540
R. Pretorius and M. Nicolau
4 Assessment of the Role of the Projects to Empower
Community Participants to Drive Sustainable
Development
The purpose of both the tourism and handicraft projects that resulted from CAMP,
was to develop entrepreneurial opportunities that would provide employment and
income for the largely unemployed populations of the two rural villages and in this
way contribute to addressing the SDGs related to No poverty, Zero Hunger, Quality
education, Gender equality, Decent work, and Economic growth. In this regard, the
tourism and handicraft projects demonstrated similarities and differences in terms of
their development, implementation, challenges and successes, as highlighted in this
section.
The handicraft group consisted of members of the same gender, while the tourism
group was a mixed group. The age differentiation between the two groups varied,
with the handicraft group having the biggest difference in ages. In both groups,
the age differentiation presented problems in the implementation of the respective
projects. In the opinion of the authors, this reflected the culture within the villages,
with youngsters expected to show respect for their elders. This sometimes impeded
the success of the respective projects.
During the training phases of the respective projects, more success were achieved
in the handicraft group. The authors speculate that the reason for the relative success
of the handicraft group could be the product of their training. The handicraft group
received training that had an immediate tangible outcome and group members could
immediately attach a monetary value on a concrete skill learnt by selling their products. The training for the tourism group was more abstract and less tangible and the
reality was that the group members found it challenging to grasp what the tourism
industry is about, as most of them had never participated in any tourist activity prior
to their training.
The training for the handicraft group was more regular, while the training of the
tourism group was more ad hoc due to the availability of the academics. The initial
successes of the handicraft group allowed the group to start selling their products
to community members and as they were immediately able to generate an income
from their training, they were more motivated to pursue the project and training. On
the other hand, the tourism group could not immediately generate an income from
their training and had to wait until implementation before financial benefits would
materialise.
Finally, both groups developed trust issues in terms of their respective projects,
the handicraft group eventually disbanded due to lack of trust with each other, while
the tourism group inherently struggled with aspects related to confidence and trust in
themselves to act as tour operators and to market the village tours that they developed
as tourist attractions.
While the two projects presented in this chapter experienced successes and challenges in their implementation, the authors are of the opinion that community engagement initiatives of academics in rural areas through the implementation of CAMP
R. Pretorius and M. Nicolau
4 Assessment of the Role of the Projects to Empower
Community Participants to Drive Sustainable
Development
The purpose of both the tourism and handicraft projects that resulted from CAMP,
was to develop entrepreneurial opportunities that would provide employment and
income for the largely unemployed populations of the two rural villages and in this
way contribute to addressing the SDGs related to No poverty, Zero Hunger, Quality
education, Gender equality, Decent work, and Economic growth. In this regard, the
tourism and handicraft projects demonstrated similarities and differences in terms of
their development, implementation, challenges and successes, as highlighted in this
section.
The handicraft group consisted of members of the same gender, while the tourism
group was a mixed group. The age differentiation between the two groups varied,
with the handicraft group having the biggest difference in ages. In both groups,
the age differentiation presented problems in the implementation of the respective
projects. In the opinion of the authors, this reflected the culture within the villages,
with youngsters expected to show respect for their elders. This sometimes impeded
the success of the respective projects.
During the training phases of the respective projects, more success were achieved
in the handicraft group. The authors speculate that the reason for the relative success
of the handicraft group could be the product of their training. The handicraft group
received training that had an immediate tangible outcome and group members could
immediately attach a monetary value on a concrete skill learnt by selling their products. The training for the tourism group was more abstract and less tangible and the
reality was that the group members found it challenging to grasp what the tourism
industry is about, as most of them had never participated in any tourist activity prior
to their training.
The training for the handicraft group was more regular, while the training of the
tourism group was more ad hoc due to the availability of the academics. The initial
successes of the handicraft group allowed the group to start selling their products
to community members and as they were immediately able to generate an income
from their training, they were more motivated to pursue the project and training. On
the other hand, the tourism group could not immediately generate an income from
their training and had to wait until implementation before financial benefits would
materialise.
Finally, both groups developed trust issues in terms of their respective projects,
the handicraft group eventually disbanded due to lack of trust with each other, while
the tourism group inherently struggled with aspects related to confidence and trust in
themselves to act as tour operators and to market the village tours that they developed
as tourist attractions.
While the two projects presented in this chapter experienced successes and challenges in their implementation, the authors are of the opinion that community engagement initiatives of academics in rural areas through the implementation of CAMP