Home stay tourism for poverty alleviation through cultural conservation

Ek Raj Sigdel

Home stay tourism is becoming very famous all around the world. Some people believe that the home stay scheme can address the issues of poverty. However, other, especially who pay more attention towards the income poverty argue that the home stay tourism can not help lowering poverty. I believe that, the home stay tourism can support empowering local communities through preserving their majestic culture, which is considered as one of the major components of the economy. In addition, the positive impact – indirect and induced – of home stay tourism can be seen in the income of rural poor.

The home stay program educates visitors to the local culture, wisdom and traditional way of life. The culture includes religion, vibrant customs, weaving, games, musical instruments, dress, architecture, picking fruits in the orchard and involving in farming etc. Similarly, the wisdom includes the local history, fables and knowledge on traditional herbal medicines and other indigenous resource management system. Home stay program is for those who wish to gain a greater understanding of each others customs, culture and way of thinking through involving and experiencing the daily lives of local people. It creates an opportunity to aware tourists on socio-economic and cultural issues of the destination sites. Thus, the strategy ultimately supports for conservation of the destination culture, which has been considered as one of the major components of the local economy (HMG, 2004) .

The home stay tourism does not seek to address the question; "how can communities benefit more from tourism, it seeks instead how tourism can contribute to the process of cultural conservation?" (Suansri 2003). Promoting community pride and preserving the unique character and culture of the local area should be the prime objective of home stay programme. Home stay is a special package, where one can have the opportunity to stay with farmers and gain the experience pertaining to farmers' and villagers' unique daily activities such as exploring village, participating in different farm activities, witnessing farming practice etc. In addition, tourists have an opportunity of enjoying the warm hospitality of the host family and be a part of the household members by joining them in their daily activities. It allows tourists to discover the origins of village and rich history it holds.

Home stay may not impact directly to the poor but indirect and induced impact can be expected. Home stay features, generally require a home with, at least one extra room, bedding, pillow, mosquito net, laundry service, a desk for study, desk lamp, safe heater in their room, etc. Proper sanitation, hospitality and hygiene are important components of home stay tourism, which we can not hope from the poor family, at least for a short run in Khumbu region. It is widely reported that the higher benefit of home stay tourism in Sirubari Village has been reaped by the well-to-do families. The programme has been initiated by British Gurkha Families, having unusual level of prosperity, education and English language (Choegyal 2002).

In addition, home stay programme should be considered as an incremental income and livelihood opportunity from the incremental activity to the local community. Pro Poor Tourism strategies often involve the development of new products, particularly based on local culture, but these should be integrated with the mainstream products if they are to find markets (ODI 2001). Trekking could be the mainstream product in the case of Sagarmatha National Park. Transforming home stay households towards lodges and hotels could not serve the purpose of conserving local culture. Home stay gives consumers more choice and authentic cultural experience, than lodge and hotels. We should think over the fact that the Pro Poor Tourism is a long term investment (ODI 2001). Therefore expectation of locals should not be raised considerably.

Home stay is a delicate social and cultural issue for the community. It requires a change of perspective from generously offering accommodation to unexpected guests or relatives to suddenly requesting a fee for service. Social and cultural relationships, cultures of hospitality, can become degraded and economically oriented. For this reason it is necessary to weigh the pros and cons before developing a home stay as an accommodation option (Suansri 2003).

Income poverty, which we are paying more emphasize has been considered as the only one component of poverty issues in Nepal (NPC 2004). According to the 10th Five Year Plan, poverty is a complex and multi – dimensional phenomenon; and income poverty is only one aspect of it. Human poverty is one of the important dimensions of poverty issue. It is therefore essential that efforts contributing to human poverty reduction be geared concomitantly with reducing income poverty. The Economic Survey 2004, identifies empowerment as one of the four pillars of human development. Thus, poverty alleviation can be possible by duly addressing the empowerment issue. Similarly, developing cultural capability is prerequisite for empowering the local communities (HMG, 2004). Thus, it can be inferred that addressing cultural aspect could directly address the poverty agenda in Nepal.

A home stay should not focus merely on providing accommodation for profit while ignoring cultural exchange and respect for the hosts culture. Generosity and hospitality should be emphasized above providing 5 stars service. To do otherwise would devalue the host at the expense of the guest (Suansri 2003. Often only wealthier households have a chance to provide accommodation and will collect benefits for themselves, except in the case that there are rules ensuring part of the profits contributed to community projects.

In order to promote the home stay tourism, it is important to educate the local communities that the scheme is not equivalent to the other lodges and hotels. They should be educated about the higher value of their way of life, dress and architecture, tradition knowledge and wisdom. Poor people can be mainstreamed in the home stay tourism activities by being tourists guide, community guide, community resource person and supporting accommodation and food etc.

In conclusion home stay tourism could be developed as an instrument to preserve the local culture in a long run in the Khumbu Region. Conservation of local culture, one of the essential components of local economy, supports for lowering the poverty issues in Nepal. However, caution should be taken towards not raising the expectation of local communities. Communities should be informed that the home stay programme, in addition to contributing local income, supports for conserving their magnificent culture. Community should understand that the home stay tourism is not the hotel or lodge type of accommodation but flourish on the traditional way of life.


References
Choegyal L 2002: Ecotour Products, Their Distribution and Sales Promotion, Paper presented at International Ecotourism Conference, Okinawa
HMG, 2004: Economic Survey Fiscal Year 2003 / 2004.
NPC, 2004: Poverty Monitoring and Analysis System, Framework Document
ODI, 2001: Pro – Poor Tourism Strategies: Expanding Opportunities for the Poor; Pro-poor tourism briefing No 1. April 2001
Suansri P. 2003: Community Based Tourism Handbook, Responsible Ecological Social Tours Project