Ecotourism based on access to wild-populations of native flora and fauna may be based on either minimal facilities or reliant on discrete major facilities. Though a complex industry with many intersecting sectors, its self-regulating processes have by and large been successful in managing the business and marketing sides of the industry.
The Committee has identified several key areas which industry and government should target in order to achieve continued growth. These areas are:
a) product and market research;
b) quality control;
c) maintaining the resource; and
d) development of approval processes.
Product and Market Research
The Committee understands that a successful ecotourism industry relies on effective product and market research. Research and knowledge requirements of particular relevance to nature-based tourism are:16
a) potential demand for expansion of nature-based tourism; 17
b) sustainable levels of use in different environments; 18
c) which tourist activities relate to which impacts; 19
d) least-cost ways to avoid, control or mitigate degradation; 20
e) effective ways to ensure that economic benefits are used in the local economy and to maintain the resource; 21and
f) appropriate monitoring systems to measure the impacts of tourist activities on ecosystems and local communities. 22
Work undertaken by the Canberra-based Bureau of Tourism Research, in conjunction with several universities, assists with the collection of statistics that underpin such research. Its research differentiates between:
a) economic research - conducted from a broad community perspective and considering all costs and benefits to the entire community, financial and non-financial; and
b) financial analysis - from the perspective of the proponent of a project and concerned with the risk and financial viability of the project.
The Committee considers that this distinction is helpful and that both approaches are relevant in the targeting of products and markets.
There remains, however, a need for more and better information on which to base planning for tourism.23 The Committee has not found evidence of the well-planned and integrated research and monitoring that is needed to support nature-based and native-species-based tourism in Victoria. Currently such research, monitoring and surveys as occur in these segments of Victoria's tourist industry appear to be done on an ad hoc basis. The work of the Collaborative Research Centre for Tourism and other centres is valuable,24 but does not address Victoria's native-species-based tourism specifically.
The Committee considers that there is need for better-targeted research to address the requirements of the industry, particularly as it relates to Victoria. This should be based on preliminary scoping studies/workshops, possibly conducted by the Collaborative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism, to determine how future research can best be targeted and so ensure that the economic benefits of an expanding tourist industry are captured in ways that are ecologically and socially sustainable. Government could assist by providing seed funding for such activity.
Quality Control
Would-be nature-tourism operators are dealing with a complex industry25 - there are economic, ecological, social and educational objectives to be met. Moreover, operations need to be tailored to the strengths and needs of specific districts. These often include the vagaries of climate and the seasonal variability of native flora and fauna display. Furthermore, the ecotourist market is known to be somewhat fickle and demanding. This is particularly so for those catering to tourists interested in native-species-based products.
A number of mechanisms are used to achieve product quality control and so meet the expectation of the consumer as well as achieve sustainable tourism objectives. These include the use of codes of practice, licensing and accreditation, and training.26
Codes
Each of the industry associations concerned with tourism in Victoria has its own Code of Practice or Conduct. The Australian Tourism Industry Association has a Code of Environmental Practice that was developed for it by the Ecotourism Association of Australia in 1990.27 Other codes of practice that have a sustainability focus have been developed by several other organisations, such as the Code for Environmentally Responsible Tourism prepared by the Pacific Asia Travel Association and the Ecotourism Association of Australia's Code of Practice.28
Such codes of practice provide a valuable foundation for the development of native-species-based tourism that is both sustainable and attractive to tourists. However, it seems that to be most effective some form of enforceable process is required. The accreditation mechanism has proven a most effective method.
Accreditation
Tourism accreditation programs are now being developed around the world.29 Within Victoria, tourism accreditation is being developed and implemented through the `Tourism Accreditation Board of Victoria Inc.'30 There are two accreditation programs relevant to native-species-based tourism. These are a Tourism Accreditation Board of Victoria's `Certified Tourism Business' program and the `National Ecotourism Accreditation Program', which specifically accredits ecotourist programs.31
The focus of the `Certified Tourism Business' program, which is now used throughout Australia, is the business side of the tourist industry.32 It aims to set minimum standards for risk management, consumer satisfaction and mechanisms for continual improvement of performance.33
The `National Ecotourism Accreditation Program' was established in 1997 and was the first ecotourism accreditation program in the world.34 It was developed by the industry to maintain its standards and reputation. It is focussed on the sustainability and educational aspects of ecotourism. At present the program has two levels - `Advanced' and `Core'. It plans shortly to accredit a third level - `Nature tourism' -, which will address sustainability values but will not emphasise education.35 By mid-1999 it is estimated that there were more than 175 accredited ecotourism programs under the program and approximately 200 operators accredited Australia wide.36 Note that programs are accredited rather than the operators.
Both programs were developed in response to the desires of the industry to maintain and improve its standards and reputation. They use self-administered assessment with review.37 Fees are aimed at cost-recovery rather than profit. In this way they should not present a barrier to operators becoming accredited.38
The Committee notes that Parks Victoria has recognised the value of accreditation. Non-accredited operators within its parks must obtain licences annually. An operator with either form of accreditation can obtain a three-year licence, and plans are in hand to provide a seven-year license for an operator with both forms of accreditation.39 Tourism Queensland also actively promotes accreditation among tour operators as a means of improving the standard of tourism in that State.40
The Committee understands that these accreditation programs are also proving to be a highly educative process - participants find that becoming accredited leads to improved operations.41
The `National Ecotourism Accreditation Program' is currently reviewing its program to meet the needs of specific States and Territories more precisely.42 The Committee strongly supports the use of this accreditation scheme by the Victorian ecotourism industry.
Training
Appropriate training is a common vehicle for tourist operators to obtain accreditation.43 It is also seen as important to high-quality tourism.44 Such training needs to be relevant to the particular sector, including native-species-based tourism.
`Tourism Training Victoria' is the operating name of the Tourism and Hospitality Industry Training Board of Victoria Inc. The Board was established to improve training for the Victorian tourism industry,45 and acts as a broker for training programs offered through various educational institutions in Victoria.46 As well as facilitating access to training through the TAFE system, Tourism Training Victoria provides library facilities and offers training itself, where a need is identified. The last includes seminars for individuals or groups contemplating starting new tourism ventures.47 Representatives of a range of industry associations are members of the Tourism Training Victoria Board. This ensures strong links with, and understanding of, the tourism industry.
Preece et al. consider that the:
tourism industry has a very proactive role, a duty and an economic incentive to communicate ecologically sustainable practices and management needs to the huge number of tourists they convey and to whom they interpret ... Tour guides have a captive audience and an opportunity to teach more people about the Australian environment than all universities and schools.48
Consequently, they conclude that tour operators generally (not only those formally involved in ecotourism) should have training that will help them to engender ecologically sustainable behaviour in tourists.49 They recommend that:
Education programs covering the basics of environmental science and ecology be a component of training and accreditation procedures for travel agents, tour operators and field staff.50
Several institutions offering tourism training are taking this need on board.51 A number of educational institutions in Victoria are providing such training in both specialist and general courses.
Courses specifically for tour operators and guides are available.52 Tourism Training Victoria is again the point of contact for these courses.53 However, there may still be a need for improved training that enables guides to "become educators who give contextual knowledge" and for more Koori teachers/guides.54
Tourism courses with segments on nature-based tourism or ecotourism are also provided by most of the universities.
A range of literature providing principles is available, including a handbook tailored to the needs of small, community-based operators.55 The community-based approach has a high potential for achieving benefits to the community as well as meeting the other objectives of ecotourism. It is a complex approach, however, and the value of having a facilitator is well demonstrated.56
The Committee commends the tourism industry, in collaboration with Tourism Victoria, for taking such a proactive role in training and assurance programs aimed at improving and maintaining standards, including sustainability, within the nature-based sector of the industry.
The Committee recognises that these initiatives are very recent and considers it important that the present impetus be maintained. Independent assessment of the effectiveness of industry training is needed to ensure that standards continue to improve and that shortfalls in programs are identified and addressed.
Tourism Training Victoria prepares Industry Training Plans each year, with eight completed as at June 1999.57 Its Plan 2000-2001 Tourism and Hospitality Industry Training Plan presents broad recommendations. It does not address native-species-based tourism as such, but draws attention to the needs of nature-based tourism. It does recommend:
a) consultation with local operators to determine their training needs;
b) provision of diverse training to meet the needs of each segment of tourism;
c) involvement of indigenous communities (who are likely to lay some emphasis on native species); and
d) linking training to accreditation programs.58
Maintaining the Resource
The ecotourism industry is dependent on a natural environment that is in good condition. The health of the native-species-based ecotourism sectors of the industry is directly proportional to the health of the population of native species. The dilemma for the industry is that it is not the manager of the natural resource - only one of a number of competing user groups. The industry can, however, become involved with the planning of such resources.
Planning for Ecotourism
The Committee recognises that in order to protect the resource used for nature-based tourism and ensure the welfare of the local community, strategies and plans need to be long term and based on an ecosystems approach to planning and management.59
Such planning should:
a) be sensitive to the scale and type of tourism, and its effects on local culture;
b) make sure that income is provided to local people whose lands and lives are affected;
c) take full account of the goals of protected areas;
d) provide access to visitors from a wide range of economic backgrounds;
e) tailor management to the conditions of the specific location; and
f) encourage codes of practice and accreditation systems for tour operators.60
According to Preece et al:
The need for an integrated approach, based on regional planning for biodiversity conservation and the development of tourism, has been recognised in a number of important policy documents, including the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development, the Final Reports of the ESD Working Groups (in particular Tourism), the National Ecotourism Strategy (ESD), the National Tourism Strategy and the Draft National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia's Biodiversity.61
The Committee notes and endorses the observation of the ESD Working Group on Tourism that:
If tourism is to develop in an ecologically sustainable way, the current political and institutional fragmentation existing in land-use planning will need to be overcome. 62
Preece et al. emphasise the need for systematic planning based on the "identification and management of key bioregions, ...[combined with] a detailed assessment of natural features that attract tourists".63 In other words, it should be the characteristics of the environment that are the principal determinants of planning and management boundaries.64 These include vegetation types, catchment areas, climatic factors and human uses. There should be a hierarchy of levels at which planning and management occur, from continental to regional and local. Each level should be based on a similar scale in environmental patterns. At the detailed level, maximum carrying capacities for visitors and operators for particular sites should be set and rigorously enforced.
The Victorian Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (now Parks Victoria) has taken a bioregional approach to developing regional plans for tourism.65 Market research has also been undertaken to determine public perceptions of regions, what tourists expect there, barriers to change, problems of distance and accommodation and needs for on-site accommodation.66
Methods to protect natural values may also involve:
a) planning legislation;
b) zoning and management to match activities and site capacities;
c) limiting visitor numbers through fees or quotas - this is difficult as visitors, revenue raisers and those responsible for protection have different goals; visitors more tolerant of degradation will come as the site runs down;
d) providing visitor education and guide services;
e) selecting visitor type - that is for low impact and high spending - this may create problems of fairness and conflict with the preceding strategy, but low-impact facilities and type of presentation may encourage low-impact visitors to the most sensitive areas;
f) educating visitors, guides and entrepreneurs (this is a long-term approach);
g) training guides/interpreters from the local community; and
h) hardening the resource (for example providing raised walks and viewing areas, barriers to vehicles, appropriate zoning and `honey pots' to draw visitors away from sensitive areas).67
Industry Contribution
The potential for incremental damage of the resource - the natural populations and ecosystems - is ever-present in a growth industry. For this reason actions to `minimise impact' may not be sufficient to insure long-term sustainability - active management is needed.68
The Committee believes that, as a user of the resource, the industry has a vested interest in its maintenance and it is appropriate for it to provide funding or in-kind support to manage and sustain these natural resources. Industry may need incentives to contribute to the conservation of its resource base (rather than rely on altruism and philanthropy). Potential actions include:
a) correcting the current deficiency in funding of the research and management needed to protect the natural resource; 69
b) providing secure protection of habitats on private land, which is often committed to other agricultural production;
c) informing the tourist industry more fully about its environmental responsibility;70
d) developing funding mechanisms and economic instruments to provide for proper management, maintenance and repair of the resource. 71
Options for raising funds to support the resource include:
a) entrance fees;
b) donations;
c) payment for associated services or products;72 and
d) private investment.73
The Committee accepts that one of the challenges of tourism is to ensure that contributions towards maintaining the natural resource from monies received by the tourist industry is equivalent to the importance of the resource to the tourist enterprise.
Government Contribution
Tourism is a difficult sector for governments.74 Its character, boundaries, needs and outputs are not easy to identify; its structure is diffuse. The infrastructure required is both `hard' (roads, airports, hotels, wildlife parks) and `soft' (guides, information, a welcoming culture). All are important; none is sufficient in itself. Where promotion is concerned, there are large externalities; the region or attraction that finances promotion is likely to attract visitors to its neighbours as much as to itself.
Moreover, the resource, particularly for nature-based tourism, is often common property prone to the two main hazards of commons - overuse and the lack of incentive for anyone in particular to invest in the care of the resource.75 Local government, which provides many of the services required by tourists and bears much of the cost of their impacts, may reap little in return.76
Stimson et al. consider that, if the benefits of tourism are to be maximised, governments need to:
a) ensure highly coordinated effort between the different levels of government;
b) ensure long-term and well-coordinated strategic planning and management; and
c) ensure timely provision of infrastructure.77
Preece et al. recommended that governments encourage sustainable practices, including restoration of habitats, through taxation incentives.78 They cite a Victorian example whereby reduced fees have been negotiated by a company that provides assistance in-kind for public land conservation. Such an approach would fit well with the desire of some tourists to be involved in conservation works.
There is a range of possibilities for the involvement of government that are relevant to native-species-based tourism.79 These include that:
a) regional planning capabilities be developed jointly with Federal, State and Local governments for the encouragement and management of ecotourism - this involves the development of information and data systems, modelling capabilities and arrangements for collaborative planning processes;
b) Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) should be examined to determine their efficiency in achieving conservation - this requires, among other things, that greater attention be paid to the cumulative impacts of development;
c) support should continue for resource-attribute surveys, monitoring programs, State of Environment Reporting and work on environmental indicators;
d) governments should continue to promote Australia's rich diversity of ecosystems and species to overseas markets;
e) education and training, for tourism operators and on a more general basis should be a basic ingredient of a national strategy;
f) the costs of providing facilities for tourists on public land should be raised through charges to tourists or tour operators on a user-pays basis where the cost of enforcement would be practicable;80
g) indirect taxes on goods used in conjunction with nature-based tourism could be used as a revenue-raising mechanism for maintaining the resource, but that such revenue should be returned to the region for such support;
h) methods to encourage benevolent contributions should be developed, including the options to enhance corporate images;81
i) concessions be offered for compliance with Codes of Practice;
j) governments support conservation of habitats on private land because of their external benefits through taxation or other incentives; and
k) innovative funding mechanisms be investigated to cover costs of research, market analysis, environmental management and demonstration to stakeholders of the benefits of protecting habitats to the industry.
Development Approval Processes
The facility-based ecotourism segment is reliant on the development of facilities in areas that are often remote, environmentally sensitive and, often, locally controversial.
The Committee received evidence that the planning and approvals processes involved in major facility-based ecotourism operations were inordinately long and complex.82
There appears to be tension between attempting to `fast track' such processes while providing for effective public consultation. It seems that this process was complicated through approvals being required for gaining access to public land as well as to undertake the actual development.
The Committee, in its Inquiry into Planning Issues for Extractive Industries, has previously considered the planning-approvals process for the extractive industry. Operators were required to seek approvals under legislation dealing with extractive industries as well as planning. The Committee recommended that "there should be a retention of the dual system of both planning and licence approval, but with a simplified operational extractive industry licence".83 Similarly, the Committee believes that Crown land licence approval should be restricted to operational matters - with the consideration of planning issues restricted to the planning permit.
The Committee also reiterates some of the principles that it established in this previous Inquiry regarding integrated approvals and single adjudication.84 It considered that the planning system in relation to ecotourism development should provide greater certainty and should be in accord with the following principles:
a) a proposal should be guaranteed a hearing;
b) a proposal can, if required, be heard in an independent forum;
c) there should be integrated approvals;
d) there should be no undue delay in the approvals process;
e) there should be a single adjudication and planning approval should be for the life of the development.
In major developments the Committee also considers that it would be useful for the general principles of a development to be determined and agreed to through an open planning process that is separate from the creation and approval of detailed design. This would enable a proponent to have assurance of an `in principle' approval of location and scale and use, prior to having to commit to detailed design. It would also assist in creating more effective public debate and input.
FACILITATING AQUACULTURE
The Committee views the closed-system farming of fish and other aquatic species as an appropriate and indeed desirable form of native biota utilisation. While a successful growth industry, it is still in many senses developing and it is evident to the Committee that, like many such developing industries, it may benefit from assistance that, in more mature industries, would be provided by industry organisations.
The key areas where assistance is likely to be needed and most relevant to the growth of the freshwater native-species-based sectors of Victoria's aquaculture are:
a) development of appropriate industry ethos and structures;
b) research and development;
c) dissemination of knowledge; and
d) the interpretation and development of markets.
Development of Appropriate Industry Ethos and Structures
Philosophical Approach
From the point of view of ecological sustainability, the farming of a native species, if in a genuinely closed system, presents no more threat to ecological processes and biodiversity than does any other form of farming.
In the Committee's opinion, native-animal farming should thus be subject to the same requirements as other types of farming with respect to pollution, health, cruelty and planning regulations. The Committee sees no need to impose special environmental restrictions on native-species farming, other than those needed to ensure that farm-bred animals do not escape to the wild and that native animals are not taken from the wild.
Consequently the Committee believes that aquaculture needs to be recognised as a form of farming by regulators. Equally, aquaculture needs to be recognised as farming by entrants to the industry.
The Committee was able to consider the views of the Aquaculture Regulatory Reform Task Force and to take them into account. This Task Force undertook a review of regulatory arrangements in the Victorian aquaculture industry and has recently published a report of its findings.85 As part of the review process, industry representatives indicated that current legislation and regulation are reasonable but that there are some issues of concern, such as difficulties with clumsy application of regulations. The industry advocated a desire for a `one-stop shop', where all regulatory requirements can be explained and dealt with through a single process. The Task Force recommended that Fisheries Victoria be established as the `one-stop' shop'. It also recommended that the relevant regulation be reviewed, "to provide sufficient flexibility in regulatory arrangements to recognise the needs of aquaculture as well as those of the wild-capture sector, while still ensuring protection and sustainability of the natural wild-stock resource for all purposes".86
The Task Force also made a range of detailed recommendations to improve licensing criteria and systems, planning and best-practice guidelines, and auditing of environmental compliance. In addition it suggested the creation of a more transparent `translocation' policy - for the cultivation of species in areas beyond their natural distribution.
The Committee supports the general thrust of these recommendations, but considers it appropriate to make a clear distinction between those forms of aquaculture that are reliant on ranching (notably eel production) and those more mature operations that are effectively independent of the wild resources.
With respect to the industry itself, the Committee notes that, while it wants to be considered as a mainstream farming sector, views more generally associated with a wild-harvest perspective remain. For instance, a significant amount of production still occurs in farm dams, which are stocked and harvested with minimal further effort to enhance production.87
Industry Organisation
It can be difficult for new industries to strike the right balance between vertical integration and specialisation. While the former appears to be necessary to ensure that production, processing and marketing grow together, small new businesses will seldom have the expertise or resources to make vertical integration work beyond the cottage-industry scale. Nor should the self-sufficiency of the individual business become an impediment to development of strong organisational networking and cooperation across the industry. Vertical integration through cooperation between industry segments and with input of appropriate expertise appears to be the mix that is needed by very new industries.
The Committee is aware that a number of industry associations have been created, including, most recently, the peak umbrella group, the Victorian Aquaculture Council. Such industry organisations can play a key role in the growth of a developing industry. The Committee sees a role for government in facilitating cooperation through such industry organisations and networks.
Research and Development
Research and development has been identified as a key requirement for growth of native-plant industries; the Committee recognises its equal importance to native-animal industries. Precisely what research is most needed varies with the sector and the Committee considers that it will often be identified best by the industry itself.88 However, an industry, especially a young industry, is unlikely to have the resources or expertise to undertake the research and development needed.
Industry may provide direction and support for research and development. However, it is the Committee's opinion that government will need to play a role in providing expertise and facilities. Government can also help young industries to identify the most fruitful directions for research and development through pilot or scoping studies, and collaborate with industry in adaptive management research.
Basic research and development regarding life cycles and husbandry of relevant species and their marketing appear to be the forms of research which need to be undertaken.
Dissemination of Knowledge
The Committee has recognised that dissemination of knowledge is as important as the research that provides the knowledge. Dissemination of knowledge is required to both potential entrants and existing aquaculturists. The Committee recognises that new industries are unlikely to have either the resources or the skills to ensure that information is disseminated efficiently.
Government already plays an important role in this field through the activities of its various departments, particularly the DNRE. A number of training institutions also play a part. It is the Committee's opinion that these activities should continue and, in some cases, be strengthened or extended where native-species farming is concerned. As a leading representative of the aquaculture industry wrote:
The best value for money [for the native-species aquaculture industry] would be to appoint a warm-water specialist as Inland Extension Officer ... stationed in the North West to provide a regular service [in] the Murray Darling Basin.89
The Committee considers that appropriate training and extension should be made more available in regional centres where native-animal farming is occurring and/or in forms which are accessible to people in these regions - such as through distance education or Internet communication.
Interpretation and Development of Markets
The difficulties experienced by entrants to new industries in knowing what consumers want, matching consumer demands and developing new markets has been discussed in earlier chapters. The Committee concludes that it is essential for new or developing animal industries to obtain adequate resources and expertise in this area. Markets must be clearly identified, the production and presentation must match market demand and effective market development should be undertaken if the success of a new industry is to be ensured. A partnership between government and industry is likely to be most efficient in ensuring a good match between production and markets.
Infrastructure
The Committee is aware that the expansion of the aquaculture industry is reliant on both domestic and export markets. Given that the product is often sought in a fresh form, the provision of adequate transport infrastructure is vital. This is particularly important for the export market.
