Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Is ecotourism a panacea? Political ecology perspectives from the Sundarban Biosphere Reserve, India

  • Published:
GeoJournal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ecotourism is increasingly being promoted as an instrument that helps local socio-economic development and generate revenues to strengthen conservation of critically endangered biodiversity. It is often posited the magic bullet particularly across protected areas in the Global South. In theory, ecotourism can provide economic benefits to economically weaker communities living around protected areas and inspire them to protect the biodiversity in their own interest. This paper, however, provides empirical evidence that the so-called win–win is not an unqualified truism. With a case study on Sundarban Biosphere Reserve, world’s largest mangrove biodiversity and home of highly endangered Royal Bengal Tiger, this article examines complexities involved in ecotourism and urges the need to make it context-specific. It assesses ecotourism’s ability to provide livelihood alternatives to local communities and how can it help in conservation. The findings demonstrate an unequal, uneven, and skewed accumulation of benefits of ecotourism, often associated with market mechanisms of global environmental protection. As little as 36% of the interviewees claimed receiving direct or indirect benefits from ecotourism, the study finds. It failed to offer any benefits at all to the poorest and most marginal communities. On the contrary, it offered disproportionately larger returns to the remotely located capital invested in the local ecotourism facilities in the Sundarbans, thus defeating the principle behind the mechanism. In the area of conservation, tourism was blamed for increasing pollution and harming the health of the ecosystem by tourists who were considered ‘outsiders’ and insensitive to the ecology by the locals and conservation agencies alike.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Interview with the Director of the Sundarban Biosphere Reserve (SBR) on Tuesday, July 31, 2012.

  2. A conversion rate of US$ 1 = Rupees 54.05 (2012) was used.

  3. See, for example, Indian court bans tourism in tiger reserve ‘core zones’ at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-18967906 (last accessed on 17 January 2016).

  4. See, for example, “Supreme Court lifts ban on tourism in core areas of tiger reserves” at http://goo.gl/mek3jK (last accessed on 17 January 2016).

  5. A mouza is the smallest administrative unit organized by the British in colonial India. The purpose was to collect revenues. Each mouza has a Jurisdiction List (J. L.) number by which it can be identified. There could be one or more than one village in a mouza. The Census of India provides village level data and for them, a mouza is equivalent to a village.

  6. See “Guidelines for Ecotourism in and around Protected Areas” at http://www.moef.nic.in/downloads/public-information/Draft%20Ecotourism%20Guidelines%202%20June.pdf (last accessed on 17 January 2016).

    Also see “Tourism facilities near wildlife habitats to pay 10% of revenue soon” at http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/flora-fauna/Tourism-facilities-near-wildlife-habitats-to-pay-10-of-revenue-soon/articleshow/14858774.cms?

  7. These nineteen hotels are: Chital, Zilla Parishad Guest House, Aram, Apanjan, Avinandan, Banani, Krishnakunja, Mainak, Madhuban, Barman Villa, Hanshoraj Resort, Mangrove, Sundari, Hemanta Lodge, Swastik, Shri Ma, Pramila, Mouchak, and Tiger Land. Among these 19 hotels, only the Zilla Parishad Guet House is owned by the state government.

  8. The idea of local ownership could be relative. An owner who lives in the Gosaba Block can be considered a local, and in contrast, an owner who lives outside the Gosaba Block can be regarded as an outsider. Here, I consider lodge owners as “local” who live in the Sundarban region, in the nineteen community development blocks of South and North 24 Parganas.

  9. See “NGT orders ban on noise, solid waste pollution in Sundarbans” http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/pollution/NGT-orders-ban-on-noise-solid-waste-pollution-in-Sundarbans/articleshow/55616060.cms (last accessed on July 6 2017).

  10. According to 2011 census of India, Pakhiralaya’s total population is 3946.

  11. We consider direct economic benefits include earnings from full time and part time jobs at the hotels, earnings as a boat driver, tour guide, and as a local tour operator. Earnings from selling grocery, occassional home stays, vegetables, tea, and snacks, pulling vans, performing a popular folk tale Banabibi Pala, and daily wage labor as a cook or construction work are considered indirect economic benefits.

  12. Gosaba Bazaar is the primary market in the Gosaba mouza. It is one of the busiest area in the village. In order to reach Pakhiralaya, one may need to visit Gosaba Bazaar first and then hire a van from there.

  13. Bigha is a unit generally used to measure land area in South Asia. In West Bengal, 1bigha is equivalent to one-third of an acre or 0.3306 acre.

  14. Para is a Bengali word which could be interpreted as a neighbourhood or a locality. The word Dakshin means south. So, Dakshin Para means a neighbourhood located in the south.

  15. Until September 2012, there were 30 shops (including grocery, tea stalls, handicrafts, and a saloon) along the paved road of Pakhiralaya.

  16. See, “For tourism, African Safari to be replicated in Sundarbans: Mamata” http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/for-tourism-african-safari-to-be-replicated-in-sunderbans-mamata/906476/ (last accessed on July 3 2017).

References

  • Balmford, A., Beresford, J., Green, J., Naidoo, R., Walpole, M., & Manica, A. (2009). A global perspective on trends in nature-based tourism. PLoS Biology, 7(6), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, A. (2007). An evolution of the potential and limitations of ecotourism as a vehicle for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development in the protected areas of India. Ph.D. diss., University of Delaware, Delaware, USA.

  • Banerjee, A. (2012). Is wildlife tourism benefiting Indian protected areas? A survey. Current Issues in Tourism, 15(3), 211–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, A. (2013). Joint forest management in West Bengal. In O. Springate-Baginski & P. Blaikie (Eds.), Forests people and power: The political ecology of reform in South Asia (pp. 221–260). New York: Earthscan, Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bangladesh, I. U. C. N. (2001). The Bangladesh Sundarbans: A photoreal Sojourn. Dhaka: IUCN Bangladesh Country Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basu, K. (2010). Ecology and adaptation—A study in the Sundarban Biosphere Reserve. In G. K. Bera & V. S. Sahay (Eds.), In the Lagoons of the Gangetic Delta (pp. 65–82). New Delhi: Mittal Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blamey, R. K. (2001). Principles of ecotourism. In D. B. Weaver (Ed.), The encyclopedia of ecotourism (pp. 5–22). New York: CABI Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bottrill, C., & Pearce, D. (1995). Ecotourism: Towards a key elements approach to operationalising the concept. Journal of Sustainable tourism, 3(1), 45–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandon, K. (1996). Ecotourism and conservation: A review of key issues. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, R. L. (1998). Power, knowledge and political ecology in the third world: A review. Progress in Physical Geography, 22(1), 79–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, R. L. (2015). Reflecting on political ecology. In R. L. Bryant (Ed.), The international hand book of political ecology (pp. 14–24). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. (2007). Ecotourism, NGOs and development: A critical analysis. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ceballos-Lascuráin, H. (1996). Tourism, ecotourism, and protected areas: The state of nature-based tourism around the world and guidelines for its development. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Che, D. (2006). Developing ecotourism in first world, resource-dependent areas. Geoforum, 37(2), 212–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danda, A. (2010). Sundarbans: Future imperfect: Climate adaptation report. New Delhi: World Wide Fund for Nature-India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Tourism, Government of West Bengal. (2008). West Bengal Tourism Policy. Kolkata: Department of Tourism, Government of West Bengal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Directorate of Census Operations. (2011). District Census Handbook: South 24 Parganas, Series 20, Part XII A and B. Kolkata.

  • Douglas, J. A. (2014). What’s political ecology got to do with tourism? Tourism Geographies, 16(1), 8–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, R. (2015). Nature-based tourism and neoliberalism: Concealing contradictions. Tourism Geographies, 17(4), 529–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eaton, R. M. (1990). Human settlement and colonization in the Sundarbans, 1200–1750. Agriculture and Human Values, 7(2), 6–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epler Wood, M., Gatz, F., & Lindberg, K. (1991). The Ecotourism Society: An action agenda. In J. Kusler (Ed.), Ecotourism and resource conservation (pp. 75–79). Selected papers from the 2nd International Symposium: Ecotourism and Resource Conservation, Omnipress, Madison.

  • Fletcher, R. (2014). Romancing the wild: Cultural dimensions of ecotourism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, R., & Neves, K. (2012). Contradictions in tourism: The promise and pitfalls of ecotourism as a manifold capitalist fix. Environment and Society: Advances in Research, 3(1), 60–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards F. J., & Flint, E. P. (1990). Long-term transformations in the Sundarbans Wetland Forests of Bengal. Agriculture and Human Values (Spring), 17–33.

  • Ghosh, A. K. (Ed.). (2008). Status of environment in West Bengal—A citizen’s report. Kolkata: ENDEV-Society for Environment and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh, P. (2013). Impacts of biodiversity conservation on rural livelihoods in and around the Sundarban Tiger Reserve (STR): A case study of struggles over access to forest-based resources In NMML occasional paper: Perspectives in Indian Development, New Series 13. New Delhi, India: Nehru Memorial Museum and Library. ISBN 81-87614- 73-0.

  • Ghosh, P.. (2014). Subsistence and biodiversity conservation in the Sundarban Biosphere Reserve, West Bengal, India. Ph.D. diss., University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA. http://uknowledge.uky.edu/geography_etds/26.

  • Ghosh, P. (2015). Conservation and conflicts in the Sundarban Biosphere Reserve, India. Geographical Review, 105(4), 429–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosh, A. (2017). Sustainability conflicts in coastal India: Hazards, climate change and development discourse in Indian Sundarbans. Advances in Asian Human–Environment Research Series, Spinger-Nature. ISBN 978-3319638911.

  • Gibson, T. D., Pelling, M., Ghosh, A., Matyas, D., Siddiqi, A., Solecki, W., et al. (2016). Pathways for transformation: Disaster risk management to enhance resilience to extreme events. Journal of Extreme Events, 3(1), 1671002-1–1671002-23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin and Chaudhary. (2017). Eco-tourism dimensions and directions in India: An empirical study of Andhra Pradesh. Journal of Commerce & Management Thought, 8(3), 436–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gopal, B., & Chauhan, M. (2006). Biodiversity and its conservation in the Sundarban mangrove ecosystem. Aquatic Sciences, 68(3), 338–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gossling, S. (1999). Ecotourism: A means to safeguard biodiversity and ecosystem functions? Ecological Economics, 29(2), 303–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, J. (2015). Sunderbans damage riles green tribunal. The Times of India, January 23. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kolkata/Sunderbans-damage-riles-green-tribunal/articleshow/45972173.cms. Accessed May 9, 2017.

  • Hackel, J. D. (1999). Community conservation and the future of Africa’s wildlife. Conservation Biology, 13(4), 726–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannam, K. (2004). Tourism and forest management in India: The role of the state in limiting tourism development. Tourism Geographies, 6(3), 331–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Healy, R. G. (1994). ‘Tourist merchandise’ as a means of generating local benefits from ecotourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(3), 137–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hearne, R., & Santos, A. (2005). Tourists’ and locals’ preferences toward Eco-tourism development in the Maya Biosphere Reserve, Guatemala. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 7(3), 303–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrold-Menzies, M. (2006). Boating on the Sea of Grass: Western development ecotourism, and elite capture in Guizhou. China. Asian Geographer, 25(1–2), 109–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, S. K., & Robles, R. (1992). Ecotourism, sustainable development, and conservation education: Development of a tour guide training program in Tortuguero, Costa Rica. Environmental Management, 16(6), 701–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jalais, A. (2010). Forest of tigers: People, politics & environment in the Sundarbans. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jhala, Y. V., Qureshi, Q., & Gopal, R. (Eds.). (2015). The status of tigers in India, 2014. New Delhi & Derahdun: National Tiger Conservation Authority & The Wildlife Institute of India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jhala, Y. V., Qureshi, Q., Gopal, R., & Sinha, P. R. (Eds.). (2011). Status of the tigers, co-predators and prey in India, 2010. New Delhi: National Tiger Conservation Authority, Govt. of India, and Dehradun: Wildlife Institute of India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jodha, N. S. (2000). Joint management of forests: Small gains. Economic and Political Weekly, 35(50), 4396–4399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karanth, K. K., & DeFries, R. (2010). Nature-based tourism in Indian protected areas: New challenges for park management. Conservation Letters, 4(2), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karanth, K. K., DeFries, R., Srivathsa, A., & Sankaraman, V. (2012). Wildlife tourists in India’s emerging economy: Potential for a conservation constituency. Oryx, 46(3), 382–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karanth, K. K., & Krishnadas, M. (2011). Opportunity or threat to National Parks? Can wildlife tourism and conservation go hand-in-hand? The Hindu Survey of the Environment, 128–136.

  • Karanth, K. K., & Nepal, S. K. (2012). Local residents perception of benefits and losses from protected areas in India and Nepal. Environmental Management, 49(2), 372–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. D., & Stewart, W. P. (1996). Ecotourism and commodification: Protecting people and places. Biodiversity and Conservation, 5(3), 293–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, Suhas. (2002). Wildlife tourism in India: Need to tread with care. In B. D. Sharma (Ed.), Indian wildlife: Threats and preservation. New Delhi: Anmol Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindberg, K., & Hawkins, D. (Eds.). (1993). Ecotourism: A guide for planners and managers. North Bennington: The Ecotourism Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandal, D. B. (Ed.). (2007). Man in biosphere: A case Study of Sundarban Biosphere Reserve. New Delhi: Gyan Publishing House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Masud, M. M., Aldakhil, A. M., Nassani, A. A., & Azam, M. N. (2017). Community-based ecotourism management for sustainable development of marine protected areas in Malaysia. Ocean and Coastal Management, 136, 104–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Misra, S., Maikhuri, R. K., Dhyani, D., & Rao, K. S. (2009). Assessment of traditional rights, local interference and natural resource management in Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 16(6), 404–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naha, D., Jhala, Y. V., Qureshi, Q., Roy, M., Sankar, K., & Gopal, R. (2016). Ranging, activity and habitat use by tigers in the mangrove forests of the Sundarban. PLoS ONE, 11(4), e0152119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narain, S., Singh, S., Panwar, H. S., & Gadgil, M. (2005). Joining the dots: The report of the Tiger Task Force. New Delhi: Government of India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noy, C. (2008). Sampling knowledge: The hermeneutics of snowball sampling in qualitative research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11(4), 327–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ojeda, D. (2012). Green pretexts: Ecotourism, neoliberal conservation and land grabbing in Tayrona National Natural Park. Columbia. Journal of Peasant Studies, 39(2), 357–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1999). Coping with tragedies of the commons. Annual review of political science, 2(1), 493–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocheleau, D. E. (2008). Political ecology in the key of policy: From chains of explanation to webs of relation. Geoforum, 39(2), 716–727.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S., & Wall, G. (1999). Ecotourism: Towards congruence between theory and practice. Tourism Management, 20(1), 123–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salum, A. L. (2009). Ecotourism and biodiversity conservation in Jozani-Chwaka Bay National Park, Zanzibar. African Journal of Ecology, 47, 166–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarin, M. (2007). Empowerment and disempowerment of forest women in Uttarakhand, India. In M. Rangarajan (Ed.), Environmental issues in India (pp. 483–506). New Delhi: Dorling Kindersley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarin, M., Singh, N. M., Sundar, N., & Bhogal, R. K. (2003). Devolution as a threat to democratic decision-making in forestry? Findings from three states in India. London: Overseas Development Institute (Working Paper 197).

  • Sarkar, R. (2008). Decentralized forest governance in Central Himalayas: A re-evaluation of outcomes. Economic and Political Weekly, 43(18), 54–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seema, P., Jojo, T. D., Freeda, M. S., Santosh, B., Sheetal, P., Gladwin, J., et al. (2006). White paper on eco-tourism policy. Bangalore: Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sekhar, N. U. (2003). Local people’s attitudes towards conservation and wildlife around Sariska Tiger Reserve, India. Journal of Environmental Management, 69(4), 339–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. USA: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoo, R. A., & Songorwa, A. N. (2013). Contribution of eco-tourism to nature conservation and improvement of livelihoods around Amani Nature Reserve. Tanzania. Journal of Ecotourism, 12(2), 75–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinha, B. C., Qureshi, Q., Uniyal, V. K., & Sen, S. (2012). Economics of wildlife tourism—Contribution to livelihoods of communities around Kanha tiger reserve, India. Journal of Ecotourism. https://doi.org/10.1080/14724049.2012.721785

  • Sivaramakrishnan, K. (2000). Crafting the public sphere in the forests of West Bengal: Democracy, development, and political action. American Ethnologist, 27(2), 431–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stem, C., Lassoie, J., Lee, D., Deshler, D., & Schelhas, J. (2003). Community participation in ecotourism benefits: The link to conservation practices and perspectives. Society and Natural Resources, 16(5), 387–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, M., & Wall, G. (2004). Ecotourism and community development: Case studies from Hainan, China. Environmental Management, 33(1), 12–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stronza, A., & Gordillo, J. (2008). Community views of ecotourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2), 448–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • STR Annual Report. (2007–2008). Conservator of Forest & Field Director, Sundarban Tiger Reserve. Canning, West Bengal, India: Directorate of Forests, Government of West Bengal.

  • STR Annual Report. (2008–2009). Conservator of Forest & Field Director, Sundarban Tiger Reserve. Canning, West Bengal, India: Directorate of Forests, Government of West Bengal.

  • STR Annual Report. (2009–2010). Conservator of Forest & Field Director, Sundarban Tiger Reserve. Canning, West Bengal, India: Directorate of Forests, Government of West Bengal.

  • STR Annual Report. (2013–2014). Conservator of Forest & Field Director, Sundarban Tiger Reserve. Canning, West Bengal, India: Directorate of Forests, Government of West Bengal.

  • STR Management Plan. (2000–2010). Kolkata: West Bengal Forest Department.

  • Upadhyay, V. P., Ranjan, R., & Singh, J. S. (2002). Human–mangrove conflicts: The way out. Current Science, 83(11), 1328–1336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wall, G. (1997). Is ecotourism sustainable? Environmental Management, 21(4), 483–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, D. (1992). Is ‘eco’ tourism for real? Landscape Architect, 82, 34–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walpole, M. J., & Goodwin, H. J. (2000). Local economic impacts of dragon tourism in Indonesia. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(3), 559–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, M. P. (1996). The social role of protected areas in the new South Africa. Environmental Conservation, 23(4), 322–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, M., & Brandon, K. (with L. Hannah). (1992). People and parks: Linking protected area management with local communities. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

  • Yuan, J., Dai, L., & Wang, Q. (2008). State-led ecotourism development and nature conservation: A case study of the Changbai Mountain Biosphere Reserve, China. Ecology and Society, 13(2), 55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank local communities of Gosaba for providing valuable information and time during the fieldwork. We also thank Dr. Tad Mutersbaugh and Dr. P. P. Karan at the University of Kentucky for their thoughtful comments on a very early draft of the paper which provided it a defined direction. We sincerely thank Dr. Jonathan Phillips and Lynn Phillips at the University of Kentucky for reviewing the final version of the article. We thank Ryan Cooper and Raghava Davuluri for lending their hand in map-making of the Sundarbans. The research was financially supported by the National Science Foundation, US (DDRI No. 1029993), and Association of American Geographers (AAG) Dissertation Research Grant 2012.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography, University of Kentucky, 817 Patterson Office Tower, Lexington, KY, 40506-0027, USA

    Priyanka Ghosh

  2. Faculty of Sustainability, Institute of Ethics and Transdisciplinary Sustainability Research, Leuphana University, Scharnhortsstraße 1, 21335, Lüneburg, Germany

    Aditya Ghosh

Authors
  1. Priyanka Ghosh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aditya Ghosh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Priyanka Ghosh.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

We, the authors hereby declare that we have followed the accepted principles of ethical and professional conduct required by your journal. We also confirm that there is no way our manuscript is in possible conflict with the ethical standards required by the journal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ghosh, P., Ghosh, A. Is ecotourism a panacea? Political ecology perspectives from the Sundarban Biosphere Reserve, India. GeoJournal 84, 345–366 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-018-9862-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-018-9862-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation