Document Sample
unesco-ladakh-workshop-report-20 Powered By Docstoc
					  Development of Cultural And Ecotourism
      in the Mountainous Regions Of
           Central and South Asia

      Theme: Capturing and Sharing Results

        Report of the Fourth Regional Workshop
Leh and Ulley Topko, Ladakh, Jammu and Kashmir, India,
                   August 26-30, 2003

  The Mountain Institute, Snow Leopard Conservancy
Table of Contents

1.   Program Background ................................................................................................................4
2.   Workshop Outline ......................................................................................................................6
3.   Monitoring and Indicators ........................................................................................................7
4.   Monitoring in Practice .............................................................................................................11
5.   Sharing Results/Dissemination ...............................................................................................14
6.   Challenges in current projects (Challenge Hat) ..................................................................18
7.   UNESCO Evaluation Discussion ............................................................................................20
8.   2004 Activity Planning Schedule ............................................................................................22
9.   Evaluation of UNESCO Workshop .......................................................................................23

Annex 1 ............................................................................................................................................24
Annex 2 ............................................................................................................................................31

ACTED      Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development
AKRSP      Aga Khan Rural Support Programme
APPA       Appreciative Participatory Planning and Action
CAMAT      Chitral Association for Mountain Area Tourism
ITTO       Iran Travel and Touring Organisation
KMF        Kazakhstan Mountaineering Foundation
NT         Nepal Trust
PLA        Participatory Learning and Action
PRA        Participatory Rural Appraisal
RSPN       Royal Society for the Protection of Nature
SLC        Snow Leopard Conservancy
TMI        The Mountain Institute
UNESCO     United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
NIRLAC     Namgyal Institute for Research on Ladakhi Art and Culture
SECMOL     Students Education and Cultural Movement of Ladakh
LEDeG      Ladakh Ecological and Development Group
1. Program Background

Participating Countries (Regions): Kazakhstan (Tien Shan/Alatau), Kyrgyzstan (Issyk-
Kul), Tajikistan (Murghab), Nepal (Humla), Pakistan (Chitral), India (Ladakh), Iran
(Masouleh) and Bhutan (Phobjikha)

Brief Description of the Program
The purpose of this inter-disciplinary project is to promote community-based cultural and
eco-tourism in selected mountain areas, with a specific focus on poverty eradication,
reduction of rural-urban migration and the preservation of cultural and natural heritage in
those areas.

The project‘s first phase will assess prospects for sustainable tourism development in
selected mountain regions of Central Asia and in the Himalayas, identify potential
difficulties and promote best practices. The aim is to help avoid the spread of tourism in
an haphazard or ad hoc way, and to help ensure that the local communities benefit from

The project will also seek to set up links and to establish co-operation between local
communities and national NGOs on the one hand and international NGOs and tour
agencies on the other, with a view to involving the local population in income-generation
activities related to tourism. Such activities could include the training of tour guides, the
production and sale of high-quality craft items, the promotion of home-stays and of bed
and breakfast type accommodation, as well as the development of traditional dance and
music, etc. As the project advances, recommendations, tour guidebooks and web sites
will also be produced.

Justification and background
Tourism is one of the fastest growing industries in developing countries, notably in
mountainous areas, which are often rich in traditional and minority cultures, as well as in
biological diversity. Many mountainous regions, infact, are safe-havens for traditional
cultures, architecture, religions, beliefs and traditional knowledge. In addition, they are
also important in environmental terms, since they are havens of biological diversity and
conserve much rare or endangered plant and animal species. The greater part of the
world‘s renewable clean water resources are formed and stored in mountain areas, and
such regions are often areas of great scenic beauty, making them prime tourist

There is, therefore, a need to assess prospects for the development of culturally and
ecologically sustainable tourism in the mountainous regions of developing countries. This
project will identify the tourist potential of a selected number of mountain environments,
will develop cultural and eco-tourism in these regions, and will promote best practices in
this regard. Specifically the project will explore forms of sustainable tourism that could
provide income-generating activities in the tourism sector, including in pilgrimage
tourism, so as to contribute to poverty alleviation and provide valuable sources of
employment for the poor.
Project areas could include among others, the important cultural and natural heritage sites
and/or ―Biosphere Reserves‖ included in the Man and Biosphere (MAB) Programme.
About 40% of all natural World Heritage Sites and over 42% of all biosphere reserves are
located in mountainous regions or include mountain areas. Mountain areas included in
the present project are: Tien Shan in Kazakhstan, Lake Issyk-Kul in Kyrgyzstan (a
Biosphere Reserve), the Himalayan regions of Ladakh in India, Humla in Nepal, and
Phobjikha in Bhutan, Chitral in the Hindukush in Pakistan, the Pamir region in Tajikistan
and the mountain areas in and around Masouleh in Iran.

Program Objectives
The project will work with interdisciplinary teams from the main participating countries.
These teams could include representatives of local NGOs, community leaders, INGOs,
UNESCO field offices and National Commissions, as well as of appropriate foundations,
research centers and tour agencies.
The main objectives of the project are:
 To identify potential areas for culturally and environmentally sustainable tourism in
    the mountainous and rural areas of Central Asia and the Himalayas/Pamirs, rich in
    traditional and minority cultures as well as biodiversity; as well as to promote best
    practices in the areas concerned; and
 To explore sustainable tourism practices that conserve natural and cultural heritage
    and provide income-generating activities in the tourism sector so as to contribute to
    poverty alleviation of mountain populations.

Project Titles (2003-2004)

ACTED                 Ecotourism in East Pamir - Tajikistan
CAMAT                 Cultural and Ecotourism Project for Chitral (Pakistan)
ITTO                  Development of Community-based Cultural Tourism in Masouleh,
KMF                   Mountain Eco- and Cultural Tourism Professionals: A Training
                      Initiative for Central Asia (Kazakhstan)
Nepal Trust           Ecotourism and Trekking Promotion, Limi Valley, Humla, Nepal
Novinomad             Development of Ecotourism in Issyk-Kul Area, Kyrgyzstan
RSPN                  Ecotourism for Conservation and Development of Phobjikha
                      Valley, Wangduephodrang District in Western Bhutan
TMI/SLC               Himalayan Homestays in India
2. Workshop Outline

The workshop was designed to address issues of monitoring and evaluation in both the
overall program and specific projects. However, Day One was given over to an open
session with Ladakhi participants and opportunities for everyone to learn about tourism in
Ladakh and within the UNESCO program (see Box 1 and Annex 2). Field trips were
included in the program, and these included:
 A guided tour of Leh town and bazaar with a architect working in cultural
 A visit to the Students Education and Cultural Movement of Ladakh campus in Phey;
 Basgo Heritage Site with the Basgo Welfare Committtee and NIRLAC; and
 Renewable energy use at Ulley Topko Tented Camp.

Box 1 - Day One – Ladakh and International Presentations

Welcome – Snow Leopard Conservancy, UNESCO – Headquarters, India.

Ladakh Presentations
 Tourism Status 2003 – Mr. Urgyan Lundup, Department of Tourism, Jammu and
   Kashmir Governmment
 Wildlife and Tourism in Ladakh – Mr. Jigmet Takpa, Wildlife Department, Jammu
   and Kashmir Government
 Tourism and Disability, Cultural Monument Conservation in Ladakh – Ms. Tundup,
   Namgyal Institute for People with Disability -NIRLAC, and Ms. Delden Angmo,
   Namgyal Institute for Research on Ladakhi Art and Culture

Handicraft exhibition

International Presentations
 Bhutan
 Kyrgyzstan
 Nepal
 India
 Tajikistan
 Iran

Vote of Thanks

Welcome Dinner hosted by NIRLAC at Stok

Additionally, participants also spent time discussing the UNESCO Evaluation scheduled
for late 2003.

The topics covered during this five-day workshop included
 Monitoring – why, how, when, where, by whom
 Indicators
   Dissemination of results – why, how, with whom, when and where
   UNESCO Evaluation
   Planning for 2004

This outline builds upon the workshop discussions at Issyk-Kul, Kyrgyzstan 2002. A
detailed workshop plan is given in Annex 1 as are notes distributed to participants prior
to the workshop. As in the previous workshop in Chitral, sessions were designed to
address current and emerging issues in the program as well as to provide practical
techniques for participants.

This report focuses on the internal workshop for UNESCO participants and invited
guests. In Annex 2, there are summaries from two of the presentations from the Open

3. Monitoring and Indicators

Examples of Everyday Monitoring (based on brainstorming) – highlights that everyone
monitors on a daily basis using a variety of indicators and methods to help manage a
range of resources and conditions, as well as understand a changing world.
         Time
         Weather
         Food needed
         Accommodations
         Answer machine, email
         Health, temperature
         Expenditures, money in bank
         Clothes – if clean
         Water availability
         News

A working definition of project monitoring: ―Ongoing information gathering over
project lifespan which leads to regular assessment of objectives and enables adjustments
and refinements to be made.‖


What is an indicator? – Indicators should always be linked to objectives and do not
―stand alone‖. Similarly, they should also be linked to baseline data. Indicators are a
measure of change and are neutral. They are not targets and should not be defined as
―increase in… ― or ―decrease in…‖ but should indicate whether there is an increase or
decrease. Indicators are variables that help to “indicate” whether progress towards
project objectives is being made or not.

Indicators should be…
 Quantitative and qualitative
   Minimum but sufficient (not too many indicators, but enough to tell the right story)
   Specific (who, where, etc.)
   Verifiable/Measurable
   Appropriate (in terms of scale, resources, time)
   Relevant to all stakeholders

Indicators for the UNESCO program

Participants were divided into three groups and each given one of the UNESCO program
objectives. Each group was asked to develop indicators for these objectives bearing in
mind the above characteristics, and to distinguish between those that they considered
their best indicators, and those that were thought to be less appropriate. These were
reviewed by all the participants, and the ideas taken into the field exercise.

One clear observation by almost everyone was the need to be much more specific about
the objective, e.g. specifying what we mean by poverty within the projects and in the
program as a whole (income, access to resources and so on), migration (seasonal,
permanent, etc.,) as well more realistic about the target, e.g. can nature conservation be
achieved and accurately be measured over the life of a two to three year project. As the
discussions in the Chitral workshop showed, poverty is varies according to countries and
regions with much depending on local historical and cultural conditions. Furthermore, it
was agreed to accept a broader interpretation of poverty beyond low income to include a
poverty of options due to caste, age, ethnicity, location, etc.

Participants also noted the need to be much more specific about indicators and their
description – what is the variable: number, quality, ratio, etc.

Another key discussion point was the need for participatory monitoring, and the inclusion
of project stakeholders in the monitoring and evaluation process – from deciding on
indicators to how to share results.

Common Indicators for UNESCO Objectives – Participants felt that while there is a
need to be specific about project targets under each UNESCO objective, there is also a
need to use common indicators across projects. Although, choosing indicators at this
stage of program development is not ideal, it is still worth pursuing before and during the
evaluation planned for 2003, and discussing further in the next workshop.
UNESCO OBJECTIVE                    INDICATORS                                                         SELECTED MEANS OF MONITORING
Conservation of cultural and        Natural heritage:
natural heritage through cultural   (Best indicators)                                                     Observation over time,
and ecotourism.                      Size of forest/number of trees, number of species                   Transects,
                                     Number of sightings of species ―x‖                                  Visitor surveys,
                                     Proportion of young and old trees                                   Mapping,
                                     Number of signs of animal ―x‖ (e.g., footprints, droppings,         Sighting records,
                                        nests, carcasses)                                                 Repeat photography
                                     Amount of funds allocated for nature conservation                   Surveys, interviews, register, minutes of meetings
                                     Number of community members participating in program                 (*Define participation)
                                     Visitor satisfaction/perspective                                    Survey questionnaire,
                                    (Less good indicators)                                                Interviews,
                                     Number of poaching cases                                            Business/financial records,
                                     Number of prey species (many factors)                               Guest-books,
                                     Number of tourists‘ visits to see wildlife                          News review
                                     Availability of field guides, books, articles, stories
                                     Number of people breaking rules/regulations
                                    Cultural heritage:
                                    (Best indicators)
                                     Number of documented sites (e.g., registered historic
                                     Number of revived customs, festivals, events
                                     Amount of funds allocated for cultural conservation
                                     Number of community members participating in program
                                     Visitor satisfaction/perspective
                                     Number of vandalism cases
                                    (Less good indicators)
                                     Number of restored sites
                                     Number of trainings in cultural conservation awareness
                                     Number of signs and information boards, posters, leaflets
Poverty alleviation through         (Best indicators)
cultural and ecotourism              Number of families benefiting from tourism income                   Village survey, administration records,
                                     Feeling of well-being (qualitative indicator), e.g., number of      Business records, customer survey,
                                        people engaging in community activities                           Trainee tracking, skills testing
                                     Confidence (e.g., number of people gaining self-confidence)         Surveys,
                                    Number of people gaining employment                          Interviews,
                                    Number of people gaining new skills in tourism               Statistics review
                                    Number of people gaining opportunities (e.g., disabled       Observation
Reduction of rural-urban         (Best indicators)
migration through cultural and    Number of young people in village                              Survey before and after, specify age, review
ecotourism.                       Availability of resources (e.g., food sufficiency)              statistics, village meetings
                                  Number of available jobs
                                 (Less good indicators)
                                  Access to tourism-related facilities                           (Define ―jobs available). Survey of
                                  Condition of vegetation/natural resources vis a vis rural       businesses/employees, interviews, review data,
                                     population                                                    review newspaper, focus groups, stakeholder
4. Monitoring in Practice

Participants were divided into two groups for the fieldwork. Each group was asked to
develop indicators and methods of measurement for the UNESCO objectives but based
on the ideas and discussions emerging from the field visit. While in some cases these
indicators are specific to the operations visited, many, if not all, could be used selectively
by the UNESCO projects for their purposes. Furthermore, some could be common across
all projects giving greater insight for management and adaptation, as well as into the
underlying hypotheses of the program. However, it is critical that the number of
indicators is kept to a minimum but yet be sufficient to assess progress and assist

Poverty alleviation (based on Ulley Topko Tented Camp)

Indicators                                            Means of Measurement

Number of women employed in tourism                   Interviews, observation, survey

Amount of income from seasonal or permanent           Interviews, observation, survey, questionnaires and
tourism work                                          records (payroll)
Amount of supplementary income to seasonal            Interviews, survey, questionnaires
tourism income
Number of people who gained new skills that could     Interviews, (employer/employees) survey,
lead to better jobs in future                         observation and testing
Number of people using new skills in their job        Interviews, observation, survey, questionnaires
Number of tourist groups in camp/hotel at one time    Check occupancy records, guest bills, count tips,
vis-à-vis level of contact between guests and staff   interviews, observation, survey, questionnaires
(re: amount of tips)
Well being (clean clothes, general level of health,   Interviews + interaction with staff, observation,
happiness and confidence, number of sick days)        survey, photography (repeat), employment and
                                                      attendance records
Number of people participating in co-financing        Interviews with employees, observation, survey,
training programs                                     questionnaires and check certificate of level of
Rural to Urban Migration (based on Ulley Topko Tented Camp)

Indicators                                               Methods or Means of Measurement

1) Number of people (age 14-35) living in that          Observation; census survey; questionnaire;
community at least 3-4 months a year who work           interviews; participatory exercise
outside seasonally in tourism
2) Number of tourism-related work in the                As above AND employment records
community (seasonal & permanent)
3) Number of people born in the community who           Same as No 1 & interview with families in
have set up permanent residence for tourism related community
4) Ratio of tourism income in households (from          Interviews; questionnaire; surveys
within community o sent from urban area)
5) Availability (amount & number of persons) of         Interviews with community and bank managers;
investment capital in the community for tourism         survey; questionnaire
related enterprises
The level of education is not a good indicator for Pheyang because both educated (matriculated) and non-
matriculated must migrate to urban areas for employment

Eco- and cultural-friendly services and operation (based on Ulley Topko Tented

Indicator                               Means of measurement

Amount of non-sustainable fuel          Survey, interview, No. of tourists/ weather
wood use
Amount of/ ratio of alternate energy    Observation, Interview, Expenditure records, photos
 No of CFL bulbs used (low
     wattage bulbs)
Amount of Garbage.                      Observations, photos, Interviews
 Amount of Recycled non                - do -
     biodegradable waste
 Amount of organic waste
 Amount of kitchen waste
Cultural & Environment friendly         Observations, interviews and Laboratory testing.
 Amount of organic food used
 % of traditional/indigenous food
Amount and quality of Visitor           Observations, interviews, visitor interviews,
information & Interpretation
materials / signs
Level of visitor satisfaction           Visitor survey

Visitor use / no of used beds per day   Book of records, interview of agents and operators
Conservation of Cultural Heritage (based on field trip to Basgo Heritage Site)

Indicators                                          Methods of Measurement

1) Number of local members in conservation          Membership records
committee & level of participation from community
2) Time contribution                                Register

3) Financial & in-kind contributions (local)        Register; bank account

4) Amount of external funding                       Accounts

5) Number & quality of sign boards & leaflets       Observation

6) Number & Type of visitors (indirect)             Register

7) Number of local artisans used                    Records of payment

8) Number of presentations for public               Report / feedback

9) Plan for sustainability                          Report

10) Amount of traditional materials used            Observation, photo & records

Lessons learned about monitoring (based on the field visits)

 Pay attention to the role of communities, how communities benefit, use indicators and
    how to create common understanding among stakeholders
   Indicators must be specific and understandable
   Stakeholder input is needed in identifying indicators
   Clarity re: Objectives of cultural and natural conservation (e.g. setting targets)
   Objectives – unreachable (change), more work is needed on indicators and methods
    with everyone.
   Importance of participatory monitoring in building better understanding of projects.
   Requirements of good monitoring are time consuming.
   Focus on participatory monitoring/evaluation, greater interaction.
   Importance of monitoring, use of local knowledge, materials, not achieving results in
   Indicators must be specific, time bound, stakeholder participation.
   Defining and getting consensus on definitions, e.g. what do we mean by community,
   Asking hard questions – measurable impacts – objectives and indicators linkage,
    qualitative indicators, direct/indirect.
   Making better use of resources and people.
   Involve communities, who are participating in tourism.
5. Sharing Results/Dissemination

Planning for how results will be presented, shared and used makes it more likely that they
will be incorporated into project decision-making and achieving objectives. The way that
results are displayed – arranged and presented – influences how this information is
understood and interpreted. How information is will also depend on the audience. For
example, when sharing with local communities there will need to be adaptations to
different levels of literacy, and when sharing with audiences such as donors and policy
makers, numbers may be more powerful. However, certain donors are often more moved
by the personal and more immediate impact that their resources have on the lives and
choices of beneficiaries. Regardless, of the strategy adopted it should be noted that if
projects engage in participatory monitoring evaluation then all those involved in the
process are partners and have a right to the results.

A brainstorming session examined the following questions regarding the sharing of

Why, With whom, What to Share, How to Share and When and Where to Share?

These results are given in the table below where those items in italics are those that
emerged later during the field visit to Ulley Topko Tented Camp. Other findings are the
result of the group brainstorming. The second table shows some of the findings after
visiting the Basgo Heritage Site project, and as such is a brief summary of a short visit.

The box below summarises some of the key advantages of participatory monitoring and
evaluation. While this exercise was not conducted in the workshop, it does capture a
great deal of the workshop discussion around how to conduct monitoring and evaluation
in the projects.

Why use a Participatory Approach to Monitoring and Evaluation

   Creates ownership
   Provides timely, reliable and valid information
   Builds consensus
   Builds skills and confidence
   Utilises local knowledge
   Is cost effective
Dissemination of Monitoring or Evaluation Results
Why Share                       With Whom                What to share                   How to Share                    When/Where
 Get customers                  Staff members           Profit and benefits            Local languages                When needed and useful
 Keep staff                     Clients                 Statistics                     Participatory to the extent    Immediately after
 For improvement                Shareholders            Vision/Principles               possible                        monitoring
 Prove our success              Service providers       Tourism relevant               Reports                        Regular intervals (before,
 Build self confidence          Homestay operators       information                    Presentations                   during and after)
 Lessons learned                Parachute Committees    Financial information          Stories and narratives         Twice a year
 Sustain cooperation            Other villagers         Difficulties and challenges    Free discussions               Before, during and after
 Inform ourselves               Wildlife department     How to achieve poverty         Exhibitions and films           season with homestays
 Inform colleagues              Travel operators         alleviation objectives         Photos                         Convenient to villagers
 External critique              Tourism department      Successes and what could       Media                          Staff visits
 Make amendments                Local agencies           be improved                    UNESCO website                 In village with broader
 Build ownership and            Colleagues              What works for you and         Newsletters                     community
  sustainability                 Partners                 why                            Workshops                      In city where policy-
 Get better understanding of    Community               What other people tell you     Conversations                   makers reside
  what activities and actions    CBOs                     about the project              Public meetings                Continue after the project
  are working                    Local authorities       Success stories and            Role playing exercise          Financial and technical
 Most effective in meeting      Donors                   quotations from                Distribute reports to all       reporting could be
                                                           stakeholders                                                    different
  desired objectives             Other projects                                           levels
 Learn from each project                                 Discoveries                    Exchange visits                In keeping with our
                                 Governments
  participant                                             Results, not detailed          Websites                        schedules
 New ideas and suggestions                               Lessons learned                Input from peers
 Increase participation                                  Research and surveys           Radio
 Transparency                                            Achievements and               Postcards for donors
 Discuss with communities                                 recommendations                Study tours
  on what we did wrong and                                Shortcomings and gaps          Registers
  what to do next                                         Local stories in local         Notice boards for service
 Impact                                                   words                           providers
 Accountability                                          Qualitative Impacts            Cyberspace
 Legal requirements                                      Next steps
 Celebrate success                                       Initiatives
 Build relationships                                     Standard indicators
 Empowerment                                             Quotes and testimonies
Dissemination activities of the Basgo Welfare Committee (based on visit to Basgo Heritage Site)

With Whom               Why                      What                 How                  When               Where
Local community(BWC)     Transparency            Progress report     General member      3 times a year    In village
                         Moral obligation        Financial report     meeting or          Once a year
                         ownership                                     verbally
                                                                       Festivals
                                                                       Through Goba
Working committee(No     Management              Verbal progress     Meetings            Once a week       Village
women members)           Supervision              representation
                         Technical input
                         Financial monitoring
                          and response
International donors     Financial obligation    Progress report     Reporting           Four times a     
                                                  Financial report     through              year
                                                  Repeated             NIRLAC
                                                   photography         No direct
                                                  Donor visits         financial report
                                                                        to donor (ext.)
                                                                       Site visits         Once a year       Onsite
NIRLAC                   Technical advise        Input to above      Close                                
                         Prepare proposals                             collaborations
                         Fund raising                                 Regular visits
                         Share result with
                          other partners
 District Government    Required by funding     Finance report      Written report      Yearly            On site
                          contract                Funding request     Annual visits,                         District office
 Hemis Monastery        Institutional           Entry fees                                               
                          obligation               (Rs.10/-)
                                                  Progress
Missing audiences
Domestic donors
Lessons learned about and ideas for dissemination or sharing results

   Can and should choose a strategy appropriate for each project
   Dissemination outline helps thinking about what to share, content, etc
   Need to share with policy-makers as part of obligation but be careful of the costs
    (financial and otherwise) of doing this
   There is a need to create visibility about project and program results internally in
   Encourage networking within project partners and find friendly and technologically
    appropriate ways to do this among project participants –
             Every two to three months select a topic, then circulate picture and caption
                to go with it to all project partners illustrating successes in this area
             Posting requests and questions to all projects via email, and sharing
                responses similarly
             Housing training resources and other useful materials for sharing on the
                UNESCO website (but bear in mind not all projects have easy and reliable
                access to internet)

Examples of successes and results in dissemination

   NGO/Government meetings – finding out what is happening on the ground (checking
    to verify who is doing what)
   UNESCO/Government sharing reports with Ministry of Culture on artifact trade
   Sharing result of fence built by villagers leading to time to build school and then
    telling government of need for teachers
   Sharing results of problems with sea buckthorn business with local government
   Sharing challenges and seeking advice from permanent clients
   Sustainable Tourism Network – Nepal
   Sharing results by RSPN with Government
   UNESCO – website- encouraging debate and generating inquiries
6. Challenges in current projects (Challenge Hat)

“In the middle of difficulties lie opportunities” (Himank sign in Leh)

Challenges                            Opportunities                       Suggestions

Lack of experienced staff             Funding, training opportunities,    Grant proposals, funding training
in eco-tourism/lack of training       monitoring training                 opps, on the job training,
                                                                          publication, TAN-training
                                                                          Exchange between projects,
Project reports are boring; only      Reports; how to share results re    What format?
technical; give little information    impacts/qualitative results to      Identify success factors; use of
about community participation (if     community                           quotes & stories; qualitative
required), and what impact will it                                        monitoring; use photos; what
have on the people/society                                                works and why (or doesn‘t work)
To find a qualified education         Find & retain Env. Ed. Person for   Advertise; contract with partner
program coordinator in Ladakh         SLC                                 to do job; offer incentives &
who wants to make a                                                       advancement opportunities
commitment to SLC (not take a
govt. teaching job) (job involves
developing indicators & monitor
How to achieve poverty                How to share opportunities and      Community to decide who to
alleviation objective of the          benefits of homestay with poor      benefit
project. Rich families are too rich                                       Contribute percentage of income
and poor are too poor to                                                  to community fund
manage/do homestay                                                        Develop different economic
                                                                          opportunities for different
                                                                          Do market assessment of demand
                                                                          on homestay
Getting communities to think                                              Build community awareness
more about conservation; e.g.                                             through games
rangeland for endangered prey                                             Involve religious leaders
species                                                                   Build upon indigenous local
                                                                          Enhance fodder resources for
                                                                          Subsidize conservation - govt
                                                                          provide fodder
                                                                          Address through ICDP approach-
                                                                          conservation commitment
Challenge of replication and                                              Be realistic about objectives
constraint of small staff (with                                           Give small grants to communities
many other obligations)                                                   to replicate, using blueprint
How to exponentially expand                                               Train others in process
corral predator proofing yet
insure the process is highly
- essential for building ownership
- maintain reciprocal cofinancing
Challenges cont.               Opportunities                        Suggestions
Economic alternatives for      Eg, credit scheme from gov‘t.        Go on strike
seabuckthorn farmers           with low interest, invest in         Unionize farmers
                               development of agriculture, start    Share pricing information with
                               business opportunities, start        farmers
                               homestay activities                  Explore other economic
                                                                    opportunities eg, ecotourism (use
                                                                    CBT planning approach to
                                                                    develop long term vision)
                                                                    Look at sustainability of SBT
What kind of materials and     ??
technology are useful in
watershed management
Lack of time                   Lower expectations

Participation in UNESCO        See Day 4 Evaluation
Evaluation                     TORs/Guidelines
How to get sustainability in   Monitor what working/now
school clubs                   working
                               Develop local leadership
                               Look at fund raising
                               opportunities for clubs
                               Organize competitions, festivals,
                               tourist events
                               Review objectives
                               Look for partners to contribute to
                               continued support
                               Tourist donations
                               Impart employment skills
                               through clubs
                               Explore income generating
7. UNESCO Evaluation Discussion

What is Evaluation – Retrospective assessment of a project‘s performance and
achievements at a particular time during or after the completion of the project

What Feedback do partners want from 2003 Evaluation?
 Feedback on homestay site assessments/evaluations of homestays
           o Use of criteria
           o Relevance to UNESCO poverty alleviation (within implementation
 Marketing advice and support (re homestays)
 Poverty alleviation impacts
 Efficiency (rate and cost at which activities lead to outputs) and effectiveness
  (performance in relation to objectives)
 How effective in project in meeting objectives; how to achieve project goals
 Sticking to within time allocation/what is timeframe of project
 Assessing how effective was the homestay training
 What does the community think of the program/What issues and needs do the
  community see as important?
 Effectiveness of the activities, re: are the activities and results relevant to the
  community needs and within the site‘s potential
 How effective is the underlying hypothesis that tourism can alleviate poverty,
  especially in mountain regions?

What Methods should be used in the Evaluation?
 Open meetings with evaluators, project staff and stakeholders/community members to
  reformulate questions and to seek stakeholder input in evaluation
 Site visits
 Meetings with villagers
 Participatory methods – open meetings, focus groups, etc.
 Provide input to planning 2004 activities with a view to optimizing efficiency and
 Team approach, with external evaluators, project staff and stakeholders
 Interviews/discussions of individuals and public (stakeholders)
 Interviews with village leaders
 Observation
 Interviews/discussions with project beneficiaries (e.g., trainees) and project staff, NGO
 Invite local community input re: what benefits they are getting from project
 Clear terms of reference
 Agreed upon schedule, with sufficient time for the evaluation
 Keep in mind local conditions and limitations
 Use tourist feedback form responses when available
 Review reports
 Focus on what is being achieved with UNESCO support (especially where UNESCO
  activities are part of larger project that have multiple funding sources)
Guidelines/TOR for Evaluation (Summary of above)

Feedback is needed on:
 How well are we achieving poverty alleviation objectives, within limitations
 Effectiveness of training/effectiveness of homestays
 Relevance of activities to objectives and local needs within objectives
 Recognition of limitations and variable emphases on different objectives
 (e.g., define ―disadvantaged‖ target groups)
 What is community perception
 Strategies toward sustainability
 Realistic objectives/targets
 Re: evaluation of project planning and management (effectiveness, efficiency,
  including staff capacity needs and institutional development needs within scope of
 How to increase motivation of project partners
 Use of technology
 Market support/advice
 Input re: effective and sustainable institutional structures

Suggested Methods (summary from above):

 Evaluation should be participatory within a continuum of participation
 TOR should be transparent among project staff, partners and stakeholders
 TOR should specify main and project-specific questions if evaluation
 Team approach, including project staff, NGO partners, gov‘t (if relevant), community
  representatives, external evaluator (select team members to represent stakeholders)
 Evaluation costs (eg daily expenses, translation) will be covered by UNESCO
 The upcoming evaluation should be considered a capacity-building exercise for
  stakeholders. Therefore, there should be an effort to document and share the
  evaluation process and results with partners, especially experiences in participatory
  monitoring and evaluation.

Preparation for UNESCO Evaluation 2003

An informal Evaluation will be conducted with most of the UNESCO projects by the end
of 2003.

Main Evaluation Questions:
 To what extent have the 2003 project activities have been achieved, and how well in
  terms of effectiveness and efficiency? What are the lessons learned?
 How well are UNESCO Objectives are being achieved?
 Input for 2004 activity planning (within the 2004-05 perspective reflected in 2003-05
  Proposals and workplans)
In addition to the Main Evaluation Questions, Project Specific Questions will be
developed to address main issues for which partners wish feedback through the
evaluation process. Project partners should submit suggested 4-5 Specific Questions to
David Tresilian by Sept. 15.

In preparation for the Evaluation:

1. Project partners should prepare for the End of 2003 Evaluation by collecting data
(written and published documents) that addresses the 3 Evaluation Questions (above) re:
 Project Indicators, and monitoring results re: progress toward 2003 activities and
  UNESCO/project objectives

2. Select Evaluation Team as soon as possible, based upon dates of evaluation and
within Participatory standards developed in the Evaluation Terms of Reference

3. Prepare Evaluation budget re: expenses re: Evaluation team travel, per diem and
translation expenses to David Tresilian by Oct. 15

4. Conduct preparatory participatory monitoring and evaluation meetings with
stakeholders before Evaluation.

5. By end of Sept., UNESCO will inform partners whether or not an evaluation will be
conducted of your project, and if so, when and the duration.

8. 2004 Activity Planning Schedule

   Proposals for 2004 Activities due to David by January 30, 2004
   Contracts will be issued by March 30, 2004
   Money will be sent out in April
   David will confirm project budgets by mid-November (most projects will receive
    $25,000 for 2004 and $25,000 for 2005, provisionally), issued within annual contracts

Planning for Fifth UNESCO Regional Workshop, Bhutan 2004

Dates of Workshop:
During last 2 weeks of March 2004
Dates of workshop will be confirmed by Nov 30 2003

Participant Names for Workshop
Names, passport information should be given to RSPN by Nov 30, cc to David

Flight Schedules
Chencho will inform UNESCO participants of flight schedules into Paro from Delhi,
Calcutta, Kathmandu and Bangkok by Nov 30.
Flight bookings
Participants must make flight bookings to Delhi, Calcutta, Kathmandu or Bangkok by
Dec 15, based upon flight schedules to Paro, Bhutan.

Flight bookings into and our of Paro will be done by a Bhutan travel agent* (Chencho
will confirm this).

Daily Expenses in Bhutan
Chencho will get quotations for participant expenses in Bhutan (eg, hotel
accommodations, meals, transportation) ands inform UNESCO participants by Nov 15.

9. Evaluation of UNESCO Workshop

What was useful?
 To see working projects and community participation (eg Bazgo, SECMOL, etc)
 To clarify definitions / Importance of consensus on definitions
 Importance of regulator monitoring and having clarity about indicators
 To get common understanding of indicators
 To know how evaluation will be done
 To receive information re: future activity planning
 To discuss sharing results of monitoring, with whom, why, when, etc.
 Discussions/interaction among project partners helps with communication, clarifying
  questions, breaking barriers; exchanges of ideas and experiences
 Realization that donors and partners should be realistic about objectives/discussion of
  indicators helps projects focus on realistic objectives
 That participatory evaluation is essential
 Clarity on indicators, identification of reliable indicators, re: SMART; how to measure
 Addressing how tourism can contribute to poverty alleviation
 Addressing limitations, difficulties of project implementation
 Developing closer relationship between donor and partners
 Monitoring and evaluation methods/understanding evaluation process
 Good for retrospection: we should do this more often
 Value of participatory sharing in formulating actions to address difficult questions
  (Challenge Hat is a great process/method to use because it seeks and values everyone‘s
  resources, ideas and opinions)
 Having resource persons in workshop
Annex 1

Fourth Regional Workshop Program (August 25-30, 2003)

Day 1 Leh, Opening

Welcome – Snow Leopard Conservancy, UNESCO – Headquarters, India.
Ladakh Presentations
 Tourism Status 2003 – Department of Tourism, Jammu and Kashmir Governmment
 Wildlife and Tourism in Ladakh – Wildlife Department, Jammu and Kashmir
 Tourism and Disability, Cultural Monument Conservation in Ladakh, Namgyal
    Institute for Research on Ladakhi Art and Culture
Handicraft exhibition
International Presentations
 Bhutan
 Kyrgyzstan
 Nepal
 India
 Tajikistan
 Iran

Vote of Thanks
Welcome Dinner hosted by NIRLAC at Stok

Day 2 (August 26)
8-11:00 Travel to Ulley Topko

11:00 Introduction to Workshop
       Outline of Workshop (Do*)
       Self introductions (name, title/what do, hobby)
       Group introductions: Stand up if you…
       Workshop Norms

11:30: What is Monitoring
       Everyday Monitoring
       Develop ―working definition‖ of Monitoring (eg ongoing information gathering
       over project lifespan which leads to regular assessment of objectives and enables
       adjustments and refinements to be made)

11:45 Why Monitor
      Brainstorm with post-its, cluster and add anything missing
             Tracks progress toward project objectives
             Provides timely information for decision making; better project implem.
             Helps identify problems as they come up (before becoming crises)
             Allows for adapting to changing circumstances/Assess new opportunities
              Provides essential information/lessons for project evaluation
              Measures/tests (conservation and poverty alleviation) impacts

12:30-1:30 Lunch

1:30   Review of Project Objectives (by (3?) participants)

1:45   Indicators: What are Indicators (we present)
       ―Measure of change‖ to indicate progress toward project objectives
       SMART: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound
       Direct and Indirect Indicators

2:00   Indicators for UNESCO Objectives (group exercise: 1 obj/group)
       Group work (30 min), write Indicators on post-its, Present and put on 3-column
       chart* (Objectives, Indicators, Monitoring Methods) (prepare chart)

3:00   Tea break

3:15   Empty your pockets/Why Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation
       Discuss why use PME (chart*: WHY, FOR WHOM, WHO DOES IT)
       Creates ownership
       Provides timely, reliable information, Measures impacts
       Builds consensus, sharing
       Builds skills and confidence, empower
       Utilizes local knowledge, for learning value/new skills
       Is cost effective, efficient
       Accountability, sustainability

       FOR WHOM
       Others (media…)

       WHO DOES IT
       External consultants
       Joint external/internal team
       Project staff

3:45   How Monitor (Methods)
       Combined with Indicator Development
4:30   Field Instructions (2 groups)
       Visit 2 sites, Basco and Ulley Topko compound and natural surroundings
       Identify Key Indicators and Monitoring Methods (re 3 UNESCO Objectives)
               Basco addressing cultural conservation and poverty alleviation/reduce
               UT/nature site re nature conservation & PA/migration
       Think about 2-3 lessons learned/ideas re: application to own project
       Prepare for presentation on Indicators, Methods

5:00   Finish

Day 3 August 28
8:30 Depart for field work

12:30-1:30      Lunch

1:30   Presentations from Field Work
       Indicators and Monitoring Methods
       Individual lessons learned/ideas re application to own projects

2:45   Tea

3:00   Monitoring vs Evaluation (dropped)
       What is the difference between M & E
       (see above Monitoring definition)
       Evaluation: Retrospective assessment of a project‘s performance and
       achievements at a particular point during or after the completion of project.
              Looks at efficiency, effectiveness, relevance of project, impacts within
              stated goals, and sustainability

3:15   Dissemination: Why Share and With Whom
       Chart* with Why, With Whom, How (and What?/) Share, When/Where
       Participants use Post-its to write 3 for each column*
       Discuss, cluster: think about what suits own project, realistic (maybe not all)

4:30   Prepare for Field Work
       Switch sites, think about What to Share, With Whom, When/Where, etc
       Prepare matrix for site
       Think about 2-3 Key lessons learned for own project
       Think about 1-2 Successes when you shared monitoring results (with whom, how,
       when) and what the results were (everyone, UNESCO too)

5:00 Finish
Evening Presentation on Snow Leopards
Day 3 August 29
8:30 Depart for Field Sites

12:30-1:30      Lunch

1:30   Present Field Work
       Matrix on What to Share, With Whom, etc
       Lessons learned for own projects

2:45   Tea

3:00   Share successes of sharing/disseminating monitoring results from projects
       Discuss, note lessons learned

3:30   Challenges in Current Projects
       Challenge Hat

4:30   Finish

Evening slide show of Chitral workshop

Day 5 August 30
8:30 Developing Guidelines for UNESCO Evaluations
      (Review Evaluation definition and Why PME)
      TOR for Evaluation: Brainstorm (general issues, will define for own projects)
             How Evaluation can be useful to you (specific feedback needs)
             What Questions do you want to have answered
             Methods to use in Evaluation
             Who to participate and with whom to share results
             What is role of project staff and outside evaluators
             How to prepare for evaluation

       Schedule for Evaluations —in time for 2004 planning

(Opportunities for learning from each others‘ projects (visiting other sites?)

10:00 Planning for 2004 Proposals
      Timing of proposals
      Guidelines (budget, focus)
10:30 Workshop Evaluation
10:45 Planning for Next Workshop
      When, where, what
      Roles, avoiding last minute travel bookings, etc
11:15 Other UNESCO Announcements/Discussion
UNESCO - Development of Cultural and Ecotourism in the Mountainous Regions of
Central and South Asia

Fourth Regional Workshop – Capturing and Sharing Results
Ladakh, India, August 26-30, 2003

Background Notes for Participants

Based on the results of previous workshops and on-going project activities and planning
cycles, the fourth regional workshop will focus on what and how we capture as results
and impacts in our projects, plus what and how we can share this learning with others that
would benefit us and themselves.

The workshop will be in two parts:

1. August, 26, 2003 - An open day with Ladakhi participants to learn about tourism in
Ladakh, and to share our work with them. The morning session will be given over to
learning about tourism development and impacts in Ladakh with four short presentations
and question and answer sessions. In the afternoon, each of the UNESCO projects
will give 10 minute presentation on their projects focusing on:

   A very brief background on the context of your project – basically why are you doing
    the project
   Impacts and results so far in the three UNESCO objectives – poverty alleviation
    (remember our discussion on the diverse nature of poverty in Chitral), migration to
    urban areas (difficult but see what you have done, and if there is nothing to report
    then discuss a little about how difficult this issue is), conservation of cultural and
    natural heritage (show results and impacts if you can)
   Challenges that you are facing – two key ones

Please keep this to 10 minutes and prepare powerpoint presentations in English. Access
to computers in Leh will be limited, so try and prepare them before you come. If you
cannot, then prepare flipcharts (three are probably enough for 10 mins). Your
presentation will be followed by a 5 minute question and answer session.

We are also trying to have a small exhibition of handicrafts during this day. Please bring
6 items from your country and we will display them. If we cannot, then please bring
them anyway so that we as a group have a chance to see handicrafts from other countries.

Along with the handicraft display, we would like all of us and those in Ladakh to learn
about how the UNESCO projects are working with local communities. Please prepare a
poster (as you did in Chitral) that shows how communities are involved in your
project – their role, benefits that they obtain (you can use the “Beautiful Tree” game
to think more about this) – and also how they could participate and benefit more.
Instructions are as before – one large piece of paper and lots of creativity! You can bring
your materials to Leh and prepare it there, or have it ready before you arrive.
2. August 27-30, Field-based workshop at Ulley Topko on the banks of the Indus River.
This is a permanent tented camp with toilets and bathrooms, and a meeting hall. There‘s
no need to bring sleeping bags, etc. Also there will three Ladakhi participants with us
and a representative from UNESCO-India.

Since the focus of the remainder of the workshop is on how we capture and share results,
we ask that you think carefully before you come about:

1. What is considered success in your project?
2. How do you measure progress in your project?
3. When do we make best use of the results of monitoring and evaluation?
4. How do we share the results of our projects?
5. With whom do we share results and why?
6. What you would like to see as results from the UNESCO evaluation this year, and
how you would use these findings?

Please bring any reports, papers, etc., from your project that help to answer the above
questions and that you think would be useful for others to see and learn about.

We have designed the workshop to make use of the cultural and natural heritage nearby
and the tented camp itself which has some interesting features. There will be at least
two half-day field trips when you will be working in small groups. For these please bring
good walking shoes, and binoculars if you have them.
Workshop Participants

Participant List and Information

Surname            First Name      Address                       Designation
Karabasheva        Gulsara         NoviNomad Co.                 General Manager
                                   Ap.12, 28 T-Moldo St
Tresilian          David           UNESCO-HQ                     Cultural Tourism
                                   1 Rue Miollis                 Project Manager
                                   75015, Paris
Lama               Wendy        Consultant

Lama               Nar Bahadur     Nepal Trust l                 Project Officer
                                   G.P.O. 8975, EPC 4131
                                   Chun Devi, Maharajgunj
                                   Kathmandu, Nepal
Jain               Nandita         The Mountain Institute        Director
                                   1828 L St., NW, #725
                                   Washington D.C.
Jackson            Rodney          SLC –International            Director
                                   18030 Comstock Ave
Hillard            Darla           Sonoma, CA 95476, USA         Coordinator
Chenco             Younten         RSPN                          Program Officer
                                   Thimpu, Bhutan
Tale               Masouleh        ITTO                          General Manager
Shah               Ambereen        UNESCO-India                  Program Off.
Wangchuk           Rinchen         SLC-India                     Field Director-India
Dadul              Jigmet          c/o Ibex Hotel, Leh, Ladakh   Program Officer
Tashi                              (J&K), India 194101           Program Officer

Invited participants to Ulley Topko
Delden Angmo – NIRLAC and the Indian Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage
Sonam Jorgyes – LEDeG, Program Officer
Annex 2

Tourism and People with Disability

This Brief presentation will show how people with Disability are involved in their own
small ways to promote tourism that benefit local people and that are environment

About the organization…
The Namgyal Institute for People with Disability is the disability wing of Namgyal
Institute for Research on Ladakhi Art and Culture (NIRLAC), an NGO registered in
It has been active in this field for the past 3 years.
So far we have covered 80-90 villages in Leh district.

We believe…
  - That all people with disability have a right to good education, health, and work
      and to basically enjoy a good quality life.
  - As such we work towards promoting equal opportunities to all PWDs whether it
      is in the field of education, health or employment.
  - Therefore our main focus is to integrate and mainstream PWDs in the larger

Our Environment…
As far as environment is concerned we have taken up few initiatives such as:
    - We have a group of 30 PWDs who are involved in making paper bags as use of
        plastic bags is banned. The raw material i.e. newspapers is provided by the
        institute and is also marketed by us. On an average they earn Rs.400-500 per
        month and a maximum of Rs.1000.This is done side by side along with other
        domestic and field/agriculture work.
    - This has also started off the system of collecting waste paper from offices,
        schools, hotels, etc which was otherwise burnt .In this too a person with polio is
    - We have recently set up a recycling paper unit at Choglamsar in which all the
        waste paper will be recycled and used again.

In these small ways PWDs hope to contribute towards preserving the environment of
Ladakh and help in the long run to keep Ladakh clean.

In tourism…
    - We have two thukpa units :one in Nubra and another in Khaltsi block. By doing
       so PWDs are encouraging the consumption of local food. These groups are again
       a mix of disabled and non –disabled persons.
    - In Nubra we are trying to encourage and promote a PWDs in carpet weaving.
In the pipeline…
    - To start pressurized boiled water at various trekking points. This will not only
       provide employment to PWDs at their own villages but also reduce use of plastic
       mineral bottles.
    - To start traditional goncha weaving by using local looms. Gonchaas are
       traditional Ladakhi dress worn by both men and women and are the best options
       during winters.

Namgyal Institute for Research on Ladakhi Art and Culture

Though this presentation would concentrate mainly on the Architecture – the Built
Heritage of Ladakh, but the issues and problems whether it is related to environment,
ecology, built heritage or any other socio, culture factors, are all inter connected.
Therefore, the problems and issues that I have discussed below holds equally good for all
the other topics mentioned above.

Historic Buildings
A historic building has architectural, aesthetic, historic, archeological, economic and
social value. But the first impact that the buildings of Ladakh have is religious, spiritual
and emotional.
The Gompas or monasteries and palaces of Ladakh lend architectural splendor to the built
heritage of Ladakh. These buildings conceal a treasure hoard of manuscripts, religious
objects statuary and above all, exquisite wall paintings as well as sacred scrolls. These
monasteries are ‗living monuments‘ which still maintain their authenticity of function,
which needs to be respected.

Issues and problems in the conservation of historic buildings in Ladakh
Architecture is an irreplaceable cultural resource. However, decay is a law of nature.
Cultural properties deteriorate and are ultimately destroyed through attack by natural and
human agents.

Climate changes
The climate of this region is also changing. The annual rainfall in the region has
increased phenomenally thus accelerating the erosion of the mud brick edifices and
destroying the wall paintings of the monumental heritage.

Impact of tourism
Special features in the form of monasteries, palaces, Chortens, rich art and culture
combined with natural setting and scenic beauty makes Ladakh a place of attraction for
both the domestic as well as foreign tourist.With a limited 4-month tourist season, the
population of the region almost doubles in this period. The success is that the local
community is the stake traders in the tourist industry and thus clearly benefits from this.
Tourist inflow has also resulted into expansion of trade and commerce and other related
activities. Tourism has become an important asset to the backward economy of Ladakh.
However, one cannot deny the significant environmental changes that had occurred due
to this growing industry. In Leh especially, it has resulted into mushrooming of
guesthouses amidst rich agriculture field, devouring already scarce agricultural land. One
of the adverse impacts is that this has placed enormous pressure on the monumental
heritage traditionally used only by monks for monastic activities, resulting in them being
in a fragile, even precarious condition.

The pressure caused by the recent developments, climate change and tourism were too
enormous to avoid the architectural interventions in the region. Well-intended attempts
were made with the urgency to conserve the historic buildings. This resulted in the most
inappropriate and insensitive restoration of these buildings.
All these changes and developments have adverse impact not only on the cultural built
heritage but also on the environment, ecology and the landscape of the region.

Keeping all this in mind, NIRLAC, is presently undertaking an Inventory programme on
listing or identifying all notable buildings aged 50 years or more.

Why Listing?
Listing is the first step towards conservation. The process makes it easy to identify the
most significant or critical structure, which requires immediate attention. This is followed
by documentation and finally the restoration of the structure.

Aim and Objectives
     The aim of the programme is to cover the entire Ladakh region that consists of
       five provinces:
    1. Leh
    2. Khaltse
    3. Nubra
    4. Dhurbuk
    5. Nyoma
This summer, Leh and its surrounding settlements were covered, that consists of more
than 50 village settlements and around 450 cultural resources and cultural landscapes
including the monasteries, palaces, stupas, rock carvings, rock inscriptions, pasture lands,
high passes etc.

     The aim is to look into a settlement as a whole rather than concentrating on single
     The idea is also to generate local expertise as the field survey was conducted by
      trained Ladakhi students.

For this presentation, examples were taken from one settlement i.e. Shey village.
It is 15 kms from Leh, and once it was the capital of Ladakh.

Slide – 1
The ruin for can be seen above the present Shey palace. It was built by the first King of
Ladakh Lhachen Spalgigon.
Shey Palace was built by King Deldan Namgyl in the beginning of 17 th Century AD. It
has a shrine that houses 3-storey statue of Lord Shakyamuni Buddha, made of copper gilt.
Dedicated to his father Senghe Namgyal. This statue is the only of its kind in the region.
Slide – 2
There are hundreds of stupas around the palace complex scattered all over the village.
Chalung Khashor- one of the unique Chortens in Ladakh. It has unique shape and has a
dome at the top, similar to the ones in Nepal and Tibet.
Slide – 3
Chortens of different shapes and sizes that dots the entire landscape.
Slide –4
Riksum Gombo – another form of stupa that house three smaller Chortens
Yellow – Manjushri – represents wisdom
White – Avalokiteshvara – represents Compassion
Blue – Vajrapani – Strength
It is usually seen over the entrance gates of residences.
Slide – 5
View of the village settlement of Shey.
Slide – 6
Rock sculptures collected from all over the village and placed under the rectangular
Slide – 7
Another group of Chortens
Slide – 8
Rock carving with an image of a Boddhisatva
Slide – 9
Rock carvings
Slide – 10
Pond in front of the palace. The village‘s name is on account of the reflection of the
palace that could be seen in the pond – Shel means reflection.
It is a fish pond now also called holy fish pond
Slide – 11
Shey palace with the fortress above is a national protected monument under ASI.
Slide – 12
Thiksey monastery
It is 17 kms from Leh. Built by Paldan Sherab, it is one of the well maintained buildings
in Leh.
Slide – 13
Stok palace
14 kms from Leh. Built in 1825 by King Tsespal Tundup, it is the seat of the present
royal family and is well maintained.
Slide – 14
Matho monastery
26 kms from Leh, it was founded in the 16 th century by Lama Tungpa Dorjey. Interesting
building façade with punctuated windows.
Slide – 15
Phiyang monastery
17 kms from Leh, it was founded by Chosje Danma Kinga in the 16 th century.
Slide – 16
Lamayuru monastery
125 kms from Leh.
It has a small shrine that dates back to 11 th century, built by the Great translator Lotsava
Rinchen Zangpo. Later more structures were added and is now one of the most
remarkable heritage sites in Ladakh.
Slide – 17
Lamayuru complex with a new RCC structure. Old traditional gallery with elaborate
wooden details and brackets are replaced with new concrete structures.
Slide – 18
Alchi temple – 69 kms from Leh, it is one of the most famous and ancient of all the
temples. It was built by Lotsava Rinchen Zangpo in the 11 th century.
Modest temple buildings consist of exquisite wall paintings, life size stucco images,
wood carvings of all Kashmiri Indian style.
Slide – 19
Alchi Chorten with paintings on the interior walls.
Slide – 20
Alchi – elaborate wooden details over the portico.
Slide – 21
Alchi – one of the giant stucco images inside the shrine.
Slide – 22
Leh palace - built by King Senghe Namgyal in the late 16th century overlooks the entire
Leh settlement. Nine storey high structure, it exhibits a remarkable Tibetan architecture
style. It is a national protected monument under ASI.
The side wall of the palace had collapsed many years back, and ASI had carried out the
repair work in the year 1998.
Slide – 23
Slide – 24
Slide – 25
Various stages of repair work.
Slide – 26
Tissuru stupa
3 kms from Leh town. King Grags-Pa-Bum-lde built it, since there was harmful
occurrence like diseases in the region.
ASI has been undertaking the repair work for quite sometime now.
Slide – 27
Slide – 28
Slide – 29
Munshi house just below the Leh palace. It is one of the most imposing structures located
at the centre of the entire Palace set up, with elaborate wooden frames and balconies.
Slide – 30
Detailed wooden frames of the balconies with wooden lattice work, arches and wooden
These are the few glimpses of the cultural heritage of Ladakh in Leh and its surrounding
villages. It is not possible to cover the entire Ladakh region for this presentation.
Finally, the term conservation has been introduced very recently to Ladakh. It ought to
take some time to the people of Ladakh to become aware of the cultural heritage. For
which we need to conduct more awareness programme, workshops and training

Development of Tourism in Ladakh

By Mr Urgain Loondup
Director of Tourism, Ladakh.

        Tourism development in Ladakh has been taking place for the last 30 years. Since
1974, 390,734 tourists have visited Ladakh. Out of this, 314,413 have been foreign and
76,321 have been domestic tourists. This year, until 24 August, 23,270 tourists have
visited Ladakh. 12,766 have been foreign and 10,504 domestic. The average tourist
spends about three to four daysin Ladakh and spends an average of Rs; 1372 / - per day
for a double room on AP basis (full board) and Rs. 191 / - per day for EP basis (lodging)
only. The hotels generally provide AP basis, whereas guesthouses provide EP basis. The
total bed numbers are 4,427 in the Leh district.

        The mode of transport for travelling to Ladakh has been by air and by road. Air
travel started in 1979. Travel by road from Srinigar started in 1974, and travel by road
from Manali started in 1989.

        Till 1992, because of restrictions on visiting some areas of the central part of
Ladakh, travel to Zanskar was restricted. In 1993, Dha-Hanu, Nubra and Changthang
were de-restricted. Some parts of Changthang and the Nubra valley are still restricted,
since these are border areas.

       Since Ladakh was opened to international tourists, two major developments have
taken place. One is economic development, and the other is cultural development. Both
economically and culturally Ladakh has developed by leaps and bounds. People are
happy. This is the positive aspect of tourism in Ladakh.

        Another positive aspect of tourism development in Ladakh is that before 1974 the
people of Ladakh led rustic, rural lives. The level of education in Ladakh at the time of
the opening of Ladakh to international tourists was very low, but now the situation is
different. People have become more educated. This is also because of the fact that
tourism development has helped in improving the economic life of the people, which has
ultimately helped the people in their education.
         Ecologically, Ladakh has become a very sensitive place. Littering is taking place
everywhere, which needs to be stopped urgently. This is the negative aspect of tourism
development in Ladakh. For waste disposal, NGOs in Ladakh can play a very important
role. They should organise campaigns at the grass-roots level in which people from the
travel trade and from the hotels and the community should be involved. For funding they
should approach the government and the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development

        Ladakh by nature is a gift of God. Its natural beauty, like the snow-capped peaks,
valleys, rivers and mountains are all beautiful features of Ladakh. Its wildlife and
endangered species, such as the snow leopard and black-necked crane, are the natural
properties of Ladakh. Due to ecological imbalances, the life of these endangered species
is now under threat. As such, we need to work hard for sustainable tourism development
in which ecological and environmental threats are attended to.