Rethinking township tourism: Towards responsible tourism development in South African townships

Abstract

Township tourism in South Africa has grown in popularity since 1994 and is considered by some to be an appropriate mechanism for stimulating local economic development. This paper suggests, however, that it is not necessarily a viable or responsible development option, since it does not automatically ensure pro-poor benefits or enhance community development. Primary research conducted in Soweto to understand visitor demand and tourism stakeholder perspectives suggests there is a demand for responsible tourism in townships. The paper contributes to South African debates about the developmental role of tourism, township tourism and local economic development, responsible tourism, and the related policy implications. It calls for responsible township tourism development in which local authorities play a vital role and recommends the development of township tourism attractions, with a focus on culture and heritage, to create unique visitor experiences.

Keywords:

• responsible tourism
• townships
• visitor demand
• heritage
• Soweto

1. Introduction

Heritage and cultural tourism is growing faster in popularity than most other tourism segments, and certainly faster than the global tourism growth rate, according to the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNTWO) (TKZN, 2008). The UNWTO also estimates that more than one-third of all international trips include some element of cultural or heritage tourism, such as visits to museums, galleries, performing arts centres and historical sites (Bonn et al., 2007).

Heritage and cultural tourism products attract tourists who visit destinations to enrich their cultural perspectives of the host community and its environment (TKZN, 2008). Such tourists tend to be educated and culturally sensitive. The proportion of visitors travelling to South Africa for cultural purposes has increased significantly since 1994, with an augmented emphasis on township tourism as a ‘catalyst for social change and healing in South Africa’ (Goudie et al., 1999, cited by Ramchander, 2004:5).

Tourism is increasingly being recognised for its economic potential and its contribution to poverty alleviation (UNWTO, 2006; Spenceley, 2008). Sharpley & Telfer (2002), however, point out that tourism benefits often do not filter down to poor communities. It is thus critically important to investigate approaches to township tourism that will afford local people real opportunities for economic empowerment (Scheyvens, 2002). This paper emphasises the importance of responsible tourism development.

According to the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism's National Responsible Tourism Guidelines (DEAT, 2002), the economic benefits of tourism should be directed towards communities. Relevant responsible tourism guidelines indicate that:

• locals should have the opportunity to take part in decision-making, be employed, trained and empowered, and become owners of tourism products;

• local goods and services should be procured;

• local entrepreneurship and small business development should be promoted;

• local cultures should be respected and protected;

• natural, cultural and heritage resources should be preserved; and

• developments should be sensitive to the environment.

Township tourism has emerged in South Africa since 1994, targeting mostly foreign special interest visitors (Ashworth, 2004; Rogerson, 2004). The current township tourism industry is therefore primarily a phenomenon of the large urban areas frequented by international visitors. Township tourism products are mainly cultural and heritage attractions, traditional cuisine, historical insights and local arts and crafts. Rogerson (2004) says township tourism has redefined heritage tourism in South Africa, which was previously synonymous with white heritage. Many believe township tourism can enhance the local economy of marginalised areas (Ramchander, 2004), and it is often marketed as a responsible tourism option by operators offering township tours. This is evident from the marketing brochures and assumed as such by international visitors. This paper proposes, however, that township tourism is not necessarily a viable and responsible tourism development option unless concerted efforts are made to this end by various tourism stakeholders.

The rest of the paper provides an overview of the literature on heritage, culture, responsible and township tourism, outlines the methods used in the study, presents research findings from surveys in Soweto, and finally discusses and recommends policy implications for responsible tourism development in townships and tourism product development.

2. Review of literature

2.1 Heritage, culture and township tourism

Heritage tourism centres on historic, natural and cultural resources (Bonn et al., 2007). From a cultural perspective, heritage can be described as:

material forms such as monuments, historical or architectural remains and artefacts on display in museums; or immaterial forms such as philosophy, traditions and art in all of their manifestations; the celebration of great events or personalities in history; distinctive ways of life; and education as expressed, for example, through literature and folklore. (Nuryanti, 1996:251)

Heritage is increasingly being used as a tool for urban planning and regeneration and it is often linked to tourism as an avenue towards this end (Van der Merwe & Patel, 2007). Heritage planning is a demand-driven, customer-oriented approach to the development of heritage sites and attractions, and such public sector urban planning approaches have been successful in Western Europe (Ashworth & Tunbridge, 2000). The concept of ‘living heritage’ suggests that cultural heritage is part of a dynamic environment that must continue to grow and develop (Nuryanti, 1996; DEAT, 2005). Local residents should thus be able to continue with their lives without restrictions. This is an important consideration when using heritage resources for tourism development in townships, since visitors enter the local residents' living space.

Law (1993) proposes that heritage resources should be creatively transformed into a tradable commodity or product to provide unique visitor experiences. A central challenge linking heritage and tourism is to reconstruct the past and the present through effective interpretation (Nuryanti, 1996). Visitors' understanding of the context and significance of heritage resources can be successfully enriched by creative interpretation.

The commodification of heritage resources for tourism purposes is often regarded as a corruptible influence that can have a negative effect on the conservation of such resources (Du Cros, 2001). This paper, however, suggests that using heritage resources to develop tourism attractions in townships will help conserve these resources, not only for tourism but also for education and reconciliation. This is a strong motivator for township tourism. The National Heritage Resources Act defines a heritage resource as ‘any place or object of cultural significance’ (RSA, 1999:659). It states that such resources contribute significantly to research, education and tourism, and must be developed and preserved for these purposes, and says museums and interpretation centres have an important mandate to promote an inclusive and tolerant society by addressing issues of concern, discrimination and human rights. The Scottish Museum Council (SMC, 2000) endorses the integration of heritage resources conservation into urban planning and socioeconomic endeavours. A fitting example is the Hector Pieterson Museum, which focuses on the events of the youth uprising on 16 June 1976 in Soweto. This museum not only attracts tourists: it has a strong educational mandate and a large school market as well.

2.2 Responsible tourism development

Frey and George observe that new concepts in recent tourism literature, fuelled by increasing international pressure to address issues of global warming, social inequality and waning natural resources, are pro-poor tourism and responsible tourism, and they observe that ‘[a]s the tourism industry matures there is an increasing demand for unique, authentic and meaningful holidays’ (Frey & George, 2008:113) and tourists want to learn more about the destination they are visiting and to interact with locals to experience the local culture. A research report by Tearfund (2002) calls for a more ethically responsible approach to tourism in response to visitor demand, and suggests that tourists are also starting to consider their impact on the host community.

The importance of responsible tourism is recognised in South Africa. The concept of responsible tourism was first endorsed by the White Paper on the Development and Promotion of Tourism in South Africa (RSA, 1996b), which was followed by the publication of the National Responsible Tourism Guidelines for South Africa (DEAT, 2002) and the Cape Town Declaration of Responsible Tourism in Destinations (Cape Town, 2002). Various responsible tourism initiatives have since been developed, such as Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa, which certifies responsible tourism operators, and the Imvelo Responsible Tourism Awards. Responsible tourism principles have also been incorporated into government policy frameworks and local economic development strategies, as well as programmes and interventions by donor agencies and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) (Spenceley, 2008).

Such principles are based on the triple bottom line imperatives of social, economic and environmental sustainability. The national responsible tourism guidelines (DEAT, 2002) encourage tourism enterprises to grow their businesses, while providing social and economic benefits to local communities and respecting the environment. The impacts of tourism development should thus be spread across time and space, while minimising the negative effects of development on the host community and the local environment. These guidelines suggest further that responsible tourism product development should enable historically disadvantaged individuals to become part of the mainstream tourism industry through entrepreneurship opportunities, training and ownership. This is essential to avoid exploiting local cultures and communities. Responsible tourism corresponds with the concept of pro-poor tourism, which says net benefits for the poor need to be ensured and tourism growth needs to contribute to poverty reduction (Spenceley, 2008). Frey & George (2008) suggest that increasing local people's involvement in tourism and sharing the benefits with them can create goodwill and improve safety and security. This is important for township tourism development. Initiatives to provide opportunities for the poor to gain economically and participate in decision-making should thus be encouraged. Since responsible tourism is an approach and not a product, an integrated approach which involves various stakeholders is required (Spenceley, 2008), and responsible tourism guidelines should be taken into account when planning for and developing tourism attractions.

2.3 Tourism clustering and the creation of attractions

The development of tourism products is central to strategic tourism development (Van Staden & Marais, 2005). Attractions, as a product that drives tourism, can be regarded as demand generators (Kotze et al., 2005), and ‘culture and heritage attractions are widely recognised as being important elements of the tourism mix at any destination’ (Prentice, 1993, cited in Kotze et al., 2005:120).

By clustering attractions, planners or developers aim to capitalise on the existing resource base, existing product strength or inherent product development opportunities with market potential to strengthen or create clusters of tourism activity (ATI, 2006). Nordin (2003) points out that clusters usually develop naturally, but can be influenced by factors such as strategies, government support, infrastructure development and joint marketing initiatives. Tourism precincts should offer sufficient variety and uniqueness in terms of attractions and facilities to attract visitors and expenditure.

Principles of innovation for sustainable destinations set out by the National Geographic Society (NGS, 2007) suggest that when developing attractions by focusing on unique attributes, market authenticity is an important consideration. The promotion of visitor experiences through meaningful interaction with local people that provides hands-on or first-hand experiences can create a better understanding of the local culture and heritage and enhance authenticity (NGS, 2007). This principle corresponds well with responsible tourism and unique experiences should be developed in a socially responsible manner.

2.4 Township tourism in South Africa

Township tours mostly involve taking visitors to areas of poverty to see how people live and to symbolic struggle sites associated with apartheid (Nemasetoni & Rogerson, 2007; Pirie, 2007). Ramchander (2004) points out that the significance of urban townships in South Africa is their connection to apartheid social segregation, which makes them different from other deprived and slum areas of the world. Pirie says a township tour is ‘a spatially visible expression of pro-poor tourism and has become a signature of tourism sensitivity, solidarity and social conscience’ (2007:237). Special interest heritage tourism, of which township tourism is an example, has been given labels such as ‘atrocity tourism’ (Ashworth, 2004), ‘ethno tourism’ (Pirie, 2007), ‘justice tourism’ (Scheyvens, 2002) and ‘thanatourism’ or ‘dark tourism’ (Ashworth, 2004), to name a few.

Several problematic and ethical issues are raised in the township tourism literature. Ashworth (2004) regards the development of township tourism as the exploitation of heritage and the suffering of others for the pleasure and entertainment of visitors. Pirie (2007) says tourists are often taken to township areas on superficial journeys and in most cases there is very limited interaction between them and the local residents. Authenticity is therefore easily compromised. There is a constant struggle between market viability and authentic representations of local cultures and tourists are regularly taken on pseudo-trips that do not reflect past or present realities (Ramchamder, 2004). Another critical question with regard to township tourism is whether real opportunities for economic empowerment are accessible to local residents (Scheyvens, 2002; Ramchander, 2004; Nemasetoni & Rogerson, 2007). Locals are generally afforded few such opportunities (Rogerson, 2004; Nemasetoni & Rogerson, 2007). Emerging entrepreneurs also experience various difficulties. Nemasetoni & Rogerson (2007:215) say that because of ‘constrained access to markets, limited funds for marketing and a lack of support from established enterprises, the majority of black tour operators become marginalised in a situation of large firm dominance of the tourism operating industry as a whole’. Others observe that locals are watched and photographed like animals in a zoo by visitors passing in coach buses (Schevyens, 2002; Ramchander, 2004). Other concerns raised about the current township tourism industry are the commodification of culture in townships and the benefits of tourism versus the social costs (Ramchander, 2004).

2.5 The Soweto context

Soweto, the largest township in South Africa, was established in the early 1900s as a product of segregation planning to accommodate labourers employed in mining and other industries around Johannesburg, while the inner city was reserved for white residents. Many sociocultural and socioeconomic problems are part of the Soweto landscape, such as overpopulation, a lack of resources, the uneven distribution of wealth, and low socioeconomic development. With the political transition and growth of the tourism economy in South Africa the townships, formerly regarded as ‘no go’ zones, have become accessible to tourists (Rogerson, 2008:401). Tourism has, accordingly, developed rapidly over the past few years in Soweto (Gasper et al., 2005). Soweto is currently considered to be one of the country's top 20 tourism attractions and is being marketed as one of the premier destinations in Johannesburg (CoJ, 2004). A visit to Soweto is a sought-after cultural experience, especially for international visitors, because of its diverse cultural background and rich political history. In 1997 South African Tourism estimated that 7 per cent of visitors to South Africa took a tour of Soweto (CoJ, 2004). According to a South African Tourism survey of international visitors in 2002, 15.8 per cent of all foreign visitors to Gauteng toured Soweto (CoJ, 2004). Most domestic visitors to Soweto go there for holiday purposes or to visit friends and relatives (CoJ, 2004; Rogerson, 2008).

Most Soweto tourism activity is clustered in the suburb of Orlando West, where the Vilakazi-Hector Pieterson Precinct is located. The area around Vilakazi Street, Pela Street and the Hector Pieterson Museum has been identified by the Johannesburg Development Agency as an important cultural, heritage and economic node that will act as a catalyst for job creation and economic development (DEAT, 2005; CoJ, 2007). There are a number of restaurants and bed-and-breakfast establishments in the vicinity. Tourism attractions in Orlando West currently include the Credo Muthwa Village, the Hector Pieterson Museum and Memorial, the Mandela Family Museum, the houses of Desmond Tutu and Winnie Mandela, the Regina Mundi Church and the Ubuntu Kraal.

3. Methodology

There has been little research into tourism development and planning in townships, particularly when it comes to the impact of tourism on the local communities (Ramchander, 2004). An observation by the author is that research studies that do exist tend to focus on Soweto; there is not much literature on other South African townships. Previous studies conducted in Soweto focus mainly on the supply side of tourism, sociocultural aspects or small enterprise development. As a secondary research activity, available township tourism research articles and reports were reviewed in the aim of analysing and understanding the Soweto tourism industry, and to support the discussion, policy implications and recommendations (i.e. Ramchander, 2004; Rogerson, 2004; CoJ, 2004; TEP, 2005; Gasper et al., 2005; Nemasetoni & Rogerson, 2007; Rogerson, 2008). These sources did not include analyses of tourism demand for township tourism products. Visser & Rogerson (2004) point out that an understanding of who tourists are and what their needs and wants are remains an under-researched topic in South Africa.

The purpose of the research was to further the understanding of tourism demand for tourism product development and to investigate stakeholder perspectives. The primary research was conducted in 2007. Structured face-to-face and telephone interviews were conducted with the relevant parties involved in the tourism system in Soweto, namely:

• tourists visiting Orlando West (92 face-to-face interviews);

• businesses in Orlando West, including bed-and-breakfast establishments (80 face-to-face and telephone interviews);

• households in Orlando West (72 face-to-face interviews); and

• tour operators conducting tours to Soweto (nine telephone interviews).

The research was conducted in Orlando West and the area was selected purposively to correspond with the concept of tourism precinct development. Non-probability sampling methods were used for household and business surveys, since lists of possible respondents from which samples could be drawn were not available. In the case of tourists, fieldworkers relied on available subjects who were willing to take part in the interviews at tourism ‘hotspots’. With regard to household and business surveys, a purposive sampling technique was used to interview households and businesses in strategically identified spots and economic nodes throughout Orlando West to ensure that a range of business types was surveyed. Telephone interviews were conducted with tour operators and accommodation establishments. Random samples were selected from contact lists specifically compiled for this purpose.

The limitations of the study include a lack of detailed and accurate information about tourism suppliers operating in Soweto and the unwillingness of some tour operators to participate in the study. A database of tourism suppliers was compiled from a variety of sources, but some information was incomplete and incorrect, and tourism organisations contacted were unwilling to release their databases.

Tourism demand was estimated by using a trend extrapolation forecasting method. Historical data from South African Tourism and other research reports reviewed were also used to identify growth trends, on the assumption that these trends will continue for some reasonable time into the future in the current macroeconomic environment. This method of tourism forecasting is not unreasonable for short-term to medium-term forecasts, but is problematic when it comes to longer-term forecasts (Smith, 1995).

4. Research findings

Of the 92 tourists interviewed, 83 per cent were international visitors and 16 per cent domestic. No school groups were interviewed as part of this survey. Most of the domestic tourists, more than 93 per cent, were from Gauteng. Of the respondents interviewed, 50 per cent said they were visiting Soweto as part of a package tour. The most popular reasons for visiting Soweto were personal interest (27 per cent) or as part of a business trip (27 per cent), and 13 per cent of respondents visited Soweto in response to promotional materials at hotels in Johannesburg. The majority of accommodation establishments and tour operations said that most of their visitors, approximately 80 per cent, are foreign.

Tourists said they would like to see more cultural attractions or activities in Soweto, e.g. more cultural villages, music and dancing, arts and crafts, museums and art galleries and performing arts (see Figure 1). Tour operators confirmed this, saying that tourists would like to see more cultural attractions, interact more with locals and experience everyday life in Soweto. They said tourists want to interact more meaningfully with locals, e.g. by becoming involved in social activities, and visiting schools and community centres. They would like to see a broader spectrum of Soweto life, including, as one tour operator said, ‘the good, the bad and the ugly’.

Figure 1: Visitor preferences for tourist attractions in Soweto (92 respondents)

Figure 2 shows what tourists spent on package tours and Figure 3 what they spent on other items. Most spend between R50 and R500 on a package tour to Soweto. They spend most of their money on food and beverages, souvenirs and entrance fees, if these were not included in a package. Figures from two reports were combined to estimate such spending trends in Soweto. Average visitor spending was as follows: R30–35 on entrance fees, R106–130 on crafts and curios, R78–100 on food and beverages and R23–80 on music and dancing shows (CoJ, 2004; TEP, 2005). In general, tourists spend little on items not included in a package tour and few make donations to local causes. It is evident that very few overnight in Soweto, since fewer than 8 per cent of the respondents said they spend money on accommodation there. This is also apparent from CoJ (2004), TEP (2005) and Rogerson (2008), which point to low accommodation occupancy rates in Soweto and an oversupply of accommodation establishments. Eighty per cent of the respondents were staying in hotels either in Johannesburg, Sandton or Kempton Park, about 18 per cent were visiting Soweto from outside the Johannesburg area, and only two were staying in Orlando West.

Figure 2: Visitor spending on package tours

Figure 3: General visitor spending in Soweto

Table 1 shows the main clients of the Soweto businesses surveyed. It is clear that most are either pedestrians or local residents. Tourists buses are the main source of clients for 22 per cent of these businesses, and other tourists not visiting Soweto as part of a package tour frequent only 4 per cent of the businesses. It therefore appears that a large proportion of businesses in the study area do not benefit significantly from tourism.

Table 1: Main clients of local businesses

Client	Major (%)	Minor (%)	Total (%)
Passing traffic	59.4	40.6	100
Pedestrians	91.0	9.0	100
Local residents	93.9	6.1	100
Tourist buses	22.2	77.8	100
Other tourists	4.3	95.7	100
Other businesses	25.6	74.4	100
Source: Author's surveys, 2007.

Of the businesses interviewed, about 66 per cent said they would like to attract more tourists and about 85 per cent said they would consider expanding, upgrading or starting a new business should new tourism attractions be developed in Soweto. It is clear from the survey that they see improved marketing, access to funding, the development of tourist attractions and lower levels of crime as the main catalysts for local economic development. They felt that tourism development could raise the profile of Soweto as a whole and stimulate other business activities. They were concerned that future tourism opportunities would be snatched up by large companies and stressed that more opportunities should be afforded to local entrepreneurs, tour operators and guides.

Most tour operators are white-owned and based in Johannesburg or Pretoria. Two were locally based in Soweto. The typical package consisted of a half-day tour to the main sites (some including lunch at a local establishment) or a full-day tour of the greater Johannesburg tour with Soweto included, often combined with a visit to the Apartheid Museum. Some tour operators also offer accommodation or shebeen tours. Most visitors to Soweto do so as part of a tour – very few visit independently. Most tour groups make short stops at selected places, which does not give tourists a chance to move around in the area to interact with locals or support local businesses, with the result that few businesses benefit. Visitors are discouraged from travelling independently or moving around freely because of safety concerns; but also, in the opinion of the author, because tour operators are indifferent as to whether locals benefit from tourism.

Interviews with owners of accommodation establishments also corroborated these findings. Accommodation is mostly in the form of small bed-and-breakfast enterprises and, as observed above, few tourists stay overnight. One of the respondents remarked that their establishments were only busy over December. Various respondents said that tourists do not get off coaches and that tour operators do not stop long enough at sites but rush past, which means that visitors are unaware of their establishments.

Most of the respondents (more than 94 per cent) were positive about the development of tourism in Orlando West. It is clear that locals see tourism as positive if they benefit from tourism initiatives. Respondents' positive expectations of the effects of tourism included the following: employment creation; better livelihoods for locals; the fostering of tolerance and understanding between cultures and racial groups (i.e. whites visiting Soweto learning about the local history and heritage); the preservation of local history, culture and heritage; infrastructure development from which local people also benefit; and attraction of government funding to the area. The respondents had high expectations of tourism development in their area, but it is unfortunately evident that few real benefits are realised. Respondents identified inadequate marketing of the area, high levels of crime affecting tourist perceptions, a lack of access to funding for developments, inadequate tourism attractions and a lack of government involvement as common constraints to tourism development.

Using the trend extrapolation forecasting method (based on historical museum visitor numbers), it was estimated that between 205 483 and 223 890 visitors, including foreign, domestic and school groups, were likely to visit Soweto in 2008 should factors that contributed to growth in recent years remain favourable. Note that the figure for 2009 was not included owing to recent dramatic changes in the global macroeconomic environment. It is clear from the analysis and comparison with figures available in other studies that there has been a sharp increase in visitors to the Hector Pieterson Museum and Memorial and thus also to Soweto over the last three years.

Key findings from the primary research confirm certain findings highlighted in the literature reviewed and include the following:

• Soweto has a strong day-trip market and can currently be considered an attraction that forms part of the greater Johannesburg culture and heritage tourism product. It is clear that Soweto cannot currently be considered a destination that offers a variety of attractions and services in its own right. There is thus a need to diversity the current township tourism product offering and upgrade the existing cultural and heritage attractions.

• A substantial proportion of tourists visit Soweto out of personal interest, and they would like to see more cultural and heritage attractions, have more to do, experience everyday life in Soweto and have meaningful interaction with locals.

• The levels of transformation remain low in the Soweto tourism system. Most tour operators are not owned by locals and local entrepreneurs experience market entry barriers.

• Most local businesses do not benefit from tourists visiting their area. Tour operators control the flow of visitors to local business and few visitors venture out of tour buses to support local businesses. Visitor contact with locals is limited and accommodation establishments have low occupancy rates.

• Tourist spending in Soweto on items not included in package tours is limited and few tourists make donations to local causes.

• It is apparent that local business and tourism-related skills are lacking.

• Access to finance is a major barrier to market entry and growth for tourism enterprises.

• A lack of tourism specific infrastructure, such as public transport, public facilities, signage and tourist information, is a significant barrier to the development of the industry.

• Poor information about the tourism industry in Soweto and poor marketing are barriers to tourism development.

• Crime and violence remain a major barrier to tourism growth in Soweto.

5. Discussion and policy recommendations

5.1 Responsible township tourism development

Township tourism is often regarded as a strategy for local economic development in areas where poverty abounds and few alternative economic development options are foreseeable. It should be realised that township tourism, a phenomenon of large urban areas frequented by international visitors, is not necessarily a suitable development option or a panacea for the ills of all underdeveloped, peripheral and rural areas. Other avenues of economic development and job creation should be investigated in such cases. It should be realised that Soweto currently has a comparative advantage over other townships in South Africa. It draws visitors because of its prominent struggle history, legacy and related attractions. Significant historical events such as the 16 June uprising add to international awareness and interest. Another advantage is its close proximity to Johannesburg. Gauteng is the province that receives the most international visitors annually, according to South African Tourism statistics. Other urban townships such as those in Durban and Cape Town also have location advantages. Care should be taken to enhance the comparative advantages of townships by creating unique experiences, products or attractions.

This study showed that tourism in Soweto is currently very fragmented and locals do not benefit significantly from it (see also TEP, 2005; Rogerson, 2008). This paper proposes that the way township tourism is currently conducted does not comply with responsible tourism principles. The study showed that locals are more positive towards township tourism if they benefit from it (see also Ramchander, 2004). Local ownership of tourism enterprises, local entrepreneurship and local participation in initiatives should be promoted. Tourists should be briefed about appropriate behaviour in townships and asked to be culturally sensitive and respectful towards locals. There should be a move away from visitors travelling to townships in luxury coaches and small group travel should be encouraged, as well as first-hand experiences with locals. Steps should be taken to encourage tourist spending and the use of overnight accommodation, and to reduce economic leakages and promote local partnerships. Community involvement in making decisions about responsible township tourism development is also crucial. Some practical recommendations are made below.

Renard (2001) suggests that initiatives aimed at transforming an existing sector must encompass a broad range of strategic interventions. Collins & Snel (2008) suggest that from a strategic perspective it is crucial that government cooperate with various donors and tourism enterprises to encourage responsible and pro-poor tourism development. Responsible tourism can be seen as essentially a management strategy that embraces planning, management, product development and marketing (GTA, 2006). The involvement of government is essential for promoting responsible tourism development. Collins & Snel (2008) stress that government has an obligation to establish adequate infrastructure to create an enabling environment for tourism development. Government is also responsible for developing a regulatory framework within which the industry should be developed and operated. These requirements are implied in the White Paper on tourism development and promotion and the Constitution (RSA, 1996a, 1996b). Efforts to spread the benefits of tourism to the appropriate parties, and to enhance the positive impacts and manage the negative impacts, thus fall under the mandate of organisations responsible for developing, managing and operating tourism at local level (GTA, 2006). According to Section 84 of the Constitution (RSA, 1996a), local tourism can be defined as a function of local authorities and each municipality has the right to regulate, structure and control the tourism industry in its own area.

Local authority destination managers are in a unique position to formulate and facilitate responsible tourism solutions specific to the destination in cooperation with local communities, tourism organisations and tourism product owners and developers. Planning authorities also need to include such stakeholders as part of the decision-making process at destination level in order to determine what constitutes responsible tourism (DEAT, 2002). Responsible township tourism development should be integrated into a broader local economic development strategy for the locality. The ideal result will be tourism policies and strategies that will grow the tourism industry in the area and ensure that responsible tourism development principles are embraced and implemented.

Leffel (2006) documents an example of a strategy for fostering responsible tourism. In 2001 the Peruvian Government began to regulate the Inca Trail by ensuring benefits to locals, and protecting the environment and the important national heritage site of Machu Picchu. Notably, tour operators had to obtain permits to continue operating on the trail, locals had to be employed and porters had to receive a minimum wage (Leffel, 2006). The same principle can be applied to township tourism by requiring tour operators to obtain permits on the condition that they use local guides, have local partners, support local businesses, provide training, contribute a portion of income to local causes as a social responsibility activity, and so on. Spenceley (2008) suggests that local government could help communities maintain some control over tourism development in their area. An overly prescriptive and restrictive approach can, however, act as a barrier to tourism development (Sharply & Telfer, 2002). The feasibility of this recommendation thus needs to be critically assessed. Another option is to provide incentives to tour operators who comply with responsible tourism principles. Such incentives could be concession allocations, marketing support, and recognition in the form of responsible tourism certification and awards. Responsible tourism can be regarded as an ethical business principle that makes good business sense and that can enhance the competitive advantage of a business and be used as a positive marketing tool (GTA, 2006; Frey & George, 2008).

5.2 Township tourism product development

Township tourism is a niche market attracting a relatively small share of the wider, mass tourism market (Rogerson, 2005). Lane (1994) suggests that an area that neither has the resources nor wishes to be developed as a mass tourism destination should focus, inter alia, on developing small-scale markets with an emphasis on heritage. Heritage resources should be creatively transformed into tradable commodities or products, focusing especially on providing unique visitor experiences (Law, 1993). Frey & George (2008:124) stress that tourists are looking for ‘new, authentic and different cultural experiences’ and that responsible tourism practices encourage the use of local heritage and knowledge to meet this demand.

This paper therefore suggests a consumer-oriented product development approach (Spenceley, 2008) with regard to township tourism product and attraction development. The current township tourism product offering should be diversified so as to give visitors more to do and to make current cultural and heritage resources more interesting, marketable and enjoyable. Tourists would like to see more cultural attractions, and respondents in this study proposed museums, art galleries, theatre and performing art productions, festivals and indigenous arts and crafts centres. Pirie (2007) recommends that more specialised and themed township tours should be offered, such as a struggle trail, a shebeen trail or an arts and crafts trail. Orbaşli (2000) mentions the Boston Freedom Trail in the US, which links heritages sites with a red line painted on the pavement, as an example of such a heritage trail, and also recommends guided walks, which, if well managed, can give visitors a more in-depth understanding of an area and enhance their experience. One of the barriers to the development of tourism in the townships is that visitors hardly get out of the coaches and have limited contact with local residents. Heritage trails or walks could solve this problem and enable tourists to visit local businesses and NGOs or charitable organisations and interact with locals. However, such development should be approached with sensitivity, in line with responsible tourism principles and in cooperation and consultation with local residents.

The feasibility of a tourist sightseeing bus service to link township attractions as part of themed trails, or to link townships with other sites of historical or heritage interest, should be investigated. Sightseeing buses would create a tourist transport infrastructure and increase access to heritage sites, visitor mobility and opportunities for tour guides. This would of course call for thorough investigation of visitor safety, responsible visitor behaviour, and local resident attitudes.

To involve visitors in the realities of everyday township life, hands-on experience should be provided and opportunities created for interaction with locals. This could be done by enabling visitors to do volunteer work with community upliftment NGOs, even if only for a day. They could take part in sports or school or orphanage activities, or help create a vegetable garden, or build facilities, or visit shacks. This could make locals feel less exploited and more positive towards visitors to their area, especially if they spend money, and make township tourism less voyeuristic. Such activities could also be meaningful learning experiences that could change negative perceptions of townships, foster greater understanding between visitors and locals and ensure a more authentic township experience.

The current township product offering could also be diversified by creative innovations such as interpretation centres, museums, interactive attractions and commemoration sites. Interpretation is essential to contextualise history, culture and heritage and provide visitors with inclusive, honest and reliable information (DEAT, 2002). Heritage sites need to be developed, and provided with signage for directions and labels and the dissemination and interpretation of information. Effective interpretation will enhance the authenticity of the visitor experience and add value to destinations. The development of heritage sites can, however, also ensure commemoration and make local residents feel proud, especially if they are actively involved in constructing the interpretation. This construction includes not only the physical construction of facilities but also intangible construction through personal testimonies, courageous tour guiding, and interaction between visitors and locals. Knowledge linkages with established institutions such as universities could provide access to accurate historical information and creative avenues for development by involving locals.

In conclusion, this paper suggests that township tourism can promote socioeconomic regeneration and pro-poor development, but only if it is developed responsibly and the benefits are spread more widely. This will take detailed and sensitive planning. Such development will not happen spontaneously: concerted efforts are needed by government, the private sector and other stakeholders to incorporate responsible tourism principles into policies, strategies and regulations. The paper strongly recommends that township tourism development be preceded by thorough investigation and planning, taking social, economic and environmental aspects into account. It is only thus that the positive impacts can be enhanced and the negative impacts managed.

Acknowledgements

The author extends gratitude to Urban-Econ Development Economists for permission to publish the primary research findings of a feasibility study conducted on behalf of the company and for all assistance in this regard, and to Marika Cook for her support and guidance.

Notes