The Economics of Tourism and Sustainable Development phần 9 ppt

239

Wastewater disposal 5.0 Provide sewerage NVP of $4.3 mn at Improvement in

in tourism centres services to one 12% discount rate. coastal water

in Dominican region to mitigate Benefits estimated quality achieved

Republic. negative impact of using WTP for

Project Type II tourism and to improved coastal

improve bathing water quality

water quality

Community 5.0 Established cultural 2% annual growth EA carried out Job creation noted but

development and centres in pilot in visitors. Economic and mitigation not quantified

culture project, sites. Only about benefit estimated plan implemented

FRY Macedonia. $0.5 mn was for at $1.3 mn. Ex ante

Project Type I tourism IRR18%

Sustainable coastal 5.0 Management of Increase in growth EA carried out Social assessment

tourism, Honduras. tourism along of tourism from Piloted innovative conducted and design

Project Type I north coast by 4% up to 8% p.a. ways to enhance reflects findings

strengthening local Increased revenue capacity for EA Small employment gain

capacity to manage. from marine and of tourism- estimated

TA to include coastal parks related impacts

HIV/AIDS Increased revenue from

prevention taxes paid by tourists.

Restoration of cultural Increased incomes

site at historic centre generated by tourist

of Turjilo spending

Small business training Annual benefits range

to develop business from $2.7 mn to

opportunities $38.4 mn depending

(handicrafts, on assumptions

tour operations etc.) related to increase

in tourism

240

Table 8.6 (continued)

Project Loan Main components Impacts

$ mn Economic Environmental Social

Cultural Heritage 31.50 Investment in a number Anticipated increase EA conducted and Improved quality of life

and Tourism of historic sites, in number of visitors management from urban

Development including Tyre and between 6% and 17% plan designed upgrading for all

Project, Lebanon. Tripoli, to protect depending on site Cultural areas are

Project Type I and manage them Anticipated revenues presently areas of

per visitor to rise by neglect and project

between 37% and 65% will uplift them

Structural 60.8* Simplify procedures No. of visitors and FE Social development was

Adjustment for tourist visas. earnings both went a key objective of

Project, Privatization of up, up 69% from 1997 loan

Madagascar. airline to facilitate to 2001 but amount

Project Type II cheaper flights due to project

not clear

Cultural Heritage 17.0 Assist government IRRs esitmated at EA conducted and Social assessment

Project, Tunisia. to develop its between 17% and 70% design reflects undertaken and

Project Type I cultural heritage and ex ante findings project design reflects

increase revenues by need to conserve

marketing, site tradition and local

development etc. culture

Notes: * Wide package of reforms; most funds are not for tourism-related expenditures.

(b) The relatively small projects (around $5 million or even less), which

invest in providing technical assistance and improving facilities or

establishing small businesses to supply tourism services, can have

significant, greater benefits than the larger projects such as the one

in Egypt. The projects in the Dominican Republic, Macedonia and

Honduras are all examples of these small projects.

(c) Projects that support worthwhile and important cultural sites can

have a very high return. Although not fully quantified, the data

available indicate that the returns can be impressive.

(d) Quantification is not easy and some of the numbers provided have

to be taken with a grain of salt. The basis for the estimation is often

no more than guesswork, and the error bounds on the estimates are

large, although this is not always acknowledged. In the one case

where it is acknowledged (e.g. the sustainable coastal tourism

project in Honduras), we see quite how wide the range of benefits

can be. This underscores the need for more effort in improving

the estimation of benefits. Only two or three projects have used

state-of-the-art tools for the valuation of tourism benefits.

4. PROJECTS WITH A GEF COMPONENT

The projects considered for this section concentrate on the environmental

and natural resources management theme. Also, these projects are at least

partly supported by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) as facilitator

and funding mechanism for integrating global concerns into the develop￾ment process, and by the World Bank as the implementing agency for

the GEF. From the fiscal years 1992 to 2003, on average, the Bank approved

15 projects and provided GEF grants worth $138 million annually. Some of

the funds served as complements to Bank lending and other co-financing

resources, mainly in the areas of conservation and sustainable use of bio￾diversity and the promotion of energy efficiency and renewable energy

development.

All information about the projects was obtained from the World Bank–

GEF projects database (http://www-esd.worldbank.org/gef/fullProjects.

cfm), which provides the following:

● country and region

● project name

● focal area (e.g. biodiversity)

● operational programme (e.g. coastal, marine, and freshwater

ecosystems)

Lessons from recent World Bank experience 241