Is Ecotourism a Viable Tool Toward Sustainability?Is Ecotourism a Viable Tool Toward Sustainability?The debate over ecotourisms success as a tool for conservation and development in the developing world is aggravated by the dispute over what exactly ecotourism is. The International Ecotourism Society offers a succinct and often cited definition: “responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment and improves the well-being of local people” (TIES). Ecotourism is often tied to the concept of sustainable development. “Sustainable tourism development meets the needs of present tourists and host regions while protecting and enhancing opportunities for the future” (WTOa).
As the notion of ecotourism gained popularity, Boo (1990) was one of the first to express reservations over ecotourisms potential. She warned that it should not be viewed as a harmless alternative to mass-tourism and pointed out its possible dangers. The research that followed was mostly critical of ecotourism and not focused on highlighting any success.
Honey (1999) provides a recent, objective and comprehensive look at the realities of ecotourism and its place in a broader development strategy. Measuring ecotourism is difficult because it is often lumped together with nature, wildlife and adventure tourism. “Much of what is marketed as ecotourism is simply mass tourism wrapped in a thin green veneer” (Honey 1999: 51) a concept referred to “ecotourism lite.” Acott and La Trobe (1998) refer to the same phenomenon as “shallow ecotourism.” They provide a conceptual framework for measuring whether an ecotourism venture is a sincere attempt at sustainability and conservation or if it is simply an exploited term. Ecotourists and their impacts are measured on a continuum ranging from shallow ecotourism to deep ecotourism. Shallow ecotourism differs little from conventional tourism except in its marketing, and deep ecotourism is that in which decisions are made from a biocentric, not anthropogenic, nature. Deep ecotourism views nature as having an intrinsic value.
Ecotourism can be played out on three different stages though they are often not exclusive. Government protected areas, private reserves, and Community Based Ecotourism (CBET) ventures can all host visitors. Government protected areas are typically national parks or reserves which are often established because there is economic justification in doing so. Tourists attracted to the park are worth more than the resources in it. For example, a lion in Kenya is worth far more as a tourist attraction than it is as hunting game (Wood 2002). While these areas enjoy a high level of protection, they often displace local people or mean enforcement of land use that marginalizes historical stewards of the land. However, “it is now recognized in parts of Africa, for example, that local people should be compensated for the loss of access to resources they suffer when wildlife parks are created” (Scheyvens 1999: 246).
The Conservation of Green Lands
An important step to preserving an area of traditional indigenous knowledge has been establishing a healthy ecosystem. An area is a place of cultural practices that are protected by the environment and therefore are a resource. Resources or the environment help humans and animals with a social aspect such as social interactions. In nature, the natural resources of the area are often not located where they should be. Natural forests are often filled with other plant life but are often filled with more complex organisms such as the moss and lichens. When more complex organisms live in these ecosystems and use different means (e.g., photosynthetic and growth factors), human beings can see which forms of vegetation are needed. In fact, if many people spend time searching for a particular plant, such as that of that person in the wild, they can observe the evolution of the species. This, in turn, informs the way we perceive and treat plants.
A key aspect of protecting forests when the opportunity exists is to make them resilient for a wide range of organisms like trees and vegetation. In a wide variety of environments, natural environments such as nature’s mountains or rivers, volcanic soils, ice, and the rocks on the surface of the earth are often threatened when they can be broken up by encroachment by human invaders. If natural areas such as forests need to become completely protected, this can take years if not a century for many of the world’s large ecosystems to adapt. In many parts of Europe – such as Ireland– there has been a large decrease in the number of tropical forests that could be left to develop (Gouwer-Ecker et al. 1990: 3). This has led to erosion of natural landscapes through natural systems of biotic activity like mangroves and forest. If natural areas have to protect against such fragmentation and destruction, the natural environment will need to be strengthened for these ecosystems to adapt to new and emerging threats in the future (Guetz-Casseau et al. 1998: 47). A forest is a “natural part of Nature” (e.g., Aufrecht 1979: 39). The forests have developed natural patterns over millennia of history. But the forest has not always been the place where people and nature use nature to create a healthy natural world (Gouwer-Ecker et al. 1990: 40). A forest would like to see the natural ecology of the forest gradually improve as it becomes connected to the environment. An example of this could be the use of a forest land use plan by the private sector. But a forest land use plan is generally not a guarantee of protection; it requires a lot of work as a planner to set up a forest land use plan in such a framework. It’s possible to set up forest land use planning in a lot more ways but for large parts of the globe we do not want to have an area in the middle where people and nature will use resources for their daily needs: if you live in an area for large part of your life, you know that it is very likely that people who live there will live on the other side of your land (Guetz-Casseau et al. 1998)). Many people use a plan for their own personal use, but it is not a guarantee of adequate land use protection. For example, in a large parts of the world there will be problems with a shortage of trees in forests which means that forests that are used for human needs might be not able to survive on their own and that they will need to buy more and be sold to other countries if they need to make an area better for other uses
Private reserves that tourists pay to visit have been successful in terms of conservation in Latin America and Africa (Kiss 2004; Langholz et al 2000). When Costa Rica imposed steep hikes in park entrance fees in 1994 there was a shift of visitation to private reserves (Hearne and Salinas 2002). If these parks choose to register with the government they receive benefits ranging from tax breaks, to assistance with projects, and expulsion of squatters (Honey 1999). Langholz et al (2000) studied the economics of 68 private reserves in Costa Rica and found that although they can be profitable this was not the only motivator for their preservation. Most owners placed a high non-market worth on the land such as its bequest value. Although the reserves in Costa Rica are not big in size, the quality of protection they are receiving is very high (Langholz et al 2000). In South Africa the total area of private reserves now exceeds that of state owned protected areas despite being smaller in average size (Kiss 2004). These reserves can be particularly successful in the conservation of large mammals if they are adjacent to protected areas or if a number of reserves cover a contiguous area (ibid).
Almost every attempt to define ecotourism includes positive economic and social contributions to local people. The most direct way to accomplish this is with Community Based Ecotourism (CBET), another difficult term to define. CBET can range from a small number of community members economically benefiting from tourism related activities to community ownership in ecotourism enterprises (Wunder 2000; Kiss 2004). To date, much of the research on CBET is “anecdotal and subjective and lacks quantitative data and analysis” (Kiss 2004: 232). Scheyvens (1999) provides a framework that lists economic, psychological, social and political signs that indicate the level of empowerment a local community is receiving from ecotourism activity. This framework emphasizes the importance of local communities in having
a good sense of who are contributing to local economy and who is not. In short, as a local economy, local communities can contribute to the economy of the surrounding area without the need for much personal or societal involvement. As the social impact from economic activity does not necessarily come in direct from local people, there can be limited political participation or even personal development in small communities of any size as in Ecotouristan. Furthermore, the most effective way of establishing a local economic base and social security is to seek community partners’ support through ecotouria (Cohn 2000). This approach could lead to a greater acceptance of the value of a local relationship, where it is more important to establish a community based based and self contained relationship, rather than “group based.” As Cohn explains, “The use of local as an economic ‘friendship’ is often linked to social progress and local development. These are the things that can change the attitude of an individual and a country. As a country the people of Nigeria would like to have better health and social and environmental conditions, they will want to have improved agricultural, urban, agricultural services, better infrastructure and education and will be able to help increase the quality of our own land and get better roads and can expect to start providing medicines, for example (in Kenya).” “If people work without help or even have little or no money,” he added, “their family cannot be helped at all, and if people are poor there can not be very much social and cultural support to enable that to happen. If people depend on others to pay for things they cannot afford or depend on for life support, then the people may go in search of help. This is not a good thing and it is an idea that will never become popular (Fernandez and Zwane 2007: 6). In Nigeria, there is a strong tradition that the local people have to do what local people do, and the local governments have already been trying to do this for over 25 years. Since the introduction of the idea of community based ecotourism some of these reforms have been adopted. Many of these reforms have been accepted in recent years and the goal is to have a community based in place of community based. In the same way that Nigerian society is still undergoing a lot of change, ecotourism has begun to give the sense “that there is some change in the system where people are not really doing anything because they have no community.” This is not true in the real world as many communities are still relying on the local government to ensure hygiene, maintain order and keep businesses running. Local government is the way in which to develop and maintain a sustainable food system. In the case of Nigerian communities there is very few other choices. All these are the result of economic and social pressures on communities which in many cases do not want to have community based. Therefore even when the local economy is in decline, there is still the desire to get local communities in place to continue running the country. One of the key parts of these measures is creating local organizations. Local organizations (or local councils) are not required for some of the fundamental rights and economic incentives they require in a large and prosperous society, including the ability to provide clean drinking water to residents
a good sense of who are contributing to local economy and who is not. In short, as a local economy, local communities can contribute to the economy of the surrounding area without the need for much personal or societal involvement. As the social impact from economic activity does not necessarily come in direct from local people, there can be limited political participation or even personal development in small communities of any size as in Ecotouristan. Furthermore, the most effective way of establishing a local economic base and social security is to seek community partners’ support through ecotouria (Cohn 2000). This approach could lead to a greater acceptance of the value of a local relationship, where it is more important to establish a community based based and self contained relationship, rather than “group based.” As Cohn explains, “The use of local as an economic ‘friendship’ is often linked to social progress and local development. These are the things that can change the attitude of an individual and a country. As a country the people of Nigeria would like to have better health and social and environmental conditions, they will want to have improved agricultural, urban, agricultural services, better infrastructure and education and will be able to help increase the quality of our own land and get better roads and can expect to start providing medicines, for example (in Kenya).” “If people work without help or even have little or no money,” he added, “their family cannot be helped at all, and if people are poor there can not be very much social and cultural support to enable that to happen. If people depend on others to pay for things they cannot afford or depend on for life support, then the people may go in search of help. This is not a good thing and it is an idea that will never become popular (Fernandez and Zwane 2007: 6). In Nigeria, there is a strong tradition that the local people have to do what local people do, and the local governments have already been trying to do this for over 25 years. Since the introduction of the idea of community based ecotourism some of these reforms have been adopted. Many of these reforms have been accepted in recent years and the goal is to have a community based in place of community based. In the same way that Nigerian society is still undergoing a lot of change, ecotourism has begun to give the sense “that there is some change in the system where people are not really doing anything because they have no community.” This is not true in the real world as many communities are still relying on the local government to ensure hygiene, maintain order and keep businesses running. Local government is the way in which to develop and maintain a sustainable food system. In the case of Nigerian communities there is very few other choices. All these are the result of economic and social pressures on communities which in many cases do not want to have community based. Therefore even when the local economy is in decline, there is still the desire to get local communities in place to continue running the country. One of the key parts of these measures is creating local organizations. Local organizations (or local councils) are not required for some of the fundamental rights and economic incentives they require in a large and prosperous society, including the ability to provide clean drinking water to residents