Linking Culture and the Environment

Y.-F. Leung et al. 21
particularly nature-based tourism, adventure tourism and ecotourism. On
the other hand, the environment can be positively or negatively impacted by
tourism. Tourism development and tourist activities can positively impact
environments by facilitating nature conservation and ecological restoration
efforts (Buckley, 2004; Blangy and Mehtac, 2006). For example, Costa Rica has
set aside more than 20% of its total land area as protected areas in response
to ecotourism-related earnings (Sweeting et al., 1999). Li et al. (2006) also
reported positive impacts of tourism on environmental conditions of
Jiuzhaigou Biosphere Reserve in China.
Conversely, undesirable effects on ecological components, diminished
ecological integrity or degraded natural processes may also result from tourism
development and operations. Tourism impacts may take a variety of
forms, including habitat fragmentation and loss due to infrastructure development,
travel-related air pollution, facility-related water and land pollution,
and activity-related soil and vegetation damage and wildlife harassment.
The proliferation of tourism facilities in the Galapogos Islands, wildlife disturbance
in East African safaris, coral reef damage in the Great Barrier Reef
of Australia, and mountain degradation in the Himalayas are some of the
better known examples of tourism impacts. General reviews of this topic are
provided by HaySmith and Hunt (1995), Buckley (2004) and Wall and
Mathieson (2006).
The scope of tourism’s environmental impacts may be understood using
an opportunity spectrum (OS) framework. The Recreation Opportunity
Spectrum, developed as a recreation planning tool (Clark and Stankey, 1979),
has been adapted to adventure tourism (Butler and Waldbook, 1991) and
ecotourism contexts (Boyd and Butler, 1996; Dawson, Chapter 3, this volume).
The common thread of these frameworks is a continuum of recreation
or tourism opportunities ranging from primitive settings and experiences to
developed settings and experiences. Management interventions differ
according to location along the spectrum. Figure 2.1 represents this continuum
in the form of concentric circles, extending from a primitive core zone
through an intermediate frontcountry buffer zone to an outer developed
zone (Ceballos-Lascurain, 1996, p. 184).
Environmental impacts of mass tourism are predominantly caused by
infrastructure and facility development within the outer developed zone,
where activities are often based on human-made attractions such as resorts
and theme parks (Fig. 2.1). Much of the earlier tourism–environment research
has focused on impacts within this outer zone. Management interventions
(MI) to such impacts in this zone primarily involve facility development and
operation and direct regulation of visitor activities.
Since nature-based tourism and particularly ecotourism have grown in
popularity, tourism impacts have shifted in type, location and extent.
Specifically, impacts have been spreading into frontcountry buffer zones and
primitive core zones (Fig. 2.1). Wall (1997) contends that ecotourism can be a
damaging force due to its penetration into fragile protected area environments.
In these primitive zones, tourist activities, rather than facility development,
often become the main stressor to ecological communities.