Ecotourism Vs Mass Tourism

Tourism, one of the world’s largest industries, is a well-developed and well-known concept. Ecotourism, on the other hand, is a fairly new idea. The tourism sector is not just the fastest growing industry in the world, but also the only service sector that provides concrete and quantified trading opportunities for countries, regardless of their level of development. However, technology, globalisation and over-consumption are creating a universe that is becoming a smaller place for travellers, which is promoting mass tourism, which is a macro global force (Liu, 2003). As a result of mass tourism, the tourism industry is efficiently growing by generating increased income and boosting extended employment.

In 2015, the World Travel & Tourism Council

In practice, works of literature have shown that ecotourism does not genuinely produce greater sustainable outcomes than mass tourism and does not focus on the wellbeing of local residents to the extent that is required, except solely to emphasise the environmental mind-set (Buchsbaum, 2004). Therefore, community-based ecotourism (CBET) approach seeks to fill the gap in ecotourism by integrating the local community into the development and operational processes. Consequently, CBET seems to be a solution for local people seeking sustainability in a tourism destination (Pookhao, 2014). (Honey, 2008) in her book “Ecotourism and Sustainable Development” outlines seven characteristics of ecotourism namely; involves travel to natural destinations, minimize impact, builds environmental awareness, provides direct financial benefits for conservation, provides financial benefits for local people, respect culture and supports human rights and democratic movements (p.22-24). Community-based ecotourism, thus, supports all the principles previously mentioned with the aim of benefiting the local people by preserving the resource, when compared to ecotourism which seeks to preserve the resource by benefiting the locals. (Primack, Bray, Galletti, Ponciano,

Even though ecotourism is in its infancy in the country, Tapakuma provides a unique opportunity for the study of ecotourism for the purpose of this research. A huge emphasis has been placed on sustainable tourism in Guyana over the years, mostly in the southern hinterland regions of the country. But little attention has been given to other regions of the country, Essequibo (Region 2) being one of such. Zeppel (2006), as cited in (Bith, 2011), stated that a major issue in community-based ecotourism is the availability of limited infrastructure and access to the community, most of the time located in remote and rural areas, which makes investments and tourism activity costly. This area stands out when compared to other areas not just because of its high biodiversity, but also since its location is in close proximity to emergency services such as hospitals, police stations etc., and at the same time situated in remote locations that are