Can ecotourism save tourism?

Deccan Herald, 26^th May 2002

A walk through the rainforest is not ecotourism unless that particular walk somehow benefits that environment and the people who live there. However, this concept is getting lost with most players seeking to make profits from the buzzword. Lakshmi Salgame & Venkatesh M R caution against the movement towards painting everything green for short term gains and suggest ways in which ecotourism can be used as a valuable tool for development that sustains the environment

Our neighbour Nepal has become synonymous with nature and the snow-clad mountains. It is worth noting that this Himalayan Kingdom has attempted some interesting approaches in the field of ecotourism. A very well known example is the Annapurna Conservation Area Project. It is often quoted as a wonderful case wherein a fine balance has been maintained in three critical areas - tourism development, the needs of the local population and conservation of the natural areas. During this International Year of Ecotourism it may be worth learning from the good practices of this project and many others around the world which have done a fine task of managing what could be competing interests and ensuring the welfare of multiple stakeholders. With a lot of momentum now to promote tourism in its many forms, ecotourism, ecotravel, ecolodges and just generally anything "eco" have become popular tourism sales pitches. As various players brace up to build our country as a tourism hotspot, there is a general feeling that ecotourism will be a key element in this overall plan. 

Defining Ecotourism
Ever since the early 1980's, the definition of 'ecotourism' has been constantly evolving. In the event of every nature traveler being labeled an 'ecotourist' and travel to a natural area often termed 'ecotourism', it leaves us confused. Our intention here is neither to sell nor devalue ecotourism but rather to explore it as a concept and leave it to the discerning reader, ecotourist or policymaker to act suitably.
Often the notion of ecotourism is confused with the broader concept of sustainable tourism or with certain types of adventure tourism that have nothing to do with ecotourism. Coined by Hector Ceballos-Lascurain, a Mexican architect, environmentalist and international ecotourism consultant, in July 1983, defining 'ecotourism' has proven to be a difficult task given all the different players who are muddying the waters. In 1983, Hector defined 'ecotourism' to be tourism that involves traveling to relatively undisturbed natural areas with the specific object of studying, admiring and enjoying the scenery and the wild plants and animals, as well as any existing cultural aspects (both past and present) found in these areas. Ecotourism implies a scientific, aesthetic and philosophical approach, although the 'ecotourist' is not required to be a professional scientist, artist or philosopher. The main point is that the person who practises ecotourism has the opportunity of immersing himself or herself in nature in a way that most people cannot enjoy in their routine, urban existences. This person, it is hoped, will eventually acquire a consciousness and knowledge of the natural environment, together with its cultural aspects, that will convert him into somebody keenly involved in conservation – of both the natural and human heritage. 
By mid-1980s, with the environmental movement gaining ground and with much talk about nurturing eco-friendly lifestyle, ecotourism was vigorously promoted, as it was compatible with the concept of a sustainable earth. Green groups launched rainforest ecotours, wilderness education interflow tour, bird-watching ecotours, etc. In India, this was when the Himalayan trek trails rocketed to popularity. Adventure groups made the most of this boom. However, most of this did not classify as ecotourism. Though it brilliantly exposed tourists to nature, it did not concretize on the positive feeling and transform the same to meaningful conservation effort. This is where experts began to reason saying mere nature travel cannot be termed ecotourism.
Natural areas have originally been home to numerous indigenous communities. Their culture, lifestyle, is completely in sync with their natural surroundings. When more and more people took to these virgin wilderness areas in the name of ecotourism, there came an expected reaction from the locals and thus came in the component of welfare of the local people. Today this component has become the mainstay. Keeping this development in mind, in the late eighties, the definition underwent a slight change. Taking the philosophy one step further, community-based ecotourism evolved. It implies an authentic encounter for the tourist in exchange for direct financial benefit to local people. Hence ecotourism came to be defined as "responsible travel to natural areas which conserves the environment and improves the welfare of the local people". A walk through the rainforest is not eco-tourism unless that particular walk somehow benefits that environment and the people who live there. A rafting trip is only eco-tourism if it raises awareness and funds to help protect the watershed. A loose interpretation of this definition allows many companies to promote themselves as something that they are not.

In 1992, the first initiative to organize the ecotourism sector happened at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. Ecotourism gained importance here as one of the mantras at the summit was that 'solutions should reside with the local communities and within citizens' groups'. In 1993, Hector revised his observations on ecotourism and comprehensively explained that ecotourism is environmentally responsible travel and visitation to relatively undisturbed natural areas, in order to enjoy and appreciate nature (and any accompanying cultural features - both past and present) that promotes conservation, has low negative visitor impact, and provides for beneficially active socio-economic involvement of local populations. IUCN (The World Conservation Union) officially adopted this definition during its 1st World Conservation Congress held in Montreal in October 1996.

World Bank estimates that in less developed areas the percentage of money generated through tourism retained in the local economy is often very low. In many of the popular ecotourism circuits it was found that as little as 10 percent of the money was pumped back into the local economy. Within a particular country the money may end up in the large cities or in the hands of the wealthy elite. 

Ecotourism in disguise?
Right here in the state, even the forests of Bandipur and Madhumalai are often exploited in the name of ecotourism. Several organizations make tall claims of a natural experience and loosely use the word ecotourism to describe their package. How much of the money earned is ploughed back for local development? And who keeps tabs on this? It’s anybody's guess that there is hardly any resources being invested back. If so why are we risking our few remaining patches of natural areas at the hands of those who have no understanding of the term per se? Instead of letting the wool to be drawn over our eyes in the name of ecotourism, it is worth finding out how committed the particular agency or operator is to the true definition and practices of ecotourism. 

Once some of the world's oldest and most prized nature destinations, including the Galapagos Islands off the coast of Ecuador, Nepal and even Monteverde, the Costa Rican cloud forest were visited by only the most physically rugged and intellectually curious. Now, however, with improved air and ground transportation, better accommodations and extensive publicity, these destinations are being marketed to a mass audience. When poorly planned, unregulated and overhyped, ecotourism, like mass tourism or even traditional nature tourism, can bring only marginal financial benefits but serious environmental and social consequences. Nowadays, some visitors reach mountain summits via what is marketed as "ecotourism of the future"- and their only step upward is into a helicopter. "Helicopter treks" fly visitors to high mountain peaks, where they get out, stretch their legs, take photographs and then fly back. Such tours clearly do little to educate the traveler and do nothing for conservation or local economic development. 

Although it sounds cliché-like to say that India is blessed with unblemished natural beauty, picturesque landscapes, and cultural diversity - the truth is that we have very bright prospects for ecotourism.But what we also have are hazy policies on ecotourism, an industry that can use a deeper understanding of the concept, and a public that will certainly benefit from greater awareness. The tourism industry's efforts to water down ecotourism, to market ecotourism in exchange for short-term profits, has led some travel experts to drop the word ecotourism and dismiss the concept as simply a fad. This is, however, a classic case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. If handled properly, ecotourism can be a valuable tool for financing the protection of ecologically sensitive areas and contribute to the socio-economic development of populations living in them. Simultaneously we need to discover ways in which authentic ecotourism can move from being simply a niche market in the category of nature tourism towards becoming a broad set of principals and practices overarching the travel and tourism industry.