![]() |
|
|||
|
Case Study 2: The South Africa SDI and Community-Public-Private Partnerships (CPPP) Programme at Makuleke and Manyeleti (Northern Province, South Africa) This case study looks at how pro-poor tourism can be built into the rural growth and investment strategies of the South African government and in so doing, explores the tensions between promoting growth and achieving social objectives. It provides a detailed example of the use of "planning gain" in influencing private investors. The case study focuses on Manyeleti Game Reserve and Makuleke contractual park (bordering and inside Kruger National Park, respectively).
In both cases, a tender process to attract private sector investment has been implemented with a strong use of planning gain - i.e. socio-economic criteria featured strongly in the evaluation of bids - to encourage pro-poor commitments. Both the SDI and CPPP programmes are using lessons from Manyeleti and Makuleke for future investment preparation. A number of tenders were received for Manyeleti Game Reserve - all of which included practical proposals on equity sharing, outsourcing, local employment and local service provision - and negotiations with the short-listed bidders are underway. At Makuleke, the newly formed Community Property Association (CPA) was assisted in the tender process by the CPPP programme, and potential bidders were required to address a similar set of socio-economic issues in the tender document. However few bids were received, mainly due to the availability of other more commercially attractive investment opportunities within the Kruger Park, and not all met the basic conditions set down. Agreement with a private investor has proceeded and a lodge is expected to open in late 2001. Given the slow pace of the investment process, the Makuleke CPA is simultaneously working on other tourism plans, such as a backpackers campsite. While it is clear that the new arrangements will be a substantial improvement on the concession agreements of the past - which provided minimal benefit to either the State or community - it is not possible to say how far pro-poor commitments will reach in practice; much depends on translating the commitments into contractual obligations, and then ensuring compliance. The case study highlights:
|
||||
|
Communication |
||||