Certification in the South African tourism industry: the case of Fair Trade in Tourism

Abstract

Internationally, certification is playing an increasing role in regulating and monitoring tourism enterprise, and promoting responsible and sustainable tourism development. Certification is relatively new in the South African tourism industry, with schemes being developed to measure product quality and the environmental, social and developmental aspects of tourism. This article positions certification in the South African tourism industry against important international debates on the topic and against some major challenges facing the industry in this country, namely the growth of the sector, transformation and sustainable socio-economic development. One certification programme, Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa, is presented as a case study.

1. INTRODUCTION

Internationally, certification in the tourism industry is playing an increasing role in regulating and monitoring tourism enterprises and promoting sustainable development. Apart from country-specific certification programmes that measure product quality, the majority of certification schemes, operating at the national, regional or local level, pertain to environmental accreditation. In recent years these schemes have aimed to address the social and developmental aspects of tourism specifically. Globally, there is significant scholarship on and debate about the role of certification in the industry and the extent to which it influences the nature and growth of the industry (see for example Font & Buckley, 2001; Buckley, 2002; Font, 2002a, 2002b; Honey, 2003; Grosspietsch, 2005; Tepelus & Cordoba, 2005). In South Africa, debates about tourism certification are still fairly new and research relatively undeveloped (Mahony, 2006). It is, however, regarded by the national government as a useful tool for marketing the country and promoting responsible and sustainable tourism development (DTI, 2005).

Section 2 which follows presents the international literature and tourism certification debates and Section 3 discusses the role of certification in the South African tourism industry and lists key certification programmes in South Africa. Section 4 discusses the contribution of one particular certification scheme, Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa (FTTSA), to the South African tourism industry. In conclusion, Section 5 analyses the challenges facing certification in general in South Africa and FTTSA in particular. The main source material for this investigation is a series of 18 detailed interviews conducted during 2005 with tourism enterprises involved with FTTSA and with tourism stakeholders involved in certification (Mahony, 2006).

2. TOURISM CERTIFICATION IN AN INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT

2.1 Definition of tourism certification

Certification is broadly defined as a voluntary procedure that assesses, audits, and gives written assurance that a facility, product, process or service meets specific standards. It usually awards a marketable logo to those that meet or exceed the baseline standards (Bien, 2003).

2.2 Consumer attitudes to sustainable tourism

There is significant literature on both the positive and negative impacts of tourism. The positive include employment (notably for the unskilled, and for disadvantaged groups such as women), skills development, high multipliers into other local enterprises, and the protection of the environment. On the negative side, unplanned and uncontrolled tourism development may do severe environmental, social and economic damage to the destination localities and their communities. Cleverdon and Kalisch (2000: 172) argue that in fact there is evidence to suggest that although some of the more fortunate sections of society – ruling elites, landowners, government officials and private businesses – may benefit, the poor and landless rural societies are being made poorer, not just materially but also in terms of their culture and resources.

Sustainable tourism seeks to maximise the positive and minimise the negative impacts of tourism. In South Africa, the concept of sustainable tourism is firmly embedded in the Tourism White Paper (RSA, 1996). In addition to government efforts to promote sustainable tourism development, tourists themselves are becoming vigilant consumers and are increasingly concerned about the impact of their actions on the environment and local communities (Tearfund, 2001, 2002). The extent to which consumer awareness of social and environmental issues actually has an impact on tourism purchasing patterns is, however, still open to debate. One school of thought argues that sustainability issues are increasingly affecting tourists' buying patterns and behaviour (Tearfund, 2001, 2002). This view is, however, contested in a report undertaken for the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) (Synergy, 2000) where it is argued that although a wide range of surveys attempt to demonstrate that tourists are prepared to choose environmentally preferable holiday experiences, and to pay a premium for these products, the experience of large tour operators, such as British Airways Holidays and TUI (Tourism Union International), points to the contrary. Tourists may in theory be influenced by the possibility of selecting environmentally friendly and socially responsible products, but in practice they are influenced by a wide variety of complex travel motives, of which social and environmental issues are only one small component. It is likely that respect for the environment contributes to the quality of the experience but, except for the dedicated few, does not provide sufficient incentive to choose one product over another [0] (Synergy, 2000). This view is also upheld by Meyer et al. (2004), who argue that there is evidence to demonstrate that while interest in ethical consumerism is growing, there is still debate as to the extent to which it translates into practice. Overall, Chafe (2004) concludes that the tourism industry is in fact lagging behind other industries in consumer demand for ethically produced goods, with the travel decision still dominated by factors such as price, quality, location, weather and safety.

2.3 International tourism certification programmes

Certification in the tourism industry is a fairly recent phenomenon, originating in the development of certification schemes that measured tourism quality and standards. Tourism certification essentially started in the 1960s, with the Michelin programme in France and the Automobile Association of America (AAA) travel guides, which measured and rated the cost and quality of service and facilities.

Following the 1992 Earth Summit and an increasing concern for sustainability issues, a proliferation of certification schemes emerged, focusing largely on the environmental impacts of tourism development. In 2003 there were over 100 ecolabelling and certification programmes designed to signify environmentally superior tourism practices (Bien, 2003). At present the largest environmental certification scheme in the tourism sector is Green Globe 21. The proliferation of environmental labels has fostered a significant body of international literature on ecolabels in the tourism industry (Buckley, 2001, 2002; Eplar-Wood & Halpenny, 2001; Honey & Rome, 2001; Flores, 2002; Honey & Stewart, 2002; Honey, 2003).

In an effort to monitor the social impacts of tourism development, several tourism certification schemes have been established to include socio-economic criteria, either as stand-alone certification schemes or as a component of environmental certification in order to complete the triple bottom line of economic, social and environmental sustainability. Internationally, social certification schemes have been criticised, as social sustainability is a subtle and complex issue and often cannot be meaningfully quantified beyond fairly basic statistics on income and employment (Font, 2002b). Font & Harris (2004) argue that social standards are ambiguous, the assessment methodologies are inconsistent and open to interpretation and there is considerable variation on what is understood as sustainable depending on the type of tourism companies that are targeted. Owing to the specific complexities of social assessments, social certification programmes are generally regarded as more subjective and less robust than their environmental equivalents (Font & Harris, 2004).

The Certificate for Sustainable Tourism (CST) was developed in Costa Rica and is widely regarded as one of the most advanced certification schemes that take into consideration both the environmental performance and socio-cultural impact of tourism activities. Its stated objective is to turn the concept of sustainability into something real, practical and necessary in the context of the country's tourism competitiveness (Tepelus & Cordoba, 2005). Uptake of the Certificate in Costa Rica has been slow, with only 5 per cent of hotels in Costa Rica being certified, and only 46 per cent of these advertising their certification (Newton et al., 2004). Indeed, it is argued that one of the primary limitations of the CST is that it is not internationally recognised by tourists (Newton et al., 2004).

2.4 Issues related to tourism certification schemes

International scholarship highlights several issues concerning tourism certification. First is that relatively few consumers are aware of the existence of certification labels, and in most cases their decisions on where to go are based on other considerations, such as the destination itself, costs and logistics. Buckley (2002) argues that certification in the tourism industry is still in its early stages, and few tourists routinely search for it when making decisions. Market demand for certified products is not evident. According to travel trade interviews referred to by Dodds and Joppe, only a small percentage of consumers pay attention to standards and, to all intents and purposes, none are willing to pay extra for adherence to environmental or social standards (Dodds & Joppe, 2005). Moreover, when there is a demand for certified products, it is difficult to distinguish whether it arises from demand for social or environmental sustainability, or a demand for quality (WTO, 2004).

Second is the slow uptake by tourism providers. Despite the proliferation of certification schemes, it was estimated in 2000 that less than 1 per cent of tourism businesses had joined certification initiatives (Synergy, 2000). Reasons for the low uptake have been cited as, inter alia, doubts as to the value of certification for marketing purposes, the costs of certification – particularly for small, medium and micro enterprises, clarity about what the labels stand for, and the degree of effort required to become compliant (Font & Buckley, 2001). Because the number of certified businesses is small, tour companies that would be willing to support certified establishments do not have enough products to choose from. A further concern is the type of operation that is certified. The majority of certification schemes address ecotourism operations rather than the large mass market operators who supply the majority of the world's tourism and have the main access to the market (Font, 2003).

Third is the proliferation of different labels covering very similar aspects and the same geographic area, which has also resulted in confusion. Fourth is the confusing definitions pertaining to certification schemes. Fifth is the continuing debate about the extent to which certification has moved the industry forward towards sustainability (Dodds & Joppe, 2005); for example, the extent to which ecolabels actually improve the environment (Weissman, 1997). This view is supported by social research which concluded that environmental education of consumers and increased environmental awareness do not stimulate environmentally responsible purchasing behaviour (Hemmelskamp & Brockmann, 1997).

A sixth issue is that certification certifies the converted. The majority of establishments that become certified are already operating according to certain social and environmental standards. Certification thus only covers the establishments whose tourism practices are sustainable and responsible, and does little to entice enterprises operating outside these parameters to become more sustainable and aim for certification. A final issue, highlighted by Sasidharan et al. (2002: 174), is that there are various problems associated with certification in developing countries, primarily relating to resource and capacity constraints. These authors conclude that, rather than contributing to sustainable tourism development, certification schemes are likely to function as nothing more than marketing gimmicks for large-scale enterprises in developing countries.

3. THE ROLE OF CERTIFICATION IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN TOURISM INDUSTRY

3.1 Major challenges facing the industry

To ensure that the tourism industry delivers on its expectations to become a leading economic sector in South Africa, three critical challenges need to be met. First, South Africa needs to maintain and improve its competitive position in the global tourism industry (SAT, 2002, 2003). Tourism is a fiercely competitive industry, with other international destinations competing with South Africa to reclaim and gain tourist market share. Individual tourism establishments thus compete in a global market and are increasingly required to be internationally competitive in both product offering and price. Second, to be sustainable the South African tourism industry needs to ensure that the benefits accruing from the growth of the tourism sector accrue to all South Africans (DEAT, 2003: 48). The ownership and benefits of the tourism industry in South Africa presently accrue largely to white South Africans (Rogerson, 2003, 2004). Transformation of the industry is essential. Third, the South African tourism industry needs to be used more effectively as a tool for promoting sustainable development, in both South Africa and the broader subregion. A pro-poor approach to tourism development is thus essential (DfID, 1999; Ashley et al., 2000, 2001).

3.2 Certification in the South African tourism industry

Certification potentially has a positive role to play in meeting all of the above challenges. It can be used as a powerful marketing incentive to attract tourists to South Africa, and for tourists to select certain tourism products from a range of product offerings. The certification of social standards may help enterprises meet transformation objectives by measuring and monitoring Black Economic Empowerment (BEE). Certification of social and environmental standards will also help promote sustainably produced and traded tourism products, thus promoting sustainable development.

The tourism industry in South Africa is guided by a range of different tourism standards that include general principles and codes of conduct, benchmarking and reporting initiatives and independently reviewed certification and award schemes.

3.2.1 Principles and codes of conduct

As a member of the international community, South Africa is bound by various principles and codes of conduct adopted by international organisations. Examples of such codes include Agenda 21 and the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism which were adopted by the WTO in 1996 and 1999 respectively (Roe et al., 2003).

In South Africa, a number of codes of conduct have been established for industry associations and individual companies. At the industry level, certain sectors of the tourism industry, for example the Professional Hunting Association of South Africa, have developed codes of conduct to guide their members (PHASA, 2005). At the corporate level, various companies have developed principles and codes of conduct to guide their operations. For instance, Conservation Corporation Africa has an internal ecotourism audit and management system that monitors resource management, guest experience and community benefits (Spenceley, 2005).

3.2.2 Benchmarks and reporting initiatives

The tourism White Paper introduces responsible tourism as the primary guiding principle for tourism development in South Africa (RSA, 1996). It argues that responsible tourism is not a luxury but rather a necessity for South Africa if it is to emerge as an international competitor. In 2002, the DEAT (Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism) published a set of responsible tourism guidelines designed to provide national guidance and indicators to enable the tourism sector to demonstrate progress towards the principles of responsible tourism (DEAT, 2002). The guidelines are not compulsory, but instead encourage tourism operators to select aspects of the guidelines to develop into a responsible tourism management plan and to sign a statement of intent to adhere to the guidelines. These guidelines thus represent a fairly loose process of self-declaration, self-evaluation and self-monitoring. Since it is unclear what proportion of the tourism sector in the South Africa has the capacity or even the willingness to self-monitor and self-regulate, the credibility and reliability of the guidelines and the value they can add to the industry have been questioned.

3.2.3 Certification

In South Africa a variety of national certification systems have been developed to assess and monitor tourism products. To monitor product quality, the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism has initiated and supports the national quality tourism certification system, which is implemented by the Tourism Grading Council (TGC). The scheme was launched in 2001, and to date over 4800 accommodation establishments have been graded, representing over 70 per cent of the accommodation stock in South Africa. Schemes to grade other sectors of the tourism industry, such as conference venues and food and beverage outlets, have also been launched. The objective of the grading scheme is to help improve the overall quality of accommodation and services in South Africa. Quality assurance has been recognised as an important means of gaining competitive advantage, and can be used by visitors as a reference point for service and quality (personal communication, S Siddo, Chief Executive Officer, Tourism Grading Council, Johannesburg, August 2005). Extending quality assurance and grading has been identified as a key intervention in the tourism sector development strategy developed by the DTI (DTI, 2005: 16). Among numerous other accreditation and award systems that provide consumers with information about product quality and pricing are the AA travel guides and the Portfolio Collection.

To certify environmental issues, the Heritage Environmental Rating Programme was launched in 2001 by Qualitour, a private South African company. To date, 33 tourism establishments have been awarded the logo. According to Qualitour, international demand for environmentally responsible and sustainable establishments represents the fastest growing tourism niche market (Business Day, 9 May 2005). However, while many operators in Africa claim to be eco-friendly, only a few to date have been prepared to have their claims independently verified. According to Qualitour, the primary reasons for establishments to join the Heritage Programme are either to save money on more environmentally responsible practices or to market their properties to environmentally aware consumers (Heritage, 2005).

FTTSA was initiated as an independent initiative of the IUCN (World Conservation Union), which aims to foster equitable and sustainable growth and development by promoting the concept of fair trade in tourism and marketing fair and responsible tourism businesses through a fair trade in tourism trademark.

Finally, the Imvelo Awards programme was initiated in 2001, organised by FEDHASA (Federated Hospitality Association of South Africa). The Imvelo Awards aim to honour Southern African tourism businesses that implement sustainable environmental, social and economic programmes and to enable hospitality and tourism businesses to demonstrate their commitment to responsible tourism and showcase their economic, social and environmental achievements.

4. FAIR TRADE IN TOURISM SOUTH AFRICA

4.1 The international fair trade movement

Despite conflicting reports on the history of fair trade, it is broadly acknowledged that the movement started in the 1960s, to support ethical trading and help small-scale producers of agricultural commodities in developing countries receive fair prices and improved terms of trade with the North (Grosspietsch, 2005).

In the late 1980s certification was developed to enhance consumer awareness of fair trade products and became known as the most effective tool for promoting these. In 1988, the first fair trade label (Max Havelaar) was established in the Netherlands. Fair trade labelling has become increasingly popular across several commodities, with over 1000 labelled products in 2002 (Seif, 2002a). Fair trade labels are diverse, but usually involve criteria such as fair prices that are cost covering and allow for community development, and fair working conditions that pay attention to human rights and social norms, respect for environmental standards and transparency through independent control and consumer information (Plüss, 2002).

In the tourism industry, the concept of fair trade has emerged as a powerful critique of mass tourism and other forms of global travel that have a negative impact on destinations and their inhabitants. This work was led initially by European advocacy organisations, including Tourism Concern in the UK and Arbeitskreis Tourismus & Entwicklung (ATKE) in Switzerland (Seif & Spenceley, in press. In response to the international fair trade movement, Tourism Concern together with the University of North London set up the international network for Fair Trade in Tourism in March 1999. The aim of the network was to promote a fair and ethical tourism industry, and to ensure that the local people whose land, natural resources, labour, knowledge and cultures are used for tourism benefit from the tourism (Kalisch, 2000a, 2000b; 2001).

The international network for Fair Trade in Tourism focuses primarily on academic research into tourism as an export trade item and its implications for destinations in the developing world. The network defines fair trade in tourism as ‘equitable global trading terms and conditions between tourist generators and host communities as a key component of sustainable tourism’ (Kalisch, 2000a:11). Academic discourse thus focuses on analysing the distribution of power within the tourism industry, and on all structures of power that underpin its operations. It has been argued that these global relations of power in the industry inevitably result in the uneven and unequal development of tourism in the developing world (Mowforth & Munt, 1998). Fair trade in tourism thus positions debates on tourism in the South within the broader discourse of global trade relations and the historically unbalanced relations of power between industrialised northern countries and the less developed countries in the South (Harris, 2003)

Debates about the application of the concept of fair trade to the tourism industry have identified two major areas of contention: first, whether a new tourism label such as ‘fair trade in tourism’ is necessary, given the similarities between its objectives and those of other developmentally sensitive concepts such as sustainable tourism, responsible tourism and pro-poor tourism, and, second, whether tourism can in fact become a fairly traded product in the same way as agricultural and manufactured goods, given the complex nature of the industry.

4.2 Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa (FTTSA)

Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa was established by the World Conservation Union in South Africa in 2001. It aims to explicitly address the imperatives for socio-economic transformation and development while at the same time actively engaging international best practice and the standards of fair trade (Seif & Spenceley, in press). It thus focuses specifically on the social and developmental aspects of tourism development, which are key to the future success of South Africa's tourism industry. This differs from the approach adopted in Europe, where the key to fair trade is conceived as the reform of trade practices and trade agreements. In South Africa, fair trade in tourism is seen in relation to local and national strategies that transform operations at the local level.

FTTSA has adopted a two-pronged approach which focuses firstly on educating the tourism industry and raising awareness of the principles of fair trade in tourism and secondly on certifying tourism establishments that comply with FTTSA principles and contribute positively to socio-economic transformation in South Africa. During June 2002, FTTSA officially launched its trademark, becoming the first organisation that awards a fair trade label in the tourism sector. To be awarded the FTTSA logo, tourism products need to meet six FTTSA principles, namely fair share, democracy, respect, reliability, transparency and sustainability (Seif, 2002b). FTTSA started accepting applications from potential trademark users in June 2003. To date 21 tourism establishments have been awarded the trademark.

5. EVALUATION OF FAIR TRADE IN TOURISM SOUTH AFRICA

5.1 Contribution of FTTSA to national tourism objectives

From a macro perspective, FTTSA is helping the tourism industry achieve various national strategic objectives. These include the transformation of the sector, the marketing of South Africa as a destination, responsible and sustainable tourism development, labour market reform and pro-poor tourism development.

5.1.1 Transformation

The notion that tourism should be fairer is strongly aligned to ongoing national efforts to transform the sector. The FTTSA accreditation process can be used by tourism enterprises to meet transformation targets.

5.1.2 Marketing South Africa

Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa recognises that one of its most important functions is to market businesses carrying the FTTSA trademark by linking fair trade products to appropriate trade and consumer networks. At present, FTTSA is realistic about the market for fairly traded tourism products, but argues that the demand for fair travel will grow over the medium to longer term (personal communication, JA Sief, Executive Director, Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa, Johannesburg, August 2005). FTTSA allows tourism companies to access a niche market, irrespective of how small it is (Steyn & Newton, 2004).

5.1.3 Sustainable development

Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa occupies a specific niche within the broader umbrella of responsible tourism, by promoting a fair, participatory and sustainable tourism industry in South Africa (Seif & Spenceley, in press). Without fair and ethical business practices, it is not possible to achieve sustainable tourism development. Most definitions of such development include elements of social equity, long-term economic benefit for all, and environmental protection. FTTSA helps promote sustainable development to the extent that its evaluation criteria include elements of social equity and long-term economic benefits for all.

To enhance FTTSA's contribution to sustainable tourism development it would be useful to integrate the individual performance of tourism establishments into a regional and national framework for sustainable development. This framework could help local authorities plan, monitor and verify sustainable tourism. Tepelus and Cordoba (2005) argue that, from a demand perspective, there is not much value in having an individual property recognised as a sustainable choice if the entire region itself does not display the same characteristics. FTTSA could thus enhance its advocacy role by ensuring that fair trade principles are included in sustainable tourism planning at the local, provincial and national level.

5.1.4 Labour market reform

A number of labour issues affect the tourism industry. These include women's rights, fair wages, long working hours, qualification and skills requirements, inability to join trade unions, importing of labour and displacement of traditional labour opportunities (Dodds & Joppe, 2005). A report by the International Labour Office (ILO) concluded that the tourism sector is known for low pay, difficult working conditions and many clandestine jobs (ILO, 2001). FTTSA is one of the few examples of tourism certification that expressly addresses labour standards. Via its certification process and its advocacy role, FTTSA is succeeding in making the industry aware of labour market issues, as well as making a positive contribution to labour market reform in South Africa.

5.1.5 Pro-poor tourism development

Many issues identified in the literature on pro-poor tourism are addressed by FTTSA: local employment, local sourcing of goods and services, and local participation in planning and decision making. Nonetheless, as FTTSA is not an initiative aimed at promoting pro-poor tourism development per se, there is a range of issues that have been identified as being important to poor people that it does not address. FTTSA focuses very much on benefiting the immediate local community rather than on poverty reduction per se.

5.2 Contribution of FTTSA to tourism enterprises' objectives

5.2.1 Recognition for enterprises

One of the key reasons tourism enterprises gave for wanting certification was the recognition they would receive for operating in a fair manner (Mahony, 2006). Independently verified external recognition by a credible organisation such as FTTSA of their efforts to operate in the ‘right way’ proved to be possibly the most important factor motivating them to be certified by FTTSA.

5.2.2 Development of enterprises

One of the biggest benefits of FTTSA certification, according to operators who have been awarded the trademark, is that the accreditation process is an effective development tool an enterprise can use as a mechanism for improving its operations and gaining recognition for its efforts in promoting fair and sustainable development. The process thus has an important educational component that appears to be highly valued by those striving to operate according to responsible and fair business practices.

5.2.3 Networking and credibility

Smaller and community based enterprises stated that in an industry that regards them with a certain scepticism, affiliation to FTTSA provided them with some degree of credibility. Although the network of FTTSA-certified enterprises is small, several highlighted the benefits that they enjoyed from being able to associate with like-minded enterprises.

5.2.4 Public relations and marketing

All the enterprises interviewed by the author indicated that they had benefited from the public exposure they had received through their association with FTTSA (Mahony, 2006). Research undertaken by FTTSA to understand how and why clients value their affiliation revealed that the marketing benefits did not feature as highly as the benefits of knowledge sharing, networking and benchmarking (Tholin, 2004). Steyn and Newton (2004) also conclude that key industry stakeholders including the DEAT, TBCSA (Tourism Business Council of South Africa) and FEDHASA believe that the longer-term impacts of FTTSA for tourism enterprises will be not so much in marketing as in knowledge sharing and empowerment. The relative importance of the marketing exposure, however, was seen differently by larger, established tourism organisations and the emerging, smaller enterprises, with some of the smaller ones expecting significant marketing gains from their affiliation with FTTSA.

5.3 Important issues facing FTTSA

5.3.1 Contribution of FTTSA to poverty elimination

Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa is working in a niche area of the South African tourism industry. Concerns have been raised about whether it can make a meaningful contribution to poverty reduction by pursuing niche markets, rather than being integrated into mainstream tourism activities. Work undertaken on pro-poor tourism concludes that poverty alleviation strategies need to place poor people and poverty at the heart of the sustainability debate by defining strategies that enhance the net benefits of tourism to the poor (Ashley et al., 2001). Cleverdon and Kalisch (2000) conclude that if fair trade in tourism is to help alleviate poverty it will need to permeate all operations, not as an option but as a matter of principle. The certification process as adopted by FTTSA, being a highly niched product, has a negligible impact on poverty alleviation.

Nonetheless, FTTSA does fulfil a strong advocacy role, making the industry aware of the principles of fair trade, and by thus having an impact on the overall sustainability and responsibility of the South African tourism industry indirectly contributes to poverty alleviation. This view is supported by the work of ATKE (Arbeitskreis Tourismus & Entwicklung), which argues that the principles of fair trade have significantly contributed to making the idea of ethical business practices more tangible – practices which have become established as a precondition for sustainable development, and which have been adopted by more and more companies (Plüss, 2002).

5.3.2 Black Economic Empowerment (BEE)

At present BEE is receiving special attention following the 2003 publication of a national broad-based BEE strategy and the tourism BEE Charter and Scorecard in May 2005. The charter aims to promote broad-based BEE in the tourism sector and the scorecard has set various BEE targets for the tourism sector in terms of ownership, strategic representation, employment equity, skills development, preferential procurement, enterprise development and social development (TBCSA, 2004). BEE presents both an opportunity and risk to FTTSA. On the positive side, many of the principles pursued by FTTSA have also been incorporated into the tourism BEE scorecard, so companies may use the certification process to help them meet the scorecard's objectives. The risk of BEE is that its focus on black ownership of business assets will overshadow other development priorities (Seif & Spenceley, in press). Research undertaken for the TBCSA has revealed that BEE objectives can and often do conflict with other priorities such as developing small businesses, supporting local business, supporting good labour practices and encouraging environmental sustainability (Sykes, 2004: 10). BEE growth may thus ultimately occur at the expense of pro-poor economic growth and the principles of FTTSA.

5.3.3 Cost of certification to operators

A global concern about certification is the cost involved, particularly for small-scale producers and community based ventures (Vorley et al., 2002). FTTSA argues that its costs are not high, and can be subsidised for smaller enterprises. Tourism enterprises have indicated that although the official cost of FTTSA certification is not prohibitive, the opportunity cost to the enterprise of preparing the necessary documentation and making time available for certification is onerous.

5.3.4 Limited number of certified establishments

By mid-2006, FTTSA had certified 21 enterprises – a negligible fraction of all tourism enterprises in South Africa. The number of certified establishments makes it difficult for FTTSA to market them as there are simply not enough to choose from. Tour operators may be willing to support FTTSA establishments, but the number, nature and location of these may not be suitable for including in operators' itineraries.

Several reasons have been advanced for this limited uptake of certification. First, while numerous establishments in South Africa claim to be operating in a socially responsible manner, many are reluctant to have their properties independently verified. Second, many simply do not qualify for accreditation as they do not meet the FTTSA criteria (personal communication, Sief, August 2005). Third, certification of social and environmental issues is still largely regarded as ‘nice-to-have’ rather than a necessity. Finally, certification does not suit all types of tourism establishments. FTTSA certification is more suited to independently run establishments than the larger hotel groups (personal communication, Sief, August 2005).

5.3.5 Ongoing financial sustainability of FTTSA

According to Seif, FTTSA aims to be self-sustainable by 2010, and to raise the capital it requires through user fees and consulting services. At present, although it receives some support from the government, the organisation is largely dependent on donor funding and in-kind support from the private sector. To date, it has been successful in raising donor funding for its continued operation. Nevertheless, the nature of donor funding, which is normally allocated on a programme basis for a year or two, renders the future of the organisation relatively uncertain (personal communication, August 2005).

5.3.6 Links between programmes

In South Africa there are currently only limited links between the quality certification systems developed by the TGC, FTTSA and the Heritage Environmental Rating Programme. These three programmes, despite being nationally based and aiming to promote the growth of the tourism sector, operate independently of one another. In South Africa, the effectiveness of certification may be enhanced if quality can be linked with environmental and social management, so that certified enterprises can guarantee that a level of quality has been achieved and the enterprise can offer the tourist a better experience. Further, there is some degree of overlap between the activities of the various certification programmes in South Africa. In the longer term, some form of consolidation between them may be desirable.

6. CONCLUSION

Internationally, the major debates on certification in the tourism industry focus on three main themes. First, consumer demand for certified tourism products is not clear. One body of literature argues that despite a proliferation of guidelines, standards and certification schemes, research indicates that only a small percentage of consumers pay attention to these standards, with very few actually choosing a holiday destination on the basis of whether an establishment is certified or not. Travel purchasing decisions are still largely based on issues such as price, health and safety (Synergy, 2000; Meyer et al., 2004; Dodds & Joppe, 2005). There is, however, an alternative body of literature which argues that sustainability issues are increasingly affecting tourists' buying patterns and behaviours, and that a growing number of tourists are willing to pay more for ethical business practices (Tearfund, 2001, 2002; Goodwin & Francis, 2003). Bien argues that consumer demand takes time to build up. Even if there is limited existing demand, sustainable tourism certification programmes make a valuable contribution to the tourism industry, and the demand will develop once the certification programme is well established, has a wide base and uses a credible standard (Bien, 2005: 16).

Second, the impact of certification on sustainable tourism development is debatable. Despite a proliferation of different certification schemes, the uptake of these by tourism enterprises has been limited. This can largely be attributed to the costs of being certified, the willingness of enterprise owners to have their establishments independently certified, and the limited perceived benefits of certification. Critics of certification argue that this absence of a critical mass has resulted in certification having only a marginal impact on the sustainable development of the tourism industry (Bass et al., 2001; Sasidharan et al., 2002). To enhance this impact it is essential to develop a larger range of certified products. Bien (2005) argues that to promote greater industry buy-in to certification, tangible incentives such as tax write-offs, preferential access to protected areas and media exposure for certified businesses need to be considered. Furthermore, Font (2003) argues that certification schemes need to be developed or expanded to include large mass market operators, as they supply the majority of the world's tourists and have the main access to the market.

Third, there are debates about the impact that certification has at the enterprise level. The direct marketing benefits of certification to tourism enterprises are not clear. Bien (2005) argues that unless the certification programme is long established, and has excellent brand recognition, simply adding a certification logo to an enterprise's promotional campaign is not going to increase occupancy rates. The benefits of certification to tourism enterprises lie rather in the cost savings, largely associated with energy and water savings, and improved standards through compliance with recognised norms of best practice.

Certification in the South African tourism industry is relatively new, with schemes being developed to monitor product quality and the environmental and developmental aspects of tourism. It has been recognised as having the potential to make a valuable contribution to promoting tourism growth as well as sustainable and responsible tourism development (DEAT/DTI/SAT, 2004; DTI, 2005).

Internationally, FTTSA is recognised as a unique initiative that has attempted to quantify and certify various social and labour issues. In South Africa it is recognised as an important initiative which aims to promote fair and responsible tourism development through certification. It has made considerable progress in raising awareness on social and labour issues in the tourism industry. This paper argues that, through its certification and advocacy function, FTTSA has made a positive contribution towards increasing the number of tourists visiting South Africa, transforming the sector, and promoting sustainable development, labour market reform and, to some extent, poverty alleviation. Further, it has helped some tourism enterprises realise their objectives, including achieving recognition, developing the enterprise and enhancing its credibility, public relations and marketing.

To enhance its impact, FTTSA needs to address the following challenges. First, its ultimate success will depend on increased consumer demand for certified products. Internationally there is a relatively high level of awareness of the concept of ‘fair trade’; however, its applicability to the tourism sector is debatable. Bien (2005) argues that true demand for standards or certification usually originates from large purchasers and operators in the tourism supply chain. Many tour operators in Europe are implementing ‘sustainability policies’, and regard certification as a way of pre-selecting the properties they will review for their catalogues. FTTSA's marketing efforts thus need to be aimed at retail and wholesale intermediaries rather than directly at consumers. Second, FTTSA is a highly niched initiative that appeals to a small number of enterprises operating within a specialised market. To increase its relevance, it needs to consider how it can be ‘mainstreamed’ without losing its credibility. Third, to date it has assumed a strong advocacy role and has been relatively successful in raising issues of fair trade. This advocacy role could, however, be strengthened further in collaboration with other influential role players such as the DEAT, SAT (South African Tourism) and TBCSA. Finally, international research demonstrates that environmental and social responsibility is important to consumers, but only after their demands for quality and price have been satisfied. Bien (2005) concludes that stressing quality, price and value is essential to any campaign that intends to promote certified businesses. FTTSA thus needs to investigate how it can develop closer synergies with the national star grading system that specifically addresses pricing and quality issues.

The author wishes to thank Professor Chris Rogerson and Jennifer Seif (FTTSA), and two anonymous referees for valuable comments on earlier drafts.