Wondering whether a village homestay really helps the people who host you? Community based tourism puts local residents in charge of hosting visitors and sharing the income, but results vary widely, so it pays to check who actually owns and runs the experience.
This guide is one part of the wider topic of sustainable travel.
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| Homestay communities reviewed in Northeast Thailand | 53 government-recognized communities |
| Of those, completely inactive (no tourist visits) | 45.3% |
| Of those, practising community-based tourism | 5.7% of active communities |
| Namibian communal conservancies studied | 77, from 1998 to 2013 |
| Time before conservancies typically earned benefits | Within 3 years (hunting) versus after 6 years (tourism) |
The figures come from a study of Northeast Thailand homestays and a study of Namibian conservancies. Figures can change, so check the sources before you rely on them.
What community based tourism means
One travel-guide definition says that local residents host travellers and, crucially, the whole community benefits from the tourism income. The same Responsible Travel guide describes the purest form as tourism that is owned, run and benefits the community in which it sits.
That guide also says the projects do not have to be owned by the community, or embedded in local tradition, to do good. In practice, then, the term covers a spectrum, from fully village-run ventures to partnerships where outsiders help with training or marketing.
Because the label is loose, two projects can both call themselves community-based and work very differently. The questions that separate them are simple:
- Who owns the land, lodging or business?
- Who makes the decisions about visitor numbers and prices?
- How is the income shared beyond the families who host?
How the money is meant to reach the community
The usual model has several households taking part in different ways: some host guests, some cook, some guide, and some supply food or crafts. A shared fund or cooperative then spreads part of the income more widely.
Baan Mae Kampong in Thailand is a neutral example. According to a Mekong Tourism profile, over 30 households participate, and villagers add their tourism revenues to the local cooperative. The profile adds that a 2016 study found tourism had expanded the variety of income resources and improved local quality of life.
Pooling income is a design choice, not an automatic feature. A homestay where only the hosting family earns money can still be small-scale and local, but it spreads fewer benefits.
Who benefits, and who does not?
Evidence from Namibia shows how benefits can reach different groups. A study of 77 communal conservancies from 1998 to 2013 found that the majority of tourism benefits were salaried jobs at lodges, according to the study’s abstract. It also found conservancies typically began generating benefits from hunting within 3 years of formation, as opposed to after 6 years for tourism.
That is a wildlife-conservancy setting, not a homestay, so it is only a loose guide to village tourism elsewhere. It does show two things: tourism income often arrives slowly, and it can reach people mainly as wages rather than as shared ownership.
Typical beneficiaries, when a project works, include:
- Host families and guides earning direct income.
- Cooks, drivers, farmers and craftspeople supplying the visit.
- The wider community, through a shared fund or cooperative.
Why many projects struggle
The Thai evidence is sobering. A review of all 53 government-recognized homestay communities in Northeast Thailand found that 45.3% were completely inactive because they had received no tourist visits, according to the study. Only a handful of active communities, 5.7%, were categorized as practising community-based tourism.
The author concluded that if widespread development of homestay villages is the sole measure of success, the effort must be judged a failure. Building a homestay is easy; bringing steady visitors and sharing the income fairly is harder.
A broader 2020 review of 103 case studies, published in Sustainability, found that community tourism in developed nations shares most positive and negative characteristics, and many barriers, with community-based tourism in developing nations. The review’s record also calls for more research, since case studies have weaknesses and tendencies of their own.
How to choose a trip that benefits locals
You cannot verify every claim, but a few checks help. Ask the host or operator plainly how income is divided, and prefer projects that name a community committee, cooperative or fund.
- Look for named local hosts, guides and decision-makers rather than vague “village” imagery.
- Ask whether outside partners take a share, and what that share pays for.
- Book direct or through an operator that explains its arrangement with the community.
- Stay long enough to spend locally: eating, buying crafts and hiring guides all add to the income.
Staying longer in one place also fits the idea behind slow travel, which leaves more time and money in fewer destinations. If you are planning a region, the guide to sustainable travel in southeast asia covers more of the wider context.
Frequently asked questions
Is every homestay community based tourism?
Show answer
No. The Northeast Thailand review found that only 5.7% of active homestay communities were categorized as practising community-based tourism. A homestay counts only if the wider community has a real say and share.
Does a project have to be fully community-owned?
Show answer
Not according to Responsible Travel’s guide, which says projects do not have to be owned by the community to do good. Full ownership is the purest form, but partnerships can still deliver benefits if the community shares in the income.
Do the benefits arrive quickly?
Show answer
Often not. In the Namibian conservancy study, tourism benefits typically started after 6 years, compared with within 3 years for hunting. Small village projects may also face quiet periods with few visitors.
How can I tell if my money reaches locals?
Show answer
Ask who hosts, who decides and how income is shared, and look for a cooperative or fund. Clear, specific answers are a better sign than general claims.
