Introduction

Tourism Benefit-Sharing (TBS) has gained significant attention in the past two decades as a means of providing economic opportunities and preserving natural protected areas (PAs) and cultural heritage sites globally (Akbar & Yang, 2021; Xu et al., 2009). TBS fosters relationships between local communities and authorities, providing an important factor in creating sustainable destinations and contributing to the 17 SDGs (Carius & Job, 2019; Imanishimwe et al., 2018). Effective benefit-sharing, as described in this study, involves local authorities fairly distributing the economic benefits from tourism revenue to Indigenous communities, which enhances their social and economic environment and encourages mutual relationships (Balmford et al., 2009).

Revenue generated from tourism development of PAs has the potential to provide economic benefits, introduce local culture, promote economic diversification, improve the quality of social services, and enhance local infrastructure (Melita & Mendlinger, 2013; Tumusiime & Vedeld, 2012). However, despite extensive research on TBS, debates on the most effective forms of PA conservation persist (Archabald & Naughton-Treves, 2001; Queiros & Mearns, 2019; Spenceley et al., 2017). Local communities play a crucial role in identifying and evaluating the value of TBS, despite varying stakeholder perceptions (Tumusiime & Vedeld, 2012). Hence, there is a pressing need for win–win TBS policies that maintain the sustainable development of PAs (Benjaminsen & Svarstad, 2010; Mukanjari et al., 2013; Spenceley et al., 2017; Tumusiime & Vedeld, 2012).

TBS has been widely studied in the context of national parks around the world (Makame & Boon, 2017; Munanura et al., 2016), but less research has focused on TBS at cultural heritage sites, particularly living heritage sites, which play a crucial role in preserving the cultural heritage of Indigenous communities. Literature suggests that TBS is an important way to explore the economic impacts of tourism on local communities (Mbaiwa & Stronza, 2010; Xu et al., 2009). However, most studies have been conducted in African countries, leaving other regions, such as Southeast Asian countries, largely overlooked. This research fills this gap by focusing on TBS in the context of ethnic and cultural heritage in Vietnam.

Studies on TBS have investigated perspectives of various stakeholders, including authorities, PA management boards, and local communities (Bruyere et al., 2009; Carius & Job, 2019; MacKenzie, 2012; Weisse & Ross, 2017). However, in-depth studies on different target groups within the local community, especially those engaged in conservation of living heritage, seem to be scarce. Moreover, previous studies have emphasized tourism revenue allocation but have not clarified the distribution of tourism revenue among host communities and who in the community should receive it (Mbaiwa & Stronza, 2010; Snyman & Bricker, 2019). In the Vietnamese context, there have been studies on the living heritage of the Kinh majority group, such as Huong Pham’s (2015) examination of the economic impact of tourism on local people in Hoi An Ancient Town. However, the living heritage of minority communities has not received the same level of attention.

Tourism plays a significant role in driving Vietnam’s transformation into a developed nation (Saltiel, 2014). One of the key components of this growth is the promotion and preservation of ethnic minority heritage, which attracts a significant number of tourists to the country (Lask & Herold, 2004; Salemink, 2013; Saltiel, 2014; Truong, 2013). The government of Vietnam has recognized the importance of ethnic minority heritage and has issued several policies and guidelines aimed at promoting socio-cultural and social development for ethnic minorities, including the Cham people of Ninh Thuận (Lask & Herold, 2004). The preservation of the Cham cultural heritage is crucial not only for the promotion of tourism but also for the overall development of the country and its people.

As the focus of this study, the Cham people in Ninh Thuận boast an abundant cultural heritage, including over 70 festivals and ceremonies that are still performed annually with the participation of the Cham community and guidance from religious dignitaries (Sakaya, 2003). The Cham’s traditional approaches to the stewardship of sacred sites have been officially recognized and promoted by the government since 2012, with representatives from the Ahier Cham community serving as consultants on cultural and religious issues concerning the Cham community.

This rich cultural heritage, particularly the temple-tower architecture system found throughout the Central region and in Ninh Thuận Province, has become a major tourist attraction and product in Vietnam. In 2019, Ninh Thuận welcomed 2.35 million visitors, a 7.3% increase from the previous year, with 100,000 being international arrivals (an annual increase of 25%) and 2.25 million being domestic arrivals (an annual increase of 6.6%) (Sở VH-TT-DL, 2020).

While the rise in tourism has brought positive economic benefits to the region, it has also led to concerns over the allocation of economic benefits from the Cham cultural heritage sites and the satisfaction of the Cham people as the owners and guardians of this cultural heritage. This chapter seeks to address these concerns by exploring the challenges faced by Cham dignitaries in maintaining their cultural heritage through TBS, and examining their perspectives on TBS and its impact on their cultural heritage. This study aims to contribute to the understanding of how equitable TBS can be developed at a living heritage site, where the financial benefits from the commodification of minority culture can be used to support local communities and the custodians of Indigenous heritage.

The contribution of this research is substantial in several key aspects. Firstly, it brings to light the difficulties faced by Cham dignitaries in safeguarding the cultural heritage of the Cham community in Ninh Thuận. Secondly, it explores the views of the Cham dignitaries on TBS and its impact on their cultural heritage. Additionally, it provides an in-depth understanding of the distribution of economic benefits from Cham cultural heritage sites and the satisfaction of the Cham community with TBS. Furthermore, this research contributes to the broader knowledge base on the significance of TBS in the preservation and promotion of cultural heritage. The findings can serve as a useful reference for policymakers and practitioners when developing equitable TBS programs, especially in the context of living heritage sites. The study emphasizes the importance of inclusive and culturally appropriate TBS programs that prioritize the involvement and benefit of local communities, including Indigenous people, by taking into account the challenges faced by the Cham dignitaries and their perspectives. Furthermore, the insights gained from this study can also inform the creation of sustainable and socially responsible cultural tourism programs. By highlighting the challenges faced by the Cham dignitaries, this research can steer future research in the field of cultural heritage preservation and promote best practices for equitable TBS. Overall, this study provides valuable insights into the challenges and opportunities faced by the Cham community in preserving their cultural heritage and the role of TBS in supporting these efforts.

Traditional Custodianship and Cultural Heritage Preservation

The preservation of cultural heritage has been a topic of great concern in the contemporary era. Western heritage management practices have widely impacted many nations, and although these approaches have had a significant impact, they have often neglected the vital role that traditional custodianship systems play in protecting and preserving a community’s heritage in the long term. Despite the recognition of the crucial role that traditional custodianship systems play in heritage management, these systems have often been overlooked in regions such as Asia and Africa (Chirikure et al., 2010; Ndoro & Wijesuriya, 2015).

However, this perspective has been challenged by several case studies in Africa that demonstrate the significance of traditional custodianship systems in heritage management (Abungu, 2015; Waterton, 2010). These studies highlight the importance of incorporating traditional management systems into the management of cultural heritage and have been recognized by UNESCO (2013) as a key component in the management of cultural heritage.

Unfortunately, some researchers have found that there is a lack of consultation with local communities in the management of cultural heritage in Africa in practice, as these communities are not considered to be conservation experts (Abungu, 2015; Waterton, 2010). This overlooks the vital role that traditional custodianship systems play in protecting and managing cultural heritage over the long term (Chirikure et al., 2010; Ndoro & Wijesuriya, 2015). However, there is a growing recognition of the significance of traditional custodianship systems in managing cultural heritage, and their role is increasingly being acknowledged and integrated into heritage management practices (Abungu, 2015; UNESCO, 2013).

To effectively preserve cultural heritage, it is crucial to recognize the value of traditional custodianship systems and to involve local communities in the management and protection of their cultural heritage (Chirikure et al., 2010; Ndoro & Wijesuriya, 2015). By doing so, we can ensure that cultural heritage is not only preserved, but also sustained and passed down from generation to generation (Abungu, 2015; UNESCO, 2013). The integration of traditional management systems into heritage management practices will also ensure that the heritage reflects the values and traditions of the local communities and that their voices are heard in the decision-making process (Weise, 2013). In short, the recognition of the importance of traditional custodianship systems and the involvement of local communities in the management of cultural heritage are critical components in ensuring the preservation and sustainability of cultural heritage (Abungu, 2015; Chirikure et al., 2010; Ndoro & Wijesuriya, 2015; UNESCO, 2013; Weise, 2013).

Traditional custodianship systems play a key role in the preservation and management of cultural heritage within communities. These systems are often rooted in customary laws that govern the use of sacred sites and protect them from violations (Abungu & Githitho, 2012; Harris, 1991; Shen et al., 2012). The regulations and principles established by these traditional systems help to minimize negative impacts on heritage sites and are a significant aspect of the local community’s connection to the landscape and its resources (Smith & Turk, 2013). However, the significance of traditional custodianship systems is often disregarded in heritage conservation and development, leading to the creation of a form of heritage that goes against local views and traditions, thereby reducing the cultural significance of the heritage being preserved (Byrne, 2012). This is due in part to the fact that these systems are often overlooked in heritage management practices (Bwasiri, 2011).

To address this issue, scholars have recommended integrating local customary systems within Western conservation models as the most effective approach to cultural heritage management (Bwasiri, 2011; Smith & Turk, 2013). This approach enables the exploration of the social concerns and needs of the local community, which is a crucial consideration, particularly in the case of the Cham community studied in this research. By considering the perspectives and needs of the Cham community, the government can effectively manage the Cham temples for the benefit of the Cham people, while preserving the cultural heritage and its traditional values.

The preservation of cultural heritage requires a holistic approach that takes into account the perspectives and needs of the local community who are connected to the heritage site (Weise, 2013). A top-down approach to heritage management, such as limiting access to cultural heritage resources for local communities, can have negative consequences for their livelihoods and traditional ways of life (Fletcher et al., 2007; Miura, 2005). Miura (2005) suggests that heritage sites should be protected by incorporating the values held by the living population, as they are the ones who will be responsible for passing down these values to future generations.

Moreover, imposing heritage management without taking into account the desires of the community and providing a functional and sustainable system will result in the loss of authenticity, as argued by Weise (2013). In order to preserve cultural heritage, it is necessary to consider both the tangible and intangible aspects of heritage, as well as the social concerns of the local community. Decision-making in heritage management should be guided by the living heritage and the perspectives of the community who holds the heritage, as this will ensure that the heritage is maintained in a culturally appropriate and sustainable manner (Weise, 2013).

Tourism Benefit-Sharing: The Importance of Involving Local Communities

The literature review section on Tourism Benefit-Sharing (TBS) has focused on exploring the relationship between protected areas (PAs) that have become tourism destinations and the allocation of benefits to local communities. TBS has emerged as a crucial component of sustainable tourism development in protected areas, providing finance for conservation activities and infrastructure development (Mbaiwa & Stronza, 2010; Spenceley et al., 2017). In recent years, scholars have become interested in integrating heritage conservation and tourism development (Munanura et al., 2016), recognizing that benefits derived from tourism can bring tangible and intangible benefits to local communities.

Tangible benefits include the creation of jobs, direct income, and improved infrastructure, while intangible benefits include capacity building, skills training, and cultural development (Spenceley et al., 2017). The key to effective TBS is a mutual understanding between the government and local communities, where the government provides welfare opportunities and the local communities maintain conservation and sustainable development (Bebbington, 1999; Makame & Boon, 2017; Spenceley et al., 2017). This relationship can be further strengthened by providing social and cultural capital, as well as living support and substantive opportunities to encourage community engagement in heritage conservation (Bebbington, 1999; Gautam, 2009). Local communities should also have equal social and economic support and opportunities to achieve sustainable livelihoods (Norton & Foster, 2001; Spenceley et al., 2017).

However, there have been cases where TBS has not been fair to local communities, with only a small part of tourism revenue being shared with a small number of direct beneficiaries in the community (Schnegg & Kiaka, 2018). Benefits are often leaked externally to foreign travel agencies, provincial or central businesses, or other organizations (Ahebwa et al., 2012; Sandbrook, 2010). To ensure that economic benefits are directly shared with the local community, it is important to establish access rights and sharing mechanisms for the host community (Kiss, 2004; Lapeyre, 2011; Wunder, 2000). For example, in Rwanda, 5% of the annual income from tourism revenue is dedicated to promoting local community livelihoods, demonstrating that TBS can improve lives and sustainably preserve heritage (Munanura et al., 2016).

The concept of Tourism-based Sustainability (TBS) has been a topic of interest among scholars and researchers due to its complexity and difficulty in implementation. This is highlighted in the studies conducted by Adams et al. (2004) and Snyman and Bricker (2019) which indicate the multifaceted nature of TBS. To address the challenges of TBS, local authorities must adopt a comprehensive approach that considers the interests of all stakeholders (Benjaminsen & Svarstad, 2010). One way of enhancing the success of TBS is through community empowerment. This involves encouraging communities to take an active role in tourism activities, such as through joint ventures or other cooperative management models (Baghai et al., 2018). This is further emphasized by Heslinga et al. (2019) who stress the significance of community empowerment in overcoming participation barriers in TBS.

Furthermore, a study by Li (2006) on community participation in decision-making in Sichuan, China found that communities still benefit from tourism development even when their participation in decision-making is weak. This highlights the importance of community involvement in TBS, as it not only benefits the community but also contributes to the overall success of TBS initiatives. Li (2006) argues that community participation is not a final goal in itself, but rather a means to achieving community involvement in tourism activities.

The literature on Tourism-based Sustainability (TBS) has mainly focused on collaborations between Indigenous communities and governments (Chirikure et al., 2010; Smith & Waterton, 2009; Waterton, 2015) and Indigenous custodian systems (Jones, 2007; Ndoro, 2004; Sharma, 2013; Smith & Turk, 2013). However, despite this extensive research, the social conditions of the Indigenous custodians, who play a central role in Indigenous custodianship, have often been overlooked. This is particularly problematic in the case of the Ahiér priests, who serve as Cham custodians, and are vital for effectively managing living Cham heritage sites to achieve sustainability. The Ahiér priests bring the Po Klaong Girai temple and Cham culture to life.

This research highlights the importance of understanding the social conditions of Cham custodians in the context of TBS. Snyman and Bricker (2019) argue that identifying the needs and problems of the community’s institutional system is necessary to comprehend the effectiveness of TBS. Moreover, MacKenzie (2012) and Strickland-Munro and Moore (2013) emphasize that understanding the needs of Indigenous communities and stakeholders in TBS is a critical foundation for achieving sustainable development goals.

In conclusion, the literature highlights the importance of considering the social conditions of Indigenous custodians in TBS. It is necessary to understand the community’s institutional system and the needs of Indigenous communities and stakeholders for effective TBS and sustainable development.

Study Background and Context

The Cham are a distinct ethnic group in Vietnam, originating from the central region and known for their long-standing history and rich cultural traditions. Their contributions to Vietnamese culture are especially evident in their beliefs and customs, which are reflected in traditional festivals and ancient beliefs.

The Cham communities are still predominantly concentrated in certain provinces in South Central and Southern Vietnam, with the oldest settlements located in Ninh Thuận Province. According to the General Statistics Office, there were 178,948 Cham people in Vietnam in 2019, with 82,532 residing in Ninh Thuận Province alone. The Cham culture is alive and vibrant in Ninh Thuận, with vibrant colors evident in writing, costumes, architectural art, sculptures, and traditional crafts. The preservation of Cham matriarchal customs is noteworthy (Biên et al., 1989, 1991; Sakaya, 2003), and many forms of Cham cultural heritage have been recognized by the Vietnamese state (Table 9.1).

Table 9.1 International and national recognition of Cham cultural heritage in Ninh Thuận province
Full size table

The Po Klaong Girai temple is a revered site for the Cham community where they come to worship their wise king and participate in various spiritual activities. The temple is famous for hosting cultural, religious, and traditional festivals throughout the year, particularly the Kate festival which takes place in the seventh month of the Cham calendar. This event attracts tourists from all over the world to the temple, making it a significant cultural and economic asset for Ninh Thuận Province.

As a part of its tourism development strategy, local authorities in Ninh Thuận Province have identified the importance of Cham culture and have taken measures to conserve and promote Cham temples and craft villages as key tourist attractions. These efforts have not only brought economic benefits to the region but also helped some Cham people living in craft villages. Nevertheless, the preservation and promotion of Cham cultural heritage through tourism development should be approached with caution, as this may result in the degradation of the heritage and the exploitation of local communities.

The Po Klaong Girai temple has gained recognition as a popular tourist destination in Ninh Thuận Province, and its entrance ticket sales have had a positive impact on local government budgets (Table 9.2). The temple’s tourism revenue has experienced a significant increase, particularly from 2017 onwards. Despite the fact that the revenue from tourism is not a major contributor to the province’s overall revenue, it holds great importance for the Cham community as it provides the necessary financial support for the preservation of their cultural heritage.

Table 9.2 Number of visitors to the Po Klaong Girai temple and revenue generated
Full size table

Challenges in Preserving Indigenous Cultural Traditions

The two major challenges identified were related to education and finances. Additionally, a widely held belief was that the Ahiér priests, as the primary custodians of heritage sites such as the Po Klaong Girai temple, should play a crucial role in preserving and promoting Cham culture through their extensive knowledge of traditional customs, religion, literature, and history.

Financial Challenges: Loss of Agricultural Assets

Traditionally, the Cham community allocated fields and buffaloes to priests and other individuals who dedicated their lives to spiritual activities. This provided stable income and allowed the priests to spend their time researching books, the Cham calendar, and other traditions, forming a community of intellectuals who held extensive knowledge of Cham culture, language, and history (Noseworthy, 2017). These individuals were highly respected by the community and were considered crucial for the preservation of Cham culture. However, after the reunification of Vietnam in 1975, the nationalization of farming assets had a significant impact on the Cham community. Many custodians lost their farming assets, and their main source of income became community contributions during ritual activities, while fields were only an additional source of income.

According to Orang005, the Po Klaong rice fields were hired by the Cham community for ritual activities and were a crucial source of income for the custodians. They could devote all their time to the community without disturbing the economy. On the other hand, Orang001 experienced a loss of their buffaloes and rice fields and had to resort to manual labor to make a living. This loss of agricultural assets made life significantly harder for the Cham community.

The declining number of Cham custodians is a significant challenge facing the preservation of Cham culture. The traditional practice of only allowing custodians’ children to follow this line of work limits the pool of potential custodians, putting added pressure on the existing community of priests. The passing of Ahier religious priests not only means the loss of their experiences and deep understanding of Cham tradition, cultural rules, and the yearly calendar, but also creates a significant threat to the sustainability of the priest system itself. In the most populated Cham village, Hamu Tanran, it is becoming increasingly difficult to find a Basaih priest for important rituals such as cremation ceremonies. Villagers must often search for priests in other villages or even travel to Palei Kraong in Binh Thuận Province. This lack of continuity in the community is causing great concern for the future of traditional Cham activities and the survival of Cham culture as a whole.

During my fieldwork, I had the opportunity to engage with many Cham priests and gain a deeper understanding of their struggles and aspirations. These priests are not just performers, but they also play the role of instrument makers, historians, and keepers of Cham culture, tradition, and history. Although there are a few officially recognized artists and drum players, custodians like Ong Maduen and Kadhar, who make ginang and kanyi instruments and are responsible for preserving traditional knowledge for future generations, are often overlooked.

The priests face many challenges in their daily lives, such as the difficulty of earning a living, a lack of interest in their line of work, and unequal recognition of their contributions. As Kadhar, one of the custodians, stated, “I am not just an instrument player, I keep all the hymns about the lives of Cham Kings, and I have documents on ancient Cham traditions passed down from my ancestors. I will transfer them to the next generation, but there is no benefit. While the ginang player may be recognized as an artist, custodians like me who play more important roles in preserving traditional values and knowledge receive no recognition.”

The conservation of living heritage sites is not limited to protecting temples and monuments. It involves preserving the spiritual life and cultural heritage of the Cham people, which is deeply intertwined with the knowledge and practices of the priests. Hence, adequate support for these custodians is critical to ensure the survival of Cham culture. Unfortunately, following agricultural land ownership reforms in Vietnam, many priests have been forced to pursue alternative means of earning a livelihood, leading to a disconnect between the present and the past, and a discontinuity in Cham heritage. The absence of new priests and the financial difficulties faced by the community have resulted in the disappearance of some public rituals, highlighting the need for greater support for the preservation of living heritage sites.

Low Levels of Public Education

The second challenge faced by the Cham community is the low levels of public education. Historically, the Cham people used their native language in all aspects of their lives, including the study of Cham texts that taught about geography, history, and customs. Young priests received specialized training at the homes of their Gurus, rather than in the public education system. However, this form of education was disrupted after 1975, leaving many without a proper high school or higher education. Those who did attend public schools were not necessarily priests, and many struggled to follow the curriculum, eventually dropping out to work in family businesses. This has resulted in a limited understanding of social history and contemporary society for many within the Cham community.

Orang008 shared that their father encouraged them to strive for higher education and pursue a career as a doctor, teacher, or in a similar field, rather than becoming a custodian. However, they found it difficult to keep up with the curriculum and eventually left school to work in agriculture. On the other hand, some custodians were able to finish high school, which made their transition to working on the Bramanism committee much easier. These individuals have a greater sense of confidence in communicating and working with the local government. Additionally, Orang001 spoke about their experience of dropping out of school due to difficult family circumstances, but eventually finishing high school. They explained that the lack of education for many within the community leads to a shyness in discussing traditional customs in Vietnamese when working with the local government. However, as a result of their education, they feel more confident in their ability to read and write Vietnamese and to work on paperwork for the committee when reporting to the local government. They believe that higher levels of education would benefit the entire community, providing them with a greater understanding of society’s issues.

The poor education received by custodians through the public education system, combined with frequent misunderstandings, has made their work challenging and hindered their ability to express their opinions in meetings with local government. Only a few priests have basic reading and writing skills and have never even left their villages. Life is difficult for them as most of their time is spent earning a living, leaving little time for other interests. This has resulted in many grammatical errors when writing reports and public announcements in Vietnamese, as noted by Orang020.

Due to their limitations in managing cultural heritage, some retired intellectuals from the community may work with the committee. These individuals have higher levels of education and experience in working with the government. According to members of the Cham community, poorly educated priests are not aware of their responsibilities and positions within the Cham society and spiritual world. Despite the high intellectual standard of the Cham community, the low level of Vietnamese public education among most Cham priests leads to them being underappreciated and not respected by Cham intellectuals and the wider community. As stated by a Cham elder, Orang009: “Some young and fresh priests do not even know the religious norms of daily life. How can they be spiritual leaders of the Cham Ahier community? They have not only a low level of public education but also a lack of understanding of the Cham language and ancient manuscripts.”

Junior priests have reported feeling that society only values doctors, engineers, and government officers and not priests who preserve cultural values. This has led to feelings of depression, low confidence, and even mental health issues, as expressed by Orang010: “I feel sad sometimes because my friends do not really respect my position as a priest. However, I still want to continue being a priest, following my family tradition. Today, there are no young people taking up this responsibility, so who will serve spiritual ceremonies for the community in the future?”

Both priests and the Cham community believe that financial support for training custodians to acquire knowledge about society and technology is needed. This would help them to better understand their position within the Cham community, be more confident in their work, and be better equipped to work effectively with the local government.

Investigating the Cham Community’s Standpoint on Sharing the Revenue from Tourism Benefits

According to the interviews, the Cham community is not benefiting equitably from the economic benefits of tourism. Despite being the traditional custodians and owners of their heritage, they do not receive financial compensation in the same manner as government employees. The interviewees expressed their disappointment with the current state of affairs, where the income generated from entrance fees is not shared with the Cham community. They believe that this money should be used to support traditional ceremonies and restore those that have been lost due to insufficient funding.

One interviewee (Orang004) stated that the government is taking money from the Cham’s heritage without sharing the benefits with the custodians. Another (Orang001) added that the small amount of money provided to the Cham community from the entrance ticket sales is unreasonable. Similarly, several interviewees (Orang002, Orang007) expressed frustration over the government keeping all of the money from ticket sales, without giving any to the Cham community.

The negative sentiments and testimonials from elders and priests are driven by the economic hardships they face in their daily lives. Despite the increase in popularity of the area as a tourist destination, generating significant revenue, the funds are not being used to support the traditional Cham custodians. Instead, they are being used for employees working at the temples and other local officials. The interviewees believe that a part of this revenue should be shared with the custodians so that they can perform spiritual activities and protect their community heritage.

Several interviewees reported feeling ownership over Cham cultural heritage, and as a result, believe they should be entitled to receive a portion of the tourism revenue generated by these sites. This is in light of the fact that the current distribution of funds only goes towards paying heritage staff and not the Cham priests, who are essential in preserving and conserving the heritage.

One interviewee, Orang026, stated, “It’s difficult for us as we work daily for the community without receiving any payment. Meanwhile, the revenue generated from tourism at the Cham temples is not being distributed to us.” Another interviewee, Orang029, shared, “At the very least, they should give us half of the tourism revenue so that the dignitaries can dedicate themselves to performing and preserving the rituals at the temple.”

The lack of financial support for Cham priests has led to the disappearance of many traditions and cultural practices. Orang005 shared, “I have had to discontinue two major festivals, Pakap Halau Kraong and Palao Kasah, due to the lack of funds. These festivals bring unity to the Cham community and promote cultural values. If I had the resources, I would call for the community to come together to revive these ceremonies. I still have records of how to perform them, but many of the custodians who knew how to celebrate have passed away, and their knowledge has been lost.”

Cham elders are advocating for a more equitable distribution of the tourism revenue in order to better preserve and promote their cultural heritage. Muk Pajuw, a female medium, stated, “I wasn’t aware of this issue until I saw the lack of funds for worship ceremonies. I've seen dignitaries calling for support from the Cham community. If there is a significant amount of ticket sales, they should allocate some of it towards the community.”

According to Interviewee 04, sharing 20–30% of the tourism benefits with the Cham priests would help preserve the Cham culture and support those who maintain it. They would be grateful for this gesture.

Interviewee 14 stated that they have spoken to the authorities many times about the unfair distribution of tourism benefits, but their concerns have been ignored. The local government has many sources of revenue, but the revenue from tourism at the Cham temple is small in comparison. However, for the Cham people, it is a large amount that is important for preserving their cultural heritage. Sharing this revenue would show the state’s concern for ethnic minorities. Similarly, Interviewee 14 shared that the Cham people are not mentioned in the decisions made regarding the distribution of tourism revenue. 60% of the revenue is kept for staff salaries and renovations at the temple, while 40% is deducted for the state budget, leaving nothing for the Cham community. This is viewed as inequality and injustice.

The majority of the interviewees believe that the tourism revenue at the Cham temple is not fairly shared with the Cham people. They believe that if the state and local authorities shared the economic benefits, it would demonstrate concern for ethnic minorities in Vietnam.

Revenue Sharing Expectations of the Cham Community from Tourism

In addition to the lack of support for their physical well-being, the traditional temple guardians and primary custodians of the sacred temples in Ninh Thuận Province also face financial difficulties. Despite the efforts they have put into protecting Cham cultural heritage for generations, they are not adequately compensated for their work, and many are struggling to make ends meet.

During my fieldwork, I met with senior priests who shared their financial and health concerns with me. Despite the critical role they play in maintaining Cham cultural heritage, they receive little support from the government, and their ability to continue performing their duties is in jeopardy. One priest, Orang006, expressed his desire for basic health care and insurance. He stated, “It is great if the government gives us support for a medical check-up. I would be very happy about that. I am old now, and I do not have money for a health check-up. Neither do other custodians. I am old with many health issues. Where can I get money for these check-ups? I have been expecting health insurance from the government, but there has been no response on that.”

Members of the committee responsible for the stewardship of the sacred temples have also proposed this support but have met with little response from the local government. Orang003, a member of the committee, shared, “I have proposed it many times as senior priests are facing health issues. They have devoted their lives to the community, so they should receive a payback for their old age. However, the local government refused the proposal and explained that other religions might ask for the same healthcare support.”

The situation highlights the need for greater support and recognition of the important role played by these traditional temple guardians and primary custodians in maintaining Cham cultural heritage. With the harsh environmental conditions and lack of financial and healthcare support, it is uncertain who will continue their work in the future.

This situation has led to a major concern for the well-being of the priests, especially the older ones, who are already facing health issues. The harsh weather conditions can exacerbate their existing health problems and make it difficult for them to perform their duties effectively (Fig. 9.1). Moreover, the lack of support from the government, in terms of providing basic health care and insurance, adds to the priests’ difficulties and raises the question of who will take over their duties in the future.

Fig. 9.1
A photo of a few men in traditional attire with headdress performing a ritual outdoors. Many men and women surround the priests. Everyone wears a hat. Many utensils and other things are arranged on the ground.

Elder priests performing rituals under the intense heat of the tropical sun

Full size image

In this context, it is crucial for the local government to consider the well-being of the priests and provide them with adequate support, including basic health care and insurance, to help them carry out their duties and preserve the cultural heritage of the Cham people. The priests have dedicated their lives to the community, and it is only fair for the government to recognize their contributions and provide them with the support they deserve. Failure to do so could result in a loss of Cham cultural heritage, as younger generations may not be willing or able to continue the work of their elders.

During my fieldwork, I interviewed several individuals who expressed their views on the relationship between the local government and the Cham community in regard to tourism revenue. Many of these respondents believed that, as the authorities benefit from tourism at Cham temples, the government has a responsibility to provide support to the priests. One interviewee, Orang018, suggested that priests should receive a monthly salary so they could concentrate on their religious duties, or be hired as official tour guides at the temples. They explained that this would allow them to earn money to support their families while also introducing Cham culture in an accurate and honest way.

Orang005, who worked in the Balamon Dignitaries Council, shared their understanding of the economic difficulties faced by the Cham community, including the loss of fields for their livelihoods. They argued that the government should provide financial support to the priests to allow them to maintain the temples and share their knowledge with visitors.

Other interviewees, such as Orang17 and Orang024, emphasized the importance of using tourism revenue to improve the education and knowledge of young Cham priests. They believed that this would help them better contribute to the conservation and promotion of Cham culture. Orang024 explained that without the preservation of Cham heritage, there would be no tourism development and profit.

In short, many of the interviewees believed that the local government should use tourism revenue to support the Cham community, including providing financial support for priests, creating job opportunities for them as tour guides, and improving the education of young priests for better preservation of Cham culture. Some respondents argued that priests should receive a monthly salary, so they can focus on their duties and others felt that tourism revenue should be used to provide financial support for their daily lives and re-train them in heritage conservation. The overall sentiment was that tourism revenue is crucial for the Cham community, and should be used to promote and maintain their culture.

Achieving Fair Distribution of Tourism Revenues for Heritage Stewards

This chapter explores the difficulties faced by traditional Cham custodians in their efforts to conserve their cultural heritage and their views on the distribution of tourism benefits at their living heritage sites in Vietnam. The study reveals that the benefits of tourism are not fairly distributed among the Cham community, with most of the revenue going to the state and government staff. The economic hardships faced by the Cham priests, including limited educational opportunities and lack of financial support, put pressure on them to seek alternative sources of income, thus compromising their cultural and religious obligations. The unequal distribution of tourism revenues is a major barrier to successful and sustainable heritage conservation in the Cham community.

The role of Ahier priests in preserving Cham cultural heritage cannot be overstated, particularly in regard to the Cham living temples in Ninh Thuận Province. As the overseers of religious activities and teachers of Cham culture, these priests have maintained the manuscripts and passed on the knowledge of the Cham community’s history, astronomy, law, customs, literature, and the legacies of its kings (Abdul, 2013). However, previous studies (Mbaiwa & Stronza, 2010; Xu et al., 2009) on the economic benefits of tourism development for local communities have failed to consider the specific needs and challenges faced by those who play a crucial role in preserving Indigenous culture. This study confirms the significance of maintaining cultural heritage and highlights how the everyday concerns of the Ahier priests need to be taken into account in the management of heritage sites.

Given the crucial role that Ahier priests play in leading spiritual practices and cultural events at the temples, I argue that the management of living heritage sites should not only consider the values held by the living community, but also the social concerns of these priests. Jigyasu (2015) also argues that the management of living heritage sites must take into account the contemporary context and the immediate socio-economic challenges faced by local communities in light of damages to the heritage (Kong, 2008). The findings of this study are consistent with Ahebwa’s (2012) findings that such challenges must be recognized and managed when implementing TBS as a policy for sustainable tourism.

The findings of my research highlight the increasing recognition of Ahier priests by government authorities in the conservation and development activities at the Po Klaong Girai temple. This shift towards collaboration with Cham communities in co-managing their living heritage sites is commendable, but the socio-economic conditions of the Cham Ahier priests still require attention. Despite the priests being instrumental in preserving their cultural heritage, they do not receive any economic benefits from the heritage sites, which hinders their ability to preserve the resources and work effectively with the local government. This lack of recognition and financial support for the priests is not unique to Cham people. Many studies have shown that tourism can exacerbate inequality and inhibit the participation of local communities in the distribution of benefits (Archabald & Naughton-Treves, 2001; Heslinga et al., 2019; Spenceley et al., 2017; Tumusiime & Sjaastad, 2014). This can lead to conflict between the financial beneficiaries of tourism and the cultural owners of the heritage, as seen with the Cham Ahier priests. The failure to address this conflict can have negative impacts on the economic, cultural, social, and political lives of stakeholders (Jamal & Stronza, 2009).

This study adds to the body of literature (Queiros & Mearns, 2019; Tumusiime & Sjaastad, 2014; Walpole & Goodwin, 2001) that demonstrates the importance of sharing tourism benefits fairly and recognizing the importance of local communities in the conservation of heritage sites. The Ahier priests, who play a central role in maintaining the spiritual activities and cultural events at the temple, require financial support for their livelihoods, education, and health care. Providing this support through TBS is necessary to foster their participation in the conservation of Cham living heritage sites and overcome their economic and educational challenges. The findings from this research align with studies that highlight the unequal distribution of benefits from tourism (Huong, 2015; Miura, 2005). In the case of the Po Klaong Girai temple, it is clear that the local Cham community is not receiving the same economic benefits from the temple that other communities, such as those near Angkor Wat and Hoi An, are receiving from their respective heritage sites. Unlike these communities, the livelihoods of the Cham people are not tied to the landscape around the temple, but rather to the resources they need to maintain their cultural traditions. This unequal distribution of benefits can lead to conflicts between the financial beneficiaries of tourism and the cultural owners of heritage sites, as has been demonstrated in several studies (Jamal & Stronza, 2009; Queiros & Mearns, 2019; Tumusiime & Sjaastad, 2014; Walpole & Goodwin, 2001). In the case of the Cham people, this conflict is exacerbated by the lack of recognition of the socio-economic conditions of the Ahier priests, who face significant economic and educational difficulties that pose a threat to the sustainability of their living heritage sites.

To mitigate these challenges and ensure the preservation of the Cham living heritage, it is necessary for the local government to provide the necessary support to the Ahier priests, including financial support for their livelihoods, education, and health care. This support is critical to overcome the economic and educational difficulties facing the Ahier priests, and to foster and encourage their participation in the conservation of the Cham living heritage sites (Kong, 2008). Failure to provide this support could result in the loss of vitality and outstanding universal values associated with these sacred temples, highlighting the need for prompt action.

My research reveals a distinct case of benefit-sharing ambiguity in the laws, policies, and mechanisms of the Vietnamese government, particularly with regard to the Heritage Legislation of Vietnam. Despite the law stipulating the sharing of economic benefits to the local community (as noted in studies by Heslinga et al. in 2019 and Scheyvens in 2002), the Heritage Legislation of Vietnam fails to consider the rights, justice, and economic benefits for those who are responsible for maintaining the cultural heritage. Although the Hoi An Protocols mention the importance of cultural resources for “sustained and equitable social and economic development” (Engelhardt & Rogers, 2009, p. 2), there is a need for clearer language to define what is meant by “sustained” and “equitable,” especially in the context of rapid socio-economic transformation affecting Indigenous communities. This lack of consideration for the social aspects of local communities, as highlighted by Kong (2008, p. 14), contributes to ineffective management of living heritage sites, as noted by Weise (2013).

Weise (2013) highlights the importance of considering the needs of local communities in the relationship between heritage sites and their surrounding communities. The living heritage of these communities, including their traditional practices, must be valued and protected. The cultural richness of heritage sites, such as the Po Klaong Girai temple, is derived not only from its architectural design, but also from the spiritual and ritual practices that give the site its “life force.” This is why it is crucial to ensure that the local communities who maintain and practice their living heritage at these sites also benefit from their preservation and conservation. As Miura (2008) points out, conserving heritage without considering the daily needs of the living population can result in a “frozen past.” Given the significance of Cham heritage in Ninh Thuận Province, it is imperative that the benefits of its conservation are shared by all stakeholders, including the local community. The need for community participation in heritage conservation is emphasized by Kong (2008), who argues that effective management of living heritage sites must consider the social considerations of local communities. This can be achieved through providing institutional and financial support that is equitable and respectful of local traditions. Only by taking these steps can we ensure sustainable development and effective conservation of the living heritage of the Cham community.

My research findings highlight the ongoing struggles of the Cham community in terms of their involvement and benefit-sharing in the Tourism Based Services (TBS) at their living heritage site. Despite their crucial role in preserving the heritage, the Cham dignitaries have expressed their disappointment and frustration over the lack of recognition and profit-sharing from the tourism industry. My study sheds light on the perspectives and experiences of the core communities who are directly involved in preserving the living heritage site. Previous studies have emphasized the importance of community participation and benefit-sharing in TBS (Makame & Boon, 2017; Munanura et al., 2016; Snyman & Bricker, 2019). However, this research highlights the need for further examination on TBS and its impact on the social and economic well-being of local communities. It is crucial to ensure that the distribution of tourism benefits is equitable and that the local communities are not detached from their living heritage sites. This study therefore calls for further research to address these pressing concerns and ensure the sustainability of both the heritage sites and the communities that hold them dear.

This study sheds light on the pressing issue of benefit-sharing for the Cham community in the context of TBS at their living heritage site. It highlights the importance of involving the community, particularly the cultural carriers, in the preservation and promotion of their living heritage. As pointed out by Jamal and Stronza (2009) and Lindberg (1991), the community’s participation and contribution are crucial for successful heritage conservation and sustainable development. The findings of this study are consistent with those of previous studies on TBS, such as those by Makame and Boon (2017), Munanura et al. (2016), and Snyman and Bricker (2019). These studies emphasize the negative impact of unfair TBS on tourism development and heritage conservation. Snyman and Bricker (2019) also underscore the importance of community attitudes and willingness to contribute to conservation efforts. However, the current heritage and tourism laws in Vietnam overlook the rights, justice, and economic benefits of the community, who are the creators and bearers of cultural heritage. This study aligns with the findings of Lapeyre (2011) and Tumusiime and Vedeld (2012), who argue that tourism development must critically consider the real benefits for the environment and the host community. It calls for a reexamination of these laws and policies to ensure that the benefits of tourism development at cultural heritage sites are shared fairly and equitably with the local communities.

Conclusion

This research sheds light on the challenges faced by the Cham community in preserving and promoting their cultural heritage through TBS at their living sacred sites in Ninh Thuận Province, Vietnam. The study highlights that the Cham people face significant economic and educational barriers that hinder the preservation and development of their cultural heritage. Moreover, the community has expressed their dissatisfaction with the unequal distribution of tourism benefits, which raises questions about the fairness towards the owners and bearers of cultural heritage.

While previous research has focused on TBS in protected areas in Africa, this study emphasizes the importance of considering the perspectives of Indigenous and ethnic communities in living heritage sites. The participation of the host community is critical in preserving cultural heritage and promoting sustainable tourism development. Listening to the voices of Indigenous and ethnic people who play a crucial role in preserving cultural heritage is crucial to address the challenges faced in preserving and promoting heritage values.

This research offers evidence for improving heritage management practices by proposing tourism development policies that promote equality and justice among stakeholders, especially minority and disadvantaged groups. It serves as a valuable lesson for sustainable heritage management in living heritage sites in other ethnic minority areas in Vietnam and around the world.