Why Ecotourism Remains a Fundamentally Flawed Product - Coursework Example

While conceptually sound, the practical realities are such that ecotourism remains a fundamentally flawed product Introduction: While the history oftourism is vast, Ecotourism compared to it can be regarded as a fairly modern movement in the industry. Tourism is one of the largest industries of the world and it is also related to many prime industry sectors of the global economy. (Fennell, 2003, p.1). The main reason for this relation between the other prime industries is that tourism industries includes a certain number of crucial elements that the tourists depend upon, so that they can achieve the general (and in some cases specific) needs within the desired destination. (Fennell, 2003, p.1). These needs include cultural (e.g. historical sites, museums) and scenic beauty, festival, religious events and entertainment. (Fennell, 2003, p.2) Today, global tourism industry has indeed become large and is rapidly expanding. It is believed that world tourism industry generated as many as 234 million jobs at the end of 2007. During the same period, its contribution to the total GDP was estimated at 10.3 percent globally, but the concept of ecotourism does not necessarily include all these concepts distinctly under its definition. Modern ecotourism is believed to have begun in the year 1980s and eventually with its advent the tourism sector of countries like Ecuador, Nepal and Costa Rica flourished. (“The History of Ecotourism”, 2008). The main essence of ecotourism includes an inert passion for adventure and the pursuit of knowledge about a specific destination or location. Here the goals of mass-tourism and ecotourism differ to a great extent, as the goals and aims of two different tourism approaches are completely different. While conceptually sound, the practical realities are such that ecotourism remains a fundamentally flawed product Ecotourism though not a new nature-based experience for tourists has gained its attention over the last two decades or so in terms of defining it specifically, isolating it from other types of tourism, and promoting it adhering to its various eco-friendly features. Ecotourism is basically a low impact nature tourism which aims at maintaining the species and habitat of the location. (Fennell, 2003, p.20). The basic motivation for an ecotourist is to visit some relatively undisturbed natural area with an objective of studying and observing the natural habitats. At a time when the world is reeling under the threat of global warming and rapid depletion and degradation of its limited resources, anything that is eco-friendly generates high hope and expectations. For these reasons the concept of ecotourism is catching up fast with the ordinary man. This popularity eventually increases the number of visits per year. It is being recorded that now ecotourism accounts for around twenty percent of all the tourism activities throughout the globe. (Diamantis, 2004, p.3). As a natural consequence of huge influx of tourists in big cities, it has also contributed to their already high level of environmental pollution. Ecotourism is seen by many as an answer. It has become an ideal, a benchmark for tourism that is particularly sensitive to the ecological needs of the day. But as we would see while conceptually sound, the practical realities are such that it is subject to misinterpretation, over-expectation, and exploitation that raise doubt over its authenticity. But the confusion starts right from defining it. Though the term ecotourism has been in popular use for more than 20 years now, it has eluded a firm definition because it is a complex notion which seeks to define an activity, set forth a philosophy, and espouse a model of development. It is not only the governments that have tried to define ecotourism, but also academics, commercial tour operators, conservation organizations, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). They perhaps tend to define things in ways that are suitable for themselves, hence the variety of definitions. But one thing is common: Ecotourism is based on natural environment and it is expected that ecotourism should be sensitive to natural environment, not degrade it, but benefit natural environment. Weaver defines its outline, “Ecotourism can either be based on the natural environment, or be focused on some specific component of that natural environment.” (Chen, 2008, p.2) But there is no thin line of difference between mass tourism and ecotourism. So it is important to understand its true dimension and limits. For that matter this type of travel packages are presumed to be more sensitive in nature. But as the popularity increases the demand also goes up and then the concept of effective management comes into the scenario. (Wearing, Neil, 2009, p.37). What ones started as adventure tourism is now becoming more of a planned holiday tours. As a result of this the actual essence of ecotourism is somehow getting lost. Also, as more tourists come in, this department needs effective management and policy. In the absence of a proper policy the true definition of ecotourism is getting diluted in the long run. (Wearing, Neil, 2009, p.37). The success of any ecotourism project can be measured on two independent parameters: One is the qualitative impact that it had on the tourists and community at large, and other, how the place of visit is affected by inflow of tourists. Measurement of qualitative impact is subjective and involves individual experience of tourists. Ecotourism is expected to generate awareness towards natural environment. According to Wearing and Neil (1999), an ecotourist should have a satisfying experience and leave with a perception such that environmental conservation and the principles of sustainability are worthwhile. This awareness should not be limited to tourists but spread across the community. But it is hard to measure it. Mckercher (2001) argues that most of the studies measuring the size and importance of such special interest tourism. They used an analysis of visitor survey data found through secondary research. Segments are based on analysis of reply to activity questions on the premise that activities are valid corollary for motives to travel. Many researchers have constructed visitor surveys in such a way that valid purpose of such trips can be defined. He argues that both this overstate the true importance of such tourism, sometimes as much as 20 times. As far as generating mass awareness towards environmental conservation, it is doubtful whether it makes any significant independent contribution. It most probably overlaps with other environmental campaigns in this regard. But in most of the cases it is being observed that the main impact that the tourists leave on an average sixty visitor sites in some Island is only severe damage of its geological features. (Kandari, Chandra, 2004, p.147). There are also worries about the fact that nesting birds who come in the proximity of the tourists in those remote localities undergo an increase in their (the bird’s) body temperature and there by effecting their life cycle in a negative way. (Kandari, Chandra, 2004, p.147). Also some instances have been recorded of trash and plastics being dropped from tour ships, which ultimately harmed the sea lions and the seabirds of the area. (Kandari, Chandra, 2004, p.147). On local or regional level, there are many examples where tourists had unique experience of wild life and nature. For instance, Rutland Water has become one the most important bird-watching sites in the British Isles. Initially established as a water supply reservoir, the place is now occupied by a considerable number of birds. Record shows above 200 species of birds. Dryandra in Western Australia has become one of the best sites to watch rare mammals, and this, together with its extensive area, results in a visit of around 30,000 people yearly. Such projects not only aim to maintain endangered species but also give tourists a nature-based experience. But more often than not the scenario is exactly opposite. A very recent article reveals that ecotourism is not always a bright option for both the nature and the economy. The studies conducted on the Humboldt penguins of Chile reveal that the penguins residing on the islands with lesser visitor are prone to give more number of offspring compared to those penguins residing on more visited island. (Rickert, 2006). This means that the increased tourist interests are actually harming the growth rate of the natural life in those islands. However, whether it was just a wild-life adventure for a tourist or led to a change in perception towards environmental conservation, which is the one of the goal of ecotourism, depends on individual judgment of each tourist. There are many interesting ecotourism projects which have benefited local community, maintaining and even enhancing natural flora and fauna. In Poland, ECEAT-Polands Ecotourism at Organic Farms-Vacations with an Eco farmer project helps local Polish farmers host foreign tourists and Poles visit farms in other countries. (World Ecotourism News, 2009) Thailand benefited from well-marketed, open, mass-tourism for its economic growth, but this resulted in large-scale interference with its local ecology and Thai culture. It thus started to focus on sustainable development, and National Ecotourism Council was formed in 1997 to formulate and monitor National Ecotourism Policy and Action Plan. It is, however, not realistic to believe that ecotourism can replace mass tourism. Ecotourism is run on different model, such as low volume, high impact. The idea is to keep the number of visitors low so as to avoid environmental degradation that is the result by large number of visits by tourists. It is also known that an inverse relation exists between number of visitors in such sites and satisfaction of tourists. Many well-known ecotourism destinations such as Galapagos Islands face repercussion due to over visitation. Moreover, majority of ecotourism projects operating are not in a position to make big financial profits as they do not provide adequate means for tourists to spend money (Ward, 1997). Thus it is felt by Ecotourism Society that "ecotourism will never generate as much revenue as mass-tourism" (Ward, 1997). This has been empirically observed in Costa Rica, where ecotourism represents the principal element of its tourist industry. In response to massive loss of forest area in the 1940s, the Costa Rican government adopted a new model of development through ecotourism which would generate revenues and at the same time conserve the national resources. It has played an important role in nation’s quest for sustainable development and has gained recognition as a successful ecotourism venture (Ward, 1997). Still, it is feared that the parks in Costa Rica are not economically sustainable. While the parks clearly generate large revenues, authorities are finding it challenging to enlarge the expenditure of the ecotourist (Ward, 1997). There is a tendency to overstate its significance. There is of course another aspect which the government is totally neglecting. With about 87000 visitors gathering each year to watch the sea turtles wile they are laying eggs, a huge amount of waste is being accumulated in the Tortuguero region of Costa Rica. (Rickert, 2006). The exponential growth of tourist arrivals also affected the local communities in the country. The seasonal variation of tourist arrival does not necessarily ensure steady economical growth and with large number regional communities present the rivalry becomes intense. (Mitchell, Pentzer, 2008, p.146). A study in the Bahamas also reveals that there is an unexpected change in the number of Allen Cays rock iguanas, after the region was opened for ecotourism. The threat is so large that these creatures might have to be declared endangered in the coming few years. Often, the difference between ecotourism and other tourism is fuzzy and more in what one calls it than in what one does. This is dangerous as ecotourism involves rare and pristine landscapes and being labeled as ‘eco-friendly’ presents a big business opportunity. Government policies often take leverage of this perception on profits and compromises on sustainable development, which is its core. At national level, ecotourism policy is driven by government’s priorities, which could be conservation, addressing poverty, or generating foreign exchange reserves. The pressure to earn foreign exchange, attract tourists, and be a part of this thriving global business often takes precedence over its eco-friendly expectations. This eco-friendly tag is further exploited by all other stakeholders such as tour operators, hotels, and everyone who are willing to make a quick gain out of this business. A look at the Greek tourism industry shows that even where government itself took some promising initiatives, there was little will by private parties to undertake voluntary initiatives and the improvement of its environmental performance still relies heavily on governmental control. For instance, the use of ecolabels for tourism has been found rather slow till now. Many hotels implemented some kind of environmental-friendly practices, such as the use of energy-saving light bulbs or appliances, because of their direct financial payoff. (Chatziathanassiou et al., 2004) In addition to environmentally sustainable, it is critical that the use of natural areas for ecotourism is also socially and economically sustainable. A high level of management competence as well as credibility is necessary to achieve such aims of sustainability for environment and all other stakeholders. To be successful in community involvement, there must be transparent and open government. Participatory involvement may incorporate designations of guides and park wardens. In these jobs local people may utilize their expertise and know-how (Wearing and Neil 1999). But as the business flourishes it is the local community who are being deprived. Evidences show that after the promotion of Kakum National park in Ghana, the local unemployment rate has increased from three percent to about twenty seven percent. (Rickert, 2006). This is due to the fact that the villagers in these cases are prohibited to continue with their earning activities in the rainforests. Thus though Ecotourism has gained popularity in many developing countries that have rich flora and fauna, but in most instances, there are leakages of benefits and little wealth trickle down to local community. Developing countries were quick to see ecotourism as one way to develop their economies which have a vulnerable base. "It is the answer to the classic impasse that they find themselves in ....... the need to capitalize on their tourism resources to earn badly needed foreign exchange without, at the same time, destroying those resources and thus compromising sustainability" (Cater and Lowman, 1995, p.85). Boo is apprehensive that if ecotourism proposals are not well researched and guidelines not implemented, then a large part of economic gains may by-pass the needy local economies, accruing instead to tour operators in such countries. The Annapurna region of Nepal, marketed as an ecotourism destination is a case in point. One study found that only twenty percents of the US$3 that the average ecotourist spends daily actually benefits the local community (Ward, 1997). This leakage of economic gains has been long observed in developing nations. High level of illiteracy and absence of vibrant democracy also contributes to this in many such developing countries. The magnitude of this was estimated in 1988 when it was found that 55% of gross tourism revenues in such developing countries ended up in the hands of foreign capitalists in the developed world. (Ward, 1997) Thus as we can see there are tremendous ambiguity associated with the original definition of ecotourism and the current practice. But it can be said that ecotourism conceptually is part of the practice of nature tourism. In both form of tourism the traveler is mostly attracted towards the location due to some previously created interest for one or more features of the particular site. (Fennell, 2003, p.19) That means the aim of the visitors would mostly be to explore and side by side acquiring more knowledge about the region. Now depending on the physical rigor of the experience and the interest in natural history ecotourism can be divided into two different dimensions. (Fennell, 2003, p.19) These two dimensions are hard and soft. The type pf ecotourism will depend on the travelers’ appetite for both the factors. This is the basis of the design of an ecotourist environment. But sometimes in order to commercialize the process and to maintain economical feasibility, both of the dimensions get diluted. That means both the “hard” factor and the “soft” factors are distinctly not present in such kind of expeditions. The main aim as discussed above is to minimize the impact on the environment. But unlike an ecotourist should, most of the tourists are opting to stay in the luxury of hotels which actually spoils the actual sense of ecotourism. In the case of “Jackson Hole” a spot located for ecotourism in Wyoming, the process of commercialization has actually harmed the natural environment and habitat. (Fonza, 2009). With the increased demand, the tour authorities have arranged for resorts and lodges and also a golf course in the area. (Fonza, 2009). There in the actual concept of ecotourism gets lost and becomes vague in these tourist spots. For that reason now instead of visiting the ecologically-sensitive areas through rough camping most of tourists are trying to bypass the hardship, and the industry also is supporting to the fact to maintain its economical feasibility. In general an ecotourist would like to hike through the natural habitats, which would come from their passion for knowledge and exploration. But most of the national Governments are making programs so that more tourists come in and more dollars are pumped in their economy. But this attempt necessarily does not help the main concept of ecotourism. In most cases such expeditions hardly helps the natural habitats. Which makes the presentation of ecotourism, as a product a flawed one. If one analyzes the historical concept of ecotourism there are certain parameters which we would find missing in the modern day’s analysis of the concept. Ideally there should be no or minimal impact on the ecosystem and the natural habitat, but due to the unrestricting of the number of tourist most of the eco-tours are actually harming the environment. The next aim ecotourism is providing responsible employment to the people of the target areas but due to over consumption of the product, these aims gets diluted most of the eco-tours takes shape of a natural mass tourism. The goal of ecotourism is only preservation and development of the scarce locations and for that huge economic inflow is necessary at times. But if the main objectives of the concepts get diluted, the product itself loses its meaning. Thus ecotourism as a product fails to fulfill most of the target issues based on which the actually concept is established. Until and unless the local governments of these respective areas take control of the situation and bring about a parity between the two separate issues of economical development and the natural habitat conservation, the ecotourism companies will exploit the situation. The overuse of this misinterpreted concept of ecotourism is bound to bring about a biodiversity and will eventually effect the global environment in a negative way. References 1. Mckercher, B. (2001) . “The Business of Ecotourism”. The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism. CABI Publishing: New York. 2. Chatziathanassiou et al. (2004). Environmental Initiatives in the Hotel Sector in Greece: Case Study of the “Green Flags” Project. In B. Bramwell (Ed.), Coastal Mass Tourism – Diversification and Sustainable Development in Southern Europe (pp. 249-268). Clevedon: Channel View. 3. Chen, J.I.(2008) Ecotourism experience in Chinese visitors, University of Queensland, available at: http://www.griffith.edu.au/conference/cauthe2008/working-papers/WP094.pdf (accessed on October 30, 2009) 4. Wearing, S. and Neil, J. (1999) Ecotourism: Impacts, Potential and Possibilities.: Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford 5. Diamantis, D. (2004). Ecotourism Management: An Overview. In D. Diamantis (Ed.), Ecotourism – Management and Assessment (pp. 3-26). London: Thomson 6. Fennell, D.A. (1999). Ecotourism: An Introduction. New York: Routledge. 7. Cater E., Lowman G. (1995) Ecotourism. A Sustainable Option? : Wiley, Chichester. 8. “The History of Ecotourism”. 2008. Content4reprit.com. website:< http://www.content4reprint.com/business/home-business/network-marketing/the-history-of-ecotourism.htm> (accessed on October 29, 2009). 9. Ward, N.K. (1997) Ecotourism: Reality or Rhetoric, available at: http://www.planeta.com/ecotravel/mexico/yucatan/ward/ward2.html (accessed on October 29, 2009) 10. World Ecotourism News (n.d.) available at: http://www.ecoclub.com/news/33/world.html (accessed on October 29, 2009). 11. Rickert E. September 29, 2006. “Unanticipated Effects of Ecotourism on Wildlife and People”. Aboutmyplanet.com. available at: http://www.aboutmyplanet.com/environment/unanticipated-effects-of-ecotourism-on-wildlife-and-people/> (accessed on November 1, 2009). 12. Kandari OP, Chandra A. 2009. Tourism, Biodiversity and Sustainable Development: Gyan Publishing House, India 13. Fonza D. June 24 2009. Ecotourism: Positive and Negative Effects. Associatedcontent.com, available at: http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1862967/ecotourism_positive_and_negative_effects.html?cat=47> (accessed on November 1, 2009). 14. Mitchell MT, Pentzer S. 2008. Costa Rica: a global studies handbook: ABC-CLIO, California Read More