Creating souvenirs through traditional practices: An analysis of local

products and souvenirs in Muang Paem, Thailand

Elisa van der Hoop, Annelies Koorn and Linda Willemse

June 18, 2013

Introduction

Many tourists consider souvenirs as important in order to remind them of the holiday

or experience they have had (Swanson, 2004; Love & Kohn, 2010). Souvenir purchases

form a significant component of the shopping behavior of tourists (Littrell et al., 1994; Lehto

et al., 2004, as noted in Wilkins, 2010). Even though the danger of souvenirs lies in mass

production and commercialization of the products, Hashimoto and Telfer (2007) argue that

not all souvenirs are commercialized, as there are local products created and sold to tourists

while these are merely deformed from local traditions. Muang Paem is an example of selling

non-commercialized authentic souvenirs. This village is a white Karen hill-tribe community

located in the northern part of Thailand. The community has established their permanent

settlement in Muang Paem in 1961, and has recently begun to develop community based

tourism (CBT). Before, Muang Paem has also known to trekking tourists due to their location

in the mountains (Report Participatory Cultural Mapping For Community Based Tourism

Development, n.d.).

This community of former Burmese people has established a high degree of self-

reliance and earn an additional income from selling these to tourists. Due to its local

traditions in weaving, bamboo weaving, herbal medicine and wood carving, the community

is rich in local products which can also be sold to tourists. This report aims to analyze the

several local products which are sold as souvenirs, the extent of adaption to the needs of the

tourists, the places of sales and tourists’ views on souvenirs. During a two-week stay in

several homestays in Muang Paem

site-specific information is gathered

through observation, self-experiencing

workshops and interviews to create

different views and opinions on the

relating subjects. The interviews are

held with people who are involved in

creating local products, several

Image 1, Made by E. van der Hoop. “Interview with community members.”

important community members and ten tourists from different nationalities.

Theory

The souvenir is an important aspect of the tourism industry (Wilkins, 2010) as almost

one third of the travel expenses are used for shopping in which the expenses for souvenirs

are a large contributor (Litrell et al. 1994; Fairhurst, Costello, and Holmes 2007 as noted in

Wilkins, 2010). Swanson (2004) argues that it is within the human nature to take home a

memorable aspect from the journey taken. There are only few people who will enjoy a

holiday without taking back a tangible aspect (Gordon, 1986;Litrell et al. 1994 as noted in

Wilkins, 2010). This tangible aspect should be a representation of the intangible in order to

remember this experience (Swanson, 2004; Love & Kohn, 2010). Such tangibles are also

known as souvenirs. The souvenir can be a representative of many things, such as culture

and history. Furthermore, the souvenir corresponds to various geographical levels

(Hashimoto & Telfer, 2007). The souvenir can be mass-produced or even handmade

(Swanson, 2004). Hashimoto & Telfer (2007) explain that souvenirs can be commercialized,

but not necessarily every souvenir is. They state that souvenirs that are made by hand, but

slightly adapted to a market, care not considered commercialized. Swanson (2004) argues

that authenticity and the souvenir’s connection to the area are the most important in

selecting a souvenir. Hashimoto & Telfer (2007) discuss that a souvenir is authentic when it

is made, produced or performed by local people using local customs or traditions. Most

international tourists appear to seek for small and easily transportable products,

understandable and useable back home (Swanson, 2004). Furthermore, tourist who are

more experienced travelers buy souvenirs related to relationships, people and events, while

inexperienced travelers buy souvenirs relating to the destination (Hashimoto & Telfer,

2007).

Methodology

This article is based on the literature review of Elisa van der Hoop, where secondary

data has been compiled and analyzed. Primary data for this research was gathered during a

two-week stay in Muang Paem, Thailand from May 25 till June 9, 2013 and in Chiang Mai on

June 11, 2013. Four in-depth interviews were conducted at the village itself to require

different views and opinions on the relating subjects. The interviews were held with

specially-selected people who are involved in creating local products and people who have a

significant function within the community or concerning CBT. These were conducted with the

help of one or two, in the case of translating Karen to Thai, translators. In order to gain

information about the demand site, ten tourists with different nationalities were interviewed

in Chiang Mai. Besides interviews, observation in the village is executed. Observing the

village, the daily lives of the villagers and local products in and around the house provided

more knowledge. Moreover, self-experiencing workshops were executed to experience the

creation of souvenirs.

Findings

In Muang Paem there is a high extent of self-

reliance by making their own products. Even though

observation has shown that the community is also

adapting to modern life, for example by wearing

non-traditional and bought clothes, traditional ways

of creating products for own use are still in-tact. The

local products of Muang Paem show a high variety.

While some of these products are merely created for

own use and sales among the locals, and therefore

not sold to outside visitors, there are many products which are also sold to tourists which

are known as souvenirs. A distinction is made between products which are made for own use

and also sold to tourists and products which are merely made for tourists. The first group

knows several products. First of all, the herbs and herbal medicine are gathered from the

community forest and some are grown in local gardens.

Next to that many of the weaving products are used in daily

life. Such products are the shirts, skirts and dresses which

are a part of the traditional clothing. Other weaving

products are bags and head scarfs. Weaving these products

is a women’s job and is purely done during free time, next

to their daily jobs.

The cotton for these products is not grown by the

community itself, but is bought in Pang Ma Pa and Chiang

Mai (Report Participatory Cultural Mapping for Community

Based Tourism Development, n.d.). Next the cotton is dyed,

either in a natural way, by using tree barks, which create

Image 2, Made by E. van der Hoop. “Bupa weaving.”

Image 3, made by L. Willemse. “Washing dyed cotton.”

soft colors such as yellow or brown, or by using chemical dye bought from the factory, which

create brighter colors such as blue and black. After the cotton is dry it is spun in order to be

able to start the weaving. After the woman has woven the product it is decorated, after

which it can be used by themselves (Bupa, personal communication, June 6, 2013; Report

Participatory Cultural Mapping for Community Based Tourism Development, n.d.).

Next to the weaving products also bamboo products are considered as a local

product. Contrary to cotton weaving, bamboo weaving is traditionally a man’s job also

conducted in their free time. Only one man in the village, mr. Tawan, has bamboo weaving

as his main occupation. Products which are made for own use are the different baskets, for

fish, rice or clothes, trays, fans for separating the rice, chicken coops (Tawan, personal

communication, June 7, 2013), fish traps, fish nets, bamboo hats and other structures such

as doors, floors and walls (Report Participatory Cultural Mapping for Community Based

Tourism Development, n.d.). All these products can be found throughout the village and in

the homes. Mr. Tawan (personal communication, June 7, 2013) notes that before a product

can be made the right bamboo is gathered in the forest and stripped to the desired size. The

duration of creating the product varies according to the size and difficulty of the product.

Finally, the bamboo and teak cups and spoons are also considered as local products,

which are often used in the houses or while on the fields (Tawan, personal communication,

June 7, 2013).

When a (wo)man has too little spare time to create their own product, they buy from

each other within the village. This applies for both bamboo, as well as for cotton weaving.

These products can also be adjusted or created to the specific needs of the tourists, yet this

can be difficult as the average stay is only 1,5 days. (Bupa, personal communication, June 6,

2013; Soetet, personal communication, June 8, 2013).

The community has identified several opportunities for

creating additional souvenirs, especially for tourists, by using

traditional practices. For example scarfs, blankets, ponchos and

wooden key-chains shaped as different animals. Many tourists

prefer to buy smaller souvenirs, such as the bags and scarfs, as

these are easy to be carried. Even though these products are

specially based on tourists wishes, these are still created

according to the traditional processes. Because they are created

and produced by the locals according to the local traditions,

Image 4, Made by L. Willemse “Weaving in a workshop.”

Hashimoto and Telfer (2007) consider the products as authentic souvenirs. As tourists value

the authenticity of a product this could be an indicator of a successful souvenir.

New ideas to develop souvenirs are the use of modern patterns in weaving (Bupa,

personal communication, June 6, 2013) and the creation of new weaving products such as

dolls in traditional clothing or bracelets. Similar products like these have proven to be

successful in other communities and are planned to be developed in Muang Paem as well.

With these examples Muang Paem shows that they have adapted their products and created

new ones to the needs and wants of the tourists. Still, they remain to use the traditional

crafting ways, preserving the authentic quality.

Bupa (personal communication, June 6, 2013) notes that tourists are more attracted

to weaving products which are naturally dyed when they know the story behind the natural

colors. This proves the theory of Hashimoto and Telfer (2007) who argue that the story

behind the product, next to the product itself, also plays an important role in souvenirs.

Even though there are only around 100 tourists each year

in the community (Poluang, personal communication, June 6,

2013), the weaving group generates around 4,000 to 5,000 baht

per month, while the total amount might be double due to sales

at homes outside of the women’s group (Bupa, personal

communication, June 6, 2013). Still, the local women make

these products according to the local traditions in their free time

and are not produced in mass. Also the bamboo and teak

products take a long time before being finished and are mostly

created during the men’s free time as well (Tawan, personal

communication, June 7, 2013). Therefore these products are no

mass-production and are not commercial according to Hashimoto

and Telfer (2007).

According to Bupa (personal communication, June 6, 2013) and Jingjon (personal

communication, June 6, 2013) there is no sufficient marketing for the souvenirs, yet.

Promotion is only done by several tour operators in the surrounding of Mae Hong Son. There

are currently two shops which sell the community's souvenirs. The first is located in Chiang

Mai. Last August this shop owner held a training course for the community concerning

souvenirs. In this training the community members learned about tourists’ needs and wants,

and created ideas for new products. The community got the opportunity to sell 500 of the

Image 5, Made by E. van der Hoop. “Weaving products.”

new and adapted souvenirs to the shop in order to promote these. The second shop is the

handicraft center in Mae Hong Son which belongs to the university. Pamphlets and brochures

are available at different tour companies in the area in order to

make tourists aware of the souvenirs in this shop. Nevertheless,

sales are slow (Jingjon, personal communication, June 6, 2013).

Next to the sales in these shops, souvenirs are sold within

the community. When the community has a notification of tourists

visiting, the house of the village headman is used as center where

weaving products are displayed and sold. Karen women can hand

in their weaving products to the weaving group, which exists of 35

women, who are stakeholders for an admission fee of 10 baht. The

weaving products are sorted and the selected products are

displayed as souvenirs in the center place. Women who hand in

their product will get paid by Bupa immediately, if the money is

available. After reducing the price of cotton, 10% of the profit is

reserved for the management of selling the products. The

remaining amount is profit for the person who made the product.

Due to the community’s outstanding skills in handicrafts, the

government has funded the women’s group with 50,000 baht,

showing the excellence of their work (Bupa, personal

communication, June 6, 2013).

Besides sales at the central place, souvenirs are sold during workshops such as

bamboo or cotton weaving. However, as the average stay is only 1.5 days, many tourists do

not have the time to participate themselves. Still, many have a look at the practices of the

locals. When relating the souvenir to the local product, the manner of which this local

product is made and the place where it is sold is important in order to be an authentic

souvenir, which is valued by tourists (Hashimoto & Telfer, 2007). It can be stated that

tourists would like to buy a souvenir at the place where the workshop is given.

Additionally, locals sell from their houses. These direct sales were especially done in

former times. The person who reaches the tourists first would sell the most. Due to the

central place, direct sales became less, but are still occurring. However, Soetet (personal

communication, June 8, 2013) argues that one cannot forbid the direct sales as they live in

a democracy. Furthermore, Thai tourists buy products at the herbal doctors rarely. Yet, it is

not considered as a souvenir as these are merely produced for the doctor’s use due to an

anxiety of losing too much of their natural environment.

Image 6, Made by E. van der Hoop. “bamboo and wood carved products.”

As one can see, efficient marketing is missing. Additionally, if tourists only pass by

the village or do not participate in the workshops

they might miss the Karen souvenirs.

According to Swanson (2004) and Love and

Kohn (2010) tourists often buy souvenirs to have

a tangible aspect to represent and remember their

experience. Nine tourists agreed to this statement

since a souvenir should be a reminder of their

holiday. Next to that, three tourists said that the

souvenir should have a meaning, while three

others said that it should represent their stay in

the country. Bupa (personal communication, June

6, 2013) noticed that tourists buy the smaller

souvenirs as it is easier to take with them on their

journey. Only one tourist claimed not to be interested in products of hill-tribes, while others

said that they would or it would depend. While four tourists stated that they would prefer to

buy their souvenirs in a shop, the majority of six agreed that buying them at a workshop

would have greater meaning. This shows that these tourists would be willing to buy

souvenirs in Muang Paem when this would have a meaning for them. Despite the average

stay of 1.5 days for the CBT product, the tourists do visit the handicrafts as it is a fixed part

of the program (group interview 1, June 6, 2013). However, it is questionable whether

tourists who not participate in CBT, for example trekking tourists, or those who do not want

to visit the handicrafts, are aware of the sales as there is no shop in the village located.

Conclusion

In the past Muang Paem received many trekking tourists. Tourists habitually buy

souvenirs as they want to have a tangible reminder of their experience. The creation of such

souvenirs start with the local product. Due to the high extent of self-reliance of traditional

practices in cotton and bamboo weaving, wood carving and herbal medicine, Muang Paem

knows many. Even though these are originally produced for own use, some products, such

as the shoulderbag, are also sold to tourists and can be seen as souvenirs, too. While some

local products are slightly changed to meet the needs and wants of the tourists, other

products are only made to create a unique souvenir. Despite changes and new additions,

authenticity of the souvenir remains as the locals continue to use the traditional processes.

Due to the fact that the products are created in their free time and take up some time, these

Image 7, Made by L. Willemse. “Workshop weaving.”

are not mass produced or commercialized. The community should, therefore, preserve these

traditional processes of creating products and souvenirs. Not only are these considered

unique, these are also authentic to the Karen culture and have been awarded by the

government organization with a large amount of money.

Selling the souvenirs is either through home

sales or cooperative sales. Although the first only

benefits the sales(wo)man, it cannot be prohibited.

The cooperative selling of the weaving products, on

which the women’s group works together and which

are sold in a central place, equals the selling chances

of all group members. Other benefits are that the

sales are well kept, cotton can be bought at reduced

prices and chances of sale increase. The group

products are also sold via two shops. However, sales

in Mae Hong Son shop are slow, due to a lack of

marketing efforts. Recommended is to strengthen the

cooperation with the shop, and thereby increasing the marketing efforts to create a rise in

sales.

Additionally, the community does not have a clear souvenir or local product shop

within the village itself, making it difficult for tourists staying for a short period of time to

find souvenirs. Therefore, an option would be to have a place to sell the souvenirs. Since

there are little tourists visiting the community, opening a new shop purely for souvenirs

would be too ambitious. A solution would be to reserve a small space in front of the grocery

shop in the village to display some of the products. As this shop is located on a main road

many travelers would be able to see and visit the shop.

Still Muang Paem keeps its traditional processes and continuously develops their

understanding of tourists buying habits. Consequently, it can be concluded that Muang Paem

is doing well concerning their local products relating to souvenirs.

Limitations

The main limitation of this research is the language barrier, due to the fact that the

community members cannot speak English. Therefore a translator was needed when

conducting interviews. A translator can control and influence the conversation while merely

summarizing what has been said. As a result it is not known what was said specifically.

Image 8, Made by L. Willemse. “Women working on dyeing.”

Furthermore, difficulties arose with formulating specific and detailed follow-up questions.

Due to the limited research time, this research is based on only a few tourist interviews

rather than many. This making it difficult to make a general assumption representing all

tourists.

Acknowledgements

This work has been created with the help of the translations of Pee Mam and Serri.

The interviews were conducted with Bupa, head of the weaving group, Tawan, local bamboo

weaving man, and two group interviews. One with Jingjon, assistant village headman and

local guide, Sukma, chair of women group and CBT committee member, Samun, homestay

member, and Bupa.The other with Rangsi, head of the CBT group, Poluang, village headman

and Soetet, local guide. Additionally in Chiang Mai, ten random tourists were anonymously

interviewed. All participants are thanked for their input. The authors thank Pee Mam for her

help in the interviews and support throughout the process and Mr. John Hummel for his

input and feedback contributing to a better result.

References

Hashimoto, A. & Telfer, D.J. (2007). Geographical Representations Embedded within

Souvenirs in Niagara: The Case of Geographically Displaced Authenticity.

Tourism Geographies: An International Journal of Tourism Space, Place and

Environment. Volume 9, Issue 2. DOI: 10.1080/14616680701278547.

Love, L., & Kohn, N. (2010). This, that, and the other: Fraught possibilities of the

souvenir. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.

Report Participatory Cultural Mapping for Community Based Tourism Development. (n.d.).

Muang Paem Community, Tum Lod Sub-district, Pang Ma Pa district, Mae Hong Son.

Swanson, K.K. (2004). Tourists’ and Retailers’ Perceptions of Souvenirs. Journal of Vacation

Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 4, 2004, pp. 363–377.

Wilkins, H. (2010). Souvenirs: What and Why We Buy. Journal of Travel Research, 2011. 50:

239. DOI: 10.1177/0047287510362782.