Tourism carrying capacity

Last updated
Overcrowded tourists at Maya beach, Thailand, in 2013 Playa Maya, Ko Phi Phi, Tailandia, 2013-08-19, DD 10.JPG
Overcrowded tourists at Maya beach, Thailand, in 2013

Tourism carrying capacity (TCC) is an imperfect [1] but useful approach to managing visitors in vulnerable areas. [2] The TCC concept evolved out of the fields of range, habitat and wildlife management. In these fields, managers attempted to determine the largest population of a particular species that could be supported by a habitat over a long period of time. [3]

Contents

"Tourism Carrying Capacity" is defined by the World Tourism Organization as “The maximum number of people that may visit a tourist destination at the same time, without causing destruction of the physical, economic, socio-cultural environment and an unacceptable decrease in the quality of visitors' satisfaction”. Whereas Middleton and Hawkins Chamberlain (1997) define it as “the level of human activity an area can accommodate without the area deteriorating, the resident community being adversely affected or the quality of visitors experience declining” [4] what both these definitions pick up on is that the carrying capacity is the point at which a destination or attraction starts experiencing adverse effects as a result of the number of visitors.

Although it is challenging to pinpoint a specific number of visitors beyond which damage begins, even an imperfect estimate of the TCC can guide policies that cap the number of visitors and reduce the environmental impact of tourism. For example, the government of Peru limits the number of hikers on the Inca Trail to 500 per day, because geologists warned that a larger number could cause serious erosion. [5]

At the extreme, in areas where the objective is to maintain pristine conditions, any level of visitor use creates adverse or negative impacts, suggesting that the carrying capacity is zero. The acceptable level of damage is a matter of human judgment. Understanding what is acceptable is the focus of the limits of acceptable change planning process referred to later in this article.

There are numerous forms of carrying capacity relevant to tourism. This article will focus on the four most commonly used.

Physical carrying capacity

This is the maximum number of tourists that an area is actually able to support. In the case of an individual tourist attraction it is the maximum number that can fit on the site at any given time and still allow people to be able to move. This is normally assumed to be around 1m per person. “PCC per a day = area (in metres squared) x visitors per metre x daily duration" (Mowforth and Munt) [6] This is a formula which has been used to calculate the physical carrying capacity.

Economic carrying capacity

This relates to a level of acceptable change within the local economy of a tourist destination, it is the extent to which a tourist destination is able to accommodate tourist functions without the loss of local activities, [7] take for example a souvenir store taking the place of a shop selling essential items to the local community. Economic carrying capacity can also be used to describe the point at which the increased revenue brought by tourism development is overtaken by the inflation caused by tourism

Social carrying capacity

This relates to the negative socio-cultural impacts associated with tourism development. The indicators of when the social carrying capacity has been exceeded are a reduced local tolerance for tourism as described by Doxey’s Index of irritation. [8] Reduced visitor enjoyment and increased crime are also indicators of when the social carrying capacity has been exceeded.

Biophysical carrying capacity

This relates to the extent to which the natural environment is able to tolerate interference from tourists. This is made more complicated by the fact that because it deals with ecology which is able to regenerate to some extent so in this case, the carrying capacity is when the damage exceeds the habitat's ability to regenerate.

Environmental carrying capacity is also used with reference to ecological and physical parameters, capacity of resources, ecosystems and infrastructure. [9]

Weaknesses of carrying capacity

Authors such as Buckley, Wagar, Washburne, McCool, and Stankey have critiqued the concept as being flawed in both the conceptual assumptions made and its practical application. For example, the notion of a carrying capacity assumes that various elements, such as the social-ecological systems in which tourism destinations are situated, are stable. But some situations are dynamically complex and some outcomes are impossible to predict. To implement a carrying capacity flawlessly would require either a stable situation or the ability to adjust entry limits based on changing conditions. Implementation also requires a means of monitoring entry, and when demand exceeds a limit, the ways in which scarce opportunities are allocated are contentious. For example, the trail capacity limits on entries into the Hardrock 100 running race in Colorado result in many disappointed runners. Nonetheless, the benefits of limiting the entries to a number that avoids harm to surrounding wilderness arguably exceed the costs.

The main criticism of carrying capacity on a practical level is that it is difficult to calculate. A safe solution is to set the limit at a conservative estimate of the capacity. The maximum number of visitors depends on how the tourists behave: ‘a large group of bird watchers moving through a landscape will have a different impact compared to a similar sized group of school children.’ The carrying capacity also depends on changing conditions at the site. In the case of national parks, visitor impacts change with seasons.

UNESCO (the organization responsible for administrating the World Heritage list) has expressed a concern that the use of carrying capacity can give the impression that a site is better protected than it actually is, it points out that although the whole site may be below carrying capacity part of the site may still be crowded. [10]

In the context of tourism in wildlife sanctuaries, Singh (2013) writes, ‘carrying capacity’ is a concept to be thought about when we intend for ‘sustainable versus full harvest/utilization of resource for a purpose’. In wildlife sanctuaries ‘full utilization of infrastructure or resources for tourism’ is a remote mandate. Hence, instead of ‘carrying capacity,’ some people recommend guidelines or regulations that prevent tourism from disturbing wildlife in ways other than limiting the volume of tourism. In cases where such regulations are easier to establish and implement than policies based on carrying capacity, regulations will perhaps be sustainable for both wildlife conservation and the tourism industry. In many other cases, limits based on estimates of the tourism carrying capacity are implemented with beneficial effects.

Limits of acceptable change

Limits of acceptable change was the first of the post-carrying-capacity visitor management frameworks developed to respond to the practical and conceptual challenges of carrying capacity. The framework was developed by The U.S. Forest Service in the 1980s. It is based on the idea that, rather than there being a threshold of visitor numbers, in fact any tourist activity has an impact and therefore management should be based on constant monitoring of the site as well as the objectives established for it. A maximum number of visitors can be established within the limits of acceptable change framework, but such maximums are only one tool among many that are available. The framework is frequently summarized into a nine step process. [11]

1. Identify area concerns and issues.

2. Define and describe opportunity classes (based on the concept of ROS).

3. Select indicators of resource and social conditions.

4. Inventory existing resource and social conditions.

5. Specify standards for resource and social indicators for each opportunity class.

6. Identify alternative opportunity class allocations.

7. Identify management actions for each alternative.

8. Evaluate and select preferred alternatives.

9. Implement actions and monitor conditions.

There is a difference of LAC as a concept and LAC as a planning framework.[ further explanation needed ].

Visitor experience and resource protection

This framework is based on the idea that not enough attention has been given to the experience of tourists and their views on environmental quality. This framework is similar in origin to LAC, but was originally designed to meet the legislative, policy and administrative needs of the US National Park Service.

Descriptive and evaluative

The process of estimating Tourism Carrying Capacity (TCC) has been described as having a descriptive and evaluative part. It follows (in principle) the conceptual framework for TCC as described by Shelby and Heberlein (1986), and these parts are described as follows:

Descriptive part (A): Describes how the system (tourist destination) under study works, including physical, ecological, social, political and economic aspects of tourist development. Within this context of particular importance is the identification of:

Evaluative part (B): Describes how an area should be managed and the level of acceptable environmental impacts. This part of the process starts with the identification (if it does not already exist) of the desirable condition or preferable type of development. Within this context, goals and management objectives need to be defined, alternative fields of actions evaluated and a strategy for tourist development formulated. On the basis of this, Tourism Carrying Capacity can be defined. Within this context, of particular importance is the identification of:

Differing definitions

First of all, the carrying capacity can be the motivation to attract tourists visit the destination. The tourism industry, especially in national parks and protected areas, is subject to the concept of carrying capacity so as to determine the scale of tourist activities which can be sustained at specific times in different places. Various scholar over the years have developed several arguments developed about the definition of carrying capacity. Middleton and Hawkins defined carrying capacity as a measure of the tolerance of a site or building which is open to tourist activities, and the limit beyond which an area may suffer from the adverse impacts of tourism (Middleton & Hawkins, 1998). Chamberlain defined it as the level of human activity which an area can accommodate without either it deteriorating, the resident community being adversely affected or the quality of visitors' experience declining (Chamberlain, 1997). Clark defined carrying capacity as a certain threshold (level) of tourism activity, beyond which there will be damage to the environment and its natural inhabitants (Clark, 1997).

The World Tourism Organization argues that carrying capacity is the maximum number of people who may visit a tourist destination at the same time, without causing destruction of the physical, economic and socio-cultural environment and/or an unacceptable decrease in the quality of visitors' satisfaction (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/iczm/pdf/tcca_material.pdf. Date assessed 08/03/07). In the publication, ‘Agenda 21 for the Travel and Tourism Venture: towards environmentally sustainable development’, the Secretary-General of the World Tourism Organization.

As part of a planning system

The definitions of carrying capacity need to be considered as processes within a planning process for tourism development which involves:

“Carrying capacity is not just a scientific concept or formula of obtaining a number beyond which development should cease, but a process where the eventual limits must be considered as guidance. They should be carefully assessed and monitored, complemented with other standards, etc. Carrying capacity is not fixed. It develops with time and the growth of tourism and can be affected by management techniques and controls” (Saveriades, 2000).

The reason for considering carrying capacity as a process, rather than a means of protection of various areas is in spite of the fact that carrying capacity was once a guiding concept in recreation and tourism management literature. Because of its conceptual elusiveness, lack of management utility and inconsistent effectiveness in minimizing visitors' impacts, carrying capacity has been largely re-conceptualized into management by objectives approaches, namely: the limits of acceptable change (LAC), and the visitor experience and resource protection (VERP) as the two planning and management decision-making processes based on the new understanding of carrying capacity (Lindberg and McCool, 1998). These two have been deemed more appropriate in the tourism planning processes of protected areas, especially in the United States, and have over the years been adapted and modified for use in sustainable tourism and ecotourism contexts (Wallace, 1993; McCool, 1994; Harroun and Boo, 1995).

See also

Notes

  1. Zekan, Bozana; Weismayer, Christian; Gunter, Ulrich; Schuh, Bernd; Sedlacek, Sabine (2022). "Regional sustainability and tourism carrying capacities". Journal of Cleaner Production. 339: 130624. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130624 . S2CID   246313586.
  2. Long, C.; Lu, S.; Chang, J.; Zhu, J.; Chen, L. (2022). "Tourism Environmental Carrying Capacity Review, Hotspot, Issue, and Prospect". International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 19 (24): 16663. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192416663 . PMC   9778874 . PMID   36554544.
  3. Jafari, Jafar, ed. 2002. Encyclopedia of Tourism. London: Routledge.
  4. Net Coast Archived 2007-07-07 at the Wayback Machine
  5. Why the Inca Trail Allows Only 500 People Per Day
  6. Mowforth, M. Munt, I. Tourism and sustainability; Development and new tourism in the third world, Routledge, London
  7. Mathieson and Wall, 1982, Tourism; economic, physical and social impacts, Longman, Harlow
  8. G. Shaw, A Williams, 1997, Critical issues in tourism: a geographical perspective, Blackwell
  9. Mexa, A. Coccossis, H. 2004, Tourism carrying capacity assessment, Ashgate
  10. Pedersen A, Managing tourism at world heritage sites, UNESCO, Paris
  11. List from National Forest Service

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tourism</span> Travel for recreational or leisure purposes

Tourism is travel for pleasure, and the commercial activity of providing and supporting such travel. The World Tourism Organization defines tourism more generally, in terms which go "beyond the common perception of tourism as being limited to holiday activity only", as people "travelling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure and not less than 24 hours, business and other purposes". Tourism can be domestic or international, and international tourism has both incoming and outgoing implications on a country's balance of payments.

The carrying capacity of an environment is the maximum population size of a biological species that can be sustained by that specific environment, given the food, habitat, water, and other resources available. The carrying capacity is defined as the environment's maximal load, which in population ecology corresponds to the population equilibrium, when the number of deaths in a population equals the number of births. The effect of carrying capacity on population dynamics is modelled with a logistic function. Carrying capacity is applied to the maximum population an environment can support in ecology, agriculture and fisheries. The term carrying capacity has been applied to a few different processes in the past before finally being applied to population limits in the 1950s. The notion of carrying capacity for humans is covered by the notion of sustainable population.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ecotourism</span> Tourism visiting environments

Ecotourism is a form of tourism marketed as "responsible" travel to natural areas, conserving the environment, and improving the well-being of the local people. The stated 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 human rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cultural tourism</span> Geographical tourism around a country or a region

Cultural tourism is a type of tourism activity in which the visitor's essential motivation is to learn, discover, experience and consume the tangible and intangible cultural attractions/products in a tourism destination. These attractions/products relate to a set of distinctive material, intellectual, spiritual, and emotional features of a society that encompasses arts and architecture, historical and cultural heritage, culinary heritage, literature, music, creative industries and the living cultures with their lifestyles, value systems, beliefs and traditions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gandaki Zone</span> Zone in Nepal

Gandaki zone was one of the fourteen zones of Nepal, located in the Western Development Region. It was named as Sapta Gandaki after the seven tributaries that makes up the Gandaki River. Pokhara served as its regional and zonal headquarter. It was also the birthplace of Bhanubhakta Acharya, first poet of Nepal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sustainable tourism</span> Form of travel and tourism without damage to nature or cultural area

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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Geotourism</span> Tourism associated with geological attractions and destinations

Geotourism is tourism associated with geological attractions and destinations. Geotourism deals with the abiotic natural and built environments. Geotourism was first defined in England by Thomas Alfred Hose in 1995.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Recreation ecology</span>

Recreation ecology is the scientific study of environmental impacts resulting from recreational activity in protected natural areas. This field of study includes research and monitoring assessments of biophysical changes, analyses to identify causal and influential factors or support carrying capacity planning and management, and investigations of the efficacy of educational, regulatory, and site management actions designed to minimize recreation impacts. These ecological understandings of environmental impacts of outdoor recreation is critical to the management of recreation, ecotourism and visitation to natural spaces. Recreation ecology research has looked at the ecological impacts of hiking, camping and other outdoor recreation activities where the use and visitation is concentrated. As outdoor recreation shows increasing participation globally, questions and concerns are raised to which these can be managed sustainably with minimal impact to the environment.

Rural tourism is a tourism that focuses on actively participating in a rural lifestyle. It can be a variant of ecotourism. Many villages can facilitate tourism because many villagers are hospitable and eager to welcome or host visitors. Agriculture has become more mechanized and requires less manual labor. This trend is causing economic pressure on some villages, which in turn causes young people to move to urban areas. There is however, a segment of the urban population that is interested in visiting the rural areas and understanding the lifestyle.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">DPSIR</span>

DPSIR is a causal framework used to describe the interactions between society and the environment. It seeks to analyze and assess environmental problems by bringing together various scientific disciplines, environmental managers, and stakeholders, and solve them by incorporating sustainable development. First, the indicators are categorized into "drivers" which put "pressures" in the "state" of the system, which in turn results in certain "impacts" that will lead to various "responses" to maintain or recover the system under consideration. It is followed by the organization of available data, and suggestion of procedures to collect missing data for future analysis. Since its formulation in the late 1990s, it has been widely adopted by international organizations for ecosystem-based study in various fields like biodiversity, soil erosion, and groundwater depletion and contamination. In recent times, the framework has been used in combination with other analytical methods and models, to compensate for its shortcomings. It is employed to evaluate environmental changes in ecosystems, identify the social and economic pressures on a system, predict potential challenges and improve management practices. The flexibility and general applicability of the framework make it a resilient tool that can be applied in social, economic, and institutional domains as well.

Ecological design or ecodesign is an approach to designing products and services that gives special consideration to the environmental impacts of a product over its entire lifecycle. Sim Van der Ryn and Stuart Cowan define it as "any form of design that minimizes environmentally destructive impacts by integrating itself with living processes." Ecological design can also be defined as the process of integrating environmental considerations into design and development with the aim of reducing environmental impacts of products through their life cycle.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sustainability accounting</span>

Sustainability accounting was originated about 20 years ago and is considered a subcategory of financial accounting that focuses on the disclosure of non-financial information about a firm's performance to external stakeholders, such as capital holders, creditors, and other authorities. Sustainability accounting represents the activities that have a direct impact on society, environment, and economic performance of an organisation. Sustainability accounting in managerial accounting contrasts with financial accounting in that managerial accounting is used for internal decision making and the creation of new policies that will have an effect on the organisation's performance at economic, ecological, and social level. Sustainability accounting is often used to generate value creation within an organisation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Assimilative capacity</span>

Assimilative capacity is the ability for pollutants to be absorbed by an environment without detrimental effects to the environment or those who use of it. Natural absorption into an environment is achieved through dilution, dispersion and removal through chemical or biological processes. The term assimilative capacity has been used interchangeably with environmental capacity, receiving capacity and absorptive capacity. It is used as a measurement perimeter in hydrology, meteorology and pedology for a variety of environments examples consist of: lakes, rivers, oceans, cities and soils. Assimilative capacity is a subjective measurement that is quantified by governments and institutions such as Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of environments into guidelines. Using assimilative capacity as a guideline can help the allocation of resources while reducing the impact on organisms in an environment. This concept is paired with carrying capacity in order to facilitate sustainable development of city regions. Assimilative capacity has been critiqued as to its effectiveness due to ambiguity in its definition that can confuses readers and false assumptions that a small amount of pollutants has no harmful effect on an environment.

Traditionally, market orientation (MO) focuses on microenvironment and the functional management of an organisation. However, contemporary organisations have widened their focus to incorporate more roles, functions and emphasis on the macro environment. Firms have been concerned with short run success and often not taken into account the long-run ecological, social and economic effects from their activities. Despite growth in the MO concept, there is still a need to reconceptualise the concept with a greater emphasis on external factors that influence a firm.

Tourism impacts tourist destinations in both positive and negative ways, encompassing economic, political, socio-cultural, environmental, and psychological dimensions. The economic effects of tourism encompass improved tax revenue, personal income growth, enhanced living standards, and the creation of additional employment opportunities. Sociocultural impacts are associated with interactions between people with differing cultural backgrounds, attitudes and behaviors, and relationships to material goods. Tourism can also have significant political impacts by influencing government policies and promoting diplomatic relations between countries. Environmental impacts can be categorized as direct effects including environmental damage, wildlife destruction, deforestation, water pollution, and indirect effects, such as increased harvesting of natural resources to supply food, indirect air and water pollution. Tourism also has positive and negative health outcomes for local people. The short-term negative impacts of tourism on residents' health are related to the density of tourist's arrivals, the risk of disease transmission, road accidents, higher crime levels, as well as traffic congestion, crowding, and other stressful factors. In addition, residents can experience anxiety and depression related to their risk perceptions about mortality rates, food insecurity, contact with infected tourists, etc., which can result in negative mental health outcomes. At the same time, there are positive long-term impacts of tourism on residents' health and well-being outcomes through improving healthcare access positive emotions, novelty, and social interactions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Overtourism</span> Excessive number of tourists

Overtourism is the congestion or overcrowding from an excess of tourists, resulting in conflicts with locals. The World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) defines overtourism as "the impact of tourism on a destination, or parts thereof, that excessively influences perceived quality of life of citizens and/or quality of visitor experiences in a negative way". This definition shows how overtourism can be observed both among locals, who view tourism as a disruptive factor that increasingly burdens daily life, as well as visitors, who may regard high numbers of tourists as a nuisance.

Scuba diving tourism is the industry based on servicing the requirements of recreational divers at destinations other than where they live. It includes aspects of training, equipment sales, rental and service, guided experiences and environmental tourism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Environmental impact of recreational diving</span> Effects of scuba diving on the underwater environment

The environmental impact of recreational diving is the effects of recreational scuba diving on the underwater environment, which is largely the effects of diving tourism on the marine environment. It is not uncommon for highly trafficked dive destinations to have more adverse effects with visible signs of diving's negative impacts due in large part to divers who have not been trained to sufficient competence in the skills required for the local environment, an inadequate pre-dive orientation, or lack of a basic understanding of biodiversity and the delicate balance of aquatic ecosystems. There may also be indirect positive effects as the environment is recognised by the local communities to be worth more in good condition than degraded by inappropriate use, and conservation efforts get support from dive communities who promote environmental awareness, and teach low impact diving and the importance of respecting marine life. There are also global coral reef monitoring networks in place which include local volunteer divers assisting in the collection of data for scientific monitoring of coral reef systems, which may eventually have a net positive impact on the environment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Slow tourism</span> Form of alternative tourism

Slow tourism is an alternative tourism choice in contrast to mass tourism. Slow tourism is a part of the sustainable tourism family, different from mainstream tourism and emphasizing the tourist’s greater personal awareness. It is characterized by reducing mobility and by taking time to explore local history and culture, while supporting the environment. The concept emerged from the Italian Slow Food movement and the Cittaslow movement.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ecotourism in Nigeria</span>

Ecotourism represents a gradually growing sub-sector within the tourism industry of Nigeria. Ecotourism is widely regarded as an optimal approach for achieving economic prosperity while concurrently promoting ecological sustainability. Various agents of change, encompassing economic development, alterations in land use and climate patterns, as well as population growth, continue to pose significant threats to global biodiversity. Consequently, these factors have contributed to a profoundly concerning and precipitous decline in biodiversity on a global scale.. The escalating concerns regarding this decline in recent years have played a pivotal role in fostering increased awareness of the paramount importance of biodiversity in upholding ecosystem stability and the fundamental functions it provides.

References