Sunrise and sunset are wonderful at Sajek Valley in the Chittagong Hill Tracts. As tourism expands in the region, questions grow over Indigenous ownership, land rights, and who controls eco-tourism development. Photo: The Times of Jumland
Bangladesh, Rangamati | February 23, 2026: To many outside Bangladesh, the Chittagong Hill Tracts appear as a breathtaking landscape of green hills, drifting clouds, waterfalls and forests. What is often invisible in that image are the people who have lived there for generations.
The region is home to Indigenous communities, including the Chakma, Marma, Tripura and several other ethnic groups. Their languages, cultures, ancestral burial grounds and collective memories are deeply rooted in this land. For them, the hills are not a tourism product. They are home. That is why tourism development in the region is not merely an economic issue. It is a question of dignity, land rights and survival.
Recently, Chittagong Hill Tracts Affairs Minister Dipen Dewan stated that strict legal action would be taken against those who destroy biodiversity in the name of tourism or resort construction. Dewan, who comes from the Hill Tracts region, is widely viewed as someone familiar with the lived realities of Indigenous communities. His statement resonated strongly among local residents because it acknowledged a long-standing concern that tourism projects have sometimes advanced without sufficient environmental safeguards or community consent.
Over the years, hills have been cut, forests cleared and tourism facilities constructed in areas historically used for traditional shifting cultivation. Families describe the land they once farmed now standing behind gates. Paths once used by children to walk to school now lead to commercial entrances. Development has arrived, but Indigenous families say they have not shared equally in its ownership or decision-making.
At the same time, State Minister Mir Mohammad Helal Uddin has spoken about transforming the Hill Tracts into a world-class eco-tourism destination. His vision emphasizes investment, infrastructure expansion and branding the region as an international attraction. The potential of the hills is undeniable. However, the central issue is not whether tourism should expand. It is who controls that expansion and who benefits from it.
Globally, eco-tourism is understood as a development model that protects ecosystems while empowering local communities. It requires free, prior and informed consent. It respects customary land rights. It ensures that Indigenous populations are not spectators on their own land but active participants in ownership, management and revenue sharing. Without these protections, the word “eco” risks becoming a label rather than a principle.
Tourism succeeds when culture remains visible and respected. Visitors travel to Nepal not only to see the Himalayas but to experience Nepali society and traditions. Travelers go to Japan to see Mount Fuji, yet what gives depth to that journey is the surrounding cultural identity. Landscapes gain meaning when the people who belong to them remain present and empowered.
The Chittagong Hill Tracts are no different. Visitors are drawn not only by clouds and scenery but by a distinct Indigenous way of life. When Indigenous shops disappear, when local crafts decline, when Indigenous youth struggle to access licenses or capital to operate tourism businesses, the character of the region weakens. Some visitors have already observed that certain hill resorts increasingly resemble urban commercial zones found elsewhere in Bangladesh. The hills remain, but the identity feels diminished.
For Indigenous communities, the fear is not modernization. It is marginalization. They seek roads, schools, healthcare, and economic opportunity like any other citizens. What they question is whether tourism development will respect their customary land rights and meaningful participation.
The 1997 Chittagong Hill Tracts Accord recognized the special character of the region and outlined commitments regarding land, governance, and Indigenous representation. Any tourism policy that sidelines community consent risks contradicting the spirit of that agreement. Sustainable development in the Hill Tracts cannot be separated from the political and historical context of the land.
Many Indigenous children may not understand the technical term “eco-tourism.” What they understand is that places where they once played are now fenced. Visitors arrive, take photographs, and leave. Yet local economic participation often remains limited. If development does not measurably improve the lives of the communities that have lived there for generations, it cannot be described as inclusive.
If Minister Dewan’s commitment to environmental protection leads to enforceable safeguards and accountability, it could signal a shift toward rights-based tourism. If State Minister Helal Uddin’s vision integrates binding guarantees for Indigenous ownership, land protection and equitable revenue sharing, it could become a model for inclusive growth.
But if tourism expansion continues without structural reform, eco-tourism risks becoming a rebranded mechanism of control rather than a path toward sustainability.
The future of the Chittagong Hill Tracts will not be determined by how impressive resorts appear in photographs. It will be determined by whether development strengthens Indigenous communities or sidelines them.
Eco-tourism that protects forests but weakens the people who belong to those forests is not sustainable development. It is displacement under a different name.
The hills are not complete without the communities who call them home. Development that sidelines them weakens both justice and sustainability.
Today, tourism in the Chittagong Hill Tracts operates largely under security-centered control, while Indigenous communities remain marginal in ownership and decision-making. That imbalance cannot define the future.
Tourism must move under transparent civilian oversight, with Indigenous people as primary partners, not bystanders. Removing Indigenous families from their homesteads in the name of tourism is not development. It is dispossession.
Eco-tourism without Indigenous control is not sustainability. It is control rebranded.
By The Times of Jumland | Rangamati Desk
