A standards organization, standards body, standards developing organization (SDO), or standards setting organization (SSO)
is an organization whose primary function is developing, coordinating,
promulgating, revising, amending, reissuing, interpreting, or otherwise
contributing to the usefulness of technical standards
to those who employ them. Such an organization works to create
uniformity across producers, consumers, government agencies, and other
relevant parties regarding terminology, product specifications (e.g.
size, including units of measure), protocols, and more. Its goals could
include ensuring that Company A's external hard drive works on Company
B's computer, an individual's blood pressure measures the same with
Company C's sphygmomanometer as it does with Company D's, or that all shirts that should not be ironed have the same icon (a clothes iron crossed out with an X) on the label.
Most standards are voluntary in the sense that they are offered
for adoption by people or industry without being mandated in law. Some
standards become mandatory when they are adopted by regulators as legal
requirements in particular domains, often for the purpose of safety or
for consumer protection from deceitful practices.
The term formal standard refers specifically to a specification that has been approved by a standards setting organization. The term de jure standard refers to a standard mandated by legal requirements or refers generally to any formal standard. In contrast, the term de facto standard
refers to a specification (or protocol or technology) that has achieved
widespread use and acceptance – often without being approved by any
standards organization (or receiving such approval only after it already
has achieved widespread use). Examples of de facto standards that were
not approved by any standards organizations (or at least not approved
until after they were in widespread de facto use) include the Hayes command set developed by Hayes, Apple's TrueType font design and the PCL protocol used by Hewlett-Packard in the computer printers they produced.
Normally, the term standards organization is not used to
refer to the individual parties participating within the standards
developing organization in the capacity of founders, benefactors, stakeholders, members or contributors, who themselves may function as or lead the standards organizations.
History
Standardization
Graphic representation of formulae for the pitches of threads of screw bolts
Maudslay's work, as well as the contributions of other engineers,
accomplished a modest amount of industry standardization; some
companies' in-house standards spread a bit within their industries. Joseph Whitworth's
screw thread measurements were adopted as the first (unofficial)
national standard by companies around the country in 1841. It came to be
known as the British Standard Whitworth, and was widely adopted in other countries.
Early standards organizations
By
the end of the 19th century differences in standards between companies
was making trade increasingly difficult and strained. For instance, an
iron and steel dealer recorded his displeasure in The Times:
"Architects and engineers generally specify such unnecessarily diverse
types of sectional material or given work that anything like economical
and continuous manufacture becomes impossible. In this country no two
professional men are agreed upon the size and weight of a girder to employ for given work".
The Engineering Standards Committee was established in London in 1901 as the world's first national standards body.
It subsequently extended its standardization work and became the
British Engineering Standards Association in 1918, adopting the name
British Standards Institution in 1931 after receiving its Royal Charter
in 1929. The national standards were adopted universally throughout the
country, and enabled the markets to act more rationally and efficiently,
with an increased level of cooperation.
In 1904, Crompton represented Britain at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition in St. Louis, Missouri, as part of a delegation by the Institute of Electrical Engineers.
He presented a paper on standardization, which was so well received
that he was asked to look into the formation of a commission to oversee
the process. By 1906 his work was complete and he drew up a permanent
terms for the International Electrotechnical Commission.
The body held its first meeting that year in London, with
representatives from 14 countries. In honour of his contribution to
electrical standardization, Lord Kelvin was elected as the body's first President.
After the war, ISA was approached by the recently formed United
Nations Standards Coordinating Committee (UNSCC) with a proposal to form
a new global standards body. In October 1946, ISA and UNSCC delegates
from 25 countries met in London and agreed to join forces to create the new International Organization for Standardization; the new organization officially began operations in February 1947.
Overview
Standards
organizations can be classified by their role, position, and the extent
of their influence on the local, national, regional, and global
standardization arena.
By geographic designation, there are international, regional, and
national standards bodies (the latter often referred to as NSBs). By
technology or industry designation, there are standards developing
organizations (SDOs) and also standards setting organizations (SSOs)
also known as consortia. Standards organizations may be governmental,
quasi-governmental or non-governmental entities. Quasi- and
non-governmental standards organizations are often non-profit
organizations.
International standards organizations
The British Standards Institution building as it appeared in 1997
Broadly, an international standards organization develops international standards. (This does not necessarily restrict the use of other published standards internationally.)
There are many international standards organizations. The three largest and most well-established such organizations are the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), which have each existed for more than 50 years (founded in 1947, 1906, and 1865, respectively) and are all based in Geneva, Switzerland.
They have established tens of thousands of standards covering almost
every conceivable topic. Many of these are then adopted worldwide
replacing various incompatible "homegrown" standards. Many of these
standards are naturally evolved from those designed in-house within an
industry, or by a particular country, while others have been built from
scratch by groups of experts who sit on various technical committees
(TCs). These three organizations together comprise the World Standards Cooperation (WSC) alliance.
ISO is composed of the national standards bodies (NSBs), one per
member economy. The IEC is similarly composed of national committees,
one per member economy. In some cases, the national committee to the
IEC of an economy may also be the ISO member from that country or
economy. ISO and IEC are private international organizations that are
not established by any international treaty. Their members may be
non-governmental organizations or governmental agencies, as selected by
ISO and IEC (which are privately established organizations).
The ITU is a treaty-based organization established as a permanent agency of the United Nations, in which governments are the primary members,
although other organizations (such as non-governmental organizations
and individual companies) can also hold a form of direct membership
status in the ITU as well. Another example of a treaty-based
international standards organization with government membership is the Codex Alimentarius Commission.
Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas building, as seen in 2014
In addition to these, a large variety of independent international standards organizations such as the ASME, the ASTM International, the International Commission on Illumination (CIE), the IEEE, the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), SAE International, TAPPI, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), and the Universal Postal Union
(UPU) develop and publish standards for a variety of international
uses. In many such cases, these international standards organizations
are not based on the principle of one member per country. Rather,
membership in such organizations is open to those interested in joining
and willing to agree to the organization's by-laws – having either
organizational/corporate or individual technical experts as members.
The Airlines Electronic Engineering Committee (AEEC) was formed
in 1949 to prepare avionics system engineering standards with other
aviation organizations RTCA, EUROCAE, and ICAO. The standards are widely
known as the ARINC Standards.
In the European Union, only standards created by CEN, CENELEC, and ETSI are recognized as European standards (according to Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012),
and member states are required to notify the European Commission and
each other about all the draft technical regulations concerning ICT
products and services before they are adopted in national law.
These rules were laid down in Directive 98/34/EC with the goal of
providing transparency and control with regard to technical regulations.
In
general, each country or economy has a single recognized national
standards body (NSB). A national standards body is likely the sole
member from that economy in ISO; ISO currently has 161 members. National
standards bodies usually do not prepare the technical content of
standards, which instead is developed by national technical societies.
NSBs may be either public or private sector organizations, or
combinations of the two. For example, the Standards Council of Canada
is a Canadian Crown Corporation, Dirección General de Normas is a governmental agency within the Mexican Ministry of Economy, and ANSI is a 501(c)(3) non-profit U.S. organization with members from both the private and public sectors. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the U.S. government's standards agency, cooperates with ANSI under a memorandum of understanding
to collaborate on the United States Standards Strategy. The
determinates of whether an NSB for a particular economy is a public or
private sector body may include the historical and traditional roles
that the private sector fills in public affairs in that economy or the
development stage of that economy.
Standards developing organizations (SDOs)
A national standards body (NSB) generally refers to one standardization organization that is that country’s member of the ISO. A standards developing organization
(SDO) is one of the thousands of industry- or sector-based standards
organizations that develop and publish industry specific standards.
Some economies feature only an NSB with no other SDOs. Large economies
like the United States and Japan have several hundred SDOs, many of
which are coordinated by the central NSBs of each country (ANSI and JISC
in this case). In some cases, international industry-based SDOs such as
the CIE, the IEEE and the Audio Engineering Society
(AES) may have direct liaisons with international standards
organizations, having input to international standards without going
through a national standards body. SDOs are differentiated from
standards setting organizations (SSOs) in that SDOs may be accredited to
develop standards using open and transparent processes.
Scope of work
Developers of technical standards are generally concerned with interface standards, which detail how products interconnect with each other, and safety standards,
which established characteristics ensure that a product or process is
safe for humans, animals, and the environment. The subject of their work
can be narrow or broad. Another area of interest is in defining how the
behavior and performance of products is measured and described in data
sheets.
Overlapping or competing standards bodies tend to cooperate
purposefully, by seeking to define boundaries between the scope of their
work, and by operating in a hierarchical fashion in terms of national,
regional and international scope; international organizations tend to
have as members national organizations; and standards emerging at
national level (such as BS 5750)
can be adopted at regional levels (BS 5750 was adopted as EN 29000) and
at international levels (BS 5750 was adopted as ISO 9000).
Unless adopted by a government, standards carry no force in law. However, most jurisdictions have truth in advertising laws, and ambiguities can be reduced if a company offers a product that is "compliant" with a standard.
Standards development process
When
an organization develops standards that may be used openly, it is
common to have formal rules published regarding the process. This may
include:
Who is allowed to vote and provide input on new or revised standards
What is the formal step-by-step process
How are bias and commercial interests handled
How negative votes or ballots are handled
What type of consensus is required
Though it can be a tedious and lengthy process, formal standard
setting is essential to developing new technologies. For example, since
1865, the telecommunications industry has depended on the ITU
to establish the telecommunications standards that have been adopted
worldwide. The ITU has created numerous telecommunications standards
including telegraph specifications, allocation of telephone numbers,
interference protection, and protocols for a variety of communications
technologies. The standards that are created through standards
organizations lead to improved product quality, ensured interoperability
of competitors’ products, and they provide a technological baseline for
future research and product development. Formal standard setting
through standards organizations has numerous benefits for consumers
including increased innovation, multiple market participants, reduced
production costs, and the efficiency effects of product
interchangeability. To support the standard development process, ISO published Good Standardization Practices (GSP) and the WTO
Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee published the "Six
Principles" guiding members in the development of international
standards.
Standards distribution and copyright
Some standards – such as the SIF Specification
in K12 education – are managed by a non-profit organizations composed
of public entities and private entities working in cooperation that then
publish the standards under an open license at no charge and requiring
no registration.
A technical library at a university may have copies of technical
standards on hand. Major libraries in large cities may also have access
to many technical standards.
Some users of standards mistakenly assume that all standards are in the public domain. This assumption is correct only for standards produced by the central governments whose publications are not amenable to copyright
or to organizations that issue their standard under an open license.
Any standards produced by non-governmental entities remain the intellectual property of their developers (unless specifically designed otherwise) and are protected, just like any other publications, by copyright laws and international treaties.
However, the intellectual property extends only to the standard itself
and not to its use. For instance if a company sells a device that is
compliant with a given standard, it is not liable for further payment to
the standards organization except in the special case when the
organization holds patent rights or some other ownership of the
intellectual property described in the standard.
It is, however, liable for any patent infringement by its
implementation, just as with any other implementation of technology. The
standards organizations give no guarantees that patents relevant to a
given standard have been identified. ISO standards draw attention to
this in the foreword with a statement like the following: "Attention is
drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may
be the subject of patent rights. ISO and IEC shall not be held
responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights".
If the standards organization is aware that parts of a given standard
fall under patent protection, it will often require the patent holder to
agree to Reasonable and non-discriminatory licensing before including it in the standard. Such an agreement is regarded as a legally binding contract, as in the 2012 case Microsoft v. Motorola.
Trends
The
ever-quickening pace of technology evolution is now more than ever
affecting the way new standards are proposed, developed and implemented.
Since traditional, widely respected standards organizations tend
to operate at a slower pace than technology evolves, many standards they
develop are becoming less relevant because of the inability of their
developers to keep abreast with the technological innovation. As a
result, a new class of standards setters appeared on the standardization arena: the industry consortia or standards setting organizations (SSOs), which are also referred to as private standards. Despite having limited financial resources, some of them enjoy truly international acceptance. One example is the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), whose standards for HTML, CSS, and XML are used universally. There are also community-driven associations such as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), a worldwide network of volunteers who collaborate to set standards for lower-level software solutions.
Ecotourism is a form of tourism involving responsible travel (using sustainable transport) to natural areas, conserving the environment, and improving the well-being of the local people. Its purpose may be to educate the traveler, to provide funds for ecological conservation, to directly benefit the economic development and political empowerment of local communities, or to foster respect for different cultures and for human rights. Since the 1980s, ecotourism has been considered a critical endeavor by environmentalists, so that future generations may experience destinations relatively untouched by human intervention. Ecotourism may focus on educating travelers on local environments and natural surroundings with an eye to ecological conservation.
Some include in the definition of ecotourism the effort to produce
economic opportunities that make conservation of natural resources
financially possible.
Generally, ecotourism deals with interaction with biotic components of the natural environments.
Ecotourism focuses on socially responsible travel, personal growth, and
environmental sustainability. Ecotourism typically involves travel to
destinations where flora, fauna, and cultural heritage
are the primary attractions. Ecotourism is intended to offer tourists
an insight into the impact of human beings on the environment and to
foster a greater appreciation of our natural habitats.
Ecotourism aims at minimal environmental impact on the areas visited.
Besides fostering respect towards the natural environment, ecotourism
also helps in creating socio-economic benefits for the communities of
the area visited.
Responsible ecotourism programs include those that minimize the
negative aspects of conventional tourism on the environment and enhance
the cultural integrity of local people. Therefore, in addition to
evaluating environmental and cultural factors, an integral part of
ecotourism is the promotion of recycling, energy efficiency, water conservation, and creation of economic opportunities for local communities. For these reasons, ecotourism often appeals to advocates of environmental and social responsibility.
Many consider the term "ecotourism", like "sustainable tourism" (which is a related concept but broader), an oxymoron. Like most long-distance travel, ecotourism often depends on air transportation, which contributes to climate change.
Additionally, "the overall effect of sustainable tourism is negative
where like ecotourism philanthropic aspirations mask hard-nosed
immediate self-interest."
Ecotourism is a sub-component of the field of sustainable tourism.
Ecotourism must serve to maximize ecological benefits, while
contributing to the economic, social and cultural wellbeing of
communities living close to ecotourism venues.
Potential ecological, economic and sociocultural benefits associated with ecotourism are described below.
Potential Ecological Benefits
A primary challenge is to make sure that ecotourism does not compromise the ecological integrity of protected areas
and welfare of local communities. Although ecotourism is not supposed
to have negative ecological outcomes, these may occur regardless.
Ecotourism is widely assumed to have many positive ecological
consequences, and some of them are listed as follows:
Direct Benefits
Incentive to protect natural environments
Incentive to rehabilitate modified environments and lands
Provide fund to manage and expand protected areas
Ecotourists assist with habitat maintenance and enhancement through their own actions
Ecotourists serving as watchdogs or guardians who personally
intervene in situations where the environment is perceived to be
threatened
Indirect benefits
Exposure to ecotourism fosters a broader sense of environmentalism
Communities experience changes in environmental attitude and behavior
Areas protected for ecotourism provide environmental benefits
Potential Economic Benefits
For many decision-makers, economic factors are more compelling than ecological factors in deciding how natural resources should be utilized. Ecotourism economic benefits are presented below:
Direct Benefits
Generates revenue (related to visitor expenditures) and creates employment that is directly related to the sector
Provides economic opportunities for peripheral regions
Supports cultural and heritage tourism, sectors that are highly compatible with ecotourism.
Potential Socio-Cultural Benefits
A
holistic approach on ecotourism must promote socio-cultural as well as
economic and ecological practices. The direct and indirect
socio-cultural benefits are outlined as follows:
Direct and Indirect Benefits
Foster community stability and wellbeing through economic benefits and local participation
Aesthetic and spiritual benefits and enjoyment for locals and tourists
Accessible to a broad spectrum of the population
When assessing potential positive impacts of ecotourism, it is
necessary to mention that ecotourism can have unintended negative
effects as well. Negative impacts can be mitigated through regulations
and codes of conduct that effectively and persuasively impart messages about appropriate visitor behavior.[8]
Terminology and history
A hanging bridge in ecotourism area of Thenmala, Kerala in India - India's first planned ecotourism destination
ecotour, n. ... A tour of or visit to an area of
ecological interest, usually with an educational element; (in later use
also) a similar tour or visit designed to have as little detrimental
effect on the ecology as possible or undertaken with the specific aim of
helping conservation efforts.
ecotourism, n. ... Tourism to areas of ecological
interest (typically exotic and often threatened natural environments),
esp. to support conservation efforts and observe wildlife; spec. access to an endangered environment controlled so as to have the least possible adverse effect.
Some sources suggest the terms were used nearly a decade earlier.
Claus-Dieter (Nick) Hetzer, an academic and adventurer from Forum
International in Berkeley, CA, coined ecotourism in 1965, according to the Contra Costa Times, and ran the first ecotours in the Yucatán during the early 1970s.
The definition of ecotourism adopted by Ecotourism Australia is: "Ecotourism is ecologically sustainable tourism
with a primary focus on experiencing natural areas that fosters
environmental and cultural understanding, appreciation and
conservation."
The Global Ecotourism Network (GEN)
defines ecotourism as "responsible travel to natural areas that
conserves the environment, sustains the well-being of the local people,
and creates knowledge and understanding through interpretation and
education of all involved (visitors, staff and the visited)".
Ecotourism is often misinterpreted as any form of tourism that involves nature (see jungle tourism).
Self-proclaimed practitioners and hosts of ecotourism experiences
assume it is achieved by simply creating destinations in natural areas.
According to critics of this commonplace and assumptive practice, true
ecotourism must, above all, sensitize people to the beauty and the
fragility of nature. These critics condemn some operators as greenwashing their operations: using the labels of "green" and "eco-friendly”, while behaving in environmentally irresponsible ways.
Although academics disagree about who can be classified as an
ecotourist and there is little statistical data, some estimate that more
than five million ecotourists—the majority of the ecotourist
population—come from the United States, with many others from Western Europe, Canada and Australia.
Currently, there are various moves to create national and
international ecotourism certification programs. National ecotourism
certification programs have been put in place in countries such as Costa
Rica, Australia, Kenya, Estonia, and Sweden.
Related terms
Sustainable tourism
A Canopy Walkway at Kakum National Park
in Ghana, ensuring that tourists have least direct impact on the
surrounding ecology. The visitor park received the Global Tourism for
Tomorrow Award the following year.
Sustainable tourism is a concept that covers the complete tourism experience, including concern for economic, social and environmental issues as well as attention to improving tourists' experiences and addressing the needs of host communities.
Sustainable tourism should embrace concerns for environmental
protection, social equity, and the quality of life, cultural diversity,
and a dynamic, viable economy delivering jobs and prosperity for all. It has its roots in sustainable development and there can be some confusion as to what "sustainable tourism" means. There is now broad consensus that tourism should be sustainable. In fact, all forms of tourism have the potential to be sustainable if planned, developed and managed properly.
Tourist development organizations are promoting sustainable tourism
practices in order to mitigate negative effects caused by the growing impact of tourism, for example its environmental impacts.
The United Nations World Tourism Organization emphasized these practices by promoting sustainable tourism as part of the Sustainable Development Goals, through programs like the International Year for Sustainable Tourism for Development in 2017. There is a direct link between sustainable tourism and several of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Tourism for SDGs focuses on how SDG 8 ("decent work and economic growth"), SDG 12 ("responsible consumption and production") and SDG 14 ("life below water") implicate tourism in creating a sustainable economy.
According to the World Travel & Tourism Travel, tourism constituted
"10.3 percent to the global gross domestic product, with international
tourist arrivals hitting 1.5 billion marks (a growth of 3.5 percent) in
2019" and generated $1.7 trillion export earnings yet, improvements are
expected to be gained from suitable management aspects and including
sustainable tourism as part of a broader sustainable development strategy.
Improving sustainability
Principles
Ecotourism in both terrestrial and marine ecosystems
can benefit conservation, provided the complexities of history,
culture, and ecology in the affected regions are successfully navigated.
Catherine Macdonald and colleagues identify the factors which determine
conservation outcome, namely whether: animals and their habits are
sufficiently protected; conflict between people and wildlife is avoided
or at least suitably mitigated; there is good outreach and education of
the local population into the benefits of ecotourism; there is effective
collaboration with stakeholders in the area; and there is proper use of
the money generated by ecotourism to conserve the local ecology.
They conclude that ecotourism works best to conserve predators when the
tourism industry is supported both politically and by the public, and
when it is monitored and controlled at local, national, and
international levels.
Regulation and accreditation
Because the regulations of ecotourism may be poorly implemented, ecologically destructive greenwashed operations like underwater hotels, helicopter tours, and wildlife theme parks
can be categorized as ecotourism along with canoeing, camping,
photography, and wildlife observation. The failure to acknowledge
responsible, low-impact ecotourism puts legitimate ecotourism companies
at a competitive disadvantage.
Management strategies to mitigate destructive operations include
but are not limited to establishing a carrying capacity, site hardening,
sustainable design, visitation quotas, fees, access restrictions, and
visitor education.
Many environmentalists have argued for a global standard that can be used for certification,
differentiating ecotourism companies based on their level of
environmental commitment, creating a standard to follow. A national or
international regulatory board would enforce accreditation
procedures, with representation from various groups including
governments, hotels, tour operators, travel agents, guides, airlines,
local authorities, conservation organizations, and non-governmental
organizations.
The decisions of the board would be sanctioned by governments, so that
non-compliant companies would be legally required to disassociate
themselves from the use of the ecotourism brand.
In 1998, Crinion suggested a Green Stars System, based on
criteria including a management plan, benefit for the local community,
small group interaction, education value and staff training.
Ecotourists who consider their choices would be confident of a genuine
ecotourism experience when they see the higher star rating.
In 2008 the Global Sustainable Tourism Council Criteria was launched at the IUCN World Conservation Congress.
The Criteria, managed by the Global Sustainable Tourism Council,
created a global standard for sustainable travel and tourism and
includes criteria and performance indicators for destinations, tour
operators and hotels. The GSTC provides accreditation through a third-party to Certification Bodies to legitimize claims of sustainability.
Environmental impact assessments
could also be used as a form of accreditation. Feasibility is evaluated
from a scientific basis, and recommendations could be made to optimally
plan infrastructure, set tourist capacity, and manage the ecology. This
form of accreditation is more sensitive to site-specific conditions.
Some countries have their own certification programs for
ecotourism. Costa Rica, for example, runs the GSTC-Recognized
Certification of Sustainable Tourism (CST) program, which is intended to
balance the effect that business has on the local environment. The CST
program focuses on a company's interaction with natural and cultural
resources, the improvement of quality of life within local communities,
and the economic contribution to other programs of national development.
CST uses a rating system that categorizes a company based upon how
sustainable its operations are. CST evaluates the interaction between
the company and the surrounding habitat; the management policies and
operation systems within the company; how the company encourages its
clients to become an active contributor towards sustainable policies;
and the interaction between the company and local communities/the
overall population. Based upon these criteria, the company is evaluated
for the strength of its sustainability. The measurement index goes from 0
to 5, with 0 being the worst and 5 being the best.
Labels and certification
Over 50 ecolabels on tourism exist. These include (but are not limited to):
Austrian Ecolabel for Tourism
Asian Ecotourism Standard for Accommodations (AESA)
An environmental protection strategy must address the issue of
ecotourists removed from the cause-and-effect of their actions on the
environment. More initiatives should be carried out to improve their
awareness, sensitize them to environmental issues, and care about the
places they visit.
Tour guides are an obvious and direct medium to communicate
awareness. With the confidence of ecotourists and intimate knowledge of
the environment, tour guides can actively discuss conservation issues.
Informing ecotourists about how their actions on the trip can negatively
impact their environment and the local people. A tour guide training
program in Costa Rica's Tortuguero National Park
has helped mitigate negative environmental impacts by providing
information and regulating tourists on the parks' beaches used by
nesting endangered sea turtles.
Small scale, slow growth and local control
The underdevelopment theory of tourism describes a new form of imperialism by multinational corporations
that control ecotourism resources. These corporations finance and
profit from the development of large scale ecotourism that causes
excessive environmental degradation, loss of traditional culture and way
of life, and exploitation of local labor. In Zimbabwe
and Nepal's Annapurna region, where underdevelopment is taking place,
more than 90 percent of ecotourism revenues are expatriated to the
parent countries, and less than 5 percent go into local communities.
The lack of sustainability highlights the need for small scale,
slow growth, and locally based ecotourism. Local peoples have a vested
interest in the well-being of their community, and are therefore more
accountable to environmental protection than multinational corporations,
though they receive very little of the profits. The lack of control, westernization,
adverse impacts to the environment, loss of culture and traditions
outweigh the benefits of establishing large scale ecotourism.
Additionally, culture loss can be attributed to cultural commodification, in which local cultures are commodified in order to make a profit.
The increased contributions of communities to locally managed
ecotourism create viable economic opportunities, including high-level
management positions, and reduce environmental issues associated with
poverty and unemployment. Because the ecotourism experience is marketed
to a different lifestyle from large scale ecotourism, the development of
facilities and infrastructure does not need to conform to corporate
Western tourism standards, and can be much simpler and less expensive. There is a greater multiplier effect on the economy, because local products, materials, and labor are used. Profits accrue locally and import leakages are reduced.
The Great Barrier Reef Park in Australia reported over half of a
billion dollars of indirect income in the area and added thousands of
indirect jobs between 2004 and 2005.
However, even this form of tourism may require foreign investment for
promotion or start-up. When such investments are required, it is crucial
for communities to find a company or non-governmental organization that
reflects the philosophy of ecotourism; sensitive to their concerns and
willing to cooperate at the expense of profit. The basic assumption of
the multiplier effect is that the economy starts off with unused
resources, for example, that many workers are cyclically unemployed and
much of industrial capacity is sitting idle or incompletely utilized. By
increasing demand in the economy, it is then possible to boost
production. If the economy was already at full employment, with only
structural, frictional, or other supply-side types of unemployment, any
attempt to boost demand would only lead to inflation. For various
laissez-faire schools of economics which embrace Say's Law and deny the
possibility of Keynesian inefficiency and under-employment of resources,
therefore, the multiplier concept is irrelevant or wrong-headed.
As an example, consider the government increasing its expenditure
on roads by $1 million, without a corresponding increase in taxation.
This sum would go to the road builders, who would hire more workers and
distribute the money as wages and profits. The households receiving
these incomes will save part of the money and spend the rest on consumer
goods. These expenditures, in turn, will generate more jobs, wages,
profits, and so on with the income and spending circulating around the
economy.
The multiplier effect arises because of the induced increases in
consumer spending which occur due to the increased incomes — and because
of the feedback into increasing business revenues, jobs, and income
again. This process does not lead to an economic explosion not only
because of the supply-side barriers at potential output (full
employment) but because at each "round", the increase in consumer
spending is less than the increase in consumer incomes. That is, the marginal propensity to consume
(MPC) is less than one, so that each round some extra income goes into
saving, leaking out of the cumulative process. Each increase in spending
is thus smaller than that of the previous round, preventing an
explosion.
Efforts to preserve ecosystems at risk
Some
of the world's most exceptional biodiversity is located in the
Galapagos Islands. These islands were designated a UNESCO World Heritage
site in 1979, then added to UNESCO's List of World Heritage in Danger
in 2007. IGTOA is a non-profit dedicated to preserving this unique
living laboratory against the challenges of invasive species, human
impact, and tourism.
For travelers who want to be mindful of the environment and the impact
of tourism, it is recommended to utilize an operator that is endorsed by
a reputable ecotourism organization. In the case of the Galapagos,
IGTOA has a list
of the world's premiere Galapagos Islands tour companies dedicated to
the lasting protection and preservation of the destination.
Natural resource management
Natural
resource management can be utilized as a specialized tool for the
development of ecotourism. There are several places throughout the world
where a number of natural resources are abundant, but with human
encroachment and habitats, these resources are depleting. Without the
sustainable use of certain resources, they are destroyed, and floral and
fauna species are becoming extinct. Ecotourism programs can be
introduced for the conservation of these resources. Several plans and
proper management programs can be introduced so that these resources
remain untouched, and there are many organizations–including
nonprofits–and scientists working on this field.
Natural resources of hill areas like Kurseong in West Bengal are
plenty in number with various flora and fauna, but tourism for business
purpose poised the situation. Researchers from Jadavpur University are
presently working in this area for the development of ecotourism to be
used as a tool for natural resource management.
In Southeast Asia government and nongovernmental organizations
are working together with academics and industry operators to spread the
economic benefits of tourism into the kampungs and villages of the
region. A recently formed alliance, the South-East Asian Tourism
Organisation (SEATO), is bringing together these diverse players to
discuss resource management concerns.
A 2002, summit held in Quebec led to the 2008 Global Sustainable
Tourism Criteria–a collaborative effort between the UN Foundation and
other advocacy groups. The criteria, which are voluntary, involve the
following standards: "effective sustainability planning, maximum social
and economic benefits for local communities, minimum negative impacts on
cultural heritage, and minimum negative impacts on the environment."There is no enforcing agency or system of punishments.for summit.
Impact on Indigenous people and Indigenous land
Valorization of the Indigenous territories can be important for designation as a protected area, which can deter threats such as deforestation. Ecotourism can help bring in revenue for indigenous peoples.
However, there needs to be a proper business plan and
organizational structure, which helps to ensure that the generated money
from ecotourism indeed flows towards the Indigenous peoples themselves,
and the protection of the Indigenous territory.
Debates around ecotourism focus on how profits off of Indigenous lands
are enjoyed by international tourist companies, who do not share back
with the people to whom those lands belong. Ecotourism offers a
tourist-appealing experience of the landscape and environment, one that
is different from the experience of the residents; it commodifies the
lives of Indigenous people and their land which is not fair to its
inhabitants.
Indigenous territories are managed by governmental services (i.e. FUNAI in Brazil, ...) and these governmental services can thus decide whether or not to implement ecotourism in these Indigenous territories.
Ecotourism can also bring in employment
to the local people (which may be Indigenous people). Protected areas
for instance require park rangers, and staff to maintain and operate the
ecolodges and accommodation used by tourists. Also the traditional
culture can act as a tourist attraction, and can create a source of
revenue by asking payment for the showing of performances (i.e. traditional dance, ...)
Ecotourism can also help mitigate deforestation that happens when local
residents, under economic stress, clear lands and create smallholder
plots to grow cash crops. Such land clearing hurts the environment. Ecotourism can be a sustainable and job-creating alternative for local populations.
Depending on how protected areas are set up and handled, it can
lead to local people losing their homes, and mostly with no
compensation.
Pushing people onto marginal lands with harsh climates, poor soils,
lack of water, and infested with livestock and disease does little to
enhance livelihoods even when a proportion of ecotourism profits are
directed back into the community. Harsh survival realities and
deprivement of traditional use of land and natural resources by local
people can occur. Local Indigenous people may also get a strong
resentment towards the change, especially if tourism has been allowed to
develop with virtually no controls. This, as it can lead to too many
lodges being built, and tourist vehicles may drive off-track and harass
the wildlife, if no control mechanisms have been put in place and
tourist vehicles can indeed be used. Vehicle use may erode and degrade land".
There is a longstanding failure by the Peruvian government to
acknowledge and protect Indigenous lands, and therefore the Indigenous
peoples have been forced to protect their own land. The land has a
better chance of staying safe and free from deforestation if the people
who care about it are the ones looking over it.
Criticism
Definition
In
the continuum of tourism activities that stretch from conventional
tourism to ecotourism, there has been a lot of contention to the limit
at which biodiversity preservation, local social-economic benefits, and environmental impact
can be considered "ecotourism". For this reason, environmentalists,
special interest groups, and governments define ecotourism differently.
Environmental organizations have generally insisted that ecotourism is
nature-based, sustainably managed, conservation supporting, and
environmentally educated. The tourist industry
and governments, however, focus more on the product aspect, treating
ecotourism as equivalent to any sort of tourism based in nature. As a further complication, many terms are used under the rubric of ecotourism.
Nature tourism, low impact tourism, green tourism, bio-tourism,
ecologically responsible tourism, and others have been used in
literature and marketing, although they are not necessarily synonymous with ecotourism.
The problems associated with defining ecotourism have often led
to confusion among tourists and academics. Many problems are also
subject of considerable public controversy and concern because of green washing, a trend towards the commercialization of tourism schemes disguised as sustainable, nature based, and environmentally friendly ecotourism. According to McLaren,
these schemes are environmentally destructive, economically
exploitative, and culturally insensitive at its worst. They are also
morally disconcerting because they mislead tourists and manipulate their
concerns for the environment.
The development and success of such large scale, energy intensive, and
ecologically unsustainable schemes are a testament to the tremendous
profits associated with being labeled as ecotourism.
Negative impact
Ecotourism has become one of the fastest-growing sectors of the tourism industry. One definition of ecotourism is "the practice of low-impact, educational, ecologically and culturally sensitive travel that benefits local communities and host countries".
Many of the ecotourism projects are not meeting these standards. Even
if some of the guidelines are being executed, the local communities are
still facing many of the negative impacts.The other negative side of
ecotourism is that it transforms nature and the environment into
commodities people are interested in paying and visiting. When the
environment becomes a product with economic value, people try to
advertise and sell it. Some of the ecotourism sites are turning to
private sectors, and the government cut off their funding. Hence, they
are obligated to make money on their own. Private natural parks and
sites are looking for their own advantage by advertising the soundness
of natural parks or coastal marines in the Caribbean. They try to show
they are protecting nature and attract people interested In ecotourism.
However, they will focus on the phenomenon that might be more
interesting for tourists and neglect other aspects of nature when they
prioritize their profits. Consequently, this policy will result in
abandoning rich ecological sites or destroying those valuable sites. For
example, in Montego Bay, hotel staff cut the seagrass that appeared to
drive back tourists; conversely, they are crucial for local nutrient
cycles.
The other problem is that the companies try to hide the truth
behind the ecotourism to maintain their profit. They don't cover the
fact that traveling from other countries to the natural sites burns
extensive amounts of aircraft fuel. In Montego Bay and Negril, a
considerable amount of run-off is released to the coastal water produced
directly or indirectly by ecotourists. Hotels in Jamaica release much
more wastewater than a city. The tourists generate a lot of waste that
ends up in the coastal water. The indirect effect of ecotourism in
Jamaica is that many people migrated to the town near the natural site
because of the more job opportunities due to construction increase,
resulting in destroying the environment. South Africa
is one of the countries that is reaping significant economic benefits
from ecotourism, but the negative effects far outweigh the
positive—including forcing people to leave their homes, gross violations
of fundamental rights, and environmental hazards—far outweigh the medium-term economic benefits.
A tremendous amount of money and human resources continue to be used
for ecotourism despite unsuccessful outcomes, and even more, money is
put into public relation campaigns to dilute the effects of criticism.
Ecotourism channels resources away from other projects that could
contribute more sustainable and realistic solutions to pressing social
and environmental problems. "The money tourism can generate often ties
parks and managements to ecotourism". But there is a tension in this relationship because ecotourism often causes conflict and changes in land-use
rights, fails to deliver promises of community-level benefits, damages
environments, and has many other social impacts. Indeed, many argue
repeatedly that ecotourism is neither ecologically nor socially
beneficial, yet it persists as a strategy for conservation and
development
due to the large profits. While several studies are being done on ways
to improve the ecotourism structure, some argue that these examples
provide a rationale for stopping it altogether. However, there are some
positive examples, among them the Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area (KAZA) and the Virunga National Park, as judged by WWF.
The ecotourism system exercises tremendous financial and
political influence. The evidence above shows that a strong case exists
for restraining such activities in certain locations. Funding could be
used for field studies aimed at finding alternative solutions to tourism
and the diverse problems Africa faces in result of urbanization, industrialization, and the overexploitation of agriculture. At the local level, ecotourism has become a source of conflict over control of land,
resources, and tourism profits. In this case, ecotourism has harmed the
environment and local people and has led to conflicts over profit
distribution. In a perfect world, more efforts would be made towards
educating tourists of the environmental and social effects of their
travels. Very few regulations or laws stand in place as boundaries for
the investors in ecotourism. These should be implemented to prohibit the
promotion of unsustainable ecotourism projects and materials which
project false images of destinations, demeaning local and indigenous
culture.
Though conservation efforts in East Africa are indisputably
serving the interests of tourism in the region it is important to make
the distinction between conservation acts and the tourism industry.
Eastern African communities are not the only of developing regions to
experience economic and social harms from conservation efforts.
Conservation in the Southwest Yunnan
Region of China has similarly brought drastic changes to traditional
land use in the region. Prior to logging restrictions imposed by the
Chinese Government the industry made up 80 percent of the regions
revenue. Following a complete ban on commercial logging the indigenous
people of the Yunnan region now see little opportunity for economic
development.
Ecotourism may provide solutions to the economic hardships suffered
from the loss of industry to conservation in the Yunnan in the same way
that it may serve to remedy the difficulties faced by the Maasai. As
stated, the ecotourism structure must be improved to direct more money
into host communities by reducing leakages for the industry to be
successful in alleviating poverty in developing regions, but it provides
a promising opportunity.
Drumm and Moore (2002) discuss the price increase and economic
leakage in their paper; saying that prices might augment since the
visitors are more capable to pay higher rates for goods and services in
opposition to the locals.
Also, they have mentioned two solutions regarding the previous issue:
(1) either a two pricing system represented as two separate price lists
(the first for the locals and the second for the tourists with respect
to the local's purchase power ability); (2) design unique goods and
services subject only or the tourists’ consumption.
Leakage appears when international investors import foreign products
instead of using local resources; thus, the tourists will be using
international products and in-turn contributing to the outside economy
rather than the local one (Drumm & Moore, 2002).
Direct environmental impacts
Ecotourism
operations occasionally fail to live up to conservation ideals. It is
sometimes overlooked that ecotourism is a highly consumer-centered
activity, and that environmental conservation is a means to further economic growth.
Although ecotourism is intended for small groups, even a modest
increase in population, however temporary, puts extra pressure on the
local environment and necessitates the development of additional
infrastructure and amenities. The construction of water treatment plants, sanitation facilities, and lodges come with the exploitation of non-renewable energy sources and the utilization of already limited local resources. The conversion of natural land to such tourist infrastructure is implicated in deforestation and habitat deterioration of butterflies in Mexico and squirrel monkeys in Costa Rica.
In other cases, the environment suffers because local communities are
unable to meet the infrastructure demands of ecotourism. The lack of
adequate sanitation facilities in many East African parks results in the
disposal of campsite sewage in rivers, contaminating the wildlife,
livestock, and people who draw drinking water from it.
Aside from environmental degradation
with tourist infrastructure, population pressures from ecotourism also
leaves behind garbage and pollution associated with the Western
lifestyle.
An example of this is seen with ecotourism in Antarctica. Since it is
such a remote location, it takes a lot of fuel to get there; resulting
in ships producing large pollution through waste disposal and green
house gas emissions. Additionally, there is a potential for oil spills
from damaged ships traversing through aggressive waters filled with
natural obstacles such as icebergs.
Although ecotourists claim to be educationally sophisticated and
environmentally concerned, they rarely understand the ecological
consequences of their visits and how their day-to-day activities append
physical impacts on the environment. As one scientist observes, they
"rarely acknowledge how the meals they eat, the toilets they flush, the
water they drink, and so on, are all part of broader regional economic
and ecological systems they are helping to reconfigure with their very
activities."
Nor do ecotourists recognize the great consumption of non-renewable
energy required to arrive at their destination, which is typically more
remote than conventional tourism destinations. For instance, an exotic
journey to a place 10,000 kilometers away consumes about 700 liters of
fuel per person.
Ecotourism activities are, in and of themselves, issues in
environmental impact because they may disturb fauna and flora.
Ecotourists believe that because they are only taking pictures and
leaving footprints, they keep ecotourism sites pristine, but even
harmless-sounding activities such as nature hikes can be ecologically
destructive. In the Annapurna Circuit in Nepal, ecotourists have worn down the marked trails and created alternate routes, contributing to soil impaction, erosion, and plant damage. Where the ecotourism activity involves wildlife viewing, it can scare away animals, disrupt their feeding and nesting sites, or acclimate them to the presence of people. In Kenya, wildlife-observer disruption drives cheetahs off their reserves, increasing the risk of inbreeding and further endangering the species.
In a study done from 1995 to 1997 off the Northwestern coast of
Australia, scientists found that whale sharks' tolerance for divers and
swimmers decreased. The whale sharks showed an increase in behaviors
over the course of the study, such as diving, porpoising, banking, and
eye rolling that are associated with distress and attempt to avoid the
diver. The average time the whale sharks spent with the divers in 1995
was 19.3 minutes, but in 1997 the average time the whale sharks spent
with the divers was 9.5 minutes. There was also an increase in recorded
behaviors from 56% of the sharks showing any sort of diving, porpoising,
eye rolling or banking in 1995 to 70.7% in 1997. Some whale sharks were
also observed to have scars that were consistent with being struck by a
boat.
Environmental hazards
The industrialization, urbanization and agricultural
practices of human society are having a serious impact on the
environment. Ecotourism is now also considered to be playing a role in
environmental depletion including deforestation, disruption of ecological life systems and various forms of pollution, all of which contribute to environmental degradation.
For example, the number of motor vehicles crossing a park increases as
tour drivers search for rare species. The number of roads disrupts the
grass cover, which has serious consequences on plant and animal species.
These areas also have a higher rate of disturbances and invasive species due to increasing traffic off of the beaten path into new, undiscovered areas.
Ecotourism also has an effect on species through the value placed on
them. "Certain species have gone from being little known or valued by
local people to being highly valued commodities. The commodification of plants may erase their social value and lead to overproduction within protected areas. Local people and their images can also be turned into commodities".
Kamuaro points out the relatively obvious contradiction that any
commercial venture into unspoiled, pristine land inevitably means a
higher pressure on the environment.
The people who live in the areas now becoming ecotourism spots have
very different lifestyles than those who come to visit. Ecotourism has
created many debates based on if the economic benefits are worth the
possible environmental sacrifices.
Who benefits?
Most
forms of ecotourism are owned by foreign investors and corporations
that provide few benefits to the local people. An overwhelming majority
of profits are put into the pockets of investors instead of reinvestment
into the local economy or environmental protection leading to further
environmental degradation. The limited numbers of local people who are
employed in the economy enter at its lowest level and are unable to live
in tourist areas because of meager wages and a two-market system.
In some cases, the resentment by local people results in environmental degradation. As a highly publicized case, the Maasai
nomads in Kenya killed wildlife in national parks but are now helping
the national park to save the wildlife to show aversion to unfair
compensation terms and displacement from traditional lands. The lack of economic opportunities for local people also constrains them to degrade the environment as a means of sustenance.
The presence of affluent ecotourists encourage the development of
destructive markets in wildlife souvenirs, such as the sale of coral
trinkets on tropical islands and animal products in Asia, contributing
to illegal harvesting and poaching from the environment. In Suriname, sea turtle reserves use a very large portion of their budget to guard against these destructive activities.
Fortress conservation
is a conservation model based on the belief that biodiversity
protection is best achieved by creating protected areas where ecosystems
can function in isolation from human disturbance. It is argued that money generated from ecotourism is the motivating factor to drive indigenous inhabitants off the land.
Up to 250,000 people worldwide have been forcibly evicted from their
homes to make way for conservation projects since 1990, according to the
UN special rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples.
Mismanagement by government
While
governments are typically entrusted with the administration and
enforcement of environmental protection, they often lack the commitment
or capability to manage ecotourism sites. The regulations for
environmental protection may be vaguely defined, costly to implement,
hard to enforce, and uncertain in effectiveness.
Government regulatory agencies, are susceptible to making decisions
that spend on politically beneficial but environmentally unproductive
projects. Because of prestige and conspicuousness, the construction of
an attractive visitor's center at an ecotourism site may take precedence
over more pressing environmental concerns like acquiring habitat,
protecting endemic species, and removing invasive ones. Finally, influential groups can pressure, and sway
the interests of the government to their favor. The government and its
regulators can become vested in the benefits of the ecotourism industry
which they are supposed to regulate, causing restrictive environmental
regulations and enforcement to become more lenient.
Management of ecotourism sites by private ecotourism companies
offers an alternative to the cost of regulation and deficiency of
government agencies. It is believed that these companies have a
self-interest in limited environmental degradation because tourists will
pay more for pristine environments, which translates to higher profit.
However, theory indicates that this practice is not economically
feasible and will fail to manage the environment.
The model of monopolistic competition
states that distinctiveness will entail profits, but profits will
promote imitation. A company that protects its ecotourism sites is able
to charge a premium for the novel experience and pristine environment.
But when other companies view the success of this approach, they also
enter the market with similar practices, increasing competition and
reducing demand. Eventually, the demand will be reduced until the
economic profit is zero. A cost-benefit analysis shows that the company
bears the cost of environmental protection without receiving the gains.
Without economic incentive, the whole premise of self-interest through
environmental protection is quashed; instead, ecotourism companies will
minimize environment related expenses and maximize tourism demand.
The tragedy of the commons
offers another model for economic unsustainability from environmental
protection, in ecotourism sites utilized by many companies.
Although there is a communal incentive to protect the environment,
maximizing the benefits in the long run, a company will conclude that it
is in their best interest to utilize the ecotourism site beyond its
sustainable level. By increasing the number of ecotourists, for
instance, a company gains all the economic benefit while paying only a
part of the environmental cost. In the same way, a company recognizes
that there is no incentive to actively protect the environment; they
bear all the costs, while the benefits are shared by all other
companies. The result, again, is mismanagement.
Taken together, the mobility of foreign investment and lack of
economic incentive for environmental protection means that ecotourism
companies are disposed to establishing themselves in new sites once
their existing one is sufficiently degraded.
In addition, the systematic literature review conducted by Cabral
and Dhar (2019) have identified several challenges due to slow
progression of ecotourism initiatives such as (a) economic leakages, (b)
lack of government involvement, (c) skill deficiency among the local
communities, (d) absence of disseminating environmental education, (e)
sporadic increase in pollution, (f) conflict between tourism management
personnel and local communities and (g) inadequate infrastructure
development.
Case studies
The
purpose of ecotourism is to engage tourists in low impact,
non-consumptive and locally oriented environments in order to maintain
species and habitats — especially in underdeveloped regions. While some
ecotourism projects, including some found in the United States, can
support such claims, many projects have failed to address some of the
fundamental issues that nations face in the first place. Consequently,
ecotourism may not generate the very benefits it is intended to provide
to these regions and their people, and in some cases leaving economies
in a state worse than before.
The following case studies illustrate the rising complexity of
ecotourism and its impacts, both positive and negative, on the
environment and economies of various regions in the world.