The Case of Maze National Park, Ethiopia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Vol. 8(3), pp. 25-31, March, 2017 DOI: 10.5897/JHMT2015.0159 Article Number: 88319EC63381 Journal of Hospitality Management and ISSN 2141-6575 Copyright © 2017 Tourism Author(s) retain the copyright of this article http://www.academicjournals.org/JHMT Full Length Research Paper Assessing protected areas for ecotourism development: The case of Maze National Park, Ethiopia Henok Bekele1*, Endalkachew Teshome2 and Mulugeta Asteray2 1Arba Minch University, Arba Minch, Ethiopia. 2University of Gondar, Ethiopia. Received 15 June, 2015; Accepted 18 January, 2016 Ecotourism is growing niche market with the potential of being sustainable development tool in protected areas. Ecotourism development needs preliminary assessment of the destination resources. This study was done with the objective of assessing ecotourism potential of Maze National Park for ecotourism development. The study used survey research design. Structured questionnaires and structured key informant interviews were used to collect data. Target population of the study was tourism experts. Samples are selected purposefully to gather genuine information from relevant respondents. The result showed that Maze National Park has high ecotourism potential in terms of its natural features, but it has moderate potential regarding provision of site infrastructure and human resource features. The local community residing in the vicinity of the national park has low potential of tangible cultural features but possesses various intangible cultural features which can attract tourists. Hence, the national park has good potential for ecotourism development. Key words: Ecotourism, Protected Area, Maze National Park, Ethiopia INTRODUCTION Ecotourism is one of the most contested subjects in development (EGA, 2008). It was developed as an Tourism literatures. It is an object of intense scrutiny, alternative to preservationist approaches to park debate and controversy (Weaver, 1998). The specific management that had marginalized local communities origins of “Ecotourism” have been variously traced back and fueled conflicts (Honey, 2008). In addition, García- to Hetzer in 1965, Miller in 1978 and Ceballos-Lascuráin Herrera (2011) stated that the existence of ecotourism in 1983 (Page and Dowling, 2002). A study by Fennel derive is originated not only from a tourism demand of (2001), unearthed 85 definitions of the term ecotourism, approaching nature, but also from its active use as a which premised on the variables of conservation, conservation tool in protected areas, since it implies education, culture, benefits to locals and reference to obtaining certain benefits for the conservation of the where ecotourism occurs. protected areas. The major drive for the creation of ecotourism concept The International Ecotourism Society defined was the growing concerns about the negative ecotourism as a "responsible travel to natural areas that environmental and socio-economic effects of tourism conserves the environment, sustains the well-being of the *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]. Authors agree that this article remain permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International License 26 J. Hosp. Manage. Tourism local people, and involves interpretation and education" Therefore, the potential of protected areas for (TIES, 2015). It is promoted as an alternative, low impact ecotourism development should be assessed before form of tourism to natural areas (Charnley, 2005). It is developing and promoting the destination as ecotourism also considered as a solution for decreasing site. Resource assessment for ecotourism development environmental and socio-economic problems and as a requires preliminary reconnaissance of the potentially sustainable development tool in ecologically sensitive relevant resources, and the categorization and weighting areas (Neba, 2010). of them according to their attractiveness for the purpose Ecotourism may not always result in environmental and of ecotourism (Fagence, 2001). In this study, the economic contribution, but it may also result in negative ecotourism potential is assessed in terms of site impacts. Studies conducted in protected areas revealed characteristics which include natural features, cultural that eco-tourism contributes to the protection of features, human resource features and site infrastructure biodiversity, supports the welfare of local people, reduces needed on the site to support visitor comfort. the negative environmental and cultural effects, promotes minimum use of non-renewable resources, and provides job opportunities for local people (Poiani et al., 1998; MATERIALS AND METHODS Yucel, 2002 and Daniel et al. 2005). This does not mean that, there are no potential threats. If it is not properly The study used both qualitative and quantitative method. As managed, it may lead to economic fluctuation, tourism Onwuegbuzie and Johnson (2006) cited from Onwuegbuzie and Leech (2004), mixed methods help to bridge the schism between industry instability, environmental degradation, increased quantitative and qualitative research. Spratt et al. (2004) also stated control by outsiders, cultural distortions, and diminished that mixed method provide more comprehensive answers to visitor experience (Drumm and Moore, 2005). research questions, going beyond the limitations of a single Ecotourism activities are directly related to natural approach. resources and many of these activities take place in Survey research design was used to assess resource potential of Maze National Park for ecotourism development, because it protected areas (Nuva and Shamsudin, 2009). Protected describes the state of affair as it exists at present (Kothari, 2004). areas are increasingly viewed as a critical component of The data were collected from both primary and secondary sources. a life support system, and expected to do more – The primary data were collected from 37 tourism experts while the ecologically, socially and economically – than they ever secondary data were collected from journals, books, web sites and have before (Ervin et al., 2010). They are primarily set up official documents. The respondents were purposefully sampled to prevent the exploitation of wildlife and environment, for based on their expertise related to tourism. Structured questionnaires and structured key informant interviews were used the purpose of recreation, and as a means of scientific to collect data from the respondents. The researcher also made study (Fennell, 2001). They are also believed to be the personal observation on tourism resources of the national park. major tourism assets for developing countries, because Structured questionnaires were written in Likert scale on the bases they can provide sustainable benefit to the local of 1 to 5 scales of strongly disagree, disagree, undecided, agree communities while funding the safeguarding and and strongly agree options. rehabilitation of the protected areas (Pananjay et al., Analyses of quantitative data were made using statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS) version 16 and Microsoft excel 2010. 2011). Mean value of each item is provided to show agreement or Africa’s natural resources, landscapes, wildlife and disagreement of the respondents and the total average mean value protected areas established the very basis of its growing of the group is described for a group as a whole to generalize the tourism sector. National parks and other protected areas items. Mean score greater than three describes agreement of the in Africa are iconic places and they are protected respondents; while, mean value less than three describes disagreement of the respondents. Qualitative data analysis followed because of their importance in conserving biodiversity, steps of data reduction (selecting, focusing, simplifying, abstracting, attractive scenery, indigenous culture, unspoiled nature transforming), data display (organizing, compressing), and and pleasant climate (UNWTO, 2008). Tourism uses conclusion drawing (Miles and Huberman, 1994). these free resources, that when packaged can be used for tourism consumption. Thus, ecotourism creates that opportunity. Description of the study area East African countries are well known for their protected areas and ecotourism development, which draws global Maze National Park is located at 06°03'N /37°40'E (SNNPR, 2002). It is found in Gamo Gofa Zone, South Nations Nationalities and attention of tourists that love to enjoy nature. Ethiopia is Peoples Region (SNNPR), Ethiopia. It is located 460 km south west among these countries which are endowed with diverse of Addis Ababa. Formerly the national park was set as controlled tourism resources. In Ethiopia, protected areas cover a hunting area, then transformed to wildlife reserve and finally total area of 193, 600 km2, which is approximately 16.5% established as national park in 2005. It is one of the wildlife of the total land area of the country (IBC, 2005). With a conservation areas known for its good population of the critically plan to be one of the top five tourism destinations in endangered endemic Swayne’s Hartebeests. It covers an area of 202 km2 (Young, 2012). Africa, Ethiopia incorporated ecotourism as essential The park is covered by savannah grassland with scattered policy issue and tourism development strategy (MoCT, deciduous broad leave trees as well as riverine forests along the 2009). main watercourses. It has large savannah habitat which supports a Bekele et al. 27 Figure 1. Location