Community-based ecotourism to meet the new tourist's expectations: an exploratory study

 

---

19 
D
ISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
 
The new tourist is sensitive to environmental issues as well as to local culture and gives special 
attention to the attitude of host communities. The behavior of host communities thus has become 
a major asset of tourist destinations. On the other hand, individuals forming host communities 
have a fear to lose control of their environment or lose their identity. Consequently host 
communities often seem reticent and discontent with general tourism development projects 
(Mason & Cheyne, 2000; Capenerhurst, 1994). Community-based ecotourism seems to be a way 
to meet new expectations of tourists and, at the same time, a means of overcoming the fears of 
the local communities and thus deterring hostility toward tourists by implicating people and 
involving them a part in all steps of the tourist initiative.
Ecotourism can be defined as a form of tourism based on nature-based activities, focused on the 
tourist learning about the ecosystem. As can be seen in Table 1, CBET is also based on 
preservation of natural resources; in only one case environmental conservation was not a priority.
But community-based ecotourism goes further. Community-based ecotourism also emphasizes 
human welfare as well as social, economical and cultural viability in the long run of host 
communities. Communities have to be implied or at the origin of the development and the 
exploitation of tourist activities. The community must maintain significant control of the 
development and the management of the tourism project to ensure that a significant portion of the 
benefits will remain within the community. CBET insists on giving host communities a higher 
level of control over tourist projects and a significant share of economic outputs (Liu, 1994; 
Ceballos-Lascurain, 1996; Sheyvens, 1999). According to Murphy (1985) a total engagement of 
local communities can enable the community to control the pace of tourist-related development, 
to integrate tourism in the economy, and to offer a more individualized tourism product. This also 
requires that the communities provide an offer to tourists, which is based on local culture and 

---

20 
traditions, as is the instance in the first five case studies. The residents are more than components 
of the tourism product; residents are the most important element, in fact the host community is a 
key for success of the tourist offer (Brent Ritchie, 1993). The community-based ecotourism 
approach must start from the needs, the expectations and the wellbeing of host communities 
(Scheyvens, 1999) and must be based on the empowerment of the host community. 
For as much control of decision-making as host communities keep, participation of government, 
companies, non-governmental organizations and external private sector investments or assistance 
are not excluded from CBET. Collaboration between authorities, external private companies and 
local communities, should lead to co-decision, co-production and co-management of tourism 
development programs. For Akama (1996) “the local community needs to be empowered to 
decide what forms of tourism facilities and wildlife conservation programs they want to be 
developed in their respective communities, and how the tourism costs and benefits are to be 
shared among different stakeholders”(p.573). If the host community is not at the origin of the 
project, it must take part in the decisions that have an impact on the life of its members, they must 
be able to maintain an extent of control over the essential resources to meet their needs, and they 
must have democratic and representative structures in decision-making instances. The success of 
community-based ecotourism relies on good governance principles, in other word it relies “on a 
system or a network of actors whose logic of action relies on the negotiation and is centered on 
the realization of a common product” (Lequin, 2001, p.85). 
In five of our case studies, host communities decided on the type and level of tourism that they 
wished to develop even when government or non-governmental organization were involved. 
Their level of control is high and goes beyond basic social empowerment. Tourism became a part 
of their lifestyle and the entire community is involved in decision-making and management of 
tourism activities. Under these conditions, tourism gives them the opportunity to improve their 

---

21 
quality of life but also to show pride for their culture and traditions. This attitude is the best way 
to ensure that tourists receive a warm welcome and the immersion they wish for in the local life 
of places they visit.
The sixth case concerning Monteverde Natural Park, sixty miles from San José in Costa Rica, 
embodies a counter example. There, the problem is to preserve the natural surroundings and to 
negotiate with the host community. The idea of negotiation itself implies that this case does not 
correspond to community-based ecotourism. In the other five cases host communities do not have 
to beg for the positive externalities of tourist activity, they gain benefits directly. In the case of a 
national park, sometimes ecological concerns can be seen as counter to the welfare of host 
communities and vice versa.