Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tourism Management Perspectives

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tmp

Reviews in tourism

Ecotourism: A panacea or a predicament?

Madhumita Das , Bani Chatterjee 1
Department of Humanities & Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur, West Bengal 721 302, India

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 16 December 2013
Accepted 15 January 2015

Keywords:
Ecotourism
Economic impact
Social impact
Environmental impact

a b s t r a c t
The paper aims to provide a description of the vision and present practices of ecotourism. Promotion of local livelihoods through ecotourism has been widely considered as an important policy instrument for biodiversity conservation. But ecotourism has become a hotly debated topic since its implementation across countries because of
the mismatch in vision and practice. The paper uses content analysis method for reviewing published literature.
Published peer-reviewed journal articles on ecotourism during 20002013 were collected and reviewed. The
overall evidence on the outcomes of ecotourism in the world shows mixed results. Though there are many success stories, the list of failures is very high. Owing to the structural, operational and cultural problems, ecotourism
in many places has become a predicament. Thus, ecotourism should be introduced with proper monitoring,
evaluation and management of ecotourism sites for reinforcing long term conservation.
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents
1.
2.
3.

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Review methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Literature review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.
Evolution of ecotourism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.
Economic impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.1.
Employment and income generation through ecotourism . . .
3.2.2.
Multiplier effect of ecotourism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.3.
Ecotourism: away from equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.4.
Failure of ecotourism to reduce forest dependency . . . . . .
3.2.5.
Ecotourism associated with compulsory displacement . . . .
3.3.
Socio-cultural impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.1.
Ecotourism and community participation . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.2.
Ecotourism and empowerment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.3.
Ecotourism and gender parity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.4.
Conict between conservation and socio-cultural betterment .
3.3.5.
Uncertainty in community participation . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.6.
Gender parity in ecotourism: a myth . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4.
Environmental impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4.1.
Biodiversity conservation through ecotourism . . . . . . . .
3.4.2.
Ecotourism as a business policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4.3.
Conict between biodiversity conservation and ecotourism . .
3.5.
Conict management between biodiversity conservation and ecotourism
4.
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 9778572766.

E-mail addresses: madhumita.das@hss.iitkgp.ernet.in, madhu08mita@gmail.com (M. Das), bani@hss.iitkgp.ernet.in (B. Chatterjee).
1
Tel.: +91 3222 283607 (ofce).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2015.01.002
2211-9736/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
10
10
10
11
11
13
13
14

M. Das, B. Chatterjee / Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

1. Introduction
The International Ecotourism Society (TIES) 1991 denes ecotourism as responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment and improves the welfare of the local people. The principles of
ecotourism are to: a) minimize negative environmental impact,
b) build environmental as well as cultural awareness and respect,
c) provide positive experiences for both visitors and hosts, d) provide
direct nancial benets for conservation, e) provide nancial benets
and empowerment for local people, and f) raise sensitivity to host countries' political, environmental, and social climate.2 Quebec declaration
on ecotourism (2002) recognizes the principles of sustainable tourism,
concerning the economic, social and environmental impacts of tourism.
The declaration says that ecotourism:
contributes actively to the conservation of natural and cultural heritage,
includes local and indigenous communities in its planning, development and operation, and contributing to their well-being,
interprets the natural and cultural heritage of the destination to visitors, and
lends itself better to independent travelers as well as to organized
tours for small size groups.3
Ecotourism is a strategy for supporting conservation and providing
income for communities in and around protected areas. It can contribute
to economic development and conservation of protected areas by:
a) generating revenues that can be used to sustainably manage
protected areas, b) providing local employment, and c) inculcating a
sense of community ownership (Jalani, 2012). Wildlife areas and national parks constitute a signicant market for ecotourism based on natural
resources and local culture (Surendran & Sekhar, 2011). Conservationists have promoted ecotourism as an integral tool of conservation of natural resources and development of indigenous communities (Stronza,
2007). It supports livelihood diversication, which is particularly important in remote areas, is labor intensive, can grow with unspecialized
labor, and has low entry barriers (Holland, Burian, & Dixey, 2003). Promotion of local livelihoods through ecotourism has been widely considered as an important policy instrument for biodiversity conservation
(Cattarinich, 2001; Lai & Nepal, 2006; Scheyvens, 2007).
In many parts of the world, ecotourism has contributed to the dual
goal of poverty eradication and conservation of natural resources
(Surendran & Sekhar, 2011). Promotion of ecotourism creates a large
amount of employment opportunities for local people who remain
engaged in a variety of activities related to tourism. The resolution,
entitled, Promotion of ecotourism for poverty eradication and environment protection, calls on UN member states to adopt policies that
promote ecotourism highlighting its positive impact on income generation, job creation and education, and thus on the ght against poverty
and hunger. It further recognizes that ecotourism creates signicant
opportunities for the conservation, protection and sustainable use of
biodiversity and of natural areas by encouraging local and indigenous
communities in host countries and tourists alike to preserve and respect
the natural and cultural heritage.4
However, against the backdrop of increasing popularity of ecotourism, Banerjee (2010) discovers that the present policies of ecotourism
benet neither conservation nor local communities. The concept remains poorly understood and much abused. Lack of funding, mismanagement, population and development pressures as well as poaching
and bureaucratic nature of forest department have distorted the very
2

Retrieved from http://www.ecotourism.org on 8th August, 2012.

Retrieved from http://www.unep.fr/scp/publications/details.asp?id=WEB/0078/PA
on 6th September, 2012.
4
Retrieved from unwto.org/en/press-release/2013-01-03/un-general-assembly-ecotourism-key-eradicating-poverty-and-protecting-envir. on 7th October, 2014.
3

concept of ecotourism. Environmental degradation, wildlife habitat destruction, economic inequity, instability, and negative socio-economic
and cultural changes within local communities are some of the few
problems associated with the introduction of ecotourism (Gulinck,
Vyverman, Bouchout, & Gobin, 2001). Tourism in a sensitive and fragile
ecosystem may not come without incurring costs (Banerjee, 2010;
Kumar, 2002; Sekhar, 2003). As such the idea of ecotourism is highly
contentious and a hotly debated topic ever since it has been implemented across different countries.
Numbers of researchers have expressed their serious concern that in
practice much of ecotourism simply neglects communities and local people. It is simply used as a buzzword to fascinate customers. This leads to
serious policy failures. It has been often reected that the costs incurred
for the creation of ecotourism spots tend to be felt most severely at local
levels, especially in the short term. Therefore, the net benets from such
conservation are low and occasionally negative for the members of local
communities. In the name of conservation the already marginalized
communities are further marginalized. By uprooting these communities
from their traditional homeland and their native socio-cultural environment, and by destroying their economy, they are exposed to outside exploitation. It has also been observed that the average rate of species
extinction has actually increased dramatically over the past few decades.
One of the important reasons for this is that the protected areas are imposed on a community with no or less input, and no regard for the local
people. This is the root cause behind the formation of all conict.5
A large number of scholars also advocate that, in practice, ecotourism has often failed to deliver the expected benets to indigenous communities due to a combination of factors like lack of mechanisms for a
fair distribution of the economic benets of ecotourism, land insecurity,
little control of the villagers over tourism and more inux of tourists
(Coria & Calfucura, 2012; Counsell, 2005). Social advocates argue that
protected areas take away local rights of access to critical resources
and, thus, negatively and unreasonably impact the social and economic
welfare of neighboring communities. This negative human impact
harms protected area's conservation objectives because protected
areas cannot succeed without the support of local communities. In the
process poverty, which is aggravated by protected areas, becomes a
root cause of ecosystem degradation. The 2004 World Parks Congress
issued a declaration that many costs of protected areas are borne
locallyparticularly by poor communities (Springer, 2009, pp. 26).
The overall evidence on the outcomes of ecotourism in the world
show mixed results. The proponents see in ecotourism the potential of
betterment of the indigenous communities through income generating
opportunities, local empowerment, and increased number of species as
a result of conservational policies. Critics, however, say that ecotourism
perpetuates economic inequality and disempowers local people
(Horton, 2009). Lack of access to land and natural resources, and alienating locals from planning process further aggravate the situation. It is
seen in many cases that there has been an increase in people-policywildlife conict for which the very purpose of ecotourism fails.
The purpose of the present study is to advance knowledge of the
complex approach of ecotourism. A series of literature have been
consulted to discover the praxis and theory. The efcacy of ecotourism
in conservation through the promotion of livelihood system of local
people in and around the protected areas in different parts of the
world is reviewed. On the basis of the review, the study nally concludes whether it is a panacea or a predicament to natural species as
well as indigenous communities.
2. Review methodology
Content analysis method is adopted for literature review. Content
analysis is an observational research method that is used to systematically evaluate the content of all forms of recorded communication
5

Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsdw20 on 25th May, 2013.

M. Das, B. Chatterjee / Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

ECOTOURISM

Economic
Employment& income
generation

Socio-cultural

Environmental

Empowerment of locals
& pride on culture

Conservation of
natural resources

Positive attitude for conservation

Fig. 1. Framework of the study.

(Kolbe & Brunette, 1991). This method also helps to identify the literature in terms of various categories (Li & Cavusgil, 1995), thereby creating a realm of research opportunities (Kolbe & Brunette, 1991). The
review is limited to the published literature including books, conference
proceedings and journal papers. Search engines were used to explore
Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and Emerald Insight, in search of literature. Published peer-reviewed journal articles during 20002013 were
collected from various sources, and are reviewed based on authors' perspective (ecotourism, government policy issues and its impact on local
people). A total of one hundred and twenty one articles including information from some websites related to ecotourism are referred for the
review. Articles focusing on economic, social, and environmental impact
of ecotourism in different parts of the world were selected for the
purpose.
The conceptual framework followed in the study is developed considering the objectives of ecotourism. Ecotourism aims at conservation
of nature through tangible improvement in the local economy, and increased respect for local culture and traditions (Fig. 1).
The rst section of the literature review starts with the evolution of
ecotourism. Ecotourism broadly aims at conservation of natural resources through providing economic benet, social empowerment and
cultural pride. It aims at improving livelihood activities and income
which in turn will help in the conservation of natural resources
(Abbot, Thomas, Gardner, Neba, & Khen, 2001; Kiss, 2004; Salafsky &
Wollenberg, 2000; Shah, 2007). Natural resources not only include
wild animals; but also birds, rivers, reefs and forests. Employment and
income, generated through tourism business, generate incentives
which in turn develops positive attitude toward conservation (Chen,
Yang, & Xie, 2005; Gyan & Nyaupane, 2011). The result of these benets
can be seen in the reduction of unsustainable practices like shing,
hunting, and degrading activities such as forest clearing. Thus there exists a strong inter-linkage between livelihood activities and conservation. Therefore the second, third and fourth sections of the literature
review describe the economic impact, socio-cultural impact and environmental impact of ecotourism respectively. Each sub-section elaborates successful case studies of ecotourism and the problems faced in
certain areas to meet its objective. The nal section of the literature review deals with those literature that provide an insight to make the policy successful. The last section of the article summarizes the ndings
and conclusions.

3. Literature review
After viewing the literature, the main arguments are systemized
along ve distinct categories, showing the evolution of ecotourism, economic impact of ecotourism, its socio-cultural impact, its environmental
impact and conict management between ecotourism and biodiversity
conservation. However, it is to be kept in mind that these three impacts
(economic, socio-cultural & environment) are interrelated as ecotourism promotes conservation through socio-economic improvement of
the condition of the local people.

3.1. Evolution of ecotourism

The potential of tourism as an important driver of growth is proved
from its contribution to national income of many countries. Nevertheless critics consider that tourism development is self-destructive and
in the long run it contributes to environmental destruction. Increasing
numbers of tourists threaten the quality of life and environment. Concomitant with the rapid development of the tourism industry, there
are increasing environmental problems like increasing noise, declining
air quality, increasing water pollution, and increasing biodiversity loss,
draining of wetlands, destruction of coral reefs, etc., leading to depletion
of nature. Therefore, the International Union for Conservation of Nature
in 1992 lists tourism as the second major threat to protected areas.
Owing to the increasing negativities of tourism, several authors reiterated tourism industry to grow carefully and in a sustainable manner
(Balmford et al., 2002; Holden, 2003; Mihalic, 2000; Sharpley, 2000;
Tepelus & Cordobci, 2005).
Sharpley (2000) has asserted that sustainable development is an
amalgamation of two schools of thought: (1) development theory and
(2) environmental sustainability theory. The major focus of his writing
is that tourism to grow sustainably must focus on preservation of the
ecosystem and equitable development. Ecotourism originated as a
type of sustainable tourism and the rst formal denition of ecotourism
is credited to Hector Ceballos-Lascurin in the early 1980s (Sharpley,
2006). The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in 1994 promoted Sustainable Nature-based Tourism.6
The term Eco-efciency was coined by World Business Council for
Sustainable Development in 1995 which aims at reducing the use of resources that has negative impacts (Gossling et al., 2005). However, the
Rio+5 sessions in 1997 formally incorporated sustainable tourism as
an environment and development issue. The Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD) meeting of 1999 incorporated Sustainable Use Including Tourism as a theme (Das, 2011). The United Nations International
year of Ecotourism of 2002 marked a major rise of ecotourism as an important form of sustainable tourism (Butcher, 2006). More recently
United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) made a milestone resolution recognizing ecotourism at the United Nations General
Assembly on 21 December 2012. The resolution highly stressed
ecotourism's role in the ght against poverty and the protection of the
environment.7
Today ecotourism is a fast growing market considered as one of the
world's biggest industries (Blangy & Mehta, 2006; Das, 2011). StarmerSmith (2004) stated that the number of eco-tourists is growing three
times faster than the conventional tourists. The study also forecasts
that by 2024, ecotourism is expected to represent 5% of the global holiday market. The growth of this niche market is because of the fact that
tourists are becoming greener and so demanding environmentally
appropriate tourism experiences (Sharpley, 2006:8).

6
7

Retrieved from www.unep.org on 9th October, 2014.

Retrieved from www.uncto.org on 9th October, 2014.

M. Das, B. Chatterjee / Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

Ecotourism captured 7% of the international market as estimated by

the United Nations World Travel Organization (UNWTO) in 2007.8
Number of examples from different ecotourism destinations can be
given to be evidence for the growth of this market. Tourists to Hol
Chan Marine Reserve in Belize increased by two-thirds over a ve year
period, from 33,669 tourists in 1991 to 50,411 in 1996. An example of
Costa Rica can be shown where more than two-thirds of tourists visit
protected areas and reserves and it is estimated that up to 53% of income comes from ecotourism and related activities. In Honduras, experts estimate that the number of eco-tourists grew nearly 15% with a
total of 200,000 tourists in 1995.9 In India, in Bhitarkanika National
Park, the number of tourists increased from 37,080 to 46,917 from
200809 to 201213 (Information Brochure, Mangrove Forest Division
(WL), Rajnagar, Kendrapara, Odisha).
International tourism arrivals are expanding at 6.5% annually and
within this ecotourism is growing at annual rate of 5% representing
the fastest growing market (Das, 2011). A debate exists among the researchers on whether the growth of ecotourism is driven by supply or
by demand. While Sharpley (2006) considers growth of ecotourism is
supply led, Perkins and Grace (2014) afrm that ecotourism can also
be partially demand driven rather than only supply driven. Growing
awareness about the detrimental effects of mass tourism, evolution of
post-material values, increasing environmental awareness, and expansion of middle class families are some of the most important reasons
for increasing demand for ecotourism by the tourists (Holden, 2003;
Mihalic, 2000; Sharpley, 2006).
3.2. Economic impact
Ecotourism highly supports the inter-linkage between livelihood activities and conservation. It is identied as a tool to enhance the livelihoods of the people around protected areas. Tourism development in
protected areas or ecotourism provides an alternative to the exploitative use of environmental resources (Nyuapane & Poudel, 2011).
Wunder (2000) is right to state that economic incentives are indispensable for nature conservation. Without creating an economic basis
for the sustainable livelihood of the locals, the purpose of ecotourism
cannot be achieved.
Thus, ecotourism is developed as a strategy to conserve biodiversity
through providing nancial benets to the locals in and around the
protected areas. In the following section, a detailed discussion of the
strategy is done.
3.2.1. Employment and income generation through ecotourism
Ecotourism is being embraced as a potential economic rescuer by
many rural communities who are motivated by the promise of jobs,
new business opportunities, and skill development (Scheyvens, 2000,
IUCN, 2012). For many indigenous communities in tropical and developing countries, ecotourism is considered as a means leading to new
sources of income and betterment in household condition (Stronza,
2007). Better access to tourists through properly organized ecotourism
enables local people to augment their livelihood security through employment and small enterprise development (Ashley, 2002; Goodwin,
2002).
Development of ecotourism will create jobs in tourism services such
as restaurants, souvenir shops, and food. Eco-lodges, campsites, home
stay accommodations, restaurants, transport, and guiding services also
provide economic benets directly to local people (Mustika, Birtles,
Welters, & Marsh, 2012; Reimer & Walter, 2013). Even in the case of island or marine communities, marine tourism industry often forms the
most important economic activity. Job opportunities range from oneperson operations such as charter shing boat operators, sea-kayak

8
9

Retrieved from www.uncto.org on 9th October, 2014.

Retrieved from pdf.usaid.gov/pdf.docs/PNADB952.pdf on 7th October, 2014.

tour guides and scuba diving instructors to multinational cruise-ship

companies (Hoyt, 2005).
The paper of Mustika et al. (2012) is noted for its rst attempt to explore the economic impact of the Cetacean watching tourism industry in
Lovina in north Bali, Indonesia. The article by using tourist expenditure
approach highlights that tourism business is more protable than most
other earning opportunities. The paper has captured primary direct expenditure and auxiliary direct expenditure, but failed to analyze the
multiplier effect to capture the indirect expenditure. Though the contrary line of argument is also posed in the article in terms of higher induced immigration and detrimental impact on dolphins for more
number of boats, but the authors have emphasized more on the ndings
about the response of 179 boat-men who do not have the intention to
leave the industry as they enjoy an above average income obtained
from ecotourism industry. So the river based ecotourism industry is
bringing much relief to the residents of this place. In order to solve the
problems, they have the opinion that shared license system, tradable
daily permits and increasing entrance fees will help a lot. In another
study in Puerto Princesa Subterranean River National Park (PPSRNP), reputed to be the longest navigable underground river in the world by
Jalani (2012) shows that this river ecotourism industry has been the
source of income for most of the households.
Fuller, Buultjens, and Cummings (2005) has done the SWOT analysis
and found that ecotourism provides potential for economic development through micro-enterprises to the Ngukurr, an indigenous community in northern Australia. The article has well emphasized the
importance of Community Development Employment Projects in
supporting indigenous-owned and operated small enterprises through
providing them the nancial resources. However, the article lacks a
clear and full comprehension for the complex sustainable development.
Reimer and Walter (2013) have brought a solution to the complexities
associated with tourism and conservation through highlighting Community Based Eco-tourism (CBET) that enforces a mutually reinforcing
relationship between environmental conservation, local economic livelihood and cultural preservation. Though no systematic measurement of
the impacts of ecotourism project is undertaken, the research nely articulates each one carefully through participatory observation and focus
group discussion. By using Honey's (2008, Chap. 2) analytical framework of ecotourism they nd that the Chiphat project appears to have
fully met ve of the seven components for authentic ecotourism: it involves travel to natural destinations, minimizes environmental and cultural impact, builds environmental awareness, provides nancial
benets and empowerment for local people, respects local culture and
implicitly supports local human rights and democratization. In a similar
study, Wunder (2000) has brilliantly conceptualized the link among
tourism, local benets and conservation by using the data from the
Cuyabeno Wildlife Reserve in the Ecuadorian Amazon region, near the
border of Colombia and Peru. Income ows from tourism have given villagers a new rationality of resource use by increasing environmental
awareness. The reserve was created in 1979 responding to continuous
pressure on natural resources from overhunting, deforestation, cattle
ranching, etc. by indigenous communities. After the creation of the reserve, local residents receive signicant income from tourism that outweighs other sources. The result of this net benet is reected in the
reduction of illegal practices and increased environmental awareness.
The complex process of tourism induced change through economic incentives is encapsulated thoroughly through the case study method
even without going for quantitative testing for lack of economic and environmental data. Even in the case of Periyar Tiger Reserve, India, economic incentives play an important role in curbing the dependence of
the people on forests and increasing their participation in conservation
of forests.10

10
Retrieved from http://www.ecoclub.com/library/epapers/13.pdf on 8th October,
2014.

M. Das, B. Chatterjee / Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

3.2.2. Multiplier effect of ecotourism

In some cases, development of ecotourism has led to the creation of
production systems related to goods and services linked to tourism like
local handicrafts, agriculture and services, stemming from the high level
of consumption of these products by tourists. Respondents, who are afliated with ecotourism related livelihood, perceived that the positive
impact of ecotourism is primarily seen in the development of their livelihood. People changed their occupation from shing and non-timber
wood usage to ecotourism activities, as tourism provided higher income
(Jalani, 2012).
Guha and Ghosh (2007) empirically measure the extent to which
tourism improves livelihood in a study in Indian Sunderbans. The
study compares the socio-economic indicators of households under
the classication of tourism participants, forest dependents, and
engaged in other economic activities, and claims that tourism participants spend 19% more on food and 38% more on non-food items relative
to other villagers. Earnings from tourism appear to nance at least partially annual consumption. While many scholars have criticized ecotourism practices for its seasonality approach, the supporting authors
have differentiated themselves by considering tourism related income
as additional revenue on top of subsistence farming.
People, who work in an ecotourism destination, will spend their additional income, which they receive from ecotourism related jobs, on
consumer goods. Increased demand for such goods will create new
jobs. The economic and employment-generating benets coming from
ecotourism have resulted in relative prosperity for areas, and have had
an important impact on local development (Seetanah, 2011; Taylor,
Hardner, & Stewart, 2006). An important aspect of the research article
of Taylor et al. (2006), is that it has used Social Accounting Matrix
(SAM) to capture both direct and indirect effects of tourism on the island economy of Galapagos. Direct income is calculated from the income of selling goods and services to tourists (hotels, restaurants,
cruise ships) and indirect income from other agents who are not directly
associated with tourists. From the results, the authors claim that tourism continues to be the major driver of economic growth of the island.
Two critical points are derived from this research (i) the international
tourist multiplier is the lowest of all multipliers because foreign tourists
spend mostly off island and (ii) the comparison of income multiplier
shows that a $1000 increase in foreign tourist expenditure and domestic
tourist expenditure is associated with $218 and $429 increase in total island income respectively.
The fact unveiled will denitely help policy makers to focus more on
domestic rather on those foreign tourists. Seetanah's (2011) paper is
also consistent with earlier work of exploring linkage of tourism with
natural areas and economic growth. With the help of dynamic panel
data framework for a sample of 19 island economies over a period of
19902007, the paper suggests that sustainable tourism is to be given
a key position in policies for sustainable tourism and economic
development.
Wunder (2000) provides an interesting fact that particularly for developing countries a rapidly growing tourism industry has proved to be
an increasingly important source of foreign exchange inows. As more
native communities start to reap direct economic benets as owners
and partners of tourism services, locals will have more incentive and
challenge to protect the resources that the tourists come to see
(Stronza, 2007; Surendran & Sekhar, 2011). In this process it promotes
biodiversity conservation through providing economic benets to the
communities in and around protected areas.
However, the benecial approach of ecotourism in uplifting the
economic condition of the locals as well as of the economy is not free
from criticisms. The conict between biodiversity conservation and
poverty reduction is a complex dilemma. Many authors argue that
ecotourism has compromised the cause of biodiversity conservation
by exacerbating impoverishment on very large numbers of people
(Cernea & Schmidt-Soltau, 2006; Coria & Calfucura, 2012). In practice,
ecotourism has mostly failed to fulll the promises made to indigenous

communities, due to a number of factors like lack of mechanisms for a

fair distribution of the economic benets of ecotourism, compulsory displacement and land insecurity. The subsequent section will provide a
clear picture of the mismatch between objectives and present practice.
3.2.3. Ecotourism: away from equity
Goodwin (2002) provides a clear picture of the economic costs to
local people because of ecotourism. Sighting the example of Keoladeo
National Park (KNP), Rajasthan, India, the paper highlights that employment is concentrated in the hands of few. In KNP males from a few Jatt
families dominate the tourism created employment market. The problem is worsened as labor is drawn from urban sector instead of focusing
on training of unskilled or less-skilled locals. The tourists are also not accessible at all areas of the KNP, thus further limiting the avenues of the
locals to earn a decent livelihood by selling native products. The author
also cites the example of Komodo National Park, Indonesia to bring to
light the signicant leakages from the local economy, as local people
are denied access to tourists although they have high interest to earn
by selling tourist demanded products and services. The same practice
also prevails in Gonarezhou National Park, Zimbabwe as well as St Paul's
Subterranean National Park in Palawan, Philippines, where the potentiality of tourism as an economic rescuer is not explored by all the local
communities.
The authors, who have highlighted the economic benets to the locals through development of ecotourism, fail to address inequitable distribution of income, which is one of the major issues in ecotourism sites.
He et al. (2008) are of the opinion that disproportional distribution of
benet among stakeholders can lead to the failure of ecotourism and
conservation. They have identied two types of uneven distribution of
economic benets among major groups of stakeholders: (a) a signicant inequality exists between the local rural residents and the other
types of stakeholders and (b) the distribution of economic benets is
unequal among the rural residents inside the reserve. The reason cited
behind this problem is that most rural residents get only low-skilled
and temporary jobs in small businesses. More than 80% of jobs, as
reected from Woolong Natural Reserve, China, go to outsiders. Outsiders also dominated in the low paid job arena leaving only 21% to
the local farmers. Hsu and Lin's (2013) case study of Taijiang National
Park in Taiwan in 2013 also reects parallel problems. By developing
their own analytical framework with 22 indicators, the paper reinforces
that there has been no positive reection in both direct and indirect
public benets. Therefore a clear conict of interest exists among different groups. Coria and Calfucura (2012) have delved deep to nd out the
reasons behind such favoritism and have found that the locals suffer
from resource and skill constraints. Therefore the author has pointed
out that ecotourism practices should not be conceived as the only
source of development of indigenous communities. The better approach
should be to complement such practices with other non-detrimental actions. Inequality also exists in extraction of non-timber forest products
(NTFP), as the better segment of the community possesses specialized
equipment for extraction of NTFP. Moreover the community views the
extraction of NTFP as a constant source of cash income, which in turn
leads to constant degradation of biological resources (Delang, 2006).
3.2.4. Failure of ecotourism to reduce forest dependency
Hussain and Badola (2010), in a study of 36 villages in Bhitarkanika
Conservation Area, depict quite perplexing things. The villagers living in
mangrove areas are poor and depend on the mangrove resources for
their livelihood, though legally no extraction is permitted. An overall
14.2% of the fuel need of each of the household was met by the forests
with a mean consumption of 312 kg wood per annum. Mangrove timber
is extracted on a small scale in many areas for jetty construction, forest
pathways, small bridges, boats, sh traps, and mooring poles. Villagers
not only depend on forests for extracting timber as well as non-timber
forest products, but they also catch sh, prawn, crab and related species
for commercial purpose. The dependency on the forest is more for the

M. Das, B. Chatterjee / Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

villages near by the protected area. The argument goes that since people
living nearest to the mangrove forests have fewer years of education,
employment and income, their dependence on forest is also the highest.
Goodwin (2002) has identied that at the Indian and Indonesian study
sites, those people who reside nearest to the protected areas and who
bear the brunt mostly, appear to participate less in tourism industry.
These authors' argument is totally different from the common belief of
many authors who claim that those who reside nearest to the park get
more employment facilities.

3.2.5. Ecotourism associated with compulsory displacement

The situation of the locals worsens when they are compulsorily
displaced for the creation of National Parks (Cernea & Schmidt-Soltau,
2006). Even in many cases lack of access to the protected areas and insecure land tenure (Cernea & Schmidt-Soltau, 2006) result in homelessness and joblessness for which a large chunk of locals do not view
wildlife conservation as a sustainable way of earning income. The authors also claim that conservational organizations like International
Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), World Wildlife Fund (WWF)
and World Conservation Society also do not concentrate on formal safeguards of the displaced. The writers have critically dened displacement, which has expanded the periphery of displacement. According
to them displacement not only includes when land takings compel
physical relocation but also when local communities are denied access
because of restrictive policy formulations. Physical displacement as
well as restricted access for the creation of national parks inevitably exacerbate poverty. They consider that such actions have a tremendous
negative economic effect on the locals. It substantially disrupts local
livelihoods and causes large scale loss of land, homelessness, food insecurity, loss of lives, and increase in morbidity. The authors have cited the
cases of Dja Bio. Reserve (Cameroon), Korup National Park (Cameroon),
Dzanga-Ndoki National Park (Central African Republic), Nsoc National
Park (Equatorial Guinea), and Cross-River Okwangwo Div. (Nigeria),
where the indigenous communities are partially resettled. There have
been number of parks like Lake Lobeke National Park, Boumba Beck
National Park (Cameroon), Loango National Park, Moukalaba-Doudou
National Park, Ipassa-Mingouli (Gabon), and Nouabale' Ndoki National
Park (Republic of Congo), where there is a complete absence of resettlement policy. Compensation policy has also not been successful in all
these protected areas. This results in greater level of dissatisfaction
and apathetic attitude of the locals toward conservation.
Arjunan, Holmes, Puyravaud, and Davidar (2006) highlight the failure of prohibitions in meeting the requirement of effective conservation. The paper provides a very important dimension that positive
attitudes might not always reect sustainable practices. In the case of
Kalakkad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, Tamil Nadu, India, 61% of the respondents reported positive attitudes toward conservation of tiger, and
59% toward forests. But the dry forests cover more than 50% of the requirement of the local community in terms of fuel, fodder, manure,
etc. Deterioration of rural economy due to damage to crop and livestock
by wildlife, and cessation of opportunities of income from forest resources and tourism in the core zone are also the key negative impacts
of conservation policy felt by the locals (Maikhuri, Nautiyal, Rao, &
Saxena, 2001). They have well attempted to estimate the mean annual
economic loss per household in Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, a
world heritage site in Indian Himalaya, and presented the estimated
loss as Rs 1285, Rs 1195 and Rs 156 due to damage caused by wildlife
to food crops, fruit trees and beehives respectively, Rs 1587 due to ban
on collection of wild medicinal plants for marketing and Rs 7904 due
to ban on tourism in the core zone. Although Reserve authority granted
compensation of livestock killed by wildlife, this was hardly 5% of the
market value of killed livestock as assessed by the people. People did
not appreciate the present benets from the reserve management in
the form of wages for carrying out forestation work, partial compensation of livestock damage and availability of solar power devices, wool,

and spinning devices. All such actions nally inculcate a harmful attitude in the mind of the locals toward conservation.
The literature about the economic impact of ecotourism can be divided into two categories. Those articles, which are in favor of ecotourism, consider it as a mechanism leading to new sources of income and
betterment in household condition. Properly organized ecotourism enables local people to augment their livelihood security through employment in ecotourism related activities and small enterprise development.
It also leads to local economic development through multiplier effect of
ecotourism. In the process, dependency of the locals on natural resources is reduced, and biodiversity is conserved. On the other hand, another group of articles emphasize on the problems associated with
ecotourism like (1) revenue leakages, as labor is drawn from urban sector, instead of focusing on training of unskilled or less-skilled locals,
(2) inequitable distribution of income among the locals, (3) compulsory
displacement for the creation of national parks leading to large scale loss
of land, homelessness, food insecurity, loss of lives, and increase in morbidity, (4) restrictions in accessing sanctuary resulting in joblessness
and (5) damage to crop and livestock by wildlife. All such problems aggravate poverty of the locals. Thus, ecotourism fails to reduce forest dependency, and the practice of conservation is away from reality.
3.3. Socio-cultural impact
Ecotourism, through increase in standard of living of the local residents, empowers them socio-politically and fosters respect for different
cultures and for human rights. Indirect incentives like improved infrastructures, health facilities, awareness and education from tourism development develop positive attitudes toward conservation (Nyuapane
& Poudel, 2011). Community-based conservation programs such as
the Van Panchayats (VP), a state level program that was introduced in
Uttaranchal, and more recently the nationally designed Joint Forest
Management (JFM) programs are initiated with an objective of addressing the conicts between the local communities and the forest department over access and use of forest resources. These institutions seek
to incorporate local communities in regulating use of forest products
(Arjunan et al., 2006). Local community is involved in the entire process
starting from the planning to execution and monitoring, and this is the
key to success of ecotourism (Rowat & Engelhardt, 2007; Stone, Bhat,
Bhatta, & Mathews, 2008).
3.3.1. Ecotourism and community participation
The paper of Stone et al. (2008) views community participation as a
remedy to the problem of unsustainable practices. The authors have
used Contingent Valuation Method to place monetary value on the benets that subsistence user groups (sherman, sher woman, rice
farmers) receive from mangrove forests. The results indicate that all
the three groups intend to restore mangroves because of the facilities
they derive from mangroves. The rice farmers have a higher willingness
to pay as mangroves help in controlling erosion and crop pests. Fishermen and sherwomen get a good catch as mangroves contribute to
sh nursery. Once the locals receive some tangible benets, and they
are involved in the conservational policies, they consider themselves
as stakeholders in the process and support the conservational policies.
The Apo Island and Handumon protected areas in the Philippines are
examples of how implementation of community based marine sanctuaries can be effective as a resource management tool. Communities
here are successfully managing their own sanctuaries and are rewarded
not only with healthy reefs, larger sh catches, and bigger sh in and
around the reserve; but also with a sense of accomplishment and
pride in having control over a central part of their lives (Parras, 2001).
3.3.2. Ecotourism and empowerment
Ecotourism helps in empowering local communities by providing economic, social, political, and psychological benets. Regular
economic gains from formal or informal sector employment and

M. Das, B. Chatterjee / Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

business opportunities empower the community economically.

Scheyvens (2000:241) describes social empowerment as a situation
in which a community's sense of cohesion and integrity has been conrmed or strengthened by an activity such as ecotourism. Shared income among community members helps improve local livelihoods by
providing infrastructure, education, and health. It enables people to
live in harmony and thus leads to social empowerment. While participation in decision making process leads to political empowerment, psychological power concerns the self-esteem of community members that
can be enhanced by external recognition and appreciation of the unique
cultural and natural resources and traditional knowledge (Nyuapane &
Poudel, 2011). Wunder (2000) concludes through the empirical study
of Cuyabeno Wildlife Reserve, a biodiversity rich area in Ecuador's
northern region that tourism income helps to unite actors and strengthen the reason for co-existence. Guha and Ghosh (2007) interpret that a
part of increased income from ecotourism practices can also be used to
nance the education of the children which will lead to development of
human capital. This will denitely lead to empowerment of local communities in the long run.
According to World Bank (2002) empowerment has four elements:
(1) access to information, (2) inclusion or participation, (3) accountability and (4) local organizational capacity, and ecotourism focuses on all
the four to empower the locals (Sutawa, 2012). However, the author articulates that empowerment has both positive and negative effects.
While empowerment enhances self-esteem of the locals, many communities consider it as freedom without any restrictions. They attempt to
get more advantages ignoring the other stakeholders. This very practice
leads to create more problems in the path of sustainable development.
3.3.3. Ecotourism and gender parity
Horton (2009) opines that ecotourism, by challenging the traditional
gender roles, has extended womens' household roles of cleaning,
cooking, and serving others. The author has found that with the arrival
of ecotourism in Costa Rica, women began to take an active role in opening cabins, restaurants, and other small businesses. Such practices help
women to earn reasonably by emancipating themselves from the
traditional patriarchal gender norms. Scheyvens (2000) has justied
women's involvement in ecotourism projects to ensure benets for
the broad range of community members. The development increases
awareness for health and hygiene for women. Thus they gain power
by boosting their self-condence, knowledge and awareness (Thien,
2009). Thien's research explores that ecotourism can be used as a
KEY or tool to open the LOCK of the DOOR. In the process it creates
equal opportunities for employment and income generation for
women, promotes adult education and reduce illiteracy, increase
awareness on health (maternal health) and hygiene offer option for viability of indigenous community which allow them to maintain their
traditional life etc. (pp. 100).
Evidences of women empowerment can be found like Masai women
in Belize, who are economically empowered by establishing a lodge
through Sandy Beach Women's Cooperative as a self-initiated ecotourism venture. Women in Himachal Pradesh, India have also become actively involved in joint forest management program and consequently
have gained the support of the tourism industry. Similarly the work of
the Siyabonga Craft Cooperative in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, a
women community, has increased the self-reliance of its members by
providing them with a good source of income. The increase income
has motivated them to go back to school as well as send their children
to schools. While learning English has helped them to speak to the tourists who came to their shop; learning math has helped them to give the
correct change to the customers and understand the bookkeeping system. Empowerment can also be seen in the case of Langtang women
who perform cultural dances for tourists and use the funds raised to restore their local monastery (Scheyvens, 2000). The author has also cited
few cases when ecotourism directly or indirectly empowers women socially through greater local access to services, such as water supplies or

health clinics. Tourism in the Annapurna area of Nepal had brought a

number of benets to the Dhampus village community. For example, installation of water taps by the lodge owners beneted many village
women who otherwise had to walk some way to collect water. In addition, the demands of tourists for better facilities witnessed the adoption
of labor-saving technologies including kerosene stoves and solar
water heaters which reduced the hard work of women considerably.
Similarly, in the Sua Bali sustainable village tourism initiative,
established by and is managed by a woman, each guest pays US$1 per
day to the village. This money is used for temple festivities and provides
a hardship fund for locals who face difculties. Some communities have
also set an example for others by overcoming cultural limitations to
women's participation in decision-making forums. In Palawan village
in the Philippines, women have emerged as the organizers and managers of a sustainable tourism project.
There have been a number of successful eco-development initiatives
in India reported by Mishra, Badola, and Bharadwaj (2009), which have
acknowledged that the poorest of the poor and socially vulnerable
groups such as women, scheduled castes and tribes, and those below
the poverty line deserve special attention in eco-development programs. The practice of eco-development in India is based on the premise that ecological sustainability is closely linked with nancial,
institutional and social sustainability (pp. 158). Focusing more on the
ownership of the locals, the eco-development programs have become
successful. Moreover they attempt to understand the policy failure of
protected areas and provide more attention to the needy and the
poorest. The poor people in this way feel as connected and thus support
conservation.
Contrary to all the positive socio-cultural impact of ecotourism,
many researchers do not consider ecotourism as a means for improving
the social status of the entire. Authors also argue that promotion of ecotourism always does not foster respect for local culture. Many ecotourism ventures in developing countries are found to be progressing
without any cheering socio-cultural impact. The subsequent section
provides an array of problems that occur as quite conicting to the mission of ecotourism.
3.3.4. Conict between conservation and socio-cultural betterment
Although increase in tourists in ecotourism spots leads to sociocultural betterment, but if tourist activity results in crowding, crime,
begging, displacement from traditional lands, or prostitution, then it
also leads to social disempowerment. Most of the protected areas in
India do not have any kind of visitor orientation programs. The author
has articulated a number of problems with reference to India which
questions efciency of protected areas in conservation. Citing the
cases of popular tiger reserves such as the Kanha, Ranthambhore and
Corbett National Parks in India, the author nds that forest authorities
have been unable to protest increase in tourists, for higher revenue generation. This has resulted in chasing tigers surrounded by jeeps and elephants for photo session, with signicant impacts on wildlife behavior
and habitat (Banerjee, 2010). Wunder (2000) has also cited the case
of Puerto Bolivar, Ecuador, where the high numbers of tourists have
caused cultural erosion, increase alcohol consumption and disease
risk. This in turn poses threat to biodiversity as well as local culture.
3.3.5. Uncertainty in community participation
In many instances it is also noted that the bureaucratic nature of the
forests does not allow locals to participate in the planning process
(Banerjee, 2010). Tosun (2000) has gone one step ahead to explain
the limitations to the participatory tourism development approach in
the context of developing countries in Asia, Latin America and in the
so-called former second world countries. The author has brilliantly
classied the reasons under operational, structural and cultural limits
to community participation in such countries. He has found that in
countries such as India, Mexico, Thailand, and Turkey, a strong centralized public administrative system, unwillingness of the politicians to

10

M. Das, B. Chatterjee / Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

distribute power appears as operational hindrances to community participation. On the other hand, lack of clear-cut denition in roles of
agencies, overlap in responsibilities of government departments and
little accountability between them, lack of information etc. also hinder
the co-ordination for participatory tourism development approach.
The structural problem occurs because of lack of qualied humanresources, lack of nancial resources, lack of appropriate legal system,
attitude of the bureaucrats, and domination of elites. From his personal
experience, the author has found that it becomes very difcult to persuade the bureaucrats to encourage community participation, who neither have tourism background nor good contact with the locals. In some
developing countries such as Turkey and Mexico local indigenous communities' right to use public places such as beaches and sea is violated
by tourism operators. Citing the case of Ramada Hotel Varca in southern
Goa, India, which violated both the maximum height and minimum distance from the sea criteria, the author also nds that the state acts in line
with a mercantilist model (pp. 623) where there exists wide scale discrimination. There also exist some cultural hindrances such as limited
capacity of poor people to handle development effectively, and apathy
as well as low level of awareness in the local community, to effective
community participation in the realm of tourism.
3.3.6. Gender parity in ecotourism: a myth
Authors, who have claimed that ecotourism related activities have
improved the status of women, did not highlight the difculties associated with in. The practical side is far from reach in majority of cases. Although in few areas, employment opportunities are created,
importance of women in the industry is often minimized considering
them as the weaker sex. In many cases, they are not involved in most
of the activities for their lack of education and skill (Badola and
Hussain, 2003). Even in the areas where they are involved, they fail to
share the benets equitably (Scheyvens, 2000). The author has found
that in terms of formal employment, local women are often overlooked
when ecotourism sites are developed. Giving the example of Mahenye,
Zimbabwe, a joint venture agreement between the local Shangaan people and Zimbabwe Sun Ltd, which owns a chain of hotels in the country,
he upholds that employment at the lodges has been heavily biased in
favor of men. Among the two tourist lodges on Shangaan land, at
Mahenye Lodge only three out of 15 positions have been lled by
women, while at Chilo Lodge, four out of 38 positions have gone to
women. This clearly shows the discrimination against women community. He has also cited the examples of Himalayan region and Indonesia,
where women involved in guiding activities are regarded as prostitutes
interested in foreign tourists. The most bafing part of the practice is
that even if they receive income, they are rarely empowered. It is because they have no/little real power and are not considered as equal
to men in their communities as well as families.
Apart from the employment sector, women also have to face the
discrimination at the community participation for decision making process. Scheyvens's (2000) article is right to say that women involvement
in decision-making process is very poor beyond the village level because meetings often necessitate travel. In many cases, travel is a problem for women because during that period they need to compromise on
their traditional roles and obligations, and because of the suspicion that
a woman traveling alone will commit adultery. Therefore, the author
has conveyed astutely that the greatest challenge in the future is to
ensure that women are not just consulted, but listened to, when deciding whether to pursue ecotourism and how to pursue ecotourism
(pp. 245).
To sum up, it may be said that many articles have considered ecotourism as a means to empower local people socio-politically through
improving their standard of living, fostering respect for different cultures, and enhancing human rights. It helps women to earn reasonably
by emancipating themselves from the traditional patriarchal gender
norms. Indirect incentives like improved infrastructures, health facilities, awareness and education from tourism development also help to

develop positive attitudes toward conservation. On the other hand,

many authors have put emphasis also on the real practices of ecotourism. They have focussed on crowding, crime, begging, and prostitution
associated with the increase in the number of tourists in ecotourism
spots. In many cases, as found, traditional mind set-up of the locals
does not allow women community to rise above the notion of weaker
sex. Such problems are more in developing countries owing to its mismanagement as well as bureaucratic nature of management. More
numbers of tourists, as found in many articles, have caused cultural erosion, increase in alcohol consumption and disease risk, as mostly the
tourists are found to be pleasant seekers more in the developing countries than in the developed ones. This in turn poses threat to biodiversity
as well as to local culture.
3.4. Environmental impact
Ecotourism represents one of the more eco-friendly alternatives for
the economic use of natural resources (Li, 2004; Wood, 2002). Tourism
development in protected areas or ecotourism provides an alternative
to the exploitative use of environmental resources (Nyuapane &
Poudel, 2011). Wunder (2000) considers that ecotourism plays an important role in enhancing the environment quality. The policy of ecotourism concentrates on applying green growth strategy in the ambit
of tourism with an intention of sustainable use of exhaustible natural
resources. Biodiversity becomes an income-generating asset that
works rationally for natural resource management. Holden's (2003) approach is quite different in the sense that it has emphasized on the
ethics for tourism. He opines that lack of environmental ethics spells catastrophe. Thus owing to the growing evidence of environmental degradation as a result of human actions, it is highly desirable that
environment should be placed on the agenda of evolution of tourism.
According to him, ecotourism emphasizes the need for resource conservation keeping an eye on the growing catastrophe of depletion of natural assets. In the long term there has been a shift from instrumental
ethics as a basis of conduct for the use of nature to a more conservation
based ethics considering the economic interest of all stakeholders to
conserve natural resources. Moreover, the environmental dimension
is much more important than the economic dimension in the issues of
urban ecotourism for the differences between the economic background of urban residents and non-urban areas (Wu, Wang & Ho,
2010).
Mihalic (2000) claims that environmental quality of a destination is
the most important factor in making travel related decision because of
increasing environmental awareness among the tourists, and growing
monopolistic structure of the tourism market. Ecotourism according to
the author integrates the capacity of systematic environmental branding of the sites.
3.4.1. Biodiversity conservation through ecotourism
Libosada (2009) believes that ecotourism provides the tangible aspect of conservation as it has been helping save animals and fragile ecosystems. Salvador, Clavero, and Pitman (2011) also carry the same kind
of notion. According to them, ecotourism is a successful conservation
policy for its capacity to conserve large mammals' diversity in Upper
Amazonia through sustainable source of income to the inhabitants.
Reimer and Walter (2013) articulate that the nancial benets from
ecotourism come from park entrance fees, voluntary donations and environmental conservation levies, which are targeted directly at conservation. Nyuapane and Poudel (2011) have nely interwoven the
complexity of tourism and biodiversity conservation through their
focus on Chitwan National Park, Nepal. They perceive that as people receive more economic benets, they take more pride about their natural
resources and tend to preserve these resources. The paper of Abbot et al.
(2001) provides evidence drawn from Kilum-Ijim forest in North West
Province, Cameroon. Adoption of Integrated Conservation and Development Projects (ICDP) has improved the income level and livelihood

M. Das, B. Chatterjee / Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

conditions of the people. This in turn has a positive impact on conservation by changing the attitudes of the people in and around the forest
area.
Ecotourism recognizes the principles of sustainable tourism. It
(a) minimizes environmental impact and thus has a small ecological
footprint and (b) contributes to conservation either through direct effort like reforestation, habitat restoration, or through nancial benets
(Zambrano, Broadbent, & Durham, 2010). The empirical study of
Badola and Hussain (2005) has revealed that the mangrove forests in
Bhitarkanika Conservation Area has helped villagers from natural disasters like super cyclone, ood etc. Local communities valued these functions of mangrove forests and so despite human-wildlife conict, the
attitudes of the local communities are not altogether negative. They
are also willing to participate in mangrove restoration and support conservation (Badola, Shibani, Hussain & Ainul, 2012). Development of forests through promotion of ecotourism in the reserve also helps in
mitigating carbon which can reduce green-house gas emissions which
is note worthy (Badola, 2010). Zambrano et al. (2010) in an attempt
to test of the efciency of Lapa Rios Ecolodge of the Osa Peninsula of
Costa Rica afrm that the lodge has made substantial contribution to
conservation and local people.
The Costa Rica Certication of Sustainable Tourism (CST) developed
by the Costa Rica Institute of Tourism has also been successful in
improving performance of the ecotourism destinations (Tepelus &
Cordobci, 2005). Apparently, such practices have ensured that certain
mammals and birds, which became extremely scarce, can now be
observed by residents and tourists with greater frequency (Wunder,
2000).
Dietz and Adger (2003) and Julianne and Thomas (2009) endeavor
to test the relationship between economic growth, biodiversity loss
and efforts to conserve biodiversity through Environment Kuznets's
Curve (EKC) hypothesis with a combination of panel and cross section
data. The EKC asserts that environmental damage increases initially
and then after a certain point of time it falls with rising income resulting
an inverted U shaped curve. However Dietz and Adger (2003) articulate that although economic drivers fuel environmental improvement,
the species cannot replenish in the same rate yielding a hyperbolic
EKC. However, Julianne and Thomas (2009) have been able to develop
EKC using estimates of per capita income and deforestation rates (index
of biodiversity threat) for 35 tropical countries. They nd that there occurs a U shaped relationship between increasing per capita income and
species conserved following the inverted U shaped relationship
between increase in per capita income and pollution. However, the support got eliminated while performing country specic panel data analysis. The authors therefore suggest that EKC is not a very genuine
representation of data and proper mechanism needs to be developed
for its use.
Nevertheless, a large number of articles posit ecotourism not to be
very effective in promoting conservation of biodiversity. Many authors
consider ecotourism as an instrument for revenue generation. The
word ecotourism is to attract customers, and thereby generate more
income. Many protected areas in developing countries is found to be
poorly planned, with the infrastructure and management inadequate
even unsuitable for ecotourism. The following section depicts many
problems of ecotourism that pose threat to successful conservation.
3.4.2. Ecotourism as a business policy
Isaacs (2000) criticizes ecotourism as a wildlife conservation strategy for its inability to insure the long term protection of environmental
assets. He claims that ecotourism is only a proxy market designed to attract customers. Ecotourism policies are designed to attract consumers'
preferences for recreation. In that process, revenue generation has
become the prime consideration and protection of environmental assets
has been kept aside. This is leading directly to environmental degradation. Honey (2008, Chap. 2) has therefore claimed in his book Ecotourism and sustainable development Who owns paradise? that Much

11

of what is marketed as ecotourism is simply conventional mass tourism

wrapped in a thin veneer of green (pp. 51). The author identies that
ecotourism is still in its infancy stage and therefore a broad set of principles and practices is to be derived that will give a new direction to the
so-called ecotourism industry. Many ecotourism sites lack proper infrastructure to consider them as ecotourism sites. Scheyvens (2000) cites
the case of Himalayan areas, where tourism has resulted in widespread
deforestation in some areas as lodges use wood for heating water and
rooms for tourists and cooking meals.
Kirkpatrick (2001) has given the example of Lower Gordon River,
one of the largest streams in Australia that attracted tourists for its highly scenic beauty of the reections of rainforest-covered banks and hills
on the still dark waters. With the increase in the tourists, some boat operators saw an opportunity to increase their prot by building faster
boats that enabled two trips a day. Soon fast boats run by different operators started racing with each other to grab more prot. This resulted
in the damage of the banks, fall of the trees into the water. The banks
also began to retreat at a rapid rate. The prot motive of the ecotourism
industry led to gradual decline of this World Heritage Area.
3.4.3. Conict between biodiversity conservation and ecotourism
The proponents of ecotourism have failed to see the threat caused by
such activities. Rise in the number of tourists, which exceeds the carrying capacity of the place, leads to very erosion of natural resources for
which tourists come (Drumm, 2008). The more elementary environmental critique against ecotourism is that it is usually based on extensive use of resources often including overseas transportation with
large CO2 emissions (Buckley, 2004). Lusseau and Higham (2004)
have conrmed that there is a proliferation of tour operators in response
to increased tourists' demand in the case of Doubtful Sound (New
Zealand). This has brought tremendous pressures on the population of
bottlenose dolphins the resident in the Sound. With the number of tourists increasing, there is an increase in the number of boats. While many
have permits, a large number of vessels do not have permission. It is so
as there are signicant commercial disadvantages associated with holding a permit because it ties operators to national responsibilities. As a result, these vessels venture into the critical zone hampering the habitat
and population of dolphins. Drum's viewpoint is awfully perplexing
when he considers that conservationists at the Nature Conservancy
have identied tourism as a threat in 78 international conservation
area plans because of its effect over the past seven years (pp. 782).
The failure of management in parks is eroding the very natural capital
that visitors travel to see. The author also has identied that if the current levels of investment continue, the tourism boom will simply destroy the biodiversity. Prime habitats will become degraded, wildlife
will become scarce, the quality of the visitor experience will decline,
and eventually ecotourism will fail completely as a policy.
Even in the case of Whale watching, Orams (2000) nds that the industry has expanded to 65 countries by 1995 from 12 countries in 1983.
The total economic benet from such activities totalled more than
US$550 million. But the impact of this industry on the life of these endangered wild animals is very much alarming. The close proximity of
the vessels to the whales, the noise and pollution of the vessels disturb
their natural behavioral pattern. Martin's (2007) review paper also
holds the same notion that the increase of whale shark-based ecotourism has serious impacts on their behavior, habitat, and ecology.
Cardenas-Torres, Enrquez-Andrade, and Rodrguez-Dowdell (2007))
point out that tourism activity is affecting the individual behavior of
the sharks Bahia de Los Angeles, considered as one of the most biologically productive areas in the Gulf of California and thus affecting the industry negatively. Thus the whale-watch operators must design the
tour uniquely that can help in conservation of these animals (Orams,
2000). The author has found a very important nding on customer satisfaction. The presence of whales and their behavior are important inuences on whale-watcher satisfaction rather than getting close to whales.
So the tour operators must come out of the traditional notion of

12

M. Das, B. Chatterjee / Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

customer satisfaction that the visitors want to get close to the animals.
In this process, they can actually help in conserving such magnicent
creature.
Such paradoxical issues are becoming more important in certain
cases as the focus point is more on tourism to generate revenues in
the name of responsible tourism. In the process, environment is getting
compromised as pointed out by Eijgelaar, Thaper, and Peeters (2010).
With the example of Antarctic cruise tourism the authors have unfolded
that the cruise passengers tripled from 2000 to 2007. The selling point of
such tourism is claimed to create environmental awareness for the destinations before it disappears and is therefore termed as responsible
tourism. However, no evidence of greater environmental awareness
among the tourists after their visit to such places is found by the authors.
Moreover such trips produce higher green house gasses and result in
signicant climate change. They have estimated that the total emissions
per passenger are 7.8 t CO2 per trip and 409 kg CO2 per day. Dawson,
Stewart, Lemelin, and Scott (2010) emphasize that climate change is
causing a substantial reduction in sea ice that is vital for survival of
Arctic wildlife species such as polar bears. The polar bear populations
in Western Hudson Bay in Canada declined by 22% between 1988 and
2004 mainly for such climate change. The polar bear viewing industry
is estimated to contribute 20,892 t/CO2 per season which is higher
than average activity emissions. Tourists are more interested to see
wildlife, including polar bears, beluga whales, walrus, seals, and penguins before they disappear completely and in the process also facilitate
in the extinction of such endangered species.
The impact of increase in the number of tourists for the growing popularity of ecotourism industry is not only limited to magnicent creatures like tigers, lions, whales, bear etc., but also it has number of
negative effects on birds (Steven, Pickering, & Castley, 2011). Kreiner,
Malikinson, Labinger, and Shtainvarz (2013) have found a cyclical interaction between the tourists and the birds. Increase in birds leads to increase in the number of tourists. But as the tourists increase, number of
birds decreases. Steven, Pickering, & Castley (2011) in their review
paper have found that such recreational activities like ecotourism alter
physiological responses of birds that include changes in temperature,
heart rate or stress hormone secretion. These activities also have negative impact on their immediate behavioral responses like changes in foraging, vigilance and evasion. In many instances, responses also include
changes in reproductive success and/or the number or density of birds.
The net effect of the protected areas is that the objective behind their creation is lost in the process. The investigation of Mllner, Linsenmair, &
Wikelski (2004) on effects of eco-tourists on the reproductive success
of hoatzins (Opisthocomus hoazin) and on hormonal status of their chicks
in Cuyabeno Reserve, Ecuador by comparing birds from undisturbed and
from tourist-exposed nests reects that chick survival is much lower at
tourist-exposed nests than at undisturbed nests.
Increased number of tourists in the marine protected areas also
causes much damage to coral reefs and marine organisms. Dive tourism
which is a major commercial activity in marine protected areas leads to
damage of the reefs for the direct physical contact of the divers with
their hands, body equipments and n (Hasler & Ott, 2008; Rouphael &
Inglis, 2001). Rouphael and Inglis (2001) have well presented the gender differences in environmental damage by the scuba divers in Great
Barrier Reef Marine Park, Australia. While female divers are more cautious and thus cause much harm, male counterparts are more adventurous causing more environmental damage to the reefs.
In few cases, the visitors also recognize that overuse of forests, vegetation damage, litter, and soil-erosion are a few but signicant problems that will worsen the natural experience that the site offers (Dixit
& Narula, 2010). It is so because too many visitors often lead to unsustainable usage (Kruger, 2005). The author has provided a very practical
line of argument that ecotourism is less sustainable in South America,
Asia and in island and mountain habitats. While scholars have exemplied Galapagos Island's growth through ecotourism, Kruger perceives
that lack of easy access to see wildlife in all these areas and high revenue

leakages for the structure of the economy stand as an obstacle for increase in tourists. While on the one hand, these difculties pose problem in bringing tourists, on the other hand more number of tourists
will put more pressure on the carrying capacity of the sites. Since the
vast majority of visitors are pleasure seekers, they are ignorant about
conservation, with attitudes and behavior incompatible with responsible ecotourism. Therefore, more tourists during the tourist season
have signicant negative impact on the wildlife behavior and habitat.
Often the ecotourism spots experience serious trail erosion due to a
high number of tourist and vehicles on certain tracks in a fragile area.
Kruger (2005) has cited problems like large scale habitat restoration
in Malaysia, track erosion in Costa Rican National Park, a world famous
ecotourism spot, and severe pollution by garbage in the Himalaya in
Nepal, and has asked the authorities to take proper initiatives to bridge
the gap between policies and practice.
Even the potential local benets of ecotourism can lead to environmental damage to a protected area without careful planning and management that balance ecological, social, and economic objectives. For
example, an increase in employment opportunities, road improvement,
technical assistance, or health care can stimulate migration of people
into the vicinity of the protected area (Gulinck et al., 2001). Baral and
Heinen (2007) from their study in Bardia National Park (BNP) and
Sukla Phanta Wildlife Reserve (SWR), Nepal, nd that both are under
threat of political turmoil, uncontrolled immigration, inefcient land reform policies and unsustainable resource use. Because of all such problems, the local cost outweighs the benets that the people receive from
parks to some extent.
In many articles, it is often pointed out that frequent human
presence inside the wild ecosystem may affect the growth of both
ora and fauna (Heltberg, Channing, & Sekhar, 2000; Laudati, 2010;
Linde-Rahr, 2003). Laudati (2010) has emphasized the effects of extending the territory of park land into the private land of rural farmers.
The dispossession of private land and loss of control over the land use
necessitate farmers to venture into wildlife areas for food and survival.
This leads to severe loss of life for which the author claims that people
residing near Bwindi National Park, Uganda consider that ecotourism
is a Trojan horse. The locals in Western Terai landscape of Nepal also
have the same kind of view that non-availability of alternative sources
of livelihood compels them to depend heavily on forest resources
which affect in meeting the objective of ecotourism. On the other
hand increase in the number of wild animals for the protected status
of the wildlife sanctuaries has resulted in increase in people-wildlife
conict. The lives of the people and also the live stocks are at risk.
Though people receive compensation for loss, these are inadequate
and the process is very tedious. This makes the benet not worth of
(Sawhney, 2003). Moreover the problem of political turmoil, uncontrolled immigration, and inefcient land reform policies along with
the most dreadful unsustainable resource use distorts the very concept
of ecotourism (Baral & Heinen, 2007). Gossling et al. (2005) through
their different case studies have questioned the eco-efciency of ecotourism. Their analysis has reected that ecotourism does not always
serve the purpose of reducing green-house gas emissions. Giving the example of Seychelles, they have given a very shocking truth that concurrent emissions of CO2-e are seven times larger in Seychelles than the
world average.
The authors who have supported ecotourism development in
protected areas consider that ecotourism provides an alternative to
the exploitative use of environmental resources. Ecotourism as explained by the authors recognizes the principles of sustainable tourism,
as it minimizes environmental impact and contributes to conservation
either through direct effort like reforestation and habitat restoration,
or through indirect effort like nancial benets. However, many authors
have also pointed out that the potential local benets of ecotourism can
lead to environmental damage to a protected area without careful planning and management that balance ecological, social, and economic objectives. Considering many examples from the world, the authors have

M. Das, B. Chatterjee / Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

questioned the eco-efciency of ecotourism. Their analysis has reected

that ecotourism does not always serve the purpose of biodiversity
conservation.
3.5. Conict management between biodiversity conservation
and ecotourism
Eco-labeling often induces rms to adopt green technologies that
can reduce pollution (Amacher, Koskela & Ollikainen, 2004). Thus in,
the midst of an array of problems, ecotourism will help in retaining as
much as possible of what remains of wild nature through a sensible
combination of sustainable use, conservation and compensation for
local people wherever necessary, makes a great economic sense
(Balmford et al., 2002). Looking at our callous attitude toward exploitation of natural habitats, it is very much imperative that overall human
welfare is eroding for short-term private gain. Lack of clear conceptualization of ecotourism as well as struggle between the traditional and
conventional values by the locals often create major problems. A bright
example of Kimana Wildlife Sanctuary, Kenya can be given here. The
sanctuary that was awarded the prestigious Silver Otter, in 1996 by
the British Guild of Travel Writers (BGTW) is now criticized for the institutional failure and corruptive practice. This has led to increasing resentment by the Kimana community (Southgate, 2006). Lack of the
possession of related resources including nance and management
skill as well as knowledge to get involved in ecotourism development
are also some of the major barriers resulting in withdrawal of community support. The Maasai Group living near Kenya's Amboseli National
Park raises their voices as It is we the Maasai who suffer from conservation. Wild animals eat our grass, kill our animals, destroy our shambas
and kill our people yet Kenya Wildlife Service only gives us a token
compensation, (pp. 87). It is to be noted here that the park attracts
more than 200,000 tourists annually. But few Maasai have derived any
substantial benets from the thriving tourism sector. While some local
men and youths have gained employment as waiters and guards,
many jobs are lled by non-Maasai Kenyans. Even the traditional
Maasai dances which entertain safari tourists each evening are now performed by non-Maasai Kenyans (Southgate, 2006).
All such policy drawbacks that raise conict between people and
policy are to be given due attention (Lai & Nepal, 2006). Therefore to
make the policy a successful one, ecotourism should be introduced in
a progressive way with proper planning and be accompanied by a general educational pilot program related to sustainable use of natural and
cultural resources (Gulinck et al., 2001). Once conservation in integrated with the development needs of the people, it will be a successful policy (Safafsky, 2011).
Proper management of the ecotourism sites is one of the major key
factors of their success. The dynamics of the three major stakeholders:
(a) resources, (b) community, and (c) tourists are most important for
the success of ecotourism and thus they are to be managed properly.
To protect resources and meet the conservation strategies, the administrative body must restrict the scope of recreational use (Robinson,
Torvik, & Verdier, 2006). Strategies like carrying capacity, regulatory
practices for the vehicles, and code of conduct for the tourists should
be introduced so as to minimize the negative effect of rising number
of eco-tourists (Tsaur, Lin, & Lin, 2006). The notion of criteria and indicators (C&I) for sustainable forest management (SFM) is another technique that can be used to assess the activities and suggest some
guidelines towards better management of natural resources (Dutta,
Guha, & Chattopadhyay, 2010). Involvement of the local community in
the entire process is another key element of success in such conservational policies, because sustainable management of protected areas ultimately depends on the co-operation and support of the local people
(Owinio, Jillo, & Kenana, 2012; Tomievi, Margaret, & Milovanovi,
2010; Tsaur et al., 2006; Karanth, Kramer, Qian, & Christensen, 2008;
Ghate, 2013). public compensation and community co-management
should be introduced to solve the conicts between community

13

economy development and biodiversity conservation (Chen et al.,

2005). More awareness campaigns for both the locals and the tourists
will also help in the conservation policies (Isaacs, 2000; Tsaur et al.,
2006).Thus all the related agencies-governments, the local authorities,
the visitors, the local community, and the developers as well as the operators have to be sensitive to the environment and local traditions and
follow a set of guidelines for the successful development of ecotourism.
In addition, non-governmental organizations and scientic and research
institutions must play a key role in the development of ecotourism
(Khanna, 2002). Reynolds & Braithwaite (2001) also mention in the
same line and proclaim that a wide range of management techniques
like differential tax system, educating both visitors and operators will
go a long way in achieving sustainability.
Winwin scenarios, where both natural resources are conserved
and human well-being is improved in ecotourism sites are though difcult but not impossible to realize (McShane et al., 2011). Long term initiatives to integrate conservation, education, research and capacity
building will help locals to know more about their biodiversity and
why they should protect it (ekerciolu, 2012). A variety of environmental indicators should be used to reect the trends in the environment and monitor the progress made in achieving environmental
policy targets. As such, environmental indicators like DPSIR (Driving
forces, Pressure, State, Impact, and Response) can be used which can
help policy-makers for better policy formulation (Gabrielsen & Bosch,
2003; Maxim, Spangenberg, & O'Connor, 2009). Gibson et al.'s (2005)
eight criteria for sustainability as used in Lambert's (2009) thesis,
e.g., Socio-ecological integrity, Efciency, Sufciency, Opportunity,
Intra- & Inter-generational equity, Civility and democracy, Precaution
and Immediate and long term integration are also useful for the policy
makers.
Development of some recognition schemes such as Costa Rica Certication for Sustainable Tourism (CST) in Costa Rica, Australian Nature
and Ecotourism Accreditation Program (NEAP) in Australia, Nature's
best in Sweden can also be prepared to evaluate environmental, social
and economic impacts of ecotourism (Haaland & Aas, 2010; Tepelus &
Cordobci, 2005). What should be more important is that the certication programs should updated periodically to get better results. The involvement of the professionals to undertake research in updating the
criterions will denitely yield better results. Along with the certication
programs, introduction of external auditing and accreditation will facilitate in improving the operation of the system. The system of external
auditing will also help in getting rid of the accusations like green
washing (Haaland & Aas, 2010). Thus all these monitoring and evaluation tools of the ecotourism sites will help in proper management of the
sites (Rio, & Nunes, 2012).
4. Conclusion
Most of the literature about ecotourism and its impact analysis are
qualitative one. The authors have mostly used descriptive analysis to
come to a conclusion.
Considering the experiences of ecotourism throughout the world,
the present paper concludes that undoubtedly ecotourism has proven
to be an effective environmental conservation tool in many cases. The
success stories of Galapagos Islands, Costa Rica's ecotourism spots,
Chitwan National Park (Nepal), Sunderbans (India), Periyar Tiger
Reserve (India), Kilum-Ijim National Park (Central Africa), Cuyabeno
Wildlife Reserve (Ecuadorian Amazon region), community based tourism in Indonesia etc. are examples of such success stories. These stories
reect properly organized ecotourism, which enables local people to
augment their livelihood security through employment in ecotourism
related activities and small enterprise development. Regular economic
gains from formal or informal sector employment and business opportunities empower the community economically. The economic empowerment results in improved infrastructures, health facilities, awareness
and education of the locals which in turn empowers them socially.

14

M. Das, B. Chatterjee / Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

Increase in standard of living of the locals also fosters respect for their
own culture and helps them to participate in the program leading to cultural and political empowerment respectively. External recognition and
appreciation of their resources boost their morale giving rise to psychological well-being. This inculcates a positive attitude in their minds toward conservation and ecotourism succeeds. Biodiversity becomes an
income generating asset that works rationally for natural resource conservation. Therefore the study has found a mutual interdependence
among the economic and socio-cultural aspects of ecotourism and conservation of natural resources.
However, it is creating detrimental conditions to the natural areas
owing to its mis-utilization. Many ecotourism spots are now facing
growing disgruntlement at the local level hampering the very success
of ecotourism policies. Tiger reserves like Kanha, Ranthambore, and
Corbett National Parks in India, Antarctic cruise tourism, polar bear
tourism, whale watch tourism, and dolphin watch tourism have generated much revenue for the people. With ecotourism becoming more
popular, there is an increase in tourists. Increase in tourists leads to
more job opportunities for people. But to our surprise, these ecotourism
sites have not been successful for meeting the objective of environmental conservation for lack of proper management of protected areas and
environmental consciousness among the tourists. In some cases like
Lovina higher income induces inux of people in terms of migration
and these results negatively on wildlife and their habitat. Growing inequity in Komodo National Park (Indonesia), Keoladeo National Park
(India), Gonarezhou National Park (Zimbabwe), and Puerto Princesa
Subterranean River National Park (Palawan, Philippines) results in the
negative attitude of the locals for ecotourism. Growing people-policy
conict in Taijiang National Park (Taiwan), Puerto Bolivar (Ecuador),
Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve (India), and Woolong Natural Reserve
(China) reects that the policy sometimes fail to address the needs of
the indigenous communities properly. In those protected areas environment is put above local people. In many cases it results in increasing
quarrying, deforestation and encroachments like in Central Cardamom
Protected Forest (Cambodia).
All these cases reect the failure of ecotourism to espouse the underlying principles of biodiversity conservation. The reasons behind the
problems associated with ecotourism are numerous like (1) revenue
leakages, as labor is drawn from urban sector instead of focusing on
training of unskilled or less-skilled locals, (2) inequitable distribution
of income among the locals, (3) compulsory displacement for the creation of national parks leading to large scale loss of land, homelessness,
food insecurity, loss of lives and increase in morbidity, (4) restrictions
in accessing sanctuary resulting in joblessness and (5) damage to crop
and livestock by wildlife, (6) sticking only to gun and guard approach
for preservation, (7) crowding, crime, begging, prostitution etc. associated with the increase in the number of tourists in ecotourism spots,
(8) insensitive attitude of the tourist, (9) lack of education for visitors
as well as locals and (10) policy gap in terms of poor planning and improper and unethical management of ecotourism. All such problems infuse negative attitude in the minds of the locals and ecotourism as a
policy fails. Considering large failures of ecotourism, one can point out
that ecotourism at present is a predicament.
However, there is much hope for ecotourism in spite of the various
loopholes in the realm of its implementation. At present economic incentives play a major role in number of sites leading to partial success
of ecotourism leaving much scope for socio-cultural betterment and environmental conservation. Once there is a wholesome development, it
will undoubtedly be a panacea for all the predicaments. The policy
drawbacks are to be addressed adequately. Involvement of the local
people through their awareness will develop their interest in such policies and they will consider themselves as stakeholders. Educating tourists about conservation and infusing awareness in them will also help in
such conservation policies. Government should also take positive steps
through proper monitoring and evaluation of the ecotourism sites.
Proper management of the sites at each of economic, social and

environmental will also help in long term conservation. Thus one

hopes to look for a positive shift in the attitude of the locals toward conservational policies.
References
Abbot, J.I.O., Thomas, D.H.L., Gardner, A.A., Neba, S.E., & Khen, M.W. (2001). Understanding the links between conservation and development in the Bamenda Highland,
Cameroon. World Development, 29(7), 11151136.
Amacher, S.G., Koskela, E., & Ollikainen, M. (2004). Environmental quality competition
and eco labeling. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 47, 284306.
Arjunan, M., Holmes, C., Puyravaud, J.P., & Davidar, P. (2006). Do developmental initiatives inuence local attitudes toward conservation? A case study from the Kalakad
Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, India. Journal of Environmental Management, 79(2),
188197.
Ashley, C. (2002). Methodology for pro poor tourism case studies. PPT working paper no.
10 (Retrieved from http://195.130.87.21:8080/dspace/bitstream/123456789/436/1/
Methodology%20for%20pro-poor%20tourism%20case%20studies.pdf. on 20th August
2013).
Badola, R. (2010). An assessment of ecosystem services of Corbett Tiger Reserve, India.
Environmentalist, 30(4), 320329.
Badola, R., & Hussain, S.A. (2003). Conict in paradise: Women and protected areas in the
Indian Himalayas Mountain. Research and Development, 23(3), 234237.
Badola, R., & Hussain, S.A. (2005). Valuing ecosystem functions: An empirical study on the
storm protection function of Bhitarkanika mangrove ecosystem in India.
Environmental Conservation, 32(1), 8592.
Badola, R., Shibani, B., Hussain, & Ainul, S. (2012). Attitudes of local communities towards
conservation of mangrove forests: A case study from the east coast of India. Estuarine,
Coastal and Shelf Science, 96, 188196.
Balmford, A., Bruner, A., Cooper, P., Costanza, R., Farber, S., Green, R.E., et al. (2002).
Economic reasons for conserving wild nature. Science, 297(5583), 950953.
Banerjee, A. (2010, March 06). Tourism in protected areas: Worsening prospects for
tigers. EPW, XLV(10).
Baral, N., & Heinen, J.T. (2007). Resource use, conservation attitude, management interventions, and park-people relations in the western Terai landscape of Nepal.
Environmental Conservation, 34(1), 6472.
Blangy, S., & Mehta, H. (2006). Ecotourism and ecological restoration. Journal for Nature
Conservation, 34(14), 233236.
Buckley, R. (Ed.). (2004). Environmental impacts of ecotourism. Wallingford: CABI
Publishing.
Butcher, J. (2006). The United Nations International Year of Ecotourism: A critical analysis
of development implications. Progress in Development Studies, 6, 146156.
Cardenas-Torres, N., Enrquez-Andrade, R., & Rodrguez-Dowdell, N. (2007).
Community-based management through ecotourism in Bahia de los Angeles,
Mexico. Fisheries Research, 84(1), 114118.
Cattarinich, X. (2001). Pro-poor tourism initiatives in developing countries: Analysis of
secondary case studies. PPT working paper no. 8 (Retrieved on 22nd August, 2013
from http://195.130.87.21:8080/dspace/bitstream/123456789/449/1/Propoor%
20tourism%20initiatives%20in%20developing%20countries%20analysis%20of%
20secondary%20case%20studies.pdf).
Cernea, M.M., & Schmidt-Soltau, K. (2006). Poverty risks and national parks: Policy issues
in conservation and resettlement. World Development, 34(10), 18081830.
Chen, Z., Yang, J., & Xie, Z. (2005). Economic development of local communities and biodiversity conservation: A case study from Shennongjia National Nature Reserve,
China. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14(9), 20952108.
Coria, J., & Calfucura, E. (2012). Ecotourism and the development of indigenous communities: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Ecological Economics, 73(15), 4755.
Counsell, S. (2005). Greenbacks in the Garden of Eden. Linking Circles, IV: International
Funders for Indigenous Peoples, Conference Report, New York.
Das, S. (2011, September 10). Ecotourism, sustainable development and the Indian state.
EPW, XLVI(37).
Dawson, j., Stewart, E.J., Lemelin, H., & Scott, D. (2010). The carbon cost of polar
bear viewing tourism in Churchill, Canada. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(3),
319336.
Delang, C.O. (2006). Not just the minor forest products: The economic rationale for the
consumption of wild food plants by subsistence farmers. Ecological Economics, 59,
6473.
Dietz, S., & Adger, W.N. (2003). Economic growth, biodiversity loss and conservation
efforts. Journal of Environmental Management, 68(1), 2335.
Dixit, S.K., & Narula, V.K. (2010). Ecotourism in Madhav National Park: Visitor's perspectives on environment impacts. South Asian Journal of Tourism & Heritage, 3(2),
109115.
Drumm, A. (2008). The threshold of sustainability for protected areas. Bioscience, 58(9),
782783.
Dutta, D., Guha, P., & Chattopadhyay, R.N. (2010). Application of criteria and indicators in
community based sustainable mangrove management in the Sunderbans, India.
Ocean and Coastal Management, 53(8), 468477.
Eijgelaar, E., Thaper, C., & Peeters, P. (2010). Antarctic cruise tourism: The paradoxes of
ambassadorship, last chance tourism and greenhouse gas emissions. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 18(3), 337354.
Fuller, D., Buultjens, J., & Cummings, E. (2005). Ecotourism and indigenous microenterprise formation in northern Australia opportunities and constraints. Tourism
Management, 26(6), 891904.
Gabrielsen, P., & Bosch, P. (2003). Environmental indicators: Typology and use in
reporting. European Environment Agency (EEA) internal working paper. Copenhagen.

M. Das, B. Chatterjee / Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

Ghate, R. (2013). Global gains at local costs: Imposing protected areas: Evidence
from Central India. Retrieved on 25th May from http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/
tsdw20
Goodwin, H. (2002). Local community involvement in tourism around national parks:
Opportunities and constraints. Current Issues in Tourism, 5(34), 338360.
Gossling, S., Peters, P., Ceron, J.P., Dubois, G., Patterson, T., & Richardson, R.B. (2005). The
eco-efciency of tourism. Ecological Economics, 54(4), 417437.
Guha, I., & Ghosh, S. (2007). Does tourism contribute to local livelihoods? A case study of
tourism, poverty and conservation in the Indian Sundarbans. SANDEE working paper
no. 26 (ISSN 1893-1891).
Gulinck, H., Vyverman, N., Bouchout, K.V., & Gobin, A. (2001). Landscape as framework for
integrating local subsistence and ecotourism: A case study in Zimbabwe. Landscape
and Urban Planning, 53, 173182.
Gyan, P., & Nyaupane, S.P. (2011). Linkages among biodiversity, livelihood, and tourism.
Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 13441366.
Haaland, H., & Aas, . (2010). Ecotourism certication Does it make a difference? A
comparison of systems from Australia, Costa Rica and Sweden. Scandinavian Journal
of Hospitality and Tourism, 10(3), 375385.
Hasler, H., & Ott, J.A. (2008). Diving down the reefs? Intensive diving tourism
threatens the reefs of the northern Red Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 56(10),
17881794.
He, G., Chen, X., Liu, W., Bearer, S., Zhou, S., Cheng, L.Y., et al. (2008). Distribution of economic benets from ecotourism: A case study of Wolong nature reserve for giant
pandas in China. Environmental Management, 42(6), 10171025.
Heltberg, R., Channing, A., & Sekhar, N. (2000). Fuelwood consumption and forest degradation: A household model for domestic energy substitution in rural India. Land
Economics, 76(2), 213232.
Holden, A. (2003). In need of new environmental ethics for tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research, 30(1), 94108.
Holland, J., Burian, M., & Dixey, L. (2003). Tourism in poor rural areas. PPT working paper
no. 12. ODI, IIED, ICRT (Retrieved on 25th August, 2013 from http://www.odi.org.uk/
RPEG/PPT/WP12.pdf).
Honey, M. (2008). Ecotourism and sustainable development, who owns paradise? (2nd ed.).
Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
Horton, L.R. (2009). Buying up nature: Economic and social impacts of Costa Rica's ecotourism boom. Latin American Perspectives, 166(36), 93107.
Hoyt, E. (2005). Sustainable ecotourism on Atlantic Islands, with special reference to
whale watching, marine protected areas and sanctuaries for cetaceans. Biology and
Environment: Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, 105b(3), 141154.
Hsu, H., & Lin, J. (2013). Benets beyond boundaries: A slogan or reality? A case study of
Taijiang National Park in Taiwan. Tourism Management Perspectives, 6, 4152.
http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf.docs/PNADB952.pdf
http://www.ecoclub.com/library/epapers/13.pdf
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsdw20
http://www.unep.fr/scp/publications/details.asp?id=WEB/0078/PA
http://www.unwto.org
Hussain, S.A., & Badola, R. (2010). Valuing mangrove benets: Contribution of mangrove
forests to local livelihoods in Bhitarkanika Conservation Area, East Coast of India.
Wetlands Ecological Management, 18, 321331.
Information Brochure, Mangrove forest division (WL), Rajnagar, Kendrapara, Odisha.
Integrating business skills into ecotourism operations (2012). Kuoni, Switzerland: International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
Isaacs, J.C. (2000). The limited potential of ecotourism to contribute to wildlife conservation. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 28(1), 6169.
Jalani, J.O. (2012). Local people's perception on the impacts and importance of ecotourism
in Sabang, Palawan, Philippines. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 57(9),
247254.
Julianne, H.M., & Thomas, A.W. (2009). Economic prosperity, biodiversity conservation, and the environmental Kuznets curve. Ecological Economics, 6(8),
20872095.
Karanth, K.K., Kramer, R.A., Qian, S.S., & Christensen, N.L., Jr. (2008). Examining conservation attitudes, perspectives, and challenges in India. Biological Conservation, 141(9),
23572367.
Khanna, M. K. (2002). Guidelines for ecotourism in and around protected areas. Retrieved
on 10th July 2012 from http://www.apo-tokyo.org/gp/e_publi/gplinkeco/10chapter8.
pdf.
Kirkpatrick, J.B. (2001). Ecotourism, local and indigenous people, and the conservation of
the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area. Journal of the Royal Society of New
Zealand, 31(4), 819829.
Kiss, A. (2004). Is community-based ecotourism (CBET) a good use of biodiversity conservation? Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 19(5), 232237.
Kolbe, R., & Brunette, M. (1991). Content analysis research: an examination of applications with directives for improving research, reliability and objectivity. Journal of
Consumer Research, 18(2), 243250.
Kreiner, N.C., Malikinson, D., Labinger, Z., & Shtainvarz, R. (2013). Are birders good for
birds? Bird conservation through tourism management in the Hula Valley, Israel.
Tourism Management, 38, 3142.
Kruger, O. (2005). The role of ecotourism in conservation: panacea or Pandora's box?
Biodiversity and Conservation, 14, 579600.
Kumar, S. (2002). Wildlife tourism in India: Need to tread with care. In B.D. Sharma (Ed.),
Indian wildlife: Threats and preservation (pp. 7294). New Delhi: Anmol Publications.
Lai, P.H., & Nepal, S.K. (2006). Local perspectives of ecotourism development in Tawushan
Nature Reserve, Taiwan. Tourism Management, 27(6), 11171129.
Lambert, E.E. (2009). Nature island tourism: Applying an eco-tourism sustainability framework to the island of Dominica. (Master's Thesis, Retrieved on 2nd September, 2012
from Proquest Dissertations and Theses).

15

Laudati, A.A. (2010). The encroaching forest: Struggles over land and resources on the
boundary of Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda. Society and Natural
Resources, 23(8), 76789.
Li, W. (2004). Environmental management indicators for ecotourism in China's nature reserves: A case study in Tianmushan Nature Reserve. Tourism Management, 25(5),
559564.
Li, T., & Cavusgil, S. (1995). A classication and assessment of research streams in international marketing. International Business Review, 4(3), 251277.
Libosada, C.M., Jr. (2009). Business or leisure? Economic development and resource
protection-concepts and practices in sustainable tourism. Ocean and Coastal
Management, 52(7), 390394.
Linde-Rahr, M. (2003). Property rights and deforestation: The choice of fuel wood source
in rural Vietnam. Land Economics, 79, 217234.
Lusseau, D., & Higham, J.E.S. (2004). Managing the impacts of dolphin-based tourism
through the denition of critical habitats: The case of bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops
spp.) in Doubtful Sound, New Zealand. Tourism Management, 25(6), 657667.
Maikhuri, R.K., Nautiyal, S., Rao, K.S., & Saxena, K.G. (2001). Conservation policy-people
conicts: A case study from Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, a world heritage site,
India. Forest Policy and Economic, 2(34), 355365.
Martin, R.A. (2007). A review of behavioural ecology of whale sharks (Rhincodon typus).
Fisheries Research, 84(1), 1016.
Maxim, L., Spangenberg, J.H., & O'Connor, M. (2009). An analysis of risks for biodiversity
under the DPSIR framework. Ecological Economics, 69, 1223.
McShane, T.O., Hirsch, P.D., Trung, T.C., Songorwa, A.N., Kinzig, A., Monteferri, B., et al.
(2011). Hard choices: Making trade-offs between biodiversity conservation and
human well-being. Biological Conservation, 144(3), 966972.
Mihalic, T. (2000). Environmental management of a tourist destination: A factor of tourism competitiveness. Tourism Management, 21(1), 6575.
Mishra, B.K., Badola, R., & Bharadwaj, A.K. (2009). Social issues and concerns in biodiversity conservation: Experiences from wildlife protected areas in India. Tropical Ecology,
50(1), 147161.
Mllner, A., Linsenmair, K.E., & Wikelski, M. (2004). Exposure to ecotourism reduces survival and affects stress response in hoatzin chicks (Opisthocomus Hoazin). Biological
Conservation, 118(4), 549558.
Mustika, P.L.K., Birtles, A., Welters, R., & Marsh, H. (2012). The economic inuence of community based dolphin watching on a local economy in a developing country:
Implications for conservation. Ecological Economics, 79, 1120.
Nyuapane, G.P., & Poudel, S. (2011). Linkages among biodiversity, livelihood and tourism.
Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 13441366.
Orams, M.B. (2000). Tourists getting close to whales, is it what whale-watching is all
about? Tourism Management, 21(6), 561569.
Owinio, O.A., Jillo, A.H., & Kenana, M.L. (2012). Socio-economics and wildlife conservation
of a peri-urban national park in central Kenya. Journal for Nature Conservation, 20(6),
384392.
Parras, D.A. (2001). Coastal Resource Management in the Philippines: A Case Study in the
Central Visayas Region. Journal of Environment & Development, 10(1), 80103.
Perkins, H., & Grace, D.A. (2014). Ecotourism: Supply of nature or tourist demand? Journal
of Ecotourism, 8(3), 223236.
Reimer, J.K. (Kila), & Walter, P. (2013). How do you know it when you see it?
Community-based ecotourism in the Cardamom Mountains of southwestern
Cambodia. Tourism Management, 34, 122132.
Reynolds, P.C., & Braithwaite, D. (2001). Towards a conceptual framework for wildlife
tourism. Tourism Management, 22(1), 3142.
Rio, D., & Nunes, L.M. (2012). Monitoring and evaluation tool for tourism destinations.
Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 6466.
Robinson, J.A., Torvik, R., & Verdier, T. (2006). Political foundations of the resource curse.
Journal of Development Economics, 79, 447468.
Rouphael, A.B., & Inglis, G.J. (2001). Take only photographs and leave only footprints?:
An experimental study of the impacts of underwater photographers on coral reef
dive sites. Biological Conservation, 100(3), 281287.
Rowat, D., & Engelhardt, U. (2007). Seychelles: A case study of community involvement in
the development of whale shark ecotourism and its socio-economic impact. Fisheries
Research, 84(1), 109113.
Salafsky, N. (2011). Integrating development with conservation: A means to a
conservation end or a mean end to conservation? Biological Conservation, 144(3),
973978.
Salafsky, N., & Wollenberg, E. (2000). Linking livelihoods and conservation: A conceptual
framework and scale for assessing the integration of human needs and biodiversity.
World Development, 28(8), 14211438.
Salvador, S., Clavero, M., & Pitman, R.L. (2011). Large mammal species richness and habitat use in an upper Amazonian forest used for ecotourism. Mammalian Biology, 76(2),
115123.
Sawhney, P. (2003). Peoplepark interaction: A case of Bandhavgarh National Park, India.
In P. Velk, M. Denish, C. Martius, & N. Giesen (Eds.), Ecology and Development Series
No. 5. (pp. 29154).
Scheyvens, R. (2000). Promoting women's empowerment through involvement in ecotourism: Experiences from the third world. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(3),
232249.
Scheyvens, R. (2007). Exploring the tourism-poverty nexus. In C.M. Hall (Ed.), Pro-poor
tourism: Who benets? Perspectives on tourism and poverty reduction (pp. 121144).
Clevedon, England: Channel View.
Seetanah, B. (2011). Assessing the dynamic economic impact of tourism for island economies. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 291308.
ekerciolu, C.H. (2012). Promoting community-based bird monitoring in the tropics:
Conservation, research, environmental education, capacity-building, and local incomes. Biological Conservation, 151, 6973.

16

M. Das, B. Chatterjee / Tourism Management Perspectives 14 (2015) 316

Sekhar, N.U. (2003). Local people's attitudes towards conservation and wildlife tourism
around Sariska Tiger Reserve, India. Journal of Environmental Management, 69(4),
339347.
Shah, A. (2007, Jul. 1420). Management of protected areas: Exploring an alternative in
Gir. EPW, 42(No. 27/28).
Sharpley, R. (2000). Tourism and sustainable development. Exploring the theoretical
divide. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(1), 119.
Sharpley, R. (2006). Ecotourism: A consumption perspective. Journal of Ecotourism,
5(12), 722.
Southgate, C.R.J. (2006). Ecotourism in Kenya: The vulnerability of communities. Journal
of Ecotourism, 5(12), 8096.
Springer, J. (2009). Addressing the social impacts of conservation: Lessons from experience and future directions. Conservation and Society, 7(1), 2629.
Starmer-Smith, C. (2004, November 6). Ecofriendly tourism on the rise. Daily Telegraph
Travel, 6.
Steven, R., Pickering, C., & Castley, J.G. (2011). A review of the impacts of nature based recreation on birds. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(10), 22872294.
Stone, K., Bhat, M., Bhatta, R., & Mathews, A. (2008). Factors inuencing community participation in mangroves restoration A contingent valuation analysis. Ocean and
Coastal Management, 51(6), 476484.
Stronza, A. (2007). The economic promise of ecotourism for conservation. Journal of
Ecotourism, 6(3), 210221.
Surendran, A., & Sekhar, C. (2011). A comparative analysis on the socio-economic welfare
of dependents of the Anamalai Tiger Reserve (ATR) in India. Margin: The Journal of
Applied Economic Research, 5(3), 361379.
Sutawa, G.K. (2012). Issues on Bali tourism development and community empowerment
to support sustainable tourism development. Procedia Economics and Finance, 4,
413422.
Taylor, J.E., Hardner, J., & Stewart, M. (2006). Ecotourism and economic growth in the
Galapagos: An island economy-wide analysis. Working paper no. 06-001. Davis: Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics University of California.
Tepelus, C.M., & Cordobci, R.C. (2005). Recognition schemes in tourism From eco to sustainability? Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(2), 135140.
Thien, O.S. (2009). Women empowerment through tourismFrom social entrepreneur perspective. (Master's Thesis) Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen University
And Research Centre (WUR).
Tomievi, J., Margaret, A., & Milovanovi, M. (2010). Socio-economic impacts on the attitudes towards conservation of natural resources: Case study from Serbia. Forest Policy
and Economics, 12, 157162.
Tosun, C. (2000). Limits to community participation in the tourism development process
in developing countries. Tourism Management, 21, 613633.

Tsaur, S., Lin, Y., & Lin, j. (2006). Evaluating ecotourism sustainability from the integrated
perspective of resource, community and tourism. Tourism Management, 27(4),
640653.
Wood, M.E. (2002). Ecotourism: principles, practices, & policies for sustainability. United Nations Publication.
Wu, Y., Wang, H., & Ho, Y. (2010). Urban ecotourism: Dening and assessing dimensions
using fuzzy number construction. Tourism Management, 31, 739743.
Wunder, S. (2000). Ecotourism and economic incentivesAn empirical approach.
Ecological Economics, 32(3), 465479 (www.ecotourism.org.).
Zambrano, A.A., Broadbent, A.N., & Durham, W.H. (2010). Social and environmental effects of ecotourism in the Osa Peninsula of Costa Rica: The Lapa Rios case. Journal of
Ecotourism, 9(1), 6283.
Madhumita Das is a research scholar at the Department
of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of
Technology, Kharagpur and is currently working on her
Ph.D. thesis on the impacts of ecotourism. She has a special
interest in sustainable tourism management and currently
focuses in ecotourism practices at Bhitarkanika National
Park, Odisha, India.

Bani Chatterjee is currently serving as a professor of

Economics at the Department of Humanities and Social
Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur. She has
a long teaching and research experience of more than 40
years. She has guided many scholars and has a large number
of research articles in reputed journal and edited books. She
has also served many administrative positions such as dean,
head, board of governing members etc.