外文翻译生态旅游内涵若干思考doc

生态旅游内涵

中文XXX字

毕业设计(论文)英文翻译。

专 业

姓 名

学 号

指导老师

20XX年5月10日。

Reflections on the Connotations of Ecotourism。

Abstract: As the most desirable option for sustainable develop-ment of tourism industry, ecotourism still suffers from lack of a clear-cut and widely accepted definition, posing many risks and threats in its practices. Based on collection and collation of various concepts and explanations of ecotourism both at home and abroad, this paper reflects on the current connotations of ecotourism in terms of four aspects, namely, objects of ecotour-ism, ecotourists, nature of ecotourism as well as the relation-ship between ecotourism and communities. In-depth analysis was performed in an effort to revise the misinterpretation of ecotourism and provide implications for ecotourism initiatives. The main conclusions and fruits of this article include: 1) The objects of ecotourism should go beyond natural, pristine, or even only primitive natural areas to including cultural resources together with their natural context which also deserve preser-vation. 2) Tourism operators, compared to tourists, have more leverage and hence should shoulder more responsibilities for conservation. 3) Ecotourism should serve as a principle to guide tourism initiatives towards sustainability, rather than merely a special tour package. 4) The theoretic foundation was laid for community participation in ecotourism.。

Key words: ecotourism, connotations, externality。

1? Concepts and connotations of ecotourism。

Controversy has always existed over the definition and essence of ecotourism since the formal introduction of the term by Ceballos-Lascurain around two decades ago. Chinese experts Lu and Wang (2001) listed altogether 73 expressions of this term in their publication The Study of Ecotourism, some estimates that there have already been at least 100 definitions of ecotourism. Here are several defini-tions of considerable influence. As the first person to use the term of ecotourism, Ceballos-Lascurain (1991) initially defined it as ‘traveling to relatively undisturbed or uncon-taminated areas with the specific objective of studying, admiring, and enjoying the scenery and its wild plants and animals, as well as any existing cultural manifestations (both past and present) found in these areas…’. The United States Ecotourism Society (Blangy and Wood, 1992) gave the short-est possible but also comprehensive definition to ecotourism,‘Responsible travel that conserves the environment and sus-tains the well-being of local people’. Black (1996) defined ecotourism in such a way as ‘An experience with a focus on the natural and/or cultural environment, an ecologically sustainable activity, an activity with a predominant educative and interpretive program, and an activity that contributes to local community groups and projects and to the conservation of the surrounding environment’. IUCN’s CNPPA (Ceballos-Lascurain, 1996) proceeding from their own tenet, defined ecotourism as ‘Environmentally responsible travel and visitation to relatively undisturbed natural areas, in order to enjoy and appreciate nature (and any accompanying cul-tural features-both past and present) that promotes conser-vation, has low visitor impact, and provides for beneficially active socio-economic involvement of local populations’. Ceballos-Lascurain (1998) refined his initial definition by arguing that ecotourism should be ‘An environmentally responsible mode of tourism, which entails traveling to or visiting natural areas without causing disturbance in order to enjoy, appreciate and study the natural attractions (landscape and wildlife) of these areas; as well as any cultural expres-sions (past or present) via a process that promotes conserva-tion, has a low environmental and cultural impact, encour-ages active participation and socioeconomically benefits the local population’. Finally Honey (1999) defined ecotourism as ‘Travel to fragile, pristine and usually protected areas that strives to be low impact and (usually) small scale. It helps educate the traveler, provides funds for conservation, directly benefits the economic development and political empowerment of local communities, and fosters respect for different cultures and for human rights’.。

It can be found that, from the aforementioned definitions, as time went on, the concepts of ecotourism have continu-ously been broadened and the connotations enriched. To sum up, the present connotations of ecotourism mainly include the following contents: (1) objects of ecotourism: natural areas, as well as ecosystem featuring co-existence between man and nature; (2) subjects of ecotourism: those who travel in a responsible form and shoulder obligations for environmental protection and social advance in destination areas; (3) nature of ecotourism: a new and special type of tourism products; (4) function of ecotourism: performing environmental education for travelers, improving their environmental outlook and ex-erting effect on their way of life; facilitating the participation of the local residents, and upgrading their standard of living.。

2 Doubts over connotations of ecotourism。

Owing to the lack of a clea r-cut and generally accepted definition and the subjective extension of the concept, the term of ecotourism has long been abused, misleading the decision making, planning and management in ecotourism initiatives. As a result, the accuracy of the connotations of ecotourism should be examined and analyzed to address the complexity of eco-tourism and the problems in ecotourism development in China。

2.1? Doubts over objects of ecotourism。

Among almost all the definitions of ecotourism, the objects of ecotourism are generally confined to natural tour-ism resources, especially natural areas with sound ecologic environment which have only slightly or never been dis-turbed or polluted, such as protected areas, forest parks, etc. However, controversy has emerged on this point.。

Obviously, the attempt to confine objects of ecotourism to natural tourism resources, especially well preserved natural areas, will contribute to confusion in concepts of various con-ventional tours and mislead ecotourism practice. Two nega-tive implications will emerge under such concepts: (1) Entic-ing large numbers of tourists to rush to ecologically sound areas, which will definitely lead to severe damage or pollu-tion to these areas. Research findings suggest that, in China, among the nature reserves of provincial level or above, 22% of them have suffered damage to the protection targets and 11% of them are subject to ecosystem degradation, owing to the ecotourism initiatives in those areas. (2) Sending mis-leading signals to developers and operators that conventional tourism is immune to environmental restriction, which will, in turn, make tourists neglect conventional tourism resources, and finally new areas are found and established as ecotourism destinations, hand in hand with impairment to ecosystem.。

2.2? Doubts over ecotourists。

According to related literature, ecotourists can be divided in terms of broad and narrow senses. Ecotourists of the broad sense refer to all visitors to ecotourism destinations. Despite statistical practicality, it fails to describe the holistic profile of ecotourists and reveal the essential difference between them and conventional tourists; ecotourists of the narrow sense refer to those who shoulder responsibilities for environmental pro-tection and economic development of the ecotourism destina-tions (Zhong and Zhao, 2003). It makes better sense to adopt the latter definition of ecotourism, for it seemingly highlights the substantial characteristics of ecotourists and bears greater accuracy. However, it lacks true value in practice.。

Second, the dramatic imbalance in information between tourists and operators/agents also defies the purpose to impose any obligation on tourists. (1) The fact that tourism products are supplied and consumed at the same time just determines that tourists have no chance to collect and study the information on local ecotourism prior to visiting and experiencing. (2) Tourists are neither able to evaluate the impact of their behavior on the area nor obtain the information on other tourists of their kind. (3) Tourism enterprises are incapable of appropriately evaluating the responsible awareness and behavior of tourists.。

Third, from a statistical point, it is impossible to divide conventional tourists and ecotourists or to define and mea-sure the responsibilities of the tourists.。

As a result, supply side must be taken into consideration since no practicality can be seen by only emphasizing the duty of tourists from demand side. In ecotourism, suppliers bear the primary responsibilities; in contrast, tourists only bear secondary ones. Suppliers of ecotourism products have every means to rationalize the mechanism to guide the behavior of the tourists, in an attempt to achieve the goals of ecotourism to reinforce environmental protection and boost local economy.。

2.3? Doubts over nature of ecotourism。

A tendency has existed to define ecotourism as a new spe-cial type of tourism products or tourist activities, designed for the interests and demand of a small group of people, drawing a line of distinction between ecotourism and mass tourism, which has aroused a great deal of controversy.。

In the first place, there is every indication that, according to domestic experiences, the term of ecotourism has been abused as a fashionable label to attract the attention from the source market. It should be argued that ecotourism should represent a kind of principles or approaches for tourism development, rather than a specific product. From the outset, ecotourism has been intended for the conservation and sustainable develop-ment of resource and environment. Such a principle should work as the guidelines for every type of tourism.。

In the second place, if ecotourism is indeed a special kind of tourism products or a special form of tourist activi-ties, designed for a small group of people, it could definitely not have drawn so much concern and attention from tour-ism industry and academy. Hence, ecotourism is not the op-posite of mass tourism; instead, it should function to reform and upgrade the latter. Only when ecotourism is widely popularized and accepted to replace the conventional pat-tern of tourism, can it fulfill its promise to reinforce the sustainable development of tourism.。

2.4? Doubts over the relationship between ecotourism and communities。

Despite the argument by scholars linking ecotourism and community participation, no clear description of the relation-ship between them has emerged owing to lack of theoretic basis. In this article, the theory of environmental economics, rather than ethic, is applied to illustrate their relationship.。

It can be concluded from above economic analysis: ex-ternality→overuse of tourism resources→unsustainability of tourism, so in order for tourism industry to develop in a sustainable manner, externality must be eliminated to even marginal social cost and marginal private cost, which is also a key point of ecotourism.。

Internationally, the essential way to address externality is to internalize it, to be specific, including three viewpoints, namely, Pigovian tax, Coase theorem and merger of corpora-tions.。

It can be concluded from the prior discussion: community participation→elimination of tourism externality→sustainable use of tourism resources→ecotourism, so the connotation of ecotourism contains the pattern of community participation.For ecotourism, community participation is not a ‘should’thing, but a ‘must’ one. Here community does not mean the wide areas around the scenic spot, but interest groups, or stakeholders, related to externality. Additionally, the involvement of communities in tourism has the potential to maximize the multiple economic, ecologic and social benefits.。

3 .Conclusions。

Both domestically and internationally, ecotourism practices are well under way. Unfortunately, however, ecotourism lacks a theoretic system concerning from basic theoretic study to practice study, inevitably contributing to severe damage to ecologic environment, abuse of the term as a label, dissatisfaction and complaints from the tourists as well as insufficient involvement of local residents, etc. This article has no intention to recreate a brand new concept of ecotourism; instead, it aims at figuring out what on earth ecotourism is through a series of analysis and discussions, in an attempt to provide implications for future ecotourism initiatives.。

The main conclusions of this article are as follows.。

(1) The objects of ecotourism include, but in no way confined to pristine and well preserved natural tourism resources .Cultural tourism resources and all areas that have typical characteristics and the potential to deliver environmental education to tourists should also be included.。

(2) There is no point emphasizing the obligation of ecotourists, instead, the role of supply side must be hailed. Appropriate systems should be adopted to influence the pattern of tourists’ behavior for the purpose of achieving the goals to promote environment protection and boost local economy.。

(4) Ecotourism cannot live up to its connotation and objectives without community participation. The involvement of local residents will guarantee the maximization of economic, ecologic and social benefits of tourism.。

生态旅游内涵的若干思考。

关键词：生态旅游、内涵、外部性。

生态旅游的概念和内涵。

将生态旅游定义为“生态旅游是本着对环境负责的态度,认为生态旅游应该是“一个对环境负责的旅游方式,对旅游地的环境和文化影响较小,注重自然和文化环境的活动,拉斯喀瑞正式介绍了生态旅游的定义及其性质,它能有效促进该地区各个时期的任何文化表达方式的保护,“负责保护自然地区的环境和维系好的当地人民的福祉”,”美国生态旅游协会（用Blangy和Wood定义生态旅游,布兰克（1996）将生态旅游定义为,哈尼（1999）给生态旅游定义为,并能带动当地不同年龄段的居民积极参与到环境保护和社会经济发展中,目前关于生态旅游至少已经有100种定义,目的是为了通过这个过程享受、欣赏和研究这些地域的自然景观和野生动物的自然区域细化,减少对当地环境的影响,并在该地区发现任何文化表达方式（过去或者现在）,1992）针对生态旅游给出的定义在短期来看有可能是最全面的,前往相对不受干扰、与外界联系少的地区旅游,这需要旅游或访问不会对当地的正常生活造成干扰,作为第一个使用“生态旅游”的人,拉斯喀瑞最初把它定义为“以学习为具体目标,拉斯喀瑞对他最初提出的定义进行完善,2001年,”1998年,并且有助于当地社区把焦点放在对周围环境的保护,大约二十年前,并能促进文化的多样性发展,并为当地居民提供有益于社会经济增长的活动,这是一个根据生态可持续发展的经验,这里面有几个定义影响相当大,享受和欣赏大自然,这种旅游方式能达到教育性引导游客的效果,保护非物质文化遗产的延续,中国专家陆和王在他们针对生态旅游研究的刊物中用73个字解释这个术语,提高经济发展,探访相对未受到外界打扰的自然区域,发掘其中所蕴含的文化特性,致力于缩小旅游规模,国际自然保护联盟的国家公园委员会（拉斯喀瑞,活动主要包括教育与解释,游客影响度低,在脆弱、原始和普通级别保护区旅游,享受风景,自觉保护,并围绕其开展项目活动,欣赏野生动植物长期生长形态,据不完全统计,自那时起争议就一直存在着,1996）从他们的宗旨出发,”最后,节约地方开支,巩固政府权力。

目前生态旅游的内涵主要包括以下内容：,生态旅游的概念已经被不断扩大,内涵丰富,从上述定义,可以发现随着时间的推移,总的来说。

生态旅游的对象：自然景观,以及生态系统中人与自然共同影响的部分。

生态旅游的主题：旅游目的地区域的人们在环境保护和社会进步中所承担的种责任和义务。

生态旅游的本质：一种新型的特殊的旅游产品。

提高当地居民的生活水平,提高他们的环境观,从而改善他们的生活方式,生态旅游的功能：对旅游者进行环境教育,带动经济发展。

对生态旅游内涵的质疑。

可用来解决复杂的生态旅游问题以及生态旅游在中国的发展问题,生态旅游的术语一直被滥用,深入检查和分析生态旅游的内涵是十分必要的,导致决策失误、规划偏离、管理不善和生态旅游计划脱离实际,由于长期缺少一个明确而又被普遍接受的定义和概念上的延伸,因此。

2.1对生态旅游对象的质疑

特别是自然区的生态环境上,几乎所有关于生态旅游的定义都把其对象局限在自然旅游资源,争议正是出现在这一点上,后期学者对它的完善也只有轻微的,并没有击中要害,如增加保护区、森林公园等,然而。

因此这些生态环境恶劣的地区不应该被排除在生态旅游的对象之外,旅游者参加生态旅游的原始动机是回到大自然以及它包括的不同类型的生态系统中,生态旅游一方面主要需要在健全的生态系统和完善的质量环境中进行,淡水生态系统和海洋生态系统等,包括森林生态系统,如森林、草原、淡水和海洋,但是它们的野性和神秘感给旅游者带来的吸引力绝对不亚于其他生态旅游对象,旅游者通过这些能更深的理解人与自然的关系,尽管荒滩、沼泽等这些在异端条件下产生的特殊环境在旅游业发展中困难重重,这些地区的生态环境恶劣且富有极强的独特性,为游客提供更多的环保机会也由此产生更多教育启示,草地生态系统,沙地生态系统,目前,另一方面,从而反思和约束自己的应为（殷和燕,2003）。

类似于纳西族东巴文化的这样的民族民俗旅游资源,将文化旅游资源排除在生态旅游对象之外的做法是不可取的,只有自然旅游资源可以作为生态旅游的对象,这种文化旅游资源较自然旅游资源更需要严格的保护体系和措施（田和李,由于人类是地球生态系统的最重要组成部分,人类活动也是引起整个生态系统动态的最重要因素,民俗旅游,而不是一种特殊的产品,无论是在丽江还是有着悠久而极具民族特色的摩梭族人,只要经营者按照这样的原则或者模式规划、开发和运营旅游产品,生态旅游应该作为一个原则或者是旅游运行实践的模式,大部分的学者认为,然而,甚至是在整个云南,2004）,在某种意义上,度假旅游都可以被纳入生态旅游的范畴之内,传统的观光旅游,商务旅游。

导致常规旅游环境免疫系统受到限制,让游客忽视传统的旅游资源,容易导致各种传统旅游和生态旅游实践之间在概念上的混淆,试图从生态旅游的对象的角度限制自然旅游资源,在两个负面的影响下会出现这样的概念：1）大量的游客基于进入生态良好区域,另11%的区域生态系统退化,由于发展生态旅游活动,生态系统的免疫功能下降,这将最终致使新发现的领域和生态旅游目的地在发展的同时,特别是对资源区域的完好保存有着深刻的意义,这势必会给这些地区带来严重的破坏和污染,显然,研究结果表明,在中国的省级以上的自然保护区中,其中22%因为遭受到损害而成为保护目标,2）开发商和运营商向旅游者发送错误信号,这将放过来。

2.2对生态旅游者的质疑

而且也不能揭示生态旅游者与传统旅游者之间的本质区别,它看起来高度概括了生态旅游这的本质特征,广义的生态旅游者指的是所有在生态旅游目的地的游客,根据相关文献,尽管根据统计的使用性能,2003）,然而,狭义的生态旅游者指的是那些自愿承担环境保护责任和生态旅游经济发展的人们（钟和赵,它并不能说明生态旅游者的整体形象,这个定义也缺乏真正的实践价值,也更为准确得感概了生态旅游者所承担的责任与义务,针对生态旅游者的定义更倾向于后者,生态旅游者有广义和狭义之分。

从旅游者自身需要的角度出发,生态旅游只能根据经验协助旅游者实现他们旅游的目的,第一,他们前往目的地是为了乐趣、放松和休闲,而不是专门为了学习,但是没有办法要求他们承担与之相对应甚至是更多的责任与义务。

使经营者/代理人颠覆了游客出游目的,游客和经营者/代理人之间的信息出现戏剧性的失衡,也没法获取其他游客所得到的同等的信息,第二,1）事实上,将任何义务都强加给游客,也不能有效地约束他们的行为,2）游客既对该地区的评价既不能影响到他们的行为,旅游产品的供应和消费的同时就决定了游客没有机会去收集和研究当地生态旅游的相关资料,3）旅游企业不能适当的提高游客的责任和意识。

第三,从统计研究上看,我们是无法通过划分传统游客和生态游客的定义和性质来确保游客知晓他们的责任,并落实到实际中。

旅游经营者和代理人应承担着主要责任,旅游经营者和代理人必需从实用性的角度考虑到游客的需求,以及自己在其中所承担的责任,在生态旅游中,游客则只需承担次要部分,生态旅游产品的供应商必需优化经营管理机制,从而实现保护生态环境的目标,正确引导游客行为,所以,相反,促进当地经济发展。

2.3对自然生态旅游的怀疑

区别于传统旅游,人们多偏向于把生态旅游定义为一种新的特殊类型的旅游产品或旅游活动,生态旅游为实现小部分人群的利益和需求而设计,当前,这已经引起了很大的舆论争议。

2.4对生态旅游与社区参与之间关系的质疑。

然而对于旅游产品,他们的边际社会成本不仅包含了产品的开发、形成、推广和维护,同时也包含了由环境污染和资源过度利用导致的潜在成本,旅游运营商应该承担,但又无力承担这些费用,并且还倾向于通过过度使用旅游资源去寻求最大利润,因此,边际社会成本通常大于边际私人成本,当社会边际成本（MSC）等会社会边际收益或者达到帕累托最佳状态时,旅游资源将得到最优利用,旅游运营商只能承受第一部分的总体成本,第二部分则强加于造成外部问题的周围的社区,在现实生活中,这样的外部问题是通过环境污染、交通拥堵、经济秩序的扰乱、当地传统文化的遗失,以及不同程度扰乱当地居民的正常生活反映的,从经济学的角度来看,(李,2002)。

所以为了旅游产业能以可持续发展的方式前行,这也是发展生态旅游的一个关键点,综上所述,旅游地聚集大量游客→旅游资源的过度使用→不可持续性的旅游,必须消除其外部性,甚至是边际社会成本和边际私人成本。

显然不能用作解决旅游业外部性,我们无法确定旅游业的社会成本,包括三个观点：庇古税、科斯定理和企业并购,（2）科斯定理是为了通过产权界定解决外部性问题,解决外部性的重要方式在与内化它,努力消除旅游业的外部化,交易成本低的事件中,所以该公司的成本和效益都是与社会平等的,社会参与必须实现,（3）企业并购建议生产企业与深陷困境的企业相结合,完成企业并购,这将有效消除或内化外部影响,单一的公司在合并后将在没有外部现有的条件下,尤其是在旅游业,更重要的是科斯定理只是用于涉及参与者少,该项定理同样不适合旅游工作,决定生产规模在水平的边际成本等于边际收益,更无法明确旅游经营者和社区之间由频繁交易而带来的困难,由于游客的参与,这项措施并不起作用,然而在现实世界中,（1）庇古税是通过实施税收和补偿受害者的政府,在这种情况下,在国际上,具体而言,资源的分布和利用将实现帕累托最优状态,因此,换言之。

社区参与生态旅游能最大限度的挖掘经济、生态和社会效益的潜力,社区参与不是我们应该怎么样,我们可以得到：社区参与旅游→消除外部性→旅游资源可持续利用→生态旅游,所以生态旅游的内涵包括社区参,而对于生态旅游,社会并不意味着景区周围的广大地区,从以上的讨论,而是我们必须怎样做,在这里,但是利益集团或者利益相关者会涉及到这些地方,此外。

结论

它具备生态旅游的典型特征,生态旅游的对象不仅仅局限于现存的那些保存完整的自然旅游资源,即文化旅游资源,能够丰富游客的认知范围,也包括它在各个时期的文化表现形式。

在整个生态旅游发展过程中,旅游经营者的作用是应该得到充分肯定的,从而实现促进环境的可持续发展和当地经济的提升,今后,他们应当采取有效的运营系统以达到影响游客行为的目的。

生态旅游区别于目前所发展的其它旅游,并代表着旅游产业发展的新阶段,生态旅游不是一种特殊的旅游产品,是今后旅游业发展应该走的正确方向,在本质上它更是是一种原则。

当地居民的积极参与将顺利实现旅游中的经济效益、环境效益和社会效益最大化,只有当社区参与包含在其中的时候,生态旅游才能真正意义上诠释其内涵和目标。