mentioned on numerous occasions with suggestions and recommendations for improvement (Hassan and Burns 2014; Karim 2014). One of the major limitations of the broader NTP is the failure to develop and accommodate regionally-based tourism plans within an integrated framework; for example, Karim (2014, p. 141) asserts “region-based Bangladesh Tourism Policy earns very insignificant 0.66% of the national GDP”. The importance of “regional tourism policy ” was also underscored by the experts’ panel on the ground of distinctive features (e.g., social, cultural, and political) of each region within the country. In this connection, one expert from the Ministry of Chittagong Hill Tracts Affairs emphasized the need for an effective policy-making body and claimed that-
In reference to the CHT region, the NTP mostly fails to acknowledge the uniqueness of the region. Tourism in CHT is currently based on nature and the ethnic lifestyles of its diverse indigenous groups. CHT has a unique landscape in comparison with other locations or tourism destinations in Bangladesh, exhibiting green hills, forests, wildlife, waterfalls, rivers and lakes. Besides, the distinctive lifestyles of indigenous groups, which can be demonstrated through languages, clothes, living patterns and other cultural elements, and can foster a desire among tourists to visit the region. Although the policy mentioned the CHT in a few cases, it was not considered in the discussion of “nature-based” and “cultural” aspects of tourism (in Chapter Three of the NTP ), both of which are considered unique to CHT within the Bangladeshi context. In addition, it is not indicated who shall prepare and execute a regional tourism policy or plan for CHT, and how such a plan shall be operationalized and integrated into the national plan (Chakma and Chakma 2016). In this vein, the expert panellists agree about the distinct political context that is increasing complexities in realizing tourism benefits from CHT. However, one expert (representing BHDC as community representative) weighted cultural aspects and added that “Capitalists are sheltered by political and multi-administrative’ structures. The absence of policy mechanism and implementation of existing laws and regulations clear up the path to view tourism as one of the invest worthy industries in CHTs . It is unfortunate that the concerned authorities don’t pay heed to the displacement of locals and exploitations of natural resources, bio-diversities, local cultures and values.” Another expert (Ministry of Civil Aviation and Tourism) endorsed this view and found linkages of corrupt practices to lack of policy instruments and their successive implementations. Putting all within the current context, strength of tourism to build peace and force political stability needs to be taken into consideration (in policies/plans) (Kelly 2012; Webster and Ivanov 2014).Whichever forms of tourism we talk about or whatever issues we identify, nothing will be effective unless we structure effective and empowered policy-making body at local level. We need expert policy makers within the existing set up of Hill District Councils (HDCs) to define a specific and clear strategic policy for tourism. The HDCs should be empowered and democratic practice should prevail to create a sense of accountability among the representatives. Those who will be elected will work together with the national level representatives to create policies and shape tourism in sustainable way.
The prospect of tourism in CHT is recognised at the administrative level but the problem rests with setting effective policy guidelines for the sustainable development of tourism. Again, the formulations and implications of the policy guidelines have been directly associated with a decision-making framework (Hassan and Burns 2014), which necessitates broader stakeholder participation to create sustainable outcomes. The importance of a participative policy framework, involving local expertise and the ideas of numerous people, is emphasised for tourism development. The “Strategic Framework for Sustainable Development in the CHT”, as set out by the central government , also acknowledges the necessity for policy planning and local inclusion towards community-based ecotourism development . The strategic framework confers (Tripura 2016: p. 136):
Although the strategic framework, as well as other relevant documents, prioritize local stakeholders’ involvement and the benefits of sharing propositions for CHT tourism development, these documents fail to propose a mechanism to operationalize the concept while considering resource realities and the unique background of the region. Hence, the current research recommends an integrative decision-making perspective within a context of tourism policy and planning in the CHT representing regional level destination .A comprehensive tourism master plan including development of new destinations and trails, as well as product and service development is required to help tap the potential of tourism in the CHT, including in the Kaptai lake area. Specific measures are required to engage local people in planning and developing tourism in order to create ownership and ensure that the benefits of tourism are accrued locally.
Conclusion
Tourism policy is unavoidable for proper functioning of destinations. In this process all types of political jurisdictions are to be involved. The primary focus of each policy must be the sustainability of the tourism sector, future generation should not be discounted in the process of present consumption. The long run policy formulation should be based on proper research and development of the industry, which must be renewed within a certain time frame to coexist with ever changing tourism dimensions. Tourism policy at national level should reflect the distinctiveness of a regional and/or local destination such as the Chittagong hill tracts. In congruence with the national tourism policy, a regional level policy must be developed following a participative and integrative structure. Such an approach essentially fosters a ‘network’ theme involving key stakeholders in the process, which in turn will raise status (from community viewpoints) and consensus while mitigating socio-political complexities. Besides collaboration, the policy-making and implementation structures must accommodate quality human capitals to enhance both effectiveness and efficiency of the overall process. Finally, a successful policy framework should take inputs being backed by strong research to avoid uncertainty and risk of failure.
The abstract of this chapter was presented at the Philippine Research Conference on Tourism and Hospitality (PRCTH) 2019. The conference was held at the University of the Philippines Diliman on October 24-25, 2019. The author would like to thank the participants who attended the session and provided their valuable comments that ultimately helped to shape this chapter.
A significant part of this chapter has been produced from the unpublished Doctoral Dissertation of the author. The Dissertation is available in the Lincoln University (New Zealand) Research Archive titled as “Co-management for tourism development and community wellbeing: The case of Hill Tracts, Bangladesh ”.