TOURISM and BIODIVERSITY Mapping Tourism’S Global Footprint

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY Mapping Tourism’s Global Footprint

Costas Christ Oliver Hillel Seleni Matus Jamie Sweeting Conservation International (CI) 1919 M Street, NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20036

Tel: 202.912.1000 Fax 202.912.1026 Web site: www.conservation.org

About the Authors

Costas Christ is the Senior Director for Ecotourism at Conservation International (CI). He is responsible for overseeing CI’s ecotourism projects and activities worldwide. An international expert on tourism and conservation, he spent 18 years living and working in Africa, Asia, and Central America as a wildlife researcher, tourism planner, and university instructor. His articles on ecotourism and adventure travel have appeared in numerous publications, including e New York Times, International Herald Tribune, and London Sunday Times. He is a founding member of e International Ecotourism Society and served as Chairman of the Board of Directors.

Oliver Hillel served as Tourism Programme Coordinator at the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) from 2000 to 2003, where he was responsible for coordinating UNEP’s tourism activities. He played a key role in the United Nations International Year of Ecotourism, including the World Ecotourism Summit. He has worked on tourism planning in his native Brazil and has provided technical support to ecotourism projects in several other countries. He is now based in the Philippines working on a sustainable tourism management plan for the island of Palawan.

Seleni Matus is the Ecotourism Manager for the Americas region at CI, where she provides technical and capacity-building support in the use of ecotourism as a key conservation strategy. Previously, she worked at Programme for Belize, a leading Belizean NGO responsible for the management of the Rio Bravo Conservation Area, where she managed the organization’s ecotourism operations. She was instrumental in the establishment of the Mesoamerican Ecotourism Alliance (Belize, Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico), serving as a founding member and its first President.

Jamie Sweeting is the Director of Travel and Leisure at e Center for Environmental Leadership in Business at CI. He works with leading tourism companies to integrate conservation principles into their day-to-day operations and to influence the planning and management of key tourism destinations. He is a coauthor of “e Green Host Effect—An Integrated Approach to Sustainable Tourism and Resort Development,” “A Practical Guide to Good Practice—Managing Environmental and Social Issues in the Accommodation Sector,” and “A Shifting Tide—Environmental Challenges & Cruise Ship Industry Responses.” TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY Mapping Tourism’s Global Footprint Acknowledgments e Tourism and Biodiversity research project was led by the Ecotourism Department of Conservation International (CI) in collaboration with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and CI’s Center for Applied Biodiversity Science (CABS) and the Center for Environmental Leadership in Business (CELB). A variety of individuals and organizations played a key role as partners and supporters including the following:

• Dilys Roe at the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) for her important written contributions; • Katrina Brandon, Mark Denil, John Pilgram, Mike Hoffman, Rob Waller, and Vineet Katariya at CABS for reviewing the text and designing the maps; • Noah Wasserman at CI’s Ecotourism Department for creating the CD-ROM tool; and • Yuri Toroptsov at UNEP’s Tourism Programme for first-draft contributions.

Appreciation is also extended to Dr. Martha Honey, executive director, Center for Ecotourism and Sustainable Development in Washington, D.C., and Professor Ralf Buckley, International Centre for Ecotourism Reaseach, Griffith University, Australia, for providing peer-review feedback.

Chapter three draws upon a UNEP report written by Dr. Auliana Poon, Tourism Intelligence Consulting; Dr. Donald Hawkins; and Kristin Lamoreux, Hawkins and Associates.

Tourism data were supplied by the World Tourism Organization (WTO) and the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC). We are particularly grateful to Eugenio Yunis, Antonio Massieu, and Augusto Huescar of WTO and Richard Dickinson of WTTC.

Funding was provided by Conservation International and its Center for Environmental Leadership in Business, the United Nations Environment Programme, and the U.K. Foreign and Commonwealth Office through its Sustainable Tourism Initiative.

e authors wish to extend their sincere gratitude and appreciation to the above organizations and individuals for their contributions to this publication.

ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT iii Contents

Acknowledgments ...... ii Foreword ...... v Executive Summary ...... vi Introduction ...... viii

1. e International Tourism Industry: Opportunities and reats for Biodiversity Conservation ...... 1 1.1 e Growth of the International Tourism Industry ...... 1 1.2 Biodiversity Considerations ...... 2 1.3 Conservation International’s Priority-Setting Mechanisms: Biodiversity Hotspots, 1.3 Wilderness Areas, and Coral Reef Hotspots ...... 3 1.4 Tourism Development and Biodiversity Conservation: Linkages and Disconnects ...... 4

2. Mapping Tourism’s Global Footprint: Impacts on Biodiversity and Local Livelihoods ...... 9 2.1 e Maps ...... 9 2.2 Is Tourism Significant in Biodiversity Hotspot Countries? ...... 9 2.3 Tourism, Biodiversity, and Poverty Reduction ...... 15 2.4 Analyzing the Maps to Assess Impacts ...... 19

3. Key Decisionmakers Regarding Tourism and Biodiversity Conservation ...... 25 3.1 e Decisionmaking Process for Tourism Development ...... 26 3.2 Governments ...... 27 3.3 Private Sector ...... 29 3.4 Development Agencies ...... 34 3.5 Local Residents in Tourism Destinations ...... 35 3.6 Other Major Players ...... 36

4. Conclusion ...... 41

References and Resources ...... 43 Links ...... 46 Data Sets ...... 48 Index of Maps

Map 1: Hotspots, Wilderness Areas, and Coral Reef Hotspots ...... 5 Map 2: International Arrivals Circa 2000 ...... 10 Map 3: Regional Tourist Arrivals 1995 ...... 11 Map 4: Average Annual Growth 1990–2000 ...... 12 Map 5: Regional Tourist Arrivals—Projections for 2020 ...... 14 Map 6: International Tourism Receipts Circa 2000 ...... 15 Map 7: Tourism as a Percentage of Gross Domestic Product 1999 ...... 16 Map 8: UNDP Human Development Index 2000 ...... 18 Map 9: Arrivals as a Percentage of Population ...... 19 Map 10: Freshwater Resources per Capita 2000 ...... 20 Map 11: Hotels and Other Facilities—Rooms Circa 2000 ...... 22 Map 12: Hotels and Other Facilities—Occupancy Rates Circa 2000 ...... 23

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT iii TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT v Foreword by Russell A. Mittermeier, President of Conservation International

ccording to the World Travel and Tourism Council, ese same areas are home to more than 1 billion people, Atourism and its related economic activities generate 11 many of them living below the poverty level. Examples percent of Global Domestic Product, employ 200 million of the highest priority hotspots include the Caribbean, people, and transport nearly 700 million international Mesoamerica, the Tropical Andes, the Atlantic Forest travelers per year. is figure is expected to double by 2020. Region of Eastern Brazil, Madagascar and adjacent Indian Tourism also represents one of the top five exports for 83 Ocean Islands, the Cape Floristic Region of South Africa, percent of all countries and is the main source of foreign the Mediterranean, the Philippines, and Sundaland (west- currency for 38 percent of countries. Simply put, tourism ern Indonesia and Malaysia). e high biodiversity wilder- is one of the largest, perhaps the largest, industry on our ness areas are also rich in endemic species but, in contrast planet. to the hotspots, are still largely intact. ey are particularly In the last decade, nature and adventure travel has important for the world’s remaining indigenous people emerged as one of the fastest-growing segments of this and include regions like Amazonia, the island of New industry. From cruise ships plying the unspoiled islands Guinea, the Congo Forests of Central Africa, the great of the Indian Ocean, where some of the rarest plants and Miombo-Mopane Woodlands and Grasslands of Southern animals on Earth are found, to groups of travelers, young Africa (including the Okavango Delta), and the Deserts and old alike, trekking into the cloud rain forests of Costa of the Southwestern United States and Northern Mexico. Rica, more and more tourists are seeking out nature and As should be obvious, most of these high-priority areas for the thrill of exploring remote, wild places. It is interesting biodiversity are also key regions for tourism development, to note, especially in these times, that tourism has contin- often in large part because of the wonderful and unique ued to expand rapidly during the past half century, despite species and ecosystems that they harbor. a steady succession of revolutions and civil wars. Even At this time in our history, we find ourselves at a following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New crossroads in many of these hotspots and wilderness areas, York City and Washington, DC, and other international where the last strongholds of biodiversity, the make-or- terrorist incidents since, the World Tourism Organization break world of basic survival for millions of people, and reports that global tourism has continued to grow, even if the ever-expanding world of tourism meet. How tourism at a somewhat slower pace than before. Tourism has repeat- grows and develops is therefore of great consequence to the edly shown itself to be an incredibly resilient industry that future of biodiversity conservation, as well as to the local bounces back quickly and then surges ahead again. people whose lives its growth will impact. “Tourism and At Conservation International, we see tourism as both Biodiversity: Mapping Tourism’s Global Footprint” is a an opportunity for conserving nature and a threat if it is two-year research project that was conducted in partner- done improperly. For more than a decade, our strategy has ship with the United Nations Environment Programme. It been to concentrate our efforts on the highest priority areas grew out of a sense of urgency about the need to minimize for biodiversity conservation, a focus that has emphasized tourism’s negative impacts and simultaneously maximize its both biodiversity hotspots and high biodiversity wilderness positive contributions to nature protection and the quality areas in the terrestrial realm and, more recently, a series of of life of local people. By linking tourism with biodiversity high priority marine areas as well. e biodiversity hotspots conservation and the well-being of local communities and are Earth’s richest and most endangered terrestrial systems. understanding how and where they overlap, we can develop ey once covered more than 12 percent of Earth’s land strategies that both conserve Earth’s most endangered surface but have cumulatively lost nearly 90 percent of ecosystems and make a significant contribution to alleviat- their original natural vegetation. What remains in them ing poverty at the same time. Many challenges lie ahead now accounts for only 1.4 percent of our planet’s terrestrial in making this a reality but so too do great opportunities. environment, but they harbor more than 44 percent of With this publication, we hope to make a contribution to all plants and 35 percent of mammals, birds, reptiles, and charting the way forward. amphibians as endemics found absolutely nowhere else.

Left: A diver hovers over a giant barrel sponge on Grand Cayman Island’s north wall.

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT v Executive Summary

ourism is often described as the world’s “big- In a growing number of instances, tourism delivers Tgest” industry on the basis of its contribution to scarce funds for conservation and provides local people global gross domestic product (GDP), the number of with an economic incentive to protect biodiversity. jobs it generates, and the number of clients it serves. Tourism also offers an alternative to potentially dam- e scale of the industry and the rate at which it con- aging forms of development such as mining, logging, tinues to grow present both opportunities and threats or consumptive use of wildlife. However, the relation- for biodiversity conservation. ship between tourism and biodiversity is not always Biodiversity is essential to human development positive, particularly when tourism development because of the goods and services it provides. An occurs without management standards and guidelines estimated 40 percent of the global economy is based in place that seek to promote biodiversity conservation on biological products and processes. However, on a and deliver tangible benefits to local communities. global scale, biodiversity is being lost at a rate many Using Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and times higher than that of natural extinction. is maps to illustrate the geographical overlap between is caused by a number of factors, including uncon- tourism development (and growth) and biodiversity trolled land conversion, climate change, pollution, hotspots, as well as areas of low human development, unsustainable harvesting of natural resources, and the this report highlights the following key issues: introduction of invasive species. So great is the con- • Although most biodiversity is concentrated in the cern over the rate of decline, and its implications for South,1 many major tourism destinations in the human welfare, that biodiversity was identified as one North (e.g., the Mediterranean, the California of the five priority areas for the 2002 World Summit coast, Florida Keys) are biodiversity hotspots. on Sustainable Development. • An increasing number of biodiversity hotspot To determine priority areas where biodiversity loss countries in the South are experiencing very rapid is a serious concern, Conservation International has tourism growth: 23 of them record over 100 per- identified a series of biodiversity “hotspots.” ese cent growth in the last 10 years, and more than 50 hotspots represent priority areas for urgent conserva- percent of these receive over 1 million international tion action on a global scale. ey are also useful for tourists per year; 13 percent of biodiversity hotspot looking at the impact of tourism on biodiversity. countries receive over 5 million international tourists per year. • While receiving fewer tourists overall than the North, many biodiversity-rich countries of the South receive large numbers of tourists. irteen of them (Argentina, Brazil, Cyprus, the Dominican Republic, India, Indonesia, Macao, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, South Africa, ailand, and Vietnam) receive over 2 million foreign visitors per year. • More than one-half of the world’s poorest 15 countries fall within the biodiversity hotspots, and in all of these, tourism is already significant or is forecast to increase. Orangutan, Tanjung Puting National Park, Indonesia.

vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT vii • In a number of biodiversity hotspot developing countries (e.g., Madagascar, Costa Rica, Belize, etc.) biodiversity is the major tourism attraction. • Forecasts suggest that tourism will become increasingly important in biodiversity hotspot countries—particularly in Southeast Asia—and will require careful planning to avoid negative impacts on biodiversity. Tourism, when properly managed and directed, can contribute to biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction, both directly by capitalizing on biodiversity assets and indirectly by reducing the vulnerability of the poor to environmental degradation through biodi- Adventure tourist hiking in the Galapagos. versity conservation. e maps in this report are a useful tool for to poverty reduction requires strong and coopera- examining some of the potential impacts of tourism tive partnerships among the different stakeholders development. For example, plotting the ratio of foreign and decisionmakers involved in tourism develop- visitors to local residents shows that tourism pressure ment. ese stakeholders include national and local can be extraordinarily high in some countries, with governments, local communities, the private sector, the number of tourists outnumbering local residents and funding organizations in cooperation with civil in certain places. is information can be used in society. e development “triad” of the public sector, conjunction with other data to highlight potential the private sector, and civil society is as essential for environmental impacts. Plotting the availability of tourism development as it is for any aspect of sustain- fresh water against tourist arrivals shows that in some able development. countries where water is already very limited and tour- is report outlines a series of recommenda- ism pressure is very high, proper planning and effec- tions specific to each stakeholder group that may be tive watershed management are essential to prevent involved in the process of tourism development. e continued growth of tourism from adversely affecting recommendations for enhancing the contribution freshwater availability for local residents and wetland of tourism to biodiversity conservation and poverty ecosystems. reduction build upon other guidelines, such as the In this regard, tourism development is a com- Quebec Declaration on Ecotourism, the United plex interaction among many actors. Most tourism Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) development is driven by the private sector, but the Draft Guidelines for Sustainable Tourism in Sensitive establishment and development of facilities are also Ecosystems, and the Cairns Charter on Partnerships heavily dependent on resources strategically allocated in Ecotourism. by multi- and bilateral development agencies, through agreements with national and local governments. Endnotes 1ere are many different ways of differentiating between the countries of the world. e term Other stakeholders also have important roles, but “ird World” is often used to describe poorer countries but can be interpreted as patronizing and inappropriate by some. e terms “South” and “North” are commonly used in development their actual contribution depends on their ability to literature to differentiate between the industrialized OECD and Central and Eastern European states (“the North”) and the less- or nonindustrialized states (“the South”). From a geographical influence the central players. Effective management perspective, there are some obvious anomalies–for example, the less-industrialized African Sahelian countries are north of the equator, and the more industrialized Australia and New Zealand are south of tourism to conserve biodiversity while contributing of the equator. Another term widely used to describe less- or nonindustrialized states is “developing countries.” In this report, both developing countries and South and North are used.

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT vii Introduction cific contexts. is report is the outcome of Phase I of his project, led by Conservation International the project—the global overview. e results of Phase T(CI) in partnership with the United Nations II, a meta-analysis of peer-reviewed case studies analyz- Environment Programme (UNEP), aims to illustrate ing the direct relationship between tourism and biodi- the overlap between tourism development (present and versity, will be published separately. It is also expected forecasted) and the biodiversity hotspots, in order to that the mapping techniques developed as a part of this highlight tourism-related opportunities and threats research project can be applied at the regional and con- for biodiversity conservation and improved human servation corridor levels to provide additional insight welfare. e project was developed on the basis of two and further recommendations for action. hypotheses: Methods 1. Tourism development is growing in or near biodiversity hotspots. To explore the relationship between tourism develop- 2. Tourism development implemented according to ment, biodiversity conservation, and poverty reduction the principles of sustaining the environment, con- at the global level, a series of maps were produced plot- serving nature, and contributing to the well-being ting tourism and socioeconomic data against priority of local peoples will have a net positive or a neutral biodiversity areas defined by CI’s “hotspot” strategy. impact on biodiversity. e aim of this mapping exercise has been to explore To explore these hypotheses, a planning workshop was whether tourism is increasing in high-biodiversity areas held at CI in Washington, DC, at which it was decided and, given that the majority of biodiversity hotspots that two levels of analysis were required: first, a global fall in the South, whether tourism is a potential tool overview of the trends in tourism development—partic- for poverty reduction. For this exercise, largely for the ularly in relation to biodiversity hotspots; and second, reasons discussed under “Data Limitations” below, a series of nature tourism case studies that explore in tourism and socioeconomic data were aggregated at the depth the relationship between tourism development, national level only. e maps thus provide a broad level biodiversity conservation, and poverty reduction in spe- of analysis and serve to illustrate global and regional trends only. ey are not intended to analyze the links between tourism, biodiversity, and local livelihoods within any specific country or to provide definitive conclusions as to the nature and scale of interactions. e maps are intended to raise awareness among key decisionmakers and planners as to the opportunities and threats of tourism as an engine for both biodiversity conservation and economic development.

Data Limitations Priority biodiversity areas are defined by CI’s hotspots strategy. Hotspots are the leading, but not the only, mechanism for identifying important biodiversity areas for this study.2 For instance, although Botswana is both a case study for the role of tourism in conservation and a well-established destination, it is not categorized as Arboreal frog, Guinea.

viii INTRODUCTION TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT ix Tourist traffic inside Ngorongoro Crater Conservation Area, Tanzania. a “hotspot” country. e tourism data used here are scope of the data collected. Finally, socioeconomic data mainly derived from the World Tourism Organization from various sources are used, including the United (WTO) and focus on international flows of tourists, Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the rather than on their activities or on the development of World Bank. For many data sets, significant gaps exist infrastructure necessary to support those flows—either in the country coverage. of which may have positive or negative impacts on biodiversity. In addition, the data do not capture the vol- CD-ROM Mapping Tool ume of domestic tourism. In Europe, the world’s lead- Included with this publication, CI has developed ing international destination, domestic tourism is esti- an accompanying CD-ROM mapping tool. Using mated by the European Environment Agency (EEA) ArcExplorer software, users can both look at the data to be seven times the volume of international arrivals tables that were compiled from many different sources (EEA 2002), and WTO’s estimates are as high as 10 and view the data in Geographic Information System times. Economic data on tourism are supplied by the (GIS) map format. It is our hope that tourism plan- World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC); much of ners, managers, and researchers will be able to use this the information is derived from models, and opinion tool to prioritize the implementation of positive is mixed as to what should and should not be included tourism-management actions in those areas with the within the definition of the tourism industry. Tourism most biodiversity and in greatest need for human is not included as a sector in the international system development. of national accounts. “Tourism Satellite Accounts” have been developed to address this problem and to Endnotes capture tourism data but still have limitations in the 2is issue is discussed further in Chapter 1.

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT ix TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 1 Chapter 1 The International Tourism Industry: Opportunities and Threats for Biodiversity Conservation

1.1 The Growth of the International Today tourism is often described Tourism Industry as the world’s “biggest” industry Since the Second World War, the on the basis of its contribution growth of international tourism has to global gross domestic product been phenomenal. Annual tourist (GDP), the number of jobs it gener- arrivals worldwide increased from ates, and the number of clients it 25 million in 1950 to 450 million serves (see Box 1). However, these in 1990. Between 1969 and 1979, conclusions are based largely on the World Bank encouraged devel- arrivals statistics, which focus on Above: Walking tour through the rural villages of oping countries to invest in tourism international tourism and therefore Tuscany, Italy. as a strategy for attracting foreign hide the significance of domestic Left: A wild cheetah adapts to the presence of investment, and the governments of tourism. ese statistics may also tourists by using a vehicle as a hunting lookout in developing countries began to see underestimate regional tourists Kenya’s Maasai Mara Game Reserve. tourism as a means to redistribute traveling by land rather than air resources from North to South. or sea. e WTO estimates that In the words of the World the ratio of domestic to interna- Tourism Organization (WTO), tional tourism is as high as 10: tourism became “one of the most 1—although this varies hugely The tourism industry was important economic, social, cul- from country to country (WTO tural and political phenomena of 1997). e size of the industry considered by some to be a the twentieth century” (Ceballos- and its rate of growth present both more reliable source of foreign Lascurain 1996). opportunities and threats for biodiversity conservation. “exchange than minerals, raw materials, cash crops and Box 1: The World’s Biggest Industry? manufactured goods, which had Statistics produced by the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC) indicate that tourism increasingly unstable prices. generates 11 percent of global GDP,3 employs 200 million people, and transports nearly 700 million international travelers per year—a figure that is expected to double by 2020. Tourism was also seen as an According to the World Tourism Organization, international tourism exceptional opportunity to valorize • accounts for 36 percent of trade in commercial services in advanced economies and national culture, wildlife and 66 percent in developing economies; • constitutes 3–10 percent of GDP in advanced economies and up to 40 percent in unique natural features. developing economies; • generated US$464 billion in tourism receipts in 2001; (Ghimire 1997). • Is one of the top five exports for 83 percent of countries and the main source of foreign currency for at least 38 percent of countries. ”

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 1 1.2 Biodiversity Considerations or are not appropriately valued e Convention on Biological in economic terms. However, Diversity (CBD) defines biodiver- the combined economic value of sity as “the variability among living 17 ecosystem services has been organisms from all sources includ- estimated at US$16.54 trillion ing, inter alia, terrestrial, marine per year (Costanza et al. 1997). and other aquatic ecosystems and Furthermore, one of the Working the ecological complexes of which Groups for the World Summit on they are part; this includes diver- Sustainable Development (WSSD) sity within species, between species reported that an estimated 40 and of ecosystems” (CBD 1992). percent of the global economy is e common understanding of the based on biological products and term “biodiversity” is all the living processes (WEHAB Working things on Earth and the ecological Group 2002). processes associated with them. UNEP’s Global Environmental

At work building a rain forest canopy walkway Vermeulen and Koziell (2002) Outlook (GEO) report on the for tourists in Ghana. note that, as such, biodiversity can state of the global environment be, and is, used as a synonym for (UNEP 2002) highlights that, on “nature” or “life on Earth.” Often a global scale, biodiversity is being lost in discussions of biodiversity lost at a rate many times higher is the emphasis on the variability than that of natural extinction. and variety within species, among is loss is due to land conver- species, and among the ecological sion, climate change, pollution, processes, and the key benefits unsustainable harvesting of natural The immense value of this these bring to humans in the form resources, and the introduc- of choice—both in the present and tion of invasive species. Human vast resource remains largely in the future. population growth, together with unrecognized….Loss of Biodiversity is essential to unsustainable patterns of con- human development because of sumption, increasing production of “biodiversity results in serious the goods and services it provides. waste and pollutants, urban devel- reductions in the goods…and Components of biodiversity may opment, and international conflict, be used directly as food, medi- further contributes to biodiversity services…that the Earth’s cine, building materials, and so loss. Over the past three decades, ecosystems can provide and that on. Biodiversity provides more major losses of virtually every kind indirect benefits, in the form of of natural habitat have occurred, make economic prosperity and environmental regulation, soil and the decline and extinction human survival possible. In short, conservation, and pollution con- of species have emerged as major trol. It also has what economists environmental issues. Although biodiversity is the very basis for refer to as “non-use values”—for insufficient information is available sustainable development. example, the simple enjoyment or to determine precisely how many “existence value” of some aspects of species have become extinct in the biodiversity and the option to use past 3 decades, about 24 percent (WEHAB Working Group 2002). biological resources in the future. (1,130) of mammals and 12 per- Many of the services biodiversity cent (1,183) of bird species are cur- ” provides are not widely recognized rently regarded as globally threat-

2 CHAPTER 1 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 3 ened. So great is the concern over “Hotspots are regions that harbor CI has also identified 10 coral the rate of decline, and its impli- a great diversity of endemic species reef hotspots. Eight of the 10 are cations for human welfare, that and, at the same time, have been adjacent to terrestrial biodiversity biodiversity was identified as one of significantly impacted and altered hotspots. Extending terrestrial con- the five priority areas for the 2002 by human activities” (Meyers, et. servation efforts seaward in those World Summit on Sustainable al. 2000). places offers an effective and afford- Development (WSSD).4 Plant diversity is the biological able strategy for protecting global A common strategy for biodiver- basis for hotspot designation—to biodiversity. Coral reef hotspots, sity conservation has been identify qualify as a biodiversity hotspot, a many of which receive significant priority areas and focus conserva- region must support at least 1,500 tourism volumes, are also identified tion efforts on those areas. e endemic plant species (0.5 percent in Map 1. international system of national of the global total). Existing An additional and comple- and regional protected areas is a primary vegetation is the basis for mentary terrestrial prioritization clear example of this approach, and assessing human impact in a region, category used by CI is that of wil- it is also implemented through a and a hotspot must have lost 70 derness areas. ree major tropical variety of international agreements: percent or more of its original habi- wilderness areas are shown in Map 1 the Ramsar Convention produces tat. Overall, the hotspots have lost —Amazonia, the Congo Forest a list of Wetlands of International nearly 90 percent of their original of Central Africa, and the island Importance, and the World natural vegetation. of New Guinea. ey are at least Heritage Convention identifies sites e biodiversity hotspots 70 percent intact and are generally of natural heritage considered to be contain 44 percent of all known under less pressure from encroach- of outstanding value. Several inter- endemic plant species and 35 per- ing human populations than are national conservation organizations cent of all known endemic species the biodiversity hotspots, having have also adopted this strategy: of birds, mammals, reptiles, and fewer than five people per square BirdLife International designates amphibians in only 1.4 percent of kilometer. As such, these areas Important Bird Areas (IBAs), the planet’s land area (Meyers, et. are among the last places where based, inter alia, on the presence al. 2000). indigenous people can maintain of globally threatened or endemic Given the great concentration traditional lifestyles. ese wilder- species; and World Wildlife Fund of plant and animal species in such ness areas are among the largest (WWF) has defined a “Global a small and highly threatened ter- remaining tracts of pristine land on 200” set of priority conservation restrial fragment of the world, it Earth but, compared to similarly areas, with the central concept is extremely important that these intact desert, arctic, or boreal being to conserve the broadest vari- areas receive very special conserva- regions, they hold a high propor- ety of the world’s habitats and the tion attention, along with research tion of the planet’s biodiversity. most endangered wildlife. and monitoring to prevent further ey are also of crucial importance extinctions. to climate regulation and watershed 1.3 Conservation International’s Map 1 illustrates the location of protection. Priority-Setting Mechanisms: each of the hotspots. e biodiver- Biodiversity Hotspots, Wilderness sity hotspots span countries of dif- 1.4 Tourism Development and Areas, and Coral Reef Hotspots ferent sizes, economic and resource Biodiversity Conservation: Linkages CI has developed a priority-setting endowments, and social contexts. and Disconnects strategy that focuses its attention Mass tourism, as well as nature- e travel and tourism industry on biodiversity hotspots around the based and adventure tourism, is claims that it is well placed to con- world. CI notes that two factors are a significant revenue generator in tribute to sustainable development considered for hotspot designation: many of these countries. on the grounds that it

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 3 • has less impact on the environ- the past 2 decades, it is reasonable In the South, tourism is often the ment than many other indus- to assume that tourism’s growth overriding justification for govern- tries, in these high biodiversity areas is ments to support the creation of • is based on an enjoyment of the linked to their relatively unique new protected areas. In addition, natural and cultural environ- natural environments. Destroying since the mid-1980s, the trend ment and so is motivated to the environment on which the toward wildlife needing to “pay its protect them, success of the industry is based is way” and for local communities to • can play a positive role in therefore like killing the goose that be actively involved in conservation awareness raising and consumer lays the golden egg. efforts has led to the emergence of education through its vast Tourism can, and sometimes ecotourism as a more responsible distribution channels, and does, make significant contributions form of nature-based travel that • provides an economic incentive to protected-area systems of conser- promotes biodiversity conserva- to protect habitat that might vation. Direct benefits from tourism tion and also brings benefits to otherwise be converted to less to conservation can be clustered in local communities (see Box 2). environmentally friendly land five areas (Brandon 1996): During the seventh session of the uses (WTTC and IHRA 1999). 1. a source of financing for biodi- United Nations Commission on e above points can be made versity conservation, especially Sustainable Development (CSD) equally in relation to tourism’s in legally protected areas; in 1999, UNEP reemphasized potential contribution to biodiver- 2. economic justification for pro- the growing recognition that “the sity conservation, because biodiver- tected areas; involvement of local communities sity is a critical component of the 3. economic alternatives for local in tourism development and opera- natural environment that tourists people to reduce overexploita- tion appears to be one important enjoy. It is true, as this research tion of wildland and wildlife condition for the conservation and project illustrates, that tourism has resources on protected areas; sustainable use of biodiversity.” been growing and increasing partic- 4. constituency-building, which Obligations of donors and govern- ularly in biodiversity hotspots in the promotes biodiversity conserva- ments under the CBD, with its South. Given the rapid growth in tion; and emphasis on sustainable use and nature and adventure travel within 5. an impetus for private biodiver- benefit sharing, have served to the global tourism industry during sity conservation efforts. reinforce this trend, resulting in

Box 2: Ecotourism—Linking Tourism and Biodiversity Conservation

“Ecotourism is an idea, a concept, that is challenging tourism as cal endurance. Nature and adventure tourism focus on what the we have known it. Defined most succinctly as ‘responsible travel tourist is seeking. In contrast, ecotourism is qualitatively differ- to natural areas, that conserves the environment and sustains the ent. It focuses on what the traveler does, plus the impact of this well being of local people,’ ecotourism fundamentally reshapes travel on both the environment and the people in the host country. the basic precepts behind tourism, which is quite simply travel Ecotourism posits that this impact should be positive. Ecotourism undertaken for pleasure. Nature tourism, which is frequently but is not, therefore, simply another niche market within the tourism erroneously considered the same as ecotourism, is defined as industry. Rather, ecotourism is a philosophy, a set of practices travel to unspoiled places to experience and enjoy nature. Its close and principles that, if properly understood and implemented, will cousin, adventure tourism, is described as nature tourism with transform the way we travel.” a kick—nature tourism with a degree of risk taking and physi- (Honey 2002)

4 CHAPTER 1 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 5 Map 1: Hotspots, Major Tropical Wilderness Areas, and Coral Reef Hotspots

Caucasus California Floristic Province Mediterranean Basin Mountains of Southwest China Caribbean Indo- Mesoamerica Burma Western Ghats & Sri Lanka Philippines Guinean Forests Polynesia/Micronesia Chocó-Darién-Western Ecuador of West Africa Eastern Arc Mts & Congo Coastal Forests of Sundaland Amazonia Tanzania & Kenya Brazilian Cerrado Forest Wallacea New Guinea Madagascar & Indian Tropical Andes Ocean Islands Polynesia/Micronesia Atlantic Forest Region New Caledonia Southwest Central Chile Succulent Karoo Australia Cape Floristic Region New Zealand

BIODIVERSITY HOTSPOTS, MAJOR TROPICAL WILDERNESS AREAS, AND CORAL REEF HOTSPOTS Scale: 1/190,000,000 Hotspots Open water Projection: Robinson Data: Conservation International 2002 Major Tropical Wilderness Areas No data for study year Cartography: M. Denil Coral Reef Hotspot Areas © CI 2003

the CBD Guidelines on Sustainable emerged as a more responsible form contribute to conservation and Tourism in Vulnerable Ecosystems, of mass tourism development (see community development in the approved in the convention’s Box 3). In the past, traditional areas being developed. Scientific and Technical advisory mass tourism developments have It might be expected that body in March 2003. been a major threat to biodiversity tourism development following Communities that receive conservation because management the principles associated with significant income from tourism controls and effective planning ecotourism would go hand in hand may be motivated to conserve bio- mechanisms have been lacking. with biodiversity conservation and diversity. However, if benefits are Drawing from the concepts of improvements in rural livelihoods. small—or not sufficiently linked ecotourism, namely that tourism In many instances, tourism has with conservation inputs—they should “conserve the environment been instrumental in delivering may be reinvested in activities that and sustain the well-being of local scarce funds for conservation undermine biodiversity conserva- people” (TIES 1991), sustain- and providing local people with tion such as livestock rearing able tourism seeks to minimize an economic incentive to protect (WCPA 2000). the negative footprint of tourism biodiversity from other, potentially Sustainable tourism has developments and at the same time more damaging forms of develop-

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 5 Box 3: Sustainable Tourism and Biodiversity Conservation

Sustainable tourism (which draws on the principles of ecotourism) can directly contribute to biodiversity conservation by: • offering less destructive livelihood alternatives to local communities and landowners in buffer zones and conservation corridors, away from unregulated logging, intensive cattle-ranching, monoculture, hunting, and unsustainable tourism; • providing an incentive for public and private landowners in critical ecosystems to permanently conserve biodiversity-rich properties, by offering revenue-producing, low-impact economic use; • providing protected-area managers with additional financial resources from visitation and donations; and • raising visitor awareness, promoting community involvement and interest in conservation issues, and generating political support for conservation through environmental education during travel.

Atlantic Forest, Brazil.

ment such as mining, logging, often leading to deforestation The role of tourism in or consumptive use of wildlife. and drainage of wetlands. Such Maintaining an attractive resource habitat disruption can result in biodiversity conservation base has in turn continued to significant loss of biodiversity. is especially significant in attract more tourists and sup- e problem is exacerbated by the port a healthy tourism industry, fact that a lot of tourism occurs in “Southern nations because thus generating more funds for fragile areas (e.g., coastal zones, many Southern nations have conservation. A mutually support- mountains, protected areas) or ing circle of success can develop. areas of high biodiversity. particularly rich biodiversity However, this positive relationship e very nature of the main- but…protected area agencies is not always the case, particularly stay product of the tourism indus- where tourism development occurs try—sand, sea, and sun—high- with few funds and little without management standards lights the fact that the industry is political power. Northern and guidelines that seek to pro- very dependent on coastal areas. mote conservation of nature and Alongside increasing urbanization tourism can provide incentives deliver tangible benefits to local and industrialization, UNEP’s communities. Global Environment Outlook to conserve biodiversity Moreover, whatever the form (GEO) report notes that uncon- through foreign exchange and of tourism developed, infrastruc- trolled, mass tourism is one of ture and facilities for the tourism the root causes behind coastal economic opportunities for industry usually require signifi- degradation today (UNEP 2002). Southern governments and cant tracts of land and building As well as its direct environmental materials. Tourism development impacts, resource depletion can local communities. regularly takes place in a rapid also have indirect socioeconomic and unplanned manner, resulting effects, as essential resources (Buckley 2002) in total landscape transformation become scarce for local people. ” in a very short period of time, e World Conservation Union

6 CHAPTER 1 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 7 (IUCN) notes that this can, in cardboard, aluminum and steel Mountains are also popular turn, have additional negative cans are processed onboard through locations for tourism and, because impacts on biodiversity, by concen- crushing, reuse and/or recycling of their fragile soils, they are par- trating local resource use in smaller and incineration” (Sweeting & ticularly sensitive to environmental areas and/or by undermining local Wayne 2003). Construction of impacts. Deforestation from tour- resource management systems hotels, recreation, and other facili- ism (through construction, use of (WCPA 2000). ties often leads to increased sewage wood for fires, etc.) can have direct In addition to resource depletion pollution. Wastewater has polluted implications for habitat conserva- and habitat disruption, littering seas and lakes surrounding tourist tion and watershed management and water pollution are problems attractions, damaging the flora and and can also increase the likelihood associated with mainstream fauna. of landslides. tourism that can have negative Coral reefs are at a particular It is these negative impacts of consequences for biodiversity con- risk from unplanned tourism devel- unmanaged tourism development servation. e littering problem is opment. Holden (2000) notes that, on the environment and local cul- exacerbated in remote areas, where as well as being mined for building tures that gave rise to ecotourism in waste collection can be logistically materials, reefs suffer from sewage the 1980s and 1990s as an alterna- difficult (e.g., on mountains, in runoff that stimulates the growth tive set of principles and practices the middle of the ocean). Waste of algae, covering the filter-feeding to harness tourism’s economic disposal from cruise ships has corals and hindering their ability to potential for biodiversity conserva- been problematic, as they have survive. In addition, reefs are often tion and sustainable development. limited capacity to carry all their damaged by the activities of careless During the last decade, ecotourism waste until they reach their home tourists—as divers and snorkelers has emerged from small model port, and destination ports have kick and stand on coral, for exam- projects demonstrating how tour- limited incentive (and capacity) to ple, or boats and jet skis scrape the ism can be a catalyst for conserving accommodate periodic discharges. surface of the reef. Furthermore, nature and promoting the well- However, “most of the major cruise dive/snorkel boat operators may being of local peoples into a wider lines have begun to implement throw their anchors into corals, and set of sustainable tourism principles comprehensive waste management local entrepreneurs often break off that can be applied across a larger programs and wastes such as glass, pieces of coral to sell as souvenirs. segment of the travel and tourism industry. However, just how far, and to what degree, these principles Box 4: Tourism’s Resource Consumption will ultimately be able to transform the mass tourism industry to be a Using consumption averages from various countries, statistics from WTO, and estimates of more positive force for biodiversity national tourism in relation to international arrivals, UNEP proposed some estimates of the conservation remains to be seen. order of magnitude of resource consumption from tourism. Endnotes If the global tourism industry were represented as a country, it would consume resources at 3e WTTC commonly quotes this figure, although the WTO puts the figure lower. e difference reflects the difficulty the scale of a northern developed country. in defining what is and is not included within the tourism “industry” and whether services such as transport are included International and national tourists use 80 percent of Japan’s yearly primary energy supply in the calculation. e WTTC figure also incorporates the multiplier effect of tourism spending and therefore reflects the (5,000 million kWh/year), produce the same amount of solid waste as France (35 million economic impact of the wider “tourism economy” rather than just the industry itself. tons per year), and consume three times the amount of fresh water contained in Lake 4WSSD focused on water, energy, health, agriculture, and Superior, between Canada and the United States, in a year (10 million cubic meters). biodiversity (WEHAB Working Group 2002).

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 7 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 9 Chapter 2 Mapping Tourism’s Global Footprint: Impacts on Biodiversity and Local Livelihoods

2.1 The Maps tant in hotspot countries—par- Chapter 1 has highlighted the ticularly in Southeast Asia—and broad relationships between tour- this will require careful plan- ism development, biodiversity, ning to avoid negative impacts and local livelihoods. is chapter on biodiversity. reviews this relationship in more e maps can also be used to depth, focusing on the impact of illustrate the potential impacts of tourism in the biodiversity hotspot tourism in different countries or countries. regions—for example, plotting the e maps presented serve to illus- number of tourism arrivals against Above: Togian woman preparing coconuts, trate the following key issues: the population of each country Malenge Island, Indonesia. • Although most biodiversity allows us to predict where tourism Left: Tourists explore Africa’s first canopy is concentrated in the South, pressure is likely to be high and walkway in Kakum National Park, Ghana. many major tourism destina- environmental and social impacts tions in the North (e.g., the more severe. Mediterranean, the California Coast, Florida Keys) also coin- 2.2 Is Tourism Significant in cide with biodiversity hotspots. Biodiversity Hotspot Countries? • Although they receive fewer e hotspots map in Chapter 1 tourists overall than the North, shows that, on a global level, the many economically poor, but majority of hotspots are concen- biodiversity-rich, countries in trated in the South. A map of the South receive large numbers international tourist arrivals by of tourists. country for 2000 shows, however, • Many hotspot countries in the that the majority of tourist arrivals South are experiencing very are in the North: North America, rapid tourism growth. Western Europe, and Russia stand • Over one-half of the poorest 15 out as significant areas for tourist countries fall within the biodi- visitation (Map 2). is finding is versity hotspots, and in all of borne out by a map of arrivals by these, tourism is already signifi- region (1995), which also shows cant or is forecast to increase. that Southeast Asia and South • In many destinations within America receive medium levels hotspot developing countries, of arrivals. Africa, South Asia, biodiversity is the major tourism Oceania, and Central America attraction. experience lower levels of arrivals at • Forecasts suggest that tourism the regional level (Map 3). will become increasingly impor- An analysis based solely on total

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 9 arrivals figures can obscure the tourist arrivals, tourism plays a vast majority of tourism impacts pressure of tourism in some cases, major role in many Caribbean happen at the coast, the site of as it does not take into account economies, accounting for 15.5 often critically endangered coral the size of the country to which percent of total employment, or one reefs. Obviously, the distribution of the tourists are arriving and the in 6.4 jobs (Hawkins et al. 2002). tourists in relation to sensitive areas amount of tourism infrastructure e biodiversity impacts of tourism will affect the impact of tourism and planning in place. Map 2 development in the Caribbean may both on local livelihoods and on shows fewer tourists arriving in be much more significant than the biodiversity. the Caribbean than in the United statistics initially convey. States, for example, but when the In addition, data on the volume 2.2.1 Tourism is significant and growing in relative sizes of these regions are of tourism provide no indications poor, biodiversity-rich countries taken into account, the implica- as to how tourists are distributed Although they receive fewer tions of even this lower number of within a particular country—they tourists overall than the North, arrivals becomes clear. Although may be extremely concentrated in parts of the South receive large the Caribbean region, a major some areas and virtually nonex- numbers of international arrivals, biodiversity hotspot, accounts for istent in others. e Caribbean is and many of these coincide with only 4 percent of international again a good example, where the

Map 2: International Arrivals Circa 2000

TOTAL ARRIVALS (IN THOUSANDS) Scale: 1/190,000,000 Projection: Robinson Fewer than 100 1,000–5,000 Hotspots Open water Data: World Tourism Organization 2001* (Tourism Market Trends) 100–500 5,000–20,000 Major Tropical Wilderness Areas No data for study year Conservation International 2002 500–1,000 20,000–70,000 Coral Reef Hotspot Areas Cartography: M. Denil © CI 2003

*Data for each country may be for activity from the years 1998 through 2000. Data for the latest date available in this range was selected for display here.

10 CHAPTER 2 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 11 hotspots: Mexico (Mesoamerica international arrivals, yet domestic by CI as one of the world’s most hotspot), Brazil (Atlantic Forest tourism is also highly significant threatened biodiversity hotspots, and Cerrado), South Africa (Cape in Mexico, China, South Africa, domestic tourism accounts for Floristic Region), ailand (Indo- and ailand. In Brazil, domestic more than 50 percent of arrivals in Burma), Malaysia, and Indonesia tourists provided six times more 2003 (Christ 2003). Although the (Sundaland and Wallacea) stand room nights in classified hotels in international arrivals represented in out as countries with high levels 2001 than the 5.5 million foreign Map 2 figures are not exclusively of international tourism arrivals, tourists (FIPE/EMBRATUR vacation tourists, tourists can be particularly during the past decade 2002). Ghimire (1997) notes considered a large, if not the larg- (Map 2). At a subnational level, that in Mexico, it was estimated est, segment of those arrivals; the the Cape Floristic Region of South that as much as 40 percent of the statistics therefore do represent sig- Africa is an important tourism country’s population participated in nificant increasing tourism travel to destination, and the resort island domestic tourism activities in 1994. each biodiversity hotspot country. of Bali falls squarely within the In ailand, domestic tourists Furthermore, although North Sundaland hotspot. outnumber international tourists America may receive many arriv- It is also important to note that at all major attractions. On the als, Map 4 shows that the average Map 2 shows only the numbers of Philippine island of Palawan, listed annual growth rate over the last

Map 3: Regional Tourist Arrivals 1995

WTO Regions

INTERNATIONAL TOURISTS ARRIVALS 1995 BY WTO REGIONS IN MILLIONS OF PEOPLE Scale: 1/190,000,000 Projection: Robinson Data: World Tourism Organization 2001 Up to 10 50–100 Hotspots Open water (Tourism Market Trends) 10–20 100–150 Major Tropical Wilderness Areas No data for study year Conservation International 2002 Cartography: M. Denil 20–50 150–250 Coral Reef Hotspot Areas © CI 2003

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 11 MapMap 4:2: AverageInternational Annual Arrivals Growth circa 1990–2000 2000

AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH IN TOURISM THROUGH THE 1990S Scale: 1/190,000,000 Projection: Robinson No growth or negative growth 250%–500% Hotspots Open water Data: World Tourism Organization 2001* (Tourism Market Trends) Less than 100% 500%–1000% Major Tropical Wilderness Areas No data for study year Conservation International 2002 100%–250% Over 1000% Coral Reef Hotspot Areas Cartography: M. Denil © CI 2003

*Data for each country may be for activity from the years 1990 through 1995 and for 1998 through 2000. Data for the latest date available in this range was selected for comparison here.

10 years has been slower in North list, Laos shows a staggering tour- a larger number of international America than in other biodiversity ism increase of over 2,000 percent. arrivals (51,000,000), has experi- hotspot countries such as Brazil. Although starting from a small enced only a comparatively modest South Africa is among several base (14,000 international arrivals growth rate of 29 percent in the last hotspot countries where the num- in 1990), if Laos follows the pattern decade. ber of international arrivals is not of its neighbor Vietnam, which ese patterns of growth are only large but also rapidly growing. has increased from 250,000 to particularly important, since it is Tourism in Laos and Cambodia 1,890,000 tourist arrivals in the last reasonable to assume that a sig- (Indo-Burma) has also grown dra- decade, the implications could be nificant percentage of new tourism matically, as it has in Vietnam and very significant in terms of negative facilities in developing countries Burma.5 impacts on biodiversity. Not only high in biodiversity will be built Of particular importance, Table did the number of international on coastal and natural destinations 1 identifies 22 hotspot countries arrivals in China top 10,000,000 harboring threatened ecosystems. where visitor arrivals have increased in 1990, but it nearly tripled to Further prioritizing exercises by more than 100 percent between 31,000,000 in 2000. By contrast, may be proposed: for example, 1990 and 2000. At the top of the the United States, while capturing focusing on countries with high

12 CHAPTER 2 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 13 Table 1: Examples of Hotspot Countries Exhibiting Tourism Growth of More Than 100 Percent

International Arrivals (in thousands) Growth 1990–2000 Percentage Growth Hotspot/Country (in thousands) 1990–2000 1990 1995 2000 Indo-Burma Laos 14 60 300 286 2043 Myanmar 21 117 208 187 890 Vietnam 250 1351 2140 1890 756 Macao 2,513 4,202 6,682 4,169 166 Succulent Karoo/Cape Floristic Region South Africa 1,029 4,684 6,001 4,972 483 Caribbean Cuba 327 742 1,700 1,373 420 Turks and Caicos Islands 49 79 156 107 218 Dominican Republic 1,305 1,776 2,977 1,672 128 Brazilian Cerrado/Atlantic Forest Brazil 1,091 1,991 5,313 4,222 387 Mesoamerica Nicaragua 106 281 486 380 358 El Salvador 194 235 795 601 310 Costa Rica 435 785 1,106 671 154 Panama 214 345 479 265 124 Guinean Forests Nigeria 190 656 813 623 328 Tropical Andes Peru 317 541 1,027 710 224 Madagascar and Indian Ocean Islands Madagascar 53 75 160 107 202 Eastern Arc Mountains and Coastal Forests

Tanzania, United Republic of 153 285 459 306 200 Mountains of Southwest China China 10,484 20,034 31,229 20,745 198 Sundaland/Wallacea Indonesia 2,178 4,324 5,064 2,886 133 Mediterranean Basin Israel 1,063 2,215 2,400 1,337 126 Southwest Australia Australia 2,215 3,726 4,946 2,731 123 Micronesia/Polynesia Cook Islands 34 48 73 39 115

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 13 volumes of international arrivals development strategies and policies out as one where the increase is (38 hotspot countries show over and that tourism is considered in likely to be particularly dramatic. 1 million international arrivals strategic biodiversity action plans. is projection implies that, as the per year, and 16 of them show (e Data Sets, located in the back home to four biodiversity hotspots over 5 million arrivals per year); of this book, provide a full listing and one major tropical wilderness or combining arrival numbers of the international arrivals data for area, this region will require very with growth rates—12 of the 22 all hotspot countries.) careful tourism planning if it is not hotspots countries with over 100 Looking forward to 2020, to suffer a serious negative impact percent growth rates had over 1 regional forecasts prepared by the on biodiversity.6 million international tourists in World Tourism Organization (Map 2000 (Australia, Brazil, China, 5) suggest that tourism will become 2.2.2 Prime tourism destinations in the Costa Rica, Cuba, the Dominican increasingly important in hotspot North are located in biodiversity hotspots Republic, Indonesia, Israel, Macao, countries. South America, south- Tourism in the North also has Peru, South Africa, and Vietnam). ern Africa, and Oceania are all significant implications for bio- ese countries clearly need to expected to experience significant diversity conservation, because ensure that biodiversity consider- growth in numbers of tourists, but biodiversity hotspots also occur in ations are incorporated into tourism the Southeast Asia region stands these northern destinations: the

MapMap 5:2: RegionalInternational Tourist Arrivals Arrivals—Projections circa 2000 for 2020

WTO Regions

INTERNATIONAL TOURIST ARRIVAL PROJECTIONS FOR 2020 BY WTO REGIONS IN MILLIONS OF PEOPLE Scale: 1/190,000,000 Projection: Robinson Up to 10 50–100 Hotspots Open water Data: World Tourism Organization 2001 (Tourism Market Trends) 10–20 100–150 Major Tropical Wilderness Areas No data for study year Conservation International 2002 20–50 150–250 Coral Reef Hotspot Areas Cartography: M. Denil © CI 2003

14 CHAPTER 2 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 15 California Floristic Province, the with some major tourism develop- trampling ecosystems remains a key northern part of Mesoamerica, ment projects already under way. threat to coastal areas in Turkey, the Mediterranean Basin, the e Mediterranean is the most Cyprus, Tunisia, Morocco, and Caucasus, and the mountains of visited tourism region in the world, Greece.” (CI 2003). south-central China, for example. accounting for 30 percent of inter- From the level of analysis of national arrivals and 25 percent 2.3: Tourism, Biodiversity, and the global mapping exercise, it is of receipts from international Poverty Reduction not possible to examine the dis- tourism. e number of tourists We have already noted above tribution of visitor arrivals across in the Mediterranean countries is that the majority of biodiversity these regions—it is theoretically expected to increase from 260 mil- hotspots are located in the develop- possible that none of China’s lion in 1990 (with 135 million to ing countries of the South. In light tourists visit the south-central the coastal region) to 440–655 mil- of the linkages between biodiversity mountains, for example. But in lion in 2025 (with 235–355 million and tourism, and between biodi- actuality, tourism pressure is well to the coastal region) (EEA 2001). versity and sustainable livelihoods, documented in this area of China, It can also be noted that “the con- it is clear that no biodiversity con- and significant growth in China’s struction of infrastructure and the servation strategy based on tourism domestic tourism is anticipated, direct impacts of people using and alone is likely to succeed unless it

MapMap 2: 6: International International Arrivals Tourism circa Receipts 2000 Circa 2000

INTERNATIONAL TOURISM RECEIPTS IN MILLIONS OF U.S. DOLLARS Scale: 1/190,000,000 Projection: Robinson Less than 500 6,000–10,000 Hotspots Open water Data: World Tourism Organization 2001* 500–2,000 Over 10,000 Major Tropical Wilderness Areas No data for study year Conservation International 2002 Cartography: M. Denil 2,000–6,000 Coral Reef Hotspot Areas © CI 2003

*Data for each country may be for activity from the years 1990 through 2000. Data for the latest date available in each range were selected for display here.

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 15 MapMap 7:2: TourismInternational as a Percentage Arrivals circa of Gross2000 Domestic Product 1999

TOURISM AS A PERCENTAGE OF GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT 1999 Scale: 1/190,000,000 Projection: Robinson Less than 1% 3%–4% Hotspots Open water Data: World Travel and Tourism Council 2002 1%–2% 4%–8% Major Tropical Wilderness Areas No data for study year Conservation International 2002 3%–4% 8%–47% Coral Reef Hotspot Areas Cartography: M. Denil © CI 2003

incorporates some poverty reduc- ings, employment, and GDP. On and Touche, IIED and ODI 1999). tion goals. average, international tourism Maps 6 and 7 illustrate the sig- Developing countries currently receipts account for around 10 nificance of tourism as a percentage have only a minority share of percent of export revenues of of GDP in developing countries. the international tourism market developing countries. e United e maps demonstrate that in the (approximately 30 percent), but Nations Conference on Trade and industrialized North, high levels of their share is growing rapidly. Development (UNCTAD) notes tourism receipts correlate to their International tourism arrivals in that tourism is a principal export significance in terms of GDP. In developing countries as a group of 49 least-developed countries the less industrialized countries of have grown by an average of 9.5 and number one for 37 of them the South, however, even low levels percent per year since 1990, com- (Diaz Benevides and Perez-Ducy of tourism receipts can be very pared with 4.6 percent worldwide 2001). Tourism’s contribution to important to the national economy. (Deloitte and Touche, IIED and GDP varies from 3 to 5 percent in In short, even modest levels of tour- ODI 1999). In these countries, Nepal and Kenya to 25 percent in ism, carefully planned and imple- tourism makes important contri- Jamaica; contribution to employ- mented, can be a positive force for butions to the national economy ment is estimated at 6–7 percent in biodiversity conservation and local through foreign exchange earn- India and South Africa (Deloitte economic benefit.

16 CHAPTER 2 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 17 Although we cannot accurately determine the degree to which tourism is directly dependent on biodiversity, we can assume with confidence that in many hotspot countries, such as Australia, Belize, Brazil, Costa Rica, Kenya, Madagascar, Mexico, South Africa, and Tanzania, a significant proportion of tourism’s GDP contribution can be directly linked to attractions and destinations in biodiversity hotspots, where biodiversity itself represents the primary tourism Tourists prepare for a beach picnic in Zanzibar. attraction. Tourism is clearly of most tourism-dependent country. over half have a tourism industry great economic significance to Although these countries are not that is growing and/or significant developing countries. However, the poorest in the world (they are (Deloitte and Touche, IIED and that significance varies widely classified by the World Bank as ODI 1999). Table 2, below, shows from country to country, with middle-income on the basis of indi- 6 of the world’s 15 poorest coun- those economies most dependent cators such as numbers of people tries where tourism is significant on tourism tending to be small living on less than US$1/day), they or growing. All are in biodiversity island states: e Caribbean is the still contain significant numbers of hotspots. most tourism-dependent region in impoverished people. Of the poor- Up-to-date poverty data (from the world, and the Maldives the est 100 countries, however, well the World Bank Development

Table 2: Significance of International Tourism to Poor, Biodiversity-Rich Countries

Percentage of population below Percentage contribution of Country Hotspot US 1$ a daya tourism industry to GDPb

Nigeria Guinean Forest 70 0.5 Madagascar Madagascar and Indian Ocean Islands 63 3.8 India Western Ghats and Sri Lanka 44 2.5 Honduras Mesoamerica 41 4.4 Ghana Guinean Forest 39 5.5 Nepal Indo-Burma 38 4.5 aWorld Bank 2001 World Development Indications bWTTC Year 2001 Country League tables

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 17 MapMap 8:2: UNDPInternational Human DevelopmentArrivals circa Index 2000 2000

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX Scale: 1/190,000,000 Projection: Robinson Below .3 .6 Hotspots Open water Data: World Tourism Organization 2001* (Tourism Market Trends) .4 .7 Major Tropical Wilderness Areas No data for study year Conservation International 2002 .5 .8 Coral Reef Hotspot Areas Cartography: M. Denil © CI 2003

*Data for each country may be for activity from the years 1998 through 2000. Data for the latest date available in this range were selected for comparison here.

Indicators) are not available to HDI rating (Cambodia, Gabon, forms of tourism development. plot a comprehensive map for all Ghana, Guatemala, Indonesia, Tourism is often noted for having biodiversity hotspots. However, Ivory Coast, Madagascar, Papua high levels of revenue “leakage,” an analysis of tourism arrivals New Guinea, southern Nigeria, and of the revenue that is retained against the Human Development Tanzania). in the destination country, much is Index (HDI)7 of the United A key question that might be captured by rich or middle-income Nations Development Programme asked is, if these countries are groups—not the poor. Tourism (UNDP) serves to illustrate the apparently doing so well in tour- is also a volatile industry, being overlap between levels of develop- ism and are so well endowed with extremely susceptible to events that ment, biodiversity, and tourism. biodiversity, why are they still so are difficult to control—natural In particular, several hotspot poor? Some argue that because for- disasters, exchange rate fluc- countries have a low HDI rating eign, private sector interests often tuations, and political unrest. For and high levels of visitation—for drive tourism, it has limited poten- example the 2002 terrorist bomb- example, Brazil, Indonesia, and tial to contribute much to poverty ing on the resort island of Bali led South Africa (Map 8). e map elimination in developing coun- to an immediate drop in tourism also illustrates the overlap between tries. is can apply to biodiver- arrivals and it was almost a year hotspots and countries with a low sity-based tourism, as well as other before tourism on Bali began to

18 CHAPTER 2 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 19 increase again. In poor countries, poverty reduction.8 Strategies for dinarily high in some countries, tourism can have a particular effect making tourism more “pro-poor” with tourists outnumbering local on the poor themselves, causing have shown some success at the residents in certain areas. Hotspot displacement, increased local costs, local level (Ashley et al. 2001). countries or areas that stand out loss of access to resources, and Scaling these approaches up and are Australia, Botswana, Eastern social and cultural disruption. applying them to biodiversity-based Caribbean, New Zealand, northern Tourism does, however, have a tourism could result in positive Mediterranean, Malaysia, Mexico, major advantage over other forms synergies between tourism growth, and Uruguay. Furthermore, as of development (such as timber biodiversity conservation, and Map 5 illustrates, tourism is likely extraction, mining, etc.) with human development in the future. to increase in the next 20 years, respect to biodiversity conservation including in areas where visitor and poverty reduction: Not only 2.4: Analyzing the Maps to Assess pressure is already high. It should is tourism highly dependent on Impacts be noted, however, that this the natural and cultural environ- e ratio of visitors to local resi- visitor-to-resident ratio is an ment—assets that the poor have dents (Map 9) is used by the World extremely rough measure of impact. and on which they can capital- Tourism Organization as a core e local distribution of the tour- ize—but, properly managed, it can indicator of the social impact of ists, the activities they engage contribute to biodiversity conserva- tourism, and the map below illus- in, and the cultural differences tion, which can directly support trates that this ratio can be extraor- between tourists and residents need

MapMap 9:2: ArrivalsInternational as a Percentage Arrivals circa of Population2000

TOURISM ARRIVALS AS A PERCENTAGE OF POPULATION Scale: 1/190,000,000 Projection: Robinson Less than 0.3% 10% 60% Hotspots Open water Data: World Tourism Organization 2002* 0.6% 20% 80% Major Tropical Wilderness Areas No data for study year Conservation International 2002 Cartography: M. Denil Coral Reef Hotspot Areas 1% 40% 100% to about 4500% © CI 2003

*Data gaps where filled by calculation of WTO international arrivals with population data.

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 19 MapMap 10:2: International Freshwater Resources Arrivals circa per Capita2000 2000

FRESHWATER RESOURCES CUBIC METERS PER CAPITA Scale: 1/190,000,000 Projection: Robinson Fewer than 1,000 4,000–10,000 Hotspots Open water Data: World Bank 1,000–2,000 10,000–50,000 Major Tropical Wilderness Areas No data for study year Conservation International 2002 Cartography: M. Denil 3,000–4,000 More than 50,000 Coral Reef Hotspot Areas © CI 2003

to be considered as well, before hotspot with limited per capita can affect wetlands. e problem is the potential impact can be fully freshwater resources and very high particularly acute in hot, dry coun- assessed. tourist-to-resident ratios. e tries (both in the North and South), e ratio of tourists to local Caribbean, Mexico, and South where available resources can be in residents can be used in conjunc- Africa also stand out as hotspot short supply, yet tourist demands on tion with other data to highlight areas with high levels of visitation water (for swimming pools, show- potential environmental impacts. (and sustained growth in visitation ers, etc.) are high because of the Water use, for example, can be a over the 1990s) and low levels of climate. e vast quantities of water serious issue with respect to tourism available fresh water. required to maintain golf courses development. Map 10 shows that Water use is a particular prob- (a rapidly increasing form of tour- in some countries the availability of lem associated with hotels, as tourist ism in the South) is another issue freshwater resources is very limited, consumption of water is often of concern. An average golf course yet some of these countries have many times higher than that of soaks up at least 525,000 gallons of tourism intakes far higher than the local people. is can result in water per day (Tourism Concern, their total population. Tunisia, water shortages and degradation of Golf Campaign, 2003), which can for example, is conspicuous as a water supplies, as well as increased severely affect fresh water availabil- country within the Mediterranean wastewater discharge, all of which ity in certain areas.

20 CHAPTER 2 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 21 Aerial view of resorts lining the beach of Cancun Island, Mexico.

Box 5: Cancun, Mexico: The Impact of Tourism Development

Prior to its development as a tourist resort in the 1970s, only 12 secondary importance in the development plan for Cancun. For families lived on the barrier island of Cancun. The entire area that instance, no provisions were made to house low-income migrants now comprises the state of Quintana Roo was made up of relative- who now work and live in the area. As a result, a shantytown ly untouched rain forests and pristine beaches and was inhabited developed, in which the sewage of 75 percent of the population by an indigenous Maya population of about 45,000. is untreated. The mangrove and inland forests were cut down, swamps and lagoons were filled, and dunes were removed. Many Today, Cancun has more than 2.6 million visitors a year and has bird, marine, and other animal species vanished. more than 20,000 hotel rooms, with a permanent population of more than 300,000. Environmental and social impacts were given (Sweeting et al. 1999)

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 21 Map 11: Hotels and Other Facilities—Rooms Circa 2000

HOTELS AND OTHER FACILITIES (THOUSANDS OF ROOMS) Scale: 1/190,000,000 Projection: Robinson Fewer than 10 100–300 Hotspots Open water Data: World Tourism Organization 2001* 10–50 300–1,600 Major Tropical Wilderness Areas No data for study year Conservation International 2002 Cartography: M. Denil 50–100 Coral Reef Hotspot Areas © CI 2003

*Data for each country may be for activity from the years 1995 through 2000. Data for the latest date available in this range were selected for display here.

Map 5 forecasts increased tour- can be associated with an increase veloped their hotels. ailand, ist arrivals in the arid countries in tourism. us, the forecast map for example, shows a high level of of North Africa and the Middle emphasizes the need for proper capacity and low level of occupancy East, where the tourist-to-resident planning if continued growth of (less than 50 percent). Indonesia ratio is already very high, and tourism is not to impinge even also shows a similar low level of in the hotspot region of the further on water availability and occupancy and high-level capacity, Mediterranean. e conclusions its relationship to biodiversity-rich although arrivals are projected to that can be drawn from these maps wetlands and the well-being of grow dramatically through to 2020. are somewhat limited, since some local residents. Bearing in mind the envi- very dry countries have a very small Maps 11 and 12, depicting the ronmental impacts associated population (e.g., Namibia) and so scale of hotel development and with building and infrastructure do not show up as a problem on levels of occupancy, are also useful development and the potential Map 10. However, they are highly indicators of potential impacts— consequences for biodiversity con- vulnerable to an increase in water especially in light of the connection servation, this should be a point of use as a result of tourism or any between hotel development and concern in hotspot countries, and other extractive use and serve to water use highlighted above. Some it underscores the need for careful highlight some of the pressures that countries appear to have overde- planning of any further develop-

22 CHAPTER 2 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 23 MapMap 12: 2: InternationalHotels and Other Arrivals Facilities—Occupancy circa 2000 Rates Circa 2000

HOTELS AND OTHER FACILITIES OCCUPANCY RATE Scale: 1/190,000,000 Projection: Robinson Less than 30% 50%–65% Hotspots Open water Data: World Tourism Organization 2001* 30%–40% 65%–83% Major Tropical Wilderness Areas No data for study year Conservation International 2002 Cartography: M. Denil 40%–50% Coral Reef Hotspot Areas © CI 2003

*Data for each country may be for activity from the years 1990 through 2000. Data for the latest date available in each range were selected for display here.

ment. e mass tourist resort of of large tourism developments in some areas, it also emphasizes the Cancun in Mexico is an example specific destinations and avoiding high levels of tourist traffic in this of the negative impact that poorly other tourism-related sprawling region and the potential effect of planned large-scale developments developments, especially along related social impacts. can have (see Box 5). On the other coastlines, has proven largely hand, it could be argued that, unsuccessful. It is not necessarily Endnotes 5Limitations of the data prevent a thorough analysis of the on a wider scale, it is better to the scale of tourism development significance of this growth, because an increase from very low concentrate tourism development that is key to its impact (both levels to only slightly higher levels shows up as significant when presented as a percentage increase. into a relatively small area (such as positive and negative), but rather 6As noted earlier, it is not the total volume so much as the Cancun), thus restricting, spatially, the way it is planned and managed distribution and activities of tourists, and the location and scale of infrastructure that is developed to support them, that are its impact. is can work even with according to the principles of envi- important in determining their impacts on biodiversity. large tourism developments if they ronmental sustainability. 7e HDI is a composite of three basic components of human are designed in an environmentally Map 12 shows high levels of development: longevity, knowledge, and standard of living. 8See Koziel and McNeill in the IIED Opinion Paper series for a friendly manner and revenue from hotel occupancy in the Caribbean. discussion of how biodiversity can contribute to the Millennium them is used to support biodiversity While on the one hand this illus- Development Goals. conservation elsewhere. However, trates that infrastructure has not maintaining the concentration been developed unnecessarily, unlike

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 23 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 25 Chapter 3 Key Decisionmakers Regarding Tourism and Biodiversity Conservation

In order to effect changes in the cies and experts, academics, and tourism industry toward more consultants, also have important conservation-friendly processes roles, but their actual contribu- in biodiversity hotspots, it is tion depends on their ability to important to identify the key influence the central players. is players whose decisions will chapter will identify the roles and ultimately affect biodiversity. interests of various stakeholders Furthermore, recommendations related to conservation in the to public and private planners and biodiversity hotspots. policymakers at various levels of Above: Scarlet macaw, Brazil. decisionmaking have to take into Tourism impacts biodiversity Left: Exploring the Inca ruins of Machu Picchu, Peru. consideration the limits imposed hotspots through by their sphere of influence and • infrastructure-related devel- immediate objectives. Key-player opment, which is primarily analysis allows policymakers and financed and managed at practitioners to understand the the governmental level. is concerns and interests of different includes methods of access parties and the means by which (roads, trails, airports, and each agent contributes to tourism transportation); water sourcing development and to biodiversity and treatment facilities; energy conservation or loss. production and distribution; e tourism industry can be and waste processing. Private seen as a network of economic investment in infrastructure and political agents, processes, development, and interpreta- and resources. e interactions tion and visitor-management between these elements will ulti- structures, often results in mately define whether the impacts landscaping and construction- on biodiversity will be positive related impacts on biodiversity; or negative. For this study, we • construction of facilities have identified governments, directly related to tourism the private sector, development (accommodation and meeting agencies, and local residents as structures, catering, shopping key players, given their central centers, marinas, and adminis- influence regarding the impacts trative facilities); of tourism on biodiversity. Other • indirect developments from stakeholders, such as tourists, tourism, such as urban devel- nongovernmental organizations opment for employee housing; (NGOs), intergovernmental agen- secondary real estate, such

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 25 as tourist homes; and urban management costs are not covered, and hotel chains to reduce use of sprawl; and and environmental degradation fertilizers and improve waste and • indirect influences on economic ensues, ultimately causing a crisis sewage management. e environ- and trade policies and strategies or even the collapse of a tourism mental improvements were accom- related to tourism development destination, again with serious panied by public awareness and (changes in local traditional effects on local biodiversity. marketing campaigns to improve economic practices due to tran- Ideally a timely assessment of the city’s image, and visitor num- sition to tourism-oriented activ- this negative trend will lead to bers increased. ities; changes in management a multistakeholder process that practices due to globalization; ensures proper oversight. Tourism 3.1 The Decisionmaking Process for changes in conservation-related development can be contained Tourism Development investments, such as park man- and better management systems In 2001, UNEP reviewed 12 agement, and in environmental can be provided for natural case studies of tourism resort management due to financial resources. In addition, financial development in various ecosystems burdens from tourism-related mechanisms can be set up to in order to investigate how deci- loans, etc.). use a small percentage of tour- sionmaking affects biodiversity e different phases of tourism revenues for environmental (Hawkins et al. 2002). On the ism development have different management. For instance, the basis of this analysis, the process impacts on biodiversity conserva- municipalities of Calvia, in Spain, can be simplified as follows: tion. Decisionmaking on siting, and Rimini in Italy, both located 1. A group of local investors, design, and planning have different in the Mediterranean hotspot and often owning biodiversity-rich effects than technological decisions heavily dependent on tourism, land, team up with potential on management and operations of experienced overdevelopment resort builders and hire profes- tourism, including water and waste and environmental degradation sional intermediaries called pollution, resource consumption, throughout the 1970 and 1980s. developers, whose role it is to and supply chain management. ese tourism destinations faced bring together all resources and Similarly, biodiversity is affected such challenges by implementing players that will determine the by choices made by tourists regard- several radical measures. In the feasibility of the resort. ing their activities such as hiking, case of Calvia, a Local Agenda 219 2. e developers look for outside boating, and sports. process led to the closing and even private investors and examine Trends in the tourism mar- deliberate destruction of hotels, the interest of partners such ketplace also determine effects on landscape renovation, the creation as tour operators and air and biodiversity. Often, an attractive of additional protected areas, and cruise carriers, based on per- tourism destination in a biodiver- the establishment of an environ- ceived market potentials. sity-rich area may experience a pro- mental levy on hotel room sales, 3. e group contacts local and nounced growth phase in accom- with extensive public awareness national government, looking modation development, ultimately and marketing campaigns (UNEP for support such as leading to overdevelopment, with 2003b). • infrastructure (free land, air- serious negative impacts on biodi- In Rimini, coastal eutrophica- ports, roads, water supply, and versity. Heavy price discounting in tion of the Adriatic Sea led to algal sewage/waste management, tourism resorts, with low-margin, blooms and heavy fish mortality in etc.); high-volume vacation packages 1985, with ensuing odors and pol- • flexible land-use regulations and uncontrolled competition, can lution causing tourism losses. e (appropriate for clusters of lead to loss of economic feasibil- tourism industry pressured local resorts); ity. In these cases, environmental authorities to engage agribusinesses • tax breaks and incentives;

26 CHAPTER 3 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 27 • soft and subsidized loans; and 3.2 Governments • attractive public land or parks National governments set the frame- that could be the base for tour work for tourism development and products. biodiversity conservation through e process can also be initiated policy and legislation. Different by local politicians and/or inves- government departments may be tors who pressure the government responsible for determining policy to offer support and then attract and associated instruments for tour- outside investors. Trade associa- ism development and biodiversity tions (representing tour operators, conservation. Some examples of hotel chains, and air carriers, etc.) these include are often partners in lobbying gov- • laws and regulations defining ernment, whose driving interests standards for tourism facilities, are job generation and future tax access to biodiversity resources, and revenue. In some cases, tourism land-use regulation and zoning;

development is financed by multi- • design, development, and regula- Balinese children participate in a traditional and bilateral development agen- tion of supporting infrastructure ceremony in the popular tourist village of Ubud, Bali. cies, under subsidized development (water, energy, roads, airports, etc.); aid loans. e terms of these loans • economic instruments defined in may or may not be supportive of policy, such as incentives for sus- biodiversity conservation. tainable tourism investment and 4. Once funding is in place the resort the creation of private reserves; is built. is can occur with or • standards for health and safety, without an environmental impact quality controls and regulation of assessment, depending on local reg- business activities; these are aimed ulations. Unfortunately, the UNEP at protecting consumers and at report points out that decisions meeting the needs of residents— about siting, design, technology, including traditional communities and product development are often and indigenous people—and made only from the perspective of protecting their lifestyles; corporate efficiency and customer • establishment and maintenance of relations; community expectations protected areas and conservation and conservation of local and corridors of interest to tourism. regional biodiversity are not usually Managers of public protected areas considered. often are the most effective players e sections below review the roles for conservation benefits from of the different stakeholders in influ- tourism development; encing this process and ensuring that • allocation of tax revenues for the tourism is developed in a manner protection of biodiversity-based that supports biodiversity conser- tourism attractions, such as vation and benefits local people. national parks and reserves. ese descriptions are followed by In many biodiversity hotspot coun- recommendations for each group of tries, tourism destinations are under stakeholders. the influence of various governmental agencies, whose mandates include

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 27 culture, historical heritage, parks, to manage this complex and frag- and forestry. Smooth coordination mented industry effectively and among these departments and to ensure its positive contribution coherence between tourism policy to local strategies for sustainable and other government policies, development (for example Local including biodiversity conserva- Agenda 21 processes) is dependent tion, are not always the rule, and on whether local policymaking therefore different policies may is coherent with national policy undermine rather than support instruments and agencies. each other. Finally, it is noteworthy that Although tourism may be in many economies in transitional driven by the private sector, gov- and developing countries, national ernment policy instruments, such and regional governments often as requirements for environmental play the role of tour operators and impact assessments (EIAs) and hotel managers, either to try to

Chalalan community-owned ecolodge in Madidi management plans, can be extraor- jump-start quality standards or National Park, Bolivia. dinarily effective in ensuring that to generate revenue (for example, development takes place in an METS is a government-run tour appropriate manner. In Cancun, operator in Suriname, and there Mexico, for example, the Mexican are similar state-run operators in government was criticized for China and Vietnam). In many “overlooking” zoning regulations destinations, therefore, effects on and other development control biodiversity are crucially related to mechanisms. Recently, however, public policymaking and strategies. with considerable pressure from outside sources, the government Recommendations for governments: halted the construction of a resort 1. Use a multistakeholder par- complex on land owned by the ticipatory planning process developer because of its proximity to develop national and local to a sea turtle nesting area (Weiner tourism strategies, policies, 2001). and master plans that reflect At the destination level, local concerns about biodiversity authorities are often responsible conservation and poverty for implementing policies regard- reduction. Integrate these into ing tourism and biodiversity broader sustainable develop- conservation. Local authorities are ment strategies and processes, well placed to negotiate between including trade-related poli- the various interests of local and cies, investment promotion, outside entrepreneurs, civil society, economic incentives for the and national government agencies, use of environmentally sound and they hold essential regulatory technologies, land-use plan- and zoning mandates that allow ning, and taxation. for the enforcement of guidelines 2. Support private sector volun- and standards. On the other hand, tary initiatives in conservation the capacity of local authorities and provide opportunities

28 CHAPTER 2 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 29 for the private tourism sector of natural areas. ese funds properties are often franchises to contribute to sustainable should cover activities includ- rather than freehold properties. As tourism management initia- ing protection of vulnerable such, their influence on tourism tives (community awareness ecosystems, management of in a particular location may be and training, protected areas, visitor numbers, and support much greater than their long-term etc.) through direct donations, for surrounding communities. commitment to that destination. If in-kind services, and the estab- 9. Develop management strate- environmental conditions worsen lishment and maintenance of gies, pilot projects, and mecha- beyond a certain degree, these private reserves. nisms for sharing revenue players potentially have the option 3. Enforce existing laws and from tourist visitation with of moving elsewhere. Furthermore, regulations to avoid inappro- the management authorities of only a limited number of tourism priate development of tourism protected areas, while keeping companies have integrated biodi- in core conservation areas, main management expenses versity considerations into their and avoid perverse incentives covered by appropriate budget- day-to-day management practices, for tourism development to ary allotments. and many remain unaware of the be environmentally damaging 10. Promote and develop educa- potential (and actual) impacts of (such as reduced land taxes for tional programs to enhance their activities. However, some cleared land). awareness about nature conser- major travel companies recognize 4. Control the planning, siting, vation and sustainable use of the importance of managing their design, and construction of biodiversity. businesses to minimize their nega- tourism facilities and infra- 11. Conduct market-assessment tive impacts and to find ways to structures according to biodi- studies to avoid tourism facil- help promote conservation and versity conservation principles ity construction in sensitive sustainable development (see Box and guidelines. ecosystems that proves to be 6). ese companies realize that by 5. Improve awareness and unfeasible and unnecessary. helping to maintain the cultural exchange of knowledge and biological integrity of the between those responsible 3.3 Private Sector places they visit, they can both for and affected by tourism e tourism industry is character- enhance the quality of the product and nature conservation at ized by a large number of small they are selling and improve their a national, subnational, and and medium-sized enterprises business reputation. local level. (SMEs). At the same time, a sig- A significant development in 6. Undertake carrying capac- nificant amount of control within the last few years is the establish- ity and limits to acceptable the industry rests in the hands of ment of voluntary environmental change assessments for sensi- a very few, increasingly vertically initiatives by hotel chains, tour tive areas and implement visi- integrated, multinational corpora- operators, and ground handlers, tor-management plans based tions. In Europe, for example, five including green certification on assessment results. companies control over 60 percent systems, conservation awards, 7. Develop or adopt certification of organized outbound travel and ecolabels. While some of schemes, reflecting national from the region (International these initiatives are supported and local priorities that include Federation of Tour Operators, in by governments and NGOs, all biodiversity criteria, and pro- UNEP Industry Report series for voluntary performance standard- vide appropriate incentives for WSSD, 2002). Few of these big setting depends essentially on their adoption. companies have any long-term private sector commitment and 8. Earmark adequate sources of investments in particular destina- consumer awareness. Initiatives funding for the management tions—even large hotel chain such as the World Legacy Awards

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 29 by Conservation International destination that influence what generators and the main resource and National Geographic Society, type of tourism will develop there, users (water, energy, land) affecting British Airways’ Tourism for what products will be available to biodiversity in hotspot destinations. Tomorrow Awards, the Green the tourist, and even, in some cases, ey also require a significant Globe 21 certification system, how much tourists will pay for amount of infrastructure, such as Australia’s National Ecotourism these products. Ground handlers roads and facilities for water supply Accreditation Program, Coopertive often have a strong commitment and treatment, which if improperly Research Center’s International to protect their destination because developed can cause significant Ecotourism Standard, and the they are permanently based there, harm to biodiversity. However, International Hotels Environment but their primary business concern hoteliers are increasingly recogniz- Initiative’s benchmarking tool all is responding to the demands of ing the importance of maintaining provide guidance and added incen- the outbound tour operators they the ecological integrity of the areas tives for corporate responsibility service. erefore, there is a vital in which they operate. toward biodiversity conservation. role that international tour opera- CI estimates that approximately tors can play in encouraging their 8 percent of major hotel chain 3.3.1 Outbound tour operators and ground suppliers to adopt environmentally properties are located within handlers and socially responsible manage- the biodiversity hotspots (Reiter Assembling the component parts of ment practices. e work of the 2000). Maps 11 and 12, however, holidays and managing significant Tour Operators’ Initiative (TOI) for illustrate the actual and potential numbers of tourists, outbound Sustainable Tourism Development growth of the hotel industry in tour operators play a significant noted below is a good example hotspot countries. Larger resorts are role in making a destination suc- of how tour operators can work significant to conservation because cessful. eir capacity to manage together to support biodiversity they control large land proper- their supply chains, their ability to conservation efforts in the destina- ties and contribute significantly ensure steady flows of tourists, and tions where they operate. to tourism-related employment. their ability to influence consumer eir decisionmaking is influenced choices make them key players in 3.3.2 Accommodation providers by their complex ownership and tourism development and biodi- Hotels, resorts, and other accom- management structure, involving versity conservation. It is often the modation facilities are both the asset owners, holding companies, tour operators working in a specific tourism industry’s main job and franchise/management corpo-

Box 6: The Tour Operators’ Initiative (TOI) for Sustainable Tourism Development

The TOI is a network of 25 tour operators that have committed to • Sustainability reporting—to develop and test reporting incorporating sustainability principles into their business opera- guidelines and performance indicators on sustainable tions and working together to promote and disseminate practices development. compatible with sustainable development. The TOI was developed by UNEP, UNESCO, and WTO, with technical TOI members are taking action in three key areas: and financial assistance provided by CELB. TOI is coordinated by Supply chain management—to develop a common approach and • a secretariat and hosted by UNEP, which ensures the implementa- tools for assessing suppliers. tion of the program of activities and continuous support to the Cooperation with destinations—to exert a positive influence and • members. speak with a collective voice on the actions of all partners, tourist boards, customers, suppliers, governments, and developers.

30 CHAPTER 3 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 31 rations. However, the majority of 3.3.3 Cruise ships hotels in hotspot destinations are Since 1980, the cruise ship independently owned, medium- industry has had an annual sized enterprises. growth rate of 8.4 percent and Small-, medium-, and large- has grown nearly twice as fast as scale hoteliers, with their assets world international tourist arriv- tied up in a particular site, have als over the past decade. Much a strong stake in the long-term of this growth is occurring in sustainability of the surrounding destinations that are located in environment. For this reason, the the biodiversity hotspots. About accommodation sector is often 70 percent of cruise destinations proactive in terms of social and are in the hotspots, including the environmental corporate account- Caribbean, the Mediterranean, ability and community outreach. Mexico, the Panama Canal Zone, However, the majority of envi- and the South Pacific. Visits by ronmental management programs cruise ships generate financial A cruise ship makes a port of call in the Caribbean. for hotels located in biodiversity benefits to attractions, restaurants, hotspots are focused on procedures retail shops, shore excursion for internal resource conservation operators, and other businesses and their related cost-savings, such at ports of call. However, some as washing towels every other day, cruise lines have had a past record water saving, recycling, switch- of illegal waste discharge at sea. ing off lights, and so on. Broader With predictions of further rapid biodiversity considerations, such growth over the next few decades, as maintaining natural habitats, it will be increasingly important avoiding land clearance, and set- to understand and address the ting aside property for species pro- environmental impacts of cruising. tection or as private nature reserves e cruise industry faces a number are yet to be integrated into such of key environmental challenges programs. In addition, the many related to its activities and opera- different forms of accommodation tions in the world’s oceans, partic- ownership increases the difficul- ularly in and around priority con- ties of disseminating information servation areas. ere is significant and practical tools on how and potential for wide-ranging negative why to incorporate sustainability environmental impacts from such practices and principles into their hazzards as mishandled waste and management. e International pollutants to poorly planned and Hotels Environment Initiative implemented management pro- (www.ihei.org) has produced cesses. Several major cruise com- excellent materials for their mem- panies have done much to respond ber hoteliers, and others, which to the challenge of preserving the help integrate biodiversity consid- environment on which their busi- erations into hotel-management ness depends and are implement- procedures. ing leadership practices, testing and refining new technologies, and

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 31 developing management programs (www.celb.org) at CI has launched ARENDAL, IPCC, 2003). to address environmental impacts. a Cruise Ship Initiative to work Climate change, in turn, through (Sweeting & Wayne 2003). with the cruise industry to reduce its impact on biodiversity—for e Caribbean, one of the their environmental footprint and example, recent coral reef bleaching most biodiversity-rich marine contribute to conservation in these episodes have been linked to chang- hotspots, accounts for 47 percent key biodiversity hotspots. ing weather patterns (UNEP Atlas of the global yearly total of 54 on Coral Reefs 2002)—indirectly million cruise ship bed days. e 3.3.4 Air travel affects biodiversity-based tourism. Mediterranean, another hotspot, is Air carriers and related industry Some impacts are more direct, such second as a cruise destination, with sectors affect biodiversity through as the potential loss of prime coastal 12 percent of all cruise ship bed their influence on airport siting and sites and small islands associated days (CLIA 2001). design and on destination- with sea-level rise. Construction of cruise ship development decisionmaking ports and related infrastructure (major tourism destinations are 3.3.5 Trade associations has a significant impact on coastal clearly dependent on the availability Much of the private sector is areas, and the building and mainte- of an airport). Arguably, though, organized into professional asso- nance costs are often borne by local the biggest threat is their contribu- ciations—at the global level, for governments with little means to tion to climate change: around 5 example, the World Travel and design conservation-friendly facili- percent of global carbon emissions Tourism Council (WTTC), the ties. are attributed to air travel, accord- International Federation of Tour e Center for Environmental ing to the UN Intergovernmental Operators (IFTO), the International Leadership in Business Panel on Climate Change (GRID Hotel and Restaurant Association

Figure 1: Strategic Initiatives Where Tourism Has Been Used as a Development Tool

Alternative Local Income

Community Participation

Natural Resource Management

Employment Generation

Poverty Alleviation

Biodiversity Conservation

Coastal Zone Management

Heritage/Cultural Preservation

Strengthening Legal and Policy Framework

Wildlife Management/Preservation

Forest Management

Expansion of Protected Areas

Revenue Generation

Decentralization

Privatization

Other

Source: Hawkins, et al. 2002

32 CHAPTER 3 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 33 (IHRA), and the International Recommendations for the private sity and on local, traditional, Council of Cruise Lines (ICCL), sector: and indigenous people. with scores of others at regional 1. Incorporate biodiversity conser- 5. Cooperate with governmental and national levels. ese associa- vation practices and principles and nongovernmental organizations have a significant ability to into the design, planning, tions in charge of protected influence biodiversity impacts, and development, and management natural areas and the conserva- changes here are likely to result in of tourism products and services tion of biodiversity. Ensure that a steep change across the industry. and into supply chain manage- tourism operations are practiced Several associations, including those ment. according to the management mentioned above, have already 2. Commit to industry-led, volun- plan and other regulations launched sustainability initiatives, tary initiatives that include crite- prevailing in those areas, so as some of which include limited sup- ria for biodiversity conservation to minimize negative impacts port to biodiversity conservation. and socioeconomic benefits. while enhancing the quality At the regional level, the Pacific 3. Innovate processes and applica- of the tourism experience and Area Travel Association (PATA), the tions through new technologies contributing financially to the Caribbean Tourism Organization and partnerships to minimize conservation of biodiversity. (CTO), and the Caribbean Hotel impacts on sensitive ecosystems 6. Support destination-manage- Association (CHA) have demon- and to contribute effectively to ment efforts that seek to strated a proactive attitude toward the conservation of biodiversity. minimize the environmental sustainability and conservation of 4. Make a commitment to educate footprint of the tourism indus- natural resources. staff and customers about the try and contribute to ongoing impacts of tourism on biodiver- conservation initiatives.

Table 3: Tourism-Related Donor Projects—Active or in Planning (2002)

Type of Project Latin Amer. & Caribbean Europe & Eurasia Africa Asia & Near East Total

Tourism in Title 24 1 5 1 31 Accommodation 3 6 1 10 Environmental Protection 25 5 25 28 83 Urban Development 4 1 1 10 16 Water Supply & Sanitation 2 1 1 4 Agriculture 2 1 2 5 Multisector 1 2 3 Social Protection 1 4 2 7 Education 2 2 Transportation 2 1 3 Microenterprises 3 3 Health 1 1 Science & Technology 1 1 Utilities 1 1 Private Sector 1 2 3 1 7 Industry 1 1 TOTAL 71 17 45 45 178

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 33 3.4 Development Agencies Investment of those projects totaled of organizations were most Governments set the rules or over US$7 billion over 5 years. likely to fund projects dealing frameworks under which tourism is Table 3 examines 178 projects, with sustainable tourism in the developed. e private sector drives either active in 2002 or at various future. Figure 2, next page, the development process itself. e stages of implementation after ini- indicates the experts’ opinion missing link between the two is tial approval on this date (in pipe- that bilateral and multilateral the financing of tourism planning line). It shows that of projects with aid agencies and government and development. Financing can significant tourism components, entities will most likely take come from private sources, from those related to environmental the lead on this subject. governments, or from multilateral protection are most prevalent. It is 2. However, the survey also asked and bilateral donor agencies and noteworthy that only 17 percent the experts, as well as officers development banks (sometimes of the projects surveyed actually from development agencies, directly, sometimes channeled include tourism in their title,10 about the relative importance through governments). although all have important tour- of key decisionmakers (Table ism components. is seems to 4). e results show that 3.4.1 The role of development agencies indicate either that development although both experts and A survey of 55 development agen- agencies do not fully recognize the development agency officers cies conducted in 2002 for UNEP importance of tourism as a sus- thought that the private sector found that although private invest- tainable development tool or that was the most important, the ments are driven by economic they are concerned about criticism experts thought development incentives, donor interventions in resulting from the poor environ- agencies were much more tourism are motivated by longer- mental and social track record of important than the officers term development objectives, tourism development projects in themselves did. including alternative local income, the 1970s and 1980s. is lack of ese results suggest that although natural resource management, definition makes it more difficult others may recognize their impor- community participation, employ- to study the scope and volume of tance, development agencies may ment generation, and coastal zone tourism-related environmental themselves be unaware of their role management (see Figure 1). conservation projects. in influencing actors on the ground e George Washington Two additional responses to the during the critical phase of siting, University, CI, and UNEP have same survey bolster the conclusion land-use planning, design, and developed a database including that development agencies do not choice of technologies and materi- details of over 320 tourism-related view themselves as important in als. e strength of this influence projects to determine the amount setting the stage for sustainable is evident in an example from of donor funds that have been tourism development: Brazil (Box 7), where experience is channeled into tourism develop- 1. A selected group of 35 key now shaping future projects of the ment at a regional level and the experts in sustainable tourism Inter-American Development Bank types of projects being funded. were asked to say which types (IDB).

Table 4: Importance of Stakeholders as Drivers of Sustainable Tourism (percentage of evaluations as “extremely important”)

Private Sector Government Dev. Agency Investors Local Pop. NGOs Tourists Experts 80 71 44 58 58 21 53 Dev. Agency Officers 100 65 27 72 83 28 53

34 CHAPTER 3 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 35 Recommendations for development 3.5 Local Residents in Tourism development that do not take local agencies: Destinations people’s priorities into account can 1. Redesign project portfolio on e negative environmental, be undermined by civil unrest and tourism as a carefully planned cultural, and social impacts of insecurity. On the other hand, tool for biodiversity conserva- unsustainable tourism development some of the successful examples of tion and poverty reduction, and have affected local people most sustainable tourism development incorporate monitoring, evalu- acutely. Traditional communi- arresting or reversing biodiversity ation, and reporting procedures ties and indigenous people can losses come from destinations based on relevant indicators for play a major role in conserving where local authorities led feasible, biodiversity conservation results biodiversity, but this has been multistakeholder governance from tourism development. acknowledged only recently, and systems (Calvia in Spain, Puerto 2. Support long-term public edu- important issues relating to par- Princesa in Philippines, Bonito in cation and awareness-raising ticipation, land and resource use, Brazil). about the impacts of tourism and democracy still need to be Local people often make up on biological diversity; collect addressed in the context of tourism a large part of the workforce in and disseminate lessons learned development. Local authorities have the tourism industry, and labor and best practices from existing an essential role as moderators and organizations in the tourism sector project portfolio. facilitators of empowerment for have contributed to the debate on 3. Develop, adopt, adapt, or apply, local communities. Experience with sustainable uses of biodiversity. e as appropriate, conservation top-down approaches to protected International Confederation of Free guidelines when preparing, area management has demonstrated Trade Unions and the International approving, and funding tourism that, if they are excluded, local Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, development projects having people can undermine biodiversity Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco, and potential implications for bio- conservation efforts (for example, Allied Workers’ Association (IUF) logical diversity. the Maasai spearing of wildlife in address sustainable agriculture 4. Invest in training and capacity- Kenya’s Amboseli National Park to in rural areas and biotechnol- building to enable local protest removal of their grazing and ogy. Overall, the role of tourism people to benefit from tourism watering rights within the park). employees in biodiversity conserva- development. Likewise, approaches to tourism tion is very important and should

Figure 2: Projected Funding Sources for Sustainable Tourism Development

Business Client/Investor

Bilateral and Multilateral Aid

Hotel Developers

Government Contracts

Other Organizations

Source: Hawkins, et al. 2002

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 35 be considered in any global action capacity-building efforts relat- plan. ing to local sustainable tourism Finally, local landowners play and ecotourism initiatives, in a crucial role in conservation, accordance with the principles especially in buffer zones of core of prior informed consent. protected areas and in conservation 4. Support local tourism contri- corridors. e long-term survival butions, such as traditional of key ecosystems and species building techniques and in a hotspot destination is often materials; modes of transport; dependent on the land-use patterns traditional foods, medicines, around relatively pristine forests and handicrafts; and respect and coral reefs. Many biodiversity access to cultural sites. hotspot countries, such as Brazil, 5. Collaborate with visitor-aware- Costa Rica, and South Africa, have ness campaigns on biodiversity already established regulations, conservation, educating

A village member of the Responsible Ecological fiscal and economic incentives, tourists on the significance of Social Tours (REST) project in Koh Yao Noi, and other policy tools to encour- natural resources for the local Thailand. age landowners to declare private culture and the economy. reserves for direct or indirect use. Costa Rica’s association of private 3.6 Other Major Players reserve owners facilitates informa- 3.6.1 Consumers/tourists tion exchange, promotes economies Tourism businesses, like all other of scale, and lobbies government businesses, are dependent on for additional support. consumers wanting to buy their products. A 1997 survey by the Recommendations for local residents German association Studienkreis in tourism destinations: fuer Tourismus and Entwicklung 1. Establish representative gover- found that 40 percent of German nance systems that allow local holidaymakers would spend an people to be accountable and additional dollar to help save the assume responsibilities in tour- environment in their destination— ism and conservation partner- an estimated potential US$750 ship, and take action to fulfill million. In 2000, Tearfund, a them within the duration of U.K.-based NGO, commissioned the partnership. market research into consumer 2. Identify, prioritize, and man- attitudes toward responsible tour- age critical conservation area ism. e results showed that the networks with direct and U.K. tourist wants to relax on indirect tourism use at the holiday, but not at the expense of local level, using tools such local people or their environment. as impact assessment, market In practice, however, consumers studies, zoning, and sustain- have brought little pressure to bear able use plans. on tourism companies. 3. Be actively involved in and Travel guides, magazines, benefit from community and newspapers can make huge

36 CHAPTER 3 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 37 contributions to raising consumer their environmental and social Conservation organizations, includ- awareness about critical issues standards and ensure they ing CI, the World Wildlife Fund facing the tourism industry and understand that your choice is (WWF), e Nature Conservancy help to stimulate a demand for determined by those standards. (TNC), and the World change. For example, National 3. Actively support tourism busi- Conservation Union (IUCN) are Geographic Traveler magazine nesses and NGOs that are interested in tourism as a mecha- routinely highlights issues of biodiversity friendly and seek to nism for biodiversity conservation, sustainable tourism and often benefit local people. particularly using priority- profiles tourism businesses that are 4. Recognize the cultural and nat- setting criteria such as hotspots and leading the way in implementing ural diversity associated with ecoregions. ese objectives are not responsible travel practices. In many natural areas, particularly mutually exclusive: Biodiversity 2000, the International Ecotourism regarding local and indigenous conservation is part of sustainable Society (TIES) launched a travel communities. development, and sustainable local media/tourist campaign, “Your livelihoods are critical to the suc- Travel Choice Makes a Difference,” 3.6.2 Nongovernmental organizations cess of biodiversity conservation. which calls upon travel consumers Tourism has attracted considerable In other cases, NGOs such as to support tourism businesses that attention from international and Tourism Concern in the United adhere to ecotourism principles local NGOs. Both conservation Kingdom, Equations in India, and and practices. At the same time, and development organizations the Instituto de Hospitalidade in Audubon magazine developed a have intervened in tourism Brazil have been developed solely to “Tread Lightly” code of conduct for with different, although often focus on tourism and to promote a travel in natural areas. overlapping, objectives. At the more responsible approach by the international level, development industry. Recommendations for consumers/ organizations such as Tearfund Local NGOs are at work tourists: and the International Institute for throughout the developing world 1. Respect local codes of conduct Environment and Development assisting communities to diversify and visitor-management plans (IIED) see the potential for tourism their income through sustainable in sensitive areas. to contribute to sustainable devel- tourism and to protect the natural 2. Ask tourism companies about opment and poverty reduction. resource base. ey play an essen-

Box 7: Inter-American Development Bank Lessons on Tourism Development With Conservation

The Brazilian state of Bahia harbors one of the most threatened ment on rain forests and mangroves, and impacts on coastal reefs conservation hotspots, the Atlantic rain forest. The US$400- and other coastal ecosystems. Intense pressure from local and million PRODETUR I project, funded by the IDB from 1994 to 2001, international NGOs and community groups, supported by bank improved and expanded eight international airports, built and officials, ultimately overcame the initial resistance from investor improved over 800 kilometers of highways and access roads, pro- groups and development-oriented government officers to allocate vided water and sewage infrastructure, and attracted over US$4 funds for conservation. The result was the conservation of 22 billion in private tourism investment. historical heritage sites and the beginning of efforts to conserve over 70,000 hectares of coastal ecosystems and protected areas, Its negative impacts on the environment, though, became clear including the creation of the new Serra do Conduru State Park. to the bank officers: uncontrolled settlement of people looking for These lessons are being applied to new IDB projects in the region. jobs, private building in environmentally sensitive areas, encroach-

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 37 5. Work with the private sector to transform practices to more directly contribute to biodiversity conservation and benefit local and indigenous communities. 6. Raise awareness among tourists as to the potential impacts— positive and negative—of tourism activities. 7. Encourage informed decisionmaking among all stakeholders regarding tourism development in or near local and indigenous communities. 8. Fill research gaps on the dynamics of the relationship between tourism development An Austrailian tourist learns to weave baskets with village women in Kenya. and biodiversity conservation at both local and regional lev- tial role in pressuring governments agement and monitoring of such els, and share best practices. and donors, raising awareness, activities. mediating negotiations, building 3.6.3 Intergovernmental organizations local capacity to deal with impacts Recommendations for rough their influence on of tourism, and implementing nongovernmental organizations: national governments, donors and sustainable tourism projects on the 1. Facilitate and mediate innova- lenders, and the secretariats of ground. During the International tive, conservation-friendly multilateral agreements related to Year of Ecotourism, UNEP identi- tourism partnerships. tourism and environment, inter- fied 35 NGOs in the South that 2. Play a role in the capacity governmental organizations such had been active in the field of building, technology transfer, as UNEP, WTO, and UNCTAD tourism and biodiversity for at least and training of local com- play an important role in shaping 3 years. Some expressed concerns munities to participate in and tourism development by providing about tourism and its role in eco- benefit from sustainable tour- technical assistance and informa- nomic development—specifically ism development. tion, guidelines, facilitating nego- about the expansion of nature and 3. Monitor impacts of tour- tiations, mediating agreements, adventure travel into new (previ- ism developments related to and providing financial and logisti- ously untouched) areas and the all stakeholders, and report cal resources. Regional bodies such risk of damaging natural resources independently and openly on as the Organization of American and the livelihood of indigenous results. States (OAS), the Caribbean communities as a result of poorly 4. Work with governments to Tourism Organization (CTO), planned tourism growth. ey say integrate sustainable tourism and the Association of South East that for tourism to significantly as a biodiversity conservation Asian Nations (ASEAN) have also contribute to sustainable develop- strategy in national biodiver- developed guidelines, codes of eth- ment there must be proper man- sity agendas. ics, and sets of principles.

38 CHAPTER 3 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 39 Recommendations for 3.6.4 Experts (academics, consulting firms) intergovernmental organizations: Caught between the development 1. Assess and monitor biodiversity agencies and the private sector, impacts of tourism develop- experts and consulting firms (includ- ment (and their social and ing the international accountancy economic determinants)—from and auditing companies) often serve supply through production to as the implementing bodies for tour- consumption; this assessment ism development projects in devel- should assist in identifying effec- oping countries—for example, in tive intervention areas. master planning and other national 2. Develop pilot projects (and tourism development projects. In research existing ones) to estab- this sense, they often affect how and lish guidelines to support devel- when tourism is implemented. Most opment and implementation of strategies aimed at the private sec- conservation-friendly tourism tor still overlook the potential role

policies by governments and this sector can play in helping the A group of tourists push their vehicle out of the local authorities. ese policies industry become more biodiversity- mud on a jungle road in Belize. should address how to balance friendly. conflicting economic, social, and environmental priorities. Recommendations for experts: 3. Encourage transparent reporting 1. Incorporate biodiversity and of conservation issues by tour- socioeconomic considerations ism corporations, support the into tourism master plans and development of certification and other development strategies. accreditation programs that con- 2. Ensure widespread participation sider conservation, and establish in tourism planning exercises, sector-specific sustainability including biodiversity-focused reporting guidelines and perfor- stakeholders such as protected- mance indicators for biodiversity area managers, NGOs, and conservation. traditional communities. 4. Work with key players and intermediaries to develop and Endnotes implement customer awareness 9A Local Agenda 21 is a planning approach based on the international Agenda 21 crafted in Rio in 1992 at the Earth campaigns addressing conserva- Summit. A local authority initiates and provides leadership to define a sustainable development strategy and an action program tion of biodiversity. to implement it. Success hinges on close cooperation between the population, NGOs, and economic and social players. e 5. Raise awareness of intermediar- International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives estimates that over 8,500 local communities worldwide, many of which are ies on their key role in catalyz- major tourism destinations, are now implementing a Local Agenda ing change in the tourism supply 21 (UNEP 2003b). 10Tourism in the Title” refers to stand-alone tourism projects—the chain, and build their capacity others being projects that include tourism as a component rather to improve conservation of bio- than the primary focus. diversity through networks and management tools (for example, screening indicators or environmentally sound technologies).

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 39 TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 41 Conclusion Tourism Development, Biodiversity Conservation, and Local Livelihoods—The Overlap

Over the past 3 decades, major supporting the livelihoods of local losses of virtually every kind of people, such as fresh water, are natural habitat have occurred, and also affected by tourism develop- the decline and extinction of spe- ment, and recognizing these links cies has emerged as a leading envi- is important to managing tour- ronmental issue. Many of the eco- ism development into the future. systems in decline are the very basis At the same time, an increasing for tourism development—coastal number of examples have shown and marine areas, coral reefs, that tourism development guided Above: Shopping for village handicrafts in mountains, and rain forests—and by the principles associated with Botswana. support a wide range of tourism ecotourism—environmental sus- Left: Fishing boats crowd the waterfront of activities, including beach tourism, tainability, protection of nature, Elmina, Ghana, a popular tourist site. skiing, trekking, and wildlife view- and supporting the well-being of ing. e maps created in this study local peoples—can have a positive help to show the overlap between impact on biodiversity conserva- tourism development and areas of tion. By creating private reserves, high biodiversity and threat—the providing justification for existing “hotspots.” Biodiversity is essential and new national parks and pro- for the continued development tected areas, and building a local of the tourism industry, yet this conservation constituency among study indicates an apparent lack of the people who live closest to awareness of the links—positive important biodiversity areas, tour- and negative—between tourism ism can have and has had a positive development and biodiversity con- impact on biodiversity conserva- servation. tion. Properly managed, tourism Tourism will require careful does have the potential to contrib- planning in the future to avoid ute to biodiversity conservation and having further negative impacts on to support poverty reduction. biodiversity. Many of the factors However, the proximity of associated with biodiversity loss— tourism development to high-biodi- land conversion, climate change, versity areas means that if it is not pollution—are also linked to tour- carefully managed, tourism could ism development. As the maps have exacerbate the already rapid decline shown, resources that are important of biodiversity. It is increasingly for conserving biodiversity and clear that, where tourism develop-

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 41 conservation efforts and poverty reduction. e recommendations developed through this study for the key players (government, private sector, development agencies, local authorities, residents, and tourists themselves) can apply to both tourism destination countries and to the main tourist originating countries. Acting on these recommendations will help to promote more responsible tourism activities and development that can positively affect both biodiversity and local economies. During the past 10 years, and

Sailing in the Virgin Islands National Park, St. John, USVI. with the advent of ecotourism principles and sustainable tourism ment is not guided by principles continue ongoing work under the guidelines, significant progress has that promote conservation of nature Convention on Biological Diversity been made among the key play- and contribute to the well-being of on tourism as a sustainable use of ers, both in terms of strategies for local peoples, both human welfare biodiversity. e emphasis is on tourism development and in terms and biodiversity can seriously suf- the need to increase the benefits of collaboration to form more fer as a consequence. Chapter 2 from tourism for host communities, effective partnerships that consider identifies 38 hotspot countries that while enhancing the protection of environmental and human factors already experience more than natural heritage and ecologically in designing tourism development 1 million annual tourism arrivals sensitive areas. plans and polices. But as tourism and lists 22 hotspot countries where Proper management of tourism continues to grow and expand into tourist arrivals have more than to ensure both social and environ- new natural areas, more concrete doubled in the last decade. In these, mental benefits requires collabora- action needs to be put into place to as well as in other biodiversity rich tion among the “sustainable devel- safeguard the Earth’s biodiversity, countries, incorporating biodiver- opment triad” of public agencies, while promoting tangible economic sity considerations into tourism the private sector, and local com- benefits to local communities. It is development policies and strategies munities. Yet this study shows that our hope that the information con- should be a priority. Although the tourism industry and public tained in this study, by providing biodiversity was one of the five authorities still appear to be largely evidence of the overlaps and links major issues under discussion at unaware of the mutually supportive between tourism, biodiversity, and the 2002 WSSD in Johannesburg, nature of the relationship between local populations and the future tourism was not a specific agenda biodiversity conservation and implications of those overlaps, can item. Nevertheless, reference to tourism development and of the contribute significantly to that tourism is made in the WSSD Plan potential to use nature tourism as effort. of Action, including the need to a way to contribute to biodiversity

42 CONCLUSION TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 43 References and Resources

Brandon, K. 1996. Ecotourism and Conservation: A Review of Key Issues. Environment Department Paper no. 33. Washington, DC: e World Bank.

Brandon, K. & Margoluis, R. 1996. “Structuring Ecotourism Success: Framework for Analysis.” In E. Malek- Zadeh (Ed.), e Ecotourism Equation: Measuring the Impacts. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Studies.

Buckley, R. C. 2002. “Tourism and Biodiversity North and South.” Tourism Recreation Research 27(1).

Buckley, R. C. 2003. Case Studies in Ecotourism. Wallingford, UK: CABI.

Ceballos-Lascurain, H. 1996. Tourism, Ecotourism and Protected Areas. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

Christ, C. 1997. “Taking Ecotourism to the Next Level.” In G. Lindberg, M. Epler Wood, P. Engeldrum (Eds.), Ecotourism: A Guide for Planners and Managers, Vol. II. e International Ecotourism Society.

Christ, C. 2002. “Ecotourism in Africa.” Grist Magazine. www.gristmagazine.com/week/christ031902.asp.

Christ, C. 2003. Northern Palawan Ecotourism Assessment. Washington, DC: Conservation International, [unpublished report].

Conservation International (CI). 2003. “What Are Hotspots?” www.biodiversityhotspots.org/xp/Hotspots/ hotspotsScience.

Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). 2002. Ecosystem Approach Principles. www.biodiv.org/programmes/ cross-cutting/ecosystem/principles.asp.

Cruise Line International Association (CLIA). 2001. “e Cruise Industry: An Overview.” www.cruising.org/ cruisenews/index.cfm.

Costanza, R.; d’Arge, R.; de Groot, R.; Farber, S.; Grasso, M.; Hannon, B.; Limburg, K.; Naeem, S.; O’Neill, R. V.; Paruelo, J.; Raskin, R. G.; Sutton, P.; & van den Belt, M. 1997. “e Value of the World’s Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital.” Nature 387:253–260.

Deloitte and Touche, IIED and ODI. 1999. Sustainable Tourism and Poverty Alleviation. Report to the U.K. Department for International Development.

Diaz Benevides, & Perez-Ducy, E. 2001. Tourism in the Least Developed Countries. Madrid: WTO and UNCTAD.

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 43 European Environment Agency (EEA). 2001. Environmental Signals 2001. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency.

Fundacao Instituto de Pesquisa Economicas (FIPE) and Brazil Tourism Promotiuon Authority (EMBRATUR). www.brasilparatodos.com.br.conheca o brasil/estatisticas de tourismo.h.

German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN). 1997. Biodiversity and Tourism: Conflicts on the World’s Seacoasts and Strategies for eir Solution. Berlin/ Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

Ghimire, K. 1997. Emerging Mass Tourism in the South. Discussion Paper no. 5. Geneva: UNRISD.

Groombridge, B. & Jenkins, M.D. 2000. Global Biodiversity: Earth’s Living Resources in the 21st Century. Cambridge, UK: World Conservation Monitoring Centre.

Hawkins, D.; Lamoureux, K.; & Poon, A. 2002. e Relationship of Tourism Development to Biodiversity Conservation and the Sustainable Use of Energy and Water Resources. Report to the United Nations Environment Programme.

Holden, A. 2000. Environment and Tourism. London: Routledge.

Honey, M. 2002. Ecotourism and Certification: Setting Standards in Practice. Washington, DC: Island Press. UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) at www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/aviation/069.htm.

Meyers, N.; Mittermeier, R.; Mittermeier, C.; Fonseca, G.; & Kent, J. 2000. “Biodiversity Hotspots for Conservation Priorities.” Nature 403: 853-858.

Pearce, D. & Moran. D. 1994. e Economic Values of Biodiversity. London: Earthscan.

Potter, C.; Cohen, J.; & Janczewski, D. (Ed.). 1993. Perspectives on Biodiversity: Case Studies of Genetic Resource. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Reiter, C. 2000. Top 10 Hotel Chains’ Hotspot Properties. Washington, DC: Conservation International [unpublished report].

Roe, D; Leader-Williams, N.; & Dalal-Clayton, B. 1997. Take Only Photographs, Leave Only Footprints: e Environmental Impacts of Wildlife Tourism. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.

Roe, D. & Urquhart, P. 2001. Harnessing the World’s Largest Industry for the World’s Poor. IIED WSSD Opinion Paper. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.

Shiva, V.; Anderson, P.; Schuching, H.; Gray, A.; Lohmann, L.; & Cooper, D. 1991. Biodiversity: Social and Ecological Perspectives. World Rainforest Movement, Penang.

44 REFERENCES AND RESOURCES TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 45 Sweeting, J.; Bruner, A.; & Rosenfeld, A. 1999. e Green Host Effect: An Integrated Approach to Sustainable Tourism and Resort Development. Washington, DC: Conservation International.

Sweeting, J. & Wayne, S. 2003. A Shifting Tide: Environmental Challenges and Cruise Industry Responses. Washington, DC: Conservation International.

Tourism Concern: Golf Campaign. 2003. www.tourismconcern.org.uk/campaigns/campaignsgolf.htm.

Travel Industry Association of America (TIAA). 2002. e Geotourism Survey: Phase 1, Executive Summary. New York: Travel Industry Association of America.

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 1995. Environmental Codes of Conduct. London: Earthscan.

UNEP. 2002. Global Environment Outlook. London: Earthscan.

UNEP. 2003a. Switched On: Renewable Energy in the Tourism Industry. Paris: UNEP/DTIE.

UNEP. 2003b. Tourism and Local Agenda 21: e Role of Local Authorities in Sustainable Tourism. Paris: UNEP/ DTIE and ICLEI.

UNEP. 2003c. Water and Waste Management: What the Tourism Industry Can Do to Improve Its Performance. Paris: UNEP/DTIE and GTZ.

Vermeulen, S. & Koziell, I. 2002. Integrating Global and Local Biodiversity Values: A Review of Biodiversity Assessment. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.

WEHAB Working Group. 2002. “A Framework for Action on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Management.” New York: United Nations. www.johannesburgsummit.org/html/documents/summit_docs/wehab_papers/wehab_ biodiversity.pdf.

Weiner, T. 2001. “On Tourism, Mexico Now inks Green.” e New York Times, 31 August 2001.

World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA). 2000. Tourism and Biodiversity. Biodiversity Brief no. 9. Gland, Switzerland: Biodiversity in Development Project, IUCN, European Commission, and Department for International Development.

World Tourism Organization (WTO). 1998. Tourism Economic Report, first edition. Madrid: World Tourism Organization.

World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC) and International Hotel & Restaurant Association (IHRA). 1999. e Global Importance of Tourism. Background Paper no. 1, prepared for the Commission on Sustainable Development, seventh session, 19–30 April 1999.

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 45 Links

BCIS (Biodiversity Conservation Information System)—www.biodiversity.org/simplify/ev.php: a consortium of 10 international conservation organizations and programs of IUCN (e World Conservation Union), BCIS members collectively represent the single greatest source of information on biodiversity conservation information. BCIS is a framework within which the members work together toward a common goal: to support environmentally sound decisionmaking and action by facilitating access to information on biodiversity.

Biodiversity and WORLDMAP—www.nhm.ac.uk/science/projects/worldmap: a map showing the distribution of some of the most highly valued terrestrial biodiversity worldwide (mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and seed plants), using family-level data for equal-area grid cells, with red for high biodiversity and blue for low biodiversity.

CI (Conservation International)—www.conservation.org: focuses on trying to preserve and promote awareness about the world’s most endangered biodiversity through scientific programs, local awareness campaigns, and economic initiatives. CI also works with multinational institutions, provides economic analyses for national leaders, and promotes “best practices” that allow for sustainable development.

Convention on Biological Biodiversity—www.biodiv.org: the first global, comprehensive agreement to address all aspects of biological diversity.

Council of Europe—www.coe.int/portalT.asp: an international organization that promotes various environmental directives.

ECOTRANS (European Network for Sustainable Tourism Development)—www.eco-tip.org: a European network of experts and organizations concerned with tourism, environment, and regional development, with a focus on practical approaches and initiatives for sustainable tourism.

ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives)—www.iclei.org: an association of local governments dedicated to the prevention of and solution to local, regional, and global environmental problems through local action.

IUCN (World Conservation Union)—www.iucn.org: a union of governments, government agencies, and nongovernmental organizations working at field and policy level, together with scientists and experts, to protect nature.

RARE Center for Tropical Conservation—www.rarecenter.org: protecting wildlands of globally significant biological diversity by empowering local people to benefit from their preservation, working in partnership with local communities, nongovernmental organizations, and other stakeholders to develop and replicate locally managed conservation strategies.

46 LINKS TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 47 TIES (e International Ecotourism Society)—www.ecotourism.org: the oldest and largest association of ecotourism players and practitioners with members and publications from all over the world.

Tourism Concern—www.tourismconcern.org.uk: raises awareness of tourism’s impact with the general public, with government decisionmakers and within the tourist industry itself.

WRI (World Resources Institute)—www.wri.org/wri/biodiv: biodiversity and protected areas.

WTO (World Tourism Organization)—www.world-tourism.org: the leading intergovernmental organization, now part of the UN system.

WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature)—www.panda.org: one of the world’s largest independent conservation organizations, with a global network of 27 national organizations, 5 associates, and 21 program offices.

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 47 (1) ------32.40 33.34 46.00 74.00 58.00 34.00 80.00 67.00 55.00 49.00 56.00 23.00 41.00 32.42 58.30 50.00 23.00 21.80 60.00 62.00 28.00 48.85 36.08 45.00 16.67 61.10 52.00 67.90 43.00 19.50 30.00 (%) Hotel and Hotel —Occupancy —Occupancy Other Facilities Facilities Other Rate circa 2000 Rate circa (1) ------551 227 677 2,954 6,157 1,067 3,317 7,783 2,000 6,766 4,550 6,456 4,106 1,215 1,086 1,746 2,412 4,508 2,391 3,579 31,805 14,701 61,890 15,795 47,204 166,087 194,926 304,928 139,550 279,636 Hotel and Hotel —Rooms circa circa —Rooms Other Facilities Other 2000 (actual) (3) ------(m_) 470.0000 375.0000 529.0000 680.0000 2448.0000 1471.0000 2787.0000 3615.0000 8980.8571 5797.0000 1561.0000 4114.0000 9429.0000 9176.0000 2228.0000 1730.0000 5589.0000 12489.0000 14009.0000 26545.0000 18177.1474 10357.0000 66667.0000 38806.0000 42945.0000 25148.0000 39613.0000 18016.0000 90432.4183 37934.0000 60596.0411 118012.0000 Fresh Water Water Fresh Capita 2000 Capita Resources per Resources - (3) ------0.733 0.697 0.403 0.800 0.844 0.754 0.939 0.926 0.741 0.826 0.831 0.478 0.871 0.788 0.939 0.784 0.420 0.494 0.653 0.572 0.856 0.779 0.325 0.313 0.543 0.512 0.940 0.715 0.375 0.365 0.831 2000 Human Devel Human opment Index* opment Index* (2) ------2.2 1.2 3.1 5.7 5.4 7.9 1.4 3.5 2.4 9.0 3.2 3.1 3.5 1.7 3.8 2.1 2.2 3.2 1.5 4.4 5.7 2.0 1.5 3.3 27.6 25.2 19.1 17.2 12.9 10.7 14.0 1999 Tourism Tourism and Travel and Travel as Percentage as Percentage of Total GDP GDP of Total Economy GDP Economy (1) ------9.00 1.00 18.00 55.00 45.00 81.00 59.00 17.00 17.00 23.00 211.00 291.00 782.00 408.00 745.00 112.00 431.00 160.00 234.00 228.00 439.00 827.00 2903.00 8442.00 1503.00 7039.00 4228.00 1074.00 11440.00 10768.00 Int’l Tourism Tourism Int’l 2000 (in mil Receipts circa circa Receipts lions of $US)

(1) - 0.000 0.900 3.600 0.700 6.900 0.700 4.400 0.100 3.550 1.200 0.300 3.800 2.821 1.900 0.400 1.300 2.000 0.400 0.100 0.400 9.300 27.500 19.400 57.300 62.400 52.400 26.800 58.800 13.800 372.300 342.500 843.200 233.700 574.100 328.300 181.500 636.600 219.300 994.900 2000 2206.500 Arrivals as Arrivals Population Population precentage of precentage - (1) - - 4.00 7.00 39.00 21.00 51.00 44.00 30.00 30.00 10.00 44.00 866.00 207.00 721.00 681.00 200.00 556.00 355.00 181.00 152.00 328.00 342.00 110.00 843.00 964.00 218.00 466.00 135.00 143.00 407.00 2991.00 4946.00 1577.00 1991.00 6457.00 5313.00 2785.00 1742.00 17982.00 20423.00 sands) Int’l Tourist Tourist Int’l Arrivals circa circa Arrivals 2000 (in thou - (1) - - 5.00 1.00 -5.00 30.00 42.00 55.00 67.00 45.00 74.00 29.00 25.00 38.00 35.00 55.00 76.00 52.00 34.00 61.00 67.00 85.00 -50.00 -24.00 -19.00 -24.00 -25.00 -72.00 150.00 123.00 632.00 120.00 106.00 250.00 197.00 387.00 156.00 195.00 496.00 389.00 (%) 2641.00 Average An Average nual Growth nual Growth 1990 to 2000 of Tourism— - - (1) - 0.60 7.50 4.60 4.60 0.60 4.60 0.60 0.60 18.80 19.10 14.10 40.00 40.00 42.80 40.00 22.90 40.00 68.50 18.80 40.00 40.00 18.80 42.80 36.00 42.80 17.00 40.00 42.80 177.00 177.00 223.30 185.20 223.30 223.30 185.20 177.00 135.80 223.30 135.80 192.00 Int’l Tourist Tourist Int’l gion—Projec tions for 2020 (in millions) Arrivals by Re by Arrivals (1) - 4.20 7.30 2.90 0.30 5.10 4.20 2.60 1.90 4.20 5.90 1.90 4.70 0.30 1.90 0.30 0.30 93.70 93.70 14.10 14.10 11.80 78.90 14.10 78.90 14.10 12.40 14.10 78.90 14.10 11.80 93.70 11.80 29.20 78.90 29.20 80.50 14.10 11.80 116.70 116.70 Arrivals by by Arrivals Int’l Tourist Tourist Int’l (in millions) Region—1995 Region—1995

- Wilderness Wilderness & Areas Amazon

Amazon

Hotspots Mediterranean Basin Mediterranean & Micronesia Polynesia Congo Caribbean Caribbean Central Chile, Forest, Atlantic Andes Tropical Caucasus Caribbean Australia Southwest Caucasus Caribbean Indo-Burma Caribbean Mesoamerica Africa West of Forests Guinean Indo-Burma Tropical Cerrado, Brazilian Andes; For Cerrado, Atlantic Brazilian est; Sundaland Indo-Burma Africa; West of Forests Guinean Congo Caribbean Congo Andes Tropical Central Chile, Country Afghanistan Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Bulgaria Faso Burkina Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Verde Cape Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile Data Sets

48 DATA SETS TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 49 ------55.00 41.00 27.00 40.00 50.00 76.00 59.00 40.30 24.00 74.00 58.60 46.00 37.00 34.80 70.00 73.00 61.00 45.00 48.00 40.00 53.80 49.00 59.00 60.00 70.00 43.60 34.00 35.00 70.00 40.80 56.62 71.00 56.00 63.00 71.40 40.00 46.00 45.00 73.70 43.00 53.00 ------389 783 330 890 730 2,522 5,101 4,899 4,497 7,599 6,499 5,283 3,357 2,450 8,518 1,822 8,136 3,594 1,758 6,045 53,970 21,864 29,497 81,272 38,072 43,363 96,399 39,459 52,192 36,726 54,855 10,110 12,033 13,943 57,870 57,386 21,218 948,185 113,611 589,174 877,070 311,841 252,984 ------2184.9722 1792.0000 4790.0000 3397.0000 1057.0000 1557.0000 1124.0000 3639.0000 2508.0000 1071.0000 2920.0000 2148.0000 9350.0000 1711.0000 3243.0000 6140.0000 2167.0000 2756.0000 6534.0000 1520.0000 1878.0000 2018.0000 50426.0000 24496.0000 29494.0000 16301.0000 34952.0000 65646.0000 21248.0000 13236.0000 11805.0000 30479.0000 22519.0000 14976.0000 11974.0000 13448.0895 275646.0000 133333.0000 174178.5000 604982.0000 ------0.726 0.772 0.511 0.512 0.431 0.820 0.428 0.809 0.795 0.883 0.849 0.926 0.445 0.779 0.727 0.732 0.642 0.706 0.679 0.421 0.826 0.327 0.758 0.930 0.928 0.637 0.405 0.748 0.925 0.548 0.885 0.747 0.631 0.414 0.349 0.708 0.471 0.638 0.835 0.936 0.577 0.684 0.721 ------2.7 3.0 7.2 2.3 1.4 5.1 1.5 4.1 2.3 3.4 8.6 7.4 3.6 5.3 3.0 3.1 3.5 4.5 2.3 6.1 2.8 2.9 5.5 8.1 9.1 3.9 1.8 5.1 1.6 3.9 5.9 8.5 2.2 4.0 5.4 14.5 11.3 ------7.00 19.00 11.00 36.00 49.00 36.00 24.00 50.00 63.00 12.00 59.00 55.00 402.00 254.00 505.00 171.00 394.00 400.00 304.00 418.00 518.00 240.00 227.00 850.00 1028.00 1102.00 2758.00 1756.00 1894.00 2869.00 4025.00 2918.00 4345.00 1401.00 9221.00 1908.00 3424.00 3296.00 5749.00 16231.00 29900.00 17812.00 ------1.700 1.900 3.000 1.517 0.107 0.800 9.400 4.500 4.100 5.900 8.400 0.800 0.200 5.200 3.900 1.500 5.900 0.200 2.200 6.800 0.200 1.700 1.200 21.800 58.000 37.400 79.200 26.800 43.300 36.600 42.000 83.300 11.500 22.200 11.800 82.700 272.100 146.300 291.600 110.000 105.400 113.400 116.900 707.000 252.400 ------24.00 44.00 53.00 73.00 21.00 74.00 70.00 96.00 75.00 530.00 301.00 615.00 795.00 125.00 294.00 252.00 155.00 385.00 372.00 129.00 623.00 823.00 143.00 408.00 303.00 1106.00 5831.00 1700.00 2686.00 5700.00 2088.00 2977.00 5116.00 1100.00 2700.00 1288.00 2641.00 5064.00 1700.00 31229.00 45500.00 18983.00 12500.00 15571.00 ------5.00 -4.00 -4.00 -1.00 54.00 72.00 14.00 64.00 70.00 58.00 72.00 91.00 42.00 11.00 41.00 70.00 88.00 65.00 62.00 17.00 41.00 55.00 -35.00 -17.00 -22.00 -36.00 -78.00 -13.00 -24.00 198.00 200.00 389.00 115.00 154.00 420.00 128.00 112.00 310.00 108.00 353.00 155.00 113.00 133.00 1004.00 - - 0.60 0.60 7.50 4.60 7.50 0.60 4.60 4.60 7.50 4.60 4.60 7.50 42.80 17.00 14.10 40.00 34.80 96.60 17.00 40.00 40.00 42.80 68.50 17.00 17.00 42.80 96.60 14.10 96.60 42.80 14.10 12.40 40.00 40.00 14.10 42.80 40.00 96.60 18.80 18.80 224.40 177.00 223.30 223.30 185.20 223.30 185.20 177.00 223.30 135.80 - - 4.70 0.30 0.30 2.90 2.60 1.90 4.70 2.60 0.30 4.70 4.70 2.90 2.90 2.17 1.90 1.90 2.90 2.60 1.90 1.90 2.60 4.20 4.20 44.10 11.80 93.70 14.10 11.40 78.90 37.60 14.10 14.10 11.80 12.40 78.90 11.80 37.60 37.60 11.80 78.90 93.70 14.10 14.10 11.80 14.10 78.90 37.60 29.20 116.70 116.70

- New New

Amazon

Mountains of S. West China, West of S. Mountains Indo-Burma Ecuador, Choco-Darien-Western Andes, Mesoamerica; Tropical Amazon Ocean & Indian Madagascar Islands Congo Congo & Micronesia Polynesia Mesoamerica Africa West of Forests Guinean Caribbean Basin Mediterranean Caribbean Caribbean Ecuador, Choco-Darien-Western Andes; Tropical Mesoamerica Congo & Micronesia Polynesia Basin Mediterranean Amazon & Micronesia Polynesia Congo Caucasus Africa West of Forests Guinean Basin Mediterranean Basin Mediterranean Caribbean Caribbean & Micronesia Polynesia Mesoamerica Africa West of Forests Guinean Amazon Caribbean Mesoamerica & Ghats Western Indo-Burma, Moun Lanka, Sundaland, Sri China West tains of S. Wallacea; Sundaland, Guinea Caucasus China Colombia Comoros Congo Republic Congo, Democratic Cook Islands Costa Rica Côte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Republic Czech Denmark Djibouti Dominica Republic Dominican Ecuador Egypt Salvador El Guinea Equatorial Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Is. Falkland Islands Faroe Fiji Finland France Guiana French Polynesia French Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 49 (1) ------(%) 47.00 65.00 60.00 42.00 58.00 69.00 39.00 39.00 65.00 25.40 32.00 28.00 21.80 30.00 28.00 37.90 59.00 63.00 39.00 57.00 68.00 39.98 46.00 25.00 52.00 49.00 70.00 54.00 19.00 71.00 47.00 26.00 39.70 49.00 48.00 Hotel and Hotel —Occupancy —Occupancy Other Facilities Facilities Other Rate circa 2000 Rate circa (1) ------404 305 710 9,124 1,988 2,648 7,333 6,431 1,041 6,632 7,708 9,201 6,700 4,150 8,329 2,748 6,766 8,657 2,954 2,240 2,686 26,691 60,000 45,594 19,908 17,485 18,000 51,189 14,500 11,815 66,823 18,203 966,138 124,503 421,850 Hotel and Hotel 1,540,053 —Rooms circa circa —Rooms Other Facilities Other 2000 (actual) (3) ------(m_) 449.0000 143.0000 151.0000 256.0000 4776.0000 2784.2273 3570.0000 3389.0000 7371.0000 1004.0000 3462.0000 1476.0000 9461.0000 1109.0000 2555.0000 6739.0000 3650.0000 3447.0000 1804.0000 9225.0000 4278.0000 1855.0000 4675.0000 2732.0000 1045.0000 9122.0000 5716.0000 13706.0000 63175.0000 14924.0000 74121.0000 21710.0000 24925.0000 14512.0000 11927.0000 21432.8837 25896.0000 Fresh Water Water Fresh Capita 2000 Capita Resources per Resources - (3) ------0.925 0.896 0.913 0.742 0.933 0.717 0.750 0.513 0.882 0.813 0.712 0.485 0.800 0.755 0.535 0.773 0.808 0.925 0.772 0.469 0.400 0.782 0.743 0.386 0.875 0.438 0.772 0.796 0.701 0.655 0.602 0.322 0.552 0.610 0.490 0.935 2000 Human Devel Human opment Index* opment Index* (2) ------3.0 3.2 4.4 9.9 3.0 9.4 4.2 7.5 2.0 1.8 5.0 2.0 3.3 3.0 3.5 1.1 4.4 2.7 3.3 2.6 6.3 2.6 5.7 3.5 3.5 21.4 47.0 17.4 11.2 1999 Tourism Tourism and Travel and Travel as Percentage as Percentage of Total GDP GDP of Total Economy GDP Economy (1) ------2.00 4.00 4.00 3.00 19.00 28.00 37.00 27.00 50.00 28.00 28.00 35.00 722.00 363.00 304.00 243.00 114.00 131.00 742.00 391.00 116.00 344.00 650.00 302.00 585.00 168.00 3571.00 3100.00 1333.00 3374.00 6609.00 3083.00 4563.00 8295.00 2040.00 6951.00 27439.00 Int’l Tourism Tourism Int’l 2000 (in mil Receipts circa circa Receipts lions of $US)

(1) - - - - 2.200 3.200 4.400 3.200 2.600 0.300 9.100 2.400 1.438 1.900 4.900 2.900 0.700 1.800 0.700 9.100 0.600 0.200 6.300 0.442 1.600 32.500 59.200 45.000 23.000 10.600 10.400 15.000 11.200 44.700 41.400 20.500 12.400 15.000 36.118 50.900 141.100 231.700 199.600 940.400 122.500 276.600 101.200 882.000 138.600 2000 Arrivals as Arrivals Population Population precentage of precentage - (1) ------1.00 5.00 78.00 77.00 69.00 40.00 61.00 91.00 33.00 17.00 10.00 943.00 130.00 300.00 490.00 742.00 186.00 807.00 224.00 160.00 228.00 467.00 526.00 300.00 158.00 208.00 614.00 451.00 6728.00 2400.00 1323.00 4757.00 1427.00 5322.00 1226.00 6682.00 1216.00 4113.00 sands) 41182.00 10222.00 20643.00 10200.00 Int’l Tourist Tourist Int’l Arrivals circa circa Arrivals 2000 (in thou - (1) ------9.00 0.00 7.00 2.00 -6.00 -2.00 84.00 54.00 34.00 47.00 16.00 13.00 80.00 92.00 65.00 89.00 75.00 37.00 39.00 87.00 20.00 22.00 54.00 77.00 76.00 (%) -90.00 -67.00 -58.00 -22.00 -60.00 -47.00 -23.00 126.00 149.00 413.00 166.00 202.00 139.00 107.00 313.00 890.00 2043.00 Average An Average nual Growth nual Growth 1990 to 2000 of Tourism— - - (1) - - 4.60 4.60 4.60 68.50 96.60 34.80 40.00 68.50 17.00 14.10 68.50 68.50 36.00 68.50 17.00 17.00 18.80 14.10 40.00 17.00 14.10 40.00 19.10 17.00 36.00 18.80 177.00 224.40 223.30 224.40 224.40 223.30 135.80 223.30 185.20 223.30 185.20 224.40 177.00 135.80 177.00 192.00 223.30 185.20 224.40 135.80 185.20 Int’l Tourist Tourist Int’l gion—Projec tions for 2020 (in millions) Arrivals by Re by Arrivals (1) - - 4.70 2.90 5.90 1.90 4.70 4.70 4.20 1.90 2.90 1.90 4.70 2.90 7.30 4.70 5.90 4.20 12.40 37.60 11.40 93.70 14.10 44.10 12.40 78.90 44.10 44.10 12.40 78.90 29.20 78.90 12.40 12.40 78.90 44.10 93.70 29.20 93.70 14.10 80.50 78.90 44.10 14.10 29.20 116.70 116.70 116.70 116.70 Arrivals by by Arrivals Int’l Tourist Tourist Int’l (in millions) Region—1995 Region—1995 Wilderness Wilderness & Areas Hotspots Mediterranean Basin Mediterranean Basin Mediterranean Caribbean & Mountains Eastern Arc Coastal Forests & Micronesia Polynesia Indo-Burma Basin Mediterranean Africa West of Forests Guinean Basin Mediterranean Indo-Burma Ocean & Indian Madagascar Islands Sundaland Indo-Burma, Basin Mediterranean & Micronesia Polynesia Caribbean Ocean & Indian Madagascar Islands Ocean & Indian Madagascar Islands California Floristic Mesoamerica, Province & Micronesia Polynesia Basin Mediterranean Caribbean Basin Mediterranean China West of S. Mountains Karoo Succulent & Micronesia Polynesia Indo-Burma Country Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Democratic Korea, of Republic Korea, Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Islands Marshall Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico of) (Federation Micronesia Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands

50 DATA SETS TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 51 ------51.00 52.00 57.60 37.00 40.00 61.00 37.00 42.00 53.63 40.00 54.00 45.00 34.73 58.00 39.00 42.00 70.00 57.30 64.00 35.00 38.00 43.00 67.00 70.00 38.00 42.00 35.00 52.00 14.14 83.00 29.00 39.00 57.12 58.00 52.00 46.00 35.00 23.00 63.00 54.00 50.00 ------699 763 631 227 2,401 3,320 1,519 4,551 5,312 2,640 4,894 1,922 2,719 1,563 4,428 1,747 9,835 2,479 1,025 3,404 1,276 1,162 25,911 65,200 35,524 13,663 29,841 60,853 97,709 11,928 95,404 55,893 35,625 26,387 16,265 51,913 15,860 96,109 15,461 19,928 10,025 214,067 676,672 141,422 318,812 ------418.0000 171.0000 740.0000 116.0000 3000.0000 2206.0000 1847.0000 6267.4118 1630.0000 7194.0000 9762.0000 4134.0000 9306.0000 1789.0000 1168.0000 2840.0000 2583.0000 4953.0000 4306.0000 7382.0000 2761.0000 2641.0000 6750.0000 85361.0000 37507.0000 87508.0000 51611.0000 17103.0000 73653.0000 30780.3822 14865.0000 31803.0000 15365.0000 21445.0000 12901.0000 156140.0000 479616.0000 ------0.917 0.635 0.275 0.462 0.942 0.751 0.499 0.787 0.535 0.740 0.747 0.754 0.833 0.880 0.803 0.775 0.781 0.403 0.814 0.772 0.733 0.715 0.632 0.759 0.431 0.811 0.275 0.885 0.835 0.879 0.622 0.695 0.913 0.741 0.499 0.756 0.577 0.941 0.928 0.691 0.667 0.440 0.762 ------6.8 3.7 1.4 0.5 2.7 1.4 2.3 5.6 4.2 2.8 4.2 3.4 2.1 5.6 1.7 1.7 1.1 1.5 9.7 3.3 2.1 3.1 2.1 3.7 1.4 2.4 1.8 2.9 7.8 3.1 1.0 4.7 2.9 2.5 5.4 2.3 5.0 6.3 20.6 10.3 24.4 ------6.00 2.00 24.00 86.00 76.00 66.00 17.00 70.00 77.00 40.00 12.00 53.00 35.00 116.00 104.00 576.00 270.00 364.00 311.00 166.00 110.00 432.00 957.00 253.00 474.00 739.00 2068.00 2229.00 1001.00 2534.00 6100.00 5206.00 2541.00 7510.00 6370.00 2526.00 4107.00 7303.00 3571.00 7119.00 31000.00 - - - - - 6.500 0.400 0.400 0.400 1.100 6.200 2.600 2.000 7.200 0.100 1.700 3.600 1.300 1.300 0.300 8.300 1.900 0.100 6.600 0.000 0.900 53.100 37.900 71.600 15.500 13.100 27.000 78.900 14.100 46.600 13.900 57.000 38.600 21.300 17.500 45.400 12.500 28.400 26.600 11.927 12.600 843.200 263.000 100.600 177.000 136.900 152.700 163.600 103.200 172.200 1239.900 ------2.00 2.00 5.00 50.00 55.00 58.00 84.00 73.00 88.00 10.00 21.00 10.00 50.00 57.00 110.00 486.00 813.00 524.00 502.00 453.00 479.00 221.00 394.00 259.00 532.00 369.00 130.00 400.00 319.00 916.00 459.00 1787.00 4481.00 1027.00 2171.00 3341.00 3274.00 3700.00 6258.00 1053.00 1090.00 6001.00 2746.00 2624.00 9509.00 17400.00 12037.00 21169.00 48201.00 11400.00 ------7.00 9.00 -9.00 26.00 83.00 23.00 67.00 41.00 50.00 31.00 97.00 15.00 84.00 35.00 83.00 25.00 67.00 50.00 25.00 29.00 28.00 68.00 41.00 34.00 52.00 24.00 21.00 45.00 63.00 36.00 79.00 -21.00 -88.00 -90.00 -78.00 -14.00 358.00 138.00 328.00 100.00 129.00 237.00 124.00 224.00 112.00 412.00 106.00 133.00 483.00 200.00 - - - 7.50 4.60 4.60 7.50 0.60 4.60 4.60 14.10 22.90 14.10 14.10 96.60 68.50 18.80 14.10 14.10 42.80 42.80 40.00 68.50 17.00 17.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 14.10 68.50 17.00 14.10 17.00 36.00 18.80 19.10 19.10 42.80 36.00 96.60 68.50 17.00 135.80 223.30 177.00 223.30 223.30 177.00 135.80 223.30 177.00 177.00 185.20 224.40 223.30 135.80 - - - 2.90 5.10 2.60 1.90 1.90 2.90 2.90 4.20 2.90 2.60 2.90 4.70 4.70 2.90 0.30 1.90 4.70 1.90 2.90 4.70 5.90 4.20 7.30 7.30 5.90 4.70 37.60 12.40 11.80 11.80 29.20 78.90 93.70 14.10 12.40 78.90 78.90 14.10 14.10 14.10 93.70 12.40 29.20 78.90 93.70 93.70 11.80 37.60 12.40 44.10 78.90 29.20 116.70 Amazon

Caribbean Caledonia New Zealand New Mesoamerica Africa West of Forests Guinean & Micronesia Polynesia & Micronesia Polynesia & Micronesia Polynesia Choco-Darien- Mesoamerica, Ecuador Western Guinea New Brazilian Forest, Atlantic Cerrado Andes, Choco-Darien- Tropical Ecuador; Western Philippines Basin Mediterranean Caribbean Ocean & Indian Madagascar Islands Caucasus Caribbean Caribbean Caribbean Ocean & Indian Madagascar Islands Africa West of Forests Guinean Sundaland Guinea New Succulent Region, Cape Floristic Karoo Basin Mediterranean Lanka & Sri Ghats Western Amazon Basin Mediterranean & Mountains Eastern Arc Coastal Forests Sundaland Indo-Burma, Netherlands Antilles Netherlands Caledonia New Zealand New Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Island Norfolk Islands Mariana Northern Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Guinea New Papua Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Rico Puerto Qatar Reunion Romania Federation Russian Rwanda Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia St. and the Grenadines Vincent St. Samoa Marino San and Principe Tome Sao Arabia Saudi Senegal Seychelles Leone Sierra Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Islands Solomon Somalia Africa South Spain Lanka Sri Helena St. and Miquelon Pierre St. Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania ailand

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 51 (1) ------19.00 47.18 55.00 36.00 76.00 56.00 29.00 62.00 44.00 52.00 64.10 50.00 57.70 58.00 60.00 21.00 47.00 29.00 (%) Hotel and Hotel —Occupancy —Occupancy Other Facilities Facilities Other Rate circa 2000 Rate circa (1) ------640 2,358 4,532 2,372 2,023 3,673 1,060 1,637 4,997 2,553 5,206 80,749 76,348 30,241 13,090 76,016 66,700 10,440 37,371 155,441 Hotel and Hotel —Rooms circa circa —Rooms Other Facilities Other 2000 (actual) (3) ------(m_) 69.0000 408.0000 408.0000 234.0000 2651.0000 2972.0000 2820.0000 2461.0000 8768.6694 4622.0000 1117.0000 11714.0000 39856.0000 35002.0000 11350.0000 17674.0000 11498.0000 Fresh Water Water Fresh Capita 2000 Capita Resources per Resources - (3) ------0.493 0.805 0.722 0.742 0.741 0.444 0.748 0.812 0.928 0.939 0.831 0.727 0.542 0.770 0.688 0.479 0.433 0.551 2000 Human Devel Human opment Index* opment Index* (2) ------0.7 3.8 3.0 8.0 4.4 3.2 4.2 4.5 4.2 2.5 2.0 0.6 3.2 2.6 14.9 31.9 12.7 1999 Tourism Tourism and Travel and Travel as Percentage as Percentage of Total GDP GDP of Total Economy GDP Economy (1) ------6.00 9.00 58.00 76.00 17.00 91.00 210.00 329.00 149.00 652.00 656.00 300.00 965.00 202.00 1496.00 7636.00 2124.00 19544.00 85153.00 Int’l Tourism Tourism Int’l 2000 (in mil Receipts circa circa Receipts lions of $US)

(1) - - - - - 2.000 6.000 0.600 4.500 1.115 2.400 1.100 0.400 1.434 3.300 28.500 25.100 45.900 11.600 10.100 98.700 36.800 17.100 49.900 26.700 11.200 647.000 513.636 2000 Arrivals as Arrivals Population Population precentage of precentage - (1) - - - - - 1.00 60.00 35.00 57.00 73.00 336.00 300.00 156.00 151.00 272.00 469.00 286.00 565.00 152.00 574.00 5057.00 9487.00 4232.00 1968.00 2140.00 1868.00 25191.00 50891.00 sands) Int’l Tourist Tourist Int’l Arrivals circa circa Arrivals 2000 (in thou - (1) - - - - - 0.00 67.00 72.00 58.00 98.00 38.00 14.00 40.00 29.00 55.00 63.00 79.00 22.00 40.00 -42.00 -11.00 -87.00 218.00 119.00 196.00 756.00 307.00 209.00 (%) Average An Average nual Growth nual Growth 1990 to 2000 of Tourism— - - (1) - - - 4.60 14.10 14.10 40.00 19.10 34.80 40.00 14.10 17.00 68.50 96.60 42.80 14.10 42.80 40.00 40.00 68.50 17.00 17.00 223.30 223.30 192.00 223.30 135.80 177.00 Int’l Tourist Tourist Int’l gion—Projec tions for 2020 (in millions) Arrivals by Re by Arrivals (1) - - - 1.90 2.90 2.90 7.30 2.90 4.70 2.90 4.70 4.70 14.10 11.40 78.90 14.10 78.90 12.40 37.60 80.50 11.80 78.90 11.80 29.20 14.10 14.10 12.40 93.70 Arrivals by by Arrivals Int’l Tourist Tourist Int’l (in millions) Region—1995 Region—1995 Wilderness Wilderness & Areas Hotspots Guinean Forests of West Africa West of Forests Guinean & Micronesia Polynesia & Micronesia Polynesia Caucasus Basin, Mediterranean Caribbean & Micronesia Polynesia Region, California Floristic & Caribbean, Polynesia Micronesia Forest Atlantic Andes, Caribbean; Tropical Amazon Indo-Burma Caribbean Caribbean & Micronesia Polynesia Country Togo Tokelau Tonga Tobago and Trinidad Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan and Caicos Islands Turks Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States United Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Nam Viet (British) Islands Virgin (US) Islands Virgin Island Wake Sahara Western Samoa Western Yemen Yugoslavia Zambia Zimbabwe included due to lack of data. all UN members are in education, and GDP per capita. Not enrollment life expectancy, (*) e HDI index is calculated using data on adult literacy, human development. under 0.5 = low 0.5 to 0.8 = medium human development; HDI index: 0.8 to 1.0 classified as high human development; Organization Tourism World (1) Source: Council 2001 Tourism & Travel World (2) Source: 2001 Report Development Human Bank World (3) Source:

52 DATA SETS TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 53 Photography All photos © Conservation International, except where noted.

Front cover: © Emilia Hillel Page 6: Russell A. Mittermeier Page 36: Haroldo Castro Page i: © Gerald Allen Page 8: Patrick Johnston Page 38: Costas Christ Page iv: © Sterling Zumbrunn Page 9: Conservation International Page 39: Costas Christ Page vi: Haroldo Castro Page 17: Costas Christ Page 40: Patrick Johnston Page vii: © Cristina Mittermeier Page 21: © Hitesh Mehta Page 41: Rod Mast Page viii: Piotr Nashrecki Page 24: Levi Norton Page 42: © Christian Heltne Page ix: Costas Christ Page 25: © Haroldo Palo Jr. Back cover: top to bottom Haroldo Page x: Costas Christ Page 27: Russell A. Mittermeier Castro, © Digital Visions, Haroldo Page 1: Haroldo Castro Page 28: Haroldo Castro Castro Page 2: Lamb Studios Page 31: © Digital Visions

TOURISM AND BIODIVERSITY: MAPPING TOURISM’S GLOBAL FOOTPRINT 53 n the past 50 years, the growth in international tourism has been Iphenomenal. Nature and adventure travel have emerged as two of the fastest growing sectors in the tourism industry. What does this mean for the world’s biodiversity? As “Tourism and Biodiversity: Mapping Tourism’s Global Footprint” reveals, tourism can be both an opportunity for conserving nature and a threat if it is done improperly. is report examines the relationship between tourism, biodiversity, and local livelihoods and maps tourism’s expanding footprint across our planet’s richest and most endangered ecosystems.

Conservation International believes that the Earth’s natural heritage must be maintained if future generations are to thrive spiritually, cul- turally, and economically. Its mission is to conserve the Earth’s living heritage, and our global biodiversity, and to demonstrate that human societies are able to live harmoniously with nature. For more information, please contact www.conservation.org.

e United Nations Environment Programme is the environmental voice of the UN family. With its headquarters in Nairobi, Kenya, it has 650 staff and a budget of approximately $US80 million per year. Its activities include environmental monitoring and assessment, development of policy instruments and law, awareness raising and information exchange, capacity and institution building, and technical assistance. For more information, please contact www.uneptie.org/tourism.

Conservation International (CI) 1919 M Street, NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20036 Tel: 202.912.1000 Fax 202.912.1026 www.conservation.org

United Nations Environment Programme Division of Technology, Industry and Economics Production and Consumption Unit Tour Mirabeau, 39-43, quai André Citroën 75739 Paris - Cedex 15, France Tel. 33 1 44 37 14 50, Fax 33 1 44 37 14 74 www.uneptie.org/tourism