UNCORRECTED PROOF! The developmental impacts of backpacker tourism in South Africa PDF-OUTPUT

Transcription

1 UNCORRECTED PROOF! GeoJournal 0: 1 17, Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. The developmental impacts of backpacker tourism in South Africa Gustav Visser Department of Geography, University of the Free State, P.O.Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa (Tel: ; Fax: ; visserge.sci@mail.uovs.ac.za) Key words: backpacker tourists, development, new tourism, South Africa, tourism Abstract South Africa has recorded considerable growth in tourism activity over the past decade. In the light of the vast range of economic sectors that gain from tourism development, the national government has instituted a range of incentives and initiatives to stimulate tourism development, with the expansion of tourism infrastructure aimed at high-end tourists forming a key component of this strategy. Little investment has, however, been made in tourism infrastructure targeting those markets that prefer to avoid high-end tourism facilities. In this respect backpacker tourists and their preferred accommodation type, backpacker hostels, are a case in point. Despite backpacker tourism being largely ignored in national tourism development initiatives, backpacker tourism is increasingly popular in South Africa. This paper focuses on the recent proliferation of backpacker tourism in this country and seeks to convey the results of the first nation-wide exploration in this regard. The paper has two main objectives. Firstly, it seeks to present broad-ranging empirical data concerning this tourist cohort and their preferred accommodation type- backpacker hostels in the South African context. Secondly, it aims to demonstrate why backpacker tourists and hostels hold much potential for local development initiatives in South Africa. In the light of the findings of this study, the paper concludes that the expansion of backpacker tourism to this country might form an appropriate means by which to achieve a range of local development objectives. 1 Introduction South Africa has recorded considerable growth in tourism activity over the past decade. In fact, with more than 6 million visitors in 2002, the country attracts more international tourists than any other African country and, with a 12% annual growth rate, has the highest tourism growth rate in the world (SAT, 2003). In the light of the vast range of economic sectors that gain from tourism development, it is not surprising that the South African government has accorded tourism expansion a central position in national development initiatives. Subsequently, the national government has instituted a range of incentives and initiatives to stimulate tourism development, with the expansion of tourism infrastructure forming a key component of this strategy (Rogerson, 2002a). In response, public, private and corporate assistance and investment have led to a proliferation of mass tourism projects such as guest houses, hotels, lodges, tourist routes and casino developments (Seif, 2000). Little investment has, however, been made in tourism infrastructure targeting those international tourism markets that prefer to avoid these types of facilities. In this respect, backpacker tourists and their preferred accommodation type, backpacker hostels, are a case in point. Backpacking is becoming increasingly popular among certain categories of tourists, leading to wide-ranging economic, social, cultural and environmental development impacts in those regions they visit (see, for example, Hampton, 1998; Scheyvens, 2002). These impacts have been shown to correlate closely to personal characteristics that define a person as a backpacker tourist. Although backpackers have been described in many ways, Hampton (1998, p. 641) reports that these tourists are generally seen as independent tourists who survive on under $15 per day, use local transport, carry all their belongings on their back, bargain for goods and services while guarding against over-charging, avoid crowds and discover new places. Similarly, Scheyvens (2002) suggests that the term backpacker in Australia, New Zealand and south and south-east Asia is widely used by the tourism industry, participants themselves, and host communities as a description of predominantly young, budget tourists on extended vacations or working holidays. Thus, taken as a whole, backpacker tourists as a sub-sector of international budget tourism are perhaps best described as tourists with characteristics that include communication networks; a demand for cheap accommodation; and a parallel structure of transport, restaurants, and support services (Hampton, 1998). In many ways these characteristics explain why the potential contribution of backpacking to tourism development has remained frustrated, both in South Africa and further afield. Indeed, the lack of interest in backpackers as a tourist cohort can largely be ascribed to government planners view that the targeting of the more conventional mass foreign tourism sectors is the best strategy for rapid economic PDF-OUTPUT G tex; 4/05/2004; 7:12; p.1 CP; DISK Gr.: , GEJO TDSA8 (gejokap:a4fam) v.1.2

2 2 and social development. As a consequence, the backpacker sector is at best tacitly ignored, or at worst actively discouraged by tourism planning officials. This paper focuses on the recent proliferation of backpacker tourism in South Africa and seeks to convey the results of the first nationwide exploration in this regard. The paper has two main objectives. Firstly, it seeks to present broad-ranging empirical data concerning this tourist cohort and their preferred accommodation type backpacker hostels in the South African context. Secondly, it aims to demonstrate why backpacker tourists and hostels hold much potential for local development initiatives in South Africa. These concerns are explored in five sections. The first section outlines the different data sources employed in this investigation. Drawing on international experiences, the second section provides a backdrop as to why the investigation of backpackertourists and backpacker hostels is important to tourism-led development. The focus then turns to the South African situation, with the third section briefly describing the spatio-temporal development of backpacker establishments locally. In the fourth section an analysis is provided of backpacker hostels as economic units and in the fifth, the backpacker as a tourist type is investigated. The final section considers the impact of backpackers and backpacker hostels on a larger canvas, focusing in particular on their contribution to local development. Study methodology The paper draws on data from three different surveys. The first consists of a questionnaire survey conducted among backpacker hostel owners in September Using a number of printed and web-based sources, 118 backpacker establishments were identified in South Africa at that time. 1 Through telephone interviews, all hostels were contacted, with 36 (30%) being willing to participate in the survey. Personal interviews with various tourism experts supplemented the questionnaire data and augmented the insights gleaned from the literature regarding tourism and tourist accommodation, including backpackers and their potential local economic development impacts. The second data source is a questionnaire survey covering 56 individual items administered in the coastal provinces, as well as Gauteng and Mpumalanga from mid-november to the end of December In total, 249 in-depth, intercept interviews were completed. It must be pointed out that the statistical sampling method is not perfect and the focus of the research is exploratory in nature. Indeed, sampling was quite difficult, as the precise dimensions of the universum are unknown. In the light thereof it was decided to take a 0.1% sample of the estimated 211,000 backpackers visiting the country according to South African Tourism (SAT, 2002). Therefore, a minimum of 210 questionnaires had to be completed across the country to ensure statistical significance. Since 249 questionnaires were completed, we are confident that our results hold statistical merit. These data sets have been supplemented by a third survey, consisting of basic visitor-book information donated by BTSA-KZN. Of the 770 questionnaires of the latter survey, 550 were usable. On the whole the data sources cover basic questions concerning the type of tourists visiting backpacker hostels in South Africa, focusing on all manner of personal attributes, travel patterns, activity preferences and the like. In this respect this is a first within the South African academic analysis of the backpacker phenomenon. Before addressing these results, however, some remarks concerning the broader significance of backpacker tourism to South Africa need to be considered. New tourism, economic development and backpacker tourists The South African Tourism White Paper (1996) has provided the policy framework for tourism development and identified a number of constraints facing the industry and its potential to achieve such objectives as job creation, black economic empowerment and small, medium and micro-enterprise development, with a view to local economic development (Seif, 2000). The White Paper, along with a number of policy commentators, points out that if the full potential of South Africa s tourism industry is to be realised, and if South Africa is to maximise its comparative advantage as an eco- and cultural tourism destination, then mechanisms must be found to enable community-based and other structurally disadvantaged tourism enterprises to profit meaningfully from international and domestic market opportunities. However, despite government and tourism industry claims, the bulk of public and corporate assistance to community-based enterprises has focussed on mass tourism, supply-side projects such as guest houses, lodges, tourist routes, cultural villages and the like. This in turn would appear to have limited the impact of tourism as a tool towards achieving local economic development that benefits the most marginalised in South Africa (see Rogerson, 2001a). Although a rich international literature has developed on the linkages between tourism and economic development, little South African-based research has focused explicitly on tourism as a development strategy. Recently, however, there has been an upsurge in the exploration of the linkages between tourism and development strategies, with Rogerson (2001a, b, c, 2002a, b, c) taking the lead in a series of investigations into what might be termed tourism-led local economic development strategies. Rogerson (2002a, p. 144) notes that since 1994 national government has launched several initiatives to promote or support economic development across South Africa through tourism. It is suggested that, beyond campaigns for marketing South Africa to international tourists, the most notable of these include the launching of the Spatial Development Initiative programme and the first steps towards a South African development framework for tourism, which identifies a set of tourism development areas linked to defined clusters of opportunity (Rogerson, 2001a, p. 144; also see Rogerson, 2001a, for an extensive discussion). Alongside of these nationally driven initiatives for linking tourism and development, however, there are a number of similar local-level initiatives, involving G tex; 4/05/2004; 7:12; p.2

3 3 interventions focussing on the development of poor black communities (Rogerson, 2001b). The recent debates on smaller-scale tourism-led local economic development must be considered against the backdrop of a number of studies that have demonstrated that the so-called mainstream tourism model of the 1950s to 1970s has many negative impacts. The mainstream model of tourism development is dominated by large capitalist enterprises that operate according to the dictates of market competition and technological efficiency (Rogerson, 2001a). As has been witnessed in several developing world regions, these tourism projects often find their spatial expression in enclave tourism resort developments (Telfer, 2002). The international literature abounds with examples suggesting that the overall experience of this tourism model as beneficial to local economic development has been limited (for extensive discussion see Sharpley and Telfer, 2002). In addition, such developments exhibit a range of negative social, cultural and environmental outcomes (Hashimoto, 2002; Southgate and Sharpley, 2002). In the light thereof, several scholars and policy developers have aimed to outline tourism-led development strategies that draw upon a new tourism or alternative tourism model. Rogerson (2001a, p. 125) reports that the notion of new tourism/alternative tourism is based on observed changes in the preference of international tourists away from mass packaged forms of tourism. It is suggested that key features of this new type of tourism include a shift away from mass tourism to individual or smaller-group travel, and from packaged tour programmes to more flexible travel options. Moreover, the focus of these tourism engagements is shifting from the so-called sun, sea and sand attractions to new forms of tourism involving travelling, trekking, and trucking experiences. In addition, this form of tourism is associated with a shift away from tinsel and junk towards a search for more real, natural and authentic forms of tourism or travel experience (Rogerson, 2001a). Rogerson (2001a, pp ) argues that the key reason for the current interest in alternative tourism, particularly by government and development agencies, is found in a number of positive environmental, economic, social and cultural impacts associated with new tourism, not least in terms of tourism-led local economic development. Firstly, alternative tourism is thought to consist of small-scale dispersal and low-density developments often located in and organised by villages or communities, where it is hoped that more meaningful interaction will be fostered between tourists and local residents, with less social and cultural disruption than in the case of tourism enclave developments. Secondly, ownership patterns in alternative tourism are weighted towards local, often family-owned, relatively small-scale businesses, rather than foreign-owned tourism capital. It is argued that by stressing small-scale local ownership, alternative tourism, at least theoretically, increases the local multiplier and spread effects within communities. Thirdly, alternative tourism encourages community participation in planning and seeks to strengthen institutions designed to enhance local participation and give priority to local needs and enterprises. Fourthly, alternative tourism emphasises sustainability, both in an environmental and cultural sense. Thus, by encouraging a respect for local cultures, it also offers many small entrepreneurial opportunities through the selling of local culture. These potentially positive tourism-led economic development impacts are directly relevant to backpackers and backpacker hostels, since they constitute a key component of the alternative tourism sector. With the notable exceptions of Hampton (1998), Richards and Wilson (2004) Scheyvens (2002), Spreitshofer (1998) and Wilson (1997), few tourism researchers have explicitly examined the ways in which backpackers contribute to local economic development in the global South. However, these studies, along with some investigations in Australia and New Zealand (for example, Gibbons and Selvarajah, 1994; Haigh, 1995), demonstrate that backpacker tourism can facilitate the achievement of local economic and non-economic development objectives in several ways. The following provides a general outline of some of the most important contributions. As outlined in the introduction, a key argument underpinning many Southern governments reluctance to promote backpacker tourism is the perception that backpackers budget-conscious spending behaviour translates into their bringing little revenue to the destination region. A number of studies have, however, challenged this perception. For instance, recent research in Australia (TNT Magazine and Student Uni Travel, 2002), confirming a range of earlier studies, found that owing to the longer duration of their stay, international backpackers actually spend more money than any other tourist category. In Australia, backpackers stay for between six and twelve months; thus in 2000/2001 the average mount spent per backpacker was A$ 7 380, as opposed to the A$ of all international visitors. Furthermore, note Baskin (1995) and Scheyvens (2002), backpackers spread their spending over a wider geographic area, bringing benefits to remote and otherwise marginalised regions where international mass tourists rarely venture. In the Australian case it was found that more than half of backpackers visited at least three states, whereas general international tourists tend to explore only Sydney and its immediate hinterland. Similar patterns have been noted in Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand. In turn, the length and spatial scope of backpackers engagement with the tourism destination hold many impacts for a region s economy. Hampton (1998), along with Goodwin (1999) and Wheeler (1999), suggests that backpackers can contribute significantly towards local economic development because they generally purchase locally produced goods and services, whereas the more structured nature of package tours limits contact with local people. In part, their contact with local economies is a function of the spatial scale of backpacker engagement with a tourism region and an interest in meeting the locals and adopting more flexible travel schedules (Hampton, 1998). These contacts range from using the local bus service, to refuelling stops whilst trekking through isolated regions, to the buying of provisions, the consumption of locally produced fruits and vegetables or cooked G tex; 4/05/2004; 7:12; p.3

4 4 meals, and visits to the local bar. Such contacts can also include activities involving participation in everyday activities such as learning craft skills (as is the case in Zimbabwe), drum-making or learning to fish (Scheyvens, 2002). An important contribution to local economic development occurs through the consumption of a range of goods and services. Since backpacker tourists seldom insist on Western or Westernised goods, unlike mass international tourists, there are generally far lower levels of economic leakage from the backpacker segment than any other tourist type. Indeed, as Riley (1988, p. 323) remarked in his groundbreaking analysis of budget tourists, backpackers are not so concerned about amenities (e.g. plumbing), restaurants (e.g. Westernised food), and transportation (e.g. air conditioning) geared specifically to the tastes of the mass tourist. If a budget traveller place has an appeal to Western tastes (e.g. banana pancakes), it requires minimal infrastructure. The minimal importance accorded to infrastructure is witnessed in many different contexts and service types including beach shacks selling food and drink to backpackers in Goa, families renting out rooms in their homes to backpackers, as in Bali, or homestays in Cape Town townships and villages along the Wild Coast. The combination of cost containment and the adventuresome nature ascribed to backpacker tourists, thus holds broad-ranging opportunities for local economies. Firstly, the entrepreneur can utilise existing skills and activities to generate income, with backpackers enhancing the demand for local goods. Hampton (1998), for example, writes that backpacker bungalows in eastern Indonesia are built of local bamboo and concrete blocks manufactured in the village, and furnished with locally produced furniture. Secondly, since these services and functions already exist, little capital needs to be invested in incomegenerating activities. Thirdly, the spread of economic benefits within communities may be greater when catering to tourists on a budget, as more community members participate through a range of existing economic linkages that focus on the local economy. Ashley and Roe (1998) found that informal sector activities associated with tourism in Namibia, including the sale of fuelwood and vegetables to backpacker campers, offered a valuable means of enhancing the livelihoods of the poorest groups in society. Individuals did not need capital, a broad range of skills, or a good command of a foreign language to participate successfully in the tourism industry in this way. It has also been found that women, often excluded from formal economic activities, are more likely to operate informal tourism enterprises by selling handicrafts, operating food stalls, or working as beach vendors. Moreover, catering to backpackers does not usually require any formal qualifications; rather, community members can develop skills on the job, augment their existing skills. The development of backpacker accommodation also challenges foreign domination of tourism enterprises within the global South. In this respect it is instructive to draw on the research of Scheyvens (2002) and Hampton (1998) at length. It has been demonstrated that there is a global economic concentration of wealth in tourism, with the package tourism market being dominated by a small number of key players with advanced forward and backward linkages controlling aspects of the international tourism system. Indeed, as O Connor (2000) demonstrated, in the United Kingdom four companies control 90% of outbound charter capacity. Significantly, these companies not only own tour operators in Britain and abroad; they also own hotels, selfcatering accommodation, airlines, cruise ships and retail chains. Hampton (1998) argues that, by supporting smaller players in the tourism system, backpackers pose a threat to such corporate domination and enhance local economic development. This concern is highlighted by Wilson (1997), who maintains that the growing emphasis on luxury tourism development in Goa, which has traditionally been characterised by small family businesses, may undermine local economic development. It is suggested that the focus on upmarket tourism poses the danger that control over this sector of the tourism industry could pass out of indigenous hands into the ownership of multinationals, who might be less sensitive to local socio-cultural and environmental issues. Hampton (1998) and Scheyvens (2002) suggest that when communities control their own tourism enterprises, as is more common where they provide for the budget sector, they are in a better position to participate in local tourism enterprises through which wider development goals and the well-being of their people can be promoted. Indeed, given the political will to constrain the larger players, backpacker tourism could increase local participation in real development, (and be) part of a more sustainable long-term strategy which attempts to balance local economic development needs against powerful interests wishing to build large international tourism resorts (Hampton, 1998, p. 655). In the light of the foregoing, there is clear evidence that backpackers provide many potential benefits for local development. The question is whether these benefits are materialising in the South African backpacker industry. The spatio-temporal development of the backpacker industry South Africa Currently, there is no published research on backpacker tourism in the local context, although Courtney-Clark (2001) conducted an exploratory study in Cape Town. In terms of the national scale, particularly with regard to backpacker tourism and local development, no studies appear to have been conducted locally. This can be attributed to the youthfulness of this tourism sector in South Africa. Indeed, backpacker establishments appear to be the most recent tourism accommodation type to have emerged in the South African tourism accommodation system. Whereas the late 1980s and 1990s can be seen as a period of largescale guest house expansion (Visser and Van Huyssteen, 1999), the late 1990s appear to have been the period during which backpacker hostel development began in earnest. The first backpacker establishments started in a number of metropolitan locations, but also in deep rural areas such as Fouriesburg (Rustler s Valley), from the late 1980s. It is clear that initially these hostels made a very hesitant entry G tex; 4/05/2004; 7:12; p.4

5 5 onto the tourist accommodation scene, with the real takeoff only occurring in the late 1990s. Backpacker hostels appear to have found a niche in the tourism accommodation market left vacant by the nature of developments in the country s hotel and guest house industries. In particular, the under-servicing of the lower-cost or budget accommodation market by hotels and guest houses appears to have been the stimulus behind the establishment of this tourist accommodation type. Indeed, it is self-evident that the dramatic increase in international tourists to South Africa since the demise of apartheid broadened the range of visitor types to the country, with more budget-conscious and independent tourists inevitably comprising part of this influx. Consequently, their presence has stimulated a demand for appropriate accommodation such as backpacker hostels. There are currently 118 backpacker hostels registered with the nine provincial tourism boards in South Africa. The largest proportion of backpacker establishments is found in South Africa s main tourist destination region: the Western Cape Province (Figure 2). The province accounts for no less than a third of these establishment, with Cape Town hosting 29% of all backpackers nationally and 46% of the provincial total. The two coastal provinces of the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal account for a further 60%, and Gauteng 14%. At the national level, the distribution of backpacker establishments broadly reflects the overall distribution of the main South African tourism product. In addition, concentrations of backpacker hostels are found along the main tourist route of the Garden Route. The most surprising aspect of this distribution is the under-representation of the important tourism region of Mpumalanga Province. At the regional level the spatial distribution of hostels reflects the overall distribution of tourist accommodation and tourism products in those locations, with hostel concentrations found, for example, found in the holiday resort towns such as Hermanus, Mossel Bay, Knysna, Plettenberg Bay and further along the coast. At the regional level, however, it is also important to note that at least in part, the geographies of backpacker establishments are structured by factors other than the tourism resource base. The fact that the backpacker tourists generally follow a specific route or routes, using public rather than private transport, is an important contributing factor with regard to the regional distribution of backpacker hostels. A significant development in this respect is that backpacker establishments have developed a somewhat dialectical relationship with the Baz Bus service provider. This bus service was specifically designed for budget travellers, fetching and dropping off tourists at backpacker hostels or lodges around the country. Unlike other bus services such as Intercity, Intercape or Greyhound, passengers buy one ticket to their final destination and can hop on, hop off wherever and as often as they wish with no time limit. Whereas the route was initially developed around established backpacker concentrations, the very existence of this bus route has subsequently structured the geography of backpacker establishments more generally (Malherbe, 2002). There are five main return routes from Cape Town to Port Elizabeth, Port Elizabeth to Durban, Durban to Manzini in Swaziland and Manzini to Johannesburg and Pretoria, as well as Pretoria to Durban via the Northern Drakensberg, with costs varying from around R 800 for the first leg to nearly R 2000 for the trip from Cape Town to Johannesburg. In considering the distribution of backpacker hostels at the regional level it is noticeable that most of them are located along these routes. Thus, in explaining the regional distribution of backpacker establishments, causality can be ascribed to the main backpacker bus route, particularly since the main growth spurt of backpacker accommodation follows the establishment of these bus routes. In considering the spatial distribution of backpackers, it is interesting to note that, as is the case in other international tourism destinations, backpacker establishments are also found in parts of the country that are not generally part of international tourists travel routes. Whereas there are no exceptionally out-of-the-way backpacker establishments along the internationally known Garden Route, those in Hogsback, Coffee Bay, Kokstad, Ficksburg and Clarens deviate substantially from the well-known international routes. In this respect, the location of backpacker hostels might be conducive to the opening up of new territory for tourism markets. Lastly, at the micro-scale, the spatial distribution of backpacker hostels is diverse, although there appears to be a tendency for the clustering of hostels in central parts of the metropolitan regions though outside the central business districts themselves. The only apparent exception to the general distribution pattern occurs in Cape Town, where a number of backpacker hostels are located in, or in close proximity to, the central business district. Taken as a whole, the significance of these particular establishments is that they connect the internationally known gateways of Cape Town and Johannesburg, and internationalised tourism corridors routes such as the Garden Route, to regions generally ignored by conventional mass international tourist flows. Consequently, backpacker tourists potentially engage a far larger part of South Africa, spreading their impact further across the country s space economy. The form and function of backpacker hostels in South Africa Backpacker hostels as physical structures cover a range of sizes, styles and locations. Thus, a description of the typical backpacker hostel is difficult. Indicative of such variance is the fact that, for example, one particular backpacker hostel was established in an old disused school building; others were established in large family homes or old hotels; while others were specifically built for their current purpose. Information concerning the cost of developing the backpacker hostels cannot be seen as reliable, and hence no clear indication can be given of the capital cost of establishing the hostels. The survey did, however, find that nearly 40% of the hostels were properties previously owned for different purposes and later converted for their current use. Significantly, however, 60% of the properties were purchased specifically with their use as backpacker hostels in mind. The cost of G tex; 4/05/2004; 7:12; p.5

6 6 Figure 1. The spatial distribution of backpacker hostels in South Africa. renovating or converting properties for their current purpose did not display any general trend, and ranged from as little as R to as much as R400,000. For those properties specifically purchased for use as backpacker hostels, capital input ranged from as little as R70,000, to the most frequently mentioned amount of R500,000 to R600,000, to as much as R700,000. The purchasing price at a very general level did reflect the higher cost of property in major urban centres, as opposed to properties in smaller, deep rural towns. In most cases it was indicated that the sourcing of building materials and building contractors for conversion or building of the backpacker hostel occurred locally (i.e., in theimmediateareainwhichthehostel is located). In terms of basic furnishing for the hostels, such as stoves, beds, bed linen, lighting, bathroom tiles and fittings, the situation was somewhat different. In larger urban centres, all purchasing took place mainly at large South African-owned and operated retail outlets, in the area where the hostels are located. However, in the smaller towns and hamlets, sourcing of materials was far more complex. A case in point is a hostel in Barkely East that used retail outlets in distantly located Bloemfontein, Aliwal North and East London. This is also true of hostels in small towns in the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal, where basic furnishings came from the larger towns or cities. On the other hand, in terms of daily requirements such as foodstuffs and cleaning materials, local retail outlets are seemingly sufficient. Although there is no direct correlation between tourist capacity and location, the survey suggests that the larger backpacker establishments are found in the metropolitan regions of Cape Town, Durban and Johannesburg, with smaller ones in the more remote regions. However, there are notable exceptions, with a smaller city such as Bloemfontein having a hostel accommodating up to 70 tourists, and a hamlet like Clarens offering a hostel providing 40 beds. Although there is a very large variation in the number of bed spaces available, it was found that on the whole, 56% of backpacker hostels provide between 21 and 40 beds. Nearly all backpacker establishments provide private rooms, generally with two bed spaces, and dormitory rooms with anything from three to twelve bed spaces. On the whole, two-thirds of bed spaces are in dormitories, with the remainder in private rooms. It must be stressed, however, that great variance in this respect was recorded. Taken together, the total number of available bed spaces for the survey group came to 1 384, of which 617 were in private rooms and 767 in dormitories. Extending these findings to South Africa as a whole, and assuming that the sample is representative of 118 hostels, the total number of bed spaces amounts to at least The different types of accommodation in private rooms and dormitories also hold cost implications. In the case of private rooms, the price per bed space varied significantly, but remained notably cheaper than those in guest houses G tex; 4/05/2004; 7:12; p.6

7 7 or budget hotels. Generally the nightly cost of a bed in a private room amounted to between R71 and R90 per person sharing, with private room rates typically amounting to double the per-person sharing rate. While private room rates displayed considerable variation, bed spaces in dormitories were concentrated in a very narrow price range of between R50 and R70 per night. It is noteworthy that not a single hostel charged more than R70 per night for a dormitory bed, with little variation between hostels in the same location. Aggregating these findings for the sample group, the potential capital inflow of backpacker establishments, if fully occupied, amounts to a daily earnings total of R89,712, or R32,744,880 annually. Extending these findings to the total number of backpackers in South Africa and assuming that the sample is representative, the total potential income can be estimated at R294,056 per day, or R107,330,440 annually. The income stream of backpacker hostels is not only determined by bed spaces sold, but is augmented by a number of additional services and functions. As a rule, establishments provide bed linen, as well as phone and laundry facilities. Most offer Internet and fax services, television with satellite or other pay stations, in addition to wideranging tourist information services, often including the booking and/or organising of local excursions. In terms of the latter, the survey suggests extensive variations in the types of activities on offer, ranging from mountain hiking, to cultural tours, township tours, wine tasting, eco-tours and diving. Many of the hostels provide some form of bar service, while meals are generally available at an additional cost. In terms of meal provision, it is noticeable that those establishments in deep rural areas generally provide a full meal service (e.g. breakfast, lunch and dinner), whereas those in metropolitan regions generally only provide breakfast, or at most breakfast and dinner. Costs for meals range from R15 to R25 for breakfast, to R35 to R40 for dinner. In most cases the hostel owners in the metropolitan regions prefer guests to support local eateries and bars. Backpacker accommodation is maintained by a number of people. Owing to the exploratory nature of the investigation, the survey did not deal with the personal characteristics of the hostel entrepreneurs, although it did in fact, aim to estimate the number of people they employ. Firstly, it is significant that the income generated from the backpacker hostels was the only or main source of income for 72% of all participants. This is a high proportion of dependence compared to other non-hotel tourist accommodation types, such as guest houses, where around 45% of owners are not dependent upon the income generated from these businesses (Visser, 1996). The sampled backpacker hostels maintained a total of 251 permanent staff member, of whom 115 (46%) were male and 136 (54%) female. In terms of the age structure of the labour force, all age ranges between 20 and 60 years were recorded. There was, however, a larger concentration of workers in the lower age ranges (20 40 years). Overall, an average of seven employment opportunities per hostel unit was recorded. If the sample is representative of the total backpacker hostel sector, 823 direct employment opportunities are maintained by this sector. Whereas the gender division of labour is relatively even, the racial division of labour is substantially uneven. The ownership basis of the surveyed hostels was exclusively white, whilst the support services component was mainly non-white. It was found that the managerial positions were mainly filled by white men and women. The more menial positions involving cleaning, cooking, gardening and maintenance were filled by black or coloured men and women. No direct information was obtained concerning the dimensions of the wage bill. However, owners indicated that salaries and wages constituted between 25 and 40% of their operating costs. Although there was generally a correlation between establishment size and the number of people employed by the backpacker hostel, there is a tendency towards higher employment rates relative to size at those hostels in more rural regions. This would seem to reflect differences in wage demands between urban and rural areas. Backpacker tourists in South Africa The general tourists seeking accommodation at a backpacker hostel are primarily from Western Europe. They are welltravelled long-haul tourists who have on average, undertaken three long-haul visits in the past three years. In terms of nationality, 29% are from Germany, 22% from the United Kingdom and 12% from the Netherlands (see Table 1). Although nationality breakdown in the main reflects the proportions recorded for overseas tourists to South Africa generally, it is noteworthy that Germany tourists are disproportionately represented in the backpacker survey (SAT, 2002). This discrepancy can be explained in two ways. Firstly, a third of all British tourists to South Africa are VFR tourists (Rule, 2003) and hence do not have to engage the local tourist accommodation sector in the same way as other overseas tourists. Secondly, South Africa is a popular budget travel destination for the German tourist market specifically (SAT, 2002). With the exception of 2% of the respondents, who were visiting South Africa as volunteers in a range of exchange programmes, all the respondents were visiting South Africa for leisure purposes. For 71% of these tourists this was their first visit to South Africa, although as many as 14% had visited the country more than four times before. This figure is significantly higher than the figure for average leisure tourists to the country, with between 50% and 60% of overseas leisure visitors usually being first-time visitors to South Africa (SAT, 2002). However, the youthfulness backpackers largely explains this difference. Backpacker tourists in South Africa are generally young men (52%) and women (48%), with 38% in the years age bracket and 26% in the years age range. More significantly, 88% of all backpacker tourists are younger than 35. This is markedly youthful in view of the fact that only 45% of the general international tourists to South Africa fall within this age range. Whereas backpackers are often portrayed as students, 65% of the sample group were in full-time employment, with only 26% being full-time students. Since no fewer than 53% of respondents worked in G tex; 4/05/2004; 7:12; p.7

8 8 Table 1. General descriptive data of backpacker tourists Age < >40 10% 38% 26% 14% 2% 10% Gender Male Female 52% 48% Education Complete Some Tertiary Completed Tertiary Trade Some Post- Completed Secondary Education Tertiary Qualification graduate Post-graduate School 19% Qualification 9% Studies Studies 20% 34% 8% 10% Occupation Professions Self-employed Skilled Full-time Volunteer Unemployed 53% 3% Artisan Student Services 7% 9% 26% 2% Gap Year Yes No 7% 93% Travel R0 R5 000 R5 001 R10 R R15 R R20 R R25 >R allowance 17% % 32% 22% 10% 8% length of <15 days days days days days >60 days stay in 9% 15% 21% 13% 9% 33% South Africa Travel Alone One other Groups more partner 33% 42% than two 14% Primary Exiting variety Friends and Competitively motivation of things to do family priced for travel in 56% recommended destination South Africa South Africa 10% 13% Previous First visit Second visit Third visit Fourth of more visits to 46% 30% 12% visit South Africa 12% the service industries, as lawyers, doctors, nurses, teachers, IT specialists and accountants, the respondents were well educated, 61% having completed at least their first degree or a tertiary level diploma. Whereas in the past backpackers were regarded as unemployed drifters, it is noteworthy that only 7% were temporarily unemployed, mainly as a result of their decision to take a gap year, whether directly after school, or university, or after the first phases of their career. Moreover, 7% of the respondents indicated that they were taking a gap year from their normal commitments. Given the differences in the occupational status of these tourists, the length of stay in South Africa varied significantly, with 36% of the respondents visiting South Africa for two weeks to a month. However, it is significant that 29% stayed for longer than three months. Perhaps most interesting was the fact that there is no relationship between the length of stay of tourists taking a gap year and that of others in full-time employment. What is significant is that 55% of all respondents stayed in South Africa for more than 30 days, which is three times the average length of stay for leisure tourists to South Africa, who generally visit for 11 days (SAT, 2002). For the group as a whole, 33% of the respondents travelled alone, 42% with one other person, who was either a friend, spouse or romantic partner and 14% in groups numbering more than two. For those travelling alone, the main motivation for doing so was independence, or practical considerations such as the fact that they had no choice because no-one they knew wanted to travel with them to South Africa. For those who travelled together, the main reason was cost-sharing and companionship. It was interesting that only 2% cited personal safety as a reason for travelling with others. In contrast to general perceptions of the unsafe nature of South African society, it is gratifying to note that these backpackers did not regard this as a key concern. This finding contrasts sharply with those of George (2003) who recently reported that 20% of overseas visitors to the Western Cape Province (which is deemed to be the safest of the South African tourism regions) were unsure whether they would recommend that region as a safe place to visit. The travel behaviour of backpacker tourists is not only framed by their demographic profile, travel partnerships and time-budgets, but also their available financial resources. In this respect international experience suggests that both time and money are of importance when studying backpacker tourists. Nearly half of all respondents had an overall budget of R or less to spend in South Africa, followed by 22% with between R10,001 and R15,000, and 10% with between R15,001 and R20,000. These budgets excluded travel costs to South Africa and any associated health or G tex; 4/05/2004; 7:12; p.8

9 9 Table 2. Backpackers daily expenses by category Table 3. Backpacker activities in South Africa Spending item Rands Activity Percentage participation Accommodation 72 Restaurant 50 Self-catering 20 Take-away 20 Bar/Tavern 50 Night-clubbing 75 General tourism activities 25 Souvenirs 30 other types of insurance. Perhaps of key importance is the fact that these tourists have budgets that are comparable to those of almost all other categories of leisure travellers to South Africa. However, the difference arises in the manner of spending and the period of time during which spending occurs. On the whole there are eight key spending areas for backpacker tourists if travel costs are not considered in the travel budgets (Table 2). On average backpacker tourists spend approximately R342 a day. This is significantly less than the average mass overseas tourist s R daily expenditure (cf. Saayman and Saayman, 2003). It must be stressed, however, that this is an aggregate amount, as the survey revealed that some of the respondents spend significantly less or more than this average. Nevertheless, when the average spending pattern is compared with the total budget of these tourists and their average length of stay, this result seems to be correct. Unlike general tourists who spend the greatest proportion of their holiday budget on accommodation costs, backpackers keep these costs to a minimum. Indeed, most backpackers allocate R72 daily, on average. This is largely made possible by the basic nature of their accommodation requirements. Indeed, for nearly all respondents, these requirements amounted to a clean dormitory bed space, clean bathrooms, a well-appointed self-catering kitchen and friendly staff. Popular extras included a bar, pool table and laundry, as well as Internet connectedness. Furthermore, the low accommodation costs are also attributable to the very limited variation in bed-space prices among backpacker hostels. Moreover, accommodation costs were retained at low levels owing to the fact that 88% of respondents only used backpacker hostel accommodation during their travels in South Africa. The largest proportion of the backpacker s daily allowance is spent on food. Whereas respondents support a range of local restaurants and take-away eateries, many of these are international or national franchised outlets such as KFC, McDonald s, Nando s and Steers. Those who prefer to prepare their own food support mainstream supermarket chains such as Shoprite, Pick n Pay and Woolworths. Although many (52%) respondents indicated that they supported informal traders in the regions they visited, practically none did so when buying food. Another large proportion of the total budget is allocated to night-time entertainment, with Abseiling 20 Adventure challenge 18 Bungee jumping 19 Cultural villages 35 Fishing 8 Game viewing 69 Hiking 72 Historical sites 54 Horse riding 7 Jet skiing 7 Kloofing 10 Mountain biking 33 Mountaineering 13 Natural sites 71 Night clubbing 61 River rafting 1 Scuba diving 27 Shark viewing 27 Skydiving 19 Surfing 36 Township tours 44 Visiting museums 53 Wind surfing 6 Wine tours 45 aggregate spending on night-club and bar/tavern recreation generally amounting to around R75 and R50, respectively. This spending pattern clearly reflects the youthfulness of the backpacker tourists and holds a number of implications in terms of the impact these tourists might have on local economies. Given the rather modest budget allocation for general touristic spending (R30), the question arises as to what this money is spent on. Table 3 provides a breakdown of the activities in which backpacker tourists engage. The international literature is not clear on the precise activities in which backpackers engage in particular regions, mainly because the geographic specificity of visited areas ultimately determine activities. Nevertheless, it is implicitly, if not explicitly, suggested that these tourists are active, adventure-seeking and more interested than other tourists in the social and cultural diversity of those regions through which they travel. Indeed, they seek out authentic experiences whether nature-based, social or cultural. Prior to analysing these activities, it must be pointed out that the number and range of activities engaged in, varied significantly among the respondents. Some visited South Africa exclusively to participate in water sports such as surfing or scuba-diving; others, to engage in typical mass tourist activities. Nevertheless, for most, their visit to South Africa was framed by the expectation of finding a range of diverse natural environments. It was interesting that the experience of cultural difference was seldom mentioned as a motivation for visiting South Africa. This is also clearly reflected in the types of activities in which these tourists engaged. G tex; 4/05/2004; 7:12; p.9

10 10 Backpackers are primarily involved in nature-based activities, with hiking, viewing of natural sites and game viewing high on their list. On the whole, these activities are either free of charge or relatively affordable. However, considering that part of the anticipated nature experience included seeing wildlife, it was notable that many backpackers pointed out that the cost of game-viewing was exorbitant, which meant that they could not participate in this activity. Interesting, too, is the high level of participation in urban activities, primarily night-clubbing. Although the level of interest in cultural village and township tours seems rather low, it is probably higher than that of most other tourist segments. It is also clear that there is a significant interest in adrenaline-pumping activities such as mountain biking, shark viewing, abseiling and bungee jumping. The respondents interest in these activities should not be considered surprising given their primary reason for visiting South Africa. This diversity is also highlighted by most as being the country s single most important feature that they have enjoyed most. An interesting finding was that there was no relationship between the total budget for the visit to South Africa and the range of activities engaged in. Taken together, however, these tourists were impressed with the value for money South Africa afforded them, and singled this out as an incentive for visiting the country and for considering a return visit. What is noticeable from the interview material is the lack of real engagement with the whole of South African society. It is often argued that backpacker tourists are culturally sensitive and actively seek out those places and aspects of a society generally found at the fringes of the host society (Scheyvens, 2002). Few respondents indicated a particular cultural or social expectation. This is reflected by the fact that only a relatively small number of backpackers either had visited or were planning to visit a cultural village or go on a township tour. Indeed, some interesting views were expressed concerning these activities. Most backpackers were not interested in engaging in such cultural experiences. Despite the range of activities engaged in, it is important to note that these activity programmes nevertheless reflect the general tourism resource base of the areas visited. If a well-known destination such as Cape Town is used as an example, it is clear that the main part of backpackers itinerary echoes that of the standard international tourists. The most popular programmes included Table Mountain, whether for hiking or using the cable car; a visit to Green Market Square; Cape Point; Robben Island; the Castle; a wine tour, and to a lesser extent, township tours. Likewise, in destinations in deep rural areas, such as Coffee Bay on the Wild Coast, activities are limited to hiking, drinking in the bar, or participation in hostel-organised adventure activities such as abseiling. In terms of the backpackers smallest spending item, these tourists differ significantly from mass tourists. Of the respondents, 68% had not bought any souvenirs at the time of the interview and 51% indicated that they probably would not do so later. For those who had bought or were planning to buy souvenirs, jewellery and ethnic art/craft were seen as most desirable. Other popular purchases were clothing and books. However, these tourists differ from standard overseas tourists in the scale of their engagement with the destination region. Thus, the issue is not so much how many activities backpackers engage in, nor necessarily the types of activities, but rather the fact that so many different destinations are visited. The single most important characteristic distinguishing backpacker tourists in South Africa from any other tourist segment is the spatial scope of their travels. As indicated earlier, most of the backpacker tourists come from Europe. When considering the countries from which they entered South Africa, however, a pattern emerges that reveals a far more interesting aspect concerning these tourists travel behaviour. Of note is that 10% of backpackers had visited Namibia immediately prior to entering South Africa. Moreover, a further 10% of the respondents had visited South Africa s neighbouring states before travelling through South Africa. Considering that very few of the respondents are nationals of these countries, this suggests that these travellers are not only visiting South Africa, but are engaged in a tour programme that involves the broader southern African region. Furthermore, it is interesting to note that 7% had visited Australia before arriving in South Africa, which would suggest that this country forms part of a larger travel route. Indeed, Figure 10 illustrates this to be the case. This observation is given further impetus by the fact that the most popular destination following the backpackers visit to South Africa is Australia, with the destinations following their visit to Australia including mostly New Zealand, but also a range of south-east Asian countries (Figure 2). Moreover, a number of southern African countries also feature intimating that backpacker tourists visits are integrated with a larger, regional, travel experience. South Africa is thus part of a backpacker route that starts off in the United Kingdom, traverses the southern African region and then goes on to Australia and New Zealand and south-east Asia. Backpackers mainly enter South Africa through Johannesburg (47%) or Cape Town (33%) International Airport. Furthermore, those visiting the neighbouring states enter overland. At the intra-regional scale, mirroring Australasian experiences, for example, backpacker tourists not only travel for longer periods than those from the same tourist-generating region, but also visit more parts of a host region. In this respect backpacker tourists in South Africa are no different. As seen in Table 3 and reflected in Figure 4, the spatial spread of backpackers across the provinces is far higher than that of average overseas tourists. Indeed, higher visitation was evident in nearly all provinces, suggesting greater movement of backpacker tourists across South Africa. The significance here is that these tourists travel through numerous regions which general mass tourists would seldom visit during one visit to the country. For example, it is significant that the Western Cape is not the only focus of their travels through South Africa, but that the less visited provinces of the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal and Mpumalanga figure prominently on their tour itineraries. In particular, the movement of backpackers through the poor and generally dangerous Transkei, is noteworthy. G tex; 4/05/2004; 7:12; p.10