Entrance and Activity Fees (Tourism)

2.   Methodology

2.3.4      Ecological design

Key aspects of ecological design are site selection and design; infrastructure design; type(s) of activity; and visitor management tools (e.g. zoning, timing, seasonality, regulations etc.) Managers should follow internationally adopted guidelines on tourism and biodiversity when designing fee systems (Leung et al. 2018). If fee systems are not well designed and managed (e.g. if earmarked revenues incentivize managers to allow inappropriate levels of visitation), negative impacts can compromise the conservation values of a site or PA (Lindberg 2001). These impacts can occur at a specific site or affect the entire PA (and beyond). The extent of impact will be influenced not only by the number of visitors and type of activity, but also by the habitat type and its sensitivity to disturbance. Through identification of major risks at the feasibility stage, strategies and safeguards can be designed to avoid or mitigate negative impacts, and should inform the development of monitoring, evaluation, and adaptive management efforts (section 2.5).

Managers should apply standards-based management frameworks driven by PA values, management objectives, and their associated indicators and standards, to determine how much impact is acceptable and balance tourism with conservation. Options include: (a) the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum (ROS), (b) carrying capacity, (c) Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC), and (d) indicators and quality standards (Leung et al. 2018). There are lessons to be learnt from sites like Machu Picchu in Peru, which charge entrance fees but have failed to establish and enforce an appropriate visitor capacity (Larson & Poudyal 2012). Management strategies to minimize tourism-induced change all revolve around the concept of supply and demand (Leung et al. 2018). Supply and demand can be manipulated either by a) increasing the supply of tourism opportunities to accommodate more use and/or spread it more evenly (e.g. increase opening hours or expand a PA); or b) by modifying use so that impacts are reduced (e.g. restrict location of an activity or seasonality). Supply and demand can also be treated as fixed, in which case managers would focus on reducing the impacts of use by enhancing the physical durability of sensitive features, or simply putting hard limits on the problematic use (e.g. group size limits, length-of-stay limitations, and bans on specific activities and behaviours).

Other tools commonly used for managing tourism impacts are zoning (a component of most tourism management processes) and rationing (e.g. lotteries and auctions for permits). An alternative approach to directly limiting visitor use is to focus on modifying visitor behaviour. For instance, educational materials and thoughtful signage can be used to encourage good environmental behaviour among visitors, and overcrowding can be discouraged by intentionally restricting or providing no facilities, which can ultimately enhance the visitor experience (Pedersen 2002). In elastic markets (see 2.3.2), introducing or raising fees – or charging differential fees according to season, trail, or zone – can be a tool for visitor management. However, in areas of high ecological risk, direct management regulations such as setting a hard limit on visitor numbers or improving trail systems are usually more appropriate. Practice standards direct using a combination of visitor use management tools that reinforce and complement each other (Leung et al. 2018).

If sites are new, or require infrastructure to be built, their design should be in keeping with the local cultural and physical landscape and climatic conditions, and infrastructure should be durable, recyclable, sustainable, and constructed using sources that minimize ecological damage (a good example is Egypt’s Wadi El Hitan World Heritage Site Park; Leung et al. 2018). Sustainable transport initiatives, such as bicycles, should be implemented wherever possible (see USNPS 2017).