“MASS TOURISM VERSUS ECO-TOURISM”

A PAPER PRESENTED FOR THE SOUTH PACIFIC TOURISM

ORGANISATION REGIONAL ECOTOURISM MANAGEMENT
SEMINAR, 17TH TO 21ST MARCH, 2003, FIJI.

GEOFF HYDE
CFTC TOURISM INVESTMENT ADVISER,
TONGA VISITORS BUREAU
 1.

1. INTRODUCTION

As I write this paper there are three main issues that dominate the current news media –
the Iraqi crisis, the unrest at the cricket world cup and the declining share markets in all
major economies. All three reflect a pending global crisis, perhaps leading to a global
recession and worse still, bitter divisions in political philosophies, diplomatic relations,
traditional trading partners, religions and perhaps even our own individual values. This is
likely to severely impact on international tourism, particularly travel safety and security
factors, investment decisions and product development. Are we heading for a major
global or regional schism? Can it be described and analysed using simple buzzwords like:

• Global v Local
• Rich v Poor
• Developed v Developing
• Corporates v Communities
• Shareholders v Stakeholders
• Urban v Rural
• Profit v Environment
• Economic rationalism v Cultural values
• Consumer markets v Human rights
• Terrorist v Tourist
• Mass tourism v Eco-tourism?

Will we be forced to choose one side or another or is some form of integration possible?
From a tourism perspective I would argue that the very nature of tourism as an activity
can assist by creating a better understanding between cultures through learning about how
other people think and feel. This can be more readily achieved by adopting an eco-
tourism philosophy and strategy rather than a more traditional mass tourism approach.

2. DEFINITIONS

Without getting too bogged down in theoretical definitions of tourism, tourist or the
tourism industry it is important to describe the conceptual differences between mass
tourism and eco-tourism. Mass tourism tends to have most of the following
characteristics:

o A concentration on high volume sales with high throughputs and

turnarounds.
o The shifting of large groups of people (tourists) ‘en masse’ to
specific ‘developed’ destinations (i.e. ability to absorb large
numbers).
 2.

o Full utilization of packaged holiday components offered as a single

product at an all inclusive price, often with a short term time
frame.
o Development of large scale transport systems, infrastructure,
accommodation, supporting facilities and attractions within
destinations, usually at a fast pace and often supply led.
o Marketing approach is centered around the more hedonistic
motives for travel, particularly the sun, sea and sand tourism
products.

The key words for mass tourism are: high volume; large scale; fast pace; hedonistic
motives. Eco-tourism, on the other hand, should have the following characteristics:

• Be a nature based experience

• Be low impact and small scale
• Promotes a conservation ethic
• Provides support for local communities
• Provides a learning opportunity
• Helps to maintain the natural and cultural integrity of certain tourism areas
• Utilises environmentally friendly techniques and technologies.

Eco-tourism has emerged in the past fifteen years from a convenient buzzword to an
international movement. It is an attempt to balance the economic development of tourism
with the conservation and protection of natural areas and traditional cultures. It underpins
the very concept of sustainable development through tourism.

3. PACIFIC ISLANDS TOURISM

It could well be argued that most of the Pacific Island (PI) countries are far more suited to
an eco-tourism rather than a mass tourism approach. While they do enjoy a comparative
advantage in terms of climate, natural attractions, relative political stability (most being
perceived as safe havens to visit?) and cultural diversity and integrity, many lack the
resources to develop for mass tourism. In particular the micro-island states of the South
Pacific like Niue, Nauru, Tuvalu, Kiribati, Tokelau, Wallis and Futuna already suffer
from the “constraints of smallness” and appear completely unsuited to a mass tourism
approach. Fiji, Tahiti, PNG, Vanuatu, New Caledonia and the Cook Islands have
elements of a mass tourism approach but are also adopting an eco-tourism approach in
their product development – an integrated style of tourism development as they are more
advanced into their tourism product life cycles. Samoa, Tonga and the Solomon Islands
are wavering somewhere in between but are fast realizing that more of an eco-tourism
approach can gain them product diversity and a niche marketing advantage. Adopting an
eco-tourism philosophy and strategy in the planning and promotion of PI tourism can
provide certain benefits, which could include:
 3.

o Less reliance and dependency on foreign investment (and control)

and less leakage effects to the national economy.
o Employment opportunities for local people as tour operators, tour
guides (environmental and cultural interpreters), scientists and
researchers.
o Potentially stronger linkages with the fisheries and agricultural
sectors.
o A better chance to preserve and conserve fragile environments and
negate the spread of pollution.

What really matters is not so much the scale, pace and volume. But rather how we
manage the impacts created by tourism development. This is relative to the type and size
of the site, area or region within any particular destination or island country. In other
words, we should be applying the principles of eco-tourism to a much broader range of
nature based tourism products (accommodation, attractions, tours, activities). This is not
to say that it can be applied to all tourism products as different types of tourists will still
have different motives for undertaking their travel. As well, eco-tourism products do not
necessarily have to only attract a small, elitist market. In fact, eco-tourism principles
applied more to a mass market will do far more good for conservation and potentially
alleviate more of the harmful impacts. The trick is to be selective in the planning and
promotion of eco-tourism products by adopting specific planning guidelines and codes of
practice for industry operators.

4. PLANNING CRITERIA FOR ECO-TOURISM DEVELOPMENT

As previously noted, the challenge for PI tourism is to be able to more effectively and
efficiently manage the impacts created by tourism development. This paper argues that
this can be done if the principles of eco-tourism are included within specific planning
guidelines for tourism product development and codes of practice for industry operators.
These should be based on the following criteria.

o Land tenure. Who actually controls the land and how does this affect the
management process? Can we utilize foreign investment without losing
control? If public land this implies the use of taxpayers money and a high
level of government control and decision making. Have local communities
been consulted? If private ownership are leaseholding agreements able to
ensure a commitment to conservation principles? Is there an “out” clause
to prevent underdeveloped or poorly developed sites from remaining for
the term of the lease?
 4.

o Revenue generation. Are profits being reinvested for conservation

programs? Do we need to adopt a user pays policy to cover expenses for
local management and maintenance programs? Can some parts of the
business operation be leased to more experienced concessionaires? Are we
able to balance visitor quotas (impact management) with revenue
generation or profit motives?

o Spatial configuration. The architectural design, shape, size and style of

tourist facilities and amenities should be environmentally friendly in both
aesthetics and functionality. Waste management techniques, energy
efficient operations and user health and safety factors should be paramount
in the planning stages. The use of local building materials and cultural
artifacts should be encouraged. Nodal and linear style configurations need
to be considered on the basis of user safety and enjoyment as well as
operational efficiency.

o Authenticity. How real or genuine is the product? If it’s a reproduction or

imitation then be honest about this. The extent and quality of the
interpretation and its presentation should be paramount. This is often
reflected in the level of training of both staff and management. Purpose
built facilities (as distinct from natural attractions) also have a role in eco-
tourism.

o Scarcity. How rare or unique is it? Can this be measured from an

international perspective? Can we adopt some or all of the guidelines used
for world heritage area listings? Eco-tourism principles do not tend to
encourage the use of such labels as ‘largest’, ‘smallest’, ‘tallest’, ‘deepest’
or ‘oldest’. The interpretation should focus more on the how and the why.

o Status. What drawing or pulling power does the attraction, tour or facility
have? How well known is it? Have all the destinations attractions and
facilities been categorized according to primary and secondary (i.e. feeds
off or relies on others) status? Is it being promoted according to eco-
tourism principles?

o Carrying capacity. Can be a difficult variable to measure but much more

investment is required into developing techniques that can monitor the
impacts of visitor numbers. Quotas, visitor surveys, observation, pricing,
promotion, scheduling, access control, signage and facility design can all
be used to reduce stress on a site or region and prevent overcrowding at
peak times. At what level will satisfaction be curtailed or the resource
begin to deteriorate?
 5.

o Accessibility. Related to carrying capacity but physical location can be an

important factor in controlling access. Physical design of access roads and
weather conditions (air and sea access) have to be factored in. Remote
locations are more difficult to access and while this may mean easier
impact management the downside is increased risk factors in case of an
emergency situation. Seasonality factor, pricing policies and hours of
operation can all affect accessibility.

o Marketing Image. How is it perceived in the market place? Is the

marketing program guided by the principles of eco-tourism? What target
markets are being pursued? Are locals being targeted as well? Are the
other criteria of authenticity, status and scarcity being honestly portrayed
in the marketing mix?

5. CONCLUSION

In conclusion let me summarise by suggesting that the PI countries stand a much better
chance of being able to afford to develop, maintain and sustain their respective tourism
industries by integrating eco-tourism principles into their national and regional tourism
planning and promotion programs. Such an approach will allow them to develop at a pace
and a scale that equates more with the resources they possess – in terms of investment
capital, tourism management expertise and marketing budgets – as well as being able to
utilize the comparative advantages they possess as South Pacific Island paradises.
Biog for Mr. Geoff Hyde:

Geoff Hyde is currently working under contract with the Commonwealth of Nations
Secretariat as the Tourism Investment Adviser for the Tonga Visitors Bureau. His
previous postings have included: four years with the Samoa Visitors Bureau (now Samoa
Tourist Authority) as their Tourism Development Adviser and Project Director for their
National Ecotourism Program; and three years as the Tourism Marketing Adviser for the
Department of Tourism in St. Vincent and the Grenadines in the Eastern Caribbean. He
has worked in the tourism industry for over 20 years as a management consultant,
lecturer and specialist tourism sector adviser to governments, universities, private
companies and international development agencies. He recently co-authored the textbook
“Road to Tourism” (Pearson Education, 2002).