the role of tourism in natural resource management in the okavango ...

the role of tourism in natural resource management in the okavango ... the role of tourism in natural resource management in the okavango ...

pfeiffer.nele60
from pfeiffer.nele60 More from this publisher
16.08.2013 Views

are directly dependent upon the earth's resources of land, water, fauna and flora for their livelihoods. Such resources must be considered as potentially renewable, capable of sustaining individuals and of being sustained indefinitely. However, the realisation of this potential is dependent upon numerous factors, including the institutional arrangements that people choose to adopt regarding natural resource utilisation (Gibbs and Bromley, 1989). Natural resources are assets for the generation of human contentment or utility, including income. However, this misleadingly narrow resource concept ignores the interdependency of the various components of ecosystems and underestimates the ecological importance of natural resources. According to this perspective, natural resources are merely factors of production, they are not desirable in themselves, but rather a means to an end in that they are valuable only to the extent that they can be used to create goods and services - water for hydro-electric power, for example, or fishery resources for food and recreational opportunities. This ambiguous view of natural resources is found in most textbook and dictionary definitions. The Concise Oxford Dictionary, for example, defines natural resources as "means of supplying a want or stock that can be drawn upon"; and this concept may be conveniently summarised by Zimmerman's (1951) dictum: "resources are not, they become". Resources are culturally defined; to the North American Indians of 1800, oil and gas were not regarded as resources; whereas they are for the contemporary North American society. Such definitions embody the concepts of 'usefulness', now or later, and the 'resource supply' available to be used by humans (Grima and Berkes, 1989). Traditionally, economists have highlighted three broad categories of factors of production: natural resources, human resources and capital. Natural resources were regarded as 'free gifts of nature'. In reality, however, they are almost never altogether free, and this is true for both renewable and non-renewable resources. In the case of the former, they are free only if they can be replenished entirely without cost. If the amount taken exceeds the natural capacity of the resource to renew itself, then the resource will eventually disappear unless it is restored at some cost. The over-fishing of a lake or the over-harvesting of a forest are prime examples in this regard. Even where the level of exploitation of the resource is less than the self­ renewal capacity, one group of users may be restricting another use of the resource 42

or displacing another group of users dependent upon that use (Gibbs and Bromley, 1989). In terms of non-renewable resources, the very depletion of the resource may be considered a cost to society. Even if a large supply of the resource remains elsewhere, these remaining supplies are likely to be more costly to develop than the supplies just exhausted. Furthermore, the use of a resource as a factor of production may levy costs on the use of other resources in that ecosystem. For example, the burning of high-sulphur coal can affect fisheries through the acidification of lakes, or forests by making trees more vulnerable to disease. These form part of the social costs of production or 'externalities' in the environmental economist's jargon - the cost which is not considered within the market. An externality is, in essence, a failure of the market system (Gibbs and Bromley, 1989). As Kneese and Bower (1968) point out, this market failure tends to be pervasive in the economy, rather than rare. In this sense, then, natural resources are not free, as the depletion of fish by one group of fishers, for example, creates externalities for another group. The pollution of a river's waters by an industrial plant generates externalities for the recreational users of that river. It may be true that the first group of fishers and the industrial plant in the above examples regarded their resources as free goods. However, sooner or later, some other group - or society as a whole - will end up paying for the cost of treating resources as free goods (Gibbs and Bromley, 1989; Pattullo, 1996). 2.10 Tourism and Natural/Environmental Resources Given the massive growth in, and scale of, tourism activity around the world, and the international tourism growth potential for the foreseeable future (Latham, 1990; Shaw and Williams, 2004), the impact of tourism on environmental quality should be of interest and relevance to academics, decision-makers and tourism operators alike. The ever increasing concern amongst the general public about environmental issues and problems, such as pollution and habitat destruction, is reason enough for those involved with tourism to show an interest in the relationship between tourism development and the use of natural or environmental resources. This is because tourism is dependent upon environmental resources and may be prone to changing 43

or displac<strong>in</strong>g ano<strong>the</strong>r group <strong>of</strong> users dependent upon that use (Gibbs and Bromley,<br />

1989).<br />

In terms <strong>of</strong> non-renewable <strong>resource</strong>s, <strong>the</strong> very depletion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>resource</strong> may be<br />

considered a cost to society. Even if a large supply <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>resource</strong> rema<strong>in</strong>s<br />

elsewhere, <strong>the</strong>se rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g supplies are likely to be more costly to develop than <strong>the</strong><br />

supplies just exhausted. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> a <strong>resource</strong> as a factor <strong>of</strong> production<br />

may levy costs on <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r <strong>resource</strong>s <strong>in</strong> that ecosystem. For example, <strong>the</strong><br />

burn<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> high-sulphur coal can affect fisheries through <strong>the</strong> acidification <strong>of</strong> lakes, or<br />

forests by mak<strong>in</strong>g trees more vulnerable to disease. These form part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> social<br />

costs <strong>of</strong> production or 'externalities' <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> environmental economist's jargon - <strong>the</strong><br />

cost which is not considered with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> market. An externality is, <strong>in</strong> essence, a failure<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> market system (Gibbs and Bromley, 1989). As Kneese and Bower (1968)<br />

po<strong>in</strong>t out, this market failure tends to be pervasive <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> economy, ra<strong>the</strong>r than rare.<br />

In this sense, <strong>the</strong>n, <strong>natural</strong> <strong>resource</strong>s are not free, as <strong>the</strong> depletion <strong>of</strong> fish by one<br />

group <strong>of</strong> fishers, for example, creates externalities for ano<strong>the</strong>r group. The pollution <strong>of</strong><br />

a river's waters by an <strong>in</strong>dustrial plant generates externalities for <strong>the</strong> recreational<br />

users <strong>of</strong> that river. It may be true that <strong>the</strong> first group <strong>of</strong> fishers and <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>dustrial plant<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> above examples regarded <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>resource</strong>s as free goods. However, sooner or<br />

later, some o<strong>the</strong>r group - or society as a whole - will end up pay<strong>in</strong>g for <strong>the</strong> cost <strong>of</strong><br />

treat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>resource</strong>s as free goods (Gibbs and Bromley, 1989; Pattullo, 1996).<br />

2.10 Tourism and Natural/Environmental Resources<br />

Given <strong>the</strong> massive growth <strong>in</strong>, and scale <strong>of</strong>, <strong>tourism</strong> activity around <strong>the</strong> world, and <strong>the</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>ternational <strong>tourism</strong> growth potential for <strong>the</strong> foreseeable future (Latham, 1990;<br />

Shaw and Williams, 2004), <strong>the</strong> impact <strong>of</strong> <strong>tourism</strong> on environmental quality should be<br />

<strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>terest and relevance to academics, decision-makers and <strong>tourism</strong> operators<br />

alike. The ever <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g concern amongst <strong>the</strong> general public about environmental<br />

issues and problems, such as pollution and habitat destruction, is reason enough for<br />

those <strong>in</strong>volved with <strong>tourism</strong> to show an <strong>in</strong>terest <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> relationship between <strong>tourism</strong><br />

development and <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> <strong>natural</strong> or environmental <strong>resource</strong>s. This is because<br />

<strong>tourism</strong> is dependent upon environmental <strong>resource</strong>s and may be prone to chang<strong>in</strong>g<br />

43

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!