⚠ Official Notice: www.ijisrt.com is the official website of the International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology (IJISRT) Journal for research paper submission and publication. Please beware of fake or duplicate websites using the IJISRT name.



Evaluating the Livelihood Impact of Tourism Revenue Sharing Funded Projects in Communities Around Musanze District, Rwanda


Authors : Simbi Cynthia Ornella; Dr. Afolabi Luqman

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 9 - September


Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/3222aupt

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26sep103

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.


Abstract : Tourism Revenue Sharing (TRS) is a policy mechanism with a pivotal role to promote community development and conservation around protected areas in Rwanda. While the TRS programme has invested heavily in social infrastructure and community projects, there is a lack of empirical evidence on the impact of TRS on the livelihoods of households. This study assessed the livelihood impact of Tourism Revenue Sharing (TRS) supported projects in the communities bordering the Musanze District in Rwanda in the light of the Theory of Change (ToC), Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Theory and Stakeholder Theory. The study specifically analyzed the impact of TRS-funded projects on access to education, healthcare and water services, as well as on household income generation and poverty reduction, and how socio-economic shocks affect household resilience; in addition, the impact of governance, inclusivity and sustainability was assessed. A mixed-methods research design, that is quantitative and qualitative, was used. A total of 275 beneficiary households were randomly selected from Kinigi, Nyange and Shingiro sectors using structured questionnaires to collect the primary data, while Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were used to collect the qualitative data. Descriptive statistics and Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) were used to analyze quantitative data and the qualitative data was analyzed using thematic analysis. The results indicate that the TRS-funded projects have contributed considerably to providing access to basic services, especially education, health care, and water provision, thus improving the welfare of households and their quality of life. Results also indicated that TRS-supported IGA had a positive effect on the household's income diversification and poverty reduction, the level of effect on the economy was moderate. The study also found that TRS interventions have increased the resilience of households through enhancing their coping and recovery processes to socio-economic shocks. In addition, governance quality, inclusivity and sustainability emerged as key factors in project effectiveness; communities with higher levels of transparency, accountability, participation and fair distribution of benefits also had better livelihood outcomes. The structural model validated that better access to basic services, economic empowerment, household resilience and institutional effectiveness all play a role in positive livelihood outcomes among the beneficiary households.

References :

  1. African Wildlife Foundation. (2023). Fifteen years of Rwanda’s tourism revenue sharing programme: Lessons for sustainability. Nairobi, Kenya: African Wildlife Foundation.
  2. Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2015). Mastering ’Metrics: The path from cause to effect. Princeton University Press.
  3. Bazeley, P., & Jackson, K. (2019). Qualitative data analysis with NVivo (3rd ed.). Sage.
  4. Bennett, N. J., Blythe, J., White, C. S., & Campero, C. (2021). Blue growth and blue justice: Ten risks and solutions for the ocean economy. Marine Policy, 125, 104387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104387
  5. Boudreaux, K., & Sacks, A. (2009). Revenue-sharing and conservation in Rwanda. Mercatus Center, George Mason University.
  6. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  7. Caliendo, M., & Kopeinig, S. (2008). Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22(1), 31-72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6419.2007.00527.x
  8. Chepkwony, L., Ole, S., & Kiprotich, R. (2025). Community conservancies and livelihood security in Maasai Mara, Kenya. Land, 14(2), 6-18. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14020006
  9. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge.
  10. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
  11. DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Sage.
  12. Dhliwayo, M., Muboko, N., & Gandiwa, E. (2023). Community perceptions of poverty reduction under CAMPFIRE in Beitbridge District, Zimbabwe. Frontiers in Conservation Science, 4, 1232613. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcosc.2023.1232613
  13. East African Community Secretariat. (2023). EAC tourism sector performance report 2023. Arusha, Tanzania: EAC Secretariat.
  14. Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone Publishing.
  15. Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage.
  16. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman Publishing.
  17. Gujarati, D. N., & Porter, D. C. (2009). Basic econometrics (5th ed.). McGraw-Hill
  18. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
  19. Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
  20. Hoddinott, J. (2006). Shocks and their consequences across and within households in rural Zimbabwe. Journal of Development Studies, 42(2), 301–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380500405501
  21. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  22. International Fund for Agricultural Development. (2022). Rural development and poverty reduction strategies. Rome, Italy: IFAD.
  23. Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
  24. Manyara, G., & Jones, E. (2007). Community-based tourism enterprises development in Kenya: An exploration of their potential as avenues for poverty reduction. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(6), 628-644. https://doi.org/10.2167/jost723.0
  25. Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Tourism. (2022). Annual report 2021-2022. Windhoek, Namibia: Government of Namibia.
  26. Ministry of Local Government. (2023). Rwanda Urban Development Project II (RUDP II) progress report. Kigali, Rwanda: MINALOC.
  27. National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda. (2021). Rwanda poverty report 2021. Kigali, Rwanda: NISR.
  28. National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda. (2022). Fifth population and housing census (PHC 2022). Government of Rwanda.
  29. National Institute of Statistics of Rwanda. (2022). Rwanda population and housing census 2022. Kigali, Rwanda: NISR.
  30. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
  31. OECD. (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. OECD Publishing.
  32. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage.
  33. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879-891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
  34. Reed, M. S., Vella, S., Challies, E., et al. (2019). A theory of participation. Restoration Ecology, 26(S1), S7–S17. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12541
  35. Republic of Rwanda. (2020). Tourism revenue sharing policy review. Kigali, Rwanda: Government Printer.
  36. Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41-55. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/70.1.41
  37. Rwanda Cooperative Agency. (2021). Annual report 2021. Government of Rwanda.
  38. Rwanda Development Board. (2019). Tourism revenue sharing (TRS) annual report 2019. Kigali, Rwanda: RDB.
  39. Rwanda Development Board. (2022). Musanze district development highlights 2022. Kigali, Rwanda: RDB.
  40. Rwanda Development Board. (2023). Tourism revenue sharing annual report 2023. Government of Rwanda.
  41. Rwanda Development Board. (2023). TRS programme implementation review 2023. Kigali, Rwanda: RDB.
  42. Rwanda Development Board. (2024). Annual tourism sector performance report 2024. Kigali, Rwanda: RDB.
  43. Rwanda Development Board. (2024). Tourism revenue sharing guidelines. Government of Rwanda.
  44. Shrestha, R., Pandey, R., & Bhatta, K. (2020). Tourism revenue sharing and community empowerment in Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. Tourism Geographies, 22(3), 367-384.
  45. Snyman, S. (2014). The impact of ecotourism employment on rural household incomes and social welfare in six southern African countries. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 14(1–2), 36–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1467358414522056
  46. Snyman, S., & Bricker, K. (2019). Living on the edge: Tourism and community development in Namibia’s communal conservancies. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 27(8), 1133–1150.
  47. Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53-55.
  48. Thapa, B. (2019). Community-based tourism and livelihood improvement in Nepal: Evidence from Annapurna Conservation Area. Kathmandu University Journal of Management, 7(2), 45- 62.
  49. United Nations Development Programme. (2020). Human development report 2020. UNDP.
  50. United Nations Development Programme. (2021). Human development report 2021/2022: Uncertain times, unsettled lives-Shaping our future in a transforming world. New York, NY: UNDP. https://hdr.undp.org/
  51. United Nations World Tourism Organization. (2022). UNWTO world tourism barometer 2022. Madrid, Spain: UNWTO. https://doi.org/10.18111/wtobarometereng.2022.20.1
  52. United Nations World Tourism Organization. (2023). UNWTO world tourism barometer 2023. Madrid, Spain: UNWTO. https://doi.org/10.18111/wtobarometereng.2023.21.1
  53. United Nations. (2023). The sustainable development goals report 2023. New York, NY: United Nations. https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2023/
  54. Wooldridge, J. M. (2020). Introductory econometrics: A modern approach (7th ed.). Cengage Learning.
  55. World Bank. (2022). Inclusive rural development strategies. Washington, DC: World Bank.
  56. World Bank. (2023). Rwanda economic update: Leveraging tourism for inclusive growth. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports
  57. World Travel & Tourism Council. (2024). Rwanda travel & tourism economic impact 2024. London, UK: WTTC. https://wttc.org/
  58. World Wide Fund for Nature. (2022). WWF Africa impact report 2022. Nairobi, Kenya: WWF. https://www.worldwildlife.org/
  59. WWF Namibia, NACSO, & Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Tourism. (2022). The state of community conservation in Namibia 2022. Windhoek, Namibia: NACSO.
  60. Yaa, H., Mwita, J., & Nshala, R. (2024). Conservation policy and benefit-sharing in the Greater Serengeti Ecosystem, Tanzania. Biodiversity and Conservation, 33(4), 905-924. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-024-02906-w
  61. Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics: An introductory analysis (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Row.
  62. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Tourism Revenue Sharing (TRS) is a policy mechanism with a pivotal role to promote community development and conservation around protected areas in Rwanda. While the TRS programme has invested heavily in social infrastructure and community projects, there is a lack of empirical evidence on the impact of TRS on the livelihoods of households. This study assessed the livelihood impact of Tourism Revenue Sharing (TRS) supported projects in the communities bordering the Musanze District in Rwanda in the light of the Theory of Change (ToC), Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Theory and Stakeholder Theory. The study specifically analyzed the impact of TRS-funded projects on access to education, healthcare and water services, as well as on household income generation and poverty reduction, and how socio-economic shocks affect household resilience; in addition, the impact of governance, inclusivity and sustainability was assessed. A mixed-methods research design, that is quantitative and qualitative, was used. A total of 275 beneficiary households were randomly selected from Kinigi, Nyange and Shingiro sectors using structured questionnaires to collect the primary data, while Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) and Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were used to collect the qualitative data. Descriptive statistics and Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM) were used to analyze quantitative data and the qualitative data was analyzed using thematic analysis. The results indicate that the TRS-funded projects have contributed considerably to providing access to basic services, especially education, health care, and water provision, thus improving the welfare of households and their quality of life. Results also indicated that TRS-supported IGA had a positive effect on the household's income diversification and poverty reduction, the level of effect on the economy was moderate. The study also found that TRS interventions have increased the resilience of households through enhancing their coping and recovery processes to socio-economic shocks. In addition, governance quality, inclusivity and sustainability emerged as key factors in project effectiveness; communities with higher levels of transparency, accountability, participation and fair distribution of benefits also had better livelihood outcomes. The structural model validated that better access to basic services, economic empowerment, household resilience and institutional effectiveness all play a role in positive livelihood outcomes among the beneficiary households.

Paper Submission Last Date
30 - September - 2026

SUBMIT YOUR PAPER CALL FOR PAPERS
Video Explanation for Published paper

Never miss an update from Papermashup

Get notified about the latest tutorials and downloads.

Subscribe by Email

Get alerts directly into your inbox after each post and stay updated.
Subscribe
OR

Subscribe by RSS

Add our RSS to your feedreader to get regular updates from us.
Subscribe