Most Popular Posts
Categories
- Biodiversity (92)
- Climate change (172)
- Community-based conservation (81)
- Economics and conservation (136)
- Endangered species (211)
- Fresh water (48)
- Habitat (221)
- Invasive species (93)
- Marine (123)
- Monitoring (230)
- Restoration (150)
- Socio-political issues (176)
- Tools and technology (101)
Archives
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
Nov
11
2009
Expensive nature tourism isn’t necessarily better for local economies
Just because a tourist spends more money at a nature destination doesn’t mean that the local community will receive more economic benefits, according to a study accepted for publication in Conservation Letters.
Nature tourism has been touted as a way to funnel money into locals’ pockets, thus encouraging the community to conserve its surroundings. One popular strategy is to attract a small number of high-paying tourists in order to bring in more money and avoid excessive environmental damage.
Researcher Chris Sandbrook at the University of Cambridge polled 161 tourists on their spending around Uganda’s Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, which contains endangered mountain gorillas. He also estimated how much money ended up in the local community and how much went to non-local owners or suppliers.
The average tourist spent $265.30, but only $56.95 was retained locally, Sandbrook found. And while the use of more expensive accommodations increased the total amount spent in the area, it didn’t affect the amount that stayed in the local economy. In other words, much of the money paid to high-end lodges ended up going to non-locals.
However, longer stays did translate to more local benefits. Instead of focusing on “high-value, low-volume” tourism, the study says, it might be more effective to stretch out tourists’ visits. – Roberta Kwok
Source: Sandbrook, C. (2009). Local economic impact of different forms of nature-based tourism Conservation Letters Accepted Article DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2009.00085.x
Image © Joe_Potato, iStockPhoto.com
Filed Under Community-based conservation, Economics and conservation, Socio-political issues |
Email This Post