Tourism Management Perspectives 4 (2012) 223–228
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Tourism Management Perspectives
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tmp
Sustainable tourism development strategy by SWOT analysis: Boujagh National
Park, Iran
Anita Reihanian a,⁎, Noor Zalina Binti Mahmood a, Esmail Kahrom b, Tan Wan Hin c
a
b
c
Institute of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia
Environment Department, Faculty of Environment and Energy, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Iran
Geography Department, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 26 April 2012
Accepted 4 August 2012
Keywords:
Boujagh National Park
Sustainable tourism
SWOT
a b s t r a c t
This paper explores the applicability of transforming the current state of tourism in Boujagh National Park
(BNP) (a region located in the northern Iran with an area of 3177 ha) to a sustainable tourism model. To
plan and implement this, different management and decision making tools were used including interviews
and questionnaire surveys as well as SWOT analysis. A series of interviews was conducted in order to identify
actions taken by governmental bodies responsible (e.g., Department of Environment). In addition, the visitors
of the park were surveyed to assess the rate of fulfillment of sustainable tourism development in the park.
Local residents were also taken into account by using a survey to reveal the problems and attractions of
the park. Results showed that the existing tourism activities in the park did not conform to sustainability requirements. Thus, a SWOT analysis was used to identify the required management strategies to improve the
tourism in the park.
© 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
At a national scale, terrestrial protected areas in Iran currently cover
7.17% of the entire country, categorized into four groups including national parks, national natural monuments, wildlife refuges, and
protected areas (Darvishsefat, Khosravi, & Borzuii, 2007). There are 25
national parks covering 1,953,537 ha of the country (DOE, 2011). It is
important to note that national parks in Iran lack any comprehensive
management plan. Recognizing the need to formulate a holistic strategy
to manage and conserve such valuable areas, the study focused on
Boujagh National Park (BNP). Tourism has had a largely unplanned development in this park. Therefore, it is necessary to take control of tourism development in BNP. Although many studies have been conducted
on national parks in Iran in general and on BNP in specific, it seems that
the fundamental problem is a lack of studies on sustainable tourism.
Regarding BNP, prior studies have attempted to document
individual cases of fauna and flora, ecology, and ornithology
(Ashouri & Zolfinijad, 2005; Ashouri, Nezami Balouchi, & Zolfinejad,
2008; Khara & Nezamibalouchi, 2005; Khara et al., 2006; Khara,
Nezamibalouchi, Sattari, Mirhasheminasab, & Mousavi, 2008; Naqinejad,
Saeedimehrvarz, Norouzi, & Faridi, 2007; Naqinejad & Saeedimehrvarz,
2009; Nezamibalouchi, Khara, Nikoukerdar, & Mirmousavi, 2005; Tatina,
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +60 98912 817 2584 (Mbl).
E-mail addresses: anita_reihanian@yahoo.com (A. Reihanian), alin@um.edu.my
(N.Z.B. Mahmood), ekahrom@hotmail.com (E. Kahrom), tanwh@um.edu.my
(T.W. Hin).
2211-9736/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2012.08.005
Tati, & Qaribkhani, 2009). Mozafari (2008) investigated the habitat and
demography of European pond turtle Emys orbicularis persica in BNP.
Yousefi (2007) tried to identify the sensitive ecological areas along the
Caspian Sea using ecological capability evaluation and economic valuation
methods. Fallahfarbod (2007) attempted to form a sustainable design for
BNP recreational area to develop tourism. In a study, Majnounian and
DanehKar (2004) ranked protected coastal areas of the Caspian Sea.
They concluded that BNP needed reconsideration in terms of designation
because of not meeting the standards of a national park. As mentioned
above, despite of studies conducted on BNP, tourism along with BNP
and SWOT never appeared together. This study made effort to integrate
these concepts in one research project.
Achieving sustainable tourism, defined as one that is ecologically
benign, economically feasible and socially acceptable, is thus contingent on environmental protection and reconciling tourism activities
with local socio-economical values (Brown, Turner, Hameed, &
Bateman, 1997). Therefore, herein the implementation of sustainable
tourism was examined through interviews with governmental bodies, officials, and staff. In addition, the park visitors were also taken
into consideration so as to reveal their experience and discover how
well the current management and activities satisfy their demands
by utilizing interviews and questionnaire surveys. Plus, since local
community is an essential element in park management, a questionnaire survey was carried out to obtain their comments.
As the results unveiled a gap between what should be and what
happens to be, a SWOT analysis was carried out so as to wisely implement the sustainable tourism in BNP in the future. Thus, this analysis
focuses on the strengths and weaknesses (internal factors) as well as
224
A. Reihanian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 4 (2012) 223–228
opportunities and threats (external factors) in this park regarding
sustainable tourism and the corresponding strategy.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Study area
BNP is located on the Caspian Lowland and Delta of Sefīd-Rūd. This
national park is located in Guilan Province, about 2 km away from
north of Kiashahr city, 20 km from Amirkelayeh, 15 km from
Lashtenesha, and 35 km from northwest of Rasht city. It is 21 m
below sea level and has an area of 3177 ha. Its geographical coordinates are 49° 55′ 20″E and 37° 26′ 55″N. Fig. 1 demonstrates the geographical location of this park in Iran. Bandar Kiashahr Lagoon, one of
the oldest lagoons in Guilan, is located within this national park. This
lagoon (formerly Bandar Farahnaz) lies immediately to the east of the
Sefid-Rūd mouth.
Field studies show that Bandar Kiashahr Lagoon is one of the main
tourist destinations in BNP and is of high importance due to spawning
and nursery grounds for fishes, breeding, staging, and wintering areas
for a wide variety of waterfowls (Ramsar Convention, 2005). This lagoon with an area of 500 ha counts as a site of Ramsar city, including
its associated marshes and the marshes and sand flats at the mouth of
the Sefid-Rūd to the west. This site has been identified as an important
bird area by Bird Life International (Evans, 1994).
BNP stands on category II in the United Nation's list of national
parks and protected areas (IUCN, 2008). Since 2002, the area was
designated as a national park in order to repel its cover changes and
protect its biodiversity. The park belongs to Iran Department of Environment (DOE) and is physically patrolled by DOE rangers.
There exist two guard stations. Some parts of this land have been
purchased by Guilan Provincial Directorate of Environment Protection and the remaining parts are being negotiated with the landowners. The 3177‐hectare coastal national park meets the required
conditions for the Siberian Crane's (Grus leucogeranus) wintering
habitat and hosts more than 100,000 migratory waterbirds annually.
Among Iran's protected areas, it harbors one of the highest numbers
of bird species (Ramsar Convention, 2005).
2.2. Data sources
2.2.1. Primary data
Primary data were collected using three questionnaire surveys, unstructured interviews, and participant's observation. There were three
different surveys administered on three different groups of stakeholders, i.e. visitors, staff, authorities active in field of park management
regarding conservation and tourism aspects as well as local residents.
Due to the fact that this method is more costly, a direct face-to-face survey method was employed since it is more likely to elicit higher response rates than mail surveys (Lee and Han, 2002). Some of the
questioned staff took the questionnaire home and returned it to the remunerator and the authors later. The main reason for which was that
the staff were approached during day time. In fact, they were at work
during the day and it was not convenient to fill out the form directly.
Fig. 1. The geographical location of the study area in the world and Iran (Yousefi, 2008).
A. Reihanian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 4 (2012) 223–228
They preferred to take time to fill out the forms instead of being
interviewed. In case of visitors and residents, the respondents were
approached in two ways depending on their preference. Either they
were interviewed by remunerators or they themselves filled out the
questionnaire. There was an open question in three of the questionnaire
surveys looking for any further comments which deemed necessary and
were not referred to in the questions. Important to note, four individuals were trained to distribute and explain the way of completing the
questionnaires and also to collect them.
In all three questionnaires, Likert scale was used to elicit the effective
factors in visitor's satisfaction and staff's and locals' opinions about the
park attractions as well as problems. This scale involves a series of questions or statements related to attitude in question. The respondent is required to indicate the degree of agreement or disagreement with each of
these statements. Responses are given a numerical score that will consistently reflect the direction of the individual's attitudes on each question/
statement. The respondent's total score is computed by summing the
scores of all statements and the final measure depends on the percentage
of each indicator (Kinnear & Taylor, 1995).
2.3. SWOT analysis
A SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis is a research method to analyze a certain status-quo. SWOT analysis,
also known as SWOT matrix, has often been used in field of business
and extended to that of natural resource management in order to assess
a given decision, project or policy directive in a systematic manner
(Schmoldt, Kangas, Mendoza, & Pesonen, 2001). It has also been used
in assessment of sustainable tourism (NOAA, 2011).
This method is based on two tiers of analysis which are conducted
separately:
1. First step is to analyze the internal factors (local analysis) which
contain a discussion on strengths and weaknesses according to
the aims of the SWOT;
2. Second step is to analyze the external factors (global analysis)
which contain a discussion on relevant opportunities and threats
(positive/negative framework conditions, potential chances and
risks) (Harfst et al., 2010).
225
Scanning the internal and external environmental factors is an important part of a strategic planning process which in turn is a component of sustainable development. Such an analysis of the strategic
environment is instrumental in formulation and selection of a strategy. In this study, the SOWT analysis was conducted on BNP to examine
the sustainable tourism development. First, the internal environmental factors of the park were classified as strengths (S) or weaknesses
(W) and those external were classified as opportunities (O) or threats
(T). Accordingly, a list of Ss and Ws and a list of Os and Ts were drawn.
The former was tabulated in the internal factor estimate matrix
(IFEM) and the latter was tabulated in the external factor estimate
matrix (EFEM). Next, these factors were weighed and scored by a
panel of experts and the final score was calculated. The following section elaborates the scoring process for S and W:
1. The factors were given a coefficient between 0 and 1, standing for
“not important” and “most-important”, respectively. This coefficient represents the relative significance of the factor in success
rate and is represented by this term; weight in the IFEM. Despite
the fact that each factor is considered an internal strength or weakness, the more effective the factor in sustainable tourism development, the higher the allotted weight will be.
2. Each factor was scored between 1 and 4, 1 standing for fundamental weakness, 2 for minor weakness, 3 for strength and 4 for great
strength. These scores were based on the activities taking place
in the park, coefficients used in the above stage and park's
status.
3. To determine each factor's final score, its weight was multiplied by
its score.
4. Once each factor's total score was calculated, they were summed
to calculate the total final score of IFEM.
5. If this value was less than 2.5, it meant that the strengths were less
than weaknesses; if it was more than 2.5 strengths were more than
weaknesses.
These steps were repeated for EFEM as well. If this value was less
than 2.5, it meant that the opportunities were less than threats; if it
was more than 2.5, opportunities were more than threats (Monavari,
Karbasi, & Mogooee, 2007).
Fig. 2 outlines the research methodology followed in this study.
Fig. 2. Research methodology outline.
226
A. Reihanian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 4 (2012) 223–228
Table 1
External factor estimate matrix (EFEM).
Opportunities
1. Job creation and direct benefit generation for local community
2. Concentration on tourism in 1404-Development Plan and a 25-million-dollar income prediction
3. High research and educational potential
4. Utilizing the future income from tourism to enhance the area conservation level
5. Conserving natural ecosystems and making effort to decrease negative impacts
6. Providing necessary facilities and conditions for establishing tourism cooperatives and providing banking facilities
7. Constant development of tourism
8. Feasibility of implementing tourism plans in Boujagh National Park, considering environmental requirements
9. Making effort to keep and emphasize on conserving native culture and prevention of the traditional context alteration
Threats
1. Inharmonious development of urban infrastructures along with population growth because of the jobless immigration
into the area
2. Lack of consideration to environmental impacts of executing projects such as resorts, hotels, etc.
3. Contamination increase due to waste disposal generated by vehicle traffic
4. Coastline alteration
5. Lack of favorable circumstances for foreign tourists
6. Exposed to land destruction and land use conversion
Total
3. Results
After primary & secondary data collection, SWOT analysis was
performed to assess the feasibility of sustainable tourism in BNP
through analyzing the results and determining the priorities.
3.1. External factor estimate matrix (EFEM)
There were 9 factors pertaining to opportunities. job creation and
direct benefit generation for local community and providing the necessary facilities and conditions for establishing the tourism cooperatives and providing banking facilities had the highest weight, while
conserving natural ecosystems and making effort to decrease the negative impacts and making effort to keep and emphasizing on conserving native culture and prevention of the traditional context alteration
had the lowest weight. The effectiveness score ranged between 3 and
4. In case of threats, 6 factors were recognized. The highest weight allocated to 6 factors amounted to either 0.1 or 0.03, and the effectiveness score ranged between 2 and 4. Ultimately, the final score was
Weight
Effectiveness score
Final score
0.1
0.06
0.06
0.08
0.04
0.1
0.05
0.05
0.04
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
4
0.4
0.24
0.24
0.32
0.16
0.4
0.15
0.15
0.16
0.03
3
0.09
0.1
0.1
0.05
0.1
0.04
1
4
4
3
4
2
–
0.4
0.4
0.15
0.4
0.08
3.74
3.74. Table 1 summarizes the process and the outcome of external
factor analysis.
3.2. Internal factor estimate matrix (IFEM)
Regarding strengths, 10 factors were identified. The weight allocated to these factors amounted between 0.02 and 0.06 and the effectiveness score ranged between 3 and 4. When considering weaknesses, 10
factors were detected. Lack of accommodation such as hotels and resorts and disregarding the external beautification and waste disposal
had the highest weight i.e. 0.1. The lowest weight was 0.04. The effectiveness score ranged between 1 and 2. Totally, the final score was
2.47. The results of this stage are shown in Table 2.
The value of external factors equalled 3.74; implying that opportunities were more than threats. The value of internal factors was 2.47,
so the strengths were less than weaknesses. In other words, although
the park is seen to have significant potential for tourism development,
tourism is not a well‐developed industry in BNP. Indeed, it can be concluded that the park does not support sustainable tourism based on
Table 2
Internal factor estimate matrix (IFEM).
Weight
Effectiveness score
Final score
Strengths
1. The region weather and climate
2. The sea along the northern border of the park
3. Boujagh International Wetland (Kiashahr Port)
4. Unique ecosystems
5. Great avian biodiversity
6. Airport existence in the province capital
7. Adjacency to Anzali and Astara Ports
8. Valuable handicrafts
9. Ancient culture and magnificent local language and accent
10. Hassan Abad access road to Zibakenar, and Lasht-Neasha to Zibakenar
0.03
0.06
0.06
0.04
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
3
4
4
3
4
3
3
3
4
3
0.09
0.24
0.24
0.12
0.16
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.08
0.06
Weaknesses
1. Lack of infrastructures and fundamental facilities
2. Lack of accommodation such as hotels and resorts
3. Unhygienic waste disposal and dumping along the wetland
4. Hasty promotion of Boujagh Wildlife Refuge to National Park
5. Shortage of urban green spaces and lack of parks at local and regional scale
6. Disregard for external beautification and waste disposal
7. Lack of balance between tourism facilities with conservation concepts
8. Weak communication with people in terms of positive impacts of tourism sustainable development
9. Lack of travel and ecotourism agencies
10. Lack of environmental professional employment in regard to tourism in the relevant authorities
Total
0.08
0.1
0.06
0.07
0.04
0.1
0.04
0.07
0.04
0.07
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
–
0.16
0.2
0.12
0.14
0.04
0.2
0.08
0.14
0.08
0.14
2.47
A. Reihanian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 4 (2012) 223–228
the current state of management and conservation, tourism, and
socio-economy of the area. It means that the unsustainable tourism
development neither conserves the area nor benefits the local communities. Thus, the park is in desperate need of sustainable tourism
plans in order to generate benefits for locals and minimize the adverse
impacts of tourism.
As mentioned earlier, sustainable tourism is the main pivot for national park development. To reach this, by pair wise matching SO,
WO, ST, and WT, twenty six key strategies were determined for this
national park.
The SWOT matrix is shown below:
• S-O strategies proposed opportunities that fit well with the park's
strengths.
• W-O strategies to overcome weaknesses to suggest opportunities.
• S-T strategies to identify the ways that can be used to reduce vulnerability to the external threats.
• W-T strategies to establish a defensive plan to prevent the park's
weaknesses from making it highly susceptible to the external
threats.
Table 3
Sustainable tourism development strategies in BNP.
SO strategies
1. Considering the area climate and weather which affects the seasonality of the
potential activities when planning for tourism.
2. Taking advantage of the future income of the tourism industry to enhance the
area conservation level.
3. Considering its particular biological and ecological conditions of Boujagh
International Wetland, located within the national park, it is a core factor in
attracting tourists, hence a particular tourism plan should be developed for
this wetland.
4. Advantage should be taken of the area's ancient culture, language and dialects,
and local garments while planning for sustainable tourism development, and
planning should be undertaken to preserve the traditional context.
5. The area handicrafts should be presented and marketed by relevant companies.
ST strategies
1. To avoid tourism negative impacts on sensitive fauna and flora species, a
particular plan should be developed to conserve the park ecological value. This
needs to be done in accordance with national and international lists such as
IUCN red list and DOE list of protected species.
2. Establishing facilities and conditions required to attract foreign tourists by
relevant companies.
3. Increasing environmental guard stations and patrols to improve conservational
capacity.
4. Conducting Environmental Impact Assessment in the case of any major
development projects within and around the park.
WO strategies
1. Providing accommodation for overnight and long stays.
2. Allocating budget to establish infrastructures.
3. Environmental education and culture building through public media, academic
conferences, and NGOs.
4. Facilitating the tours operated by tour operators with collaboration of the
authorities.
5. Communicating and introducing the park attractions by using well-designed
educating packages.
6. Supporting and funding nature tours.
7. Establishment of equipped bird-watching site in different locations in the park.
WT strategies
1. Planning and fund provision in order to establish travel agencies to attract
tourists.
2. Building roads suitable for tourism and reducing tourist congestion in just one
route.
3. Infrastructure development harmonized with population increase caused by
tourist visits.
4. Informing ecotourists and tourists by local guides, handing out brochures, and
erecting signs to prevent park pollution.
5. Environmental education with respect to hotel and accommodation constructors,
and tourism operators to lessen environmental impacts.
6. Employing environmental management experts to manage and educate how to
dispose waste in order to diminish the park environmental pollution.
227
These development strategies are listed in Table 3 on external and
internal factors in SWOT matrix.
4. Conclusions
This study examines the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and
threats of tourism development in Boujagh National Park. The main
issues which influence tourism industry development in the park
have been identified by SWOT analysis. The current and future situation of tourism in BNP is criticized by means of quantified SWOT analysis. Accordingly, BNP has a great potential for tourist attraction. The
strong points are the beauty of the landscape, presence of a large variety of bird species, great diversity of environments in a large territory, existence of valuable natural areas that may be further enhanced
in terms of enjoyment, and presence of beach tourism in coastal
areas that can be integrated with ecotourism. However, its infrastructure and promotion are inadequate due to local government's lack of
attention to tourism industry. Therefore, BNP is open to mass and
unsustainable tourism activities. These results may help the park's
managers to analyze the problem of tourism and determine the potential improvement actions. Consequently, this paper provides an
important alternative for further research projects on implementation of sustainable tourism in BNP.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2012.08.005.
References
Ashouri, A., Nezami Balouchi, S., & Zolfinejad, K. (2008). Identifying birds in Boujagh
National Park. Iranian Journal of Ecology, 34, 101–112.
Ashouri, A., & Zolfinijad, K. (2005). A three-year study on the birds in Boujagh National
Park. Iranian Journal of Environmental Sciences, 11, 11–22.
Brown, K., Turner, R., Hameed, H., & Bateman, I. (1997). Environmental carrying capacity
and tourism development in the Maldives and Nepal. Environmental Conservation,
24(4), 316–325.
Darvishsefat, A., Khosravi, A., & Borzuii, A. (2007). Concept of the National Atlas of Protected
Areas of Iran and its Realization. Tehran, Iran: Tehran University Publications.
DOE (2011). Protected areas in Iran. available at: http://www.doe.ir/portal/Home/Default.
aspx?CategoryID=194f31a0-4030-446f-8a8a-3b49774ba52d accessed Feb, 2011.
Evans, M. I. (1994). Important bird areas in the Middle East. Cambridge, United Kingdom:
BirdLife International.
Fallahfarbod, S. (2007). Sustainably design BNP recreational area to develop tourism
(Master's thesis). University of Tehran, Teahran, Iran.
Harfst, J., Wirth, P., Lintz, G., & Bieberstein, C. (2010). Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats of European mining regions (SWOT Report I) (pp. 103). Germany,
Dresden: Leibniz Institute of Ecological and Regional Development (IOER).
IUCN (2008). Guidelines for applying protected area management categories. available at:
http://data.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/PAPS-016.pdf accessed March 2011.
Khara, H., & Nezamibalouchi, S. (2005). Identifying and study on fish species and
abundance in Kiasharhr Wetland. Scientific Journal of Iranian Fisheries, 13, 41–54.
Khara, H., Nezamibalouchi, S., Sattari, M., Mirhasheminasab, F., & Mousavi, A. (2008).
Investigating the economic fishes contaminated by Rudolphi, 1819 parasite in
Kiahshahr Wetland. Iranian Journal of Biology, 20, 418–429.
Khara, H., Nezamibalouchi, S., Sattari, M., Mirhasheminasab, F., & Mousavi, A. (2006).
Study on alimentary tract parasite of the fishes in Boujagh Wetland. Iranian Scientific
Journal of Fisheries, 15, 9–18.
Kinnear, T., & Taylor, J. M. H. (1995). Marketing research, an applied approach. New York:
McGraw Hill Higher Education.
Lee, C., & Han, S. (2002). Estimating the use and preservation values of national parks
tourism resources using a contingent valuation method. Tourism Management, 23,
531–540.
Majnounian, H., & DanehKar, A. (2004). Ranking of protected coastal areas of the Caspian
Sea. Paper presented at the 6th International Conference on Coasts, Ports and Marine Structures available at: http://www.civilica.com/Paper-ICOPMAS06-ICOPMAS06_120.html.
(accessed August 2010).
Monavari, M., Karbasi, A., & Mogooee, R. (2007). Environmental strategic management.
Tehran: Kavoush Qalam, Iran.
Mozafari, O. (2008). Habitat and demography of European pond turtle Emys orbicularis
persica in Boujagh National Park (Master's thesis). Islamic Azad University, Tehran,
Iran.
Naqinejad, A., & Saeedimehrvarz, S. (2009). New floral genera and species in the Flora
Iranica region in Boujagh National Park. Iranian Journal of Botany, 13, 112–119.
228
A. Reihanian et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 4 (2012) 223–228
Naqinejad, A., Saeedimehrvarz, S., Norouzi, M., & Faridi, M. (2007). Study on flora and
habitat diversity of the vascular plants and moss in Boujagh National Park. Iranian
Journal of Plants, 7, 83–105.
Nezamibalouchi, S., Khara, H., Nikoukerdar, L., & Mirmousavi, M. (2005). Study on the
diet of pike Esox lucius in Kiashahr Wetland. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Science &
Natural Resources, 11, 175–186.
NOAA. Assessment for sustainable tourism. available at: http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/
management/international/pdfs/day2_assessment_manual.pdf accessed Nov , 2011.
Ramsar Convention (2005). Information sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS) — 2009–2012
version. available at: http://www.ramsar.org/ris/key_ris_e.pdf accessed 2011.
Schmoldt, D., Kangas, J., Mendoza, G., & Pesonen, M. (2001). The analytic hierarchy
process in natural resource and environmental decision making. The Netherlands:
Springer.
Tatina, M., Tati, R., & Qaribkhani, M. (2009). Study on outbreak extent and severity of
parasites of pike Esox lucius and Rutilus rutilus caspicus in Kiashahr Wetland.
Iranian Journal of Veterinary, 3, 23–32.
Yousefi, A. (2007). Identifying ecologically sensitive areas of the Caspian Sea, case study:
Boujagh National Park (Doctoral dissertation). Islamic Azad University, Tehran,
Iran.
Anita Riehanian is a Ph.D. candidate at Institute of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, in the University of
Malaya, Malaysia. She has been involved in writing books
(1) and a chapter in a book, and scientific articles (6). Her
research interests and expertise include tourism and
tourism management, environmental management, environmental planning, and coastal management. She also
worked in National Ecotourism Committee, Tehran, Iran
between 2005 and 2007. As a matter of fact, this paper is
inspired by her doctoral dissertation. It has been supervised and consulted by three university professors including Dr. Noor Zalina Binti Mahmood, Dr. Tan Wan
Him, and Dr. Esmail Kahrom.
Dr. Noor Zalina Binti Mahmood is a senior lecturer at
Institute of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Science, in
the University of Malaya. Her areas of expertise involve
solid waste management (controlled solid waste, construction waste, recycling) and environmental protection
(material flow analysis (MFA), life cycle assessment (LCA),
environmental management systems).
Dr. Esmail Kahrom is a lecturer at Tehran and Azad
University. His areas of expertise include ecology, ornithology,
wildlife management, and wetland management.
Dr. Tan Wan Him is a senior lecturer at Geography Department,
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, in the University of Malaya.
His areas of expertise are tourism and population.