Ecotourism Spectrum

1. Background

The word ‘eco’ in ecotourism is usually related to ecological concepts as an indication to

ecologically sustainability (Higham, J., 2007); the recent growth of ecotourism has become

an important economic activity in natural areas worldwide.

Ecotourism provides innumerable opportunities for visitors to experience its attractions and

learn about the conservation of the environment, and also generates revenues for the local

communities of the destinations. In addition, ecotourism is also conform by components

which were developed to achieve preservation and conservation of animal species and

biodiversity respectively, benefit local communities in order to improve their quality of life

and to encourage education, culture and responsible travel.

The objective of this paper is to assess the merits of orthodox and artificial ventures across

the applicability of the Ecotourism Opportunity Spectrum framework. ECOS provides a

useful guide to assess the significance of ecotourism components given to the destination.

In this respect I have compared orthodox and artificial practices of ecotourism activity in

order to assess their contribution to ecotourism; in other words the criteria will show

definitions and benefits of each particular activity contemplated among the ecotourism

opportunity spectrum.

2. Definitions of Ecotourism

‘Ecotourism is environmentally responsible, enlightening travel and visitation to relative

undisturbed natural area in order to enjoy and appreciate nature (and any accompanying

cultural features both past and present), that promotes conservation, has low visitor impact,

and provides for beneficially active socio-economic involvement of local populations’.

(Ceballos-Lascurain 1996, cited in Higham, J., 2007)

‘Ecotourism is a sustainable form of natural resource-based tourism that focuses on

experiencing and learning about nature, and which is ethically managed to be low-impact,

non-consumptive, and locally oriented (control, benefits, and scale). It typically occurs in

natural areas, and should contribute to the conservation or preservation of such areas’

(Fennell, 2003 quoted in Weaver, D., 2006)

‘Ecotourism is a new form of non-consumptive, educational, and romantic tourism to

relatively undisturbed and under visited areas of immense natural beauty, and cultural and

historical importance for the purposes of understanding and appreciating the natural and

socio-cultural history of the host destination’ (Sirakaya et al 1999 stated Higham, J., 2007)

3. Ecotourism Components

Should have a place in the natural environment

Should contribute to conservation

Should contribute to the local communities

Should be educative

Should have a low impact on the environment

Should be ethical and responsible for the destination and local culture

Should contribute to the sustainability of the environment.

Should be enjoyable for the visitors

Should be adventurous as well

Should be developed at small scales

Should support the preservation of the wilderness and biodiversity

Should have an approach to travel

Should support international human rights and labour agreements

Should accompanying cultural features

Table 1.0

Review of Table 1.0

All reviewed authors agreed just on one element that ecotourism should be nature-base -

however between each other have some similarities.

Ceballos-Lascurain has considered that ecotourism must be related to cultural

aspects are part of the ecotourism while he leaves out the importance of

sustainability, small scale and human rights.

Dowling takes sustainable into primary account but leaves behind several aspects

such as the nature conservation and preservation of the destinations, ethics and

responsible travel, culture, adventure, small scale, etc.

Diamantris just contemplates three crucial elements. He proposes that ecotourism

just needs to be nature-based, sustainable and generate benefits to the local

community.

Sirikaya et al, as the three authors above also do not take into account that

ecotourism has to be developed in neither a small scale nor the human rights; they

highlight the need to have a low impact on the environment, be educative and

approach to travel.

Honey is the only one concluding that ecotourism should operate with human rights;

nevertheless, excludes sustainability, small scale, educational, cultural and related to

travel.

Fennell’s concept considers all the elements that have been pointed out before with

the exception of cultural and human rights; still it is the only one that adds

adventure.

4. Ecotourism Opportunity Spectrum

The Ecotourism Opportunity Spectrum (ECOS; Boyd and Butler, 1996) can be defined as a

framework that analyses components and opportunities within the ecotourism zones and it

was adapted from the Tourism Opportunity Spectrum TOS (McCool, S. et al 2009); ECOS is

divided into two parts hard (active, deep) or orthodox and soft (passive, shallow) or

artificial.

Table 2.0

Criteria of table 2.0

In table 2.0, I have adapted an ecotourism opportunity spectrum by comparing ecotourism

zones classes against each other depending on the achievement of the ecotourism

components. The results showed are assessed under my own criteria and information

found.

Review of Table 2.0

► Orthodox

Wilderness Areas

A wildness area is an unchanged zone (land or sea) that is deprived of long-lasting or

significant occupancy; this areas, are supposed to remain in its natural form which is what

help, protect and preserve its sustainable environment (Weaver, D., 2000). Wild areas fulfil

almost all the ecotourism components; since it is practice in their own environment (animals

and plants) that are nature-based; seeing different species in the wild it is not a very solid

motive for conservation, is also cultural, educational, enjoyable and adventurous; the

ecotourism operators that bring visitors over there are based in small scales and this will

probably result as non-significant impact on the destination.

Safaris

The concept of safaris refers to a trip taken to observe, photograph or interact with animals

and other wildlife (Spenceley, A., 2008)); this activity also forms part of the wilderness area,

but the reasons why I have separated it is because in safaris the interaction with the animals

could be more adventurous and different from others (e.g. whale or bird watching)

depending on the place. Safaris meet most of all ecotourism components; it is nature-based,

small scale, adventurous, enjoyable, educational and cultural just to mention some. Despite

this, safaris are also well known for the lack of ethic and respect towards the animals (from

both sides guides and tourists), sometimes conservation is not one of the main priorities,

neither the impact on the environment which at the same time puts in doubt its

conservation contribution and the impact of it on the animals behaviour, particularly if large

numbers of visitors are brought closer and closer to the animals.

National Parks

National parks are protected areas where organizations and laws have the purpose of

conserve wildlife, natural and cultural heritage, as well as seeking for benefits to towns

along them (National Parks UK). Generally people that live and work in there are from the

local communities; the owners of national parks are in minority authorities and mostly

private organizations (e.g. National Trust), landowners, farmers and local villagers.

Conversely countless villages have been completely removed for the protection of these

areas and they protest because they are not receiving any benefit. Still national parks

contribute to ecotourism by giving the opportunity to enjoy and learn nature experience,

develop the tourism within a small scale at the same time that assists the conservation and

the preservation of the species and environment.

► Artificial

Zoos

The definition given by Alexander (1979) in Mason, P. (2000) stabilises that zoos are a

selection of categorised animals to be protected and studied while it occurs be an attraction

that provides knowledge and enjoyment to people. The contribution of zoos to ecotourism

is to ensure the conservation of threatened species and biodiversity through sponsoring

non-profit organizations that are in charge of helping endangered animals; it also

contributes to educate visitors to be responsible inspiring them to learn about animals and

animal care and also motivate their interest in wildlife. Zoos are a potent element to

encourage habitat protection (Mason, P., 2000). However, the reality is that zoos do not

count with the main ecotourism components; they are not nature-based or at least not the

majority of them; besides the fact that there are also countless issues about their ethics and

practices such as whether is it fair or not to use animals to entertain people, whether zoos

are really the best option for endangered animals, or if it really motivate people to travel to

the wild; as S. Bostock stated in (Mason, P., 2000), ‘seeing an animal in its natural habitat is

better that seeing one in a zoo, but seeing one in a zoo is better than seeing one on film’.

Circuses

As we all know circuses are travelling companies that consist of clowns, acrobats,

counterweight, musicians and animal performance travelling around they are mostly urban

accessible. Several animal welfare groups argue that circuses are related to animal cruelty,

since they do not have suitable living conditions, they are used to entertain people, and the

physical brutality of the training. There are innumerable reasons to explain why circuses do

not meet any of the ecotourism components, first of all since they are nomads its practices

do not take place in natural environment and its practices do not benefit any local

community, do not contribute to preservation, conservation, sustainability, education, and

definitely their practices are not categorized as small scale; the only two components that

circuses could meet are enjoyment (and this is because most of the people that attend it are

not aware of the training methods) and culture (that is related to the artistic

performances).

5. Conclusion

There are countless concepts of what ecotourism is, however is not possible to find one

concept that is known has the official definition. Table 1.0 indicates the comparison

between ecotourism components, and how these components change depending on the

author, country or organization; whereas Ceballos-Lascurain focuses on culture, Fennell

emphasises on small scales, Dowling on environmental sustainability, Diamantis on

education, Honey on human rights and Sirikaya on the low impact of these practices on the

environment; still most of the crucial objectives form part of each one of the definitions.

Although, the truth about ecotourism is that nobody has established the concept correctly,

nobody is certainly sure about the meaning and it is extremely improbable that someone

can create a concept that meets all the ecotourism industry and marketing expectations

(Nicholson-Lord’s, 2002 stated in in Weaver, D., 2006).

In conclusion, the findings obtained in this paper showed framework of the Ecotourism

Opportunity Spectrum (ECOS) thought table 2.0 and revealed that orthodox tourism

practices are more likely to fulfil the ecotourism components and objectives; still some of

them do not meet very important components such as the conservation of the

environment, give benefits to the local community and practice with ethic and respect to

animals; meanwhile the artificial side seem to be in doubt or no to fit well among the same

context, nevertheless they have few benefits; zoos offer protection and preservation for

endangered species (animals or biodiversity) and contribute to the conservation of

destinations by sponsoring programs; however, not all has to be black or white, and the lack

of a proper ecotourism definition definitely is not the only thing that this industry is missing.