Download PDF - Anchor Environmental

Turnover was estimated as follows:
1. Method 1: Each type of tourism enterprise was allocated a size factor as an estimate of the
level of turnover relative to the typical model, based on general experience of the team.
2. Method 2: As above, except that the size factor was estimated individually for each enterprise
by members of one of the larger tourism companies (Dave van Smeerdijk and colleagues at
Wilderness Safaris).
3. Method 3: Data were gathered on the number of beds, and the average prices of as many of
the enterprises as possible. Average values were interpolated for budget camps, luxury
camps, guesthouses and hunting camps. Occupancy rates were assumed to be 40% for
hotels and budget camps, 35% for hunting camps, and 50 – 85% for luxury camps, based on
discussions with camp operators.
A portion of this turnover was then attributed to the delta. For hotels, this was assumed to be 25%
(since they also attract considerable government business), for guesthouses, 60%, and for camps,
100% (since these are located within the delta). About 50% of turnover by mobile tour operators was
assumed to be attributed to the delta, based on typical itineraries. Turnover values were divided into
non-consumptive tourism, safari hunting tourism, and CBNRM. Total CBNRM turnover includes that of
the lodges, camps in those areas, as well as that of community trusts (listed as 'Other CBNRM'
income).
Turnover in related sectors was estimated using ratios from a previous study of tourism in the area
(FGU-Kronenberg 1988b). These ratios describe turnover of other items relative to camp turnover
(Table 3-1). Direct value added was calculated based on the turnover to direct value added ratios in
the enterprise models.
Table 3-1 Estimated ratio of turnover of different tourism enterprises relative to safari lodges, based on a 1988
study of 70 financial statements in the tourism industry (Barnes et al. 1988)
Type of enterprise
Ratio of turnover relative to safari lodges
Safari lodges 1.00
Mobile safaris 0.10
Tourist motels 0.66
Hotels 4.08
Safari hunting 0.84
Travel agents 2.48
Air charter 1.69
Restaurants 1.29
Bars/bottle stores 1.15
Airlines 12.10
3.3.2 Direct use value: Household use of resources
The consumptive use of resources is usually either assessed by means of surveys of users or using
monitoring data, which seldom exist in reliable form in developing country contexts (Eaton & Sarch
1997, Emerton 1998, Turpie et al. 1999). In this study, direct use values were estimated using social
survey methods in conjunction with existing information in the published and unpublished literature,
and in existing economic models. Questionnaire instruments were prepared in advance and refined
during the planning meeting of February 2006. After the survey instruments were designed, team
members then travelled to Shakawe to undertake a series of focus group meetings in Area 1 at
Shakawe on the 20th of February 2006. Ten enumerators were trained over a period of 2.5 days (21
– 24th February 2006) to carry out the survey. After training, eight were selected to carry out surveys
and a ninth was engaged to translate the questionnaire from English to Setswana and to also assist
with translation in focus group meetings. The questionnaires were tested in Maun and then refined
before data collection commenced. The focus groups and household surveys were undertaken from
26 February to the 8th of March 2006 under the supervision of two of the study team members. The
itinerary for the focus group and household surveys is attached as Appendix 1. Information on
household activities and use of natural resources was collected in three different ways:
18