In Pursuit of Ecotourism

Biodiversity and Conservation 5, 277-291 (1996) In pursuit of ecotourism HAROLD GOODWlN Darrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology. Universityof Kent, Canterbury CT2 7PD, UK Received 7 October 1995; revised and accepted 30 October 1995 Ecotourism is expected, by the tourism industry and academics, to grow rapidly over the next 20 years. Much has been written about ecotourism, often with missionary zeal, but there is little consensus about its definition. It is argued here that conservationists and protected area managers should adopt a definition of ecotourism which contributes to the maintenance of biodiversity and an appropriate definition is suggested. Ecotourism is not merely an alternative to mass tourism, nor is it the only alternative. The literature on nature tourism and the environmental impacts of the industry dates back to the late 1970s. Tourism is now the world's largest industry and it has an increasing impact on protected areas. Our understanding of these mechanisms, their ecological impacts and our capacity to manage tourism in protected areas lags behind the growth of tourism to protected areas. A rapid growth in nature tourism and tourism to protected areas has coincided with a shift in protected area management strategies towards integrated development. Tourism is one means available to protected area managers seeking to increase the economic value of a protected area and to offer sustainable opportunities for economic development to local people, This paper argues that potentially conflicting commercial, protected area and development interests all contribute to the emergence of ecotourism and have been doing so for many years. Ecotourism needs to be tightly defined if it is to benefit conservation. Protected area managers should consider how they can take control of nature tourism to the parks they manage and convert it into ecotourism for the benefit of conservation and the livelihoods of local people. Keywords: ecotourism; nature tourism; protected areas. The growth of the tourism industry Tourism is the world's largest industry. There were 532 million international tourist arrivals in 1994 and international tourism receipts of $US337 billion 1. International tourist arrivals were only 25 million in 1950. By the year 2000 the World Travel Organization (WTO) is projecting international tourist arrivals of 661 million, nearly double the 1994 figure. The W T O is projecting one billion international tourist arrivals by 2010 (UNEP, 1992; WTO, 1995). Fortunately, ecotourism constitutes only a fraction of the industry, but many tourists, who would not define themselves as ecotourists, also visit a national park o r protected area as part of their trip. The tourism industry is a powerful economic system, commercially driven and increasingly impacting on the ecosystems of some of the world's protected areas. Given the expectations of growth in this sector of the industry, increasing numbers of protected areas will experience rising numbers of tourists. This presents both a threat and an opportunity. The interests of the tourism industry and those who see nature tourism to protected ~There are no world figures for domestic tourism. 0960-3115 © 1996 Chapman & Hall 278 Goodwin areas as a sustainable route to economic development and rising standards of living for local people conflict with conservationists who "see both tourist developments and tourists themselves as threats to the survival of wildlife and of treasured landscapes" (Coppock. 1982). 2The vast majority of parks are not equipped to maximize the benefit to be derived from tourism. Parks lack trained guides, interpretive information, visitor centres and the infrastructure to manage the visitors who arrive. Nor do parks provide adequate means for tourists to spend money during their visit (Boo, 1990, 1991 ): parks are not maximizing revenue. As there is no internationally accepted definition of ecotourism which can bc used by national statistical offices to measure it, we are dependent upon estimates. Jenner and Smith (1992) have produced some estimates and forecasts of environmentally sensitive tourism which includes ecotourism. They define "environmentally sensitive tourism as mass market travel which is dependent on the quality of the environment, where, for example, a tourist may choose the Pyrenees in preference to the Alps because they consider the Alps overdeveloped. They define "ecotourism' as travel to unspoilt natural environments where the travel is for the specific purpose of experiencing that natural environment. They further identify "minimum impact ecotourism'. Jenner and Smith's figures suggest a dramatic growth, with environmentally sensitive tourism and ecotourism doubling between 1995 and the end of the century. It is clear thal minimum impact ecotourism is a fragment of the total market. Given the strength of consumer demand for ecotourism products and dramatic growth forecasts for this sector of the world's largest industry it is not surprising that governments are now beginning lo develop national ecotourism strategies. The problems of definition are considerable, not least because some elements ol a particular trip may be ecotourism and others not: and because the statistics collected from exit surveys or immigration forms are largely dependent upon the traveller's self-definition of their purpose or activity. Most tourism trips are undertaken for a range of reasons and include visits to recreational, cultural, historical, biological and commercial attractions. Table 1. The value of environmentally sensitive tourism and ecotourism world-wide 1980-2000. Environmentally sensitive tourism Ecotourism Minimum impact ecotourism 198():' 1985~' $10bn $4bn $20bn $5bn $25mn $35mn 1989~' 1995b 2000t" $50bn $10bn $150bn $25bn $3(X)bn $50bn $100mn $250mn $500mn "Estimate. ~'Forecast. Excludes transport. Adapted from Jenner and Smith (1992). ~'Coppock(t982) identiiied the major threats as "lossof habitat: damage caused by the pressure of human leer or vehicles on soil and vegetation:damage to flora and fauna by fire:damage to, or destruction of, flora and fauna by pollution; and disturbance of fauna, especially birds and mammals." It is remarkable how little sustained researcil has been undertaken on these effects. In pursuit of ecotourism 279 Competing definitions of ecotourism The word 'ecotourism' has been coined relatively recently and there remains no consensus about its meaning. ' E c o t o u r i s m ' has spread rapidly first because it has a n u m b e r of different meanings and second because it has been extensively used opportunistically in marketing, 3 where the tag 'eco-' has come to be synonymous with responsible consumerism. The tourism industry has been quick to exploit the marketing value of ecotourism, the m o r e so since its meaning is unclear and there is no requirement for the operator to do more than alter the packaging. The ecotourist has been variously defined in terms of visitor behaviour and philosophy. 4 The advertising appeals to and promotes these approaches. Ecotourism is 'a niche market for environmentally aware tourists who are interested in observing nature' (Wheat, 1994), described by Steele (1993) as 'an economic process where rare and beautiful ecosystems are marketed internationally to attract visitors'. Kelman put it bluntly 'a tour advertised as environmentally friendly can be just as suspect as m a n y of the products tarted up with green packaging at your grocery store' (Wight, 1994). The World Travel and Tourism Environment Research Centre in its 1993 World Travel and Environment Review defined ecotourism as tourism 'with the specific motive of enjoying wildlife or undeveloped natural areas' ( W T I ' E R C , 1993), making no distinction between nature tourism and ecotourism. Others have also used ecotourism and nature tourism synonymously (Lindberg, 1991; Aylward and Freedman, 1992). CeballosLascurain's, 1987 definition has been used by others (Boo, 1990: Stewart and Sekartjakrarini, 1994): °... travelling to relatively undisturbed or uncontaminated natural areas with the specific objective of studying, admiring, and enjoying the scenery and its wild plants and animals, as well as any existing cultural manifestations (both past and present) found in these areas. In these terms, nature-oriented tourism implies a scientific, aesthetic or philosophical approach to travel although the ecological tourist need not be a professional scientist, artist or philosopher. The main point is that the person who practices ecotourism has the opportunity of immersing himself/herself in nature in a manner generally not available in the urban environment.' (quoted in Boo, 1990). Ziffer (1989) offered a definition which combined motivation, philosophy, conduct and economic benefit to conservation: 'Ecotourism: a form of tourism inspired primarily by the natural history of an area, including its indigenous cultures. The ecotourist visits relatively undeveloped areas in the spirit of appreciation, participation and sensitivity. The ecotourist practices a non-consumptive use of wildlife and natural resources and contributes to the visited area through labor or financial means aimed at directly benefiting the conservation of the site and the economic well-being of the local residents..'. The American based Ecotourism Society was founded in 1990 'as a center for research, information and policies on developing ecologically sound tourism in natural areas around the world.' The Ecotourism Society defines ecotourism as: "purposeful travel to natural areas to understand the culture and natural history of the environment, taking care not to alter the integrity of the ecosystem, while producing economic 3Examples include ecotour, ecotravel, ecosafari, ecovacation, eco(ad)ventures, ecocruise, ecosafari and so on (Cater and Lowman, 1994). 4For a discussion and list of ethical principles and codes of conduct for ecotourists see Wight (1994). 28() Goodwin opportunities that make the conservation of natural resources beneficial to local people" {Wood, 1991 ). These definitions are broadly drawn, seeking to combine ecological and cultural tourism activities, often within frameworks which address philosophy and motivation. The US Office of Technology Assessment of the American Congress concluded that: 'While some ecotour operators are out simply to make a profit with little consideration of environmental and social issues, others are sensitive to these issues and may actively contribute to conservation projects/goals' (U S OTA, 1993). They pointed out that there is a: 'wealth of literature . .[which].. addresses the nature and growth of ecotourism, its potential environmental and sociological impacts and planning and management issues ... no definition of ecotourism has been universally accepted, data are commonly questionable, and much information and study is needed to assess the impact of nature travel" (US OTA, 1993). Ecotourism is often defined prescriptively. Consider for example the National Eco-tourism Strategy published in 1994 by the Mexican Secretariat of Tourism in cooperation with the World Conservation Union (Table 2). It has developed a long list of characteristics of ecotourism which constitute a highly prescriptive definition, ~ one which has been taken-up by the World Tourism Organization (WTO, 1995). It is interesting to note that there is only one reference to protected areas and that where ecotourism is identified as a suitable mechanism for improving links between local communities and protected area managers. Definitions of this nature are difficult to use analytically. The World Tourism Organization (WTO) definition of ecotourism will be the one which is used to determine the volume of ecotourism and to measure its value world-wide. The emerging definition of ecotourism within the W T O and the one which will therefore prevail is derived from Australia. Australia's National Ecotourism Strategy defined ecotourism as 'Nature-based tourism that involves education and interpretation of the natural environment and is managed to be ecologically sustainable" (Commonwealth Department of Tourism, 1994). The report recognizes that the natural cnvironment includes cultural components and that to be "ecologically sustainable" there must be an appropriate return to the local community and a contribution to the hmg-term conservation of the resource (WTO, 1995). Alternatives to m a s s tourism As foreign tourism became available in "package tours" at lower prices to a mass clientele, and the polluting effects of tourism became more evident, alternative forms of tourism were identified and promoted. There is a plethora of alternatives to mass tourism which are used in the marketing, and sometimes the design, of tourism products. Ecotourism is only one of many. Responsible tourism, science tourism, ethical tourism, soft-tourism. environmentally-friendly travel, green tourism, sustainable tourism, adventure travel, low-impact tourism are just some of the marketing terms coined to describe these "superior' alternatives. "Notc lhc repetition of "should'. In pursuit of ecotourism 281 Table 2. Mexican national ecotourism strategy (WTO, 1995). 1. Eco-tourism areas should be perceived in a planetary sense as part of the patrimony of the visitors, but in addition should be respected as the place of abode of local residents with their own traditions and customs. 2. Eco-tourism use should minimise negative impacts both upon the local and natural environments, as well as upon local inhabitants. 3. Eco-tourism should contribute to the management of the protected areas and improve the links between local communities and those who manage protected areas. 4. Eco-tourism should procure economic as well as other social benefits for the inhabitants of the area and maximise their participation in deciding what type of tourism and how much tourism should be allowed to develop. 5. Eco-tourism should promote genuine interaction between hosts and guests as well as a real interest in the sustainable development and protection of natural areas, both within the country visited and the home country of the visitor. 6. Eco-tourism should supplement and complement traditional activities of the area (agriculture, stock-breeding, fishing, social systems, etc.) without marginalising them or attempting to replace them, so that the local economy is strengthened and becomes less subject to sudden internal or external changes. 7. Eco-tourism should offer specific opportunities so that local inhabitants and workers in the tourism industry are able to use natural areas in a sustainable manner and to learn and appreciate the natural wonders that bring foreign visitors into the area in the first place. 'Call it alternative, responsible or sustainable the desired components are now familiar. The traveller is preferred to the tourist, the individual to the group, specialist operators rather than large firms, indigenous accommodation to multinational hotel chains, small not large essentially good versus bad .... Perhaps the true situation is better expressed as the good guise versus the bad guys...' Wheeller (1992). Wheeller points out that the core c o m p o n e n t s of travel and tourism are the same: 'transport, a c c o m m o d a t i o n and trimmings' and goes on to ask: '... what proportion of these latter day travellers are truly independent in their travels? Like it or not clearly they all utilize much of the same infrastructure as the organized tourists and are part of the same system' (ibid). Less-developed countries ( L D C s ) have particular advantages in attracting alternative tourists, they have areas of u n d e v e l o p e d land often rich in landscape, habitat and wildlife interest and they have so far maintained their cultural diversity, although the impact of tourism m a y threaten its continuation. The concepts of appropriate tourism (Krippendorf, 1982; Richter, 1987) and alternative tourism (Gonsalves, 1987; Smith and Eadington, 1994) have considerable relevance in rural areas. Alternative tourism activities are likely to be small scale, locally o w n e d with low import leakages and profits re-invested locally (Gonsalves, 1987; Cater, 1993). In the d e v e l o p m e n t of tourism in rural areas, there is a strong case to be m a d e for alternative tourism. Alternative tourism recognizes that local communities are affected by tourist development, and seeks to give the local c o m m u n i t y an effective voice in decisions a b o u t the forms of tourism which use its environment. It also 282 Goodwin seeks to ensure that a reasonable share of the incomes and profit derived from tourism goes to the local community. Environmentally responsible tourism As long ago as 1982, Krippendorf argued that the landscape is the real raw material or tourism. Travel companies are merely a means to an end, and the tourist uses their services in order to "consume the landscape and the countryside'. The landscape can lose its tourist value through its over-use by the tourist - 'tourism destroys tourism' - but it is the monetary value of tourism which keeps the land productive. Tourism, ~the countrysidedevourer', is an extractive industry, it can consume landscapes, it 'damages the environment of the native inhabitants and thus reduces the quality of their life'. Krippendorf concluded that 'ecology should be placed before economy in tourism, nol least for the sake of the economy itself and all who participate in it'. Enlightened self-interest requires the tourism industry to address (and prevent) the destruction of its essential raw-material. Tourism is far from a smokeless industry. The tourism industry is increasingly being blamed for environmental, and social/cultural damage. There is a long catalogue of literature documenting the environmental impacts of tourism encompassing all sectors of the industry: aircraft emissions and noise, hotel water consumption and waste, tourist litter and polluted beaches. Tourists destroy vegetation, cause trail erosion, degrade coral reefs and endanger traditional cultures (Beed, 1961; Pigram, 1980; WTO, 1981; Travis, 1982: Jenner and Smith, 1992, Cater and Goodall, 1992: UNEP, 1992). Some hotel chains and tour operators conduct environmental audits into waste management, recycling and energy use in pursuit of sound environmental practice and a greener image (WTTERC, 1993). Environmental impact assessment (EIA) and physical, economic, social and environmental carrying capacity analyses, have become a regular part of the process of tourism development. The tourism industry responds to the environment There has been a significant 'greening" of tourism in the last ten years, as the industry responds to its changing market and recognizes the need to maintain the quality of its product. Major tour operators have been developing and implementing policies to minimize the adverse environmental impact of tourism. This has been part of the general industrial and commercial response to increased consumer awareness of the environment. The World Tourism Organization (WTO, 1988) recognized that 'the environment is tourism's base . . . . It depends to a large extent on natural resources, both for passive tourism (i.e. sightseeing) and for participatory tourist activities (e,g. hiking/trekking, water-based sports)...' The report recognized that the last decade of the twentieth century would see greater attention being paid by host governments and tourism developers and operators to the principles of sustainable tourism. It was 'envisaged as leading to management of all resources in such a way that economic, social and aesthetic needs can be fulfilled while maintaining cultural integrity, essential ecological processes, biological diversity and life support systems' (WTO, 1988). Sir Colin Marshall, Chairman of British Airways~ speaking at the Tourism for Tomorrow Awards ceremony in 1994 said that the business of the tourism and travel industry "is In pursuit of ecotourism 283 essentially the renting out, for short-term lets, of other people's environments, whether that is a coastline, a city, a mountain range or a rainforest. These 'products' must be kept fresh and unsullied not just for the next day, but for every tomorrow' (BA, 1994). The Pacific Asia Travel Association (PATA) code for environmentally responsible tourism calls on its members to adopt an environmental ethic which enhances long-term profitability, product sustainability and intergenerational equity. The code identifies the sustainable use of renewable resources and the conservation of non-renewable resources as important priorities, and expects PATA members to acknowledge responsibility for the environmental impacts of all tourism-related activities (PATA, 1992). PATA is the international trade association for the travel and tourism industry in the region. It is not an association of ecotourism operators, and its code seeks to establish standards for the industry as a whole. PATA's code for environmentally responsible tourism includes the expectation that members will identify areas worthy of conservation by relevant authorities and accept responsibility to contribute to the conservation 'of any habitat of flora or fauna, and of any site whether natural or cultural, which may be affected by tourism' (PATA, 1992). The code expects PATA members to take responsibility for involving the wider community in tourism planning issues, and to encourage 'an understanding by all those involved in tourism of each community's customs, cultural values, beliefs and traditions'. Enhancing the appreciation and understanding of the environment by tourists through the provision of accurate information and appropriate interpretation is identified as an important component of environmentally responsible tourism (PATA, 1992). While codes of practice may be little more than pious statements of intent they do establish criteria by which consumers might make comparative judgements of the tour operators. Sustainable tourism Tourism has been widely endorsed as one of the primary strategies for environmentally benign development. Farrell and McLellan (1987) argue that 'In terms of modern thinking and ecodevelopment, if tourism is sustained significant steps have then been taken toward maintaining environmental integrity. A healthy environmental integrity means the possibility of successful tourism which, when managed properly, becomes a resource in its own right'. The logic of this argument is attractive. However, there are other, potentially more profitable, models of tourism development which appear to thrive on environmental degradation - it is not clear that unregulated tourism development will be sustainable. Carefully managed tourism can provide significant economic returns from the low-impact use of protected areas and can be less erosive than some alternative land uses. Tourism to protected areas, if adequately regulated and controlled, offers one of the least damaging economic uses. Sustainable tourism requires that the host population achieves rising living standards, that the tourist 'guests' are satisfied with the product and continue to arrive each year. It also requires that the natural environment is maintained for the continued enjoyment of the hosts and guests, all of which requires careful management. If nature-based tourism is to benefit conservation there must be a clear link between the tourist destination choice and locally protected nature (Valentine, 1992). Local people and the industry need to appreciate the economic value of the protected or vulnerable area as a tourist destination. It must be clear to local people and the tourist industry that the protected or 284 Goodwm vulnerable area is one of the reasons that tourists are attracted to the area, only thus can it be accorded an economic value. The development goal is to attract 'visitors to natural areas and use the revenues to fund local conservation and economic development' (Ziffer, 1989). The impetus for ecotourism development often comes from outside and it behoves conservationists, development experts and the tourism industry to be aware of the conflicts between the immediate interests of the rich tourists and the local people. Eco-missionaries can expect to be accused of green imperialism and eco-colonialism. If tourism is to make any adequate recompense for the non-development of relatively pristine sites it will need to generate significant revenue for the benefit of those expected to sacrifice these potential sources of income (Cater and Lowman, 1994). The World Tourism Organization, U N E P and UNESCO's Man and the Biosphere Programme jointly sponsored the first World Conference on Sustainable Tourism in April. 1995. The conference adopted a Charter on Sustainable Tourism which applies Agenda 21 to the industry. The Charter on Sustainable Tourism establishes a set of imperatives for major changes in the tourism industry as a whole, applying the recommendations of the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (WTO, 1995). The Charter asserts that tourism development should be based on criteria of sustainability: 'it must be ecologically sound in the long term, economically viable, as well as ethically and socially equitable for the local communities'. Tourism development, the World Tourism Organization asserts, 'must respect the fragile balances that characterise many tourist destinations, in particular small islands and environmentally sensitive areas'. P r o t e c t e d areas Increasing competition for the use of natural resources has resulted from population growth and the pursuit of rising material standards of living. The world's protected areas and natural landscapes are under increasing pressure from mining, logging, agricultural development, harvesting and poaching. The establishment of parks has generally resulted in the exclusion of local people and the denial of the rights of indigenous people to land and the resources to be found on it. The creation of Yellowstone National Park in 1872 for the preservation of pristine (no resident population) wilderness followed the expulsion and repression of the Shoshone, Crow and Blackfoot Indians. This model of the pristine national park was gradually adopted and came to predominate. In 19696 the IUCN defined a national park as a relatively large area not materially altered by human exploitation and occupation and where the state has taken steps to prevent or eliminate the exploitation or occupation of the area (McNeely, 1994). Comparatively little of the world is uninhabited. The creation of protected areas and the exclusion of human activity from these areas, has often imposed a high opportunity cost on local people who usually remain uncompensated for their loss. This policy of exclusion inevitably resulted in conflict between people and parks as local people asserted their historical rights to the land. By the mid-eighties there was increasing concern about the "Twoyears earlier the IUCN began to study the relationshipsbetween tourism and conservationwhen it held its Tenth TechnicalMeeting on Ecology,Tourism and Recreationin 1967.For a usefulaccount of the debate about tourism and the environment with a particular focus on protected areas see Dowling (1992). In pursuit of ecotourism 285 conflicting demands for park resources and the poor relations with local people (Machlis and Tichnel, 1985). This conflict is persistent and can result in violent confrontation. The creation of a national park is generally justified by the importance of the natural resources contained within it whilst rendering it (legally) valueless to local people. There is increasing recognition that 'protected areas cannot co-exist in the long term with communities which are hostile to them' and that local people are important stakeholders with whom protected area managers must seek to cooperate (McNeely, 1994). The IVth World Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas endorsed the redefinition of a national park to exclude only 'exploitation or occupation inimical' to protect 'the ecological integrity of one or more ecosystems for this and future generations'. The new definition went further, accepting that part of the purpose of a national park was to 'provide a foundation for spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational' use for visitors. This modification of the IUCN's Protected Areas Categories clearly accepted and recognized the value of tourism as a use of national parks, provided that it was 'environmentally and .culturally' compatible with the maintenance of its 'ecological integrity' (McNeely, 1994). McNeely reflects the changing attitudes of protected area managers when he argues that long-established human activity embracing 'cultural identity, spirituality, and subsistence practices' has contributed to the maintenance of biological diversity (McNeely, 1993; Kemp, 1993). Cultural diversity and biological diversity are often inextricably linked, defining the management context for the protected area manager and the 'product' for the tourist. Tourism is one of the forms of sustainable use which potentially enables protected area managers to allow local people to derive economic benefit from the park and to encourage local support for its maintenance. Tourism, if carefully managed, may offer diversified low-impact development and counter the danger of agricultural mono-culture which threatens biodiversity. However, no form of tourism is without environmental, economic and social impacts. Large numbers of ecotourists will quickly constitute a mass and begin to impact on the local physical and cultural environment. If tourism is not carefully controlled and managed it will be incompatible with diversified rural development and conservation objectives. Not all forms of nature tourism support conservation. Protected areas and tourism The relationship between tourism and protected areas has a long history. Myers (1972) argued that tourism provided the incentive for conservation through the establishment of National Parks. Budowski (1976) argued that there was a symbiosis between conservation and tourism. Where tourism is wholly or partly based on values derived from nature and its resources, it could provide an economic value for conservation of species and habitats. Others argued that the risk was too great and that tourism caused pollution and inflicted damage on flora and fauna (Goldsmith, 1974; Crittenden, 1975; Liddle, 1975). The IUCN in 1982 affirmed that the 'tourist potential' of an area is an important factor in the selection of protected areas, but recognized that many areas of important conservation value have little appeal for tourists and that the pursuit of tourism revenue may result in inappropriate development (IUCN, 1986). Philips 7 (1985), argued that tourism provides conservation 7Then Director of the Countryside Commission of the United Kingdom. 286 (;oodwin with an economic justification, a means of building support for conservation and a source of revenue. The 1992 IVth World Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas declared that tourism associated with protected areas "must serve as a tool to advance protected areas objectives for maintaining ecosystem integrity, biodiversity, public awareness, and enhancement of local people's quality of life (IUCN, 1993)'. Revenue generated from tourism in protected areas should be re-invested in protection and management. Recommendation 9, dealing with tourism and protected areas significantly makes no particular reference to ecotourism, dealing rather with tourism as a whole (IUCN, 1993). Tourism to protected areas is emerging as a development strategy. The IUCN's World Conservation Strategy (1980) endorsed the sustainable utilization of species and ecosystems. Over the last 10 years there have been a series of initiatives to implement projects which enable local economic development while maintaining or furthering conservation objectives. Zebu and Bush (1990) produced clear survey evidence that park authorities had realized that local populations could no longer be ignored in the establishment, planning and management of national parks and other protected landscapes. The same survey reported that tourism formed part of the management strategy of 75% of respondents (Zebu and Bush, 1990). Wells and Brandon (1992) in their study of integrated conservation development projects (ICDPs), reported that many of the projects had promoted nature tourism in order to provide funds for protected area management and to generate income gains forlocal communities. However, they report that the results had been disappointing, with all visitor spending in the parks going directly to the central treasury or to concession holding private corporate interests. Although, at some popular sites, revenues may exceed local protected area operating budgets, it is unusual for any of the additional revenues to bc returned to park management "and extremely rare for a revenue share to go to local people'. Wells and Brandon reported that local employment opportunities linked to tourism were "insufficient to attract much popular local support for the parks'. In any event "only a small minority of protected areas attract significant numbers of visitors' (Wells and Brandon, 1992). Tourism also presents an opportunity for increasing awareness of the importance of the maintenance of biodiversity to tourists and local visitors. Graham Child argues that the "challenge is to determine how protected areas can be transformed from the bastions ol conservation to the bridgeheads from which to spread more sustainable land use" (Child. 1994). Consumptive and non-consumptive tourist-use both provide potential sources of sustainable revenue derived from conserved land if carefully regulated. Conservation of both species and habitat is essential to sustainable use as is economic viability for parks and tourism enterprises. The tension between the preservation of the ecological integrity of a park and recreational and tourist use will require careful management and long-term monitoring of the impact of tourists on parks. Increasing awareness of the importance of improving park-people relationships coincided with renewed threats to the funding of national parks in a period of declining government budgets. Traditionally parks have been managed as "merit goods', to which access should not be denied on the basis of income. Admission charges have been kept low to encourage access, although in many cases the advantage has accrued to overseas tourists rather than the national or local population. This results in the national treasury subsidizing visits by non-taxpayers. The host (usually low income) population is In pursuit of ecotourism 287 subsidizing the recreational activities of the guests (always comparatively wealthy). Foreign visitors pay 300 USD to take a three day trip to visit Komodo National Park in Indonesia. The admission charge paid to the Komodo National Park is equivalent to 1 USD. Komodo National Park is one of Indonesia's most successful nature tourism sites but it earns relatively little from the tourists. Nature tourism is a problem because it is not controlled and managed for the benefit of the protected area and its local population. Nature tourism It is important to distinguish between ecotourism and nature tourism. Nature, or nature-based, tourism encompasses all forms of tourism - mass tourism, adventure tourism, low-impact tourism, ecotourism - which use natural resources in a wild or undeveloped form- including species, habitat, landscape, scenery and salt and fresh-water features. Nature tourism is travel for the purpose of enjoying undeveloped natural areas or wildlife. Not all forms of nature tourism are compatible one with another; trekking, mountain biking and white-water rafting may not be compatible with birdwatching or photo-safaris. Some forms of nature tourism may quickly transform the undeveloped and unspoilt nature of the areas in which they develop. Consider for example the transformation of the beaches of Goa, Bali and the Mediterranean. Nature tourism involves the marketing of natural landscapes and wildlife to tourists. It has the potential to provide developing countries with the finance and motivation required to boost conservation efforts. National parks and protected areas are one of the primary resources for nature tourism, which is of increasing economic importance, providing foreign exchange and an economic return for the preservation of natural habitats and their dependent species. Nature tourism includes a wide range of activities from relatively passive scenery and wildlife viewing to physically exerting 'adventure tourism' activities (mountaineering or white-water rafting) often involving elements of risk. Nature tourism may be consumptive (sport hunting) or non-consumptive and it may or may not be sustainable. Nature tourism may be the primary focus of a tourism activity or part of a package of leisure, recreational or cultural tourism activities. However, only some forms of nature tourism make a positive contribution to conservation. It is these forms of nature tourism which constitute ecotourism. Ecotourism rediscovered Ecotourism is no panacea. A critical approach to ecotourism is essential if it is to be harnessed for the conservation of habitats and species. Ecotourism will not be significantly different from conventional tourism unless it is carefully managed and controlled (Cater, 1993). Protected area managers and conservationists need to take more control over the definition and use of the concept and over the supervision of its practise. There is an urgent need to 'put the ecology back into ecotourism' (Valentine, 1993) in order to establish a symbiotic relationship between nature based tourism and 288 Goodwin conservation. For governments and development agencies ecotourism has much to offer in diversifying rural economies in L D C s in urgent need of foreign exchange. Tour operators will continue to use ecotourism as a marketing tool. It is difficult for consumers to get accurate information about the tours which they are offered and about the operators who claim the mantle of ecotourism. If ecotourism is to become a means of harnessing part of the tourism industry for conservation of habitats and species, it is essential to focus on the activity rather than the motivation of the ecotourists. It is what they do, rather than what they say (or think) they do that impacts on conservation and ecosystems. It is easier to determine whether individual activities and tours meet ecotourism criteria, by contributing directly or indirectly to conservation, than it is to determine whether or not individuals are ecotourists or not. Only conservationists and protected area managers are in a position, or have the expertise, to credibly assert a more useful definition of ecotourism. Ecologists and conservationists need to 'take control of the language being used in the name of ecotourism' (Valentine, 1993) and to use it to benefit conservation and the maintenance of protected areas. It is protected area managers and conservationists, working with local people, who are best placed to manage nature tourism to ensure that its environmental impact does not jeopardise the integrity of the ecosystem and that both local people and the park gain significantly from ecotourism. Nature tourism and ecotourism need to be distinguished. Nature tourism is concerned with the enjoyment of nature, ecotourism additionally requires a contribution to conservation. Hence the following definition ~ of ecotourism is offered: low impact nature tourism which contributes to the maintenance of species and habitats either directly through a contribution to conservation and/or indirectly by providing revenue to the local community sufficient for local people to value, and therefore protect, their wildlife heritage area as a source of income. According to this definition ecotourism makes a direct or indirect measurable contribution to the continued protection and m a n a g e m e n t of natural habitats and their species. Generally this contribution is likely to be financial but the work of commercial and "not-for-profit' organizations which enable tourists to make a practical contribution should not be ignored. However, their claims too need to be carefully and openly assessed by conservationists. Ecotourism is too powerful a force, driven by producers and consumers in the world's largest industry, for conservationists and protected area managers to allow it to bc controlled and developed by that industry. It is the form and impact of the nature tourism which must be managed to fulfil ecotourism criteria, it is essential that ecotourism is low impact and that this is ensured through careful extensive and intensive visitor management. Protected area managers and conservationists have an opportunity to manage nature tourism and turn it into ecotourism at the point of consumption, whatever the motivation of the tourist. It is the activity which needs to be controlled and used for conservation. If control is inadequate, pollution, habitat destruction, wildlife disturbance and a host of other negative impacts will result. Carrying capacity analysis and limits of SBoo (1992) defined ecotourism in similar terms as "nature travel that advances conservation and sustainable development efforts', integrating conservation with economic development and providing increased funds to parks, new jobs for local residents and environmental education for visitors. In pursuit of ecotourism 289 acceptable change (LAC) management tools will need to be applied if tourism is to be harnessed for conservation. Ecotourism can demonstrate that good conservation is good economics, to local people and to governments. Re-investment in the maintenance of ecosystems and the species which inhabit them is at the core of ecotourism. Ecotourism can bring money and jobs to local people and increased revenues to national treasuries to enable them to fund park management. Ecotourism serves conservation objectives only if it demonstrates to local people and to governments that they should stop poaching, logging, slash-and-burn agriculture and other forms of encroachment and habitat disturbance to maintain the protected area for tourism. Conclusion Ecotourism can benefit protected areas in three ways. First, ecotourism is one of the most important ways in which money can be generated to manage and protect the world's natural habitats and species. Ecotourism can contribute directly to conservation through park admission fees and payments for guiding, accommodation and interpretation centres. Central to the definition of ecotourism is re-investment by the industry in the maintenance of habitats and species. Second, ecotourism can enable local people to gain economically from the protected area with which they live. Protected areas cannot co-exist in the long term with communities which are hostile to them. Local people are important stakeholders with whom protected area managers must cooperate. More of the benefits of conservation need to be delivered to local people by enabling them to benefit from the protection of the parktheir use of which is now regulated. If local people secure a sustainable income (a tangible economic benefit) from tourism to these protected areas, they will be less likely to exploit them in other less sustainable ways - obvious examples are overfishing, poaching or coral blasting. If local people gain from the sustainable use of, for example, a coral reef or wild animals through tourism they will protect their asset and may invest further resources into it. Third, ecotourism can offer a means by which people's awareness of the importance of conservation and ecological literacy can be raised, whether those tourists are domestic or international. The clients on whom the ecotourism section of the tourism industry depends are potential voters, taxpayers and leaders who may help to build constituencies of support to lobby for conservation (US OTA, 1993). However, as Aylward and Freeman (1992) cautioned: 'If the revenues of ecotourism do not accrue to national park systems or local communities, there will be little economic incentive for investment in the recurring costs of conservation activities'. The often voiced injunction to 'take only photographs and leave only footprints' is not enough. Ecotourism must ensure that nature tourists contribute financially to the maintenance of the biodiversity contained in protected areas. Acknowledgements Ivan Kent has contributed much to the development of my views on ecotourism over the last year. Kate Stefanko read a late draft and improved it significantly. 290 Goodwin References Aylward, B. and Freedman, S. (1992) Ecotourism. In Global Biodiversity (B. Groombridge, ed.) pp. 413-15. London: Chapman & Hall. BA (1994) British Airways Press Release, London, 15 February 1994. Beed, T.W. (1961) Tahiti's recent tourist development Geography 46, 368. Boo, E. (1990) Ecotourism: the Potentials and Pitfalls 1 & 2. Washington DC: WWF. Boo, E. (1991) Ecotourism: a tool for conservation and development. In Ecotourism and Resource Conservation, vol 1 (A. Kusler, ed.) New York, Berne: Ecotourism and Resource Conservation Project. Boo, E. (1992) The Ecotourism Boom. WHN Technical Paper 2. Washington DC: WWF. Budowski, G. (1976) Tourism and conservation: conflict, coexistence or symbiosis'? Environ. Conserv. 3, 27-31. Cater, E. (1993) Ecotourism in the Third World: problems for sustainable development. Tourism Management 24, 85-90. Cater~ E. and Goodall, B. (1992) Must tourism destroy its resource base? In Environmental Issues in the 1990s (A.M. Mannion and S.R. Bowlby, eds) pp 309-25. London: Wiley. Cater, E. and Lowman, G. (1994) Ecotourism: a Sustainable Option? London: Wiley. Child, G. (1994) Strengthening protected-area management: a focus for the 1990s, a platform for the future. Biodivers. Conserv. 3, 459-63. Commonwealth Department of Tourism (1994) National Ecotourism Strategy. Canberra: A G P S Coppock, J.T. (1982) Tourism and conservation. Tourism Management 3, 270-5. Crittenden, A. (1975) Tourism's terrible toll. lnternat. Wildlife 5, 4-12. Dowling, R.K. (1992) Tourism and environmental integration: the journey from idealism to realism. In Progress in Tourism, Recreation and Hospitality 4, (C.P. Cooper and A. Lockwoo& eds). London: Belhaven. Farrell, B.H. and McLellan, R.W. (1987) Tourism and physical environment research. Ann. Tourism Res. 14, 1-16. Goldsmith, E. (1974) Pollution by tourism. Ecologist 48, 47-8. Gonsalves, P.S. (1987) Alternative tourism - the evolution of a concept and establishment of a network. Tourism Recreat. Res. 12, 9-12. IUCN (1986) Managing Protected Areas in the Tropics. [ UCN, Gland. IUCN (1993) Parks for Life: Report ~ff"the IVth World Congress on Nationa! Parks and t'rotected Areas. 1UCN, Gland. Jenner, P. and Smith, C. (1992) The Tourism lndustrv attd the Environment, Special Report 2453. London: Economist Intelligence Unit. Kemp. E. (ed.) (1993) The Law o f the Mother." Protecting Indigenous People in Protected Areas. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books. Krippendorf, J. (1982) Towards new tourism policies, the importance of environmental and sociocultural factors. Tourism Management 3, 135~48. Liddle, M.J. (1975) A selective review of the ecological effects of human trampling on natural ecosystems. Biol. Conserv. 17, 17-36. Lindberg, K. (1991) Policies for Maximising Nature J?mrism's" Ecological attd Economic Bentff-its. Washington DC: World Resources Institute. Machlis, G.E. and Tichnell, D.L. (1985) The State o f the World's Parks: An International Assessment o f Resource Management, Policy and Research. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. McNeely, J.A. (1993) Diverse nature, diverse cultures. People Planet 2, 11-13. McNeely, J.A. (1994) Protected Areas for the 21st century: working to provide benefits to society. Biodivers. Conserv. 3, 390-405. Myers, N. (1972) National parks in savannah Africa. Science 178. 1255-63. PATA (1992) Going Green. Asia 7"ravel Trade 28. PATA (1993) Endemic Tourism, a Profitable Industry in a Sustainable Environment. San Francisco: PATA. In pursuit o f ecotourism 291 Philips, A. (1985) Tourism, Recreation and Conservation in National Parks and Equivalent Reserves. Derbyshire: Peak Park Joint Planning Board. Pigram, J.J. (1980) Environmental implications of tourism development. Ann. Tourism Res. 7, 554-83. Richter, L.K. (1987) The search for appropriate tourism. Recreat. Res. 12, 5-7. Smith, V.L. and Eadington, W.R. (1994) Tourism Alternatives. London: Wiley. Steele, P. (1993) The economics of ecotourism, In Focus, 9, 4-6. Stewart, W.P. and Soehartini Sekartjakrarini (1994) Disentangling ecotourism. Ann. Tourism Res. 21, 840-2. Travis, A.S. (1982) Managing the environmental and cultural impacts of tourism and leisure development. Tourism Management 3, 256-63. UNEP IE/PAC (1992) Industry Environ. 15, 3 4 . US OTA (1993) Science and technology issues in coastal ecotourism. Tourism Management 14, 307-16. Valentine, P.S. (1992) Nature-based tourism. In Special Interest Tourism (B. Weiler and C.M. Hall, eds). London: Belhaven. Valentine, P.S. (1993) Ecotourism and nature conservation: a definition with some recent developments in Mieronesia. Tourism Management 24, 107-16. Wells, M, and Brandon, K. (1992) People and Parks - Linking Protected Area Management with Local Communities. Washington DC: World Bank. Wheat, S, (1994) Taming tourism. Geographical 116, 16--19. Wheeller, B. (1992) Is progressive tourism appropriate? Tourism Management 13, 104-5. Wight, P. (1994) Environmentally responsible marketing of tourism. In Ecotourism: a Sustainable Option? (E. Cater and G. Lowman, eds). London: Wiley. Wood, M.E. (1991 ) Formulating the Ecotourism Society's Regional Action Plan. In Ecotourism and Resource Conservation, I (J.A. Kusler, ed.) pp. 80-89. WI: Madison WTO (1981) Risks of Saturation or Tourism Carrying Capacity Overload in Holiday Destinations. Madrid: WTO. WTO (1988) Tourism to the Year 2000: Qualitative Aspects Affecting Global Growth. Madrid: WTO. WTO (1995) World Tourism Organisation News, May 1995. WTTERC (1993) World Travel and Tourism Environment Review 1993. Oxford: WTTERC. Zebu, E.H. and Bush, M.L. (1990) Park-People relationships: an international review. Landsc. Urban Plan. 19, 117-31. Ziffer, K.A. (1989) Ecotourism: the Uneasy Alliance. Washington DC: Conservation International.