4.1 Preserving Services Derived from the Forest: Protected Area and Social Forestry Approaches
4.2 Need for Increased Research and Utilization of Results
4.3 Importance of Social Issues in Management
4.4 Continued Funding Difficulties in Natural Areas
4.5 Ecotourism Management: Low Level of Funding and Reliance on Simplistic Strategies Like Carrying Capacity
4.6 Growth in International and Domestic Visitation
4.7 Change in the Visitor Market
4.8 Continued or Increased Competition, Particularly for International Visitors
4.9 Importance of Interpretation
4.10 Importance of Partnerships Among Ecotourism Actors
4.11 Greater Private Sector Roles in Management of Natural Areas
4.12 Pressure to Use Natural Areas for Activities that are Not Nature-Dependent
4.13 Professionalization of Operators and Desire to Exclude Those Not Meeting Professional Criteria
4.14 Tendency for Dominance by Larger Operators and Those Located in Regional or National Centres
4.15 Summary of Issues, Trends, Implications, and Options
This section describes several issues and trends, and their implications, in the services of forests and ecotourism fields. For each of these, one or more options are presented for achieving objectives given the trends, with ecotourism objectives focusing on sustainability in the dimensions described in Section 3.4. Issues and options relevant to tourism generally, such as infrastructure development and promotion, are not addressed in detail. Rather, this section focuses on issues and options that are particularly relevant to ecotourism and may be overlooked by traditional tourism planning and development. The issues tend to be interrelated, such that the grouping is somewhat arbitrary and is used as an organizational tool.
Many of the options will be familiar to readers. They are commonly-noted means for achieving the potential benefits of ecotourism. It is recognized that political and economic realities may hinder implementation of these options and thus achievement of ecotourism objectives. In short, ecotourism rhetoric does not always translate into ecotourism reality. Nonetheless, the options are presented here to offer a vision of future possibilities and to guide those actions that are feasible. Many of the issues relate to achieving a balance between private and public objectives, between providing economic and other benefits from natural areas and conserving those areas.
Protected areas and their management
Movements towards a community/social forestry approach
Issue/trend: Though forest production provides important economic benefits in many of the region's countries, it (and other activities) also negatively impacts services of forests and ecotourism potential. Therefore, there is a need to implement programmes that maintain or enhance services of forests and ecotourism potential.
Options: Two options for maintaining and enhancing services derived from forests and ecotourism are implementation and management of protected areas4 and social forestry programmes.
4 Elsewhere in the world, notably in southern Africa, sometimes successful efforts have been made to bring wildlife into agricultural areas and basing tourism on this (Editor).
Protected area systems can be seen as conservation mechanisms that incorporate social and cultural factors alongside legal, economic and political mechanisms and ecological insights. The movement towards a more inclusive policy context that integrates local people and their rights within protected area management frameworks is indicative of this.
In a report outlining the role of protected areas in the Asia-Pacific region, Braatz (1992) prioritized the need for integrated national strategies and investment focusing on programme development rather than species preservation. Braatz has identified three major objectives that will be crucial to the protection of biodiversity in the Asia-Pacific region:
· modifying policies that adversely affect biodiversity;
· reconciling local people's needs with protected area management; and
· ensuring the sustainability of investments.
In relation to participation, Braatz suggests there are three countries well suited to demonstrate the importance of participation:
· Indonesia because of its importance for biodiversity and its foreign assisted development programme;· India because of its active NGOs and strong participatory process; and
· Papua New Guinea because some 97% of land there is under customary tenure.
Finally, in relation to sustainability of investments, Braatz suggests ecotourism and forest development as priority components.
Many government agencies and non-governmental organizations in the region (for example, several in Nepal and India) are assessing the usefulness of community and social forestry approaches. In the specific context of policies and policy directions, these represent, at least potentially, an acknowledgement of the rights of local populations and the movement towards a policy context that incorporates a more inclusive range of interests and values.
Social forestry is seen as an important option for forest protection and the maintenance of services of forests (World Bank 1997). At least potentially, it exemplifies the characteristics of community involvement, participation, and development of some degree of self-reliance. In addition, it provides opportunities for reforestation and the maintenance or even enhancement of biodiversity with benefits accruing at the local level. It can also enhance the possibility for tourism and ecotourism. Social forestry programmes are those which are designed as to:
· motivate large numbers of people to plant trees;· promote the kind of tree growing that best supplies firewood, small timber, grasses and income; and
· provide increased benefits to the poorer strata in society.
These programmes are especially aimed at involving farmers and the landless. Social forestry can incorporate a wide variety of activities, including farmers growing wood to sell or use for firewood, and individuals earning income from the gathering, processing and sale of minor forest products such as fruits nuts, mushrooms, herbs, basketry materials, honey, and vines. It can also include government and other groups planting trees on public lands to meet local village needs.
Unlike in conventional production forestry, where the focus is on the wood that trees produce, a social forestry approach focuses on people, on community involvement and on the trees that provide direct and indirect benefits locally. The approach therefore is used to create immediate economic and social benefits to local people or communities from their immediate locality.
According to Gregersen, Draper and Elz (1989), social forestry is important for the following reasons:
· Environmental protection connection. Deforestation causes decline in agricultural land quality, soil degradation, flooding downstream results in loss of crops, and so on.· Agricultural productivity. Social forestry can contribute to the livelihood of the poor by improving soil, providing food supplements, and providing wood for construction, fencing, fibre, shade, and fodder. Social forestry also can provide income for farmers and rural communities and can help raise people from mere subsistence. In many parts of the world, agroforestry, or the integration of tree growing into farming systems, is a main tool in social forestry programmes involving farmers. Agroforestry is a collective name for all land use systems and practices in which woody perennials are deliberately grown on the same land management unit as crops and/or animals.
· Fuelwood. Fuelwood is the primary source of energy for poorer urban households and for the vast majority of rural households in developing countries.
· Employment. Whilst social forestry cannot solve the problem, it can contribute to increasing locally available jobs and income.
However, social forestry is not a panacea. The assumption that local knowledge and management is preferable to western scientific knowledge and centralized management does not always hold true. Likewise, the role of women within social forestry does not always take into account the reality of family and class power relationships.
In summary, social forestry is an important option for resource management approaches incorporating a local development framework. At least potentially, it exemplifies important characteristics such as community involvement, participation, and building some degree of self-reliance. In addition, it provides opportunities for reforestation and the maintenance or even enhancement of biodiversity with benefits accruing at the local level. In this context, it also can enhance the possibility for tourism and ecotourism.
It is probable that protected area establishment and social forestry programmes will expand in the future. However, as noted in Section 4.4, a critical issue will be the level of financial and political support for both approaches, and thus the wealthier countries of the region probably will achieve the most progress in this regard. Protected area and social forestry programmes are not the sole options for preserving services of forests, but they can make important contributions toward this goal. If they are not effectively implemented, alternate approaches must be sought if this goal is to be achieved.
Issue/trend: Ecotourism occurs within a competitive and complex environment, and this competition and complexity probably will increase in the future. As a result, the collection and utilization of information increasingly will be critical if effective policies and programmes are to be developed and implemented.
Options: Enhanced implementation of ecotourism-related research and utilization of research results. The research focus will depend on local information needs. However, a general recommendation is that topic areas be expanded beyond the common focus on identification and management of environmental impacts to include identification and management of social, economic, and experiential aspects, with the latter two categories including market research.
Insofar as research provides valuable information in decision-making processes, the conduct of research and use of results will enhance a site's ability to benefit from ecotourism while reducing its negative impacts.
Issue/trend: There is a global tendency for protected area staff to be trained in the natural sciences, particularly biology or ecology. However, it has become clear that the challenges natural area managers face often are more social and political than ecological and technical, and it is likely that future challenges also will be significantly social/political in nature (World Bank 1997). As noted by Fazio and Gilbert (1986), natural resource management is 90% managing the public and 10% managing the resource. In particular, ecotourism has a technical ecological component (e.g., its environmental impact), but it also has a significant social and political component.
Due to their training, and associated world view, it is natural for ecologically-oriented staff to seek technical solutions to problems that are at least partly socio-political. The focus on carrying capacity is an example of this. Likewise, planning and management tends to focus on the natural environment rather than on the human environment, and on visitation in particular.
In addition, often it is difficult for natural area staff to work effectively with tourism professionals, who typically have very different training, priorities, and personalities. As a result, it is difficult to develop the trust and personal relationships that contribute to effective cooperation. Lastly, often it is difficult for staff to work effectively with local communities.
Options: As part of the skill enhancement noted in Section 4.5, there may be a focus on developing and/or recruiting social science skills amongst natural area staff. An increased focus on social issues and corresponding staff skills will enhance the ability of natural area managers to respond effectively to ecotourism and broader conservation challenges.
Issue/trend: There has been a trend in many countries of stable or decreasing government funding for natural area management, despite increased pressure on these areas, including increased visitation (Eagles 1995; Reynolds 1995). This imbalance between available resources and management needs may lead to deterioration at many natural areas.
To varying degrees, developing countries in the region have benefited from bilateral or multilateral (e.g., GEF) funding for natural area management. Moreover, economic growth in many countries may lead to increased financial and political support for natural areas in the future. Of course, this will vary across countries, in part based on varying levels of economic development. For example, funding for natural area protection and management is more likely to increase in Malaysia than in Burma or Laos.
However, any increase in funding may be offset as expenses increase. In particular, ecotourism generates financial and non-financial costs for natural areas (Lindberg, Enriquez, and Sproule 1996). The historic and projected increases in ecotourism mean that these costs are likely to increase. However, ecotourism also provides a potential source of revenue. Though fees have been instituted or increased at various sites in the region, in general Asia-Pacific remains behind Latin America and Africa in terms of generating ecotourism-related funding for natural areas.
Options: Where the need for revenue outweighs other ecotourism objectives (such as the desire to provide open access to all visitors), visitor fees can be implemented/increased.
Collection and retention of fees not only increases available funding, but may also increase support for ecotourism amongst natural area managers. Many agencies responsible for natural areas have had strong conservation ethics of "resource protection" at all costs (see Section 4.3). Managers often are ambivalent and even hostile to the idea of tourism. This is made worse by tourist revenue being transferred to the central treasury. It is also reinforced by low budgets, few staff, and "all the tourist problems". Thus, retention of fees at the local level probably would increase managerial support for ecotourism.
At the most basic level, ecotourism can help address natural area funding difficulties only when fees are charged and when they benefit the area financially, usually through retention of fee revenue directly by the area. A recent survey of protected areas around the world indicates that only about half of the areas responding to the survey collected fees at that time (Figure 4) (Giongo, Bosco-Nizeye, and Wallace 1994).
Figure 4: Revenues Sources Used By Protected Areas Developed and Developing Country Averages
Source: Giongo, Bosco-Nizeye, and Wallace (1994)
Though there has been a trend toward implementation of fees over the past several years, many areas still charge little or no fee. Moreover, it is common for revenues from fees that are charged to be directed back to the general government treasury, thereby providing no direct benefit to the natural area.
An example of a site that charges fees but receives little direct benefit is the Dinghushan Biosphere Reserve (DBR) in China. DBR received an estimated 13.5 million yuan (approx. US$1.7 million) in entrance and related fees in 1995. However, this revenue has made little contribution to reserve management, as only 5% is allocated to the management agency (most of the money goes to the local government tourism bureau). Thus, substantial revenue is generated, but the revenue primarily has contributed to infrastructure development by local government rather than to environmental interpretation, visitor management, or general reserve management.
It is worth noting that results of a visitor survey at DBR (Lindberg et al. 1997) indicate visitor support for a greater portion of entrance fee revenues to be dedicated toward reserve management, as opposed to local government. When asked how revenues from entrance fees should be distributed, 18% selected the "100% to conservation, research, and education" option while 43% selected the "75% to conservation... and 25% to construction for tourism" option. Both options would represent a substantial change to the current distribution.
A similar distribution situation was found in study of tourism at Tangkoko Duasudara Nature Reserve in Indonesia. Kinnaird and O'Brien (1996 cited in Brandon 1996) found that the Department of Forestry, which manages the reserve, receives only 2% of ecotourism revenues, and the reserve itself receives only a fraction of that.
Mt. Everest in Nepal, where the climbing fee is US$50,000, provides an excellent example of capturing potential fee revenue (Gurung 1996). Though few sites are able to charge such high fees, the distribution of revenue from this fee to conservation programmes serves as an example for other sites. In addition, a portion of the US$700 per person fee for ten days of trekking in the Mustang region of Nepal goes to conservation and development programmes, while the 1993 amendment to Nepal's Wildlife Conservation Act provides for the distribution of 30% to 50% of protected area revenue to surrounding communities (Brandon 1996).
If it is determined that fees should be charged, there are various ways they might be applied, including:
· Entrance fee: collected when tourists enter the site.· Admissions fee: charged for admission to a specific facility, such as a visitor centre.
· Use fee: charged for use of a specific object, such as rented equipment, or opportunity, such as a camping place.
· License or permit: like a use fee, this includes fees such as hunting or fishing permits.
· Sales and concessions: includes 1) profits from natural area sales of souvenirs, lodging and others goods or services, 2) license fees from concessions to sell these goods and services on site, and 3) revenues from licensing area logos and trademarks.
Experience in various countries suggests that:
· Fee systems will be most efficient if, within overall objectives, flexibility is provided for each site to implement the fee structure most appropriate to local conditions (that is, a single fee structure for the whole system may not be efficient).· Earmarking at least a portion of fee revenues directly to the area collecting them (as opposed to the general government treasury) encourages efficient collection and enhancement of visitor experience quality.
· When fees are earmarked, this portion of the site's income becomes dependent on cyclical variations in visitation, such that an endowment should be considered as a means to even out income over such variations.
· Multi-tier fee systems, in which some groups pay more than others, can be used to reduce concerns about equity; for example, foreigners might pay more than nationals, or pensioners might pay reduced fees.
· In areas with low visitation and/or multiple entry points, it simply may not be practical to collect entrance fees, though alternative systems (e.g., annual passes) can be used.
· The responsiveness of demand to fees may be reduced by "hiding" fees in larger expenditure items (such as by incorporating fees as part of the price of a whole tour) or by explaining the importance of fee revenue for maintaining the natural attraction.
· Often, there are opportunities for increasing non-fee revenues, such as through donation programmes or through souvenir sales.
Depending on how they are implemented (as well as on site characteristics and other factors), fees have the potential to significantly supplement traditional natural area funding
sources. If they are not implemented, ecotourism may make natural areas worse off because of the costs imposed by this activity.
Issue/trend: The previous section notes the problem of insufficient natural area funding. With respect to ecotourism in particular, many countries and sites have devoted insufficient funding, political support, and research/analysis to managing ecotourism given the complexity of this activity with respect to both the natural and social environments. One of the results of the lack of support in the face of increased pressure is the reliance on simplistic management strategies such as carrying capacity.
Options: At the basic level, an important option is to provide to natural area managers the funds needed to implement the types of management strategies described in Section 4.6. These funds will need to be supplemented by the development of staff skills, through training of existing staff and/or through hiring of new staff (see Section 4.3).
Next, a commitment to planning at various geographic levels may be made (e.g., at the individual natural area, national, and even international levels). In particular, effective planning requires explicit statements of ecotourism-related objectives and ongoing monitoring to determine whether those objectives are being achieved (Chudintra 1993; Lindberg, McCool and Stankey 1997; Yong 1996). UN FAO (1988), Inskeep (1991), MacKinnon et al. (1986), and WTO and UNEP (1992) are examples of resources available to guide and facilitate planning efforts.
Of particular concern is the popularity of the carrying capacity concept. Though this concept is appealing in its simplicity and helps draw attention to the possibility of "overdeveloping" ecotourism, it simply is not adequate to deal with the complexity found within the ecotourism context. Therefore, it is proposed that this concept be avoided in favour of alternate frameworks that focus on identifying and maintaining desired conditions (these conditions might be environmental, experiential, social, and/or economic; for further discussion, see Harroun and Boo 1996; Lindberg, McCool and Stankey 1996). Alternative frameworks not only are more appropriate, but also may be more accepted by the tourism industry, as the focus on conditions rather than numbers encourages management actions that reduce negative impacts per visitor rather than the number of visitors.
Moreover, planning processes, such as the Limits of Acceptable Change system (LAC), that involve standards can be used to avoid the tendency, through multiple small developments, for tourism to undergo an undesirable amount of succession. For example, a wilderness site may slowly become more developed as the site is hardened, more and different types of people come, and hardening and infrastructure development continues. By setting standards reflecting wilderness qualities at an early stage (e.g., a low level of encounters with other visitors), management has a guide and rationale for implementing actions consistent with the standard (e.g., restricting the number of visitors to the site) or rejecting actions that are inconsistent with the standard. Succession, and thus the value of good planning, is also relevant at the community scale. Pattaya (Thailand) has been used as an example of tourism that gradually developed well beyond its small village origin (Chudintra 1993).
The recognition of ecotourism's complexity and the devotion of sufficient funding and support to its management will greatly enhance the likelihood of achieving ecotourism objectives in the long term.
Issue/trend: As noted in Section 3.3, the expected trend to 2010 is for continued ecotourism growth within the region. This growth can lead to increased impacts, both positive and negative, on natural areas.
Options: Strengthen visitor management in natural areas in order to achieve ecotourism objectives. Several strategies for doing so are provided below.
Much has been written about the management of tourists, particularly in natural areas (Cole, Petersen, and Lucas 1987; Hammitt and Cole 1987; Harroun and Boo 1996; Knight and Gutzwiller 1995; WTO and UNEP 1992). On-site management options include:
· Site hardening, such as building boardwalks.· Selective marketing and restrictions on activities, such as marketing non-motorized uses (e.g., trekking/hiking/bushwalking rather than Four-Wheel Drive use) and restricting motorized use.
· Managing behaviour, such as through education and persuasive communication (including use of visitor guidelines) - everything from keeping appropriate distances from animals to carrying out rubbish.
· Overall limitations on use, such as a maximum number of visitors per period (e.g., day or year) for the site.
· Selective limitations on use, including:
* Refuge zoning, such as permanently prohibiting visitation in certain geographic areas.* Buffer zones, such as prohibiting visitation within X meters of active bird nests or within Y meters of whales while whale watching.
* Temporal limitation, such as limiting visitation by season or time of day.
Of course, a combination of these strategies might be used. For example, visitors might be allowed within 50 m of bird groups during non-nesting periods, but only within 150 m during nesting periods. In addition, management of behaviour and spatial limitations can be achieved passively through trail/track and infrastructure design and layout rather than solely through more intrusive visitor guidelines. Though user fees typically are promoted as a way to generate revenue, they are also a potential management tool insofar as they can be used to limit use overall or distribute use spatially or temporally (e.g., high fees during peak visitation seasons).
Much attention recently has been directed at low impact design, construction, and management of visitor-related infrastructure in natural areas (CDOT 1995; Hawkins, Wood and Bittman 1995; US NPS 1993). Significant potential exists for the indirect environmental impacts of tourism to be reduced through utilization of alternate energy sources, the implementation of recycling programmes, and so on. The substitution of kerosene for firewood in Nepal is a widely-cited example of reducing such indirect impacts.
For both experiential and social reasons, it is recommended that buildings be designed in harmony with the local architecture and use traditional construction materials. Unfortunately, in many ecotourism areas, such as in Namche Bazaar in the Everest region of Nepal, lodges have been constructed of cement, which is unattractive to many western visitors.
Governments can play important roles in managing the environmental impacts of tourism infrastructure and operations through regulation and incentives. For example, in Malaysia the government has granted various incentives, such as pioneer status and income tax exemptions, to promote tourism investment. These incentives could be used to encourage environmentally sensitive practices, such as energy and waste minimization.
Strategies for managing environmental impacts also can be used to manage experiential impacts. For example, conflict often is caused by visitor behaviour, in which case there may be opportunities to manage conflict by managing behaviour through visitor education and guidelines. At the most general level, crowding can be managed by limiting the number of visitors.
A site might disperse and spatially limit certain activities to reduce crowding or conflict. For example, motorized activities might be allowed in some areas, but only non-motorized activities in other areas. If the area is of limited size, managers may need to determine the most appropriate or desirable activity, and then market and manage for that activity. The strategy of dispersal illustrates the potential for conflict between strategies to manage environmental versus experiential impacts. It may be sensible to concentrate use to minimize the real extent of environmental impacts, but it may be sensible to disperse use to minimize experiential impacts.
With respect to increasing positive economic impacts, the issue of user fees and natural area finance is discussed in Section 4.4. With respect to increasing jobs and other economic benefits, the traditional approach is to increase the number of visitors. Given that negative impacts (environmental, experiential, sociocultural, and economic) correspond, to varying degrees, to visitor numbers, generally it will be preferable to increase local benefits by:
· increasing spending per visitor;
· increasing backward linkages (reducing leakages); or
· increasing local participation in the industry.
Spending per visitor can be increased through, for example, provision of handicrafts where such provision does not currently exist (Healy 1994). Backward linkages can be increased through greater use of local agricultural and other products (Lindberg and Enriquez 1994; Telfer and Wall 1996).
Though visitor management traditionally focuses on environmental and experiential impacts and, to a lesser degree, economic impacts, social impacts on local communities may have at least as great an effect on sustainability as do these other impacts. As one ecotourism operator put it, "ecotourism cannot be achieved if development is opposed by the community" (Jarvie 1993:55).
Probably the best way to minimize negative social impacts and enhance local economic benefits is to ensure local involvement in, and control over, tourism development (Brandon 1993, 1996; Brohman 1996). There are obstacles to local involvement, including local factionalism and a tendency toward centralized government planning. Moreover, this involvement may make tourism development slower and more expensive. However, it also probably makes it more sustainable. As noted by Brandon (1996), local residents can (and should) decide what level of tourism they want, what cultural practices they wish to share, and where tourists will be allowed to go. Several different levels of community involvement are possible, from full local development of facilities to partnerships or joint ventures with industry, to delegation of rights in exchange for fees. The Annapurna Conservation Area Project (ACAP) in Nepal is a commonly-cited example of effective local development of ecotourism.
The local involvement process should include education about probable tourism impacts so that residents can make an informed decision regarding the desirability of tourism. Lastly, development should keep in mind the impacts listed in Section 3.4/Sociocultural Dimension and should pursue opportunities for minimizing costs and maximizing benefits. For example, reduced access to resident recreational areas (e.g., beaches) is a commonly-cited cost of tourism, so continued resident access to these areas should be preserved.
Future increases in visitation can bring important economic and other benefits. However, it also can generate increased negative impacts. If effective visitor management is implemented, the benefits can be enhanced while the negative impacts are minimized. Indeed, in some cases it may be possible, through effective management, to reduce negative impacts from current levels despite an increase in visitation. On the other hand, if visitor management is not strengthened, increased visitation may severely jeopardize resource management and other objectives.
Issue/trend: As noted in the previous section, the number of visitors is expected to increase at many of the region's natural areas. In addition, it is expected that the types of visitors (the visitor market) will change.
One of the primary changes will be in the balance of western and Asian visitors (with Asian visitors being both domestic and intraregional). Though growth is expected for western ecotourists, faster growth is expected for Asian ecotourists, such that the latter will comprise a larger proportion of all visitors. In general, Asian visitors are more likely to prefer larger group sizes, relative comfort, and easy site accessibility. They may seek forest-oriented experiences, but are more likely to do so in the context of trips taken for other purposes, such as golfing or diving.
Moreover, there often is divergence between the on-site experiences sought by Asians and westerners, and this will compound the need for effective management. The issue of divergent experiences is illustrated by the case of Dinghushan Biosphere Reserve (DBR) in China (Lindberg et al. 1996). Visitor survey results suggest that many DBR visitors (almost all of whom are domestic) are motivated by the opportunity to view scenery in the reserve, as well as to learn about nature. These motivations lead to support for restricting activities, including infrastructure development, that might threaten natural features. Nonetheless, observation of visitor behaviour in DBR suggests that these responses should be interpreted cautiously and with due regard to the cultural context. For example, there is a much higher tolerance for littering in the reserve than would be the case in many western reserves.
Moreover, cross-cultural evaluations of human relationships with the natural environment suggest that, relative to western cultures, eastern cultures tend to favour human manipulation of nature in order to enhance its appeal, in contrast to preservation of nature in a pristine state (Kellert 1996). Thus, DBR visitors may be more tolerant of human changes to the nature reserve than would be true of visitors in many western reserves (this tolerance extends to the acceptance of, and possibly preference for, buildings with modern material like concrete rather than more natural materials like wood).
Though little empirical research has been conducted on cross-cultural motivations and desired experiences in ecotourism settings, observation and discussion with researchers and reserve managers in many countries suggest that substantial cross-cultural differences exist. The example of litter suggests that perceptions of depreciation and environmental degradation caused by other visitors varies across cultures. Similarly, perceptions of crowding may vary across cultures. Of the 242 respondents (in the DBR visitor survey) who reported that they saw at least 200 other people during their visit, fewer than 25 % selected the number 5 or higher on a scale of 1 to 9, with 1 being "not at all crowded" to 9 being "extremely crowded." The reserve is located within two hours of a city of six million people, and it is unlikely that visitors expect a wilderness experience. Nonetheless, the level of crowding in the reserve probably is much more tolerable to Chinese visitors than to western visitors.
Of course, there is variability within cultures, with certain individuals and groups in Chinese society being more sensitive than others to environmental degradation and crowding. For example, Xing (1993) notes the high levels of visitation at Wuyishan, Changbaishan, and Huangshan reserves (with the latter having more than 10,000 visitors per day during peak periods) and observes that such visitation levels, and associated infrastructure, may devalue the natural beauty of the reserves.
Other trends also will cause changes in the visitor market. For example, the population in many source countries is ageing. Though older visitors may still seek ecotourism experiences, they are more likely to desire more comfort and greater site accessibility than their younger counterparts.
Options: Ecotourism is a business and, therefore, the ecotourism product needs to adapt to changes in the marketplace (or choose to accept static or declining visitation if adaptation will lead to changes that are unacceptable with respect to other management objectives). Thus, if natural areas are to take full advantage of ecotourism, they will need to evaluate the market most suited to the ecotourism product offered, as well as tailor the product to the desired market as far as practical and desirable. It may be difficult to simultaneously satisfy markets with disparate desires and tolerances, such that a variety of spatially or temporally separated ecotourism experiences may need to be offered within or across natural areas.
Issue/trend: Though regional ecotourism visitation levels are expected to increase, competition for these visitors also is expected to increase as new destinations are developed and as visitors become more sophisticated and discriminating in their choice of destinations. On the supply side, various countries in the region, such as Mongolia, have begun developing their ecotourism potential. On the demand side, many visitors are seeking more than a generic visit to a rainforest. They may search for specialized itineraries, trips involving significant contact with local communities, and high-quality interpretive programmes (discussed in Section 4.9) (Wood 1997). Increased sophistication and expectations have been noted for westerners, but also will be increasingly true for Asian visitors in the future.
Thus, sites not only have to attract visitors in the face of increased supply, but they also have to provide a high quality experience once the visitors arrive, thereby helping to attract future visitors through word-of-mouth referrals.
Options: One innovative option for reaching potential visitors in a competitive marketplace is the World-wide Web (WWW). Though the Web offers small ecotourism companies the opportunity to reach visitors around the world, Web marketing must be done well to be effective and should not be viewed as a panacea for attracting visitors (Johnson 1996). Numerous ecotourism operators and government agencies already are on the Web. For example, Samoan ecotour operators can be found at http://public-www.pi.se/~orbit/samoa/eco-oper.html while the Tasmania (Australia) Parks and Wildlife Service is at http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/. National parks and hill resorts are contained in the Malaysia Tourism Promotion Board site at: http://tourism.gov.my/. Marketing efforts generally, and Web marketing in particular, provide excellent opportunities for public-private partnerships.
In addition, destinations can maintain and enhance the quality of the visitor experience and offer the visitor something different than other sites and/or what the same site offered previously. Some sites have a natural advantage with respect to offering unique experiences. For example, only China can offer giant pandas in their native habitat. However, other sites can develop competitive advantages through, for example, enhancing access or predictability, enhancing trip quality through improved interpretation, developing or linking with complementary attractions, and so on.
Increased competition, increased expectations on the part of visitors, and the apparent trend for ecotourists to be less likely than sun and sand tourists to make repeat visits presents substantial challenges to natural areas. A flexible, business-oriented approach to marketing and trip quality can help ensure continued visitation and visitor satisfaction. If sufficient action is not taken, traditional ecotourism destinations in the region may lose their market share to new destinations as they are developed. For example, Choegyal (1996) states that Nepal has lost market share to regional competitors.
Issue/trend: As discussed in previous sections (4.6 and 4.8), there is a need to more actively manage visitors and to enhance the quality of the visitor experience.
Options: Implement interpretive programmes as a means for achieving both of these objectives.
Development of interpretive centres and other interpretive material has occurred at many sites within the region. For example, the Malaysia Department of Wildlife and National Parks recently constructed interpretive centres at Bota Kanan and Sungkai (DWNP 1996a). However, interpretation has been largely neglected at many sites in the region (Lindberg et al. 1997; Campbell 1994). For this reason, and due to its importance in ecotourism, it is discussed in some detail here (further discussions are available in Ham (1992) and other interpretation resources). Though the focus here is on using interpretation to manage visitors and enhance the visitor experience, it also serves to develop a keener awareness of an area or issue and to promote public understanding of the natural area management agency and its policies.
Put simply, interpretation seeks to help people understand and appreciate the environment through various communication processes. Interpretation is more than just providing information or explaining the environment (Wylie 1994). Tilden (1977) defines interpretation as "an educational activity which aims to reveal meaning and relationships through the use of original objects, by firsthand experience and by illustrative media, rather than communicate factual information." The concept of interpretation is illustrated by the saying, "through interpretation understanding, through understanding appreciation, through appreciation protection".
The following are some of the considerations for effective interpretation (expanded from Allcock et al. 1994):
· the level and type of education will depend on the interests and expectations of the tourist and will include a broad range of educational opportunities through interpretation, interactive and participative approaches, and the use of various media;· the interpretive component may acknowledge the natural and cultural values of a destination and also can address issues such as resource management and the role and attitude of the host community;
· content can include information and orientation, rules and regulations, activities, local flora and fauna, ecological processes, management issues and the cultural history and prehistory of the area (in short, topics can be broad and varied, and are only limited by the imagination of the interpreters); and
· interpretive material should be easily accessible, accurate and stimulating to encourage responsible behaviour and an ongoing interest in the environment and conservation after the visit.
The "art" of interpretation has been well-developed in many countries, but planning has been slower to progress. It has frequently been omitted, ad hoc (Upitis 1991) or in many cases reinvented. However, planning for interpretation can help managers:
· decide what they want to achieve, by identifying what opportunities are offered to raise public awareness, and what management issues can be addressed through interpretation; and· work out the most effective and efficient way to achieve goals.
Proper planning is required for effective evaluation, and thus effective strategic planning. Upitis (1991) summarizes the questions that should be asked when planning interpretation:
· why communicate?
· what is the objective?
· what is the message?
· who is the audience
· how/when/where is the best way to communicate with the audience?
· what have we achieved?
Interpretation can be included as part of the management planning process of the site, rather than being considered as an afterthought. Interpretive considerations can have a major influence on the placement of facilities, such as trails/tracks and campsites.
The range and type of interpretation will vary considerably from country to country as well as site to site. In Asia and the Pacific, interpretive services have traditionally been fairly basic, and often have been designed for a limited domestic market. Interpretation is one area in which consideration must be given to the differences between domestic and international visitors. This is not just a challenge in terms of language, but also in terms of the type of media, style of presentation, and the content. Often, there will need to be provision for multilingual interpretation, whether in the written media or guides.
Interpretation also can be a valuable tool to increase the awareness and understanding of local people who may live adjacent to the natural area. Interpretation can illustrate how they can contribute to the protection and sustainability of the area's natural resources upon which they may depend for subsistence or income. Indeed Ceballos-Lascur <in (1996) suggests that there is increasing evidence to indicate that on-site interpretive programmes in developing countries have an important strategic environmental education function.
Ceballos-Lascurin (1996) goes on to describe the case study of the Kanah National Park interpretive centre in India. The interpretive centre was created entirely by local staff and utilized local resources. The development of this highly successful interpretive centre has resulted in a number of spin-offs. It has demonstrated the abilities of the Indian staff and has encouraged other park managers to develop their own interpretive services. It has given interpretation a higher profile within the Indian parks system and has allowed the continued development of expertise in planning, design and development of other interpretive facilities. It is also significant that this project was developed as a partnership between the managers and the local people who had been relocated from the park when it was designated.
The effective implementation of interpretive programmes can greatly enhance the visitor experience, thereby making the site more competitive. In addition, interpretation can be used to manage visitors in a non-intrusive manner, thereby reducing negative impacts and increasing positive impacts. Moreover, it can be used to raise the general awareness and level of support for resource management policies and agencies.
Issue/trend: Almost every ecotourism observer notes the importance of forming partnerships among ecotourism actors. Such partnerships not only promote the setting of balanced objectives, but also promote achievement of these objectives through utilization of the varied skills and contributions each actor can make. For example, government clearly has an important role in ecotourism, but the private sector and NGOs offer skills, flexibility, and political independence that government agencies and local communities may lack. Moreover, the private sector and NGOs may be more efficient in achieving objectives, even in such traditional public sector activities as conveying the importance of conservation to surrounding communities.
Despite significant barriers to forming and maintaining such partnerships, the fact that they can provide substantial benefits but currently are relatively rare leads many observers to expect a future increase in partnerships.
Options: Though the roles of actors within a partnership will vary across sites, Eagles (1995) provides some broad categories of roles that each sector might take on. The public sector role in ecotourism typically is to:
· provide environmental protection (the natural area itself);
· provide infrastructure, such as roads and airports;
· provide security and enforcement;
· monitor and control impacts;
· allocate access;
· provide information, such as through interpretive programmes; and
· resolve conflicts.
The private sector role in ecotourism typically is to:
· provide accommodation and food;
· provide transportation, such as busses and airlines;
· provide information, such as guides and brochures;
· promote sites to potential visitors; and
· provide consumer products, such as souvenirs.
Various types of partnerships might be pursued, with national or regional ecotourism councils as one option. A specific example of public-private partnership is the formation of the Nepal Tourism Board, with representation from both the private and public sectors (Gurung 1996). An example of inter-agency cooperation is the Joint Committee on Nature Attraction Utilization in Indonesia, with representation by the Directorate General of Tourism and the Directorate General of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation (Nababan and Aliadi 1993). Joint marketing between natural areas, regional/national tourism agencies, and ecotourism businesses is another example of opportunities for partnerships to achieve mutual objectives in a cost-effective manner.
More extensive partnership opportunities also exist and likely will expand in the future. These include co-management of natural areas (e.g., government-NGO and government-local communities) and joint ventures between the private sector and local communities (Christ Forthcoming; Pfister and Jubenville Forthcoming).
Depending on the type and effectiveness of the partnership, it can be an important means for achieving ecotourism and natural area management objectives more efficiently or in ways that individual actors alone simply cannot do.
Issue/trend: For a variety of reasons, including private sector pressure to access natural areas and lack of public sector funding for natural area management, there is a trend toward greater private sector roles in the management of natural areas. These roles vary across countries, but often involve private sector management of infrastructure and activities within parks.
The greater private sector role can increase funding for infrastructure development. Moreover, it can bring skills, including hospitality and tourism management skills, that may be lacking in natural area management staff. However, this trend also may jeopardize natural area conservation objectives. When private concessionaires lead infrastructure development, there may be a loss of economic benefit and management control. Important revenue-generating opportunities may be lost by natural area management agencies by offering "crown jewels" of tourism in concessions that do not reflect true financial value.
Options: The value of private sector participation should be recognized (see Section 4.10), but this participation must be balanced with conservation objectives if the latter are to be achieved. New public-private relationships need to be explored. Rather than react to lack of funding by inviting private sector leadership, other options may be pursued. One of these options is for the public sector to charge user fees and to take on a greater role in infrastructure. For example, it may be possible to follow the common hotel owner-management relationship, with public agencies investing the capital needed for infrastructure development and ownership, but with private companies hired as managers.
In simplified terms, natural area managers face three options with respect to pressure for increased private sector roles. First, the natural area can resist this pressure and retain the status quo, which limits negative impacts and loss of control, but also limits ecotourism-related benefits (e.g., additional revenue). Second, the natural area can follow a traditional concessionaire model, which may generate some additional revenue and may obviate the need for the natural area management agency to be involved in tourism itself. However, the revenue benefits may be less than their potential, and control may be lost.
Third, more creative relationships may be explored, such as the hotel model noted above. Though such an option would require some natural area agency involvement in tourism, this commitment likely would be repaid in terms of retention of control and greater financial benefits.
Issue/trend: Related to the previous issue/trend, there is pressure to use natural areas for activities that are not nature-dependent. For example, golf courses have been proposed, and in some cases developed, in several national parks and other protected areas in the region.
At the same time, the supply of natural areas with little or no environmental degradation continues to decline. Therefore, it should be questioned whether it is either environmentally desirable or economically efficient to locate non nature-dependent activities in natural areas preserved for conservation or nature tourism purposes.
Options: In simplified terms, two options are to allow or to not allow non nature-dependent infrastructure and activities in national parks and similarly-designated natural areas. If they are allowed, the natural areas may gain concession fees and/or political support, but negative environmental and experiential impacts may outweigh these benefits. Insofar as the infrastructure and associated activities are less dependent on intact ecosystems than is the case for ecotourism activities like birdwatching, it may be better to locate them outside protected areas for both economic efficiency and conservation reasons.
Issue/trend: There is a trend toward enhancing the skills of ecotourism operators as part of the need to ensure high quality visitor experiences and to sustain the economic viability of these operators. Simultaneously, many "bona fide" ecotourism operators (those that adhere to ecotourism principles) are trying to differentiate themselves from operators who use the label solely as a marketing tool.
Options: Recognize the inherent difficulties for ecotourism operators, arising from the nature of small scale businesses operating in remote regions, and provide appropriate assistance through government agencies, industry associations, and vocational and/or university training programmes.
The following section describes some ecotourism operator difficulties and needs, using the Australian context as an example (Lindberg and McKercher 1997). Though there is variability across countries, similar difficulties exist elsewhere (Yong 1996), and several observers stress the importance of enhancing professionalism amongst ecotourism operators (e.g., Chudintra 1993).
Best estimates suggest that about 600 businesses are involved in the Australian ecotourism sector (Cotterill 1996). Dozens of new operators are entering the industry monthly and a similar number likely are deciding the leave the sector. Cotterill's profile of the industry suggests that (in Australia):
· the industry is comprised of small operators with most having four or fewer staff;· the average life of enterprises is 10 years; and
· each operator primarily provides either day tours or extended tours to one to three natural areas.
The industry faces many operational issues that will affect the long term viability of many businesses. Given a goal of sustainability, the industry as a whole, if not individual operators, must remain viable. A major issue for the sector is the lack of business expertise on the part of new entrants (Cotterill 1996). Most new entrants have little practical business or business planning background, and many also are woefully under-capitalized. Business planning emerged as one of the three most critical issues identified by Australian tour operators in a survey of new eco and adventure businesses conducted by the Victorian Tourism Operators Association (VTOA 1995). Information needs include basic business planning, business development, marketing issues, accounting and book keeping, accessing finance, pricing, booking and reservations procedures, taxation issues, cost control and new business development. Indeed, the issues identified by the ecotourism sector are similar to those identified by the small business in general (Meredith 1993; Reynolds, Savage and Williams 1994).
The lack of business expertise affects all aspects of the ecotourism operation including such fundamental issues as product development. Cotterill's (1996) research identified the need to package products better, coordinate itineraries, and improve product quality and presentation. The ecotourism sector is unique in that it serves small numbers of clients, often has a limited number of trips, and often is constrained by seasonality issues. As a result, gross revenues often are low and the industry as a whole faces seasonal cash flow crises.
Marketing often emerges as a key issue for ecotourism businesses. Traditionally, ecotourism products have not been marketed effectively through the travel trade (Wild 1996). Many operators do not understand how the travel trade works. Moreover, many have not developed their pricing structure to accommodate the up-to-30% commissions demanded by wholesalers and inbound operators. On the other hand, the travel trade largely has been uninterested in selling ecotourism products. The inbound, wholesale, and retail travel system is geared to selling mass tourism experiences in which large numbers of people purchase carefully packaged and standardized products. Until recently, few travel agencies have been interested in selling specialist tourism products (Richardson 1996; Southern 1996).
Practical operational problems that affect the profitability of some ecotourism operations also were identified. Cotterill (1996) cited the need to ensure product consistency. He notes that in some locations the accommodation is substandard for the quality and price of the experience offered. The end result is deficient product quality, which threatens to reduce consumer satisfaction. Although many ecotourists are prepared to trough it, the facilities and services must be at suitable standards. A more strategic approach to planning the tour and a better understanding of satisfying client needs would address this weakness.
In a similar manner, the effective hiring, management, training, and rewarding of staff emerged as a significant issue in the Cotterill (1996) study. The first imperative is to determine the appropriate staffing level. Some larger businesses have a client to staff ratio as high as 20:1. For specialist products, the client-staff ratio can be as little as 2:1. The second imperative is to find enough suitably skilled staff to perform the necessary duties. Sourcing suitable staff in rural areas can be a problem, and training staff is costly. The third imperative is efficient employment in the face of seasonality. Like most tourism businesses, ecotourism operators experience peak periods in which large numbers of staff may be needed. During the rest of the operating season, a few key staff people may be suitable for operating the business. In the off season, an organization may have no need for any salaried staff.
Finally, Cotterill's (1996) research identified a number of personal issues as important factors that limit the commercial profitability and, in some cases, viability of ecotourism operations. The greatest personal challenge facing all small business operators is the risk of burnout. This risk is especially strong with ecotourism operators who may face the gruelling combination of a heavy work load, a lack of support systems, and a lack of financial resources to hire additional staff. Many ecotourism businesses offer their trips on weekends, yet they also must work a full Monday to Friday schedule to operate the office, prepare for trips, and be available to answer customer inquiries. As a result, operators may find themselves working seven day weeks for the entire operating season.
To some degree, these weaknesses and difficulties can be overcome by appropriate assistance through government agencies, industry associations, and vocational and/or university training programmes.
Accreditation has been pursued in part as a means to exclude businesses that do not follow ecotourism principles. The term "ecotourism" has become a positioning statement and a politically correct form of mass tourism. As such, virtually any type of tourism activity has claimed to offer an ecotourism experience. In Australia, bus tours that once were sold as day sightseeing trips from Sydney or Melbourne now are being marketed as ecotourism experiences because the tours stopped at wildlife parks. Yet there was no change in the tour itinerary nor the qualifications of interpretive staff. Locations outside Australia have followed similar paths (Wight 1993). Golf resorts in Hawaii became ecotourism resorts (Remington 1994). Singapore, possibly the most urban of all nations, promoted itself as an ecotourism destination because of its renowned zoo (STPB 1993). The Desaru resort being developed in Johor, Malaysia will have 12 hotels with 5,000 rooms and three golf courses, yet will "promote ecotourism" by setting aside 242 of the 1,600 hectares as a natural reserve (Manam 1996). South Pacific island nations like Fiji and Western Samoa began to promote themselves as ecotourism destinations, though three years earlier they had been positioned as mass tourism resort destinations.
The danger of abusing the ecotourism label comes not so much from large resorts using the term, because consumers presumably will be able to easily determine the type of experience they are purchasing. Rather, the confusion occurs when operators working in natural areas use the term while not complying with ecotourism principles. Such operators may be able to underprice those complying with the principles and may provide inferior experiences that, through negative word of mouth, can jeopardize demand for site and thus the viability of other businesses.
Accreditation is an option that enables consumers to identify those operators that comply with ecotourism principles. Australia is in the process of implementing such an accreditation programme, and more information can be found at http://lorenz.mur.csu.edu.au/ecotour/neap.html. The pluses and minuses of accreditation programmes, and the different types of such programmes, have been widely debated (for example, see Basiuk 1996 and Kumar 1996), and the experience of implementation in Australia and elsewhere can be used to guide future accreditation efforts.
Issue/trend: There is a tendency, particularly for developing countries within the region, for ecotourism to be dominated by larger operators and/or those in regional or national centres. This results from economies of scale, differential access to capital, and the tendency for individuals with the necessary entrepreneurial and linguistic skills to be located in such centres.
Often, larger operators play important roles as intermediaries between consumers and small local operators. However, the dominance of larger operators can work against the goal of providing local economic benefits. Moreover, there is a common perception that large and out-of-region operators are less environmentally and socioculturally sensitive than smaller and/or local operators.
Options: Recognize the reasons for dominance by larger operators (and the important roles they can play), but implement programmes to facilitate local involvement where practical and desirable. Various options for achieving this include (see also Brandon 1993; Lindberg and Huber 1993):
· Local involvement in planning and management. This was discussed in Section 4.6.· Local training. This training would cover a range of topics, including general overviews of the ecotourism industry, hospitality management (including hygiene), relevant language skills, interpretive material, cross-cultural considerations, and so on. Training can be based on existing tourism programmes, such as those conducted by the Malaysian Tourism Promotion Board, but should be supplemented with material specifically for ecotourism (Yong 1996). This training also is relevant to guides and businesses from outside local areas.
· Provision of local capital through microcredit and other programmes.
· Facilitation of outreach to visitors and to other sectors of the ecotourism industry, such as inbound operators. One of the key needs for local businesses is to reach potential visitors directly or through inbound operators. For many ecotourism sites, it is important to identify appropriate marketing outlets. For example, getting information into "backpacker" guidebooks may be more important than putting glossy brochures in tourist centres.
· Natural area requirements that local guides be used.
Opportunities for greater local benefits from ecotourism exist not only within the ecotourism industry itself (such as guides or operators), but also within related industries. For example, training and capital might be targeted at developing the type, quality, and reliability of agricultural products used by local restaurants and lodges. Various resources relating to business development, community ecotourism development, and guide training are available, including Bushnell (1994), Pedersen (1995), and Pond (1993).
Finally, innovative strategies for small operator marketing can be pursued. One strategy, that of utilizing the World-wide Web, was noted in Section 4.8. This is an important potential strategy, but its usefulness should not be overstated, as it may become more and more difficult for small operators to become noticed on the Web as the number of sites proliferates. Indeed, it is possible that the Web ultimately will favour larger operators that are able to establish and maintain a higher Web profile. Again, partnerships may play a critical role here. Groups of operators, possibly in conjunction with natural area management agencies, can pool resources for combined sites that may be more attractive and useful to consumers than would be sites for individual operators.
Various demographic, tourism, and other trends will present challenges and opportunities for the region's natural area managers into the future. To some degree, these trends will put pressure on managers to maintain and improve their present activities. However, they also will put pressure on managers to take on new and different responsibilities and perspectives. For example, effective resource management will require increasingly greater social and political skills.
An overarching issue is the need for ecotourism to be dealt with in a business-like approach in terms of reacting to changes in the marketplace and satisfying ecotourists as customers. There are two general options for doing so: either natural area management agencies can take on this responsibility themselves or they can invite the private sector to do so in a partnership mode.
It should be stressed that this does not mean that important resource management objectives should be sacrificed to the desires of tourists or the tourism industry. Indeed, it may be critical for natural area managers to cultivate additional political support for such objectives in order to resist desires that are inconsistent with the objectives. Rather, it means that a more flexible, business-like approach can be taken within the constraint of achieving these objectives. Such an approach will enhance the probability that ecotourism objectives will be achieved into the future.
