Tourism Management 30 (2009) 90–98

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tourism Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tourman

Tourism as a sustainable livelihood strategy

Teresa C.H. Tao a, *, Geoffrey Wall b
a
Department of Geography, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong
b
Department of Geography, University of Waterloo, 200 University Avenue West, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Sustainable development and its derivative, sustainable tourism, have both conceptual and practical
Received 15 October 2007 deficiencies that have frustrated their application. A sustainable livelihoods approach is introduced as
Accepted 29 March 2008 being more practical, especially in the common situation in which communities and individuals sustain
themselves by multiple activities rather than discrete jobs. When tourism is introduced into a commu-
Keywords: nity, it is important that it complements rather than displaces existing activities. A case study is pre-
Sustainable development sented of an aboriginal community in Taiwan to illustrate the links between tourism and other livelihood
Sustainable tourism
strategies.
Sustainable livelihoods
Aboriginal communities
Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Taiwan

1. Introduction only source of sustenance. This is true of most communities and is

Tourism seldom occurs in isolation. It competes for the use of
scarce resources, such as land, water, labour, energy, and waste
assimilation capacity, with other potential uses of those resources
and even with uses that require that the resources not be con-
sumed, such as nature preservation, or lightly used such as pro-
tected areas, both predominantly natural or built. While it is not
possible to examine everything at the same time, even though one
may be sympathetic to systems thinking (Farrell & Twining-Ward,
2004), pragmatism requires that attention is focused on a subset of
reality. It is natural for tourism scholars to abstract tourism from
the broader context in which it occurs in order to focus on their
specialization but, if the links between tourism and other sectors
are not adequately appreciated, and if the context in which tourism
occurs is overlooked, then understanding is likely to be partial. The
substantial literature on the economic, environmental and socio-
cultural impacts of tourism is replete with seemingly contradictory
observations, with researchers reporting both positive and negative
findings in each of these categories (Wall & Mathieson, 2006).
However, the manifestations of tourism likely vary with the form
that it takes and the situations in which it occurs, making findings,
of necessity, contingent (Wall & Mathieson, 2006).
Although tourism may dominate the economies of many des-
tinations and the incomes of many individuals, it is seldom their
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ852 2859 2841; fax: þ852 2559 8994.
E-mail addresses: c2tao@hkucc.hku.hk (T.C.H. Tao), gwall@fes.uwaterloo.ca
(G. Wall).
particularly the case for individuals in many marginal economies.
In such situations, many people may not have a conventional job
but may farm, fish, hunt, do odd jobs, migrate and send back re-
mittances, obtain unemployment benefits and, generally, support
themselves through multiple means. Furthermore, these means
may vary with the seasons, and may involve a mix of activities that
span the subsistence, barter and cash economies. The introduction
of tourism may result in conflict with such activities, displacing
them or making them less viable, or it may fit into the existing
situation as a complementary activity, contributing to economic
diversification and forging positive linkages with existing forms of
production. Of course, it may also do both at the same time.
Acknowledgement of the importance of the links between tourism
and other activities leads to the conclusion that tourism should be
seen as a tool for development and not as an end in itself (McCool &
Moisey, 2001). It may be pertinent to ask whether and in what
forms tourism might contribute to sustainable development. Such
a perspective acknowledges that tourism is unlikely to be the sole
user of resources and that a balance should be sought between
tourism and other existing and potential activities. It also recog-
nizes that tourism may not be necessary for sustainable de-
velopment and that the reduction of tourism may be a legitimate
goal in certain circumstances.
Sustainable development and its derivative sustainable tourism,
although intuitively appealing, widely adopted by international
organizations and many governments, and enshrined in legislation,
are concepts that have been much criticized because of their lack of
precision and because of the difficulties that have been experienced
with their implementation (Wall, 2002). Evidence for definitional

0261-5177/$ – see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2008.03.009
 T.C.H. Tao, G. Wall / Tourism Management 30 (2009) 90–98
problems, and conceptual and practical difficulties can be found in
Butler (1993, 1998, 1999); Clarke (1997); Hunter (1995); McMinn
(1997); Stabler (1997); Telfer (1996, 2002); Wall (1993, 2002);
Wheeller (1993); World Tourism Organization (1996). However, in
part because of the lack of alternative paradigms, they continue to
be widely espoused but seldom achieved. Building upon a sustain-
ability perspective, this paper briefly introduces and applies a sus-
tainable livelihoods (SL) approach. Although the approach is not
articulated fully here, it will be argued that it provides a tangible
way forward and is particularly useful in circumstances, such as
those mentioned above, in which communities and individuals are
sustained through multiple livelihood strategies. ‘‘Livelihood’’ is
a more concrete concept than ‘‘development’’ and easier to discuss,
observe, describe and even quantify.
2. Sustainable livelihoods
It is suggested that an SL approach (Scoones, 1998) is useful
because it acknowledges that, particularly in poor communities,
people gain their livelihoods through multiple activities rather than
one formal job and new initiatives do not occur in a tabula rasa but,
like much tourism, must be incorporated into an existing system. In
contrast to the previous environment and development thinking
aimed at sustainable development, SL is a people-centred paradigm
which emphasizes people’s inherent capacities and knowledge and
is focused on community level actions (Chambers, 1986; UNDP &
Wanmali, 1999). With an emphasis on livelihood security, it rec-
ognizes that it is necessary to begin by focusing on people, with the
resources that they currently control, and the knowledge and skills
that they already have (Chambers, 1988). According to Chambers
and Conway (1992) (cited in Scoones, 1998, p. 5):
A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets (including both
material and social resources) and activities required for a means of
living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover
from stresses and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and
assets, while not undermining the natural resource base.
Very briefly, and as indicated in the above quotation, a liveli-
hood comprises the capabilities, assets (stores, resources, claims
and access) and activities that are required to make a living. A
livelihood is sustainable which can cope with and recover from
stresses and shocks, maintain or enhance capabilities and assets,
and provide SL opportunities for the next generation. Among other
things, an SL approach involves the development of short-term
coping mechanisms and longer-term adaptive capacities that en-
hance the abilities of individuals and communities to deal with
changing circumstances (Chambers & Conway, 1992).
The two main ideas of SL are adaptive strategies, and participa-
tion and empowerment. Adaptive strategies are defined as ‘‘the
changes and adjustments people make in their livelihood systems in
order to cope under difficult circumstances’’ (Helmore & Singh,
2001, p. 3). They are based on local knowledge, combing traditional
knowledge with appropriate elements from contemporary, or ex-
ternal knowledge, assimilated into the community over time. As
indicated above, a key feature of an SL approach is the recognition
that the root of all human development and economic growth is
livelihoods – not jobs per se. Understanding the current livelihood
activities, assets, and entitlements of a community or individual
naturally provides the best guide to how their livelihoods can be
made more productive and more sustainable (Helmore & Singh,
2001). An SL approach inherently reveals the multi-sectoral char-
acter of real life, integrating environmental, social and economic
issues into a holistic framework, which is an opportunity to promote
the sort of cross-sectoral and cross-thematic approach that should
be the hallmark of sustainability (Helmore & Singh, 2001; UNDP &
Wanmali, 1999). An SL approach is directed towards the ways in
91
which local people can seek to meet basic and ongoing needs for
food and shelter, as well as security and dignity, through meaningful
work, while simultaneously striving to minimize environmental
degradation, accomplish rehabilitation, and address concerns about
social justice (Walker, Mitchell, & Wismer, 2001) by focusing on
their assets, strategies, and strengths rather than needs alone.
Tourism may be a new activity in a community and it is often
perceived as being risky. It is useful to explore how tourism is and
might be incorporated into the existing mix of livelihood strategies
so that it enriches rather than replaces the means by which people
may be sustained. If a community decides to incorporate tourism as
one of their livelihood strategies in order to achieve SL, tourism will
be a form of livelihood diversification. Ellis (1998, p. 5, cited in
Hussein & Nelson, 1998, p. 4) defined livelihood diversification as
‘‘the process by which rural families construct a diverse portfolio of
activities and social support capabilities in their struggle for sur-
vival and in order to improve their standards of living.’’ Such di-
versification can have many advantages and tourism can become:
(1) a means to enable accumulation (e.g., income) for consumption
and investment; (2) a means to help spread risk; (3) an adaptive
response to longer-term declines in income or entitlements, due to
serious economic or environmental changes beyond local control;
and/or (4) a means to take pressure off fragile lands and increase
household incomes. Appropriate involvement in tourism, which is
often desired by local people, will bring changes in uses and values
of resources and activities. These need to be reviewed and un-
derstood in the local cultural and natural setting where they occur,
and through local minds rather than being assessed solely by ex-
ternal agencies. It is important that local communities can have the
opportunity to evaluate their own resources (human, physical, and
economic), to assess their past, present and future needs and re-
sources, and to identify their strengths and weaknesses before
evaluating any decision to become involved in tourism. Only when
communities understand themselves and their abilities in their
own terms can they begin to evaluate decisions relating to external
features such as tourism.
It has only been possible to introduce the most basic aspects of
the SL approach here and those interested in more information
should explore the references that have been cited. Although the SL
approach can help to promote sustainability in its broadest sense
because it aims to understand livelihood systems and to promote
the essential characteristics of sustainability (economic efficiency,
social equity, ecological integrity, and resilience), the issue of cul-
tural sustainability still needs further exploration under such an
approach. As has already been discussed, ‘‘sustainability’’ can prove
to be a difficult concept to agree on in practice, even among experts.
More importantly, there may be significant differences of judgment
between local practitioners and external experts over what prac-
tices or which livelihood combinations are ‘‘sustainable’’ (Rennie &
Singh, 1995). Nevertheless, the SL approach inherently reveals the
multi-sectoral character of real life, so that development work is
better able to address actual problems as they exist at the village
level. But tourism may or may not fit well into local people’s live-
lihoods. The purpose of this paper, then, is to use an SL approach in
the context of a case study to examine if and how tourism fits and is
integrated into local livelihood strategies.
3. Research approach
In order to illustrate the SL approach and to highlight the role of
tourism as one among many livelihood strategies, Scoones’s sus-
tainable livelihood framework (Fig. 1) is used as a conceptual
framework to examine how a Cou indigenous community in
Shanmei, Taiwan, secures their livelihoods. The community is
located in a remote area in the mountainous interior of Taiwan. This
was chosen as the study site because people in Shanmei depend
92 T.C.H. Tao, G. Wall / Tourism Management 30 (2009) 90–98
Fig. 1. Sustainable rural livelihoods: a framework for analysis. From Scoones (1998, p. 4).
upon multiple livelihood resources and Cou culture has many im-
plications for the way tourism development is being done. It will be
demonstrated how tourism and associated community-based re-
source management initiatives can ‘‘fit in’’ with existing activities in
a rural economy. The livelihoods and priorities of individuals,
households and a community are assessed, and the many positive
and negative consequences of tourism initiatives are identified. An
additional aim is to try to understand tourism from an indigenous
perspective and to examine how tourism can be introduced in ways
that enhance local livelihoods with acceptable associated adverse
consequences. While the focus of the research is on the current
situation in Shanmei, an evolutionary perspective was adopted in
the research so that the changes that gave rise to the present sit-
uation can be appreciated. However, this paper concentrates upon
the latter.
Field research was undertaken for a total of eight months from
July 2004 to January 2005 and from November to December 2005.
Data were collected in two phases – the second phase allowing the
checking of data from the earlier phase and the filling of gaps. The
sampling approach in the first phase was progressive, evolving as
the author became more familiar with the environment and was
able to assess the number of individuals who could be approached
given the time available. Data were collected through qualitative
methods including direct and participant observation, in-depth
interviews with key village informants, village residents, govern-
ment officials, academics and NGO staff. Data were collected until
information was repetitive and no new insights were being gained.
The selection of interviewees followed two principles: the first one
was pre-determined, identifying key leaders and village residents
who had been involved in the management of local fish stocks and
establishing Danayigu Ecological Park. Second, Shanmei village
comprises seven diverse neighbourhoods. Most tourism activities
were carried out in and around Danayigu Ecological Park. Previous
studies had focused on participants primarily involved in tourism
but the majority of Shanmei residents are involved in a variety of
livelihood activities in addition to tourism. As a result, individuals
from each neighbourhood were interviewed to ensure that the
data fully represented different voices of Shanmei. The data col-
lected in the first phase were analyzed and a number of pre-
liminary results were obtained. Further detailed questions were
raised. The results were given to local residents through local
presentations and conference presentation to seek feedback in the
second phase.
A total of 131 interviews were completed. In order to protect the
anonymity of informants, the specific sources of information are
not identified below. However, unless otherwise stated, it can be
assumed that the information was gained from interviewees in
2004 and 2005 and, in most cases, was corroborated by more than
one person. Secondary data on indigenous people, and tourism in
Taiwan and at the research site were also collected, including
government documents and statistics, archival material, literary
works, newspapers and magazines. The number of important
books and reports numbered more than 80.
The categories in the SL framework were used to guide data
collection and analysis. Two forms of data analysis were conducted
to gain different insights from the data. Initially, types and patterns
of activities and resource use were examined. Different groups of
informants’ answers to research questions were also compared to
quantitative data from reports (e.g., on expenditures and employ-
ment). Second, components of the sustainable livelihood frame-
work, particularly inputs, outputs and flows of livelihood resources,
actors, and trends in the social environment were identified and
linked to bring a dynamic element to the analysis.
4. Livelihood resources
The social and economic vicissitudes of Shanmei began with the
introduction of a market economy during the Japanese colonial
 T.C.H. Tao, G. Wall / Tourism Management 30 (2009) 90–98 93

period from 1895 to 1945. More dramatic change came from 1945
to the present from the Nationalist Chinese government’s policies
to ‘‘make the mountain like the plains’’ (shandi pindihua) and
‘‘make the mountain modernized’’ (shandi shianndaihua). The im-
provement of transportation and the introduction of a market
economy resulted in a shift in Shanmei Cou economic activities
from slash and burn agriculture and hunting, to a sedentary agri-
cultural and forest industry and, more recently, towards tourism.
4.1. Contemporary livelihoods
For nearly 20 years, Shanmei villagers have applied Cou tradi-
tional knowledge to restore the fish population in the Danayigu
River and used their natural resources as attractions to develop
tourism in pursuit of economic development (Shanmei Community
Development Association, 2005). The Danayigu Ecological Park was
established in 1995 based on a combination of natural and cultural
attractions. The main tourist activities are walking the trails along
the river, viewing the fish, and exposure to Cou culture, particularly
local foods and cultural performances. The park has attracted
a large number of visitors and has created a number of opportu-
nities for employment and cash earnings. The Shanmei Community
Development Association (SCDA) and its institutions have used
income generated from the park effectively and have enabled the
majority of Shanmei residents to benefit from tourism to some
extent. Almost every household in Shanmei has a connection with
the park and an increasing number of local livelihood activities are
directly or indirectly related to tourism. To examine how tourism
has been incorporated into existing livelihoods, it is necessary to
understand how people construct their overall livelihood portfolio
and then to examine how tourism activities fit in. More specifically,
the significance of tourism meeting different kinds of needs, as well
as potential competition or complementarity with other economic
activities will be explored, leading to an overall assessment of the
contributions of tourism to local livelihoods. The accumulation of
new livelihood resources and the extent to which tourism de-
velopment and management have been experienced by different
groups (mainly by sex and age) as positive (opportunities, benefits,
and/or advantages) or negative (threats, costs, and/or disadvan-
tages) on individual, household, and community scales will also be
examined.
Table 1 provides an overview of economic activities in Shanmei
village and their proportional distribution. Tourism is important in
Shanmei, in terms of the proportion of villagers involved, the
number of visitors, and the capital invested. Although almost every
household is involved in agriculture and the most often mentioned
economic activity is casual labour, between 17.3 and 29.8% of the
working population, depending largely on the season, work in
tourism. This is a large proportion. The number of visitors to
Danayigu Ecological Park increased from 33,194 in 1998 to 178,627
in 2005, which is a substantial number for a small, remote com-
munity, requiring increased personnel for park management,
maintenance and operation. Much money has been spent on the
restoration of the Danayigu River, the establishment of the
Danayigu Ecological Park and, after the park became renowned,
subsidies supporting casual labour and tourism promotion pro-
grams were provided by the government to Shanmei. In order to
accommodate the increasing number of visitors, tourism enter-
prises, such as restaurants, food stalls and lodges, were established.
The park has also strengthened the place and cultural identities of
Shanmei residents, making tourism even more important than is
revealed in the employment statistics in Table 1. For reasons de-
scribed above, Shanmei villagers have changed their lifestyle from
traditional, predominantly subsistence hunting and gathering,
slash and burn agriculture and fishing, to current mixed livelihood
activities that commonly incorporate tourism.
If the livelihood activities in Shanmei are divided into two cat-
egories: tourism and non-tourism-related activities, migration ac-
counts for the largest proportion of the whole livelihood activity
spectrum (38.8%), particularly rural–urban migration as there are

Table 1
Economic activities of Shanmei population with work ability

Total population in Shanmei 467

n %
Non-tourism-related activities
Migration With productivity 143 34.7
Without productivity 19 4.1
Subtotal 162 38.8
Employment Permanent jobs in Alishan area 25 5.4
Odd jobs and labour 98 21.0
Army 12 2.6
Subtotal 135 29.0
Retail business 12 2.6
Farming (crops and livestock) and 60 12.8
harvesting (bamboos and mountain
products) for cash
Hunting 12 2.6
No work 8 1.7
Unknown 53 11.3

Tourism-related positions and activities

Under and paid by Shanmei Community Employment in SCDA 8 1.7
Development Association (SCDA) Employment in Shanmei Community 33–53 7.1–11.3
Share Cooperation (SCSC) and Danayigu
Ecological Park
Subtotal 41–61 8.8–13.0
Under SCDA, not paid by it, and inside the park Interpreters, restaurants, food stalls, and 17–40 3.6–8.6
handicraft stores
Not under SCDA and outside the park Self-run enterprises including lodges, 23–38 4.9–8.1
restaurants, homestays,
campsites, and cafés
Subtotal 40–78 8.5–16.7
Total 81–139 17.3–29.8

Note: Based on interviews conducted in 2005, the situation changes from time to time.
94 T.C.H. Tao, G. Wall / Tourism Management 30 (2009) 90–98
more job opportunities in urban areas. This is followed by paid
employment (29%), primarily in odd jobs and manual labour
(21.0%). The proportion of tourism-related positions and activities
fluctuates around a quarter but steady positions paid by SCDA
employ less than one-tenth of the Shanmei labour force. The pro-
portion of regular and part-time positions, not paid by SCDA, can
reach up to 16.7%. The figures for tourism activities are unstable,
depending primarily on the number of visitors. Therefore, it is
important that casual employees have other livelihood sources.
Cash crops from farming and harvesting that mainly supported
most households in the past, now only account for over one-tenth
of employment. However, except for wage employment and
tourism-related activities, the activities serve both subsistence and
cash needs. The significance of tourism to villagers is assessed
below in the context of this wide array of livelihood activities.
4.2. Relationship between tourism and other economic activities
As has been indicated above, tourism does not exist in isolation
and some of the most important links, particularly those connected
with tea production, hunting, and the harvesting of trees, plants
and other mountain resources will now be discussed.
4.2.1. Cash crop production and livestock
Tea production. Recognizing the inflow of tourists and inspired
by the possibilities of tourism development, several households
who own tea plantations have started to convert small parcels of
land to pick-your-own orchards, planting plums, mulberries, apri-
cots and peaches. The strategy has basically been one of trial and
error. They usually start with a small portion of the land and with
one or two kinds of fruit. When demand increases, they expand the
area of the orchard and plant more kinds of fruit. The benefits of
planting these fruits are multiple. First, unused land is used.
Second, the orchard flowers can be another tourist attraction in
early spring. Third, the fruits can be harvested and exchanged for
other products or sold for cash. More households plan to expand
their orchard area. They hope that they will become an attraction of
Shanmei in the future. A small proportion of pigs and chickens are
supplied to tourism enterprises, such as restaurants and food stalls
inside and outside of the park.
Hunting. A former village head commented that cutting the
original forests, afforesting with new species and over-hunting
have reduced the number of migratory birds. This hampers de-
velopment of ecotourism through activities such as bird watching.
Harvesting of trees, plants and mountain resources. These re-
sources provide both products for subsistence and cash incomes.
Honey, medicinal plants, rattan, jelly figs, and a variety of bamboos
Table 2
Sources of tourism income
Community collective incomea
Inside the park
Wages from employment in the park (director, patrolling staff,
gate keeper, plant tender, janitor, dancers)
Semi-community-run enterprise: Danayigu restaurant
Individual-run enterprise: restaurants, food stalls, handicraft stores
Self-employment, e.g., tour guides
Sales of local specialties to park visitors (e.g., seasonal agricultural products)
Temporary employment for park-related construction and development
Sales of cultivated Gu fish
Crafts sales to tourists
Leasing land to stall businesses and parking lots
Note: Based on fieldwork conducted in 2004 and 2005.
a
Cleaning fee, parking fee, fish feed, soft drink and spring water, fishing fee, public phone, rent of Danayigu restaurant, and vending machine.
are gathered for household use. Some are also sold to other
households. Harvesting makino trees and giant bamboos planted
by their ancestors used to be the main income source for Shanmei
residents. The cash earned by selling two trucks of bamboo shoots
used to be able to cover the school registration fee for a semester
but that is not the case now. Nonetheless, as tourism increases in
Shanmei, some of the resources can be harvested and sold to
tourists directly or processed as new products with added value.
For example, bamboo shoots are made into different dishes and
sold in restaurants and food stalls. After initial processing, barrels of
bamboo shoots are sold to tourists directly.
4.3. Livelihood activities in tourism
Opportunities to participate in tourism are distributed unevenly
in Shanmei. The main areas of concentration are in and around the
park plus, to a lesser extent, along a major access road (Jiayi Local
Road 129). Within the community, those with strong financial
capital and relevant skills, such as having a strong connection with
outside groups and marketing abilities, have more opportunities.
Tourism-related livelihood activities are concentrated on weekends
and holidays. Tourism is primarily engaged in for cash. This is im-
portant in terms of meeting basic needs because there are limited
cash-earning opportunities in the mountains. The employment
opportunities created directly and indirectly from Danayigu Park
have greatly and positively impacted Shanmei villagers’ livelihoods.
Table 2 shows the variety of sources of tourism income that are
gained both within and outside of the park.
4.4. Benefits redistributed from the park by local institutions
As an indigenous community, communal management of re-
sources and the sharing of benefits have a long history in Shanmei.
The Danayigu Ecological Park was developed with the support of
the community and most of the income accrues to the Shanmei
Community Development Association (SCDA) which has the pri-
mary responsibility for managing the park and allocating the
profits that are made through its operation. The activities of SCDA
provide livelihood opportunities for many residents of Shanmei.
These will be considered under two headings: employment under
SCDA and paid by it, and employment under the jurisdiction of
SCDA but not paid by it (Table 1). A third set of activities are neither
under the control of SCDA nor paid by it. However, all three of these
groupings of livelihood activities depend heavily on the existence
of the park and, in that sense, depend heavily on tourism. Each will
be considered in turn.
Outside the park
Self-run enterprise, e.g. lodges, restaurants, homestays, campsites, cafés
Wages from employment in lodges, restaurants and homestays
Sales of package tours and Cou life experience camp
Crafts sales to tourists
Leasing unused land to restaurant owners for food production
(e.g., planting crops, raising livestock)
Leasing unused land for the operation of tourism enterprises
Teaching craft DIY in studios
 T.C.H. Tao, G. Wall / Tourism Management 30 (2009) 90–98
4.4.1. Employment under SCDA and paid by it
Income gained primarily from entrance fees to Danayigu
Ecological Park are spent by SCDA to cover its own costs of op-
eration as well as those of the park. Other monies are distributed
by the SCDA through the Shanmei Community Share Cooperative
(SCSC). Table 1 shows that up to 13.0% of Shanmei villagers with
work ability are paid by SCDA which has eight paid positions,
including the chair of the board of directors, the general execu-
tive, the secretary, the accountant, the cashier, a general assistant
and two clerks. The personnel are changed every two years in
accordance with the re-election of the board of directors. Under
SCDA, SCSC was established in December 2004 to take charge of
the affairs of the park (Shanmei Community Development Asso-
ciation, 2005). It began with 29 positions in the park and these
have since increased to 33. These include the director of the park
who is also the manager of SCSC, one public relations agent, three
clerks, six patrol staff, one gate keeper/ticket seller, one plant
tender/janitor, and 19 dancers. Except for the director, most jobs
paid by SCDA are open to all Shanmei villagers and each job is
allocated for a period of 1–2 years, so that villagers can take
turns. Wages are based on working hours/days, plus overtime pay
and bonuses. If a worker cannot attend to their job, another
person can fill in. The park is open all year round from 8:00 a.m.
to 5:00 p.m. During weekends, the increased number of visitors
requires more casual labour, such as gate keepers or patrol staff
who are also paid by the community association based on
working hours (Informal conversation, 2005). In addition to the
above, there are additional dancers who are high school students
who only perform in the park during weekends and holidays. All
dancers have opportunities to perform on such occasions
depending upon their availability.
The benefits that are derived from the above situation are as
follows:
(1) Flexible hours. Formal dancers in the program now perform five
days per week and obtain stable income. This is beneficial for
mothers with young children (in public school) and teenagers,
because two performances per day, one in mid-morning and
the other in mid-afternoon, leave them with time to take care
of children. When there is no performance, some women make
extra cash by producing handicrafts, selling agricultural prod-
ucts, or becoming waitresses when restaurants in the park are
busy.
(2) Creating cash-earning opportunities. Performing part-time pro-
vides those studying and working outside of the village with
the opportunity to make extra income and subsidize family
expenses. The wage is NT$ 1200 (US$ 40) per person per day.
For high school students who attend schools in cities, per-
forming on weekends offers them an opportunity to earn some
cash. This option partially meets the cash needs of several
families, such as in paying tuition fees. Such work offers
a chance to earn cash when there are few casual labouring jobs
during the non-farming season. Also, if a household wishes to
continue with agricultural activities, it may need to pay other
villagers for help.
(3) Providing a back-up employment opportunity. The positions in
the parks are good for individuals who do not have the ability
to find a better job, who are temporarily unemployed and who
have small children and, therefore, need to work close to home.
The jobs in the park provide an option for those who are unable
to engage in agriculture.
On the other hand, staff under regular employment with more
than nine working hours daily, such as patrol staff and ticket sellers,
find it difficult to farm. Their households usually pay for labour to
do the farming instead.
95
4.4.2. Employment under SCDA but not paid by it
As Table 1 shows, up to 8.6% of Shanmei villagers with work
ability benefit from the opportunities to gain wage and cash
earnings from activities undertaken within Danayigu Ecological
Park. Inside the park, sources of tourism income come from being
a tour guide/interpreter; sales of local specialties to park visitors;
temporary employment for park-related construction and de-
velopment; sales of cultivated fish; crafts sales; and leasing land to
stall holders and for parking. Also, there is a community-owned
enterprise, the Danayigu Restaurant, that is run privately, and other
individually run enterprises, such as restaurants, food stalls, and
handicraft stores.
These opportunities provide the following individual and com-
munity benefits:
(1) Diverse cash-earning opportunities. The household that runs the
community restaurant can make a profit by serving up to 400
visitors per sitting in Danayigu Ecological Park. The operators
mainly rely on relatives for regular help. When business is busy,
they offer temporary employment to other villagers. The wage
is NT$ 800–1500 (US$ 32–60) per person per day (In-
terviewees, 2005). At least half of the stock of one of the
handicrafts stores is locally made by community institutions
and individual villagers. When sold, income is generated for
other villagers who made them.
Temporary employment for park-related construction and
development also generates cash earnings. In recent years, the
success of Danayigu nature conservation and Shanmei com-
munity development has attracted inputs from external fund-
ing sources to further improve the facilities and the
environment within the park. Examples include construction
work to renovate the park gate and suspension bridge and
developing hiking trails, and enhancing the environment by
clearing brush and planting certain flowering species to attract
butterflies.
Crafts sales to tourists are another source of income. More
than half of the crafts sold in Danayigu have been purchased
from elsewhere and have great similarity to crafts sold in other
aboriginal areas and scenic spots. Recently, government
subsidies for cultural businesses have facilitated the local
production of handicrafts. Through various community in-
stitutions, more and more traditional handicrafts are being
produced by the older people, and many modern handicrafts,
mainly produced by women, are also sold in the park.
Leasing land to individuals for stall business and to the
community development association for parking lots provides
cash earnings to a couple of individuals who own land inside
the park.
The meals sold in the restaurants use self- and locally raised
livestock and vegetables, thereby reducing costs and providing
earning opportunities for villagers even though they are not
involved in tourism directly.
(2) Maintains raw material supply and stimulates crop production.
Fieldwork conducted in 2004 and 2005, revealed there were 13
individually run restaurants and food stalls and two handicraft
stores in the park. Most are open only during weekends, and
serve both local residents and visitors. The restaurants serve
a variety of Cou and general dishes (e.g., roasted mountain pork
and sausages, river shrimps, rice cooked in bamboo, local fish,
mountain bamboo shoots, vegetables and banana cakes). The
food stalls sell small meals, snacks (e.g., dry sliced pork), drinks
(e.g., jelly fig drinks), desserts (e.g., pestled millet, ice cream
and popsicles) and processed local agricultural products (e.g.,
millet wine, flavoured bamboo shoots, bottled wasabi, fig
seeds). A number of seasonal vegetables are produced and sold
in Shanmei. Some of them are in abundant supply, such as
96 T.C.H. Tao, G. Wall / Tourism Management 30 (2009) 90–98
bamboo shoots, yams and taro, whereas others are insufficient
to meet the demand. In the latter cases, owners of restaurants
and food stalls contact relatives and friends in other Cou
villages who transport vegetables to Shanmei or order them
from outside (Interviews, 2005). Use of locally produced crops
offers additional opportunities for cash earnings and stimulates
crop production, helping to maintain the raw material supply.
(3) Provides earning opportunities at low cost and with low labour
demand. The investment in and operating costs of running
a food stand in the park are small: one only needs to pay for
electricity and the cost of ingredients. Employees in restaurants
and food stalls who prepare food and serve tourists said that
they like the jobs more than working in agriculture because
they are less tiring.
The operator of the community-run restaurant indicated that
she prefers to run the restaurant and her own homestay in
comparison with farming which was her previous way of
making a living. Farming is more physically demanding and the
prices of agricultural products have been low and externally
determined. However, she sets the price of accommodation
herself.
(4) Provides different livelihood options. Businesses in the park
provide additional livelihood activities to several families when
farming alone cannot support them. An old couple, a disabled
woman and a middle-aged woman with three children run
three food outlets that are open every day. They are open for
long hours because they have very few other livelihood op-
tions. A female owner of a restaurant and two female owners of
food stands indicated that they like the work because they are
interested in cooking and sharing Cou culture with tourists.
(5) Creates a market to sell local products. The park visitors and its
businesses constitute a market for local agricultural and
mountain products, such as jelly figs, millet wine and mulberry
wine.
Unfortunately, these opportunities wax and wane with the
weather which can be extremely severe in the interior of Taiwan.
Business was greatly constrained in 2005 by typhoons and constant
heavy rain on weekends. In fact, the first author was air-lifted out of
another similar study site following severe weather and associated
landslides in 2005, and the second author had to turn back on
a planned visit in 2007 because of typhoon damage.
4.4.3. Employment outside of the park
As Table 1 illustrates, up to 16.7% of Shanmei villagers with work
ability benefit from the opportunities to earn wage and cash in-
comes through tourism enterprises outside of Danayigu Ecological
Park. However, the park is the main attraction and they would
probably be less successful if the park did not exist. Sources of
tourism income are self-run enterprises, such as lodges, restau-
rants, homestays, cafés, snack stalls, campsites, campgrounds with
barbecue area, camps that provide Cou life experiences, and sales of
package tours. At the time of this field work, there were 6 lodges
and homestays (4 individually run and 2 run by churches), and 2
cafés.
The benefits derived from these activities are as follows:
(1) Provides different livelihood options. In self-run enterprises such
as lodges, restaurants, homestays, campsites and cafés, the
jobs, especially for regular staff, are less demanding than casual
labour, with lots of down time. The latter jobs, such as weeding,
highway maintenance and working in wasabi plantations are
often in the Mt. Alishan area, a two to three hours drive away.
The former jobs are particularly helpful to single parent fami-
lies with young children. It is easier to look after children if jobs
are proximate to home. Even though the wages may be less
than for casual labour, it may be preferred because it is rela-
tively stable and does not require leaving the village. When
business is slow and no wages are paid, staff can take left-over
food and ‘‘borrow’’ subsistence food in advance of earnings.
Business is concentrated on weekends, so homestay owners
can undertake other economic activities during weekdays. The
prices charged for homestays are fixed, unlike the prices of
agricultural products that fluctuate with supply, so that
sometimes the income cannot even cover the costs. However,
homestays provide multiple options and can accommodate and
cater to tourists, relatives and friends.
(2) Provides cash earnings for operators and others. For enterprises
like lodges and homestays, cash comes from charges for ac-
commodation, food and beverages, packaged tours, services,
and sales of local specialties including agricultural products
and some local-made handicrafts. If customers are interested in
making handicrafts themselves, business owners will refer
them to villagers with such skills. During the bamboo shoot
harvesting season, if the business is busy, the staff usually asks
relatives to do jobs and pays them later. This creates another
opportunity for cash earnings. Two cafés serve coffee, tea and
simple meals to visitors and villagers and provide a variety of
merchandise, such as handicrafts (made both locally and from
outside, Cou and non-Cou) and CDs. One café provides space for
the display and sale of local agricultural products and handi-
crafts produced by villagers. The setting provides an opportu-
nity to earn cash for locals who have difficulty in gaining access
to markets.
Almost no funds were needed for investment in the only
campground in Shanmei. Most facilities in the campground are
made of local materials. The campground is easy to maintain
(compared to homestays) for campers are only provided with
a space, electricity and water. Income is immediate and work is
done close to home and can be shared among household
members. Income comes from multiple sources, including
camping and parking fees, barbecue and tent rentals, and sales
of items such as firewood and Cou-style pestle rice.
Households that run lodges or homestays and provide
package tours or Cou life experience camps usually pay family
members, relatives or other villagers for help, such as for rent of
trucks to take tourists sightseeing, cooking, barbecue opera-
tion, cleaning rooms, and guiding tours.
(3) Creates livelihood opportunities for the next generation. Many of
the younger generation who obtain their education in cities are
no longer familiar with mountain work such as farming,
hunting and gathering. Villagers who run homestays and
guesthouses say that one major reason for them to borrow
money to invest in the business is that limited job opportuni-
ties are available in the mountains and the majority of the
younger generation has not developed the skills required to
survive in the mountains. The building of homestays, guest-
houses and accompanying infrastructure are physical and
economic capital that can be passed on to the next generation
to provide them with a livelihood option and cash-earning
opportunities.
(4) Creates a market and enhances skills. The lodges and restaurants
create a market for the sale of a variety of items, such as crops
produced by their owners and by other villagers, either fresh or
processed, as well as for local handicrafts which are sold to
tourists directly. Such businesses also provide many small jobs
enabling villagers to earn a little cash. For both the owner and
staff, restaurant management and administration skills are
enhanced through communication with customers.
Against this, for a couple of households, large investments in
a villa and restaurant have placed the owners and their families in
 T.C.H. Tao, G. Wall / Tourism Management 30 (2009) 90–98
long-term debt. The majority of income is used to pay off the loan.
Natural and man-made disasters have had a huge impact on busi-
ness. Livelihoods that rely only on tourism are risky.
4.5. Summary of livelihood strategies
A wide range of resources and livelihood strategies is employed
by Shanmei households: migration, wage employment (regular and
occasional), crop production, livestock rearing, harvesting of trees,
plants and other mountain resources, fishing, hunting, and tourism
enterprises. Most households combine several activities to support
themselves and to spread risk. Although several households rely
mainly on tourism-related activities, more than one source of
income is usually pursued to disperse the risk. A large majority of
households relies on cash from casual labour to supplement their
livelihoods. Also, each activity provides not just one but a range of
benefits (and sometimes costs).
Shanmei villagers use a variety of resources, including social
networks, labour, land, capital, knowledge and markets to produce
food and marketable commodities and to generate income. People
seek to balance the time, resources and risk allocated to various
activities, so that a wide range of needs is met. Livelihood strategies
are continually adapted to changing situations and hence are
dynamic. There is enormous variation between households and
from year to year in the types of activities undertaken and the
emphases placed upon them. Nevertheless, two major observations
are of note. First, it is mainly males who have migrated out of the
village and who make a living undertaking heavy labour. The ma-
jority of females are responsible for domestic work, office jobs and
other casual labour in the village. Second, the majority of the
younger generation (under the age of 35) has obtained their formal
education outside of Shanmei. Most have not learned traditional
knowledge from their elders on how to farm or hunt or how to
weave and make handicrafts.
5. The place of tourism as a livelihood strategy
The park has been important in increasing the range of liveli-
hood options. Positions and opportunities for cash earning gener-
ated inside the park are close to home and are particularly
beneficial for mothers and single parents with young children, the
disabled, unemployed, the elderly and women. The fact that the
presence of the park attracts visitors enables some residents to
operate their own businesses in the community.
Tourism delivers consumers to the products rather than the
other way around. Small markets created by tourism enterprises
increase opportunities for earning cash. This addresses villagers’
increasing needs for cash. Tourism links with other economic sec-
tors, particularly agriculture, increasing the proportion of tourism
revenue retained in the community. Tourism provides opportuni-
ties for both farm and off-farm diversification, and helps to main-
tain farming and gathering activities. The tourism products build
on, and help to preserve, natural resources and culture. These are
assets that most aboriginal people have, even though they may lack
financial assets. Many tourism activities require part-time or casual
labour which fit in with current lifestyles and provide new, sup-
plementary, livelihood options.
Nevertheless, the majority of males migrate out of the village to
make a living. The majority of females are responsible for domestic
work, office jobs and other casual labour in the village. The majority
of the younger generation (under the age of 35) have obtained their
formal education outside the village and they have not learned how
to survive in the mountains through traditional means. Tourism-
related activities, such as dancing and running a café, have en-
couraged some young adults to return to make a living.
97
Tourism activities have the potential both to complement and to
compete with other economic activities. Conflicts between tourism-
related and other activities are not very obvious at present, but they
may exist in the use of land and water and the allocation of time.
Even though not every villager in Shanmei is involved in tourism
business, the majority have links to tourism in one way or the other,
whether directly or indirectly, so it enhances their well-being. But it
is a fragile component of the economy because of its seasonality
and susceptibility to hazards. So it is not, at least at present, the
saviour of the economy and culture. But it is based primarily on
indigenous culture and uses local resources. It promotes local
specialties, such as culture and agricultural products in which the
community may have a comparative advantage, and it does allow
some economic benefits to be obtained.
6. The utility of a sustainable livelihood approach to tourism
Tourism is a relatively recent activity in the long history of in-
digenous communities in Taiwan. It is being inserted as one more
set of activities into an existing economy and, as such, it should not
be viewed in isolation from them. It is a risky activity and so far it
has not replaced other forms of livelihood sustenance, especially in
marginal communities in relatively remote locations. In such
places, many individuals are sustained by combinations of liveli-
hood strategies, both subsistence and market-oriented, rather than
specific jobs. Thus, it is particularly important that tourism com-
plement rather than replace existing livelihood sources leading to
diversification of livelihood strategies. Therefore, advocates of
sustainable development should not emphasize the maintenance of
tourism over an indefinite period of time. Rather, their aims would
be better served by exploration of how tourism might fit into a suite
of livelihood strategies, contributing to the achievement of sus-
tainable livelihood outcomes. The approach that has been taken in
this paper is different from that reported in most tourism literature
which only addresses tourism. The strength of the sustainable
livelihood approach is that it encourages the adoption of a broad
perspective from which to examine the consequences of tourism.
Tourism should not be considered as a panacea for all of the
problems in indigenous communities. It is not a reliable source of
income in many marginal economies but it may supplement in-
comes derived in other ways and help to disperse the risk.
7. Conclusion
Development is multi-faceted and culture and cultural sensi-
tivity should be important in the development process. Tourism
may be a development option but, if introduced, it will need to fit
into an existing system. The examination of tourism in isolation
inevitably results in a partial picture of its consequences. Further-
more, in marginal communities, such as the indigenous community
in Taiwan that has been examined above, many people support
themselves and their families by involvement in a plurality of ac-
tivities that vary with the seasons and from year to year. The no-
tions of sustainable development and sustainable tourism,
although widely referenced, have conceptual deficiencies and have
not proven to be good practical guides in the development of more
productive and resilient societies, especially in marginal commu-
nities where the need to move towards sustainability may be par-
ticularly challenging. The adoption of a sustainable livelihoods
approach offers a way forward. Livelihood is a much more tangible
concept than development: it is easier to understand and use. This
is one of the first studies of tourism to employ the concept of
sustainable livelihoods, to emphasize that tourism should be un-
derstood in the broader economic and cultural context in which it
takes place, and to provide a case study to illustrate the kinds of
information that can be generated by adopting such an approach.
98 T.C.H. Tao, G. Wall / Tourism Management 30 (2009) 90–98
Acknowledgement
Support for this research has been provided by Social Sciences
and Humanities Research Council of Canada. Special thanks to the
Alishan Cou people who shared their kindness, friendship, care,
hospitality and perspectives with us. We are touched by Cou wis-
dom of life and world view reflecting human virtue.
References
Butler, R. W. (1993). Tourism – an evolutionary perspective. In J. G. Nelson, R. Butler, &
G. Wall (Eds.), Tourism and sustainable development: Monitoring, planning, man-
aging (pp. 27–44). Waterloo: University of Waterloo Heritage Resource Centre.
Butler, R. W. (1998). Sustainable tourism – looking backward in order to progress?
In C. M. Hall, & A. A. Lew (Eds.), Sustainable tourism. A geographical perspective
(pp. 25–34) New York: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd.
Butler, R. W. (1999). Sustainable tourism: a state-of-the-art review. Tourism Geog-
raphies, 1(1), 7–25.
Chambers, R. (1986). Sustainable livelihood thinking – An approach to poverty.
Brighton, UK: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.
Chambers, R. (1988). Sustainable rural livelihoods: a key strategy for people,
environment and development. In C. Conroy, & M. Litvinoff (Eds.), The greening
of aid (pp. 1–17). London: Earthscan Publications/IIED.
Chambers, R., & Conway, G. (1992). Sustainable rural livelihoods: Practical concepts
for the 21st century. IDS discussion paper 296. Brighton, UK: Institute of
Development Studies, University of Sussex.
Clarke, J. (1997). A framework of approaches to sustainable tourism. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 5(3), 224–233.
Ellis, F. (1998). Survey article: household strategies and rural livelihood di-
versification. The Journal of Development Studies, 35(1), 1–38.
Farrell, B., & Twining-Ward, L. (2004). Reconceptualizing tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research, 31(2), 274–295.
Helmore, K., & Singh, N. (2001). Sustainable livelihoods – Building on the wealth of the
poor. Bloomfield: Kumarian Press.
Hunter, C. (1995). On the need to re-conceptualize sustainable tourism
development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 3(3), 155–165.
Hussein, K., & Nelson, J. (1998). Sustainable livelihoods and livelihood diversification.
UK: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.
McCool, S. F., & Moisey, R. N. (2001). Introduction: pathways and pitfalls in the
search for sustainable tourism. In S. F. McCool, & R. N. Moisey (Eds.), Tourism,
recreation and sustainability: Linking culture and the environment (pp. 1–15).
New York: CABI.
McMinn, S. (1997). The challenge of sustainable tourism. The Environmentalist, 17(2),
135–141.
Rennie, J. K., & Singh, N. C. (1995). Participatory research for sustainable livelihoods: A
guidebook for field projects. Winnipeg, Manitoba: International Institute for
Sustainable Development.
Scoones, I. (1998). Sustainable rural livelihoods: A framework for analysis. Brighton,
U.K.: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.
Shanmei Community Development Association. (2005, July). The first quarterly of
Shanmei Community (in Chinese). Unpublished manuscript.
Stabler, M. J. (Ed.). (1997). Tourism and sustainability. Principles to practice. CAB In-
ternational Wallingford.
Telfer, D. J. (1996). Development through economic linkages: tourism and agricul-
ture in Indonesia. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Department of Geography,
University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Telfer, D. J. (2002). The evolution of tourism and development theory. In R. Sharpley,
& D. J. Telfer (Eds.), Tourism and development: Concepts and issues (pp. 35–78).
Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
UNDP, & Wanmali, S. (1999). Participatory assessment and planning for sustainable
livelihoods. United Nations development programme – sustainable livelihoods
documents. <http://www.undp.org/sl/Documents/Strategy_papers/Participatory_
Assessment_forSLSW.htm/PAPSL.htm>. Accessed 10.09.03.
Walker, J., Mitchell, B., & Wismer, S. (2001). Livelihood strategy approach to
community-based planning and assessment: a case study of Molas, Indonesia.
Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 19(4), 297–309.
Wall, G. (1993). International collaboration in the search for sustainable tourism in
Bali, Indonesia. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1(1), 38–47.
Wall, G. (2002). Sustainable development: political rhetoric or analytical construct.
Tourism Recreation Research, 27(3), 89–91.
Wall, G., & Mathieson, A. (2006). Tourism: Changes, impacts, and opportunities. New
York: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Wheeller, B. (1993). Sustaining the ego. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1(2), 121–129.
World Tourism Organization. (1996). What managers need to know: A practical guide
to the development and use of indicators of sustainable tourism. Madrid: World
Tourism Organization.