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 g enerates 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 fr amework. 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
y y y y y y y y y y y y y y 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. y 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. y 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. y Diamantris just contemplates three crucial elements. He proposes that ecotourism just needs to be nature -based, sustainable and generate benefits to the local community. y 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. y Honey is the only one concluding that ecotourism should operate with human rights; nevertheless, excludes sustainability, small scale, educational, cultural and related to travel. y 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 ecot ourism 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 w ith 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 a t 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 lea rn 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 nat ure-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 endange red 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 si nce 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 th e 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 improba ble 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 indust ry is missing.