Ecotourism concept

The term ecotourism was first taken into use in the 1960s and ecologists started deeper
discussions in the 1970s, tourism sector adopted it in the 1980s and in 1990s it was
considered one of the fastest growing tourism sectors (Bjrk 2007). The concept of
ecotourism and the development of this economic sector has been very fast and
hence the general understanding of the nature of ecotourism is hard to be achieved.
The term has become so remarkable that many have tried to take advantage of it. There
are different terms in use in different regions and hence special research on terminology
has even been carried out. For example, David Fenell (2001) analysed 85 definitions of
ecotourism, which were in use in tourism business as well as academic literature. The
ecotourism definitions most of all contained references to the location (e.g. nature area),
secondly to nature protection, thirdly to culture, fourthly to the income for local
community and fifthly to education. The worldwide spread of ecotourism and
acknowledgement of ecotourism as a system with many and complex stakeholder
groups have served as the most important impact factors for the development of the
concept of ecotourism.

Initially the concept of ecotourism was in use in the Third World Countries but it has
developed into a global phenomenon. Similarly, the amount of ecotourism stakeholder
groups has grown. Those circumstances as well as the fact that academics and
practitioners alike still debate on the principles of ecotourism, has created the need for
common standards. None of the tourism sectors is similar to ecotourism. Therefore it is
hard to find an internationally used definition, especially when it has to be applied in
practice.

The main challenge is not working out a new and better definition for ecotourism
but interpretation of the ecotourism definition into more practical criteria and
guidelines.

It is easy to say that ecotourism must be responsible and sustainable but what kind of
practical guidelines are there for its achievement. It is undoubtedly a very complicated
task, as each ecotourism area is unique and it is difficult to compare their areas. What is
unique for one region may not be unique for another. For example, dog-sledging in
Northern Finland or Northern Sweden is traditional, that is ecotourism, but the same
activity cannot be classified as ecotourism in Estonia.


2. Variabilities in ecotourism concept

Generally Ecotourism is understood as environmentally friendly and socially
responsible way of tourism that supports the local economy as well as nature
protection in protected areas and at the same time educated the tourist about the
local nature and culture (Honey 1999, Fennell 2003, Buckley 2004, Diamantis 2004,
Gssling ja Hultman 2006, Weaver ja Lawton 2007, Higham 2007).
2




Definitions of ecotourism
Ecotourism is an environmental-conscious way of travelling and visiting of
rather untouched natural areas for enjoyment and honouring nature and culture
(Hector Ceballos-Lascurain 1987).

Ecotourism is responsible travel to natural areas that promotes conservation and
well-being of local people.) (TIES, The International Ecotourism Society.)

Ecotourism is a responsible way of travelling that supports the preservation
natural and cultural heritage and wellbeing of local people. (Estonian Ecotourism
Society).

Due to the specificities of the regions, the approach to ecotourism varies by regions too.
Three ecotourism definitions were presented above. The first one is one of the initial
definitions of ecotourism, which has been formulated by the Mexican Hector Ceballos-
Lascurain. The second is the most used concept in the world today that has been
formulated by The International Ecotourism Society and the third one has been taken into
use by the Estonian Ecotourism Society. When taking a closer look at the definitions, we
can see that the definition of The International Ecotourism Society lacks the word
culture. It has been widely discussed why the most known definition in the world does
not contain the word culture. Having read abundant literature and talked personally
with many authors cited here, it seems to be the problem of the New World. Cultural and
natural heritage are stressed in Europe. Nature has priority in the New World and instead
of getting acquainted with cultural heritage; there is preference to talk about supporting
the local people.

Cultural diversity is large in the New World and while talking about cultural heritage,
there remains a question weather to talk about the culture of indigenous people or
newcomers culture. Therefore, it is easier to stress the nature experience and talk about
the local people. As in Europe, mainly indigenous people are in power, the term culture
is used more often. However, the problems arise here too. Our closest area with cultural
problems is Lapland where are issues weather to present the indigenous Sami culture or
where and when to present Finnish, Swedish or Norwegian culture.

2.1. Ecotourism in Europe

Northern-Europe

Many tourism stakeholders in the Northern-Europe have observed that ecotourism as an
activity, philosophy and development model fits to the Northern-Europe very well.
Ecotourism has become a significant economic sector in Northern Europe which
considers totally market economy rules even when the governments and tourism
3
organisations finance it as a regional and economic development model (Ziffer 2006).
Out of the neighbouring countries, Sweden is the leader of ecotourism although critics
blame that ecotourism development motives in Sweden are too idealistic. Therefore this
theoretical concept is thought to be more understandable for tourism operators than the
general public. Ecotourism products are marketed in Sweden with a focus on peoples
sense of responsibility but also on very attractive nature experience. Therefore the
products with eco-labels Naturens Bsta are very popular in Sweden.
On the contrary, in Norway, ecotourism is considered as an unnecessary concept as the
majority of tourism takes place in nature and is naturally also sustainable and ecological
(Viken 2006). He was a key figure in Norwegian media in spring of 2006 during the
Global Ecotourism Conference in Oslo. There were different opinions but majority of the
Norwegians thought that there is no need to especially stress ecotourism as the majority
of Norwegian tourism anyway applies to the criteria of ecotourism.

Icelanders and Danes have created an understanding of tourism, which corresponds to
ecotourism calling it sustainable tourism in natural environment where environment
protection and nature study are self-explanatory components of tourism experience.

A large number of Scandinavian tourism operators and tourism organisations consider
Scandinavian tourism as ecotourism. This approach corresponds to the research results,
which prove that many Scandinavian tourism types correspond to ecotourism
requirements. For example, the main negative impacts created by tourism in the world are
small or missing in Scandinavia. Fredman et al (2006) claim that a large share of
Scandinavian tourism can be considered non- institutionalised or uncertified ecotourism.

Western-Europe

Western Europe is the worlds most densely inhabited areas. Ecotourism is seen as
responsible nature and culture tourism when local life-style and cultural heritage are
important. Differently from the New World, none of the countries has own national
ecotourism strategy but local ecotourism products have been well developed and in this
part of the world the majority of the worlds eco-labelling processes take place here. The
ecotourism products have significant European Union financial support via the LEADER
program. As many areas are very densely populated and suffer under the pressure of mass
tourism, the majority of West-Europe must be excluded as ecotourism destination Hence,
the majority of the Western-European ecotourists are outgoing tourists (Blangy, Vautier
2003).

In Great Britain ecotourism is addressed in local contexts and in political documents
quite a lot. The outgoing tourism operators write in their marketing materials and product
development foremost about nature tourism, responsible tourism and sustainable tourism
(WTO 2002).

German and Austrian citizens are known as one of the most highly environmental
conscious tourists. In local context, ecotourism is ever more talked about as the supporter
of the economic situation of the rural regions. As the environmental problems are more
4
talked about, then the word ecotourism is becoming a trendy word. As to the tourism
operators, they are very careful using the term ecotourism. Namely in the German culture
there is a perception of ecotourism as something exclusive and expensive. Therefore the
tourism operators often avoid using the ecotourism term as the clients might immediately
expect an expensive package.

Eastern-Europe

In eastern Europe ecotourism is a high priority tourism sector, especially in those
countries which border with former iron curtain (Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia,
Hungary, Slovenia). Ecotourism is tackled in the context of nature as well as culture
tourism. As in the Western Europe the countries of Eastern Europe are often associated
with socialist industrial heritage and environmental pollution, ecotourism is one of the
ways to improve the image. Such nature and culture resources are important which
cannot be found in Western-Europe any longer (large carnivores, traditional/exotic village
life). If add here the proximity of the destination markets, it is obvious that ecotourism
has an important role in the economy and politics of those countries (Johnson 2004).

Southern-Europe

Southern-European countries have applied the principles of environment protection and
sustainable development foremost due to the political requirements of the European
Union. The concept of ecotourism is not widely spread in those countries (Blangy,
Vautier 2003). There are much less environmentally conscious tourists than in Northern
or Western-Europe. Ecotourism is foremost associated with travelling to Latin-America
to get acquainted with nature and culture there. The prefix eco is gaining popularity and
there are also misuse of the term. The prefix eco is often used for tourism products that
are offered outdoors like surfing, yachting and diving.

2.2. Ecotourism in North-America

North-America is an area where ecotourism is talked about the most. A decade ago the
North-Americans associated ecotourism foremost with developing countries and
according to many surveys the Americans thought that ecotourism takes place in rain
forests and supported lo al communities. Today people talks about ecotourism in North-
America also in the context of internal tourism. Differently from Europe, the main focus
here is on nature and on the level of states and provinces the attitude towards the concept
of ecotourism is quite different. While marketing ecotourism products in North-America,
one should focus on cultural heritage as Europe is definitely a culture tourism destination
for Europe.

USA

Ten states out of fifty have their own ecotourism strategy where the concept has been
interpreted slightly differently. In the destination marketing of the states ecotourism is
paid attention very differently. Such states like Hawaii, Alaska and Florida pay special
5
attention to ecotourism, while South-Carolina and Texas focus on nature tourism,
including hunting and fishing tourism. Outgoing ecotourism product consumers have
rather high requirements to ecotourism products. While in case of Europe one speaks
about hunting and fishing tourism and sometimes also about ecotourism stressing the
traditionalism of those activities, then in case of USA ecotourists those activities are they
certainly excluded (Fennell 2003, Weaver 2001).

Canada

Differently from USA, Canada has its own national ecotourism strategy. Canadian
tourism committee has approved ecotourism as one of the most important areas in
Canadian tourism development. Ecotourism has been positioned as one out of five
adventure tourism sectors. Ecotourism is dealt with on the level of provinces in practice.
In comparison with USA, there is more attention paid to local indigenous people -
Indians - in Canada.


4. The relation of ecotourism with other concepts
Several related concepts like nature tourism, culture tourism, sustainable tourism,
adventure tourism developed together with the emergence of ecotourism in 1980s. Since
in 1990s the new concept of ecotourism was addressed rather freely meelevaldne?????
One can find several parallel tourism terms in use in the literature of that period. In that
literature of one can find such synonyms as nature tourism, green tourism, environmental
tourism, alternative tourism, continuous development tourism, environmentally
sustainable tourism. The usage of unclear and wrong terminology has created
misunderstanding and confusion. The beginning of the new century, especially in 2002
which the UN organisation called the year of international ecotourism, brought much
clarity to the ecotourism terminology. Below we will look at the concept of ecotourism in
relation with other tourism terms.


Ecotourism
6

Figure 1. The relations of ecotourism with nature and culture tourism.


Nature tourism
Nature tourism is a significantly wider term than ecotourism. Nature tourism includes
each type of tourism, which is based directly on attractions related to natural
environment. To distinguish responsible nature tourism from tourism which burdens
nature was an important incentive for taking the term ecotourism into use (figure 1). It
means that ecotourism includes that part of nature tourism that follows the carrying
capacity of nature and uses resources in a sustainable way. Ecotourism presents itself
nature protection, environmental consciousness, responsibility and participation of
community.
Nature tourism is tourism that takes place in natural environment and uses natural
environment as tourism attraction. Nature tourism that is not responsible and exceeds the
carrying capacity of nature is not part of ecotourism.


Culture tourism
As mentioned above, ecotourism includes cultural components but culture tourism cannot
be equalised with ecotourism. Culture tourism focuses on heritage tourism that cannot be
classified as part of ecotourism but also as part of mass culture that is not part of
ecotourism (figure 1). Culture tourism pays attention foremost to cultural aspects. In
many world areas cultural elements are often secondary in ecotourism. But the border
between culture and nature tourism is often blurry since in some situations it is difficult
to distinguish culture and nature environment. Estonian semi-natural habitats (wooded
meadows, flooded meadows, alvars) are both culture and nature heritage. At the same
time it is possible to present a forest trip as a nature tourism as well as culture tourism
Nature tourism
Culture tourism
7
package taking about the biology of habitats in the first instance, forest and forest plants
related folklore in the second case.



Figure 2. Connection of ecotourism to adventure tourism


Adventure tourism
Adventure tourism is characterised by three main components: risk and physical activity
and special skills in order to participate in the activities successfully and safely. Some
forms of ecotourism (especially this which takes places in wild nature or sea
environment) include those components and thus can be classified as adventure tourism.
In several parts of the world a large part of ecotourism is classified as part of adventure
tourism, for example. Canadian Tourism Board addresses nature and animal observations
as adventure tourism (Fennell 1999). However, the majority o adventure tourism cannot
be classified as ecotourism for various reasons.
Firstly, adventure tourism attractions are not always nature-based (e.g. war field,
racetracks, brownfields). Secondly, like in ecotourism in general, there is no compulsory
requirement of sustainability in adventure tourism although many adventure tourism
enterprises operate in a sustainable way. Thirdly, the most important difference between
adventure and ecotourism is the fact that in ecotourism it is important to minimise the
conflict between a participant and an attraction. While ecotourism seeks
educational/instructional experiences, then adventure tourism seeks foremost
environment that allows taking risk, offers challenges and demands physical effort.
Ecotourism Adventure tourism
8

Figure 3. Connection of sustainable tourism and ecotourism

Sustainable tourism
Ecotourism can be considered as a better regulated sub-type of sustainable tourism.
Ecotourism includes traditional activities outside the urban environment. Sustainable
tourism means adjusting of any type of tourism (aviation, hotel businesses) with the
principles of sustainable development. Thus, sustainable tourism is a much wider
concept. When localism and traditionalism play the greatest role in ecotourism, then in
sustainable tourism the focus on foremost on minimisation of consumption of natural
resources and environment protection. When ecotourism is talked about in rural tourism,
then the concept of sustainable tourism is topical both in a city and in a countryside.

Summary

The development of the concept of ecotourism and the economic secor have been
fast but it is still in an early stage of development. Therefore ecotourism is
interpreted differently in various parts of the world.
The main challenge for ecotourism is not working out a newer and better
definition but how to interpret the ecotourism definition into practical criteria and
guidelines.
Estonian Ecotourism Society defines ecotourism as a responsible way of
travelling that supports the preservation natural and cultural heritage and
wellbeing of local people.
Culture and nature heritage are stressed in ecotourism in Europe. Nature has
priority in the New World and talking about supporting local people is preferred
Sustainable
tourism
Ecotourism
9
instead of getting acquainted with cultural heritage.
Ecotourism is quality tourism and therefore is is much harder to be organised
compared to traditional tourism and it demands much more from a tourist and a
service provider.
Despite the complexity of the ecotourism concept, the main values of ecotourism
have become more concrete. The majority of tourism stakeholders have accepted
that ecotourism must be based on nature and/or culture experiences considering
the natural and cultural carrying capacity of the area, support local economy, be
(experientially) educative and responsibly marketed.
The most frequent misuse of the concept of ecotourism is its likening with nature
tourism. Ecotourism partly overlaps with nature tourism and culture tourism.
The concept of ecotourism partly overlaps with the concept of adventure tourism
but not all adventure tourism is responsible and not all ecotourism products
include adventurous elements.
Ecotourism is a more strictly regulated sub-type of sustainable tourism.


References

Bjrk, P. (2007). Definition Paradoxes: From concept to definition. In Higham, J. Critcal
Issues In Ecotourism: Understanding a complex tourism phenomenom. Buttleworth-
Heinemann, Oxford, 2346.

Blangy, S., Vautier, S. (2003). Europe. In: Weaver, D. B. The Encyclopedia of
Ecotourism. CABI Publishing.

Buckley, R. (2004). Environmental impacts of ecotourism. CABI Publishing,
Wallingford.

Ceballos-Lascurain, H. (1987). The future of ecotourism. Mexico Journal. 1314.

Diamantis, D. (2004). Ecotourism. Thompson Learning, London.

Fennell, D. A. (1999). Ecotourism: an Introduction. Routledge, London.

Fennell, D. (2001). A content analysis of ecotourism definitions. Current Issues In
Tourism, 4 (5). 403421.

Fennell, D. (2003). Anglo-America. In: Weaver, D. B. The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism.
CABI Publishing.

Fredman, P., Gssling, S., Hultman, J. (2006). Sweden: Where holidays come naturally.
In: Gssling, S., Hultman, J. Ecotourism in Scandinavia: Lessons in theory and practice.
CABI Publishing, Wallingford, 2338.

Gssling, S., Hultman, J. (2006). Ecotourism in Scandinavia: Lessons in theory and
10
practice. CABI Publishing, Wallingford.

Higham, J. (2007). Critical Issues In Ecotourism: Understanding a complex tourism
phenomenom. Buttleworth-Heinemann, Oxford.

Honey, M. (1999). Ecotourism and sustainable development. Who owns paradise? Island
Press, Washington DC.

Johnson, C. (2004). Ecotourism planning considerations in Eastern Central Europe. In:
Diamantis, D. Ecotourism. Thompson Learning, London.

Ziffer, K. A. (1989). Ecotourism: the uneasy alliance. Working Paper Nr 1, Conservation
International, Washington DC.

Viken, A. (2006). Ecotourism in Norway: Non-existence or Co-existence? In:
Gssling, S., Hultman, J. Ecotourism in Scandinavia: Lessons in theory and practice.
CABI Publishing, Wallingford, 3852.

Weaver, D. (2001). Ecotourism. John Wiley & Sons Australia Ltd. Milton.

Weaver, D. B., Lawton, L. J. (2007). Twenty years on: The state on contemporary
ecotourism research. Tourism Management 28. 11681179.