benefits of ecotourism case study

Winter is here! Check out the winter wonderlands at these 5 amazing winter destinations in Montana

• Travel Guide
• Sustainability

Ecotourism Costa Rica Case Study: Who Benefits?

Published: November 14, 2023

Modified: December 28, 2023

by Jyoti Vanness

• Central & South America
• Travel Destinations

Introduction

Ecotourism has become a buzzword in the travel industry, with travelers increasingly seeking out destinations that prioritize sustainability and environmental conservation. One country that has made significant strides in developing and promoting ecotourism is Costa Rica.

Renowned for its breathtaking biodiversity and commitment to environmental protection, Costa Rica has positioned itself as a leading destination for eco-conscious travelers. From lush rainforests and diverse wildlife to immaculate beaches and stunning volcanoes, the country offers a plethora of natural wonders for visitors to explore.

In this article, we will delve into the concept of ecotourism and discuss why Costa Rica serves as an excellent case study for examining the benefits and challenges associated with this form of sustainable travel.

At its core, ecotourism involves responsible travel to natural areas that conserve the environment, sustain the well-being of local communities, and provide educational and enjoyable experiences for visitors. It goes beyond traditional tourism by incorporating principles of conservation, community empowerment, and environmental stewardship.

Costa Rica, with its commitment to environmental protection and sustainable development, has emerged as a prime example of how ecotourism can positively impact a country’s economy, society, and natural resources.

Throughout this article, we will explore the economic, social, and environmental benefits of ecotourism in Costa Rica. We will also discuss the challenges and criticisms that this form of tourism faces in the country, shedding light on the complexities of balancing tourism growth with environmental preservation.

Join us on this journey as we uncover the fascinating world of ecotourism in Costa Rica and examine the question: Who truly benefits from this unique approach to travel and conservation?

Definition of Ecotourism

Ecotourism is a form of tourism that focuses on sustainable travel experiences, promoting the conservation of natural resources and the well-being of local communities. It encompasses responsible travel practices that minimize negative impacts on the environment while providing educational and enriching experiences for visitors.

Ecotourism goes beyond traditional tourism by emphasizing the importance of environmental conservation, cultural preservation, and community empowerment. It aims to create a positive and symbiotic relationship between tourists, local communities, and the natural environment.

The International Ecotourism Society (TIES) defines ecotourism as “responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment, sustains the well-being of local people, and involves interpretation and education.” This definition highlights the three pillars of ecotourism: environmental sustainability, community development, and visitor education.

The environmental sustainability aspect of ecotourism involves minimizing the ecological impacts of tourism activities. This can be achieved through practices such as reducing water and energy consumption, managing waste effectively, and protecting fragile ecosystems and wildlife habitats. Ecotourism encourages tourists to appreciate and respect the natural beauty and biodiversity of the destinations they visit.

Community development is another essential component of ecotourism. It focuses on empowering local communities by involving them in decision-making processes, providing economic opportunities, and preserving their cultural heritage. Ecotourism initiatives often collaborate with local communities to ensure that they directly benefit from tourism-related activities, such as hospitality, guiding, and the sale of local products.

Visitor education plays a crucial role in promoting ecological awareness and sustainability. Ecotourism seeks to educate tourists about the natural and cultural significance of the destinations they visit, as well as the importance of responsible travel practices. By providing educational experiences, ecotourism encourages tourists to become ambassadors for conservation and advocates for sustainable tourism.

Overall, the concept of ecotourism is centered around the idea of promoting a harmonious and mutually beneficial relationship between tourists, host communities, and the environment. It seeks to create a positive impact on local economies, empower communities, and protect natural habitats for future generations.

Overview of Costa Rica

Costa Rica, a small country located in Central America, is often referred to as a “natural paradise” due to its incredible biodiversity and stunning landscapes. Situated between the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean, Costa Rica is home to a wide array of ecosystems, including rainforests, cloud forests, mangroves, beaches, and volcanoes.

Despite its size, Costa Rica boasts an astounding 5% of the world’s biodiversity, making it one of the most biodiverse countries on the planet. It is estimated that the country is home to around 500,000 species, including over 12,000 different plant species, 850 bird species, 250 mammal species, and countless reptiles, amphibians, and insects.

The country’s commitment to environmental conservation is evident through its extensive system of national parks, reserves, and protected areas, which cover around 25% of its land. Costa Rica was one of the first countries to recognize the value of its natural resources and has been at the forefront of sustainable development for several decades.

Costa Rica’s emphasis on sustainability has garnered international recognition. It has been named the “Greenest Country in the World” by the Happy Planet Index and consistently ranks highly on the Environmental Performance Index.

In addition to its natural beauty, Costa Rica also offers a rich cultural heritage. The country is home to various indigenous communities, each with its own traditions, languages, and customs. Visitors have the opportunity to learn about and engage with these vibrant cultures through community-based tourism initiatives.

Costa Rica’s tourism industry has experienced significant growth in recent years. It has become a popular destination for eco-conscious travelers seeking immersive experiences in nature and opportunities for adventure activities like hiking, zip-lining, and wildlife observation.

With its commitment to sustainability, Costa Rica has taken the lead in promoting and developing ecotourism. The government has implemented policies and initiatives to encourage the growth of sustainable tourism practices, including the Certification for Sustainable Tourism (CST) program, which recognizes and rewards businesses that operate in an environmentally and socially responsible manner.

Overall, Costa Rica’s remarkable natural beauty, dedication to environmental conservation, and thriving ecotourism industry make it an ideal case study for examining the benefits and challenges associated with sustainable travel. As we delve deeper into the topic, we will explore how ecotourism has positively impacted the country’s economy, society, and environment.

Ecotourism Development in Costa Rica

Costa Rica has been at the forefront of ecotourism development, setting an example for the world with its commitment to environmental stewardship and sustainable tourism practices. The country’s journey towards becoming an ecotourism hotspot can be traced back to the 1970s when it made a conscious decision to prioritize the conservation of its natural resources.

Recognizing the potential of its rich biodiversity and pristine environments, Costa Rica began investing in the creation of national parks and protected areas. Today, the country boasts an impressive network of over 30 national parks, wildlife refuges, and biological reserves, which offer visitors unparalleled opportunities to experience and appreciate its natural wonders.

The ecotourism industry in Costa Rica has grown exponentially over the years, with a significant increase in the number of eco-lodges, nature-based tour operators, and community-based tourism initiatives. These businesses strive to provide authentic and sustainable experiences that showcase the country’s unique ecosystems while promoting conservation and benefiting local communities.

The government of Costa Rica has played a crucial role in promoting and regulating ecotourism development. It has implemented policies and initiatives that incentivize businesses to adopt sustainable practices, such as the Certification for Sustainable Tourism (CST) program mentioned earlier. This certification program assesses the sustainability performance of tourism businesses, recognizing those that meet specific criteria related to environmental, social, and cultural sustainability.

In addition to government efforts, Costa Rican communities have been actively involved in the development of ecotourism. Many local communities have started their own initiatives, offering visitors the chance to experience their culture, traditions, and way of life. This community-based approach ensures that the benefits of tourism are distributed more equitably and help empower local populations.

Ecotourism in Costa Rica not only focuses on land-based activities but also encourages responsible marine tourism. The country’s extensive coastline is home to vibrant coral reefs, marine biodiversity, and numerous protected marine areas. Visitors can engage in activities such as snorkeling, scuba diving, and sea turtle conservation projects, all while respecting the fragile marine ecosystems.

Overall, the development of ecotourism in Costa Rica has not only enhanced the country’s reputation as a nature lover’s paradise but has also provided numerous economic and social benefits. Through sustainable tourism practices, Costa Rica has successfully demonstrated that it is possible to generate revenue from tourism while preserving the environment and supporting local communities.

Economic Benefits of Ecotourism

Ecotourism has brought significant economic benefits to Costa Rica, contributing to the country’s overall growth and development. The sustainable tourism practices and emphasis on conservation have created a strong and thriving ecotourism industry, which has become a major source of revenue for the country.

One of the key economic benefits of ecotourism in Costa Rica is job creation. The growth of the tourism industry has led to the creation of employment opportunities in various sectors, from hospitality and tour guiding to ecotourism management and conservation efforts. Local communities have been able to capitalize on the demand for eco-friendly accommodations, eco-tours, and other nature-based experiences, providing livelihoods for many individuals and supporting small businesses.

Furthermore, ecotourism has stimulated entrepreneurship and the development of local businesses. Many small-scale eco-lodges, restaurants, and tour operators have emerged, often owned and operated by members of the local communities. These enterprises not only contribute to the diversification of the tourism industry but also help to retain economic benefits within the communities themselves.

The revenue generated from ecotourism activities also has a trickle-down effect on the economy. Money spent by visitors on accommodations, meals, transportation, and souvenirs circulates within the local economy, supporting local suppliers and service providers. This multiplier effect creates additional economic opportunities and helps to stimulate the growth of other sectors, such as agriculture and handicrafts.

In addition to direct economic benefits, ecotourism generates revenue for environmental conservation. The funds collected from entrance fees to national parks and protected areas, as well as through conservation initiatives, contribute to the preservation of Costa Rica’s natural habitats and the protection of its biodiversity. These resources are then reinvested in maintaining the integrity of these ecosystems, improving visitor infrastructure, and supporting research and educational programs.

Moreover, the success of ecotourism has positioned Costa Rica as a top travel destination for nature enthusiasts, attracting a steady stream of international visitors. This has resulted in increased tourism revenues, as travelers are willing to pay a premium for authentic and sustainable experiences. The monetary value placed on Costa Rica’s natural beauty and eco-conscious approach has created a competitive advantage and captured the attention of discerning travelers.

Overall, the economic benefits of ecotourism in Costa Rica have been significant, creating jobs, fostering entrepreneurship, and stimulating economic growth. By incorporating sustainability into its tourism practices, Costa Rica has transformed its natural resources into a valuable economic asset, ensuring a prosperous future for both the tourism industry and the local communities it supports.

Social Benefits of Ecotourism

Ecotourism in Costa Rica has not only brought economic prosperity but has also had a profound impact on the social well-being of local communities. It has fostered community empowerment, cultural preservation, and improved quality of life for many individuals.

One of the key social benefits of ecotourism is the empowerment of local communities. Through community-based tourism initiatives, local residents have been given the opportunity to actively participate in the tourism industry. They have become guides, hosts, and entrepreneurs, showcasing their culture, traditions, and way of life to visitors. This active involvement not only generates income but also helps to preserve and celebrate the unique cultural heritage of the communities.

Ecotourism has also provided educational opportunities for residents of these communities. As tourists seek immersive and educational experiences, local community members have the chance to share their knowledge and expertise, serving as interpreters and educators. This exchange of knowledge enhances cultural understanding and promotes respect for diverse cultures and traditions.

Furthermore, ecotourism has played a vital role in raising awareness about environmental conservation among both locals and visitors. Through guided tours and interpretive programs, visitors learn about the importance of protecting the environment and the actions they can take to minimize their impact. Local communities, in turn, develop a sense of environmental stewardship, as they witness firsthand the benefits of preserving their natural resources for future generations.

Another significant social benefit of ecotourism is the fostering of a sense of pride and identity within local communities. By showcasing their natural and cultural heritage, communities are able to reinforce their own worth and uniqueness. This recognition and appreciation from visitors bolsters community pride and self-esteem, strengthening social cohesion.

Additionally, the interaction between visitors and local communities can promote cross-cultural exchange and understanding. Tourists have the opportunity to engage with locals, learn about their way of life, and gain a deeper appreciation for different cultures. This cultural exchange encourages tolerance, empathy, and a sense of global citizenship.

Moreover, ecotourism has provided opportunities for the preservation of traditional practices and crafts. Many local artisans have been able to revive and sustain traditional handicrafts, such as weaving, pottery, and woodworking, which are then showcased and sold to tourists. This preservation of cultural heritage helps to maintain traditions, generate income, and provide a sense of pride and continuity within the community.

Overall, the social benefits of ecotourism in Costa Rica extend beyond economic gains. Through community empowerment, cultural preservation, and educational opportunities, ecotourism has positively impacted the social fabric of local communities, fostering a sense of pride, preserving traditions, and promoting cross-cultural understanding.

Environmental Benefits of Ecotourism

Ecotourism in Costa Rica has had profound environmental benefits, playing a significant role in the conservation and protection of the country’s rich natural resources. By promoting sustainable practices and raising awareness about environmental issues, ecotourism has contributed to the preservation of Costa Rica’s unique ecosystems.

One of the key environmental benefits of ecotourism is the conservation of biodiversity. Costa Rica is home to an astounding array of plant and animal species, many of which are endangered or threatened. Ecotourism prioritizes the protection of these species and their habitats, ensuring that visitors have minimal impact on delicate ecosystems. By adopting responsible travel practices, such as staying on designated trails, minimizing waste, and respecting wildlife, visitors can experience the natural wonders of Costa Rica without causing harm to the environment.

Another important environmental benefit of ecotourism is the preservation and restoration of natural areas. Many ecotourism initiatives invest in the restoration and rehabilitation of degraded environments, such as reforesting areas that have been deforested or rehabilitating coastal habitats. These efforts not only enhance the beauty and integrity of the landscapes but also provide essential habitats for wildlife and contribute to the overall health of ecosystems.

Ecotourism also supports and funds the establishment and management of protected areas. The revenue generated from entrance fees and tourist activities in national parks and reserves helps to maintain and protect these areas. These funds are used for conservation efforts, such as patrolling against illegal activities, conducting research, and implementing sustainable management practices. They also support educational programs and infrastructure development, providing visitors with an informative and enjoyable experience while minimizing negative impacts on the environment.

Furthermore, ecotourism encourages sustainable resource management. By showcasing the value of intact ecosystems, it promotes the sustainable use of natural resources, such as water, energy, and land. Eco-lodges and other nature-based accommodations often employ environmentally friendly practices, such as water and energy conservation measures, waste management strategies, and the use of renewable energy sources. These initiatives minimize the ecological footprint of tourism and serve as examples of sustainable practices that can be replicated in other areas.

Ecotourism also plays a role in raising awareness about environmental issues and promoting environmental education. Through guided tours, educational programs, and interpretive materials, visitors gain a deeper understanding of the importance of environmental conservation. This education fosters a sense of responsibility and empowers tourists to make informed choices that minimize their impact on the environment, both during their visit and in their everyday lives.

Overall, the environmental benefits of ecotourism in Costa Rica are far-reaching. By prioritizing the conservation and sustainable use of natural resources, ecotourism has helped to safeguard Costa Rica’s rich biodiversity, support the establishment of protected areas, promote sustainable resource management, and raise environmental awareness among visitors and local communities.

Challenges and Criticisms of Ecotourism in Costa Rica

While ecotourism has brought numerous benefits to Costa Rica, it is not without its challenges and criticisms. It is important to recognize and address these issues to ensure the long-term sustainability and effectiveness of ecotourism practices in the country.

One of the main challenges of ecotourism in Costa Rica is the potential for negative environmental impacts. Despite efforts to promote responsible travel practices, some tourists may engage in activities that harm the environment, such as improper disposal of waste, disturbance of wildlife, or damage to fragile ecosystems. Balancing the desire to attract tourists with the need for environmental protection requires continued education and enforcement of sustainable practices.

Another challenge is the potential for the commodification of culture and the loss of authenticity. Commercialization and the demand for cultural experiences can sometimes lead to the exploitation of local traditions and customs, turning them into commodified spectacles for tourist consumption. It is crucial to strike a balance that respects and celebrates local cultures while preserving their integrity and authenticity.

Infrastructure development can also pose challenges to ecotourism in Costa Rica. As tourism grows, there is a need for increased infrastructure, such as accommodations, transportation, and recreational facilities. However, poorly planned or excessive infrastructure development can result in the degradation of natural habitats, increased pollution, and loss of biodiversity. Careful management and sustainable infrastructure planning are necessary to minimize these negative impacts.

Furthermore, the economic benefits of ecotourism may not always reach the local communities who bear the burden of hosting tourists. There is a need to ensure that the revenue generated from ecotourism is distributed equitably and contributes to the overall well-being of the local population. This can be achieved through community empowerment, providing opportunities for local businesses, and supporting initiatives that preserve and celebrate local cultures.

There are also concerns about the risk of over-tourism in popular ecotourism destinations in Costa Rica. Increased visitor numbers can place stress on fragile ecosystems and disrupt the natural balance of these areas. Proper management strategies, including visitor limits, trail restrictions, and seasonality control, are necessary to mitigate the potential negative effects of over-tourism.

Critics argue that ecotourism in Costa Rica has become commercialized and focused more on profit than conservation. Some businesses may use the label of “ecotourism” as a marketing tool without genuinely prioritizing sustainable practices. Greenwashing, where businesses falsely claim to be environmentally friendly, can mislead tourists and undermine the credibility of genuine ecotourism efforts.

Finally, climate change poses a significant challenge to the sustainability of ecotourism in Costa Rica. Rising temperatures, changing rainfall patterns, and extreme weather events can threaten ecosystems and impact wildlife habitats. Adaptation and mitigation strategies are necessary to ensure the long-term viability of ecotourism in the face of these environmental challenges.

Awareness and active management of these challenges and criticisms are vital for the continued success of ecotourism in Costa Rica. Through collaboration and commitment, stakeholders can address these issues and work towards a more sustainable and responsible approach to ecotourism in the country.

Costa Rica serves as an exemplary case study for the positive impacts and challenges of ecotourism. Over the years, the country has successfully harnessed the power of sustainable tourism to conserve its natural resources, empower local communities, and boost its economy.

Through the development of eco-friendly accommodations, nature-based tourism initiatives, and community-based tourism projects, Costa Rica has created numerous job opportunities and entrepreneurial ventures for its residents. Local communities have been able to showcase their cultural heritage and benefit from the revenue generated by ecotourism activities.

The environmental benefits of ecotourism in Costa Rica are undeniable. The preservation of biodiversity, restoration of natural areas, and funds allocated for the management of protected areas have contributed to the conservation of the country’s fragile ecosystems. Additionally, by promoting sustainable practices and environmental education, ecotourism has raised awareness about the importance of environmental stewardship among both tourists and locals.

However, the challenges and criticisms associated with ecotourism in Costa Rica should not be overlooked. Environmental impacts, cultural commodification, infrastructure development, equitable distribution of benefits, over-tourism, greenwashing, and the impacts of climate change all pose challenges that require ongoing attention and management.

Despite these challenges, it is clear that ecotourism has had a transformative impact on Costa Rica, positioning it as a global leader in sustainable travel. By tackling these challenges head-on and continuously improving sustainable practices, Costa Rica can continue to reap the benefits of ecotourism while mitigating its negative impacts.

In conclusion, the success of ecotourism in Costa Rica demonstrates that by prioritizing environmental conservation, promoting community empowerment, and fostering educational experiences, sustainable tourism can be a powerful catalyst for positive change. Costa Rica serves as an inspiration and a model for other countries, showing that it is possible to create a thriving tourism industry while protecting the natural beauty and cultural heritage that make our world truly special. As travelers and stakeholders, it is our responsibility to support and promote sustainable tourism practices, ensuring that ecotourism continues to be a force for environmental preservation and social progress.

1. The International Ecotourism Society. (2021). What is ecotourism? Retrieved from https://ecotourism.org/what-is-ecotourism/

2. World Travel & Tourism Council. (2021). Travel & Tourism Economic Impact 2021: Costa Rica. Retrieved from https://www.wttc.org/economic-impact/country-analysis/country-profiles-2021/#C

3. Castillo, R. R. (2019). Ecotourism in Costa Rica: A review of its economic, environmental, and social impacts. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 27(3), 940-950.

4. Honey, M. (2008). Ecotourism and Sustainable Development: Who Owns Paradise? Island Press.

5. Lindberg, K., & Hawkins, D. (Eds.). (1993). Ecotourism: A Guide for Planners and Managers (Vol. 1). The Ecotourism Society.

6. McNamara, K., & Honey, M. (2020). Costa Rica and ecotourism development: A critical analysis. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28(4), 519-535.

7. Spenceley, A. (Ed.). (2012). Responsible Tourism: Critical Issues for Conservation and Development. Earthscan.

8. Weaver, D. B. (2008). Ecotourism (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

9. World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). (2021). Tourism Highlights 2021 Edition. Retrieved from https://www.unwto.org/publication/tourism-highlights-2021-edition

10. World Travel & Tourism Council. (2021). Costa Rica: The Greenest Country in the World. Retrieved from https://www.wttc.org/content/files/2021/reports/Country%20Profiles%202021/CostaRica2020.pdf

Note: The above references are for informative purposes only. It is recommended to consult additional sources for comprehensive research on the topic.

• Privacy Overview
• Strictly Necessary Cookies

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, how to unlock the benefits of ecotourism: a case study of karpaz, north cyprus.

Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes

ISSN : 1755-4217

Article publication date: 2 May 2022

Issue publication date: 1 July 2022

This research was motivated by the strong desire of the researchers to make an impact on the protection and conservation of the environment and to make recommendations to enhance sustainable ecotourism development in the Karpaz peninsula, North Cyprus. The aim of the research was first to assess the current challenges faced by those involved in ecotourism and sustainable practices and secondly to develop solutions for these challenges.

Design/methodology/approach

Qualitative applied research was used with the objective of combining the concerns of local entrepreneurs with the knowledge of the members of the ecotourism associations and organisations to raise public awareness, empower locals, bring social change and improve the lives of the local community. Twenty in-depth interviews were conducted with ecotourism entrepreneurs, members of the Ecotourism Association, the Ecotourism Movement and the Karpaz Ecotourism Cooperative.

The results showed that the main challenges faced were a lack of finance, a lack of support from the local and national governments and a lack of knowledge regarding ecotourism and sustainable development amongst members of the local community. The solutions are educating the local community about agri-ecotourism, putting pressure on local and national governments to support agri-ecotourism, getting other tourism associations such as tour operators on their side and setting up farming cooperatives for farmers.

Originality/value

The value and originality of this study lie in the use of applied research approach with its social agenda of finding solutions which can be developed from the new knowledge which arises from the study.

• Agri-ecotourism
• Sustainable development
• Social capital
• Eco-markets
• North Cyprus

Acknowledgements

The data for this paper came from a larger project.

Yorganci, I. and Emin, E. (2022), "How to unlock the benefits of ecotourism: a case study of Karpaz, North Cyprus", Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes , Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 339-348. https://doi.org/10.1108/WHATT-03-2022-0038

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2022, Emerald Publishing Limited

Related articles

All feedback is valuable.

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Local people’s perception of the impacts and importance of ecotourism in Central Nepal

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Software, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected] (SU); [email protected] (SGC)

Affiliations Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States of America, Himalayan Conservation and Research Institute Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing – original draft

Affiliations Himalayan Conservation and Research Institute Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal, Tribhuvan University, Institute of Forestry, Pokhara, Nepal

Roles Methodology, Software, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliations Himalayan Conservation and Research Institute Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal, Faculty of Forestry, Agriculture and Forestry University, Hetauda, Makawanpur, Nepal

Roles Software, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliations Himalayan Conservation and Research Institute Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal, College of Forestry, Agriculture & Natural Resources, University of Arkansas, Monticello, AR, United States of America

Roles Writing – review & editing

Affiliations Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies, College of Environmental Studies, National Dong Hwa University, Hualien, Taiwan, Natural Resources Conservation Nepal (NRCN), Kathmandu, Nepal

• Suraj Upadhaya, 
• Sarada Tiwari, 
• Beeju Poudyal, 
• Sagar Godar Chhetri, 
• Nabin Dhungana

• Published: May 27, 2022
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268637
• Reader Comments

Ecotourism contributes to conserving natural resources and promoting natural and cultural resources stewardship. However, without the strong support and involvement of local people, it is not easy to achieve the stated goals. This study aimed to understand the local people’s perception of the impacts and importance of ecotourism. We conducted a semi-structured interview of 167 respondents from Chitwan National Park (CNP), Nepal’s prime center for ecotourism. The result revealed that more than 70% of respondents are interested in ecotourism activities, and their interests are significantly affected by their age, academic qualification, and occupation. Local people from the study area perceived that infrastructure development and increase in the knowledge base are significant impacts of ecotourism. The study showed that local people’s socioeconomic and demographic characteristics significantly influenced their perceived impacts of ecotourism. Detailed understanding and consideration of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics can contribute to effective outreach and planning process, potentially resulting in the higher promotion of ecotourism.

Citation: Upadhaya S, Tiwari S, Poudyal B, Godar Chhetri S, Dhungana N (2022) Local people’s perception of the impacts and importance of ecotourism in Central Nepal. PLoS ONE 17(5): e0268637. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268637

Editor: Jun Yang, Northeastern University (Shenyang China), CHINA

Received: January 27, 2022; Accepted: May 4, 2022; Published: May 27, 2022

Copyright: © 2022 Upadhaya et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: The data underlying the results presented in the study are available from https://github.com/HimalayanConservationResearchInstitute/ecotourism-cnp?fbclid=IwAR3V3qFwmcBfJ4m-ZUCZZ315BbDUi5dIv155z2ErdYgi8k64aAPZX8x9xNE .

Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

1 Introduction

The tourism industry is one of the world’s largest industries and is associated with many sectors of the world’s economy. It creates jobs, drives exports, and generates prosperity across the globe [ 1 , 2 ]. Tourism contributes 10.4% of total gross domestic products (GDP), approximately US $8.8 trillion annually, creating 319 million jobs to the world economy [ 1 ]. In Nepal, travel and tourism contributed 7.9% of total GDP, approximately US $746.3 million annually, and created 1.05 million jobs [ 1 ].

Ecotourism is defined as "responsible travel to natural areas that conserve the environment, sustains the well-being of the local people, creates knowledge and understanding through interpretation and education of all involved; visitors, staff and the visited" [ 3 ]. It represents nature-based travel to a relatively undisturbed touristic destination [ 4 ]. In both developed and developing countries, ecotourism is viewed as an engine of economic advancement and a pathway for improving the livelihoods of communities that might otherwise struggle to grow and flourish [ 5 , 6 ]. Ecotourism helps poverty alleviation, job creation, income redistribution, and export of domestic products to international markets [ 7 , 8 ]. Ecotourism can promote sustainable development through managing biological diversity and ecosystem services and functions by ensuring quality tourism experiences and absorbing or adapting to the pressures of tourists [ 9 ]. It focuses on community development, poverty alleviation, biodiversity conservation, and traditional economic activity, including agriculture, livestock, and hunting [ 10 ]. In developing countries like Nepal, it supports employment, markets, and cultural conservation and promotes ownership, management, and equitable sharing of benefits from natural resources among communities in the local area [ 11 – 13 ].

Nepal is popular for natural, historical, cultural, and adventure activities. For international tourists, it is famous for its low-cost tourism destinations. Due to higher buying power resulting from a favorable currency exchange rate and lower living expenditures, inbound tourist numbers are high [ 14 ]. The majority of the tourists prefer Nepal as a destination for trekking, rafting, wildlife safari, and cultural pilgrimage. Nepal’s rich biodiversity is also another high attraction for tourists. This includes watching spectacular species such as the One-horned Rhino, Asian Elephant, and Royal Bengal Tiger. Many ecotourists opt for their destination in the protected areas of Nepal, such as Chitwan National Park (CNP), Bardiya National Park, and Suklaphanta National Park. While natural attraction provides the foundation of tourism in any country, promoting an increase in tourist numbers depends on positive tourism experiences [ 15 ].

Similarly, the availability of facilities, quality delivery of services, and hospitality help sustain the quality and growth of tourism [ 15 ]. CNP has been serving these facilities through local people, entrepreneurs, and people in business. The primary services provided by the local people are manufacturing handmade souvenirs, showcasing their tradition through dance, homestay, and guiding the ecotourists. In turn, the local community earns foreign currency, advances their livelihood, and is motivated to develop ecotourism.

Several studies have explored the perceived impacts of ecotourism on the local community. Developing ecotourism industries and interactions with tourists significantly impact local communities [ 16 ]. These interacting forces can influence the communities’ values, behavior, lifestyles, and quality of life [ 17 ]. The development of ecotourism industries can positively and negatively affect both the natural resources and local communities’ livelihoods [ 15 ]. It is also found that ecotourism has supported the conservation of natural resources, promoted alternative energy sources, and enhanced women’s empowerment [ 12 ]. Households involved in ecotourism-related activities have a significantly higher living standard [ 18 ]. Their purchasing power will be greater than their counterparts and vice-versa [ 19 ]. There is a trade-off between economic benefits and environmental and socio-cultural costs that requires a balance between the protection of natural resources, livelihood improvement, and community development [ 20 ].

People’s perceptions of the sustainability of ecotourism revealed different perspectives. The perspectives of the individuals are influenced by their socio-demographic factors. For instance, the demands and necessities of the low-income and high-income individuals are different. As a result, they observe the resource from their perspectives. Low-income residents benefited from fuelwood, non-timber forest products, and fodder [ 21 ].

In contrast, high-income individuals benefited from timber extraction, forest-based enterprises, and large businesses. These benefits motivate local people to conserve forestlands and associated biodiversity. Also, the provision of wildlife damage compensation schemes provided by the Nepal Government has dramatically improved the attitudes of local people toward conservation [ 22 ]. Similarly, the revenue generated from ecotourism can be used to manage and conserve wildlife species and their habitat [ 23 ], community development, conservation education, and skills development [ 24 ]. Besides, ecotourism promotes and keeps alive local culture and traditions. Many hotel owners encourage tourists to visit Tharu (ethnic community) villages in CNP to understand better Tharu’s culture, art, living style, and traditions [ 25 ]. The community shows a warm welcome and respect to the tourists. The tourist visits the area to see the local culture, encouraging locals to conserve their indigenous practices. Also, local people perceived that the presence of tourists enhanced their pride in the region [ 26 ]. Ecotourism also played a crucial role in sustaining traditional practices and making prosperous communities.

Though ecotourism has many positive aspects, there are also some negatives. The fast growth of the tourism industry might have negatively impacted society, the environment, and the economy [ 27 ]. Drug abuse, illegal sexual activities, and other illegal activities have been enhanced due to tourism activities [ 25 ]. Also, a report by [ 28 ] found that the consumption of drugs and alcohol, robbery, and prostitution has increased in this area. These negative economic externalities encompass a rise in the price of goods and services [ 29 ]. Due to Nepal’s small and tourism-dependent economy, the pricing effects on commodities might become a permanent and nationwide phenomenon that affects the lives and welfare of all inhabitants [ 30 ]. In addition, tourism might have negative impacts on forests and biodiversity. Unplanned tourism activity is responsible for environmental degradation, waste generation, and pollution [ 13 , 31 ]. Therefore, unmanaged tourism development activities are a risk to the sustainability of the tourism industry.

In sum, previous research has identified several impacts of ecotourism, even when ecotourism helps uplift people’s livelihood. However, those studies focused on the major tourist flow areas where there are sophisticated services provided by hotels, lodges, and big business owners to the visitors. Also, rural and urban residents’ perception of ecotourism is significantly different [ 32 ]. So, to our knowledge, there is a paucity of information on local peoples’ perception of ecotourism in the study area. Also, its impacts on various social and economic aspects are still lacking.

A previous study also suggested that a host community’s participation in ecotourism development is closely linked to its access to knowledge about ecotourism and its related ability to control and manage local tourism resources [ 33 ]. Another study argued that understanding whether the host community benefits from ecotourism activities is crucial for sustainable management [ 34 ]. Host community participation facilitates access to benefits from ecotourism activities, but it also entails the right to a say in exerting controls on the ecotourism development process [ 6 ]. A sense of ownership and perceptions of ecotourism by host communities is an important issue for ecotourism development [ 6 ]. Today, policymakers pay increasing attention to economic development and growth and less attention to the effects of this growth on the environment, leading to the degradation of biodiversity. It is found that behavioral and functional activities in the area influenced tourism activities. It is not easy to accurately identify tourism’s social, ecological, and economic impacts [ 32 ]. Therefore, this study seeks to understand the local community’s perceptions of ecotourism impacts.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 study area.

Chitwan National Park (CNP) was the first national park declared in Nepal (in 1973) and has an area of 932 km 2 . CNP was designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1984. The Kumroj, a village and one of the potential destinations for ecotourism, covers 21.22 km 2 of land in the buffer zone of CNP ( Fig 1 ). The total area of Kumroj comprises 3.10 km 2 of forest area, 12.98 km 2 of agricultural land, 3.66 km 2 of grassland, 0.94 km 2 of water bodies, and the remaining 0.54 km 2 of other lands [ 35 ]. It consists of 1,750 households with 8,082 residents representing 16 different castes comprising indigenous Tharu and Darai communities along with hill migrants [ 35 , 36 ]. People of Kumroj depend on agriculture as the main source of income, besides which they rely on forest resources through plantation and regeneration of forest to sustain their livelihood. The degraded forest was recovered through community participation after 1980, and ecotourism was started in 1997 [ 36 ]. The renovation of the community forest and the increased presence of wildlife in the forest managed by the Kumroj buffer zone community forests users’ group have assisted the ecosystem regeneration. Then after, they promoted ecotourism, which can support local livelihood and conservation of forest resources [ 37 , 38 ]. Through ecotourism activities which started in 1997, this community of forest users group is generating approx. $45,000 annually [ 36 ]. Kumroj area has prime value for recreation, cultural richness, and wilderness, making it potential for ecotourism.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268637.g001

2.2 Data collections

The target population for this study consisted of local communities living in the adjacent villages (Khumroj) of Chitwan National Park. A total of 167 households (10% of the total households) were interviewed, which is enough for generalizing the results in the study area at a 95% confidence level with a 5% margin of error [ 39 ]. The authors themselves carried out the interviews in June-July of 2019 for this study. Stratified random sampling (SRS) with a sample interval of ten was applied, i.e., every tenth household after the first randomly selected households was surveyed. The SRS method was used because it provides a well-representation of the population. The head-of-household was asked to answer the questions. Only one person had selected from one household for an interview. If the head-of-household member was not available, we interviewed a family member above 18-years-old. In addition, the head-of-household who understood the Nepali (local) language and who was willing to participate at the time of data collection was included in this study. If both cases were not possible, the household was not included in the sampling.

Face to face semi-structured questionnaire was used for data collection (S1). So far, there is no institutional review board or national ethical guidelines for social science research in Nepal. However, the study adhered to established standards in research ethics, such as keeping the personal identifier confidential and obtaining verbal consent before starting the questionnaire survey. We also maintained confidentiality by keeping the filled-up questionnaire safely, using the data only for analysis purposes, and discarded immediately after completing the data entry. Data were collected according to the convenience of respondents, and time was allocated to 25–30 minutes for each respondent. A questionnaire survey was the primary source of data collection. The four-page survey instrument included two parts. Part 1 covered the respondent’s demographic characteristics, including gender (male and female), age (recoded as two categories; Young and Old, based on the median age of Nepalese people ~ 25 years), and education (illiterate: who did not go to school or cannot read or write; literate: who went to school or can read and write). Ethnicity was measured into four possible categories. Household income was recoded into two categories (1) Less than Nepal’s median household income and (2) higher than median household income per month. The second part of the survey solicited respondents’ perceptions of various aspects of ecotourism. Respondents were asked to state their perceptions about the benefits of ecotourism. Respondents who perceived that ecotourism is beneficial answered "Yes" otherwise "No."

Similarly, those respondents who think ecotourism changed their lifestyle responded "Yes" otherwise "No." Respondents were asked about their level of interest in ecotourism and their response, and we categorized their responses into "high," "medium," and "low." These two "Yes" and "No" and "high," "medium," and "low" three answers were used in the Chi-square test. Due to space limitations and the survey’s primary objective, we did not ask about the quantitative benefits of ecotourism.

In addition to the questionnaire survey, we also conducted key informant surveys (n = 5) with personnel from Kumroj Buffer Zone Community Forest Users Group and the homestay management committee to understand the local area better. During the key informant survey, we discussed existing services available for ecotourism, the socioeconomic situation, and the operational plan of the group.

2.3 Data analysis

Data were reviewed and checked daily for completeness, consistency, and accuracy. After finishing the data collection, all the data were rechecked, edited, coded, categorized, entered, and analyzed in the computer program using R software.

For further analysis, we grouped variables into different categories. We described perception with seven different dependent variables., 1) Local people’s interest in ecotourism: this variable can be defined as the residents’ have an attentiveness or being attracted to continue their business; 2) local people’s perceptions about the economic impacts of ecotourism: this means whether people believed or have some evidence of raising the economic activity in their areas due to ecotourism; 3) impacts of ecotourism in changing respondents’ lifestyle: this variable identifies the resident’s perception regarding their improvement of different facilities such as switching from fuelwood to gas, more conscious about the health and safety, and being more informed; 4) impacts of ecotourism in causing economic inequality in the study area: it explains about the negativity of the inflow of tourism. For example, increase in bus fares, land, room, house, and overall market; 5) ecotourism as the reason for the increase in commodity price: the variables try to reveal the disproportion of the goods and services such as market prices of the basic daily necessities; 6) perceptions towards the impacts of ecotourism in infrastructure development in their area: this explained about whether resident’s experienced about the development of infrastructure in their community such as road construction and maintenance, electricity and other utilities; and 7) impacts of ecotourism on knowledge improvement of locals: the variable explains how the local people gather the information regarding the ecotourism activities and their level of awareness about the current ecotourism demand in the market.

Similarly, we have the socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents as independent variables. Age, gender, caste, education status, household income, and occupation were the major socioeconomic factors. We grouped ethnicity into four major groups, namely (1) Brahmin/Chhetri/Newar (BCN); (2) Janajati; (3) Madhesi; (4) Dalits. Similarly, we grouped the education level into three categories (1) illiterate, (2) school level, and 3) university level. However, for the convenience of analyzing the data, we further grouped it into two categories (1) illiterate and (2) literature. Likewise, we categorized household income into three categories, (1) low, (2) medium, and (3) high, based on the minimum salary of the Government of Nepal. Again we further group them into two categories (1) low; and (2) high using the national median income [ 40 ]. Similarly, the respondents’ ages were grouped into three categories (1) young age; (2) middle age; and (3) elderly age group. In addition, the occupation of the respondents was grouped into three major categories (1) agriculture, (2) business, and (3) others (remittance, pension, etc.). Given the nature of the data, we employed a chi-square test to assess the association of these variables to respondents’ perceptions.

Of the 167 household respondents interviewed, 85 respondents were male (50.90%), and 82 were female (49.10%). The majority of the respondents were 25 years or older ( Table 1 ). The median age of the respondent was 25 years. Most of the respondents interviewed were between the age of 15–39 years (43.71%), followed by 40–59 years (39.52%) and above 60 years (16.77%). Twenty-six percent of respondents were illiterate, while 73.66% of respondents have primary school or higher academic qualifications. The major source of livelihood was found to be agriculture. More than two-thirds of the respondents’ major source of income was agriculture, followed by business and other jobs ( Table 1 ). The median monthly income of the respondents was NRs 14,700 (the US $1 = NRs 103). Most of the respondents (83.23%) were less than NRs 18,500 monthly income, which is the minimum salary of the Government of Nepal. Only a few respondents (6 or 3.59%) had income more than NRs. 30,000, and the remaining respondents (13.17) had income between NRs. 15,001- NRs 30,000.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268637.t001

3.1 Local people’s interest in ecotourism

The results showed that more than 70% of the respondents showed high or medium interest in ecotourism in their area ( Table 2 ). One of the possible reasons for showing greater interest is that local people benefited from ecotourism. A chi-square test of independence was performed to examine the relationship between different socio-demographic characteristics and the respondents’ interest in ecotourism. Among six variables, an education level (p = 0.016) and occupation type (p<0.001) were statistically significant to the interest of the local people in ecotourism at a 95% level of significance ( Table 2 ). The finding is logical because educated people were more aware of the opportunity of having ecotourism. Similarly, an occupation that depends upon the inflow of tourists in the area would increase the business’s profitability.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268637.t002

3.2 Perceptions of local people on the economic impacts of ecotourism

Most respondents think that ecotourism is not responsible for a change in their lifestyle. Only 9% of respondents think that ecotourism brings a difference in their lifestyle ( Table 3 ). The study revealed that people were only fulfilling their basic needs rather than making more money which significantly improved or changed their lifestyle through tourism activities. The contingency table indicates that variables such as income (p = 0.003), age (p<0.001), and occupation (p<0.001) of the respondents were statistically significant to the change in lifestyle of the people ( Table 3 ). In contrast to the impacts of ecotourism on the changing lifestyle of respondents, more than 83% of respondents think that ecotourism is responsible for creating economic inequality among locals in the study area ( Table 4 ). No single socio-demographic characteristic was found to be significant. However, most respondents with low income and involved in agriculture think that ecotourism is the reason for economic inequality in the community ( Table 4 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268637.t003

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268637.t004

More than 90% of respondents reported that ecotourism is not responsible for increasing commodity prices in the study area ( Table 5 ). However, most respondents with high income reported that the increase in commodity prices in their place is due to ecotourism. The chi-square test shows that respondents’ ethnicity, income, occupation, and age significantly affect their response towards ecotourism’s impacts on an increase in commodity price ( Table 5 ). Most respondents in agriculture occupations do not think that increased commodity price is due to ecotourism. Similarly, respondents with low income believe that there is no relationship between ecotourism and increased commodity prices ( Table 5 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268637.t005

Most of the respondents (92%) perceived that infrastructure development in their area is due to ecotourism. They saw infrastructure development as the direct impact of ecotourism in their community. The chi-square test shows that only age and education are significant among the socio-demographic factors, with respondents’ perceptions of ecotourism impacts infrastructure development. More than 90% of the respondents who have at least school-level education think that infrastructure development in their area is due to ecotourism. Similarly, respondents of older age feel the same ( Table 6 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268637.t006

3.3 Perceptions of local people on the social impacts of ecotourism

The results show that majority of the local people perceived that their knowledge base had been improved due to ecotourism. They believe that ecotourism impacts the educational development of their children. The result showed that most of the respondents with low income think that ecotourism activities in their area have helped to improve their children’s knowledge and language abilities ( Table 7 ). The chi-square test shows the significant relationship between respondents’ income level and perceptions of ecotourism’s impacts on knowledge improvement ( Table 7 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268637.t007

4 Discussion

Our study showed that local people from the Kumroj Buffer zone of Chitwan National Park have both positive and negative perceptions of the impacts of ecotourism. We found that people living around CNP are interested in ecotourism. Local people’s higher interest is obvious in areas like CNP, where the ecotourism industry is well established. As [ 41 ] suggested, the higher interest of local people in ecotourism is directly influenced by multiple factors, including local organizations and groups involved in providing ecotourism services. Such associations or networking agencies encourage local people to engage in ecotourism activities by conducting meetings, agri-business exhibitions, and extension programs. Our results also showed that the demographics and socioeconomic status of the local people were associated with their interest in ecotourism activities. This study revealed that most respondents recognized that infrastructure development in their area is due to increased ecotourism activities. Our results align with the existing studies by [ 42 ], ecotourism activities contribute to the infrastructure development of the area. We also found that old-aged and literate locals perceived ecotourism contributes to infrastructure development. The local people who perceive that their knowledge base is improved due to ecotourism activities are typically low-waged. People with low income appreciate the income from ecotourism as their primary source of income, which enables their children to get an education.

The study found that most residents were interested in ecotourism activities, and those interested residents were literate. This suggests that educated people are more interested in ecotourism. Educated people are an essential aspect of conserving natural resources and protected areas. These ecological protection areas also allow academic institutions to organize and implement field-based education for their students [ 43 ], which will enable them to see many benefits and positive aspects of ecotourism. This interest increase in ecotourism activities creates many different economic dynamics in the Kumroj Buffer Zone Area. A previous study suggests that due to the influx of tourists in the area, local people suffer from an increase in the price of commodities [ 1 ]. Still, local people from the Khumroj Buffer zone do not perceive that ecotourism significantly impacts commodity prices. This local people’s perception is significantly associated with their ethnicity, income, occupation, and age. In contrast, the study found that ecotourism is responsible for creating economic inequality among the local people. We feel that this aspect should be explored in-depth in future research.

Also, the study found that tourism helps in promoting infrastructure development. This perception of infrastructure development due to ecotourism activities is associated with the respondents’ age and education level. The previous study also showed that tourism activities encourage establishing facilities such as road access, hotel, lodges, resorts, restaurants, infrastructure, souvenir shops, grocery, and gift shops [ 12 , 44 ]. These facilities encourage large business personnel to engage in a range of tourism activities and create an opportunity to produce and sell local products such as vegetables, fruits, livestock, and handmade souvenirs [ 45 ]. In addition, ecotourism encourages small businesses such as nature guide services and travel and tours company in the areas. These infrastructure developments and other physical facilities enhance the economic benefits at the local, provincial and national levels. The economic benefits that residents perceive from ecotourism development include more employment opportunities, increased income, and business opportunities [ 1 , 9 , 19 , 30 ]. For instance, according to the CNP authorities, a total of 152,671 tourists visited and generated NRs 24,19,60,998.28 (US $1 = NRs 103) revenue in the fiscal year 2017/2018.

The social impacts of ecotourism on the local community are often perceived as improving residents’ quality of life, education standard (or literacy rate), leadership skills, and improvement in the language [ 1 , 46 ]. Due to the rise in income and economic activity, the local people can afford their basic needs, resulting in better living standards. Also, people can afford better schools for their children, be aware of their health, access to new technologies, and enhance social networks. Therefore, many locals switched from traditional cooking stoves to improved ones, reducing the dependency of forest products such as firewood. Our results align well with previous research where most of the residents switched to biogas plants and solar energy systems for the household energy source [ 47 ]. It is also found that CNP provides funds to the local people for road construction, school building maintenance, and biogas plants due to tourism activities [ 47 ]. Also, it creates opportunities for cultural exchange and the revitalization of local traditions [ 48 ]. Tourism can also result in social and cultural benefits such as more recreational opportunities for residents, improved public services and infrastructure, and a source of social change [ 1 , 48 , 49 ]. However, ecotourism may also have costs or adverse socio-cultural effects. As a source of change, ecotourism can have a negative impact on traditional family values, lead to cultural commercialization, and create socio-cultural conflicts in the host community due to differences in the economic welfare and purchasing power between the host community and tourists [ 50 ].

People perceived that ecotourism had played a vital role in the sustainable development of human welfare. A steady increase in tourists has positively and negatively impacted the region [ 51 ]. However, sustainable tourism management has always been a better strategy to mitigate tourism’s adverse effects [ 52 ]. The local peoples’ perceptions and attitudes towards ecotourism significantly contribute to sustainable tourism management.

5. Conclusions

Knowing local residents’ opinions is necessary in tourism destinations’ planning process and governance. Understanding their perceived impacts of ecotourism is needed for positive output. This study explored the relationship between local peoples’ perception of impacts and the importance of ecotourism with their socioeconomic and demographic characteristics. This study looked into the most overlooked aspect of ecotourism management, and the findings will serve as the foundation for local governments’ social aspects of ecotourism planning. Further, the study could serve as a guide to compare these famous ecotourism destinations with other tourist areas with similar characteristics, considering that results are not generalizable. The socio, economic and ecological conditions of each context influence the results; although they might have some common characteristics with other destinations, they are still unique to the particular local destination [ 17 ].

We hope this study will help fill in existing gaps in literature around the perceived impacts of ecotourism in underdeveloped countries Nepal. Though our research investigated the association between respondents’ socioeconomic and demographic characteristics and their perceived impacts and importance of ecotourism, we did not do any research that explored the causal effect of these associations. Furthermore, this study did not examine how local people perceived the ecological impacts of ecotourism. We suggest doing this as this will provide a more comprehensive understanding of the perceived impacts of ecotourism on all three aspects of sustainability viz, social, economic, and ecological.

Supporting information

S1 file. survey guide used to collect data..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268637.s001

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful to all the respondents from Kumroj Village for participating in this study. The authors also acknowledge feedback from the two anonymous referees and the editor of this journal, which helped improve the quality of the manuscript.

• 1. World Travel and Tourism Council. Travel & tourism: Global economic impact & trends 2020. 2020. Available: https://wttc.org/Portals/0/Documents/Reports/2020/GlobalEconomicImpactTrends2020.pdf?ver=2021-02-25-183118-360 .
• View Article
• Google Scholar
• 3. The International Ecotourism Society. What is ecotourism? 2022 [cited 24 Mar 2022]. Available: https://ecotourism.org/what-is-ecotourism/ .
• 18. Guha I, Gosh S. Does tourism contribute to local livelihoods? A case study of tourism, poverty and conservation in the Indian Sundarbans. Kathmandu, Nepal; 2007. Report No.: No 26–07.
• 20. Adhikari Y, Fischer A. Tourism: Boon for forest conservation, livelihood, and community development in Ghandruk VDC, Western Nepal. Initiat. 2011;4. https://doi.org/10.3126/init.v4i0.5535
• PubMed/NCBI
• 28. Chitwan National Park. Chitwan National Park and Buffer Zone Management Profile: Socioeconomic evaluation of buffer zone communities. 2005.
• 35. NTNC. Kumroj- The Model Biogas VDC. 2013.
• 38. Tiwari S, Upadhaya S. Local people perception towards the impact of ecotourism on their livelihood: A case study from Chitwan National Park, Nepal. International Youth Scientific Conference. Hetauda, Nepal: Ministry of Industry, Tourism, Forests and Environment; 2019. pp. 250–256.
• 39. Vaske JJ. Survey research and analysis: applications in parks, recreation and human dimensions. Pennsylvania: Venture Publishing Inc; 2008.
• 40. Central Bureau of Statistics. National Economic Census 2018, Analytical Report No.1. Kathmandu, Nepal; 2020. Available: https://cbs.gov.np/wp-content/upLoads/2020/07/NEC2018-Analytical-Report-No-1-Analysis-on-18-Industries.pdf .
• 41. Yip HW, Mohd A, Ghani ANA, Emby Z. Participatory of local operators in ecotourism services delivery: The nature-based tourism development in Pahang National Park, Malaysia. 2006;17: 313–318. https://doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2006.9687192

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 31 May 2023

Eco-tourism, climate change, and environmental policies: empirical evidence from developing economies

• Yunfeng Shang 1 ,
• Chunyu Bi 2 ,
• Xinyu Wei 2 ,
• Dayang Jiang 2 ,
• Farhad Taghizadeh-Hesary   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5446-7093 3 , 4 &
• Ehsan Rasoulinezhad   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7726-1757 5  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  10 , Article number:  275 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

12k Accesses

14 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Environmental studies

Developing ecotourism services is a suitable solution to help developing countries improve the status of sustainable development indicators and protect their environment. The primary purpose of this paper is to find out the effects of green governance variables and carbon dioxide emissions on ecotourism for 40 developing economies from 2010 to 2021. The results confirmed a uni-directional causal relationship between the green governance indicator and the inflation rate of the ecotourism indicator. In addition, with a 1% improvement in the green governance index of developing countries, the ecotourism of these countries will increase by 0.43%. In comparison, with a 1% increase in the globalization index of these countries, ecotourism will increase by 0.32%. Moreover, ecotourism in developing countries is more sensitive to macroeconomic variables changes than in developed economies. Geopolitical risk is an influential factor in the developing process of ecotourism. The practical policies recommended by this research are developing the green financing market, establishing virtual tourism, granting green loans to small and medium enterprises, and government incentives to motivate active businesses.

Similar content being viewed by others

Comprehensive green growth indicators across countries and territories

Role of foreign direct Investment and political openness in boosting the eco-tourism sector for achieving sustainability

Ways to bring private investment to the tourism industry for green growth

Introduction.

The challenge of climate change has become a primary threat to living on the Earth in the last centuries (Rasoulinzhad and Taghizadeh-Hesary, 2022 ). Many meetings of the countries at the regional and international level are held on the topics of environment and climate change. Regardless of environmental issues, population growth, and the lack of control of greenhouse gas emissions, industrialization has been the most crucial cause of the climate change crisis. Chao and Feng ( 2018 ) address human activity as the leading cause of climate change and express that this challenge is a potential threat to living on Earth. Woodward ( 2019 ) argued that climate change threats include the rise in global temperature, the melting of polar ice caps, and unprecedented disease outbreaks. Therefore, urgent policies and solutions are essential to control and lower the risk of global change. One of the signs of climate change is the increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s surface. Figure 1 shows the temperature data from 1910 to 2021 for the four continents of Asia, Europe, Africa, and North America.

Source: Authors from NOAA ( https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/climate-at-a-glance/global/time-series ).

The data in Fig. 1 shows that the air temperature has increased significantly over the past century, which has been more prominent in Asia and Europe. In 2021, we saw a decrease in temperature changes due to the spread of the Corona disease and a decrease in the rate of greenhouse gas emissions. However, the role of the Asian continent in increasing the global temperature has been more than other continents due to its large population and excessive consumption of fossil fuels.

During the past decades, the world’s countries have tried to formulate and implement various environmental policies collectively in the form of agreements or separately to fight environmental threats. Regarding international agreements, such things as the Paris Agreement of 2015, the Kyoto Protocol of 1997, the Montreal Protocol of 1987, and the Vienna Convention on the Protection of the Ozone Layer in 1985 can be addressed whose primary purpose is to integrate the goals and motivation of the international community to the world’s environmental threats. However, a group of earlier studies, such as Zheng et al. ( 2017 ), Takashima ( 2018 ), and Roelfsema et al. ( 2022 ), emphasized the inefficiency of these global agreements, especially after the left the USA from the Paris Agreement on 1 June 2017. The most important cause of this inefficiency has been the need for more motivation of countries to fulfill their international obligations towards environmental issues. However, many governments consider the threat of climate change only within their geographical boundaries and have tried to formulate and implement green policies to advance their environmental protection goals. These policies include green financial policies (green taxes, green subsidies), monetary policies (such as green loans and green financing), and cultural and social policies in line with sustainable development. The ultimate goal of these green policies is a green economy, an environmentally friendly economy, a zero carbon economy, or a sustainable economy. Lee et al. ( 2022 ) define the green economy as a broad concept comprising green industry, agriculture, and services. Centobelli et al. ( 2022 ) express that environmental sustainability should be more attention in the service sector owing to its penetration into social life and interactions.

Tourism and travel-related services are among countries’ main parts of the service sector. By creating the flow of tourists, tourism services can lead to capital transfer, job creation, cultural exchange (globalization), and increasing welfare in the country hosting the tours. According to the Yearbook of Tourism Statistics published by the World Tourism Organization, international tourism has increased from 522.2 billion US dollars in 1995 to nearly 1.86 trillion US dollars in 2019. This increase shows the importance of tourism services in generating income for countries, especially in the era of Corona and post-corona. Casado-Aranda et al. ( 2021 ) express that tourism services can be a central driver of economic growth recovery in post COVID era. Jeyacheya and Hampton ( 2022 ) argue that tourism can make high incomes for host countries leading to job creation and economic flourishing in destination cities for tourists.

An important issue mentioned in the corona era and relies on the post-corona era is the revitalizing of green economic growth. An important issue mentioned in the corona era and relying on the post-corona era is the revitalizing green economic growth (Bai et al., 2022 ; Werikhe, 2022 ), an opportunity that countries should pay more attention to in order to rebuild their economic activities. In other words, countries should plan their return to economic prosperity with environmental issues in mind. To this end, the issue of tourism finds a branch called Ecotourism or sustainable tourism which has environmental concerns and tries to help countries to improve environmental protection policies. Ecotourism is an approach based on environmental criteria, which is opposed to over-tourism (a type of tourism that disrupts the protection of the environment and destroys natural resources). The International Ecotourism Society defines Ecotourism as an efficient way to conserve the environment and improve local people’s well-being. It can be said that Ecotourism, along with various economic advantages (income generation, job creation, globalization, poverty alleviation), will bring environmental protection to the world’s countries, achieving the goals of green economic growth recovery and sustainable development. Xu et al. ( 2022 ) consider Ecotourism as one of the essential components of achieving sustainable development in the post-corona era.

Ecotourism in developing countries has more priorities compared to developed economies. Firstly, developing countries are often countries with financial problems of the government, and the governments in these countries need more capital to advance sustainable development goals. Therefore, developing ecotourism services can be a suitable solution to help these countries improve the status of sustainable development indicators and protect their environment. Second, due to the spread of the Corona disease, developing countries have experienced numerous bankruptcy in the tourism services sector. Therefore, promoting ecotourism in these countries is of great importance in the post-corona era. Third, developing countries have a high share in the emission of greenhouse gases in the world due to their high dependence on fossil fuels and the lack of advanced green technologies. Fourth, due to bureaucratic processes, high cost, and lack of market transparency, greenwashing may happen in developing economies’ ecotourism industry, meaning that a company serving ecotourism services makes its activities seem more sustainable and ethical than they are. The term “greenwashing” can harshly impact the future development path of the ecotourism industry in developing economies. According to the reasons mentioned above, developing ecotourism in developing countries can be an essential factor in controlling and reducing greenhouse gas emissions in these countries.

This paper tries to contribute to the existing literature from the following aspects:

Calculating the ecotourism index for selected countries based on the criteria for measuring sustainable tourism stated by the World Tourism Organization in the United Nations. Considering that there is no specific index for ecotourism, the calculation of ecotourism in this article will be innovative.

Measuring the green governance index as a proxy for environmental policies for selected countries based on the Environment Social and Governance (ESG) data.

Selecting a sample of 40 developing countries from different geographical regions to calculate the interconnections between ecotourism, green governance, and climate change

Making a further discussion to address the role of uncertainty and the developing level of countries in the relationship between ecotourism and explanatory variables.

The main results confirm the existence of a uni-directional causal relationship running from the green governance indicator and inflation rate to the ecotourism indicator. In addition, with a 1% improvement in the green governance index of developing countries, the ecotourism of these countries will increase by 0.43%. A 1% increase in the globalization index of these countries accelerates ecotourism by 0.32%.

Moreover, ecotourism in developing countries is more sensitive to macroeconomic variables changes than in developed economies. Geopolitical risk is an influential factor in the developing process of ecotourism. The practical policies recommended by this research are developing the green financing market, establishing virtual tourism, granting green loans to small and medium enterprises, and government incentives to motivate active businesses.

The paper in continue is organized as follows: section “Literature review” provides a short literature review to determine the gaps this research seeks to fill. Section “Data and model specification” argues data and model specification. The following section represents empirical results. Section “Discussion” expresses discussion, whereas the last section provides conclusions, policy implications, research limitations, and recommendations to research further.

Literature review

This part of the article analyzes and classifies the previous literature on ecotourism and sustainable development in a rational and structured way. The importance of tourism in economic growth and development has been discussed in previous studies. However, the study of the effect of tourism on climate change has received little attention. Especially the relationship between sustainable tourism, climate change, and environmental policies is a problem that has yet to receive the attention of academic experts.

A group of previous studies has focused on the place of tourism in economic development and growth. Holzner ( 2011 ) focused on the consequences of tourism development on the economic performance of 134 countries from 1970 to 2007. They found out that excessive dependence on tourism income leads to Dutch disease in the economy, and other economic sectors need to develop to the extent of the tourism sector. In another study, Sokhanvar et al. ( 2018 ) investigated the causal link between tourism and economic growth in emerging economies from 1995 to 2014. The main results confirmed that the linkage is country-dependent. Brida et al. ( 2020 ) studied 80 economies from 1995 to 2016 to determine how tourism and economic development are related. The paper’s conclusions highlighted tourism’s-positive role in economic activities.

Another group of previous studies has linked tourism to sustainability targets. Sorensen and Grindsted ( 2021 ) expressed that nature tourism development has a positive and direct impact on achieving sustainable development goals of countries. In a new study, Li et al. ( 2022 ) studied the impacts of tourism development on life quality (as one of the sustainable development goals defined by the UN in 2015) in the case of Japan. They found that tourism development positively impacts the quality of life of age groups in the country. Ahmad et al. ( 2022 ) explored the role of tourism in the sustainability of G7 economies from 2000–2019. The primary findings revealed the positive impact of tourism arrivals on sustainable economic development. Zekan et al. ( 2022 ) investigated the impact of tourism on regional sustainability in Europe. They concluded that tourism development increases transport, leading to increased carbon dioxide emissions. Therefore, tourism development causes environmental pollution.

Tourism that can pay attention to environmental issues is called “ecotourism.” Many new studies have studied different dimensions of ecotourism. Lu et al. ( 2021 ) expanded the concept of the ecotourism industry. The significant results expressed that smart tourist cities are essential for efficient ecotourism in countries. Thompson ( 2022 ) expressed the characteristics of ecotourism development through survey methodology. The results confirmed the importance of transparent regulations, government support, and social intention to promote ecotourism. In another study, Heshmati et al. ( 2022 ) employed the SWOT analysis method to explore the critical success factors of ecotourism development in Iran. They found that legal documentation and private participation are major influential factors in promoting ecotourism in Iran. In line with the previous research, Hosseini et al. ( 2021 ) tried to explore the influential factors in promoting ecotourism in Iran by employing a SWOT analysis. They depicted that attracting investors is essential to enhance ecotourism projects in Iran. Hasana et al. ( 2022 ) reviewed research to analyze the earlier studies about ecotourism. The conclusions expressed that ecotourism is necessary for environmental protection. However, it is a challenging plan for the government, and they should carry out various policies toward ecotourism development. Kunjuraman et al. ( 2022 ) studied the role of ecotourism on rural community development in Malaysia. The significant results confirmed that ecotourism could transfer-positive impacts.

Several earlier studies have concentrated on the characteristics of ecotourism in different developed and developing economies. For example, Ruhanen ( 2019 ) investigated the ecotourism status in Australia. The paper concluded that the country could potentially make a larger share of ecotourism to the entire local tourism industry. Jin et al. ( 2022 ) studied the role of local community power on green tourism in Japan. They concluded that the concept of agricultural village activity and regional support positively influences the development of green tourism in Japan as a developed economy. Choi et al. ( 2022 ) sought to find aspects of ecotourism development in South Korea. The preliminary results confirmed the importance of green governance and efficient regulation to promote a sustainable tourism industry. Baloch et al. ( 2022 ) explored the ecotourism specifications in the developing economy of Pakistan. They found that Pakistan’s ecotourism needs government support and the social well-being of the visited cities. Sun et al. ( 2022 ) studied ecotourism in China. They concluded that there is imbalanced development of ecotourism among Chinese provinces due to the need for more capital to invest in all ecotourism projects throughout the Chinese cities. Tajer and Demir ( 2022 ) analyzed the ecotourism strategy in Iran. They concluded that despite various potentials in the country, insufficient capital, lack of social awareness, and political tension are the major obstacles to promoting a sustainable tourism industry in Iran.

Another group of earlier studies has drawn attention to promoting eco-tourism in the post COVID era. They believe that the corona disease has created an excellent opportunity to pay more attention to environmental issues and that countries should move towards sustainable development concepts such as sustainable (eco) tourism in the post-corona era. Soliku et al. ( 2021 ) studied eco-tourism in Ghana during the pandemic. The findings depicted the vague impacts of a pandemic on eco-tourism. Despite the short-term negative consequence of the pandemic on eco-tourism, it provides various opportunities for developing this sector in Ghana. Hosseini et al. ( 2021 ) employed the Fuzzy Dematel technique to find solutions for promoting eco-tourism during COVID-19. They found out that planning to increase the capacity of eco-tourism and incentive policies by governments can help promote the eco-tourism aspect under the pandemic’s consequences. Abedin et al. ( 2022 ) studied the consequence of COVID-19 on coastal eco-tourism development. The primary findings confirmed the negative impacts of a pandemic on the development of eco-tourism.

A review of previous studies shows that tourism can positively impact green growth and sustainable development. Sustainable tourism can be used as a policy to deal with the threat of climate change. This issue needs more attention in the corona and post-corona eras. Because in the post-corona era, many countries have sought to revive green economic growth, and ecotourism can be one of the tools to achieve it. As observed, a detailed study of the relationship between climate change, ecotourism, and environmental policies has yet to be done. Therefore, this research will address and fill this literature gap.

Data and model specification

Data description.

The paper seeks to find the relationship between climate change, ecotourism, and environmental policy for the panel of 40 developing economies from different regions from 2010 to 2021 (480 observations). The sample size could have been more extensive due to the lack of information on some variables. However, there are 480 observations in the data analysis of the data panel; therefore, the number of samples selected is acceptable.

To determine the proxies for main variables, CO2 emissions per capita are selected as the proxy for climate change. Many earlier studies (e.g., Espoir et al., 2022 ) have employed this variable as an appropriate variable representing the status of climate change. Regarding ecotourism, the World Tourism Organization proposed some measurements of sustainable tourism, and also following Yusef et al. ( 2014 ), the entropy weight method is employed to calculate a multi-dimensional ecotourism indicator comprising per capita green park area (square meters), gross domestic tourism revenue (US dollars), the ratio of good air quality (%), green transport, renewable water resources (km3) and deforestation rate (%). It is a novel ecotourism indicator that can show the ecotourism status in countries.

In addition, the green governance index is calculated as a proxy for environmental policy. Principally, the Environment, Social, and Governance (ESG) data from World Bank are gathered to calculate this variable. With the improvement of the Green Governance Index, the quality of environmental policies will also increase, and vice versa. With the adverseness of the Green Governance Index, the efficiency of environmental policies will decrease.

Regarding control variables, the inflation rate as an influential factor in tourism flows is selected. The importance of this variable to promoting/declining tourism flows has been drawn to attention by some earlier studies, such as Liu et al. ( 2022 ). The inflation rate can raise the total cost of travel, causing a reduction in tourism flows, while any reduction in the inflation rate can increase the intention of tourists to travel. In addition, the KOF globalization index provided by the KOF Swiss Economic Institute is another control variable. A country with a higher degree of globalization means more readiness to accept tourists from countries with different cultures and religions.

Model specification

According to the variables mentioned above, 40 examined developing countries from 2010 to 2021, the panel co-integration model can be written as Eq. 1 :

ETOR indicates the ecotourism index, while CO2, GGI, INF, and GLOB denote Carbon dioxide emissions per capita, green governance index, inflation rate, and globalization index, respectively. i is 1,2,…,40 and shows examined developing economies, while t is time and contains 2010, 2011,..,2021.

Prior to the estimation of coefficients of Eq. 1 , the panel unit root tests are employed to find out whether the series is stationary. To this end, three tests of LLC (Levin et al., 2002 ), Breitung’s test ( 2000 ), and the PP-Fisher test (Philips and Perron, 1988 ). If all the variables are stationary at the first level of difference (I(1)), a panel co-integration test can be conducted to explore whether the model is spurious. To this end, Kao’s co-integration test ( 1999 ) and Pedroni’s residual co-integration test ( 2004 ) are conducted. If the co-integration relationship exists among variables, the panel causality test can be run to determine the causal linkages among variables. In this paper, the two steps of Engle and Granger (1987)‘s test, which is based on the error correction model (ECM) is used as Eqs. 2 – 6 :

In the above Equations, Δ is the first differences of variables, while θ and ECT represent the fixed country effect and error correction term.

The next step is the long-run panel co-integration estimations. To this end, Fully Modified OLS (FMOLS) and Dynamic OLS (DOLS) as robustness checks are conducted, which are two famous panel co-integration estimators (Rasoulinezhad, 2018 ). The FMOLS estimator has various advantages. It allows serial correlation, endogeneity, and cross-sectional heterogeneity (Erdal and Erdal, 2020 ).

Empirical results

In this section, we will implement the experimental research model. The purpose of implementing an econometric model based on panel data is to find the effects of green governance variables and carbon dioxide emissions on ecotourism. As the first step, the panel unit root tests are conducted. The results are reported in Table 1 as follows:

According to Table 1 , all three-panel unit root tests depict that all series are non-stationary at the level and become stationary after a first difference. Next, the panel co-integration tests are conducted, and their results are represented in Tables 2 and 3 :

The two-panel co-integration tests’ findings confirm the presence of co-integration linkages among variables.

The panel causality test studies the short-term and long-term causal relationship among variables. Table 4 reports the results of the panel causality check as follows:

According to Table 4 , there is a uni-directional causal relationship between the green governance indicator and the inflation rate of the ecotourism indicator. At the same time, there is a bi-directional causal relationship between carbon dioxide emissions and ecotourism indicators, confirming the existence of the feedback effect. In addition, there is only short-term causality from the green governance indicator to carbon dioxide emissions. In contrast, ecotourism and the globalization index have a uni-directional causal linkage. In the short term, improving ecotourism can cause globalization and reduce carbon emissions in developing economies. Regarding the long-term causality, it can be concluded that the ECT of ecotourism, green governance index, and globalization index are statistically significant. These three variables are major adjustment variables when the system departs from equilibrium.

In the last stage, the long-run estimations are done through FMOLS and DOLS estimators. Table 5 lists the results of the estimations by these two-panel co-integration estimators:

Based on FMOLS estimation, it can be concluded that the Green Governance index has a positive and significant coefficient in such a way that with a 1% improvement in the green governance index of developing countries, the ecotourism of these countries will increase by 0.43%. By improving the state of green governance, the quality of formulated and implemented green policies in these countries will increase, improving the conditions of ecotourism development. This finding aligns with Agrawal et al. ( 2022 ) and Debbarma and Choi ( 2022 ), who believe that green governance is essential to sustainable development. In the case of carbon dioxide emissions, the coefficient of this variable is not statistically significant. In other words, the variable of carbon dioxide emissions per capita has no significant effect on ecotourism in developing countries. The inflation rate has a significant negative effect on ecotourism. With a 1% increase in the general prices of goods and services in developing countries, ecotourism will decrease by 0.34%. This finding aligns with Rahman ( 2022 ), who showed a negative relationship between inflation and sustainable development in their research. An increase in inflation means an increase in the total cost of a tourist’s trip to the destination country, inhibiting the growth of tourist services.

Regarding the globalization variable, this variable has a significant positive effect on the ecotourism of developing countries. With a 1% increase in the globalization index of these countries, ecotourism will increase by 0.32%. Globalization means more interaction with the world’s countries, acceptance of different cultures and customs, more language learning in society, more acceptance of tourism, and development of tourist services in the country. This finding is consistent with the results of Akadiri et al. ( 2019 ), who confirmed that globalization is one of the crucial components in tourism development.

The DOLS estimator was also used to ensure the obtained findings’ validity. The results of this method are shown in Table 5 . The signs of the coefficients are consistent with the results obtained by the FMOLS method. Therefore, the validity and reliability of the obtained coefficients are confirmed.

In this section, we will briefly discuss the relationship between ecotourism and climate change and the environmental policy considering the uncertainty and the relationship between variables in developed and developing countries.

Consideration of uncertainty

Uncertainty as a primary reason for risk has become a research issue in recent decades. Uncertainty can make the future unpredictable and uncontrollable, affecting economic decision-making. Regarding tourism, the impacts of uncertainty have been drawn to attention by several earlier studies (e.g., Dutta et al., 2020 ; Das et al., 2020 ; and Balli et al., 2019 ; Balli et al., 2018 ). In general, uncertainty in the tourism industry reflects tourists’ concerns and consumption habits in the way that by increasing uncertainty, it is expected that tourists make sense of risks and postpone their tourism activities, and vice versa; in the sphere of certainties, the various risks are clear, and tourists can make rational decisions for their tourism plans and activities. In order to explore the impacts of uncertainties on eco-tourism of the examined developing economies, the geopolitical risk index (GPR) as a proxy for economic policy uncertainty index is gathered and added as a control variable to Eq. 1 . The estimations results by FMOLS are reported in Table 6 as follows.

According to Table 6 , the uncertainty (geopolitical risk) has a negative coefficient meaning that with a 1% increase in geopolitical risk, the eco-tourism industry in the examined developing countries decreases by approximately 0.69%. The signs of coefficients of other variables align with the earlier findings, represented in Table 5 . In addition, the magnitude of the impact of geopolitical risk is larger than the impacts of other variables highlighting the importance of lower geopolitical risk in these economies to reach sustainable tourism targets.

Difference in developed and developing economies

Considering the different structures and financial power of these two groups of countries, the relationship between the variables mentioned in these two groups is expected to be different. In the previous section, the results for the group of developing countries showed that the Green Governance index has a positive and significant coefficient. In the case of carbon dioxide emissions, the coefficient of this variable is not statistically significant. The inflation rate has a significant negative effect on ecotourism. Regarding the globalization variable, it can be mentioned that this variable has a significant positive effect on the ecotourism of developing countries. In order to analyze the relationship between variables in the developed countries, the top 10 countries with the highest HDI in 2021 are selected (Switzerland (0.962), Norway (0.961), Iceland (0.959), Hong Kong (0.952), Australia (0.951), Denmark (0.948), Sweden (0.947) and Ireland (0.945)). The selected variables, explained in section “Data and model specification”, are collected from 2010 to 2021. The panel unit root tests confirmed that all series are non-stationary at the level and become stationary after a first difference. In addition, the presence of co-integration linkages among variables is revealed by the panel co-integration test. The panel co-integration estimator of FMOLS is employed to study the long-term relationship among variables. The findings are reported in Table 7 as follows:

According to the estimated coefficients, the green governance indicator positively and statistically significantly impacts ecotourism in the examined developed economies. However, the magnitude of the impact of this variable is more considerable for developing countries because these countries have more imbalances in markets and regulations. Therefore, the presence of good green tourism can have a more positive effect on advancing the goal of ecotourism. Contrary to the findings of developing countries, carbon dioxide emission in developed countries has a negative and significant effect, meaning that with an increase of 1% in carbon dioxide in developed countries, the level of ecotourism becomes more unfavorable by 0.034%. Moreover, inflation and globalization variables have significant negative and positive coefficients, respectively. However, the magnitudes of these two variables’ coefficients are also higher in developing countries. Ecotourism in developing countries is more sensitive to changes in macroeconomic variables such as green governance, globalization, and inflation.

Another difference between eco-tourism in developed and developing economies may be interpreted through the term “greenwashing,” introduced by Westerveld in 1986 (Maichum et al., 2016 ). In developing countries, due to the economic structure, limited knowledge, bureaucratic process, lack of legal eco-certification, and imperfect competition, a company involved in the eco-tourism industry makes an unsubstantiated claim to deceive consumers into accepting the company’s services are in line with environmental protection policies. Hence, green governance in developing countries should have another role in regulating the eco-tourism market to lower the threat of greenwashing in eco-tourism services.

Conclusions and policy recommendations

Concluding remarks.

The findings of econometric modeling revealed the relationship between environmental policies, climate change, and ecotourism. Based on the findings of the econometric model, the following conclusions can be presented:

A uni-directional causal relationship runs from the green governance indicator and inflation rate to the ecotourism indicator, which means that any changes in green governance and inflation rate cause changes in ecotourism, which is vital for developing economies where governance and inflation rate are two crucial issues.

There is a bi-directional causal relationship between carbon dioxide emissions and ecotourism indicators, confirming the existence of the feedback hypothesis, expressing that in developing economies, any policies related to ecotourism cause changes in CO2 emissions and vice versa.

There is only short-term causality from the green governance indicator to carbon dioxide emissions, whereas there is a uni-directional causal linkage from ecotourism to the globalization index. In other words, in the short term, improving ecotourism can cause globalization and reduce carbon emissions in developing economies.

By improving green governance in developing economies, the quality of formulated and implemented green policies in these countries will increase, improving the conditions of ecotourism development.

An increase in the inflation rate raises the total cost of a tourist’s trip to developing economies, inhibiting the growth of eco-tourist services.

Globalization means more interaction with the world’s countries, acceptance of different cultures and customs, more language learning in society, more acceptance of tourism, and development of tourist services in developing countries.

Policy implications

In order to achieve the promotion of ecotourism in developing countries, the implementation of integrated and effective strategic and practical policies is of great importance. According to the concluding remarks mentioned, practical policies are presented as follows for enhancing ecotourism in developed countries. The development of ecotourism requires the improvement of various infrastructures and mechanisms, which depends on the implementation of projects related to ecotourism in developing countries. Because most countries do not have enough financial power to invest in such projects, developing the green financing market can be one of the critical practical solutions. The green financing tool can increase the investment risk and return on investment in such projects, and as a result, the participation of the private sector in these projects will increase. With information and communication technology development, virtual tourism can solve many environmental issues related to human physical presence. Virtual tourism is one of the branches of tourism services that provide people with destinations, places of interest, and tourist attractions with full quality but in virtual form. Another practical policy is granting green loans to small and medium enterprises active in ecotourism. Despite the organizational agility, these companies do not have the significant financial power to develop different sectors of ecotourism; therefore, the cooperation of the banking industry of developing countries by providing green loans (with low-interest rates) can motivate small and medium-sized companies in the field of activities related to ecotourism. Government incentives to motivate businesses active in ecotourism and government deterrent policies (green tax) from businesses active in the field of tourism to lead them to increase the share of ecotourism in their activities can be a proper operational strategy. In developing countries, the role of government and green governance is vital in advancing the goals of ecotourism. By improving the level of its green governance, the government can create efficient policies, regulations, and social tools to create motivation and desire to accept ecotourism, an essential and undeniable issue in developing societies. Creating a guarantee fund for ecotourism companies in developing countries is another practical policy to support these companies financially. Guarantee funds can be established with the participation of the people of ecotourism destinations in order to strengthen the financial strength of ecotourism companies in these destinations.

Limitations and recommendations to further research

This research had a practical and innovative contribution to the literature on ecotourism in developing countries. The findings obtained from the econometric model analysis provided appropriate practical and strategic policies to the policymakers of countries interested in the development of ecotourism. However, access to data related to the ecotourism index and sustainable development of developing countries due to the lack of community in a specific database is considered one of the critical limitations of this research. This limitation caused many developing countries to be excluded from the research sample, which may have created a deviation in the research. Adding more countries to the test sample in future research is suggested to obtain complete and accurate results. Also, due to the outbreak of the Corona pandemic at the end of 2019 and the Russia-Ukraine war since the beginning of 2022, it is suggested that these two variables be included in the econometric model as an illusion in order to analyze their effects on the ecotourism of the countries of the world. Using other econometric methods, such as artificial neural networks, is suggested to model ecotourism in different countries. Complex modeling by taking into account trends and trends to predict the relationship between variables in the future will be an essential step in formulating effective programs in ecotourism.

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abedin Z, Handayani W, Zaky E, Faturrahman A (2022) Perceived risk and attitude’s mediating role between tourism knowledge and visit intention during the COVID-19 pandemic: implementation for coastal-ecotourism management. Heliyon 8(10):e10724. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10724

Article   Google Scholar  

Agrawal A, Brandhorst S, Jain M, Liao C, Pradhan N, Solomon D (2022) From environmental governance to governance for sustainability. One Earth 5(6):615–621

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Ahmad N, Youjin L, Hdia M (2022) The role of innovation and tourism in sustainability: why is environment-friendly tourism necessary for entrepreneurship? J Clean Prod 379(Part 2):134799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134799

Akadiri S, Alola A, Akadiri A (2019) The role of globalization, real income, tourism in environmental sustainability target. Evidence from Turkey. Sci Total Environ 687:423–432

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Bai X, Wang K, Tran T, Sadiq M, Trung L, Khudoykulov K (2022) Measuring China’s green economic recovery and energy environment sustainability: econometric analysis of sustainable development goals. Econ Anal Policy 75:768–779

Balli F, Shahzad SJH, Uddin GS (2018) A tale of two shocks: what do we learn from the impacts of economic policy uncertainties on tourism? Tour Manag68:470–475

Balli F, Uddin GS, Shahzad SJH (2019) Geopolitical risk and tourism demand in emerging economies. Tour Econ 25(6):997–1005

Baloch Q, Shah S, Iqbal N, Sheeraz M, Asadullah M, Mahar S, Khan A (2022) Impact of tourism development upon environmental sustainability: a suggested framework for sustainable ecotourism. Environ Sci Pollut Res https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-22496-w

Breitung J (2000) The local power of some unit root tests for panel data. In: Baltagi B (ed.). Nonstationary panels, panel cointegration, and dynamic panels, advances in econometrics. vol. 15. JAI Press, Amsterdam. pp. 161–178

Brida J, Gomez D, Segarra V (2020) On the empirical relationship between tourism and economic growth. Tour Manag 81:104131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104131

Casado-Aranda L, Fernandez J, Bastidas-Manzano A (2021) Tourism research after the COVID-19 outbreak: insights for more sustainable, local and smart cities. Sustain Cities Soc 73:103126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103126

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Centobelli P, Cerchione R, Esposito E (2022) Environmental sustainability in the service industry of transportation and logistics service providers: systematic literature review and research directions. Transp Res Part D Trans Environ 53:454–470

Chao Q, Feng A (2018) Scientific basis of climate change and its response. Glob Energy Interconnect 1(4):420–427

Google Scholar  

Choi Y, Oh C, Chon J (2022) Applying the resilience principles for sustainable ecotourism development: a case study of the Nakdong Estuary, South Korea. Tour Manag 83:104237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104237

Das D, Dutta A, Bhadra A, Uddin GS (2020) Role of presidential uncertainties on the hotel industry. Ann Tour Res 81:102762

Debbarma J, Choi Y (2022) A taxonomy of green governance: a qualitative and quantitative analysis towards sustainable development. Sustain Cities Soc 79:103693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.103693

Dutta A, Mishra T, Uddin GS, Yang Y (2020) Brexit uncertainty and volatility persistence in tourism demand. Curr Issue Tour 24(16):2225–2232

Erdal H, Erdal G (2020) Panel FMOLS model analysis of the effects of livestock support policies on sustainable animal presence in Turkey. Sustainability 12:3444. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12083444

Espoir D, Mudiangombe B, Bannor F, Sunge R, Tshitaka J (2022) CO2 emissions and economic growth: Assessing the heterogeneous effects across climate regimes in Africa. Sci Total Environ 804:150089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150089

Hasana U, Swain S, George B (2022) A bibliometric analysis of ecotourism: a safeguard strategy in protected areas. Region Sustain 3(1):27–40

Heshmati M, Gheitury M, Shadfar S (2022) Factors affecting possibility of ecotourism development and sustaining natural resources using SWOT approach in west Iran. Int J Geoheritage Parks 10(2):173–183

Holzner M (2011) Tourism and economic development: the beach disease. Tour Manag32(4):922–933

Hosseini S, Paydar M, Keshteli M (2021) Recovery solutions for ecotourism centers during the Covid-19 pandemic: utilizing Fuzzy DEMATEL and Fuzzy VIKOR methods. Exp Syst Appl 185:115594. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115594

Hosseini S, Paydar M, Triki C (2021) Implementing sustainable ecotourism in Lafour region, Iran: applying a clustering method based on SWOT analysis. J Clean Prod 329:129716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129716

Jeyacheya J, Hampton M (2022) Pathway choice and post-Covid tourism: Inclusive growth or business as usual? World Dev Sustain 1:100024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wds.2022.100024

Jin C, Takao M, Yobuta M(2022) Impact of Japan’s local community power on green tourism. Asia Pacific J Region Sci 6:571–591

Kao C (1999) Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data. J Economet 90(1):1–44

Article   MathSciNet   MATH   Google Scholar  

Kunjuraman V, Hussin R, Aziz R (2022) Community-based ecotourism as a social transformation tool for rural community: a victory or a quagmire. J Outdoor Recreat Tour 39:100524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jort.2022.100524

Lee C, Wang C, Ho S (2022) The dimension of green economy: Culture viewpoint. Econ Anal Policy 74:122–138

Levin A, Lin CF, Chu CS (2002) Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample properties. J Economet 108(1):1–24

Li J, Ridderstaat J, Yost E (2022) Tourism development and quality of life interdependence with evolving age-cohort-based population. Tour Manag 93:104621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2022.104621

Liu A, Kim Y, Song H (2022) Toward an accurate assessment of tourism economic impact: a systematic literature review. Ann Tour Res Empirical Insight 3(2):100054. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annale.2022.100054

Lu C, Huang J, Chen C, Shu M, Hsu C, Bapu T (2021) An energy-efficient smart city for sustainable green tourism industry. Sustain Energy Technol Assess 47:101494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2021.101494

Maichum K, Parichatnon S, Peng KC (2016) Application of the extended theory of planned behavior model to investigate purchase intention of green products among Thai consumers. Sustainability 8:1077

Pedroni P (2004) Panel cointegration: asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis. Economet Theory 20(3):597–625

Phillips PCB, Perron P (1988) Testing for a unit root in time series regressions. Biometrika. 75(2):335–346

Rahman M (2022) The effect of taxation on sustainable development goals: evidence from emerging countries. Heliyon 8(9):e10512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10512

Rasoulinezhad E (2018) A new evidence from the effects of Russia’s WTO accession on its foreign trade. Eur Econ Rev 8(1):73–92

Rasoulinezhad E, Taghizadeh-Hesary F (2022) Role of green finance in improving energy efficiency and renewable energy development. Energy Efficiency 15(2):14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-022-10021-4

Roelfsema M, Soest H, Elzen M, Coninck HH, Kuramochi T, Harmsen M, Dagnomilis I, Hohne N, Vuuren D (2022) Developing scenarios in the context of the Paris Agreement and application in the integrated assessment model IMAGE: a framework for bridging the policy-modelling divide. Environ Sci Policy 135:104–116

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Ruhanan L (2019) The prominence of eco in ecotourism experiences: an analysis of post-purchase online reviews. J Hosp Tour Manag 39:110–116

Sokhanvar A, Ciftcioglu S, Javid E (2018) Another look at tourism-economic development nexus. Tour Manag Perspect 26:97–106

Soliku O, Kyiire B, Mahama A, Kubio C (2021) Tourism amid COVID-19 pandemic: impacts and implications for building resilience in the eco-tourism sector in Ghana’s Savannah region. Heliyon 7(9):e07892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07892

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Sorensen F, Grindsted T (2021) Sustainability approaches and nature tourism development. Ann Tour Res 91:103307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2021.103307

Sun Y, Ding W, Yang G (2022) Green innovation efficiency of China’s tourism industry from the perspective of shared inputs: Dynamic evolution and combination improvement paths. Ecol Indica 138:108824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108824

Tajer E, Demir S (2022) Ecotourism strategy of UNESCO city in Iran: applying a new quantitative method integrated with BWM. J Clean Prod 376:134284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.134284

Takashima N (2018) International environmental agreements between asymmetric countries: a repeated game analysis. Jpn World Econ 48:38–44

Thompson B (2022) Ecotourism anywhere? The lure of ecotourism and the need to scrutinize the potential competitiveness of ecotourism developments. Tour Manag 92:104568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2022.104568

Werikhe A (2022) Towards a green and sustainable recovery from COVID-19. Curr Res Environ Sustain 4:100124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2022.100124

Woodward A (2019) Climate change: disruption, risk and opportunity. Glob Trans 1:44–49

Xu L, Ao C, Liu B, Cai Z (2022) Cotourism and sustainable development: a scientometric review of global research trends. Environ Dev Sustain https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02190-0

Yusef N, Rahman F, Jamil M, Iranmanesh M (2014) Measuring the quality of ecotourism services: case study–based model validation. Sage Open, https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014538270

Zekan B, Weismayer C, Gunter U, Schuh B, Sedlacek S (2022) Regional sustainability and tourism carrying capacities. J Clean Prod 339:130624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130624

Zheng H, Dai H, Lai H, Wang W (2017) U.S. withdrawal from the Paris agreement: reasons, impacts, and China’s response. Adv Clim Change Rese 8(4):220–225

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Hospitality Administration, Zhejiang Yuexiu University, Zhejiang, China

• Yunfeng Shang

School of Economics, Tianjin University of Commerce, Tianjin, China

Chunyu Bi, Xinyu Wei & Dayang Jiang

School of Global Studies, Tokai University, Tokyo, Japan

Farhad Taghizadeh-Hesary

TOKAI Research Institute for Environment and Sustainability (TRIES), Tokai University, Tokyo, Japan

Faculty of World Studies, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Ehsan Rasoulinezhad

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Yunfeng Shang , Dayang Jiang or Ehsan Rasoulinezhad .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Shang, Y., Bi, C., Wei, X. et al. Eco-tourism, climate change, and environmental policies: empirical evidence from developing economies. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 275 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01777-w

Download citation

Received : 11 November 2022

Accepted : 18 May 2023

Published : 31 May 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01777-w

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Economic impacts of integrating strategic innovation in environmental policy-making for sustainable energy investments.

• Elias G. Carayannis
• Pantelis C. Kostis
• Serhat Yüksel

Journal of the Knowledge Economy (2024)

Spatial effects of green finance development in Chinese provinces under the context of high-quality energy development

• Fangbin Qian

Economic Change and Restructuring (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• A-Z Publications

Annual Review of Environment and Resources

Volume 44, 2019, review article, ecotourism for conservation.

• Amanda L. Stronza 1 , Carter A. Hunt 2 , and Lee A. Fitzgerald 3
• View Affiliations Hide Affiliations Affiliations: 1 Applied Biodiversity Science Program and Departments of Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences, and Anthropology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-2261, USA; email: [email protected] 2 Recreation, Park, and Tourism Management, and Anthropology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA 3 Applied Biodiversity Science Program and Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-2258, USA
• Vol. 44:229-253 (Volume publication date October 2019) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-101718-033046
• First published as a Review in Advance on July 05, 2019
• Copyright © 2019 by Annual Reviews. All rights reserved

Ecotourism originated in the 1980s, at the dawn of sustainable development, as a way to channel tourism revenues into conservation and development. Despite the “win-win” idea, scholars and practitioners debate the meaning and merits of ecotourism. We conducted a review of 30 years of ecotourism research, looking for empirical evidence of successes and failures. We found the following trends: Ecotourism is often conflated with outdoor recreation and other forms of conventional tourism; impact studies tend to focus on either ecological or social impacts, but rarely both; and research tends to lack time series data, precluding authors from discerning effects over time, either on conservation, levels of biodiversity, ecosystem integrity, local governance, or other indicators. Given increasing pressures on wild lands and wildlife, we see a need to add rigor to analyses of ecotourism. We provide suggestions for future research and offer a framework for study design and issues of measurement and scaling.

Article metrics loading...

Full text loading...

Literature Cited

• 1.  Sellars RW. 1997 . Preserving Nature in the National Parks: A History New Haven, CT: Yale University Press [Google Scholar]
• 2.  National Park Service (NPS) 1916 . National Park Service Organic Act (16 U.S.C. l 2 3, and 4). NPS Washington, DC: https://www.nps.gov/parkhistory/online_books/fhpl/nps_organic_act.pdf [Google Scholar]
• 3.  Machlis G , Field D. 2000 . National Parks and Rural Development: Practice and Policy in the United States Washington, DC: Island Press [Google Scholar]
• 4.  Runte A. 1979 . National Parks: The American Experience Lincoln: Univ. Nebraska Press [Google Scholar]
• 5.  Budowski G. 1976 . Tourism and environmental conservation: conflict, coexistence, or symbiosis?. Environ. Conserv. 3 : 01 27 [Google Scholar]
• 6.  Gössling S. 1999 . Ecotourism: a means to safeguard biodiversity and ecosystem functions?. Ecol. Econ. 29 : 2 303– 20 [Google Scholar]
• 7.  Krüger O. 2005 . The role of ecotourism in conservation: panacea or Pandora's box?. Biodivers Conserv 14 : 3 579– 600 A meta-analysis of ecotourism and its impacts on endangered species, with attention to social variables, such as the importance for community involvement and control. [Google Scholar]
• 8.  The International Ecotourism Society (TIES) 2018 . What is Ecotourism? Washington, DC: TIES http://www.ecotourism.org/what-is-ecotourism [Google Scholar]
• 9.  Belsky JM. 1999 . Misrepresenting communities: the politics of community-based rural ecotourism in Gales Point Manatee, Belize. Rural Sociol 64 : 4 641– 66 [Google Scholar]
• 10.  Cater E. 2006 . Ecotourism as a western construct. J. Ecotourism 5 : 1–2 23– 39 [Google Scholar]
• 11.  Goodwin H. 1996 . In pursuit of ecotourism. Biodivers Conserv 5 : 3 277– 91 [Google Scholar]
• 12.  Kiss A. 2004 . Is community-based ecotourism a good use of biodiversity conservation funds?. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19 : 5 232– 37 A rigorous analysis of both social and ecological impacts of community-based ecotourism. [Google Scholar]
• 13.  Lindberg K , Enriquez J , Sproule K 1996 . Ecotourism questioned: case studies from Belize. Ann. Tour. Res. 23 : 3 543– 62 [Google Scholar]
• 14.  Orams MB. 1995 . Towards a more desirable form of ecotourism. Tour. Manag. 16 : 1 3– 8 [Google Scholar]
• 15.  Wallace GN , Pierce SM. 1996 . An evaluation of ecotourism in Amazonas, Brazil. Ann. Tour. Res. 23 : 4 843– 73 [Google Scholar]
• 16.  Wheeller B. 1994 . Ecotourism: a ruse by any other name. Prog. Tour. Recreat. Hosp. Manag. 6 : 3– 11 [Google Scholar]
• 17.  Wight PA. 1993 . Sustainable ecotourism: balancing economic, environmental and social goals within an ethical framework. J. Tour. Stud. 4 : 2 54– 66 [Google Scholar]
• 18.  Weaver DB. 1993 . Ecotourism in the small island Caribbean. GeoJournal 31 : 4 457– 65 [Google Scholar]
• 19.  Büscher B , Davidov V. 2013 . The Ecotourism-Extraction Nexus: Political Economies and Rural Realities of (Un)Comfortable Bedfellows Florence, Italy: Routledge [Google Scholar]
• 20.  Butcher J. 2007 . Ecotourism, NGOs and Development: A Critical Analysis New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
• 21.  Duffy R. 2002 . A Trip Too Far: Ecotourism, Politics, and Exploitation London: Earthscan [Google Scholar]
• 22.  Fletcher R. 2009 . Ecotourism discourse: challenging the stakeholders theory. J. Ecotourism 8 : 3 269– 85 [Google Scholar]
• 23.  Fletcher R , Neves K. 2012 . Contradictions in tourism: the promise and pitfalls of ecotourism as a manifold capitalist fix. Environ. Soc. 3 : 1 60– 77 [Google Scholar]
• 24.  Meletis ZA , Campbell LM. 2007 . Call it consumption! Re-conceptualizing ecotourism as consumption and consumptive. Geogr. Compass 1 : 4 850– 70 [Google Scholar]
• 25.  Sharpley R. 2006 . Ecotourism: a consumption perspective. J. Ecotourism 5 : 1–2 7– 22 [Google Scholar]
• 26.  West P , Carrier JG. 2004 . Ecotourism and authenticity. Curr. Anthropol. 45 : 4 483– 98 [Google Scholar]
• 27.  Geffroy B , Samia DSM , Bessa E , Blumstein DT 2015 . How nature-based tourism might increase prey vulnerability to predators. Trends Ecol. Evol. 30 : 12 755– 65 [Google Scholar]
• 28.  Frid A , Dill LM. 2002 . Human-caused disturbance stimuli as a form of predation risk. Conserv. Ecol. 6 : 1 11 [Google Scholar]
• 29.  Fernández-Juricic E , Venier MP , Renison D , Blumstein DT 2005 . Sensitivity of wildlife to spatial patterns of recreationist behavior: a critical assessment of minimum approaching distances and buffer areas for grassland birds. Biol. Conserv. 125 : 2 225– 35 [Google Scholar]
• 30.  Thomas K , Kvitek RG , Bretz C 2003 . Effects of human activity on the foraging behavior of sanderlings Calidris alba . Biol. Conserv 109 : 1 67– 71 [Google Scholar]
• 31.  Steidl RJ , Anthony RG. 2000 . Experimental effects of human activity on breeding bald eagles. Ecol. Appl. 10 : 1 258– 68 [Google Scholar]
• 32.  Goss-Custard JD , Triplet P , Sueur F , West AD 2006 . Critical thresholds of disturbance by people and raptors in foraging wading birds. Biol. Conserv. 127 : 1 88– 97 [Google Scholar]
• 33.  Beale CM , Monaghan P. 2004 . Human disturbance: people as predation-free predators. ? J. Appl. Ecol. 41 : 2 335– 43 [Google Scholar]
• 34.  Kerbiriou C , Le Viol E , Robert A , Porcher E , Gourmelon F , Julliard R 2009 . Tourism in protected areas can threaten wild populations: from individual response to population viability of the chough Pyrrhocorax pyrrhocorax . . J. Appl. Ecol 46 : 3 657– 65 [Google Scholar]
• 35.  Fitzgerald LA , Stronza AL. 2016 . In defense of the ecotourism shield: a response to Geffroy et al. Trends Ecol. Evol. 31 : 2 94– 95 [Google Scholar]
• 36.  Weaver DB , Lawton LJ. 2007 . Twenty years on: the state of contemporary ecotourism research. Tour. Manag. 28 : 5 1168– 79 A thorough and thoughtful review of ecotourism research. [Google Scholar]
• 37.  Bateman PW , Fleming PA. 2017 . Are negative effects of tourist activities on wildlife over-reported? A review of assessment methods and empirical results. Biol. Conserv. 211 : 10– 19 Assessment of 102 biological evaluations of ecotourism, outlining misleading assumptions, measurement biases, faulty conclusions, and alternative interpretations. [Google Scholar]
• 38.  Blumstein DT , Geffroy B , Samia DSM , Bessa E , eds. 2017 . Ecotourism's Promise and Peril Cham, Switz.: Springer Int Publ. [Google Scholar]
• 39.  Ferraro PJ , Hanauer M. 2014 . Advances in measuring the environmental and social impacts of environmental programs. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 39 : 495– 517 [Google Scholar]
• 40.  Ferraro PJ , Hanauer MM. 2014 . Quantifying causal mechanisms to determine how protected areas affect poverty through changes in ecosystem services and infrastructure. PNAS 111 : 11 4332– 37 [Google Scholar]
• 41.  Ferraro PJ , Hanauer MM. 2011 . Protecting ecosystems and alleviating poverty with parks and reserves: “win-win” or tradeoffs?. Environ. Resour. Econ. 48 : 2 269– 86 [Google Scholar]
• 42.  Ferraro PJ , Pattanayak SK. 2006 . Money for nothing? A call for empirical evaluation of biodiversity conservation investments. PLOS Biol 4 : 4 e105 [Google Scholar]
• 43.  Buckley R. 2009 . Evaluating the net effects of ecotourism on the environment: a framework, first assessment and future research. J. Sustain Tour. 17 : 6 643– 72 [Google Scholar]
• 44.  Buckley R. 2010 . Conservation Tourism Wallingford, UK: CABI [Google Scholar]
• 45.  Buckley R. 2011 . Tourism and environment. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 36 : 1 397– 416 A comprehensive review of 138 articles assessing the influence of different forms of tourism on the environment. [Google Scholar]
• 46.  Moore RL , Driver BL. 2005 . Introduction to Outdoor Recreation: Providing and Managing Natural Resource Based Opportunities State College, PA: Venture Publ. [Google Scholar]
• 47.  Newsome D , Moore SA , Dowling RK 2013 . Natural Area Tourism: Ecology, Impacts and Management Bristol, UK: Channel View Publ. [Google Scholar]
• 48.  Fennell DA. 2008 . Ecotourism New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
• 49.  Ashley C , Roe D , Goodwin H 2001 . Pro-Poor Tourism Strategies: Making Tourism Work For The Poor: A Review of Experience (Pro-Poor Tourism Report No. 1) London: Cent. Responsib. Tour. [Google Scholar]
• 50.  Epler Wood M , Gatz F , Lindberg K 1991 . The Ecotourism Society: An Action Agenda. Ecotourism Resour. Conserv. (Miami) 75– 79 Washington, DC: The Ecotourism Society [Google Scholar]
• 51.  United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) 2005 . Making Tourism More Sustainable: A Guide for Policy Makers Madrid: UNWTO [Google Scholar]
• 52.  Foster GM. 1973 . Traditional Societies and Technological Change Manhattan: Harper & Row [Google Scholar]
• 53.  Rostow WW. 1960 . The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• 54.  Escobar A. 1991 . Anthropology and the development encounter: the making and marketing of development anthropology. Am. Ethnol. 18 : 4 658– 82 [Google Scholar]
• 55.  Stronza A , Hunt C. 2012 . Visions of tourism: from modernization to sustainability. Pract. Anthropol. 34 : 3 19– 22 [Google Scholar]
• 56.  Mowforth M , Munt I. 2015 . Tourism and Sustainability: Development, Globalisation and New Tourism in the Third World New York: Routledge. , 4th ed.. [Google Scholar]
• 57.  de Kadt E. 1979 . Tourism: Passport to Development ? Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• 58.  World Commission on Environment and Development (WECD) 1987 . Our Common Future (The Brundtland Report) New York: Oxford Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• 59.  Brandon KE , Wells M. 1992 . Planning for people and parks: design dilemmas. World Dev 20 : 4 557– 70 [Google Scholar]
• 60.  Smith VL , Eadington WR. 1992 . Tourism alternatives: potentials and problems in the development of tourism Philadelphia: Univ. PA Press [Google Scholar]
• 61.  Ziffer K. 1989 . Ecotourism: The Uneasy Alliance Washington, DC: Conserv. Int. [Google Scholar]
• 62.  Boo E. 1990 . Ecotourism: The Potentials and Pitfalls , Vol. 1 Washington, DC: World Wildlife Fund [Google Scholar]
• 63.  Tobias D , Mendelsohn R. 1991 . Valuing ecotourism in a tropical rain-forest reserve. Ambio 20 : 91– 93 [Google Scholar]
• 64.  Fennell DA , Eagles PFJ. 1990 . Ecotourism in Costa Rica: a conceptual framework. J. Park. Recreat. Admin. 8 : 1 23– 34 [Google Scholar]
• 65.  Lindberg K. 1991 . Policies for Maximizing Nature Tourism's Ecological and Economic Benefits Washington, DC: World Resour. Inst. [Google Scholar]
• 66.  Scheyvens R. 1999 . Ecotourism and the empowerment of local communities. Tour. Manag. 20 : 2 245– 49 [Google Scholar]
• 67.  Butler R , Hinch T. 2007 . Tourism and Indigenous Peoples: Issues and Implications Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann [Google Scholar]
• 68.  Gardner B. 2016 . Selling the Serengeti: The Cultural Politics of Safari Tourism Athens, GA: Univ. Georgia Press [Google Scholar]
• 69.  Stronza A. 2001 . Anthropology of tourism: forging new ground for ecotourism and other alternatives. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 30 : 1 261– 83 [Google Scholar]
• 70.  Stronza A , Gordillo J. 2008 . Community views of ecotourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 35 : 2 448– 68 [Google Scholar]
• 71.  Weaver DB. 2001 . Ecotourism as mass tourism: contradiction or reality. ? Cornell Hotel Restaur. Adm. Q. 42 : 2 104– 12 [Google Scholar]
• 72.  Kontogeorgopoulos N. 2004 . Conventional tourism and ecotourism in Phuket, Thailand: conflicting paradigms or symbiotic partners?. J. Ecotourism 3 : 2 87– 108 [Google Scholar]
• 73.  Cater E. 2006 . Ecotourism as a Western Construct. J. Ecotourism 5 : 1–2 23– 39 [Google Scholar]
• 74.  Duffy R. 2008 . Neoliberalising nature: global networks and ecotourism development in Madagasgar. J. Sustain Tour. 16 : 3 327– 44 [Google Scholar]
• 75.  Fletcher R. 2014 . Romancing the Wild: Cultural Dimensions of Ecotourism Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• 76.  Fletcher R. 2011 . Sustaining tourism, sustaining capitalism? The tourism industry's role in global capitalist expansion. Tour. Geogr. 13 : 3 443– 61 [Google Scholar]
• 77.  Vivanco LA. 2001 . Spectacular quetzals, ecotourism, and environmental futures in Monte Verde, Costa Rica. Ethnology 40 : 2 79– 92 [Google Scholar]
• 78.  West P , Carrier J. 2004 . Ecotourism and authenticity: getting away from it all?. Curr. Anthropol. 45 : 4 483– 98 [Google Scholar]
• 79.  Harrison D. 1997 . Ecotourism in the South Pacific: the case of Fiji. World Ecotour ‘97 Abstracts Volume D Bruni 75 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: BIOSFERA [Google Scholar]
• 80.  Honey M. 2008 . Ecotourism and Sustainable Development: Who Owns Paradise ? Washington, DC: Island Press [Google Scholar]
• 81.  Higham J. 2007 . Ecotourism: competing and conflicting schools of thought. Critical Issues in Ecotourism: Understanding a Complex Phenomenon J Higham 1– 19 Oxford: Elsevier [Google Scholar]
• 82.  Ceballos-Lascurain H. 1996 . Tourism, Ecotourism, and Protected Areas: The State of Nature-Based Tourism Around the World and Guidelines for its Development Cambridge, UK: IUCN [Google Scholar]
• 83.  Chirgwin S , Hughes K. 1997 . Ecotourism: the participants’ perceptions. J. Tour. Stud. 8 : 2 2– 7 [Google Scholar]
• 84.  Bjork P. 2000 . Ecotourism from a conceptual perspective, an extended definition of a unique tourism form. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2 : 3 189– 202 [Google Scholar]
• 85.  Shannon G , Larson CL , Reed SE , Crooks KR , Angeloni LM 2017 . Ecological consequences of ecotourism for wildlife populations and communities. Ecotourism's Promise and Peril DT Blumstein, B Geffroy, DMS Samia, E Bessa 29– 46 Cham, Switz.:: Springer Int. Publ. [Google Scholar]
• 86.  Larson CL , Reed SE , Merenlender AM , Crooks KR 2016 . Effects of recreation on animals revealed as widespread through a global systematic review. PLOS ONE 11 : 12 e0167259 [Google Scholar]
• 87.  Buckley RC , Morrison C , Castley JG 2016 . Net effects of ecotourism on threatened species survival. PLOS ONE 11 : 2 e0147988 A landmark study that introduced the population accounting approach to assessing ecotourism's influence on the extinction horizon of threatened and/or endangered species. [Google Scholar]
• 88.  Steven R , Castley JG , Buckley R 2013 . Tourism revenue as a conservation tool for threatened birds in protected areas. PLOS ONE 8 : 5 e62598 [Google Scholar]
• 89.  Buckley RC , Castley JG , de Vasconcellos Pegas F , Mossaz AC , Steven R 2012 . A population accounting approach to assess tourism contributions to conservation of IUCN-Redlisted mammal species. PLOS ONE 7 : 9 e44134 [Google Scholar]
• 90.  Fowler GS. 1999 . Behavioral and hormonal responses of Magellanic penguins (Spheniscus magellanicus) to tourism and nest site visitation. Biol. Conserv. 90 : 143– 49 [Google Scholar]
• 91.  Lewis S , Turpie J , Ryan P 2012 . Are African penguins worth saving? The ecotourism value of the Boulders Beach colony. Afr. J. Mar. Sci. 34 : 4 497– 504 [Google Scholar]
• 92.  Ellenberg U , Mattern T , Seddon PJ , Jorquera GL 2006 . Physiological and reproductive consequences of human disturbance in Humboldt penguins: the need for species-specific visitor management. Biol. Conserv. 133 : 1 95– 106 [Google Scholar]
• 93.  UNESCO 2019 . Iguazu National Park - UNESCO World Heritage Centre. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO ) https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/303/ [Google Scholar]
• 94.  Woodford MH , Butynski TM , Karesh WB 2002 . Habituating the great apes: the disease risks. Oryx 36 : 2 153– 60 [Google Scholar]
• 95.  Muehlenbein MP , Martinez LA , Lemke AA , Ambu L , Nathan S et al. 2010 . Unhealthy travelers present challenges to sustainable primate ecotourism. Travel. Med. Infect. Dis. 8 : 169– 75 [Google Scholar]
• 96.  Sandbrook CG. 2010 . Local economic impact of different forms of nature-based tourism. Conserv. Lett. 3 : 1 21– 28 [Google Scholar]
• 97.  Berger J. 2007 . Fear, human shields and the redistribution of prey and predators in protected areas. Biol. Lett. 3 : 620– 23 [Google Scholar]
• 98.  Buckley R. 2012 . Endangered animals caught in the tourist trap. New Sci October 2012 28– 29 [Google Scholar]
• 99.  Jacobson SK , Lopez AF. 1994. Biological impacts of ecotourism: tourists and nesting turtles in Tortuguero National Park, Costa Rica. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 22 : 414– 19 [Google Scholar]
• 100.  Campbell LM. 2002 . Conservation narratives in Costa Rica: conflict and co-existence. Dev. Change 33 : 1 29– 56 [Google Scholar]
• 101.  de Vasconcellos Pegas F , Coghlan A , Stronza A , Rocha V 2013 . For love or for money? Investigating the impact of an ecotourism programme on local residents’ assigned values towards sea turtles. J. Ecotourism 12 : 2 90– 106 [Google Scholar]
• 102.  Hunt CA , Vargas E. 2018 . Turtles, Ticos, and tourists: protected areas and marine turtle conservation in Costa Rica. J. Park. Rec. Admin. 36 : http://doi:10.18666/JPRA-2018-V36-I3-8820 [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
• 103.  Alexander SE. 2000 . Resident attitudes towards conservation and black howler monkeys in Belize: the Community Baboon Sanctuary. Environ. Conserv. 27 : 04 341– 50 [Google Scholar]
• 104.  Walker K , Hawkins E. 2013 . Watching and swimming with marine mammals: international scope, management and best practice in cetacean ecotourism. International Handbook on Ecotourism R Ballantyne, J Packer 365– 81 Northampton, UK: Edward Elgar Publ. [Google Scholar]
• 105.  Munn CA. 1992 . Macaw biology and ecotourism or ‘When a bird in the bush is worth two in hand. .’ In New World Parrots in Crisis: Solutions from Conservation Biology SR Beissinger, NFR Snyder 47– 72 Washington, DC: Smithsonian Inst. Press [Google Scholar]
• 106.  Lemelin RH , Fennell D , Smale B 2008 . Polar bear viewers as deep ecotourists: How specialised are they?. J. Sustain Tour. 16 : 1 42– 62 [Google Scholar]
• 107.  Buckley R. 2010 . Protecting lemurs: ecotourism. Science 344 : 6182 358 [Google Scholar]
• 108.  Lindsey PA , Alexander RR , du Toit JT , Mills MGL 2005 . The potential contribution of ecotourism to African wild dog Lycaon pictus conservation in South Africa. Biol. Conserv. 123 : 3 339– 48 [Google Scholar]
• 109.  Walpole MJ , Goodwin HJ. 2000 . Local economic impacts of dragon tourism in Indonesia. Ann. Tour. Res. 27 : 3 559– 76 [Google Scholar]
• 110.  Walpole MJ , Leader-Williams N. 2002 . Tourism and flagship species in conservation. Biodivers Conserv 11 : 543– 47 [Google Scholar]
• 111.  Diedrich A. 2007 . The impacts of tourism on coral reef conservation awareness and support in coastal communities in Belize. Coral Reefs 26 : 4 985– 96 [Google Scholar]
• 112.  Walters RDM , Samways MJ. 2001 . Sustainable dive ecotourism on a South African coral reef. Biodivers Conserv 10 : 12 2167– 79 [Google Scholar]
• 113.  Spalding M , Burke L , Wood SA , Ashpole J , Hutchinson J , zu Ermgassen P 2017 . Mapping the global value and distribution of coral reef tourism. Mar. Policy 82 : May 104– 13 [Google Scholar]
• 114.  Kirby CA , Giudice R , Day B , Turner K , Silvera Soares-Filho B et al. 2011 . Closing the ecotourism-conservation loop in the Peruvian Amazon. Environ. Conserv. 38 : 01 6– 17 [Google Scholar]
• 115.  Hunt CA , Durham WH , Driscoll L , Honey M 2015 . Can ecotourism deliver real economic, social, and environmental benefits? A study of the Osa Peninsula, Costa Rica. J. Sustain. Tour. 23 : 3 339– 57 [Google Scholar]
• 116.  Charnley S. 2005 . From nature tourism to ecotourism? The case of the Ngorongoro Conservation Area, Tanzania. Hum. Organ. 64 : 1 75– 88 [Google Scholar]
• 117.  Kirkby CA , Giudice-Granados R , Day B , Turner K , Velarde-Andrade LM 2010 . The market triumph of ecotourism: an economic investigation of the private and social benefits of competing land uses in the Peruvian Amazon. PLOS ONE 5 : 9 e13015 [Google Scholar]
• 118.  Durham WH. 2008 . The challenge ahead: reversing vicious cycles through ecotourism. Ecotourism and Conservation in the Americas A Stronza, WH Durham 265– 71 Wallingford, UK: CABI [Google Scholar]
• 119.  Powell RB , Ham SH. 2008 . Can ecotourism interpretation really lead to pro-conservation knowledge, attitudes and behaviour? Evidence from the Galapagos Islands. J. Sustain Tour. 16 : 4 467– 89 Influential study on how the interpretation facet of ecotourism and impacts on knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors. [Google Scholar]
• 120.  Broadbent EN , Almeyda Zambrano AM , Dirzo R , Durham WH , Driscoll L et al. 2012 . The effect of land use change and ecotourism on biodiversity: a case study of Manuel Antonio, Costa Rica, from 1985 to 2008. Landsc. Ecol. 27 : 5 731– 44 [Google Scholar]
• 121.  Almeyda AM , Broadbent EN , Wyman MS , Durham WH 2010 . Ecotourism impacts in the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica. Int. J. Tour. Res. 12 : 6 803– 19 [Google Scholar]
• 122.  Zambrano AMA , Broadbent EN , Durham WH 2010 . Social and environmental effects of ecotourism in the Osa Peninsula of Costa Rica: the Lapa Rios case. J. Ecotourism 9 : 1 62– 83 [Google Scholar]
• 123.  Brandt JS , Buckley RC. 2018 . A global systematic review of empirical evidence of ecotourism impacts on forests in biodiversity hotspots. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain 32 : 112– 18 Review of 111 studies of tourism's impact on biodiversity hotspots; concludes tourism works best for conservation when it adheres more closely to the tenets of ecotourism. [Google Scholar]
• 124.  Agrawal A , Redford K. 2006 . Poverty, Development, and Biodiversity Conservation: Shooting in the Dark ? New York: Wildlife Conserv. Soc. [Google Scholar]
• 125.  Brown TL , Decker DJ. 2005 . Research needs to support community-based wildlife management: global perspectives. Hum. Dimens. Wildl. 10 : 2 137– 40 [Google Scholar]
• 126.  Langholz J. 1999 . Exploring the effects of alternative income opportunities on rainforest use: insights from Guatemala's Maya Biosphere Reserve. Soc. Nat. Resour. 12 : 2 139– 49 [Google Scholar]
• 127.  Wunder S. 2000 . Ecotourism and economic incentives—an empirical approach. Ecol. Econ. 32 : 3 465– 79 [Google Scholar]
• 128.  Troëng S , Drews C. 2004 . Money talks: economic aspects of marine turtle use and conservation. WWF International Jan. 7. http://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?153802/wwwpandaorglacmarineturtlespublications [Google Scholar]
• 129.  Stronza A , Pêgas F. 2008 . Ecotourism and conservation: two cases from Brazil and Peru. Hum. Dimens. Wildl. 13 : 4 263– 79 [Google Scholar]
• 130.  Bookbinder MP , Dinerstein E , Rijal A , Cauley H , Rajouria A 1998 . Ecotourism's support of biodiversity conservation. Conserv. Biol. 12 : 6 1399– 404 [Google Scholar]
• 131.  Barkin D. 2003 . Alleviating poverty through ecotourism: promises and reality in the Monarch Butterfly Reserve of Mexico. Environ. Dev. Sustain 5 : 3/4 371– 82 [Google Scholar]
• 132.  Young EH. 1999 . Balancing conservation with development in small-scale fisheries: Is ecotourism an empty promise?. Hum. Ecol. 27 : 4 581– 620 [Google Scholar]
• 133.  Stronza A. 2007 . The economic promise of ecotourism for conservation. J. Ecotourism 6 : 3 210– 30 [Google Scholar]
• 134.  Mbaiwa JE , Stronza AL. 2010 . The effects of tourism development on rural livelihoods in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. J. Sustain Tour. 18 : 5 635– 56 [Google Scholar]
• 135.  Stronza AL. 2010 . Commons management and ecotourism: ethnographic evidence from the Amazon. Int. J. Commons 4 : 1 56 [Google Scholar]
• 136.  Stronza A. 2008 . Partnerships for tourism development. Building Community Capacity for Tourism Development G Moscardo 101– 15 Wallingford, UK: CABI [Google Scholar]
• 137.  Borman R. 2008 . Ecotourism and conservation: the Cofan experience. Ecotourism and Conservation in the Americas A Stronza, WH Durham 21– 29 Wallingford: CABI [Google Scholar]
• 138.  Hoole AF. 2009 . Place-power-prognosis: community-based conservation, partnerships, and ecotourism enterprises in Namibia. Int. J. Commons 4 : 1 78 [Google Scholar]
• 139.  Zeppel H. 2006 . Indigenous Ecotourism: Sustainable Development and Management Wallingford, UK: CABI [Google Scholar]
• 140.  Stronza A. 2008 . Through a new mirror: reflections on tourism and identity in the Amazon. Hum. Organ. 67 : 3 244– 57 [Google Scholar]
• 141.  Coria J , Calfucura E. 2012 . Ecotourism and the development of indigenous communities: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Ecol. Econ. 73 : 47– 55 [Google Scholar]
• 142.  Orams MB. 1997 . The effectiveness of environmental education: Can we turn tourists into “greenies”?. Progr. Tour. Hosp. Res. 3 : 295– 306 [Google Scholar]
• 143.  Ballantyne R , Packer J. 2013 . International Handbook on Ecotourism Northampton, UK: Edward Elgar Publ. Excellent state-of-the-knowledge summary of ecotourism research from numerous disciplinary perspectives, with contributions by social scientists. [Google Scholar]
• 144.  Ham S. 2011 . The ask—or is it the offer?. Travelers’ Philanthropy Handbook M Honey 141– 49 Washington, DC: Cent. Respons. Travel [Google Scholar]
• 145.  Ardoin NM , Wheaton M , Hunt CA , Schuh JS , Durham WH 2016 . Post-trip philanthropic intentions of nature-based tourists in Galapagos. J. Ecotourism 15 : 1 21– 35 [Google Scholar]
• 146.  Ardoin NM , Wheaton M , Bowers AW , Hunt CA , Durham WH 2015 . Nature-based tourism's impact on environmental knowledge, attitudes, and behavior: a review and analysis of the literature and potential future research. J. Sustain Tour. 23 : 6 838– 58 [Google Scholar]
• 147.  Falk J , Staus NL. 2013 . Free-choice learning and ecotourism. International Handbook of Ecotourism R Ballantyne, J Packer 155– 68 Northampton, UK: Edward Elgar Publ. [Google Scholar]
• 148.  Wheaton M , Ardoin N , Hunt CA , Schuh J , Kresse M et al. 2016 . Using web and mobile technology to motivate pro-environmental action after a nature-based tourism experience. J. Sustain Tour. 24 : 4 594– 615 [Google Scholar]
• 149.  Hughes K , Packer J , Ballantyne R 2011 . Using post‐visit action resources to support family conservation learning following a wildlife tourism experience. Environ. Educ. Res. 17 : 3 307– 28 [Google Scholar]
• 150.  Wu J , Huang D , Liu J , Law R 2013 . Which factors help visitors convert their short-term pro-environmental intentions to long-term behaviors?. Int. J. Tour. Sci. 13 : 2 33– 56 [Google Scholar]
• 151.  Chieh‐Wen S , Shen M , Chen M 2008 . Special interest tour preferences and voluntary simplicity lifestyle. Int. J. Cult. Tour. Hosp. Res. 2 : 4 389– 409 [Google Scholar]
• 152.  Hall CM. 2011 . Consumerism, tourism and voluntary simplicity: We all have to consume, but do we really have to travel so much to be happy?. Tour. Recreat. Res. 36 : 3 298– 303 [Google Scholar]
• 153.  Heyman W , Stronza A. 2011 . South-South exchanges enhance resource management and biodiversity conservation at various scales. Conserv. Soc. 9 : 2 146 [Google Scholar]
• 154.  Hunt C , Stronza A. 2011 . Missing the forest for the trees?: Incongruous local perspectives on ecotourism in Nicaragua converge on ethical issues. Hum. Organ. 70 : 4 376– 86 [Google Scholar]
• 155.  Stem CJ , Lassoie JP , Lee DR , Deshler DD , Schelhas JW 2003 . Community participation in ecotourism benefits: the link to conservation practices and perspectives. Soc. Nat. Resour. 16 : 5 387– 413 [Google Scholar]
• 156.  Ostrom E. 1990 . Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
• 157.  Ostrom E. 2008 . The challenge of common-pool resources. Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 50 : 4 8– 21 [Google Scholar]
• 158.  Kellert SR , Mehta JN , Ebbin SA , Lichtenfeld LL 2000 . Community natural resource management: promise, rhetoric, and reality. Soc. Nat. Resour. 13 : 8 705– 15 [Google Scholar]
• 159.  Moreno PS. 2005 . Ecotourism along the meso-American Caribbean reef: the impacts of foreign investment. Hum. Ecol. 33 : 2 217– 44 [Google Scholar]
• 160.  Jones S. 2005 . Community-based ecotourism: the significance of social capital. Ann. Tour. Res. 32 : 2 303– 24 [Google Scholar]
• 161.  Marcinek AA , Hunt CA. 2015 . Social capital, ecotourism, and empowerment in Shiripuno, Ecuador. Int. J. Tour. Anthropol. 4 : 4 327 [Google Scholar]
• 162.  Snyman S. 2013 . Household spending patterns and flow of ecotourism income into communities around Liwonde National Park, Malawi. Dev. South Afr. 30 : 4–05 640– 58 [Google Scholar]
• 163.  Ostrom E , Burger J , Field CB , Norgaard RB , Policansky D 1999 . Revisiting the commons: local lessons, global challenges. Science 284 : 5412 278– 82 [Google Scholar]
• 164.  Pretty J , Smith D. 2004 . Social capital in biodiversity conservation and management. Conserv. Biol. 18 : 3 631– 38 [Google Scholar]
• 165.  Romero-Brito TP , Buckley RC , Byrne J 2016 . NGO partnerships in using ecotourism for conservation: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLOS ONE 11 : 11 1– 19 [Google Scholar]
• 166.  Dann G , Nash D , Pearce P 1988 . Methodology in tourism research. Ann. Tour. Res. 15 : 1 1– 28 [Google Scholar]
• 167.  Bernard HR. 2013 . Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches Los Angeles: Sage [Google Scholar]
• 168.  Fennell DA. 2001 . A content analysis of ecotourism definitions. Curr. Issues Tour. 4 : 5 403– 21 [Google Scholar]
• 169.  Stronza A. 2000 . “ Because it is ours”: community-based ecotourism in the Peruvian Amazon PhD Thesis Univ. Fla., Gainesville https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=5309930 [Google Scholar]
• 170.  Brightsmith DJ , Stronza A , Holle K 2008 . Ecotourism, conservation biology, and volunteer tourism: a mutually beneficial triumvirate. Biol. Conserv. 141 : 11 2832– 42 [Google Scholar]
• 171.  Stonich SC. 1998 . The political ecology of tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 25 : 25– 54 [Google Scholar]
• 172.  Stonich SC. 2000 . The Other Side of Paradise: Tourism, Conservation and Development in the Bay Islands Elmsford, UK: Cognizant Comm. Corp. [Google Scholar]
• 173.  Mbaiwa JE. 2015 . Ecotourism in Botswana: 30 years later. J. Ecotourism 14 : 2–3 204– 22 [Google Scholar]
• 174.  Mbaiwa J. 2008 . The realities of ecotourism development in Botswana. Responsible Tourism: Critical Issues for Conservation and Development A Spenceley 205– 24 New York: Earthscan [Google Scholar]
• 175.  Mbaiwa JE , Thakadu OT , Darkoh MBK 2008 . Indigenous knowledge and ecotourism-based livelihoods in the Okavango Delta in Botswana. Botsw. Notes Rec. 39 : 62– 74 [Google Scholar]
• 176.  Mbaiwa JE. 2003 . The socio-economic and environmental impacts of tourism development on the Okavango Delta, north-western Botswana. J. Arid. Environ. 54 : 447– 67 [Google Scholar]
• 177.  Gezon LL. 2014 . Who wins and who loses? Unpacking the “local people” concept in ecotourism: a longitudinal study of community equity in Ankarana, Madagascar. J. Sustain Tour. 22 : 5 821– 38 [Google Scholar]
• 178.  Campbell LM. 1999 . Ecotourism in rural developing communities. Ann. Tour. Res. 26 : 3 534– 53 [Google Scholar]
• 179.  Gray NJ , Campbell LM. 2007 . A decommodified experience? Exploring aesthetic, economic and ethical values for volunteer ecotourism in Costa Rica. J. Sustain. Tour. 15 : 5 463– 82 [Google Scholar]
• 180.  Wiens JA. 1989 . Spatial scaling in ecology. Funct. Ecol. 3 : 4 385 [Google Scholar]
• 181.  Levin SA. 1992 . The problem of pattern and scale in ecology: the Robert H. MacArthur Award Lecture. Ecology 73 : 6 1943– 67 [Google Scholar]
• 182.  Hunt CA , Stronza A. 2009 . Bringing ecotourism into focus: applying a hierarchical perspective to ecotourism research. J. Ecotourism 8 : 1 1– 17 [Google Scholar]
• 183.  Salafsky N , Cauley H , Balachander G , Cordes B , Parks J et al. 2001 . A systematic test of an enterprise strategy for community-based biodiversity conservation. Conserv. Biol. 15 : 6 1585– 95 [Google Scholar]
• 184.  Woodward RT , Stronza A , Shapiro-Garza E , Fitzgerald LA 2014 . Market-based conservation: aligning static theory with dynamic systems. Nat. Resour. Forum. 38 : 4 235– 47 [Google Scholar]
• 185.  Taylor JE , Dyer GA , Stewart M , Yunez‐Naude A , Ardila S 2003 . The economics of ecotourism: a Galápagos Islands economy‐wide perspective. Econ. Dev. Cult. Change 51 : 4 977– 97 [Google Scholar]
• 186.  Wilson C , Tisdell C. 2003 . Conservation and economic benefits of wildlife-based marine tourism: sea turtles and whales as case studies. Hum. Dimens. Wildl. 8 : 1 49– 58 [Google Scholar]
• 187.  Pretty J , Ward H. 2001 . Social capital and the environment. World Dev 29 : 2 209– 27 [Google Scholar]
• 188.  van Riper CJ , Landon AC , Kidd S , Bitterman P , Fitzgerald LA et al. 2017 . Incorporating sociocultural phenomena into ecosystem-service valuation: the importance of critical pluralism. Bioscience 67 : 3 233– 44 [Google Scholar]
• 189.  Stone M , Wall G. 2004 . Ecotourism and community development: case studies from Hainan, China. Environ. Manag. 33 : 1 12– 24 [Google Scholar]
• 190.  Ross S , Wall G. 1999 . Evaluating ecotourism: the case of North Sulawesi, Indonesia. Tour. Manag. 20 : 6 673– 82 [Google Scholar]
• 191.  Ross S , Wall G. 1999 . Ecotourism: towards congruence between theory and practice. Tour. Manag. 20 : 1 123– 32 [Google Scholar]
• 192.  Weinberg A , Bellows S , Ekster D 2002 . Sustaining ecotourism: insights and implications from two successful case studies. Soc. Nat. Resour. 15 : 4 371– 80 [Google Scholar]
• 193.  Garrod B. 2010 . Local participation in the planning and management of ecotourism: a revised model approach. J. Ecotourism 2 : 1 33– 53 [Google Scholar]
• 194.  Guevara JR. 1986 . Learning through participatory action research for community ecotourism planning. Convergence 29 : 3 24– 40 [Google Scholar]
• 195.  Boucher D , Elias P , Lininger K , May-Tobin C , Roquemore S , Saxon E 2011 . The Root of the Problem: What's Driving Tropical Deforestation Today ? Cambridge, UK: Union of Concerned Scientists [Google Scholar]
• 196.  Redmore L , Stronza A , Songhurst A , McCulloch G 2017 . Which way forward? Past and new perspectives on community-based conservation in the Anthropocene. Encycl. Anthrop. 3 : 453– 60 [Google Scholar]
• 197.  Steffen W , Crutzen PJ , McNeill JR 2009 . The Anthropocene: are humans now overwhelming the great forces of nature?. Ambio 36 : 614– 21 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

• Article Type: Review Article

Most Read This Month

Most cited most cited rss feed, adaptive governance of social-ecological systems, dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in tropical regions, climate change and food systems, wetland resources: status, trends, ecosystem services, and restorability, global water pollution and human health, adaptation to environmental change: contributions of a resilience framework, i ndustrial s ymbiosis : literature and taxonomy, environmental governance, c arbon d ioxide e missions from the g lobal c ement i ndustry 1, global biogeochemical cycling of mercury: a review.

The Economic Benefits of Nature-Based Tourism

Photo credit: Sheviakova Kateryna/Shutterstock.com

Nature-based tourism can help countries achieve their development goals while promoting biodiversity conservation. In destinations with rich natural assets but limited economic opportunities, nature-based tourism can create jobs and diversify rural economies. Money spent by tourists on activities, transportation, food, and accommodation ripple through local communities – generating jobs, income, and indirect impacts, benefiting poor and nonpoor households alike. By stimulating investment and economic activity in and around protected areas, tourism provides benefits to local communities and strengthens incentives to support and engage in conservation, which may otherwise create opportunity costs for them.

Nature-based tourism can also generate financing for biodiversity conservation. In many countries, visitor entrance fees, tourism concessions and leasing fees, and other financial mechanisms account for a substantial proportion of the budgets of protected and conserved areas. As a result, more and more countries are prioritizing nature-based tourism to fuel economic development and conservation.

The World Bank is investing in projects that help countries protect their natural assets , grow and diversify nature-based tourism businesses , and share the benefits from tourism with local communities. The World Bank also invests in new tools and knowledge to measure the local economic impacts of nature-based tourism, to help inform policies for sustainable development and conservation of protected areas.

There is a significant lack of data and methodologies that measure the impacts of tourism at the local level.   Furthermore, most cost-benefit studies of tourism projects focus only on activities that are directly affected by tourism, like hotels and lodges, restaurants, tour operators, and souvenir shops. Economic spillovers, or indirect impacts, are an important part of how tourism affects local economies and create income multipliers. Yet they are rarely considered in policy design or cost-benefit analysis for new tourism operations.

Local economy-wide impact evaluation (LEWIE) models can be used to quantify both the direct and indirect impacts of tourist spending on economies around protected areas. These approaches measure visitor numbers and tourist spending in protected areas and gather data from surveys of local households and businesses. The resulting data can make the case for greater investments in natural areas and tourism and inform policies that improve tourism and refine business models. Assessments can also help identify those protected areas that are generating high returns from government investments. 

The report showed that tourism generated jobs for:

• 30 percent of the working age population around Zambia’s South Luangwa National Park
• 14 percent around Zambia’s Lower Zambezi National Park
• 13 percent in Nadroga-Navosa and the Mamanuca Islands in Fiji
• 12 percent around Brazil’s Whale Coast, home to Abrolhos Marine National Park
• 3 percent around Nepal’s Chitwan National Park

A new  LEWIE-lite methodology  for protected area tourism provides a more accessible and user-friendly methodology to assess the impacts of tourist spending on local economies. The World Bank piloted LEWIE-lite in Madagascar and Uganda. Better and more readily available data can be used to advocate for greater investments in natural areas and tourism and improve tourism policy and decision-making.

Funding for the studies was provided by  PROBLUE ,  PROFOR ,  PROGREEN , the  Global Wildlife Program , and  WAVES .

For summary of results: Banking on Protected Areas: Promoting Sustainable Protected Area Tourism to Benefit Local Communities

Read the country report: Assessing the Economic Impact of Protected Area Tourism on Local Economies in Brazil

Tourism is the largest source of foreign exchange in Fiji and vital for local livelihoods. Fiji recognizes the need to protect its natural assets for sustainable tourism development. The study estimated the economic impact of tourism in three island destinations in the Mamanuca Islands that are being considered for formal marine protected area status. It found that tourism there created 8,304 jobs (through direct and indirect channels), employing 13 percent of the local population in the Mamanucas Islands and on the mainland (the western coastal region in Nadroga-Navosa province).

Read the country report: Economic Impacts of Protected Area Tourism on Local Communities in Nepal

Feature story: Harnessing Tourism to Enhance the Value of Biodiversity and Promote Conservation in Nepal

Read the country report: Assessing the Economic Impact of Tourism in Protected Areas on Local Economies in Zambia

Blog: Protecting biodiversity to improve economic outcomes in Zambia

• The Global Wildlife Program [email protected]

This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here .

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Local people’s perception of the impacts and importance of ecotourism in Central Nepal

Suraj upadhaya.

1 Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States of America

2 Himalayan Conservation and Research Institute Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal

Sarada Tiwari

3 Tribhuvan University, Institute of Forestry, Pokhara, Nepal

Beeju Poudyal

4 Faculty of Forestry, Agriculture and Forestry University, Hetauda, Makawanpur, Nepal

Sagar Godar Chhetri

5 College of Forestry, Agriculture & Natural Resources, University of Arkansas, Monticello, AR, United States of America

Nabin Dhungana

6 Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies, College of Environmental Studies, National Dong Hwa University, Hualien, Taiwan

7 Natural Resources Conservation Nepal (NRCN), Kathmandu, Nepal

Associated Data

The data underlying the results presented in the study are available from https://github.com/HimalayanConservationResearchInstitute/ecotourism-cnp?fbclid=IwAR3V3qFwmcBfJ4m-ZUCZZ315BbDUi5dIv155z2ErdYgi8k64aAPZX8x9xNE .

Ecotourism contributes to conserving natural resources and promoting natural and cultural resources stewardship. However, without the strong support and involvement of local people, it is not easy to achieve the stated goals. This study aimed to understand the local people’s perception of the impacts and importance of ecotourism. We conducted a semi-structured interview of 167 respondents from Chitwan National Park (CNP), Nepal’s prime center for ecotourism. The result revealed that more than 70% of respondents are interested in ecotourism activities, and their interests are significantly affected by their age, academic qualification, and occupation. Local people from the study area perceived that infrastructure development and increase in the knowledge base are significant impacts of ecotourism. The study showed that local people’s socioeconomic and demographic characteristics significantly influenced their perceived impacts of ecotourism. Detailed understanding and consideration of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics can contribute to effective outreach and planning process, potentially resulting in the higher promotion of ecotourism.

1 Introduction

The tourism industry is one of the world’s largest industries and is associated with many sectors of the world’s economy. It creates jobs, drives exports, and generates prosperity across the globe [ 1 , 2 ]. Tourism contributes 10.4% of total gross domestic products (GDP), approximately US $8.8 trillion annually, creating 319 million jobs to the world economy [ 1 ]. In Nepal, travel and tourism contributed 7.9% of total GDP, approximately US $746.3 million annually, and created 1.05 million jobs [ 1 ].

Ecotourism is defined as "responsible travel to natural areas that conserve the environment, sustains the well-being of the local people, creates knowledge and understanding through interpretation and education of all involved; visitors, staff and the visited" [ 3 ]. It represents nature-based travel to a relatively undisturbed touristic destination [ 4 ]. In both developed and developing countries, ecotourism is viewed as an engine of economic advancement and a pathway for improving the livelihoods of communities that might otherwise struggle to grow and flourish [ 5 , 6 ]. Ecotourism helps poverty alleviation, job creation, income redistribution, and export of domestic products to international markets [ 7 , 8 ]. Ecotourism can promote sustainable development through managing biological diversity and ecosystem services and functions by ensuring quality tourism experiences and absorbing or adapting to the pressures of tourists [ 9 ]. It focuses on community development, poverty alleviation, biodiversity conservation, and traditional economic activity, including agriculture, livestock, and hunting [ 10 ]. In developing countries like Nepal, it supports employment, markets, and cultural conservation and promotes ownership, management, and equitable sharing of benefits from natural resources among communities in the local area [ 11 – 13 ].

Nepal is popular for natural, historical, cultural, and adventure activities. For international tourists, it is famous for its low-cost tourism destinations. Due to higher buying power resulting from a favorable currency exchange rate and lower living expenditures, inbound tourist numbers are high [ 14 ]. The majority of the tourists prefer Nepal as a destination for trekking, rafting, wildlife safari, and cultural pilgrimage. Nepal’s rich biodiversity is also another high attraction for tourists. This includes watching spectacular species such as the One-horned Rhino, Asian Elephant, and Royal Bengal Tiger. Many ecotourists opt for their destination in the protected areas of Nepal, such as Chitwan National Park (CNP), Bardiya National Park, and Suklaphanta National Park. While natural attraction provides the foundation of tourism in any country, promoting an increase in tourist numbers depends on positive tourism experiences [ 15 ].

Similarly, the availability of facilities, quality delivery of services, and hospitality help sustain the quality and growth of tourism [ 15 ]. CNP has been serving these facilities through local people, entrepreneurs, and people in business. The primary services provided by the local people are manufacturing handmade souvenirs, showcasing their tradition through dance, homestay, and guiding the ecotourists. In turn, the local community earns foreign currency, advances their livelihood, and is motivated to develop ecotourism.

Several studies have explored the perceived impacts of ecotourism on the local community. Developing ecotourism industries and interactions with tourists significantly impact local communities [ 16 ]. These interacting forces can influence the communities’ values, behavior, lifestyles, and quality of life [ 17 ]. The development of ecotourism industries can positively and negatively affect both the natural resources and local communities’ livelihoods [ 15 ]. It is also found that ecotourism has supported the conservation of natural resources, promoted alternative energy sources, and enhanced women’s empowerment [ 12 ]. Households involved in ecotourism-related activities have a significantly higher living standard [ 18 ]. Their purchasing power will be greater than their counterparts and vice-versa [ 19 ]. There is a trade-off between economic benefits and environmental and socio-cultural costs that requires a balance between the protection of natural resources, livelihood improvement, and community development [ 20 ].

People’s perceptions of the sustainability of ecotourism revealed different perspectives. The perspectives of the individuals are influenced by their socio-demographic factors. For instance, the demands and necessities of the low-income and high-income individuals are different. As a result, they observe the resource from their perspectives. Low-income residents benefited from fuelwood, non-timber forest products, and fodder [ 21 ].

In contrast, high-income individuals benefited from timber extraction, forest-based enterprises, and large businesses. These benefits motivate local people to conserve forestlands and associated biodiversity. Also, the provision of wildlife damage compensation schemes provided by the Nepal Government has dramatically improved the attitudes of local people toward conservation [ 22 ]. Similarly, the revenue generated from ecotourism can be used to manage and conserve wildlife species and their habitat [ 23 ], community development, conservation education, and skills development [ 24 ]. Besides, ecotourism promotes and keeps alive local culture and traditions. Many hotel owners encourage tourists to visit Tharu (ethnic community) villages in CNP to understand better Tharu’s culture, art, living style, and traditions [ 25 ]. The community shows a warm welcome and respect to the tourists. The tourist visits the area to see the local culture, encouraging locals to conserve their indigenous practices. Also, local people perceived that the presence of tourists enhanced their pride in the region [ 26 ]. Ecotourism also played a crucial role in sustaining traditional practices and making prosperous communities.

Though ecotourism has many positive aspects, there are also some negatives. The fast growth of the tourism industry might have negatively impacted society, the environment, and the economy [ 27 ]. Drug abuse, illegal sexual activities, and other illegal activities have been enhanced due to tourism activities [ 25 ]. Also, a report by [ 28 ] found that the consumption of drugs and alcohol, robbery, and prostitution has increased in this area. These negative economic externalities encompass a rise in the price of goods and services [ 29 ]. Due to Nepal’s small and tourism-dependent economy, the pricing effects on commodities might become a permanent and nationwide phenomenon that affects the lives and welfare of all inhabitants [ 30 ]. In addition, tourism might have negative impacts on forests and biodiversity. Unplanned tourism activity is responsible for environmental degradation, waste generation, and pollution [ 13 , 31 ]. Therefore, unmanaged tourism development activities are a risk to the sustainability of the tourism industry.

In sum, previous research has identified several impacts of ecotourism, even when ecotourism helps uplift people’s livelihood. However, those studies focused on the major tourist flow areas where there are sophisticated services provided by hotels, lodges, and big business owners to the visitors. Also, rural and urban residents’ perception of ecotourism is significantly different [ 32 ]. So, to our knowledge, there is a paucity of information on local peoples’ perception of ecotourism in the study area. Also, its impacts on various social and economic aspects are still lacking.

A previous study also suggested that a host community’s participation in ecotourism development is closely linked to its access to knowledge about ecotourism and its related ability to control and manage local tourism resources [ 33 ]. Another study argued that understanding whether the host community benefits from ecotourism activities is crucial for sustainable management [ 34 ]. Host community participation facilitates access to benefits from ecotourism activities, but it also entails the right to a say in exerting controls on the ecotourism development process [ 6 ]. A sense of ownership and perceptions of ecotourism by host communities is an important issue for ecotourism development [ 6 ]. Today, policymakers pay increasing attention to economic development and growth and less attention to the effects of this growth on the environment, leading to the degradation of biodiversity. It is found that behavioral and functional activities in the area influenced tourism activities. It is not easy to accurately identify tourism’s social, ecological, and economic impacts [ 32 ]. Therefore, this study seeks to understand the local community’s perceptions of ecotourism impacts.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 study area.

Chitwan National Park (CNP) was the first national park declared in Nepal (in 1973) and has an area of 932 km 2 . CNP was designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1984. The Kumroj, a village and one of the potential destinations for ecotourism, covers 21.22 km 2 of land in the buffer zone of CNP ( Fig 1 ). The total area of Kumroj comprises 3.10 km 2 of forest area, 12.98 km 2 of agricultural land, 3.66 km 2 of grassland, 0.94 km 2 of water bodies, and the remaining 0.54 km 2 of other lands [ 35 ]. It consists of 1,750 households with 8,082 residents representing 16 different castes comprising indigenous Tharu and Darai communities along with hill migrants [ 35 , 36 ]. People of Kumroj depend on agriculture as the main source of income, besides which they rely on forest resources through plantation and regeneration of forest to sustain their livelihood. The degraded forest was recovered through community participation after 1980, and ecotourism was started in 1997 [ 36 ]. The renovation of the community forest and the increased presence of wildlife in the forest managed by the Kumroj buffer zone community forests users’ group have assisted the ecosystem regeneration. Then after, they promoted ecotourism, which can support local livelihood and conservation of forest resources [ 37 , 38 ]. Through ecotourism activities which started in 1997, this community of forest users group is generating approx. $45,000 annually [ 36 ]. Kumroj area has prime value for recreation, cultural richness, and wilderness, making it potential for ecotourism.

2.2 Data collections

The target population for this study consisted of local communities living in the adjacent villages (Khumroj) of Chitwan National Park. A total of 167 households (10% of the total households) were interviewed, which is enough for generalizing the results in the study area at a 95% confidence level with a 5% margin of error [ 39 ]. The authors themselves carried out the interviews in June-July of 2019 for this study. Stratified random sampling (SRS) with a sample interval of ten was applied, i.e., every tenth household after the first randomly selected households was surveyed. The SRS method was used because it provides a well-representation of the population. The head-of-household was asked to answer the questions. Only one person had selected from one household for an interview. If the head-of-household member was not available, we interviewed a family member above 18-years-old. In addition, the head-of-household who understood the Nepali (local) language and who was willing to participate at the time of data collection was included in this study. If both cases were not possible, the household was not included in the sampling.

Face to face semi-structured questionnaire was used for data collection (S1). So far, there is no institutional review board or national ethical guidelines for social science research in Nepal. However, the study adhered to established standards in research ethics, such as keeping the personal identifier confidential and obtaining verbal consent before starting the questionnaire survey. We also maintained confidentiality by keeping the filled-up questionnaire safely, using the data only for analysis purposes, and discarded immediately after completing the data entry. Data were collected according to the convenience of respondents, and time was allocated to 25–30 minutes for each respondent. A questionnaire survey was the primary source of data collection. The four-page survey instrument included two parts. Part 1 covered the respondent’s demographic characteristics, including gender (male and female), age (recoded as two categories; Young and Old, based on the median age of Nepalese people ~ 25 years), and education (illiterate: who did not go to school or cannot read or write; literate: who went to school or can read and write). Ethnicity was measured into four possible categories. Household income was recoded into two categories (1) Less than Nepal’s median household income and (2) higher than median household income per month. The second part of the survey solicited respondents’ perceptions of various aspects of ecotourism. Respondents were asked to state their perceptions about the benefits of ecotourism. Respondents who perceived that ecotourism is beneficial answered "Yes" otherwise "No."

Similarly, those respondents who think ecotourism changed their lifestyle responded "Yes" otherwise "No." Respondents were asked about their level of interest in ecotourism and their response, and we categorized their responses into "high," "medium," and "low." These two "Yes" and "No" and "high," "medium," and "low" three answers were used in the Chi-square test. Due to space limitations and the survey’s primary objective, we did not ask about the quantitative benefits of ecotourism.

In addition to the questionnaire survey, we also conducted key informant surveys (n = 5) with personnel from Kumroj Buffer Zone Community Forest Users Group and the homestay management committee to understand the local area better. During the key informant survey, we discussed existing services available for ecotourism, the socioeconomic situation, and the operational plan of the group.

2.3 Data analysis

Data were reviewed and checked daily for completeness, consistency, and accuracy. After finishing the data collection, all the data were rechecked, edited, coded, categorized, entered, and analyzed in the computer program using R software.

For further analysis, we grouped variables into different categories. We described perception with seven different dependent variables., 1) Local people’s interest in ecotourism: this variable can be defined as the residents’ have an attentiveness or being attracted to continue their business; 2) local people’s perceptions about the economic impacts of ecotourism: this means whether people believed or have some evidence of raising the economic activity in their areas due to ecotourism; 3) impacts of ecotourism in changing respondents’ lifestyle: this variable identifies the resident’s perception regarding their improvement of different facilities such as switching from fuelwood to gas, more conscious about the health and safety, and being more informed; 4) impacts of ecotourism in causing economic inequality in the study area: it explains about the negativity of the inflow of tourism. For example, increase in bus fares, land, room, house, and overall market; 5) ecotourism as the reason for the increase in commodity price: the variables try to reveal the disproportion of the goods and services such as market prices of the basic daily necessities; 6) perceptions towards the impacts of ecotourism in infrastructure development in their area: this explained about whether resident’s experienced about the development of infrastructure in their community such as road construction and maintenance, electricity and other utilities; and 7) impacts of ecotourism on knowledge improvement of locals: the variable explains how the local people gather the information regarding the ecotourism activities and their level of awareness about the current ecotourism demand in the market.

Similarly, we have the socioeconomic characteristics of the respondents as independent variables. Age, gender, caste, education status, household income, and occupation were the major socioeconomic factors. We grouped ethnicity into four major groups, namely (1) Brahmin/Chhetri/Newar (BCN); (2) Janajati; (3) Madhesi; (4) Dalits. Similarly, we grouped the education level into three categories (1) illiterate, (2) school level, and 3) university level. However, for the convenience of analyzing the data, we further grouped it into two categories (1) illiterate and (2) literature. Likewise, we categorized household income into three categories, (1) low, (2) medium, and (3) high, based on the minimum salary of the Government of Nepal. Again we further group them into two categories (1) low; and (2) high using the national median income [ 40 ]. Similarly, the respondents’ ages were grouped into three categories (1) young age; (2) middle age; and (3) elderly age group. In addition, the occupation of the respondents was grouped into three major categories (1) agriculture, (2) business, and (3) others (remittance, pension, etc.). Given the nature of the data, we employed a chi-square test to assess the association of these variables to respondents’ perceptions.

Of the 167 household respondents interviewed, 85 respondents were male (50.90%), and 82 were female (49.10%). The majority of the respondents were 25 years or older ( Table 1 ). The median age of the respondent was 25 years. Most of the respondents interviewed were between the age of 15–39 years (43.71%), followed by 40–59 years (39.52%) and above 60 years (16.77%). Twenty-six percent of respondents were illiterate, while 73.66% of respondents have primary school or higher academic qualifications. The major source of livelihood was found to be agriculture. More than two-thirds of the respondents’ major source of income was agriculture, followed by business and other jobs ( Table 1 ). The median monthly income of the respondents was NRs 14,700 (the US $1 = NRs 103). Most of the respondents (83.23%) were less than NRs 18,500 monthly income, which is the minimum salary of the Government of Nepal. Only a few respondents (6 or 3.59%) had income more than NRs. 30,000, and the remaining respondents (13.17) had income between NRs. 15,001- NRs 30,000.

3.1 Local people’s interest in ecotourism

The results showed that more than 70% of the respondents showed high or medium interest in ecotourism in their area ( Table 2 ). One of the possible reasons for showing greater interest is that local people benefited from ecotourism. A chi-square test of independence was performed to examine the relationship between different socio-demographic characteristics and the respondents’ interest in ecotourism. Among six variables, an education level (p = 0.016) and occupation type (p<0.001) were statistically significant to the interest of the local people in ecotourism at a 95% level of significance ( Table 2 ). The finding is logical because educated people were more aware of the opportunity of having ecotourism. Similarly, an occupation that depends upon the inflow of tourists in the area would increase the business’s profitability.

3.2 Perceptions of local people on the economic impacts of ecotourism

Most respondents think that ecotourism is not responsible for a change in their lifestyle. Only 9% of respondents think that ecotourism brings a difference in their lifestyle ( Table 3 ). The study revealed that people were only fulfilling their basic needs rather than making more money which significantly improved or changed their lifestyle through tourism activities. The contingency table indicates that variables such as income (p = 0.003), age (p<0.001), and occupation (p<0.001) of the respondents were statistically significant to the change in lifestyle of the people ( Table 3 ). In contrast to the impacts of ecotourism on the changing lifestyle of respondents, more than 83% of respondents think that ecotourism is responsible for creating economic inequality among locals in the study area ( Table 4 ). No single socio-demographic characteristic was found to be significant. However, most respondents with low income and involved in agriculture think that ecotourism is the reason for economic inequality in the community ( Table 4 ).

More than 90% of respondents reported that ecotourism is not responsible for increasing commodity prices in the study area ( Table 5 ). However, most respondents with high income reported that the increase in commodity prices in their place is due to ecotourism. The chi-square test shows that respondents’ ethnicity, income, occupation, and age significantly affect their response towards ecotourism’s impacts on an increase in commodity price ( Table 5 ). Most respondents in agriculture occupations do not think that increased commodity price is due to ecotourism. Similarly, respondents with low income believe that there is no relationship between ecotourism and increased commodity prices ( Table 5 ).

Most of the respondents (92%) perceived that infrastructure development in their area is due to ecotourism. They saw infrastructure development as the direct impact of ecotourism in their community. The chi-square test shows that only age and education are significant among the socio-demographic factors, with respondents’ perceptions of ecotourism impacts infrastructure development. More than 90% of the respondents who have at least school-level education think that infrastructure development in their area is due to ecotourism. Similarly, respondents of older age feel the same ( Table 6 ).

3.3 Perceptions of local people on the social impacts of ecotourism

The results show that majority of the local people perceived that their knowledge base had been improved due to ecotourism. They believe that ecotourism impacts the educational development of their children. The result showed that most of the respondents with low income think that ecotourism activities in their area have helped to improve their children’s knowledge and language abilities ( Table 7 ). The chi-square test shows the significant relationship between respondents’ income level and perceptions of ecotourism’s impacts on knowledge improvement ( Table 7 ).

4 Discussion

Our study showed that local people from the Kumroj Buffer zone of Chitwan National Park have both positive and negative perceptions of the impacts of ecotourism. We found that people living around CNP are interested in ecotourism. Local people’s higher interest is obvious in areas like CNP, where the ecotourism industry is well established. As [ 41 ] suggested, the higher interest of local people in ecotourism is directly influenced by multiple factors, including local organizations and groups involved in providing ecotourism services. Such associations or networking agencies encourage local people to engage in ecotourism activities by conducting meetings, agri-business exhibitions, and extension programs. Our results also showed that the demographics and socioeconomic status of the local people were associated with their interest in ecotourism activities. This study revealed that most respondents recognized that infrastructure development in their area is due to increased ecotourism activities. Our results align with the existing studies by [ 42 ], ecotourism activities contribute to the infrastructure development of the area. We also found that old-aged and literate locals perceived ecotourism contributes to infrastructure development. The local people who perceive that their knowledge base is improved due to ecotourism activities are typically low-waged. People with low income appreciate the income from ecotourism as their primary source of income, which enables their children to get an education.

The study found that most residents were interested in ecotourism activities, and those interested residents were literate. This suggests that educated people are more interested in ecotourism. Educated people are an essential aspect of conserving natural resources and protected areas. These ecological protection areas also allow academic institutions to organize and implement field-based education for their students [ 43 ], which will enable them to see many benefits and positive aspects of ecotourism. This interest increase in ecotourism activities creates many different economic dynamics in the Kumroj Buffer Zone Area. A previous study suggests that due to the influx of tourists in the area, local people suffer from an increase in the price of commodities [ 1 ]. Still, local people from the Khumroj Buffer zone do not perceive that ecotourism significantly impacts commodity prices. This local people’s perception is significantly associated with their ethnicity, income, occupation, and age. In contrast, the study found that ecotourism is responsible for creating economic inequality among the local people. We feel that this aspect should be explored in-depth in future research.

Also, the study found that tourism helps in promoting infrastructure development. This perception of infrastructure development due to ecotourism activities is associated with the respondents’ age and education level. The previous study also showed that tourism activities encourage establishing facilities such as road access, hotel, lodges, resorts, restaurants, infrastructure, souvenir shops, grocery, and gift shops [ 12 , 44 ]. These facilities encourage large business personnel to engage in a range of tourism activities and create an opportunity to produce and sell local products such as vegetables, fruits, livestock, and handmade souvenirs [ 45 ]. In addition, ecotourism encourages small businesses such as nature guide services and travel and tours company in the areas. These infrastructure developments and other physical facilities enhance the economic benefits at the local, provincial and national levels. The economic benefits that residents perceive from ecotourism development include more employment opportunities, increased income, and business opportunities [ 1 , 9 , 19 , 30 ]. For instance, according to the CNP authorities, a total of 152,671 tourists visited and generated NRs 24,19,60,998.28 (US $1 = NRs 103) revenue in the fiscal year 2017/2018.

The social impacts of ecotourism on the local community are often perceived as improving residents’ quality of life, education standard (or literacy rate), leadership skills, and improvement in the language [ 1 , 46 ]. Due to the rise in income and economic activity, the local people can afford their basic needs, resulting in better living standards. Also, people can afford better schools for their children, be aware of their health, access to new technologies, and enhance social networks. Therefore, many locals switched from traditional cooking stoves to improved ones, reducing the dependency of forest products such as firewood. Our results align well with previous research where most of the residents switched to biogas plants and solar energy systems for the household energy source [ 47 ]. It is also found that CNP provides funds to the local people for road construction, school building maintenance, and biogas plants due to tourism activities [ 47 ]. Also, it creates opportunities for cultural exchange and the revitalization of local traditions [ 48 ]. Tourism can also result in social and cultural benefits such as more recreational opportunities for residents, improved public services and infrastructure, and a source of social change [ 1 , 48 , 49 ]. However, ecotourism may also have costs or adverse socio-cultural effects. As a source of change, ecotourism can have a negative impact on traditional family values, lead to cultural commercialization, and create socio-cultural conflicts in the host community due to differences in the economic welfare and purchasing power between the host community and tourists [ 50 ].

People perceived that ecotourism had played a vital role in the sustainable development of human welfare. A steady increase in tourists has positively and negatively impacted the region [ 51 ]. However, sustainable tourism management has always been a better strategy to mitigate tourism’s adverse effects [ 52 ]. The local peoples’ perceptions and attitudes towards ecotourism significantly contribute to sustainable tourism management.

5. Conclusions

Knowing local residents’ opinions is necessary in tourism destinations’ planning process and governance. Understanding their perceived impacts of ecotourism is needed for positive output. This study explored the relationship between local peoples’ perception of impacts and the importance of ecotourism with their socioeconomic and demographic characteristics. This study looked into the most overlooked aspect of ecotourism management, and the findings will serve as the foundation for local governments’ social aspects of ecotourism planning. Further, the study could serve as a guide to compare these famous ecotourism destinations with other tourist areas with similar characteristics, considering that results are not generalizable. The socio, economic and ecological conditions of each context influence the results; although they might have some common characteristics with other destinations, they are still unique to the particular local destination [ 17 ].

We hope this study will help fill in existing gaps in literature around the perceived impacts of ecotourism in underdeveloped countries Nepal. Though our research investigated the association between respondents’ socioeconomic and demographic characteristics and their perceived impacts and importance of ecotourism, we did not do any research that explored the causal effect of these associations. Furthermore, this study did not examine how local people perceived the ecological impacts of ecotourism. We suggest doing this as this will provide a more comprehensive understanding of the perceived impacts of ecotourism on all three aspects of sustainability viz, social, economic, and ecological.

Supporting information

Acknowledgments.

The authors are thankful to all the respondents from Kumroj Village for participating in this study. The authors also acknowledge feedback from the two anonymous referees and the editor of this journal, which helped improve the quality of the manuscript.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

Data Availability

• DOI: 10.1108/whatt-03-2022-0038
• Corpus ID: 248455800

How to unlock the benefits of ecotourism: a case study of Karpaz, North Cyprus

• Ilkay Yorganci , E. Emin
• Published in Worldwide Hospitality and… 2 May 2022
• Environmental Science, Business

2 Citations

Role of constructed environment for tourism development: a global trend analysis base on triangulated review, assessing sustainable tourism in kuala kubu bharu: a qualitative approach, 42 references, community-based ecotourism: a collaborative partnerships perspective, community-based ecotourism management for sustainable development of marine protected areas in malaysia, how do you know it when you see it community-based ecotourism in the cardamom mountains of southwestern cambodia, stakeholder collaboration as a major factor for sustainable ecotourism development in developing countries, performance evaluation of community-based ecotourism: a case study in satun province, thailand, ecotourism in the kakum conservation area, ghana: local politics, practice and outcome, local people's perception on the impacts and importance of ecotourism in sabang, palawan, philippines, does social capital really enhance community based ecotourism a review of the literature, ecotourism and the empowerment of local communities, ecotourism impacts in the nicoya peninsula, costa rica, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Advertisement

Ecotourism and sustainable development: a scientometric review of global research trends

• Published: 21 February 2022
• Volume 25 , pages 2977–3003, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Lishan Xu 1 , 2 ,
• Changlin Ao   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8826-7356 1 , 3 ,
• Baoqi Liu 1 &
• Zhenyu Cai 1  

24k Accesses

31 Citations

Explore all metrics

With the increasing attention and awareness of the ecological environment, ecotourism is becoming ever more popular, but it still brings problems and challenges to the sustainable development of the environment. To solve such challenges, it is necessary to review literature in the field of ecotourism and determine the key research issues and future research directions. This paper uses scientometrics implemented by CiteSpace to conduct an in-depth systematic review of research and development in the field of ecotourism. Two bibliographic datasets were obtained from the Web of Science, including a core dataset and an expanded dataset, containing articles published between 2003 and 2021. Our research shows that ecotourism has been developing rapidly in recent years. The research field of ecotourism spans many disciplines and is a comprehensive interdisciplinary subject. According to the research results, the evolution of ecotourism can be roughly divided into three phases: human disturbance, ecosystem services and sustainable development. It could be concluded that it has entered the third stage of Shneider’s four-stage theory of scientific discipline. The research not only identifies the main clusters and their advance in ecotourism research based on high impact citations and research frontier formed by citations, but also presents readers with new insights through intuitive visual images.

Similar content being viewed by others

Sustainable land use and management research: a scientometric review

Navigating the landscape of global sustainable livelihood research: past insights and future trajectory

Land quality evaluation for sustainable development goals: a structured review using bibliometric and social network analysis

Explore related subjects.

• Artificial Intelligence

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Ecotourism, which has appeared in academic literature since the late 1980s, is a special form of nature-based tourism that maintains the well-being of the local community while protecting the environment and provides tourists with a satisfying nature experience and enjoyment (Ceballos-Lascuráin, 1996 ; Higgins, 1996 ; Orams, 1995 ). With years of research and development, ecotourism has risen to be a subject of investigation in the field of tourism research (Weaver & Lawton, 2007 ). In 2002, the United Nations declared it the International Year of Ecotourism (IYE), and the professional Journal of Ecotourism was established in the same year.

With the progress and maturity of ecotourism as an academic research field, countless scholars have put forward standards and definitions for ecotourism (Sirakaya et al., 1999 ; Wight, 1993 ). The main objectives of ecotourism emphasize long-term sustainable development (Whitelaw et al., 2014 ), including the conservation of natural resources, the generation of economic income, education, local participation and the promotion of social benefits such as local economic development and infrastructure (Ardoin et al., 2015 ; Coria & Calfucura, 2012 ; Krüger, 2005 ; Oladeji et al., 2021 ; Ross & Wall, 1999 ; Valdivieso et al., 2015 ). It can also boost rural economies and alleviate poverty in developing countries (Snyman, 2017 ; Zhong & Liu, 2017 ).

With unrestricted increasing attention to the ecological environment and the improvement of environmental awareness, ecotourism is becoming ever more prevalent, and the demand for tourism is increasing year by year (CREST, 2019 ). This increase, however, leads to a number of environmental, social and economic challenges in the development of ecotourism. For example, due to the low public awareness of ecotourism, the increase in tourists has brought a series of negative impacts on the local ecological environment, culture and economy, including disrespect for local culture and environmental protection, as well as more infrastructure construction and economic burden to meet the needs of tourists (Ahmad et al., 2018 ; Chiu et al., 2014 ; Shasha et al., 2020 ; Xu et al., 2020 ). Such challenges and contradictions are urgent problems to be tackled by the sustainable development of ecotourism. Especially against the backdrop of the current pandemic, tourism has experienced a severe blow, but climate change and other environmental issues have not been improved (CREST, 2020 ). In this context, facing these challenges and difficulties, it is essential to re-examine the future development path of ecotourism, to explore how government agencies can formulate appropriate management policies while preserving the environment and natural resources to support sustainable tourism development. Accordingly, it is necessary to consult literature in the field of ecotourism to understand the research progress and fundamental research issues, to identify challenges, suitable methods and future research direction of ecotourism.

Some previous reviews of ecotourism offer a preview of research trends in this rapidly developing area. Weaver and Lawton ( 2007 ) provide a comprehensive assessment of the current state and future progress of contemporary ecotourism research, starting with the supply and demand dichotomy of ecotourism, as well as fundamental areas such as quality control, industry, external environment and institutions. Ardoin et al. ( 2015 ) conducted a literature review, analyzing the influence of nature tourism on ecological knowledge, attitudes, behavior and potential research into the future. Niñerola et al. ( 2019 ) used the bibliometric method and VOSviewer to study the papers on sustainable development of tourism in Scopus from 1987 to 2018, including literature landscape and development trends. Shasha et al. ( 2020 ) used bibliometrics and social network analysis to review the research progress of ecotourism from 2001 to 2018 based on the Web of Science database using BibExcel and Gephi and explored the current hot spots and methods of ecotourism research. These reviews have provided useful information for ecotourism research at that time, but cannot reflect the latest research trends and emerging development of ecotourism either of timeliness, data integrity, research themes or methods.

This study aims to reveal the theme pattern, landmark articles and emerging trends in ecotourism knowledge landscape research from macro- to micro-perspectives. Unlike previous literature surveys, from timeliness, our dataset contains articles published between 2003 and 2021, and it will reveal more of the trends that have emerged over the last 3 years. Updating the rapidly developing literature is important as recent discoveries from different areas can fundamentally change collective knowledge (Chen et al., 2012 , 2014a ). To ensure data integrity, two bibliographic datasets were generated from Web of Science, including a core dataset using the topic search and an expanded dataset using the citation expansion method, which is more robust than defining rapidly growing fields using only keyword lists (Chen et al., 2014b ). And from the research theme and method, our review focuses on the area of ecotourism and is instructed by a scientometric method conducted by CiteSpace, an analysis system for visualizing newly developing trends and key changes in scientific literature (Chen et al., 2012 ). Emerging trends are detected based on metrics calculated by CiteSpace, without human intervention or working knowledge of the subject matter (Chen et al., 2012 ). Choosing this approach can cover a more extensive and diverse range of related topics and ensure repeatability of analysis with updated data (Chen et al., 2014b ).

In addition, Shneider’s four-stage theory will be used to interpret the results in this review. According to Shneider’s four-stage theory of scientific discipline (Shneider, 2009 ), the development of a scientific discipline is divided into four stages. Stage I is the conceptualization stage, in which the objects and phenomena of a new discipline or research are established. Stage II is characterized by the development of research techniques and methods that allow researchers to investigate potential phenomena. As a result of methodological advances, there is a further understanding of objects and phenomena in the field of new subjects at this stage. Once the techniques and methods for specific purposes are available, the research enters Stage III, where the investigation is based primarily on the application of the new research method. This stage is productive, in which the research results have considerably enhanced the researchers’ understanding of the research issues and disclosed some unknown phenomena, leading to interdisciplinary convergence or the emergence of new research directions or specialties. The last stage is Stage IV, whose particularity is to transform tacit knowledge into conditional knowledge and generalized knowledge, so as to maintain and transfer the scientific knowledge generated in the first three stages.

The structure of this paper is construed as follows. The second part describes the research methods employed, the scientometric approach and CiteSpace, as well as the data collection. In the third part, the bibliographic landscape of the core dataset is expounded from the macroscopic to the microscopic angle. The fourth part explores the developments and emerging trends in the field of ecotourism based on the expanded dataset and discusses the evolution phase of ecotourism. The final part is the conclusion of this study. Future research of ecotourism is prospected, and the limitations of this study are discussed.

2 Methods and data collection

2.1 scientometric analyses and citespace.

Scientometrics is a branch of informatics that involves quantitative analysis of scientific literature in order to capture emerging trends and knowledge structures in a particular area of study (Chen et al., 2012 ). Science mapping tools generate interactive visual representations of complex structures by feeding a set of scientific literature through scientometrics and visual analysis tools to highlight potentially important patterns and trends for statistical analysis and visualization exploration (Chen, 2017 ). At present, scientometrics is widely used in many fields of research, and there are also many kinds of scientific mapping software widely used by researchers and analysts, such as VosViewer, SCI2, HistCite, SciMAT, Gephi, Pajek and CiteSpace (Chen, 2011 , 2017 ; Chen et al., 2012 ).

Among these tools, CiteSpace is known for its powerful literature co-citation analysis, and its algorithms and features are constantly being refined as it continues to evolve. CiteSpace is a citation visual analysis software developed under the background of scientometrics and data visualization to analyze the basics that are included in scientific analysis (Chen, 2017 ; Chen et al., 2012 ). It is specialized designed to satisfy the need for systematic review in rapidly changing complicated areas, particularly with the ability to identify and explain emerging trends and transition patterns (Chen et al., 2014a ). It supports multiple types of bibliometric research, such as collaborative network analysis, co-word analysis, author co-citation analysis, document co-citation analysis, and temporal and spatial visualization (Chen, 2017 ). Currently, CiteSpace has been extensively used in more than 60 fields, including computer science, information science, management and medicine (Abad-Segura et al., 2019 ; Chen, 2017 ).

In this paper, we utilize CiteSpace (5.8.R1) to analyze acquired bibliographies of ecotourism to study emerging trends and developments in this field. From macro to micro, from intuitive to complex, from whole to part and from general to special, the writing ideas are adopted. Figure  1 presented the specific research framework of this study.

The research framework of this study

2.2 Data collection

Typical sources of scientific literature are Web of Science, Scopus and Google Scholar. Considering the quantity and quality of data, the Web of Science database was expected to provide the original data in this research. In order to comprehend the research status and development trends of ecotourism, this study systematically reviewed the ecotourism literature collected on the Web of Science Core Collection. The Web of Science Core Collection facilitates access to the world’s leading scholarly journals, books and proceedings of conferences in the sciences, social sciences, art, and humanities, as well as access to their entire citation network. It mainly includes Science Citation Index Expanded from 2003 to current and Social Sciences Citation Index from 2004 to present. Therefore, the data obtained in this study are from 2003 and were consulted on June 3, 2021.

In the process of data retrieval, it is frequently confronted with the choice between recall rate and precision rate. To address the problem of low recall rate in keyword or topic retrieval, Chen et al. ( 2014a , b ) expanded the retrieval results through ‘citation expansion’ and ‘comprehensive topic search’ strategies. However, when the recall rate is high, the accuracy rate will decrease correspondingly. In practical standpoint, instead of refining and cleaning up the original search results, a simpler and more efficient way is to cluster or skip these unrelated branches. Priority should be placed on ensuring recall rate, and data integrity is more important than data for accuracy. Therefore, two ecotourism documentation datasets, the core dataset and the expanded dataset, were obtained from the Web of Science by using comprehensive topic search and citation expansion method. The latter approach has been proved more robust than using keyword lists only to define fast-growing areas (Chen et al., 2014b ). A key bibliographic landscape is generated based on the core dataset, followed by more thorough research of the expanded dataset.

2.2.1 The core dataset

The core dataset was derived through comprehensive subject retrieval in Web of Science Core Collection. The literature type was selected as an article or review, and the language was English. The period spans 2003 to 2021. The topic search query is composed of three phrases of ecotourism: ‘ ecotour* ’ OR ‘ eco-tour* ’ OR ‘ ecological NEAR/5 tour* ’. The wildcard * is used to capture related variants of words, for example, ecotour, ecotourism, ecotourist and ecotourists. The related records that are requested include finding these terms in the title, abstract or keywords. The query yielded 2991 original unique records.

2.2.2 The expanded dataset

The expanded dataset includes the core dataset and additional records obtained by reference link association founded on the core dataset. The principle of citation expansion is that if an article cites at least one article in the core dataset, we can infer that it is related to the topic (Garfield, 1955 ). The expanded dataset is comprised of 27,172 unique records, including the core dataset and the articles that cited them. Both datasets were used for the following scientometrics analysis.

3 Bibliographic landscape based on the core dataset

The core dataset consists of a total of 2991 literature from 2003 to 2021. This study utilized the core dataset to conduct an overall understanding of the bibliographic landscape in the field of ecotourism.

3.1 Landscape views of core dataset

The distribution of the yearly publication of bibliographic records in the core and expanded datasets is presented in Fig.  2 . It can be observed that the overall number of ecotourism-related publications is on the rise, indicating that the scholarly community is increasingly interested in ecotourism. After 2018, the growth rate increased substantially. And in 2020, the number of publications in the expanded dataset is close to 5000, almost double that of 2017 and 5 times that of 2011. This displays the rapid development of research in the field of ecotourism in recent years, particularly after 2018, more and more researchers began to pay attention to this field, which also echoes the trend of global tourism development and environmental protection. With the increase in personal income, tourism has grown very rapidly, and with it, tourism revenue and tourist numbers, especially in developing states. For instance, the number of domestic tourists in China increased from 2.641 billion in 2011 to 6.06 billion in 2019, and tourism revenue increased from 1930.5 billion RMB in 2011 to 5725.1 billion RMB in 2019 (MCT, 2021 ). However, due to the lack of effective management and frequent human activities, the rapid development of tourism has led to various ecological and environmental problems, which require corresponding solutions (Shasha et al., 2020 ). This has played an active role in promoting the development of ecotourism and triggered a lot of related research. In addition, since 2005, the expanded dataset has contained numerous times as many references as the core dataset, demonstrating the importance of using citation expansion for literature retrieval in scientometric review studies.

The distribution of bibliographic records in core and expanded dataset. Note The data were consulted on June 3, 2021

The data were consulted on June 3, 2021

The dual-map overlay of scientific map literature as Fig.  3 shows, against the background of global scientific map from more than 10,000 journals covered by Web of Science, represents the distribution and connections on research bases and application fields across the entire dataset of the research topics (Chen & Leydesdorff, 2014 ). Colored lines are citation links, and numbered headings are cluster labels. On the left side is the journal distribution which cites literature, regarding the field application of ecotourism, mainly covers multiple disciplines such as 3. Ecology, Earth, Marine, 6. Psychology, Education, Health, 7. Veterinary, Animal Science and 10. Economics, Economic and Political. On the right side is the distribution of journals of cited literature, representing the research basis of ecotourism. As can be observed from the figure, ecotourism research is based on at least five disciplines on the right, including 2. Environmental, Toxicology, Nutrition, 7. Psychology, Education, Social, 8. Molecular, Biology, Genetics, 10. Plant, Ecology, Zoology and 12. Economics, Economic, Political. It can be viewed that the research field of ecotourism spans multiple disciplines and is a comprehensive and complex subject. The dual-map overlay provides a global visualization of literature growth of the discipline level.

A dual-map overlay of ecotourism literature

The total number of papers issued by a country or an institution reflects its academic focus and overall strength, while centrality indicates the degree of academic cooperation with others and the influence of published papers. The top 15 countries and institutions for the number of ecotourism papers published from 2003 to 2021 are provided in Table 1 . Similar to the study of Shasha et al. ( 2020 ), the ranking of the top six countries by the number of publications remains unchanged. As can be seen from the table, the USA ranks first in the world, far ahead in both the number of publications and the centrality. China ranks second in global ecotourism publications, followed by Australia, England, South Africa and Canada. While the latest data show that Taiwan (China), Turkey and South Korea appear on the list. Overall, the top 15 countries with the most publications cover five continents, containing a number of developed and developing, which shows that ecotourism research is receiving global attention. In terms of international academic cooperation and impact of ecotourism, Australia and England share second place, Italy and France share fourth place, followed by South Africa and Spain. China’s centrality is relatively low compared to the number of publications, ranking eighth. Academic cooperation between countries is of great significance. Usually, countries with high academic publishing level cooperate closely due to similar research interests. International academic cooperation has enhanced each other’s research capacity and promoted the development of ecotourism research. Therefore, although some countries have entered this list with the publication number, they should attach importance to increase academic cooperation with other countries and improving the international influence of published papers.

The Chinese Academy of Sciences and its university are the most prolific when it draws to institutions’ performance. It is the most important and influential research institute in China, especially in the field of sustainable development science. Australia has four universities on the list, with Griffith University and James Cook University in second and third place. USA also includes four universities, with the University of Florida in fourth place. South Africa, a developing country, gets three universities, with the University of Cape Town and the University of Johannesburg fifth and sixth, respectively. In comparison with previous studies (Shasha et al., 2020 ), Iran and Mexico each have one university in the ranking, replacing two universities in Greece, which means that the importance and influence of developing countries in the field of ecotourism is gradually rising. Based on the above results, it can be summarized that the USA, China, Australia and South Africa are relatively active countries in the field of ecotourism, and their development is also in a relatively leading position.

3.2 Most active topics

The foam tree map and the pie chart of the focal topics of ecotourism based on the core dataset generated by Carrot2 through the title of each article is illustrated in Fig.  4 . Developing and developed, case study, protected areas, sustainable tourism, tourism development and developing ecotourism are leading topics in the field of ecotourism research, as well as specific articles under the main topics. The lightweight view generated by Carrot2 provides a reference for the research, and then, co-word analysis is employed to more specifically reflect the topics in the research field.

Foam tree map and pie chart of major topics on ecotourism

The topics covered by ecotourism could be exposed by the keywords of the articles in the core dataset. Figure  5 displays the keywords analysis results generated based on the core dataset. From the visualization results in the figure, it can infer that ecotourism, conservation, tourism, management, protected area, impact, biodiversity, sustainability, national park and community are the ten most concerned topics. Distinct colors set out at the time of co-citation keywords first appear, and yellow is generated earlier than red. In addition, Fig.  5 can also reflect the development and emerging topics in the research field, such as China, Mexico, South Africa and other hot countries for ecotourism research; ecosystem service, economic value, climate change, wildlife tourism, rural tourism, forest, marine protected area and other specific research directions; valuation, contingent valuation, choice experiment and other research methods; willingness to pay, preference, benefit, perception, attitude, satisfaction, experience, behavior, motivation, risk, recreation and other specific research issues.

A landscape view of keywords based on the core dataset

4 Emerging trends and developments based on the expanded dataset

The expanded dataset, consisting of 27,172 records, is approximately nine times larger than the core dataset. This research applies the expanded dataset to profoundly explore the emerging trends and developments of ecotourism.

4.1 Keywords with citation bursts

Detection of citation bursts can indicate both the scientific community’s interest in published articles and burst keywords as an indicator of emerging tendencies. Figure  6 displays the top 30 keywords with the strongest citation bursts in the expanded dataset. Since 2003, a large number of keywords have exploded. Among them, the strongest bursts include ecotourism, bird, disturbance, reserve, Africa, challenge, sustainable development and strategy. Keywords with citation burst after 2017 are experience, challenge, sustainable development, willingness to pay, perspective, strategy, quality and satisfaction, which have continued to this day. The results indicate dynamic development and emerging trends in research hotspots in the field of ecotourism.

Top 30 keywords with the strongest citation bursts

4.2 References with citation bursts

Figure  7 sets out the top 30 references in the expanded dataset with citation bursts. The articles with the fastest growing citations can also contribute to describe the dynamics of a field. References with high values in strength column are important milestones of ecotourism research. The two articles with strong citation bursts prior to 2010 focused on the human impact on the environment and animals. West et al. ( 2006 ) discussed the relationship between parks and human beings and the social impact of protected areas, and Köndgen et al. ( 2008 ) studied the decline of endangered great apes caused by a human pandemic virus. The paper with the strongest citation burst in the entire expanded dataset was released by Fairhead et al. ( 2012 ), which looked at ‘green grabbing,’ the appropriation of land and resources for environmental purposes. Milcu et al. ( 2013 ) conducted a semi-quantitative review of publications dealing with cultural ecosystem services with the second strongest citation burst, which concluded that the improvement of the evaluation method of cultural ecosystem service value, the research on the value of cultural ecosystem service under the background of ecosystem service and the clarification of policy significance were the new themes of cultural ecosystem service research. In addition, many articles with citation burst discussed the evaluation method of ecosystem services value (Costanza et al., 2014 ; Groot et al., 2010 ), the evaluation of cultural ecosystem service value (Plieninger et al., 2013 ) and its role in ecosystem service evaluation (Chan et al., 2012 ; Chan, Guerry, et al., 2012 ; Chan, Satterfield, et al., 2012 ; Chan, Satterfield, et al., 2012 ; Daniel et al., 2012 ). The most fresh literature with strong citation burst is the article of D’Amato et al. ( 2017 ) published in the Journal of Cleaner Production, which compared and analyzed sustainable development avenues such as green, circular and bio economy. In addition, it is worthwhile noting the use of R in ecotourism, with the persuasive citation burst continuing from 2012 to the present, as indicated by the orange arrow in Fig.  7 .

Top 30 references with the strongest citation bursts

4.3 Landscape view of co-citation analysis

The landscape view of co-citation analysis of Fig.  8 is generated based on the expanded dataset. Using g -index ( k  = 25) selection criteria in the latest edition of CiteSpace, an annual citation network was constructed. The final merged network contained 3294 links, 2122 nodes and 262 co-citation clusters. The three largest linked components cover 1748 connected nodes, representing 82% of the entire network. The modularization degree of the synthetic network is 0.8485, which means that co-citation clustering can clearly define each sub-field of ecotourism. Another weighted mean silhouette value of the clustering validity evaluation is 0.9377, indicating that the clustering degree of the network is also very superior. The harmonic mean value amounts to 0.8909.

A landscape view of the co-citation network based on the expanded dataset

In the co-citation network view, the location of clusters and the correlation between clusters can show the intellectual structure in the field of ecotourism, so that readers can obtain an overall understanding of this field. The network falls into 25 co-citation clusters. The tags for each cluster are generated founded on the title, keywords and abstract of the cited article. Color-coded areas represent the time of first appeared co-citation links, with gray indicating earlier and red later. The nodes in the figure with red tree rings are references to citation bursts.

4.4 Timeline view

In order to further understand the time horizon and study process of developing evolution on clusters, after the generation of co-citation cluster map, the Y -axis is cluster number and the year of citation publication is X -axis, so as to obtain the timeline view of the co-citation network, shown as Fig.  9 . Clusters are organized vertically from largest to smallest. The color curve represents co-citation link coupled with corresponding color year, with gray representing earlier and red representing newer. Larger nodes and nodes with red tree rings indicate high citation or citation burst. The three most cited references of the year demonstrate below each node, in vertical order from least to most.

A timeline visualization of the largest clusters

The timeline view provides a reasonably instinctual and insightful reference to understand the evolutionary path of every subdomain. Figure  9 shows 19 clusters ranging from #0 to #18, with #0 being the largest cluster. As can be seen from the figure, the sustainability and activeness of each cluster are contrasting. For example, the largest cluster has been active since 2006, while the gray and purple clusters are no longer active.

4.5 Major clusters

Taking clustering as a unit and analyzing at the level of clustering, specifically selecting large or new type clustering, is the foothold of co-citation analysis, which can help to understand the principal and latest research fields related to ecotourism. Table 2 displays a summary of the foremost 19 clusters, the first nine of which are all over 100 in size. The silhouette score of all clusters is greater than 0.8, indicating that the homogeneity of each cluster is high. The mean year is the average of the publication dates of references in the cluster. By combining the results in Table 2 , Figs.  8 and 9 , it can be observed that the five largest clusters are #0 cultural ecosystem services, #1 large carnivore, #2 human disturbance, #3 whale shark and #4 ecosystem service. A recent topic is cluster #16 COVID-19 pandemic. #11 Ecological footprint and #14 social media are two relatively youthful fields.

The research status of a research field can be demonstrated by its knowledge base and research frontier. The knowledge base consists of a series of scholarly writing cited by the corresponding article, i.e., cited references, while the research frontier is the writing inspired by the knowledge base, i.e., citing articles. Distinct research frontiers may come from the same knowledge base. Consequently, each cluster is analyzed based on cited references and citing articles. The cited references and citing articles of the five largest clusters are shown in Online Appendix A. Fig a) lists the 15 top cited references with the highest Σ (sigma) value in the cluster, where Σ value indicates that the citation is optimal in terms of the comprehensive performance of structural centrality and citation bursts. Fig b) shows the major citing articles of cluster. The citation behavior of these articles determines the grouping of cited literature and thus forms the cluster. The coverage is the proportion of member citations cited by citing articles.

4.6 Phase evolution research

Through the above analysis of the core dataset and the expanded dataset of ecotourism, we can see the development and evolution of the research field of ecotourism. The research process of ecotourism has gone through several stages, and each stage has its strategic research issues. Research starts with thinking about the relationship between humans and nature, moves to study it as a whole ecosystem, and then explores sustainable development. Hence, the evolution of ecotourism can be roughly parted into three phases.

4.6.1 Phase I: Human disturbance research stage (2003–2010)

This phase of research concentrates on the influence of human activities such as ecotourism on the environment and animals. Representative keywords of this period include ecotourism, human disturbance, response, coral reef, bird, disturbance, recreation, reserve, park, South Africa and people. Representative articles are those published by West et al. ( 2006 ) and Köndgen et al. ( 2008 ) of human impact on the environment and animals. The representative clustering is #2 human disturbance, which is the third largest one, consisting of 130 cited references from 1998 to 2012 with the average year of 2004. This cluster has citation bursts between 2002 and 2010 and has been inactive since then. As showed in Fig S3 a) and b), the research base and frontier are mainly around the impact of human disturbances such as ecotourism on biology and the environment (McClung et al., 2004 ). And as showed in Fig.  8 and Fig.  9 , clusters closely related to #2 belong to this phase and are also no longer active, such as #5 off-road vehicle, #6 protected area, #10 poverty reduction and #12 sustainable lifestyle.

4.6.2 Phase II: Ecosystem services research stage (2011–2015)

In this stage, the content of ecotourism research is diversified and exploded. The research is not confined to the relationship between humans and nature, but begins to investigate it as an entire ecosystem. In addition, some specific or extended areas began to receive attention. Typical keywords are abundance, resource, Africa, risk, predation, consequence and science. The most illustrative papers in this stage are Fairhead et al. ( 2012 )’s discussion on green grabbing and Milcu et al. ( 2013 )’s review on cultural ecosystem services. Other representative papers in this period focused on the evaluation methods of ecosystem service value and the role of cultural ecosystem service in the evaluation of ecosystem service value. Most of the larger clusters in the survey erupted at this stage, including #0 cultural ecosystem services, #1 large carnivore, #3 whale shark, #4 ecosystem services. Some related clusters also belong to this stage, such as #7 neoliberal conservation, #8 responsible behavior, #9 tourism development, #13 mangrove forest, #15 volunteer tourism, #17 circular economy and #18 telecoupling framework.

Cluster #0 cultural ecosystem services are the largest cluster in ecotourism research field, containing 157 cited references from 2006 to 2019, with the mean year being 2012. It commenced to have the citation burst in 2009, with high cited continuing until 2019. Cultural ecosystem services are an essential component of ecosystem services, including spiritual, entertainment and cultural benefits. Thus, in Fig.  8 , the overlap with #4 ecosystem services can obviously be seen. In Cluster #0, many highly cited references have discussed the trade-offs between natural and cultural ecosystem services in ecosystem services (Nelson et al., 2009 ; Raudsepp-Hearne et al., 2010 ) and the important role of cultural ecosystem services in the evaluation of ecosystem services value (Burkhard et al., 2012 ; Chan, Guerry, et al., 2012 ; Chan, Satterfield, et al., 2012 ; Fisher et al., 2009 ; Groot et al., 2010 ). As non-market value, how to evaluate and quantify cultural ecosystem services is also an important issue (Hernández-Morcillo et al., 2012 ; Milcu et al., 2013 ; Plieninger et al., 2013 ). Besides, the exploration of the relationship among biodiversity, human beings and ecosystem services is also the focus of this cluster research (Bennett et al., 2015 ; Cardinale et al., 2012 ; Díaz et al., 2015 ; Mace et al., 2012 ). The citing articles of #0 indicate the continued exploration of the connotation of cultural ecosystem services and their value evaluation methods (Dickinson & Hobbs, 2017 ). It is noteworthy that some articles have introduced spatial geographic models (Havinga et al., 2020 ; Hirons et al., 2016 ) and social media methods (Calcagni et al., 2019 ) as novel methods to examine cultural ecosystem services. In addition, the link and overlap between #0 cultural ecosystem service and #17 circular economy cannot be overlooked.

Ecosystem services relate to all the benefits that humans receive from ecosystems, including supply services, regulatory services, cultural services and support services. Research on cultural ecosystem services is based on the research of ecosystem services. It can be viewed in Fig.  9 that the research and citation burst in #4 was all slightly earlier than #0. Cluster #4 includes 118 references from 2005 to 2019, with an average year of 2011. In its research and development, how to integrate ecosystem services into the market and the payment scheme to protect the natural environment is a significant research topic (Gómez-Baggethun et al., 2010 ). In Cluster #4, the most influential literature provides an overview of the payment of ecosystem services (PES) from theory to practice by Engel et al. ( 2008 ). Many highly cited references have discussed PES (Kosoy & Corbera, 2010 ; Muradian et al., 2010 ), including the effectiveness of evaluation (Naeem et al., 2015 ), social equity matters (Pascual et al., 2014 ), the suitability and challenge (Muradian et al., 2013 ), and how to contribute to saving nature (Redford & Adams, 2009 ). The cluster also includes studies on impact assessment of protected areas (Oldekop et al., 2016 ), protected areas and poverty (Brockington & Wilkie, 2015 ; Ferraro & Hanauer, 2014 ), public perceptions (Bennett, 2016 ; Bennett & Dearden, 2014 ) and forest ecosystem services (Hansen et al., 2013 ). The foremost citing articles confirm the dominant theme of ecosystem services, especially the in-depth study and discussion of PES (Muniz & Cruz, 2015 ). In addition, #4 is highly correlated with #7 neoliberal protection, and Fairhead et al. ( 2012 ), a representative article of this stage, belongs to this cluster.

As the second largest cluster, Cluster #1 contains 131 references from 2008 to 2019, with the median year of 2014. As Fig S2 a) shows, the highly cited literature has mainly studied the status and protection of large carnivores (Mace, 2014 ; Ripple et al., 2014 ), including the situation of reduction (Craigie et al., 2010 ), downgrade (Estes et al., 2011 ) and even extinction (Dirzo et al., 2014 ; Pimm et al., 2014 ), and the reasons for such results, such as tourist visits (Balmford et al., 2015 ; Geffroy et al., 2015 ) and the increase in population at the edge of the protected areas (Wittemyer et al., 2008 ). The conservation effects of protected areas on wildlife biodiversity (Watson et al., 2014 ) and the implications of tourist preference heterogeneity for conservation and management (Minin et al., 2013 ) have also received attention. It is worth noting that the high citation rate of a paper using R to estimate the linear mixed-effects model (Bates et al., 2015 ) and the use of R in this cluster. The relationship between biodiversity and ecotourism is highlighted by the representative citing articles in research frontier of this cluster (Chung et al., 2018 ).

Cluster #3 refers to marine predator, and as shown in Fig.  8 , which has a strong correlation with #1. A total of 125 references were cited from 2002 to 2018, with an average year of 2011. References with high citation in #3 mainly studied the extinction and protection of marine life such as sharks (Dulvy et al., 2014 ), as well as the economic value and ecological impact of shark ecotourism (Clua et al., 2010 ; Gallagher & Hammerschlag, 2011 ; Gallagher et al., 2015 ). The paper published by Gallagher et al. ( 2015 ) is both the highly cited reference and main citing article, mainly focusing on the impact of shark ecotourism. It is also noteworthy that #6 protected area, #13 mangrove forest and #29 Mediterranean areas are highly correlated with these two clusters (Fig.  8 ).

Moreover, some clusters are not highly correlated with other clusters, but cannot be neglected at this stage of research. Cluster #8 responsible behavior includes 107 citations with the average year 2013, and mainly studied environmentally responsible behaviors in ecotourism (Chiu et al., 2014 ). Cluster #9 tourism development contains 97 cited references with mean year of 2015, focusing on the impact of such factors as residents’ perception on tourism development (Sharpley, 2014 ). Cluster #15 volunteer tourism consists of 52 citations, with an average year of 2011, which mainly considers the role of volunteer tourism in tourism development and sustainable tourism (Wearing & McGehee, 2013 ). Cluster #18 telecoupling framework has 26 cited references with the mean year being 2015, and the application of the new integrated framework of telecoupling Footnote 1 in ecotourism can be seen (Liu et al., 2015 ).

At this stage, it can be seen that the research field of ecotourism begins to develop in the direction of diversification, including the value evaluation and related research of ecosystem services and cultural ecosystem services, as well as the exploration of wild animals and plants, marine animals and plants and biodiversity. Neoliberal conservation, tourists’ responsible behavior, tourism development, volunteer tourism and circular economy are all explored. Some new research methods have also brought fresh air to this field, such as the introduction of spatial geographic models and social media methods, the discussion of economic value evaluation methods, the widespread use of R and the exploration of telecoupling framework. Therefore, from this stage, research in the field of ecotourism has entered the second stage of scientific discipline development (Shneider, 2009 ), featured by the use and evolution of research tools that can be used to investigate potential phenomena.

4.6.3 Phase III: Sustainable development research stage (2016 to present)

This stage of research continues to explore a series of topics of the preceding phase and further extends the research field on this basis. The keywords at this stage are politics, marine protected area and valuation. Some other keywords are still very active today, such as experience, challenge, sustainable development, willingness to pay, perspective, strategy, quality and satisfaction. The representative article is about sustainable development published by D'Amato et al. ( 2017 ), as shown in Fig.  8 belonging to #17 circular economy. The emerging clusters in this period are #11 ecological footprint, #14 social media and #16 COVID-19 pandemic. Cluster #11 contains 70 cited references from 2013 to 2020 with the mean year 2017. This clustering study mainly used the ecological footprint as an environmental indicator and socioeconomic indicators such as tourism to investigate the hypothesis of environmental Kuznets curve (Ozturk et al., 2016 ; Ulucak & Bilgili, 2018 ). Cluster #14 includes 52 cited references, with an average year of 2016. It can be seen that the introduction of social media data has added new color to research in the field of ecotourism, such as using social media data to quantify landscape value (Zanten et al., 2016 ) and to understand tourists’ preferences for the experience of protected areas (Hausmann et al., 2018 ), as well as from a spatial perspective using social media geo-tagged photos as indicators for evaluating cultural ecosystem services (Richards & Friess, 2015 ). As the latest and most concerned topic, cluster #16 contains 48 cited references, with mean year of 2018. This cluster mainly cites research on over-tourism (Seraphin et al., 2018 ) and sustainable tourism (Higgins-Desbiolles, 2018 ) and explores the impact of pandemics such as COVID-19 on global tourism (Gössling et al., 2021 ).

These emerging clusters at this phase bring fresh thinking to the research of ecotourism. First of all, the analysis of ecological footprint provides a tool for measuring the degree of sustainability and helps to monitor the effectiveness of sustainable programs (Kharrazi et al., 2014 ). Research and exploration of ecological footprint in ecotourism expresses the idea of sustainable development and puts forward reasonable planning and suggestions by comparing the demand of ecological footprint with the carrying capacity of natural ecosystem. Secondly, the use of social media data brings a new perspective of data acquisition to ecotourism research. Such large-scale data acquisition can make up for the limitations of sample size and data sampling bias faced by survey data users and provide a new way to understand and explore tourist behavior and market (Li et al., 2018 ). Finally, the sudden impact of COVID-19 in 2020 and its long-term sustainability has dealt a huge blow to the tourism industry. COVID-19 has highlighted the great need and value of tourism, while fundamentally changing the way destinations, business and visitors plan, manage and experience tourism (CREST, 2020 ). However, the stagnation of tourism caused by the pandemic is not enough to meet the challenges posed by the environment and the climate crisis. Therefore, how to sustain the development of tourism in this context to meet the challenges of the environment and climate change remains an important issue in the coming period of time. These emerging clusters are pushing the boundaries of ecotourism research and the exploration of sustainable development in terms of research methods, data collection and emerging topics.

Despite the fact that the research topics in this stage are richer and more diversified, the core goal of research is still committed to the sustainable development of ecotourism. The introduction of new technologies and the productive results have led to a much-improved understanding of research issues. All this commemorates the entrance of research into the third stage of the development of scientific disciplines (Shneider, 2009 ). In addition to continuing the current research topics, the future development of the field of ecotourism will continue to focus on the goal of sustainable development and will be more diversified and interdisciplinary.

5 Conclusion

This paper uses scientometrics to make a comprehensive visual domain analysis of ecotourism. The aim is to take advantage of this method to conduct an in-depth systematic review of research and development in the field of ecotourism. We have enriched the process of systematic reviews of knowledge domains with features from the latest CiteSpace software. Compared with previous studies, this study not only updated the database, but also extended the dataset with citation expansion, so as to more comprehensively identify the rapidly developing research field. The research not only identifies the main clusters and their advance in ecotourism research based on high impact citations and research frontiers formed by citations, but also presents readers with new insights through intuitive visual images. Through this study, readers can swiftly understand the progress of ecotourism, and on the basis of this study, they can use this method to conduct in-depth analysis of the field they are interested in.

Our research shows that ecotourism has developed rapidly in recent years, with the number of published articles increasing year by year, and this trend has become more pronounced after 2018. The research field of ecotourism spans many disciplines and is a comprehensive interdisciplinary subject. Ecotourism also attracts the attention of numerous developed and developing countries and institutions. The USA, China, Australia and South Africa are in a relatively leading position in the research and development of ecotourism. Foam tree map and pie chart of major topics, and the landscape view of keywords provide the hotspot issues of the research field. The development trend of ecotourism is preliminarily understood by detecting the citation bursts of the keywords and published articles. Co-citation analysis generates the main clusters of ecotourism research, and the timeline visualization of these clusters provides a clearer view for understanding the development dynamics of the research field. Building on all the above results, the research and development of ecotourism can be roughly divided into three stages: human disturbance, ecosystem services and sustainable development. Through the study of keywords, representative literature and main clusters in each stage, the development characteristics and context of each stage are clarified. From the current research results, we can catch sight that the application of methods and software in ecotourism research and the development of cross-field. Supported by the Shneider’s four-stage theory of scientific discipline (Shneider, 2009 ), it can be thought that ecotourism is in the third stage. Research tools and methods have become more potent and convenient, and research perspectives have become more diverse.

Based on the overall situation, research hotspots and development tendency of ecotourism research, it can be seen that the sustainable development of ecotourism is the core issue of current ecotourism research and also an important goal for future development. In the context of the current pandemic, the tourism industry is in crisis, but crisis often breeds innovation, and we must take time to reconsider the way forward. As we look forward to the future of tourism, we must adopt the rigor and dedication required to adapt to the pandemic, adhering to the principles of sustainable development while emphasizing economic reliability, environmental suitability and cultural acceptance. Post-COVID, the competitive landscape of travel and tourism will change profoundly, with preventive and effective risk management, adaptation and resilience, and decarbonization laying the foundation for future competitiveness and relevance (CREST, 2020 ).

In addition, as can be seen from the research and development of ecotourism, the exploration of sustainable development increasingly needs to absorb research methods from diverse fields to guide the formulation of policy. First of all, how to evaluate and quantify ecotourism reasonably and scientifically is an essential problem to be solved in the development of ecotourism. Some scholars choose contingent valuation method (CVM) and choice experiment (CE) in environmental economics to evaluate the economic value of ecotourism, especially non-market value. In addition, the introduction of spatial econometrics and the use of geographic information system (GIS) provide spatial scale analysis methods and results presentation for the sustainable development of ecotourism. The use of social media data implies the application of big data technology in the field of ecotourism, where machine learning methods such as artificial neural networks (ANN) and linear discriminant analysis (LDA) are increasingly being applied (Talebi et al., 2021 ). The measurement of ecological footprint and the use of telecoupling framework provide a reliable way to measure sustainable development and the interaction between multiple systems. These approaches all have expanded the methodological boundaries of ecotourism research. It is worth noting that R, as an open source and powerful software, is favored by scholars in the field of ecotourism. This programming language for statistical computation is now widely used in statistical analysis, data mining, data processing and mapping of ecotourism research.

The scientometrics method used in this study is mainly guided by the citation model in the literature retrieval dataset. The range of data retrieval exercises restraint by the source of retrieval and the query method utilized. While current methods can meet the requirements, iterative query optimization can also serve to advance in the quality of the data. To achieve higher data accuracy, the concept tree function in the new version of CiteSpace can also serve to clarify the research content of each clustering (Chen, 2017 ). In addition, the structural variation analysis in the new edition is also an interesting study, which can show the citation footprints of typical high-yielding authors and judge the influence of the author on the variability of network structure through the analysis of the citation footprints (Chen, 2017 ).

Availability of data and material

The data that support the findings of this study are available from Web of Science.

Telecoupling, an integrated concept proposed by Liu et al. ( 2013 ), encompasses both socioeconomic and environmental interactions among coupled human and natural systems over distances. Liu et al. ( 2013 ) also constructed an integrated framework for telecoupling research, which is used to comprehensively study and explain multiple human-nature coupling systems at multiple spatial–temporal scales to promote the sustainable development of global society, economy and environment, and has been applied to ecotourism, land change science, species invasion, payments for ecosystem services programs, conservation, food trade, forest products, energy and virtual water, etc. (Liu et al., 2015 ).

Liu, J., Hull, V., Batistella, M., DeFries, R., Dietz, T., Fu, F.,... Zhu, C. (2013). Framing Sustainability in a Telecoupled World. Ecology and Society , 18 (2), 26. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05873-180226

Abad-Segura, E., Cortés-García, F. J., & Belmonte-Ureña, L. J. (2019). The sustainable approach to corporate social responsibility: A global analysis and future trends. Sustainability, 11 (19), 5382. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11195382

Article   Google Scholar  

Ahmad, F., Draz, M. U., Su, L., Ozturk, I., & Rauf, A. (2018). Tourism and environmental pollution: Evidence from the one belt one road (OBOR) provinces of Western China. Sustainability, 10 (10), 3520. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103520

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Ardoin, N. M., Wheaton, M., Bowers, A. W., Hunt, C. A., & Durham, W. H. (2015). Nature-based tourism’s impact on environmental knowledge, attitudes, and behavior: A review and analysis of the literature and potential future research. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23 (6), 838–858. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2015.1024258

Balmford, A., Green, J. M. H., Anderson, M., Beresford, J., Huang, C., Naidoo, R., Walpole, M., & Manica, A. (2015). Walk on the wild side: Estimating the global magnitude of visits to protected areas. PLoS Biology, 13 (2), e1002074. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002074

Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67 (1), 132904.

Bennett, N. J. (2016). Using perceptions as evidence to improve conservation and environmental management. Conservation Biology, 30 (3), 582–592. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12681

Bennett, E. M., Cramer, W., Begossi, A., Cundill, G., Díaz, S., Egoh, B. N., Geijzendorffer, I. R., Krug, C. B., Lavorel, S., Lazos, E., Lebel, L., Martín-López, B., Meyfroidt, P., Mooney, H. A., Nel, J. L., Pascual, U., Payet, K., Harguindeguy, N. P., Peterson, G. D., … White, G. W. (2015). Linking biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human well-being: Three challenges for designing research for sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14 , 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2015.03.007

Bennett, N. J., & Dearden, P. (2014). Why local people do not support conservation: Community perceptions of marine protected area livelihood impacts, governance and management in Thailand. Marine Policy, 44 , 107–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2013.08.017

Brockington, D., & Wilkie, D. (2015). Protected areas and poverty. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 370 (1681), 20140271. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0271

Burkhard, B., Kroll, F., Nedkov, S., & Müller, F. (2012). Mapping ecosystem service supply, demand and budgets. Ecological Indicators, 21 , 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.06.019

Calcagni, F., Maia, A. T. A., Connolly, J. J. T., & Langemeyer, J. (2019). Digital co-construction of relational values: Understanding the role of social media for sustainability. Sustainability Science, 14 , 1309–1321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00672-1

Cardinale, B. J., Emmett Duffy, J., Gonzalez, A., Hooper, D. U., Perrings, C., Venail, P., Narwani, A., Mace, G. M., Tilman, D., Wardle, D. A., Kinzig, A. P., Daily, G. C., Loreau, M., Grace, J. B., Larigauderie, A., Srivastava, D. S., & Naeem, S. (2012). Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature, 486 , 59–67. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11148

Ceballos-Lascuráin, H. C. (1996). Tourism, ecotourism, and protected areas: The state of nature-based tourism around the world and guidelines for its development. World Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas, 4th, Caracas.

Chan, K. M. A., Guerry, A. D., Balvanera, P., Klain, Sarah, Satterfield, T., Basurto, X., Bostrom, A., Chuenpagdee, R., Gould, R., Halpern, B. S., Hannahs, N., Levine, J., Norton, B., Ruckelshaus, M., Russell, R., Tam, J., & Woodside, U. (2012). Where are cultural and social in ecosystem services? A framework for constructive engagement. BioScience, 62 (8), 744–756.

Google Scholar  

Chan, K. M. A., Satterfield, T., & Goldstein, J. (2012b). Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values. Ecological Economics, 74 , 8–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.11.011

Chen, C. (2011). Predictive effects of structural variation on citation counts. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63 (3), 431–449. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21694

Chen, C. (2017). Science mapping: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Data and Information Science, 2 (2), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1515/jdis-2017-0006

Chen, C., Dubin, R., & Kim, M. C. (2014a). Emerging trends and new developments in regenerative medicine a scientometric update (2000–2014). Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, 14 (9), 1295–1317. https://doi.org/10.1517/14712598.2014.920813

Chen, C., Dubin, R., & Kim, M. C. (2014b). Orphan drugs and rare diseases: A scientometric review (2000–2014). Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, 2 (7), 709–724. https://doi.org/10.1517/21678707.2014.920251

Chen, C., Hu, Z., Liu, S., & Tseng, H. (2012). Emerging trends in regenerative medicine a scientometric analysis in CiteSpace. Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy, 12 (5), 593–608. https://doi.org/10.1517/14712598.2012.674507

Chen, C., & Leydesdorff, L. (2014). Patterns of connections and movements in dual-map overlays: A new method of publication portfolio analysis. Journal of the Association for Information Science, 65 (2), 334–351. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22968

Chiu, Y.-T.H., Lee, W.-I., & Chen, T.-H. (2014). Environmentally responsible behavior in ecotourism: Antecedents and implications. Tourism Management, 40 , 321–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.06.013

Chung, M. G., Dietz, T., & Liu, J. (2018). Global relationships between biodiversity and nature-based tourism in protected areas. Ecosystem Services, 34 , 11–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.09.004

Clua, E., Buray, N., Legendre, P., Mourier, J., & Planes, S. (2010). Behavioural response of sicklefin lemon sharks Negaprion acutidens to underwater feeding for ecotourism purposes. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 414 , 257–266. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps08746

Coria, J., & Calfucura, E. (2012). Ecotourism and the development of indigenous communities: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Ecological Economics, 73 , 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.10.024

Costanza, R., de Groot, R., Sutton, P., van der Ploeg, S., Anderson, S. J., Kubiszewski, I., Stephen Farber, R., & Turner, K. (2014). Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, 26 , 152–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.002

Craigie, I. D., Baillie, J. E. M., Balmford, A., Carbone, C., Collen, B., Greena, R. E., & Hutton, J. M. (2010). Large mammal population declines in Africa’s protected areas. Biological Conservation, 143 (9), 2221–2228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2010.06.007

CREST. (2019). The Case for Responsible Travel: Trends & statistics 2019 . https://www.responsibletravel.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/213/2021/03/trends-and-statistics-2019.pdf

CREST. (2020). The Case for Responsible Travel: Trends & statistics 2020 . https://www.responsibletravel.org/docs/trendsStats2020.pdf

D’Amato, D., Droste, N., Allen, B., Kettunen, M., Lähtinen, K., Korhonen, J., Leskinen, P., Matthies, B. D., & Toppinen, A. (2017). Green, circular, bio economy: A comparative analysis of sustainability avenues. Journal of Cleaner Production, 168 , 716–734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.053

Daniel, T. C., Muhar, A., Arnberger, A., Aznar, O., Boyd, J. W., Chan, K. M. A., Costanza, R., Elmqvist, T., Flint, C. G., Gobster, P. H., Gret-Regamey, A., Lave, R., Muhar, S., Penker, M., Ribe, R. G., Schauppenlehner, T., Sikor, T., Soloviy, I., Spierenburg, M., … von der Dunk, A. (2012). Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. PNAS, 109 (23), 8812–8819. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1114773109

Díaz, S., Demissew, S., Carabias, J., Joly, C., Lonsdale, Mark, Ash, N., Larigauderie, A., Adhikari, J. R., Arico, S., Báldi, A., Bartuska, A., Baste, I. A., Bilgin, A., Brondizio, E., Chan, K. M. A., Figueroa, V. E., Duraiappah, A., Fischer, M., Hill, R., … Zlatanova, D. (2015). The IPBES conceptual framework-connecting nature and people. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 14 , 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2014.11.002

Dickinson, D. C., & Hobbs, R. J. (2017). Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research. Ecosystem Services, 25 , 179–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.04.014

Dirzo, R., Young, H. S., Galetti, M., Ceballos, G., Isaac, N. J. B., & Collen, B. (2014). Defaunation in the anthropocene. Science, 345 (6159), 401–406. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1251817

Dulvy, N. K., Fowler, S. L., Musick, J. A., Cavanagh, R. D., Kyne, P. M., Harrison, L. R., Carlson, J. K., Davidson, L. N., Fordham, S. V., Francis, M. P., Pollock, C. M., Simpfendorfer, C. A., Burgess, G. H., Carpenter, K. E., Compagno, L. J., Ebert, D. A., Gibson, C., Heupel, M. R., Livingstone, S. R., … White, W. T. (2014). Extinction risk and conservation of the world’s sharks and rays. Life, 3 , e00590. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00590.001

Engel, S., Pagiola, S., & Wunder, S. (2008). Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues. Ecological Economics, 65 (4), 663–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.03.011

Estes, J. A., Terborgh, J., Brashares, J. S., Power, M. E., Berger, J., Bond, W. J., Carpenter, S. R., Essington, T. E., Holt, R. D., Jackson, J. B. C., Marquis, R. J., Oksanen, L., Oksanen, T., Paine, R. T., Pikitch, E. K., Ripple, W. J., Sandin, S. A., Scheffer, M., Schoener, T. W., … Wardle, D. A. (2011). Trophic downgrading of planet earth. Science, 333 (6064), 301–306. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1205106

Fairhead, J., Leach, M., & Scoones, I. (2012). Green Grabbing: A new appropriation of nature? The Journal of Peasant Studies, 39 (2), 237–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2012.671770

Ferraro, P. J., & Hanauer, M. M. (2014). Quantifying causal mechanisms to determine how protected areas affect poverty through changes in ecosystem services and infrastructure. PNAS, 111 (11), 4332–4337. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1307712111

Fisher, B., Turner, R. K., & Morling, P. (2009). Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecological Economics, 68 (3), 643–653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.09.014

Gallagher, A. J., & Hammerschlag, N. (2011). Global shark currency: The distribution, frequency, and economic value of shark ecotourism. Current Issues in Tourism, 14 (8), 797–812. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2011.585227

Gallagher, A. J., Vianna, G. M. S., Papastamatiou, Y. P., Macdonald, C., Guttridgeg, T. L., & Hammerschlag, N. (2015). Biological effects, conservation potential, and research priorities of shark diving tourism. Biological Conservation, 184 , 365–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.02.007

Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for science: A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science, 122 (3159), 108–111. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.122.3159.108

Geffroy, B., Samia, D. S. M., Bessa, E., & Blumstein, D. T. (2015). How nature-based tourism might increase prey vulnerability to predators. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 30 (12), 755–765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2015.09.010

Gómez-Baggethun, E., de Groot, R., Lomas, P. L., & Montes, C. (2010). The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecological Economics, 69 (6), 1209–1218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.007

Gössling, S., Scott, D., & Hall, C. M. (2021). Pandemics, tourism and global change: A rapid assessment of COVID-19. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29 (1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1758708

de Groot, R. S., Alkemade, R., Braat, L., Hein, L., & Willemen, L. (2010). Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecological Complexity, 7 (3), 260–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.10.006

Hansen, M. C., Potapov, P. V., Moore, R., Hancher, M., Turubanova, S. A., Tyukavina, A., Thau, D., Stehman, S. V., Goetz, S. J., Loveland, T. R., Kommareddy, A., Egorov, A., Chini, L., Justice, C. O., & Townshend, J. R. G. (2013). High-resolution global maps of 21st-century forest cover change. Science, 342 (6160), 850–853. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1244693

Hausmann, A., Toivonen, T., Slotow, R., Tenkanen, H., Moilanen, A., Heikinheimo, V., & Minin, E. D. (2018). Social media data can be used to understand tourists’ preferences for nature-based experiences in protected areas. Conservation Letters, 11 (1), e12343. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12343

Havinga, I., Bogaart, P. W., Hein, L., & Tuia, D. (2020). Defining and spatially modelling cultural ecosystem services using crowdsourced data. Ecosystem Services, 43 , 101091. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101091

Hernández-Morcillo, M., Plieninger, T., & Bieling, C. (2012). An empirical review of cultural ecosystem service indicators. Ecological Indicators, 29 , 434–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.01.013

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. https://doi.org/10.1177/004728759603500203

Higgins-Desbiolles, F. (2018). Sustainable tourism: Sustaining tourism or something more? Tourism Management Perspectives, 25 , 157–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2017.11.017

Hirons, M., Comberti, C., & Dunford, R. (2016). Valuing cultural ecosystem services. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 41 , 545–574. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085831

Kharrazi, A., Kraines, S., Hoang, L., & Yarime, M. (2014). Advancing quantification methods of sustainability: A critical examination emergy, exergy, ecological footprint, and ecological information-based approaches [Review]. Ecological Indicators, 37 , 81–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.10.003

Köndgen, S., Kühl, H., N’Goran, P. K., Walsh, P. D., Schenk, S., Ernst, N., Biek, R., Formenty, P., Mätz-Rensing, K., Schweiger, B., Junglen, S., Ellerbrok, H., Nitsche, A., Thomas Briese, W., Lipkin, I., Pauli, G., Boesch, C., & Leendertz, F. H. (2008). Pandemic human viruses cause decline of endangered great apes. Current Biology, 18 (4), 260–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2008.01.012

Kosoy, N., & Corbera, E. (2010). Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism. Ecological Economics, 69 (6), 1228–1236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.002

Krüger, O. (2005). The role of ecotourism in conservation: Panacea or Pandora’s box? Biodiversity & Conservation, 14 , 579–600. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-004-3917-4

Li, J., Xu, L., Tang, L., Wang, S., & Li, L. (2018). Big data in tourism research: A literature review. Tourism Management, 68 , 301–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.03.009

Liu, J., Hull, V., Batistella, M., DeFries, R., Dietz, T., Fu, F., & Zhu, C. (2013). Framing sustainability in a telecoupled world. Ecology and Society, 18 (2), 26. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05873-180226

Liu, J., Hull, V., Junyan Luo, W., Yang, W. L., Viña, A., Vogt, C., Zhenci, Xu., Yang, H., Zhang, J., An, Li., Chen, X., Li, S., Ouyang, Z., Weihua, X., & Zhang, H. (2015). Multiple telecouplings and their complex interrelationships. Ecology and Society, 20 (3), 44. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07868-200344

Mace, G. M. (2014). Whose conservation? Science, 345 (6204), 1558–1560. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1254704

Mace, G. M., Norris, K., & Fitter, A. H. (2012). Biodiversity and ecosystem services: A multilayered relationship. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27 (1), 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2011.08.006

McClung, M. R., Seddon, P. J., Massaro, M., & Setiawan, A. N. (2004). Nature-based tourism impacts on yellow-eyed penguins Megadyptes antipodes: Does unregulated visitor access affect fledging weight and juvenile survival? Biological Conservation, 119 (2), 279–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2003.11.012

MCT. (2021). Statistical Bulletin on Culture and Tourism Development 2020 . Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China. Retrieved from http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2021-07/05/content_5622568.htm

Milcu, A. I., Hanspach, J., Abson, D., & Fischer, J. (2013). Cultural ecosystem services: A literature review and prospects for future research. Ecology and Society, 18 (3), 44. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05790-180344

Minin, E. D., Fraser, I., Slotow, R., & MacMillan, D. C. (2013). Understanding heterogeneous preference of tourists for big game species: Implications for conservation and management. Animal Conservation, 16 (3), 249–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1795.2012.00595.x

Muniz, R., & Cruz, M. J. (2015). Making nature valuable, not profitable: Are payments for ecosystem services suitable for degrowth? Sustainability, 7 (8), 10895–10921. https://doi.org/10.3390/su70810895

Muradian, R., Arsel, M., Pellegrini, L., Adaman, F., Aguilar, B., Agarwal, B., Corbera, E., Ezzine de Blas, D., Farley, J., Froger, G., Garcia-Frapolli, E., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Gowdy, J., Kosoy, N., Le Coq, J. F., Leroy, P., May, P., Méral, P., Mibielli, P., … Urama, K. (2013). Payments for ecosystem services and the fatal attraction of win-win solutions. Conservation Letters, 6 (4), 274–279. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00309.x

Muradian, R., Corbera, E., Pascual, U., Kosoy, N., & May, P. H. (2010). Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics, 69 (6), 1202–1208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.006

Naeem, S., Ingram, J. C., Varga, A., Agardy, T., Barten, P., Bennett, G., Bloomgarden, E., Bremer, L. L., Burkill, P., Cattau, M., Ching, C., Colby, M., Cook, D. C., Costanza, R., DeClerck, F., Freund, C., Gartner, T., Goldman-Benner, R., Gunderson, J., … Wunder, S. (2015). Get the science right when paying for nature’s services. Science, 347 (6227), 1206–1207. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1403

Nelson, E., Mendoza, G., Regetz, J., Polasky, S., Tallis, H., Cameron, D., Chan, K. M. A., Daily, G. C., Goldstein, J., Kareiva, P. M., Lonsdorf, E., Naidoo, R., Ricketts, T. H., & Shaw, M. (2009). Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7 (1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1890/080023

Niñerola, A., Sánchez-Rebull, M.-V., & Hernández-Lara, A.-B. (2019). Tourism research on sustainability: A bibliometric analysis. Sustainability, 11 (5), 1377. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11051377

Oladeji, S. O., Awolala, D. O., & Alabi, O. I. (2021). Evaluation of sustainable ecotourism practices in Oke-Idanre Hills, Ondo-State, Nigeria [Article; Early Access]. Environment Development and Sustainability . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01550-6

Oldekop, J. A., Holmes, G., Harris, W. E., & Evans, K. L. (2016). A global assessment of the social and conservation outcomes of protected areas. Conservation Biology, 30 (1), 133–141. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12568

Orams, M. B. (1995). Towards a more desirable form of ecotourism. Tourism Management, 16 (1), 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0261-5177(94)00001-Q

Ozturk, I., Al-Mulali, U., & Saboori, B. (2016). Investigating the environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis: The role of tourism and ecological footprint. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23 , 1916–1928. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-015-5447-x

Pascual, U., Phelps, J., Garmendia, E., Brown, K., Corbera, E., Martin, A., Gomez-Baggethun, E., & Muradian, R. (2014). Social equity matters in payments for ecosystem services. BioScience, 64 (11), 1027–1036. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biu146

Pimm, S. L., Jenkins, C. N., Abell, R., Brooks, T. M., Gittleman, J. L., Joppa, L. N., Raven, P. H., Roberts, C. M., & Sexton, J. O. (2014). The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection. Science, 344 (6187), 1246752. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1246752

Plieninger, T., Dijks, S., Oteros-Rozas, E., & Bieling, C. (2013). Assessing, mapping, and quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level. Land Use Policy, 33 , 118–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.12.013

Raudsepp-Hearne, C., Peterson, G. D., & Bennett, E. M. (2010). Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. PNAS, 107 (11), 5242–5247. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0907284107

Redford, K. H., & Adams, W. M. (2009). Payment for ecosystem services and the challenge of saving nature. Conservation Biology, 23 (4), 785–787. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01271.x

Richards, D. R., & Friess, D. A. (2015). A rapid indicator of cultural ecosystem service usage at a fine spatial scale: Content analysis of social media photographs. Ecological Indicators, 53 , 187–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.01.034

Ripple, W. J., Estes, J. A., Beschta, R. L., Wilmers, C. C., Ritchie, E. G., Hebblewhite, M., Berger, J., Elmhagen, B., Letnic, M., Nelson, M. P., Schmitz, O. J., Smith, D. W., Wallach, A. D., & Wirsing, A. J. (2014). Status and ecological effects of the world’s largest carnivores. Science, 343 (6167), 1241484. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1241484

Ross, S., & Wall, G. (1999). Ecotourism: Towards congruence between theory and practice. Tourism Management, 20 (1), 123–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(98)00098-3

Seraphin, H., Sheeran, P., & Pilato, M. (2018). Over-tourism and the fall of Venice as a destination. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 9 , 374–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2018.01.011

Sharpley, R. (2014). Host perceptions of tourism: A review of the research. Tourism Management, 42 , 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.10.007

Shasha, Z. T., Geng, Y., Sun, H.-P., Musakwa, W., & Sun, L. (2020). Past, current, and future perspectives on eco-tourism: A bibliometric review between 2001 and 2018. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27 , 23514–23528. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08584-9

Shneider, A. M. (2009). Four stages of a scientific discipline; four types of scientist. Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 34 (5), 217–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibs.2009.02.002

Sirakaya, E., Sasidharan, V., & Sönmez, S. (1999). Redefining ecotourism: The need for a supply-side view. Journal of Travel Research, 38 (2), 168–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/004728759903800210

Snyman, S. (2017). The role of private sector ecotourism in local socio-economic development in southern Africa. Journal of Ecotourism, 16 (3), 247–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/14724049.2016.1226318

Talebi, M., Majnounian, B., Makhdoum, M., Abdi, E., & Omid, M. (2021). Predicting areas with ecotourism capability using artificial neural networks and linear discriminant analysis (case study: Arasbaran Protected Area, Iran). Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23 , 8272–8287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00964-y

Ulucak, R., & Bilgili, F. (2018). A reinvestigation of EKC model by ecological footprint measurement for high, middle and low income countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 188 , 144–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.03.191

Valdivieso, J. C., Eagles, P. F. J., & Gil, J. C. (2015). Efficient management capacity evaluation of tourism in protected areas. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 58 (9), 1544–1561. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2014.937479

Watson, J. E. M., Dudley, N., Segan, D. B., & Hockings, M. (2014). The performance and potential of protected areas. Nature, 515 , 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13947

Wearing, S., & McGehee, N. G. (2013). Volunteer tourism: A review. Tourism Management, 38 , 120–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.03.002

Weaver, D. B., & Lawton, L. J. (2007). Twenty years on: The state of contemporary ecotourism research. Tourism Management, 28 (5), 1168–1179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2007.03.004

West, P., Igoe, J., & Brockington, D. (2006). Parks and peoples: The social impact of protected areas. Annual Review of Anthropology, 35 , 251–277.

Whitelaw, P. A., King, B. E. M., & Tolkach, D. (2014). Protected areas, conservation and tourism-financing the sustainable dream. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22 (4), 584–603. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2013.873445

Wight, P. (1993). Ecotourism: Ethics or eco-sell. Journal of Travel Research, 31 (3), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/004728759303100301

Wittemyer, G., Elsen, P., Bean, W. T., Burton, A. C. O., & Brashares, J. S. (2008). Accelerated human population growth at protected area edges. Science, 321 (5885), 123–126. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1158900

Xu, L., Ao, C., Mao, B., Cheng, Y., Sun, B., Wang, J., Liu, B., & Ma, J. (2020). Which is more important, ecological conservation or recreational service? Evidence from a choice experiment in wetland nature reserve management. Wetlands, 40 , 2381–2396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-020-01348-8

Zanten, B. T. V., Berkel, D. B. V., Meentemeyer, R. K., Smith, J. W., Tieskens, K. F., & Verburg, P. H. (2016). Continental-scale quantification of landscape values using social media data. PNAS, 113 (46), 12974–12979. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1614158113

Zhong, L., & Liu, L. (2017). Ecotourism development in China: Achievements, problems and strategies. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 8 (5), 441–448. https://doi.org/10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2017.05.001

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study is funded by Education Department of Heilongjiang Province (1451MSYYB013) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.71874026 and No.71171044).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Management Science and Engineering, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin, 150030, China

Lishan Xu, Changlin Ao, Baoqi Liu & Zhenyu Cai

Faculty of Economic and Management, Mudanjiang Normal University, Mudanjiang, 157011, China

College of Engineering, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin, 150030, China

Changlin Ao

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

In this study, LX proposed the research topic, designed the research methodology and framework, and made the data analysis. She was the major contributor in writing the manuscript. CA contributed to the design of the whole paper, including the research topic and methodology, and also participated in the writing and revision of the manuscript. BL and ZC were involved in data collection and analysis. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Changlin Ao .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interest or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Ethics approval and Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent to publication

Additional information, publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 1035 KB)

Rights and permissions.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Xu, L., Ao, C., Liu, B. et al. Ecotourism and sustainable development: a scientometric review of global research trends. Environ Dev Sustain 25 , 2977–3003 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02190-0

Download citation

Received : 29 October 2021

Accepted : 03 February 2022

Published : 21 February 2022

Issue Date : April 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-022-02190-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Sustainable development
• Research trends
• Scientometrics
• Web of Science
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Site Search

• How to Search
• Advisory Group
• Editorial Board
• OEC Fellows
• History and Funding
• Using OEC Materials
• Collections
• Research Ethics Resources
• Ethics Projects
• Communities of Practice
• Get Involved
• Submit Content
• Open Access Membership
• Become a Partner
• Advanced Search
• Webinar Series

Case: Ecotourism

This case explores a variety of ethical issues concerning ecotourism. The setting is a fictitious lodge in Botswana's Okavango Delta, a UNESCO World Heritage site. Mini-vignettes offer three perspectives. Nuru is a poor Botswanan who lives near the lodge and would like to be involved in its activities. Rachel, the lodge's new manager, has just come to the position from working as a field biologist specializing in African elephants with Conservation International (CI), a non-profit dedicated to worldwide conservation of ecosystems.

This biodiversity case is part of a larger collection of Life and Environmental Science ethics education resource sets on ethics of emerging biotechnologies, big data in the life sciences, human enhancement, and biodiversity. Doctoral students from Arizona State University’s Center for Biology and Society developed the resources under the direction of Karin Ellison and Joseph Herkert between 2014 and 2019.

Okavango Game Lodge lies on the outskirts of the world-famous Okavango Delta in Botswana, Africa. A UNESCO World Heritage site, this delta is unique because it floods during the dry season in what would be an otherwise arid landscape. Thus, the flooded delta draws a remarkable number of wildlife from all over southern Africa, including cheetahs, rhinoceros, lions, zebras, giraffes, and elephants.

When the lodge was built in 1980, environmental impact was a minor concern. In recent years, however, the lodge has shifted its focus to eco-tourism, or tourism that is directed toward enjoying the natural environment while supporting conservation efforts. The redirection came in part from the realization that the lodge depends on the delta’s wildlife as a draw for tourists. In addition, lodge managers were intrigued by a national certification program that provides incentives and guidelines for the development of eco-tourism lodges (Botswana Tourism Organisation 2013).

Nuru lives in a small village near the Okavango Game Lodge. Her people, the Hambukushu, are one of the many groups indigenous to the area, each with a distinct culture and language. The Hambukushu are known for their mixed economy of agriculture, fishing, hunting, and pastoralism (Bock 1998).  Nuru is an accomplished blanket weaver, and she also works with her husband and their four children on their small sorghum farm. Despite these means of income, Nuru and her family are living below the poverty line in Botswana, like most of their neighbors. Nuru, her family, and the community are excited by the expansion of ecotourism in the area because of the potential for increased job opportunities and development.

As required by Botswana’s government for any ecotourism venture, the village must elect a Community Trust, a board of trustees who mediate between the village and the lodge to ensure equitable distribution of benefits. Several large-share landowners step up to the plate; they are well-known in the community, all older men, long-time residents, and among the most affluent. Many of them own larger parcels of land closer to the center of town or near new roads and see the potential to develop shops, restaurants, and services that benefit from the influx of tourists.

Nuru’s small farm lies several kilometers from the lodge, the town, and the newest roads, and thus does not benefit from such development. But the Community Trust notifies her that as part of the Okavango Game Lodge’s ecotourism initiative, Nuru and other community members are invited to sell their handmade crafts in the Craft Market during the high visitation season, May through December. Nuru also notices that members of her own community who already have lucrative jobs as shop owners, small-hoteliers, or safari-managers (most often men) are securing jobs at the Okavango Game Lodge in the kitchens, as waiters, and as cleaners.

One day, Nuru sees a job posting for safari guides and wildlife educators at the lodge. Although she has no formal training, Nuru has been living and farming in the delta region her whole life, so she decides she has the know-how to perform the job duties. This could be her first chance at a steady income to support her family.

The lodge’s manager, Rachel Jacobs, is a South African biologist with a lifelong passion for wildlife. She completed her bachelor’s degree in Conservation Biology and her master’s degree in Wildlife Ecology and became a field biologist with a focus on African elephants with Conservation International (CI), a non-profit dedicated to worldwide conservation of ecosystems. After 5 years working throughout many southern African countries with CI, she learned that Okavango Game Lodge was seeking a new manager to direct an eco-tourism overhaul of their safari and educational programs, as well as their facilities.

She applied for and accepted the job, seeing it as the perfect opportunity to apply her passion for wildlife and conservation in the hotel and game-lodge industry that she believes is too often at the heart of many human-wildlife conflicts. In her work with CI, she often confronted lodges and hotels over issues with over-exposed wildlife, development, and pollution. Safari and trophy hunting programs would sometimes allow guests to come too close, too often to wildlife. And lodge facilities come with a host of infrastructure projects that increase the flow of visitors, and thus also increase amounts of waste and pollution, further development, and wildlife exposure.

Upon arriving to the lodge, Rachel immediately went to work on initiatives to help the lodge reach their new environmental and sustainability goals. However, she was presented with two concerns.

First, to initiate and sustain improvements, Rachel would like to secure investments from American developers. With such investments, the lodge could employ electric vehicles and solar-powered boats, build the infrastructure to recycle grey-water, and manage their own waste recycling plant. Through these efforts, they could cut their waste footprint by as much as 85%. But to recruit top investors, Rachel would need to agree to share a margin of the lodge’s profits with the investors, cutting from the revenue that could otherwise enter the local economy.

In addition, Rachel faces a hiring conundrum. To improve the lodge’s wildlife conservation and educational programming, Rachel would like to hire more safari guides and wildlife educators. As she pages through applications, she recognizes some old friends. A handful of her colleagues from university and CI have applied to be safari guides and wildlife educators, and Rachel believes their world-class expertise could inspire and impress guests of the lodge. But she also notes a dozen applications from members of the nearby Hambukushu village. One application, Nuru’s, catches Rachel’s eye as the only woman from the village who has applied to a be a safari guide. Nuru could be the first woman villager employed in such a position. This excites Rachel, but still, can Nuru’s application compete with an expert hire from Conservation International? In general, she wonders, would village members know enough to lead safaris? The lodge already hosts a twice weekly fair for village members to sell crafts to tourists, and several village members work in the kitchens and in housekeeping. Perhaps that is enough.

Mahendra, an animal behavior specialist who studies elephants, hails from Massachusetts, United States. In addition to being a well-known expert in elephant behavior and social structures, he is an avid traveler and photographer. Mahendra is planning a trip to one of his regular field sites, the Okavango Delta. In fact, the largest population of elephants in the world (~130,000) migrate to the flooded plains each year (UNESCO 2017). This July, he will be bringing his wife and teenage daughter for the first time so he will be staying in a hotel or lodge rather than his usual “roughin’ it” conditions. As Mahendra begins to plan his trip, he reviews his accommodation options.

First, there is an affordable option. Sanctuary Inn is in the town of Maun, the closest city to the delta. The Inn is staffed and owned by long-time residents of Maun. They provide breakfast and modest amenities at a rate less than half what the large game lodges charge. Mahendra would need to take a daily car or jumper-plane to field sites, but he could probably afford more days in the field staying at a cheaper inn.

Dreaming, Mahendra also looks up rates at the Royal Safari Camp. This one is located right in the heart of the delta. As with any lodge in such a location, you can see wildlife up-close-and-personal, sometimes daily! Work would be right on his doorstep. The price is steep, but the amenities are similar to a four- or five-star hotel in Boston. That would be the best of both worlds, and his family prefers this option.

Finally, Mahendra views the Okavango Game Lodge. Mahendra notices that the lodge is Green and Green+ certified by the Botswanan government, indicating that conservation and sustainability are priorities for the lodge. They also host a “Craft Market.” Local men and women line the road leading up to the lodge, selling baskets, bracelets, woven clothing, and other local goods and souvenirs. The lodge is located on the delta, so the prices are high. But the lodge has more rustic accommodations, so rates are not so steep as at the Royal Safari Camp. In any case, Mahendra would have easy access to field sites as well as the opportunity to cross paths with fellow elephant expert turned eco-lodge manager, Rachel Jacobs.

Discussion Questions:

• How are benefits to the community distributed among different households, including Nuru’s? Is that distribution equitable?
• How can the village achieve more equitable distribution of benefits of ecotourism? Can the lodge help? How?
• Summarize the competing interests Rachel must consider in her management of the lodge. Which should she prioritize? How does her background potentially influence her priorities? Might Rachel be problematically biased against “experiential knowledge” ( vs. knowledge that accompanies advanced degrees)?
• Should Rachel accept the money from foreign investors to achieve her sustainability and conservation goals? Why or why not?
• Should Rachel hire Nuru as a safari guide and wildlife educator? Why or why not?
• Where should Mahendra stay for his trip to the Okavango Delta, and why?
• What ethical, logistical, and other concerns are relevant to his decision?
• In an ecotourism project, how should environmental and social-developmental goals be combined? Are there trade-offs between affording new sustainability measures vs. development goals? Justify your position drawing on the experiences of each character above.
• When involving the community, should the lodge accept existing local gender and wealth hierarchies or should they address the inequities they perceive? Explain your response by citing examples from the case. 

Bibliography:

Aciksoz, S., P. Bollukcu, and D. Celik. 2016. “Ecotourism and Ethics in Protected Areas: Bartin-Sogutlu Village.” Oxidation Communications 39: 3621-3636.

Acott, T. G., H. L. La Trobe, and S. H. Howard. 1998. “An Evaluation of Deep Ecotourism and Shallow Ecotourism.” Journal of Sustainable Tourism 2: 238-253.

Bock, J. 1998. “Economic Development and Cultural Change among the Okavango Delta Peoples of Botswana” Botswana Notes and Records 30: 27-44.

Botswana Tourism Organisation. 2013. “Eco Certification System.” Accessed June 24, 2017.  http://www.botswanatourism.co.bw/eco-certification-system  

Botswana Tourism Organisation. 2013b. “Eco Certification Criteria.” Accessed June 24, 2017 http://www.botswanatourism.co.bw/eco-certification-criteria  

Ceballos-Lascuráin, H. 1996. Tourism, ecotourism, and protected areas: The state of nature-based tourism around the world and guidelines for its development . Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

CIA (Central Intelligence Agency). 2017. “Africa: Botswana.” World Fact Book. Accessed July 8, 2017. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/bc.html

Clifton, J., and A. Benson. 2006. “Planning for sustainable ecotourism: the case for Research Ecotourism in Developing Country Destinations.” Journal of Sustainable Tourism 14: 238-254.

Gilbert, N. 2010. “c.” Nature News , May 6. http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100506/full/news.2010.222.html

He, G., X. Chen, W. Liu, S. Bearer, S. Zhou, L. Y. Cheng, H. Zhang, Z. Ouyang, and J. Liu. 2008. “Distribution of Economic Benefits from Ecotourism: A Case Study of Wolong Nature Reserve for Giant Pandas in China.” Environmental Management 42: 1017-1025.

Holden, A. 2003. “In need of a new environmental ethics for tourism?” Annals of Tourism Research 30: 94-108.

Jones, S. 2005. “Community-based ecotourism: The significance of social capital.” Annals of Tourism Research 32: 303-324.

Lenao, M., and B. Basupi. 2016. “Ecotourism development and female empowerment in Botswana: A review.” Tourism Management Perspectives 18: 51-58.

Mbaiwa, J. E. 2015. “Ecotourism in Botswana: 30 years later.” Journal of Ecotourism 14: 204-222.

Scheyvens, R. 1999. “Ecotourism and the empowerment of local communities.” Tourism Management 20: 245-249.

Stark, J. C. 2002. “Ethics and ecotourism: connections and conflicts.” Philosophy and Geography 5: 101-113.

Stem, C. J., J. P. Lassoie, D. R. Lee, D. D. Deshler, and J. W. Schelhas. 2003. “Community Participation in Ecotourism Benefits: The Link to Conservation Practices and Perspectives.” Society and Natural Resources 16: 387-413.

Stevens, P. W., and R. Jansen. 2002. Botswana National Ecotourism Strategy. Gaborone: Government of Botswana.

The Nature Conservancy. 2017. “Eco-Trips and Travel.” Accessed June 30. https://www.nature.org/greenliving/what-is-ecotourism.xml

TIES (The International Ecotourism Society). 2017. “What is Ecotourism?” Accessed June 25. http://www.ecotourism.org/what-is-ecotourism

TIES. 2015. “TIES Announces Ecotourism Principles Revision.” The International Ecotourism Society. Accessed July 5. http://www.ecotourism.org/news/ties-announces-ecotourism-principles-revision

UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization). 2017. “Okavango Delta.” Accessed July 6. http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1432

Vanhove, M.P.M., A-J. Rochette, and L. J. de Bisthoven. 2017. “Joining science and policy in capacity development for monitoring progress toward the Aichi Biodiversity Targets in the global South.” Ecological Indicators 73: 694-697.

Wilson, J. 2014. “The first all-female guiding team in Africa – Our Chobe Angels.” Out and About, Chobe Game Lodge . April 24. Accessed July 1. http://www.chobegamelodge.co.bw/blog/first-female-guiding-team-africa-chobe-angels/

World Travel and Tourism Council. 2015. Travel and Tourism, Economic Impact 2015: Botswana. Available at: https://www.wttc.org/-/media/files/reports/economic%20impact%20research/countries%202015/botswana2015.pdf London, UK

The International Ecotourism Society:  http://www.ecotourism.org

The Nature Conservancy: https://www.nature.org/greenliving/what-is-ecotourism.xml

Botswana Ecotourism Certification System: http://www.botswanatourism.co.bw/eco-certification-system

The author wishes to acknowledge the contributions of Karin Ellison, OEC - Life and Environmental Sciences Editor, and Joseph Herkert, OEC Engineering Editor. They provided valuable input in selecting the topic and crafting the resource.

Ecotourism There is no one definition of "ecotourism," but the common thread through most definitions is that ecotourism should be nature-based tourism that has both environmental and socio-economic benefits. The International Ecotourism Society defines ecotourism as: "...responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment, sustains the well-being of the local people, and involves interpretation and education" (TIES 2015; TIES 2017). With a focus on conservation of the environment, empowerment of the local communities, and interpretation for a greater understanding of nature, TIES paints ecotourism as a win-win-win. Similarly, the World Conservation Union (IUCN) defines ecotourism as: "Environmentally responsible travel to natural areas, in order to enjoy and appreciate nature (and accompanying cultural features, both past and present) that promote conservation, have a low visitor impact, and provide for beneficially active socio-economic involvement of local peoples" (Ceballos-Lascuráin 1996, 20). The Nature Conservancy argues that ecotourism should be sensitive to biodiversity as well as appreciating the local cultures. They also highlight that there should be "local participation in decision-making." (The Nature Conservancy 2017).

Although ecotourism, in theory, is a win-win-win for the environment, the local community, and the tourism industry (hoteliers and tourists), there can be situations in which one or more parties are unduly burdened. For example, any kind of tourism to environmentally and culturally sensitive areas can be detrimental when visitors come in large numbers (Stem et al. 2003), leading to increased waste and habitat disturbance. Any benefits (e.g., revenue for protected areas and local communities, education for travelers and locals, etc.) must be weighed against potential negative impacts.

Ecotourism and Ethics Environmental ethics asks us to reflect on humanity's responsibility toward the environment. What are those responsibilities? How ought we behave toward nature? (Holden 2003). It is appropriate to evaluate ecotourism practices in these terms to see if promises of environmental stewardship and motivations are true in practice. Just as there are competing definitions of ecotourism, there are also competing claims as to what constitutes the most ethical motivations and practices. For example, some environmental ethicists argue that true ecotourism is non-consumptive, and thus non-utilitarian, and eco-centric (nature-centered); they view all organisms as having intrinsic value (Reviewed in Aciksoz et al. 2016; TIES 2015). Others argue that all ecotourism is inherently utilitarian, viewing nature as a commodity to sell accommodations (Stark 2002; Holden 2003). Holden claims that transitions toward ecotourism (such as in the hypothetical Okavango Game Lodge case) are often anthropocentric (human-centered); lodges transition only when they notice that other modes of tourism destroy the environment that draws human visitors in the first place (2003). In Holden's view, a lodge manager is concerned with environmental well-being only so far as it contributes to the health of their eco-tourism business. Finally, what are an eco-lodge's responsibilities to the local community? There are experts who believe that eco-tourism practices must be in harmony with not only the natural environment, but also the human environment (Aciksoz et al. 2016; Mbaiwa 2015; Stark 2002).

Some find it is helpful to frame ecotourism practices as "deep" or "shallow," with the acknowledgement that such classifications are fluid and gradated (Acott et al. 1998). Deep-ecotourism practitioners are guided by a deeply intrinsic value of the natural world. They are ecocentric, and encourage first-hand experiences with nature and culture. Shallow-ecotourism is more utilitarian; a healthy environment is valued as a driver of visitation. Such a framework acknowledges the array of motivations and practices you might find among eco-tourism projects, but the terms "deep" and "shallow" are normative, and thus it would be more neutral so simply use the labels "ecocentric" and "anthropocentric" ecotourism, again with the understanding that the classifications are fluid and gradated.

Ecotourism in the Delta The Okavango Delta, one of the largest inland deltas in Africa, lies in northwest Botswana, a sparsely populated country in southern Africa with just over 2.2 million residents across a territory the size of France (CIA 2017). This UNESCO World Heritage Site floods during the dry season, transforming the brown, arid landscape into a lush, nutrient-rich oasis, providing water for countless animals and plants during the arid winters (UNESCO 2017). This wetland system is largely untouched by human development, with restrictions on permanent settlements.

In the last two decades, the national government in Botswana has become dedicated to ensuring that the massive tourism industry has a small footprint on the delta it depends on (Botswana Tourism Organisation 2013). Note that such motivations for a national ecotourism program are indicative of anthropocentric ecotourism; the government has a utilitarian value of nature as being crucial to maintaining levels of tourism. (This makes sense, as travel and tourism contributed to 8.5% of the nation's GDP in 2014 with projected increases around 5% per year through 2025 (World Travel and Tourism Council 2015).) However, such values and motivations may not be replicated on the local scale.

In 2002, as part of the Botswana National Ecotourism Strategy, the national government launched an Ecotourism Certification System, "designed to encourage and support responsible environmental, social, and cultural behavior by tourism businesses and make sure they provide a quality, eco-friendly product to consumers." According to this certification system, ecotourism must be sensitive to natural and cultural heritage with opportunities for biodiversity conservation and economic development. Thus, development initiatives for local communities are required to be integrated at the outset of all certified ecotourism projects (Stevens and Jansen 2002). Through this program, lodges and hotels are expected to minimize negative impacts on their social, cultural, and environmental surroundings, ensure equitable distribution of benefits to their host communities, invest part of their revenue in conservation, provide educational programming for guests and locals, and provide a "quality" experience to guests.

Case Overview In this case, each character experiences some of the benefits; we will explore later whether those benefits are distributed fairly. In short, we see that Nuru and the Hambukushu community are benefitting from an influx of revenue that contribute to new infrastructure, job opportunities, and tourist patrons of shops and restaurants. Nuru is employed by the craft market and has also applied for a position as a safari guide and wildlife educator. Rachel feels fulfilled in carrying out her personal conservation mission by changing practices and programming at the lodge. She also knows that certification with the national government will bring more guests and more revenue to support her initiatives. Mahendra has options; if he values cultural, social, and environmental sustainability he can choose an eco-lodge that fits that ethic. And he may also benefit through enhanced research opportunities with the lodge due to proximity to his field sites. Finally, the delta environment is likely to benefit from more sustainable tourism practices that can protect the area from waste, pollution, and unsustainable uses of resources. While each character and the environment derive some benefit, there are also tradeoffs and tensions.

Nuru According to the definitions of ecotourism above, one component of a successful ecotourism venture is that it is economically beneficial (such as providing income and employment opportunities) to the local community. And more broadly, biodiversity is often defended as a resource of food and income for the world's poorest people (Gilbert et al. 2010). However, a review of several studies presented at a meeting of the Zoological Society of London in 2010, found that evidence linking conservation projects (including ecotourism ventures) with poverty alleviation is only anecdotal. Those locals who do benefit are most often the affluent members of the community (Gilbert et al. 2010).

For example, in a case study in Wolong Nature Reserve, China, He et al. (2008) found there was significant inequality among rural stakeholders; those who were closer to roads and further from the reservation reaped the benefits both of direct tourism and indirect infrastructure improvements. Also, He et al. found that the nonpermanent souvenir shops are run by the less affluent locals, while the year-round permanent shops were run by community elites. And when rural residents are employed, it is often in low-skill, low-wage jobs (cleaners, waiters, cooks) (He et al. 2008; Lenao and Basupi 2016).

J. E. Mbaiwa, an expert on and scholar of ecotourism in Botswana, found that across the last 30 years, ecotourism ventures in Botswana have often been successful, but only when certain socio-economic and political dynamics are at play (Mbaiwa 2015). Specifically, villages tend to benefit most when an active and fair Community Trust implements ecotourism projects in the community (Mbaiwa 2015). Community Trusts are government prerequisites for any ecotourism projects in Botswana; they are registered legal entities comprised of adults who have lived in the village for more than five years.

In Nuru's village the Board of Trustees are affluent, male members of the society. Many of them own large parcels of land close to main roads and the village center. Thus, the distribution of revenue and other indirect benefits like infrastructure improvements may be skewed toward such members of society. In addition, jobs and entrepreneurial opportunities are most available to those members of Nuru's village who are already trained to take such positions or who have the land and facilities necessary to start a restaurant or shop. While a job at the Craft Market provides nice supplemental income, Nuru will find that her business is sensitive to seasonality (the delta is most popular May through December). A job at the lodge could provide better security and income, as well as opportunities for upward mobility into management positions.

To improve the distribution of benefits to rural, less affluent members of her village, perhaps Nuru should run to be elected to the trust. Her voice could represent those with similar struggles. In addition, the lodge could help by initiating a training program to build foreign language, hospitality, and entrepreneurial skills. A real-life example, the Chobe Game Lodge located in Botswana's Chobe National Park implemented the first female safari guide training program in an effort to provide more equitable job opportunities (Wilson 2014). It is worth noting that in Botswana, societies are traditionally patriarchal, and women tend to be excluded from some opportunities (Lenao and Basupi 2016; Jones 2005). However, the country has started to pass legislation aimed toward removing or counteracting prior discrimination (Lenau and Basupi 2016). Still, initiatives to improve opportunities for women should be done in a way that will not be construed as imposing western gender norms.

Rachel Given Rachel's background as a biologist, CI employee, and her new focus on making Okavankgo Game Lodge a sustainable eco-lodge, it is highly possible that she holds an ecocentric ethic. She accepted the manager position to reduce the negative impacts of the lodge on the environment, not because the lodge depends on the environment for business (though it does), but because she has seen in her prior career the damage lodges' can cause to the environment and animals she has harbored a life-long passion for. This ethic stands in contrast to the utilitarian view of ecotourism held by the national government and certification program.

Rachel's passion for the environment drives her to seek foreign investments that will initiate and maintain several sustainability measures at the lodge, but such investors will request that revenue be shared. Her ethical viewpoint and passion may lead her to accept the compromise, meaning she may be blind to the potential damage such agreements could do to the local economy. Thus, in one sense, accepting foreign investments could suit her ecocentric ethic, but to others with a more anthropocentric leaning worldview, Rachel could be entering an unethical deal. For example, according to our definitions of ecotourism above, "ecotourism ventures should only be considered 'successful' if local communities have some measure of control over them and if they share equitably in the benefits emerging from ecotourism activities" (Scheyvens 1999). But it is also possible that Rachel could justify her foreign investments in terms of benefits to the local community. Increased investments could lead to better facilities that attract more guests and thus more revenue. Rachel could grant control over revenue, and related investments, to the local Community Trust.

In addition, Rachel's focus on western standards of scientific expertise may make her more likely to hire her CI colleagues as opposed to Nuru, because she knows she can trust her old friends to espouse and practice her same ecocentric worldview. And logistically, her CI colleagues would require less training; most speak many foreign languages, are experienced in education, and all have expertise in ecology and conservation. She might also realize, however, that she could balance the hiring process by hiring one or two of her CI colleagues to then train several local hires, including Nuru.

Is it possible to be ecocentric and still be concerned about the local community? Ethical worldviews come in gradients. Rachel may realize that she can still achieve her goals without foreign investments, albeit more slowly. First, in a conversation with the Community Trust, she might find that many of her raw materials and food can be sourced locally, meaning lower costs, a boost to the local economy, and a more authentic culinary experience for guests. She could also take advantage of the tax incentives for sourcing and employing locally -- a budget saver.

And perhaps her ecocentric ethic means she hopes the she can inspire both guests and locals to have a better appreciation for nature. One way to get the local community excited about her projects, is to involve them. She could have them arrange a cultural education program to supplement environmental education (Stem et al. 2003). She might also initiate a training program to build entrepreneurial skills in the community, because although direct employment with ecotourism has been found unlikely to influence conservation perspectives, indirect benefits such as education opportunities and infrastructural improvements can have a positive influence on conservation perspectives (Stem et al 2003). Plus, Rachel would be building the capacity of the local community to participate in the educational and tourism market. In other words, she would be contributing to their economic empowerment (venues for regular income), psychological well-being (potential for building optimistic futures), social empowerment (keeping revenue local to contribute to community groups, health clinics, etc.) and political empowerment (allowing community voices to guide development) (Scheyvens 1999).

Mahendra Where Mahendra decides to stay will depend on his world view, as well as how he weighs that against logistical concerns. If Mahendra is a strong ecocentric, he will certainly want to support the Okavango Game Lodge as the only ecotourism option. However, if he does not have a strong ecocentric ethic he may be more concerned with either (a) saving money or (b) keeping his family comfortable, in which case we would stay at the Sanctuary Inn or the Royal Safari Camp respectively. The Okavango Game Lodge does get logistical bonus points for being conveniently close to his field site. Also, depending on Mahendra's awareness of and concern for local and indigenous communities, he might be either pleased that the lodge sponsors a Craft Market or disappointed by the Craft Market as the lodge's only (current) meager attempt at community engagement and support.

Considering that Mahendra knows of Rachel's background as a fellow elephant biologist, Mahendra might consider reaching out to her to initiate a community science program. Perhaps he could become a regular patron of the Okavango Game Lodge, implementing a training and employment program for locals and lodge guests who are interested in partaking in elephant research. This would be considered "research ecotourism," providing research opportunities for visitors and locals that focus on the delta region's biology (in this case, specific to elephant biology) (Clifton and Benson 2006). Additionally, employing community members to help with "mapping, measuring, and monitoring" could increase local capacity to self-employ or seek employment as safari guides, wildlife educators, or ecologists. This could also be seen as part of a broader call to increase biodiversity knowledge and knowledge acquisition skills in developing countries (Vanhove et al. 2017).

Conclusion The Botswana government's "Ecotourism" certification level is defined as follows:

Ecotourism: This level upholds the principles of ecotourism, as stated in the Botswana National Ecotourism Strategy (2002) and defines those facilities that have met all the principles of ecotourism. The level reflects the facilities' commitment to and involvement with local communities in tourism development, nature conservation, environmental management and interpretation of the surrounding environment to the guests. (Botswana Tourism Organisation 2013b)

In this case, there are trade-offs between affording new sustainability measures vs. achieving developmental goals, particularly if Rachel's ecocentric ethic drives her to compromise with foreign investors and leads her to hire only her CI colleagues. However, if Rachel wishes to achieve the final "Ecotourism" certification level, she will need to balance her goals with community engagement and development. So "success" in this case is a balancing act for the lodge and the community.

It is worth noting that "success" depends on your environmental ethic. Those who tend toward anthropocentric will want to see environmental goals balanced with developmental goals. Someone who is strongly ecocentric, like Rachel, might be willing to compromise developmental goals in order to move more quickly with sustainability and environmental initiatives. It's also worth noting that community involvement with ecotourism doesn't necessarily change the terms in which locals see the forest so much as it keeps them too busy with new jobs to conduct old, potentially "harmful" activities, such as converting protected land to agriculture (e.g., Stem et al. 2003). Should ecotourism project managers like Rachel be satisfied to simply keep people preoccupied? Then, questions remain: If people had time, would they hunt? It tourism levels dropped, would the forest lose its value? So perhaps Rachel should push for "loftier goals," such as a greater respect for nature or a shared ecocentric ethic. But how could she go about achieving that? And what does it mean to respect nature? There are different interpretations, and utilitarian values don't necessarily equate with "disrespect."

Rachel needs to develop a greater understanding of the community's own environmental ethic before she decides to impose her own. A good practice would be to offer involvement and training with the eco-lodge wherever she can, especially to underrepresented members of the local community. Most importantly, balancing community development needs, local traditions and values, and sustainable development, is not amenable to one-off solutions; rather it requires careful and continuous attention.

Related Resources

Submit Content to the OEC   Donate

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Award No. 2055332. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Promoting Ecotourism: A Case Study on Sagada, Philippines

Related Papers

I am just starting to gather data. I have not yet started making abstracts for my own research. these article is authored by someone else. it is another reference.

Ramon B A Alampay

The Philippines, through tourism, aspires to become a stronger player in the integrated travel industry of today. Yet, the country realizes that in order to do so, it must conserve, protect and strengthen the cultural, historical and natural resources upon which the Philippines draws its unique competitive advantages. All these in a manner that can be sustained for the benefit and enjoyment of future generations of Filipinos. This book, a collection of research papers funded by the Philippine APEC Study Center Network (PASCN), reflects the scope and complexity of sustainable tourism development. The various papers also mirror the complexity of sustainable tourism development and hint at the multidisciplinary approach that this mode of tourism needs to succeed. Each paper applies a different disciplinary framework to its particular tourism problem: economics, sociology, anthropology, environmental science, management science, human resources development, and others. Each paper also provides a unique academic angle on sustainability and tourism.

www.cdrj.ssu.edu.ph

Ronald Orale

Samar is the third largest island in the Philippines blessed with worldclass, less known ecotourism destination like highly diverse forest/reefs, gigantic caves, waterfalls, beaches, etc. Tourist arrival share attributed mostly to the private sector remains very low because of poor intervention especially from the local government. Private-led initiatives to promote Samar’s world-class sites are relatively successful, bringing in tourists from all over the world. Samar’s ecotourism sites are rated by these tourists higher in terms of panoramic appeal but poor in terms of accessibility; support structure, services and facilities compared to the more known and government-supported destinations in the Philippines. Samar Island towns are one of the poorest in the Philippines. Increasing tourist arrival through improved government intervention will result into a better economic activity which will potentially reduce the poverty level in the three provinces of Samar.

Rowena Abat - Parducho

The 7,107 islands of the Philippines make it one of the most frequently visited places by tourists in Asia and the Pacific. This paper attempted to review existing literatures on how ecotourism serves as a strategy for nation building, as well as establish the need for more conscious efforts to make its contributions sustainable.

Mary Jean Abello-Camarin

Tourism is said to be a fragmented industry or group of industries, composed primarily of competing businesses which have no collective strategy, leading to a complex and fragmented area for development of government policy (Noel Scott, 2012). Such nature of tourism requires a more focused regional tourism planning approach that significantly responds to sustainable tourism products (Buhalis and Costa, 2006). This study delved into the crafting of a tourism development framework for Caraga Region as a planning approach to ensure sustainability of its predominantly nature-based tourism assets. The five Provincial Local Governments of Caraga were rated through a survey on the implementation level of tourism-related initiatives. Results revealed that the tourism-related initiatives’ implementation has bearing to the tourist arrivals of the provinces from 2010-2014. The problems encountered in the implementation of the initiatives were rooted on balancing market-led and supply-led development approaches that will both deliver satisfying tourist’s experience and preserve the integrity of tourism resources. Tourism therefore must not be done in isolation (United Nations World Tourism Organization, 2011) to achieve this. Patterned to the integrative tourism development model of Getz, the study concluded that Caraga Region’s tourism development framework must be anchored on responsible governance, infrastructure development, green tourism product development, human resource development and peace and security. Key Words: Caraga Region tourism development framework, tourism development, tourism

ziyad zarkasi

Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research

Jazztin Jairum Manalo

Sustainable tourism has been considered by many local governments as part of their initiatives for economic upliftment. It is one of the major sources of income through the use of their tourist attraction without compromising the natural resources situated within. The enactment and effective implementation of the local government’s policy have achieved a promising efficient outcome for sustainable tourism.. The city of Puerto Princesa had a long history considering its transformation from an environmentally degraded city into one of the major ecotourism sites around the world. Thus, this paper presents the case of Puerto Princesa and its practices as well as economic development by practicing sustainable tourism and effective policy implementation. The City Ordinance No. 163-91 and 640 has improved the lives of the communities by practicing cleanliness and effective waste management their surrounding and tourist destinations. Economic development and benefits from sustainable tourism reflects the city of Puerto Princesa as a role model for Local Government Units. The passing of City Ordinances on Cleanliness drive have played an important role in effective waste management of the city. The key role of having a strong political will in the local government has strongly maintained its best practices for two decades up to the present.

Jay-r B Cabayan Jr.

Gessa Mae Abriol

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Vee Jay Dalisay

CMR Bulilan

Celyrah B Castillo

AGRICULTURAL TRAVEL AND TOURISM

Tamara Ratz

Bob Capistrano

Vahid Ghasemi

Varslee Jeb T . Vargas

Bhea Marie Roxas

Michele J Dulay

Asian Journal of Social Sciences, Arts & Humanities

manilyn leonardo

Sven Gross , Louisa Klemmer

Gracia Bacz

Historically Digitized

Ricardo Sandalo , Mayo Grace Caoili Amit

Danna Carla Dela Cruz

Muhamad Salehudin

PANGASINAN Extention Office

International Conference for Tourism and Business

RYAN T LIBA

Ed John Dela Cruz

Freya Higgins-Desbiolles

International Journal of Information Research & Review

Jonatan Gomez Punzon

Christian D Soler

12th Philippine Network of Educators on Environment (PNEE) International Conference and Scientific Meeting

Jofer Asilum

Alexis Fillone , Nicanor Jr. Roxas , Jan Baldo

Towards Sustainable Development in Southeast Asia: From Forest Management to Eco-tourism

Nestor Castro

Maria Luisa Gonzales

FORUM PROCEEDINGS

Carmela Bosangit

R.W. (Bill) Carter , Sokhom Thok

Gülpınar AKBULUT ÖZPAY

Awangku Hassanal Bahar Pengiran Bagul

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Distribution of economic benefits from ecotourism: a case study of Wolong Nature Reserve For Giant Pandas in China

Affiliation.

• 1 Center for Systems Integration and Sustainability, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA. [email protected]
• PMID: 18853224
• DOI: 10.1007/s00267-008-9214-3

Ecotourism is widely promoted as a conservation tool and actively practiced in protected areas worldwide. Theoretically, support for conservation from the various types of stakeholder inside and outside protected areas is maximized if stakeholders benefit proportionally to the opportunity costs they bear. The disproportional benefit distribution among stakeholders can erode their support for or lead to the failure of ecotourism and conservation. Using Wolong Nature Reserve for Giant Pandas (China) as an example, we demonstrate two types of uneven distribution of economic benefits among four major groups of stakeholders. First, a significant inequality exists between the local rural residents and the other types of stakeholder. The rural residents are the primary bearers of the cost of conservation, but the majority of economic benefits (investment, employment, and goods) in three key ecotourism sectors (infrastructural construction, hotels/restaurants, and souvenir sales) go to other stakeholders. Second, results show that the distribution of economic benefits is unequal among the rural residents inside the reserve. Most rural households that benefit from ecotourism are located near the main road and potentially have less impact on panda habitat than households far from the road and closer to panda habitats. This distribution gap is likely to discourage conservation support from the latter households, whose activities are the main forces degrading panda habitats. We suggest that the unequal distribution of the benefits from ecotourism can be lessened by enhancing local participation, increasing the use of local goods, and encouraging relocation of rural households closer to ecotourism facilities.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• Role of New Nature Reserve in Assisting Endangered Species Conservation - Case Study of Giant Pandas in the Northern Qionglai Mountains, China. Guan TP, Owens JR, Gong MH, Liu G, Ouyang ZY, Song YL. Guan TP, et al. PLoS One. 2016 Aug 17;11(8):e0159738. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0159738. eCollection 2016. PLoS One. 2016. PMID: 27532870 Free PMC article.
• Ecological degradation in protected areas: the case of Wolong Nature Reserve for giant pandas. Liu J, Linderman M, Ouyang Z, An L, Yang J, Zhang H. Liu J, et al. Science. 2001 Apr 6;292(5514):98-101. doi: 10.1126/science.1058104. Science. 2001. PMID: 11292872
• Estimating the social and ecological impact of community-based ecotourism in giant panda habitats. Ma B, Yin R, Zheng J, Wen Y, Hou Y. Ma B, et al. J Environ Manage. 2019 Nov 15;250:109506. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109506. Epub 2019 Sep 6. J Environ Manage. 2019. PMID: 31499468
• Sustainable harvest, people and pandas: Assessing a decade of managed wild harvest and trade in Schisandra sphenanthera. Brinckmann JA, Luo W, Xu Q, He X, Wu J, Cunningham AB. Brinckmann JA, et al. J Ethnopharmacol. 2018 Oct 5;224:522-534. doi: 10.1016/j.jep.2018.05.042. Epub 2018 Jun 6. J Ethnopharmacol. 2018. PMID: 29883683 Review.
• Assessing ecotourism from a multi-stakeholder perspective: Xingkai Lake National Nature Reserve, China. Su MM, Wall G, Ma Z. Su MM, et al. Environ Manage. 2014 Nov;54(5):1190-207. doi: 10.1007/s00267-014-0360-5. Epub 2014 Sep 24. Environ Manage. 2014. PMID: 25248933 Review.
• The metacoupled Arctic: Human-nature interactions across local to global scales as drivers of sustainability. Kapsar K, Frans VF, Brigham LW, Liu J. Kapsar K, et al. Ambio. 2022 Oct;51(10):2061-2078. doi: 10.1007/s13280-022-01729-9. Epub 2022 Mar 30. Ambio. 2022. PMID: 35353295 Free PMC article. Review.
• The Escalating Effects of Wildlife Tourism on Human-Wildlife Conflict. Cui Q, Ren Y, Xu H. Cui Q, et al. Animals (Basel). 2021 May 12;11(5):1378. doi: 10.3390/ani11051378. Animals (Basel). 2021. PMID: 34066227 Free PMC article.
• New taxa of Berberis (Berberidaceae) with greenish flowers from a biodiversity hotspot in Sichuan Province, China. Li X, Zhang L, Li W, Yin X, Yuan S. Li X, et al. Plant Divers. 2017 Jan 23;39(2):94-103. doi: 10.1016/j.pld.2017.01.002. eCollection 2017 Apr. Plant Divers. 2017. PMID: 30159497 Free PMC article.
• Revealing pathways from payments for ecosystem services to socioeconomic outcomes. Yang H, Yang W, Zhang J, Connor T, Liu J. Yang H, et al. Sci Adv. 2018 Mar 21;4(3):eaao6652. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aao6652. eCollection 2018 Mar. Sci Adv. 2018. PMID: 29750187 Free PMC article.
• Effects of Conservation Policies on Forest Cover Change in Giant Panda Habitat Regions, China. Li Y, Viña A, Yang W, Chen X, Zhang J, Ouyang Z, Liang Z, Liu J. Li Y, et al. Land use policy. 2013 Jul;33:42-53. doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.12.003. Land use policy. 2013. PMID: 26146431 Free PMC article.
• Environ Manage. 2001 Aug;28(2):165-77 - PubMed
• Science. 2003 May 23;300(5623):1240-1 - PubMed
• Environ Manage. 2006 Jan;37(1):1-14 - PubMed
• PLoS Biol. 2006 Oct;4(11):e360 - PubMed
• Science. 2007 Sep 14;317(5844):1513-6 - PubMed

Publication types

• Search in MeSH

Related information

Linkout - more resources, full text sources, miscellaneous.

• NCI CPTAC Assay Portal
• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

(661)-384-7070

Software Categories

• Resource Center

For Vendors

Get help - it's free

7 Benefits Of Telehealth For Patients And Providers

By Aahil Hussain Alvi -

Sep 24, 2024 - 5 mins Read

Have you ever thought why telehealth is important or how does it improve patient care?

Telehealth—the delivery of healthcare services through digital forms of communication—is a rapidly evolving industry. It enables patients to easily access medical services without visiting healthcare facilities.

Telehealth bridges fundamental gaps in traditional healthcare delivery by providing medical services to people living in rural or underserved areas. For healthcare workers, telehealth expands the ability to monitor and manage patients, leading to improved health status.

This blogpost will discuss several advantages of telehealth as seen from the patient and provider perspectives. Stay tuned to find out how telehealth can improve patient care.

• Benefits Of Telehealth For Patients

Telehealth has revolutionized healthcare, making it more accessible, affordable, and convenient for patients. With the ability to connect with healthcare providers remotely, individuals can receive care from the comfort of their own homes.

 Like telemedicine, telehealth benefits far outweigh its cost. Moreover, its advantages are not just confined to providing quality care remotely, but also to improving administrative and educational aspects.

As Dr. Rahul Sharma said in an interview published on Healthcare IT news ,

“Telehealth holds the potential to improve access to timely, high-quality care by reducing the need for transportation and providing more flexible scheduling of appointments.”

Here are some of the telehealth benefits for patients:

1.Convenient Access To Healthcare

Telehealth can be used by patients from the comfort of their homes, hence avoiding the need to travel for physical appointments. It simplifies regular consultation for chronic illnesses and reduces the need to commute for minor injuries, especially for those from rural or remote areas.

2.Cost Savings

Telehealth lowers costs for patients as compared to face-to-face consultations, which require funds for transport, parking, and, in some cases, accommodation. Also, the cost of online consultations is relatively cheaper than clinical and office visits, making healthcare budget-friendly. There are several EHR software, such as SimplePractice , that offer telehealth features at affordable costs.

3.Reduced Waiting Times

According to a 2022 survey of 15 metropolitan areas, the average waiting time to get a physician’s appointment is 26 days. Telehealth offers a significant advantage by reducing this waiting time compared to the traditional system. Patients appreciate the ability to get appointments faster, with flexible scheduling options.

4.Online Prescriptions And Medical Certificates

Telehealth services make it easy to receive prescriptions and issue medical certificates. Many telehealth providers allow patients to receive the necessary documentation online, and patients can also get their medications delivered to their homes.

5.Improved Health Outcomes

Telehealth helps manage chronic diseases and mental disorders efficiently as it enables patients to receive immediate consultation from a healthcare provider. It allows for early intervention if complications arise, ensuring quality care.

6.Increased Patient Engagement

Telehealth encourages patients to take control of their health by being more actively involved in their care. As patients can readily obtain health information and connect with providers, they become more involved in their care, improving health literacy and outcomes.

7.Health Parity

Telehealth enhances health equity of patients with disabilities and the elderly by granting them equal access to healthcare services.

Research shows that more than 60 million Americans live in rural areas, where a majority of rural residents are older and have poor access to healthcare facilities. Thus, people must travel about 20 miles farther to access common healthcare services. Therefore, telehealth plays a major role in getting rid of inequity in the delivery of basic health care to all individuals, regardless of circumstances.

• Benefits Of Telehealth For Healthcare Providers

Unlike Telemedicine benefits, telehealth advantages extend beyond remote care.  Medical providers benefit greatly from telehealth, incorporating it to improve workflows and boost job satisfaction. Here are a few noteworthy telehealth benefits for providers:

1.Improved Access To Patients

Telehealth improves access to healthcare in both facilities and remote regions, ensuring more patients receive care. It also standardizes the management of multiple prescriptions for the same condition and the process of writing medical certificates, saving time and reducing the need for physical contact.

2.Resource Optimization  

Providers can minimize administrative tasks like processing forms and booking appointments using telehealth. This results in healthcare professionals spending adequate time with patients, improving overall efficiency and service delivery.  

3.Flexibility In Scheduling

Telehealth allows providers to offer greater access to patient care through flexible appointments, including evenings and weekends, outside of standard working hours.

4.Enhanced Work-Life Balance

Perhaps the most important advantage that highlights why telehealth is important for providers is the work-life balance and reduced risk of professional burnout. It enables healthcare professionals to work remotely, having better control over their time.  

5.Better Provider Collaboration

Healthcare providers can consult with specialists and other healthcare workers through telehealth platforms. It results in effective and efficient delivery of healthcare plans, leading to enhanced patient care plans.

6.Minimized Exposure To Infections

Telehealth also significantly reduces the chances of transmitting diseases during public health crises such as COVID-19. Through virtual consultations, the healthcare industry can continue to provide services while observing set measures to contain the contraction of infectious diseases.

7.Reduced No-Show Rates

Scheduling telehealth appointments is more flexible in nature, improving attendance and the rate of no-shows. Such a scheduling flexibility makes it easier for patients to honor their appointments and consequently meet their health needs.

Thus, telehealth improves the quality of care when implemented by providers and enhances their efficiency and professional satisfaction.

NASA recently used 3D telemedicine to help astronauts stay healthy during space missions. Benefits of telemedicine for doctors have reached new heights as healthcare professionals provide guidance to astronauts in space.

• Case Study: Telehealth In The US

There are several telehealth examples and use cases . Teladoc Health, a renowned telehealth firm in America, is a good case-study of effective telehealth integration. Teladoc has been instrumental in expanding telehealth and health care services to millions of clients, especially amidst the COVID-19 outbreak.

Through its virtual telemedicine service, Teladoc has made it possible for patients to visit doctors and get much-needed healthcare services even during lockdowns. It created a major impact on patient care, providing them with advice, recommendations, and even professional treatments, without physical contact. Thus, Teladoc’s telehealth services enabled healthcare professionals to enhance the efficient use of resources and minimized provider workload.

This case study highlights that utilizing telehealth can solve essential healthcare problems through effective, cheap, and efficient solutions.

• Embracing The Future Of Healthcare With Telehealth

Telehealth has revolutionized modern health care and closed gaps to guarantee quality health care to every individual. Implementing it brings many advantages to the patients and clinicians. It includes easy access, reduced costs, better health and satisfaction with work-life balance.

As telehealth continues to evolve, it holds high potential to transform healthcare delivery. To explore telehealth solutions and find the right software for your practice, visit Software Finder and discover how we can support your journey towards enhanced healthcare.

Join the future of healthcare now!

On This Page

EMR Vendor Selection Template

Working out just 1 or 2 days each week may lower your risk of over 200 diseases, new study finds

When you feel like you’ve barely got enough time in the day as it is, getting at least two and a half hours of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per week can feel almost impossible. That number comes from the CDC’s recommendations for all adults, which suggests breaking up the 150 minutes into 30 minutes a day, five days a week, in addition to two days of strength training for all major muscle groups.

Working out five days a week might not be realistic for parents juggling full-time jobs and kids’ busy schedules, or people working shifts demanding 12 hours at a time. Many barely have the energy to cook dinner at the end of a long day.

Those people might be inclined to become “weekend warriors”—people who save their workouts for the weekend. And there’s good news for those weekend warriors: A new study published in Circulation journal indicates one to two days of exercise might be just as beneficial as exercising throughout the week, if you are still hitting those overall physical activity guidelines.

A case for ‘weekend warriors’

“It’s hard to get somebody to engage multiple times per week, if it’s a large time commitment or a spread out time commitment,” says Dr. Shaan Khurshid, lead author of the study and a faculty member in the Demoulas Center for Cardiac Arrhythmias at Massachusetts General Hospital.

Khurshid tells Fortune that he observed as busy lifestyles are becoming more common, more people are concentrating their exercise into one or two days. That set him and his team out to answer the question: Do those who exercise 20–30 minutes most days reap more health benefits than those who opt for longer exercise sessions on one or two days of the week?

Not necessarily, it seems.

Weekend warriors and regular exercisers had an almost equally lowered risk of developing 264 diseases, especially hypertensio n, diabetes , obesity, and sleep apnea.

Khurshid and his colleagues examined data on 89,573 individuals wearing physical activity trackers on their wrists for a full week. 30,228 participants were classified as the inactive group (exercising less than 150 minutes per week), 37,872 were in the weekend warrior group (exercising for at least 150 minutes, one to two days per week), and 21,473 were in the regular group (exercising for at least 150 minutes dispersed throughout the week).

All participants were engaging in moderate-to-vigorous exercise—what Khurshid defines as activity that gets your heart rate up to the point where speaking is hard, and singing is almost impossible. That includes activities like jogging or playing a sport, he says.

Both weekend warrior and regular activity patterns had similarly reduced health risks compared to the inactive group for all disease categories tested, including: heart attack (27% and 35% reduced risk respectively), stroke (21% and 17% lower risk), and diabetes (43% and 46% lower risks, respectively). 

“We didn’t see any diseases where one [workout] pattern was better than the other,” Khurshid tells Fortune .

150 minutes of exercise is still the magic number

If you’re working out just two days out of the week, you’ll probably have to concentrate a good amount of exercise into that short period. Weekend warrior and regular activity patterns had similar benefits because the participants exercised for a similar total volume during the week.

The regular during-the-week exercisers had a median volume of 418 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, while the weekend warriors had a median volume of 288 minutes. What’s most important here is they all were well above the 150 minutes per week guideline from the CDC.

Khurshid says the bottom line is “however works for you best to get those guideline recommended levels.”

He acknowledged that a limitation of the study was that they only tracked participants for one week; however, Khurshid says, one week of tracking still seems to be indicative of people’s regular activity habits.

Empowered exercisers

Khurshid says people who are struggling to work out more than a day or two per week can see this study as validating their chosen routines and busy schedules.

“It’s empowering to be able to say, ‘Get the volume that you need to get, but it doesn’t matter how you do it. It’s important that you do it,’” Khurshid says.

“We don’t need to unnecessarily put constraints on how somebody should get their activity or make it harder for somebody to get their activity by saying, ‘You’ve got to do five days a week, you’ve got to do 30 minutes at a time,’” Khusrhid says. “It empowers you to find a routine that works for you and stick with it.”

Khurshid is hoping that these findings will catapult him into more research on the topic, such as how many weeks in a year you need to hit that 150-minute threshold to see health benefits. Ideally, participants will wear activity trackers for years, he says, to have more long-term data to analyze.

More on working out:

• Just how much exercise you need each week , according to experts
• How to stay in shape in your 30s, 40s, and 50s
• How 30-second micro-workouts can boost your energy and help you get fit

Latest in Health

Chappell Roan drops out of music festival to prioritize health

How vitamin B12 could give you an energy boost

Got COVID? Here are the new 2024 isolation guidelines

Free, at-home COVID tests are back. Here’s how to order yours

Perfectionism is not healthy or sustainable. Here’s what to strive for instead

Most popular.

Could it be COVID? Here are the symptoms to watch out for in 2024

7 patterns of long-lasting relationships, according to a couples therapist

It’s not 8 glasses a day anymore. Here’s how much water you should drink each day