2.8 Ecotourism Impacts
2.8.3 Environmental Impacts of Ecotourism
28
Secondly, the position of the tourist resorts in relation to international borders attracts illegal immigrants who are in most cases unemployed so when they fail to obtain the jobs they had hoped for they resort to crime in order to earn a living.
Finally, there are always big differences between the per capita incomes of hosts and tourists. The tourists are in most cases richer than their hosts are and this leads to increased frustration in the local community which in some cases spills over as crimes against tourists.
Mansfeld and Pizam (2006) believe that there is a close link between tourism and crime.
They argue that tourists can be easy prey for criminals and this is attributed to the fact that the tourists are not aware of dangerous areas or local situations in which they might be exposed to crimes. At the same time, tourists can easily be identified by the criminals and in most cases not very well equipped to safeguard themselves.
29
(Holden, 2004). At the same time, Schelhaas (2007) asserts that tourism can contribute to nature conservation since it gives nature an economic value, raises awareness and provides a motive for conservation, including an effective venue for environmental education.
Furthermore, in developing countries there is an enormous pressure to earn foreign currencies to service foreign debts and to increase exports (Gereffi and Frederick, 2010). Thus, nature tourism may offer an attractive means to earn foreign exchange (Holden, 2004). The poor and the disadvantaged bear the burden of negative environmental impacts, for instance, pollution and natural resource depletion (Tschakert, 2007).
Dudley (2008) state that tourism should not be perceived as a conservation panacea for all areas of increasing biodiversity, since tourism does not always generate adequate revenue to pay for conservation management. Thus, the government has to step in with subsidies and public donations are also needed. Weaver (2008) emphasises that the responsibility for conserving the natural environment in an area should not be the responsibility of the locals working on their own. All stakeholders must be involved. A key determinant of how tourism interacts with the environment is the issue of environmental ethics held by its stakeholders, inclusive of tourists, tourism businesses (private sector), local communities and the government (Holden, 2004). It is also important to consider the symbiotic relationship that exists between visitors, local communities and destination areas since these three elements interact with each other creating negative and positive economic, socio-cultural and environmental impacts (Timothy, 2011).
Bushell and Eagles (2007) suggests that to avoid the loss of precious biodiversity through tourism-related pressures and to access the benefits that tourism can produce for protected areas it is imperative that they have sufficient capacity in respect of infrastructure, personnel and management systems in place. In many developing countries, Park systems have not been able to finance the investments required to establish this capacity at the areas facing pressure from visitation (Drumm et al., 2007). Most ecotourism operators have acknowledged the value of sustainability and conservation and are changing their business practices to preserve their natural resources and rehabilitate the environment (Fennell, 2007). Drumm et al. (2007) assert that given the rising tourist demand for access to protected natural areas, it is more and more important that adequate pricing mechanisms be applied to ensure that tourism and recreation contribute to biodiversity conservation.
30
Loon et al. (2007) provide a case study of a community-run project, the Lillydale Environmental Education Centre which is supported by Sabi Sabi. This centre serves as a multifunctional environmental education centre promoting Shangaan knowledge and rural development tourism to the area and encouraging local environmental conservation practices through training workshops. The Lillydale Environmental Education Centre has demonstrated successful involvement of the local community. Timothy (2011) discusses practical measures that can be taken to involve host communities in their local tourism systems such as the establishment of local tourism forums where ideas can be exchanged and issues aired, concessionary admission schemes for local people to tourist attractions and facilities as well as public awareness programmes stressing the benefits of tourism to communities.
Timothy (2011) suggests that there is an increase in awareness and concern for the environment which has meant that tourism organisations are becoming more involved in determining the effects they have on their environment. Clifford et al. (2010) discuss the principles of sustainable development as incorporated in the National Environmental Management Act (NEMA), Act 107 of 1998. Hall (2008) emphasises that Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a means for evaluating the possible consequences of tourism and other forms of development. The Integrated Environmental Management (IEM) is designed to ensure that the environmental consequences of development proposals are understood and adequately considered in the planning process (Beven, 2007). Hall (2008) discusses that an EIA is a very useful technique used to make certain that environmental impacts of proposed projects have been evaluated and providing the foundation for making any necessary adjustments to the project. Geneletti and Dawa (2009) discuss that the EIA is a tool used in many developing countries as well as in South Africa to assist development, mitigate negative impact of developments and enhances positive impacts.
Timothy (2011) contends that imposing limits on tourist use through the formation of maximum thresholds may cause resentment, both with tourists who may be denied access to facilities, and with commercial tourism operators who may object to what they see as intervention in the market. Mowforth and Munt (2008) argue that carrying capacity calculations can be influenced by tour operators, officers of conservation organisations or government officials who promote either a destination’s exclusivity (a low carrying capacity) or its capability and potential to absorb more visitors (a high carrying capacity).
31
Fennell (2007) deals with carrying capacity from a sociological perspective and suggests that it is difficult to quantify. Weaver (2008) considers carrying capacity from an environmental setting, community viewpoint and an economic concern. In an environmental situation the concept applies to the maximum number of people who can utilise a location without an unacceptable decline in the quality of the experience gained by tourists (Zhong et al., 2011).
Furthermore, (Kim et al., 2013) argue that from a community standpoint, carrying capacity relates to a destination’s ability to absorb tourism before the community feels the negative effects. From an economic concern, carrying capacity deals with employment and revenue earned and as long as these are positive and the host community benefits from tourism, the predetermined level is correct (Weaver, 2008).