IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v6y2014i4p2379-2391d35438.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Sustainable Tourism Paradigm: Opportunities and Limits for Forest Landscape Planning

Author

Listed:
  • Dina Rizio

    (School of Social Sciences, University of Trento, 26, via Verdi, Trento 38122, Italy
    Department of Economics and Management, University of Trento, 5, via Inama, Trento 38122, Italy)

  • Geremia Gios

    (Department of Economics and Management, University of Trento, 5, via Inama, Trento 38122, Italy
    This author contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

The promotion of sustainable tourism models has been widely debated; many pages have been devoted to the attempt to provide the subject with a strong theoretical base and coherent structure. This said, it is still the case that, although such frameworks are crucial for the development of appropriate planning and policy instruments, their actual implementation continue to be fraught with difficulties. These problems are exacerbated when sustainable tourism entails development opportunities which require the support of the local community and the management of natural resources which are typically common goods. Under these circumstances, new management structures, which can both satisfy the needs of the local community and ensure the appropriate stewardship of the natural resources, must be created. Management solutions are not always easy to define and often need to be considered within a general framework, based on which individual cases are then formulated. This study analyses the connections between models of sustainable tourism and natural resource management considering the forest landscape case. This relationship is first examined from a theoretical perspective and then within a case study, in order to highlight the dual approach—both general and within a specific context.

Suggested Citation

  • Dina Rizio & Geremia Gios, 2014. "A Sustainable Tourism Paradigm: Opportunities and Limits for Forest Landscape Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-13, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:4:p:2379-2391:d:35438
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/4/2379/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/6/4/2379/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert, 2010. "Payments for ecosystem services: From local to global," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2060-2068, September.
    2. Norgaard, Richard B., 2010. "Ecosystem services: From eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1219-1227, April.
    3. Blake, Adam & Arbache, Jorge Saba & Sinclair, Thea & Teles, Vladimir Kuhl, 2010. "Tourism and poverty relief," Textos para discussão 237, FGV EESP - Escola de Economia de São Paulo, Fundação Getulio Vargas (Brazil).
    4. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    5. Tazim Jamal & Blanca A. Camargo & Erica Wilson, 2013. "Critical Omissions and New Directions for Sustainable Tourism: A Situated Macro–Micro Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(11), pages 1-20, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Antonella Lerario & Silvia Di Turi, 2018. "Sustainable Urban Tourism: Reflections on the Need for Building-Related Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-25, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Spangenberg, Joachim H. & von Haaren, Christina & Settele, Josef, 2014. "The ecosystem service cascade: Further developing the metaphor. Integrating societal processes to accommodate social processes and planning, and the case of bioenergy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 22-32.
    2. Mark E. Eiswerth & G. Cornelis van Kooten, 2017. "Maximizing Returns from Payments for Ecosystem Services: Incorporating Externality Effects of Land Management," Working Papers 2017-06, University of Victoria, Department of Economics, Resource Economics and Policy Analysis Research Group.
    3. Tek B. Dangi & Tazim Jamal, 2016. "An Integrated Approach to “Sustainable Community-Based Tourism”," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-32, May.
    4. Lapeyre, Renaud & Froger, Géraldine & Hrabanski, Marie, 2015. "Biodiversity offsets as market-based instruments for ecosystem services? From discourses to practices," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 125-133.
    5. Van Hecken, Gert & Bastiaensen, Johan & Vásquez, William F., 2012. "The viability of local payments for watershed services: Empirical evidence from Matiguás, Nicaragua," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 169-176.
    6. repec:lib:000cis:v:1:y:2013:i:1:p:41-52 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Ian R. Cook & Erik Swyngedouw, 2012. "Cities, Social Cohesion and the Environment: Towards a Future Research Agenda," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 49(9), pages 1959-1979, July.
    8. Farley, Joshua, 2012. "Ecosystem services: The economics debate," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 40-49.
    9. Chan, Kai M.A. & Satterfield, Terre & Goldstein, Joshua, 2012. "Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 8-18.
    10. Kolinjivadi, Vijay & Adamowski, Jan & Kosoy, Nicolás, 2014. "Recasting payments for ecosystem services (PES) in water resource management: A novel institutional approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 144-154.
    11. Polishchuk, Yuliana & Rauschmayer, Felix, 2012. "Beyond “benefits”? Looking at ecosystem services through the capability approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 103-111.
    12. Reutemann, Tim & Engel, Stefanie & Pareja, Eliana, 2016. "How (not) to pay — Field experimental evidence on the design of REDD+ payments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 220-229.
    13. Brück, Maria & Abson, David J. & Fischer, Joern & Schultner, Jannik, 2022. "Broadening the scope of ecosystem services research: Disaggregation as a powerful concept for sustainable natural resource management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    14. Kaiser, Josef & Krueger, Tobias & Haase, Dagmar, 2023. "Global patterns of collective payments for ecosystem services and their degrees of commodification," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    15. Primmer, Eeva & Furman, Eeva, 2012. "Operationalising ecosystem service approaches for governance: Do measuring, mapping and valuing integrate sector-specific knowledge systems?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 85-92.
    16. Bennett, Drew E. & Gosnell, Hannah, 2015. "Integrating multiple perspectives on payments for ecosystem services through a social–ecological systems framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 172-181.
    17. Carlo Aall & Ko Koens, 2019. "The Discourse on Sustainable Urban Tourism: The Need for Discussing More Than Overtourism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-12, August.
    18. Carlo Aall, 2014. "Sustainable Tourism in Practice: Promoting or Perverting the Quest for a Sustainable Development?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(5), pages 1-22, April.
    19. Rodrigo Muniz & Maria João Cruz, 2015. "Making Nature Valuable, Not Profitable: Are Payments for Ecosystem Services Suitable for Degrowth?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-27, August.
    20. Leander Raes & Nikolay Aguirre & Marijke D’Haese & Guido Huylenbroeck, 2014. "Analysis of the cost-effectiveness for ecosystem service provision and rural income generation: a comparison of three different programs in Southern Ecuador," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 471-498, June.
    21. Polishchuk, Yuliana & Rauschmayer, Felix, 2011. "Ecosystem effects on well-being: More than just "benefits"? Looking at ecosystem services through the capability approach," UFZ Discussion Papers 6/2011, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:6:y:2014:i:4:p:2379-2391:d:35438. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.