evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Angkor Archaeological Park — Heritage Tourism Revenue Funding Forest & Hydraulic Restoration (Cambodia)

Cambodia · Siem Reap · See the Cambodia profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 89% 27/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Angkor's temple-entrance ticket revenue, which reached about $37 million in 2023, funds APSARA's parallel work restoring the park's ancient baray reservoirs and moats and reforesting the surrounding land that protects the temples' foundations.

700,000 cubic metres
North Baray stored water volume (2008) (2008)
5,000,000 cubic metres/year
North Baray stored water volume (2011-2013) (2011-2013)
220 hectares
ADF reforestation area (Phnom Kulen) (since 2015)
800 hectares
APSARA-led plantings
11.5 USD million
Ticket revenue (2022) (2022)
37 USD million
Ticket revenue (2023) (2023)

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
APSARA National Authority
Period
2005-present (hydraulic restoration); 2015-present (reforestation)
Keywords
cultural heritage, forestry, hydrology, tourism, groundwater management

Context

The Angkor Archaeological Park in Siem Reap, Cambodia, UNESCO-listed since 1992, is as much a hydraulic landscape as a monumental one — its temples depend on the water table maintained by an ancient network of barays (reservoirs) and moats and on surrounding forest cover that stabilises the sandy soils the temple foundations sit on.

Activities

The APSARA National Authority has run hydraulic restoration works since 2005, refilling reservoirs such as Srah Srang and the Angkor Thom/Angkor Wat moats, and since 2015 APSARA and partners including the NGO Archaeology and Development Foundation have run reforestation programmes to protect the park's soil and hydrology.

Results

Academic monitoring of the North Baray recorded stored water rising from about 700,000 cubic metres in 2008 to roughly 5,000,000 cubic metres a year by 2011-2013; ADF alone reports planting trees across roughly 220 hectares since 2015, with separate APSARA-led plantings of about 800 hectares and 100,000 trees reported elsewhere in the park. Foreign-visitor ticket revenue rose from about $11.5 million in 2022 to around $37 million in 2023, funding APSARA's operating budget within which this work sits.

Conclusions

The available sources document real, quantified hydraulic and reforestation activity, but do not establish a transparent, fixed earmark of ticket revenue for conservation, nor an independent impact evaluation isolating these works' contribution to temple structural stability — this is best read as a heritage site whose tourism income coexists with, and plausibly helps sustain, an administratively fragmented set of conservation efforts rather than a single audited payment-for-ecosystem-services scheme.

Implementation

Indicative cost
High (€500k–€5M) — Funded within APSARA's operating budget, underpinned by $37 million in 2023 foreign-visitor ticket revenue.
Time to results
Long (> 3 years) — Hydraulic restoration since 2005; reforestation since 2015; both ongoing.
Staffing & skills
APSARA National Authority (Cambodia's state body for the site), Archaeology and Development Foundation (ADF) for Phnom Kulen reforestation, Angkor Enterprise managing ticket sales

Conditions for success

  • Large and growing tourism revenue base ($37M in 2023) funding APSARA's operating budget
  • Credible, specific hydrological monitoring data (North Baray volumes)

Common failure modes

  • Funding pathway between ticket sales and conservation spending is not transparently quantified
  • Reforestation reporting fragmented across several actors rather than tracked as a single programme
  • No independent impact evaluation isolating these works' contribution to temple structural stability

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes Own resources / municipal budget Philanthropic / foundation funding

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Similar practices you may find useful