Thesis title: “The development of community-based ecotourism - lumes

19Fig. 4 The two labels for ecotourism awarded by the Australian NEAP(Source: Australian Nature & Ecotourism Accreditation Programme Website)A particularity of the Australian NEAP is the recent introduction of a thirdcategory that concerns nature-based tourism operators, thus allowing the officialrecognition of nature-based, sustainability-oriented services that do not exactly fulfillthe strict criteria for ecotourism (Issaverdis, 2001). This new level was introducedwith the rationale that all forms of tourism in protected areas, whether they areecotourism or not, ought to be sustainable. The Australian NEAP can offercertification to three different types of tourism products: tours, attractions andaccommodation (Newson & Crabtree, 2001; Australian Nature and EcotourismAccreditation Programme Website, consulted on 3/11/2004).The procedure followed by an operator in order to receive accreditation underthe Australian NEAP includes both self-assessment and independent assessment.Furthermore, certification is based upon a wide variety of principles, namely “focuson nature, interpretation, ecological sustainability, conservation, local communities,culture, customer satisfaction and responsible marketing” (Chester & Crabtree, 2002,p. 178). After the successful completion of the process, the ecotourism productreceives the NEAP certificate for three years, with an engagement for annual renewal(Issaverdis, 2001; Australian Nature and Ecotourism Accreditation ProgrammeWebsite, consulted on 3/11/2004). NEAP is considered much more efficient thanGreen Globe 21 in assuring that standards of certain sustainability in ecotourism andnature tourism are indeed met in practice. This is due to the fact that only thecompanies that can demonstrate compliance with strict environmental performancecriteria can be certified under this scheme (Synergy, 2000 for WWF-UK).Despite the fact that the Australian NEAP is widely acknowledged as one ofthe most successful ecotourism and nature tourism certification programmesworldwide, there are certain drawbacks to be considered. More specifically, accordingto Chester & Crabtree (2002), NEAP fails to address in depth a number of seriousissues such as monitoring environmental performance, protecting the social structureand rights of host communities, promoting ethical business practices and ensuringfairness of local labour engagement, as well as contributing to the development andmaintenance of community infrastructure.Moving on to the third case, Costa Rica is a very good example of a countrythat has very successfully invested on its natural environment and has efficientlyutilized its natural resources through tourism development (Mercer, 1996). Actually,Costa Rica has developed a viable certification programme as part of the country’snational strategy for the promotion of sustainable tourism patterns. It is a type ofvoluntary programme based on negotiated agreements between the Costa Ricangovernment and tourism companies. In fact, the CST programme was designed inclose collaboration of different stakeholders such as the State, leading academicinstitutions, representative part of the tourism industry and environmentalorganizations (Rivera, 2002).