The challenge of sustainable tourism development in the Maldives: Understanding the social and...

The challenge of sustainable tourism development inthe Maldives: Understanding the social and political

dimensions of sustainabilityapv_1447 148..164

Regina ScheyvensInstitute of Development Studies, School of People, Environment and Planning, Massey University, PB11222, Palmerston

North, New Zealand.Email: [email protected]

Abstract: Issues of power and politics are central to the development of the tourism sector and itsprospects for contributing to sustainable development. This is demonstrated through a case study ofthe evolution of tourism in the Maldives, a luxury tourism destination where the government hasfollowed a consistent policy of ‘quality tourism’ that has often been cited as a prime example ofsustainable tourism. However, recently concerns have been raised about environmental degradation,human rights abuses, connections between the political and economic elite, and huge economicdisparities associated with tourism here. Research on sustainable tourism needs to recognise thestate’s pivotal role in directing tourism development and consider how states balance the competinginterests of other powerful tourism stakeholders.

Keywords: Maldives, politics, social sustainability, sustainable development, tourism

Introduction

Over the past two decades, tourist numbers inthe Asia and Pacific regions have soared. Inter-national arrivals have more than doubled from82 million in 1995 to over 180 million in 2009,generating over US$200 billion (United NationsWorld Tourism Organization (UNWTO), 2010:5). Thus, Asia and the Pacific have overtaken theAmericas (North and South) as second only toEurope in terms of both international arrivalsand revenue earned from tourism (UNWTO,2010: 3). This growth in tourism has alsoled to job creation. Currently, tourism in theregion accounts for 8.9% of employment, or140 million jobs. Tourism is a particularly sig-nificant economic sector in a number of thesmall island states in the region (McElroy, 2006).Rapid growth of tourism has been activelypursued by many governments, often whilesimultaneously espousing support for sustain-able development of the tourism sector.

Academics, however, are more wary about theprospects for achieving sustainable tourism,

bemoaning that the rhetoric of sustainability isoften not followed through in practice or, atworst, is used to obscure rather unsustainabledevelopment practices (Mowforth and Munt,2009): ‘Rarely have notions of “sustainability”been interpreted or employed in holistic terms.Rather, sustaining the tourism industry and theresources upon which it depends has appearedall too often to be the major priority’ (Hall andBrown, 2008: 1024). Some stress the need for aholistic approach that balances environmental,social and economic aspects of sustainability(see, e.g. Butler, 1991; Sharpley, 2000). Overton(1999) argues that in particular, social elementsof sustainability have not been given the promi-nence they deserve. His discussion of socialsustainability encompasses issues of power suchas the extent to which communities have controlover development occurring in their local area.In order to gain deeper insights into why tourismin the region is so often not sustainable in prac-tice, this paper argues that we need to pay greaterattention to issues of power, including social andpolitical dimensions of tourism development.

Asia Pacific Viewpoint, Vol. 52, No. 2, August 2011ISSN 1360-7456, pp148–164

© 2011 The AuthorAsia Pacific Viewpoint © 2011 Victoria University of Wellington

doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8373.2011.01447.x

A neglect of social and political issues isapparent in much of the sustainable tourismliterature. In Sustainable Tourism in Islands andSmall States: Issues and Policies (Briguglio et al.,1996), for example, all but one chapter focusesonly on environmental and economic aspects ofsustainability. Neto (2003) squarely criticises thesustainable tourism literature’s overemphasis onenvironmental issues because this can lead topartial ‘solutions’ that are unlikely to dealadequately with various development chal-lenges. Thus, for example, Ghosh et al. (2003)writing with reference to islands in the IndianOcean, argue that ecotourism is the answerbecause they believe the key issue in the regionis environmental sustainability. Other criticalconcerns, such as the power of elites over themeans of production for tourism and the growinggap between the rich and the poor, are notdeemed worthy of attention.

Social sustainability has achieved greaterprominence, however, in the work of someadvocates of pro-poor tourism (see, e.g. Mitchelland Ashley, 2010; Scheyvens, 2011). Thus, forexample, German bilateral donor, DeutscheGesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit(GTZ), has made social sustainability central totheir concerns. In an attempt to improve work-ing conditions in the tourism sector, DeutscheGesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit(GTZ) has collaborated with the tourism industry,labour unions and non-governmental organisa-tions (NGOs) to discuss fair wages and the abo-lition of forced labour and sexual exploitation inthe industry (Tampe and Lengefeld, 2007).

While a number of tourism writers havedevoted their attention to the politics of tour-ism (e.g. de Kadt, 1979; Richter, 1989; Hall,1994; Coles and Church, 2007), few haveexplicitly examined how political factors influ-ence the sustainability of tourism. Coles andChurch thus complain that power is absentfrom much writing on sustainable tourism:‘Nowhere perhaps is this perceptible paucityof theoretical and conceptual engagement withpower discourses more emphatically exposedthan in studies of so-called “sustainable tour-ism”; that is in, arguably, the most high-profiletopic within cross-disciplinary studies of tour-ism’ (2007: 7). Mowforth and Munt’s (2009)Tourism and Sustainability is perhaps theonly book to scrutinise how power relations

among global, national and subnational actorsare central to the sustainability of tourism.These authors emphasise the ‘inherently politi-cal nature of tourism development’ (2009:296).

There is a particular need for greater atten-tion to the roles of the state and, specifically,governments in influencing tourism devel-opment: ‘. . . tourism studies still lack a fullappreciation of the state’s current role in rela-tion to tourism and hence its power’ (Churchand Coles, 2007: 278). Sofield (2003: 23)laments that so often tourism literature ‘glossesover the role of government’. He urges us tothink beyond tourism as a private industry:‘While tourism as an industry is generallyregarded as a private sector activity wheremarket forces predominate, in fact the embraceof the state is comprehensive’ (2003: 23–4).Governments have incredibly important roles,and responsibilities, when it comes to tourismdevelopment in the Third World, particularly ifthey are concerned about issues of sustainabil-ity (Brohman, 1996). It is generally agreed thatthe market is an inappropriate mechanism forproviding the checks and balances needed toachieve sustainable tourism, even though inpractice ‘. . . regulatory frameworks . . . in-creasingly reflect the imperatives of market-driven growth’ (Bianchi, 2004: 498). Mowforthand Munt (2009: 293) agree, noting ‘It is gov-ernments that have a pivotal role and possessthe potential power to control, plan and directthe growth and development of tourism’. Thus,it is up to governments to set the ground rules,or regulations, within which tourism takesplace. And it is governments that have thepower to establish policies that can determinewhether a country follows a path of tourismdevelopment dictated primarily by overseasinterests and capital, or one that seeks toachieve economic gains for a wide range localpeople and the state while preserving the integ-rity of social, cultural and environmental fea-tures of their country.

In theory, governments can also set condi-tions through which power and associatedresources can be assigned to communities(Sofield, 2003: 340). Giving ‘voice’ and ‘own-ership’ to communities through tourism devel-opment can be facilitated by departments andministries in charge of tourism planning, for

Tourism development in the Maldives


149

example. However, government interests andpriorities often diverge greatly from those oflocal communities, and even where they wantto ensure benefits to communities there areoften complex forces that influence them, bethey external (e.g. foreign companies) orinternal (elites, or industry associations) (Mow-forth and Munt, 2009). As noted by Wall(1996: 41), ‘Planning is a political process thatempowers some and disadvantages others,often strengthening the position of the power-ful and further undermining the position of theweak’.

This paper will use a detailed case study ofthe evolution of tourism in the Maldive Islandssince the 1970s to demonstrate that social andpolitical issues deserve greater attention indiscussions over the prospects for achievingsustainable development of tourism. For threedecades, uniquely, there was a single ruler inthe Maldives (the longest serving leader in Asiaat the time) and a consistent tourism policywas in place to promote ‘quality tourism’.However, a number of challenges to the sus-tainability of the quality tourism strategy haveemerged. While a change of government in2008 has delivered greater democracy andopportunities to spread the benefits of tour-ism more widely, the new leader has alsobeen constrained in his actions to delivermore sustainable forms of development. TheMaldives therefore provide a pertinent casethrough which to examine the challenge ofsustainable tourism development, and, in par-ticular, whether social and political dimen-sions of sustainability are getting the attentionthey deserve.

Paradox of sustainable tourism inthe Maldives

The Maldive Islands, described eloquently inpromotional materials as ‘strings of pearls scat-tered across the Indian Ocean’, are a premiumtourism destination. They comprise a series of20 atoll groups with over 1000 tiny islands, onlyone fifth of which are inhabited by the totalpopulation of approximately 400 000 Maldiv-ians, leaving much scope for tourism develop-ment on the uninhabited isles. A combination ofa tropical climate, beauty, isolation and strate-gic marketing have contributed to the growth of

the tourism sector such that it now dominatesthe economy, providing more jobs and far moreforeign exchange than its closest rival, fisheries.Tourism is projected to contribute almost 30%of the country’s gross domestic product (GDP)in 2011, while fisheries will contribute only 3%(Maldives Monetary Authority, 2010). However,the development of tourism was neither randomnor automatic. It was carefully planned as partof a Quality Tourism Strategy from the 1970sonwards by a government that saw the eco-nomic benefits that tourism could bring but,cautious of its potential negative impacts,planned for it to evolve carefully.

This section begins with a discussion of therapid growth of tourism development in theMaldives from the 1970s onwards. It discussesthe Quality Tourism Strategy and how this hassubsequently influenced the nature of tourismdevelopment as well as plans for more sustain-able and equitable tourism development sug-gested in the 2007–2011 Tourism Master Plan.The main part of this paper then critiques thestructure and impacts of the tourism industry,providing revelations about the politics oftourism and how environmental, social andeconomic sustainability have been underminedin various ways in this small island state. Itnotes, however, that after many years of elitecontrol there has been a level of reform both interms of a new government and a new tourismplan.

Growth and significance of tourismdevelopment in the Maldives

Prior to the 1970s, there was only sporadictourism in the Maldives, mainly resulting fromboats calling into the islands while sailingaround the Indian Ocean. Thus, the country’stourism industry is not officially considered asbeginning until 1972 with the opening of thefirst two resorts, offering 280 beds. By 1985,there were 55 resorts, growing to 97 resorts by2009, with a total capacity of over 20 000 beds(Maldives Monetary Authority, 2010). In addi-tion, another 51 islands have been allocated forhotel or resort development in future (Ministryof Tourism and Civil Aviation (MoTCA), 2007b:23). With this growth the industry diversifiedbeyond adventure tourism and became moreupmarket. In 2006, 53% of tourists came to the

R. Scheyvens


150

Maldives for leisure and relaxation, 30% fortheir honeymoon and 15% for diving (MoTCA,2007b: 47).

The growth in tourist arrivals has paralleledthe rapid development of new facilities andhas remained strong over a long period oftime. From just 42 000 tourists in 1980, num-bers grew to close to 800 000 in 2010. This isdespite the government’s plan in the 1980s tocap tourist arrivals at 160 000 annually (Richter,1989: 165). The major source markets have tra-ditionally been Italy and the United Kingdom,followed by Germany, France and Japan. WhileChina and India have been regarded as majoremerging markets, in February 2010, the numberof Chinese tourists surpassed all other nationali-ties and there was a doubling of Chinese touristsoverall from 2009 to 2010, suggesting an impor-tant shift in source markets (Maldives MonetaryAuthority, 2010).Tourism has, overall, expandedvery rapidly. Figure 1 shows small dips in arrivalsin 2001 (in the face of a reduction in long haultravel after the 9/11 tragedy) and in 2009 (due tothe global financial crisis). While this figure alsoreveals the more dramatic drop in tourist arrivalsin 2005, the year immediately following theAsian tsunami, which resulted in scores of deathsand put a number of resorts out of action, therewas an impressive recovery in 2006 when arrivalfigures were up 52.3% over 2005 (MoTCA,2007a). Another indicator of the success of thetourism sector in the Maldives is the occupancyrate for resorts, which increased from 65.6% in2001 to 81.4% in 2006, again showing good

recovery in the face of the Asian tsunami(MoTCA, 2007b: 39). Meanwhile in February2010, occupancy rates for resorts soared toover 95%.

The projections are that there will be over 1million tourists visiting the Maldives annuallyby 2012 (MoTCA, 2007b: 74). While the con-tinued effects of the global economic crisismay undermine this prediction, the governmentseems set to pursue such growth. Thousandsof hotel and resort beds will need to be addedto make this a reality, and it is reasonable toquestion whether such rapid growth can beaccommodated in a sustainable fashion.

The Maldives is heavily reliant on interna-tional tourism revenue. The industry brings inaround 70% of foreign exchange earnings(MoTCA, 2007a: 26) and provides half of allpaid employment through a wide range ofoccupations including construction, transport,handicraft manufacture and sales, and employ-ment in resorts (Abdulsamad, 2004). Tourismhas contributed significantly to the Maldives’US$ 3756 GDP per capita figure, which is con-siderably higher than their South Asian neigh-bours (India – $1043; Sri Lanka – $2099) (IMF,2008). In 2006, 35.3% of government revenue,over US$ 147 million, came directly fromtourism due to the following:• the lease rent charged for each tourist resort

island (the state owns all land, thus theynominate uninhabited islands for resortdevelopment that are then leased to thehighest bidder),

Figure 1. Growth in tourist arrivals in the Maldives, 1996–2010Source: Ministry of Tourism (2001); MoTCA (2007a); MoTAC (2010)



151

• bed tax (US$8/person/night) for all foreigntourists staying in tourist accommodation and

• departure tax paid by each passenger fromMalé International Airport (MoTCA, 2007a:25, 36).Indirect revenues from tourism also accrue to

the government (MoTCA, 2007b: 36). In total,over 90% of tax revenue thus comes fromtourism taxes and import duties (Haynes, 2004).A new tourism goods and services tax of 3.5%,introduced in 2011, will add to governmentrevenues. Undoubtedly, the government hasbeen able to improve services and infrastructurebecause of tourism earnings, thus, for example,most Maldivians have access to schoolingand they have a high literacy rate of 97%(compared, for example, with 61% for India)(UNDP, 2009). Tourism revenues have alsofunded development of the public sector,providing jobs for many Maldivians.

The case for sustainable tourism inthe Maldives

The rapid growth of the tourism sector notedabove has been planned carefully in accordancewith the Quality Tourism Strategy put in place in1978 when President Maumoon Abdul Gayoomcame into power. Gayoom stayed in power untilhe was defeated in the country’s first democraticelections in 2008. The Quality Tourism Strategywas in part a response to the haphazard style ofdevelopment of the sector prior to this time,which included independent tourists onextended holidays in India and Sri Lanka turningup on islands to ‘hang out’ for a while. Theirbehaviour including their standards of dress andtheir partying was seen as disrespectful of localcustoms and religion in this Islamic state.

The Quality Tourism Strategy thus specifiedthat in order to protect the human environmentand avoid ‘cultural pollution’, resort islands areseparate from islands inhabited by Maldivianpeople and should not be visible from inhabitedislands, and tourists may only visit inhabitedislands during daylight and under prescribedcircumstances (Domroes, 2001). It also soughtto protect the natural environment throughregulations requiring, for example, that all newresorts prepare an environmental impact assess-ment, treat their own wastes and provide theirown fresh water, that coastal development does

not unduly disturb coastal ecology, and thatindigenous vegetation may not be removed(Domroes, 2001: 129–130; Ghina, 2003). Fur-thermore, when investors bid for specified unin-habited islands on which they wish to establishresorts, it is not just maximising rent which isconsidered: environmental impact and plans tocater for staff welfare are also supposed to bebrought into account (Lyon, 2003).

Such policies have impressed commentators,leading tourism academic Linda Richter tosuggest that ‘the country has approached tourismdevelopment with considerable intelligence’(Richter, 1989: 167). Similarly, the Maldives hasbeen lauded by the World Tourism Organizationas offering an excellent example of sustainabletourism (Lyon, 2003: 15). The Maldives’ self-promotion has followed similar lines. Forexample, when the Deputy Director of Planningand Development from the Maldives Ministry ofTourism (Mr Ismail Firag) gave a presentation at asustainable tourism conference in China in2000, he titled it: ‘Presentation on ExemplaryIsland Destination in the World’ (Firag, 2001).This is supported by the Ministry’s vision: ‘TheVision of the Ministry of Tourism is for theMaldives to be the best example of sustain-able tourism development – a nation with aneconomically profitable tourism industry inharmony with its natural environment, culturalresources, and the values of its people’ (Ministryof Tourism, Arts and Culture (MoTAC) 2011 –emphasis added).

In addition, the Tourism Master Plan 2007–2011, signalled that the Maldives had entered anew phase of tourism development. This Plancalls for more public consultations on mattersconcerning the industry, such as terms for leaseagreements as well as input from NGOs andtourism sector employees (MoTCA, 2007b). Afocus on spreading the benefits of tourism isalso clear in the new Tourism Master Plan,which states as its vision ‘. . . expanding andstrengthening the Maldives tourism as an instru-ment of economic and social development in amanner that benefits all Maldivians, in all partsof the country’ (MoTCA, 2007b: 19).

Trouble in paradise

On the surface, it certainly appears that theQuality Tourism Strategy enacted under the

R. Scheyvens


152

Gayoom government attempted to ensure thatthey did not sacrifice their environment orculture for the sake of a few tourist dollars.However, all has not been ideal in terms ofthe practice of sustainable tourism since then.This became apparent when, in 2004, UnitedKingdom tourism watchdog group TourismConcern launched a campaign that highlightedproblems with tourism in the Maldives (Haynes,2004). Tourism Concern had responded to pleasfrom a group of Maldivian political exiles whowanted foreigners to understand that corruptionand repression were realities in the supposed‘paradise’ of their homeland. The campaign alsohighlighted the high levels of poverty in acountry where tourism was bringing in enor-mous riches: luxury tourism brings millionsof dollars into the economy every year, yet42% of the population earns around US$1.50per day (Tourism Concern, 2008a). A briefingon the campaign, named ‘Lost in Paradise’,summarised these concerns:

The income from the resorts rarely reachesthose who need it and benefits the select few,including the government in the form of taxes.State management of tourism protects thesesystems and ensures local communities aredenied access to the benefits of tourism. Localpeople are unable to speak out due to therepressive government and conditions wherethey are faced with imprisonment and possibletorture for having a voice (Haynes, 2004: 1).

In a similar campaign, Friends of the Maldives,a UK-based organisation focusing on humanrights, called for a boycott of the 21 resortsowned by members of the government, theirfamilies and friends (Henderson, 2008: 107).Another interesting source of critique of tourismin the Maldives is the 6th edition of LonelyPlanet’s Maldives guide book (Masters, 2006) inwhich the author is highly critical of the politicsand economics of tourism development here.While the book is still embellished with imagesof idyllic beaches and luxurious resorts, Mastersraises strong concerns about human rights viola-tions and the lack of good governance within thecountry.

The discussion below will draw on some cri-tiques from these campaigns and a range ofsecondary sources. It is also based on theauthor’s observations and analysis of the envi-

ronmental, social and economic sustainabilityof tourism development in the Maldives. Duringa two-week visit to the Maldives in 2005, Icollected statistics on tourism, discussed withgovernment officials the impacts of the 2004Asian tsunami on the industry, visited Thilafushi– the ‘rubbish island’, visited two resorts andinterviewed the then Minister of Tourism, DrMahamood Shougee.

Environmental concerns Undoubtedly, mosttourists are stunned by the beauty of the‘natural’ environment that greets them whenthey arrive at their Maldives’ resort. While lyingby the pool, most will not feel racked with guiltover their carbon footprint, despite the fact thatthey have travelled on medium- to long- haulflights to reach their destination. Tourists enjoythe long stretches of sandy beach, unaware thatplants have been removed from these areas inorder to make the beach appear more ‘pristine’.They may also be oblivious to the fact that muchof the sand has been brought in from anotherisland because reef blasting, to make channelsfor boats, changed the currents and led toerosion of some beach areas. As Lyon (2003: 59)explains further: ‘. . . that exuberant tropicalvegetation requires careful cultivation, regularirrigation and sometimes soil imported from SriLanka’. Tourists sitting on the balcony of theirover-the-water bungalow gazing at the lagoonare unlikely to consider the impact that drivingpoles into the coral has had on the marine envi-ronment. In essence, the natural environment ofthe tropical island has been ‘beautified’, ‘sani-tised’ and built upon in ways that underminelocal ecosystems (Domroes, 2001: 127).

While the environmental guidelines notedearlier may seem comprehensive, resort manag-ers are typically more focused on windowdressing than serious environmental protection.Not all resorts compost organic waste or askguests to minimise water use, and nor do theyall have sewage treatment facilities (Buckley,2003: 203). In order to provide most of the freshwater required, greenhouse gas-emitting dieseldesalination plants are used, which is ratherironic as the Maldives, where most of theislands are no more than 1 metre above sealevel, is one of the countries in the world mostat risk of sea-level rise because of climatechange. The ecosystems of many resort islands



153

are overloaded with liquid and solid wastes:leaching of nutrients and chemicals leads toeutrophication and thus loss of marine speciesdiversity and an increase in undesirable speciessuch as sea grasses, which are now choking thecoral colonies in some areas (Domroes, 2001;Firag, 2005).

The carrying capacity of resort islands isbeing stretched as tourist demand leads toincreasing levels of waste production (Brownet al., 1997: 320; Dowling, 2000: 253). Touristresorts produce on average 2.5 kg of waste perperson per day, as opposed to only 0.3–0.5kg ofwaste per person per day for Maldivians livingon outer islands and 0.8–1 kg of waste perperson per day for those living in the capital,Malé (United Nations Environment Program,2005: 33). And despite the talk of resorts man-aging their own wastes, including owning theirown incinerators and compactors, during theauthor’s visit to the Maldives there was ampleevidence of resorts bringing boatloads of unseg-regated ‘waste’ and dumping it on Thilafushiisland, the dedicated solid waste managementsite, adjacent to Malé. When this point wasraised with the Minister of Tourism in 2005, hestated that the resorts were within their rightsand did not need to pay to dump rubbish on theisland. There is clearly little incentive then forresorts to recycle or to minimise their wastes.

Some of these problems may have been exac-erbated by the government’s decision in recentyears not to abide by recommendations in theFirst Tourism Master Plan (TMP) for greatercontrol over resorts. Rather, they decided toallow resort owners the freedom to innovate,which often includes ‘hard engineering solu-tions’ such as land reclamation and constructionof breakwaters (MoTCA, 2007b: 26, 56). Thelatest TMP covering 2007–2011 thus noted thatthe natural environment was being compro-mised because ‘some developers take advantageof weak monitoring on the part of MoTCA todeviate from the regulatory regime’ (MoTCA,2007b: 56). One key strategy in this regard is tostrengthen the regulatory regime regarding envi-ronmental issues; this includes tightening stan-dards for sewage and waste water disposal(MoTCA, 2007b: 81). The new TMP notes thatthere has not been strict adherence to Environ-mental Impact Assessment (EIA) requirementsboth during resort construction, and in the prac-

tices of resorts once they are in operation,because of lack of capacity of government agen-cies to follow up on this (MoTCA, 2007b: 55). Ahigh profile case of environmental damage as aresult of resort construction hit the headlines inthe Maldives in 2005, whereby the DhivehiObserver (2005), a local independent newspa-per, reported that fully-grown coconut palms,topsoil and sand had been removed from aninhabited island, Mandhoo, in order to beautifythe exclusive Hilton Maldives Resort and Spacomplex. Ironically, this removal of the island’sprotective shield occurred just 2 months after theDecember 2004 tsunami struck, wiping outMandhoo’s breadfruit trees. Now their ability togrow their own foods has been further limited byremoval of top soil.

On a more positive note, the new presidentelected in 2008, Mohamed Nasheed, has beenoutspoken at international forums on climatechange since coming into power, leading to himbeing named by the United Nations as one ofsix ‘2010 Champions of the Earth’. He has alsobeen involved in well-planned stunts, such asholding an underwater cabinet meeting toexpose the threat of rising sea levels to low lyingcountries such as the Maldives. Nasheed has setthe country a target of being carbon neutral by2020, supported by a switch to renewablesources of energy, while admitting the difficultyof fully achieving this in the aviation industry,which is required to bring most tourists to theMaldives (Maldives Live, 2010). Meanwhile, theresort of Soneva Fushi is aiming to be world’sfirst carbon neutral resort, and the presidentwants to use examples like this to contest theclaim that luxury tourism is synonymous withenvironmental degradation (Nasheed, 2009).

Economic concerns Economically, while somecommentators focus myopically on the impres-sive growth in the sector and associated rev-enues earned from tourism, significant concernshave arisen. In particular, while the rewards ofgrowing the tourism sector have been significantfor the government and for both local elites andforeign investors in tourism, they have beenspread very unevenly among the Maldivianpopulation (Buckley, 2003: 203). While thissection will focus on barriers to more wide-spread local ownership of tourism productsand services, employment, the geographical

R. Scheyvens


154

concentration of tourism, and leakages, the fol-lowing section on social concerns will look inmore detail at inequalities related to tourismdevelopment.

While there is quite high local ownership ofthe tourism product in the Maldives, with localsholding leases for 42 of the 97 resorts andanother 20 being joint ventures (Maldives Mon-etary Authority, 2010), many local owners callin foreign companies to operate their resorts.There is also genuine bitterness among thegeneral population that just a few Maldivianfamilies and companies – many of which haddirect connections to the Gayoom government– have successfully bid for resort islands. Mostinvestors have needed a large amount of capital,extensive business experience and politicalconnections, in order to be able to successfullycompete for an uninhabited island. In the recentpast, when new islands were released for lease,it was expected that existing resort ownerswould win most of the bids (Haynes, 2004). Forexample, in 2008, the Villa Group owned fiveresorts and controlled 12.4% of total bed capac-ity in the Maldives, in addition to owning asso-ciated travel and tour booking companies.Universal Enterprises, started by the two broth-ers who established the Maldives’ first resort in1972, own 10 resorts, as well as starting a newdivision in 2003, ‘Per Aquum Resorts and Spas’,which operates two new luxury resorts. Theowners of these resort groups are among therichest people in the Maldives. This skewedownership of tourism businesses and limitedsharing of benefits led the authors of the latestTMP to conclude that:

. . . better formulae need to be worked outto deal with resulting social inequalities inthe areas of the distribution of wealth andinvestment opportunities. If lease periodsare extended without addressing the socialinequalities, future generations may be pre-vented from becoming owners/operators oftourist resorts considering the fact that thenumber of islands available for tourism devel-opment is limited (MoTCA, 2007b: 65).

At present, there are major barriers preventinghigher levels of involvement in tourism fromMaldivian communities in general. First, the ruleabout developing tourist resorts on islands sepa-rate from local inhabitants is still largely in place.

Over a decade ago Guthunz and von Krosigk(1996: 24) noted that, while certainly providingprotection from negative cultural impacts, thiscould mean that ‘. . . the local population mayalso be segregated from participation in theenclave economies’. One minor concession hasbeen to allow hotel development on a few inhab-ited islands that house airstrips that then feedtourists to nearby resorts. Second, because onlythe government, not individuals or communities,owns land in the Maldives, local communitiescould not use local land as equity if investing intourism development. Outer island dwellers inthe Maldives cannot simply set up the type ofsmall-scale, home-grown tourism ventures thathave proved to be both popular and sustainablein other island states such as Samoa (Scheyvens,2008).Third, due to the fact that resort islands areset up as all-inclusives, there are limited possi-bilities for local people to run successful smalltourism-related businesses such as restaurants,tour guiding or handicraft stalls:

There are specific shops designated for touristsand local people have few opportunities tobecome small entrepreneurs and to benefitfrom the local tourist trade. This contributes tothe perception of widespread corruption andprotectionism (Haynes, 2004: 3).

Tourists are often advised not to bring anylocal currency when they come into the countryas they can charge everything – meals, drinks,fishing or diving excursions and the like – totheir resort account.

However, suggested activities in the 2007–2011 TMP could help to address these con-cerns somewhat. They include developing acommunity-based tourism action plan, tender-ing islands or plots of land for future hotel orresort development close to existing populationcentres and assisting communities to developand promote cultural attractions and heritagesites (MoTCA, 2007b: 77). The latter wouldprovide more opportunities for tourists to visitlocal communities. A further strategy aims toidentify and initiate resort-community partner-ship programmes and projects that wouldincrease usage of local produce by resorts(MoTCA, 2007b: 75).

There has always been a strong geographicalconcentration of tourist services in just 2 of the



155

20 administrative atoll groups (Kaafu and Alifu),those closest to Malé International Airport,which provided 75% of tourist beds in 2005.Until the mid-1990s, Kaafu and Alifu atolls con-stituted the only ‘tourism zones’ (Ministry ofTourism, 2005). Decentralisation promoted inthe 1996–2005 TMP has led to the developmentof some outer atolls, and in 2003, just beforeelection time, a new policy came in to allow atleast one resort on every atoll. Officials havedelivered on their plan to expand tourismbeyond the two dominant atolls: by 2009, Kaafuand Alifu atolls accounted for 69.1% of resortbeds, a slight drop. This change is largelybecause of new resort developments in atollswhich in 2005 had zero beds for tourists. Thus,by 2009, Noonu had 490 beds, Gaafu Alifu had200 beds and Seenu had 830 beds (MoTAC,2009: 2).

Enhancing opportunities for Maldivians toinvest in resorts, hotels and support services is afurther way in which the government hopes toencourage wider ownership of the industry. TheMaldives Tourism Development Corporation(MTDC) was set up in 2006 in response togrowing criticism of the lack of spread of thebenefits of tourism, and it has opened up oppor-tunities for more widespread investment byMaldivians in the tourism sector. MTDC is 45%government owned and has 55% public-ownedshares, and 15 new islands have been set asidefor MTDC to develop as resorts (MoTCA,2007b: 29). Development of nine of theseresorts had been expedited by 2009 (MTDC,2009: 5). MTDC aims to attract up to 30 000share holders, and by the third quarter of 2009had issued shares to 24 000 individuals (MTDC,2009: 6). However, despite touting the notion ofincreases local involvement in tourism in the2007–2011 TMP, the number of guesthouses(which tended to be locally owned) decreasedfrom 28 in 2005 to 22 in 2009 (MoTAC, 2010).

The existing skewed concentration of resortsand the wide geographical spread of the islandshave severely restricted job opportunities forlocal people. Thus, while tourism providesaround 14 000 jobs, 6000 of these positions arefilled by foreigners. Most Maldivians who wishto work in tourism must migrate to work andlive away from home for long periods of time.Employment in the tourism sector is thereforeseen as inappropriate for young women in this

Islamic state: only 7% of resort employees arewomen and most are foreigners, with Maldivianwomen making up only 2% of the resort work-force (MoTCA, 2007b: 52). Tourism work is alsoregarded as undesirable for men: ‘Men areunlikely to take on menial work for low paywhen there is a prospect that they can get a fewdays or weeks of relatively well-paid work on afishing dhoni’ (Lyon, 2003: 20). Thus, Western-ers are often employed in managerial or special-ist positions within resorts, while Bangladeshisand Sri Lankans fill restaurant jobs (where theirEnglish language skills are desired) and cleaningor labouring positions. The lack of jobs createdwould be no surprise to Sathiendrakumar andTisdell (1989), who, two decades ago, raisedconcerns about the extent to which the tourismindustry could provide employment for localinhabitants in the Maldives.

Tourist resort jobs are also not attractive toMaldivians because living and working condi-tions can be harsh (Robinson, 2001), and therights of workers in the Maldives have not beenadequately protected due to a lack of legislationin the past (MoTCA, 2007b: 63). Worker accom-modation is typically cramped, with up to 15people in one room, and there are reports thatworkers are often not paid for several months ata time if ‘business is slow’ (Haynes, 2004: 3).Maldivians are also paid less than other nation-alities for doing the same types of work. In2001, a foreign housekeeper was paid 165%compared with a Maldivian housekeeper, a tourguide 207% and a waiter 133% more than localcounterparts (MOT, 2001, cited in Yahya et al.,2005: 40). Not surprisingly, Maldivians oftenchoose to stay on their home islands where theymay be able to earn a small income from fishingrather than residing for 11 months of the yearhundreds of kilometres away from their familieson a resort island where they are required towork 12 hours a day, 61/2 days of the week(Maldivian waiter, pers. comm., August 2005). Itis not good for the nation either socially, eco-nomically or politically to rely so heavily onforeign workers, particularly when there is sig-nificant youth unemployment and a growingyouth drug problem (Kun, 2007; MoTCA,2007b).

A further challenge to economic sustainabil-ity in the Maldives is the fact that there areheavy leakages from the tourism sector. This is

R. Scheyvens


156

due to a number of factors. Leakage occurs partlybecause resorts repatriate profits and expatriateworkers repatriate wages. In addition, the ‘bedrent’ system of tendering for islands on which toestablish resorts, and the set rate for bed taxes,has pushed developers into targeting the higherend of the tourism market. Beds at resorts areleased at up to US$16 000 per annum. There isno way then that a backpacker establishmentcould earn sufficient revenue to pay such a lease.When resorts cater largely for higher spend-ing, luxury tourists, more imported goods arerequired (including construction material, fur-nishings, food and alcohol). This heavy relianceon imported goods is compounded by the lack ofarable land and other natural resources in theMaldives: ‘As an island nation, the Maldives isalmost exclusively a producer of fish andcoconut products; everything else is imported’(Lyon, 2003: 117). In 2000, the import content oftourist expenditures was estimated at 80%, butit reached as high as 98% for beverage sales(Firag, 2002: 133). Yahya et al. (2005: 36) arguethat the government ‘has not made a con-certed attempt to develop “diagonal integration”between local industry, small businesses andresort economies’.

Another overarching issue that should bementioned is that of the vulnerability of theindustry to external shocks, especially in rela-tion to the country’s heavy dependence on thisone industry. Thus, following the Asian tsunamiof 26 December 2004, 21 out of the 87 resortshad to suspend operations and tourism arrivalswere down by over 50% for the first half of 2005(MoTCA, 2007a: 26).

Socio-cultural concerns The poor spread ofthe benefits of tourism raised above is reflectedin high levels of inequality across the Maldives.This has not gone unnoticed by the generalpopulation. One sign of the emerging discon-tent with the concentration of tourism revenuesin the hands of a few can be seen in a blogposted in response to an announcement on theMaldives Tourism website that the Maldives hadwon the 2007 World Travel Awards title for‘World’s Most Romantic Destination’:

As Maldives continue to receive awards, wewould really appreciate if government of Mal-dives try to distribute this rich industry to people

of this nation, instead of giving this industryto 3 or 4 richest person of this country (http://www.maldivestourism.net/blog/madlives-named-worlds-most-romantic-destination/Accessed 5 June 2008).

In the same year, the Maldives was alsoawarded Best Island Destination by readers ofCondé Nast magazine. Such awards are notnew – the Maldives has received many acco-lades from the travel industry – but the responseis illuminating in that it points to the growingpublic discontent with the huge disparities inwealth in the country. Henderson (2008: 107)thus refers to the noticeable ‘disquiet aboutthe inequities and sustainability of an indus-try in which affluent tourists are pampered inluxurious surroundings while impoverishedMaldivians struggle to eke out an existence’.

Superficially, development levels seem quitehigh in the Maldives. The life expectancy rate is72 years, over 97% of the population are literate(European Union, 2008), and they have thehighest GDP per capita in South Asia, as men-tioned earlier. Certainly, such achievementscould not have been made without the growthof the tourism sector documented herein.However, because of inequities in the spreadand ownership of resorts, the way touristshave been discouraged from visiting inhabitedislands, and political decisions about howtourism revenue will be spent, tourism hasexaggerated existing inequalities betweenMaldivians: 20% of those living in the outerislands lived on less than US$1.17 per day in2005, which is three times the rate of poverty ofMalé residents (Asian Development Bank,2007: 2). Disturbingly, income disparities bet-ween Malé and the other atolls are increasingover time. The policy of developing enclavetourism on uninhabited islands means thatmost tourists learn little about Maldivian cultureduring their stay, and these arrangements also‘insulate most village residents from tourism’(Buckley, 2003: 199). This led Richter (1989:165) to refer to the ‘quarantine’ of tourists onresort islands.

Yahya et al. (2005: 37) emphasise the core-periphery trend, whereby tourism has entren-ched development of the centre and exaggeratedinequalities, compounding the underdevelop-ment of the far spread outer atolls. Despite



157

the millions of dollars tourism brings into theeconomy every year, service delivery to outerislands is poor, with 40% of the population livingon islands without access to health care (UN,2002). Around one quarter of atoll populationsreceive electricity for less than 6 hours a day, and12% of the population do not have access topotable water (UN, 2002: 2; 8). Most Maldivianscannot grow fresh fruit and vegetables due to thelack of suitable soils. Thus, for example, whiletourists feast on a wide range of largely importedfruits and vegetables at resort buffets, one quarterof Maldivian children under the age of 5 sufferstunted growth because of malnutrition (Interna-tional Bureau for Children’s Rights, 2006: 4–5).This is the basis of the claim that ‘Maldives facesa nutritional situation more acute than that ofsub-Saharan Africa’ (UN, 2002: 21).

There are also concerns of a gender imbal-ance on some islands where the men havechosen to take on employment in the tourismindustry. For the 11 months of the year they areaway from home, their island might be three-quarters female. This places a heavy workburden on family members left behind and dis-rupts normal family functioning. As Robinson(2001: 85) noted after conducting a WorldTourism Organization (WTO) impact study onthe Maldives, ‘the negative impacts were mainlyfelt in the Atolls with out-migration – peopleblamed absent fathers for the growth of drugsand alcohol-related problems’. If resorts werebuilt close to inhabited islands, this would notbe such an issue.

The discussion above raised serious chal-lenges to the sustainability of tourism in theMaldives, focusing on environmental, economicand socio-cultural concerns. It is now time togive specific consideration to the politics oftourism and how this has influenced the natureof tourism development in this country.

Political concerns There has been a particularpolitics that has influenced the nature and struc-ture of tourism in the Maldives, strongly associ-ated with one-party rule by the Gayoomgovernment from 1978 to 2008:

Tourism in the Maldives has had a politicaldimension since its inception due to the tightcontrol exercised by government and thefinancial interest in resorts of its members and

their allies. A thriving tourism industry can beharnessed to hegemonic ambitions . . . successas a destination has been exploited to consoli-date the power and standing of the regime(Henderson, 2008: 106).

Gayoom had the power to appoint allmembers of the Cabinet and judiciary (EuropeanUnion, 2008), and he was seen by some ‘. . . asa dictator who would never relinquish his power’(Alcantara, 2008). Such views of Gayoom,however, contrast sharply with those of peoplewho saw him as the architect of one of the mostprosperous countries in South Asia, largelybecause of development of the tourism sector.The economic development that occurred underGayoom, while impressive in many ways, wasbased on tight social and political control at theexpense of personal freedom. As noted by Hend-erson (2008: 103), ‘Questions of the extent ofpresidential power, independence of the judi-ciary, police brutality and other human rightsviolations are pressing . . .’. Public criticisms ofthe government led to the arrest and detainmentof many people (particularly journalists andpolitical activists), accusations of torture andsuspicious deaths in custody. There were restric-tions on individual freedoms including speechand press, religion, and freedom of assembly(European Union, 2008). As a Lonely Planetauthor surmised:

. . . the [recent] history of the country has beendefined by the dictatorship of Maumoon AbdulGayoom, president for three decades and aman jokingly referred to as the CEO of theMaldives, because he runs it like a giant touristcorporation. It’s no joking matter though, asthe police brutality and human rights abusesthat have occurred under his rule are shock-ing . . . (Masters, 2006: 17).

In addition to human rights violations, a majorconcern has been the close connection betweenthe political and economic elite, wherebyGayoom’s ‘. . . family and allies run all aspectsof the economy, they own resorts and reap muchof the financial benefits of this country’ (Masters,2006: 16). As Members of the European Parlia-ment noted when they voted to block aid to theMaldives in 2004, the tourism industry ‘remainsin the hands of Gayoom’s supporters’. Theyadded that ‘. . . it is our responsibility to help the

R. Scheyvens


158

developing world expand its tourist industry. Wecannot, however, continue to support a dictator-ship which creams off the profits from tourismand hides them abroad’ (EU Business, 2004,cited in Abdulsamad, 2004: 12). Recently, theNew York Times reported on efforts by thecurrent government to reclaim up to US$400million in funds which were misappropriated byGayoom and his close friends during his rule(Saltmarsh, 2010).

The control of elites over the tourism industryis further entrenched by the Maldives Associa-tion of Tourism Industry (MATI), a powerfulassociation that lobbies government to serve theinterests of major industry players and attemptsto broker good deals for them. As the formerMinister of Tourism acknowledged, ‘Tourismhas a strong lobby; most of the wealthy peopleare in tourism’ (Dr Shougee, pers. comm., July2005). The fact that the foreign consultants whoprepared the 1996–2005 Maldives TMP giveMATI such great recognition in their acknowl-edgements section is indicative of the holdMATI has on tourism planning and policymaking within the country:

The Consulting Team would like to acknowl-edge the valuable contribution of individualmembers of the tourism industry in Maldives,and of their representative organization, theMaldives Association of Tourism Industry(MATI). Because of their efforts, the TourismMaster Plan has been prepared, in effect, inconjunction with the private sector; with theirgiving a very strong input into the generalthinking which underpins the Master Plan(Nethconsult/Transtec, 1996: 2 – emphasisadded).

Even the latest TMP, which was not so depen-dent on private sector input, recognises thepower that key players within the industry exert:‘The present decision making processes are sub-stantially influenced by the leading entrepre-neurs in the industry’ (MoTCA, 2007b: 67).

Concern about the lack of legislation protect-ing the rights of workers was expressed earlier inthis paper. Interestingly, in July 2008, an Employ-ment Act came into effect in the Maldives butapparently because of an oversight on the part ofgovernment, tourism workers were excludedfrom being covered by the Act. The Act requiresthat all employees have rights to job descrip-

tions, employment contracts, a minimum wage,protection from unfair dismissal and a maximumworking week of 48 hours – far less than the70 hours per week with no overtime pay, whichhas been expected in the past. MATI was veryconcerned about the extension of the Employ-ment Act to cover tourism employees, arguingthat the economy would be ‘affected adversely’by the new legislation (Tourism Concern,2008b). As noted in a Tourism Concern newsitem, ‘Many of the MPs in charge of drafting thenew bill have links with the tourism industry’(Tourism Concern, 2008c). This led to industryemployees coming together to form TourismEmployees Association of the Maldives (TEAM),which promptly organised a 5500 strong petitionof tourism employees who were prepared tostrike unless they too would be covered by theAct. In response to the petition, the EmploymentAct was amended in October 2008 to includetourism sector workers. This encouraged someworkers to assert their right to protest about theirlabour rights – several strikes by resort employ-ees took place, and in at least one case, where 13employees had been fired for engaging in apeaceful strike, a violent clash with policeensued. A new Labour Act was under consider-ation in 2011, and a MATI spokesperson claimedthat they wanted to outlaw strike action on resortproperty (Merrett, 2011).

Collusion between economic and politicalelites was then a strong characteristic influenc-ing the development of tourism in the Maldivesunder the Gayoom government. As notedearlier, one of Tourism Concern’s key reasonsfor targeting a campaign against the Maldiveswas the lack of democracy and politicalfreedom, and this was seen as directly linked tothe failure of tourism to deliver benefits to themajority of the Maldivian people. As one criticasserted, ‘Unless a transparent system is put inplace with a more democratic system of govern-ment, the tourism industry in the Maldives willonly help the authoritarian regime to stay inpower’ (Abdulsamad, 2004: 12).

Interestingly, a significant change did occur inthe politics of the Maldives because of publicpressure. In 2004 and 2005, protests against thesingle party state gained momentum andreceived international attention, to the embar-rassment of a country touting ‘get away from itall’ luxury vacations. Tourists do not expect



159

holidays to the Maldives to be disrupted bypolitical protests. Public protests were oftenbanned during this period and the leader of themain opposition movement, a journalist by thename of Mohamed Nasheed, who advocatedfor human rights and criticised Gayoom’s gov-ernment, was jailed. Feeling the weight ofpublic concern, however, Gayoom’s govern-ment began a process of political reform, statinga commitment to transition to a multipartydemocracy and a greater separation of thepowers of the president. A Roadmap for Reformwas established in 2006. This led to majorchanges in 2008, when a constitution was put inplace and a presidential election was held,whereby the former political prisoner, Nasheed,gained the majority vote. He was sworn in asthe Maldives’ first democratically elected presi-dent in November 2008.

While garnering much popular support andwinning friends internationally through hisstrong stance on climate change, as notedearlier, Nasheed has battled to implementreforms he promised around issues such ascurbing corruption and building economicprosperity. First, the global economic crisisreduced tourist numbers and thus led to adecrease in public finances, and second, therewas a constitutional crisis in 2010 when itbecame clear that the powers of the executivewere being undermined by the opposition-controlled parliament, which blocked any newinitiatives put before it. This led to the cabinetdeciding to resign en masse in June 2010. Whilethey were later reappointed, the challenge ofbringing about reforms continues. In the mean-time, two opposition party members placedunder house arrest for alleged treason, leadingto concerns that Nasheed was using tacticsthat Gayoom had once used when floutinghis powers as president. A number of streetmarches were held in Malé in protest at thepolitical situation in 2010 and some peoplewere injured, after which Britain and the USAissuing travel warnings to their nationals(Bangkok Post, 2010).

Democratic reforms in the past few years havenevertheless opened up more possibilities for thepeople to demand a better spread of the benefitsof tourism in future, and the new governmentis implementing strategies to support this. Thenational framework for development during

2009–2013 is known as the Aneh DhivehiRaajje, and this pledges, among other things, toestablish a nationwide transport system and toprovide quality health care for all. These twothings alone would make a significant differenceto the well-being of many outer islanders in theMaldives.

Table 1 provides a summary of key pointsfrom the above discussion noting both chal-lenges to the sustainability of tourism in theMaldives and some positive developments.

Conclusion

This paper has argued that social and politicalissues deserve greater attention in discussionsover the prospects for achieving sustainabledevelopment of tourism. This is readily appar-ent in the case of the Maldives when examin-ing the tourism sector: ‘the country’s politicalcircumstances have determined key features ofits tourism industry in the past and present andwill continue to do so in the future’ (Hender-son, 2008: 110). The Maldives introduced theirQuality Tourism Strategy in 1978 in associationwith a ‘one island, one resort’ model wherebytourism is restricted to uninhabited islands, andsince then they have been cited internationallyas an exemplar of sustainable tourism. Whilethis strategy combined with decades of politi-cal stability may have helped the tourismindustry to expand at a rapid rate, the country’simage as a tranquil haven of luxury tourism hascome somewhat unstuck in recent years, withpolitical turmoil occurring in the capital, andcampaigns emerging to expose both corruptionand vast inequalities in development. Itbecame untenable to growing numbers of thepopulace that a country with so rich a tourismbooty should be structured in such a way thata narrow range of people benefited. Publicprotests, strikes at resorts, high child malnutri-tion rates and a lack of basic services in manyouter islands are issues that have come to marthe reputation of a country that earns around70% of its foreign revenue from its tourismsector.

It should be of considerable concern toadvocates of sustainable development thatgovernments can still hide behind rhetoric of‘sustainability’ and ‘quality tourism’ whileimplementing strategies that, as Bianchi asserts

R. Scheyvens


160

in the case of the Canary Islands ‘. . . gloss overquestions of environmental and social justiceand democratic access to decision-making overthe tourism means of production’ (2004: 518).It could be argued that no country in the worldso clearly demonstrates the clash between

sustainable tourism rhetoric and reality on theground as does the Maldives.

While it would be easy to assume that a new,democratically elected government led by apresident who is outspoken on climate changeissues, combined with a more participatory

Table 1. Sustainability of tourism development in the Maldives

Aspects ofsustainability

Positive examples Negative examples

Environmental • 10-year carbon-neutral strategy• Active participation in international discussions

on climate change• Investments in renewable energy• Using waste to reclaim land

• Luxury tourism makes heavy demands on freshwater and energy resources and creates highlevels of wastes

• Lack of environmental monitoring during andafter resort construction. Regulations flouted.

• High carbon emissions: most tourists are onmedium- to long- haul flights

• Lack of separation of wastes by resorts; littlerecycling; undesirable materials leaching intothe marine environment

Economic • Local ownership of resorts (62/97 resorts arelocally owned or joint ventures) is higher thanin many other developing countries

• Maldives Tourism Development Corporationformed in 2006 to develop new resorts with 55%public-owned shares – to enable more Maldiviansto have a stake in ownership of the tourismproduct

• Decentralisation plans are beginning to addressthe geographical concentration of tourism:since 2005, resorts developed for the firsttime in three new atolls.

• A small number of elites, along with foreigners,dominate ownership of resorts

• Targeting of the luxury market and the ‘oneisland, one resort’ model has prevented mostMaldivian people from being able to developproducts or services for tourism

• Over half of all jobs in the tourism sector go toforeigners

• Lack of unionisation and issues with legislationhave made the labour force in tourism vulnerableto exploitation

• Profits from foreign-owned and foreign-managedresorts are repatriated, along with wages fromforeign employees in the sector

• Very heavy dependence on tourism as aneconomic sector increases the economy’svulnerability

Social • The 2007–2011 Tourism Master Plan soughtstrategies to spread the benefits of tourism morewidely: community-based tourism action plans,tendering islands or plots of land for future hotelor resort development close to existing populationcentres; and assisting communities to develop andpromote cultural attractions and heritage sites

• Tax revenue from tourism has enabled thegovernment to invest well in some sectors,such as education

• Huge disparities in the spread of benefits fromtourism: basic infrastructure is still absent onmany of the outer islands

• Social disruption: because of separation of resortislands from those inhabited by Maldivians, thoseemployed in the sector often spend 11 monthsaway from home each year

• Tourists are ‘quarantined’ on resort islands andlearn little about Maldivian people and cultureduring their stay

Political • More opportunities for freedom of speech andthe right to protest since the election of a newPresident in 2008

• The 2007–2011 Tourism Master Plan calls formore participation by the public andnon-governmental organisations (NGOs) intourism planning

• Tourism Employees Associations of the Maldives(TEAM) formed in 2008 to provide a voice foremployees in the sector and advance theirinterests

• Collusion between the political and economicelite

• Allegations of corruption in the resort biddingprocess, entrenching the power of a few owners

• Maldives Association of the Tourism Industry(MATI) has had a strong influence over tourismplanning

• Tourism workers initially not included under newminimum wage legislation in 2008

• Proposals to prevent strike action at the place ofwork by tourism employees in 2011



161

TMP, will pave the way for more sustainabledevelopment of the tourism sector in future, thereality is more complex. Timothy and Tosun(2003) assert that sustainable tourism develop-ment is only possible where a wide range ofvoices, including those of destination residents,contribute to tourism policy and planning.While consulting all stakeholders when devel-oping tourism plans is essential, the fact that theMATI had such strong influence over pasttourism plans in the Maldives, as noted earlier,should be of concern. The new Maldives gov-ernment is more diverse than in the past, butthere are still strong links to resort owners andinvestors. The government also faces challengesahead in terms of managing the democraticreform process in a peaceful way and dealingwith the unsustainable practices of manytourism operators, while trying to implementeffective mechanisms to share the riches oftourism among the majority of the country’sinhabitants. In particular, they must negotiatewith the small group of elites who dominatethe tourism sector and who have benefited sub-stantially from the status quo. While there aresome good suggestions in the latest TMP, theymainly provide politically safe options thatfail to challenge the established power of elitesover the sector. This is a significant barrierto promoting more sustainable and equitabledevelopment.

What can proponents of sustainable devel-opment in small island states learn from thisstudy of tourism in the Maldives? First, sustain-able development of the tourism sector needsto be government-led. While industry bodiesmay propose voluntary codes of conduct andexceptional corporates might implement pro-grammes that are both sustainable and sociallyresponsible, a framework encouraging morebroad-based change is required. Second, whilestrong relationships between the tourism indus-try and government are needed to ensure con-tinued development of the sector, this does notmean that the interests of a few powerfulplayers should come to supercede the interestsof the majority of a country’s population that,directly or indirectly, could also stand to gainor lose from tourism development. Third,equity should be seen as complementary tosustainable development of tourism – thus thegoal of any tourism plan should be to improve

the overall well-being of a country’s people,not just to fill the pockets of a few whileproviding low-level jobs to a disempoweredlabour force. Governments should be calledinto account when they receive over half amillion luxury tourists a year yet they cannotprovide basic health services to all of their ownpopulation of less than 400 000.

While the significance of tourism as an eco-nomic sector continues to grow in Asia and thePacific, sustainable development of tourism stillremains an elusive goal in most countries. Thisis due to the fact that tourism growth is still themajor priority for most governments, and mostseem unwilling to be strong advocates for sus-tainable tourism if that means compromisinggrowth of the sector. These governments oftenhave difficulty balancing their own interestin gaining revenue through tourism, with thedesires of powerful stakeholders from thetourism sector, and the competing interests ofdiverse communities who seek to benefit fromtourism. It is of concern that governmentsacross Asia and the Pacific, not just theMaldives, continue to espouse ideals of equity,sustainability and improved quality of life forthe people, even though their resources arediverted overwhelmingly into the promotion ofeconomic growth.

There is a clear need for more criticalresearch on sustainable development options inAsia and the Pacific, particularly with regard tokey sectors flagged for further growth such astourism. Such research requires serious engage-ment with social and political issues. Researchon sustainable tourism needs to recognise thatgenuine sustainability requires not just a com-mitment to reducing carbon emissions or pro-tecting one’s people from negative touristbehaviours by building resorts on uninhabitedislands; rather it must be based on broad par-ticipation in decision making and more equi-table sharing of the benefits of tourism.

References

Abdulsamad, A. (2004) Maldives, Just Change 1: 12.Asian Development Bank (ADB) (2007) Maldives: Poverty

assessment. Manila: Asian Development Bank.Alcantara, N. (2008) New era begins in Maldives amid

challenges, but tourism is optimistic, World TourismDirectory News. Retrieved 11 November 2008,Website: http://www.worldtourismdirectory.com/news

R. Scheyvens


162

Bangkok Post (2010) Maldives: Politics spark trouble in para-dise, 24 July 2010, Retrieved 16 February 2011, fromBangkok Post Website: http://www.bangkokpost.com/print/187685

Bianchi, R. (2004) Restructuring and the politics of sustain-ability: A critical view from the European periphery(The Canary Islands), Journal of Sustainable Tourism12(6): 495–529.

Briguglio, L., B. Archer, J. Jafari and G. Wall (1996) Sustain-able tourism in Islands and small states: Issues andpolicies. London: Pinter.

Brohman, J. (1996) New directions in tourism for the ThirdWorld, Annals of Tourism Research 23(1): 48–70.

Brown, K., R.K. Turner, H. Hameed and I. Bateman (1997)Environmental carrying capacity and tourism develop-ment in the Maldives and Nepal, EnvironmentalConservation 24(4): 316–325.

Buckley, R. (2003) Case studies in ecotourism. Wallingford:CABI Publishing.

Butler, R. (1991) Tourism, environment, and sustainabledevelopment, Environmental Conservation 18(3): 201–2019.

Church, A. and T. Coles (2007) Tourism and the manyfaces of power. In A. Church and T. Coles (eds)Tourism, Power and Space, Routledge, London: 269–283.

Coles, T. and A. Church (2007) Tourism, politics and theforgotten entanglements of power, in A. Church and T.Coles (eds), Tourism, power and space, pp. 1–42.London: Routledge.

De Kadt, E. (1979) Politics, planning and control, in E. deKadt (ed.), Tourism: Passport to development?, pp.18–33. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Dhivehi Observer (2005) Hilton hits on Mandhoo: No roomfor ethics in Maldives resort. Dhivehi Observer, 6November 2005. Retrieved 5 June 2008, from DhivehiObserver Website: http://www.dhivehiobserver.com/speicalreports/Mandhoo-Hilton/Hilton_Maldives_Resort.htm

Domroes, M. (2001) Conceptualising state-controlled resortislands for an environment-friendly development oftourism: The Maldivian experience, Singapore Journalof Tropical Geography 22(2): 122–137.

Dowling, R. (2000) The Maldives, in C.M. Hall and S. Page(eds), Tourism in South and Southeast Asia: Issues andcases, pp. 248–255. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.

European Union (2008) The EU’s relations with Maldives,Retrieved 5 June 2008, from European Union Website:http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/maldives/intro/index.htm

Firag, I. (2001) Presentation on exemplary island destinationin the world: Tourism industry in the Maldives, IslandTourism in Asia and the Pacific, pp. 92–100. Madrid:World Tourism Organization.

Firag, I. (2002) Tourism development: An economicperspective, The economic impact of tourism in theIslands of Asia and the Pacific, pp. 126–139. Madrid:World Tourism Organization.

Firag, I. (2005) Tourism and the environment: Current issuesfor management, Ministry of Tourism, Malé, Republicof Maldives. Retrieved 14 July 2005, Website: http://www.fao.org/docrep/X5623E/x5623e0p.htm

Ghina, F. (2003) Sustainable development in small islanddeveloping states: The case of the Maldives, Environ-ment, Development and Sustainability 5: 139–165.

Ghosh, R., M. Siddique and R. Gabbay (eds) (2003) Tourismand economic development: Case studies from theIndian ocean region. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Guthunz, U. and F. von Krosigk (1996) Tourism develop-ment in small island states: From MIRAB to TouRAB?in L. Briguglio, B. Archer, J. Jafari and G. Wall (eds),Sustainable tourism in islands and small states: Issuesand policies, pp. 18–35. London: Pinter.

Hall, C.M. (1994) Tourism and politics: Policy, power andplace. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.

Hall, D. and F. Brown (2008) Finding a way forward: Anagenda for research, Third World Quarterly 29(5):1021–1032.

Haynes, K. (2004) Briefing on the Maldives: Lost in Paradise.6 August 2004. London: Tourism Concern.

Henderson, J.C. (2008) The politics of tourism: A perspec-tive from the Maldives, Tourismos: An InternationalMultidisciplinary Journal of Tourism 3(1): 99–115.

International Monetary Fund (IMF) (2008) World Econo-mic Outlook Database. October 2008. Retrieved 15January 2009, from IMF Website: http://imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2008/02/weodata/index.aspx

International Bureau for Children’s Rights (2006) Makingchildren’s rights work: Country profile on maldives.Retrieved 5 June 2008 from International Bureau forChildren’s Rights Website: http://www.unicef.org/Making_Child_Rights_work_in_the_Maldives.pdf

Kun, L. (2007) Maldives launches first ever national drugabuse prevention campaign. Retrieved 15 January2009, Website: http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/maldives_42327.html

Lyon, J. (2003) Maldives, 5th edn, Melbourne: LonelyPlanet.

McElroy, J.L. (2006) Small island tourist economiesacross the life cycle, Asia Pacific Viewpoint 47(1): 61–77.

Maldives Live (2010) Blog. April 10 2010: Retrieved 30September 2010, from Maldives Live Website: http://maldiveslive.blogspot.com/2010/04/forty-two-year-old-president-mohamed.html

Maldives Monetary Authority (2010) Monthly statistics:December 2010. Retrieved 16 February 2011, fromMaldives Monetary Authority Website: http://www.mma.gov.mv/Monthly%20Statistics/dec10.pdf

Maldives Tourism Development Corporation (MTDC)(2009) Annual Report 2009. Male.

Masters, T. (2006) Maldives, 6th edn, Melbourne: LonelyPlanet.

Merrett, N. (2011) Conrad resort claims resolution found toon-site strikes, Minivan News, 24 March 2011. Retri-eved 5 April 2011, Website: http://minivannews.com/politics/conrad-resort-claims-resolution-found-to-on-site-strikes-17699

Ministry of Tourism (2001) Tourism Statistics 2001. Malé,Republic of Maldives: Ministry of Tourism.

Ministry of Tourism (2005) Statistics 2005. Male, Republic ofMaldives. Retrieved 5 June 2008, from Ministry ofTourism Website: http://www.tourism.gov.mv/pubs/stat2005/HTML/tourism.htm



163

Mitchell, J. and C. Ashley (2010) Tourism and povertyreduction: Pathways to prosperity. London: Earthscan.

MoTAC (2009) Tourism yearbook 2009. Malé, Republic ofMaldives.

MoTAC (2010) Tourism Yearbook 2010. Malé, Republic ofMaldives.

MoTAC (2011) Mission, vision and purpose of Tour-ism Department. Retrieved 16 February 2011, fromMoTAC Website: http://www.tourism.gov.mv/article.php?aId=3

MoTCA (2007a) Tourism Yearbook 2007. Malé, Republic ofMaldives.

MoTCA (2007b) Maldives third tourism master plan, 2007–2011. Malé, Republic of Maldives.

Mowforth, M. and I. Munt (2009) Tourism and sustainability:New tourism in the Third World. London: Routledge.

Nasheed, M. (2009) Where survival is at stake. The Econo-mist, November 13 2009. Retrieved 16 February 2011,Website: http://www.economist.com/node/14742559/print

Nethconsult/Transtec and Board Failte (1996) MaldivesTourism Master Plan 1996–2005. Volume 1 – MainReport. Brussels: Commission of the EuropeanCommunities.

Neto, F. (2003) A new approach to sustainable tourismdevelopment: Moving beyond environmental pro-tection, Natural Resources Forum 27(3): 212–222.

Overton, J. (1999) Sustainable development and the PacificIslands, in J. Overton and R. Scheyvens (eds), Strategiesfor sustainable development: Experiences from thePacific, pp. 1–15. London: Zed Books.

Richter, L.K. (1989) The politics of tourism in Asia. Hawaii:University of Hawaii Press.

Robinson, J. (2001) The socio-cultural dimensions of sus-tainable tourism development, Island tourism in Asiaand the Pacific, pp. 78–86. Madrid: World TourismOrganization.

Saltmarsh, M. (2010) Going after government looters, NewYork Times June 11, 2010.

Sathiendrakumar, R. and C. Tisdell (1989) Tourism and theeconomic development of the Maldives, Annals ofTourism Research 16: 254–269.

Scheyvens, R. (2008) On the beach: Small scale tourism inSamoa, in J. Connell and B. Rugendyke (eds), Tourismat the grassroots, pp. 131–147. London: Routledge.

Scheyvens, R. (2011) Tourism and Poverty. New York:Routledge.

Sharpley, R. (2000) Tourism and sustainable development:Exploring the theoretical divide, Journal of SustainableTourism 8(1): 1–19.

Sofield, T. (2003) Empowerment for sustainable tourismdevelopment. Oxford: Pergamon.

Tampe, M. and K. Lengefeld (2007) Tourism as a field ofactivity in German development cooperation: A basicoverview, priority areas for action and strategic recom-mendations. Eschborn, Germany: GTZ.

Timothy, D.J. and C. Tosun (2003) Appropriate planning fortourism in destination communities: Participation,incremental growth and collaboration, in S. Singh, D.J.Timothy and R.K. Dowling (eds), Tourism in Destina-tion Communities, pp. 181–204. Wallingford: CABIPublishing.

Tourism Concern (2008a) New presidency in the Maldi-ves: Can paradise be restored? 11 November 2008,Retrieved 30 September 2010, from Tourism ConcernWebsite: http://www.tourismconcern.org.uk/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=81&cntnt01returnid=72

Tourism Concern (2008b) Maldives: New labour lawsextended to tourism workers. 7 August 2008, Retrieved30 September 2010, from Tourism Concern Website:http://www.tourismconcern.org.uk/index.php?cntnt01articleid=57&cntnt01returnid=79&mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0

Tourism Concern (2008c) Tourism staff in Maldives petitionHuman Rights Commission. 10 July 2008, Retrieved 30September 2010, from Tourism Concern Website:http://www.tourismconcern.org.uk/index.php?mact+News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01a

United Nations (2002) United Nations Development Assis-tance Framework for Republic of Maldives 2003–2007. 26 July 2002. Malé, Republic of Maldives.Retrieved 15 January 2009, Website: http://www.dhivehiobserver.com/reports/UNDAF.pdf

United Nations Development Program (UNDP) (2009)Human Development Report 2009. Retrieved 10January 2010, from UNDP Website: http://hdr.undp.org/en

United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) (2005)Maldives: Post-tsunami environmental assessment.New York: UNEP.

United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO)(2010) World tourism barometer: Interim update April2010. Madrid: UNWTO.

Wall, G. (1996) One name, two destinations, in L. Harrisonand W. Husbands (eds), Practicing responsible tourism:International case studies in tourism planning, policy,and development, pp. 41–57. Chichester: Wiley.

Yahya, F., A. Parameswaran, I. Ahmed and R. Sebastian(2005) The economic cost of tourism in Maldives,Tourism 53(1): 33–44.

R. Scheyvens


164

The challenge of sustainable tourism development in the Maldives: Understanding the social and...

Documents

Transcript of The challenge of sustainable tourism development in the Maldives: Understanding the social and...