acotourism as mass tourism.pdf

Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterlyhttp://cqx.sagepub.com/ Ecotourism as Mass Tourism: Contradiction or Reality? David Bruce Weaver Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly 2001 42: 104 DOI: 10.1177/0010880401422010 The online version of this article can be found at: http://cqx.sagepub.com/content/42/2/104.citation Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com On behalf of: The Center for Hospitality Research of Cornell University Additional services and information for Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly can be found at: Email Alerts: http://cqx.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://cqx.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav >> Version of Record - Apr 1, 2001 What is This? Downloaded from cqx.sagepub.com at Bournemouth University on March 26, 2013 Cornell University 104 CORNELL HOTEL AND RESTAURANT ADMINISTRATION QUARTERLY Downloaded from cqx.D. is on the faculty at the School of Tourism and Hotel Management at Griffith University (D. perhaps.edu. E cotourism is widely perceived as a nature-based form of alternative tourism that embodies the virtuous traits that mass tourism supposedly [email protected] at Bournemouth University on March 26. Hence. David Bruce Weaver. The first section establishes a working definition of ecotourism. and considers its implications for the tourism sector and for ecotourism venues. This article.au). © 2001. the notion of mass ecotourism is usually seen as a contradiction in terms or oxymoron. and not its opposite. however.sagepub.. 2013 .Ecotourism as Mass Tourism: Contradiction or Reality? by David Bruce Weaver What’s the difference between ecotourism and mass tourism? Not much. and the remainder of the paper then develops the rationale for the above contention. argues that ecotourism as both a reality and an ideal can logically be conceived as a form of mass tourism.gu. Ph. and economically sustainable while providing opportunities for appreciating and learning about the natural environment or specific elements thereof. in that the desire to understand and appreciate natural attractions implies a desire to ensure that the integrity of those attractions is not undermined.1 First. A Range of Activities A wide range of ecotourism activities can be accommodated under this definition. 1998). Research Report 1.” Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 1999). 4 David Weaver.g. It is therefore more sensible to employ the criterion of reasonable intent. Ecotourism in the Less Developed World (Wallingford. “Ecotourism: The Search for an Operational Definition. ecotourism is differentiated from nature-based tourism activities that are more leisure based (such as the classic “3S” vacation of sea. Second. must be made to this final element. on the assumption that these can neither be easily divorced from each other nor from ecological sustainability. with scuba diving being perhaps the classic example of an activity that combines ecotourism. UK: CAB International. such as a particular type of animal or plant. which has been proposed in a number of sources.. DC: World Resources Institute.com at Bournemouth University on March 26. ecotourism is present when a relevant enterprise makes every reasonable effort to ensure that its operations are sustainable. ecotourism should be sustainable. This follows logically from the second criterion. Australia: John Wiley & Sons. bird watching. and adventure tourism. sand.sagepub. 1 Ross Blamey. One important qualifier. 5 (1997). however. 109–130. ecotourism emphasizes learning as an outcome of the interaction between ecotourists and the natural environment. Draft Queensland Ecotourism Plan (Brisbane: Department of Tourism. a rainforest or a grassland) or specific components thereof. The motivation in those latter pursuits is either to enjoy the hedonistic experience of relaxing in the sun and gaining a tan or to have a memorable experience that offers some degree of risk and personal challenge. the focus of attraction is natural environments (e.4 These three criteria can be combined to form the following working definition of ecotourism. but a more relevant typology for this discussion is the notion of a spectrum of activities that ranges from hard to soft.g.2 Finally. Australia: CRC for Sustainable Tourism.3 I consider it unlikely that anything can be described as being ecologically or socio-culturally sustainable beyond the shadow of a doubt. socio-culturally. for example: Kreg Lindberg. climbing. The natural attraction in either case serves as a suitable venue that allows these motivations to be played out. or rafting). Sustainable Tourism: A Critical Analysis (Gold Coast. The whole issue of sustainability has proven to be murky and contentious. 2 Hybridization among various types of tourism is a real possibility. That is. Ecotourism is therefore essentially a form of naturebased tourism. 1991). Youth and Sport. geological tourism). whale watching. In this way. 1995).5 At the “hard” end of the spectrum is active ecotourism. Classification can be made by activity type (e. Ecotourism is a form of naturebased tourism that strives to be ecologically. April 2001 • 105 Downloaded from cqx. 2013 . in line with current best practices. in line with current bestpractice principles. Vol. “Ecotourism” is present whenever an enterprise makes every reasonable effort to ensure that its operations are sustainable. “3S” tourism. and sun) or those that are adventure oriented (such as trekking. 2001). 5 See. While some definitions emphasize this notion of ecological sustainability. Policies for Maximizing Nature Tourism’s Ecological and Economic Benefits (Washington. Queensland. most also include an economic or socio-cultural dimension. which tends to involve a small num3 See: David Weaver and Laura Lawton.. Ecotourism (Brisbane.TO U R I S M A Working Definition of Ecotourism Three core elements can be distilled from the many attempts that have been made to define ecotourism. pp. and David Weaver. .... “The Characteristics of UK’s Ecotourists....... 106 CORNELL HOTEL AND RESTAURANT ADMINISTRATION QUARTERLY Downloaded from cqx.. “Overnight Ecotourist Market Segmentation in the Gold Coast Hinterland of Australia............. 1991). while the high estimates take in more of soft ecotourism.. Australia: James Cook University..... No... “Western Environmental Values and Nature-based Tourism in Kenya.... 24........... David Chapman......... “Identifying Ecotourists in Belize through Benefit Segmentation: A Preliminary Analysis. and reliance on an infrastruc- ture of services............. non-mediated experiences with the natural environment (see Exhibit 1).” For many ecotourism researchers.. 59–82... Neither estimate is necessarily inaccurate........ These travelers expect a high level of comfort and services and are more likely to rely on interpretation and mediation to appreciate the relevant natural attractions. while involving different populations and methods....” Tourism Recreation Research.... Disparate sources have claimed that ecotourism accounts for as little as 2 percent7 or as much as 20 to 25 percent8 of all leisure travel...” in Tourism and Sustainable Development: Monitoring. ber of environmentally aware participants who embark on relatively long specialized trips. 10 A more restrictive view of ecotourism is offered by James Butler.. the hard ecotourist supports “enhancement sustainability..............” Tourism Management. Tensie Whelan (Washington.. Managing..” Conservation Biology..... generally supports this concept of an ecotourism spectrum.....6 This distinction between hard and soft ecotourism helps to explain the large discrepancies that are reported with regard to the size of the ecotourism sector........ The multi-purpose nature of the overall vacation experience of soft ecotourists is especially relevant. “An Ecotourism Perspective..... Vol......g. and Visitor Reactions to the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area” (unpublished report). 5...... Townsville.. Moderate environmental commitment Enhancement sustainability ... John Nelson.... pp... since the other types of activities that these travelers pursue usually relate to mass tourism (e..... Emphasis on interpretation Source: David Weaver and Laura Lawton..........” Journal of Travel Research (in press).................... They argue that high levels of visitation are not compatible with the environmental and socio-cultural well being of rural destinations where this type of activity occurs. 8 Don Hawkins... most ecotourists fall somewhere on the continuum between hard and soft travel........ “Final Report: Understanding Visitor Plans for. Large groups Physically active . ed. pp............ 2013 ➔ .....Exhibit 1 Characteristics of hard and soft ecotourism as ideal types Hard (Active) The Ecotourism Spectrum Soft ➔ (Passive) Strong environmental commitment .. ed.......10 Sustainability and Mass Tourism The widespread emphasis on hard ecotourism as the most legitimate form of this activity and the contrary view that I’m expressing in this article can both be understood by examining the evolution of 9 John Akama............. pp..... expect few services during those trips........com at Bournemouth University on March 26..... 429–432....................... The reader will recognize that soft ecotourism comprises many of the characteristics of mass tourism in terms of its volume.. Steady-state sustainability Specialized trips ....... Ontario: University of Waterloo. this notion of mass tourism that is embodied in soft ecotourism is contradictory and perhaps even dangerous... the “soft” segment tends to embark on short ecotourism experiences as one component of a multi-purpose trip........... To be sure............... Vol.. Vol... and have physically active..... 567–574. Physically passive Few if any services expected . 1994........................ Short trips Small groups . cited in: Joan Giannecchini. shopping. “Ecotourism: New Partners........ Multi-purpose trips Long trips ........ This is demonstrated in Kenya.. 2..... Planning........” Journal of Travel Research (in press).... “Overnight Ecotourist Market Segmentation in the Gold Coast Hinterland of Australia. DC: Island Press........ for instance.................... In contrast............... In contrast.........sagepub...... however. One could therefore say that those safari participants in Kenya are both mass tourists and ecotourists...” Journal of Sustainable Tourism........” or leaving an area in the same condition as when they arrived.. Research carried out in several ecotourism destinations... one can justifiably describe it as an ecotourism experience even if the level of services and numbers involved is indicative of mass tourism............ 234–243. Dimitrios Diamantis...... No... 6 See: Philip Pearce and Gianna Moscardo. New Relationships..... those vacationers participate in a day-long or (occasionally) an overnight safari in one of the popular and well-serviced protected areas that are nearby.. cited in: Nature Tourism: Managing for the Environment. pp. Vol.. quoted in: Robert Scace.... purpose of travel. where the typical North American or European vacationers spend most of their time in Nairobi or at coastal resorts....” or improving the condition of the physical environment through donations and volunteer activity (such as tree planting).... Services expected Emphasis on personal experience ...... pp............ An important distinction is that soft ecotourists are usually associated with “steady-state sustainability. Visitor Expectations of.. Vincent Palacio and Stephen McCool.... Richard Butler and Geoffrey Wall (Waterloo. 1993).. 1995).................. sightseeing).................... 7.. 17 (1996).. Ecotourism in State Forests of New South Wales: Who Visits and Why? (Sydney: State Forests of New South Wales and The University of Sydney...... 3...9 As long as the safari component of this trip meets the three basic criteria set out above.. 99–102..... I call them “mass ecotourists.... and David Weaver and Laura Lawton.......... The low estimates are based on the hard definition.. At some point............... 7 According to the Specialty Travel Index........ 1986). Montserrat. According to Jafari. tourist strips.com at Bournemouth University on March 26. such as Antigua. Philip English. “A Framework of Approaches to Sustainable Tourism. This era saw the rise of alternative tourism. 414–432. Although sustainable nature-based tourism had already been practiced for many decades within national parks and other protected areas. Whereas mass tourism was reputed to be large-scale. ironically. and therefore mass tourism was the best option. smokeless industry. 17–60. pp. ed. Hence. the application of the ecotourism label placed this form of tourism in an ideological niche that gained its identity from its conscious opposition to mass tourism. 224–233. In this view. The Great Escape? An Examination of North-South Tourism (Ottawa: The North-South Institute. Bystrzanowski (Vienna: Centre for Research and Documentation in Social Sciences. 1989). mass tourism was the worst possible outcome for destinations. Vol.14 Knowledge-based platform.” in which tourism was perceived as the ideal. 12 For more recent examples see: E. 3 (1997). the more tourism the better. whereas Antigua was promoted for its 365 beaches.” Journal of Sustainable Tourism. The Holiday Makers: Understanding the Impact of Leisure and Travel (Oxford: Heinemann. 5. Tourism and Development in the Third World (New York: Routledge.sagepub. 1987). and concentrated in high-density 11 Jafar Jafari. and socio-cultural integrity of destinations. In this regard. This was long evident in the marketing of Caribbean island nations such as Dominica. which is what characterized the “adaptancy” platform of the 1980s. 2013 . the 1950s and 1960s were characterized by an “advocacy platform. “An English-language Literature Review. Given the legacy of those first three platforms. it cannot meet 13 Jackie Clarke. An interesting juxtaposition was Dominica’s emphasis on its reputed 365 waterfalls. Where mass tourism was considered to be inherently unsustainable. economic. John Lea. 1988). or tourism deliberately conceived by cautionary-platform supporters as a good ideal type diametrically opposed to bad mass tourism. and Jost Krippendorf. Vincent as nature-tourism destinations that conscientiously avoided the masstourism model favored by nearby islands. pp. locally controlled.” led by many academics who viewed tourism in general as a Trojan horse capable of undermining the environmental. pp. the reluctance to identify ecotourism as a form of mass tourism or to allow soft ecotourism as a legitimate form of ecotourism is not at all surprising. Jafari’s four tourism platforms provide a good basis for placing this evolution in context. 18 (1991). externally controlled. and St. See: David Weaver. alternative tourism was thought to be inherently sustainable. alternative tourism was supposed to be small-scale. April 2001 • 107 Downloaded from cqx. “Alternative to Mass Tourism in Dominica.13 Ecotourism emerged within this context as a form of alternative tourism that put the emphasis on natural attractions as opposed to cultural attractions. By contrast. and especially for those in supposedly vulnerable developing nations or other peripheral locations. This caused the government and the tourism industry to investigate how the island’s rainforests and mountains could be converted from tourism liabilities to assets. if mass tourism is perceived to be inherently unsustainable.12 “Adaptancy” platform. The next logical step was the proposal of tourism options deemed to be more acceptable. Vol. and dispersed within low-density local neighborhoods. following unsuccessful efforts to develop beachbased mass tourism. Although sustainable naturebased tourism has been practiced for many decades within protected areas. high leakage. J.TO U R I S M thinking about tourism in general and ecotourism in particular.” Annals of Tourism Research. 14 Dominica’s repositioning as a nature-tourism destination in the 1970s occurred. the decade of the 1970s was dominated by a “cautionary platform. No. conducive to the formation of linkages with other sectors of the local economy. at some point the “ecotourism” label identified this heretofore common form of tourism as the opposite of mass tourism. After all.11 Advocacy and cautionary platforms. Homestays and farm tourism are two examples of this type of tourism activity.” in Tourism as a Factor of Change: a Sociocultural Study. Tourism and Sustainability: New Tourism in the Third World (London: Routledge.” Journal of Travel Research. Diamantis and A. 19 See. 17 John Swarbrooke.: Simon Fraser University. Chapter 7. 5 (October 1996). 46–53. while large-scale or mass tourism may be sustainable under other conditions. Hence.” in Tourism: The State of the Art. “An Attempt at Autonomous Development: The Case of the Tufi Guest Houses. Pamela Wight. Clarke (Suva. pp. 1999).” Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly. 108 CORNELL HOTEL AND RESTAURANT ADMINISTRATION QUARTERLY Downloaded from cqx. No. It is in this new climate that innovative proposals for ecotourism-and-mass-tourism combinations and convergences have appeared. 217–224. 1993). ed. the more likely that the site’s environmental and sociocultural carrying capacities will be exceeded. More coherent with the knowledge-based platform is the view that while there may indeed be vulnerable spaces and destinations for which anything more than alternative tourism is inappropriate. A. moreover. sustainability is assumed to be negatively correlated with scale. pp. UK: CABI Publishing.V. 3 (1990). This reasoning is preferable to the advocacy platform’s perspective that visitation levels should be increased to maximize profits.16 The scenario of sustainable mass tourism is illustrated by the enlightened self-interest of the German tour operator TUI. The logical difficulty with the concept of limiting visitation. but rather on the effectiveness of the management practices that are applied to the circumstances of each individual destination. pp. UK: Wiley. 21 (2000). given the ample contrary evidence that has been compiled over the past three decades? One argument holds that the conventional tourism industry is learning from its past mistakes. 2013 . 40–45. Sustainable Tourism Management (Wallingford.com at Bournemouth University on March 26. is that carrying capacity is not necessarily fixed. cogeneration. 1998). they generate volumes of output that allow them to implement profitable recycling. In this framework.17 Once this possibility of sustainable mass tourism is acknowl15 See: Richard Butler. pp. in-house positions that deal with environmental and social issues in a highly professional manner and to conduct full-scale environmental audits. This line of argument results in the possibility that large and increasing numbers of soft ecotourists (a variety of mass tourists) could actually improve the sustainability of tourism. and D. for example: Susanne Hawkes and Peter Williams. a large company is more likely than a small business to establish specific 18 Hana Ayala. 28. “A Broad-context Model of Destination-development Scenarios.18 Finding Sustainability On what grounds can the potential sustainability of mass tourism be argued. “Resort Ecotourism: A Paradigm for the 21st Century.20 20 Dominica and Montserrat are probable cases in point. No. As well. 154–166. “The Greening of the Hospitality Industry: Economic and Environmental Good Sense. Fiji: University of the South Pacific. UK: MacMillan. Papua New Guinea. F.” in Ambiguous Alternative: Tourism in Small Developing Countries. Bécherel (Basingstoke. and realizes. 1987). 1994).” Tourism Management. pp. ed. pp. 121–141. The conventional line of reasoning within the cautionary and adaptancy platforms is that the greater the visitation level. B. Vol. “Green Strategies. and David Weaver. Clan rivalries and conflicts were exacerbated even more when well-meaning foreignaid agencies provided the operators with motor boats and other aid. but can be raised through appropriate management strategies. ed. there is considerable additional evidence that the mainstream industry has made significant progress toward sustainability during the 1990s.” in The International Marketing of Travel and Tourism: A Strategic Approach. edged. S. 16 Stephen Ranck. Moreover. “Alternative Tourism: Pious Hope or Trojan Horse?. 1999). Ladkin. Seaton (Chichester. What sparked a change in attitude was the emergence in the 1990s of a knowledge-based platform that attempts to apply a more judicious approach and move beyond the ideologically based platforms of the past. like TUI. Britton and W. are in many ways inherently better positioned to implement sustainable practices because of their internal economies of scale. Although room enough remains for skepticism. as described below. and that management and regulation are unnecessary impediments to the effective operation of the marketplace. however. Martin Mowforth and Ian Munt. which has been proactive in trying to ensure that its clients do not contribute to negative socio-cultural and environmental effects in the destinations that they visit. Vellas and L.sagepub. then there is no longer any basis for contending that mass tourism and ecotourism are inherently incompatible. For example. and carrying-capacity levels of a particular protected area are assumed to be constant. 665–674. The Greening of Tourism: From Principles to Practice (Victoria. 37. Vol. where delicate inter-clan balances were disrupted when one clan began to profit materially from the operation of traditional-style guest houses for overseas tourists. and other measures that are coherent with the goals of sustainability.the sustainability criterion of ecotourism. Vol. the assessment of a particular tourist product as good or bad does not depend on scale.C. this view associates sustainability with a small scale of operation and with seeing every increase in visitation as a threat to the site’s integrity.19 Large corporations that make up a substantial portion of the mass-tourism industry. that its future profitability and viability depend on adopting an attitude of enlightened self-interest with respect to environmental and socio-cultural sustainability. provided they are making short visits to a protected area. smallscale alternative tourism may actually be inappropriate and unsustainable under certain circumstances. including Ayala’s concept of resort ecotourism. Thus.15 An example of the former scenario is found in the Tufi region of Papua New Guinea. have suggested that mass ecotourism can be more sustainable than the harder.g. through entry and other user fees) that can be used to more effectively manage the park. conducting two pilot projects that take advantage of visitor numbers.22 Even more contentiously.TO U R I S M • Provides lobbying clout in the face of competing resource users B (ecotourism to mass tourism) • Contributes to diversification of a mass-tourism product • Attractive to an increasingly “green” mass-tourism market • Further exposure to sustainability principles and practices C (protected areas to ecotourism) A M B Mass tourism • Provides an attractive. A less capitalintensive example is the placement of patio-type stones on a dirt trail. I 21 This increase in trail use. or to a small number of hard ecotourists having access to no services at all (with the concomitant possibility of garbage and waste being left behind ). other types of mass tourism. No one would challenge the proposition that increasing numbers of visitors have Exhibit 2 Mutually beneficial linkages between ecotourism. and a mass-produced vehicle to reach their ecotourism site from there. at this writing. for example.21 High visitor intakes can also enhance the educational element of ecotourism by making possible sophisticated interpretive facilities that offer virtual-reality experiences. A highly efficient on-site waste treatment facility. Enhanced management could occur. But the NPS has identified increased motor traffic as the chief cause of that degradation. ecosystem displays. and thereby makes some aspects of ecotourism dependent on mainstream tourism. 22 Even the most intrepid hard ecotourists are also mass tourists in that they will almost inevitably use a major airline to reach an overseas gateway. however. At the most basic level. Hence. high-quality venue for ecotourism activities • Insulates ecotourism from incompatible activities D (ecotourism to protected areas) • Revenue flow provides funds for enhancement and expansion • Broad exposure increases public support degraded the Yosemite valley and the south rim of the Grand Canyon. the mass-tourism market provides some ecotourism sectors with most of its clientele (e. Linking Ecotourism and Mass Tourism with Protected Areas The previous sections argue that ecotourism can be. and protected areas. for example. and resort tourists visiting protected areas near resort destinations).com at Bournemouth University on March 26. for example.. mass tourism. As suggested earlier. small-scale versions of the sector. and if those plans succeed. the numbers of visitors could increase beyond their current level. They are also likely to spend some time in a large urban hotel at the gateway during the early and late phases of their stay in that destination. rather than simply the number of visitors. a variant of mass tourism. and capital-intensive interpretive trails. 2013 M M there are also many cases where sustainability is positively correlated with the number of visitor arrivals. the implementation of carrying-capacity measures at one location must consider the repercussions of those measures on the carrying capacity of other resources and locations. through appropriate and well-considered site-hardening measures that increase the site’s capacity to accommodate a large number of visitors in an environmentally sustainable way. might be possible only because of the economies of scale generated by a large number of visitors. Such services could be supported only by large numbers of visitors. which are the main ecotourism venue (see Exhibit 2).sagepub. while seeking to ameliorate the environmental impact of high traffic. Mass tourism benefiting ecotourism. and protected areas A (mass tourism to ecotourism) • Provides a large clientele (soft ecotourists) and revenue flow • Brings economies of scale amenable to sustainability Ecotourism C D M Protected areas . National Park Service is. At Yosemite and the Grand Canyon the park service is working on a project to exclude cars during the busy season in favor of bus and light rail. cruise passengers who become soft ecotravelers when they disembark on desert islands owned by the cruise line. Such an option is preferable to a moderate number of visitors over-stressing old or outmoded facilities. April 2001 • 109 Downloaded from cqx. research facilities. could exceed the carrying capacity of the plants and animals living along the trail. which could increase the trail’s carrying capacity tenfold. such an argument can be made simply because a greater volume of visitors results in a higher revenue flow (as. and is for the most part. In this section I will explore in more detail the mutually beneficial relationships that can be established between mass ecotourism.S. The U. A direct interface between protected areas and mass tourism is likely to increase the chances of negative outcomes. it follows that protected areas are also important for conventional mass tourism. The advantages of scale for facilitating appropriate site-protection measures and high-quality education were discussed earlier. pp. and the Great Barrier Reef. mining and logging interests). • The fact that some areas merit protection is usually due to the outstanding character of their natural landscapes. At a deeper level. which is strictly protected to the extent that almost all human activity is prohibited. Technology. preserving biodiversity. it may be more difficult to justify to some politicians and legislators the continued existence of protected natural areas strictly on less tangible grounds such as protecting watersheds. lobbyists who represent competing resource stakeholders such as logging and mining). Measures include prohibitions on activities that are likely to be injurious to natural attractions as well as to the ecotourism industry that they support. that support is indirect and therefore best mediated through the specialized ecotourism sector. large revenue inflows also help to achieve “enhancement” sustainability (that is. • Some protected areas. add security measures. like Banff. and ecotourism helps to sustain the conventional mass-tourism industry. easy access to natural areas by a large segment of 110 CORNELL HOTEL AND RESTAURANT ADMINISTRATION QUARTERLY Downloaded from cqx. such as site degradation. the increasing attractiveness of ecotourism to mass tourists attests to a greening (or.. are tourism icons of their respective countries that attract many visitors on the strength of their reputation. sustainability which improves the status quo. Since ecotourism depends on protected areas. 25 Auliana Poon. Just as protected areas indirectly support conventional mass tourism. Ecotourism strengthens the mass tourism product through diversification. 2013 . Jamaica. Tourism in the Less Developed World. • The continued destruction and degradation of natural landscapes suggests that such areas will eventually be confined to the higher order protected areas. High-order protected areas26 are ideal ecotourism venues. which revealed that 70 percent were motivated to visit that country primarily because of the opportunity to view interesting wildlife in its native habitat. for the following reasons. and IV of the IUCN (World Conservation Union) classification scheme. by offering a chance for visitors to take a break from the beach or shopping to observe and learn about natural attractions.678 inbound tourists to Kenya. 1993). UK: CAB International. 24 23 cially conscientious and prefers to experience a diverse range of fulfilling activities.com at Bournemouth University on March 26. and Queensland (Australia). The success of 3S tourism in relatively remote and expensive destinations. Ecotourism benefits mass tourism. vandalism. through the revenues generated from mass tourists’ engaging in soft ecotourism. but not Category I. government is likely to take it more seriously than hard ecotourism as something deserving support. it’s likely that those tourists would probably travel to cheaper and more accessible 3S destinations such as Malta. The strong influence of ecotourism on mass tourism is illustrated by a 1990 random survey of 1. See: Weaver. Tourism. • Protected areas contain relatively unspoiled natural environments. III. aging) of the mainstream tourist market. or saving such areas for future generations. to ensure that these areas are maintained in pristine condition.23 This pattern is repeated in other well-known ecotourism destinations such as Costa Rica. so too does conventional mass tourism indirectly support protected areas. as discussed above). 570–571. However. Yellowstone. which makes them especially attractive to ecotourists. Ecotourism. and engage in rehabilitation efforts. and Competitive Strategies ( Wallingford. perhaps. and serve to sustain the sector in all parts of the world. More fundamentally. 1998. According to Auliana Poon.. is directly related to the availability of readily accessible soft-ecotourism opportunities. Ecotourism benefits protected areas. However. in that they provide the means to expand park boundaries and systems. or Hawaii. Furthermore.sagepub. preventing climate change.g. Protected areas benefit ecotourism. with support from both the public sector and other elements of the mass-tourism industry.24 If not for these wildlife-viewing opportunities. revenue from mass ecotourism is emerging as the single biggest incentive to justify the continued existence of park systems in the face of pressure from expanding human population and resource competitors (e. • Regulations are in place. 26 That is. Categories II.g. Without such cash flows. is better positioned to deal with competition from other groups that seek to exploit the natural environment in potentially incompatible ways (e. an emerging breed of tourist is environmentally and soAkama. therefore. This shift in travelers’ preferences could accelerate the movement in mass tourism toward sustainability. and minimal use of interpretive and educational opportunities. Serengeti. and have become critical of the urban and coastal hotels and surroundings that have been allowed to degrade.25 Such travelers favor “sun-plus” destinations that can offer environmental as well as 3S attractions.Because soft ecotourism is relatively popular and can generate substantial revenue. at least theoretically. Belize. See. 38.sense of overcrowding or environshell: the presence of tourism can be mental stress. too. is designated for intensive Protected Areas levels of visitor services and facilities. the population is likely to translate into increased public support for park protection as official policy. for example: NatureWatch. but ity to host 1. There is a growing literature in the area of effective environmental landscaping and design to accommodate large visitor numbers in a sustainable and satisfying way.” Tourism Geographies. or just 1 percent of its Relationship of Ecotourism and total area.) Certheir local communities. and fragile.5 million visitors per the absence of tourism. Imagine that a ten-square-kilometer block of land.29 This implies a capaceither a threat or an opportunity. world’s protected areas is cited by many academics as a grave threat to though much larger. Canada)27 and fied land adjacent to the park for this purpose. Montana: Falcon Press.000 daily arrivals. No. April 2001 • 111 Downloaded from cqx. while elimi. of course. This view is tain criteria should be taken into account in selecting the intensiveentirely justified if no measures are taken in response to the influx. Vol.sagepub. Nuespecially sensitive ecological sites. 1. the vast majority of those 1.000 square kilometers. can have advantages in creating business opportunities for those local residents.TO U R I S M trated by a hypothetical protected area of 1. or if use area. Wendy Hudson (Helena. The growing influx of visitors to the (This is a hypothetical example. Here is my argument in a nut. though this. 28 Sanette Ferreira and Alet Harmse. also elimiremaining 99 percent of the land. accessible to hard ecotourism activicomplex. nates this potential opportunity. including access to outside transportation and an absence of those measures are ineffective. 325–342. Of course.28 If such measures are adopted. 100–110.5 milThe best strategies are those that lion visitors. as this allows for services that are provided in the the most efficient site-protection visitor area will more than suffice to measures to be implemented and produce a satisfying park visit if apalso minimizes the amount of space propriately managed. but Alaska’s Denali National Park. the interpretation cenconcentrate large numbers of visitors ters. This can be illus29 27 J. 5. and overall into a small area. For of tourists within those spaces. through the revenues generated from mass tourists’ engaging in soft ecotourism. views of the remainder of the park The degradation of intensely used were somehow available. No. depending on the nature through the optimum distribution of the area’s natural resources. Any fear areas within Yosemite and Grand Canyon National Parks has already that this land was being sacrificed been cited.year without seriously damaging the nating a potential threat. most of which could still be made Protected areas tend to be diverse. pp. South Africa’s Kruger National If those ten square kilometers are Park. “Policy Formulation at the Tourism/Environment Interface: Insights and Recommendations from the Banff–Bow Valley Study. 2 (1999). It merous examples can be cited of would also be desirable if panoramic unsustainable outcomes as a result. ed. interpretive trails. attention must also be paid to the roads and communities beyond the park that will have to cope with the traffic generated by those 5. is conceptually the integrity of those places and not far off from this situation. Brent Richie. Mass tourism indirectly supports protected areas. I contend that mass ecoday could quite easily be accommotourism can be far more of an opdated without creating any undue portunity than a threat to protected areas. South Africa: Policy and Practice.R. 1992).com at Bournemouth University on March 26. but positive ties such as long-distance hiking and outcomes are nevertheless possible canoeing. pp. 3.” Journal of Travel Research. Vol.000 visitors per however. and to these can be could. Imagine then that is affected by significant numbers of visitors. be allayed by acadded the experience of the Banff quiring at least some already modiCorridor (Alberta. properly planned. 2013 . “The Social Carrying Capacity of Kruger National Park. 31 while in Costa Rica’s celebrated Monteverde Cloud Forest Preserve. ed. Mutually beneficial relationships among those components. 183–197. the inaccessible land is still valued as a scenic vista. and in managing the remaining untouched parts of the park.sagepub. 35 This could also have a recruitment effect for more conventional forms of ecotourism.” in Tourism and National Parks: Issues and Implications. this paper serves to point out that ecotourism can be and usually is a variant of mass tourism.that each visitor is levied a basic entry fee of $10 over and above all other fees for services. celebrated. “Modified Spaces. Whether this is positive or negative for the protected area depends. National Parks such as Yosemite. Vol. “Artificial Reefs and Dive Tourism in Eilat. and the construction of 34 Laura Lawton and David Weaver. In the wider spectrum of tourism activity. but only through carefully considered cooperative planning and management. are specific elements of the natural environment. M. Vol. will not appear spontaneously. H.30 This emphasis on concentrating visitors in a small area already reflects the situation of most popular protected areas. National Parks and Resource Conflicts. the comparable figure is 2 percent. A Reasonable Connection Ultimately. but also as an essential strategy for ensuring the future viability of many protected areas. Then the remaining area can be maintained in a relatively unspoiled condition. within highly modified environments for some or all of their life cycle. a consideration of specific components of natural environments as ecotourism attractions opens additional venue opportunities that are also relevant to mass tourism. Ståhl. pp. “Pay the Price of Ecotourism. Boyd (Chichester. The willingness of many people to observe these and other species in highly modified environments raises the interesting possibility of urban ecotourism and agricultural ecotourism. pp.S.34 Those unconventional venues might not only divert some tourism activity away from natural areas. and exploited as a great opportunity for the enhancement of the ecotourism sector itself. 764–766. 2013 .37 All of these measures have the benefit not only of providing on-site “ecotourism” opportunities. “Tourism. but also of fostering the environmental sustainability of the mass-tourism resort or hotel facilities. For the mass ecotourists. 31 D. Leader-Williams.” Ambio. Roe. 112 CORNELL HOTEL AND RESTAURANT ADMINISTRATION QUARTERLY Downloaded from cqx.35 Such ecotourism can be fostered in several ways. 2001). supported by the revenue generated from mass ecotourism.” in Encyclopedia of Ecotourism. 8 (1998).com at Bournemouth University on March 26. as wildlife habitat. for example: Max Terman. however. likely to provide the desirable natural environments that are referred to in the criteria section at the beginning of this paper. 315–326. pp. Israel. Leave Only Footprints: The Environmental Impacts of Wildlife Tourism (London: International Institute for Environment and Development. even if they themselves do not plan on ever personally experiencing that resource.B. again. and even the Grand Canyon. 2000). Chman. Shlesinger.000 visitors who visit South Africa’s Kruger National Park each year is concentrated on only 4 percent of the land. since such spaces are 30 That is. Peregrine falcons have successfully adapted to the concrete jungle of some inner North American cities. DalalClayton. thereby contributing to product diversity. Yet. and for its existence value. people have a sense of well-being just in knowing that some special resource is being protected. sitehardened area of the park in a sustainable and satisfying way. D. 187–202.32 Almost all visitation in Canada’s Banff National Park occurs within the Bow Valley corridor.36 the provision of nesting sites. and even thrive. pp. However. though they are seldom recognized and promoted in any explicit way as a form of ecotourism.” Americas. the vast majority of the 700. and contrary to the conventions of the cautionary and adaptancy platforms. but also potentially extend the scope of ecotourism activity all the way to the courtyard or immediate surrounds of any resort or inner-city hotel. Weaver (Wallingford. I believe this approach will increasingly be viewed not only as a desirable compromise. This $15 million can be used to augment the public purse in maintaining those facilities. 32 Martha Honey. pp. while whooping cranes make opportunistic use of croplands in the Great Plains during their migration.33 Comparable management schemes are evident in major U. 38 (1997). 6 (1994). ed. 40–47. is my view that mass ecotourism should be recognized. 1997). 36 See. Like Denali. and for protected areas. 33 Philip Dearden. the Great Smoky Mountains (which remains the most-visited park). both species have demonstrated the ability to survive. HED Wildlife and Development Series No. Some hotels are already implementing those kinds of measures. which accounts for no more than 4 percent of the park’s area. No. wherein someone who observes wildlife in an urban or farmland setting may be inspired to visit a relatively undisturbed protected area. No. 10. UK: Wiley. and B. Wilhelmsson. Modified Environments as Ecotourism Venues The status of protected areas as the main ecotourism venue is entirely warranted. 46. Moreover. Vol. 27. “Natural Links: Naturalistic Golf Courses as Wildlife Habitat. A major feature and challenge of this planning is to concentrate visitor traffic to a protected area into a small. Butler and S. such in situ opportunities also occupy a niche between non-ecotourism activity in the resort and soft ecotourism in a protected area. artificial reefs.” Landscape and Urban Planning. for example. UK: CAB International. and Y. N. including the establishment of micro-environments to replace conventional manicured landscaping on hotel grounds and golf courses. CQ 37 D. on the way the area is managed. for example. for mass-tourism in general. R. Take Only Photographs. Peregrine falcons and whooping cranes.