The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism

The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism



The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism

Edited by

David B. Weaver

School of Tourism and Hotel Management, Griffith University, Australia
Advisory editors

Kenneth F. Backman, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management,

Clemson University, USA

Erlet Cater, Department of Geography, University of Reading, UK
Paul F.J. Eagles, Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies, University of

Waterloo, Canada

Bob McKercher, Department of Hotel and Tourism Management, Hong Kong

Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, China

CABI Publishing

CABI Publishing is a division of CAB International

CABI Publishing CABI Publishing
CAB International 10 E 40th Street
Wallingford
Oxon OX10 8DE Suite 3203
UK New York, NY 10016

Tel: +44 (0)1491 832111 USA
Fax: +44 (0)1491 833508
Email: [email protected] Tel: +1 212 481 7018
Web site: http://www.cabi.org Fax: +1 212 686 7993
Email: [email protected]

© CAB International 2001. All rights reserved. No part of this publication
may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronically, mechan-
ically, by photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior per-
mission of the copyright owners.

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library,
London, UK.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
The encyclopedia of ecotourism / edited by David B. Weaver.

p. cm.
Topical chapters arranged under a common theme.
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 0-85199-368-0 (alk. paper)

1. Ecotourism. I. Weaver, David B. (David Bruce)
G156.5.E26 E53 2000
338.4Ј7910--dc21

00-044459

ISBN 0 85199 368 0

Typeset by Columns Design Ltd, Reading.
Printed and bound in the UK by Biddles Ltd, Guildford and King’s
Lynn.

Contents

Contributors ix
xiii
Preface
1
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION TO ECOTOURISM
D.B. Weaver 5
23
1 Principles of Ecotourism 37
R.K. Blamey 63
73
2 Types of Ecotourism
M.B. Orams 85

3 Ecotourists: Not a Homogeneous Market Segment 89
P.A. Wight 107
123
4 Global Growth and Magnitude of Ecotourism 139
D.E. Hawkins and K. Lamoureux 155

5 Ecotourism in the Context of Other Tourism Types v
D.B. Weaver

SECTION 2: A REGIONAL SURVEY BY CONTINENT
E. Cater

6 Kenya and South Africa
P.U.C. Dieke

7 Anglo-America
D.A. Fennell

8 Asia
A.A. Lew

9 Oceania (Australia, New Zealand and South Pacific)
R.K. Dowling

10 Europe
S. Blangy and S. Vautier

vi Contents 173

11 Latin America and the Caribbean 189
D.B. Weaver and R. Schlüter
193
SECTION 3: A REGIONAL SURVEY BY BIOME 205
D.B. Weaver 219
235
12 Rainforests 251
W. Frost 265

13 Mountain Ecotourism: Creating a Sustainable Future 283
P.W. Williams, T.V. Singh and R. Schlüter
287
14 Polar Environments 303
B. Stonehouse 315
327
15 Islands and Coasts 345
E.A. Halpenny
359
16 Deserts, Grasslands and Savannahs
D.B. Weaver 363
379
17 Marine Environments 395
C. Cater and E. Cater 411
433
SECTION 4: ECOTOURISM VENUES
D.B. Weaver

18 Public Protected Areas
L.J. Lawton

19 Privately Owned Protected Areas
J. Langholz and K. Brandon

20 Modified Spaces
L.J. Lawton and D.B. Weaver

21 Wilderness
W.E. Hammitt and M.C. Symmonds

22 Indigenous Territories
T. Hinch

SECTION 5: ECOTOURISM IMPACTS
P.F.J. Eagles

23 Economic Impacts
K. Lindberg

24 Environmental Impacts
R. Buckley

25 Exploring Socio-cultural Impacts on Local Communities
S. Wearing

26 Developing Indicators for Destination Sustainability
E. Sirakaya, T.B. Jamal and H.-S. Choi

27 Rural Development
R.W. Butler

Contents vii

SECTION 6: PLANNING, MANAGEMENT AND INSTITUTIONS 447
K.F. Backman
451
28 Management Tools and Techniques: an Integrated Approach to Planning 463
S. Backman, J. Petrick and B.A. Wright 479
497
29 Policy and Planning 509
D.A. Fennell, R. Buckley and D.B. Weaver
521
30 Ecotourism-related Organizations
E.A. Halpenny 525
535
31 Ecotourism in the Inter-sectoral Context 549
J. Cohen 565

32 The Place of Ecotourism in Public Policy and Planning 579
S. Parker
595
SECTION 7: THE BUSINESS OF ECOTOURISM
B. McKercher 597
611
33 Accommodations 627
J. Gardner 639

34 Tour Operators 657
B.R. Higgins 663

35 Tour Guides and Interpretation
B. Weiler and S.H. Ham

36 The Business of Ecotourism
B. McKercher

37 The Pursuit of Excellence: Benchmarking, Accreditation, Best Practice
and Auditing
J.-P. Issaverdis

SECTION 8: METHODOLOGIES, RESEARCH AND RESOURCES
D.B. Weaver

38 Methodological Approaches Used in the Literature
K.F. Backman and D.B. Morais

39 Information Sources for Planning and Management
P.F.J. Eagles

40 Education and Training
N. Lipscombe and R. Thwaites

41 Areas and Needs in Ecotourism Research
D.A. Fennell

Glossary

Index



Contributors

Kenneth F. Backman Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management,
Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-1005, USA

Sheila Backman Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, Clemson
University, Clemson, SC 29634-1005, USA

Russell K. Blamey Urban and Environmental Program, Research School of Social
Sciences, Australian National University, ACT 0200, Australia

Sylvie Blangy Department of Tourism and Sustainable Development, SECA (Société
d’Eco-Amènagement), Parc Scientifique Agropolis, 34 397 Montpelier Cedex 5, France

Katrina Brandon 4110 Gallatin Street, Hyattsville, MD 20781-2132, USA. Present address:
Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International, Washington, District
of Columbia, USA
Ralf Buckley International Centre for Ecotourism Research, School of Environmental and

Applied Science, Griffith University Gold Coast Campus, Parklands Drive, Southport,
Queensland 4217, Australia
Richard W. Butler School of Management Studies for the Service Sector, University of
Surrey, Guildford, GU2 5XH, UK
Carl Cater School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1SS, UK
Erlet Cater Department of Geography, University of Reading, Whiteknights, Reading RG6
2AB, UK
Hwan-Suk Choi Department of Recreation, Parks and Tourism Sciences, Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX 77843-2261, USA
Judy Cohen Marketing Department, Rider University, 2083 Lawrenceville Road,
Lawrenceville, NJ 08648-3099, USA
Peter U.C. Dieke University of Strathclyde, The Scottish Hotel School, 94 Cathedral
Street, Glasgow G4 0LG, UK
Ross K. Dowling School of Marketing, Tourism and Leisure, Faculty of Business and
Public Management, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup, WA 6027, Australia
Paul F.J. Eagles Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies, University of Waterloo,
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1
David A. Fennell Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies, Faculty of Physical
Education and Recreation, Brock University, St Catherines, Ontario, Canada L2S 3A1
Warwick Frost Department of Management, Monash University, Clyde Road, Berwick
3806, Australia

ix

x Contributors

John Gardner Cooper and Gardner Architects, 14 Par-la-Ville Road HM 08, PO Box
HM 1376, Hamilton HM FX, Bermuda

Elizabeth A. Halpenny Nature Tourism Solutions, R.R.#2, Almonte, ON K0A 1A0, Canada
Sam H. Ham College of Forestry, Wildlife and Range Sciences, Department of Resource

Recreation and Tourism, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844-1139, USA
William E. Hammitt Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, Clemson

University, Clemson, SC 29634-1005, USA
Donald E. Hawkins School of Business and Public Management, The George Washington

University, 2121 Eye Street, NW, Washington, DC 20052, USA
Bryan R. Higgins Department of Geography and Planning, State University of New York

at Plattsburgh, 101 Broad Street, Plattsburgh, NY 12901-2681, USA
Tom Hinch Faculty of Physical Education and Recreation, University of Alberta,

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2H9
Jean-Pierre Issaverdis Victoria University, Footscray Park Campus, K538, PO Box 14428,

Melbourne, MC 8001, Australia
Tazim B. Jamal Department of Recreation, Parks and Tourism Sciences, Texas A&M

University, College Station, TX 77843-2261, USA
Kristin Lamoureux School of Business and Public Management, The George Washington

University, 2121 Eye Street, NW, Washington, DC 20052, USA
Jeff Langholz 312 Fernow Hall, Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University,

Ithaca, NY 14853, USA. Present address: Program in International Environmental
Policy, Monterey Institute of International Studies, Monterey, California, USA
Laura J. Lawton School of Business, Bond University, Gold Coast, Queensland 4229,
Australia
Alan A. Lew Department of Geography and Public Planning, Northern Arizona
University, PO Box 15016, Flagstaff, AZ 86011-5016, USA
Kreg Lindberg School of Tourism and Hotel Management, Griffith University Gold Coast
Campus, PMB 50, Gold Coast Mail Centre, Queensland 9726, Australia
Neil Lipscombe School of Environmental and Information Science, Charles Sturt
University, PO Box 789, Albury, NSW 2640, Australia
Bob McKercher Department of Hotel and Tourism Management, Hong Kong Polytechnic
University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China
Duarte B. Morais School of Hotel, Restaurant and Recreation Management, 201 Mateer
Building, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802-1307, USA
Mark B. Orams Centre for Tourism Research, Massey University at Albany, Private Bag
102 904, North Shore MSC, New Zealand
Steven Parker Department of Political Science, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV
89154-5029, USA
James Petrick Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, Clemson
University, Clemson, SC 29634-1005, USA
Regina Schlüter Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Turisticos, Avenida del Libertador
774, Piso 6 – Of. ‘W’, 1001 Buenos Aires, Argentina
Tej Vir Singh Centre for Tourism Research and Development, A-965/6 Indira Nagar,
Lucknow, India 226016
Ercan Sirakaya Department of Recreation, Parks and Tourism Sciences, 308 Francis Hall,
Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2261, USA
Bernard Stonehouse Scott-Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge, Lensfield
Road, Cambridge CB2 1ER, UK
Mathew C. Symmonds Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management,
Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634-1005, USA
Rik Thwaites School of Environmental and Information Science, Charles Sturt
University, PO Box 789, Albury, NSW 2640, Australia

Contributors xi

Sandrine Vautier Wittelsbacherallee 121, D-60385 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Stephen Wearing School of Leisure and Tourism Studies, University of Technology,

Sydney, PO Box 1, Lindfield, NSW 2070, Australia
David B. Weaver School of Tourism and Hotel Management, Griffith University Gold

Coast Campus, PMB 50, Gold Coast Mail Centre, Queensland 9726, Australia
Betty Weiler Department of Management, Monash University, Berwick Campus, PO Box

1071, Narne Warren, VIC 3078, Australia
Pamela A. Wight Pam Wight and Associates, 14715-82 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta,

Canada T5R 3R7
Peter W. Williams School for Resource and Environmental Management, Simon Fraser

University, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5A 1S6
Brett A. Wright Center for Recreation Resources Policy, George Mason University, Mail

Stop 4E5, 10900 University Blvd, Manassas, VA 20110, USA



Preface

The beginning of the new century is a good nomic impacts of ecotourism on host desti-
time to take stock of the activities and top- nations, including rural areas, and by
ics that have been studied under the guise reviewing sustainability indicators. This is
of ‘ecotourism’ for just over a decade. This followed by a series of chapters that con-
Encyclopedia of Ecotourism is the first siders aspects of planning, management
attempt to review the sector in a compre- and institutions, including those that are
hensive way within a single volume. Its 41 external to ecotourism itself. The theme of
chapters, whose authors include many Section 7 is the business of ecotourism,
leaders in the field, represent a diversity of which incorporates accommodations, tour
perspectives and styles. This diversity, operators, tour guiding and interpretation,
within reason, has been encouraged, since planning and marketing, and quality con-
there is no one correct way to analyse the trol issues. The eighth and final section
ecotourism sector or gain insight into its concentrates on the creation and dissemi-
evolution. Topically, the chapters have nation of ecotourism knowledge by consid-
been divided into eight sections, each rep- ering prevalent research methodologies,
resenting a common theme. The first sec- information sources, training and educa-
tion establishes the context for the volume tion, and research needs.
by considering fundamental issues of defi-
nition, categories, market development, An ambitious volume such as this
growth and relationship to other forms of would not have been possible without the
tourism. The next set of chapters reviews fine efforts and dedication of numerous
the status of ecotourism in all of the individuals. My heartfelt thanks first of all
world’s major regions, while the spatial go to the authors, who made time in their
theme is continued in Section 3 with its full schedules to prepare an impressive
focus on major biomes, including rainfor- array of contributions that will mark this
est, alpine and polar regions, savannahs, volume as an indispensable reference to
islands and marine environments. Generic those with any kind of interest in eco-
ecotourism settings, such as protected tourism. Special thanks go to authors such
areas, modified spaces and indigenous ter- as Dave Fennell, Elizabeth Halpenny and
ritories, are examined in the fourth section. Ralf Buckley who readily and willingly
Section 5 changes the focus by considering agreed to make additional chapter contri-
the environmental, socio-cultural and eco- butions when other potential contributors
were forced to withdraw from the project.

xiii

xiv Preface

As Chief Editor, I was fortunate to work ful production of the Encyclopedia. As the
with an excellent team of Advisory Editors, originator of the project, Tim Hardwick,
consisting of Ken Backman, Erlet Cater, Publisher, must be congratulated for his
Paul Eagles and Bob McKercher. This team inspired and timely book idea. I would also
of experts laboured away at the coalface, like to extend my gratitude to Production
working directly and effectively with the Editor Zoe Gipson for her excellent work in
authors through their first and second bringing the manuscript to final produc-
drafts, and thereby making my final editor- tion. The reviewers of the original book
ial responsibilities a pleasant rather than proposal were also most supportive, by
onerous task. The team at CABI Publishing encouraging publication and providing
also deserves the highest praise. As my excellent feedback on refining the scope
direct contact with the publisher, and contents of the book. Finally, I extend
Development Editor Rebecca Stubbs per- my deep gratitude to Laura Lawton, who
formed a great number of essential tasks, assisted with the Encyclopedia in a variety
and also provided encouragement and of ways, provided unwavering support,
expert advice when required. Her profes- and kept me sane during the hectic final
sionalism is a major reason for the success- phases.

Section 1

Introduction to Ecotourism

D.B. Weaver

School of Tourism and Hotel Management, Griffith University Gold Coast Campus,
Queensland, Australia

Authors who contribute to the introductory as ecotourism, and how disturbed a land-
section of a volume such as this face the scape can be yet still qualify as an eco-
special responsibility of having to establish tourism venue. In similar vein, Blamey
the context for the sections that follow. In cites the learning imperative of ecotourism,
the case of ecotourism, this is a particularly but asks whether product interpretation
vexatious task since the knowledge base is should merely satisfy consumer demand
incipient, and no consensus currently for information at a superficial level, or
exists as to the meaning and interpretation whether it should try to change consumer
of the term itself. Yet, even in this atmos- attitudes toward an enhanced sense of
phere of conceptual fuzziness, these intro- environmental responsibility.
ductory chapters perform the extremely
useful function of pointing out the debates, The third criterion that he discusses,
disputes, shortfalls and ambiguities that sustainability, is even more contentious
characterize a field which is, after all, still and ambiguous. While most stakeholders
only in its infancy. Moreover, where war- agree that there is an onus on ecotourism to
ranted, they suggest areas in which some be environmentally and socio-culturally
degree of consensus or cohesion may be sustainable, stakeholders have dramatically
emerging; indicators, perhaps, that eco- variant perspectives on what this means
tourism is moving toward a higher level of and how it should be effected. For ex-
maturity. ample, there are those who argue that eco-
tourism must contribute actively to the
This duality between persisting ambigu- enhancement of the resource base, while
ity and emerging consensus is evident in others contend that it is sufficient for eco-
Chapter 1, where Blamey puts forward cri- tourism to make things no worse than the
teria around which ecotourism seems to be status quo. But it is not a question of adopt-
coalescing, but also emphasizes the debates ing just one or the other perspective. In
and uncertainties that continue to dog all Chapter 2, Orams demonstrates how eco-
of these criteria. For example, he acknowl- tourism can adhere to its core criteria yet
edges the widespread perception that eco- embrace a spectrum of motivations, levels
tourism is ‘nature-based’, but then bursts of involvement and outcomes, ranging
the bubble of consensus by citing unre- from ‘hard’ to ‘soft’ types of ecotourism,
solved issues such as how proximate to and from the ‘active’ to the ‘passive’. In the
nature the experience should be to qualify hard, active pole of ecotourism, resource

© CAB International 2001. The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism 1
(ed. D.B. Weaver)

2 D.B. Weaver

enhancement is generally regarded as an example, appear to be younger than hard
imperative. This is not the case in soft, ecotourists in some origin regions, though
passive ecotourism, although Orams sup- more research is required to determine
ports the implementation of measures that whether such findings are more than just a
would move the latter toward the more regional trend.
enhancive side of the continuum.
The hard–soft spectrum is also implic-
Some researchers and practitioners itly embraced in Chapter 4 by Hawkins and
demonstrate a strong bias in favour of hard Lamoureux, who show that ecotourism,
ecotourism, sometimes even to the point of perceived in this liberal way, constitutes a
excluding the soft perspective as a legiti- substantial portion of the overall tourist
mate expression of the sector. This elitist market. Furthermore, ecotourism is a
approach, however, may be seen as mis- rapidly expanding sector, as evidenced by
guided for a number of reasons. In reality, the growth of indicators such as the provi-
this type of ecotourism involves such a sion of ecotourism-related educational
small number of participants as to render it opportunities, the formulation of strategic
almost irrelevant in terms of economic plans and policies, and the availability of
impacts on destinations, and in its capacity funding from international agencies. But
to foster adequate lobbying clout in the Hawkins and Lamoureux also point out the
face of larger stakeholders such as the difficulties in trying to quantify the magni-
forestry and mining industries. The soft tude and growth of a sector that is often
type of ecotourism, in contrast, is much regarded interchangeably or included with
more prevalent and therefore potentially other forms of tourism, such as ‘nature-
more advantageous in both respects. As based’, ‘adventure’ and ‘sustainable’. This
well, soft ecotourism is far more accessible confusion of terminology is a hindrance to
to those who are not wealthy, young or the systematic study of ecotourism as a dis-
healthy. Yet, even here there is risk, espe- crete sector, and is another indication of
cially in the possibility that such a mode of the sector’s immaturity.
ecotourism might mutate into the sort of
conventional mass tourism that academics In Chapter 5, Weaver helps to alleviate
have been criticizing for so many years – this situation by exploring the relationship
and to which, ironically, ecotourism was between ecotourism and other relevant
originally conceived as a more appropriate types of tourism. After reviewing much of
alternative. the available literature, he concludes that
ecotourism is a subset of both nature-based
Despite this risk, the option of embrac- and sustainable tourism, and overlaps with
ing both the hard and soft types of activity adventure, cultural and 3S (sea, sand, sun)
into a single ecotourism spectrum seems to tourism. In many cases, as with trekking,
be gaining support, and is reflected in the ecotourism hybridizes with these other sec-
remaining three chapters in the section. In tors, making it impossible to differentiate
Chapter 3, Wight draws from a growing the constituent components. More con-
base of market knowledge to identify how tentiously, and in concert with his own
the emerging ‘ecotourist’ differs from the support for the hard–soft continuum,
tourist and consumer markets in general. Weaver asserts that ecotourism can be a
The ‘typical’ ecotourist, it appears, tends to subset of alternative tourism or mass
originate in a more developed country, is tourism, as long as the basic criteria are
female, has higher-than-average income met. Reflecting a point made in Chapter 1
and education levels, and is somewhat by Blamey, he indicates that ecotourism
older than the average tourist. However, has long been and is still widely regarded
Wight also stresses that the ecotourist mar- as a form of alternative tourism. This ten-
ket differs internally with respect to age, dency owes to the origins of ecotourism in
income, activity patterns, motivation, etc., the ‘adaptancy platform’ of the 1980s
differences that in large part reflect the (Jafari, 1989), which proposed small-scale
hard–soft continuum. Soft ecotourists, for alternatives to conventional mass tourism

Introduction to Ecotourism 3

that were reputed to be inherently more that the majority of ecotourism already
benign. However, the ‘knowledge-based occurs in the guise of mass tourism, and
platform’ that appeared in the late 1980s, that large scales of operation afford certain
by adopting a more objective and less ideo- advantages in the provision of sustainable
logical approach to tourism, has served to outcomes and quality education that are
erode the association between the scale of a not available in small-scale alternative
tourism product and the perception that it tourism operations. As stated earlier, this is
is either good or bad as a result. Depending a controversial line of reasoning, and the
on the given circumstances, alternative issue of scale remains one of the focal
tourism and mass tourism can both have points of debate and dispute within
either positive or negative consequences, the evolving area of ecotourism studies.
and hence there is no inherent reason for Either implicitly or explicitly, each chapter
making a categorical disassociation between in this section, and indeed in this volume,
ecotourism and mass tourism. Going even provides its own perspective on this
further, a good argument can be made point.

Reference

Jafari, J. (1989) An English language literature review. In: Bystrzanowski, J. (ed.) Tourism as a Factor
of Change: a Sociocultural Study. Centre for Research and Documentation in Social Sciences,
Vienna, pp. 17–60.



Chapter 1

Principles of Ecotourism

R.K. Blamey

Urban and Environmental Program, Research School of Social Sciences,
Australian National University, Australian Capital Territory, Australia

Around the world, ecotourism has been hailed as a panacea: a way to fund conservation and
scientific research, protect fragile and pristine ecosystems, benefit rural communities, promote
development in poor countries, enhance ecological and cultural sensitivity, instill environmental
awareness and a social conscience in the travel industry, satisfy and educate the discriminating
tourist, and, some claim, build world peace.

(Honey, 1999, p. 4)

Introduction Ecotourism developed ‘within the
womb’ of the environmental movement in
Although the origins of the term ‘eco- the 1970s and 1980s (Honey, 1999, p. 19).
tourism’ are not entirely clear, one of the Growing environmental concern coupled
first to use it appears to have been Hetzer with an emerging dissatisfaction with mass
(1965), who identified four ‘pillars’ or prin- tourism led to increased demand for
ciples of responsible tourism: minimizing nature-based experiences of an alternative
environmental impacts, respecting host nature. At the same time, less developed
cultures, maximizing the benefits to local countries began to realize that nature-based
people, and maximizing tourist satisfac- tourism offers a means of earning foreign
tion. The first of these was held to be the exchange and providing a less destructive
most distinguishing characteristic of ‘eco- use of resources than alternatives such as
logical tourism (“EcoTourism”)’ (Fennell, logging and agriculture (Honey, 1999). By
1998). Other early references to ecotourism the mid 1980s, a number of such countries
are found in Miller’s (1978) work on had identified ecotourism as a means of
national park planning for ecodevelopment achieving both conservation and develop-
in Latin America, and documentation pro- ment goals.
duced by Environment Canada in relation
to a set of road-based ‘ecotours’ they devel- The first formal definition of ecotourism
oped from the mid-1970s through to the is generally credited to Ceballos-Lascuráin
early 1980s. Each tour focused on a differ- (1987), who defined it as: ‘travelling to
ent ecological zone found along the corri- relatively undisturbed or uncontaminated
dor of the Trans-Canada highway, with an natural areas with the specific objective of
information pack available to aid interpre- studying, admiring, and enjoying the
tation (Fennell, 1998). scenery and its wild plants and animals, as
well as any existing cultural manifestations

© CAB International 2001. The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism 5
(ed. D.B. Weaver)

6 R.K. Blamey

(both past and present) found in these Some of the definitions of ecotourism
areas’. While definitions such as that of that have proved popular in recent years,
Ceballos-Lascuráin (1987) and Boo (1990) and which are consistent with the defini-
tended to emphasize the nature-based tion offered in the introduction to this vol-
experience sought by the tourist, more ume, are listed in Table 1.1. Although any
recent definitions have tended to highlight number of principles of ecotourism can be
various principles associated with the devised, an analysis of definitions such as
concept of sustainable development. these indicates that three dimensions can
According to Wight (1993), sustainable represent the main essence of the concept.
ecotourism imposes an ‘ethical overlay’ on According to this interpretation, eco-
nature-based tourism that has an educative tourism is:
emphasis. Although this overlay has
arguably been implicit, if not explicit, in • nature based,
earlier discussions of ecotourism, the con- • environmentally educated, and
cept does appear to have evolved into • sustainably managed.
something explicitly normative over the
past decade. This is in part a reflection of The last dimension is taken to encompass
increasing recognition among industry and both the natural and cultural environments
government that nature-based tourism can involved in supplying the ecotourism
only be sustained in the long term if a prin- experience. Thus, where Ross and Wall
cipled and proactive supply-side manage- (1999) outline five fundamental functions
ment approach is adopted. of ecotourism; namely: (i) protection of nat-
ural areas; (ii) education; (iii) generation of

Table 1.1. Selected definitions of ecotourism. Definition
Source
Ceballos-Lascuráin (1987, p. 14) Travelling to relatively undisturbed or uncontami-
nated natural areas with the specific objective of
The Ecotourism Society (1991a, b) studying, admiring, and enjoying the scenery and its
Ecotourism Association of Australia (1992) wild plants and animals, as well as any existing
National Ecotourism Strategy of Australia cultural manifestations (both past and present)
(Allcock et al., 1994) found in these areas

Tickell (1994, p. ix) Responsible travel to natural areas which conserves
the environment and improves the well-being of
local people

Ecologically sustainable tourism that fosters
environmental and cultural understanding,
appreciation and conservation

Ecotourism is nature-based tourism that involves
education and interpretation of the natural
environment and is managed to be ecologically
sustainable

This definition recognizes that ‘natural environment’
includes cultural components and that ‘ecologically
sustainable’ involves an appropriate return to the
local community and long-term conservation of the
resource

Travel to enjoy the world’s amazing diversity of
natural life and human culture without causing
damage to either

Principles of Ecotourism 7

money; (iv) quality tourism; and (v) local sized in earlier definitions. Valentine
participation, the last three fall under the (1992a, p. 108) defines nature-based tourism
heading ‘sustainably managed’ in this as tourism ‘primarily concerned with the
chapter. The three-dimensional interpreta- direct enjoyment of some relatively undis-
tion is also consistent with Buckley’s turbed phenomenon of nature’. A variety of
(1994) restrictive notion of ecotourism in motivations for nature-based tourism have
which ecotourism is nature based, environ- been suggested, including the desire to
mentally educated, sustainably managed get back in touch with nature, a desire to
and conservation supporting. escape the pressures of everyday life,
seeing wildlife before it is too late, and
One further dimension of ecotourism, specific interests and activities such as
not referred to in most definitions, but wor- trekking, birdwatching, canyoning and
thy of the status of at least a ‘secondary white-water rafting and kayaking (Whelan,
principle’, involves the small-scale, per- 1991).
sonalized and hence alternative nature of
many classical ecotourism experiences. Valentine identified three main dimen-
The above three principles, together with sions of nature-based tourism (NBT) per-
this fourth, provide the defining character- taining to the experience, style and
istics of classical ecotourism as shown in location. In terms of the type of experience
Fig. 1.1. Popular ecotourism is similar to involved, different NBT experiences vary
classical ecotourism with the exception in nature dependency, intensity of interac-
that it does not qualify as a form of alterna- tion, social context and duration. Different
tive tourism. Each principle is now styles are associated with different levels of
described in detail, beginning with the infrastructure support, group size and type,
nature-based dimension. cultural interaction factor, willingness to
pay and length of visit. Locations vary in
Nature Based terms of accessibility (remoteness), devel-
opment contribution, ownership and
The most obvious characteristic of eco- fragility (Valentine, 1992a, b).
tourism is that it is nature based. As noted
above, it is this dimension that is empha- Questions arise as to what does and
does not constitute a nature-based experi-
ence. Does a drive through a forested area

Education and Small groups/
interpretation personalized

A A = Classical
B ecotourism
B = Popular
Nature based ecotourism
Fig. 1.1. Dimensions of ecotourism.
Sustainably
managed

8 R.K. Blamey

qualify as nature based, or must the driver Some authors have also questioned
actually pull over and go for a wander (the whether environments with significant evi-
activity/experience component)? If he or dence of human disturbance might qualify
she does wander, how long must this wan- as ecotourism, particularly if they demon-
der be for the individual to be considered a strate adherence to other ecotourism prin-
nature-based tourist (the duration com- ciples. Whelan (1991), for example, asks
ponent)? A further question relates to the whether farmstays might in some cases
natural environment itself (the attraction/ qualify as ecotourism, and Chirgwin and
experience component). Does walking Hughes (1997, p. 97) suggest that modified
through regenerated forest areas, or swim- areas such as wetlands associated with
ming in slightly polluted or littered lakes human-made watercourses can serve as an
or streams, or for that matter any public ‘ecotourist venue if they are well presented
beach, constitute a nature-based experi- and managed, aesthetically pleasing and
ence? (Blamey, 1997). provide the opportunity to observe
wildlife’. While such areas are not natural,
The issue of proximity is one that com- they may qualify as ‘nature based’, depend-
monly arises when considering whether a ing on how one interprets terms such as
tourism experience involving nature can be ‘relatively undisturbed’. Tourism in urban
considered nature based. Does a sightsee- environments can be sustainably managed
ing flight to Antarctica qualify as a nature- (Hinch, 1996), but the ‘natural’ environ-
based experience? What about the tourist ments within them are often highly influ-
who travels to Nepal, arguably an ‘eco- enced by humans and do not generally
tourism destination’, but gets no closer to satisfy the ecotourism criterion of being
the Himalayas than sitting in a restaurant nature based. Acott et al. (1998) argue that
with great views of the Annapurna range. it is possible for individuals to be eco-
Alternatively, the tourist might take a short tourists in ‘non-ecotourist locations’.
stroll up a nearby hill to get better views.
Even the dedicated trekker may get little Operational definitions of nature-based
closer to true wilderness than the lower tourism, and hence also ecotourism will
altitude areas dominated by subsistence clearly require the line to be drawn some-
farming. In all these cases, a guide can where. Subjective decisions cannot be
readily be hired to provide interpretation. avoided. Ultimately, any definition of these
concepts will have an arbitrary component
Requiring ecotourism to take place in (Blamey, 1997). Nature-based tourism, and
protected areas (Kutay, 1989) does not hence ecotourism, are indeed fuzzy con-
resolve the question of what qualifies as cepts.
nature based. While ecotourism often
occurs within ‘protected areas’ such as the Environmentally and Culturally
Annapurna Sanctuary, these areas may Educative
contain environments that have been quite
disturbed by human activity (possibly lead- A feature of ecotourism experiences is edu-
ing to the protected area status). Further- cation and interpretation about the natural
more, relatively undisturbed areas are also environment and any associated ‘cultural
commonly found outside protected areas manifestations’. In contrast to learning,
(Kusler, 1992). Indeed, it can be argued that which is ‘a natural process, occurring
ecotourism should occur outside protected throughout life and mostly incidental’,
areas since, by definition, protected areas education involves ‘a conscious, planned,
are worthy of protection from develop- sequential and systematic process, based
ment, and tourism represents a form of on defined learning objectives and using
development. Unprotected areas are also specific learning procedures’ (Kalinowski
most suited to another claimed benefit of and Weiler, 1992). Interpretation is ‘an edu-
ecotourism activity: promoting conserva- cational activity which aims to reveal
tion of non-protected areas (Bottrill and
Pearce, 1995).

Principles of Ecotourism 9

meanings and relationships through the on active learning and formalized educa-
use of original objects, by first hand experi- tion. As Urry (1990, p.1) states, ‘When we
ence, and by illustrative media, rather than “go away” we look at the environment with
simply to communicate factual informa- interest and curiosity. It speaks to us in
tion’ (Tilden, 1977 cited in Moscardo, ways we appreciate, or at least we antici-
1998). Although virtually all nature-based pate that it will do so. In other words, we
tourism involves some degree of learning, gaze at what we encounter’. Most gazing
it is education and interpretation that involves learning. It is difficult to view an
serves as a key element and defining char- animal for the first time without learning
acteristic of ecotourism experiences. For something. This experiential form of learn-
the purposes of this chapter, the term edu- ing is distinct from formal education
cation includes interpretation. regarding the biology, zoology or ecology of
areas. Many tourists work hard for most of
Two main purposes of environmental the year and primarily seek spiritual
education can be distinguished in the eco- renewal and rejuvenation of the mind as a
tourism context. The first involves satisfy- first priority for their holidays (Honey,
ing tourist demand for information 1999). Selectively attending to and process-
regarding natural and cultural attractions, ing the words of a tour guide is one thing,
thereby providing a satisfying recreational while studying information packs in detail
experience. The second involves changing before embarking on a tour may be quite
in a pro-environmental way, the knowl- another.
edge, attitudes and/or behaviour of
tourists, with a view to minimizing nega- To the extent that ‘ecotourists’ are moti-
tive impacts and producing a more envi- vated by an interest in learning about
ronmentally and culturally aware citizenry. nature, ecotourism can be considered a
The two purposes will often be related, for form of special interest tourism, or tourism
example, when information provided about in which ‘the traveller’s motivation and
the sensitive nature of the ecology serves decision making are primarily determined
both purposes. Education can, however, be by a particular special interest’ (Hall and
environmentally informative without being Weiler, 1992, p. 5). Adventure tourism is
environmentally supportive (Blamey, 1995). another case of special interest tourism.
The first type of education does more to
The first function of environmental edu- distinguish ecotourism from nature-based
cation in ecotourism coincides with what adventure tourism than it does to distin-
will often be the primary motivation for guish ecotourism from other nature-based
undertaking an ecotourism experience: sightseeing tours.
learning about the plants, animals, land-
scapes and so on that are unique to an area. The second function of environmental
Interpretation may be static, as with self- education can be achieved in a variety of
guided walks involving information signs, ways, some more overt than others. For
displays and the like, or personalized, example, tourists can be educated about
where guides provide information (Burgess, how best to minimize their impacts while
1993). To varying degrees, individuals can visiting a site, and presented with a code of
tailor the educative experience to meet ethics for tourist conduct. This recognizes
their own interests, for example by asking that pursuit of the first educative function
questions, moving closer, smelling, having often impacts on local cultures and flora
eye contact with particular species and and fauna. It is often the desire for experi-
learning the mannerisms of species. ential learning that drives the tourist to
move closer to the objects of their interest,
It is important to recognize that different thereby increasing the impact. Another
tourists will have different needs for cogni- approach is to simply provide information
tion in the form of formalized education pertaining to ecological relationships and
and interpretation. A distinction can be the sensitive and possibly threatened
drawn between more passive forms of nature of such relationships and the
learning and those with a heavier emphasis

10 R.K. Blamey

species involved. The resultant knowledge Local communities and industry can
changes will sometimes translate into atti- also be the target of environmental commu-
tudinal and behavioural change, particu- nications, as the principles outlined by
larly when presented in a caring and Wight (Table 1.2) demonstrate. For exam-
emotionally involving manner. The ethic of ple, local communities can be educated
care implicit in some interpretation styles regarding the sensitive nature of natural
can readily flow over to the tourist. areas, and how best to protect these areas
Another fairly covert way of influencing and maximize tourism-related revenues
behaviour is to provide information about and benefits. Industry can also be educated
alternative sites, routes or activities with a about best environmental and/or business
view to moving visitors away from heavily practice. More generally then, the eco-
used and ecologically and/or culturally tourism industry ‘consists of a number of
sensitive sites (Moscardo, 1998). sectors which need to work together effec-
tively for the industry to flourish. Each sec-
The longer-term objective of the second tor has specific needs for formal training
function of environmental education is and access to information. Each also has its
summarized well by Ceballos-Lascuráin own communication task to deliver infor-
(1988 cited in Ziffer, 1989, p. 5): mation to other sectors’ (Social Change
Media, 1995). The sectors considered by
the person who practices ecotourism has the the strategy include consumers, travel
agents, operators and guides, natural
opportunity of immersing him or herself in resource managers, trainers, industry bod-
ies, state tourism bodies and the media. Of
nature in a way most people cannot enjoy in course, most if not all industries are depen-
dent for their success on communication
their routine, urban existences. This person within and between sectors. It is the two
environmental education functions referred
will eventually acquire a consciousness … to above that can be considered as defining
characteristics of ecotourism.
that will convert him into somebody keenly
Sustainably Managed
involved in conservation issues.
The term sustainable tourism development
Individuals who do not normally con- is a derivative of the more general concept
sider in any detail their impacts on the of sustainable development, brought to
environment may adopt a more reflective, prominence with the publication of Our
sensitive and enlightened perspective once Common Future, the report of the World
engaged in ecotourism experiences, which Commission on Environment and Develop-
may last beyond the life of that experience. ment (WCED, 1987). The WCED defined
In Norton’s terminology, the objective here sustainability as ‘meeting the needs of the
is to instil transformative values in tourists present without compromising the ability
and locals (Ross and Wall, 1999). Of of future generations to meet their own
course, the possibility exists that those needs’ (WCED, 1987, p. 8). This report
who take most notice of tourist codes of stimulated much discussion regarding defi-
behaviour and other information or mater- nitions of sustainability and sustainable
ial pertaining to the minimization of tourist development, and the principles and prac-
impacts, may well be those who least need tices held to be consistent with any one
it (Hall, 1993). definition.

In addition to being educated for the Responses to the sustainable develop-
purposes of short- or long-term pro- ment concept appear to take one of two
environmental changes in knowledge, atti- main forms (Barbier, 1989). The first is a
tudes and/or behaviour, tourists can be
educated about how to get the most out of
their experiences in other ways. This
involves providing information about the
experiences available at a site, suggested
walks and routes, the location of toilets
and other facilities, safety and warning
messages, how to cope with sea and road
sickness, and so on (Moscardo, 1998).

Principles of Ecotourism 11

Table 1.2. Ecotourism principles and guidelines.

Wight (1994) The Ecotourism Society National Ecotourism Accreditation
(Lindberg and Hawkins, 1993) Program (NEAP), Australia.
Eligibility principles

It should not degrade the Prepare travellers to minimize Focuses on personally
experiencing natural areas in ways
resource and should be their negative impacts while visiting that lead to greater understanding
and appreciation
developed in an environmentally sensitive environments and cultures

sound manner before departure

It should provide long-term Prepare travellers for each Integrates opportunities to
benefits to the resource, to the encounter with local cultures understand natural areas into
local community and industry and with native animals and plants each experience

It should provide first-hand, Minimize visitor impacts on the Represents best practice for
participatory and enlightening environment by offering literature, ecologically sustainable tourism
experiences briefings, leading by example, and
taking corrective actions

It should involve education Minimize traveller impacts on Positively contributes to the
among all parties: local cultures by offering literature, ongoing conservation of natural
communities, government, briefings, leading by example, and areas
non-government organizations, taking corrective actions
industry and tourists (before,
during and after the trip)

It should encourage all-party Use adequate leadership, and Provides constructive ongoing
recognition of the intrinsic maintain small enough groups to contributions to local communities
values of the resource ensure minimum group impact
on destinations. Avoid areas that
are under-managed and over-visited

It should involve acceptance of Ensure managers, staff and contact Is sensitive to, interprets and
the resource in its own terms, employees know and participate in involves different cultures,
and in recognition of its limits, all aspects of company policy to particularly indigenous cultures
which involves supply-oriented prevent impacts on the
management environment and local cultures

It should promote understanding Give managers, staff and contact Consistently meets client
expectations
and involve partnerships employees access to programmes

between many players, which that will upgrade their ability to

could involve government, communicate with and manage

non-governmental organizations, clients in sensitive natural and

industry, scientists and locals cultural settings

(both before and during

operations)

It should promote moral and Be a contributor to the conservation Marketing is accurate and leads to
ethical responsibilities and
behaviour towards the natural of the region being visited realistic expectations
and cultural environment by all
players Provide competitive, local
employment in all aspects of business
operations

Offer site-sensitive accommodations
that are not wasteful of local
resources or destructive to the
environment, which provide ample
opportunity for learning about the
environment and sensitive interchange
with local communities

12 R.K. Blamey

generalized, normative and energized and guidelines is that developed by
response associated with the pursuit of Tourism Concern (1991) in association
synergisms and balance among environ- with the Worldwide Fund for Nature
mental impacts, economic development, (WWF). Each of the ten sustainability prin-
participatory processes, intergenerational ciples listed in Box 1.1 is accompanied by
and intragenerational equity, sustainable a list of recommendations. Associated with
livelihoods and so on. The second, while the first general principle, for example, are
overlapping with the first, is narrower and recommendations that the tourism industry
involves the development of formal rules should: (i) prevent damage to environmen-
for sustainability. Different rules or models tal resources; (ii) act as a force for conser-
are associated with different assumptions vation; (iii) develop and implement sound
regarding what it is that is to be sustained. environmental policies in all areas of
This has become known as the constant tourism; (iv) install appropriate systems to
capital perspective and is outlined later in minimize pollution from tourism develop-
this chapter. ments; (v) develop and implement sustain-
able transport policies; (vi) adhere to the
The first type of response appears to precautionary principle; (vii) research,
have dominated discussions regarding sus- establish and abide by the carrying capac-
tainable tourism development and is ity of a destination; (viii) respect the needs
reflected in a wide range of government and rights of local people; (ix) protect and
and industry initiatives in the ecotourism support the cultural and historical heritage
context, including ecotourism strategies, of peoples worldwide; (x) carry out prac-
sustainability indicators, accreditation and tices in a responsible and ethical manner;
so on. Sustainable development provides and (xi) actively discourage the growth of
an organizing concept for the development exploitative sex tourism1.
of such initiatives (de Kadt, 1992). This
perspective tends to see the pursuit of sus- Two sustainability principles that are
tainable tourism development as involving commonly highlighted in the ecotourism
the balancing of social, economic and envi- context are that ecotourism should: (i) sup-
ronmental goals (Wight, 1993). Discussions port local economies; and (ii) support
and initiatives are also commonly focused conservation. The Australian National
around lists of sustainability principles Ecotourism Strategy, for example, ‘recog-
and guidelines. In the first edition of the nizes that “natural environment” includes
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, for ex- cultural components and that “ecologically
ample, Bramwell and Lane (1993) outline sustainable” involves an appropriate return
four basic principles of sustainable to the local community and long-term con-
development and sustainable tourism devel- servation of the resource’ (Table 1.1)
opment: (i) holistic planning and strategy- (Allcock et al., 1994, p. 3). The require-
making; (ii) preservation of essential ment that local communities and regions
ecological processes; (iii) protection of both benefit from ecotourism and participate in
human heritage and biodiversity; and (iv) decision making, or at least be no worse
development to ensure that productivity off, appears to be based on two main
can be sustained over the long term for premises. The first draws on the principles
future generations. of intragenerational equity and intergenera-
tional equity underlying the concept of
Another well known list of principles

1 Although such wish-lists have value, several authors have argued that they are typically very general in
nature and that this leaves a significant gap between policy endorsement and implementation (Berry and
Ladkin, 1997; Hunter, 1997; Garrod and Fyall, 1998). Ashcroft (cited in Wheeller, 1995) argues that
‘Reading each principle in turn I found myself increasingly asking the questions, Why? How? When? With
what? It soon became very tiresome ploughing through so many platitudinous points’. Consequently, recent
years have seen attention turning to the development of guidelines, codes of conduct, indicators of
sustainable tourism, accreditation and so on.

Principles of Ecotourism 13

Box 1.1. Principles for sustainable tourism (Tourism Concern, 1991).

Using resources sustainably
The conservation and sustainable use of resources – natural, social and cultural – is crucial and
makes long-term business sense

Reducing over-consumption and waste
Reduction of over-consumption and waste avoids the costs of restoring long-term environmental
damage and contributes to the quality of tourism

Maintaining biodiversity
Maintaining and promoting natural, social and cultural diversity is essential for long-term sustainable
tourism, and creates a resilient base for the industry

Integrating tourism into planning
Tourism development which is integrated into a national and local strategic planning framework and
which undertakes environmental impact assessments, increases the long-term viability of tourism

Supporting local economies
Tourism that supports a wide range of local economic activities and which takes environmental costs
and values into account, both protects these economies and avoids environmental damage

Involving local communities
The full involvement of local communities in the tourism sector not only benefits them and the
environment in general but also improves the quality of the tourism experience

Consulting stakeholders and the public
Consultation between the tourism industry and local communities, organizations and institutions is
essential if they are to work alongside each other and resolve potential conflicts of interest

Training staff
Staff training which integrates sustainable tourism into work practices, along with recruitment of
personnel at all levels, improves the quality of the tourism product

Marketing tourism responsibly
Marketing that provides tourists with full and responsible information increases respect for the
natural, social and cultural environments of destination areas and enhances customer satisfaction

Undertaking research
Ongoing research and monitoring by the industry using effective data collection and analysis is
essential to help solve problems and to bring benefits to destinations, the industry and consumers

sustainable development, and essentially servation, they can be used for conservation
holds that it is the socially responsible, or purposes (Ziffer, 1989). Other ways of sup-
right, thing to do. The second is instrumen- porting conservation include participating
tal in nature and involves the assumption in rehabilitation projects, participating in
that local communities are most likely to scientific monitoring and removing litter
protect or maintain a resource base in a from sites visited. The instrumental effect
form that is suitable for tourism if they referred to above is additional. It is recogni-
stand to benefit from it. In this case, they tion of the potential of ecotourism to assist
have an incentive to protect the resource. the twin goals of conservation and eco-
nomic development that has resulted in its
Support for local economies and conser- popularity as a core development strategy in
vation can take a variety of forms. Potential numerous less developed countries (Honey,
economic benefits include foreign exchange 1999).
earnings, employment, infrastructure devel-
opment, long-term economic stability and The extent to which a region can supply
economic diversification (Lindberg, 1991; locally made products for consumption by
Wight, 1994). To the extent that the rev- the tourism industry depends on the extent
enues obtained through entrance fees, dona- of development and the diversity of
tions and ancillary goods and services economic development (Ziffer, 1989). By
(accommodation, souvenirs, etc.) are suffi- integrating ecotourism development into
cient in magnitude and earmarked for con- broader regional development strategies,

14 R.K. Blamey

leakages can be minimized and the eco- ties, covering such areas as language
nomic benefits from ecotourism maxi- changes, land tenure, desecration of com-
mized. The extent to which nature-based munity life, begging, prostitution and
tourists seek out locally owned accommo- crime. Finucane (1992, p. 13) expressed a
dation, tours and so on is still somewhat concern that ‘heavy tourist exposure will
unclear. It is one thing to buy a locally result in a gradual erosion of indigenous
made souvenir and quite another to seek language and culture or the creation of a
out locally made products when they have commercialized culture’. Johnston and
no clear linkages to the local area. For Edwards (1994) argue that codes of con-
example, wooden sculptures are likely to duct and other strategies associated with
be made locally (local in supply) and responsible tourism may represent struc-
tourists are likely to be looking for local tural adjustments, but not necessarily the
product (local in demand). However, bat- structural transformations required to
teries for one’s camera will often not be make tourism sustainable. They argue
locally made, and partly in expectation of (p. 475) that sustainability is a ‘distracting,
this, consumers are unlikely to search for and arguably unobtainable notion. Perhaps
local product. what is needed is a more realistic articula-
tion of what ecotourism can and cannot
As with the other principles discussed offer hosts and guests’. Cultural impacts
in this chapter, operational definitions of can often be minimized by involving local
ecotourism will require some means of dis- communities in decisions that affect them,
tinguishing between those tourism experi- particularly regarding the kind and amount
ences that do and don’t qualify. How does of tourism that should occur (Scheyvens,
one decide when a nature-based tourism 1999; Wallace, 1999). The assumption here
experience is sufficiently supporting of is that communities know what is good for
local communities and/or conservation to them, and can put aside short-term inter-
qualify as ecotourism? One approach is to ests in order to achieve the best long-term
assess these principles in terms of absolute outcomes. A related tension exists between
levels of support. For example, ecotours revenue raising and keeping the number of
might be required to make contributions to tourists below social and environmental
conservation organizations to the amount carrying capacities (Honey, 1999) (see also
of 5% of the tour price. Alternatively, these Chapter 25 in this volume).
benefits can be assessed in relation to the
costs, with a requirement of no net loss in Twining-Ward (1999) argues that new
welfare. While cost–benefit analysis (CBA) types of development based on ‘sound
offers a means of conducting such an principles’ may be a case of treating the
analysis, it is both time consuming and symptoms rather than the cause and that
costly, and of questionable use when deal- care is required to ensure that ecotourism
ing with matters of equity. How does one does not divert attention from issues of
decide if benefits to local communities in scale and intensity of tourism develop-
the form of employment and income justify ment. To the extent that ecotourism
irreversible losses in cultural identity and involves a growing means by which ‘devel-
sense of purpose? Compensating locals opment’ encroaches on to pristine natural
with tourist income may simply add fuel to areas, it may be operating at the margins of
their decline in identity2. serious attempts to move towards sustain-
able tourism. As an ecotourism destination
Several authors have considered the cul- becomes more popular, it begins to lose its
tural impacts of tourism. Pearce (1992), for appeal, thereby prompting operators to
example, refers to a number of studies that move into new, pristine areas, with the
have looked at impacts on host communi-

2 To some extent, the cultural values at stake may have existence value among other members of society,
which a comprehensive CBA might attempt to incorporate.

Principles of Ecotourism 15

cycle repeating itself indefinitely if not assumptions regarding what it is that is to
controlled. Burton (1998) found that it is be sustained. Sustainable development is
often the genuine ecotourism operators that interpreted to imply a requirement that
seek to initiate the geographic spread of human welfare does not decline with time.
tourism by seeking new unspoiled environ- According to the constant capital rule, this
ments. Lawrence et al. (1997) argue that can be achieved by leaving the next genera-
the legitimacy of ecotourism is threatened tion a stock of capital assets no less than
by the tension between sustainability prin- the current stock. Intergenerational equity
ciples and the basic fact that growth in eco- is achieved by acknowledging the right of
tourism involves more and more tourists future generations to ‘expect an inheritance
moving into pristine areas. Even the most sufficient to allow them the capacity to
benign forms of ecotourism will still have generate for themselves a level of welfare
some negative impact on the environment. no less than that enjoyed by the current
Wheeller (1995) has questioned whether generation’ (Turner et al., 1992, p. 2).
there can ever be a symbiotic relationship Capital can take several forms, including
between tourism and the environment, man-made, human, natural, moral and cul-
arguing that the commitment of tour opera- tural capital. Discussions most commonly
tors, tourists and host communities to prin- focus on man-made and natural capital,
ciples of sustainability will tend to be with the latter being divided into cate-
conditional on self-interest: ‘we rarely sac- gories such as non-renewable, renewable,
rifice so much as to cause any adverse semi-renewable and recyclable.. The pre-
effect on ourselves. The utility derived (by servation of cultural capital involves the
us) usually outweighs the cost of that sacri- maintenance of sustainable livelihoods and
fice. So too … with expressed support hence a diversity of knowledge and per-
for sustainable tourism’ (Wheeller, 1995, spectives on how to adapt to one’s environ-
p. 128). ment. Cultural diversity is hence related to
biological diversity, and both have clear
While such concerns are generally interrelations with moral capital.
regarded as important, they have taken lit-
tle of the gloss off the growing ecotourism A key issue that arises when implement-
movement. One way that the continued ing the constant capital rule is the extent to
pursuit of ecotourism has been justified, in which the different types of capital can or
light of such concerns, is to argue that eco- should be substituted for one another, or in
tourism can serve as a model for other other words, what it is that is to be sus-
forms of tourism, thereby facilitating the tained. Several different schools of thought
greening of tourism as a whole. The ulti- have emerged on this issue and these are
mate goal of the ecotourism ‘movement’ is summarized in Box 1.2. Stronger forms of
thus to infuse the entire travel industry sustainable development are associated
with sustainability principles (Honey, with less optimistic views regarding the
1999). Clearly, there are substantial benefits extent to which human-made capital can
to be gained by integrating environmental be substituted for natural capital in the
technologies and practices into mainstream long term. These two forms of capital are
tourism development, rather than restrict- instead held to be complementary in the
ing their application to a small niche market. majority of cases. A precautionary and
proactive environmental management
The constant capital perspective approach is advocated, which involves tak-
ing a risk-averse perspective when consid-
As mentioned earlier, the constant capital ering impacts that are uncertain and
perspective of sustainable development potentially irreversible. Strong notions of
focuses on the development of formal rules sustainable development are also associ-
for sustainability, with different rules or ated with environmental (or ecological)
models being associated with different sustainability. This involves the main-
tenance of natural capital, consisting of

16 R.K. Blamey

Box 1.2. The sustainability spectrum.

Very weak sustainability
Sustainability requires the total capital stock, consisting of the aggregate of natural, man-made, human,
moral and cultural stocks, to remain constant over time. Any type of capital can hence be reduced as
long as it is compensated for by the provision of other capital assets deemed to be of equal value to
humans. Different types of capital are hence assumed to be perfectly substitutable. Renewable capital
can hence be substituted for non-renewable capital and man-made capital can be substituted for any
type of natural capital. This position is consistent with exploitation and an emphasis on economic
growth. Economic growth increases consumer choice and satisfaction, and provides the human capital
in the form of research and development expertise required to devise technical fixes and generally
maintain human welfare at a constant level (Turner, 1991).

Weak sustainability
Very weak sustainability is modified here in response to the problematic nature of the assumption of
perfect substitutability. Some types of natural capital are assumed to be complements rather than
substitutes, and some key species and processes are not considered to be substitutable at all (Common
and Perrings, 1992). The latter are referred to as critical natural capital. Ecological constraints are
imposed on the use of natural assets such that stocks remain within the bounds thought to coincide with
ecosystem stability and resilience (Turner et al., 1992). A broad, systemic management perspective,
drawing on the precautionary principle and safe minimum standards is likely to be involved. A set of
environmental indicators may be derived to provide an indication of the state of ecosystems.

Strong sustainability
This rule requires that natural capital remains constant in aggregation, but one form of natural capital
can be substituted for another, subject to certain ecological constraints. Physical indicators are again
used to provide the monitoring necessary to inform managers. This approach assigns primary
importance of maintaining ecosystem structure and function and responds to and takes a precautionary
approach to uncertainties and irreversibilities. Unlike the safe minimum standard, constant natural
capital must be maintained even when the opportunity costs (benefits forgone) are considered to be
very high.

Very strong sustainability
This rule coincides with a steady-state economy, characterized by zero economic growth and zero
population growth, and is motivated in part by a consideration of thermodynamic limits. This is likely to
require constant stocks of individual natural assets in addition to a constant aggregate stock of natural
capital. This position coincides with a more biocentric view in which the intrinsic rights of nature are
acknowledged and given significant weight in decision making.

both source and sink functions, over a of sustainable tourism that now exist most
specified time and space. Box 1.3 offers a commonly reflect a weak sustainability
more rigorous definition of this natural sci- position (Box 1.2), although little attention
ence concept (Goodland, 1999). is typically given to such distinctions. One
reason for the lack of consensus on a defin-
The constant capital perspective is ition is that sustainability ‘has been used
attracting increasing attention in the sus- by both industry and the conservation
tainable tourism literature (see, for ex- movement to legitimize and justify their
ample, Hunter, 1997; Garrod and Fyall, existing activities and policies’ (McKercher,
1998). Hunter (1997) argues that there is a 1993, p. 131).
need to conceptually reconnect sustainable
tourism to the sustainable development lit- Hunter (1997) argues that different sus-
erature in general, and the constant capital tainable development paths, corresponding
literature in particular. According to to different positions in Box 1.2 and differ-
Hunter (1997), the plethora of definitions ent manifestations of these positions, are

Principles of Ecotourism 17

Box 1.3. A definition of environmental sustainability (adapted from Goodland, 1999, p. 716).

Environmental sustainability involves the maintenance of natural capital according to the following
rules:

1. Output rule:
Waste emissions from a project or action should be kept within the assimilative capacity of the local
environment without unacceptable degradation of its future waste absorptive capacity or other
important services.

2. Input rule:
(a) Renewables: Harvest rates of renewable resource inputs must be kept within regenerative capacities

of the natural system that generates them.
(b) Non-renewables: Depletion rates of non-renewable resource inputs should be set below the rate at

which renewable substitutes are developed by human invention and investment. An easily
calculable portion of the proceeds from liquidating non-renewables should be allocated to the
attainment of sustainable substitutes.

suited to different circumstances. For sustainability (Box 1.3), if the loss of
example, a weak sustainability perspective species due to non-return and non-recov-
with a strong emphasis on economic ery following release is sufficiently low to
growth will most easily be justified when keep the total loss, from all sources, below
there is a strong link between poverty and the maximum sustainable (or economic)
environmental degradation and when yield, billfish angling can be considered
tourism activity would result in a decline environmentally sustainable. Applying the
in more harmful activities such as uncon- concept of environmental sustainability to
trolled logging. Stronger notions of sustain- tourism in natural areas thus involves
able tourism, on the other hand, may be adapting the input and output conditions
better suited to circumstances that are less specified in Box 1.3 to the tourism context
characterized by poverty relationships and in question and developing a holistic and
where the alternative to tourism activity is multiple-use management plan to ensure
complete protection. Hunter (1997) argues that the conditions are met.
that sustainable tourism should be concep-
tualized as an adaptive paradigm. The first perspective on sustainable
development tends to address ecological
The constant capital perspective is only sustainability via the concepts of carrying
workable if the relevant stocks and flows capacity, indicators of sustainable develop-
can be measured (Garrod and Fyall, 1998). ment and so on. Along these lines, the
Garrod and Fyall (1998) consider some of Australian National Ecotourism Strategy
the issues arising. An interesting question states that ‘Planning for ecotourism is
is whether activities traditionally viewed based on resource constraints. Ecotourism
as consumptive in orientation can qualify opportunities will be lost if the resilience
as ecotourism experiences. Holland et al. of an area and the ability of its community
(1998) argue that billfish angling can often to absorb impact are exceeded, or if its bio-
satisfy ecotourism criteria since it often diversity and physical appearance are
involves, inter alia, a unique natural altered significantly’ (Allcock et al., 1994,
resource, an emphasis on catch and p. 17). The two perspectives on sustainable
release, experiential learning and positive tourism development clearly have much in
contributions to resource conservation and common, and both advocate a holistic
local economies. In terms of strong notions approach to environmental management in
of sustainable development (Box 1.2) and order to avoid the tyranny of incrementalism.
the associated concept of environmental

18 R.K. Blamey

An Alternative to Mass Tourism rience. However, it is debatable whether
these should be viewed as necessary char-
Ecotourism is more than just sightseeing. It acteristics of ecotourism, since this would
is an experience. For many ecotourists and rule out a large number of tours that satisfy
others involved in the ecotourism industry, the other criteria, some of which may excel
this experience differs fundamentally to the on the sustainability and education dimen-
mass tourism experience. As noted earlier, sions. Hence, this dimension is perhaps
disillusionment with mass tourism may best thought of as a secondary characteris-
have triggered the emergence of ecotourism. tic or principle that distinguishes classical
To the extent that ecotourism, as a form of ecotourism from popular ecotourism.
alternative tourism, offers a less problemati-
cal form of tourism than mass tourism, it is As with the other dimensions of eco-
potentially as diverse as the problems asso- tourism, this dimension is associated with
ciated with mass tourism. Butler (1992, certain tensions. In particular, a tension
p. 33) observes that tourism can have detri- exists between the alternative tourist’s desire
mental impacts with regard to for authentic, low key and intimate experi-
ences and the need to be sensitive to com-
price rises (labor goods, taxes, land); changes munity values. As Butler (1989, cited in
in local attitudes and behavior; pressure on Butler, 1990, p. 44) observed, it can be argued
people (crowding, disturbance, alienation);
loss of resources, access, rights, privacy; that tourism which places tourists in local
denigration or prostitution of local culture; homes, even when they are culturally
reduction of aesthetics; pollution in various sympathetic, and not desiring a change in
forms; lack of control over the destination’s local behavior, is much more likely to result
future; and specific problems such as in changes in local behavior in the long run
vandalism, litter, traffic, and low-paid than is a larger number of tourists in more
seasonal employment. conventional tourist ghettos, where contact
with locals is limited.
Many of these problems are addressed by
the sustainability principles described in More generally, small-scale tourism
the previous section. However, ecotourism operations may or may not be more sus-
often offers an alternative to mass tourism tainable than larger-scale operations
in ways that do not necessarily fall within (Thomlinson and Getz, 1996). Destinations
the principles described thus far in this that are targeted towards the exclusive,
chapter. And some of these attributes quality rather than quantity, type of eco-
appear to be important from a demand per- tourism experience also run the risk of
spective. In particular, tourists are increas- being seen as elitist (Whelan, 1991).
ingly seeking authenticity, immersion,
self-discovery and quality rather than Differing Perspectives
quantity (Hall and Weiler, 1992). They are
seeking novel, adventuresome and person- As with many other types of tourism, a
alized experiences in unique, remote good deal of confusion has surrounded the
and/or primitive locations (Wight, 1996b). concept of ecotourism. To a large extent,
The less popularized ecotourism develop- this is a result of different stakeholders
ments thus tend to be small scale and low adopting different perspectives (Blamey,
key and involve a high degree of participa- 1997). In particular, different perspectives
tion by the local population. Crowded have been adopted by: (i) scientific, conser-
areas are to be avoided. vation and non-governmental organizations;
(ii) multilateral aid organizations; (iii)
The fact that a significant proportion of developing countries; and (iv) the travel
the ecotourism market offers small-scale industry and travelling public (Honey,
and personalized experiences suggests that 1999). Honey (1999, p. 11) observes that
such characteristics often represent an ‘almost simultaneously but for different
important element of the ecotourism expe-

Principles of Ecotourism 19

reasons, the principles and practices of based tourism market. Blamey (1997,
ecotourism began taking shape within p. 117) observes that if
these four areas, and by the early 1990’s,
the concept had coalesced into the hottest tourists are not currently demanding
new genre of environmentally and socially
responsible travel’. environmentally responsible tourism

One of the key distinctions is between practices, there is no reason to focus
demand and supply-based perspectives on
the ecotourism product. Those adopting discussions and initiatives regarding
the former tend to begin with an observa-
tion that for several decades now, a minor- environmental responsibility around
ity of tourists have sought to get away from
the masses and seek experiences of a small ecotourism in preference to other forms of
scale, educative, personalized and unique
nature. Ecotourism is a response to this tourism, unless ecotourism offers the
demand. The ecotourism industry can only
be profitable in the long term, however, if greatest potential for improvement, or the
measures are taken to protect the natural-
resource base upon which ecotourism best display of green tourism practices.
depends. To this end, a holistic approach
to environmental and tourism management Preece et al. (1995) argue that a ‘false
is required, consisting primarily of supply- distinction’ is being made between tourism
side initiatives such as restrictions of and ecotourism. Nature-based tourism and
access, zoning systems, pricing mecha- ecotourism ‘should be considered as
nisms and monitoring. While ecotourism woven into the broad fabric of tourism, and
must be conducted in a sustainable way, should not be limited by artificially trying
the product is defined primarily from a to categorise the phenomenon’ (p. 10).
demand perspective. While some tourists They go on to state that ‘the narrow focus
interested in ecotours actively seek out the on the term “ecotourism” has blinkered the
environmentally friendly ones, this is very view of planners and policy makers’ (p. 13).
much the minority.
Although the above perspectives differ
The second perspective tends to view in how they define the ecotourism product,
the above indications of changing con- they both hold that a sustainable eco-
sumer demand as an opportunity to tourism industry requires supply-side man-
develop a new class of nature-based agement (Wight, 1993). The combination of
tourism product. The product is ‘environ- supply-side initiatives that best serves the
mentally and culturally friendly nature- industry is itself subject to differing per-
based experiences with an educative spectives. Questions about how best to
emphasis’. It is environmentally friendly in manage the environmental impacts of an
much the same way that toilet paper made industry, whether it be ecotourism or the
from recycled and unbleached paper is production of automobiles, are typically
seen as environmentally friendly. To the distinct from the issue of how one defines
extent that consumers do not already the industry producing those impacts.
demand the environmentally friendly
product attribute, the demand for it needs The supply-side management challenge
to be created via advertising and other for environmental and tourism manage-
forms of promotion. ment is to ensure ‘that ecotourism doesn’t
occur willy-nilly wherever there is a
While the above demand perspective demand for it, but that governments, tour
might be viewed as insufficiently proactive operators, conservation groups, and local
and less socially responsible, the supply- communities, among others, plan together
based perspective runs the risk of unneces- where ecotourism sites should be estab-
sarily isolating a portion of the nature- lished and how they should be managed’
(Whelan, 1991, p. 20). Local communities
may need to be involved in management
decisions. As previously observed, supply-
side initiatives pertaining to restrictions of
access, use of permits and pricing mecha-
nisms can be accused of being elitist or
inequitable (Allcock et al., 1994).

Ultimately, the complete integration of

20 R.K. Blamey

environmental and developmental objec- The
tives requires a convergence among differ- sustainable
ing perspectives (Barbier, 1989). In the ecotourism
tourism context, this will require conver-
gence in demand and supply perspectives ideal
and the different perspectives within each
(particularly the latter) (Fig. 1.2). Wheeller Ecotourism Ecotourism
(1995, p. 64) argues that people will inter- in in
pret notions of ecotourism and sustainable
tourism as suits them, and that ‘no interna- demand supply
tional decree will disperse the convenient
clods of confusion’ that have enveloped the Fig. 1.2. One potential merging of perspectives.
terms. Ecotourism is, however, a fairly new
concept in many countries, and the poten-
tial thus exists for the divergent current
perspectives to merge into a coherent
whole in the medium to long term (Blamey,
1995). Although ecotourism ‘is indeed rare,
often misdefined, and usually imperfect, it
is still in its infancy, not on its deathbed’
(Honey, 1999, p. 25).

References

Acott, T.G., La Trobe, H.L. and Howard, S.H. (1998) An evaluation of deep ecotourism and shallow
ecotourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 6, 238–253.

Allcock, A., Jones, B., Lane, S. and Grant, J. (1994) National Ecotourism Strategy. Commonwealth
Department of Tourism, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.

Barbier, E. (1989) Economics, Natural-Resource Scarcity and Development, Conventional and
Alternative Views. Earthscan, London.

Berry, S. and Ladkin, A. (1997) Sustainable tourism: a regional perspective. Tourism Management 18,
433–440.

Blamey, R.K. (1995) The Nature of Ecotourism, Occasional Paper No 21. Bureau of Tourism Research,
Canberra.

Blamey, R.K. (1997) Ecotourism: the search for an operational definition. Journal of Sustainable
Tourism 5, 109–130.

Boo, E. (1990) Ecotourism: the Potentials and Pitfalls, Vols 1 and 2. WorldWide Fund for Nature,
Washington, DC.

Bottrill, C.G. and Pearce, D.G. (1995) Ecotourism: towards a key elements approach to operationalis-
ing the concept. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 3, 45–54.

Bramwell, B. and Lane, B. (1993) Sustainable tourism: an evolving global approach. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism 1, 1–5.

Buckley, R. (1994) A framework for ecotourism. Annals of Tourism Research 21, 661–669.
Burgess, A.S. (1993) The environmental responsibilities of commercial ecotourism in Tasmania.

Thesis, University of Tasmania, Hobart.
Burton, R. (1998) Maintaining the quality of ecotourism: ecotour operators’ responses to tourism

growth. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 6, 117–142.
Butler, R.W. (1990) Alternative tourism: pious hope or Trojan horse? Journal of Travel Research 28

(Winter), 40–45.
Butler, R.W. (1992) Alternative tourism: the thin edge of the wedge. In: Smith, V.L. and Eadington,

W.R. (eds) Tourism Alternatives: Potentials and Problems in the Development of Tourism.
University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 31–46.
Ceballos-Lascuráin, H. (1987) The future of ecotourism. Mexico Journal January, 13–14.

Principles of Ecotourism 21

Chirgwin, S. and Hughes, K. (1997) Ecotourism: the participants’ perceptions. Journal of Tourism
Studies 8, 2–8.

Common, M.S. and Perrings, C. (1992) Towards an ecological economics of sustainability. Ecological
Economics 6, 7–34.

Ecotourism Association of Australia (1992) Newsletter 1, 2.
The Ecotourism Society (1991a) The Ecotourism Society Newsletter Number 1, Spring.
The Ecotourism Society (1991b) Ecotourism Guidelines for Nature-Based Tour Operators. The

Ecotourism Society, North Bennington, Vermont.
Fennell, D.A. (1998) Ecotourism in Canada. Annals of Tourism Research 25, 231–235.
Finucane, S.J. (1992) A report on the environmental impacts of ecotourism in Western Australia.

Postgraduate report, Murdoch University, Western Australia.
Garrod, B. and Fyall, A. (1998) Beyond the rhetoric of sustainable tourism? Tourism Management 19,

199–212.
Goodland, R. (1999) The biophysical basis of environmental sustainability. In: Van den Bergh, J. (ed.)

Handbook of Environmental Economics. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp. 709–721.
Hall, C.M. (1993) Submission on strategic direction for ‘ecotourism’. Submission to National

Ecotourism Strategy, Commonwealth Department of Tourism, Canberra.
Hall, C.M. and Weiler, B. (1992) Introduction: What’s special about special interest tourism? In:

Weiler, B. and Hall, C.M. (eds) Special Interest Tourism. Belhaven Press, London, pp. 1–14.
Hetzer, W. (1965) Environment, tourism, culture. Links July, 1–3.
Hinch, T.D. (1996) Urban tourism: perspectives on sustainability. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 4,

95–110.
Holland, S.M., Ditton, R.B. and Graefe, A.R. (1998) An ecotourism perspective on billfish fisheries.

Journal of Sustainable Tourism 6, 97–115.
Honey, M. (1999) Ecotourism and Sustainable Development: Who Owns Paradise? Island Press,

Washington, DC.
Hunter, C. (1997) Sustainable tourism as an adaptive paradigm. Annals of Tourism Research 21,

850–867.
Johnston, B.R. and Edwards, T. (1994) The commodification of mountaineering. Annals of Tourism

Research 21, 459–478.
de Kadt, E. (1992) Making the alternative sustainable: lessons from development for tourism. In:

Smith, V.L. and Eadington, W.R. (eds) Tourism Alternatives: Potentials and Problems in the
Development of Tourism. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 47–75.
Kalinowski, K.M. and Weiler, B. (1992) Educational travel. In: Weiler, B. and Hall, C.M. (eds) Special
Interest Tourism. Belhaven Press, London, pp. 15–26.
Kusler, J. (1992) Ecotourism and resource conservation: introduction to issues. Paper presented at the
World Congress on Adventure Travel and Ecotourism, August.
Kutay, K. (1989) The new ethic in environmental travel. In: The Environmental Journal, cited in
Ziffer, K.A. (1989) Ecotourism: the Uneasy Alliance, Working Paper #1. Conservation
International, Washington, DC.
Lawrence, T.B., Wickins, D. and Phillips, N. (1997) Managing legitimacy in ecotourism. Tourism
Management 18, 307–316.
Lindberg, K. (1991) Policies for Maximizing Nature Tourism’s Ecological and Economic Benefits.
International Conservation Financing Project Working Paper, World Resources Institute,
Washington, DC.
Lindberg, K. and Hawkins, D.E. (eds) (1993) Ecotourism: a Guide for Planners and Managers. The
Ecotourism Society, Vermont, USA.
McKercher, B. (1993) Some fundamental truths about tourism: understanding tourism’s social and
environmental impacts. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 1, 6–16.
Miller, K. (1978) Planning National Parks for Ecodevelopment: Methods and Cases from Latin
America. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Moscardo, G. (1998) Interpretation and sustainable tourism: functions, examples and principles.
Journal of Tourism Studies 9, 2–12.
Pearce, D.G. (1992) Alternative tourism: concepts, classifications and questions. In: Smith, V.L. and
Eadington, W.R. (eds) Tourism Alternatives: Potentials and Problems in the Development of
Tourism. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 15–30.

22 R.K. Blamey

Preece, N., Van Oosterzee, P. and James, D. (1995) Two Way Track – Biodiversity Conservation and
Ecotourism: an Investigation of Linkages, Mutual Benefits and Future Opportunities.
Biodiversity Series, Paper No. 5. Department of the Environment, Sport and the Territories,
Canberra.

Ross, S. and Wall, G. (1999) Ecotourism: towards congruence between theory and practice. Tourism
Management 20, 123–132.

Scheyvens, R. (1999) Ecotourism and the empowerment of local communities. Tourism Management
20, 245–249.

Social Change Media (1995) A National Ecotourism Education Strategy. Commonwealth Department
of Tourism, Canberra.

Thomlinson, E. and Getz, D. (1996) The question of scale in ecotourism: case study of two small eco-
tour operators in the Mundo Maya region of Central America. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 4,
183–200.

Tickell, C. (1994) Foreword. In: Cater, E. and Lowman, G. (eds) Ecotourism: a Sustainable Option?
John Wiley & Sons, Brisbane, pp. ix–x.

Tourism Concern (1991) Beyond the Green Horizon. Tourism Concern and WWF, Roehampton
Institute, London.

Turner, R.K. (1991) Environment, economics and ethics. In: Pearce, D., Barbier, E., Markandya, A.,
Barrett, S., Turner, R.K. and Swanson, T. (eds) Blueprint 2: Greening the World Economy.
Earthscan, London, pp. 208–224.

Turner, R.K., Doktor, P. and Adger, N. (1992) Sea level rise and coastal wetlands in the UK: mitigation
strategies for sustainable management. Paper presented to the conference of the International
Society for Ecological Economics, Stockholm, 6–8 August.

Twining-Ward, L. (1999) Towards sustainable tourism development: observations from a distance.
Tourism Management 20, 187–188.

Urry, J. (1990) The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies. Sage Publications,
London.

Valentine, P.S. (1992a) Review. Nature-based tourism. In: Weiler, B. and Hall, C.M. (eds) Special
Interest Tourism. Belhaven Press, London, pp. 105–128.

Valentine, P.S. (1992b) Ecotourism and nature conservation: a definition with some recent develop-
ments in Micronesia. In: Weiler, B. (ed.) Ecotourism: Incorporating the Global Classroom.
Bureau of Tourism Research, Canberra, pp. 4–9.

Wallace, G.N. (1999) Toward a principled evaluation of ecotourism ventures. Working paper located
at http://www.ecotourism.org/textfiles/wallacea.txt

Wheeller, B. (1995) Egotourism, sustainable tourism and the environment – a symbiotic, symbolic or
shambolic relationship? In: Seaton, A.V. (ed.) Tourism: the State of the Art. John Wiley and
Sons, Brisbane, pp. 647–654.

Whelan, T. (1991) Ecotourism and its role in sustainable development. In: Whelan, T. (ed.) Nature
Tourism: Managing for the Environment. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp. 3–22.

Wight, P.A. (1993) Sustainable tourism: balancing economic, environmental and social goals within
an ethical framework. Journal of Tourism Studies 4, 54–66.

Wight, P.A. (1994) Environmentally responsible marketing of tourism. In: Cater, E. and Lowman, G.
(eds) Ecotourism: a Sustainable Option? John Wiley & Sons, Brisbane, pp. 39–56.

Wight, P.A. (1996a) North American ecotourists: market profile and trip characteristics. Journal of
Travel Research Spring, 2–10.

Wight, P.A. (1996b) North American ecotourism markets: motivations, preferences and destinations.
Journal of Travel Research Summer, 3–10.

World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) (1987) Our Common Future. Oxford
University Press, Oxford.

Ziffer, K.A. (1989) Ecotourism: the Uneasy Alliance, Working Paper no. 1. Conservation
International, Washington, DC.

Chapter 2

Types of Ecotourism

M.B. Orams

Centre for Tourism Research, Massey University at Albany, North Shore MSC, New Zealand

Introduction tive of the practical component that is now
so important in the further evolution of the
The rise of the term ‘ecotourism’ has been ecotourism concept.
relatively rapid. In 1980 the term did not
exist and now, 20 years on, this Semantic Debates
Encyclopedia represents the thinking of
many different authors from around the The evolution of language is an interesting
world on the topic. The term ecotourism phenomenon. It seems that a natural part of
has also become the subject of much this evolutionary process is the invention,
debate; what it is, what it should be and adoption and eventual common usage of
how it can work are all questions that con- terms that describe valuable concepts or
tinue to dominate the literature. This chap- ideas. There are many examples through-
ter continues with the debate initiated in out history. In the context of this discus-
Chapter 1, for this kind of discussion is sion, namely the management of human
healthy. Complex problems, such as manag- influences on natural ecosystems, three
ing tourists’ impacts on natural ecosystems, terms provide examples of this process.
seldom have simple answers. Because of
this complexity a concept such as eco- The terms ‘conservation’ and ‘sustain-
tourism should not be expected to provide ability’ have become popular terms for
a universal simple answer. Consequently, valuable approaches to managing natural
ecotourism is not ‘the’ answer to the prob- resources. Each evolved in a similar way.
lems caused by nature-based tourism. It is, First, the concepts themselves appear to
however, a concept that has value, and real- have existed for many centuries. Second,
izing that value is best achieved by con- the invention of the specific terms occurred
structive thinking and debate, but most of and usage of them became more wide-
all by learning from practical application of spread and diverse in their application.
the ideas contained within the ecotourism Third, debates ensued regarding defini-
concept. A consideration of the types of tions, typologies and the value of the
ecotourism activity is one way to contribute terms/concepts. For example, Fennell
to this debate, and this chapter attempts to (1999, p. 72) outlines three differing per-
do just that. In addition, this chapter also spectives that evolved in the early use of
contains two case studies that are illustra- the term conservation:

© CAB International 2001. The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism 23
(ed. D.B. Weaver)

24 M.B. Orams

The first involved the view that conservation Africa to view wildlife were popular
among explorers and adventurers from
should entail the maintenance of harmony Western Europe during the 1800s (Adler,
1989). Recreational activities such as hik-
between humankind and nature, the second ing, birdwatching, climbing, cross-country
skiing, fishing, canoeing and other boating
that conservation was related to the efficient are all based on the natural environment
and have been popular for centuries.
use of resource. The final perception was that Therefore, many of the activities that can
now be included under the label ‘eco-
conservation – preservation could ideally be tourism’ have existed long before the term
itself was invented. The successful evolu-
attained from the standpoint of religion and tion of the term ‘ecotourism’ (in the sense
that it is now widely used) is related to
spirituality. three main issues. First, it is a reaction
against the negative impacts associated
Finally, the terms became used in more for- with ‘mass tourism’ (Weaver, 1998). For
mal contexts, such as in law, in interna- example, Glasson et al. (1995, p. 27) stated:
tional agreements and within government ‘Tourism contains the seeds of its own
agencies. destruction; tourism can kill tourism,
destroying the very environmental attrac-
The semantic evolutionary process illus- tions which visitors come to a location to
trated by ‘conservation’ and ‘sustainability’ experience’. Second, it has developed in
has also occurred with regard to the con- response to the growth of tourism based on
cept of ‘ecotourism’. The idea of integrating natural environmental attractions and
tourism with conservation has probably third, as an outcome of the growing under-
been around since the early days of African standing and acceptance of the principles
safaris and the development of the national of environmental conservation and sustain-
park concept in the 19th century. In the ability (Orams, 1995) (see Chapter 1).
tourism literature, the concept was given
wider and more explicit exposure by Defining Ecotourism:
Budowski in a 1976 article entitled Lines in the Sand
‘Tourism and conservation: conflict, co-
existence or symbiosis?’. However, while It is difficult to consider the subject ‘types
Budowski’s paper made a case for the of ecotourism’ without having a clear defi-
ideals of ecotourism, as generally under- nition or understanding of what eco-
stood today, he did not explicitly use the tourism actually is. Thus, a consideration
term ‘ecotourism’ to describe his thinking. of the topic occurs within the semantic
There is no general agreement on who debate that has dominated the literature on
invented or first used the term ‘ecotourism’ ecotourism to date. As with all such
(Fennell, 1999), but it is clear that the term debates the difficulties arise when consid-
first appeared in the published material ering the ‘margins’. That is, while there
during the 1980s (for example, Romeril, may be a general acceptance of what the
1985; Ceballos-Lascuráin, 1987; Laarman basic concept includes and a correspond-
and Durst, 1987; Ziffer, 1989). Certainly, ing general acceptance of what it does not
even if the term itself was not used, the include, there is little agreement regarding
concept has been around for centuries those activities or operations that don’t
(Fennell, 1999). It seems likely that the clearly fit into either scenario. For exam-
invention of the term ‘ecotourism’ itself is ple, does a safari that includes both an edu-
related to the connotations associated with cational component and the hunting of
terms with the ‘eco’ prefix such as ‘ecology’ wildlife constitute an ‘ecotourism’ experi-
and ‘ecosystem’. Thus combining this pre-
fix with the term tourism provides a suit-
able label for the concept that authors like
Hetzer (1965), Budowski (1976) and others
have advocated.

The idea of visiting areas for the pur-
poses of observing and experiencing ele-
ments of the natural environment pre-dates
‘ecotourism’. Safaris to places such as

Types of Ecotourism 25

ence? Similarly, what of a tourism opera- ventional mass tourism as a beast; a mon-
tion that has the best conservation inten- strosity which has few redeeming qualities
tions but through ignorance and/or for the destination region, their people and
accident the natural attraction is harmed? their natural resource base’ (Fennell, 1999,
An example of this is the September 1998 p. 7). It should be remembered, however,
collisions between whale-watching vessels that there are many locations where the
and whales off Stellwagen Bank north of mass tourism ‘beast’ has been an economic
Cape Cod, Massachusetts. These collisions saviour and has, on balance, not been the
resulted in injury for a humpback whale destructive, exploitive industrial develop-
and the death of a minke whale ment that the modern tourism literature
(Associated Press, 1998). paints it. This is particularly true when one
considers the potential alternative uses of
There are now so many definitions of those resources which formed the basis of
ecotourism and so many papers discussing the development of tourism, for example,
these definitions that to review all of these as when a beach area is developed as a
again here would be repetitious and per- tourist resort as an alternative to sand min-
haps even annoying. Instead, the reader ing.
should consult useful publications such as
those by Valentine (1990), Figgis (1993), This is not to deny that ‘mass tourism’
Miller and Kaae (1993), Moore and Carter has caused problems, because it has. There
(1993), Hvenegaard (1994), Orams (1995), has, quite justifiably, been a need to iden-
Higgins (1996), Weaver (1998), Fennell tify an alternative approach to tourism
(1999) and Chapter 1 of this Encyclopedia. development that lessens the negative con-
At the risk of inducing ‘eco-nausea’, how- sequences of the mass tourism approach.
ever, it is useful to consider the range of Thus the ‘alternative tourism’ perspective
definitions offered in terms of the concep- has become a popular paradigm. This alter-
tual approaches they represent. This analy- native approach has been described as a
sis is important, for if we are to understand ‘competing paradigm’ to mass tourism
the range of ‘types of ecotourism’ it is help- (Fennell, 1999), but it can also be viewed
ful to clarify what this range includes. as a complementary approach to tourism.
That is, it is not possible to have ‘alterna-
Mass and alternative tourism tive tourism’ without something for it to be
‘alternative’ to. So, the discussion returns
Fennell (1999) considers that ecotourism to a semantic debate … perhaps it is best to
exists within the broader classification of accept that alternative tourism is a natural
tourism types which, at an initial level, can outcome of the maturing understanding of
be divided into ‘mass tourism’ and ‘alterna- tourism development and its strengths and
tive tourism’. Mass tourism is seen as the weaknesses. Fennell (1999, p. 9) states that:
more traditional form of tourism develop-
ment where short-term, free-market princi- AT is a generic term that encompasses a
ples dominate and the maximization of
income is paramount. The development of whole range of tourism strategies (e.g.
the tourism industry was originally seen as
a desirable and relatively ‘clean’ industry ‘appropriate’, ‘eco-’, ‘soft’, ‘responsible’,
for nations and regions to pursue. This was
particularly true in terms of benefits in for- ‘people to people’, ‘controlled’, ‘small scale’,
eign exchange earnings, employment and
infrastructural development such as trans- ‘cottage’, and ‘green’ tourism) all of which
port networks (Warren and Taylor, 1994).
However, in the past two decades the purport to offer a more benign alternative to
‘worm has turned’. ‘These days we are
more prone to vilify or characterise con- conventional mass tourism in certain types of

destinations.

However, Weaver (1998) quite rightly
points out that there are also many criti-
cisms of alternative tourism. It is clear that
just because alternative tourism has devel-
oped as a reaction to the negative con-
sequences of mass tourism it is not

26 M.B. Orams

necessarily less harmful or better than its Borge et al., 1991; Groom et al., 1991;
alternative. It does however, provide a use- Barnes et al., 1992; Burnie, 1994) and thus
ful means to conceptualize the relationship is widely viewed as ‘ecotourism’. However,
between differing views of tourism (Fig. many authors point out that significant
2.1). In Chapter 5 of this Encyclopedia, negative environmental impacts can result
Weaver challenges the dichotomous per- from nature-based tourism (Butler, 1990;
spective on alternative tourism and mass Wheeller, 1991; Zell, 1992; Pleumarom,
tourism in suggesting circumstances under 1993; Wheeller, 1994; Glasson et al., 1995)
which ecotourism can be considered as a and question whether nature-based tourism
form of mass tourism. is automatically ‘ecotourism’ (see also
Chapter 5).
Nature-based tourism versus ecotourism
An additional issue to consider is the
There appears to be a consensus in the lit- now commonplace inclusion of a socio-
erature on tourism that demand for oppor- cultural component within the discussion
tunities to interact with nature has been of ecotourism. For example, Wallace and
increasing rapidly (Jenner and Smith, Pierce (1996, p. 848) argue that ecotourism
1992). This general interest in nature and is travel that is based not only on nature
experiences based upon natural attractions but also on ‘the people (caretakers) who
is reflected in an increasing demand and live nearby, their needs, their culture, and
value being placed on relatively undis- their relationships to the land’. This inclu-
turbed natural environments and, in partic- sion of a human component within eco-
ular, wild animals (Gauthier, 1993). tourism is a significant extension of the
Tourism of this type has been applauded concept. However, the inclusion of the
by many as a suitable saviour for threat- needs of people does little to clarify the
ened wildlife populations (Davies, 1990; concept of ecotourism. For if humans, and
human behaviour, are considered to be part
of the ‘natural’ environment the lines in

Environmentally Environmentally
sustainable activities unsustainable activities

Mass
tourism

Alternative
tourism

Fig. 2.1. Relationships between mass and alternative tourism (after Weaver, 1998).

Types of Ecotourism 27

the sand bounding the ecotourism concept There are, unfortunately, a significant num-
are extended even further. If ecotourism is ber of relevant examples (Hanna and Wells,
interpreted too broadly, it becomes mean- 1992; Burger and Gochfield, 1993; Griffiths
ingless. For example, if the viewing of a and Van Schaik, 1993; Ingold et al., 1993;
cultural dance performance by an indige- Muir, 1993; Viskovic, 1993). As a result,
nous group is considered to be ecotourism many authors have expressed concern over
why not include other human activities, the negative impacts that are being
sport, art, music and so on? inflicted on natural ecosystems in the name
of ‘ecotourism’ (Hegerl, 1984; Mellor, 1990;
If ecotourism is to have any meaning, Ward, 1990; Laycock, 1991).
lines bounding its application must be
drawn. As discussed in Chapter 1, eco- For the purposes of this chapter, the
tourism is considered to share three basic ecotourism concept is considered broadly.
characteristics. However, it is acknowledged that even
though the philosophy of ecotourism is
1. The natural (non-human) environment ethically sound – namely that it attempts at
or a feature of it is the prime attraction for the very least to minimize its negative
the tourist. impacts – the application of that approach
2. The basis of that attraction for the is not always successful. Because of this
tourist is an inherent appreciation/educa- broad interpretation and application of the
tional interest in that natural environment ecotourism approach it is useful to con-
or natural environmental feature. Based on sider the types of ecotourism operations
this and the first criterion, ecotourism within a conceptual framework.
therefore incorporates such related activi-
ties as birdwatching, nature observation, Conceptual Frameworks for
hiking and bushwalking, nature photogra- Analysing Types of Ecotourism
phy, outdoor education, stargazing and
whale-watching. The status of diving, It is clear that there is a great variety of def-
snorkelling and scuba-diving is a matter of initions of ecotourism. Equally, there is a
some debate, while activities such as great variety of tourism operators and agen-
trekking and safaris are hybrids with cies that have adopted the label with differ-
adventure and other forms of tourism. ent interpretations of what the label
3. A management regime/effort directed at actually means. Thus, the types of eco-
the conservation/sustainable use of that tourism occur within this range of defini-
natural environment exists. tions and use of the term. While some may
argue that certain types of operations
Thus, ecotourism is seen as a subset of should not use the term ‘ecotourism’ to
nature-based tourism. One of the difficul- describe their activities, the reality is they
ties in applying such an interpretation of are using the label and they cannot be pre-
the concept is in assessing the application vented from doing so. There is no copy-
of the last criterion. Many tourism opera- right on the term, there is no patent on
tors and their clients may satisfy each of what the approach entails. As a conse-
the three criteria, however, despite the best quence any debate over who has the right
intentions for their activities to be conser- to call themselves an ecotourism operator
vation-oriented and sustainable, the result is meaningless. What can be done, how-
of their activities may still be detrimental ever, is to review the range of ecotourism
to the attraction. This is the essence of the types and to categorize them according to
problem in defining ecotourism. It is a con- the nature of their operation or the defini-
cept with worthy intentions. However, its tion of ecotourism that they subscribe to. A
results are still often no better than those number of authors have attempted to do
obtained from other forms of tourism. just that, as described below.
Consequently, ecotourism may not always
be beneficial to the natural environment.

28 M.B. Orams

Soft–hard ‘soft’ ecotourist has casual interest in the
natural attraction but wishes to experience
Laarman and Durst (1987) describe ‘hard’ that attraction on a more superficial and
and ‘soft’ dimensions of ecotourism (Fig. highly mediated level. Similarly, the soft
2.2). These terms refer to the level of dedi- ecotourist is less prepared to accept dis-
cation of the ecotourist to the experience in comfort and physical hardship as part of
terms of the physical rigour/effort involved the experience, and may be content to
and the level of interest in the natural spend a considerable amount of their time
attraction. ‘Hard-core’ ecotourists have a in an interpretive centre surrounded by
deep level of interest and often expertise in other tourists. Typically, hard ecotourists
the subject matter; for example, they may are engaged in specialized ecotourism
have a life-long passion for birdwatching or travel, while soft ecotourists engage in eco-
other forms of nature observation. In addi- tourism as one, usually short duration,
tion, ecotourists have differing dispositions element of a multi-purpose and multi-
regarding the level of physical challenge dimensional travel experience.
and comfort they wish to experience or are
prepared to tolerate. A ‘hard’ ecotourist is Laarman and Durst’s (1987) discussion
prepared and may even desire to live basi- and subsequent work (1993) provide a use-
cally, with few comforts, and to travel in ful context when considering the types of
difficult circumstances for long periods ecotourists themselves (see Chapter 3).
within a wilderness context in order to However, at a more fundamental level
truly ‘experience’ nature. Conversely, the types of ecotourism can be considered in
terms of their relationships with nature.

Level of challenge/physical difficulty Hard Difficult Difficult
and

dedicated

Soft Easy Dedicated
and
casual

Soft Hard
Degree of interest/expertise in natural attraction
Fig. 2.2. Hard and soft ecotourism (after Laarman and Durst, 1987).

Types of Ecotourism 29

Natural–unnatural Exploitive–passive–active

Miller and Kaae (1993) have described the Ecotourism types can also be classified
diverse number of definitions and applica- according to their tendency to be consis-
tions of the concept of ecotourism as part tent with their degree of impact on the nat-
of a continuum of relatedness to nature ural environment. This classification is
(Fig. 2.3). This continuum of ecotourism linked with a consideration of ethics in
paradigms is bounded by polar extremes. ecotourism. This consideration is seen by a
At one pole is the view that all tourism number of authors as an integral part of
(including ecotourism) has negative any discussion of ecotourism (Kutay, 1989;
impacts on the natural world. That is, no Wight, 1993; Duenkel and Scott, 1994;
matter what management strategies are in Karwacki and Boyd, 1995; Orams, 1995;
place, humans through their mere presence Fennell, 1999), and is pursued further in
have an unnatural impact. Therefore, eco- Chapter 41.
tourism, in this view, is impossible because
any kind of tourism will have a negative It is, in fact, difficult to view ecotourism
effect. At the other extreme, humans are in any other way; for inherent in almost all
viewed as living organisms – fauna – definitions of ecotourism is the suggestion
whose behaviour is inevitably ‘natural’. that ecotourism is attempting to ‘do the
That is, humans are part of the natural right thing’. The concepts of conservation,
world, just like all other living things and sustainability and alternative tourism dis-
therefore human behaviour is ‘natural cussed earlier have a similar ethical com-
behaviour’ and contributes to the natural ponent and are concepts closely linked
evolution of life. This view holds that with that of ecotourism. The variation
because humans are part of ‘nature’ they within the ecotourism realm surrounds
are part of the ‘natural process’ and, as a what the ‘right thing’ actually is. Without
result, they are literally unable to behave delving too deeply into deep ecology and
unnaturally. There is, therefore, no differ- environmental ethics, the oft-quoted con-
ence between ecotourism and other forms tention of Aldo Leopold (1949, p. 224) is a
of tourism in terms of their ‘naturalness’ useful fundamental guideline with regard
and thus, all ecotourism is tourism and to ecotourism. ‘A thing is right when it
vice versa. These two positions represent tends to preserve the integrity, stability and
extreme and unrealistic views. In reality, beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong
types of ecotourism can be considered as when it tends otherwise.’ Thus, ecotourism
lying somewhere between these polar operations that actively contribute to the
extremes. improvement of the natural environment
can be viewed as ‘better’ (Orams, 1995), or

Humans are part of Humans are separate
nature from nature

Current definitions of ecotourism

All tourism is Ecotourism is
ecotourism impossible

Fig. 2.3. Humans as natural and unnatural influences and ecotourism (after Miller and Kaae, 1993).

30 M.B. Orams

as more positive and responsible. Opera- among a group of around 13 islands known
tions that detract from the quality of the as the Capricorn–Bunker Group. Heron is a
natural environment can be viewed as sand cay located at the western end of a
‘worse’ or more exploitive and irresponsi- coral reef lagoon and is relatively small –
ble. Between these types of ecotourism are around 800 m long and 280 m wide at its
those types that can be viewed as more widest point. The island is an ecologically
neutral and passive, operations that simply important breeding site for a number of
seek to minimize their impacts on the nat- species of birds and sea turtles. Early
ural environment. This kind of conceptual human use of the island was based on the
approach can be represented diagrammati- harvesting of turtles, and a turtle soup fac-
cally (Fig. 2.4). It acknowledges that there tory operated at Heron from 1925 to 1929
are many different types of ecotourism but (Limpus et al., 1983). This factory became
considers that some are better than others. a tourist resort in 1932 (Great Barrier Reef
Furthermore, this typology has been used Committee, 1977) and it has been subse-
as a basis for arguing that the role of eco- quently bought and developed by the P&O
tourism operators and agencies charged company. Additional development on the
with managing ecotourism should be to island includes a research station (estab-
prompt movement from less desirable to lished in 1951) now operated by the
more desirable states along this continuum University of Queensland (Jones, 1967) and
(Orams, 1995). a park centre for Heron Island National
Park (established in 1983) (Neil, 1993).
Case Studies of Differing Types of
Ecotourism Heron Island Resort promotes itself as
an ‘environmentally friendly’ ecotourism
The following two case studies provide facility:
examples of types of ecotourism activity.
The first of these can be viewed as an eco- Whilst the island is an international resort,
tourism ‘type’ that is located toward the great care is taken to make it a ‘live and let
exploitive, negative end of the continuum, live’ situation with nature. The resort takes
the second as a ‘type’ located toward the up only one corner of the island, with the
responsible, positive end. remainder belonging to the seabirds and the
turtles … The golden rule of Heron is to
Case study 1: Heron Island, Great Barrier enjoy nature, without disturbing it. This is
Reef, Australia carried out right through to details like
garbage disposal. Resort waste that is not
Heron Island is located in the southern biodegradable such as bottles and cans, is
region of Australia’s Great Barrier Reef actually shipped back to the mainland and
properly disposed. Every precaution is taken
so as not to upset the delicate balance of
nature.

(Heron Island Resort, 1986, p. 2)

Exploitive Passive Active
– results in – minimal – contributes to
damage to the damage to the the health of host
host environment host environment
environment

More responsible and more desirable ecotourism
Fig. 2.4. The continuum of ecotourism types (after Orams, 1995).

Types of Ecotourism 31

However, despite these ‘green’ sentiments exploitive end of the continuum. This is
there is no doubt that the development and because, despite best intentions to mini-
operation of the resort at Heron Island has mize impacts, they still have occurred and
caused significant detrimental environmen- have resulted in a significant deterioration
tal impacts. It should also be noted that the of the natural environment. This pattern is
operation of the University of Queensland common among many ecotourism destina-
research station and the national park cen- tions.
tre also contributes to these impacts.
Case study 2: Tiritiri Matangi Island, Hauraki
Examples of these impacts include the Gulf, New Zealand
building of structures resulting in a reduc-
tion in the area available for nesting for Tiritiri Matangi Island is located east of
both seabirds and turtles. This is particu- New Zealand’s Whangaparaoa Peninsula,
larly significant for the green sea turtle and approximately 30 km north of Auckland.
the burrow nesting wedge-tailed shear- The island was partially cleared of native
water, both of which are thought to return forest by Maori, then almost completely
to the same site each year for nesting. The cleared by European settlers near the turn
lights from buildings are also thought to of the century for conversion to pastoral
confuse hatchlings from both these species farmland, primarily for sheep and cattle
resulting in increased mortality rates grazing (Moon, 1998). In 1971 the New
(Gibson, 1976; Hulsman, 1983; Lane, Zealand government assumed responsibil-
1991). Tourists who walk around the island ity for the island. As a result, public access
have been observed to collapse the shear- to the island was granted (prior to this
water burrows, killing the nesting bird and time, even though the island was publicly
chick (Dyer, 1992). In addition, disturbance owned an exclusive grazing lease was in
of seabirds can cause them to abandon place and the public had restricted access).
their nests and hatchlings can die if the In 1982 a working plan was developed
parent does not return after as little 15 min which adopted a strategy of replanting the
(Hulsman, 1984). island in native plants and to create an
environment where natural bush, forest
Of more direct concern with regard to and native bird species could flourish
the marine environment, is the dredging (Drey, 1982). A critical component of this
and maintenance of the boat channel strategy was the involvement of visitors to
through the reef flat to the western side of the island and the promotion of the island
the island. This channel has significantly as an easily accessible wildlife sanctuary
altered the tidal flow around the island and for tourists (domestic and international) to
the surrounding reef flat (Gourlay, 1991), visit (Hawley, 1997).
altering the benthic fauna adjacent to the
channel (Neil, 1988) and accelerating Throughout the 1980s and 1990s visi-
beach erosion on the northern and south- tors to the island have been encouraged to
ern sides of the island (Neil, 1993). Tourists participate in planting programmes, to
and their actions also have an impact on become members of a community sup-
Heron’s ecology. The common practice of porters’ programme, to raise money, and to
walking over the coral reef flat at low tide become aware of the conservation values of
at Heron can significantly reduce the the island (Moon, 1998). In the mid-1990s
health and abundance of coral (Woodland the island had become so popular that a
and Hooper, 1977). Litter is common on daily commercial ferry service began to
both the intertidal areas and the reef flat operate from nearby Gulf Harbour on the
(personal observation). Recreational fishing mainland. In addition, a number of ‘eco-
is also likely to alter the natural composi- tour’ operators began to take package tours
tion of reef fish populations. to the island. With the assistance of the
supporters’ programme and a significant
Heron Island provides an interesting
example of an ecotourism destination that
can be classified as being toward the

32 M.B. Orams

number of volunteers the gradual reintro- concern with regard to ecotourism because
duction of a number of endangered native much of this type of tourism is conducted
bird species has begun. These birds have in high-quality natural sites with few
added to the attraction of the island and a human influences. Ecotourism can, in
remarkable success rate has been achieved some situations, simply be the catalyst for
in re-establishing these birds and their more widespread tourist development
breeding on the island (Moon, 1998). ‘jump-starting’ a pristine natural environ-
ment down the path of development. This
The support of tourists to the island has risk is possibly one of the most significant
been fundamental in re-establishing the with regard to ecotourism. The reality is for
natural habitat that existed on Tiritiri many ecotourism locations and operators
before humans arrived in this part of the with the best intentions, that once the eco-
world. The continued involvement of these nomic development ‘ball starts rolling’ it is
tourists in planting programmes, in finan- extremely difficult to control the outcomes.
cial support for management on the island, It is understandable then that many are
in providing educational programmes for cynical regarding the results of ecotourism,
other visitors and in ensuring that inappro- irrespective of whether the type of eco-
priate behaviour (such as the bringing of tourism is responsible and active or not
pets) is minimized on the island, has (for example, see the writings of Wheeller,
resulted in a major improvement in the 1991, 1994). It can be argued that eco-
quality of the island’s environment over tourism, while a laudable concept in the-
the past decade (Cessford, 1995). ory has little value in practice. However,
cases such as that of Tiritiri Matangi island,
The development of ecotourism has provide hope that ecotourism can have
been of great benefit to Tiritiri Matangi positive practical outcomes.
island. Quite simply, without tourism it
would have remained an ecologically Conclusions Regarding Types of
insignificant location. Fortunately, with the Ecotourism
help of island visitors and supporters, it is
fast becoming one of the most important It is difficult when examining ecotourism
bird sanctuaries in New Zealand – a nation not to become cynical regarding its appli-
with many of the world’s most endangered cation. The words of the Reverend Francis
bird species. Thus, Tiritiri Matangi is a Kilvert, written in his diary in 1870 seem,
location that conforms to the responsible, in many situations, as apt today (Croall,
active end of the ecotourism continuum. 1995): ‘of all the noxious animals, the most
noxious is the tourist’. In fact many present
These two case studies may not necessarily day commentators may argue that because
reflect their status as more or less desirable the ecotourist is ‘dressed up’ with a palat-
ecotourism when considered in a temporal able label that ‘of all the tourists, the most
context. Rather they may simply represent dangerous is the ecotourist’. Others, how-
their differing stages along the tourism ever, argue that ecotourism is the ‘answer’
development path. Tourism is a complex to tourism development and claim ‘that
social and economic process that does not ecotourism is the only tourism develop-
remain static over time. There are many ment that is sustainable in the long term’
examples of the development of tourism – (Warren and Taylor, 1994, p. 1). The argu-
or ecotourism – at a particular site that in ment that ecotourism should only fall
its early stages had few negative impacts, towards the active and hard end of the con-
appeared to be sustainable and was viewed tinuum and contribute to the health and
as a positive outcome for local communi- viability of the natural attractions upon
ties, both human and natural. However, which it is based is an appealing one.
over time many such locations have been However, these lofty aspirations appear to
transformed gradually from the positive
end of the continuum to the exploitive.

This temporal transition is of particular

Types of Ecotourism 33

be unattainable in many situations, and spread adoption of the terms ‘conservation’
possibly incompatible with the dominant and ‘sustainability’ have not solved the
market behaviours and expectations. planet’s environmental problems. Neither
Perhaps this is because the value of the will the concept of ecotourism. However, it
ecotourism concept has been diluted is important to remember that the goal of
through its popularity. It is certainly an ecotourism is a sound and worthy one. Just
attractive label that has been rapidly because it is difficult to achieve in practice
adopted by many operators and nations does not mean that the concept is flawed.
because it expresses ideals that are attrac- Rather, it may be a reflection of the relative
tive to the market place. Authors such as immaturity of the tourism management
Wight (1993) recognize that the ecotourism field and the difficulty of the task. This
label is being utilized to take advantage of does not negate the worth of the eco-
a ‘greening’ of the market and to ‘eco-sell’ tourism concept. The next stage in the
tourism and travel. In many cases eco- management of ecotourism is to move
tourism has become nothing more than a beyond the semantic evolutionary process
marketing gimmick which dresses up exist- discussed earlier and to further evolve the
ing tourism attractions in an attempt to successful application of the concept. Part
increase market share (Wight, 1993). of this evolution involves the recognition
of distinctive ecotourism typologies and
Irrespective of the marketing of the types that utilize different habitats, attract
term, it is now clear that ecotourism is not different markets, and require distinctive
a panacea that always both protects the planning and management measures. The
environment and supports economic activ- battle that remains is in developing effec-
ity (Butler, 1990; Zell, 1992; Pearce, 1994; tive techniques and strategies to make
Wall, 1994; Wheeller, 1994; MacKinnon, these various types of ecotourism work in
1995). However, it was always extremely practice, in its active and responsible
naive to expect it to be so. The natural sense. We now know where we want to go,
environment is complex and dynamic, and and that is the first important step in get-
the invention of a concept does not provide ting there.
an automatic answer to the problems
caused by humans visiting it. The wide-

References

Adler, J. (1989) Origins of sightseeing. Annals of Tourism Research 16, 7–29.
Associated Press (1998) Conservationists Want Whale-Watching Boats to Slow Down. Associated

Press, Boston, 15 September.
Barnes, J., Burgess, J. and Pearce, D. (1992) Wildlife tourism. In: Swanson, T.M. and Barbier, E.B.

(eds) Economics for the Wilds: Wildlife, Wildlands, Diversity and Development. Earthscan
Publications, London, pp. 136–151.
Borge, L., Nelson, W.C., Leitch, J.A. and Lestritz, F.L. (1991) Economic Impact of Wildlife Based
Tourism in Northern Botswana. Agricultural Economics Report No 262. Agricultural Experiment
Station, North Dakota University.
Budowski, G. (1976) Tourism and environmental conservation: conflict, coexistence or symbiosis?
Environmental Conservation 3(1), 27–31.
Burger, J. and Gochfield, M. (1993) Tourism and short term behavioural responses of nesting masked,
red-footed, and blue-footed boobies in the Galapagos. Environmental Conservation 20(3),
255–259.
Burnie, D. (1994) Ecotourists to paradise. New Scientist April, 24–27.
Butler, R.W. (1990) Alternative tourism: pious hope or Trojan horse? Journal of Travel Research 28(3),
40–45.
Ceballos-Lascuráin, H. (1987) Estudio de prefactibilidaad socioeconomica del tourismo ecologico y
anteproyecto asquitectonico y urbanistico del Centro de Turismo Ecologico de Sian Ka’an,
Quintana Roo. Study completed for SEDUE, Mexico.

34 M.B. Orams

Cessford, G.R. (1995) Conservation Benefits of Public Visits to Protected Islands. Science and
Research Series No. 95, Department of Conservation, Wellington.

Croall, J. (1995) Preserve or Destroy. Tourism and the Environment. Calouste Gulbenhin Foundation,
London.

Davies, M. (1990) Wildlife as a tourism attraction. Environments 20(3), 74–77.
Drey, R. (1982) Tiritiri Matangi Island Working Plan. Department of Lands and Survey for the

Hauraki Gulf Maritime Park Board, Auckland.
Duenkel, N. and Scott, H. (1994) Ecotourism’s hidden potential – altering perceptions of reality.

Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance October, 40–44.
Dyer, P.K. (1992) Wedgetailed shearwater nesting patterns: a spatial and ecological perspective,

Capricorn Group, Great Barrier Reef. PhD thesis, The University of Queensland, Brisbane,
Australia.
Fennell, D.A. (1999) Ecotourism: an Introduction. Routledge, London.
Figgis, P. (1993) Ecotourism: special interest or major direction? Habitat Australia February, 8–11.
Gauthier, D.A. (1993) Sustainable development, tourism and wildlife. In: Nelson, J.G., Butler, R.W.
and Walls, G. (eds) Tourism and Sustainable Development: Monitoring, Planning, Managing.
Heritage Resources Centre Joint Publication No. 1, University of Waterloo, Ontario, pp. 98–109.
Gibson, J.D. (1976) Seabird islands no. 38, big island, five islands, New South Wales. Australian Bird
Bander 14, 100–103.
Glasson, J., Godfrey, K. and Goodey, B. (1995) Toward Visitor Impact Management. Ashgate
Publishing, Aldershot, UK.
Gourlay, M.R. (1991) Coastal observations for monitoring environmental conditions on a coral reef
island. In: Proceedings of the 10th Australasian Conference on Coastal and Ocean Engineering,
Auckland. The University of Auckland, Auckland, pp. 73–77.
Great Barrier Reef Committee (1977) Conservation and Use of the Capricorn and Bunker Groups of
Islands and Coral Reefs. GBRC, Brisbane.
Griffiths, M. and Van Schaik, C.P. (1993) The impact of human traffic on the abundance and activity
periods of Sumatran rain forest wildlife. Conservation Biology 7(3), 623–626.
Groom, M.J., Podolsky, R.O. and Munn, C.A. (1991) Tourism as a sustained use of wildlife: a case
study of Madre de Dios, southeastern Peru. In: Neotropical Wildlife Use and Conservation.
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 393–412.
Hanna, N. and Wells, S. (1992) Sea sickness. In Focus (Tourism Concern) 5, 4–6.
Hawley, J. (1997) Tiritiri Matangi Working Plan. Department of Conservation, Auckland.
Hegerl, E.J. (1984) An evaluation of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park concept. In: Ward, W.T. and
Saenger, P. (eds) The Capricornia Section of the Great Barrier Reef. Past, Present and Future.
Royal Society of Queensland and Coral Reef Society, Brisbane, pp. 173–180.
Heron Island Resort (1986) Advertising brochure. Heron Island Resort, Queensland.
Hetzer, N.D. (1965) Environment, tourism, culture. LINKS (July). Reprinted in Ecosphere (1970) 1(2),
1–3.
Higgins, B.R. (1996) The global structure of the nature tourism industry: ecotourists, tour operators,
and local businesses. Journal of Travel Research 35(2), 11–18.
Hulsman, K. (1983) Survey of seabird colonies in the Capricornia section of the Great Barrier Reef
Marine Park ii: population parameters and management strategies. Unpublished research report
to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, Townsville, Queensland.
Hulsman, K. (1984) Seabirds of the Capricornia section of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. In:
Ward, W.T. and Saenger, P. (eds) The Capricornia Section of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park:
Past, Present and Future. Royal Society of Queensland and Australian Coral Reef Society,
Brisbane, pp. 159–168.
Hvenegaard, G.T. (1994) Ecotourism: a status report and conceptual framework. Journal of Tourism
Studies 5(2), 24–35.
Ingold, P., Huber, B., Neuhaus, P., Mainini, B., Marbacher, H., Schnidrig-Petrig, R. and Zeller, R.
(1993) Tourism and sport in the alps – a serious problem for wildlife? Revue Suisse de Zoologie
100(3), 529–545.
Jenner, P. and Smith, C. (1992) The Tourism Industry and the Environment. Special Report No. 2453.
The Economist Intelligence Unit, London.
Jones, O.A. (1967) The Great Barrier Reef Committee – its work and achievements, 1922–1926.
Australian Natural History 15, 315–318.

Types of Ecotourism 35

Karwacki, J. and Boyd, C. (1995) Ethics and ecotourism. Business Ethics 4(4), 225–232.
Kutay, K. (1989) The new ethic in adventure travel. Buzzworm: the Environmental Journal 1(4),

174–176.
Laarman, J.G. and Durst, P.B. (1987) Nature travel and tropical forests. FREI Working Paper Series.

Southeastern Center for Forest Economics Research, North Carolina State University, Raleigh.
Laarman, J.G. and Durst, P.B. (1993) Nature tourism as a tool for economic development and conser-

vation of natural resources. In: Nenon, J. and Durst, P.B. (eds) Nature Tourism in Asia:
Opportunities and Constraints for Conservation and Economic Development. United States
Forest Service, Washington, DC.
Lane, S.G. (1991) Some problems during the exodus of young shearwaters from Mutton Bird Island,
New South Wales. Corella 15, 108.
Laycock, G. (1991) Good times are killing the Keys. Audubon 93(5), 38–41.
Leopold, A. (1949) A Sand County Almanac. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Limpus, C.J., Fleay, A. and Guinea, M. (1983) Management and turtles. In: Ward, W.T. and Saenger, P.
(eds) Proceedings of The Inaugural Great Barrier Reef Conference. James Cook University Press,
Townsville, pp. 61–78.
MacKinnon, B. (1995) Beauty and beasts of ecotourism. Business Mexico 5(4), 44–47.
Mellor, B. (1990) Loving the reef to death? Time 45(Nov), 48–55.
Miller, M.L. and Kaae, B.C. (1993) Coastal and marine ecotourism: a formula for sustainable develop-
ment? Trends 30(2), 35–41.
Moon, L. (1998) The Singing Island. The Story of Tiritiri Matangi. Godwit, Auckland.
Moore, S. and Carter, B. (1993) Ecotourism in the 21st century. Tourism Management 14(2), 123–130.
Muir, F. (1993) Managing tourism to a seabird nesting island. Tourism Management 14(2), 99–105.
Neil, D.T. (1988) Holothurian populations on Heron Reef, GBR: effect of the boat channel.
Unpublished report to the Australian Marine Sciences Association meeting, 28 May.
Neil, D.T. (1993) Barrier Reef Studies. Unpublished course handbook. Department of Geographical
Sciences and Planning, The University of Queensland, Brisbane.
Orams, M.B. (1995) Towards a more desirable form of ecotourism. Tourism Management 16(1), 3–8.
Pearce, D.G. (1994) Alternative tourism: concepts, classifications and questions. In: Smith, V.L. and
Eadington, W.R. (eds) Tourism Alternatives: Potentials and Problems in the Development of
Tourism. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 15–30.
Pleumarom, A. (1993) What’s wrong with mass tourism. Contours (Bangkok) 6(3/4), 15–21.
Romeril, M. (1985) Tourism and the environment – towards a symbiotic relationship. International
Journal of Environmental Studies 25, 215–218.
Valentine, P.S. (1990) Nature-based tourism: a review of prospects and problems. In: Miller, M.L. and
Auyong, J. (eds) Proceedings of the 1990 Congress on Coastal And Marine Tourism, Vol. 2.
National Coastal Resources Research and Development Institute, Corvallis, Oregon,
pp. 475–485.
Viskovic, N. (1993) Zootourism. Turizam 41(1–2), 23–25.
Wall, G. (1994) Ecotourism: old wine in new bottles? Trends 31(2), 4–9.
Wallace, G.N. and Pierce, S.M. (1996) An evaluation of ecotourism in Amazonas, Brazil. Annals of
Tourism Research 23(4), 843–873.
Ward, F. (1990) Florida’s coral reefs are imperilled. National Geographic 178(1), 115–132.
Warren, J.A.N. and Taylor, C.N. (1994) Developing Ecotourism in New Zealand. The New Zealand
Institute for Social Research and Development Ltd, Wellington.
Weaver, D.B. (1998) Ecotourism in the Less Developed World. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.
Wheeller, B. (1991) Tourism’s troubled times: responsible tourism is not the answer. Tourism
Management 12(1), 91–96.
Wheeller, B. (1994) Ecotourism: a ruse by any other name. In: Cooper, C.P. and Lockwood, A. (eds)
Progress in Tourism, Recreation and Hospitality Management, Vol. 7. Belhaven Press, London,
pp. 3–11.
Wight, P.A. (1993) Ecotourism: ethics or ecosell? Journal of Travel Research 21(3), 3–9.
Woodland, D.J. and Hooper, J.N.A. (1977) The effect of human trampling on coral reefs. Biological
Conservation 11, 1–4.

36 M.B. Orams

Zell, L. (1992) Ecotourism of the future – the vicarious experience. In: Weiler, B. (ed.) Ecotourism
Incorporating the Global Classroom. International Conference Papers, The University of
Auckland, Auckland, pp. 30–35.

Ziffer, K. (1989) Ecotourism: the Uneasy Alliance. Working Paper No. 1. Conservation International,
Washington, DC.