The tourism industry on Flores

This Is the thesis of Norwegian Students Who ware Helped By Me as an Interpreter During the Fieldwork in Norway

UNIVERSITY OF AGDER


The tourism industry on Flores


By:
Kirsten Marie Kvia
Stine Solvang
Hege Lovise Lundgreen

Development Studies Programme
University of Agder
Spring 2009
Kristiansand, Norway
Supervisor: Stein Kristiansen
Preface
In January 2009 a group of Norwegian students from the University of Agder, went to Indonesia to conduct their fieldwork as a part of their bachelor degree. Our host University in Indonesia was Gadjah Mada University in Yogyakarta. The students split into four groups; two conducting their fieldwork on Lombok, and the other two groups on Flores. We did our fieldwork on Flores. Our bachelor thesis is investigating the tourism industry on Flores.
We would like to thank our supervisor at University of Agder, Stein Kristiansen for guidance throughout the process of doing our fieldwork and writing our bachelor thesis. We would also like to thank MAP and Agus Pramusinto at Gadjah Mada University for lectures and for organizing our program in Yogyakarta. Thanks to Pater Philippus Thule at Ledalero for assisting us with lectures and guidance about different subjects on Flores. We would like to thank Rumah Norwegia in Yogyakarta for the opportunity to use their facilities.
We also want to thank our interpreters on Flores; Emil and Rofinus, who has been our guides helping us understand the people and culture of Indonesia. We wish them the best for the future. Also thanks to all our respondents who shared time and information with us during our stay in Indonesia.

Kristiansand May 2009

Kirsten Marie Kvia, Stine Solvang and Hege Lovise Lundgreen





Abstract
When doing our fieldwork on Flores, we found different data for and against tourism development. Flores has unique attractions, so there is potential for tourism development, but it is an unknown destination and they only have a low amount of tourists per year. Because of Indonesia’s difficult history and bad governance our main argument is that; Flores is held back by bad governance and poor marketing, not lack of potential or issues of commodification of culture and authenticity. Our main empirical findings that support this are: We encountered government officials that clearly lacked competence and knowledge about marketing and tourism, and lack of collaboration between different stakeholders. Our respondents were either positive to commodification of culture or they could not relate to the concept. The tourists thought that modernization corrupted the villages’ authenticity, however, as there is such few visitors, this cannot cause harm to the attraction yet.
In this fieldwork we used qualitative method. We conducted several interview guides, as well as field conversations and observations. We had an interpreter assisting us with possible language barriers, and to increase our understanding of the culture and context we were working in.











Limitations
During our fieldwork we encountered some limitations which might have affected the validity and reliability of the empirical findings. The limitations have primarily been caused by the scarcity of time and people.
When we visited Flores it was low season, consequently, there was not many tourists there at the time. Our questions were still answered quite similarly from most of our respondents, so for this period of the year our results were adequate. When it comes to the other groups of respondents, we think we got a representative amount of interviews. However this can always be improved, and we do not know what the outcome would have been if we had interviewed a larger amount of respondents. This is also why time was a limitation, because we did not have the time to be on Flores for both the low and high season.
We also had some limitations when it comes to the issue of commodification of culture, because many of our informants did not understand or could relate to the concept.












Content
Preface ii
Abstract iii
Limitations iv
List of pictures, maps, figure and table vi
Introduction 1
1.0 Contextual description 3
1.1 Indonesia 3
1.1.1General history 3
1.1.2 Political history 4
1.1.3 Decentralization 5
1.1.4 Environment and tourism 7
1.2 Flores 8
1.2.2 Current tourism 9
2.0 Theory 11
2.1 Criterions for tourism attractions 11
2.2 Tourism marketing 14
2.3 Impacts of tourism 16
2.4 Commodification of culture and authenticity 17
3.0 Methodology and study areas 18
3.1 Qualitative method 19
3.2 Selection of study areas 20
3.2.1 Kelimutu National Park 20
3.2.2 Komodo National Park 20
3.2.3 Nggela, Bela and Bena Village 21
3.2 Sampling technique and selection of respondents 21
3.3 In-depth interviews 23
3.4 Interpreter 24
3.5 Language and culture barriers 24
3.6 Validity and reliability 24
4.0 Empirical findings and discussion 25
4.1 Potential tourism attractions on Flores 25
4.2 Tourism marketing 27
4.3 Impacts of tourism 30
4.4 Commodification of culture and authenticity 31
5.0 Conclusion 34
References 37

List of pictures, maps, figure and table
• Map 1: Map of Indonesia p. 3 (CIA, 2009).
• Map 2: Map of Flores p. 8 (Shaw 2009).
• Figure 1: Pancasila p. 4 (Indonesia Media, 2009).
• Table 1: List of respondents p. 22.
• Picture 1: Three colored lakes in Kelimutu National Park p. 21 (Globe at one, 2007).
• Picture 2: Komodo dragon in Komodo National Park p. 21 (private photo).
• Picture 3: Traditional house in Nggela Village p. 22 (private photo).


Introduction
The main theme for our bachelor thesis is tourism development potential on Flores. We want to focus on existing national parks, Kelimutu and Komodo, and culture and traditional villages as attractions for visitors. We also want to study how improved marketing systems could put Flores in a better position to utilize its potentials.
First of all, Asia for us is of great interest. Indonesia is a big country with many relevant issues for development studies. Getting the opportunity to do our fieldwork in Indonesia was exiting. Extensive reading and lectures at The University of Gadjah Mada (UGM) gave us a good basis for choosing tourism as our main theme. Tourism is relevant for development studies because it could be a big contributor to a country’s economic and social development.
We made the following hypothesis: The tourism industry on Flores is held back by bad governance and poor marketing, not lack of potential or issues of commodification of culture and authenticity.
We have these research questions as the main questions we would like answered, and worked out an interview guide from the following:
1. What are the main tourism attractions on Flores?
2. How is Flores currently being marketed as a tourist destination, and how could marketing be improved?
3. What are the impacts of tourism?
4. Is commodification of culture and authenticity a problem?
To answer these questions we conducted interviews with government officials, national park staff/guides, hotel/restaurant owners, tourists and local citizens.
Indonesia is the world’s largest archipelago, with a population of approximately 240 million people. It became independent in 1949, after being a Dutch colony, and Soekarno became president. After this Soeharto ceased power, and centralized the government to a powerful president and a weak parliament. He created a national culture, one which all Indonesians could identify with. His regime was strict and corrupt. The financial crisis in 1997 and several student demonstration pushed towards democracy. The outcome of this was decentralization and regional autonomy. The Indonesian history has given the people a lot of different challenges, which they are still facing today.
Flores is located in the province of East Nusa Tenggara in the eastern part of Indonesia. The island has approximately 1.8 million inhabitants and the largest Catholic population in Indonesia. The people of Flores are economically mostly divided into four groups; farmers, breeders, fishermen and traders. Flores has a tropical climate and the flora and fauna are diversely rich. This causes challenges concerning environmental degradation, for example deforestation.
International tourism has grown into a global industry, serving about 924 million consumers in 2008 (UNWTO 2009). According to statistics from the Ministry of Culture and Tourism in Indonesia (2009), the number of visitors the last decade has varied between 4.5 million and 5.5 million per year. This clearly shows Indonesia’s small part in the global tourism industry.
We did our fieldwork on Flores, where we used qualitative method for gathering data.
After this introduction follow a general description of Indonesia, our study area Flores and the current situation on tourism in Indonesia. Next we will present our theories on the subjects. In chapter three we present our use of methodology in the thesis. After this, empirical findings with discussions, and then we will finish with our conclusion.








1.0 Contextual description
1.1 Indonesia
Indonesia consists of more than 17 000 islands, stretching 5000 km from the northern tip of Sumatra, to the border of Papua New Guinea. This makes Indonesia the world’s largest island nation. Of all the islands, 6000 are inhabited. The population is approximately 240 million. About 70 % of the population lives on Java (Saunders 2007).The population probably migrated from the Southeast Asian mainland around 500 B.C. Islam reached the country in the thirteenth century and gradually became the dominant religion (Saunders 2007). There is no state religion in Indonesia, but religion is an important part of the cultural and social foundation in the Indonesian society. 80 % of the population is Muslim. The rest are Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and some still subscribe to different animist beliefs. This makes Indonesia the largest Muslim country in the world. Hinduism survives especially on the island of Bali (Saunders 2007), and Catholicism is found mainly in the eastern parts of the country. Religion infiltrates the lives of Indonesians to an extent no longer true in most of the West (Saunders 2007).

Map 1: Indonesia

1.1.1General history
Indonesian history has given its people a lot of the challenges they are facing today, beginning as the Portuguese entered the country in the sixteenth century. They wanted monopoly on the spice trade from the East, and were the first Europeans to settle in the country (Friend 2003). This was the start of colonial Indonesia. The English and the Dutch entered in the seventeenth century. The English stayed in Southwest Sumatra until 1824. The Dutch established themselves at Batavia (Jakarta), and extended their influence in Indonesia by The Dutch East India Company (V.O.C) (Saunders 2007). The company went bankrupt in 1799, and the area became a Dutch colony (Store Norske Leksikon 2009).
1.1.2 Political history
The Japanese invasion of Indonesia during World War 2 started the country’s liberation movement. After the war, the Dutch failed to take back control over the country, and under the leadership of nationalist leader Soekarno, Indonesia was declared independent in 1949. Soekarno was president until 1966 when a political conflict between military and communists arose, and after CIA supported a state coup, general Soeharto became president (Cribb and Brown 1995).
Before this, the country’s economy had worsened. There were about 60-70% poor people, the inflation was high, and the exchange rate fell from 160 RP for USD 1 to 120,000 RP for USD 1. The period of Soeharto’s government from 1966-1998 is called Orde Baru, - the New Order. Soeharto began the New Order with an economic stabilization board, and an economic policy consisting of a trilogy of development; political stability, economic growth, equity, implemented by five year development plans from 1969 (Kumorotomo 2009).
Indonesia has a state ideology called Pancasila, which consist of five principles: 1) believe in one true God, 2) humanity which is civil and just, 3) a united Indonesia, 4) wise representation of democracy, 5) and social justice for every Indonesian citizen. The Pancasila ideology was defined as the foundation of all social activity, and all organizations must be built on these (Friend 2003).
During the New Order, Indonesia still relied very much on foreign investments and foreign debt, but the inflation decreased from 650% in 1966 to 13% in 1969. In the beginning of the period the students supported Soeharto and the New Order, but on January 15th 1974 the students got together in what is called the Malari Riot, where they protested on the domination of Japanese investments and a demand for justice. From 1975 Soeharto centralized the government to a powerful president and a weak parliament. He reduced the political parties from 10 to 3; the military were the main actors in politics with their party Golkar, which also controlled the district and village levels (Kumorotomo 2009).
Soeharto created a national culture, one which most Indonesians could identify with, but some of the localized variants still remained. He did this because the culture had to be ‘tamed’ for the sake of a national unity. Culture became a national resource for political and economic purposes, but specific cultural identities could only be tolerated at the level of cultural display. He created a touristic point of view on culture; culture was for display, to be viewed and consumed. Many traditional villages were ruined by this strategy and valuable traditions were lost (Erb 2005).
The main problems of the New Order were corruption, collusion and nepotism. The poverty rate was about 40% of the total population, and the country had huge foreign depth. There were human rights abuses, injustice and several separatism movements, especially in the regions of Aceh, Papua, and East Timor. Timor Leste separated in 1998, and became independent in 1999/2000. With the financial crisis in 1997 there followed a political crisis in Indonesia in 1998. The exchange rates fell again, there were a series of riots and demonstrations, and Soeharto was overthrown on May 21st 1998. The power was handed over to his vice president Habibe, and a new structure of government occurred. He opened up for media, political parties and free elections, which created a push towards democracy. The number of political parties rose from 3 to 48, and is now in 2009 down to 38 political parties, though most of the new parties have sprung out of the legalized 3 from the earlier period (Kumorotomo 2009).
The financial crisis from 1997 hit the country hard, and millions of Indonesians were left unemployed and in extreme poverty. The country’s GDP (Gross Domestic Product) has increased again the last few years, and so has the gap between rich and poor. This growth has been concentrated to Java (Saunders 2007).
1.1.3 Decentralization
After 1999, those who took benefit from the old regime were very well organized, while those fighting for democracy were not. Therefore, the new regime was more or less a continuance of the previous. Anyhow, the main agenda was to clean up corruption, collusion and nepotism, in addition to increasing democracy by enforcing freedom, transparency, accountability and public participation (Lele 2009). The decentralization plan was implemented from 2001, and transferred the primary responsibility for health, education (except for universities), important infrastructure items such as water and regional roads, economy, agriculture, and the environment to the local governments. The central government retains control over the military, police, religion, foreign policy and fiscal matters including most of the tax authority, banking and the monetary system. But the central government and the regions now share the natural resource revenues (Kaiser et al. 2006).
The arguments in favour of decentralization are the following: If decisions are made at the district level, rather than in Jakarta it is easier for the affected citizens to obtain information about planning and decision-making processes, and to gain access to the decision makers in parliament and administration. As a consequence, citizens can voice their opinions and feed their interests into the planning and decision-making process easily, for instance participating in hearings and other meetings prior to the decision-making. The informational advantages of a decentralized decision-making process, due to reduced information asymmetries between those governing and those governed, facilitates monitoring of decisions and identifying the responsible decision-makers. This will empower the citizens to hold their decision-makers accountable for their actions, much more than in a centralized system. The last argument is that decentralization will allow for a more efficient process of discovery of the best policies. This is because an increase in the number of decision-making units will arrange for different policy options to be tried simultaneously in a ‘natural experiment setting’ (Kaiser et al. 2006).
Prior to decentralization, public investments and service provision by the Indonesian government had been associated with broad-based improvements in education, basic health, water, sanitation and road infrastructure, but now highly centralized top-down state institutions appeared increasingly ineffective in underpinning the populations welfare and promoting economic activity throughout the archipelago (Kaiser et al. 2006). Another problem with the decentralization was, and still is, that the local governments were used to receive orders. When they stand on their own, the lack of competence creates a problem of bad governance (Lele 2009). The bureaucrats at the local level may be less educated and less well equipped, and local bureaucrats may not be in the same position to prepare decision-making and to implement policies. The advantage of decentralized decision-making may turn out to be a disadvantage. The resource requirements for skilled planning personnel increase dramatically, since decision-making is not only regionalized but also multiplied. The severe shortage in skilled bureaucrats can constitute a significant capacity constraint, which can nullify the ideal outcome of decentralization (Kaiser et al. 2006).
Decentralization worsens the living conditions for the Indonesia people. For instance, their natural recourses provide a big problem considering environment and conservation, as the national parks and the resources surrounding them are exploited unsustainably due to lack of knowledge, alternatives or money. The national parks are governed from the national level. This shows a collaboration problem between the different levels of the decentralized ruling system and the tasks they stand before. Among the consequences for the environment and natural resources management is the absence of policy coherence. The environmental management is politically divided and the environmental crisis leads to scarcity. The president and the people on each political level often come from different parties and this provides problems on how to rule and conserve these areas. Corruption is now more dangerous than before, as it happens on all levels. With democratization and decentralization power is divided and fragmented (Lele 2009). This affects negatively on the tourism industry on Flores.
1.1.4 Environment and tourism
Indonesia has a tropical climate and the flora and fauna is diversely rich. Asian mammals are in the West, Australian marsupial species and birds in the East, and the endemic species in the middle of the archipelago. Orangutans, tigers, rhinos and komodo dragons are the pride of Indonesia. The seas around the archipelago also hold the country’s treasures, a rich marine environment that holds a myriad of species, including fish, corals and marine mammals. National parks around the archipelago serve to preserve this rich, natural heritage (Indonesian Embassy 2009). This makes Indonesia an ideal place for travelers to visit. Indonesia, along with many other countries, has signed numerous international agreements relating to climate change and environmental issues (Saunders 2007). One of the eye-opening factors that have made the government take the environment conservation more seriously is because there has been an increase in the commercial importance and awareness that conservation is an important contributor to the local and national economy. Tourism is also dependent on the conservation of landscape and forests, and tourism is one of the big contributors to the national and local economy (Saunders 2007).


1.2 Flores
Flores is located in the province of East Nusa Tenggara in the eastern part of Indonesia. The province consists of the islands of Flores, Timor, Sumba, Sabu, Roti and Lumbata and Alor. The province capitol is Kupang in Timor. The island of Flores consists of the following 8 regions; West-, Central and East-Manggarai, Ngada, Nage-Keo, Ende, Sikka and Flores Timur (Kristiansen 2009). The population is approximately 1.8 million people (Stewart 2007).
1.2.1 History
The Portuguese arrived in the area in 1511. Solor and Ende were occupied by Muslims in 1610 to 1629, and the Portuguese and Dutch fought over the Solor Fortress (Thule 2009). In the seventeenth century the Dutch kicked out the Portuguese of most of Flores, and by 1850 they had purchased Portugal’s remaining enclaves in the area (Stewart 2007). The seed of Catholicism was sown by the Portuguese in the period from 1570 to 1770, and also the conflict between Catholics, Muslims, and Protestants. East is Catholic and west is protestant due to the conflict between the Portuguese and the Dutch. The people of Flores are economically mostly divided into four groups; farmers, breeders, fishermen and traders. People prefer to stay in their village and ‘kampung’ (neighborhood), and their biggest interest is to keep their soil/land. The Catholic religion and the culture of traditional housing are strong unifying factors (Thule 2009).
1.2.2 Current tourism
This chapter is mainly based on the information we got from our informants and our own observations.
International tourism has grown into a global industry, serving about 924 million consumers in 2008 (UNWTO 2009). According to statistics from the Ministry of Culture and Tourism in Indonesia, the number of visitors the last decade has varied between 4.5 million and 5.5 million per year. The statistics also show that the average length of stay has gone down from 12 days in 2000 to 9 days in 2007 (Ministry of Culture and Tourism, Republic of Indonesia 2009). This clearly shows Indonesia’s small part in the global tourism industry. When it comes to Flores the latest statistics show 13625 tourists to Manggarai region. In Sikka, Ende and Ngada region the numbers vary from 2681 to 6959, but these tourists have most likely entered the Manggarai region and then traveled east (Statistics of Nusa Tenggara Timur Province 2002). We could not find more recent statistics than this.
According to our informants the average length of stay on Flores is approximately three days. Flores is quite unknown to tourists, the marketing is poor or non-existing; for example some of the tourists we spoke to accidentally discovered Flores in a travel book.
Traveling to Flores today is rather expensive and time-consuming compared to other destinations in the area. There are only two air companies that fly to the island and only a few, quite expensive, flights per week. Alternatively one can travel by different busses and ferries. On Flores the roads are in poor conditions and it is very strenuous getting around the island. Many people choose not to visit the island due to the low standard on accommodation and facilities. Already when traveling to Flores we see the beginning of one of the problems the tourism industry there is facing. As with most of the tourism industry on the island, there is little or no competition. This keeps prices high, quality on supply low, and holds back development as no one needs to compete in order to get the tourists and visitors to their hotel, restaurant, business, etc. The alternatives are too few, and we see the same issues with facilities and accommodation. Here the standard is low, there are problems with water supply and electricity, and the service and facilities are limited.
One of the things that keep coming up as a reason for this is the relationship between the different stakeholders, the local government and the Tourism Information Offices. Several of the people we met stated this as the main challenge in developing the tourism industry. For instance, there seem to be no collaboration between the restaurants/hotels and the Tourism Information Offices. The people we interviewed said the Tourism Information Office only came to collect the tax fees. They would like to collaborate with the office, for example on marketing, like web pages, as they do not know how to do this by themselves. Some of the restaurants and hotels on Flores are members of the hotel and restaurant organization Perhimpunan Hotel dan Restoran Indonesia (PHRI). They are sometimes invited to meetings regarding policy changes etc, but most often they just get a letter from the local government with information on what has been decided. If they try to arrange meetings with the Tourism Information Office or local parliament no one tends to show up. This gives us an impression of how the offices work.
We were told that funding from Central government is a problem. Neither the Tourism Information Offices nor the PHRI get sufficient funds. Central government invites them to certain events that they rarely have enough money to attend. This is the only example we got of collaboration. The budget, together with policy and decision-making, is also the reason for that one of the Tourism Information Offices’ four year plan will not be fulfilled. They say that the different regions have different potential and therefore get different amounts of money from the government. For example the Tourism Information Office in Labuan Bajo get about 20 billion Rupiahs (USD 1.9 million), while the office in Bajawa only get about 2 million Rupiahs (USD 200) per year.
The current situation on tourism is also in some way affected by incidents like the bombings on Bali in 2002 and 2005, and the tsunami in 2004. Indonesia is a part of the pacific ring of fire, volcanoes, earthquakes and tsunamis. As a result of this, several countries around the world have issued travel warnings for Indonesia. One consultant to the Tourism Information Office that we spoke to mentions the poor job the government did protesting against these warnings. This stops tourists from choosing to visit Indonesia and Flores and therefore also upholds the situation as it is. As we have learned talking to people in the restaurant and hotel business, they do not expect an increase in tourism as they see that the tourism industry does not work well, and therefore they do not invest in their entities as it does not seem to be profitable.

2.0 Theory
In this chapter we will present the theories that we have based our research questions on. We have used several theories and divided them into four categories. In each category we will present a proposition that we will discuss in chapter four.

2.1 Criterions for tourism attractions
Franklin (2003:27) defines tourism as: ’the temporary movement of people to destinations outside their normal places of work and residence, the activities undertaken during their stay in those destinations and the facilities created to care their need’.
Tourism cannot be understood as just a means of having some enjoyment and a break from the everyday routine. Munt and Mowforth (2003) make a distinction between tourism and travelling. Tourists want the sun, sand, sea and sex. They describe tourism with words like invasion, pollution and swarms, and characterize tourists as unadventurous, narrow-minded and boring. Travelling on the other hand consists of discovery, exploration and understanding. Travelers are adventurous, sensible, experienced and independent. Ultimately travel will be individual enough to be a sustainable alternative to the juggernaut of mass tourism.
According to a survey (Shaddick 2007) the most popular type of holiday is a beach vacation. Of those respondents who identify ‘sun and beach’ as the principal elements of their holiday, a considerable number of these also want sightseeing, restaurants, bars and something for the children. These other key factors will play an important role in selling a destination to travelers and differentiating one beach holiday from another. For those intending to take ‘adventure’ or ‘mountain and countryside’ holidays, sightseeing is the key ingredient and this completely dominates any other factor. Sightseeing therefore features highly as a main element for many different types of holiday, indicating that people still want a flavor of the country being visited and experiences unavailable at home. To conclude sights and culture will strengthen the appeal of a destination, restaurants and a social scene are also important, and emphasizing these will further enhance the attraction of that destination.
Ecotourism has been widely recognized as a form of nature tourism which is expected to contribute to both conservation and development. Fundamental functions of ecotourism are the protection of natural areas, the provision of high quality tourism experiences and the stimulation of local economies, through provision of resources for conservation, environmental education and local empowerment (Ross and Wall 1999). Ecotourism is ideal for many countries because of different nature complexes and geological origins. Many areas around the world support unique flora and fauna, and many countries also hold a number of species threatened with extinction and are destroying their forests (Ross and Wall 1999). Ross and Wall (1999) state that the success of conservation and ecotourism in protected areas depends on the building of harmonious relationships between natural areas and local residents, between local residents and tourism, and between tourism and protected resources, facilitated by management. Protected areas should provide tourists with a high quality experience in nature, and in return, protected areas should receive environmental and economic support. But there are several reasons why tourism is not making financial contributions to protected areas; mainly fee policies, tour operator monopolies and untapped opportunities for generating and earmarking revenues. According to the Indonesian Department of Forestry legislation, all profits from tourism to protected areas are required to be remitted to central government, and generally do not filter back to protected areas (Ross and Wall 1999).
In 1996, Labuan Bajo was pinpointed by the government of Nusa Tenggara Timur province as the number one destination for that province. Part of the reason for this is because of the beautiful islands and sea surrounding the port town and the wildlife and many opportunities for snorkeling and diving. The main reason is the town’s entry to the Komodo islands (Erb 2000). Labuan Bajo is still the number one destination on Flores, but it is also a convenient entry port to the island from which tourists can make overland trips to the famous tri-colored lakes of Kelimutu.
In 1993 a study took place in the National Parks of Kelimutu and Komodo. It was a case study of cooperative efforts between the United States Department of Agriculture/Forest Service (USDA/FS) and Ministry of Forestry (MOF), Indonesia. This study was to identify, plan and design improvements in the national parks. Both of the parks are good study areas for examining ecotourism concepts and development, but they differ in some important aspects in their degree of facilities, programs and stages of development. The program would also provide opportunities for the MOF, USDA/FS and cooperating organizations to share knowledge and experiences in developing successful components of ecotourism as well as promote Indonesia`s attractions within the USA (Terzich 1994). The FS team came up with a public information and interpretation program. The goal was to provide accurate information so that visitors may better plan their trips to Komodo National Park, provide a quality interpretive experience for the visitors, and inform of activities available to increase the visitors’ time in the park. They found out that the park staff was struggling with aging facilities, lack of interpretive information for visitors, lack of opportunities to disperse visitors into other areas of the park, and complaints from visitors about fees, food, and lodging (Terzich 1994). Both ferry terminals and airports also lacked information about the National Parks, visitors arriving at these locations could not get logistical information. The team came up with a main theme; the lands protected by Komodo National Park form a ‘world of its own’- the natural and cultural history of the area has served to create an ecosystem unique within Indonesia and the world (Terzich 1994). ‘There`s more to Komodo National Park than dragons!’ (Terzich 1994:4). They concentrated on a guide for rangers based on answering questions, because the quality and enjoyment of the visitors experience can be increased tremendously by providing appropriate and accurate information in an understandable form. And they also developed an updated version on the Komodo National Park orientation brochure. The FS team noticed that if more interpretive trails and guided walks were provided the visitors would possibly increase the length of their stay (Terzich 1994). However, successful ecotourism is also dependent on adequate facilities, because successful ecotourism combines a number of components together as a package. If certain basic needs such as adequate toilet facilities are not provided, other aspects of the visitors experience may suffer (Terzich 1994).
In Kelimutu National Park the main attractions are three spectacular volcanic lakes high up on the mountain, which attracted 11,000 visitors in 1993 (Terzich 1994). Although visitor information and interpretive programs were lacking in the park, safety, site protection and management issues took a much higher priority (Terzich 1994). Successful and sustainable ecotourism depends largely upon the protection and management of the resources that attract visitors, so the FS team identified the following issues regarding Kelimutu National Park: Kelimutu has several dangerous site conditions, facilities in poor condition, the ecosystem is being damaged by the visitors walking around the area, problem with littering, lack of interpretive information and lack of clear direction for management of the park (Terzich 1994). The team therefore identified improvements to the visitor information center/ranger station as most important on their list to support successful operation and management of the park (Terzich 1994).
Opportunities to increase community-based ecotourism still exist in the towns near the two national parks. Some activities which should be explored are: improved restaurant and food service for visitors in Labuan Bajo, centralized or cooperative handicraft centers, and presentations of local dances, music, customs, and/or culture. These activities could support an increase in local economic diversity. They would also promote recognition that the park near these communities is worth protecting (Terzich 1994).
Will Flores as a tourism destination fulfill any of these criterions?

2.2 Tourism marketing
On the subject of marketing and tourism development we have chosen two theories, Baker and Cameroon (2007) and Milne and Ateljevic (2001). In short, Baker and Cameroon’s (2007) theory is about the growing importance of marketing as a consequence of globalization and competition between destinations. As opposed to Milne and Ateljevic who states the complexity between the tourism industry and processes of economic development, the local and regional involvement in tourism industry and the nature of tourism development processes.
Baker and Cameroon (2007) identify four categories of success factors to be incorporated in one’s strategic planning to develop tourism; 1) strategic orientation, 2) destination identity and image, 3) stakeholder involvement, 4) implementation, monitoring and review. They state that the essence in destination marketing requires the satisfaction of both internal and external stakeholders. Milne and Ateljevic (2001) review the complex links between the tourism industry and processes of economic development, and a discussion of local and regional involvement in the tourism industry. They address the importance of network formation for the development of tourism products and they, as well as Baker and Cameroon (2007), suggest that the sustainability of the industry may be tied to creating effective alliances between the private and public sector. They stress the importance of trust and reciprocity in these networks (Milne and Ateljevic 2001). Obviously place marketing is also important regarding a country’s development in general, not only to increase tourism arrivals. It becomes clear seeing that the worldwide earnings on international tourism was USD 623 billion in 2004 (Baker and Cameroon 2007). Milne and Ateljevic (2001) also mention this with the 500 million travelers per year and the affects that follow this, for example jobs, increase in GDP and development outcomes for individuals, households, communities and regions. As they write, tourism is often seen as a key element that can enable communities devastated by economic restructuring to gain foothold in regional and national economy (Milne and Ateljevic 2001). With tourism being a worldwide industry and the consequence of the competition following this, it is proposed by Baker and Cameroon (2007) that destinations should be able to be marketed as a product, using branding. They emphasize the importance of effective planning, and define hereby a ‘brand’ both as a generic practice and then its application to destinations.
In order to be a successful destination one needs, according to Baker and Cameroon (2007); 1) effective human resource training, 2) to cooperate and learn from other destinations, 3) use research-led marketing, 4) different strategic objectives that are listed in the article. They also write that an effective destination marketing plan will address for example, what is to be done and when, who will do it, what it will cost, measurements, monitoring, as well as a long-term vision. The challenges are mentioned as fragmentation of ownership, the number of stakeholders involved in destination marketing and the complexity of the tourism product itself. Cooperation between private and public sector is important, and that a ‘free-market’ solution would be problematic. There are also financial, political and environmental issues. Baker and Cameroon (2007) write that in order to achieve successful destination branding a balance between the local, regional and national politics is required, as well as innovative marketing communication. Milne and Ateljevic (2001) on the other hand, argues that information and communication technologies are becoming more and more important as many travelers tend to find their information there and make their choices based on that instead of consulting travel agents (Milne and Ateljevic 2001). There is great competition on this area as tourism products do not want to risk being invisible in this cyberspace (Milne and Ateljevic 2001). They note that to understand the context of local tourism development one must understand how key stakeholders like government, industry, community and tourists interact (Milne and Ateljevic 2001). One approach in the article views locals as being capable of planning and participate in tourism development, of making their voices heard and having the ability to control the outcomes of the industry to some degree (Milne and Ateljevic 2001). In this way host communities can define the type of tourism they want, and attract the kind of industry that is most appropriate to their needs (Milne and Ateljevic 2001).
Because of the bad governance on Flores, we assume that proper marketing as described by these theories is not present.

2.3 Impacts of tourism
Meethan (2001) takes on several different views on impacts of tourism discussed in the tourism literature. The theories show both positive and negative impacts, mainly on culture and economy.
It is often assumed that the negative impacts of tourism development are likely to be more significant in the developing countries of the world, particularly those that view tourism as a panacea for their economic and social problems. However, it is also accepted that cultural tourism can offer something of a boom to developing world economies, as well as making a positive contribution to social and cultural development. It can provide a means of raising the profile of lesser known destinations and enhancing the standard of living for local people. The growth of international tourism and the diversification of the tourism product have led to an increase in demand for cultural activities, which are becoming an integral part of the visitor experience.
Some have argued that greater disparities in wealth between the hosts and guests may actually exacerbate differences. Some attempts to account for these socio-cultural changes assume that host populations will simply mimic the behavior and values of the guests. Emulating the visitors, the residents, may adopt new styles of clothing, begin eating and drinking the imported food and beverages favored by the tourist, or aspire to obtain the material goods so casually displayed by him.
Modernity is viewed as both the antithesis and rampant destroyer of the authentic. The tourism literature is replete with dire warnings of cultural collapse or contamination that will inevitably occur with the arrival of tourism. No sooner is ‘paradise’ discovered than it is apparently overrun by the barbarian hordes of alienated moderns or is contaminated by acculturation.
Meethan (2001) argues that there is a conflict between the ’development tendencies of mass society and the traditional culture it supplants’. This conflict applies to the processes of commodification of both cultures and people to serve the needs of the tourist system. Following this, indigenous crafts and artifacts become degraded if they are produced not for internal use but for external tourist consumption. In short, culture cannot be bought and sold without negative effects.
But it is not all negative. Tourist-host contacts promote greater understanding between cultures and societies. Certain cultures or, destinations are portrayed as ‘exotic’, and are often described within promotional literature as being places set apart from modernity, where the tourists can encounter the untamed other in its natural, authentic habitat.
Meethan (2001) does not discuss the environmental impacts of tourism, which is here being illustrated by United Nation Environment Program (2001).
The quality of the environment, both natural and man-made, is essential to tourism. However, tourism's relationship with the environment is complex. It involves many activities that can have adverse environmental effects. Many of these impacts are linked with the construction of general infrastructure such as roads and airports, and of tourism facilities, including resorts, hotels, restaurants, shops, golf courses and marinas. The negative impacts of tourism development can gradually destroy the environmental resources on which it depends.
On the other hand, tourism has the potential to create beneficial effects on the environment by contributing to environmental protection and conservation. It is a way to raise awareness of environmental values and it can serve as a tool to finance protection of natural areas and increase their economic importance (UNEP 2001).
Can we assume that our informants view tourism as a panacea for their economic and social problems, and will therefore only consider the positive impact of tourism?

2.4 Commodification of culture and authenticity
Stroma Cole (2007) argues that the majority of analyses have taken an ethic and often Euro – centric view of the process of cultural commodification. And by doing this, they ‘fail to ask the important questions about the interface between power and culture, and the strategic use of tourism and its processes by marginalized communities in less developed countries’ (Cole 2007:944). She thinks that authenticity is a Western cultural notion associated with the past ‘primitive other’ articulated in opposition to modernity. She describes commodification as; ‘when cultural assets are redefined as consumables for tourists, their culture becomes commoditized’ (Cole 2007:945). Cole (2007) has found out that the local people’s perspective is positive to cultural commodification, while other research paper suggests it as a negative impact. She did her research in two villages in Ngada, on Flores. ‘The complex of attractions provides tourists with a feeling of being enclosed in antiquity’ (Cole 2007:947), - this is how Cole describes the two villages in Ngada. She divides her paper into three parts; the state’s, the tourists, and the village’s perspective of tradition and authenticity. The state views culture as heritage that should be looked after and as tourism capital to be exploited. Tourists seemed to prefer the villages that appeared economically poorer because they were seeking a contrast with their own culture. The villagers were not at all concerned about commodification of culture. They were proud that their villages are considered a national heritage and that tourist would come to see their culture. Stroma Cole (2007) concludes that her research reveals that tourists do indeed make judgments about authenticity in relation to poverty. If any of the villages attempts to get economic benefits from tourism, they are described as spoilt. And when it comes to commodification of culture (ticket sales, sales of souvenirs, or paying to take photographs) it was viewed negatively. Her research also show that the local government is denying villagers to have windows in their homes, and even some of them electricity, because the villages should remain traditional to attract tourists.
Maribeth Erb (2005) based her research on the region Manggarai. She wants to show that the elite uses tradition and culture to win the masses to their side, and that the masses also use tradition and culture to empower themselves. During the period of President Soeharto (1966-1998) all of the diversity of the Indonesian culture should be gathered to one culture, to unite the country: one national culture. Culture became a national resource for political and economic purposes; specific cultural identities could only be tolerated at the level of cultural display. Tourism was an important part of this program because embedded within the touristic idea of culture is the notion that culture was for display, to be viewed and consumed. Indonesians where encouraged to think of their culture as an object to be shown to others.
Will our respondents relate to the concepts of commodification of culture and authenticity?

3.0 Methodology and study areas
In this chapter we will account for the methods for doing fieldwork, how we proceeded, and our experience. It will also include a presentation of our study areas.

3.1 Qualitative method
In our fieldwork we used qualitative method as this is the most suitable. When defining qualitative methods it is often referred to as texts from observation and interviews, while quantitative methods are referred to as number material. Qualitative methods are used to answer questions about social phenomena, with a focus on relations between persons and analyzing roles, relations and communication (Aase and Fossåskaret 2007). The different types of qualitative research methods are observation, participant observation, field conversations and interviews (Aase and Fossåskaret 2007).
In our fieldwork we used field conversations, unstructured interviews and observation. These methods complement each other and will jointly produce better data. Field conversations are non-scheduled/planned interviews, more like casual conversation between people. The researcher often talks as much as he listens. Within this kind of conversations there may be important information for the study (Aase and Fossåskaret 2007). We often used field conversations, because we could meet interesting people at restaurants, tourism locations, etc. When we were on Flores, it was low season and there were not many tourists there so when we met them coincidentally, we often did an interview that was not planned; a field conversation.
Observation was important for to get our own perception on the subjects we were researching. Advantages of observation are that we ourselves experience the potential attractions and the tourism situation in general, and this gives us the ability to check the validity and reliability of our data and respondents.
Unstructured interviews are defined as interviews where the main goal is to get a good picture of the interview objects experience about the world. It is important to understand a person’s daily life from its own perspective. The non-verbal information might also be as important as the verbal information you get from an interview or a conversation (Haslerud 2008). This will give new scientific explanations. But some people do not agree with this. They say that when you use qualitative research you can get diverse information about the same phenomenon, and that the information you get is not objective, but subjective. Everything depends on the person that you are interviewing. This is why it is important to catch the variety of the interview objects opinion about the subject, and have a big number of interview objects (Haslerud 2008).
According to Trochim (2006) unstructured interviewing involves direct interaction between the researcher and a respondent or group. It is different from traditional structured interviews in several important ways. There is no formal structured instrument or protocol, and the interviewer is free to move the conversation in any direction of interest that may come up. Consequently, unstructured interviewing is particularly useful for exploring a topic broadly, but there is a price for this lack of structure. Each interview tends to be unique with no predetermined set of questions asked of all respondents, it is usually more difficult to analyze unstructured interview data, especially when synthesizing across respondents.

3.2 Selection of study areas
In our fieldwork on Flores we chose the following study areas as they are the main attractions on the island. See map 2.
3.2.1 Kelimutu National Park
Kelimutu National Park is a volcanic mountain surrounded by small villages, located 13, 5 km from Moni village, Ende region. It is famous for the three colored lakes that changes color. It is thought that the lakes’ colors are in constant flux due to dissolving minerals. When we visited mount Kelimutu, the lakes were dark blue/green, bright turquoise and black. The lakes are sacred to local people, and legend has it that the souls of the dead go to these lakes. The volcano has attracted sightseers since the colonial era (Stewart 2007).
3.2.2 Komodo National Park
Komodo National Park is situated west of Labuan Bajo, West-Manggarai region. In Komodo National Park there are two main islands: Komodo and Rinca. It is on these islands that the famous Komodo dragon lives. It is the largest lizard in the world. Komodo National Park is a World Heritage site. It encompasses Komodo, Rinca and several neighbor islands, and their rich surrounding coral reefs, mangroves and tempestuous sea with excellent diving and snorkeling possibilities. Rinca receives just as many visitors as Komodo, because it is nearest to the port of Labuan Bajo (Stewart, 2007).
3.2.3 Nggela, Bela and Bena Village
Nggela Village can be found 32 km south of Moni, near Mount Kelimutu. It is famous for the weaving, usually done by hand and still using many natural dyes. The village consists of traditional houses, which the seventeen leaders and their families live in.
Bena village lie in the slopes of the Gunung Inerie volcano, 19 km south of Bajawa, Ngada region. It is one of the most traditional Ngada villages, and is a protected site. The village is one of the few that were saved when Soeharto introduced the one national culture. The houses in Bena village have high thatched roofs, lined up in two rows on a ridge. It is the most visited village on Flores by tourists, and weavings and souvenir stalls line the front of houses.
Bela village is located a couple kilometers away from the main road outside Bajawa. It is a smaller traditional village with fewer tourists than the others. Also these villagers sold their handmade weavings (Stewart 2007).

3.2 Sampling technique and selection of respondents
When we were doing our fieldwork, we often used the ‘snowball method’, because it is a good way to find new interview objects. We were searching for people that had specific information about our subject and where willing to share it. When interviewing one person he/she will often recommend another person who has more knowledge, or have a different point of view about the subject. That way we did not have to rely on a detailed list of people we wanted to interview, we got new interview objects along the way (Haslerud 2008).
After our main issue was designed we started to think about what kind of persons it was important for us to interview. We had to find persons that could or may provide us with valid qualitative data. We decided that we had to interview different government officials, guides, tourists, local people and people that interact with tourists, like hotel and restaurant owners. Different interview guides for all the different respondents was constructed. All the questions that we thought could give us good data for our paper had to be included. We were prepared that we might have to change the questions as we went along. After some interviews we found out which questions that was most fruitful, and all of them were constructed with a focus on our research questions.
When constructing interview guides, short and simple questions are essential. This is because we cannot expect that the respondents will understand difficult words and sentences. We did not want our interview objects to be confused. It was also important to stay away from questions that had simple yes or no answers. That way the respondents would feel free to share their knowledge about the subject.
Since we are a group consisting of 3 people we decided that during the interviews one should ask the questions and have a dialog with the respondent and the interpreter, and the other two would take. This is a method that worked really well for us and it gave us good notes from all the interviews.
Selection of respondents
Government officials National Park, restaurant, hotel -employees and guides Local citizens Tourists
Ende/Moni 3 male 7 male and 1 female 2 male and 6 female 2 male and 1 female
Bajawa 1 male 4 male 2 male 2 male and 2 female
Labuan Bajo 4 male 2 male and 1 female * 6 male and 3 female
Table 1: Respondents *In Labuan Bajo we did not visit any traditional villages so we have no interviews with local citizens from this town.

3.3 In-depth interviews
The purpose of doing an in-depth interview is to deeply explore the respondent’s point of view and their feelings about the subject. It should consist of open ended questions, not simply yes or no. The interview will then have a semi structured format; the flow of the conversation dictates the questions asked, and the order of the questions. The interviewer should be conversational, but the role is primarily a listener. Other important skills for an interviewer is notice/react to non-verbal clues, flexible, open minded and willing to release power and control. When you are doing an interview it is important to record the responses by writing notes and observations on non-verbal information during the interview. After the interview it is also important to record your reflections, own views and feelings. All this put together can give you a deeper meaning and understanding of the responses.
In-depth interviews can be with just one respondent or a group of respondents. It is important that the interpreter is consistent during group interviews, so that all the respondents do not talk at the same time etc. Then taking notes will be difficult and much is forgotten when it is translated to us (Margono 2009).
There are 7 important steps to follow when you are doing an in-depth interview:
1. Thematizing. The main issue that we want to do research on. Pinpoint key information.
2. Designing. Design what you want to find out. The job of constructing interview guides starts here. They consist of important questions about the subject. Different interview guides for different respondents is essential. Actual information about place, date, time and special circumstances that can affect the interviews is recorded.
3. Interviewing. First impression is important, if not good the respondent can get reluctant and the interview will fail. Some strategies include: active listening (completely understand), patience (do no rush the respondent), flexibility (be open to slight deviations from the topic)
4. Transcribing (creating a written text of the interview)
5. Analyzing (determining the meaning in the information gathered in relation to the purpose of the study). Make sense of the information.
6. Verifying (checking the credibility and validity of the information gathered). Do not take things that have been said for granted to be true. Check the facts, if it is possible.
7. Reporting. Share what you have learned from the in-depth interviews with other internal or external stakeholders. Oral and written reports. Regardless of the means by which the information is shared, the important point is to share it. New knowledge has value in itself (Margono 2009).

3.4 Interpreter
A good interpreter is essential, if not one could lose a lot of important data. Before starting the interviews it is important that the interpreter is well informed of the main issue and what kind of data we are interested in. The interpreter should be familiar with all the interview guides so he can be prepared. It can be a challenge working with an interpreter because you are not in direct contact with the respondent. We have experienced that the interpreter and the respondent can talk for a long while, and then it is important to not settle with a short answer but to get all the information. After the interviews it is important to go through the interview and the notes with the interpreter. That way you can be sure that you understood everything, and that you discuss the non-verbal signs that could have important meaning.

3.5 Language and culture barriers
When we were doing fieldwork in Indonesia we do not feel that we experienced a lot of language and culture barriers. This is because we had two local interpreters/guides with good English skills, so it was easy for us to have a good dialogue with them. They also helped us to show respect in different settings and situations as with what to wear, ‘say and do not say’. Many of the interviews were conducted in English. We also learned some Bahasa Indonesia because it was fun for us to learn a new language, and it was a nice way to show respect to the respondents. Something they seemed to appreciate.

3.6 Validity and reliability
Validity and reliability are important components to research. Joppe (2000) defines them like this: 1) ‘Validity determines whether the research truly measures that which it was intended to measure or how truthful the research results are. In other words, does the research instrument allow you to hit ‘the bull’s eye’ of your research object? Researchers generally determine validity by asking a series of questions, and will often look for the answers in the research of others’, 2) ‘The extent to which results are consistent over time and an accurate representation of the total population under study is referred to as reliability. In other words, if the results of a study can be reproduced under a similar methodology, then the research instrument is considered to be reliable’.
Data triangulation involves using several data sources that vary in time, space and persons. This strategy seeks to investigate the same social phenomenon in different circumstances to provide more accurate data (Greene et al. 2005). We questioned several different informants and experienced that the same answer were given to most of our core questions. This indicates that the information we got is valid for that area, and that it illustrates the subject we wanted to research in a good way. We do not have enough informants to represent the entire population on Flores; however there are enough to clarify our hypothesis. If one uses similar methodology as we did, we think one can reproduce the same empirical findings and we therefore consider our research to be reliable.

4.0 Empirical findings and discussion
In this chapter we will present the data we gathered from our respondents. The empirical findings and our theory will be discussed within each of the four subjects.

4.1 Potential tourism attractions on Flores
The main tourism attractions on Flores, mentioned by all respondents, are Kelimutu National Park, Komodo National Park, traditional villages and the local culture. Hot springs and waterfalls were also mentioned and always recommended to the tourists as minor attractions.
When we visited Mount Kelimutu the short track up the mountain increased our expectations. Arriving at the top, the volcanic lakes of Kelimutu and the nature surrounding the mountain was truly an incredible sight. The colours of the lakes were different from anything else we have ever seen and the view was spectacular. The local people’s spiritual connection to the lakes made our perception of the attraction mythical and even more exciting.
In Komodo National Park hiring a boat is the best way to get around the park and to the attractions there as tracking to see the Komodo dragon, diving and snorkeling. The scenery of the park was characterized by a male tourist like this: ‘Being in Komodo National Park gave me a Jurassic Park feeling!’ We all agree with this statement as the scenery in the park is so intact and unique, especially for tourists coming from ‘the western world’.
In the traditional villages on Flores, little is changed and houses and traditions are well preserved. The locals are friendly and talk willingly about their village and traditions. It is interesting to see a totally different kind of living than our own.
The tourists we met had great diversity in their reasons for choosing Flores as a destination, such as research and special interests. Similar for them all were that they had one of the main attraction as their reason for visiting Flores, and discovered new during their stay. All of them had either Kelimutu National Park or Komodo National Park as their main attractions and in addition, all of them mentioned traditional villages and the culture on Flores as interesting sights.
Discussion
Flores is not a typical sun and beach destination, but the island is rich in culture, nature and attractions. According to the survey (Shaddick 2007) this is something that many people now are more interested in when choosing a travel destination. Our empirical findings tell us that Kelimutu National Park, Komodo National Park and traditional villages/culture are the main attractions on Flores. They are all so unique and fall under the category of nature and culture tourism. According to the theory we have used, ecotourism is therefore important for conservation and protection of these attractions, as the tourism industry on Flores depends on these.
The research on Kelimutu National Park and Komodo National Park done by USDA/FS and MOF in 1993 identified plan and design improvements for both parks. At that time both parks were at different stages of development. The main goal for Komodo National Park was to provide accurate information, quality interpretive experience and information of activities available for the visitors. In Kelimutu National Park safety, sight protection and management issues had a much higher priority. When we visited the parks 16 years later, they were still in two different stages of development. Kelimutu National Park had made progress by making the necessary changes in safety and sight protection, but there was still lack of information and facilities for the visitors. There were big information boards in the park, but most of the information was in Bahasa Indonesia. Komodo National Park had an information office in Labuan Bajo where tickets for entering the park could be bought, and the staff provided us with brochures containing the necessary information of the park and facilities. On the island there were English speaking guides and important facilities as restaurants and toilettes. The visitors also had the opportunity to buy souvenirs from local salesmen.
The Tourism Information Offices and the employees on restaurants and hotels/guides were unanimous on these three sights being main attractions on Flores. We met a few tourists and all of them had different reasons for visiting Flores. They were researchers, old couples and typical backpackers. Often they only mentioned one of the main attractions as their reason for coming to Flores, and their travel were characterized by spontaneity and exploration eager. None of these mentioned sun, sea, and sand as reasons for coming to the island. Munt & Mowforth (2003) will see these as travelers, not tourists.
According to the survey (Shaddick 2007) a considerable number of tourists would like sightseeing, restaurants and something for the children in addition to the main attractions. They concluded that sights and culture will enhance the attraction of a destination. Restaurants and a social scene are also important, and emphasized that these will further enhance the appeal of a destination. Our empirical findings tell us that the sights and culture is there, but that the other elements are not present, at least not in the standard that tourists demand.

4.2 Tourism marketing
At the Tourism Information Offices we experienced different approaches to our questions and different rules and organization. They all seemed to have some kind of projects or future plans, but they did not think those would be fulfilled due to lack of funding and put the blame on the ‘bureaucracy’. The plans and projects were vague, and it was quite difficult getting hold of what the offices tasks were. For example the future plans for the tourism office in Ende was collaboration with a man in Jakarta which takes photographs of tourism attractions in Ende, to ‘put on internet’. On the question of ‘what are this office’s main tasks/what do you do at work every day’ most of them did not have especially good answers and sometimes did not seem to know what they were supposed to be doing. The head of office in Bajawa had to look in a book to find the answers, and on the question of ‘how they were marketing their region’ he said: ‘from this year we are trying to develop a new style in marketing tourism with electronic data systems, not a conventional way but a better way’. The head of office in Ende said the following: ‘every year a group of Frenchmen come to visit Ende region, this is a good way to promote Flores’. The different Tourism Information Offices meet every year, but they all disagree on how often. Some told us they meet every four months and others said once a year. Nor could they tell us what these meetings were about.
We got the chance to interview a man who worked as a consultant for a Tourism Information Office on Flores. He was European with many years of experience in the tourism sector. He designs different proposals to develop tourism and marketing on Flores, and thinks it is crucial with a good web page containing professional photos and articles to promote Flores. A reservation of a domain for a website has been made and he recommended a commercial activity around it. His proposals still remain on paper because they always have an excuse to postpone the project or blame on the lack of funds. He even gives us an example on the poor marketing: when he visited the world tourism expo in Germany 2007, Indonesia had a stand with only a few paintings and a dance. He blames the government for the ‘anti-Indonesia image’ and bad publicity/reputation around the world; ‘they have not done anything to improve the reputation after the Bali- bombings and the tsunami’.
We spoke to many small entrepreneurs on Flores, whom all were local people trying to make a business in the tourism sector. When it comes to promotion of the island, some of them relied only on the ‘word of mouth’ or their business being mentioned in a travel book. Some of them claimed to have web pages, but we could not find them online. All agreed that lack of promotion is a hurdle for their business development, and they mentioned they had very few tourists in the low season and only a small increase during the high season. Many of them wanted to collaborate with the different tourism offices; they have an organization, Perhimpunan Hotel dan Restoran Indonesia (PHRI). But the tourism offices do not involve them in decision making, and they do not attend the meetings that the PHRI invites them to.
Traditional villages, as one of the main tourism attractions, have no marketing and no collaboration with the Tourism Information Offices. The offices only collect an amount of the entrance fee. The villagers do not know the reason for this and say they do not get any funds channeled back to the village. They too would like more marketing as that could increase visitors and potential profit for the village.
The National Park Office that controls Kelimutu National Park is in Ende. Head of office state they did not market Kelimutu because it was already known. We asked him if there has been a decrease in visitors after the Bali bombings. His reply was not a significant decrease because the tourists have a special relationship to the attraction. At the entrance to Kelimutu National Park we talked to the park staff, they thought that it is important to increase the promotion of the park. On March 21st a meeting with different agents will take place with the agenda to market Kelimutu National Park around the world, including on the internet. They informed us that before the Bali-bombings there were as much as 75 tourists a day. Then it decreased to 30-40 in the high season and 0-10 in the low season. The decrease can also be connected to the earthquake in 2002. The entrance fee goes directly to the Ministry of Forestry and in return they get funds used to upgrade facilities around the park; a place to camp, new buildings and a research station. The entrance fee to the park is 20 000 RP (USD 2).
The PKA Balai Taman Nasional Komodo and PT. Putri Naga Komodo are working together to protect Komodo National Park. Both parties have long term commitment to protecting the marine biodiversity of the park. In Labuan Bajo we interviewed the communication coordinator at Putri Naga Komodo. He thinks people are too dependent on government obligations, and they have no budget for or knowledge about developing tourism and marketing of the park. Putri Naga cannot rely on the small funds from the local government since they are a private organization with private investors. The government enjoys benefits from the tourism industry, so they support Bali. His experience is that the government care about remote areas as well, so he thinks a good collaboration is possible. He is very satisfied with the marketing of Komodo National Park. In October 2006 they came up with the slogan, ‘Komodo and so much more’. They have two well known websites and have established a West Flores Tourism Forum. They created their own tourism forum because the public one was insufficient and corrupt, and it did not represent Manggarai region properly. He said that the amount of success the park has achieved is because it is managed private, which he thinks is the only way Komodo National Park can utilize its potential. His hopes for the future are that the rest of Flores will follow, ‘the public Tourism Information Offices will improve because they follow the private sector, if not they cannot justify their budget to the local government. The public funds are to improve and develop’.
The management of Komodo National Park is based on ecotourism and visitors entering the park therefore have to pay entrance fee 20 000 RP (USD 2), West-Manggarai Compensation fee 20 000 RP, and the amount of contribution to the conservation fund that depends on the length of stay, which vary from 75 000 RP (USD 7, 5) to 225 000 RP (USD 24).
Discussion
Baker and Cameroon (2007), state that the essence in destination marketing requires the satisfaction of both internal and external stakeholders. Milne and Ateljevic (2001) mention the local and regional involvement in the tourism industry. They both suggest that the sustainability of the industry may be tied to creating effective alliances between the private and public sector. Effective destination marketing plans, human resource training, trust and reciprocity, communication and collaboration characterize the essence in the theories about marketing. Our empirical findings clearly show the opposite. The Tourism Information Offices’ tasks and projects are unclear as each of them has different rules, plans, and organization. They also had different opinions on their role as a Tourism Information Office and different view on the collaboration between the offices, and between other stakeholders. As the theory suggests these are all important elements to achieve successful marketing. The Tourism Information Offices say they have marketing projects, internet pages and make several examples of what they consider as good marketing, none of which comply with the theories.
Our empirical findings on the management of Kelimutu National Park and Komodo National Park show a clear distinction between the public and private sector. The public sectors shortcoming becomes clear when we see how much better Komodo National Park is governed, and what they have accomplished.

4.3 Impacts of tourism
The impacts of tourism are many, but the one mentioned the most from our informants was the economic benefits of an increase in tourism. All of them wanted more tourists to the island. Many of them had small businesses or knew someone who had. All the small branches in the tourism industry such as restaurants, guest houses and kiosks belong to local people. The big hotels are often owned by non-Indonesians. Many of our informants also are depended on another job as well, because they cannot live of the income from tourists. Their hope is that an increase in tourism would lead to economic growth in their society; first of all that they do not need to depend on a second income.
Our local respondents were not at all concerned about possible negative impacts of tourism, such as environmental degradation and their culture being contaminated. Neither were the government officials, though they were aware of the importance of ecotourism as a contributor to environmental protection, and conservation of the natural recourses on the island. Our informants instead expressed their concerns about the lack of tourists visiting the island, and as a male tourist said: ‘let’s get the tourists here first before we start to worry’.
Discussion
In the tourism literature it is often assumed that the negative impacts of tourism development are likely to be more significant in the developing countries of the world. Particularly for those who view tourism as a panacea for their economic and social problems. As we found in our empirical findings the people on Flores express little concern for negative impacts, they see tourism merely as positive. This is because they are so confident that tourism will lead to economic growth, something they in turn can benefit from. They have little experience and knowledge on both the positive and negative impacts of tourism.
Though we saw some sort of mimic and emulating, this will most likely come under modernization in general, and not so much as a negative impact of tourism. The exception could be to some extent in the traditional villages.
Modernization may be seen as destroying the authenticity. The situation explained in the theory does not so much apply to Flores as other destinations, as it is the traveler that visit the island, and not the typical hordes of tourists. According to United Nations Environment Program, the negative impacts of tourism development can gradually destroy the environmental resources on which it depends. The local people do not seem to be aware of the fact that an increase in tourism can harm the resources that create the attraction the tourists come to see.

4.4 Commodification of culture and authenticity
All the government officials we spoke with were very positive to culture as a heritage that should be looked carefully after. It is a tourism attraction which they can profit from. But the question of commodification of culture and authenticity gave us a variety of answers. First of all it seemed to be a concept they did not have any relations to. The head of office in Ende said: ‘there is no fear of commodification, because in primary school there is a class about culture’. In Bajawa, the head of office was unsure of what we meant with the question, but was happy to tell us that there were no conflicts between the villages and tourists interests, and that the villagers are proud to present their culture. The staff at the office in Labuan Bajo had nothing to say about the question, they did not understand or did not see the meaning of it.
The local people were proud of their village being considered a national heritage, and that tourists are interested to come and see their culture. The oldest person in Bela village said: ‘people in the village are happy about tourists and all of the visitor’s show respect’. The villagers get a fair price for the weavings they sell, and they only perform rituals when they are supposed to. The visitors can give a contribution if they want to, but they have to pay a small amount if they want to do any kind of research. By doing this, they mean that their culture will not be damaged in any way, and they would like to see more tourists in the village.
In Bena village we interviewed the head of village. The people in this village offer the tourists both food and drinks, because they are seen as guests. They like to show their culture and they even perform rituals and traditional dances ‘out of season’, but then the visitors will have to pay a small amount of money.
Our local informants in Nggela told us that the general view of tourists in the village was positive. They were proud to show their culture and sell their weavings to the tourists. The head of village had to give his permission if they were to perform cultural rituals. One of the 17 leaders explained to us that all the leaders will come together and discuss if they want to give the villagers permission to perform rituals for the tourists. ‘On request money will be charged, but it is free when it is the right time of the year for the rituals’. In Nggela village only the leaders live in the traditional houses. The traditional way of living is their heritage and they do not want to change it.
The tourists we interviewed generally did not think that commodification of culture was a problem; they did not view themselves as an element that could harm the culture in any way. For them it was more the issue of authenticity. When they visited the traditional villages they wanted genuineness, see the poverty and traditions/culture. They all said that seeing a TV-antenna, paying entrance fees or the fact that they were selling soft drinks etc, corrupted the village’s authenticity.
Discussion
The theories we have on the subject of commodification of culture and authenticity, mentions both positive and negative influences. This is also reflected in our empirical findings, although it is mostly positive from all perspectives. The tourists were different in their views, but they are also outsiders from a very ‘western’ way of life and thinking. The concepts of commodification of culture and authenticity are also ‘western’. As Cole (2007) writes this could make it difficult for people from Indonesia to understand or relate to the questions we asked them. Something we also experienced.
Soeharto`s ‘one national culture program’ ruined most of the traditional villages on Flores. Now many have been rebuilt and the Indonesian state perceives culture as a heritage that should be looked after, and as tourism capital to be exploited. Cole (2007) writes in her theory the same as our empirical findings; the government officials see the economic and political side of it. The concept of commodification of culture is unknown to them; they do not see the potential problems with selling their culture as a commodity. They have a certain distance to the villages, because they do not see the villages as a part of their identity. We visited three traditional villages and they all stated that their culture were not in any risk of being damaged, they had certain rules for performing traditional rituals and maintaining the houses in the village. They viewed tourists as guest, but they also saw them as costumers by charging money for every little thing. Meethan (2001) states that culture cannot be bought and sold without negative effects. The villagers and government officials just saw the positive sides. The tourists we talked to had some negative views, but it was about the authenticity of the villages. For them the villages were a bit too modern. The fact that entrance fees were charged and the houses had TV antennas reduced the authenticity. According to Meethan (2001) this is caused by the interaction between host and guest, were the host might mimic the behavior and habits. On the other hand, Cole (2007) states that authenticity has no objective quality, it is socially constructed and thus negotiable. It varies according to the tourists and their point of view and is a value placed on a setting by the observer.

5.0 Conclusion
The main theme for our bachelor thesis is tourism development potential on Flores. Our main research questions are:
1. What are the main tourism attractions on Flores?
2. How is Flores currently being marketed as a tourist destination, and how can marketing be improved?
3. What are the impacts of tourism?
4. Is commodification of culture and authenticity a problem?
Flores’ main attractions are not sand, sun and sea, but the potential is huge. The main tourism attractions on Flores are Komodo National Park, Kelimutu National Park, the culture and traditional villages, and all of them are in fact unique. The Komodo dragon and the three colored lakes of Kelimutu exist nowhere else in the world. The traditional villages give the visitor a retrospect into a history quite far from what the average tourist is used to experience. So to conclude; with these ‘one of a kind’ attractions there is most definite a potential for tourism development on Flores.
The tourism industry on Flores today is deeply affected by the decentralization plan from 2001. The fragmentation of power from central to local government has left the local bureaucrats who were used to receive orders, to now stand on their own. The lack of competence and skills among the government officials at the Tourism Information Offices in Ende, Bajawa and Labuanbajo, and the National Park Office in Ende is evident when reviewing our empirical findings. Other instrumental factors to the situation of bad governance are the lack of funds from the central government, how they are distributed and the lack of efficient collaboration between the different stakeholders in all levels. Bad governance might be the sole contributor to the insufficient marketing of Flores. Marketing is dependent on knowledge, plans, collaboration, funds etc. We have not found indications of this in our empirical findings. According to our informants and our own observations the private sector is less affected by bad governance. Komodo National Park is managed privately and is therefore in a far better position to utilize its potential. They have created a brand and based its management on ecotourism and accountability. This is an example of how the marketing can be improved, though it does not have to be private, good governance is however crucial.
Bad governance can also have severe consequences for the attractions on Flores. Ecotourism is crucial for conservation and protection of the attractions and this is not possible with bad governance. Without ecotourism the attractions might lose its appeal and ability to attract tourists. However, Flores has such a low number of visitors per year that the impacts of tourism, both positive and negative, are not extensively present. Our informants see economic growth and investments in infrastructure and facilities as the solution to their problems. Consequently, they see an increase in tourism merely as positive.
Our empirical findings on the issues of commodification of culture and authenticity make it plausible to assume that this is not a hurdle for tourism development on Flores. All of our informants are either positive to commodification of culture or they cannot relate to the concept. They are used to see culture as something to be viewed at and make a profit on. The local citizens were proud to show their culture, but at the same time aware of the importance of protecting it. However, as all ‘untouched’ societies the citizens will be affected in some way by modernization and interaction with tourists. Our local informants had no thoughts on the issue of authenticity, except for the rules of keeping the village according to their traditions. This is stated as a potential issue by the tourists we interviewed, as they reacted to entrance fees, TV-antennas and the sale of soft drinks when visiting the traditional villages. They felt that it corrupted the authenticity. This implies that decrease of authenticity can occur as a negative impact for traditional villages in the future. But as traditional villages is not the main attraction chosen by our informants, this may only have a small effect and may not harm the tourism industry on Flores.
This implies that decrease of authenticity can occur as a negative impact for traditional villages in the future since traditional villages is not the main attractions chosen by our informants. This may only have a small effect and may not harm the tourism industry on Flores.
Based on our main theme and research questions we made a hypothesis. The tourism industry on Flores is held back by bad governance and poor marketing, not lack of potential or issues of commodification of culture and authenticity. The empirical findings based on the information we received from our respondents and our own observations, together with extensive theory on the subjects strongly supports our hypothesis.

















References
Aase, T. H. and Fossåskaret, E. 2007 Skapte virkeligheter - kvalitativt orientert metode. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
Baker, J. M., Cameroon, E. 2007 Critical success factors in destination marketing. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 8, 2:79-97.
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) 2009 The world factbook – Indonesia. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/maps/id-map.gif. Accessed on May 20, 2009.
Cole, S. 2007 Beyond authenticity and commodification. Annals of Tourism Research, 34, 4: 943-960.
Cribb, R. and Brown, C. 1995 Modern Indonesia, a history since 1945. USA: Longman Group Limited.
Erb, M. 2000 Understanding tourists. Interpretations from Indonesia. Annals of Tourism Research, 27, 3:709-736.
Erb, M. 2005 Shaping a ‘New Manggarai’: Struggles over culture and tradition in an Eastern Indonesian regency. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 46, 3:323–334.
Franklin, Adrian 2006 Tourism: An Introduction. SAGE Publications Ltd.
Friend, T. 2003 Indonesian destinies. Cambridge, USA: The Belknap press of Harvard University press.
Globe at one 2007 The East Indies. http://www.globeatone.co.uk/siteadmin/site_images/uploaded_photo/49_03_~Kelimutu,%20Flores.jpg. Accessed on May 20, 2009.
Greene, J. C., Kreider, H. & Mayer, E., 2005: “Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Social Inquiry” In: Somekh, B. & Lewin, C. (eds.) Research Methods in the Social Sciences, Sage Publications, London.
Haslerud, G. 2008 Det kvalitative forskningsintervju. Lecture given at University of Agder, Kristiansand, November 13.
Indonesia Media 2009 Patriotisme Tionghoa Pasca. http://www.indonesiamedia.com/2008/4/mid/opini/garuda-pancasila.jpg. Accessed on May 20, 2009.
Joppe, M. 2009 The research process. http://www.htm.uoguelph.ca/pagefiles/MJResearch/ResearchProcess/home.html Accessed on May 20, 2009.
Kaiser, K. Pattinasarany, D., Schulze, G.G. 2006 Decentralization, governance and public services in Indonesia. In: G. Peterson, P. Smoke and E. J. Gómez (eds.). Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.: An Inter-Disciplinary Perspective (pp. 164-207). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Press.
Kristiansen, S. 2009 Conversation. May, 2009.
Kumorotomo, W. 2009 The heritadge from Orde Baru 1965-1998. Lecture given at Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta, January 13.
Lele, G. 2009 Democratization and political development after 1999. Lecture given at Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta, January 14.
Margono 2009 Interview guide design and techniques of in-depth interviews. Lecture given at Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta, January 27.
Meethan, K. 2001 Tourism in Global Society. New York, USA: Palgrave.
Milne, S., Ateljevic, I. 2001 Tourism, economic development and the global–local nexus: theory embracing complexity. Tourism Geographies 3, 4:369–393.
Ministry of Culture and Tourism, Republic of Indonesia 2006 Visitor arrivals to Indonesia 2000-2007. http://www.budpar.go.id/page.php?ic=621&id=180 Accessed on May 7, 2009.
Munt, I. and Mowforth, M. 2003 Tourism and Sustainability. London, UK: Routledge.
Pramusinto, A. 2009 Decentralization and administrative reforms after 2001. Lecture given at Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta, January 15.
Ross, S., Wall, G. 1999 Evaluating ecotourism: The case of North Sulawesi, Indonesia. Tourism Management, 20:673-682.
Saunders, G. 2007 Culture Smart – Indonesia. London, UK: Kuperard.
Shaddick, C. 2007 Sun, sea, sand and surfing. Marketing Week January 11, 2007. Centaur Communications.
Shaw, D. 2009 Flores. http://www.devonshaw.eu/images/compflores.gif. Accessed on May 28, 2009.
Smith, M. K. 2003 Issues in Cultural Tourism Studies. London, UK: Routledge.
Statistics of Nusa Tenggara Timur 2009 Number of tourists by regency/municipality 2001-2002. http://ntt.bps.go.id/tour/to03.htm Accessed on May 5, 2009.
Stewart, I. 2007 Indoneisa: Nusa Tenggara. Lonely Planet Publications Pty Ltd.
Store Norske Leksikon 2009 Indonesia – historie – 1 – historisk oversikt. http://www.snl.no/Indonesia_%E2%80%93_historie_%E2%80%93_1/Historisk_oversikt Accessed on May 15, 2009.
Terzich, M. 1994 Improvements to Visitor Information and Resource Protection to support ecotourism in two Indonesian parks: A case study of cooperative efforts between the USDA forest service and Ministry of Forestry, Indonesia. Alaska, USA: USDA/Forest Service.
The Indonesian Embassy 2006 Tourist information in English. www.indonesiskaambassaden.se/page12292818.aspx Accessed on May 2, 2009.
Thule, Pater P. 2009 Tracing the Portuguese heritage. Lecture given at Ledalero, Maumere, February 9.
Trochim, W. M.K. 2006 Qualitative methods. http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/qualmeth.php Accessed on January 1, 2009.
UN World Tourism Organization 2009 http://www.unwto.org/index.php. Accessed on May 5, 2009.
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) 2001 Environmental impacts of tourism. http://www.gdrc.org/uem/eco-tour/envi/index.html Accessed on May 5, 2009.
Vikør, L. S., Filseth, G., Store Norske Leksikon 2009 Indonesia – historie – 2. http://www.storenorskeleksikon.no/Indonesia/historie_%E2%80%93_2 Accessed on May 4, 2009.