INAUGURAL LECTURE INAUGURAL LECTURE

Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Delivered as Universiti Professorial Inaugural Lecture on 30 November 2020 via live streaming on Universiti Malaysia Sabah Facebook

PENERBIT UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH Kota Kinabalu • Sabah • Malaysia http://www.ums.edu.my 2020 A Member of the Malaysian Scholarly Publishing Council (MAPIM) © Universiti Malaysia Sabah, 2020

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, stored in a database or retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronics, mechanical, graphic, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of Penerbit Universiti Malaysia Sabah, except as permitted by Act 332, Malaysian Copyright Act of 1987. Permission of rights is subjected to royalty or honorarium payment.

Penerbit Universiti Malaysia Sabah makes no representation – express or implied, with regard to the accuracy of information contained in this book. Users of the information in this book need to verify it on their own before utilizing such information. Views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or policy of Universiti Malaysia Sabah. Penerbit Universiti Malaysia Sabah shall not be responsible or liable for any special, consequential, or exemplary problems or damages resulting in whole or part, from the reader’s use of, or reliance upon, the contents of this book.

Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

Chan, Jennifer Kim Lian, 1961- Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach / Jennifer Chan Kim Lian; Editor: Lindsy Lorraine Majawat. (INAUGURAL LECTURE SERIES; 8) Mode of access: Internet eISBN 978-967-2962-02-1 1. Ecotourism--Malaysia. 2. Sustainable tourism--Malaysia. 3. Tourism--Malaysia. 4. Government publications--Malaysia. 5. Electronic books. I. Lindsy Lorraine Majawat. II. Title. 338.4791595

Typeface for text: Times New Roman Text type and leading size: 11/13.2 points Cover and layout designer: Nataniel Ebin Proofreader: Marshell Kanam Gombor Editor: Lindsy Lorraine Majawat Published by: Penerbit Universiti Malaysia Sabah Tingkat Bawah, Perpustakaan Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Jalan UMS 88400 Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia. Printed by: Percetakan Keningau Sdn. Bhd. Lot 26, Phase 1, HSK Industrial Centre, km 8 Jalan Penampang, 88300 Kota Kinabalu, Sabah. Jennifer Chan Kim Lian Faculty of Business, Economics and Accountancy Universiti Malaysia Sabah CONTENTS

Acknowledgements vii Synopsis x Sinopsis xii Introduction 1 Conceptualization of Ecotourism, Sustainable Development 6 and Sustainable Tourism • Contextual Issues on the Tourism Industry and Ecotourism • Concept and Definitions of Ecotourism • Importance of Ecotourism: Sustainable Form of Tourism and Economy Development Interconnectedness: Sustainability, Sustainable Development 14 and Sustainable Tourism • Concept of Sustainability • Sustainable Development • Sustainable Tourism • Ecotourism and Sustainable Development: Problems, Gaps, and Deficiencies • Characteristics and Criteria of Ecotourism • Malaysia Ecotourism Sites and National Ecotourism Plan • Ecotourism Attractions in Malaysia • Ecotourism Experiences • Importance of Sustainable Experiences • Co-creation of Ecotourism Experiences • Four Realms of Ecotourism Experiences • Review of Measures and Approaches to Sustainability of Ecotourism Integrated Approach to Sustainable Ecotourism Destination 40 Development • Sustainable Ecotourism Destination • Ecotourism Destination Dimensions • Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Indicators • Sustainable Tourism Indicators • Evaluation of Sustainable Ecotourism Destination by extending Butler’s Tourism Area Life Cycle • Sustainable Ecotourism Development Framework • Ecotourism Destination Development Stage • Extending Butler’s (1980) Tourism Area Life Cycle • Butler’s (1980) Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC) • An Integrated Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development Framework • Comprehensive and Approaches on Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Management Conclusion 67 References 69 Biodata 83

vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

irst and foremost, I thank God for all blessings upon my life and the great opportunity to deliver this inaugural lecture. FIt has been a meaningful journey in my academic career, although it has not always been smooth. I strongly believe that challenges along the path have made me a better person. As I was preparing this volume, many reflections flashed back from the day I took up my academic career. I first joined Stamford College Kota Kinabalu as a Programme Coordinator and Lecturer for Tourism and Hotel Management from 1994 – 1996; thereafter as a Lecturer at the School of Business and Economics, Universiti Malaysia Sabah, and was later appointed as Deputy Dean for Research and Development (2000 – 2002). As I reflect on my journey, I am proud to state that I have not compromised my integrity and dignity, even at times of unpleasant pressures and challenges. I am grateful to God that I made progress and achieved more than expected at these establishments. Hence, this success is not solely mine. It is also a manifestation of the achievements of many others that offered help and assistance to me, directly or indirectly, throughout the journey. I would like to express my deepest appreciation to all the Vice Chancellors of UMS. It is an honour to have served faithfully under the leadership of different individuals as they helm UMS over time. I am eternally grateful to the founding Vice Chancellor Tan Sri Prof. Emeritus Datuk Seri Panglima Dr Abu Hassan Othman for his concern and special approval on my PhD study at the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland. Due to his approval, I had the great opportunity to learn from my supervisor, Prof. Tom Baum, and many other international scholars. With the useful guidance from Prof. Tom Baum, I completed my PhD and graduated under 3 years; and was reunited with my youngest son, Morgan, whom I had to entrust my mother to take care of while I was away doing my PhD with my other two children. Being separated with a young baby had been a great challenge. Viewing the challenges positively, it transformed into motivation and determination to finish my PhD as soon as possible. vii Upon completing my PhD, I was then appointed as the Deputy Director for the Centre for Strategic and Academic Management from 2008 until 2014. Now, holding the post as Director of Borneo Tourism Research Centre since 2015. I appreciate every opportunity given to enrich my experience through various positions. I record my sincere thanks to former Vice Chancellors Prof. Emeritus Datuk Dr Noh Dalimin, Prof. Datuk Dr Kamarulzaman Ampon, Prof. Datuk Dr Harun Abdullah, Prof. Datuk Dr D Kamarudin D Mudin and also the current Vice Chancellor Prof. Datuk ChM. Dr Taufiq Yap Yun Hin. The scholarly credentials of the present Vice Chancellor have become motivations to my passions in my work and research. With my grateful heart, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Deans of School of Business and Economics/ Faculty of Business, Economics and Accounting, past and present, Dr Sarma Aralas (Acting Dean then) to whom I had the chance to serve as Deputy Dean (Research and Development), and the previous deans – Prof. Dr Rasid Mail, Prof. Datuk Dr Kasim Mansur, Prof. Dr Arsiah Bahron and Prof. Datin Dr Siti Maimon Kamso. Especially, my outmost gratitude and appreciation to the previous Dean, Associate Prof. Dr Raman Nordin for his undivided support, especially for his encouragement in establishing this lecture that marks another milestone in my career. Without him, this volume could not have materialized. Besides the management team, I would like to express my gratitude to my caring colleagues and friends who are part of this important journey and have contributed to the success of the book and the talk. Indeed, it is my privilege that some colleagues have become personal friends, associates and confidantes that I can count on. I thank my Faculty of Business, Economics and Accounting colleagues such as Associate Prof. Dr Nga Lay Hui @ Janice Nga, Associate Prof. Dr Awangku Hassanal Bahar Pengiran Bagul, Dr Tini Maizura Mohtar, Dr Rini Suryati Binti Sulong, Dr Arif @ Kamisan Pusiran, Dr Lim Fui Yee Beatrice, Dr Yeoh Ei Leen, Ms Sartinah Bt Ramli and Ms Natarsha Nadia A. Alidin at Borneo Tourism Research Centre, other co-researchers and collaborators, and administrators of all my research projects and consultation work and many others in the programme and faculty.

viii Special acknowledgement and appreciation to my postgraduate students who had contributed their valuable time, support and assistance to ensure the success of the organized events and activities. I wish them well and all the best in their future undertakings. More than anything, my academic career and achievement reflect the accumulation of efforts over the long term, consistent and demanding struggle. I could not have achieved everything without the full support of my family. I am indebted to my family who stand through thick and thin with me throughout this journey; I give them all my greatest thanks. This volume is dedicated to you for being great persons in my life. To my most understanding children (Charles, Simone and Morgan), no words could express the love that I have for you. While there may be times that I need to handle demanding tasks at work, your understanding and sacrifices have given me the energy to brave all odds to give you all the best. My deepest appreciation and gratitude go to my husband, Chua Hock Kong for his willingness to sacrifice, support and understanding throughout my academic journey thus far. I am grateful to God for having you in my life. Your tolerance for having a busy working wife has been a great encouragement to my career and our life together. Without you, I could not have achieved what I have in my career and family life. From the bottom of my heart, I thank you for all the love and concern demonstrated throughout all these years. May God bless you and your families for your kind deeds.

ix SYNOPSIS

he lecture aims to share new perspectives on sustainable ecotourism destination through an integrated approach. It Tsuggests several pertinent factors that ought to be considered to improve and strengthen the sustainability of ecotourism destinations. An alternative, sustainable ecotourism destination framework is offered by incorporating sustainable and experiential dimensions, the concept of co-creation and the six phases of ecotourism destination development in the sustainable development criteria. In particular, the lecture points out the importance of ecotourism experiential dimensions and destination development phases as important components which have been neglected in sustainable ecotourism destination management. Simply put, the development process or phase at the destination significantly influences the sustainability dimensions and the quality of experiences. The quality of experiences and conditions of the destination will in return have a significant impact on the level of development and growth. The lecture conveys a coherent understanding of the emergence of ecotourism, its importance in sustainable tourism and the interconnectedness of ecotourism, sustainable development and sustainable tourism. This is followed by an analysis and conceptualisation of the concept and criteria of ecotourism, sustainable tourism and sustainable development. Specifically, the contextual issues and problems faced by sustainable ecotourism destinations, including any gaps and deficiencies in sustainable tourism and ecotourism in Malaysia, are also discussed. Ecotourism is widely recognised as a place for experience consumption and is conceptualised and underpinned by the four realms of experiences based on the experience economy model. The co-creation approach to ecotourism is also introduced as part of sustainable ecotourism destination. An ecotourism destination is akin to a product’s experience life cycle. Butler’s model for evolving tourist destinations,

x known as the Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC) (1980), is a widely accepted theory used to explain the destination development cycle in six phases: exploration, involvement, development, consolidation, stagnation, decline or rejuvenation. The lecture contributes to sustainable ecotourism destination development and management by proposing an integrated, holistic and practical framework, instead of a framework based on principles of sustainability and sustainable criteria only. The framework must consist of relevant key components and factors to determine destination sustainability inclusively. Ecotourism products and experiences are associated with environmental, natural, cultural and social parameters within that site. The proposed framework benefits the ecotourism destination management and key ecotourism stakeholders. It strengthens the destination sustainability during the planning and development process based on the aforementioned six development phases. Each development phase exhibits different requirements and conditions concerning the sustainability of the destination. Consequently, the framework enhances the essence of sustainable ecotourism destination through optimal use of natural resources and a greater balance between economic growth, consumption of environmental resources and impacts on the community. It addresses the gaps of sustainable ecotourism destination development and recommends this framework to be used in all 60 proposed ecotourism sites identified in the Malaysian ecotourism clusters. The lecture offers a valuable and insightful understanding of sustainable ecotourism destinations and a sound theoretical approach to the management of such destinations for academics and practitioners.

xi SINOPSIS

yarahan ini bertujuan untuk berkongsi perspektif baharu berkenaan destinasi ekopelancongan yang mampan Smelalui pendekatan bersepadu. Ia mencadangkan beberapa faktor penting yang harus dipertimbangkan bagi meningkat dan mengukuhkan kemampanan destinasi ekopelancongan. Rangka kerja destinasi ekopelancongan yang mampan dikemukakan dengan menggabungkan dimensi mampan dan pengalaman, konsep penciptaan bersama dan enam fasa pembangunan destinasi ekopelancongan sepertimana dalam kriteria pembangunan mampan. Secara khusus, syarahan ini memperlihatkan kepentingan dimensi pengalaman ekopelancongan dan fasa-fasa pembangunan destinasi sebagai komponen penting yang telah diabaikan dalam pengurusan destinasi ekopelancongan mampan. Secara ringkasnya, proses pembangunan atau fasa di destinasi secara signifikannya mempengaruhi dimensi kemampanan dan kualiti pengalaman. Kualiti pengalaman dan keadaan destinasi akan kembali mempunyai kesan yang ketara ke atas tahap pembangunan dan pertumbuhan. Syarahan ini menyampaikan pemahaman yang mendalam tentang kemunculan ekopelancongan, kepentingannya dalam bidang pelancongan mampan dan ketersalingan ekopelancongan, pembangunan mampan dan pelancongan mampan. Ia diikuti dengan analisis dan pengkonseptualan konsep tersebut dan kriteria ekopelancongan, pelancongan mampan dan pembangunan mampan. Secara khusus, turut dibincangkan adalah berkenaan isu kontekstual dan masalah yang dihadapi oleh destinasi ekopelancongan yang mampan, termasuk sebarang jurang dan kekurangan dalam pelancongan mampan serta ekopelancongan di Malaysia. Ekopelancongan diiktiraf secara meluas sebagai tempat untuk penggunaan pengalaman dan ia dikonsep dan diperkukuhkan oleh empat jenis pengalaman berdasarkan model ekonomi pengalaman. Pendekatan penciptaan bersama dalam ekopelancongan juga diperkenalkan sebagai sebahagian daripada destinasi ekopelancongan yang mampan. Satu destinasi ekopelancongan adalah serupa dengan

xii kitaran hayat pengalaman produk. Model Butler untuk destinasi pelancongan yang berkembang, dikenali sebagai Kitar Hayat Kawasan Pelancongan (TALC) (1980) merupakan satu teori yang diterima meluas untuk menghuraikan kitaran pembangunan destinasi dalam enam fasa iaitu penerokaan, penglibatan, pembangunan, pengukuhan, ketepuan, kemerosotan atau peremajaan. Syarahan ini menyumbang kepada pembangunan dan pengurusan destinasi ekopelancongan yang mampan dengan mencadangkan rangka kerja bersepadu, holistik dan praktikal, dan bukannya satu rangka kerja berdasarkan prinsip kemampanan dan kriteria mampan semata-mata. Rangka kerja ini mestilah terdiri daripada komponen utama yang berkaitan dan faktor untuk menentukan kemampanan destinasi dalam cara yang inklusif. Produk dan pengalaman ekopelancongan dikaitkan dengan parameter alam sekitar, alam semula jadi, budaya dan sosial dalam kawasan tersebut. Cadangan rangka kerja ini memberi manfaat kepada pengurusan destinasi ekopelancongan dan pemegang taruh utama ekopelancongan. Ia menguatkan kemampanan destinasi semasa proses perancangan dan pembangunan berdasarkan enam fasa pembangunan yang disebutkan. Setiap fasa pembangunan mempamerkan keperluan dan syarat yang berbeza berkaitan dengan kemampanan destinasi. Oleh itu, rangka kerja ini meningkatkan inti pati destinasi ekopelancongan yang mampan melalui penggunaan sumber semula jadi yang optimum dan mewujudkan keseimbangan yang lebih di antara pertumbuhan ekonomi, penggunaan sumber alam sekitar dan kesan ke atas masyarakat. Ia menangani jurang pembangunan destinasi ekopelancongan yang mampan dan mengesyorkan rangka kerja ini untuk digunakan dalam semua 60 cadangan tapak ekopelancongan yang dikenal pasti dalam kluster ekopelancongan Malaysia. Syarahan ini memberi pemahaman yang bernilai, mendalam dan tepat tentang destinasi ekopelancongan mampan serta pendekatan teori yang kukuh kepada pengurusan destinasi untuk ahli-ahli akademik dan para pengamal ekopelancongan.

xiii by

Jennifer Chan Kim Lian Faculty of Business, Economics and Accountancy Universiti Malaysia Sabah

Introduction

cotourism emerged in the 1980s (Fennell, 2015). It is a subcomponent of the field of sustainable tourism and a Epotentially effective tool for sustainable development with economic development and conservation strategies. Ecotourism, sustainable development and sustainable tourism are key components of tourism destinations and they have been extensively researched. Ecotourism and its development play vital roles in the tourism industry and economic development of a country. There is an increasing trend towards sustainability from the existing multi- generational demographic profile of tourists. Thus, ecotourism, sustainable development and sustainable tourism have been widely Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian researched and has received attention from both practitioners and government agencies. In line with these changes, tourist destinations deserve greater attention in adopting sustainable goals and transition to sustainability. Increasingly, the word “sustainability” has become an important component in the tourism industry and has been widely associated with ecotourism. Ecotourism has become an important driver of economic, social, cultural and environmental changes in many developing countries (Vignati, Hawkins, & Prideaux, 2015). Malaysia is an attractive tourist destination due to its diverse and unique multi-tourism resources as evidenced by its wildlife, scenery, forests, beaches and cultural heritage as well as its strategic location. Thus, it attracts all categories of visitors and its market is diverse and heterogeneous. However, this poses a serious threat to the sustainable development and management of tourist destinations. Ecotourism is perceived as alternative tourism and a tool for making Malaysia’s tourism industry more sustainable. However, for ecotourism to grow sustainably, the economy, social, environmental, spatial, temporal and personal dimensions (individual, human) must be taken into account. Additionally, the experiential outcomes and destination development phases must also be considered as important factors. Malaysia is a country rich with natural attractions, particularly sandy beaches, enchanting islands, diverse flora and fauna, tropical forest retreats and magnificent mountains that make it one of the top ecotourism destinations (Daud, 2002). It is also one of the twelve mega-biodiversity countries which recognise the importance of preserving its wealth of environmental, social and cultural heritage, as documented in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (2003). Malaysia’s sustainable tourism policy and legislation is consistent with Agenda 21 and has been adopted in the National Ecotourism Plan 2016 – 2025 (MOTAC, 2017). The establishment of Agenda 21 enables the local authorities and communities to work together and strengthens the management and development of sustainable tourism in the local areas. It aims to incorporate tourism with broader sustainable development through comprehensive action.

2 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Briefly, Agenda 21 comprises of three components which relate to sustainable tourism (as cited from Tourism and local agenda 21, UNEP, 2003, p. 14) and are as following: 1. Establishing effective structures for multi-stakeholder participation, both in setting the direction for tourism in the community and working together to develop and manage it. 2. Identifying a strategy for sustainable tourism within the context of a wider sustainable development strategy that reflects stakeholders’ views and that allows tourism management to integrate with other management functions in the destination. 3. Identifying and implementing a set of actions, in line with the strategy, that addresses the economic, social and environmental sustainability of tourism in the area.

Malaysia is one of the signatories of Agenda 21, hence the country is expected to comply with the sustainable development concept. Therefore, Agenda 21 was fulfilled by the country’s local authorities in 2000. The local authorities involved are the Miri City Council, Petaling Jaya City Council, Kerian District Council and Kuantan Municipal Council (Awang Kipli, 2006). Indeed, numerous tourism destinations in Malaysia have been gazetted as terrestrial or marine protected areas in categories such as forest and wildlife reserves, sanctuaries, wetlands and marine parks. East Malaysia is a prime ecotourism destination, given its tropical climate, spectacular landscapes and endemic wildlife attractions. A considerable proportion of East Malaysia’s tourist attractions are focused on natural areas such as national parks and reserves. These attractions provide the experience sought by ecotourists. Ryel and Grasse (1991) recognised that attracting ecotourists depends upon biodiversity, cultural history and unique geography of areas as well as the infrastructure available to support the development of ecotourism. The economic development in Malaysia, especially in recent years, has brought out the importance of ecotourism. Broadly speaking, ecotourism implies travelling to natural areas that offer unique learning opportunities and environmentally friendly

3 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian activities while stimulating the economy and social development of local communities. Experiencing and learning about the local environment, ecosystem and culture are key components in ecotourism destinations. The key attributes of ecotourism sites also influence the quality of experiences. Notwithstanding the prominence of sustainable development and tourism, there has been limited research and empirical evidence focusing specifically on sustainable ecotourism destination. Most of the research about ecotourism has been conducted on sustainable development (Mondino & Beery, 2019), ecotourism management (Jing & Fucai, 2011), ecotourism in protected areas (Wang, Zhong, Zhang, & Zhou, 2014), ecotourism and sustainability indicators (Batta, 2006), transformation planning of ecotourism systems (Choi, Doh, Park, & Chon, 2017), ecotourism and community development (Schellhorn, 2010) and ecotourism opportunities and challenges (Nianyong & Zhuge, 2001). Additionally, ecotourism experiences are key attractions and motivations for visitors to come to their respective destinations. The ecotourism experiences have been extensively researched, but there is limited understanding of the conceptualisation and categorisation of ecotourism experience dimensions, which are essential to managing ecotourism experiences - one of the key components of sustainable ecotourism destination. Although the sustainability of tourism destination is a widely accepted and studied concept, there are issues regarding the factors contributing to the sustainable development of a destination and the prevalent framework for ecotourism destinations. Sustainable development requires sustainable growth in terms of economic contributions, sustainable use of resources and environment based on destination development (Díaz & Rodríguez, 2016). The advantage of using an integrated approach is that it consists of prominent factors that shape and affect the sustainability of a destination.

4 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

The purpose of the lecture is to improve the understanding of the interconnection between ecotourism sustainable development and sustainable tourism; it also identifies the key components manifested in a holistic sustainable framework; subsequently to recommend the future sustainable development of ecotourism destination. In particular, the lecture highlights important ecotourism experiences and destination development phases that have been neglected. These are important sustainable development components that contribute to the sustainability of an ecotourism destination. The lecture focuses on the major factors of a more holistic integrated sustainable destination framework that has room for improvement in sustainable destination management. The lecture begins by reviewing concepts, definitions and analysing contextual issues on ecotourism, sustainable development and tourism development. It also presents critical issues and challenges in a sustainable ecotourism destination from the five sustainability dimensions (economy, social, environment, permanence and human). Ecotourism experiences are conceptualised as an important component of attractions and is underpinned by the four realms of experiences based on the experience economy model. An integrated perspective on sustainable ecotourism destination is discussed using several pertinent components for strengthening sustainable destinations. An insightful understanding of sustainable ecotourism destination development from the lens of Butler’s Tourism Area Life Cycle (1980) is also presented. It proposes a new outlook towards the sustainable ecotourism destination framework built upon the destination’s attractions and experiences as well as development phases. This is a more holistic approach to understand sustainable ecotourism destinations, while previously the focus has only been on three or five sustainability pillars.

5 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Conceptualization of Ecotourism, Sustainable Development and Sustainable Tourism The presentation starts with a brief account of the contextual issues followed by the reviews of concepts and definitions of ecotourism, sustainable development, sustainable tourism and its importance. It shreds the changes of the tourism industry and shows the co- existence of ecotourism, sustainable development and sustainable tourism in ecotourism destinations, which is an important concept and practice that contributes to the substantiality of ecotourism destinations. It presents the concept of ecotourism and connects it to the sustainable development concept. Based on the reviews, it establishes the foundation of ecotourism and concatenates sustainable development and sustainable tourism; followed by ecotourism sites and promotions of Malaysia as an ecotourism destination. Contextual Issues on the Tourism Industry and Ecotourism

In the 20th century, the tourism industry and tourism destination landscape was shaped by several pertinent factors related to changes in economic conditions and business landscape, tourism profiles and issues related to sustainability and sustainable growth; including an introduction of 17 Sustainable Development Goals recently. Due to these changes, a new perspective towards tourism growth and development has grown from mass tourism into other types of tourism, for example, alternative tourism, ecotourism and is further influenced by changing tourist demographic profiles and increasing awareness and acceptance of the concept

6 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach of sustainability globally. Consequently, several new categories of tourism have emerged such as niche tourism, rural tourism, alternative tourism and ecotourism with the common aim to ensure tourism continues to grow sustainably. In line with these changes, tourism destinations being the place of visitation or experiences by tourists, deserve greater attention in terms of sustainable development. The sustainable growth of tourism requires a clear vision and understanding of the key elements underpinning the relevant concepts. To some extent, concepts are well recognised and defined but are being interpreted differently. More importantly, there are missing links amongst these concepts in the context of ecotourism sustainable destination. In short, tourism destinations are being shaped by the changing demographic profile of tourists and sustainability measures. Saarinen (2005) argues that a shift towards nature-based tourism or ecotourism has influenced the consumption and economic production, thus moving towards an experience economy. Tourism involves multifaceted development and it competes for the use of a wide range of resources, as such nature preservation and conservation practices are becoming increasingly crucial to ensure tourism continues to grow, especially in the protected areas. Indeed, the notions of sustainable development and sustainable tourism emerged as an alternative approach to tourism planning, development and management. Although these two concepts are commonly used, both have theoretical deficiencies and it has been proven to not be suitable practical compendiums in the development of a highly constructive and robust society, especially in communities residing at the fringes where the shift into sustainability could be especially difficult. Ecotourism has been widely recognised as a category of sustainable tourism which supports conservation and development (Tsaur, Lin, & Lin, 2006). It is increasing in popularity when compared to other tourism segments (Meric & Hunt, 1998; Wight, 2001) that generate environmental, social and economic benefit to a certain area. The rapid growth of both international and domestic travellers to ecotourism sites and destinations, the trends to seek unique and memorable experiences and being close to nature are

7 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian increasingly creating negative impacts and issues on the ecotourism destination. The development of ecotourism is accompanied by significant challenges. These challenges have stimulated the need for sustainability and sustainable development. Although tourism academics and practitioners focused chiefly on ecotourism, there has been insufficient understanding in relating ecotourism concepts and its experiential dimensions to the experience economy model and theory of sustainable development and sustainable ecotourism destination development. Concept and Definitions of Ecotourism

The international acknowledgement and response to sustainable practices and universal ecological practices gave rise to the term ‘ecotourism’ in the latter quarter of the ’80s (Diamantis, 1999). Ceballos-Lascurian (1983) introduced the term ‘ecotourism’ to explain and describe nature-based travel to moderately untouched landscapes with scholastic motives. There is no universal consensus or accepted definition on the precise meaning of ecotourism (Weaver, 2008). Nonetheless, there are a few commonly used ecotourism definitions, for example, The International Ecotourism Society defines ecotourism as “socially and environmentally responsible travel to natural areas which conserve the environment and improves the welfare of local people” (TIES, 2015). Ceballos- Lascurian (1998, p. 7) describes “ecotourism as the travel to relatively undisturbed areas with the specific objective of studying, admiring and enjoying the scenery and its wildlife, as well as any existing cultural manifestations found in these areas”. Hence, ecotourism is a form of tourism that aims to nurture sustainable practices through safeguarding resources, revitalisation of culture and economic development (Newsome, Moore, & Dowling, 2002). Ecotourism ensures the sustainable use of natural resources, and at the same time, creates economic prospects for the local community (Farrell & Runyan, 1991; Bhattacharya, Sarkar, & Choudhury, 2012). In general, ecotourism is defined “as a form

8 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach of tourism that fosters learning experiences and appreciation of the natural environment or some component thereof, within its associated cultural context ... preferably in a way that enhances the natural and cultural resources” (Weaver, 2001, p. 15). The purpose of ecotourism is to conserve and utilize environmental and cultural resources in a sustainable manner for the economic development of local people; thus, sustainable ecotourism destinations deserve considerable attention, particularly in the area of sustainable management and development. Furthermore, one should not treat ecotourism as a general solution, but rather as an opportunity to encourage sustainable development as well as to understand the effects of unsustainable ecotourism activities. Thus, ecotourism is a unique subset of the tourism industry which advocates and practices environmentally-conscious approaches and focuses on the conservation of the environment and enhancing the indigenous community’s welfare, to provide a low-impact small-scaled substitute to mass tourism (International Ecotourism Society, 2016). It provides an understanding of the human impact on the environment and cultivates greater gratitude to the visitors. This suggests that ecotourism is a type of natural-resource based tourism that is sustainable (Kiper, 2013). Consequently, ecotourism is highly dependent upon the destination resources and experiential dimensions to attract tourists and achieve success. Like tourism, ecotourism is extremely sensitive and responds dynamically to external “changes” in particular in the economy, social society and environment. These three aspects have become prominent pillars not only for ecotourism but also in sustainable development and sustainable tourism. On the whole, nature-based, alternative tourism, adventure tourism, special interest tourism, and soft adventure tourism are frequently used as references to ecotourism. However, nature- based tourism, alternative and sustainable tourism are deemed common terms. Generally, ecotourism offers benefits for locals, conservation, development and educational experiences. The International Ecotourism Society (TIES, 2015) defines ecotourism as “responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment, sustains the well-being of local people and involves interpretation and education”.

9 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

The Malaysia National Ecotourism Plan (Kamarudin, 2016, p. 16) defines ecotourism based on the following criteria: 1. Conservation of nature and culture 2. Reinvestment and maintain quality of resource and conservation 3. Ecological, economical and socio-cultural sustainability 4. Ethical, and corporate social responsibility 5. Education about conservation, habitats and cultures

Based on these definitions, there seems to be agreement that ecotourism is typified by nature-orientation and natural conservation ethics as well as cultural conservation. It is an environmentally responsible form of tourism that conserves cultural and natural resources, the ecological system (Ceballos-Lascurain, 1993) including TIES (2015), the impact of the local community which focuses on the community participation and well-being of the indigenous resident in the ecotourism area, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Mainstream definitions of ecotourism from prominent researchers (Kiper, 2013, p. 775)

Ceballos- Ecotourism is defined as tourism that involves Lascurain, 1987 travelling to an undisturbed and uncontaminated natural area with the specific object of studying, admiring and enjoying the scenery, wild animals and plants. Ziffer, 1989 Ecotourism is a type of tourism that is primarily inspired by the natural history and the indigenous culture of the area. The visitation is in an undeveloped area, and the ecotourist practices non-consumptive use of natural resources and wildlife. Visitors also contributed to the visited area through financial means and labour that will benefit the economy and well-being of the locals and the conservation of the ecotourism site.

10 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Commonwealth Ecotourism is nature-based tourism which Department of involves interpretation and education of the natural Tourism, 1994 environment. The ecotourism site is managed to be ecologically sustainable. The definition embraces the natural environment, the cultural component, and the ‘ecologically sustainable’ management that contributes to the local community and long term conservation of resources. McCormick, 1994 The purpose of the vacation is to understand the natural history and culture of the environment while taking care of the integrity of the ecosystem which then leads to economic opportunities that benefits the local people. Brandon, 1996 A type of travel which is environmentally responsible and the visitation is to an undisturbed area which involves an appreciation of nature that leads to conservation and has a relatively low negative visitor impact. This also allows a beneficially active socio-economy involvement of the local population. Guo, 1997 Ecotourism is nature-based tourism and a type of sustainable tourism that emphasizes on tourist involvement, high quality spiritual experience and public education. Honey, 1999 Travelling to a pristine, fragile, and usually protected area, which helps to educate the traveller, directly benefits the economic development and political empowerment of local communities; provides funds for conservation, and fosters respect for different culture for human rights. Weaver, 1999 Ecotourism is a result of the interest among tourism marketers and planners. This is rationalized by the number of popular assumptions of the sector’s potential benefits in environmental, socio-culture and economic benefits.

11 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Mohonk, 2000 Ecotourism is sustainable tourism in a focused natural area that benefits both communities and the environment in the visited area by raising awareness, understanding, and appreciation of the environment and cultural product. Weaver, 2001 Ecotourism is a type of tourism that fosters appreciation of the natural environment and learning experiences of some components that are associated with a cultural context. TIES, 2015 A type of responsible travel to a natural area that sustains the well-being of the local people there and conserves the environment. This involves education and interpretation.

In short, the definitions of ecotourism include nature orientation, conservation of the natural environment and local cultures, environmental education, sustainability, and participation by the local community (Baral, Stern, & Hammett, 2012; Cini, Van der Merwe, & Saayman, 2015; Fereday & Muir-Cochrane, 2006; Dolnicar, Crouch, & Long, 2008; Fennell, 2015; Nowaczek & Smale, 2010). Importance of Ecotourism: Sustainable Form of Tourism and Economic Development

Ecotourism and its development play vital roles in the tourism industry and economic development of a country. Globally, numerous countries consider ecotourism as a major economic activity which represents a substantial segment of gross domestic product, for example in Malaysia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Nepal, Kenya, Madagascar and territories such as Antarctica. Furthermore, ecotourism has been considered as a panacea for solving the environmental and economic problem of less developed countries.

12 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Ecotourism has gained considerable attention from both researchers and practitioners and the topic has been extensively researched from the various disciplines including management, planning, development and sustainability perspectives. The key criteria of ecotourism include (Beaumont, 2011; Kiper, 2013; Mader, 2002): 1. Environmental conservation 2. Meaningful community participation 3. Profitable and self-sustained

These criteria serve as critical aspects in planning, developing and managing ecotourism destinations, and are imperative in the sustainable development and sustainable tourism context. Thus, it contemplates that ecotourism is an element of sustainable tourism. In addition to the provision of quality and valuable experiences, continuity and exploitation at an optimal level, striking an equilibrium between the demands of the tourism industry and safeguarding the environment and equal distribution of benefits to the local community are acute features of sustainable tourism. The key criteria of ecotourism are reflected in three important components: economy, social and environment, and is rooted in the concept of sustainable development (Brundtland, 1987). Thus, they are interconnected and in simple terms, economy, social benefits and the environment are fundamental to sustainable development. Furthermore, to ensure sustainable tourism development, again the economy, social and environmental aspects are crucial and are key parameters to measure sustainable development, as pointed out by Yin (2016). These three pillars (economy, social and environment) have become key principles of sustainable tourism and represent sustainability in three intersecting circles (Purvis, Mao, & Robinson, 2018).

13 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Interconnectedness: Sustainability, Sustainable Development and Sustainable Tourism Concept of Sustainability

Sustainability is central to ecotourism development and growth as ecotourism is highly sensitive and dependent on the natural resources of the destination, and generate economic, socio-cultural and environmental impacts. In simple terms, the sustainability pillars consist of the economy (profit), society (people) and environment (planet). It is a multidimensional, complex and situational subjective matter. Hall (1998) includes the economy, environment and social aspect as three pillars of the sustainability model in developing sustainable tourism. This model serves as a useful guide to understand the significance of the economy, environment and social pillars in the context of sustainable tourism. The three pillars of sustainability are as follows: 1. Economy and profits include access to the business environment and economic health 2. Environment and planet include natural resources and green factors – energy and pollution emissions 3. Social and people include performance and quality of life

The three pillars of sustainability in business practices are perceived as: 1. The economy of the local community and development 2. Social/cultural: people and resources 3. Environment: natural resources and experiences

14 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

In general, sustainability relates to ecological safeguarding, economic development, social equity and environmental impact. The achievement of sustainability is largely dependent upon employing three interconnected ‘pillars’: economy, social and environmental (Negrusa, Toader, Sofica, Tutunea, & Rus, 2015; Purvis et al., 2018; Hall, 1998). Elsewhere, Dredge and Jenkins (2008) present a sustainable tourism model that captures the interconnection between the three pillars as presented in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1 The three pillars of sustainability

UNEP (2003) and UNWTO (2015) define sustainability in tourism as “an effective approach for developing strategies and policies for more sustainable tourism, and the tools that would make the policies work on the ground” (Making Tourism More Sustainable: A Guide for Policy Makers by UNEP and WTO’s, p. iv). To achieve sustainability within tourism, it is imperative to collaborate with all important shareholders, including those in the non-profit, private and government sectors. The sustainability concept is strongly tied to the management of the natural environment, economy, and socio- cultural aspects of an area (Mowforth & Munt, 2016; Weaver, 2006). The goal of sustainability brings many advantages such as income redistribution, ecosystem maintenance, quality of life, the system of nature and human environment, and the redistribution of

15 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian power. Sustainable development and sustainable tourism models are ideal for ecotourism destination development. However, the review of literature shows several major problems in relation to sustainable development and tourism; this includes economy inequality, socio- cultural and environmental exploitation, and uncontrolled spatial planning in the development phase. As a consequence, it assumes that sustainable development is a myth and that it is not able to promote ecotourism while at the same time maintaining a good quality environment. It implies the need for strategies to develop tourism in conjunction with the conservation of culture and nature by examining the context of the destination. Sustainable Development

The World Commission on Environment and Development (1987, p. 16) described sustainable development as “the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. On the other hand, Van der Merwe and Van der Marwe (1999, p. 5) understand it as “the process of economic development to meet the basic quality of life and protect the ecosystems and community systems”. Sustainable development involves the three fundamental principles: community participation, equity and a futurist orientation; and all present and future stakeholders. Accordingly, sustainable development through ecotourism is an issue of increasing concern (Kiper, 2013). As dimensions of ecotourism development are related to the environmental, economic and social aspects of tourism development, there needs to be a suitable equilibrium between these three dimensions to achieve long term sustainability (Bhuiyan, Siwar, Ismail, & Islam, 2012). Both concepts of sustainability and sustainable development are well reflected in the 17 Sustainable Development Goals by the United Nations in 2017. Furthermore, ecotourism is a sub- component of the field of sustainable tourism and is perceived as an effective tool for sustainable development; and subsequently, research on ecotourism and sustainable tourism amongst others have

16 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach been widely discussed and researched. Extensive research work has focused on the concepts of ecotourism, sustainable development and sustainable tourism. These terms have been used interchangeably and to some extent, these concepts are treated as the same. However, there is a misconception which requires clearing up. Although some similarities exist, they cannot be treated as identical, as stated by Sharpley (2010). To some extent, the term ‘sustainability’ is considered of a similar nature to sustainable development (Dresner, 2002). This is because “sustainability is usually seen as a guide for the economy and social policymaking in equilibrium with ecological conditions” (Seghezzo, 2009, p. 539). According to Moldan, Janouskova, and Hak (2012), both sustainability and sustainable development have similar meanings at the most basic level but exhibit certain differences as “sustainability” is a broad discipline that provides an insight into majority facets of the human world from business to technology to environment and the social sciences. On the other hand, the concept of sustainable development was launched by the WCED (1987, p. 30) as a “‘global objective’ to guide policies orientated to balance ‘economy and social systems and ecological conditions’”. It is often represented with the ‘triple bottom line’ (TBL), which consists of the economy, environment, and society (Elkington, Tickell, & Lee, 2007, p. 1). Sustainable Tourism

In the late 1980s, sustainable tourism started to gain traction and is seen in tourism policies and strategies as well as tourism research topics (Hall, 1998). It is defined as “tourism that takes full account of its current and future economy, social and environmental impacts, addressing the needs of visitors, the industry, the environment and host communities” (UNEP and UNWTO, 2005, p. 11 – 12.). In simple terms, sustainable tourism implies achieving an equilibrium between environmental, economy and social-cultural facets as stated on the triple bottom line (Elkington, 1998). This includes activities, supervision and growth of tourism that maintains the

17 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian nature, environment, economy and social integrity and safeguards natural, environmental and cultural resources while ensuring tourist satisfaction through meaningful experiences and promoting sustainable tourism practices (Niedziółka, 2012). On the other hand, Cernat and Gourdon (2007) stated that UNWTO (1994) has defined sustainable tourism as follows: “Sustainable tourism development meets the needs of present tourists and host regions while protecting and enhancing opportunities for the future. It is envisaged as leading to management of all resources in such a way that economy, social and aesthetic needs can be fulfilled while maintaining cultural integrity, essential ecological processes, and biological diversity and life support systems”. Elsewhere, Seghezzo (2009) presents a sustainable tourism model that captures the interconnection between the three pillars - economy, environment and society as well as the relationship of nature-based tourism, local economic development and management of natural resources, as presented in Figure 2.

Figure 2 Sustainable tourism model (modified from Seghezzo, 2009)

18 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

The elements of sustainable tourism, shown in Figure 2 above, illustrate the presence of the three pillars of sustainable development (economy, environmental and society). Sustainable tourism requires governmental support in the environment, private sector and the local community to achieve sustainable tourism (Seghezzo, 2009). From the economic aspect, it means economic returns for both short and long term to businesses or tourism destination and in particular, generating the economy, in terms of wealth and values or profits for the businesses and communities. As for the social aspect, it means generating stable employment and income-earning opportunities that benefit the host communities and social services to reduce poverty. All these must be fairly distributed to the host community or stakeholders. For the environmental aspect, it emphasizes the ideal consumption of natural resources that include responsible consumption behaviour and maintaining ecological authenticity and conservation efforts. In terms of the cultural aspect, there is a need to respect the socio-cultural authenticity of the host community, safeguard their cultural heritage and traditional values, which is essential for a peaceful society. Sustainable tourism, which is also referred to as the “triple bottom line”, involves three main elements. The first element is the environment, where sustainable tourism should have a minimised effect on natural resources, particularly in the gazetted area. The second element is the social and cultural elements. In this case, both society and cultures are respected and not disturbed. All stakeholders such as individuals, communities, tour operators and government institutions are involved in all phases of planning, development, and monitoring. The third element is the economy, where sustainable development should be able to support wellbeing of the economy or create a sustainable and equitable income for the local communities and other stakeholders that are involved. It also provides benefits to the owner, employees, and neighbours.

19 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Figure 3 Interconnectedness: Ecotourism sustainable tourism and sustainable development

Based on Figure 1 and Figure 2, the economy, environment and society are common elements for both sustainable development and sustainable tourism. Likewise, based on the discussion of the concepts, definitions and characteristics of ecotourism, sustainable tourism and sustainable development, it is concluded that there are strong connections between these three concepts and this has shown that ecotourism, sustainable tourism and sustainable development are all connected and associated with the three pillars – environment, economy and social, as presented in Figure 3. Figure 3 illustrates the interconnection between ecotourism sustainable development and sustainable tourism. Consequently, for good measures of sustainable ecotourism destination, it argues that one must not only understand the underpinning concept of ecotourism, sustainable development and sustainable tourism, but also the experiential consumption, destination development phases and indicators to measure the level of sustainability (Medina, 2005) which influence sustainable developments. Experiential consumption is important as the ecotourism environment is very complex and volatile and it is shifting from production and service to experience, shared and virtual economy.

20 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Ecotourism and Sustainable Development: Problems, Gaps and Deficiencies

Despite the importance of ecotourism, past studies record numerous problems, gaps, issues and deficiencies regarding ecotourism. Among the issues, problems and deficiencies are the negative perceptions towards ecotourism which affect destination sustainable development. This is due to the lack of proper environmental education among the stakeholders, especially the local stakeholders (Mondino & Beery, 2019). There is a language barrier that becomes an obstacle in sustainable development of ecotourism among local stakeholders (Mondino & Beery, 2019). Other problems related to ecotourism include noise pollution, lack of attention on issues related to environmental capacity, profit-centred development, the conflict between residents and landowners within a protected area and information deficit, interpretation and programming regarding ecotourism destinations (Fennell, 2008; Choi, Doh, et al., 2017; Choi, Song, Kim, & Lee, 2017). Jing and Fucai (2011) stated that over-supply of tourism enterprises, low quality of tourist and ecotourism are viewed only for economy interest (Cheng et al., 2007; Cheng and Wang, 2009; Wang et al., 2012; Chen and Nakama, 2013). Furthermore, the environmental capacity of the ecotourism destinations are frequently ignored, which destroys ecotourism environments. On the other hand, vandalism is increasing and travel agencies are thoughtlessly attracting tourists, causing excessive tourists in the ecotourism scene (Jing & Fucai, 2011). Ecotourism forms a multifaceted mutual relationship among the factors that will impact the restoration of the local area and habitat environment in an ecotourism destination. The issues and problems found in ecotourism can be distinguished by comprehending the social aspect of the ecosystem from the dynamic tourist-operator relationship (Choi, Doh, et al., 2017; Choi, Song, et al., 2017).

21 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

In the case of Malaysia, Nair and Thomas (2013) indicated that the scarcity of effective implementation of sustainable tourism is due to insufficient effectual involvement from various stakeholders, and the lack of tourism strategy integration with the wider strategy for sustainable development. Above all, stakeholders such as the government, industries and society ought to participate in prominent sustainable tourism. Furthermore, there is a crucial need for the local agenda to focus on sustainable tourism in Malaysia. The planning and design of sustainable tourism is required at every level, particularly the national level, to guarantee dependable comprehension of the concept (Siti-Nabiha, Wahid, Amran, Che Haat, & Abustan, 2008). The presentation stipulates that attraction and experiential dimensions are key components of sustainable ecotourism destination development. The following presentation identifies the key attraction and experiences at ecotourism destinations in Malaysia; and conceptualizes ecotourism experiences as experiential products. It illuminates the concept and importance of co-creation experiences of ecotourism experiences within the ecotourism destination, and ecotourism experiences are underpinned and interpreted from the co-creation and experiential network perspective. It proposes that ecotourism experiences can be categorised and referenced into the four realms of experiences as described in the experience economy model by Pine and Gilmore (1998). The presentation highlights the importance of co-creation experiences to achieve sustainable ecotourism experiences within the ecotourism destination context, which is a more holistic and beneficial approach. The existing ecotourism literature focuses on the management and development of ecotourism, ecotourist profiles, characteristics and motivations (Boo, 1990; Fennell & Eagles, 1990; Palacio & McCool, 1997; William, 1992), including the ranges of experiences pursed by ecotourists (Eagles, 1992; Ryan, 1997). Nonetheless, there is a lack of empirical evidence and discussion in the literature with regards to the conceptualization and categorization of ecotourism experiences, its experiential dimensions and outcomes from the experience model. This is crucial as ecotourism focuses on experiencing and learning the natural environment; thus it is a place of experiential consumption. Arguably, such an understanding will strengthen the sustainable development of ecotourism destinations.

22 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Characteristic and Criteria of Ecotourism

Ecotourism is based on the natural environment with an emphasis on its biological, physical and cultural features; and relies on a natural setting and local attractions including nature and culture and communities in which they occur naturally. Ecotourism enhances the knowledge and comprehension of an area’s natural and cultural systems, and the ensuing input of sightseers (Page & Dowling, 2002). Blamey (1998) puts forward the three core criteria of ecotourism as nature, learning and sustainability, which also recur in other definitions. Chesworth (1995) shares the six characteristics of ecotourism: moderately untouched natural areas and archaeological sites; emphasis on learning and quality of experience, economically benefits the local communities, seeks to observe uncommon species and not deplete resources, as well as maintaining the environment or assisting to reverse environmental loss and recognising and respecting local culture and traditions. Nonetheless, The World Tourism Organization (WTO) proposes the characteristics of ecotourism to include the motivation to experience nature-based cultural and educational tourism destinations, avoiding negative impacts, building awareness in biodiversity, and providing benefits to the local community (UNWTO, 2002a), whilst the Malaysia National Ecotourism Plan outlines ecotourism characteristics in terms of soft and hard adventure spectrums. Based on the criteria and characteristics of ecotourism, several unique experiences are offered. Educational characteristics of ecotourism are a crucial component of ecotourism, separating it from other forms of nature-based tourism. Environmental education and interpretation are essential instruments in crafting gratifying and profound ecotourism experiences. Interpretation is the ability to assist in the education of people and it is a principal precept to ecotourism (Weiler & Davis, 1993). Ecotourism education can affect tourist, community and industry behaviour and assist in the longer- term sustainability of tourists activity in natural areas (Crabtree, 2000). Likewise, the involvement of local communities is another

23 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian characteristic of ecotourism helping the local community and the environment as well as enriching the quality of the tourist experience. Native communities could partake in the ecotourism processes as well as the delivery of knowledge, service, facilities and products. Ecotourism could also generate income for resource conservation management in addition to social and cultural advantages (Page & Dowling, 2002). Dowling (1997) observed that the satisfaction of visitors with the ecotourism experience is vital to the sustainability of the ecotourism industry in the long run. Undeniably, this incorporates aspects of the visitor experience concept. It is also vital to distinguish the prominence of visitor safety in terms of political stability. Ecotourism is a distinctive subset of the tourism industry. It is a highly specialised aspect of the broad nature-based tourism concept and is considered as a sustainable version of nature tourism. Located in environmentally sensitive and/or protected areas, ecotourism depends largely on its local resources that translate to unique and novel experiences. This implies that the key ecotourism attractions consist of its natural environment, wildlife, landscape, local culture and heritage as well as soft and hardcore eco-activities. Indeed, the rapid spread of ecotourism worldwide demonstrates a growing awareness in both nature and environment (Chan, 2007). This is consistent with studies by Guzman and Galves (2016) showing that natural setting and learning, as well as wildlife attractions, are the key experiences that visitors would like to have when visiting ecotourism destinations (Korir, Muchiri, & Kamwea, 2013). Similarly, both appreciation of the landscape and nature, and the pursuit of novelty experiences or locale influence the demand for ecotourism (HLA & ARA Consulting, 1994; Wight, 1996a, 1996b). Epler Wood (2002) asserted that the primary motivations driving ecotourism are observation and enjoyment of environmental features and associated cultural resources. Holden and Sparrowhawk (2002) noted that the top ecotourism stimuli are acquiring knowledge about nature, the physicality of activity and making acquaintance with people of comparable interest. Whereas Ballantine and Eagles (1994) suggest that the ecotourists’ leading motivation is to study nature in its native or original setting. Both

24 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Eagles (1992) and Page and Dowling (2002) prove that attraction and social components are important players in the ecotourism context, whilst Kiper (2013) points out that environmental education and interpretation are essential for the creation of pleasurable and profound ecotourism experiences. A more recent study by Kerstetter, Hou and Lin (2004) found that ecotourism experience dimensions are related to being close to natural settings, being able to witness the ecological landscape and to improve physical health and to be with family or friends. On the other hand, The World Tourism Organization, Market Intelligence and Promotion Section, and Sustainable Development of Tourism Section (UNWTO, 2002a, 2002b) remarked that being present in wildlife areas, a sighting of unique faunal species, touring archaeological sites and indigenous people, bird watching and other water activities were recorded as ecotourism experiences. Malaysia Ecotourism Sites and National Ecotourism Plan

The tourism industry, an essential Malaysian foreign exchange earner, contributed RM84.1 billion to the country’s economy with a total of 25.8 million tourists in 2018 (Tourism Malaysia, 2019). This impressive economic development has been rapidly growing and provides employment opportunities, improvements in infrastructure as well as income to the country (Siti-Nabiha et al., 2008). However, a massive influx of tourists carries with it an unprecedented rate of change in the natural environment. Thus, this may raise doubts as to its sustainability and intergenerational equity. Due to the importance of tourism to the country’s economy and various benefits that come with it, there is a need to ensure that the industry continues to develop sustainably both economically and environmentally. Likewise, the Malaysia government is committed to sustainable economic growth guided by the 17 Sustainable Development Goals prescribed by the United Nations. Indeed, in Malaysia, ecotourism is the quickest growing subsector of tourism as recognised by

25 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian the national government (WWFNM, 1996). The rapid growth of ecotourism universally illuminates a growing interest in nature and ecological landscapes (Chan, 2007). Eagles and Higgins (1998) have observed that the transformations in environmental mindsets, the advancement of environmental education and the environmental mass media have contributed to the search of ecotourism. Ecotourism is an important sector of tourism in Malaysia as outlined in the National Ecotourism Plan. A total of 60 sites have been identified as ecotourism destinations based on 17 clusters as presented in Map 1. In terms of approaches for ecotourism development, the Malaysia Ecotourism Plan 2016 – 2025 recorded five focus areas as follows (Kamarudin, 2016): • Investment in ecotourism • Tourism concessions • The synergy between ecotourism and conservation • Ecotourism marketing • Ecotourism clusters

Sources: Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture Malaysia (MOTAC) Official Portal (2017) Map 1 Ecotourism cluster in Malaysia

26 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

The National Ecotourism Plan 2016 – 2025 has outlined six ecotourism marketing strategies. Monitoring data on visitors and visitor management issues in protected areas is one of the strategies to identify a measure for ecotourism activity. It shows the importance of measuring ecotourism in terms of activities but neglects the sustainability of ecotourism destinations. Similarly, in the National Ecotourism Plan 2016 – 2025 documents, ecotourism Product Development and Destination Management has been identified as one of the issues faced by ecotourism in Malaysia. This implies a need to pay greater attention to product and destination management. It is widely confirmed that ecotourism is more of an experiential consumption product or place experience as compared to other tourism products. As a result, the understanding of how to manage ecotourism destinations using a sustainable approach is vital.

Table 2 List of 60 proposed ecotourism clusters (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, 2016, p. 81 – 83)

State Macro/ Regional cluster 1. – Timah Tasoh – Sungai Batu Pahat – Cuping Hill – Perlis State Park 2. Jitra – – Gunung Jerai 3. – Ulu Muda 4. Geopark – Pulau Payar Pulau Pinang 5. National Park – Georgetown – Pulau Jerejak 6. Sedim – Seberang 7. Taiping – Bukit Kurau – Bukit Merah 8. Ulu Geroh – Gua Tempurung – – 9. Royal Belum – – 10. Pulau Sembilan – Teluk Senangin – Segari Melintang / 11. Selangor State Heritage Park 12. Sepang – – Shah Alam 13. Kuala Lumpur Urban Ecotourism Cluster 14. Kuala Selangor – Bukit Malawati – Sabak Bernam Melaka 15. Melaka Urban Ecotourism Cluster (Melaka Historical City – Ayer Keroh) 16. Tanjung Keling – Pengkalan Balak – Sungai Linggi – Tanjung Tuan 17. Jasin – Selandar – Tebong – Asahan

27 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Negeri 18. Rantau – Port Dickson – Sg. Menyala – Sg. Timun Sembilan 19. Jelebu Ecotourism Valley (Jelebu – Kenaboi – Seremban) 20. Seremban – Kuala Pilah – Jempol 21. Rembau – Tampin 22. Ramsar Johor – Gunung Pulai – Sungai Johor 23. Kota Tinggi – Sungai Johor – Desaru – Sedili 24. Mersing – Sultan Iskandar Marine Park 25. Kluang – Endau Rompin – Segamat 26. Tangkak – Sagil – Gunung Ledang 27. Batu Pahat – Jawa – Muar 28. Lanchang – Jerantut – Kuala Tahan/Taman Negara 29. Tioman – Rompin – Endau 30. Pekan – Chini – Bera 31. Cherating – Kuantan – Sg. Lembing 32. – 33. Kenong – Kuala Lipis – Raub – Bentong 34. Pergau – Jeli – Gunung Stong – Nenggiri 35. Merapoh – Gua Musang – Stong – Kuala Koh 36. Kota Bharu – Pasir Mas – Bachok 37. Kampung Raja – Besut – Pulau Perhentian – Jerteh 38. Setiu – Merang – Penarik 39. Ajil – Kuala Berang – Tasik Kenyir 40. Kuala Terengganu – Kuala Nerus 41. Marang – Pulau Kapas 42. Dungun – Rantau Abang – Al-Muktafi Billal Shah – Pulau Tenggol 43. Kemaman – Kijal – Chukai – Kerteh 44. Lundu – Sematan – Telok Melano – Tanjung Datu 45. Bako – Santubong – Kubah – Semenggoh – Bau – Padawan 46. Sri Aman – Batang Ai – Ulu Sungai Menyang – Maludam 47. Sibu – – Tunoh – Baleh – Palagus 48. – Daro – Pulau Bruit – Tanjung Manis 49. Bintulu – Bakun – Belaga – Lusong Laku – Nanga Merit – Murum 50. Miri – Sibuti – Niah – Loagan Bunut 51. Limbang – Mulu – Gunung Buda 52. Lawas – Bario – Ba’kalalan – Baram

28 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Sabah 53. Kota Kinabalu – Papar – Beaufort – Klias – Kuala Penyu – Menumbok – Sipitang – Long Pasia 54. Sandakan – Kinabatangan 55. Kota Kinabalu – Kota Belud – Kota Marudu – Kudat 56. Kota Kinabalu – Tambunan – Crocker Range Park – Keningau – Tenom 57. Kota Kinabalu – Tamparuli – Kundasang – Ranau 58. Maliau Basin – Imbak Canyon 59. Danum Valley – Tabin (Lahad Datu) 60. Tawau – Semporna – Mabul – Sipadan – Kunak

Interestingly, the ecotourism destination development which is deemed as key to ecotourism in Malaysia and commonly located in or near protected or sensitive sites is not included as one of the five focus areas in the plan. Instead, the plan tends to consider investment, marketing and clusters as being more crucial than the sustainable management of ecotourism destinations. This poses a threat to the sustainability of ecotourism destinations. It is postulated that this may be due to the lack of understanding of the importance of sustainable development of ecotourism destinations or the assumption that sustainable practices and sustainable tourism will naturally take place. It strongly suggests that sustainable development and sustainable tourism are well connected to ecotourism development; thus great attention should be given as to how ecotourism is an element of sustainable tourism since little is known of this and it is barely mentioned. Ecotourism Attractions in Malaysia

Malaysia is blessed with rich faunal diversity, with 307 identified mammal species, and approximately 30 endemic species. About 784 species of birds, 242 amphibian species, and 567 reptilian species are unequally distributed across Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak. The marine diversity in Malaysia is also very remarkable, with a record of 2,068 species of freshwater and marine fishes. There are 27 species of marine mammals and 4 turtle species found

29 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian in Malaysia but the number might be increasing as discoveries are constantly added to the growing inventory (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, 2016, p. 23). Likewise, diverse cultural heritages in various forms such as areas, buildings, dance, food, dress, events, handicraft, and lifestyles (Ismail, Masron, & Ahmad, 2014) contribute significantly to the ecotourism experience. In terms of ecotourism destination and experiences, the main attractions in ecotourism are the cultural patrimony, flora, and fauna, as it offers enjoyment in cohabitation with the local people in addition to enjoyment of the natural landscape (Guzman & Galves, 2016). To attract potential tourists with the right ecotourism product needs, an in-depth understanding of the attributes of the ecotourism destination is needed (Abang Abdurahman et al., 2016). Even though Malaysia is already positioned as an ecotourism destination and is well known among tourists, it is not as impressive as other general tourism destinations globally. Recently, wildlife attraction in an ecotourism destination has had a dramatic and rapid growth worldwide and has offered varieties of customized tour package and safaris (Korir et al., 2013). Ecotourism sites need to be conducive for tourists to travel and visit. Ecotourism sites with accessible accommodation especially for travellers with extra needs such as elderly travellers, the disabled community and small children can help boost tourist numbers in an ecotourism attraction (Ewen, Hoffer, Capobianco, & Doucette, 2019). The majority of the ecotourism destinations in Malaysia such as Wildlife Sanctuaries and National Parks are situated in the countryside and are typically equipped with rudimentary basic infrastructures, for example, road accessibility, harbours and other services. Both state and federal governments in Malaysia have been trying to develop infrastructure facilities in different ecotourism areas (David et al., 2017). Table 3 specifically reviews the ecotourism attractions, attributes and experiences gained in Malaysia.

30 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Table 3 List of the ecotourism destination attributes and experience of ecotourism in Malaysia

Attraction Attributes Experience Natural • Natural environment • Mountain (hiking and climbing) setting • Wildlife • Island (snorkelling) • Climate • Beaches • Flora • River cruise • Landscape • Ramsar site (migratory bird) • Bird watching • Beautiful and unique scenery • Seasons Cultural and • Harmonious ethnic group • Traditional cuisine historical • Traditional custom heritage • Historical site • Multi-racial and ethnic group Quality and • Language • The technology convenience • Infrastructure and facilities • Political stability • Stability of currency

Ecotourism Experiences

Experience has long been seen as central to the tourism and hospitality product and service (Chan, 2007). This is equally relevant in the context of ecotourism as it is a distinctive subsector of the tourism industry that focuses on experiences and acquiring knowledge on nature, its landscape, flora, fauna and cultural habitats of the locals (Kiper, 2013). Past studies have confirmed that ecotourism experiences are the main reason for the increasing demand (Lee, 1997; Fennell, 2003). It is also widely acknowledged that ecotourism can be regarded as an experience consumption place that focuses on its nature, environment and activities (Chan & Baum, 2007).

31 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Ecotourism experiences are driven by the search for unique and memorable experiences settings. Such unique and memorable experiences are ascribed to the ecotourism site. A wide range of on- site ecotourism experiences are “experiential” products facilitating feeling, emotions and knowledge for visitors; these experiences are deemed as useful ways to add value and make ecotourism more competitive. The value or attractiveness of products or services are enhanced by a specific experience, therefore creating memorable experiences is essential. This implies that ecotourism experiences are multifaceted, contextual and co-created between the host or environment and visitors/tourists who have engaged in a specific service transaction. Visitors to ecotourism sites differ from the conventional tourists in several areas including their socio-demographic and economic characteristics (Wight, 1996a, 1996b). For example, they tend to enjoy learning about nature, landscape/wildlife, tropical forests, birds, trees and wildflowers, mammals, lakes and stream, parks, ocean, mountains, rural areas and meet people with similar interests, cultural interaction, and these are pertinent motivation factors and interests to the ecotourist (Eagles & Cascagnette, 1995). Accordingly, ecotourism offers visitors interesting, unique and novel experiences through interacting with nature as learning and education (Guzman & Galves, 2016). Visitors seek genuine and multifaceted educational activities in the part of leisure experience, in addition to the destination’s varied natural and cultural resources (Ayala, 1996). Correspondingly, Chan and Baum (2007) reveal that the ecotourism experience is reflected in three major themes: (1) seeing wildlife in its natural habitat and preservation of the natural environment (wildlife, rainforest, and local culture), (2) having basic accommodation and facilities, and (3) learning and acquiring knowledge about nature and the environment. These three themes closely reflect descriptions of the ecotourism experience as documented in ecotourism literature (Ayala, 1996; Ryan et al., 2000; Wight, 1996a). This implies that ecotourists’ interpretation of ecotourism experiences is linked to nature and landscape, basic lodging and amenities, and educational experience. These factors influence the ecotourists’ perception of their experiences.

32 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Consequently, the results indicate the ecotourists’ experience is multifaceted. Parallel to this, Stein, Denny and Pennisi (2003) reveal that major ecotourism experiences are related to adventure or excitement and learning. Researchers have found that learning and education is an important motive of visitors and contributes to sustainable quality experience (Weiler & Ham, 2001). Importance of Sustainable Ecotourism Experiences

Ecotourism products and experiences are associated with environmental, natural, cultural and social parameters within the site. Arguably, making ecotourism sustainable requires considering the environmental, economic and social aspects of the rural community. For example, the unspoilt, pristine and untouched natural environment acts as a unique attraction and contributes to developing authenticity in the ecotourism setting. It is thus vital to preserve and conserve the landscape, natural resources and the environment. Furthermore, from the economic perspective, numerous micro-businesses such as eco-lodges, farmhouses, handicraft and local food and leisure activities generate employment for the local community. Ecotourism promotes and stimulates small businesses, thus providing opportunities to generate extra income while maintaining the authenticity of resources and preserving the ecotourism and rural lifestyle, values and traditions. Subsequently, it enhances the well-being and welfare of these communities. More importantly, a sustainable ecotourism experience implies achieving a balance between environmental, economy and socio-cultural aspects as reflected in Figure 1. This is also shown in The Triple Bottom Line Sustainability Model (Elkington, 1998). It includes activities, management and development of ecotourism that preserves nature, economy and social integrity, and safeguards natural, environmental and cultural resources while ensuring tourists’ satisfaction through meaningful experiences and promoting sustainable tourism practices (Niedziółka, 2012). The

33 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian interrelation among the three pillars of the economy are based on the local community, integration of economy and environment, and conservation with equity for the social sphere in achieving sustainable development. This model is relevant to the ecotourism experiences that are attributed to the economy, environment and social aspects of the ecotourism destinations’ community; and is pertinent in developing quality experiences, adding value to rural tourism and enhancing the well-being of the destination community. Accordingly, ecotourism destinations have unique resources, which, if properly managed, can create multiple appealing, authentic or novel and memorable ecotourist experiences as in rural tourism (Lane & Kastenholz, 2015). Co-creation of Ecotourism Experiences

Ecotourism destinations offer unique experiences derived from a wide variety of attractions related to nature, landscape, wildlife and cultural heritage of the locals. A series of experiences derived from tangible and intangible elements are present in the ecotourism experiences, environment and network through the five senses. The five senses, which gives rise to fascinating, novel and remarkable destination experiences. Ecotourism experience is attributed to the co-creation by the ecotourists, resources or environment and hosts within that parameter (Figure 4). Such experience networks are deemed as “co-creation networks”, consisting of all stakeholders and things that surround the tourists within an experience environment as presented in the following Figure 4. Ecotourism offers an alternative way for the preservation of nature, landscape and environment and improves the wealth and well- being of local communities. The three pillars (economy, environment and social) simultaneously co-create ecotourism experiences which add value to, and increases the competitiveness of ecosites and

34 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach tourism businesses. Co-creation among the three pillars and tourists and host in developing sustainable ecotourism tourism experiences cannot be ignored. Accordingly, “sustainable tourism is the only type of tourism that can offer authentic countryside lifestyle, where they can relax and enjoy nature and country lifestyle” (Sanagustin Fons, Mosene Fierro, & Patino, 2011, p. 557).

Figure 4 Ecotourism destination experience network

Ecotourism experiences’ co-creation is derived from the individual ecotourist when he engages in activities and interacts with subjects during the trip in a specific experience environment (Larsen, 2007). The ecotourists interact, participate, connect and engage with local hosts and local resources and gain experiences. This experience network is where all stakeholders come together to construct ecotourism experiences, which is considered a holistic form of ecotourism. It is linked to environmental experience where everyone performs on differing time spatial contexts. This network enables the ecotourists to immerse and surround themselves with the tangible and intangible elements of the environment. This implies the importance of sustainable ecotourism and the need for further research to gain an insightful understanding of how sustainable ecotourism experiences through co-creation can be realized.

35 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Ecotourism experience network consists of various stakeholders who co-create and engage in ecotourism and add value to both hosts and ecotourists, thus creating uniqueness and authenticity of the ecotourism destination. Ecotourism experiences co-creation breaks down the process through which tourists create their interactions within the network. Ecotourists make connections and interact with the community and resources to seek experiences. There are four different types of ecotourism experiences which can be linked to the four experiences’ realm by Pine and Gilmore (1998). These include education, escapism, aesthetics and entertainment; under these needs, different levels of participation and absorption versus immersion of the tourists are required, thus separating tourists from ecotourism suppliers. Active participation and interaction in co-creation experiences and on-site experiences are vital as ecotourists connect in different ways through emotions, and learning. This also enhances the intensity of the experience. In this context, experiences formed and gained are attributed to the presence of hosts, ecotourists and environment within ecotourism destination, involving dimensions such as the physical aspects of the environment, social actors, participants, host dynamic, and features of services, which ultimately influence ecotourists’ on-site experiences (Campos, Mendes, Oom do Valle, & Scott, 2018). Accordingly, dynamic involvement and interaction in co- creation experiences are important elements in on-site experiences at an ecotourism destination. Comparably, co-creation is a consumer’s experience of specific activities that require active participation and interactive experiences (Cabiddu, Liu, & Picoli, 2013); and co- created experiences have a distinctive value. Four Realms of Ecotourism Experiences

A tourism experience is a highly subjective, variable, sentimental, and individualistic topic (Chan & Baum, 2007). Moreover, it is a multidimensional subject. Ecotourism destination provides an array of experiences and is widely acknowledged as experience-

36 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach based tourism. Ecotourism products and experiences are strongly associated with environmental, natural, cultural and social parameters within the site. These experiences are consequences of individual involvement, interaction and participation of activities. This indicates that ecotourists consume a series of experiences derived from the tangible and intangible elements present in the tourism experiences environment and network using their five senses. Ecotourism experiences, just like tourism experiences can be structured as follows: SENSE (sensory), FEEL (emotional), THINK (cognitive), ACT (behavioural) and RELATE (relational), which provide sensory, emotional, cognitive, behavioural and relational values that are reflected in the experience sequence (Schmitt, 1999). Ecotourists seek fascinating, novel and remarkable experiences. These experiences can be termed as psychological occurrences and processes that integrate into different stages and involve the elements of expectations, perceptions and memory (Larsen, 2007). In that sense, ecotourism experiences can be guided and explained by the four experiences’ realm (Pine & Gilmore, 1998), resulting from the two dimensions of perception, namely level of participation – active and passive; and four types of experiences, namely (i) entertainment experiences – with passive participation, while absorbed by the environment; (ii) aesthetic experiences – passive participation but being immersed in the environment; (iii) educational experiences – active participation in activities; and (iv) the escapist experiences – active participation and immersion in the environment. This implies that an experiential view of ecotourism focuses on the nature of tourist experience which is necessary for sustainable management of ecotourism destination. It strongly proposes that ecotourism destination should set the stage during development and growth by exploring the key experiential dimensions that impact the destination. In this case, an ecotourism destination must be able to stage its experiences and differentiate memorable experiences from ordinary activities. This rich set of experiences encompasses all four experiential realms.

37 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

The presentation has discussed the major ecotourism attractions, experiential dimensions and the importance of sustainable ecotourism experiences, as well as how ecotourism experiences are underpinned by the four realms of experiences. Using the co-creation concept, the ecotourism experience is illuminated and provides a clearer understanding and a new approach to address sustainable ecotourism experiences. Review of Measures and Approaches to Sustainability of Ecotourism

Malaysia is blessed with a diverse landscape and ecosystem which ranges from tropical rainforest, freshwater to marine habitats. As a megadiverse country, Malaysia accentuates the conservation of its country’s environmental, social, and cultural heritage through the National Tourism Plan, where ecotourism has been recognised as one of the sustainable tourism forms in the Plan. Subsequently, sustainable ecotourism development covers natural areas that include highlands, coastal areas, marine parks, islands, national and state parks, geological sites, wetlands and Ramsar sites, turtle landing sites, and firefly habitats. The Malaysian legal and institutional framework supports sustainable tourism as stated by Siti-Nabiha et al. (2008). Literature has documented various ways to measure and determine the sustainability of tourism destinations. For example, sustainability implies the importance of environmental and economically sustainability (Siti-Nabiha et al., 2008). In the same vein, an integrated perspective of resources, community and tourism has been adopted to evaluate the sustainability of ecotourism by Tsaur et al. (2006). Teh and Cabanban (2007) proposed parameters for sustainable ecotourism development in a marine site at Pulau Banggi, Sabah. The environment, natural resources, biodiversity, ecosystem, products, and management of destination, educational

38 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach opportunities, human pressure, and accommodation are emphasized to gauge or measure sustainability. But there were no indicators for sustainable ecotourism development in Malaysia in social, economic, and environmental dimensions. Badaruddin (2002) questioned the sustainable development of ecotourism in Malaysia as a result of the absence of local community consideration on ecotourism. Extensive studies on sustainable tourism in Malaysia have been conducted by researchers in various ecotourism sites under broadly similar sustainable development topics. Different sustainable tourism approaches have been undertaken by academics to study sustainable tourism and destination sustainability. For example, Ng, Chia, Ho and Ramachandran (2017) used Ecotourism Indicator System (SEIS) to research sustainable tourism in Tioman Island. Likewise, Bhuiyan, Siwar, and Ismail (2016) measured the sustainability of Lake Kenyir as an ecotourism destination based on resource community, resource tourism, community tourism, and tourism community with potential sustainable level. Negative effects on ecotourism resources have been adopted as an approach to determine the sustainability of Pulau Payar and Pulau Redang Marine Park in Malaysia (Yacob, Radam, & Shuib, 2009). Jaafar and Maideen (2012) investigated the sustainability of Redang and Tioman Island marine parks from conservation perspectives. Other researchers suggested that sustainable indicators for ecotourism development must be created in tourism destinations (Abidin, 1999; Li, 2004; Yacob et al., 2009). Bhuiyan et al. (2012) discovered the favourable opinions of the local communities toward the environmental features of ecotourism development in Sekayu Recreational Forest in Malaysia. Nevertheless, the above studies are considered as fragmented researches and approaches to sustainable destination development; and these do not provide adequate holistic perspectives to address the development of sustainable ecotourism destinations.

39 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Integrated Approach to Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development Sustainable Ecotourism Destination

Ecotourism destination is a multidimensional social system functioning within a micro and macro environment. Predominantly, the emphasis has been on the composition of individuals, tourism product offerings, experiences and resources which come together to produce a complete sustainable experience of the visited area. Ecotourism destination is a decisive factor for the travel preferences of tourists (Díaz & Rodríguez, 2016). Therefore, any changes to the attractiveness of the ecotourism destination could influence tourist choice. Among the significant factors in the tourist decision- making process is ecotourism resources. Negligence in sustainable management of the resources might diminish the attractiveness of tourism destinations, causing the ecotourist to lose interest. However, existing destination management only focuses on the resources, attractiveness, facilities and safety aspects of the destination (Díaz & Rodríguez, 2016). Arguably, the destination development stage as the dynamics of development of touristic destinations as pointed out by Butler’s (1980) Tourism Area Life Cycle is equally important in the context of sustainable destination management, which has been much neglected. Ecotourism destination is a place of experiential consumption of natural, human and environmental resources. For ecotourism to be sustainable, it must balance the principles and goals of sustainable development. In real life, it is difficult to balance all

40 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach aspects of sustainable development as mentioned above. Sustainable ecotourism destination has three interlinked characteristics, namely: environmental, socio-cultural and economy (Zenelaj & Prifti, 2013). The ideal usage of resources, reduction of ecological, cultural and social effects and boosting the benefits for conservation efforts and native communities, are vital at ecotourism destination (UNEP, 2006). An ecotourism destination needs to align with the three goals of sustainable development, namely economy viability, environmental protection and social well-being of the community; and these goals are linked to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. This implies that sustainability, sustainable development and destination dimensions are important components in evaluating sustainable ecotourism destination. Accordingly, sustainable development of ecotourism is an increasing concern (Kiper, 2013) as dimensions of ecotourism development are related to the environmental, economy and social aspects. A proper equilibrium between these three dimensions is needed for long term sustainability (Bhuiyan et al., 2012). Past studies on ecotourism evoke attention to the need for sustainability and sustainable development. This is due to nature and criteria and its destination or site being in a nature- based and environmentally sensitive area, requiring extra efforts in protection, conservation and culture resources. To achieve sustainable ecotourism development, the economy, environmental and social aspects of the destination are paramount. Simply, these aspects are interrelated and contributed significantly to the sustainability of ecotourism destination. Furthermore, the sustainability of ecotourism is related to the management of natural and cultural resources, economy and environment (Mowforth & Munt, 2009; Weaver, 2006). This indicates that sustainability and sustainable destinations are a great concern and far-reaching for ecotourism. Simply, ecotourism fosters sustainable use through resource conservation, cultural revival and economy development (Newsome et al., 2002).

41 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Ecotourism Destination Dimensions

Researchers have evidenced and confirmed from studies that three pillars – environment, economy and social also known as the “triple bottom line” concept – are pertinent dimensions to the ecotourism and ecotourism destination sustainability; and the three pillars serve as a principle in ecotourism to achieve sustainability in terms of Economy Efficiency, Preserving the Environment and Social Equity. In the same vein, sustainable development is explained as meeting the requirements of the current demands without jeopardising the future generation, and is also pertinent to destination sustainability and development. It relates to the future needs which depends on how well we balance social, economic and environmental objectives or needs in making decisions. Essentially, sustainable development implies the need to maintain a balance between natural capital, human capital and economy future activities (WCED, 1987). The evaluation of ecotourism destination development has resulted in contradictions and inadequacy in assessing ecotourism sustainability from the integrated perspective of resource, community and tourism (Seghezzo, 2009). A model of sustainable development centred on the three pillars of sustainability pose serious limitations. The limitation of using three pillars of sustainable tourism is that as it only focuses on economy, social and environment aspects and ignores other critical dimensions. Elsewhere, Seghezzo (2009) proposes the five dimensions of sustainability as an alternative approach which is a more inclusive and holistic perspective to comprehend sustainable ecotourism. It suggests the inclusion of three additional elements, namely “Place (third dimension), Permanence (fourth dimensions) and Persons (fifth dimension)’, where the place dimension encompasses the three dimensions of space. Permanence relates to time whilst the Persons category represents a human dimension. Undoubtedly, sustainable ecotourism includes environment protection, living close to the environment and the social and economic dimension of the ecotourism destination (Janusz & Bajdor, 2013). Sustainable

42 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach ecotourism also requires appropriate economic development and social security at the destination (Angelkova, Koteski, Jakovlev, & Mitrevska, 2012). Seghezzo (2009) states that additional dimensions: place, permanence and persons are important aspects in the sustainable development context. This is because the context and status of ecotourism destinations are varied and shaped by these dimensions. Hence, Seghezzo (2009) suggests an alternate sustainability triangle by including the three ‘P’s – ‘Place’, ‘Permanence’, and ‘Persons’ (the new three Ps) which have been neglected in the notion of sustainability by WCED as presented in Figure 5.

Figure 5 Five Dimension Sustainability Model (Source: Seghezzo, 2009, p. 548)

Arguably, place including space and time affords a vital share in the sense of belonging and identity which are partially responsible for the formation of norms and values by the generation. A precise definition of spatial and temporal restrictions is important to examine sustainability (Bossel, 2004; Chambers, Simmons, & Wackernagel, 2000; Edwards, 2005; Fresco & Kroonenberg, 1992). The importance of exact locales, landscapes, or ‘places’ as crucial elements of sustainability is emphasised by Escobar (2001). Adam (1998) suggests more attention be given to ‘timescapes’, the temporal dimension of the ecological complications, to deepen our comprehension of their nature and effect.

43 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

According to Seghezzo (2009), ecotourism destinations consist of three aspects, namely, economy, environment and social. These three aspects interact with each other and can be construed as the three pillars that make up the destination sustainability paradigm. Furthermore, Macnaghten and Urry (1998) state that spatialised, timed, sensed and embodied dimensions of nature and nature itself are key components of sustainable development. It is widely acknowledged that local conditions, constraints, and opportunities are necessary to devise more sustainable policies (Rootes, 2007). The Permanence aspect means upholding current conditions subject to changes and enhancement. Norton (2005, p. 304) implied that “sustainability, whatever else it means, has to do with our intertemporal moral relations”. Thus, permanence could be seen as the main realm of inter-generational equity. The necessity for interminable thinking is consistently recognised in the sustainability discourse. Permanence, which is regarded as a temporal dimension, has been generally overlooked in the sustainability discussion whilst persons is a symbol of people as individual beings and not as homogenous members of society and culture. In short, space, time, and human aspects are interlinked with each other and interact in multifarious manners at ecotourism destinations, as shown in Figure 6. This influences the sustainable development of the destination. Simply, it implies protection of our natural environment, human and ecological health, propelling innovation without jeopardising or compromising the quality of human life as the essence of sustainable ecotourism development and destination. Hence, sustainable development must also take into account social and ecological factors, as well as the economy. Therefore, this approach is consistent with and reflected in the 17 Sustainable Development Goals.

44 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Figure 6 Details of five sustainability dimensions in ecotourism destinations

The expansion of ecotourism depends on non-traditional forms of capital, namely environmental, social and cultural assets to achieve the economic values of profitability. Thus, ecotourism is a component of sustainable tourism which builds a sustainable system that conserves and protects the underlying stocks of economy, social, cultural and environmental capital on which it depends on. The intangible nature of social, cultural and environmental capital are important measurable values. In the same vein, there are four elements which are interrelated in the sustainable ecotourism destination as follows: • Ecotourist expectations and needs • Responsive tourists and practices • Destination competitiveness • Policies and regulations

45 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Sustainable ecotourism destination varies in terms of the nature of the location and the relationships between resource, community and concept of sustainable ecotourism. More importantly, we need to consider the destination development progress or phases, as the sustainability practices for each phase should be varied due to its development phases and resources. Common factors influencing the sustainable development of tourist destination are: • Changing patterns, taste and impacts from the visitors and shift towards sustainable awareness and demand • Relationships between the natural environment and human development • Destination development plans - market needs, human and environmental integrity to maintain its economic viability • Power, politics, peace, a war in a destination related to the heritage of conflicts – over land, religion, resources, and beliefs

Embracing sustainability at the ecotourism destination requires sound environmental and sustainable principles and responsible, realistic and multifaceted practices by all stakeholders with shared visions. This also includes continual monitoring of influences for preventive and corrective measures. At the same time, understanding the different destination development phases and its experiential dimensions is crucial. From the destination management perspective, sustainable destination development serves to: • Address the needs of ecotourists and the economic interests of the tourism industry • Approach ecotourism development in a way which reduces the negative impacts • Protect local people’s business interests, heritage and environment

46 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Embracing sustainability at ecotourism destinations is essential because it will provide: • High level of tourist satisfaction and ensure a meaningful experience for tourists • An enriched and improved quality of life at each destination • Sustainable use of resources based on tourism-quality criteria and codes of conduct • Specific frameworks for positive and preventive actions • Monitoring and exchange of experiences, promotion of awareness among all parties involved • Guidance by sound environmental and sustainable principles and responsible practices by all stakeholders of the tourist destination/ecotourism sites • The local community – opportunities for ownership, management, training and capacity building • Implementation of the principles of sustainability

The destination experience outcomes are affected by the existing resources and level of interactions and intensity of consumption, which will be different in all development phases as pointed out by Butler’s Tourism Area of Life Cycle. Likewise, there are several factors which influence the changes of tourist destinations such as the actual operation of sustainable management (Dodds & Butler, 2009; Graci, 2007; Graci & Dodds, 2010; Hanrahan, 2008; Miller & Twining-Ward, 2005) and such practices can no longer be ignored at the ecotourism destination level. On a global scale, there are increasing concerns on the effective method to channel or encourage sustainable management at tourism destinations. The approach to sustainable management should be holistic and integrated in which individual performance contributes to the greater goal of the destination as a whole. Conceptually, ecotourism is a component of sustainable tourism and an effectual instrument for sustainable development at natural sites. An ecotourism destination is an environmentally sensitive place that offers wide ranges of authentic and unique experiences, nature attractions and activities from its natural

47 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian environment and resources. It accounts for the social, economic and environmental implications. Expansive and uncontrolled development at ecotourism destinations has brought negative impacts on its environment, social and culture. On the other hand, the sustainability of ecotourism destination depends on the environment and natural resources’ opportunities to secure a steady and enduring foundation (Angelkova et al., 2012). This implies that sustainability is a concern, and extra attention should be given to tourist destinations. Sustainability at ecotourism destinations varies by space, time and development phases. This suggests that ecotourism destination development should be guided by the concept of sustainable development framework. This framework should include the territorial, temporal, and personal aspects of development. Although the importance of ensuring ecotourism destination development sustainably has been well addressed, tourist destinations are facing several pertinent issues relating to ecotourism development, which includes misunderstood concepts, ineffective policies and regulations, incoherent management, lack of qualified staff, financial limitations which impose serious threats to the ecotourism destination, as pointed out by Nianyong and Zhuge (2001). Due to these factors and the limitations of the three dimensions of sustainability, the success of sustainable ecotourism destination remains unclear and unsolved while it is a paramount issue for ecotourism. Likewise, ecotourism is multifaceted in nature and increasingly has an impact on the economy, the natural environment and the local community at a different level of development of ecotourism destination. Each ecotourism destination development phase is different and thus the types of ecotourism experiences and its context at the sites differ too. Therefore, to manage sustainable destination development, one needs to observe the destination development stage and its context as well as its experiential outcomes. It argues that sustainability of destination is significantly dependant on the development phase and the ecotourism experiential outcomes of the destination; while these are an important areas of understanding, there is limited research on these topics.

48 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Ritchie and Crouch (2010) illustrate a model of destination sustainability indicating the macro environment is dynamic and filled with constant changes and progress. It consists of economy, technology, ecology, political and legal development and sociocultural issues as well as changes in the demographic environment. Ecotourism experience is connected to natural resources, history and culture, including an assortment of the destination’s activities. Indeed, the activities dimension of ecotourism destination attractiveness appears to be growing in importance due to the desire to seek novel experiences. It suggests that visitor experiences become a hallmark of the experience economy (Ritchie & Crouch, 2010). This implicates the need for a regular monitoring process and also sustainable indicators which are vital in the context of destination sustainability. Put simply, ecotourists are attracted to destination experiences due to experiences being an accumulation of all interactions, behaviour and the five-senses of the individual being. Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Indicators

An indicator identifies and measures the results of actions; and it describes the condition, practicality and possible effect of the system at the destination. Indicators analyse the presence of current issues and indicate imminent conditions or difficulties, threats and the potential need for action. Indicators are developed based on specific criteria to address specific issues at tourist destinations. They can become key management tools by measuring performance that provides vital information to tourism managers and stakeholders. In general, measurement of indicators can be in quantitative or qualitative form. Accordingly, different stages of destination development will require different criteria and indicators (Tsaur et al., 2006). According to WTO, indicators are essential instruments for destination sustainability in terms of planning and management

49 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian of destination as well as policymaking. Over the years, researchers have developed an array of indicators for sustainable tourism and ecotourism to address the various levels of sustainability and performance levels. Predominantly, these indicators are derived from economy, social-cultural and environmental aspects; and these indicators can identify areas of concern or act as a warning for necessary actions.

Table 4 Categories of sustainable indicators

No. Themes of indicator Examples 1 Destination management Sustainable tourism public policy; high participation; customer satisfaction; information and communication. 2 Economy value Contribution to the local economy; the quantity of employment. 3 Ecological/environment Stress; reducing transportation impact; landscape and biodiversity management; conservation; waste management. 4 Social and culture Satisfied residents; improvement of infrastructure protecting and enhancing cultural heritage; local identity and assets.

Ecotourism or sustainable tourism is considered as a part of sustainable development which helps to boost local livelihood, culture and environmental conservation (Tran & Walter, 2014). Sustainable development tourism is generally utilised to manage the sustainable performance of a tourist area (Ocampo, Ebisa, Ombe, & Escoto, 2018). To implement sustainable tourism, an indicator is needed in which it can become a guide for ecotourism practices (Jaini, Anuar, & Daim, 2012) and an effective monitoring system (United Nation, 2007). The World Tourism Organization (WTO) has created universal tourism indicators that are appropriate and can be used as the basis for sustainable tourism (Dymond, 1997). Five

50 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach important elements of sustainable tourism are used to categorize the indicator of sustainable development namely ecological, social, economy, planning (Jaini et al., 2012) and cultural (Aziz, Barzekar, Ajuhari, & Idris, 2015) as presented in Table 4. Sustainable development requires a set of relevant and practical indicators to measure and determine the performance of sustainability. This is because destination sustainability is subject to an assortment of aspects which are gradually rising in complexity and is interrelated with the three pillars of sustainability. Furthermore, the natural and physical environment co-exists with the three pillars of sustainability which makes it even more difficult to assess without indicators. Also, sustainability at ecotourism destinations may differ from time and space. This indicates the need for sustainable indicators to identify which factors affect sustainability (Tsaur et al., 2006). For example, negative impacts on the environment have been recognised in the ecotourism development, whilst the local community need to maintain an attractive living environment, which adds value to the destination through community involvement. Generally, the sustainable indicator can be categorized as destination management, economy, ecology, and social as presented in Table 4. More importantly, with the existence of these indicators, destination management can make better decisions concerning costs or risks; address emerging issues and prevention strategies, identify impacts and corrective actions. Furthermore, relevant and good indicators are essential for monitoring and managing ecotourism destinations as well as the measurement of ecotourism performance with regards to its economic viability of meeting the market, human and environmental integrity.

51 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Sustainable Tourism Indicators

The World Tourism Organization (WTO, 1996) has developed a set of relevant core sustainable tourism indicators as the basic framework for specific measures and sustainable tourism management as presented in Table 5 below.

Table 5 WTO Core Indicators of Sustainable Tourism (WTO, 1996)

Indicator Specific measures 1. Site protection IUCN index was used to classified site protection. 2. Stress Number of tourists visiting site (per annum/ peak month) 3. Use intensity Usage intensity during peak periods (persons per hectare) 4. Social impact Ratio of tourists to local community (peak period and overtime) 5. Development control Presence of environmental review procedure or formal controls over the development of the site and use densities 6. Waste management Percentage of sewage treatment plant output (also structural limits of other infrastructural capacities on site, such as water supply) 7. Planning process Presence of an organized regional plan for tourist destination regions 8. Critical ecosystems Total number of rare/endangered species 9. Consumer satisfaction Visitors satisfaction level (questionnaire-based) 10. Local satisfaction Locals satisfaction level (questionnaire-based) 11. Tourism contribution to Total economic activity proportion contributed by the local economy tourism only

Given the importance of indicators, specific ecotourism practices indicators have been developed by several researchers such as Jaini et al. (2019) on the specific tour, local culture and tradition, education and interpretation, traditions education; culture

52 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach by Evans (2005); sustainable practices, conservation, socio- economy development, and tourism operators by Moulin (1995) in Table 6 below. Also, there are destination-specific indicators for specific types of destination, for example, in coastal, urban, ecotourism, homestay communities. In short, these indicators are deemed functional in the context of sustainability.

Table 6 List of sustainable ecotourism indicators

Element Indicator Specific measure References Social Social impact The ratio of tourists to locals (peak Jaini et al., 2012 period and overtime) Local and Level of satisfaction or complaint by Jaini et al., 2012; tourist locals with tourism Pengiran Bagul satisfaction & Datu Eranza, 2010; Mearns, 2011 The conflict between tourist and locals Aziz et al., 2015 Number and list of social disturbance such as theft, burglary, etc Education To tourist and community Mearns, 2011 Skill development and training of staff Mearns, 2011 member Education training for local people for Aziz et al., 2015 hosting Effect on Effect of tourism on the community in Mearns, 2011 community the ecotourism site Local community involvement in conservation projects Hygiene and Number of the active care centres in the Aziz et al., 2015 tourist safety region Number of endemic diseases in Aziz et al., 2015 ecotourism regions Number of incidents, accidents and Aziz et al., 2015 other undesired accidents Accessibility to clean water and food Aziz et al., 2015

53 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Ecological Site Category of site protection according Jaini et al., 2012 protection to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) index Well-managed site Pengiran Bagul & Datu Eranza, 2010 Local community involvement in the Mearns, 2011 conservation project Existence of management for Aziz et al., 2015 spectacular landscape or geological feature The growth rate of incompatible Aziz et al., 2015 construction with the natural surrounding area Stress Tourist numbers visiting site (per Jaini et al., 2012 annum/peak month) Use intensity The intensity of use in peak period Jaini et al., 2012 (persons/hectare) Waste Percentage of sewage from the site Jaini et al., 2012 management receiving treatment (additional indicators may include structural limits of other infrastructural capacities on site such as water supply) Solid waste management (waste volume Mearns, 2011 production and disposal, landfilling, recycling) Critical Number of rare/endangered species Jaini et al., 2012; ecosystem Aziz et al., 2015 Diversity of plant and wildlife Economy Consumer Level of satisfaction by visitors Jaini et al., 2012 satisfaction Percentage of a return visitor Mearns, 2011 Perception of sustainability Mearns, 2011 Tourism The proportion of total economic Jaini et al., 2012 contribution activity generated by tourism only to the local Clear improvement in live and Pengiran Bagul & economy livelihood Datu Eranza, 2010 Number of employment of local people Mearns, 2011 that are employed by tourism

54 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Planning Development Existence of environmental review Jaini et al., 2012; control procedure or formal controls over Aziz et al., 2015 the development of the site and use densities Planning Existence of an organized regional plan Jaini et al., 2012 process for tourist destination region Networking Partnership and collaboration among Mearns, 2011; and different organizations Aziz et al., 2015 Collaboration Cultural Protection, A historic building, sacred place, local Pasape, Anderson, maintenance, architectural building, local traditional W., & Lindi, 2015; and revival agriculture Aziz et al., 2015 Development of food Aziz et al., 2015 Appreciation Diverse traditional clothing, music, Mearns, 2011 and local rituals, and festivals conservation

Evaluation of Sustainable Ecotourism Destination by Extending Butler’s Tourism Area Life Cycle

Review of literature and past studies through extensive work and discussions have only centred on concepts, definitions, importance and issues of ecotourism, sustainable development and sustainable tourism as these are vital to the tourism industry and national economy. However, there is a lack of focus on sustainable destination development in relation to destination development stages. Also, a holistic framework for sustainable development ecotourism has not been discussed in past studies. Sustainable development has become a prominent area of research and an agenda of concern for different stakeholders within developed and developing countries (Chan, 2010). Extensive research work has been carried out, yet there seems to be no conclusive or acceptable holistic conceptual framework which identifies key

55 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian attributes and guides the sustainable tourism development of a particular destination, especially at the ecotourism destination. Accordingly, sustainability is becoming a significant concept in tourism destinations and has increasingly added to destination competitiveness (Mathew, 2009). Arguably, the development of ecotourism destination must be guided not only by effective and efficient management of the destination and the consumer base but also the various development stages, as pointed out by Butler’s Tourism Area Life Cycle (1980). In the Malaysian context, some of the common issues faced in sustainable ecotourism destination development include: 1. Lack of conceptual understanding and practices by the stakeholders due to it being multidimensional, contextual and subjective 2. Limited education and awareness in the community and different contextual and cultural issues 3. Not clearly understanding the importance of sustainability in the tourism context. At the government level, a clear vision, strategies and policies of implementation and monitoring sustainable development in the tourism industry must be in place and enforced 4. Lack of implementation of sustainable development and practices at the destination and collaborative efforts among the key stakeholders, in addition to undermining the importance of embracing practices of sustainability at the destination Sustainable Ecotourism Development Framework

Evaluation of the sustainability of an ecotourism site or destination is rather complex and multi-faceted. It requires identifying the relevant sustainability dimensions, in-depth analysis of the relationship between sustainability dimensions – resource, experiential dimensions, community and tourism in sustainable ecotourism, its impacts and development phases.

56 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Ecotourism destinations are commonly located in the protected areas or other natural undisturbed natural areas. Thus, ecotourism is seen as a tool for conservation and sustainable development which is associated with economy, environmental and social aspects that make up the key components of ecotourism destination. These aspects are the crucial pillars of sustainability which determine the destination’s sustainability. Ecotourism focuses on the improvement and maintenance of the natural system at the destination. Sustainable ecotourism destination development must take into account the environmental, economic and social dimensions. Also, it is equally important to consider the destination development stage. It raises the pertinent question of how to maintain sustainable development at ecotourism destinations. This indicates that ecotourism destination development entails the integration of many factors such as the natural area (environment/ cultural resources) and people (ecotourists, local communities and operators or managers) (Ceballos-Lascurain, 1993). Tourism resources are important attractions and generate profits, which also facilitate the improvement and maintenance of the natural system. Tsaur et al. (2006) introduced a sustainable ecotourism development framework based on three components: resources, communities and tourists, and shows the interrelation between resources, communities and tourists and the economic, social and environmental aspects in association with the development of ecotourism destination. It suggests that successful sustainable ecotourism development is dependent upon these components, as presented in Figure 7. The Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Framework showcases the interrelation among resources, community and ecotourism to examine the destination sustainability. The fine interaction among resources, community and ecotourism is a crucial component for a destination that aims for sustainability (Tsaur et al., 2006). For example, ecotourism destination views tourism resources as being paramount to the destination on top of the relationship between resources and community resident. At the same time, the local community also influences resources relating to environmental and social aspects. Tourism resources together

57 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian with the environmental aspect should be attractive features to attract visitors. Local community must participate in the process of sustainable ecotourism development (Ryan, 2002).

Figure 7 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Framework: components and three pillars of sustainability [adopted from Tsaur et al. (2006, p. 642)] Ecotourism Destination Development Stage

In terms of the development process and phases, the book recommends that Butler’s Tourism Area Life Cycle theory which is based on the six developmental phases is deemed applicable to sustainable ecotourism destination development.

58 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Extending Butler’s (1980) Tourism Area Life Cycle

Ecotourism is a major economic driver, employment provider, a tool for nature conservation and a protector of the environment and social culture. An ecotourism destination is a complex and open system that is composed of an array of diverse resources and agents at the destination who co-produce a variety of products and services (Farrell & Twinning-Ward, 2004). The complexity and close interrelationship among resources and agents at the destination contributes to the destination’s competitiveness. To be sustainable, development of ecotourism should be economically, socially and environmentally sound. Hence, the sustainability performance of ecotourism destination is of great concern and importance in the context of destination attractiveness and needs a more comprehensive framework. A significant number of academic research studies have been conducted in the field of ecotourism and sustainability and on the problems, gaps, issues and deficiencies in tourism practices and research (Bramwell & Lane, 2012, 2013; Buckley, 2012; Hall, 2011; Moscardo & Murphy, 2016). Nevertheless, the researchers state that there is limited capability in finding adequate solutions to the challenges to the sustainability of destinations. Sustainability is a widely accepted and studied concept, for example, several drivers of tourism performance have been identified including infrastructure, economic conditions, security, safety, price, natural and cultural resources, environmental sustainability, government policies, and skilled labour and training. Byrd, Cárdenas and Greenwood (2008) consider natural resource planning, economic concerns, education needs, and awareness to be crucial for sustainable tourism development. However, it seems that destination development is not viewed as an important aspect of sustainable tourism development and limited studies have focused on key sustainability factors in destination development (Diaz & Rodriguez, 2016). In particular, the factors that contribute to the sustainable development of the destination and the prevalent framework of ecotourism destinations are still questionable.

59 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

The sustainable development concept believes in balancing economy and social and cultural progress without compromising natural areas while achieving higher development level (Angelevska- Najdeska & Rakicevik, 2012). Sustainable development requires sustainable growth in terms of economic contributions, sustainable use of resources and environment-based destination development. However, taking an integrated approach, destination sustainability dimensions – economic, environmental and social aspects by themselves are not sufficient to address destination sustainability. Ecotourism experiences, as a key attraction, and destination development stages are together perceived as prominent factors that shape and affect the destination sustainability. The benefits of an integrated approach to sustainable ecotourism destination management include: • Addresses the needs of ecotourists and the economic interests of the tourism industry. • Ensures ecotourism development in a way which reduces negative impacts. • Protects local business interests, heritage and environment. • Protects the local environment in part because it is the livelihood of the destination. Butler’s (1980) Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC)

According to Mouhamadou Bamba (2018), the life cycle theory has been used to analyse the progressive and socio-economic phenomena and it has been extended to understand the dynamics of developing touristic destination by Butler (1980) who believes that a destination and place evolution go through several phases or steps. Based on the life cycle theory, Butler developed a model known as Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC); and he postulated that regions or place destinations including the tourist destinations have to undertake six evolutionary stages, namely, exploration, involvement, development, consolidation, stagnation and decline or rejuvenation.

60 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Literature records that this life cycle theory has been applied in several destinations to understand the destination development, including Lancaster County (Hovinen, 2002), Ontario (Helleiner, 1983), Black Pool and Scottish Highlands (Butler, 1985) Grand Cayman Island (Weaver, 1990), and selected Pacific Islands (Choy, 1992). However, the theory has not been used in the ecotourism destination development context. It is postulated that ecotourism destination development will go through similar six stages with modification and adaptation to suit a specific site or destination (Haywood, 1986; Mouhamadou Bamba, 2018). Kangas, Pensonen, Kurtilla, and Kajanus (2001) argue that the TALC model is difficult to sustain at an ecotourism destination simply because it does not include the conservation and protection of the environment. Therefore, a hybrid method which combines strength, weakness, opportunities, threats (SWOT) analysis and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method as presented in Figure 8 below was developed as a framework for building strategies for sustainable destination development. Researchers have discussed sustainable tourism, but a relatively limited number of studies discuss the development of strategies for sustainable development at the destination (Kisi, 2019). Kisi (2019) extends this method to develop a strategic approach for sustainable development at Zonguldak, Turkey.

Figure 8 Hybrid method SWOT (strength, weakness, opportunities and threats); AHP (analytical hierarchy process) and TOWS (threats, opportunities, weakness and strength) for sustainable destination (Kangas et al., 2001)

61 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Although the above method analyses the destination and sets priorities based on SWOT (Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis, it argues that the destination experiences and development stages must take into consideration the due changes and impacts at different stages. Moreover, the concept of sustainability and development at the destination is not included in the method. The method poses limitation in terms of destination sustainability. It suggests that Butler’s (1980) Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC) with its different stages (Figure 9) and theoretical explanation in Table 7 are relevant in the context of developing sustainable ecotourism destination.

Figure 9 Tourism Area Life Cycle (modified from Butler, 1980)

TALC outlines the six development stages and different involvements and actions required at and control for each stage. This information represents the different stages of destination development and requires different focuses and strategies for sustainable development. This indicates the planning for sustainable ecotourism development must not only be analysed from the concept of sustainability and dimensions, resources management and agents at the destination, but also the site/destination. The site

62 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach or destination evolves continuously just like in the product life cycle and will be affected by the changes and impacts from the weather, development, and human actions. Table 7 below provides a detailed description of each phase of TALC.

Table 7 Butler’s Theoretical Life Cycle of Destination (Butler, 1980, pp. 5 – 12)

Phase Description Exploration Few people start visiting the area which is usually the adventurous tourist. Tourist are usually interested in nature or culture and may have a close interaction with local people and use local facilities. Exploration happens through word-of- mouth promotion and it has a minimal impact on the social, culture and physical environment. Involvement There are increases in the number of tourists but still under control. Some advertising efforts are also happening to kick- start the tourist market. The social life of locals undergoes some changes and more pressure on the infrastructure is created with local entrepreneurs offering and preparing basic specialized facilities and services for the tourist. Development The number of tourist visiting is increasing rapidly and might even exceed the local population and more foreign- owned facilities start to emerge causing loss of local control. More promotion of artificial attraction with extensive and intensive advertisement. Enhanced accessibility to the tourism destination. There is also a need for use of migrant labour and rapid landscape changes happen. Consolidation This is when the growth rate starts to decline and tourism is no longer a major economic sector and more advertising events occur. Opposition to tourism may happen due to over-crowding and high density of tourism destination. Some facilities may be abandoned and start to deteriorate. Stagnation Tourist capacity is reached or exceeded and there is a surplus in hotel capacity and changes in ownership. More focused tourist packages are preferred. Social, environmental and economical problems may occur. Decline Vacationers decline and the tourist market suffers losses. The market relies on day visitors and weekenders. Many facilities undergo conversions. Local resentment towards visitors may happen. Rejuvenation Change of attraction and a new tourist market is found.

63 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

An Integrated Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development Framework

In relation to the above limitations mentioned, this book presents a comprehensive sustainable ecotourism destination framework by including the critical factors – sustainability dimensions, elements of ecotourism experiences and destination development cycle as presented in Figure 10 below. The three factors shown in Figure 10 are co-existent and interrelated with the destination. They are also affected by the development process and growth stages. Simply put, the sustainability dimensions are fundamental to sustainable development and ecotourism and the experiences are derived from these dimensions. The development process or stages at the destination significantly influence the sustainability dimensions and, subsequently, the quality of experiences.

Figure 10 Proposed integrated sustainable ecotourism destination development framework

64 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Based on the development stages in Butler’s TALC model, each development stage exhibits different development conditions and thus provides different kinds of ecotourism experiences. Therefore, this results in different types of ecotourism experiential dimensions and outcomes at different stages of development. It means variations in the level of quality of experiences occurs. This indicates sustainable ecotourism experiences and destination are attributed to the different developmental stages that are underpinned by Butler’s TALC. Therefore, it is deemed as an alternative and relevant approach to understand, analyse and evaluate sustainable ecotourism destination through experiential dimensions and development stage. It is understood that as an ecotourism destination evolves through the stages, the impacts from economy, environment, and society, the quality of experiences will be affected and will change accordingly; particularly due to the volume of visitors’ arrivals. Hence, to ensure the sustainability of ecotourism destination and its development, we can no longer only focus on the sustainability dimensions. The quality of experiences and conditions of the destination will have a significant impact on the level of development and growth. Regarding Butler’s cycle, at the exploration stage, there is a high level of destination sustainability and the quality of experiences is good due to a small number of visitors, less development and fewer impacts at the destination. However, at the development phase, the number of visitors increases, businesses expand, and consumption intensifies at the destination. Thus, there are more impacts on the sustainability dimensions – economic, environmental and social. Hence, it is postulated that the level of sustainability and quality of experiences are affected. Likewise, at the consolidation stage, the destination has developed into an overcrowded and high-density destination, subsequently, the quality of tourism products and experiences are adversely affected. The issues of sustainable destination become a great concern to the key stakeholders. The destination sustainability is being badly affected at the decline stage. There is a decrease in the number of visitors and the loss of market segment. Thus, there are negative impacts on the economy and social aspects. The destination at the rejuvenation stage

65 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian seeks new resources and markets to strengthen the sustainability dimensions. This implies that different sustainability indicators are required to assess and measure the destination sustainability. Even though there is recurrent criticism of Butler’s model (1980), but its strength lies in certain important implications relating to the destination management (Mouhamadou Bamba, 2018). This is because a destination is a place of production and dissemination of tourism practices. It is not static. Its identity and position changes over time due to several factors, such as the availability of and accessibility to the means of transport and tourist facilities, consumption pattern and characterization of visitors, environment and physical characteristic of the region, territorial dynamics of the region, investment and the government policies, and emergence of new destinations as competitors. When a destination reaches its limit for growth, this heralds the decline phase which occupies a key place in the TALC. Moreover, when there are no interventions in the evolution of destinations, a problem may appear and make the decline inevitable. In this situation, corrective actions are necessary to produce a positive effect and, at the same time, control the tensions caused at the destination due to exploitation by tourists. In this case, Butler’s model (1980) can be studied and utilised as a tool in the planning and operations of tourist destinations. Haywood (1986) also recommended the use of TALC for prospective analysis and site management purposes. Also, the final stage of this model involves ‘the theory of innovation’. Butler has proposed that a destination is not necessarily going to its doom when it declines because innovation may extend its existence as a tourist destination under a different identity or due to another new tourist function (Mouhamadou Bamba, 2018). The assessment of vulnerability and resilience of ecotourism destinations requires a strong sustainable development framework. This framework could be applied to designing resilience-building strategies for a destination.

66 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Comprehensive and Approaches on Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Management

Researchers are increasingly tasked with producing impactful research. Thus, we need to be able to demonstrate that our research is relevant to the key challenges in society and doing so in a way that adds to the public debate on these topics. Moving on, we need to present a distinctive opportunity to increase the contribution of the tourism sector to the three pillars of sustainability – economy, social and environmental – at the same time fostering awareness of the true dimensions of a sector that is frequently neglected or not valued (UNWTO, 2015). Sustainable ecotourism destination development and management requires an integrated, meaningful and practical framework. This framework should consist of relevant sustainability key factors to determine the sustainability of the destination. Although tourism academics and practitioners have paid significant attention to sustainable tourism development in recent years, a constant failure persists within the tourism literature to relate the concept to the theory of its parental paradigm – sustainable development. Thus, the applicability of sustainable development to the specific context of tourism is seldom examined. There is an argument that principles of sustainable tourism disregard or ignore the characteristics of the production and consumption of tourism or ecotourism, and the crucial dissimilarities between sustainable tourism and sustainable development concepts (Sharpley, 2010).

67 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Conclusion The book recognises the importance of ecotourism and sustainable development in the Malaysian context. It improves the comprehension of ecotourism, sustainable development, and sustainable tourism by drawing the common factors with regards to sustainability. It addresses the gaps of sustainable development framework; and proposes ways to improve sustainable ecotourism destination development by focusing attention on relevant sustainability factors and framework for sustainable ecotourism destination. Based on the review of past studies and gaps, it recommends that the sustainable development of ecotourism must take into account ecotourism experiences and destination development in addition to sustainability dimensions. Butler’s TALC is a relevant theory that can be extended to the ecotourism destinations as a useful framework for sustainable development. The book enhances the understanding of the interconnection between ecotourism, sustainable development and sustainable tourism where sustainability is significantly related to economy, environment, and societal aspects. It points out the neglected ecotourism experiences as key attractions and that the concept of co- creation of experiences of ecotourism is considered as the key factor contributing to sustainable destination. More importantly, it suggests that the destination development is of significance to the sustainable development framework. The proposed sustainable ecotourism destination framework is deemed more practical and relevant to sustainable ecotourism destination as it includes three important factors – sustainability dimensions, ecotourism experiences, and site development – unlike past studies which did not consider these factors in the destination development cycle. This offers a valuable and insightful understanding and a sound theoretical approach to sustainable ecotourism destination management for academics and practitioners. It addresses the gap in sustainable ecotourism destination development and recommends this framework should be extended to all 60 proposed ecotourism sites identified in the Malaysian ecotourism clusters. It strongly suggests sustainable tourism researchers and ecotourism practitioners apply this framework to strengthen their understanding and management of sustainable ecotourism destinations in Malaysia.

68 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

References

Abang Abdurahman, A. Z., Ali, K. K., Khedif, L. Y. B., Bohari, Z., Ahmad, J. A., & Kibat, L. Y. (2016). Ecotourism product attributes and tourist attraction: UiTM undergraduates studies. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 224, 360 – 367. Abidin, Z. Z. (1999). The identification of criteria and indicators for the sustainable management of ecotourism in Taman Negara National park: A Delphi consensus (PhD thesis). West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia. Adam, B. (1998). Timescapes of modernity: The environmental and invisible hazards. London and New York: Routledge. Angelevska-Najdeska, K., & Rakicevik, G. (2012). Planning of sustainable tourism development. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 44, 210 – 220. Angelkova, T., Koteski, C., Jakovlev, Z., & Mitrevska, E. (2012). Sustainability and competitiveness of tourism. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 44, 221 – 227. Awang Kipli, D. S. N. (2006). Local agenda 21 initiative in waste minimization for Miri City. In Forth Sabah-Sarawak Environmental Convention, 2006, Malaysia. Ayala, H. (1996). Resort ecotourism: A paradigm for the 21st century. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 37 (5), 46 – 53. Aziz, A., Barzekar, G., Ajuhari, Z., & Idris, N. H. (2015). Criteria & indicator for monitoring ecotourism sustainability in protected watershed: A Delphi consensus. Journal of Environmental Science, Toxicology and Food Technology, 9 (3), 1 – 9. Badaruddin, M. (2002). The development of ecotourism in Malaysia. Is it really sustainable? Paper presented at the International Year Ecotourism 2002, Regional Conference in Chiang Mai, Thailand, 3 – 7, March 2002. Ballantine, J., & Eagles, P. (1994). Defining Canadian ecotourist. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2 (4), 210 – 124. Baral, N., Stern, M. J., & Hammett, A. L. (2012). Developing a scale for evaluating ecotourism by visitors: a study in the Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20 (7), 975 – 989. Batta, R. N. (2006). Evaluating ecotourism in mountain areas: a study of three Himalayan destinations. International Review for Environmental Strategies, 6 (1), 41 – 61.

69 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Beaumont, N. (2011). The third criterion of ecotourism: are ecotourists more concerned about sustainability than other tourists? Journal of Ecotourism, 10 (2), 135 – 148. Bhattacharya, D., Sarkar, R., & Chowdhury, B. (2012). Irresponsible ecotourism practices flanking the best national park in India: A multivariate analysis. SIT Journal of Management, 1 (1), 1 – 27. Bhuiyan, M. A. H., Siwar, C., Ismail, S. M., & Islam, R. (2012). The role of ecotourism for sustainable development in East Coast Economy Region (Ecer), Malaysia. OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development, 3 (9), 53 – 60. Bhuiyan, M. A. H., Siwar, C., & Ismail, S. M. (2016). Sustainability measurement for ecotourism destination in Malaysia: A study on Lake Kenyir, Terengganu. Soc Indic Res, 128, 1029 – 1045. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-1068-5 Blamey, R., & Hatch, D. (1998). Profiles and motivations of nature-based tourists visiting Australia. Canberra: Bureau of Tourism Research. Boo, E. (1990). Eco-tourism: The potentials and pitfalls. Washington, DC: World Wildlife Fund. Bossel, H. (2004). Indicators for sustainable development: Theory, method, applications. A report to the Balaton Group. Winnipeg: International Institute for Sustainable Development. Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (2012). Towards innovation in sustainable tourism research? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20 (1), 1 – 7. Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (2013). Getting from here to there: Systems change, behavioural change and sustainable tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21 (1), 1 – 4. Brandon, K. (1996). Ecotourism and conservation: A review of key issues. Washington, DC: World Bank. Brundtland, G. H. (1987). Report of the World Commission on environment and development: Our common future. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. Buckley, R. (2012). Sustainable tourism: Research and reality. Annals of Tourism Research, 39 (2), 528 – 546. Butler, R. W. (1980). The concept of a tourist area cycle of evolution: Implications for management of resources. Canadian Geographer/ Le Géographe Canadien, 24 (1), 5 – 12. Butler, C. S. (1985). Systemic linguistics: Theory and applications. London: Batsford Academic and Educational. Byrd, E. T., Cárdenas, D. A., & Greenwood, J. B. (2008). Factors of stakeholder understanding of tourism: The case of Eastern North Carolina. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 8 (3), 192 – 204.

70 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Cabiddu, F., Lui, T. W., & Piccoli, G. (2013). Managing value co-creation in the tourism industry. Annals of Tourism Research, 42, 86 – 107. Campos, A. C., Mendes, J., Valle, P. O. D., & Scott, N. (2018). Co-creation of tourist experiences: A literature review. Current Issues in Tourism, 21 (4), 369 – 400. Ceballos-Lascurain, H. (1983). Ecotourism planning for protected areas. In K. Lindberg & D. Hawkins (Eds.), Ecotourism: A guide for planners and managers (pp. 15 – 31). North Bennington, VT: Ecotourism Society. Ceballos-Lascurain, H. (1987). The future of ‘ecotourism’. Mexico Journal, 1, 13–14. Ceballos-Lascurain, H. (1993). Ecotourism as a worldwide phenomenon. In K. Lindberg, & D. E. Hawkins (Eds.), Ecotourism: A guide for planners & managers (pp. 12 – 15). North Bennington: The Ecotourism Society. Ceballos-Lascurain, H. (1998). Introduction. In K. Lindberg, M. Epler Wood, & D. Engeldrum (Eds.), Ecotourism: Guide for planners and managers (Vol. 2, pp. 7 – 10.). Vermont: The Ecotourism Society. Cernat, L., & Gourdon, J. (2007). Sustainable tourism – the need for a comprehensive methodological framework. In M. Mashayekhi (Ed.), Is the concept of sustainable tourism sustainable? Developing the sustainable tourism benchmarking tool. Geneva: United Nation Publications. Cini, F., Van der Merwe, P., & Saayman, M. (2015). Tourism students’ knowledge and tenets towards ecotourism. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 15 (1), 74 – 91. Chambers, N., Simmons, C., & Wackernagel, M. (2000). Sharing nature’s interest: Ecological footprints as an indicator of sustainability. London: Earthscan. Chan, J. K. L. (2007). Herzberg’s dual factor theory to tourism experi- ences: Satisfiers and dissatisfiers.World Journal of Tourism, Leisure and Sports, 1 (1), 1 – 10. Chan, J. K. L., & Baum, T. (2007). Ecotourists’ perception of ecotourism experience in Lower Kinabatangan, Sabah, Malaysia. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15 (5), 574 – 590. Chan, J. K. L. (2010). Building sustainable tourism destination and developing responsible tourism: conceptual framework, key issues and challenges. Tourism Development Journal – An International Research Journal, 8 (1), 24 – 32. Cheng, F. M., He, X., & Wang, J. (2007). Cold thinking of “ecotourism hot”. Journal of Xiangtan University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 31, 153 – 156.

71 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Chen, B., & Nakama, Y. (2013). Thirty years of forest tourism in China. Journal of Forest Research, 18 (4), 285 – 292. Cheng, L., & Wang, T. (2009). Analysis on the future policy tendency of ecotourism management based on the appropriation of benefits in western China. Society and Natural Resources, 23 (2), 128 – 145. Chesworth, N. (1995). Ecotourism seminar paper delivered in the Institute of Environmental Studies and Management. UPLB. College, Laguna. Choi, Y., Doh, M., Park, S., & Chon, J. (2017). Transformation planning of ecotourism systems to invigorate responsible tourism. Sustainability, 9 (12), 2248. Choi, Y. E., Song, K., Kim, M., & Lee, J. (2017). Transformation planning for resilient wildlife habitats in ecotourism systems. Sustainability, 9, 487. Choy, D. J. (1992). Life cycle models for Pacific island destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 30 (3), 26 – 31. Commonwealth Department of Tourism. (1994). National ecotourism strategy. Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Tourism. Crabtree, A. (2000). Plan and develop interpretive activities. Australia: South West Institute of TAFE. Daud, M. (2002). The ecotourism development in Malaysia. In T. Hundloe (Ed.), Linking green productivity to ecotourism: Experiences in the Asia Pacific Region. Tokyo: APO. David, G., Roslan, A., Pesiu, E., Salam, M. R., Abdullah, M. T., Hamza, A. A., & Clements, R. (2017). Bird sanctuary: A potential ecotourism activity in Lake Kenyir, Terengganu. Ecotourism Potentials in Malaysia, 30, 30 – 41. Diamantis, D. (1999). The concept of ecotourism: Evolution and trends. Current Issues in Tourism, 2 (2 – 3), 93 – 122. Díaz, M. R., & Rodríguez, T. E. (2016). Determining the sustainability factors and performance of a tourism destination from the stakeholders’ perspective. Sustainability, 8 (9), 951. Dodds, R., & Butler, R. (2009). Barriers to implementing Sustainable Tourism Policy in Mass Tourism Destinations. TOURISMOS: An International Multidisciplinary Journal of Tourism, 5 (1), 35 – 53. Dolnicar, S., Crouch, G. I., & Long, P. (2008). Environment-friendly tourists: what do we really know about them? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16 (2), 197 – 210. Dowling, R. K. (1997). Plans for the development of regional ecotourism: theory and practice. Sydney: College of Business, the University of Notre Dame Australia.

72 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Dredge, D., & Jenkins, J. (2008). Tourism planning and policy. Milton: Wiley & Sons. Dresner, S. (2002). The principles of sustainability. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd. Dymond, S. (1997). Indicators of sustainable tourism in New Zealand: A local government perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 5 (4), 279 – 293. Eagles, P. (1992). The travel motivations of Canadian ecotourists. Journal of Travel Research, 31 (2), 3 – 7. Eagles, P. F., & Cascagnette, J. W. (1995). Canadian ecotourists: Who are they? Tourism Recreation Research, 20 (1), 22 – 28. Eagles, P., & Higgins, B. (1998). Ecotourism market and industry structure. In K. Lindberg, M. Epler Wood & D. Engeldrum (Eds.), Ecotourism: A guide for planners and managers (pp. 11 – 43). Vermont: The Ecotourism Society. Edwards, A. R. (2005). The sustainability revolution: Portrait of a paradigm shift. Gabriola: New Society Publishers. Elkington, J. (1998). Accounting for the triple bottom line. Measuring Business Excellence, 2 (3), 18 – 22. Elkington, J., Tickell, S., & Lee, M. (2007). Sustainability: 20 Years of global leadership. London: SustainAbility. Retrieved from http:// www.sustainability.com Epler Wood, M. (2002). Ecotourism: Principles, Practices and Policies for Sustainability. USA: United Nations Publication. Escobar, A. (2001). Culture sits in places: Reflections on globalism and subaltern strategies of localization. Political Geography, 20, 139 – 174. Ewen. C. J., Hoffer, M. R., Capobianco, M. C., & Doucette, R. M. (2019). Community-based inclusion: Promoting rural tourism through accessibility in Cuenca, Ecuador. Retrieved from https:// digitalcommons.wpi.edu/iqp-all/5497 Evans, B. (2005) Before Culture: The Ethnographic Imagination in American Literature, 1865–1920. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Farrell, B. H., & Runyan, D. (1991). Ecology and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 18 (1), 26 – 40. Farrell, B. H., & Twining-Ward, L. (2004). Reconceptualizing tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 31 (2), 274 – 295. Fennell, D. A. (2003). Ecotourism. London: Routledge. Fennell, D. A. (2008). Responsible tourism: A Kierkegaardian interpretation. Tourism Recreation Research, 33 (1), 3 – 12.

73 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Fennell, D., & Eagles, P. (1990). Ecotourism in Costa Rica: A conceptual framework. Journal of Parks and Recreation Administration, 8 (1), 23 – 24. Fennell, D. A. (2015). Ecotourism (4th ed.). New York: Routledge. Fereday, J., & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5 (1), 80 – 92. Fresco, L. O., & Kroonenberg, S. B. (1992). Time and spatial scales in ecological sustainability. Land Use Policy, 9 (3), 155 – 168. Graci, S. (2007). Accommodating green: Examining barriers to sustainable tourism development. TTRA Canada Conference Proceedings. Montebello, Quebec: Travel and Tourism Research Association. Graci, S., & Dodds, R. (2010). Sustainable tourism in island destinations. London: Earthscan. Guo, L. (1997). Chinese ecotourism-the foundation of sustainable Tourism. Progress in Geography, 16 (4), 1 – 10. Guzman, L. C., & Galves, J. C. P. (2016). Motivations and value attributes of ecotourism in natural protected area: Santay Island (Ecuador). Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 7 (3), 240 – 249. Hall, C. M. (1998). Historical antecedents of sustainable development and ecotourism: New labels on old bottles. In C. M. Hall, & A. A. Lew (Eds.), Sustainable tourism: A geographical perspective (pp. 13 – 24). New York: Longman. Hall, C. M. (2011). Policy learning and policy failure in sustainable tourism governance: from first- and second-order to third-order change? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19 (5), 649 – 671. Hanrahan, J. (2008). Host community participation and sustainable tourism in Ireland: The local authority perspective (Doctoral dissertation). Institute of Technology Sligo, Ireland. Haywood, K. M. (1986). Can the tourist-area life cycle be made operational? Tourism Management, 7 (3), 154 – 167. Helleiner, G. K. (1983). Towards a New Bretton Woods: Challenges for the world financial and trading system. London: Commonwealth Secretariat. HLA & ARA Consultants. (1994). Tour operator market for Alberta ecotourism experiences. Edmonton: Alberta Economy Development and Tourism. Holden, A., & Sparrowhawk, J. (2002). Understanding the motivations of ecotourists: The case of trekkers in Annapurna, Nepal. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4, 435 – 446.

74 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Honey, M. (1999). Ecotourism and sustainable development: Who owns paradise? Washington DC: Island Press. Hovinen, G. R. (2002). Revisiting the destination lifecycle model. Annals of tourism Research, 29 (1), 209 – 230. International Ecotourism Society. (2016). What is ecotourism? Retrieved from https://ecotourism.org/ Ismail, N., Masron, T., & Ahmad, A. (2014). Cultural heritage tourism in Malaysia: Issues and challenges. In M. A. Othuman Mydin & A. Marzuki (Eds.), SHS Web of Conferences (Vol. 12). EDP Sciences. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20141201059 Jaafar, M., & Maideen, S. A. (2012). Ecotourism-related products and activities, and the economic sustainability of small and medium island chalets. Tourism Management, 33, 683 – 691. Jaini, N., Anuar, A. N., & Daim, M. S. (2012). The practice of sustainable tourism in ecotourism sites among ecotourism providers. Asian Social Science, 8 (4), 175 – 178. Jaini, N., Robat, M., Anuar, A. N. A., & Jamaluddin, E. R. (2019). The identification of criteria for ecotourism practice in Peninsular Malaysia. Journal of Hotel and Business Management, 8 (190), 2169 – 2286. Janusz, G. K., & Bajdor, P. (2013). Towards to sustainable tourism– framework, activities and dimensions. Procedia Economy and Finance, 6, 523 – 529. Jing, Y., & Fucai, H. (2011). Research on management of ecotourism based on economy models. Energy Procedia, 5, 1563 – 1567. Kamarudin, K. (2016). National ecotourism plan 2016 – 2025. Retrieved from http://www.motac.gov.my/en/download/send/86-pelan-eko- pelancongan-kebangsaan-2016-2025/410-national-ecotourism- plan-2016-2025-executive-summary Kangas, J., Pesonen, M., Kurttila, M., & Kajanus, M. (2001). A’WOT: Integrating the Ahp with Swot Analysis. Proceedings–6th ISAHP, 189 – 198. Kerstetter, D. L., Hou, J. S., & Lin, C. H. (2004). Profiling Taiwanese ecotourists using a behavioral approach. Tourism Management, 25 (4), 491 – 498. Kiper, T. (2013). Role of ecotourism in sustainable development. In M. Özyavuz (Ed.), Advances in landscape architecture. DOI: 10.5772/55749. Retrieved from https://www.intechopen.com/ books/advances-in-landscape-architecture/role-of-ecotourism-in- sustainable-development.

75 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Kişi, N. (2019). A strategic approach to sustainable tourism development using the SWOT hybrid method: A case study of Zonguldak, Turkey. Sustainability, 11 (4), 964. Korir, J., Muchiri, J., & Kamwea, J. (2013). Wildlife-based tourism, ecology and sustainability of protected areas in Kenya. Journal of Natural Sciences Research, 3 (3), 40 – 48. Lane, B., & Kastenholz, E. (2015). Rural tourism: the evolution of practice and research approaches–towards a new generation concept? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23 (8 – 9), 1133 – 1156. Larsen, S. (2007). Aspects of a psychology of the tourist experience. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 7 (1), 7 – 18. Lee, C. K. (1997). Valuation of nature-based tourism resources using dichotomous choice contingent valuation method. Tourism Management, 18 (8), 587 – 591. Li, W. (2004). Environmental management indicators for ecotourism development in China’s nature reserves: A case study in Tianmushan Nature Reserve. Tourism Management, 25, 559 – 564. Macnaghten, P., & Urry, J. (1998). Contested natures. London: Sage Publications. Mader, R. (2002). Latin American ecotourism: What is it? Current Issues in Tourism, 5 (3 – 4), 272 – 279. Mathew, V. (2009). Sustainable tourism: A case of destination competitiveness in South Asia. South Asian Journal of Tourism and Heritage, 2 (1), 83 – 89. McCormick, K. (1994). Can ecotourism save the rainforests? Retrieved from http://www.ran.org/ran/info_center/ecotourism.html Mearns, K. F. (2011). Using sustainable tourism indicator to measure the sustainability of community-based ecotourism Venture Malealea Lodge & Pony Trek Centre, Lesotho. Tourism Review International, 15, 135 – 147. Medina, L. K. (2005). Ecotourism and certification: Confronting the principles and pragmatics of socially responsible tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 13 (3), 281 – 295. Meric, H. J., & Hunt, J. (1998). Ecotourists’ motivational and demographic characteristics: A case of North Carolina travelers. Journal of Travel Research, 36 (4), 57. Miller, G., & Twining-Ward, L. (2005). Monitoring for a sustainable tourism transition: The challenge of developing and using indicators. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing.

76 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment. (2016). National Policy on Biological Diversity 2016 – 2025. Retrieved from http://www. kats.gov.my/ms-my/PustakaMedia/Penerbitan/National%20 Policy%20on%20Biological%20Diversity%202016-2025.pdf. Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture Malaysia (MOTAC). (2017). National Ecotourism Plan 2016 – 2025: Executive summary. Retrieved from http://www.motac.gov.my/en/download/category/86-pelan- eko-pelancongan-kebangsaan-2016-2025 Mohonk Agreement. (2000). A framework and principles for the certification of sustainable and ecotourism. New York: Institute for Policy Studies. Pp. 97-100. Retrieved from https://www.rainforest- alliance.org/sites/default/files/2016-08/users_guide.pdf Moldan, B., Janouskova, S., & Hak, T. (2012). How to understand and measure environmental sustainability: Indicators and targets. Ecological Indicators, 17, 4 – 13. Mondino, E., & Beery, T. (2019). Ecotourism as a learning tool for sustainable development: The case of Monviso Transboundary Biosphere Reserve, Italy. Journal of Ecotourism, 18 (2), 107 – 121. Moscardo, G., & Murphy, L. (2016). Using destination community wellbeing to assess tourist markets: A case study of Magnetic Island, Australia. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 5 (1), 55 – 64. Mouhamadou Bamba, L. Y. (2018). An Application of Butler’s (1980) Tourism Area Life Cycle to Saly (Senegal). International Journal for Innovation Education and Research, 6 (1), 47 – 56. Moulin, C. (1995). On concepts of community cultural tourism. The Tourist Review, 4, 35 – 39. Mowforth, M., & Munt, I. (2009). Tourism and sustainability: Development, globalisation and new tourism in the third world. London & New York: Routledge. Mowforth, M., & Munt, I. (2016). Tourism and sustainability: Development, globalisation and new tourism in the third world (4th ed.). New York: Routledge. Nair, P. K., & Thomas, T. K. (2013). Sustainable tourism in Malaysia. Mondes du Tourisme, 8, 60 – 69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/ tourisme.88 Negrusa, A. L., Toader, V., Sofica, A., Tutunea, M. F. & Rus, R. V. (2015). Exploring gamification techniques and applications for sustainable tourism. Sustainability, 7, 11160 – 11189. Newsome, D., Moore, S. A., & Dowling, R. K. (2002). Natural area tourism: Ecology, impacts and management. Australia: Multilingual Matter Ltd.

77 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Ng, S. I., Chia, K. W., Ho, J. A., & Ramachandran, S. (2017). Seeking tourism sustainability: A case study of Tioman Island, Malaysia. Tourism Management, 58 (2017), 101 – 107. Nianyong, H., & Zhuge, R. (2001). Ecotourism in China’s nature reserves: Opportunities and challenges. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 9 (3), 228 – 242. Niedziółka, I. (2012). Sustainable tourism development. Regional Formation and Development Studies, 8 (3), 157 – 166. Norton, B.G. (2005). Sustainability: A philosophy of adaptive ecosystem management. London: The University of Chicago Press. Nowaczek, A., & Smale, B. (2010). Exploring the predisposition of travellers to qualify as ecotourists: the Ecotourist Predisposition Scale. Journal of Ecotourism, 9 (1), 45 – 61. Ocampo, L., Ebisa, J. A., Ombe, J., & Escoto, M. G. (2018). Sustainable ecotourism indicators with fuzzy Delphi method – A Philippine perspective. Ecological Indicators, 93, 874 –888. Page, S., & Dowling, R. (2002). Ecotourism. Harlow, Essex: Pearson Education Limited. Palacio, V., & McCool, S. (1997). Identifying ecotourists in Belize through benefit segmentation: A preliminary analysis. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 5 (3), 234 – 243. Pasape, L., Anderson, W., & Lindi, G. (2015). Assessment of indicators of sustainable ecotourism in Tanzania. Anatolia, 26 (1), 73 – 84. Pengiran Bagul, A. H. B., & Datu Eranza, D. R. (2010). Success indicator for ecotourism site. In B. Mohamed (Ed.), Proceeding of Regional Conference on Tourism Research, the state of the art and its sustainability. Malaysia: Regional Conference on Tourism Research. Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1998). Welcome to the experience economy. Harvard Business Review, 76, 97 – 105. Purvis, B., Mao, Y., & Robinson, D. (2018). Three pillars of sustainability: In search of conceptual origins. Sustainability Science, 14 (3), 681 – 695. Ritchie, J. R., & Crouch, G. I. (2010). A model of destination competitiveness/sustainability: Brazilian perspectives. Revista de Administração Pública, 44 (5), 1049 – 1066. Rootes, C. (2007). Acting locally: The character, contexts and significance of local environmental mobilizations. Environmental Politics, 16 (5), 722 – 741. Ryan, C., Hughes, K., & Chirgwin, S. (2000). The gaze, spectacle and ecotourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 27 (1), 148 – 163.

78 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Ryan, C. (1997). Rural tourism in New Zealand: Rafting at river valley ventures in the Rangitikel. In S. J. Page & D. Getz (Eds.), The business of rural tourism: International perspectives. London: Thomson International Business. Ryan, C. (2002). Equity, management, power sharing and sustainability: Issues of the “New Tourism”. Tourism Management, 23 (1), 17 – 26. Ryel, R., & Grasse, T. (1991). Marketing ecotourism: Attracting the elusive ecotourist. In T. Wheln (Ed.), Nature tourism: Managing for the environment (pp. 164 – 186). Washington, DC: Island Press. Saarinen, J. (2005). Tourism in the Northern wildernesses: Wilderness discourses and the development of nature-based tourism in northern Finland. In C. M. Hall, & S. Boyd (Eds.), Nature-based tourism in peripheral area: Development or disaster? (pp. 36 – 49). Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Sanagustin Fons, M. V., Monseñe Fierro, J. A., & Gómez y Patiño, M. (2011). Rural tourism: A sustainable alternative. Applied Energy, 99, 551 – 557. DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.08.031 Seghezzo, L. (2009). The five dimensions of sustainability.Environmental Politics, 18 (4), 539 – 556. Schellhorn, M. (2010). Development for Whom? Social Justice and the Business of Ecotourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18 (1), 115 – 135. Schmitt, B. (1999). Experiential marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 15 (1 – 3), 53 – 67. Sharpley, R. (2010). The myth of sustainable tourism. In CSD Working Papers Series 2009/2010. Preston, Lancashire: Center for Sustainable Development. Siti-Nabiha, A. K, Wahid, N. A., Amran, A., Che Haat, H., & Abustan, I. (2008). Towards a sustainable tourism management in Malaysia. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/ publication/42437374_Towards_sustainable_tourism_ management_in_Malaysia Stein, T. V., Denny, C., B., & Pennisi, L. A. (2003). Using visitors’ motivations to provide learning opportunities at water-based recreation areas. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11 (5), 404 – 425. Teh, L., & Cabanban, A. S. (2007). Planning for sustainable tourism in southern Pulau Banggi: An assessment of biophysical conditions and their implications for future tourism development. Journal of Environmental Management, 85 (4), 999 – 1008. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.11.005

79 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2003). The organisation for economic co-operation and development (OECD) annual report. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/ about/2506789.pdf TIES. (2015). What is ecotourism? Retrieved from http://www.ecotourism. org/what-is-ecotourism Tourism Malaysia. (2019, February 27). Tourism contributes RM84.1 billion to Malaysia economy with 25.8 million tourists in 2018. Retrieved from https://www.tourism.gov.my/media/view/ tourism-contributes-rm84-1-billion-to-malaysia-economy-with- 25-8-million-tourists-in-2018 Tran, L., & Walter, P. (2014). Ecotourism, gender and development in Northern Vietnam. Annals of Tourism Research, 44, 116 – 130. Tsaur, S. H., Lin, Y. C., & Lin, J. H. (2006). Evaluating ecotourism sustainability from the integrated perspective of the resource, community and tourism. Tourism Management, 27, 640 – 653. UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). (2003). Tourism and local agenda 21: The role of local authorities in sustainable tourism. France: Author. UNEP (United Nation Environment Programme) & UNWTO (World Tourism Organization). (2005). Making tourism more sustainable - A guide for policy makers. Madrid: UNWTO. UNEP (United Nation Environment Programme). (2006). Wildlife watching and tourism: A study of benefits and risks of a fast-growing tourism activity and its impact on species. Nairobi: Author. United Nation. (2007). Indicators of sustainable development: Guidelines and methodologies (3rd Ed.). New York: Author. UNWTO (World Tourism Organization). (1994). Sustainable development. Retrieved from https://www.unwto.org/sustainable-development UNWTO (World Tourism Organization). (2002a). World Summit on Sustainable Development. Retrieved from https://digitallibrary. un.org/record/478154/files/A_CONF-199_20-EN.pdf UNWTO (World Tourism Organization). (2002b). The Canadian ecotourism market – Market intelligence and promotion section, and sustainable development of tourism section. Madrid: World Tourism Organization. UNWTO (World Tourism Organization). (2015). UNWTO annual report. Madrid, Spain: Author. Van der Merwe, I., & Van der Merwe, J. (1999). Sustainable development at the local level: An introduction to local agenda 21 – A South African version. South Africa: Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism.

80 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Vignati, F., Hawkins, D., & Prideaux, B. (2015). Sustainable tourism: Driving green investment and shared prosperity in developing countries. USA: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. Wang, G., Innes, J. L., Wu, S. W., Krzyzanowski, J., Yin, Y., Dai, S., & Liu, S. (2012). National park development in China: conservation or commercialization? Ambio, 41(3), 247-261. Wang, L. E., Zhong, L., Zhang, Y. & Zhou, B. (2014). Ecotourism environmental protection measures and their effects on protected areas in China. Sustainability, 6 (10), 6781 – 6798. WCED (World Commission on Environmental Development). (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Weaver, D. B. (1990). Grand Cayman Island and the resort cycle concept. Journal of Travel Research, 29 (2), 9 – 15. Weaver, D. B. (1999). Magnitude of ecotourism in Costa Rica and Kenya. Annals of Tourism Research, 26 (4), 792 – 816. Weaver, D. (2001). Ecotourism. Milton: John Wiley & Sons. Weaver, D. (2006). Sustainable tourism: Theory and practice. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. Weaver, D. (2008). Ecotourism (2nd ed.). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Weiler, B., & Davis, D. (1993). An exploratory investigation into the roles of the nature-based tour leader. Tourism Management, 14 (2), 91 – 98. Weiler, B., & Ham, S. (2001). Tour guides and interpretation. In D. Weaver (Ed.), Encyclopedia of ecotourism (pp. 549 – 563). Oxford: CABI. Wight, P. A. (1996a). North America ecotourists: Market profiles and trips characteristics. Journal of Travel Research, 24 (4), 2 – 10. Wight, P. A. (1996b). North American eco-tourism markets: Motivations, preferences and destinations. Journal of Travel Research, 25, 3 – 10. Wight, P. A. (2001). Ecotourists: Not a homogeneous market segment. In D. B. Weaver (Ed.), The encyclopedia of ecotourism (pp. 37 – 62). Oxon, OX: CAB International. William, P. W. (1992). A local framework for ecotourism development. Western Wildlands, 18 (3), 14 – 19. World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future (Oxford paperbacks). Oxford: Oxford University Press. World Tourism Organization (WTO). (1996). What Tourism Managers need to know: A practical guide to the development and use of indicators of Sustainable development. Ottawa: Consulting and Audit Canada. World Wide Fund for Nature Malaysia (WWFNM). (1996). National Ecotourism Plan, Part 2 – Ecotourism Potential: Site listings. Malaysia: Ministry of Culture, Arts and Tourism.

81 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Yacob, M. R., Radam, A., & Shuib, A. (2009). A contingent valuation study of marine parks ecotourism: The case of Pulau Payar and Pulau Redang in Malaysia. Journal of Sustainable Development, 2 (2), 95 – 105. Yin, S. (2016). Sustainable city tourism in developing countries: Malaysia Experience. Retrieved from https://scienceimpact.mit. edu/sustainable-city-tourism-developing-countries-malaysia- experience Zenelaj, E., & Prift, A. (2013). Model of sustainable tourism based on rural development. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 2 (9), 468 – 474. Ziffer, K. (1989). Ecotourism: The uneasy alliance. Washington, DC: Conservation International.

82 BIODATA

PROFESSOR DR JENNIFER CHAN KIM LIAN

rofessor Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian was born in Alor Setar, Kedah on 5th January 1961 into a farmer’s family. Growing Pup in a simple lifestyle and surrounded by endless acres of paddy field, she wondered how other places would be different from the paddy field. She went to school because she was eager to learn as she realised that education is important to her. Even at a young age, she had developed an immense interest and motivation to travel to other parts of the world to fulfil her inquisitive and curious mind. This is attributed to her late father who shared with her many interesting historical and life events in China and other places. Jennifer received her early education at SRJK Boon Teik, Tokai, Kedah and upper secondary at SMJK Sultanah Asma II, Alor Setar. Her tertiary education started in 1982 when she enrolled in the University of Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada and graduated in 1984. Upon graduation, she came back to Penang and observed that the tourism industry had vast potential and decided to pursue her undergraduate degree in Travel Industry Management at Hawaii Pacific University, United States of America in 1985. Her Professor, Richard Cherry convinced her to continue her Master Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian of Business Administration (MBA) at Monterey Institute of International Studies, California, the United States of America in 1987. She graduated with an MBA – International Management and International Marketing in 1989. Sponsored by Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Jennifer enrolled in a doctoral research programme in late 2002 at the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom; and graduated with a Doctor of Philosophy in Tourism and Hospitality Management in 2005. The title of her thesis is Guest Satisfaction in the Ecolodge Context. While pursuing her studies in Hawaii (1985 – 1987), she worked as a Tour Coordinator, Supervisor and Tour Guide. Subsequently, upon returning from her studies, she started her career as a Marketing and Sales Manager at Hotel Shangri-La (1989 – 1991). She worked as a Branch Manager for Reliance Travel at Kota Kinabalu (1991 – 1992). Later, she joined AMC College as a Tourism Lecturer (1993 – 1994). She then joined Stamford College, Sabah as a Programme Coordinator cum Lecturer for Tourism and Hotel (1994 – 1996). She had a stint with Shangri-La Rasa Ria Hotel during the soft opening in 1994 – 1995 as the Corporate Training consultant before joining Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS) under the School of Business and Economics in 1996 as a lecturer for the Hotel Management Programme. She was promoted as a Deputy Dean for Research and Development in 2000 which she held until 2002, after which she pursued her Doctoral Research programme. Currently, Jennifer is the Director of Borneo Tourism Research Centre, UMS since 2015, and a Professor in Tourism and Hospitality at the Faculty of Business, Economics and Accountancy. She has held several leadership roles as Deputy Director for Centre for Strategic and Academic Management (2008 – 2014), Head of Critical Agenda Project 2 – Learning and Teaching, Committee Member – UMS Academic Development and UMS Internal Research Grant Panel Assessor, UMS Staff Training and Development Programme; Coordinator for UMS Institutional External Auditing –Academic Performance Audit by Malaysian Qualification Agency in 2010; and Academic Programme Quality Assurance and Programme Auditing and Accreditation; was a Leader cum Trainer for the Internal APA and Programme Auditing for JKPT and MQF from 2008 – 2014.

84 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Jennifer has been actively involved in seminars, conferences and workshops. In 2016, she was the Organizing Chairperson for the UMS-MIMA-MKN-Sabah-KESBAN at SEA Enduring Security for ESSZone – 1st Pillar workshop on Economic Security; held the Chairmanship for Scientific Committee for the Inaugural BIMP-EAGA Higher Education Summit-Education and Social Cultural Understanding for Regional Sustainability in 2017; Co-organizing member with the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Environment, Sabah for a seminar and workshop at Kinabatangan titled Beyond 2020: Tourism Perspectives; Chairperson for an International Conference on Enhancing Profitability through Sustainable Growth and Practices in Travel and Tourism: Embracing the Global Sustainable Standards which was supported and endorsed by the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Environment Sabah, October 2019. Jennifer’s contribution towards Universiti Malaysia Sabah’s quality assurance is inspiring, responsible and commendable in achieving the Institution Academic Performance Audit (IAPA) including preparation of MQF03 document and APA audit. She was a Leader cum Trainer for the internal APA and programme auditing from 2008 – 2014. She was instrumental in achieving the Institution Academic Performance Audit and preparation of MQF03 document, preparation of APA audit in 2009 – 2010. She successfully received a blanket approval for UMS Undergraduate programme (64 programmes) within the time frame, making UMS one of the few universities to receive approval in 2010. Due to her expertise in tourism and hospitality management as well as her eager pursuit of quality assurance in academic programmes, Jennifer was involved in a wide range of services to the academic community at both national and international levels. At the national level, Jennifer served as one of the panel members for Hotel Star Rating Classification, Expert Panel Group Members for developing National Programme Standards-Hospitality and Tourism; panel auditor for Tourism and Hospitality Programme by the Malaysian Qualification Agency since 2009; Steering Committee Member for studies in formulating the strategic direction for the Tourism Industry in Malaysia; she was appointed as

85 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

Committee Member of the Entry Point Project (EPP10) – Tourism and Hospitality Cluster and the Malaysian Centre for Tourism and Education (MyCenThe). Also, she is involved as a Facilitator and Trainer for AKEPT Student Supervision Train the Trainer Training Module; an Expert cum Researcher team member for developing a student supervision module for Training the Trainers by AKEPT 2010 – 2012. She is also an Expert Panel Assessor for Research, Development and Consultancy Grant by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation Malaysia since 2016. Currently, she is an Academic Advisory Board Member and Academic External Assessor for several higher learning institutions in Malaysia besides being an internal and external PhD Examiner and serves as External Assessor for Associate Professor’s promotions. Her most recent appointment was as a National Research Grant Assessor for FRGS, LRGS and TRGS under the Ministry of Education, Malaysia. At the international level, Jennifer holds several positions. She has been appointed by the World Gastronomy Institute as an Advisory Member Malaysia since 2018; an International Visiting Professorial Fellow and Doctor Fellow of the Royal Institution, Singapore since 2015 and Honorary President of the Royal Institute of Tourism, Singapore; Professorial Chairholder in the field of Tourism and Human Capital Development by Royal Institution Singapore (2017 – 2018); appointed Board Member of Asian Ecotourism Network January 2019. As a well-recognised tourism and hospitality scholar, Jennifer is regularly invited as a speaker, panel and chair of forum discussion in Taiwan, Singapore, Philippines, Indonesia, India, China and the United Kingdom. She was invited as a speaker for numerous international conferences: International 3rd Annual Women’s Meet Chennai, 2018; Keynote Speaker and Panel Forum International Conference on Sustainable Tourism and Hospitality Marketing: Setting Agenda for Future Research, Shilong, India, 2018; Invited Speaker for 1st PUP-SIMP-AAG Joint International Multidisciplinary Research Conference Plus in Manila, 2018, as an invited speaker at 18th AAHRMEI Annual National Convention and Enhancement Seminar: Bridging Linkages to Sustain Excellent in

86 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Hospitality and Tourism Education, Batam, Indonesia; Panel Forum at International Subject Focus Summit-Hospitality and Tourism- The Way Forward: Hospitality and Tourism Education Convergence with Industry 4.0 in Kuching. Jennifer was also an Invited speaker on Sustainable Human Resource Development in Star Rated Hotels and Rural Tourism in Marco Polo Seminar Series 2019, University of Chester, UK, 30- 31 May 2019; Utilisation and Benefits of Ecotourism of Wetlands in 3rd International Symposium on Conservation and Management of Wetlands (ISCMW 2018); Risk Management in Event Planning Invitation in 2nd Asia Pacific Centre for Events Management (APCEM) Conference; Sustainable and Responsible Tourism Practices in Wildlife and Ecotourism Destination: Kinabatangan Beyond 2020: Tourism Perspectives, Good Governance and Ethical Standards of Global Tourism, Hospitality and Restaurant Managers in the 21st Century (Malaysia Setting); Social Transformation of Undeveloped Coastal and Island Communities with OTEC Solutions in Sabah, Malaysia; Sustainable Marine Ecotourism on Turtle Island: Framework and Monitoring in Sustainable Green Marine Tourism, Trends in Customer-Oriented Diversity Service Innovation and Management in the Hospitality Sector: Theoretical Understanding of Service Management, Service Innovation and Research Agenda in 2012, Building Sustainable Tourism Destination and Developing Responsible Tourism: Conceptual Framework, Key Issues and Challenges in International conference on Sustainable Tourism 2010: Prospects and Challenges for India. In academia, Jennifer values delivering high-quality learning experiences to students, accompanied by research findings and publications. Currently, Jennifer has authored more than 100 academic publications; and has won six Best International refereed conference paper awards both as a single author and co-author. She has supervised and successfully graduated 10 PhD and 9 master graduates with one GOT (Graduate-on-Time). More importantly, Jennifer has established strong networks and collaborations with the industry where she initiated and successfully signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Murdoch University, Perth in 2016, Memorandum of Association (MoA) with Kinabatangan Life of Corridor (KiTA) in 2017 to

87 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian collaborate in research and publication; MoU with Kadamaian Tourism Association (KATA), Kiulu Tourism Association (KTA) and Almacrest International College in 2018 to spearhead tourism training and rural tourism research. She has also signed MoUs with tourism and hotel companies namely Borneo Eco Tours and Sukau Rainforest Lodge – Asia’s Leading Green Hotel in 2000 and is the founding person to have a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) signed with Shangri-La’s Tanjung Aru Beach and Spa Resort (international five stars rated hotel) which allowed hotel students to access various in-house training courses in 2001. She founded the Hotel Management Club in 1999 which allows final year hotel students to showcase their knowledge and skills in organizing and serving theme banquet as well as to socialise and network with industry people for future career opportunities. Her contributions to the tourism industry extend to various tourism associations and tourism communities in Sabah to diversify tourism products and to strengthen the quality of tourism experiences. She develops and conducts relevant tourism and languages training, resource audits and tourism value creations for tourism product development with a team of dedicated trainers. Her recent presentation on managing sustainable rural tourism destination was at Kampung Silou-Silou, Kota Belud, Sabah. She was also invited to the Youth Participation talk in Urban and Rural Tourism in Sandakan Sabah initiated by the Ministry of Youth, Culture and Sports Development, Sabah. Throughout more than 10 years of work experiences in the hotel and tourism industry and over 25 years in higher education, her teaching and research focused on various issues within tourism and hospitality management including nature tourism and tourism, protected areas, sustainable and responsible tourism management, hospitality, human resource management and tourism marketing including tourist behaviour, product development and service experience. Another stream of research addresses methodological issues including using multi-methods and data triangulation, mixed methods research and qualitative method. A special focus is given to issues of destination safety and risk in the context of tourism. Her

88 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach academic work consists of both theoretical conceptualization and empirical studies. The latter is mostly based on qualitative methods, but also include surveys and quantitative analyses as well. Throughout her research work, Jennifer’s innovation and knowledge discoveries include: 1. Training courses for Hotel and Hospitality Supervisory Certificates (recognized by in Prolus Programme by Ministry of Human Resource under the Resource Development Fund), 1998 –1999 • Supervisory Certificate in Hotel Operations – 4 months • Supervisory Certificate in Food, Beverage & Catering Management – 6 months • Executive Certificate in Hospitality Marketing –1 1/2 months 2. Module for Managing Hotel Services and Tourism (2008) for SEDCO 3. Perception Profile for Ecolodge Accommodation (PhD thesis, in 2005) 4. Internet Framework for Small and Medium Size Accommodation Business Sector (Best Paper Award in 2008) 5. Sustainable Volunteer Tourism Programme Framework

In research and consultation, Jennifer has undertaken a wide range of tourism research and consultation projects funded by both private and government sectors from local, national and international. Her recent research focuses on Geopark as Sustainable Geo-Tourism Destination: Value Creation and Sustainable Model, Developing and Promoting Sustainable River Tourism Products and Services along Petagas-Putatan River and Civil Society Participation and Sustainable Regional Development. Her previous and current research and consultancy works include: • Study on Empowering the Women and Youth in Sabah to Achieve their full Economy and Social Potential, UNEP, 2019 – 2020 • Rural Tourism Training and Development Program for Marais Centre, Tenom, Sabah Tourism Board, 2019

89 Inaugural Lecture | Prof. Dr Jennifer Chan Kim Lian

• Rural Tourism and Youth Participation and Leadership in Sustainable Rural Tourism Development and Consumption, 2019 – 2020 • Strategic Plan for Youth Development Plan and Policy for Sabah 2016 – 2020 by the Ministry of Youth and Sports Sabah, 2017 • KESBAN AT SEA-Holistic Security Handbook for ESSZONE, Holistic Security Development and Security for ESSZONE, MIMA, UMS and NKM, 2019 • Salary Analysis for P25, P50 and P75 for Accommodation Sector in Sabah • Tourism Packages Audit for Sabah, Ministry of Tourism Malaysia • Tourism Specific Life-Quality Index Research for Residents and Tourists in Sabah, Ministry of Hungary and Xellum Kft., Budapest • Trainer and Module Development for Managing and Supervision of Budget Hotels and Chalets in Sabah for SVH SEDCOVEST Holding Sdn Bhd, Sabah, Malaysia • Tourism Development in for Labuan Development Authority • Marketing Survey on Tourism Industry in Sabah, Sabah Tourism Board • Tourists/Visitors’ Requirements and Satisfaction Survey, Sabah Tourism Board • A Market Study for Manukan Island for Kinabalu Golf Resorts, Sdn Bhd, Sabah • Tourism Related Economy Development in Lower Kinabatangan, Sabah for the Partners for Wetlands Project, WWF Netherlands

Jennifer received several distinctive accolades for her outstanding performance and contributions. These include the Lifetime Achievement in Tourism and Management Award by Venue International Foundation, Chennai, India on 3 March 2018; UMS Prominent Leadership Excellence Award – Instructor (2016) in 2017 and Professorial Chair Holder – Tourism and Human Capital Development. Jennifer has also been awarded the Anugerah

90 Sustainable Ecotourism Destination Development in Malaysia: An Integrated Approach

Perkhidmatan Cemerlang for her outstanding performance and services in the years 1999, 2000, 2006 and 2012; and Meritorious Service Award, Universiti Malaysia Sabah in the years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2013. She was listed in the Honoured Member of International WHO’S WHO Professional (Testament to the professional, academic and civic achievement of the member), 2000; received Savoy Educational Trust Scholarship, 2005 – The Scottish Hotel School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, and Dean’s List – MBA 1988 – 1989, Monterey Institute of International Studies, California, USA, 7 May 1989. Externally, Jennifer is an active article reviewer for high impact and Scopus tourism and hospitality journals; editorial board member for The Routledge Handbook of Tourism Experience Management and Marketing (TRHTEMM), editor for IGI Global- book, Global Opportunities and Challenges for Rural and Mountain Tourism, an editorial board member for the Journal review panel for Electronic Journal of Business Research Method, Journal of Tourism and Recreation, International Journal of Qualitative Research in Services; Journal of Hospitality Management and Tourism. Past editorial board member of Editorial team for Heliyon online journal. Editorial board for World Journal of Tourism Small Business Management, World Journal of Tourism Small Business Management, World Journal of Eco-tourism, Asian Journal of Business Research and editor-in-chief for the Tourism Educators Association of Malaysia (TEAM) Journal for Tourism and Hospitality.

91