
Definition
“development that meets the needs of the
present without compromising the ability of
future generations to meet their own needs”
1
3
Cultural Sustainability
Social Sustainability
Environmental Sustainability
Economic
Sustainability
Sustainable Tourism involves social responsibility, a strong
commitment to nature and the integration of local people in any
tourist operation or development. Sustainable tourism is defined by
the World Tourism Organisation (WTO), the Tourism Council
(WTTC) and the Earth Council as:
Sustainable Tourism Development meets the needs of present tourists, host
regions while protecting and enhancing opportunity for the future. It is
envisaged as leading to management of all resources in such a way that
economic, social and aesthetic needs can be fulfilled while maintaining
cultural integrity, essential ecological processes, biological diversity and life
support systems. Sustainable tourism products are products which are
operated in harmony with the local environment, community and cultures
so that these become the beneficiaries not the victims of tourism
development. Source
SUSTAINABLE TOURISM
The concept of tourism carrying capacity is based on a general statement that any form
of development within the carrying capacity of ecosystem means a sustainable
development. That fits in a general definition of sustainable development as:
.. a form of development which uses the natural ecosystems as resources of
production and consumption growth leaving them unchanged for the future
generation,
or, more simply, defines it
.. a development within the carrying capacity of ecosystem.
According to such general definition of carrying capacity and sustainable development,
sustainable development of tourism can be defined as:
.. a form of tourism development which uses natural resources and cultural
heritage to increase the number of visitors and the profit from tourist
activities, but preserves them for the future generations,
or as
.. a development of tourism within the carrying capacity of tourist resources.
Source
This term originated in
the biological sciences.
It generally refers to
the level of human
activity and
development that an
area can absorb before
compromising the
environment and the
quality of the human
experience. Source
7
As defined by UNWTO –
the maximum number
of people that may visit
a tourist destination at
the same time, without
causing the destruction
of the physical,
economic, and
sociocultural
environment or an
unacceptable decrease
in the quality of visitor’s
satisfaction.
8
Middleton and Hawkins Chamberlain (1997) defined
Tourism Carrying Capacity (TCC) as «...the level of
human activity an area can accommodate without the area
deteriorating, the resident community being adversely
affected or the quality of visitors experience declining».
The World Tourism Organisation (WTO) proposes the
following definition of the carrying capacity «The
maximum number of people that may visit a tourist
destination at the same time, without causing destruction of
the physical, economic, socio-cultural environment and an
unacceptable decrease in the quality of visitors' satisfaction.
» (UNEP/MAP/PAP, 1997). Source
Carrying capacity: The maximum number
of people that may visit a tourist
destination at the same time, without
causing destruction of the physical,
economic, socio-cultural environment and
an unacceptable decrease in the quality of
visitors' satisfaction.The IB splits carrying
capacity into environmental carrying
capacity and perceptual carrying capacity.
Environmental carrying capacity is the
maximum number of visitors before
environmental harm is done. Perceptual
carrying capacity is the maximum number
of visitors before visitors consider an
impact like noise to be excessive.
O'Reilly (1986) describes two schools of thought. In one, carrying capacity is
considered to be the capacity of the destination area to absorb tourism before the
host population feels negative impacts. Capacity is dictated by how many tourists
are wanted rather than by how many can be attracted. The second school of
thought is that tourism carrying capacity is the level beyond which tourist flows
decline because certain capacities, as perceived by the tourists themselves, have
been exceeded and therefore, the destination area ceases to satisfy and attract them.
Factors in the tourism life cycle concept -- in which there are changes over time in
the physical environment, the attitudes of tourists, and the attitudes of hosts -- are
a logical basis for defining tourism carrying capacity (Martin and Uysal 1990).
Figure 1 Hypothetical Evolution of a Tourist Area (Adapted from Miller and Gallucci, 2004)
Like most products, destinations have a lifecycle. In his 1980 article, Butler
proposed a widely-accepted model of the lifecycle of a tourist destination. The
basic idea of Butler’s 1980 Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC) model is that a
destination begins as a relatively unknown and visitors initially come in small
numbers restricted by lack of access, facilities, and local knowledge, which is
labeled as Exploration in Figure 1 (Miller and Gallucci, 2004).
As more people discover the destination, the word spreads about its attractions
and the amenities are increased and improved (Development). Tourist arrivals
then begin to grow rapidly toward some theoretical carrying capacity
(Stagnation), which involves social and environmental limits. The rise from
Exploration to Stagnation often happens very rapidly, as implied by the
exponential nature of the growth curve.
The possible trajectories indicated by dotted lines A-E in Figure 1 are examples
of a subset of possible outcomes beyond Stagnation. Examples of things that
could cause a destination to follow trajectories A and B toward Rejuvenation are
technological developments or infrastructure improvements leading to
increased carrying capacity. Examples of things that could cause a destination
to follow trajectories C and D are increased congestion and unsustainable
development, causing the resources that originally drew visitors to the
destination to become corrupted, or no longer exist. The trajectory in Figure 1
of most interest to this research is trajectory E, which is the likely path of a
destination following a disaster or crisis.
Tourism Carrying Capacity
The limiting factor in tourism carrying
capacity can be the attitude of the local
population.

direct link between increased community
irritation & continual tourism development
Source
Butler (1980) believed that tourism destinations progress through a
recognizable cycle of evolution, with differing stages of popularity. According
to Butler, there are six stages through which tourist areas pass: exploration,
involvement, development, consolidation, stagnation, and decline. Changes in
the physical and social environment can result in a decline of the tourism
industry.
Too many tourists can place a burden on a community both environmentally
and socially. If the residents of the host community perceive tourism as
counterproductive to their welfare, then an attitude of negativity may be
shown toward tourists. Repercussions from this may include feelings on the
part of the tourists of being unwelcome, resulting in less visitation.
If residents are uncomfortable with increasing tourist numbers, their attitudes
may change over time (Doxey 1976). In creating an index of resident attitudes,
he asserted that this phenomenon starts with euphoria that tourism will
provide an economic boon to the community and progresses on a continuum
until antagonism occurs when residents feel overwhelmed with tourists. The
result of this animosity on the part of local residents may be a decline in
tourism. It is vital therefore, that communities interested in tourism
development plan for sustainable growth. One method of ensuring that the
desires of the community are reflected in planning and policy decisions that
support sustainable growth is the assessment of resident attitudes.
Thus, tourism carrying capacity can be defined as the number of visitors
that an area can accommodate before negative impacts occur, either to the
physical environment, the psychological attitude of the tourists, or the
social acceptance level of the hosts. Physical/biological deterioration of the
environment means that the carrying capacity had been exceeded. When
tourists are no longer comfortable in a destination area for reasons that
include perceived negative attitudes of the local residents, crowding of the
area, or deterioration of the environment, then carrying capacity has been
exceeded. In addition, social capacity is exceeded when local residents
become anti-tourism because the environment is being destroyed, the local
culture is being violated, or they are being crowded out of various
activities.
EUPHORIA
Initial phase of development, visitors &
investors welcome, little planning or control
mechanism - exploration
APATHY
Visitors taken for granted, contacts
between residents & outsiders more formal
(commercial), planning concerned mostly
with marketing
ANNOYANCE
Saturation points approached, “hosts” have
misgivings about tourism, policy makers
attempt solutions via increasing
infrastructure (rather than limiting
growth) - critical on Butler’s curve
ANTAGONISM
Irritations openly expressed, visitors seen
as cause of all problems, planning now
remedial but promotion increased to offset
deteriorating reputation of destination
Doxey's Irritation Index
Source
Although measuring the carrying capacity
of any area has proven elusive, it cannot be
ignored if sustainable growth is to be
achieved.
Tourism Carrying Capacity
While there are similarities in the concepts
of recreational and tourism carrying
capacities, the main difference is that
tourism carrying capacity includes the
residents of a community and their views
and actions toward tourism as an
economic and social force in their lives.
The limiting factor in tourism carrying
capacity can be the attitude of the local
population.
DRAWBACKS OF CARRYING
CAPACITY:
- Carrying capacity puts a limit on the
number of visitors  can be politically
difficult because local businesses want
more tourists to maximize their revenue
and many problems are not so much due
to numbers of people, but their behavior.
- “Limits of acceptable change”: instead
how many visitors, should ask what
biological and social conditions are
acceptable, and how they may be
attained (the point is not the number of
visitors but their use of resource in a
destination) Source
Limits of Acceptable Change
Limits of acceptable change was the first of the post
carrying capacity visitor management frameworks
developed to respond to the practical and
conceptual failures of carrying capacity. The
framework was developed by The U.S. forest service
in the 1980s. It is based on the idea that rather than
there being a threshold of visitor numbers, in fact
any tourist activity is having an impact and
therefore management should be based on constant
monitoring of the site as well as the objectives
established for it. It is possible that with in the Limit
of acceptable change framework a visitor limit can
be established but such limits are only one tool
available.
Recreational Carrying Capacity
Recreational carrying capacity is a
multidimensional and dynamic concept
capable of manipulation by resource
managers in a way that is consistent with
administration, budgetary, and resource
constraints (Lime and Stankey 1971).
Recreational carrying capacity is a
management system directed toward
maintenance or restoration of ecological
and social conditions defined as acceptable
and appropriate in area management
objectives and not a system directed
toward manipulation of use levels
(Stankey and McCool 1984). It has also
been defined as the level of use beyond
which impacts exceed acceptable levels
specified by evaluative standards (Shelby
and Heberlein 1984).