You are on page 1of 18

Journal of Sustainable Tourism

ISSN: 0966-9582 (Print) 1747-7646 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsus20

Tourists and community development: corporate


social responsibility or tourist social responsibility?

Andrew Chilufya, Emma Hughes & Regina Scheyvens

To cite this article: Andrew Chilufya, Emma Hughes & Regina Scheyvens (2019): Tourists and
community development: corporate social responsibility or tourist social responsibility?, Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, DOI: 10.1080/09669582.2019.1643871

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2019.1643871

Published online: 30 Jul 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 867

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at


https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rsus20
JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM
https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2019.1643871

Tourists and community development: corporate social


responsibility or tourist social responsibility?
Andrew Chilufyaa , Emma Hughesb and Regina Scheyvensb
a
Tourism Department, Ministry of Tourism and Arts, Lusaka, Zambia; bInstitute of Development Studies,
Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY


Corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities are usually determined, in Received 10 February 2019
large part, by head office and by shareholder interests. This article Accepted 10 July 2019
explores the unique case of tourism CSR which has a distinctive
KEYWORDS
relationship with local communities. CSR programmes of hotels and
Tourists; corporate social
resorts in the Global South are increasingly creating opportunities for responsibility; community
tourists to engage directly with communities, yet the relationship development; hotels;
between tourists and CSR – and how this impacts on community devel- Fiji; Zambia
opment outcomes – has so far been overlooked. Based on two separate
research projects undertaken in Zambia and Fiji which examined hotel
CSR from community perspectives, we show how these programmes
were largely motivated, driven and financed by tourists. This suggests
that, in the accommodation subsector of tourism, CSR is not only being
shaped by head office, but that tourists can play a key role, leading
us to coin the term TSR (tourist social responsibility). For community
development initiatives in particular, this gives rise to both challenges
and opportunities.

Introduction
For the tourism industry, and particularly the accommodation sector, corporate social
responsibility (CSR) programmes often constitute a key way of contributing directly to develop-
ment in destination communities. CSR is conventionally understood as company investment
activities which bring environmental or social benefits beyond the company, with activities usu-
ally determined, in large part, by head office and by shareholder interests. (Lindgreen, Swaen, &
Campbell, 2009, p. 439; Nyahunzvi, 2013) This article seeks to challenge that notion, showing
how – in the case of the tourism industry and the accommodation subsector in particular – CSR
initiatives can be heavily influenced by the tourists themselves. When considering community
development outcomes, this has significant implications in terms of the nature of CSR activities
and how they relate to local communities.
Existing research suggests that CSR has a limited impact on development outcomes for local
communities (Banks, Kuir-Ayius, Kombako, & Sagir, 2013; Blowfield, 2007; Jenkins, 2005), with crit-
ics suggesting that CSR is more responsive to head office or stakeholders than community needs
(Akpan, 2008; Banerjee, 2008; Sagebien & Whellams, 2010). Where CSR policies are formulated at
global headquarters and shaped by international development debates, this can impact on how

CONTACT Emma Hughes e.l.hughes@massey.ac.nz Institute of Development Studies, School of People, Environment
and Planning, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
ß 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 A. CHILUFYA ET AL.

community concerns are addressed at country-level. Kapelus (2002), for example, demonstrates
that this can result in a failure to effectively implement CSR and Akpan (2008) indicates it can
lead to the potential for a mismatch between corporate and community expectations. Bowen,
Newenham-Kahindi, and Herremans (2010) show that company–community engagement can be
weak and that transformational outcomes are rare, consistent with the finding that as a stake-
holder group the local community is disregarded in policymaking within tourism CSR (Farmaki &
Farmakis, 2018). These structural constraints can limit the ability of business to prioritise commu-
nity well-being. We contend, however, that the tourism industry, in particular the accommoda-
tion sector, constitutes a unique case of CSR where tourism consumers play a key role in
shaping CSR practices. While it does not necessarily follow that the tourism sector is better
placed to address community needs, CSR nevertheless represents a critical aspect of community
development in tourism areas. Consideration of the importance of the role of tourists in shaping
and funding CSR can therefore add to our understanding of who influences CSR and how, along-
side advancing our understanding of tourism-sector led community development.
Tourism research on CSR shows that community-focused programmes are largely discussed in
terms of the business case for the company, for example mitigating risk and providing a social
licence to operate (Ashley, De Brine, Lehr, & Wilde, 2007; Ashley & Haysom, 2006; Williams, Gill, &
Ponsford, 2007), while engagement strategies are often directed towards company staff (Coles,
Fenclova, & Dinan, 2013, p. 134). Where the involvement of tourists in CSR is discussed it tends
to be in terms of tourist demand for ethical practices (de Grosbois, 2012; Dodds & Joppe, 2005),
or meeting tourist expectations to experience pristine environments and local culture (Kalisch,
2002). Communication of CSR can therefore focus on generating positive public relations
(Mowforth & Munt, 2009, p. 223). Further, there is little acknowledgement of tourist participation
in CSR programmes or any indications of the extent of their involvement. Where CSR focuses on
environmental initiatives such as energy conservation or reduction of carbon emissions, tourists
may in fact have limited direct participation. However, where initiatives target local communities,
we suggest that the role of tourists could be much more influential.
In this article, we report on two independent studies undertaken in different parts of the
world examining tourism CSR from community perspectives, both of which generated an unex-
pected finding. In each case, the researchers later noted the fascinating phenomenon of tourist-
driven CSR: rather than constituting an interaction between hotel management and commun-
ities, community-focused CSR occurred principally at the interface between tourists and com-
munities. As the title of this article suggests, if tourists are driving CSR, we might need to talk
more directly about tourist social responsibility (TSR).
Below we first outline current evidence in the literature examining the connections between
tourists and CSR. We then go on to present case study findings from research undertaken in
Zambia and Fiji considering the community development implications of CSR. The final section
considers the opportunities and challenges that arise from recognition of tourist involvement in
hotel-sponsored community development.

Tourists and community development


Mowforth and Munt argue that tourists should be taken more seriously in tourism research in
general (2009, p. 120), drawing attention to the ethos of new tourists which demands “a clear,
and sometimes explicit acknowledgement that they seek sustainability in their holiday pursuits,
with a minimum of negative impact.” (Mowforth & Munt, 2009, p. 189)
There is consideration in the literature of the demand for companies to respond to such
ethical concerns, for example through the call for ethical tourism products (Scheyvens, 2011,
p. 114), responsible tourism (Goodwin, 2011) and voluntourism experiences (McGehee, 2014;
McLennan, 2014) along with evidence of the corresponding growth of certification schemes
JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM 3

(de Grosbois, 2012; Dodds & Joppe, 2005). There is less discussion of the relationship between
tourists and CSR. Existing research tends to focus either on the direct impact of CSR on tourist
behaviour, or on the indirect impact of tourists on CSR through tourist expectations for cultural
experiences and community engagement while on holiday.

Tourists and CSR


CSR refers to a company’s responsiveness to the “triple bottom line” of financial, social and environ-
mental outcomes spanning activities such as “employee welfare schemes, stakeholder engagement,
community action, charitable giving, responsible supply chain management, ethical leadership and
environmental stewardship.” (Coles et al., 2013, p. 123) According to Telfer and Sharpley (2008,
p. 52), CSR in tourism is “considered to be a key element in the achievement of sustainable develop-
ment in general”. Yet there is limited mention of the impact of tourists on CSR policy and practice
with literature principally assessing the implications for company performance and marketing. A
review of contemporary literature on the role of CSR in the hotel industry identified a lack of aware-
ness in tourists of hotels’ CSR practices (Serra-Cantallops, Pen ~a-Miranda, Ramo n-Cardona, &
Martorell-Cunill, 2018), and although positive correlation between CSR and consumer choices has
been identified around environmental issues (Randle, Kemperman, & Dolnicar, 2019; Su, Swanson,
Hsu, & Chen, 2017; Tuan, 2018), it seems that “knowledge does not necessarily translate into action”
(Kasim, 2004, p. 24). Interestingly, although Kasim’s (2004) study on tourist demand for green and
socially responsible hotels in Malaysia found that socio-environmental issues were not the basis of
hotel choice, the study did find a high interest in the recreation experience. The study suggests
therefore that responsible hotel practices could be enacted through the provision of recreational
programmes focussing on traditional heritage and culture. It is this latter type of community
engagement where the connection between tourists and responsible business practice is most
evident, explored in further detail next.

Holiday expectations
In the 1990s, Poon (1994) suggested that “new tourism” heralded the rise of consumers seeking
more authentic experiences and holidays which minimise negative impact on the environment,
creating possibilities for greater sustainability and advantages for vulnerable destinations. The
demand for cultural experiences has continued to grow, including access to heritage sites, cul-
tural entertainment, local cuisine, and opportunities to purchase local souvenirs, together acting
as a driver for tourism companies to engage with local communities and their environment in
positive ways. Conservation initiatives can support preservation of the local environment and
heritage, while hiring local entertainers and offering tours, information and handicrafts can pro-
vide valuable income-earning opportunities for local people (Scheyvens, 2011, p. 116). Strong
agriculture–tourism linkages can contribute to poverty reduction, economic development,
employment for farming communities (Thomas-Francois, von Massow, & Joppe, 2017). Tourist
demand for local activities while on holiday, however, does not necessarily result in outcomes
which are locally-meaningful. Discussions of slum tours, for example, demonstrate that tours can
vary widely in terms of the benefits that accrue to communities. While such tours can provide a
means to direct economic benefits to communities and overcome stereotypes (Scheyvens, 2011,
pp. 92–93), often the residents of the slum, shanty town or favela have little control over tours
and the benefits that “trickle down” are few (Mowforth & Munt, 2009, pp. 285–291). Concerning
demand for local produce and cuisine, research shows that this is also shaped by tourist expecta-
tions (Sengel et al., 2015); in many cases tourists forgo potential local delicacies and prefer
ubiquitous steak, pizza and pasta dishes (Laeis, Scheyvens, & Morris, 2019) and the majority of
food and beverages are still imported from overseas (Harrison & Pratt, 2015, p. 13; Meyer, 2006).
4 A. CHILUFYA ET AL.

Further, while local entertainment provides an income, contracts may be insecure, symptomatic
of a wider issue of power in which the poor are up against the financial might of companies
(Manteaw, 2007).
Where there is a clear commitment from tourists to supporting ethical tourism, this still does not
equate to alignment with community development concerns. For example, signs of tourist values
influencing local CSR practices can be seen in the emphasis on issues such as the environment, with
Mowforth and Munt referring to the tourist imperative to “green the earth’s poor” (2009, p. 56).
Similarly, tourist beliefs on issues like child welfare or animal rights shaped by dominant views in their
own countries might be transferred to foreign contexts when they travel. Swedish tour operator
Apollo, for example, was influenced by tourists to invest in animal welfare in their holiday destinations
(Zapata Campos, Hall, & Backlund, 2018). In fact, research links social responsibility to tourist emotions
(Tran, Hwang, Yu, & Yoo, 2018) and shows that a key motivator in ethical tourism is the individual
hedonic or feel-good value for tourists (Malone, McCabe, & Smith, 2014), with tourist priorities focused
around a range of personal extrinsic and intrinsic goals (Caruana, Glozer, Crane, & McCabe, 2014).
Evidence shows that ultimately tourists will fulfil individual priorities; Sharpley argues it is unrealistic
to expect tourists to be accountable for ethical behaviour (Sharpley, 2015, p. 377) echoing
McKercher’s (1993, p. 11) sentiment that tourists are above all “consumers not anthropologists.”
In summary, current evidence in the literature shows that the impact of tourists on the ethical
practices of hotels, and the subsequent benefit to local communities, is ambiguous, with limited
tourist motivation to exert ethical purchasing power and a self-interested approach to activities
while on holiday. The literature does not deal with tourist involvement in community-oriented
hotel CSR practices or the community-focused practices of hotels more generally. The lack of
knowledge of the impact of tourists on community CSR is particularly significant in large-scale
tourism settings: despite the growth of new forms of tourism, large-scale mass tourism continues
to constitute the majority of travel globally (Weaver, 2015). Therefore, tourist engagement in
community development may be an important factor for consideration in tourism and develop-
ment debates. Exploration of this neglected area offers the opportunity to better understand an
area of tourist impact on sustainable practices.

Methodology
The authors undertook fieldwork in Zambia and Fiji for two separate studies, both aiming to
explore the contributions of hotels and resorts to the development of nearby communities from
the perspectives of local communities and hotel staff. Analysis of community experiences is crit-
ical to understanding the development potential of CSR. Evidence from studies in other sectors
(e.g. oil and mining) show that there are clear differences in how initiatives are perceived from a
corporate or community perspective (Akpan, 2008; Idemudia, 2009; Kapelus, 2002). It is only
“beneficiary-centred” approaches which make room for distinctions between CSR done “for”, “to”
or “with” communities. (Akpan, 2008, p. 497) The community-centred investigations in Zambia
and Fiji provide a basis for examining the relationship between tourist involvement in CSR practi-
ces and community development outcomes. Both studies adopted a qualitative approach, using
semi-structured interviews to collect data; this method offered both a rigorous structure and the
ability to solicit a range of interviewee experiences.
Zambia’s tourism sector, while small, is currently one of the identified growth potential areas
for the economy (GRZ, 2018). The tourism product is mainly based on the country’s vast cultural
and natural resources, most of which are located in rural areas neighbouring poor communities.
The land tenure system in Zambia is still largely communal at approximately 90% traditional and
10% state-owned (Mbinji, 2012), thus most tourism resorts are located on communal land with
prospects of creating benefits from tourism for communities. Often, however, chiefs are under
pressure from investors who seek shortcuts to acquire communal land without considering the
JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM 5

impacts on the majority of the people (German, Schoneveld, & Mwangi 2011; Nolte, 2012). Data
were collected between July and December 2014 and focused on Indigenous Mukuni commun-
ities neighbouring hotel and lodge resorts in the tourist town of Livingstone, adjacent to the
world-renowned Victoria Falls. A total of 113 interviews were undertaken with senior government
officials, hotel and lodge managers, the local tourism association, leaders of local and inter-
national NGOs along with curio traders, small-scale farmers and other Mukuni community mem-
bers. Interview questions explored different ways in which hotels and lodges were practising CSR
to deliver benefits to communities, whether communities had a voice in influencing CSR practi-
ces, and how tourism policies could better promote community-responsive CSR.
Fiji is the largest tourist destination in the South Pacific attracting a third of the region’s tourist
arrivals (South Pacific Tourism Organisation, 2014) and as the country’s key income earner, tourism
accounts for 33% of employment (World Travel and Tourism Council, 2015). Tourism in Fiji is concen-
trated on the coast, with the majority of hotels located on communally-owned land. 99-year tourism
leases with Indigenous landowning communities are negotiated by the government-established
iTaukei Land Trust Board, creating an ongoing direct link between hotels and landowning commun-
ities. Although classed as an upper-middle income country by the World Bank, almost a third of the
population remain below the poverty line with a higher proportion of the rural population living in
poverty (Ministry of Economy, 2017). Data were collected from June to October 2014 and focused pri-
marily on Indigenous Fijian communities located adjacent to multinational resorts, including both
landowning and non-landowning communities. Two hotels were selected as case studies in the prin-
cipal tourist locations of Denarau and the Coral Coast, which receive 50% and 18% of visitors to Fiji,
respectively (Bernard & Cook, 2015; Movono, Pratt, & Harrison, 2015). Eighty interviews were under-
taken with resort management, CSR managers, community members, partnering NGOs and project
beneficiaries, including school and hospital staff, in addition to government bodies and tourism
organisations. interviews at the community level explored the relationship between the community
and the hotel, their priorities for development and the details of the CSR initiatives, how they were
identified and carried out and any known outcomes. At a company level, questions and observation
explored how initiatives were identified, carried out and implemented and were used to ascertain the
perceived impact on the community in general, individuals or groups within the community, and for
the company itself.
Site observation of some CSR projects in communities was also undertaken in both Zambia
and Fiji. In both cases, interviews were either transcribed or detailed notes taken and were ana-
lysed thematically. Themes covered CSR strategy and practices, education, health, employment,
partnerships, and local customs and values. The role of tourists only appeared later as a theme
when through the research process the significance of the role of tourists in CSR in both cases
became apparent.
The CSR programmes in both locations focused primarily on education and health. Initiatives
encompassed support for local schools and provision of scholarships and internships, infrastruc-
ture and equipment for hospitals, and health-care programmes for staff. In addition, there was
support for environmental restoration activities. Other activities carried out by the hotels which
specifically benefitted local communities included examples of ethical business practices such as
preferential employment, locally-sourced goods and services and locally-provided entertainment
and community tours. The examples that follow focus specifically on education programmes,
which were the most significant focus of CSR across all case study areas, and community tours,
which were the most common way for tourists to engage directly with communities.

Tourist involvement in CSR


All hotels in the study locations, varying in size from 20 to 440 beds, had well-established CSR
programmes, including hotels which have been recognised with industry awards for their
6 A. CHILUFYA ET AL.

achievements. Most, but not all, have arrangements in place contributing varying percentages of
profits to CSR (ranging from 2% to 10%). However, in all cases the most substantial contribution
to CSR programmes comes from guest donations. Several hotels provided a donation box in the
lobby, while others appealed for donations from tourists by showcasing their CSR projects in
communities to guests. In Fiji, a voluntary amount is automatically added to each guest bill at
the end of the stay (between US$2.50–$5) and tourists make additional donations via community
tours in both locations. The hotels provide all the human resources necessary to run CSR pro-
grammes including staff expertise in project management, finance, engineering, training, health
and safety and construction along with contributions of staff time through volun-
teer programmes.

Tourists and education


CSR initiatives in the case study locations in both Zambia and Fiji focus overwhelmingly on sup-
porting schools, particularly primary schools, and rely heavily on tourist support to implement
programmes. Support for local schools includes infrastructure development and maintenance,
student scholarships, outfitting libraries and computer labs, donations of books, computers and
stationery, donations of vocational equipment (e.g. for hospitality training courses), tourism
expertise and staff and tourist volunteer time. While the hotels and lodges are directly involved
in improving infrastructure and facilities in schools, the main engine behind these practices is
tourists who are increasingly seeking out opportunities to engage with and donate to
local schools.
School visits are a popular activity offered by many hotels. Sometimes they are built into a
community or village tour, and sometimes a stand-alone activity. Tourists make a tour of the
school and kindergarten and students often provide some entertainment, such as performing
local songs and dances. Some hotels and lodges charge for the activity and others offer a free
visit with the expectation that tourists will make a donation to the school. In addition to contri-
buting financial donations, tourists may gift stationery and books, with arrangements sometimes
made to donate other more expensive items including computers, musical instruments and play
equipment. In Zambia, items such as exercise books, pencils and pens are often purchased from
small community-owned shops, while in Fiji, most donations are brought from the tourist’s
home country, with hotel management making efforts to coordinate and manage these dona-
tions by collecting items and distributing as needed and by guiding choice of gifts prior to the
guest’s arrival. Unsurprisingly, patterns of donations are unpredictable. Hotel staff also devote a
great deal of time and energy to providing opportunities for tourists to “give back” to the com-
munity. Opportunities to physically hand over gifts are a high priority, along with managing
guest expectations of this experience.
Guests get excited about the donations. Their kids might have saved their pocket money … they’ve
brought them over in their suitcase: it’s a big thing for them. They want recognition and a huge thank you
(CSR manager, Fiji).

From a community perspective, there is certainly some financial benefit for schools in engag-
ing directly with tourists, in addition to the benefits to small businesses when purchases are
made locally, but interactions are largely driven by tourist priorities. For example, tourists com-
monly prefer to donate their items directly during tours, with one principal in Fiji revealing that
whereas in the past the tourists would bring donations to the office for the school to distribute
as appropriate, they are now more likely to want to direct their gifts to a class of their choice.
Some schools on the tourist trail also receive visitors every day, causing disruption to classes.
There are some examples of schools managing the agenda for school visits, such as setting limits
on the days of visits or using visits as a leadership exercise for students who provide tours for
guests, but in general the control is firmly held by the tourists. The expectation for hands-on
JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM 7

involvement in education CSR as part of the holiday experience also has an impact on the geo-
graphical distribution of donations. Schools in the vicinity of hotels are most likely to benefit
from tourist donations, while schools in more remote areas do not have access to this assistance.
For countries where tourism is the primary income earner such as Fiji and Zambia, this can fur-
ther exacerbate inequalities.
Two examples of tourist support for education-related CSR follow: the Tonagbezi Lodge in
Zambia and the Bilo Bar Club in Fiji. From its opening in 1990, Tongabezi Lodge, a 20-bed lodge
providing a luxury safari experience for clients, had an ambitious goal of establishing and man-
aging a community trust school for children of its staff and children of non-lodge staff from a
nearby community. The Tujatane Community Trust School (TCTS) was established in May 1996
with the construction of the first pre-school classroom, resourced by the Lodge. The lodge own-
ers played an instrumental role in the school’s establishment, viewing education as the starting
point for change and emancipation of the nearby community. As the financial challenge of
expansion was considered too high for the lodge alone, the decision was made by Lodge man-
agement to involve tourists through guest donations.
To fundraise for the school capital projects and management costs, cards were produced and
placed in guest rooms profiling the school project and including options to sponsor a building
project, a teacher, a child or a programme (including items from a wish list). Tourists also have
the liberty to donate according to their interests outside these options. Donated funds go
straight into the bank account of the school project.1 The option to tour the school project site
initially allowed tourists to assess the needs of the community at the project site and over the
years these tours have become part of the tourism activities of the lodge. It is common for tou-
rists to engage directly with the project and the community during tours to identify new activ-
ities or to follow-up on the progress being made by projects or students that they finance. The
trust school also accepts volunteer teachers, who arrive primarily as tourists and include youth
groups from schools and groups of retired professionals, mostly from the US and the UK.
From a community perspective, the school fulfils the high demand for primary- and second-
ary-level education, since the alternative government schools are located far from the commu-
nity. Qualified volunteers also remain invaluable to the running of the school: the Head Teacher
of Tujatane School first came as a voluntourist herself. However, although this was seen as a
positive contribution to the community, volunteers are not always professionally qualified teach-
ers. Individual projects and programmes that are implemented in the school have come to
reflect tourists’ interests over those of the lodge management and communities. This is because
through their financial contributions and by volunteering their services as members of the school
management board, tourists have gained power to influence school policies and practices. Over
time this has relegated the power of communities to a peripheral position with community
members identifying a lack of voice in management decisions.
The second example is the Bilo Bar Club, Fiji, which demonstrates that one of the longest
running education projects in the tourism industry in Fiji originates from tourists. The Bilo Bar
Club is a loyalty club, founded in 1981 as a social club by a group of returnee guests to Shangri-
La’s Fijian Resort and Spa. The club took on a charitable focus in response to cyclones which
damaged Fiji in the 1980s and a trust fund for donations and an annual fee was established. The
club now has over 3000 active members who have raised more than FJ$500,000 (US$250,000)
for local projects, including the building and resourcing of five local kindergartens, with provision
for wages and training for staff. The first kindergarten was opened in 1991 and the most recent
in 2013. Four continue to be supported by the Bilo Bar Club. The club is not solely focused on
education, although this is the primary expenditure. Funds have also contributed to
improvements at the local hospital and to a national sand dune reserve. Furthermore, individual
members contribute additional donations, for example 120 ukuleles distributed to five schools
and gift boxes of clothing and stationery for all 150 children at a boarding school. The adminis-
tration of the fund is provided by hotel staff, and the hotel also supplements fundraising
8 A. CHILUFYA ET AL.

initiatives, for example providing prizes for fundraising raffles. Members hold an AGM each year,
where funding proposals are assessed and decided on by majority vote.2 Monitoring is carried
out by club members who visit projects annually to assess their successful completion or moni-
tor the use and care of equipment and buildings. Kindergarten teachers are also invited to
trustee meetings to report on any issues. On average, one major project is approved each year
and followed-up the next year; however, the most active club members visit the hotel several
times a year when they may also interact with funded projects.
The club demonstrates collaboration between the hotel, guests and the community through
its structure: the board is comprised of representatives from hotel management, returnee tourists
and the community through the Ka Levu (provincial chief). Of particular interest here, is the pri-
mary focus of the tourists in directing the organisation. Although the community are represented
on the board, it is the tourists who lead and manage this initiative, engage directly with schools
and communities, decide on priorities, determine project scope and assessment criteria, and pro-
vide ongoing project financing. Project timing and communication with organisations receiving
funding can be challenging as decisions on projects funded by the loyalty club can generally
only be advanced during the members’ stay in Fiji, with community members expressing uncer-
tainty about ongoing funding, waiting times and communication with the club. However, the
value of the educational support provided by the Bilo Bar Club was emphasised by each of the
four villages, and the kindergartens remain a highly visible, enduring and positive source of CSR
for local communities.

Tourists and community tours


The value of community tours to tourism businesses cannot be overemphasised. In both Zambia
and Fiji, hotels, lodges and resorts partner with the neighbouring communities to allow guests
to experience the local culture of the area. It was found that the motivation behind this enthusi-
asm in both locations is the need to meet the growing demand from tourists for unique cultural
experiences. As one representative from Tourism Fiji noted, “There has been a change in the
way tourists look at things. Now they are venturing out - they want to see more of what’s out
there, feel and interact”. It is also a way to provide opportunities for the communities to benefit
from tourism. Some hotel and lodge managers in Zambia argued that their involvement in com-
munity tours in Mukuni communities was part of their companies’ deliberate policy to contribute
to community development in the area, while other managers and senior government officials
explained that community tours are client-driven. In Fiji, community tours are most frequently
organised by the recreation arm of hotels as part of the menu of entertainment on offer, rather
than constituting a component of CSR programmes; however, management also acknowledge
the importance of the income-generation opportunity to local villages. For tours in both coun-
tries, tourists usually pay a set fee and a proportion (around 10% or up to US$5 per person) is
paid to the community through a trust fund or community committee, which supports local
development in different ways. Our research also found that the community tours often act as a
springboard for further development initiated by tourists.
Community tours in Zambia start with a traditional handshake from village tour guides at
Chief Mukuni’s palace. While the lead guide logs in tour details and receives payment from the
hotel representative, the guides on duty take the tourists through the traditional formalities in
readiness to pay a courtesy call on the Chief. Tourists are then led by the guides through a grass
thatched passage into the arena that acts as the Chief’s official office and meeting place. After
the royal welcome, tourists are given a guided tour of the communities. Tourists listen to the his-
torical narration of the origins and traditional practices of the Mukuni people and have a chance
to meet and participate in the activities of different households. Tours also include visits to local
schools and clinics. No prior arrangements are made to receive or to parade to entertain tourists.
JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM 9

For this reason, Mukuni is considered as a “living” tourist village. Village tours always end with
shopping at the local curio market next to Chief Mukuni’s palace.
During the tours, tourists make direct donations to the households, schools and clinics they
visit. Most of the items that tourists donate are those which are bought from village shops, such
as bags of maize meal, sugar, cooking oil, money and stationery. Mukuni community members
feel that village tours are important because they create opportunities to generate both commu-
nity level benefits as well as individual and household level incomes:
… when companies bring their clients, they pay US$5 each for village tours … this money goes to the
community trust for community projects … . when tourists are taken to local markets, they buy crafts and
curios … Mukuni people benefit when tourists buy crafts and curios … selling of these items for some is
the main source of livelihood. In addition, tourists donate to families, to schools and [the] clinic …
(Community Member, Zambia)

Additional community revenue comes from many other CSR arrangements made through the
Mukuni Community Development Trust (MCDT), a community-level structure established with
the primary purpose of helping local people to capture opportunities and benefits from tourism.
For example, fees paid by white water rafting companies for launching their activities on the
Zambezi River from Mukuni land and lease fees paid by hotel and lodge companies for operat-
ing on Mukuni land. Mukuni communities also provide most village tour guides: young people
are professionally trained with help from local hotels and are in turn employed by the MCDT.
The funds collected by the MCDT are used to implement social investment projects in the areas
of education, health and water and sanitation.
In some cases, tourists return to their home countries to mobilise more resources by fundrais-
ing. As an example, an NGO called Butterfly Tree was formed by one of the tourists who stayed
at a hotel in Livingstone in 2006. The NGO was formed to support livelihood improvement and
social investment projects in Mukuni communities, with the tourist motivated to establish the
NGO after taking part in community tours in the area. Butterfly Tree also mobilises retired teach-
ers, doctors, nurses, engineers and other essential experts to come to Mukuni as voluntourists
every six months to offer their resources and services to the community over a period of 4 to 6
weeks. This NGO is creating a positive impact on the living standards of people in Mukuni com-
munities. Mukuni community members, including their leaders, spoke highly of the activities of
this NGO, as did hotel managers in the area:
… the founder [of Butterfly Tree] first came as a guest to one of the hotels … The NGO has supported
water and sanitation projects, school services and infrastructure projects, orphan support, and health issues
especially HIV/AIDS awareness campaigns … (hotel manager, Zambia)

Village tours in Fiji typically begin with a welcome song and ceremony and a guided tour
around the village with the opportunity to buy handicrafts finishing with a traditional farewell
song. Rather than touring “living villages” as in Zambia, tourists are often provided with some
form of entertainment: this could be a meke (dance) performance or another activity such as coco-
nut husking or weaving. The village tours are led by the adults of the village, under the leadership
of the village head, and at this time usually also included a visit to a local school outside of the vil-
lage. The proceeds from village tours (approximately FJ$5/US$2.50 per head) go directly to the vil-
lage committee and support village upkeep, church renovations, construction of village fences and
traditional obligations such as funeral and wedding costs. One village established a loan scheme
from village funds where households could borrow from the fund to support individual family or
unexpected expenses. In addition, some villagers see tours as a way to preserve their own culture
and hand down stories to the next generation, for example through training young people
as guides.
Villagers, however, have limited influence over the tours, which are directed by hotel manage-
ment with fees set by individual hotels. According to both the Fiji Hotel and Tourism Association
(FHTA) and the South Pacific Tourism Organisation (SPTO), arrangements for tours are made
10 A. CHILUFYA ET AL.

through individual discussions between resorts and villagers; there are no regulations in place
and a lack of knowledge about how tour fees are distributed. Therefore, although tours provide
an additional source of income for villages, it can be unpredictable. Tours are also strongly influ-
enced by tourist expectations. For example, one hotel manager indicated that tourists increas-
ingly want to watch Polynesian fire dancing with a declining interest in viewing traditional Fijian
meke dances performed in the villages. As resorts incorporate opportunities to experience enter-
tainment such as fire dancing and lovo nights (food from an underground oven) in the resort
itself, many tours have become more minimalist with fees just covering the cost of maintaining
the village (tidying, cutting grass, etc.). One villager explains how their income from tours is reli-
ant on tourist demands:
It seems like the hotel controls everything from one point. If the hotel does not like how the tourists
respond to the village tour they might pull out. We have no control (community member, Fiji).

As with the example from Zambia, an additional benefit arises when tourists continue to
engage with the communities they have visited. Villagers in one village recounted how an
American visitor fell in love with their village and asked how he could further support them. He
subsequently funded the building of a new community hall for the village, and his photograph
can now be seen hanging on the wall inside.

Discussion
The examples above illustrate that in these two case studies tourists are clearly a significant force
in community development, whether through shaping ad hoc donation practices or founding
and funding longer-term development projects. Importantly, each of these examples in the areas
of both education and community tours demonstrates the strength of the connection between
tourists and communities with tourists increasingly becoming the driving force behind commu-
nity CSR projects in two geographically dispersed regions. This was substantiated by tourism
officials in both locations. A Fiji Hotel and Tourism Association official pointed out, “sometimes
CSR is not between us and the communities; it’s between guests and communities.” Similarly, a
senior tourism official in the Department of Tourism in Zambia remarked that “CSR is client driv-
en … . Government sees hotels and lodges that are doing CSR as responding to their market
(tourists) and those hotels and lodges that are particularly engaging in CSR with adjacent com-
munities as doing so because their clients expect them to do it … they respond to that demand”.
This suggests that any assessment of community development impacts of tourism-related CSR
should therefore consider the potential influence that tourists have over CSR. The following
sections examine this relationship and the impact on communities in more detail.
Findings suggest that the relationship between tourists and CSR can be categorised in three
ways, viewing tourists as influencers, drivers or architects of CSR (see Table 1). First, tourists can
be seen as “influencers” where they serve as a key motivation behind the implementation of CSR
programmes. CSR programmes are designed to be responsive to tourist demands to engage
with communities, with examples including community and school tours. Activities on offer are
subject to their ongoing popularity with tourists. Where tourists have greater influence over CSR
programmes they can be seen as “drivers”. In these instances, tourists have significant influence
over how CSR is shaped, implemented and accounted for. Examples include the Tujatane
Community School in Zambia, where tourists have the ability to influence which projects are
funded through their donation decisions and through their active involvement in the
programmes as volunteers while on holiday. Less commonly, tourists manage both the design
and implementation of CSR programmes and can be seen as “architects” of CSR, as in the case
of the Bilo Bar and through volunteer roles on the Tujatane school board.
Although tourists are not explicitly acknowledged in the CSR literature, it is clear that they
can play a significant role in shaping CSR, which impacts on the livelihoods of people in host
JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM 11

Table 1. Degrees of tourist involvement in CSR.


Role of tourists
in CSR Key characteristics Examples
Influencers Key motivation behind design and implementation of  Community tours
CSR programmes. Allows tourists to engage with  School tours
communities and “give back” while on holiday.  Adventure activities on community-owned
land, e.g. rafting
 Collection and distribution of donations to
communities
Drivers Influence over how CSR is shaped, implemented and  Ongoing development programmes with
accounted for. Tourists have input into CSR tourist input, for example hotel-sponsored
programmes through donation decisions or active school, hotel-managed school libraries
involvement in programme development.  Tourists volunteering in schools,
construction projects, health clinics
Architects Design and implementation of CSR programme is  Tourist-led trust funds
managed by tourists. Tourists develop priorities,  Tourist membership on boards of a school
fundraise, make decisions on donations and or charity
monitor projects.
Source: authors.

destinations. These findings from the tourism sector supplement existing research identifying
CSR as typically directed by corporate head office by adding an understanding of how tourists
also influence CSR. Acknowledging the degree of influence of tourists in community-centred
CSR raises questions around where the balance of power and control in shaping CSR lies, and
suggests greater reflection is necessary on the challenges and opportunities created by tourist-
community interactions.

Challenges
First, the shaping of the CSR agenda by tourists limits the opportunities for communities to set
priorities for their own development as articulated in the Declaration on the Right to
Development, including the right to participation, equity and self-determination (United Nations,
2013). Recipients of CSR assistance are consulted but in practice have little control over projects,
as shown in the case of the Tujatane Community Trust School in Zambia. Philanthropic dona-
tions are often directed by tourists, which can skew the agenda. Tourists often decide what they
want to donate and where, limiting the ability of both hotels and partners to target the funding
most appropriately. In this regard, communities are relegated to a position of passive recipients
of gifts from hotels and tourists. The nature of the obligations implicit in the receipt of “gifts”
from donors can be problematic for communities, reflecting the unequal dynamics of the
encounters between “donor” and “beneficiary” and the expectation for gratitude in the recipient
(Mauss, 1954; Rajak, 2010). While communities are not able to genuinely influence the develop-
ment agenda, significant priorities may be overlooked.
Second, accountability of hotels for voluntary CSR is not primarily to communities, but is
increasingly, to hotel guests (who want to see where their donations are made). This is consist-
ent with existing research showing that the outcomes of development initiatives of private
organisations tends to be showcased through websites reporting success stories rather than the
impact or meaning of the work (Schulpen, 2007). Furthermore, communities are reluctant to
demand accountability from tourists, or indeed hotels, for voluntary initiatives. Companies expect
communities to conform to donor requirements: this can include evidencing self-help strategies
as well as performing for tourists and displaying gratitude. The need for hotels to be responsive
to satisfying guest demands as well as reporting to head office effectively means that
the accountability to communities is minimal. It also adds to the imperative to determine
beneficiaries through geographical parameters which prioritise locations adjacent to resorts.
12 A. CHILUFYA ET AL.

Third, tourist demands for greater engagement with destination communities, either through
tours or by volunteering can have a number of negative impacts. The expectation for school
visits means that sometimes schools host visitors on a daily basis. The long-term impact of per-
forming for tourists from a young age and continually having classes interrupted, being photo-
graphed and, for kindergarteners, picked up by tourists, is not generally considered. During their
visit, the study space is transformed into one of performance and display. This not only risks
objectifying the children but demands considerable emotional labour from them (Guiney, 2018).
Schools reliant on volunteer staff have limited quality control over the selection of teachers, and
while voluntourism provides a highly valued experience for the tourist, the benefits to the des-
tination communities can be variable (Luh Sin, Oakes, & Mostafanezhad, 2015; McLennan, 2014;
Raymond & Hall, 2008). These factors suggest that tourist involvement with communities can
arguably present a greater challenge than an opportunity.
Finally, the promotion of tourist support for communities as part of the tourist experience can
also promote an uncritical response to inequalities and perpetuate neo-colonial approaches to
development. Neo-colonial relationships of dominance are manifested in patterns of tourism
development arising from the control of tourism from the global North and are visible in the
unequal power relationship between tourists and communities (see Mowforth & Munt, 2009, pp.
47–72). Tucker makes the link between tourist empathy for the “other” and neoliberal discourse,
suggesting that market-oriented logic urging "the individual to ‘care’ … in turn diverts attention
away from transnational structures of inequality.” (2016, p. 35) That is, by creating opportunities
for tourists to support local communities while on holiday, tourist companies effectively transfer
the responsibility for ameliorating the living conditions of destination communities to the
consumer, while limiting expectations for the industry to change its practices. Further, when
volunteer tourists assume the roles of “expert” or “teacher” without the appropriate experience
or qualifications, this embodies a “neo-colonial construction of the westerner as racially and
culturally superior” (Raymond & Hall, 2008, p. 531) and can reinforce uncritical perceptions of
poverty as accepted by the communities concerned or as a matter of luck (p. 533).
While there are opportunities afforded by heightened tourist awareness of destination
communities, overall the issues identified above require significant consideration and careful
planning if tourist-driven community development is to be meaningful to communities and
deliver lasting development impacts. There is also much that hotels and lodges could do to
better control tourist-community engagement and ensure beneficial outcomes.

Opportunities
Although hotels and tourists do not have expertise as development agents (Blowfield, 2007;
Blowfield & Dolan, 2010; Fox, 2004), through collaborations with locally-based agents such as
NGOs, community groups and local government, hotels have the ability to connect a wide network
of donors with appropriate initiatives. Hotels can play an important coordinating role and connect-
ing function for tourists who want to donate goods or services because of their unique position in
the community. As demonstrated in examples from both Fiji and Zambia, this role by hotels is
effectively a facilitative role that links tourism and community development through tourist-driven
CSR. For example, some hotels in Zambia collaborated with NGOs, universities and a donor organ-
isation to train local farmers in new vegetable gardening skills. Similarly, a hotel in Fiji collaborated
with an NGO to facilitate the construction of an early childhood centre in a remote village.
The imperative to respond primarily to tourist demands rather than head office also provides
hotels with the opportunity to tailor programmes to local demands rather than international pri-
orities, for example profiling specific projects for guests to donate to and providing guidance on
the choice of gifts to bring prior to the guest’s arrival in consultation with communities. In Fiji,
one hotel was able to diverge from the international CSR programme set by head office to
JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM 13

establish projects which were more closely aligned to local needs, for example focussing on edu-
cation needs rather than child mortality in a context where child mortality is very low. Thus, if
well managed, this link could provide a unique opportunity to channel the goodwill of tourists
effectively for community development. With the interventions of stakeholders such as
government and NGOs, this can also help to lower initial input costs for CSR and ensure that
programmes directly target community needs, thereby encouraging both hotels and tourists to
do more. In addition, this synergy could facilitate community involvement and help to address
sustainability concerns expressed in literature for CSR initiatives (Ite, 2004; Muthuri, 2007;
Muthuri, Moon, & Idemudia, 2012; Van Alstine & Afionis, 2013).
The greater engagement with different cultures and communities can also have the capacity
to promote positive cross-cultural engagement if managed well. Raymond and Hall (2008) note
the potential for voluntourism to create opportunities for cross-cultural understanding where
there are greater opportunities for interaction and the appropriate support in place from the
facilitating organisation and this is reflected in positive community perspectives of engaging
with tourists through tours. Higgins-Desbiolles (2006, p. 1196), meanwhile, underscores
the “transformative capacity” of tourism and calls for academia to identify “the tangible and
intangible benefits [social tourism] could deliver to the entire community (not just the business
sector) through research” (p. 1206). A critical tourism approach similarly suggests that empathy
in tourists “may open up new forms of intersubjective understanding and thereby create more
ethical relations between people across cultural and social divides” (Tucker, 2016, p. 1064).

Conclusion
Our research suggests that tourists play a far greater role in CSR than has been previously
acknowledged. These findings indicate that the tourism industry presents a unique case of
private sector-led development: tourists themselves play a significant role in shaping CSR, both
through involvement in CSR activities and through influence over activities such as recreation
and procurement. Increasingly, there is evidence of much more proactive involvement of tourists
in community development, through shaping local education to establishing NGOs and trust
funds. Although this phenomenon may not happen in all cases and in other scenarios hotels will
still retain most of the control, we argue that the role of tourists in CSR in the tourism industry
is worthy of greater attention. Our research shows that for CSR programmes in two distinct case
study locations the primary accountability of hotels was to tourists rather than shareholders or
head office. Tourist demand not only shaped the nature of CSR but was a significant driver in its
implementation and management. In some instances, tourists were the principal architects in the
design of community development initiatives. Much of the CSR in the case study hotels is
funded, and even directed, by guests – either through development initiatives such as the con-
struction and management of kindergartens and schools or through tourist participation in recre-
ational activities such as community tours. As a key stakeholder group, tourist demands, and
their perceptions of priorities for communities, play a significant part in shaping hotel-initiated
community development. This leads us to suggest, in the title of this article, that we should be
talking about TSR (tourist social responsibility), not just CSR. Further research is needed to
identify the existence of this phenomenon in different settings and locations, with additional
research exploring tourist perspectives on involvement in CSR to be welcomed.
From the perspectives of local communities, tourist influence over CSR gives rise to both
challenges and opportunities. On the positive side, engaging directly with communities while
on holiday can link tourism with development, creating opportunities for tourists to contribute
directly to local development outcomes and building cross-cultural understanding and empathy.
However, it also means that community priorities can be overlooked in favour of tourist
14 A. CHILUFYA ET AL.

preferences with accountability of hotels for outcomes primarily corresponding to satisfying tour-
ist demands, and initiatives can ultimately serve to reinforce existing inequalities.
Nevertheless if the role of tourists is appropriately harnessed in tourism destinations, a greater
contribution could be made by tourism-driven community development. In support of this
proposition, we urge that policy makers/practitioners in government and CSR managers pay
more attention to ensuring that the role and accountability of both hotels and tourists is
directed to respective communities. In addition, measures that seek to encourage the role and
interventions of other stakeholders such as government and NGOs become a necessary aid to
success. The importance of encouraging these measures is premised on the need to support the
development of equitable relationships in the CSR process, which is an important factor for
achieving inclusiveness and sustainability (Scheyvens & Biddulph, 2017).
We consider that if managed appropriately the tourist quest for engagement with
communities and their desire to “give back”, in combination with private sector goals to deliver
development outcomes, could spur a wide range of options for expanding CSR-driven commu-
nity development. However, to ensure positive outcomes for communities as well as for tourists,
a number of safeguards must be put in place. First, programmes require genuine consultation
with communities as partners in tourism CSR. Second, recognising that neither tourists nor hotels
are development specialists, the involvement of other stakeholders, such as government and
NGOs is essential to the sustainability and effectiveness of outcomes. Finally, the role that
tourists play in CSR-led community development as influencers, drivers and architects should be
acknowledged in the tourism industry with further research and planning undertaken to enhance
future outcomes.

Notes
1. See more details on donations and other details about Tujatane at: www.tongabezitrustschool.com.
2. The AGM processes are public and transparent with documentation posted online. http://bilobar.com/
category/agm-meeting-minutes/.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge helpful comments of anonymous reviewers in revising this article.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Funding
This work was supported by the Royal Society of New Zealand [MAU1206] and the New Zealand Aid Programme.

Notes on contributors
Andrew Chilufya is Chief Tourism Development and Research Officer at the Ministry of Tourism and Arts, Zambia.
His research examines tourism and community development in Zambia.

Emma Hughes is a Research Associate in Development Studies at Massey University. Her research examines com-
munity development and tourism from community perspectives.

Regina Scheyvens is a Professor in Development Studies at Massey University. Her research focuses on the relation-
ship between tourism, sustainable development and poverty reduction.
JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM 15

ORCID
Andrew Chilufya http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6842-4086
Emma Hughes http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9762-6074
Regina Scheyvens http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4227-4910

References
Akpan, W. (2008). Corporate citizenship in the Nigerian petroleum industry: A beneficiary perspective. Development
Southern Africa, 25(5), 497–511. doi:10.1080/03768350802447602
Ashley, C., De Brine, P., Lehr, A., & Wilde, H. (2007). The role of the tourism sector in expanding economic opportunity.
Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
Ashley, C., & Haysom, G. (2006). From philanthropy to a different way of doing business: Strategies & challenges
in integrating pro-poor approaches into tourism business. Development Southern Africa, 23, 265–280. doi:
10.1080/03768350600707553
Banerjee, S. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad and the ugly. Critical Sociology, 34(1), 51–79.
doi:10.1177/0896920507084623
Banks, G., Kuir-Ayius, D., Kombako, D., & Sagir, B. (2013). Conceptualizing mining impacts, livelihoods and corporate
community development in Melanesia. Community Development Journal, 48(3), 484–500. doi:10.1093/cdj/bst025
Bernard, K., & Cook, S. (2015). Luxury tourism investment and flood risk: Case study on unsustainable development
in Denarau island resort in Fiji. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 14, 302–311. doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.
2014.09.002
Blowfield, M. (2007). Reasons to be cheerful? What we know about CSR’s impact. Third World Quarterly, 28(4),
683–695. doi:10.1080/01436590701336523
Blowfield, M., & Dolan, C. (2010). Fairtrade facts and fancies: What Kenyan fairtrade tea tells us about business’ role
as development agent. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(S2), 143–162. doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0558-2
Bowen, F., Newenham-Kahindi, A., & Herremans, I. (2010). When suits meet roots: The antecedents and consequen-
ces of community engagement strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(2), 297–318. doi:10.1007/s10551-009-0360-1
Caruana, R., Glozer, S., Crane, A., & McCabe, S. (2014). Tourists’ accounts of responsible tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research, 46, 115–129. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2014.03.006
Coles, T., Fenclova, E., & Dinan, C. (2013). Tourism and corporate social responsibility: A critical review and research
agenda. Tourism Management Perspectives, 6, 122–141. doi:10.1016/j.tmp.2013.02.001
de Grosbois, D. (2012). Corporate social responsibility reporting by the global hotel industry: Commitment, initiatives
and performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(3), 896–905. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.10.008
Dodds, R., & Joppe, M. (2005). CSR in the tourism industry? The status of and potential for certification, codes
of conduct and guidelines. Study prepared for the CSR Practice Foreign Investment Advisory Service Investment
Climate Department. Washington: IFC/World Bank.
Farmaki, A., & Farmakis, P. (2018). A stakeholder approach to CSR in hotels. Annals of Tourism Research, 68, 58–60.
doi:10.1016/j.annals.2017.11.009
Fox, T. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and development: In quest of an agenda. Development, 47(3), 29–36.
doi:10.1057/palgrave.development.1100064
German, L., Schoneveld, G., & Mwangi, E. (2011). Processes of Large-Scale Land Acquisition by Investors: Case Studies
from Sub-Saharan Africa. Paper presented at the the International Conference on Global Land Grabbing, Sussex,
6-8 April, 2011, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.
Goodwin, H. (2011). Responsible tourism. London and New York: Routledge.
GRZ, (2018). Zambia Tourism Master Plan, 2018-2038. Lusaka, Zambia: Government of the Republic of Zambia.
Guiney, T. (2018). Hug-an-orphan vacations’:‘Love’and emotion in orphanage tourism. The Geographical Journal,
184(2), 125. doi:10.1111/geoj.12218
Harrison, D., & Pratt, S. (2015). Tourism in Pacific islands: Current issues and future challenges. In S. Pratt & D.
Harrison (Eds.), Tourism in Pacific islands. Current issues and future challenges (Vol. 48, pp. 3–21). Oxford, England:
Routledge.
Higgins-Desbiolles, F. (2006). More than an “industry”: The forgotten power of tourism as a social force. Tourism
Management, 27(6), 1192–1208. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2005.05.020
Idemudia, U. (2009). Assessing corporate–community involvement strategies in the Nigerian oil industry:
An empirical analysis. Resources Policy, 34(3), 133–141. doi:10.1016/j.resourpol.2009.01.002
Ite, E. (2004). Multinationals and corporate social responsibility in developing countries: A case study of Nigeria.
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 11(1), 1–11. https://doi-org.ezproxy.massey.ac.nz/
10.1002/csr.49
16 A. CHILUFYA ET AL.

Jenkins, R. (2005). Globalization, corporate social responsibility and poverty. International Affairs, 81(3), 525–540. doi:
10.1111/j.1468-2346.2005.00467.x
Kalisch, A. (2002). Corporate futures: Social responsibility in the tourism industry. London, England: Tourism Concern.
Kapelus, P. (2002). Mining, corporate social responsibility and the “community”: The case of Rio Tinto, Richards Bay
Minerals and the Mbonambi. Journal of Business Ethics, 39(3), 275–296. https://doi-org.ezproxy.massey.ac.nz/10.
1023/A:1016570929359
Kasim, A. (2004). Socio-environmentally responsible hotel business: Do tourists to Penang Island, Malaysia care?
Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing, 11(4), 5–28. doi:10.1300/J150v11n04_02
Laeis, G. C., Scheyvens, R. A., & Morris, C. (2019). Cuisine: A new concept for analysing tourism-agriculture linkages?
Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 1–16. doi:10.1080/14766825.2019.1624763
Lindgreen, A., Swaen, V., & Campbell, T. T. (2009). Corporate social responsibility practices in developing and transi-
tional countries: Botswana and Malawi. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(S3), 429–440. doi:10.1007/s10551-010-0415-3
Luh Sin, H., Oakes, T., & Mostafanezhad, M. (2015). Traveling for a cause: Critical examinations of volunteer tourism
and social justice. Tourist Studies, 15(2), 119–131. doi:10.1177/1468797614563380
Malone, S., McCabe, S., & Smith, A. P. (2014). The role of hedonism in ethical tourism. Annals of Tourism Research,
44, 241–254. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2013.10.005
Manteaw, B. (2007). From tokenism to social justice: rethinking the bottom line for sustainable community develop-
ment. Community Development Journal, 43(4), 428–443. doi:10.1093/cdj/bsm015.
Mauss, M. (1954). The gift (I. Cunnison, trans.). London, England: Cohen and West.
McGehee, N. (2014). Volunteer tourism: Evolution, issues and futures. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(6), 847–854.
doi:10.1080/09669582.2014.907299
McKercher, B. (1993). Some fundamental truths about tourism: Understanding tourism’s social and environmental
impacts. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1(1), 6–16. doi:10.1080/09669589309450697
McLennan, S. (2014). Medical voluntourism in Honduras: ’Helping’ the poor? Progress in Development Studies, 14(2),
163–179. doi:10.1177/1464993413517789
Meyer, D. (2006). Caribbean tourism, local sourcing and enterprise development: Review of the literature. London,
England: Pro-Poor Tourism Partnership.
Ministry of Economy. (2017). 5-year and 20-year National Development Plan: Transforming Fiji. Suva, Fiji: Ministry of
Economy.
Movono, A., Pratt, S., & Harrison, D. (2015). Adapting and reacting to tourism development. A tale of two villages
on Fiji’s Coral Coast. In S. Pratt & D. Harrison (Eds.), Tourism in Pacific islands: Current issues and future challenges
(Vol. 48). Oxford, England: Routledge.
Mowforth, M., & Munt, I. (2009). Tourism and sustainability: Development, globalisation and new tourism in the Third
World, 3rd ed. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Muthuri, J. (2007). Corporate citizenship and sustainable community development. Fostering multi-sector collabor-
ation in the Magadi Division in Kenya. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 2007(28), 73–84. doi:10.9774/GLEAF.4700.
2007.wi.00008
Muthuri, J., Moon, J., & Idemudia, U. (2012). Corporate innovation and sustainable community development in
developing countries. Business & Society, 51(3), 355–381. doi:10.1177/0007650312446441
Nolte, K. (2012). Large-Scale Agricultural Investments under Poor Land Governance Systems:Actors and Institutions in
the Case of Zambia. Paper presented at the Annual Worldbank Conference on Land and Poverty, Washington,
DC, April 23-26, 2012DChttp://hdl.handle.net/10419/72461
Nyahunzvi, K. D. (2013). CSR reporting among Zimbabwe’s hotel groups: A content analysis. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 25(4), 595–613.
Poon, A. (1994). The ‘new tourism’ revolution. Tourism Management, 15(2), 91–92. doi:10.1016/0261-5177(94)90001-
9
Rajak, D. (2010). In good company: An anatomy of corporate social responsibility. Stanford, CA: Stanford University
Press.
Randle, M., Kemperman, A., & Dolnicar, S. (2019). Making cause-related corporate social responsibility (CSR) count in
holiday accommodation choice. Tourism Management, 75, 66–77. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2019.05.002
Raymond, E. M., & Hall, C. M. (2008). The development of cross-cultural (mis) understanding through volunteer tour-
ism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(5), 530–543. doi:10.2167/jost796.0
Sagebien, J., & Whellams, M. (2010). CSR and development: Seeing the forest for the trees. Canadian Journal of
Development Studies/Revue Canadienne D’ etudes du Developpement, 31(3–4), 483–510. doi:10.1080/02255189.
2010.3673731
Scheyvens, R. (2011). Tourism and poverty. New York, NY: Routledge.
Scheyvens, R., & Biddulph, R. (2017). Inclusive tourism development. Tourism Geographies, 20(4), 589-609. doi:10.
1080/14616688.2017.1381985
Schulpen, L. (2007). Development in the ’Africa for beginners’. Dutch Private Initiatives in Ghana and Malawi.
Radboud University: Nijmegen: Centre for International Development Issues Nijmegen.
JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM 17

Sengel, T., Karagoz, A., Cetin, G., Dincer, F. I., Ertugral, S. M., & Balık, M. (2015). Tourists’ approach to local food.
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195, 429–437. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.485
Serra-Cantallops, A., Pen ~a-Miranda, D. D., Ramo n-Cardona, J., & Martorell-Cunill, O. (2018). Progress in research on
CSR and the hotel industry (2006–2015). Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 59(1), 15–38. doi:10.1177/
1938965517719267
Sharpley, R. (2015). The consumption of tourism. In R. Sharpley & D. Telfer (Eds.), Tourism and development:
Concepts and issues, 2nd ed. (pp. 358–377). Bristol, England: Channel View Publications.
South Pacific Tourism Organisation (2014). Pacific regional tourism strategy 2015 – 2019. Draft report. Pacific Regional
Tourism Capacity Building Programme (PRTCBP). Suva, Fiji: SPTO.
Su, L., Swanson, S. R., Hsu, M., & Chen, X. (2017). How does perceived corporate social responsibility contribute to
green consumer behavior of Chinese tourists: A hotel context. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality
Management, 29(12), 3157–3176. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-10-2015-0580
Telfer, D., & Sharpley, R. (2008). Tourism and development in the developing world. London, England: Routledge.
Thomas-Francois, K., von Massow, M., & Joppe, M. (2017). Service-oriented, sustainable, local food value chain–A
case study. Annals of Tourism Research, 65, 83–96. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2017.05.008
Tran, H., Hwang, Y., Yu, C., & Yoo, S. (2018). The effect of destination social responsibility on tourists’ satisfaction:
The mediating role of emotions. Sustainability, 10(9), 3044.
Tuan, L. T. (2018). Activating tourists’ citizenship behavior for the environment: The roles of CSR and frontline
employees’ citizenship behavior for the environment. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26(7), 1178–1203.
Tucker, H. (2016). Empathy and tourism: Limits and possibilities. Annals of Tourism Research, 57, 31–43. doi:10.1016/
j.annals.2015.12.001
United Nations. (2013). Realizing the right to development: Essays in commemoration of 25 years of the united nations
declaration on the right to development. New York and Geneva: United Nations. Office of the High Commissioner
for Human Rights.
Van Alstine, J., & Afionis, S. (2013). Community and company capacity: The challenge of resource-led development
in Zambia’s ’New Copperbelt’. Community Development Journal, 48(3), 360–376. doi:10.1093/cdj/bst019
Weaver, D. (2015). Enlightened mass tourism as a ‘third generation’aspiration for the twenty-first century.”. In M.
Hughes, D. Weaver, & C. Pforr (Eds.), The practice of sustainable tourism. Resolving the paradox. Abingdon, Oxon:
Routledge.
Williams, P. ,Gill, A. ,& Ponsford, I. (2007). Corporate social responsibility at tourism destinations: Toward a social
license to operate. Tourism Review International, 11, 133–144. doi:10.3727/154427207783948883
World Travel and Tourism Council. (2015). Travel and tourism. Economic impact 2015: Fiji. Retrieved from https://
www.wttc.org/-/media/files/reports/economic%20impact%20research/countries%202015/fiji2015.pdf.
Zapata Campos, M. J., Hall, C. M., & Backlund, S. (2018). Can MNCs promote more inclusive tourism? Apollo tour
operator’s sustainability work. Tourism Geographies, 20(4), 630-652. doi:10.1080/14616688.2018.1457074

You might also like