Download MARINE ECOTOURISM FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN

Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
MARINE ECOTOURISM FOR SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT IN THE THIRD WORLD –
POTENTIALS AND CONSTRAINTS
G. Poyya Moli 88
Abstract
Tourism has emerged as one of world’s largest industries and a
fastest growing economic sector. However, the diversity, integrity
and productivity of many key third world marine/coastal
ecosystems have been severely eroded due to tourism and other
human activities. This increases the conflicts between
conservation of natural resources/biodiversity and development,
besides the local livelihoods. Fortunately, the newly emerging
marine Ecotourism can be effectively used in the third world for
not only achieving the objectives of the CBD, but also for ensuring
Socio-Economic and Environmental sustainability, in the posttsunami situation by adopting the principles of ICZM. The
potentials and constraints for evolving and implementing such
innovative tourism strategies are discussed with their
policy/planning implications.
Key words: Creative cultural industries, integrated coastal zone
management, marine ecotourism, sustainable livelihoods, third
world
88
Department of Ecology & Environmental Sciences, Pondicherry University
Poyya Moli
Tourter
202
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
T
ourism has emerged as one of world’s largest industries
and a fastest growing sector of the world economy (Yeung
& Law ,2005), with an average annual growth rate of 7%.
Ecotourism (ET) is the tourism industry's fastest growing
sub-sector, with an estimated world-wide annual growth of 1030%. Some estimates suggest that 20% of all international tourists
are in some way involved in ‘ecotourism’ (Epler Wood, 2002).
According to the World Wildlife Fund for Nature 20% of revenue
generated from tourism in developing countries is due to
ecotourism (WWF, 2001).
The marine/coastal ecosystems of third world countries are
invariably the most ecologically and culturally diverse regions of
the world, attracting an increasing number of tourists (Miller &
Auyong, 1991; Miller, 1993). However, the diversity, integrity and
productivity of many key marine tourism destinations in the third
world have been severely eroded, impacting a large poor
population who are heavily dependent on them. The persistent
and rapid decline in natural coastal ecosystems, habitats and
species is not only reducing the availability of goods and services
to the local resource dependent communities but also reducing
opportunities for sustainable economic growth (Beekhuis, 1981;
Archer, 1985; Bringas-Rábago, 2002; Sawkar et.al., 1998; Reddy,
2007; Cameron & Gatewood, 2008).
Though tourism in marine ecosystems could lead to a variety of
potential benefits, uncontrolled mass tourism, the most
predominant form of tourism today, inevitably increases the
conflicts between conservation (natural resources/biodiversity),
development and local livelihoods. Though it is well known that
“environment (e.g. climate, sun, water and sand) is the travel
industry’s base product”, it is rarely respected /understood by the
tourism promoters and is seldom discussed in the literature.
Though natural beauty and cultural heritage represent a
competitive advantage for many areas, how many in the tourism
industry really care about vanishing species of plants and animals
or degradation/pilferage of heritage monuments or for that
matter acculturation of tribes in the highly vulnerable island
settings? Many of these decisions are irreversible/ interconnected
because once habitats/ Ecosystems/ communities lose the
character that make them distinctive and attractive to non
residents, they have lost their ability to vie for tourist-based
income in an increasingly global and competitive marketplace (Liu
& Var, 1986; Holder, 1988; Lea, 1988; Inskeep, 1991;
Mieczkowski, 1995; George & Poyya Moli, 2007a).
Poyya Moli
Tourter
203
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
The emerging principles of sustainable development in general
(WCED, 1987; Lele,1991; UN 2002 & 2005; DEFRA, 2005) and
sustainable tourism/Eco-tourism in particular (Eber, 1992; Wight,
1993; Cater, 1993; .Woodley, 1993; Honey, 1999; Scheyvens,
1999; Ross & Wall, 1999; Sweeting et.al. 1999; European
Communities, 2000; Hardy & Beeton, 2001; Asian Productivity
Organization, 2002; Al-Sayed & Al-langawi, 2003; Epler Wood
Report, 2005; UNEP, 2005; Wink, 2005 ), could contribute
significantly to the conservation and long term sustainable
development of coastal tourist destinations (Loannides, 1995;
White et.al.1997; European Communities, 2000; Orams, 2002;
Garrod & Wilson, 2004; Garrod,et.al, undated; Jennings, 2004;
Hoyt, 2005).
This paper aims to promote marine ecotourism (MET) as a tool for
regeneration of peripheral coastal communities, to generate
appropriate local, regional and national guidance on the site
specific spatial planning structures, policies and frameworks to
achieve long term sustainable development by reducing regional
disparities/conflicts. It also aims to identify and evaluate
potentials and constraints for diversification into MET, thereby
developing products that not only enhance the quality of tourism
but also help to reinforce the economic and social/cultural
cohesion of coastal communities in the third world.
BACKGROUND
The coastal/marine zones support a wider variety of ecosystems
(mangroves, estuaries, coral reefs, sea grass beds, coastal forests,
beaches) that co-exist in a state of dynamic balance. They are
among the ecologically fragile and economically important
ecosystems. Besides, they share all the characteristics of the
mountain ecosystems (remoteness, fragility & endemism) except
upland/low land linkages that are replaced by island- mainland
linkages. Coastal/marine regions are different from others by a
wider variety of stake-holders, with lack of communication and
coordination, inter-sectoral linkages and complexity, common
property resource (CPR) use regimes (open access nature of the
most of coastal/marine resources) and the conflicting uses and
user groups – confronted with over-exploitation, pollution and
degradation, fragmented and poorly coordinated policies, ad-hoc
decisions for short-term gains at the cost of long-term
sustainability and coastal livelihoods (Di Ciommo, 2007).
Poyya Moli
Tourter
204
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
The out-of-sight, out-of-mind attitudes and gradual nature of the
coastal/oceanic processes coupled with low levels of
community/stake holder awareness make the situation worse in
the third world countries like India (Sawkar et.al, 1998; Reddy,
2007).
It is becoming increasingly clear that if tourism planning is not
properly done based on sound Ecological and Economic
principles, there would be many negative impacts , especially in
coastal areas (Price, 1981; Sun & Walsh, 1998; Hall, 2001;
Harriott, 2002; UNEP- DTIE, 2002; Mason, 2003; Shaalan, 2005;
Jackson, 2006). Such impacts can be broadly classified into:
Socioeconomic impacts
Cultural impacts and
Environmental impacts
Of these, the environmental impacts are causing more serious
problems in the coastal zones; tourism has inevitable and
important environmental impacts, including: resource use,
consumption, degradation/depletion of biodiversity, besides
various types of wastes and pollution. At the same time, beaches,
mountains, rivers, forests and diverse flora and fauna make the
marine/coastal environment a basic resource that the tourism
industry needs in order to thrive and grow. While the viability of
tourism could be threatened by negative environmental impacts,
tourism could also contribute significantly to environmental
protection. This shows that tourism and the marine/coastal
environment are interrelated and interdependent in complex
ways, and together they could provide a sustainable economic
base for development (Lim & McAleer, 2005).
While habitat destruction, direct harvesting, pollution and marine
debris remain the most important threats to marine animals,
intrusive or irresponsible methods of marine wildlife viewing can
potentially harm and even kill popular animals, such as whales,
dolphins, manatees, dugongs and marine turtles. Slow moving
marine animals, particularly manatees and marine turtles, can be
injured and killed by propellers and fast moving boats. Scarring
caused by propellers can make marine animals more susceptible
to infection and disease. These animals are often popular attractions for tourists, whose experience may be diminished if they are
not present. In addition to poor boating practices, intrusive
actions by individual water sports enthusiasts, such as snorkelers,
divers and kayakers, can disturb marine life and, in some cases,
Poyya Moli
Tourter
205
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
drive animals from their primary habitat. For example, the chasing
or handling of marine turtles can cause them to abandon primary
feeding grounds, while excessive daytime interaction in shallow
bays can deprive dolphins of important rest periods. Intrusive
viewing can create stress in mothers of marine mammals,
separate cow/calf pairs and decrease survival rates in newborn
calves (CELB, Undated).
The following are the most common environmental consequences
of improper tourism planning/ activities that would seriously
affect the coastal/marine biodiversity:
Accidental discharge /disposal of toxic substances/toxic
antifouling bottom paints, fuels, cleaning agents and
other hazardous materials or other waste into the
environment from boats and land based activities - air,
water and soil contamination with pollutants and noise
pollution especially in peak tourist seasons, due to
improper / inadequate implementation of pollution
control measures - health hazard to local people and
tourists besides deleterious impacts on local flora and
fauna (Spiegel et al., 2008; Sale et.al.,2008)
Solid waste pollution/marine debris, chiefly plastics disposal problems causing littering of the landscape by
tourists, and improper disposal of waste generated by
tourist facilities (Chaerul et. al., 2004; De Araujo et.al.,
2006)
Deforestation / removal of soil vegetal cover leading to
biodiversity loss, soil erosion, flash floods and siltation/
sedimentation - destruction of coral reefs; disputation
of soil stability; alteration of drainage system and water
run-off -- increases in numbers and scale of landslides,
rock falls; unaesthetic scars on the landscape (Hall,
2001; Priskin, 2003)
Extensive damage to near-shore marine ecosystems,
especially coral reefs by the use of anchors for mooring
commercial / recreational boats. Anchors and the chains
connected to them, damage warm water corals by
crushing and killing the corals and other reef dwelling
organisms on which they fall. Repeated anchor drops or
large anchors can break up the integrity of the reef,
causing widespread scarring and leaving the injured corals open to infection/bleaching. Anchoring can also
cloud water with disturbed sediment, choking tropical
Poyya Moli
Tourter
206
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
corals and limiting available sunlight, which the
symbiotic algae need for photosynthesis. The sedimentfilled anchor scars are poor environments for new coral
growth, but good environments for fast-growing algae,
which may take the place of corals. Degraded habitat
reduces the number and variety of fish, which are
important for both attracting visitors and ensuring the
health of the reef. Besides, reduced visibility due to
cloudy water negatively affects the quality of visitor
experience to a reef environment. Similar impacts could
be observed in sea-grass beds also (Harriott, 2004;
Thiele et.al, 2005; MacPherson, 2007)
.Structural alteration of plant/animal communities,
changes in species composition; disappearance of rare
species, decline of diversity of plant species leaving
fewer plants to mature and provide shelter for the other
dependent wildlife (Hill & Pickering, 2006; Pickering et.
al., 2007; Paulo et.al, 2008)
Constant trampling—disappearance of fragile species
and damage of tree roots; reduction of reproduction
rates of vegetation; increased soil erosion and damage
of plant habitats; disruption of predator-prey
relationships; disruption of feeding and breeding
activities, relocation of feeding and breeding areas or
even destruction of wildlife habitats and disturbance of
wildlife migration (Davenport & Davenport 2006;
Stockin et. al., 2008)
Collection /sale of rare species of marine animals as
souvenirs e.g. coral reefs, reef fishes, mollusks,
starfishes, etc.(Vaughan, 2000)
Among the several instruments available for overcoming these
constraints, for conserving the marine/coastal biodiversity, the
convention on biological diversity (CBD) (CBD, 1992) and the first
global agreement on conservation and sustainable use of
biological diversity (UNCED, 1992) are prominent. Their goal is to
maintain the worlds’ ecological features in the frame of economic
development. Their 3 main objectives are:
Conservation of biological diversity
Sustainable use of its components
Fair and equitable sharing of the benefits of the use of
genetic resources
Poyya Moli
Tourter
207
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Tourism can be considered as a cross-cutting issue within the CBD.
This led to the development of international rules and principles
focussing on sustainability and to the first “draft international
guidelines for activities related to sustainable tourism
development” (CBD, 2004).
Community based tourism is a more sustainable form of
development than conventional mass tourism as it allows host
communities to break away from the hegemonic grasp of tour
operators and the oligopoly of wealthy elites at the national level
(Sharpley & Tlfer, 2002). In an attempt to differentiate between
forms of ecotourism that advance the needs and concerns of local
communities, and those that simply take place in natural areas,
several researchers have begun to employ the term ‘communitybased ecotourism’ (CBET) (Timothy & White, 1999). Recognising a
‘need to promote both the quality of life of people and the
conservation of resources’ (Scheyvens, 1999), CBET can be
defined as ‘a form of ecotourism where the local community has
substantial control over, and involvement in, its development and
management, and a major proportion of the benefits remain
within the community’ (WWF, 2001).
Despite potential limitations – including problems associated with
defining the ‘local’ community, overcoming existing inequalities,
and gaining community consensus – CBET offers the possibility of
greater local control and participation (Mitchell, 2003). The roots
or underlying principles of CBET derive from the concept of
community development, a small-scale, locally oriented, and
holistic approach to economic growth and social change. CBET
strives to merge the sustainability and conservation essential to
ecotourism with the benefits, control, involvement, and welfare
that underpin community development (Woodley, 1993; Stronzaa
& Gordillob, 2008).Thus, CBET appears to be the connecting
thread for ensuring environmental, cultural, economic and social
sustainability in India (Poyya Moli, 2007a) based on successful
case studies elsewhere (Bookbinder, et al., 1998, Gosling; 1999;
WWF, 2001; Foucat, 2002).
While community based approaches can be effectively integrated
into marine ecotourism (MET), the following characteristics such
as ‘intangibility’, ‘heterogeneity’, perishability’ and ‘inseparability’
of tourism described by Holloway & Robinson (1995) are more
relevant for MET, as the destinations involved are often remote,
with multiple uses/users, promising attractions but are
ecologically fragile and culturally sensitive:
Poyya Moli
Tourter
208
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
‘Intangibility’: tourism usually has to be bought (the visitor
still has to trust the brochure) before it can be experienced
and it is a service rather than a physically product based.
‘Heterogeneity’: is the opposite of standardisation: no
holiday experience is exactly like another as is the case with
a branded physical product/commodity- site specificities the same tourists may be considering other holidays or
activities and be implicitly trading time (and expenditure)
between them.
‘Perishability’: unsold transport seats, unsold beds in an
hotel or unsold places on group tours become instantly
worthless, especially for ET locations as they are remote
‘Inseparability’: tourism has diverse elements – transport,
accommodation, food, entertainment activities, with many
different people involved, each of whom can critically affect
the quality of a holiday. This would include even the
interpersonal interactions (starting from arrival/welcome till
departure)
Ironically, the very consequences of lack of development, the unspoilt character of the marine /coastal water/landscapes and
distinctive local cultures, become positive resources as far as
tourism is concerned, which will be inevitably/irreversibly
damaged by ill-conceived tourism policy/planning (Duffield &
Long, 1981; Visser & Njuguna, 1992; Roehl & Ditton ,1993;
Vallega, 1994).
MET is typically not targeted on a single species of wildlife. Due to
the incidental nature of sightings for many of the species of
interest to marine ecotourists, many tour operators focus their
provision on multiple species or simply the appreciation of the
marine environment in general, rather than with watching
particular species of wildlife such as Sea-scapes and geological
features (such as caves), maritime heritage and unique cultural
characteristics, land-based facilities, such as marine interpretation
and sea life centres. Not only do such facilities extend the
spectrum of ecotourism activities, but as ‘wet weather’
attractions they help iron out seasonality. Furthermore, they can
facilitate participation by a broader section of the population
(crafts, artisanal skills, local products etc.) and, very importantly,
can even act as ‘drop in’ educational centres for the local
population. It is important that marketing plans recognise such
opportunities, since this will help marine ecotourism to grow
without unduly increasing the burden of pressure on marine
Poyya Moli
Tourter
209
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
wildlife. These activities may be water-based, land based, or both.
They may be formally organised or undertaken independently.
They may form the basis of a specialist holiday or simply be an
element of a conventional holiday. Whether such activities are
indeed marine ecotourism depends on how they are planned,
managed and marketed (Anonymous, undated).
In order to maintain/enhance the habitat/ biodiversity and in turn
to attract more quality conscious tourists, the tourism industry
was forced to seek alternatives. As a result, several alternative
tourism strategies have been evolved such as 'green' tourism,
'responsible' tourism, 'sustainable' tourism, ‘eco-development’
tourism, 'eco' tourism (ET), ‘eco-cultural' tourism (ECT), ‘Heritage
eco-cultural' tourism (HECT), ‘Health tourism’, ‘community'
tourism, ‘'ethical' tourism, 'fair-trade' tourism and even, most
recently, the particularly un-catchy, 'pro-poor' tourism(PPT).
Among these, community based marine ET hold greater promise.
Community-based eco-tourism (CBET) is popular as a means of
supporting biodiversity conservation as well as sustainable
livelihoods, particularly in developing countries (CBD & UNEP,
2007, Poyya Moli, 2007a). Most international conservation
organizations also support CBET 89 . The major costs of
conservation have to be born disproportionately by the local
communities, especially the poor, while the benefits are
dispersed. In recent years, many funding bodies have taken an
indirect approach to conservation, investing in projects that
encourage people to take up alternative practices that are
compatible with conservation rather than investing in
conservation itself. Perhaps the best example of this ‘conservation
by distraction’ is ploughing money into community-based
ecotourism projects (Nicholls, 2004).
Although the mutual exclusion of ecotourism and mass tourism is
implied in definitions of ecotourism, few have actually explored
the mechanics of the spatial relationship between the two
supposedly separate, ‘polar opposite’ tourism types (Diamantis,
1999).
89
http://www.conservation.org/xp/CIWEB/programs/
ecotourism/ ecotourism. xml; http:// www.
uneoptie.org/pc/tourism/ ectourism/home.htm; http:// www.
conservationafrica.org /international-yearecotourism.htm;
http://www. planeta.com/ ecotravel/tour/tourism_
conservation.html
Poyya Moli
Tourter
210
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Weaver (2002a), provides more pertinent exception, commenting
that in the ‘rainforest and reef’ ecotourism zone of Asia,
concentrations of conventional tourists in beach resort areas and
international gateways seek diversionary day-only trips to more
‘natural’ terrestrial or marine locations. Recognizing a gap in the
geographical literature on tourism, Weaver concludes by calling
for a ‘more systematic examination of emerging spatial and
structural patterns of ecotourism in Asia’ (Weaver, 2002a). A
similar spatial relationship between ecotourism and mass tourism
in southern Thailand illustrates mutual interdependence and
benefit (Kontogeorgopoulos, 2004).
Interestingly, most eco-tourists are from North America and
Europe, while most eco-tourism destinations are in developing
countries that have areas endowed with richer biodiversity and
great natural beauty; they have relatively more undisturbed and
preserved biologically/culturally richest areas, but are also
plagued by poverty, inadequate local participation and tourism
developments that are unregulated. This has to be taken into
account before introducing ET in these areas (Poyya Moli, 2007a).
Pro-poor tourism (PPT) is emerging as an opportunity to enhance
socio-economic sustainability in the third world (Ashley et.al.,
2001). PPT is not a specific product but an approach that seeks to
increase participation of poor people at many points in the sector,
and that aims to increase their economic and social benefits from
tourism while reducing the negative impacts on the poor. Through
PPT, poor people are able to participate more effectively and
directly in product development (Odendal & Schoeman, 1990;
Roe & Urquhart, 2002; WTO, 2006). However, indirect
participation in the tourism value chain is also important: supply
chains, enterprise linkages and non-financial partnerships may
reach more people, and be more accessible to the poor (Ashley,
2006).Ensuring the sustainability of supply chains would ensure
the adoption of PPT approaches. UNESCO’s informal support to
CBET approaches cross and link all the key areas of UNESCO’s
work – Education, Culture, Communication, Social Development
and the Environment by integrating poverty alleviation with
overall development (Ashley, 2006; Ashley et.al., 2006).
While the capacity of the tourism sector to promote pro-poor
development is an issue that has attracted recent attention and
positive recommendations in policy and academic circles (Ashley
et.al., 2001), the following questions have to be answered while
Poyya Moli
Tourter
211
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
designing PPT oriented MET approaches in the third world - How
do poor people gain access to and control over land, water and
natural resources and through what institutional mechanisms?
How do emerging institutional arrangements in the context of
MET affect poor people’s access to land, water and other natural
resources? What institutional overlaps, complementarities and
conflicts enable or limit access? What new governance
arrangements are required to encourage a sustainable livelihoods
approach? How do the livelihood concerns and contexts of poor
people get represented in MET policy processes concerning land,
water and natural resources in local, national and international
arenas? What are the challenges for community participation in
the MET policy process?
Besides the issues of poverty, peace and sustainability, considered
as the indicators of development are threatened due to a myriad
of conflicts and they are more visible than ever before in the third
world. Tourism considered as a global peace industry has greater
potential to reduce these conflicts. The newly emerging Heritage
Eco-cultural Tourism (HECT) holds the key for the promotion of
peace and sustainability (Poyya Moli, 2003). The potentials for
integrating the restoration/revival of heritage elements with
sustainable livelihoods through MET are greater in the coastal
regions of the third world – especially the islands -as they are
endowed with richer heritage /cultural diversity (Kelman, 2007).
MARINE ECOTOURISM
MARINE ECOTOURISM – A BRIEF OVERVIEW
Ecotourism (ET) developed ‘within the womb of ‘Environmental
movement in the 1970s and 1980s. Growing Environmental
concern coupled with an emerging dissatisfaction with ill-planned
mass tourism led to increased demand for more authentic nature
based experiences of an alternative nature. By mid 1980s, ET was
identified as a means of achieving the twin goals of Biodiversity
conservation and sustainable development in a number of
countries (Dearden & Harron 1994).
ET activities are offered by a large and wide variety of operators,
and practiced by an even larger array of tourists. While there is no
single universal definition for ET, its general characteristics can be
summarized as follows (modified from Ceballos-Lascurain, 1993;
Zeppel, 1997; Goodwin et. al. 1998; Drumm & Moor, 2002):
Poyya Moli
Tourter
212
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
All nature-based forms of tourism in which the main
motivation of the tourists is the observation and
appreciation for admiring, enjoying and/ or studying
nature as well as the traditional cultures prevailing in
relatively undisturbed or uncontaminated natural areas
by respecting/ protecting/ reviving local cultures and
traditions
It is generally, but not exclusively organized for
Environmentally /socially conscious small groups by
specialized and small, locally owned businesses
It minimizes negative impacts upon the natural and
socio-cultural environment
It integrates conservation and sustainable livelihoods by
providing alternative employment and equitable income
opportunities based on tourism related microenterprises for local communities and for as many
other stakeholders as possible, including private tour
operators as well as generates income for protected
area conservation. It increases awareness towards the
conservation of heritage, natural and cultural assets,
both among locals and tourists by participatory,
interactive, interpretative, enlightening and educational
experiences and
Involve stakeholders (individuals, communities,
ecotourists, tour operators and
government
institutions)
in
the
planning,
development,
implementation and monitoring phases
Among the several forms of alternative tourism types, ET is
emerging as a dominant concept throughout the world, attracting
a larger number of alternative tourists. ET is a large and fast
growing industry, accounting for US $ 2 billion globally in
1996.Though the tourist volume is small, ET can generate
sufficient revenue, especially from foreign tourists (true for at
least a few sites) – e.g. 1993 data – Madagascar 275 to 360 $ / trip
to see lemurs; Belize, $ 350/trip for coral reef diving; Whale
watching is one of the fastest growing global tourism sectors and
is taking place in more than 70 countries. It has grown
tremendously in South Africa, and it contributes largely to poverty
eradication and job creation. Whale watching is much more
profitable, and sustainable, than killing whales and with full and
effective involvement of local communities and if properly
Poyya Moli
Tourter
213
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
organized, regulated and managed, it can provide financial and
other benefits to local people.
MET includes activities that are conducted primarily in a marine
setting and involve marine resources or terrestrial resources that
occur at that marine/terrestrial interface (e.g. view-scapes,
terrestrial wildlife, etc. in the coastal realm). Activities may
include viewing, education/interpretation or photography of
marine wildlife and environments (mangroves, coral reefs, etc.)
besides others such as swimming, diving, snorkeling, paragliding,
beach walking, bird watching etc. A variety of whale behaviors
could be seen on an ET expedition- blowing, breaching, tail
slapping, adult calf interactions as well as many other behaviors.
However, whale watching is unpredictable. The chances of seeing
a whale are mostly based on luck but can be increased
dramatically by going to the right place. This can be ideally linked
to the local traditional knowledge of the Fishers.
"Marine protected areas" (MPAs) are used as management tools
to protect, maintain, or restore natural and cultural resources in
coastal and marine waters. They have been used effectively both
nationally and internationally to conserve biodiversity, manage
natural resources, protect endangered species, reduce user
conflicts, provide educational and research opportunities, and
enhance commercial and recreational activities (Salm et.al.,
2000). Thus they are ideally suited for community based ET. Such
MPAs with higher ET potential exist in several places of the third
world. For instance, in India - the Gulf of Mannar Biosphere
reserve (Tamil nadu), Sundarbans (West Bengal), Andaman and
Nicobar islands and the Lakshadweep islands are notable ideal
sites. They possess an immense array of attractions – coral reefs,
mangroves, unpolluted silvery beaches, besides portraying a wide
treasure of Heritage and tribal cultures. Their pristine nature
attracts a large number of national and international tourists and
hence can be ideally developed into MET locations. On the
contrary, as the current tourism policies and planning of several
third world countries have not adequately taken into account the
special need for MET planning. Government of India too has failed
to distinguish between the two different but overlapping concepts
– nature tourism and ET. Not surprisingly, many State tourism
development corporations in India too have started promoting
nature based mass tourism under the banner of ET in the
marine/coastal ecosystems, without integrating Environmental
and socioeconomic sustainability in to their programmes!
Poyya Moli
Tourter
214
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
However, ET can benefit Marine Protected areas (MPAs) in three
ways:
ET by definition would provide financial support for the
conservation of Marine Biodiversity by way of visitor
fees, accommodation charges, food bills etc.
ET enhances local livelihoods by providing
employment/small business opportunities and thus
ensure that the local communities stand to gain by
protecting the marine habitats /BD
ET can be used to raise awareness about the Ecological
importance and the rich cultural diversity of the
destination areas that are under threat among the local
communities and the tourists.
Two key elements that should be considered as part of the master
site planning process for tourism in MPAs are zoning and access to
site:
Zoning. Zoning facilitates the application of different
management objectives to different areas of the site.
These different use levels, e.g.: strictly protected zone,
restricted tourism use zone, moderate tourism use
zone, etc., help to proactively minimize the negative
impacts on the natural and cultural environments.
Access to Site. Minimize road construction. If a road has
to be built, maintain the canopy cover unbroken to
avoid the creation of barriers to the movements of birds
and animals. If a road is needed for supplying the lodge,
consider electric or hybrid powered vehicles to
transport supplies from the main road to reduce noise,
water and air pollution.
MARINE ECOTOURISM – THE POTENTIALS
Almost all marine ET destination areas (including small islands,
coasts, mountains, wetlands, grasslands and other marine
ecosystems and habitats) in the third world are ecologically
/culturally vulnerable, but are of outstanding beauty and rich
biological /cultural /heritage diversity. Hence, ET can be ideally
promoted in such areas. For evolving sustainable ET strategies, we
have
to
adapt
the
following
appropriate
environmental/socioeconomic strategies (both for prevention as
well as post impact management) that are based on several
Poyya Moli
Tourter
215
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
guidelines including that of certification programs for sustainable
tourism and ET (Honey & Rome, 2001; Honey, 2002; Font et.al.,
2003), guidelines for sustainable/community based ET (WWF,
2001; Epler Wood, 2002; Williams, 2006), impacts guidelines and
best practices (TIES, 2002), Ecolodge guidelines (The nature
Conservancy, undated) and the recently emerging pro-poor
tourism approaches (Ashley et.al., 2001; Neto, 2003):
Adopt appropriate green infra-structure that has
minimal impact on the natural and cultural surroundings
by fitting into the physical and cultural environments
through attention to design and landscaping as well as
building materials
Marine environmental protection – controls on
pollution, habitat degradation, deforestation of coastal
forests, encroachments, alien invasive species
Controlling the human numbers / activities / impacts
within the regular absorbing / carrying capacities and
sustainabilities, so that stability, resilience and
biodiversity are not irreversibly affected (e.g. Coral reefs
- rules against walking on reefs, collection of shells or
corals and strict codes of conduct about snorkeling
procedures such as no walking, no grabbing at corals,
zoning regulations based on reef sensitivity should be
imposed and enforced)
Reducing poverty by providing alternative sustainable
livelihoods through training/capacity building and
empowerment through deliberatively inclusive policies thus promoting equity and improving the quality of life
Working towards self – sufficiency/self reliance to meet
the local needs of the communities and the needs of the
Eco-tourists
Integration of conservation and development (policies,
legislation, implementation, participation etc) based on
a gender balanced approach
Restoration of lost biodiversity by insitu and exsitu
methods
Sustainable exploitation of biodiversity in general and
renewable resources in particular
Installation of adequate/appropriate water supply,
drainage, sanitation, solid waste and sewage disposal
systems according to national/International standards –
Eco-lodges/Eco-tels/rooms
Poyya Moli
Tourter
216
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Use of materials/energy resources that generate lesser
pollutants (renewable resources) and recycling of
wastes to reduce pollution as well as by conservation
Integrate Environmental and cultural education into the
visitor’s experience
Control measures on ship bilge cleaning operations and
dumping of solid wastes into waterways during
navigation
Establishment of controls on: prohibited fishing
methods on reefs such as dynamite fishing, spear fishing
and using poisons; mining of beach sand, use of boat
anchors in coral bottom bays (Mooring systems provide
permanent lines that allow boaters to fix their position
without dropping anchor), cutting of trees in camping
and trekking areas, feeding of wild animals (will induce
behavioral changes)
Avoiding the purchase of souvenirs made form coral or
any threatened or endangered marine species such as
turtles, hard woods, shells from beach traders, or
ancient artifacts (which have probably been stolen)
Avoid menu items that are caught using destructive
processes, such as poisons, explosives or illegal
equipment; avoid catching and serving rare, threatened
or endangered marine species for seafood consumption
Incorporation of interpretation, training/capacity
building and extension programmes for all stake-holders
Field study centres in exceptionally species rich & highly
endemic areas (e.g.Krusadai Islands, GOM region) for
scientists and university students – to be devoted for
the exclusive use of scientific research /non-destructive
field
work
(observations
without
any
collection/disturbance of the populations) and banning
all tourism activities
Community based monitoring of ET impacts - Ecotourists too can be involved (e.g. reef/ beach
monitoring, use of Environmental health indicators)
Oceanarium - with representative marine wildlife kept
in large well-managed tanks, creating for the visitor a
feeling of walking under the ocean (e.g. Malaysia,
Australia & Canada). The charges can be moderate to
heavy to meet the maintenance expenditures. However,
concessions may be given for student groups.
Poyya Moli
Tourter
217
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Sharpening political and administrative integrity to
reduce the sectoral / policy conflicts by optimal
tradeoffs for enhancing both individual and community
benefits
Implement/periodically update the coastal zone
regulation legislation for maintenance of environmental
quality/health standards
Strengthening international,
including regional,
cooperation and coordination for conserving marine BD.
MET plays a particularly important role because it can create jobs
in remote regions that historically have been benefited less from
economic development programs than have the more accessible
areas. Even a small number of jobs may be significant in
communities where populations are low and livelihood
alternatives are few. Besides, the declining coastal fish catches (as
reported by fishing communities after tsunami), make the lives
harder for the poorer and miserable traditional fishers. Their idle
catamarans and rich traditional knowledge can be effectively used
to integrate biodiversity conservation into MET, especially for
charismatic, but vulnerable species (that are poached) such as
whale sharks. As the importance of coastal/marine tourism has
grown in recent years, marine recreation promoters have realized
that many marine species previously considered “harvestable”
now generate much greater economic value through wildlife
viewing by tourists (Goodwin & Swingland,1996; Bookbinder et.
al., 1998; Gosling,1999; Harriott, ,2004; Johnston & Tyrrell. 2005;
Higham & Lűck, 2007).
The recent tsunami appears to be a mixed blessing for those who
have survived the disaster. The fishers on the tsunami hit Indian
coasts report that while the fish catches have declined post
tsunami, there is an apparent re-appearance of star fishes and
dolphins. The presence of former indicates that the
marine/coastal waters are now purged off the pollutants, thanks
to the violent churning action on the sea bottom, while the latter
is widely known as a “flag ship/charismatic” species that could
attract more wild life enthusiasts. Hence, the safer marine/coastal
regions could attract more Eco-tourists in the future (Poyya Moli,
2006).
Poyya Moli
Tourter
218
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
MARINE ECOTOURISM – THE CONSTRAINTS
In reality, most of the potential benefits are not realized in many
third world countries that have a greater potential for ET. The
MET represents a way of integrating biodiversity conservation and
ecological sustainability considerations into sectoral policies, e.g.
regional policies, fisheries, transport and tourism. Yet, experience
has shown that if MET is to play this role effectively, it must be
developed and marketed within a planning framework that
ensures that the practice of ecotourism is compatible with
sustainability considerations. Marketing MET encourages tourists
to come closer to nature: an activity that carries with it the risk of
causing serious harm to the very things that ecotourism providers
are helping tourists to experience. MET that is done badly, or
excessively, may do more harm than it does good. For example,
they may have the effect of disturbing the animals concerned at
critical points in their life cycle (e.g. mating or suckling young).
This in turn may threaten the biological viability of the
populations of whales and dolphins (CELB, undated; Stockin et.al,
2008). Hence, any marketing plan for marine ET therefore needs
to be based on awareness of these risks.
Observation over recent years has confirmed that opening up new
biodiversity-rich areas for so-called tourism-cum-conservation
projects only add to the multi-dimensional impacts of mass
tourism. Third world countries, such as India, embarking on
strategies to transform their last “un-spoilt” territories into
tourism attractions risk that their remaining patches of coastal
biodiversity/natural forests will be sacrificed for commercial
purposes; marine, coastal and watershed areas get exposed and
polluted; and already depleting biological resources further
threatened.
Cruise tourism is emerging as one of the popular modes of
tourism in the fastly developing third world countries, such as
India, thanks to the economic boom and the surplus income of
the elites. However, the rapid growth of the cruise ship industry in
other parts of the world has triggered the impact assessment
studies of cruising as a significant area of marine tourism research
(Hall & Braithwaite, 1990; Allen 1992; Dwyer & Forsyth, 1996;
Dwyer & Forsyth, 1998; Hall, 2001; Ritter, 2003; Ritter & Schafer
1998). In examining some of the cultural dimensions of the cruise
ship experience, Wood (2000) argued that the global nature of
the cruise market has meant that cruise ships have become
examples of ‘globalisation at sea’ with corresponding
Poyya Moli
Tourter
219
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
deterritorialisation, cultural theming, and simulation. Such lessons
have to be carefully considered, while planning/ implementing
cruise tourism in the third world. In India, it is especially true in
pristine locations such as Andaman & Nicobar and Lakshadweep
Islands, though India could earn more income per number of
tourist. It is now well established that islands with their
geographical, environmental, structural and political limitations
are more vulnerable to the effects of tourism and in many cases
lack the capacity of the mainland to absorb these impacts. As a
result, sustainability oriented tourism development strategies
assume greater importance in island tourism destinations
(Kokkranikal et.al., 2003; Baldacchino, 2006) .
In spite of tremendous opportunities, ET has limited potential in
marine/coastal areas and cannot be universally promoted
everywhere, due to various limitations that include:
Geographical and biological factors – due to the fragility of
the habitats involved (Allen , 1992; Garrod & Wilson, 2004)
Physical factors (denser cover in protected areas vs higher
visibility preferred for viewing) (Peter et.al., 2007; Poyya
Moli, 2007b)
Economical factors (only a few sites are sufficiently unique
to be economically self-sufficient) (White et.al., 1997;
Pedro & Albino, 2007)
Cultural factors (danger of acculturation, if Eco-tour
promoters/tourists are insensitive to the local cultural
diversity, especially that of ancient cohesive tribal cultures)
(Poyya Moli, 2003 & 2007b; Carla Guerro´n-Montero,
2006)
Ownership rights and sharing of benefits – the tragedy of
the common property resources and other conflicts;
tourism destinations are particularly sensitive to the
“tragedy of the commons” (Hardin, 1968; Briassoulis, 2002;
Healy, 2006; Pedro & Albino, 2007) and conflict with
polluting uses/activities (Getzner, 2002).
Booming human populations, especially in the third world
– hunger for land and its natural resources vs. Ecological
integrity and sustainability of PAs? (Poyya Moli, 2007a;
Stronzaa, & Gordillob,2008)
Conflicts between tourism development (use and user
conflicts)
and
conservation
in
PAs
the
tradeoffs/compromises without degrading habitat/species
Poyya Moli
Tourter
220
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
diversity and livelihood security are becoming difficult due
to the market forces (Wearing & Darcy 1999, Weaver,
2001; Davosa et.al., 2007; George & Poyya Moli, 2007b)
Such constraints reflect the relative immaturity of the tourism
management field and should not discourage us in adopting MET,
wherever it can be potentially introduced. They only help us to
understand the complexity of the issues involved and the
community based/ community run MET case studies would guide
us to formulate viable MET ventures.
On the one hand, it is encouraging to note that throughout the
world, there is a growing need for ‘greening’ the tourism industry
and to ‘eco-sell’ tourism and travel, as modern tourists are
seeking destinations with unspoiled natural beauty. On the
contrary, unfortunately, some State Governments and tour
companies in third world countries as well as some developed
countries regard ET as a passing fad or a gimmick or a buzzword
and consider it conveniently as a synonym with any offering
resembling an “outdoor activity,” whether it takes a responsible
approach to the environment or not. Often the ET label is misused
by tourism operations in what is known as “green washing,” or
“green cloaking” which include unregulated development of
relatively undisturbed areas, appropriation of ancestral lands, or
just applying traditional tourism development models under the
name of eco-tourism. If ET becomes uncontrollable, large
numbers of Eco-tourists will quickly constitute a mass and begin
to impact on the local physical, biological and cultural
environment. The resultant impacts will be no different than that
of mass tourism- perhaps they can be even greater. Since the
destination areas are located in Ecologically/culturally sensitive
areas, the anticipated impacts would be more severe and
irreversible (Weaver, 2001 & 2002b; Shepherd, 2002). A glaring
example is the proposed 5 star mega “Eco-tourism” project, in
Sunder bans, one of the largest mangrove forests in the world and
a unique tiger habitat, in West Bengal, India, with an outlay of Rs
500 crore, entirely under the control of a single corporate giant –
the Sahara group. This would have covered five Virgin Islands in
the 36,000 sq.kms of water area in the Sunderbans Delta.
However, the proposed areas ironically fall in the Coastal
Regulation Zone (CRZ) Category I, where no construction activity
for tourism is permitted! If the project was implemented (the
Govt. of WB have given the green signal, but the central
Government has not approved it as there was a stiff opposition
Poyya Moli
Tourter
221
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
from civil society groups), the pristine habitats/ecosystems would
be irreparably damaged, valuable species would be threatened
and the local communities would be alienated/uprooted, thus
unleashing serious Ecological, Economic and cultural impacts.
However, realizing the huge Economic potentials, several other
state Governments in India, are vying with each other to start
such corporate based “mega ET projects”. Conditions are not far
different in several other developing countries. This is in direct
violation of the basic principles of ET and the very concept of
protected areas – benefiting the local communities by ensuring
their participation/inclusion in biodiversity conservation. Thus,
putting ET on a truly sustainable path is a major challenge,
requiring partnerships and cooperation between the tourism
industry, governments, local people and the tourists themselves.
Hence, utmost care is required while planning/implementing
MET.
FUTURE PERSPECTIVES
In the past, the Ecotourists/ET planners were preoccupied with
how the marine environment will negatively impact on them
(stingrays, sharks, fire coral, etc.), not how ET can negatively
impact on the fragile ecosystems that are being visited; for
instance, touching coral can injure it, and it may take years to
repair itself, if at all; hence, this needs to be reversed in the
future. The future for MET lies in identifying/adopting sustainable
and cost effective alternatives such as green infrastructure
(maintaining Ecological corridors while developing the
transportation/accommodation networks, using locally available
renewable resources in buildings, mooring buoys instead of
anchors, waste recycling, water harvesting and reuse, root zone
cleaning systems, other phyto-remediation systems, Ecological
sanitation ), organic and exotic foods, health and spirituality
products, and revival of creative cultural industries along with
diversified tourist activities that are organically interlinked to
Biodiversity conservation and sustainable livelihoods. For
instance, preventing anchor damage requires minimal investment
or operational change, but can return significant benefits in terms
of increased revenues from tourists who want to see healthy,
intact reefs.
Thus, there is an urgent need for self regulation- from the ET
promoters on the one hand to the Ecotourists on the other hand.
This calls for the development of consistent, uniform standards of
accreditation and certification to establish operational clarity in
Poyya Moli
Tourter
222
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
planning and implementing marine/ coastal ET. It helps ensure
businesses self-defined as “ecotourism” and/or in fragile and/or
protected Marine/coastal ecosystems, support areas and
communities promoting ET, and to meet public demand and
consumer interest for those travelers who want to be as
environmentally friendly as possible. ET certification is the
procedure by which a third party gives written assurance that an
ET product, process, service or management system conforms to
specified requirements. ET accreditation is the procedure by
which an authoritative body verifies the competence of those
doing the ET certifying or auditing. It “certifies the certifiers.”
The desire for legitimizing force of accreditation and certification,
however, has led to the development of numerous certification
programs and standards that have varying degrees of quality and
application. This has again meant some confusion over the validity
of these systems, and whether there should not be something of
an international standard such as those provided by the
International Standards Organization (such as ISO 14000), or
agreed upon by practitioners and advocacy bodies alike, to foster
trust and consensus in accreditation and certification
mechanisms. ET certification programs are intended to go beyond
the “greening” of tourism industry or nature tourism. Their
fundamental principles are created through broad stakeholder
participation, whose eventual tenets weigh equally internal and
external environmental, socio-cultural and economic impacts.
There are a number of leading global, regional national, and subnational sustainable tourism and ecotourism certification
programs, (including Blue Flag, Synergy for WWF – UK, 2000;
Green Globe, 2004; Green Hotel Initiative, Kiskeya Alternativa,
Alianza Verde’s Green Deal, PAN Parks, Smart Voyager, and
Saskatchewan’s Horizons) and new certification initiatives in
Belize, Brazil, Fiji, Kenya, Peru, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sweden,
Fiji, and Vermont). These can be general in their orientation, or
specific in terms of their industry sector, locale or natural area of
operation (i.e. marine versus national park). These may be
critically evaluated and adopted for the third world
marine/coastal Ecosystems for initiating long term sustainable
development. The ET industry is in a relatively early and
experimental stage in the third world. Despite the wide diversity
of the marine/coastal Ecosystems in the third world and the
associated treasures of arts/heritage/culture, the number of Ecotourists are low in comparison to the neighboring countries such
Poyya Moli
Tourter
223
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
as Sri lanka, Maldives, Indonesia and Phillippines (Tisdell, 1997).
Hence there are still opportunities to develop a comprehensive
management plan based on site-specific ground realities rather
than an ad hoc system of add-ons by simply copying a few
selected elements from the western models of ET as it is being
done now.
Over the past decade and a half, visitor management frameworks
and procedures have been developed to address issues resulting
from tourism and recreation use of areas. These have included
the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS) (Clark & Stankey,
1979), the Tourism Opportunity Spectrum (TOS) (Butler &
Waldbrook, 1991), Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) (Stankey
et.al., 1985), Visitor Activities Management Planning (VAMP), and
the Visitor Impact Monitoring Process (VIMP). A new framework
was outlined by Boyd & Butler (1996), based on existing
approaches, that incorporates and modifies ideas from the ROS
and TOS to address ecotourism specifically. It is termed the
Ecotourism Opportunity Spectrum (ECOS) and contains the
following eight components:(1) accessibility, (2) relationship
between ecotourism and other resource uses, (3) attractions in a
region, (4) presence of existing tourism infrastructure, (5) level of
user skill and knowledge required, (6) level of social interaction,
(7) degree of acceptance of impacts and control over level of use,
and (8) type of management needed to ensure the viability of
areas on a long term basis. The first seven factors are set against a
spectrum of ecotourism opportunities which ranges from ecospecialists to eco-generalists. The spectrum suggested by Fernie
(1993) which has been adopted for the ECOS framework is very
similar to other classifications of ecotourism including the ‘hard’
and ‘soft’ categorization by Wilson & Laarman (1988), Laarman &
Perdue(1989) and Fennell & Eagles (1990) which was based on
the interests of the tourist and the physical rigor of the
experience itself. The eighth factor links decision makers and
stakeholder groups that may be involved in managing a region for
ecotourism. These methodologies have to be integrated into MET
planning/implementation for not only sustaining the MET
enterprises but also for restoring/reviving nature and
culture/heritage in the destination areas.
Sustainable livelihoods analysis (SLA) has been recently used to
assess the impacts of the tourism on many aspects of coastal
livelihoods. By contrast, conventional analyses of tourism tend to
focus on macro-economic benefits, or environmental impacts, or
Poyya Moli
Tourter
224
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
negative social consequences or conservation issues. Hence,
community run/based MET can be enhanced by adopting SLA.
However, we need much more rigorous assessment and analysis
of existing CBET projects in Marine/coastal areas, and better
information on which to base decisions about whether it is the
appropriate choice in any given situation. This means identifying
concrete conservation and socio-economic goals, and site-specific
market analysis and research on the linkages between those goals
and community actions and incentives. The best conservation
strategy for any given site must be developed based on a realistic,
hardheaded assessment of the options, including their feasibility,
cost-effectiveness, social impacts and sustainability. Financial and
technical resources for conservation and for development are too
scarce to waste on wishful thinking (Kiss, 2004).
All these innovative strategies can be ideally incorporated into the
integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) programme. The
ICZM framework coordinates the often conflicting needs of
fisheries, aquaculture, forestry, industries, and tourism to ensure
the sustainable use of coastal resources and conservation of
critical habitats Considering the complexity and vulnerability of
the coastal zone, the recently emerging ICZM approach appears
to be ideal for Integration of conservation with livelihoods in
tsunami hit areas (AID Environment, 2004).ICZM is a dynamic
process in which a coordinated strategy is developed and
implemented for the allocation of environmental, socio-cultural,
and sustainable multiple uses of the coastal zone. ICZM is also a
continuous, interactive, adaptive, participatory, consensusbuilding process comprised of a related set of tasks, all of which
must be carried out simultaneously to achieve a desired set of
goals and objectives for planning/implementing MET (White,
Barker & Tantrigama, 1997; Jennings, 2004; Noronha, 2004; CicinSaina & Belfioreb, 2005; Ming Gu & Poh Poh Wonga, 2008).
While MET is emerging as a potential choice for ensuring
sustainable development in the coastal regions of the third world,
the political will and administrative support (as exemplified by the
establishment of separate departments of ET and appropriate
regulations) required for evolving appropriate policy/ planning for
MET, is becoming sinqua none . The tremendous demand for MET
in the third world has not been matched with official efforts to
adequately plan, implement and monitor developments through
appropriate administrative and legal mechanisms and policy
instruments. As a consequence, the infrastructure for research,
Poyya Moli
Tourter
225
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
education, impact assessments, control regulations and risk
containment are woefully deficient or non-existent. This requires
coordinated efforts of all the relevant stake holders by ensuring
active participation, transparency and accountability. Thus,
training and capacity building for all the relevant stake holders for
ET in general (Poyya Moli, 2007a) and MET in particular is
emerging as a priority area in the coastal regions of the third
world.
REFERENCES
AID Environment (2004). Integrated Marine and Coastal Area
Management (IMCAM) approaches for implementing the
Convention on Biological Diversity. CBD Technical Series,
14. Montreal, Canada: Secretariat of the Convention on
Biological Diversity.
Allen, W.H. (1992). Increased dangers to Caribbean marine
ecosystems. Bioscience, 42 (5).
Al-Sayed, M., & A. Al-langawi, A. (2003). Biological resources
conservation through ecotourism development. Journal of
Arid Environments, 54, pp.225–236.
Anonymous (undated). Planning for Marine Ecotourism in the EU
Atlantic Area Good Practice Guidance University of the
West
of
England,
Bristol.
Accessed
at
http://www.tourism-research.org/sustainable.pdf on 8th
Feb 2009.
Archer, E. (1985). Emerging environmental problems in a tourist
zone: the case of Barbados. Caribbean Geography, 2,
pp.45–55.
Ashley, C. (2006). How can Governments boost the local economic
impacts of tourism? London, UK.
Ashley, C., Roe, D., & Goodwin, H. (2001). Pro-poor tourism
strategies: making tourism work for the poor – A review of
experiences. England.
Ashley, C., Goodwin, H., McNab, D., Scott, M., Chaves, L. (2006).
Making Tourism Count for the Local Economy in the
Caribbean: Guidelines for Good Practice. Pro-Poor Tourism
Partnership and Caribbean Tourism Organisation.
Asian Productivity Organization (2002). Linking productivity to
Ecotourism. Tokyo: APO.
Baldacchino, G. (2006). Warm versus Cold Water Island Tourism: A
Review of Policy Implications. Island Studies Journal, 1 (2),
pp.183-200.
Poyya Moli
Tourter
226
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Beekhuis, J.V. (1981). Tourism in the Caribbean: impacts on the
economic, social and natural environments. Ambio, 10.
Bookbinder, M.P. et al. (1998). Ecotourism’s support of
biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biol, 12, pp.1399–
1404.
Boyd, S.W., & Butler, R.W. (1996). Managing ecotourism: an
opportunity spectrum approach. Tourism Management, 17
(8), pp.557-566.
Briassoulis, H. (2002). Sustainable Tourism and the Question of
the Commons. Annals of Tourism Research, 29 (4), 1065–
1085.
Bringas-Rábago, N. L. (2002). Baja California and California's
Merging Tourist Corridors: The Influence of Mexican
Government Policies. The Journal of Environment &
Development, 11 (3), pp.267-296.
Butler, R.W., & Waldbrook, I.A. (1991). A new planning tool: the
Tourism Opportunity Spectrum. J Tourism Studies, 2 (I),
pp.1-14.
Cameron, C.M., & Gatewood, J.B. (2008). Beyond Sun, Sand and
Sea: The Emergent Tourism Programme in the Turks and
Caicos. Islands Journal of Heritage Tourism, 3 (1), pp.5573.
Cater, E. (1993). Ecotourism in the Third World: problems for
sustainable tourism development. Tourism Management,
14 (2), pp.85-90.
CBD (1992). Convention on Biological Diversity. Accessed at
http://www.biodiv.org/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf
on
8th
February 2009.
CBD (2004). Guidelines on Biodiversity and Tourism Development:
International guidelines for activities related to sustainable
tourism development in vulnerable terrestrial, marine and
coastal ecosystems and habitats of major importance for
biological diversity and protected areas, including fragile
riparian and mountain ecosystems (CBD Guidelines).
Montreal: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological
Diversity. Accessed at
http://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/tou-gdl-en.pdf
on
8th Feb 2009
CBD & UNEP (2007). Managing Tourism & Biodiversity. User’s
Manual on the CBD Guidelines on Biodiversity and Tourism
Development.
Ceballos-Lascurain (1993).Tourism, Eco-tourism and protected
areas. Gland: IUCN.
Poyya Moli
Tourter
227
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
CELB (undated). A Practical Guide To Good Practice: Managing
Environmental Impacts In the Marine Recreation Sector.
Accessed at www.celb.org on 8th Feb 2009.
Chaerul, M., Tanaka, M., & Shekdar, A. V. (2004). Effect of Tourism
Activities to Municipal Solid Waste Characteristics in Bali
Island-Indonesia. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of
the Japan Society of Waste Management Experts, 15 (3),
pp.7-9.
Cicin-Saina, B., & Belfioreb, S. (2005). Linking marine protected
areas to integrated coastal and ocean management: A
review of theory and practice. Ocean & Coastal
Management, 48 (11-12), pp.847-868.
Clark, R.N., & Stankey, G.H. (1979). The Recreation Opportunity
Spectrum: A Frame work for Planning, Management, and
Research US Department of Agriculture Forest Service.
Pacific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station,
General Technical Report.
Davenport, J. & Davenport, J.L. (2006). The impact of tourism and
personal leisure transport on coastal environments: A
review Estuarine. Coastal and Shelf Science, 67 (1-2),
pp.280-292.
Davosa, C.A., Siakavarab, K., Santorineoub, A., Sidec, J., Taylord,
M., & Barrigae, P. (2007). Zoning of marine protected
areas: Conflicts and cooperation options in the Galapagos
and San Andres archipelagos. Ocean & Coastal
Management, 50 (3-4), pp.223-252
Dearden, P., & Harron, S. (1994). Alternative tourism and adaptive
change. Annals of Tourism Research, 21 (1), pp.81–102.
De Araujo, M.C.B., & Costa, M.F. (2006). Municipal services on
tourist beaches: Costs and benefits of solid waste
collection. Journal of coastal research, 22 (5), pp.10701075.
DEFRA (2005). Sustainable Development action plan- just jump
straight in. DEFRA, p.26.
Diamantis, D. (1999). The concept of ecotourism: Evolution and
trends. Current Issues in Tourism 2 (2-3), pp.93–122.
Di Ciommo, R. C. (2007). Gender, Tourism, and Participatory
Appraisals at the Corumbau Marine Extractive Reserve.
Brazil Human Ecology Review, 14 (1), pp. 56-67.
Drumm, A., & Moore, A. (2002). Ecotourism Development : A
Manual for Conservation Planners and Managers. An
Introduction to Ecotourism Planning, 1, p.96.
Poyya Moli
Tourter
228
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Duffield, B.S., & Long, J. (1981). Tourism in the highlands and
islands of Scotland: rewards and conflicts. Annals of
Tourism Research, 8 (3).
Dwyer, L., & Forsyth, P. (1996). Economic impacts of cruise
tourism in Australia. Journal of Tourism Studies, 7 (2),
pp.36–43.
Dwyer, L., & Forsyth, P. (1998). Economic significance of cruise
tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 25 (2), pp.393–415.
Eber, S. (1992). Beyond the green horizon. Principles for
sustainable tourism. World Wildlife Fund : Godalming.
Epler Wood, M. (2002). Ecotourism: principles, practices & policies
for sustainability, 1 & 2. UNEP/TIES Edition.
Epler Wood, M. (2005). Stepping Up: Creating a Sustainable
Tourism Enterprise Strategy that Delivers in the Developing
World. Epler wood International. Accessed at
http://www.eplerwood.com/pdf/EplerWood_Report_Oct0
5.pdf on 8th February 2009.
European Communities (2000). Towards quality coastal tourism Integrated quality management (IQM) of coastal tourist
destinations. EU, Italy, p.159.
Fennel, D.A., & Eagles, P. F.J. (1990). Ecotourism in Costa Rica: a
conceptual framework. J Park and Recreation
Administration, 8 (1), pp. 23-34.
Fernie, K. J. (1993). Ecotourism: a conceptual framework from the
eco-tourist perspective. Unpublished MSc thesis,
Department of Forestry. Toronto, University of Toronto.
Font, X., Sanabria, R., & Skinner, E. (2003). Research Note.
Sustainable Tourism and Ecotourism Certification: Raising
Standards and Benefits. Journal of Ecotourism, 2 (3),
pp.213-218.
Foucat, V.S.A. (2002). Community-based ecotourism management
moving towards sustainability in Ventanilla, Oaxaca,
Mexico. Ocean & Coastal Management, 45, pp.511–529.
Garrod, B., Wilson, J., & Bruce, D. (undated) . Planning for marine
Ecotourism in the EU Atlantic area. Good practice guide.
p.78.
Garrod, B., & Wilson, J.C. (2004). Nature on the Edge? Marine
Ecotourism in Peripheral Coastal Areas. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 12 (2), pp. 95–120.
George, B.P., & Poyya Moli, G. (2007). Tourism and Environmental
quality management : Comparative perspectives. Asean
Journal of hospitality and tourism, 6 (1), pp.29-44.
Poyya Moli
Tourter
229
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Getzner, M. (2002). Investigating public decisions about
protecting
wetlands.
Journal
of
Environmental
Management, 64 (3), 237-246.
Goodwin, H., & Swingland, I.R. (1996). Ecotourism, biodiversity,
and local development. Biodiversity Conservation, 5,
pp.275–276.
Goodwin, H., Kent, I., Parket, K. & Walpole, M. (1998). Tourism,
Conservation and Sustainable development. International
Institute of Environment and Development. London.
Gosling, S. (1999). Ecotourism: a means to safeguard biodiversity
and ecosystem functions. Ecol. Econ., 29, pp.303–320.
Green globe 21 (2004). Green globe 21, International Eco tourism
standard. Ecotourism Australia and The Cooperative
Research Centre (CRC) for Sustainable Tourism.
Accessed at
http://anna.spenceley.co.uk/files/AfricanCertificationTools
EcSocEnvCriteriaTIES.pdf on 17th February 2009
Guerro´n-Montero, C. (2006). Tourism and Afro-Antillean Identity
in Panama. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 4 (2),
pp.65-84.
Hall, C.M. (2001). Trends in ocean and coastal tourism: the end of
the last frontier? Ocean & Coastal Management, 44 (9-10).
Hall, J.A., & Braithwaite, R. (1990). Caribbean cruise tourism: a
business of transnational partnerships. Tourism
Management, 11 (4).
Hardin, G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Science, 162,
pp.1243-1248.
Hardy, A.L. & Beeton, R.J.S. (2001). Sustainable Tourism or
Maintainable Tourism: Managing Resources for More Than
Average Outcomes. Journal of Sustainable tourism, 9 (3),
pp.168-192.
Harriott, V. J. (2002). Marine tourism impacts and their
management on the Great Barrier Reef. CRC Reef Research
Centre
technical
report,
46.
Accessed
at
http://www.reef.crc.org.au/publications/techreport/pdf/H
arriott46.pdf on 8th February 2009.
Harriott, V.J (2004). Marine tourism impacts on the Great Barrier
Reef. Tourism in Marine Environments, 1 (12), pp. 29-40.
Healy, R.G. (2006). The commons problem and Canada's Niagara
Falls. Annals of Tourism Research, 33, 525-44.
Higham, J.E.S., & Lűck, M. (2007). Marine wildlife and tourism
management: Insights from the natural and social sciences.
Wallingford, UK: CABI.
Poyya Moli
Tourter
230
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Hill, W., & Pickering, C.M. (2006). Vegetation associated with
different walking in the Kosciuszko alpine area, Australia.
Journal of Environmental Management, 78, pp. 24–34.
Holder, J.S. (1988). Pattern and impact of tourism on the
environment in the Caribbean. Tourism Management, pp.
119–127.
Holloway, J. C. & Robinson, C. (1995). Marketing for Tourism (3rd
Ed.). Essex: Longman Group Limited.
Honey, M. (1999). Ecotourism and Sustainable Development.
Who Owns Paradise? Washington: Island Press.
Honey, M., & Rome, A. (2001). Protecting Paradise: Certification
Programs for Sustainable Tourism and Eco-tourism, Inst.
For Policy analysis. Press Release. Accessed at
http://www.ips.dc.org/ecotourism/protectingparadise/sta
ndardsforparadise.pdf on 8th February 2009.
Honey, M. (2002) Ecotourism and Certification: Setting Standards
in Practice. Washington: Island Press.
Hoyt, E. (2005). Sustainable ecotourism on Atlantic islands, with
special reference to whale watching, marine protected
areas and sanctuaries for cetaceans. Biology
and
environment: Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy,
105b (3), pp.141 -154 .
Inskeep, E. (1991). Tourism Planning: An integrated and
Sustainable Development Approach. New York: Van
Nostrad Reinhold.
Jackson, L. A. (2006). Ameliorating the negative impacts of
tourism: a Caribbean perspective. International Journal of
Contemporary Hospitality Management, 18 (7), pp.574 –
582.
Jennings, S. (2004). Coastal tourism and shoreline management.
Annals of Tourism Research, 31 (4), pp.899-922.
Johnston, R.J., & Tyrrell, T.J. (2005). A Dynamic Model of
Sustainable Tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 44,
pp.124-134.
Kelman, I. (2007). Sustainable Livelihoods from Natural Heritage
on Islands. Review essay. Island Studies Journal, 2 (1),
pp.101-114.
Kiss, A. (2004). Is community-based ecotourism a good use of
biodiversity conservation funds? Trends in Ecology and
Evolution, 19 (5), pp.232-237.
Kokkranikal, J., McLellan, R., & Baum, T. (2003). Island Tourism and
Sustainability: A Case Study of the Lakshadweep Islands.
Journal of sustainable tourism, 11 (5), pp. 426-447.
Poyya Moli
Tourter
231
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Kontogeorgopoulos (2004). Ecotourism and mass tourism in
Southern Thailand: Spatial interdependence, structural
connections, and staged authenticity. GeoJournal, 61 (1–
11).
Laarman, J.G., & Perdue, R.R (1989). Science tourism in Costa Rica.
Annals of Tourism Research, 16 (2), pp.15-215.
Lea, J. (1988). Tourism and Development in the third world,
London: Routledge.
Lele, S.M. (1991). Sustainable Development: A Critical Review.
World Development, 19 (6), pp. 607-621.
Lim, C., & McAleer, M. (2005). Ecologically sustainable tourism
management. Environmental Modeling & Software, 20,
pp.1431–1438.
Liu, J.C., & Var, T. (1986). Resident attitudes toward tourism
impacts in Hawaii. Annals of Tourism Research, 13, pp.193–
214.
Loannides, D. (1995). Planning for International Tourism in Less
Developed Countries: Toward Sustainability? Journal of
Planning Literature, 9 (3), pp.235-254.
MacPherson, R. (2007). Coral Reefs Still in Danger from Tourism
Head. Science, 317 (5844), pp.1498 – 1500.
Mason, P. (2003). Tourism Impacts, Planning and Management.
Butterworth Heinemann Elsevier, p.208.
Mieczkowski, Z. (1995). Environmental Issues of Tourism and
Recreation. Lanham: University Press of America.
Miller, M.L., & Auyong, J. (1991). Coastal zone tourism: a potent
force affecting environment and society. Marine Policy, 15
(2), pp.75–99.
Miller, M. (1993). The rise of coastal and marine tourism. Ocean &
Coastal Management, 21 (1–3).
Ming G., & Poh Poh, W. (2008). Coastal zone management
focusing on coastal tourism in a transitional period of
China. Ocean & Coastal Management, 51 (1), pp.1-24.
Mitchell, R.E. (2003). Community-based tourism: Moving from
rhetoric to practice. E-Review of Tourism Research, 1 (1),
pp.10-13. Accessed at http://ertr.tamu.edu on 8th February
2009.
Neto, F. (2003). A new approach to sustainable tourism
development: moving beyond environmental protection.
Natural Resources Forum, 27.
Nicholls, H. (2004). Feature - The Conservation Business. PLoS
Biology, 2 (9). Accessed at www.plosbiology.org on 8th
February 2009.
Poyya Moli
Tourter
232
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Noronha, L. (2004). Coastal management policy: observations
from an Indian case. Ocean & Coastal Management, 47,
pp.63–77.
Odendal, A., & Schoeman, G. (1990). Tourism and rural
development in Maputaland: a case-study of the Kosi Bay
area. Development Southern Africa, 7, pp.195–208.
Orams, M. B. (2002). Marine ecotourism as a potential agent for
sustainable development in Kaikoura, New Zealand.
International Journal of Sustainable Development, 5 (3),
pp.338 – 352.
Paulo, A., Nunes, L.D., & Markandya, A. (2008). Economic value of
damage caused by marine bio-invasions: lessons from two
European case studies. Journal of Marine Science: Journal
du Conseil, 65 (5), pp.775-780.
Pedro, P., & João Albino, S. (2007). Tragedy of the commons' in
the tourism accommodation industry. Tourism Economics,
13 (2), pp.209-224.
Peter A., Lindsey, P.A., Alexander, R., Mills, M.G.L., Romañach, S.,
& Woodroffe, R. (2007). Wildlife Viewing Preferences of
Visitors to Protected Areas in South Africa: Implications for
the Role of Ecotourism in Conservation. Journal of
Ecotourism, 6 (1), pp.19–33.
Pickering, C.M., Bear, R., & Hill, W. (2007). Indirect Impacts of
Nature Based Tourism and Recreation: The Association
Between Infrastructure and the Diversity of Exotic Plants in
Kosciuszko National Park, Australia. Journal of Ecotourism,
6 (2), pp.146–157.
Poyya Moli G. (2003). Promotion of peace and sustainability by
community based heritage eco-cultural tourism in India.
The international journal of humanities and peace, 19 (1),
pp.40 – 45.
Poyya Moli, G. (2006). Integration of conservation with livelihoods
in tsunami hit areas, In Paulraj, S. (Eds.) Proc. of the
National commemorative conference on Tsunami. Madurai
Kamaraj University, Madurai. pp.135-142.
Poyya Moli, G. (2007a). Community based eco tourism as the
connecting thread for ensuring environmental, cultural,
economic and social sustainability in India – Potentials and
constraints. The international journal of environmental,
cultural, economic and social sustainability, 3 (4), pp. 191198.
Poyya Moli, G. (2007b). Eco-cultural tourism in Indian islands –
some implications. The Green Portal, Tourism Journal from
KITTS, 4 (1), pp.16-27.
Poyya Moli
Tourter
233
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Price, C. (1981). The impact of tourism on the environment.
Journal of Environmental Management, 12 (3).
Priskin, J. (2003). Tourist Perceptions of Degradation Caused by
Coastal
Nature-Based
Recreation.
Environmental
Management, 32 (2), pp. 189-204.
Reddy, S. (2007) Mega Tourism in Andaman and Nicobar Islands:
Some Concerns. J. Hum. Ecol., 21 (3), pp.231-239.
Ritter, F. (2003). Interactions of Cetaceans with Whale-Watching
Boats. Implications for the Management of WhaleWatching Tourism. A Report based on the Findings of the
Research Project M.E.E.R. La Gomera. Berlin, Germany.
Ritter, W., & Schafer, C. (1998). Cruise-tourism: a chance of
sustainability. Tourism Recreation Research, 23 (1), pp.65–
71.
Roe, D., & Urquhart, P. (2002). Pro-poor tourism: harnessing the
world’s largest industry for the world’s Poor. International
institute for environment and development. London.
Roehl, W.S., & Ditton, R.B. (1993). Impacts of the offshore marine
industry on coastal tourism: the case of Padre Island
National Seashore. Coastal Management, 21 (1), pp.75–89.
Ross, S., & Wall, G. (1999). Evaluating ecotourism: The case of
North Sulawesi, Indonesia. Tourism management, 20,
pp.673-682.
Sale, P.F., & Butler, M.J. IV, Hooten, M.J., Kritzer, J.P., Lindeman,
K.C., Sadovy de Mitcheson, Y. J., Steneck, R.S., & Van
Lavieren, H. (2008). Stemming Decline of the Coastal
Ocean: Rethinking. Environmental Management, Hamilton,
Canada: UNU-INWEH.
Salm, R.V., Clark, J., & Siirila, E. (2000). Marine and Coastal
Protected Areas: A Guide for Planners and Managers.
Washington, DC: IUCN – The World Conservation Union.
Sawkar, K., Noronha, L., Mascarenhas, A., Chauhan, O.S., & Saeed,
S. (1998). Tourism and the Environment - Case Studies on
Goa, India, and the Maldives. IBRD &WB.
Scheyvens, R. (1999). Ecotourism and the empowerment of local
communities. Tourism Management, 20, pp.245- 249.
Shaalan , I.M. (2005). Sustainable tourism development in the Red
Sea of Egypt - threats and opportunities. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 13 (2), pp.83-87.
Sharpley, R., & Tlfer, D.J. (2002). Tourism and Development:
Concepts and Issues. Clevedon: Channel View.
Poyya Moli
Tourter
234
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Shepherd, N. (2002). How ecotourism can go wrong: The cases of
Sea Canoe and Siam Safari, Thailand. Current Issues in
Tourism, 5 (3), pp.309–318.
Spiegel, J. M., Gonzalez, M., Cabrera, G. J., Catasus, S., Vidal, C., &
Yassi, A. (2008). Promoting health in response to global
tourism expansion in Cuba. Health Promotion
International, 23 (1).
Stockin, K., Lusseau, D., Binedell, V., & Orams, M. (2008). Tourism
affects the behavioural budget of common dolphins
(Delphinus spp.) in the Hauraki Gulf, New Zealand. Marine
Ecology Progress Series, 355, pp.287-295.
Stronzaa, A., & Gordillob, J. (2008). Community views of
ecotourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 35 (2), pp.448468.
Sun, D., & Walsh, D. (1998). Review of studies on environmental
impacts of recreation and tourism in Australia. Journal of
Environmental Management, 53 (4).
Stankey, G.H., Cole, D.N., Lucas, R.C., Peterson, M.E., & Frissell,
S.S. (1985). The Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) System.
Wilderness Planning. USDA.
The Nature Conservancy, (undated). Ecolodge Guidelines.
Accessed at
http://conserveonline.org/workspaces/tncecotourismprog
ram/publications/publications1/ecolodge_guidelines_v1.pdf on 17th February 2009
Sweeting, J., Aaron, E. N., Bruner, G., & Rosenfeld, A.B. (1999).
The Green Host Effect - An Integrated Approach to
Sustainable
Tourism
and
Resort
development.
Conservation international, Washington, USA.
Synergy for WWF-UK (2000). Tourism Certification. An analysis of
Green Globe 21 and other tourism certification
programmes.
accessed
at
http://www.wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/tcr.pdf on 8th
February 2009
Thiele, M.T, Pollnac, R.B., & Christie, P. (2005). Relationships
between coastal tourism and ICM sustainability in the
central Visayas region of the Philippines. Ocean & Coastal
Management, 48 (3-6), pp. 378-392.
TIES (2002).Marine Ecotourism Guidelines: Impacts Guidelines and
Best practices.
Timothy, D., & White, K. (1999). Community-based ecotourism
development on the periphery of Belize. Current Issues in
Tourism 2 (2&3).
Poyya Moli
Tourter
235
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Tisdell, C. (1997). Tourism development in India and Bangladesh:
General issues, illustrated by ecotourism in the
Sunderbans. Tourism Recreation Research, 22(1), pp.26–33.
UNCED, (1992). The Rio Declaration on environment and
development. Accessed at
http://bch.minambiente.it/EN/Documents/RioDecl.pdf on
8th February 2009.
UN (2002). Global challenge – global opportunity. Trends in
Sustainable development. Johannesburg Summit.
UN (2005). The millennium goals report. Accessed at
http://www.un.org/docs/summit2005/MDGBook.pdf on
8th February 2009.
UNEP (2005). Making tourism more sustainable – a guide for
policy makers. (1&2). Paris, France.
UNEP- DTIE (2002). Sustainable Development of Tourism:
Conceptual Definition.
Vallega, A. (1994). Mediterranean action plan for which futures?
Ocean & Coastal Management, 23.
Vaughan, D. (2000). Tourism and Biodiversity: A Convergence of
Interests? International Affairs, 76 (2), pp. 283-297.
Visser, N., & Njuguna, S. (1992). Environmental impacts of tourism
on the Kenya coast. Industry and Environment, 15 (3&4),
pp.42–52.
WCED (1997). Our Common Future. Oxford University Press,
Oxford.
Weaver, D. (2001): Ecotourism as mass tourism: Contradiction or
reality? Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration
Quarterly, 42 (2), pp.104–112.
Weaver, D. (2002a).Asian ecotourism: Patterns and themes.
Tourism Geographies, 4 (2), pp.153–172.
Weaver, D. (2002b). The evolving concept of ecotourism and its
potential impacts. International Journal of Sustainable
Development, 5 (3), pp.251–264.
Wearing, S., & Darcy, S. (1999). Ecotourism options in coastal
protected area management: a case study of North Head
Quarantine Station, Australia. The Environmentalist, 18 (4),
pp. 239-249.
Wight, P. (1993). Sustainable Ecotourism: Balancing economic,
environmental and social goals within an ethical
framework. Journal of Tourism Studies, 4 (2), pp.54-66.
White, A.T., Barker, V., Tantrigama, G. (1997). Using integrated
coastal management and economics to conserve coastal
tourism resources in Sri Lanka. Ambio, 26 (6).
Poyya Moli
Tourter
236
Tourisme & Territoires / Tourism & Territories (2009)
Williams, J. (2006). Responsible Travel Handbook.
Accessed at http://www.tourismfutures.org/index2.php?option=com_content&do_pdf=1&i
d=997 on 8th February 2009.
Wilson, M.A., & Laarman, J.G. (1988). Nature tourism and
enterprise development. World Leisure and Recreation,
29/30 (1), pp. 22-27. Ecuador.
Wink, R. (2005). Eco-tourism and collective learning: an
institutional perspective. International Journal of
Environment and Sustainable Development, 4 (1), 1-16.
Wood, R.E. (2000). Caribbean cruise tourism. Globalization at sea.
Annals of Tourism Research, 27 (2).
Woodley, A. (1993). Tourism and Sustainable Development: The
Community Perspective. In Nelson, J.G., Butler, R., & Wall,
G. (Eds.). Tourism and Sustainable Development:
Monitoring, Planning, Managing. Department of
Geography Publication Series, 37.Waterloo: University of
Waterloo. pp.136-147.
WTO (2006). Poverty alleviation through tourism - a compilation
of good practices. Madrid : WTO.
WWF (2001). Guidelines for community-based ecotourism
development. Gland, Switzerland: WWF International.
Accessed at
http://assets.panda.org/downloads/guidelinesen.pdf on
8th February 2009.
Yeung, M. & Law, R. (2005). Forecasting US air travelers to
Europe, Caribbean and Asia. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism
Research, 10 (2), pp. 137-149.
Zeppel, H. (1997). Maori Tourism in New Zealand. Tourism
Management, 18 (7), pp.475-478.
Poyya Moli
Tourter
237