This article was downloaded by: [McMaster University]On: 22 October 2014, At: 08:47Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office:Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism ResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscriptioninformation:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rapt20

Comparative Review of Research onEnvironmental Impacts of Tourism in Englishand Chinese LiteraturesXiang Huang a b , Geoffrey Wall b & Jigang Bao aa Center for Tourism Planning & Research, Sun Yat-Sen Universityb Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of WaterlooPublished online: 22 Dec 2006.

To cite this article: Xiang Huang , Geoffrey Wall & Jigang Bao (2007) Comparative Review of Researchon Environmental Impacts of Tourism in English and Chinese Literatures, Asia Pacific Journal of TourismResearch, 12:1, 33-46, DOI: 10.1080/10941660601035928

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10941660601035928

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”)contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and ourlicensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publicationare the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor &Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independentlyverified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantialor systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, ordistribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and usecan be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Comparative Review of Research on EnvironmentalImpacts of Tourism in English and Chinese

Literatures

Xiang Huang1,2�, Geoffrey Wall2 and Jigang Bao1

1Center for Tourism Planning & Research, Sun Yat-Sen University2Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of Waterloo

China is experiencing an increasingly high level of recreation and tourism use of itsenvironments but only limited studies of the environmental impacts of tourism havebeen published. This paper is based upon a collection of research papers on the environ-mental impacts of tourism in English and Chinese, especially research on carryingcapacity and the physical impacts of tourism. The paper compares the characteristics ofresearch in English and Chinese literatures. It shows that China lags behind thewestern world in this research field. Chinese researchers need to: (1) be more critical ofthe feasibility of carrying capacity applications; (2) introduce new technologies in theirresearch on vegetation and soil; (3) know more about the buffering effects of differentkinds of tourist trails such as boardwalks, concrete trails, cross-tie trails, cobble trailsand so on; (4) try to shed light on possible positive impacts of tourism; and (5) paymore attention to the protection of environmentally sensitive areas. The paper alsodiscusses the dilemmas of research on carrying capacity and environmental impacts.

Key words: review, environmental impacts, tourism

Introduction

The Chinese tourism market is arguably one of

the most important, largest and most rapidly

growing tourism markets in the world.

Figure 1 shows the domestic person-trip

numbers per year in China from 1985 to

2004. The Chinese National Tourism

Administration (CNTA) claimed that

domestic tourists numbered 1.1 billion

people in 2004. Ignoring the deviant years of

1989 (Tiananmen Square incident) and 2003

(SARS outbreak), the average annual increase

in the number of domestic tourists in China

Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 12, No. 1, March 2007

�E-mail: huangxiang630@hotmail.com

ISSN 1094-1665 print/ISSN 1741-6507 online/07/010033–14 # 2007 Asia Pacific Tourism Association

DOI: 10.1080/10941660601035928

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014

from 1985 to 2004 was 11.21%. Figure 2

shows the annual domestic tourism revenues

in China from 1985 to 2004. In 2004 they

amounted to 471.1 billion RMB.1 Again,

ignoring the deviant years 1989 and 2003

and the inflation rate, the average annual

increase in income from domestic tourism in

China from 1985 to 2004 was 22.29%.

Thus, it is evident that tourism is an important

industry in China and the market has been

expanding rapidly.

At one time, many government officials and

scholars in China believed that tourism was an

“industry without smoke”, meaning that it is

unlikely to generate pollution. However,

with the growth in tourist numbers and associ-

ated infrastructure, more and more research-

ers began to acknowledge its environmental

impacts. In China, research on environmental

impacts of tourism began in the middle

1980s and peaked in the late 1990s. The ear-

liest report about environmental impacts of

tourism in China that we have found is “Dis-

cussion on Tourism Environmental Capacity

issues in Suzhou”, which was published by

Zhao in Urban Planning (1983). The earliest

master’s degree thesis about tourism environ-

mental impacts was “Research on the

Tourism System: the Case of Beijing City” by

Bao (1986), in which the environmental

capacity of Yihe Garden in Beijing is the

most important part. In 1989, Chu completed

a doctoral thesis entitled “Research on Spatial

Organization of Tourism” in which environ-

mental capacity theory was also an important

part. The earliest book, Tourism Environ-

mental Protection Compendium, was pub-

lished by Lin in 1999.

The environmental impacts of tourism are a

huge research theme and an interdisciplinary

research field, research results are reported in

many different academic journals. In this

paper, environmental carrying capacity

research, physical impacts and associated

management research have been selected as

the focus of attention since they constitute

more than two-thirds of the environmental

impact research that has been conducted in

China.

This paper is based on as complete a

collection of articles and books in Chinese

concerned with the environmental impacts of

tourism as could be obtained. Through a

review of this research, the following ques-

tions will be answered:

. What have international and Chinese

researchers achieved in environmental

impacts research?

. How does Chinese research compare with

research undertaken elsewhere?

. What should Chinese researchers do in the

future?

Figure 1 Domestic Person-Trips: 1985–2004.

Source: China Travel & Tourism Press (1986–

2005).

Figure 2 Domestic Tourism Revenues:

1985–2004.

Source: China Travel & Tourism Press (1986–

2005).

34 Xiang Huang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014

International Research on EnvironmentalImpacts of Tourism

Environmental Carrying Capacity Research

Research on carrying capacity in recreation

and tourism was based on similar research

conducted on rangeland management (Wall,

2000) and was used in the field of outdoor

recreational research in the early 1960s by

Wagar (1964). The concept of carrying

capacity concept has been widely discussed

in outdoor recreation management (Boden,

1977; Liddle, 1991; Van Wagtendonk,

1986).

The large numbers of studies of recreation

and tourism that have addressed carrying

capacity issues has generated a great deal of

information on the impact of feet and vehicles

in recreational environments of many types.

In particular, the following general points

can be made:

. Carrying capacity research has drawn

attention to the existence of “thresholds”

of use that should not be exceeded and

which can be used to guide environmental

management by providing indicators on

whether or not a site is being overused.

For example, Mathieson & Wall (1982)

defined carrying capacity as the maximum

number of people who can use a site

without an unacceptable alteration in the

physical environment and without an unac-

ceptable decline in the quality of the experi-

ence gained by visitors. Note that this

definition incorporates both physical and

psychological dimensions (see below).

WTO/UNEP (1992, Ch. 3, }1) defined

carrying capacity as “the level of visitor

use an area can accommodate with high

levels of satisfaction for visitors and few

impacts on resources”. The notion of

“threshold” is inherent to the carrying

capacity concept (Cole, 1988; Liddle,

1988; Wagar, 1964). The search for, and

establishment of, a critical “threshold”,

when successful, was expected to guide

management decisions.

. An initial focus upon physical impacts was

expanded to incorporate other dimensions

in an integrated fashion. The concept of car-

rying capacity initially centered on biological

and biophysical aspects of carrying capacity

(Stankey & McCool, 1984). However, as

environmental management applications,

particularly in parks and protected areas,

were increasingly contemplated, recreation

researchers adapted the concept leading to

significant exploration through which social

carrying capacity gained greater prominence

(Graefe, Kuss & Vaske, 1990; Stankey &

McCool, 1984; Stewart & Cole, 2001).

This change reflects a more holistic under-

standing of tourism – environment relation-

ships to incorporate both physical and social

dimensions. However, the use of terminol-

ogy varied. For example, Wall & Wright

(1977) restricted their discussion of environ-

ment to the physical environment whereas

Cooper (1989) understood the tourism

environment to encompass an amalgam

of the natural, social and cultural

environments.

. Great difficulty has been experienced in

moving from theory to practice and there

has been much frustration in moving past

conceptual issues to the development of

operational management tools. Thus,

while attractive theoretically, some scholars

have questioned the utility of the carrying

capacity concept (Bury, 1976; McCool,

1989; Stankey, McCool & Stokes, 1990).

However, a variety of management tools

with origins in carrying capacity research,

have been developed and tested although

Comparative Review of Research on Environmental Impacts 35

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014

none has been adopted widely. Examples

include LAC (Stankey, Cole, Lucas,

Petersen & Frissell, 1985), VIM (Graefe,

1987), VERP (USA National Park Service,

1997), and PAVIM (Farrell & Marion,

2002). Zhang (2004), viewing these

developments from a distance, suggested

that although there are some blind spots in

the theory, environmental impact manage-

ment tools based on carrying capacity have

been greatly developed in the last three

decades.

. In the early stages of carrying capacity

research, many proponents dreamed of

finding a single number that could be con-

sidered as the limit to use. Importantly, it

was believed by many that, under such a

limit, no damage would occur. In other

words, they believed in a “magic” number

that could be approached with impunity

and exceeded with peril. However, it was

soon realized that this was a simplistic

notion for changes in the environment that

occur with the first visitors, if not before.

More complex perspectives emerged such

as that of Lindberg, McCool & Stankey

(1997) who defined carrying capacity as

the maximum use of any site without

causing negative effects on the resources,

reducing visitor satisfaction or exerting

adverse impact upon the society, economy

and culture of the area (McIntyre, 1993).

However, the criterion of no negative

change is unrealistic for the literature indi-

cates that even small amounts of use can

cause changes in at least one of these dimen-

sions (Lindberg, McCool & Stankey, 1997).

LAC theory rejects the notion of a single

carrying capacity by acknowledging that

any recreational use produces some

impacts; therefore, it is necessary to identify

to what extent changes are appropriate and

acceptable (Stankey et al., 1985).

. Scientific research is typically an error-testing

process and subsequent researchers com-

monly find something new to improve the

state of knowledge in a process known as

knowledge accumulation. This has occurred

in carrying capacity research. People were

initially excited to use carrying capacity in

management when the concept was initially

put forward. However, Seidl and Tisdell

(1999) among others, suggested that the car-

rying capacity concept had not been

employed successfully in socio-economic

research such as tourism. The more that cri-

ticism of the concept accumulated (Buckley,

1999; Stankey & McCool, 1989; Wall,

1982), the more that modified approaches

were explored. Although greatly modified

and sometimes rejected, the carrying

capacity concept in fact underpins many sub-

sequent ideas in the management of environ-

mental impacts in tourism and recreation.

Measurement of Physical EnvironmentalImpacts

Physical environmental impacts research

mainly observed and recorded environmental

changes occurring in recreational areas. They

used various technical devices to measure

changes and occasionally used experimental

methods where environments were exposed

to known amounts of uses and the conse-

quences recorded. These procedures met the

requirements of research in the natural

sciences, which used replicable methods.

Meinecke’s (1928) report is the earliest

documentation of research results on the

environmental impacts of recreational activi-

ties. Bates (1935, 1938) also conducted early

field research. The results of the work of

other active researchers such as Bayfield’s

(1971, 1973) and Liddle’s (1973, 1975) were

36 Xiang Huang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014

summarized by Wall & Wright (1977) whose

work presents the state of knowledge at the

time. They presented the results of studies of

the impacts of recreation on geological fea-

tures, soil, vegetation, water, wildlife and air,

explained the mechanisms involved and dis-

cussed their interrelationships. Bayfield’s and

Liddle’s (1991) works, which were undertaken

in a diversity of environments, including sand

dunes, tropical and temperate forests, and

coral reefs, stimulated further development of

recreation studies in this field world-wide

(Sun & Walsh, 1998).

The pioneering works were augmented by

investigations undertaken by many other

researchers. For example, according to Sun &

Walsh’s (1998) summary, Cole (1978, 1988)

researched trail and campground impacts on

mountain areas: Kuss & Morgan (1980) and

Kuss & Hall (1991) studied soil changes in

recreation areas and methods of predicting soil

vulnerability: Grabherr (1982, 1985) reported

research results of tourism impacts on ski areas

in Austria: Liddle (1988) argued that resistance

and recovery are two strategies of plants that

occur in the face of trampling impact, Liddle

(1991) and Sun & Liddle (1993a, 1993b,

1993c) further developed these ideas in detailed

experimental studies. Hawes (1994) found that

tourism impacts change species abundance and

diversity. Cole & Bayfield (1993) constructed a

protocol to compare the damage to vegetation

exposed to short-duration trampling of various

intensities and subsequent recovery over a one-

year period. Watson, Niccolucci & Williams

(1993) studied the impacts of hiking and horse-

riding in the Sierra and Inyo National Forests

in California, USA. Liu (1992, 1993) also

reported the impacts of tourism on vegetation

in Taiwan, and Whinam & Comfort (1996),

Obua & Harding (1997), Wang & Miko

(1997) , Gormsen (1997), Obua (1997), Ap &

Crompton (1998), Wong (1998), Alavalapati

& Adamowicz (2000), Hillery, Nancarrow,

Griffin & Syme (2001), Salmona & Verardi

(2001), Johnson (2002), Arrowsmith & Inba-

karan (2002), van Rooyen (2002), Mbaiwa

(2003) and Stevens (2003) all contributed to

this field.

The main achievements in this field can be

summarized as follows:

. A set of systemic scientific research methods

was established through the work of Bay-

field (1971, 1973, 1979), Liddle (1973,

1975), Wall & Wright (1977) and others.

. A body of knowledge concerning the

impacts of tourism and recreation on

vegetation, soil, air and water was estab-

lished.

. The mechanism involved in these impacts

was documented, for example in the work

of Cole & Bayfield (1993).

. While much of the research was undertaken

at a micro level, sometimes involving micro-

scopic plant structures and the measurement

of soil particles, some researchers, such as

Wong (1998) addressed broader area

concerns.

. Research was undertaken in many different

places with a diversity of environmental

characteristics that were exposed to different

types and intensities of use. Researches came

from seven different continents and work was

undertaken, for example, in tropical, subtro-

pical, temperate, boreal and arctic settings.

Research on Environmental Impacts ofTourism in China

Environmental Carrying CapacityResearch

Chinese researchers’ interest in the environ-

mental impacts of tourism began with the

Comparative Review of Research on Environmental Impacts 37

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014

tourism carrying capacity issue. After 1978

when China became more open to the

outside world, the international tourism

market was cultivated initially but, as the

Chinese quality of life improved greatly,

both domestic and international demands

grew rapidly. However, in the early years

tourism infrastructure was quite weak in

China. As a result, conflicts associated with

overcrowding were apparent from the early

1980s. Zhao (1983) was the first to address

carrying capacity but Bao (1986, 1987) inau-

gurated a new phase in this field. He defined

carrying capacity as the maximum tourist

number a destination can accommodate

when meeting both the requirements of the

least tolerant tourists (psychological

capacity) and the protection of environ-

mental quality. The famous Yihe Garden in

Beijing was taken as a case and Bao suggested

a capacity of 42,087 person/day, based on

which he suggested a variety of management

strategies.

Chu (1989) considered carrying capacity as a

conceptual system which he divided into five

types of basic capacity and three types of non-

basic capacity. He also attempted to construct

a tourism environmental carrying capacity math-

ematical model. Cui (1995) suggested “tourism

environmental bearing capacity (TEBC)”

although, contrary to claims, it differed little

from other formulations of carrying capacity

(Zhang, 2004). TEBC is composed of eco-

environmental bearing capacity, resources

spatial bearing capacity, psychological bearing

capacity and economic bearing capacity (Cui &

Yang, 1997; Cui, Liu & Li, 1998; Cui, Xu &

He, 1999). The ideas were published in Cui’s

(1999) doctoral degree thesis and in a book

(Cui, 2001). Others writing on similar topics

were Liu (1998, 2000), Feng (1991), Lu

(1994a, 1994b), Hu (1995), Jiang (1996), Sun

& Wang (2000), Dai, Ding & Lin (2002),

Wen, Yang & Wang (2002), and Wang &

Weng (2003).

There is a temporal evolution in Chinese

researchers’ understanding of carrying

capacity:

. There has been an expansion from a narrow

physical emphasis to a broader integrated

perspective. From Zhao (1983) to Cui &

Yang (1997), Cui et al. (1998) and Cui

et al. (1999) and then to Wang & Weng

(2003), there has been a trend towards the

incorporation of social and cultural dimen-

sions to enrich the physical perspectives.

. Acceptance has given way to skepticism. In

particular, Zhang (2004) has been highly

critical of the carrying capacity models

that have appeared in the Chinese literature,

especially the TEBC model.

Measurement of Physical EnvironmentalImpacts

Research into the physical impacts of tourism

and recreation in China has exhibited great

progress. Both qualitative and quantitative

methods have been used. The earliest qualitat-

ive research was concerned with environ-

mental impacts in the Beijing-Tianjing area

from the perspective of historical evolution

(Song, Yang & Guo, 1985). The landmark

quantitative research monitors the environ-

mental impacts at Zhangjiajie, a world

natural heritage site in Hunan province, from

1984 to 1988. These studies provide convin-

cing evidence that environmental change is

caused by tourism activities (Wang & Hao,

1988).

The most abundant results exist on the

impacts on vegetation, in which modifications

to tourist trails have generally been considered

as indicators of impact. Liu & Zhang (1997)

38 Xiang Huang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014

found that tourists introduced invasive

vegetation species and in some parts of

Mt Xiang in Beijing, an introduced plant

Broussonetia papyrifer began to take the

place of the indigenous Cotinus coggygria

var. cinere. The latter was formerly a

common species which is famous for its red

leaves and was the chief landscape attraction.

This result implied that if nothing was done,

the chief attraction will be diminished. In

another work, Li, Bao & Qing (1998) used

community landscape importance, a tourism

impacts coefficient and sensitivity as indicators

to evaluate the environmental impacts of

tourism in Mt Danxia. They found less

damage on tourism resources in the area

with tourism development, implying that

sensitive tourism development is an effective

way to protect tourism resources. From

2000, Cheng & Zhang (2000, 2002), Cheng,

Zhang, Shangguan & Zhang (2002) and

Cheng, Zhang & Shangguan (2003) published

four papers on the environmental impacts of

tourism in leading environmental, geography

and ecology journals. The exhaustive

experiments that were conducted make this

research among the best investigations of the

impacts on vegetation. Guang, Lin & Chen

(1999), Wang, Piao, Sun, Cha & Hwang

(1999), Chen, Hu & Tian (2001) and Liu, Li

& Ye (2001) also contributed to the research

on the impacts of tourism on vegetation.

Impacts of tourism on soil have been

explored by Chen (2001), Shi, Lei & Xie

(2002), Wang, Cai & Zhang (2003) and

Chen & Yang (2004). Researchers have

developed soil impacts indicators (SII) and

other models. The consequences of tourism

activities, especially trampling and horse-

riding, have been evaluated based on soil

compaction, porosity and soil density.

Peng, Lin & Lin (1998) used chlorophyll

fluorescence in two vegetation species,

Schima superba Gardn.et Champ and Pinus

massoniana Lamb, as an indicator to evaluate

the impacts of tourism on air quality. Shi, He

& Wu (2002) constructed a model of air

quality impacts of tourism and Song, Wei &

Liang (2003) studied the CO2 content and

temperature changes caused by visitors in a

cave-tourism destination.

With respect to water, Wang, Wang, Xu, Qi

& Wang (1995) studied the effects of tourism

on the normal sediment aggradation process in

Kuming Lake, Beijing. Shi, Zheng & Zhong

(2002) built a water quality evaluation

model and applied it to the Zhangjiajie

world natural heritage site. Water quality

standards for recreational use were enacted

by the Chinese central government in 1991,

providing guidance for research and practice

in water quality issues in tourism sites.

Grassland ecosystems are special and

sensitive environments that are often a major

tourism attraction. Liu, Cui & Zhang (1998)

and Wei, Yang & Han (1999) studied the

negative impacts of tourism on alpine

meadows and ordinary grassland. Gao, Ma,

Chen & Li (2002) used data collected in

1965, 1983, 1994 and 2000 to demonstrate

the changes in the biodiversity of alpine

meadows.

More generally, Deng & Chen (1995) and

Deng, Chen & Li (1996) appealed for the

establishment of a tourism-oriented research

station for monitoring the environmental

impacts of tourism. Yi, Liu & Liu (2003) pub-

lished a manual dealing with the development

and operation of a tourism environmental

monitoring system. Zhang, Xu & Na (2003)

addressed issues of the environmental protec-

tion of forest parks under the following

headings: the education subsystem, the devel-

opment subsystem, the monitoring subsystem,

the evaluation subsystem and security subsys-

tem. Wei (2003) and Wei, Jiang & Zhang

Comparative Review of Research on Environmental Impacts 39

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014

(2003) explored the processes involved in

tourism impacts and created a computer

model. Quan (2003) and Quan & Yang

(2002) established a model of environmentally

sensitive factors in four seasons to determine

the land use capacity threshold for hotels.

Ge, Li & Zhu (2002) used network efficiency

to evaluate the impacts of tourism at the

landscape level.

The main achievement of this body of

research can be summarized as follows:

. Ecological research methods were used to

study the impacts of tourism. For example,

the researchers in the vegetation impacts

subfield were mostly from ecology and bio-

geography. They used ecological methods

such as sample plots to explore vegetation

diversity and to calculate prominence

values. They successfully built up a set of

field methods to collect data and evaluate

the impacts.

. The impacts of tourism were evaluated in

different types of ecosystem. Cases from

different places were valuable in under-

standing possible impacts in other places

with the same or similar physical situation.

Status of Research

Some conclusions can be drawn concerning

the status of Chinese research on environ-

mental impacts in comparison with work

undertaken in other countries.

. Great progress was made in carrying

capacity research but, as elsewhere, the

results did not lend themselves to practical

application. Nevertheless, national stan-

dards were developed and an operational

manual on ecological capacity, tourist

capacity and population capacity was

written up as a Code for Scenic Area Plan-

ning (Chinese Ministry of Construction,

1999). This was built upon carrying

capacity research. However, the calculation

of these capacities was impractical and, as in

the case of the TEBC created by Cui (1995),

practical utility was limited.

. Research methods on the impacts of tourism

on vegetation and soil are relatively mature,

but new technologies such as GIS are only

slowly being introduced in this field.

Vegetation and soil impacts of tourism are

usually caused by trampling, vehicles and

invasion by alien species. The common

research methods, such as the use of

sample plots, are derived from ecology.

This is true of both the Chinese and inter-

national literatures. Field and, to a lesser

extent, experimental methods have also

been employed to explore impacts on both

soil and vegetation. However, only limited

attention has been devoted to either physical

or chemical characteristics. Water transfer

is a key process but no studies were found

that address this topic in the context of

tourism impacts.

. As a focus of visitor activities, trails have

received most attention by investigators of

impacts. However, such studies provide

insufficient information for broader plan-

ning. Much Chinese research on vegetation

and soils has concentrated on trails (Chen

et al., 2001; Guang et al., 1999; Li et al.,

1998; Liu et al., 2001; Liu & Zhang,

1997). However, little research has been

done on the consequences and effectiveness

of trail types and surfaces.

. Almost all research has been undertaken

with an assumption that tourism will only

bring negative impacts. On the other hand,

it has been argued that tourism values

provide a rationale for protecting attractive

40 Xiang Huang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014

features and landscapes. Smith (1983)

showed that there may be some positive

impacts and Li et al. (1998) indicated that

ecosystems in areas that are well developed

for tourism may be protected more

effectively than those that are less well devel-

oped. More knowledge is required on how to

encourage the positive impacts of tourism.

. More impact research should also be

undertaken in environmentally sensitive

areas. Tourism in Tibet, Xinjiang and

other areas in west China are developing

very rapidly. These areas have low

capacities and their ecosystems are very

vulnerable. Tourism is bringing increasing

environmental pressures to these areas but

little research has been undertaken in

these. At the same time, rainforest tourism

in Yunnan and Hainan is also growing.

Rainforest ecosystems are rich and rare. In

order to balance development and

protection in rainforests it is necessary to

know the potential impacts of tourism but

little such research has yet been done.

Summary and Conclusions

Research on carrying capacity and the physical

environmental impacts of tourism is evolving.

Many scholars have rethought “carrying

capacity” and it is becoming increasingly

recognized that the “magic” number does

not exist (Wall, 1982). Environmental

processes are dynamic and human impacts

are complex and cannot be represented by a

single number. Impacts occur at all levels of

use and it is necessary to decide what

impacts are acceptable and unacceptable,

what changes can be managed for and miti-

gated, and how. The overall goal of carrying

capacity researchers is to help to build an

efficient environmental management system.

However, as important as numbers of users

are, types of activities and their spatial and

temporal distributions are of equal if not

more significance. Thus, it is not possible to

manage the system through the blind appli-

cation of a particular tourist number. Cui

(1995) suggested that psychological capacity

is usually smaller that other capacities so the

undertaking of periodic surveys of user satis-

factions will be an important input into the

management system.

With respect to research on physical impacts

of tourism, it will be necessary to construct a

set of environmental indicators. However,

these are likely to vary from place to place

with the nature of the environment. Further-

more, problems of scale will be difficult to

resolve and it will also be difficult to disentan-

gle natural and anthropogenic changes and,

within the latter, the consequences of

tourism from other anthropogenic stresses.

Use is usually ongoing so it may be difficult

to know when an effect has “finally” hap-

pened (Hughes, 2002).

Perhaps the fundamental discontinuity is that

researchers attempt to develop and apply so-

called objective research methods but managers

are expected to exercise judgment and to make

decisions about desirable present and future

states. Carrying capacity was first seen as

being a technical problem but desirable out-

comes are judged subjectively and can only be

determined and evaluated against clear goals

and objectives. Thus, while knowledge of

use–impact relationships can be a valuable

input to the management of tourism and recrea-

tion areas, it is only one input and often not the

most important. What was first seen as being a

tractable scientific problem is now widely

viewed as being a complex management issue

which science can inform but, by itself, is

usually unable to resolve.

Comparative Review of Research on Environmental Impacts 41

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014

References

Alavalapati, J. R. R. & Adamowicz, W. L. (2000).

Tourism impact modeling for resource extraction

regions. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(1), 188–202.

Ap, J. & Crompton, J. L. (1998). Developing and testing a

tourism impact scale. Journal of Travel Research, 37(2),

120–131.

Arrowsmith, C. & Inbakaran, R. (2002). Estimating

environmental resiliency for the Grampians National

Park, Victoria, Australia: A quantitative approach.

Tourism Management, 23(3), 295–309.

Bao, J. G. (1986) Research on Tourism System: A Case as

Beijing City. Unpublished master’s thesis, Peking Uni-

versity, Beijing, China.

Bao, J. G. (1987). Study on tourism environmental

capacity: a case study of Yihe Garden. China Environ-

mental Science, 7(2), 32–36.

Bates, G. H. (1935). The vegetation of footpaths, side-

walks, cart-tracks and gateways. Journal of Ecology,

23(2), 470–487.

Bates, G. H. (1938). Life forms of pasture plants in relation

to treading. Journal of Ecology, 26(2), 452–454.

Bayfield, N. G. (1971). Some effects of walking and skiing

on vegetation at Cairngorm. In E. Duffey & A. S. Watt

(eds), The Scientific Management of Animal and Plant

Communities for Conservation, 469–485. Oxford:

Blackwell Scientific Publications.

Bayfield, N. G. (1973). Use and deterioration of some

Scottish hill paths. Journal of Applied Ecology, 10(3),

635–644.

Bayfield, N. G. (1979). Recovery of four montane heath

communities on Cairngorm, Scotland, from disturbance

by trampling. Biological Conservation, 15(3), 165–179.

Boden, R. (1977). Ecological aspects of outdoor recreation

planning. In D. Mercer (ed.), Leisure and Recreation in

Australia, 222–232. Melbourne, Australia: Sorrett

Publications.

Buckley, R. (1999). An ecological perspective on carrying

capacity. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(3), 705–708.

Bury, R. L. (1976). Recreation carrying capacity: Hypoth-

esis or reality? Parks and Recreation, 11(1), 22–25.

Chen, B. & Yang, G. H. (2004). Quantitative study of the

impact of tourist trampling on ecotourism scenic region:

A case research of the Shangre-la Bita Lake Ecotourism

Scenic Region. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 24(3),

371–375.

Chen G. (2001). Recreational impacts on erosion and runoff.

Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 8(2), 84–87.

Chen, Y., Hu, D. & Tian, Z. Q. (2001). Effects of tourism

on the species diversity of forest community in

Longchiman Nature Reserve. Journal of Capital

Normal University (Natural Science Edition), 22(1),

89–93.

Cheng, Z. H. & Zhang, J. T. (2000). Impacts of tourist

development on vegetation in Tianlong Mountain.

Scientia Geographica Sinica, 20(2), 144–147.

Cheng, Z. H. & Zhang, J. T. (2002). Relationship between

tourist influencing factors and geographical factors of

Luya Mountain, Shanxi, China. Chinese Journal of

Applied Environmental Biology, 8(5), 467–472.

Cheng, Z. H., Zhang, J. T. & Shangguan, T. L. (2003).

Relationship between tourism development and veg-

etation environment in Luya Mountain Nature

Reserve: Tourism influencing index and some indices

analysis. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 23(4), 703–711.

Cheng, Z. H., Zhang, J. T., Shangguan T. L. & Zhang, F.

(2002). Relationship between tourism development and

vegetation environment in Luya Mountain Nature

Reserve I: Quality analysis of vegetation environment.

Acta Ecologica Sinica, 22(10), 1765–1773.

China Travel & Tourism Press (1986–2005). Chinese

Tourism Almanac. Beijing, China: Author.

Chinese Ministry of Construction (1999). Code for Scenic

Area Planning. Beijing: China Architecture & Building

Press.

Chu, Y. F. (1989). Research on Tourism Spatial Organiz-

ation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Nankai Uni-

versity, Tianjing, China.

Cole, D. N. (1978). Estimating the susceptibility of wild-

land vegetation to trailside alteration. Journal of

Applied Ecology, 15(1), 281–286.

Cole, D. N. (1988). Disturbance and Recovery of

Trampled Montana Grassland and Forests in Montana

(Res. Pap. INT-389). Ogden, UT: USDA Forest Service.

Cole, D. N. & Bayfield, N. G. (1993). Recreational tram-

pling of vegetation: Standard experimental procedures.

Biological Conservation, 63(3), 209–215.

Cooper, C. P. (1989). Progress in Tourism, Recreation and

Hospitality Management. London: Belhaven Press.

Cui, F. J. (1995). Tourist environmental bearing capacity.

Economic Geography, 15(1), 105–109

Cui, F. J. (1999). Environment Analysis Methods and

Cases Study of Regional Tourism Development. Unpub-

lished doctoral dissertation, Peking University, Beijing,

China P. R. C.

Cui, F. J. (2001). Protection and Management of Scenery

Tourism Destination. Beijing, China: China Travel

and Tourism Press.

Cui, F. J. & Yang, Y. S. (1997). Temporal-spatial differen-

tiation features and utility intensity of the TEBC resource

of Mt. Tai. Geographical Research, 16(4), 47–55.

42 Xiang Huang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014

Cui, F. J., Liu, J. M. & Li, Q. L. (1998). Study of the theory

and application of tourism bearing capacity index.

Tourism Tribune, 13(3), 41–44.

Cui, F. J., Xu, F. & He, J. M. (1999). Elementary study on

regional tourism sustainable development evaluation

index system. Tourism Tribune, 14(4), 42–45.

Dai, X. J., Ding, D. S. & Lin, Z. (2002). Research on

tourist carrying capacity of sustainable tourism.

Human Geography, 17(6), 32–36.

Deng, J. Y. & Chen, D. D. (1995). Exploitation and protec-

tion of Chinese forest ecotourism resources. Resources

Exploitation and Market, 11(5), 216–291, 233.

Deng, J. Y., Chen, D. D. & Li, S. D. (1996). Environ-

mental effect of forest ecotourism on ecosystems: A dis-

cussion on the necessity of establishing forest

ecotourism orientation station. Rural Eco-Environ-

ment, 12(1), 24–28.

Farrell, T. A. & Marion J. L. (2002). The Protected Area

Visitor Impact Management (PAVIM) framework: A

simplified process for making management decisions.

Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10(1), 31–51.

Feng, X. Q. (1991). Environment capacity evaluation of

Lishan famous scenery area. Resources Exploitation

and Protection, 7(2), 118–120.

Gao, X. M., Ma, K. P., Chen, L. Z. & Li, D. Q. (2002).

The effects of tourism on species diversity of subalpine

meadows in Dongling mountainous area, Beijing. Biodi-

versity Science, 10(2), 189–195.

Ge, X. D., Li, W. J. & Zhu, Z. F. (2002). Network effi-

ciency: A new indicator for environmental impact

assessment of trails. Journal of Natural Resource,

17(3), 381–385.

Gormsen, E. (1997). The impact of tourism on coastal

areas. GeoJournal, 42(1), 39–54.

Grabherr, G. (1982). The impact of trampling by tourists

on a high altitudinal grassland in the Tyrolean Alps,

Austria. Plant Ecology, 48(3), 209–217.

Grabherr, G. (1985). Damage to vegetation by recreation

in the Austrian and German Alps. In N. G. Bayfield &

G. C. Barrow (eds), The Ecological Impacts of

Outdoor Recreation on Mountain Areas in Europe

and North America(Recreation Ecology Research Rep.

9, 74–91). Ashford, UK: Wye College.

Graefe, A. R. (1987). Recreation Impacts and Carrying

Capacity: A Visitor Impact Management Framework.

Washington, DC: National Parks & Conservation

Association.

Graefe,A.R.,Kuss, F. R.&Vaske, J. J. (1990). Visitor Impact

Management: The Planning Framework. Washington,

DC: National Parks & Conservation Association.

Guang, D. S., Lin, W. Q. & Chen, Y. J. (1999). The effects of

tourist disturbance on soil and vegetation in Baiyun moun-

tain. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 11(6), 6–9.

Hawes, M. (1994). Walking Track Management Strategy

for the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area.

Hobart, Tasmania: Department of Environmental and

Land Management.

Hillery, M., Nancarrow, B., Griffin, G. & Syme, G.

(2001). Tourist perception of environmental impact.

Annals of Tourism Research, 28(4), 853–867.

Hu, B. Q. (1995). Calculation methods of tourism

environmental capacity. Environmental Science

Research, 8(3), 20–24.

Hughes, G. (2002). Environmental indicators. Annals of

Tourism Research, 29(2), 457–477.

Jiang, Z. H. (1996). Study on tourism carrying capacity

and environmental quality of Mount Huangshan.

Rural Eco-environment, 12(2), 9–11.

Johnson, D. (2002). Environmentally sustainable cruise

tourism: A reality check. Marine Policy, 26(4), 261–270.

Kuss, F. R. & Hall, C. N. (1991). Ground flora trampling

studies: Five years after closure. Environmental Man-

agement, 15(5), 715–727.

Kuss, F. R. & Morgan, J. M. III (1980). Estimating the

physical carrying capacity of recreation areas: A

rationale for application of the universal soil loss

equation. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation,

35(2), 87–89.

Li, Z., Bao, J. G. & Qing, C. F. (1998). The impact of

tourist development on the vegetation cover of Mount

Danxia, Guangdong. Acta Geographica Sinica, 53(6),

554–561.

Liddle, M. J. (1973). The Effects of Trampling and

Vehicles on Natural Vegetation. Unpublished doctorial

dissertation, University College of North Wales,

Bangor, Wales, UK.

Liddle, M. J. (1975). A selective review of the ecological

effects of human trampling on natural ecosystems.

Biological Conservation, 7(1), 17–36.

Liddle, M. J. (1988). Recreation and the Environment:

The Ecology of Recreation Impacts. Brisbane,

Australia: Griffith University.

Liddle, M. J. (1991). Recreation ecology: Effects of tram-

pling on plants and corals. Trends in Ecology &

Evolution, 6(1), 13–17.

Lin, Y. Y. (1999). Tourism Environmental Protection

Compendium. Beijing: Tourism Education Press.

Lindberg, K., McCool, S. & Stankey, G. (1997). Rethink-

ing carrying capacity. Annals of Tourism Research,

24(2), 461–465.

Comparative Review of Research on Environmental Impacts 43

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014

Liu, C. Y., Li, W. J. & Ye, W. H. (2001). Non-polluted

ecological impact assessment method of tourism in

nature reserve. China Environmental Science, 21(5),

399–403.

Liu, H. Y., Cui, H. T. & Zhang, J. H. (1998) Effects of

recreational development on the subalpine meadow in

Donglin Mountain. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 17(3),

63–66.

Liu, H. Y. & Zhang, J. H. (1997). Effects of recreational

disturbance on the Cotinus Coggygria Var. Cinerea

forest in Xiangshan mountain, Beijing. Acta Phytoeco-

logica Sinica, 21(2), 191–196.

Liu, J. Y. (1992). Trampling impacts on vegetation of

Tataka recreation area, Yushan National Park,

Central Taiwan. Quarterly Journal of the Experimental

Forestry of National Taiwan University, 6(4), 33–78.

Liu, J. Y. (1993). Recreational impacts on vegetation of

Patungkuan area, Yushan National Park, Central

Taiwan. Quarterly Journal of the Experimental Forest

of National Taiwan University, 7(3), 1–32.

Liu, L. (1998). Elementary study on tourism environ-

mental bearing capacity research methods. In A. Z.

Chen, Y. T. Lu & Z. M. Chen (eds), Theory and

Practice of Tourism Geography: Tourism Geography

Proceeding No. 5, 151–164. Beijing: Geology

Publishing Company.

Liu, L. (2000). Research on Tourism Environmental

Bearing Capacity. Beijing: China Environmental

Science Publishing Company.

Lu, L. (1994a). Mountain area tourist season research:

Take Huangshan as an example. Geographical

Research, 13(4), 58–63.

Lu, L. (1994b). Mountain area tourist flow research: Take

Huangshan as an example. Acta Geographica Sinica,

49(3), 236–246.

Mathieson, A. & Wall, G. (1982). Tourism: Economic,

Physical and Social Impacts. London: Longman.

Mbaiwa, J. E. (2003). The socio-economic and

environmental impacts of tourism development on the

Okavango Delta, north-western Botswana. Journal of

Arid Environments, 54(2), 447–467.

McCool, S. F. (1989). Limits of acceptable change:Evolution

and future. In R. Graham & R. Lawrence (eds), Towards

Serving Visitors and Managing our Resources: Proceed-

ings of a North American Workshop on Visitor Manage-

ment in Parks and Protected Areas, 185–193. Waterloo,

Ontario: Tourism Research and Education Centre.

McIntyre, G. (1993). Sustainable Tourism Development:

Guide for Local Planners. Madrid, Spain: World

Tourism Organization.

Meinecke, E. P. (1928). The Effect of Excessive Tourist

Travel on California Redwood Parks. Sacramento,

CA: California Department of Natural Resources.

Obua, J. (1997). The potential, development and ecologi-

cal impact of ecotourism in Kibale National Park,

Uganda. Journal of Environmental Management,

50(1), 27–38.

Obua, J. & Harding, D. M. (1997). Environmental impact

of ecotourism in Kibale National Park, Uganda. Journal

of Sustainable Tourism, 5(3), 213–223.

Peng, C. L., Lin, Z. F. & Lin, G. Z. (1998). Effect of

tourism and industrialization on the atmospheric

quality of subtropical forests and on chlorophyll

fluorescence of two species of woody plants. Acta

Botanica Sinica, 40(3), 270–276.

Quan, H. (2003). A study on the threshold and the

tendency in Zhangjiajie tourist and ecological

environment. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 23(5), 938–945.

Quan, H. & Yang, Z. Z. (2002). Environment change and

sustainable development in ecotourism area: A case

study of Zhangjiajie. China Population, Resource and

Environment, 12(3), 95–98.

Salmona, P. & Verardi, D. (2001). The marine protected

area of Portofino, Italy: A difficult balance. Ocean &

Coastal Management, 44(1/2), 39–60.

Seidl, I. & Tisdell, C. A. (1999). Carrying capacity recon-

sidered: From Malthus’ population theory to cultural car-

rying capacity. Ecological Economics, 31(3), 395–408.

Shi, Q., Lei, X. D. & Xie, H. M. (2002). Tourism impacts

on soil in Zhangjiajie National Forestry Park. Journal of

Sichuan Forestry Science and Technology, 23(3), 28–

33.

Shi, Q., He, Q. T. & Wu, Z. W. (2002). Integrated

evaluation of recreation development effects on air

quality in Zhangjiajie National Forestry Park, China.

Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 24(4), 25–28.

Shi, Q., Zheng, Q. M. & Zhong, L. S. (2002). Integrated

evaluation of recreation development effects on water

quality: Take Zhangjiajie National Forestry Parks as a

study case. Journal of Natural Science Hunan Normal

University, 25(4), 88–92.

Smith, S. L. J. (1983). Recreational Geography. Harlow,

UK: Longman.

Song, L. H., Wei, X. N. & Liang, F. Y. (2003). Effect of

speleo-tourism on the CO2 content and temperature in

Baiyun Cave, Lincheng, Hebei. Carsologica Sinica,

22(3), 230–235.

Song, L. F., Yang, G. X. & Guo, L. X. (1985). Evolvement

of tourism environment in Beijing-Tianjing area.

Journal of Environmental Sciences, 5(3), 255–265.

44 Xiang Huang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014

Stankey, G. H., Cole, D. N., Lucas, R. C., Petersen, M. E.

& Frissell, S. S. (1985). The Limits of Acceptable

Change (LAC) System for Wilderness Planning (Gen.

Tech. Rep. INT-176). Ogden, UT: US Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and

Range Experiment Station.

Stankey, G. H. & McCool, S. F. (1984). Carrying capacity

in recreational settings: Evolution, appraisal, and

application. Leisure Sciences, 6(4), 453–473.

Stankey, G. H. & McCool, S. F. (1989). Beyond social

carrying capacity. In E. L. Jackson & T. L. Burton

(eds), Understanding Leisure and Recreation: Mapping

the Past Charting the Future, 497–516. Pennsylvania

State College, PA: Venture Publishing.

Stankey, G. H., McCool, S. F. & Stokes, G. L. (1990).

Managing for appropriate wilderness conditions: The

carrying capacity issue. In J. C. Hendee, G. H. Stankey

& R. C. Lucas (eds), Wilderness Management(2nd

edn), 215–240. Golden, CO: North American Press.

Stevens, S. (2003). Tourism and deforestation in the Mt

Everest region of Nepal. The Geographical Journal,

169(3), 255–277.

Stewart, W. P. & Cole. D. N. (2001). Number of

encounters and experience quality in Grand Canyon

backcountry: Consistently negative and weak relation-

ships. Journal of Leisure Research, 33(1), 106–120.

Sun, D. & Liddle, M. J. (1993a). A survey of trampling

effects on vegetation and soil in eight tropical and

subtropical sites. Environmental Management, 17(4),

497–510.

Sun, D. & Liddle, M. J. (1993b). The morphological

responses of some Australian tussock grasses and the

importance of tiller number in their resistance to

trampling. Biological Conservation, 65(1), 43–49.

Sun, D. & Liddle, M. J. (1993c). Plant morphological

characteristics and resistance to simulated trampling.

Environmental Management,17(4), 511–521.

Sun, D. & Walsh, D. (1998). Review of studies on

environmental impacts of recreation and tourism in

Australia. Journal of Environmental Management,

53(4), 323–338.

Sun, Y. J. & Wang, R. S. (2000). Environment capacity of

ecotourism resort. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology,

11(4), 564–566.

USA National Park Service. (1997). The Visitor Experi-

ence and Resource Protection (VERP) Framework: A

Handbook for Planners and Managers (Pub No.: NPS

D-1215). Denver, CO: Author, Denver Service Center.

van Rooyen, M. W. (2002). Management of the old field

vegetation in the Namaqua National Park, South

Africa: Conflicting demands of conservation and

tourism. The Geographical Journal, 168(3), 211–223.

van Wagtendonk, J. W. (1986). The determination of car-

rying capacity for the Yosemite Wilderness. In R. C.

Lucas (ed.), Proceedings of the Nature Wilderness

Research Conference: Current Research (Gen. Tech.

Rep. INT-212, pp. 456–461). Ogden, UT: US Depart-

ment of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain

Research Station.

Wagar, J. A. (1964). The carrying capacity of wildlands

for recreation. Forest Science Monograph, 7, 1–23.

Wall, G. (1982). Cycles and capacity: Incipient theory or

conceptual contradiction? Tourism Management, 3(3),

188–192.

Wall, G. (2000). Carrying capacity. In J. Jafari (ed.), Ency-

clopedia of Tourism, 72–73. London: Routledge.

Wall, G. & Wright, C. (1977). The Environmental

Impacts of Outdoor Recreation (Dept. of Geography,

Pub. Series No. 11). Waterloo, Canada: University of

Waterloo.

Wang, C. Y. & Miko, P. S. (1997). Environmental impacts

of tourism on U.S. national parks. Journal of Travel

Research, 35(4), 31–36.

Wang, H. & Weng, G. M. (2003). Economics analysis of

overload of tourism environmental capacity. Geogra-

phy and Geo-information Science, 19(2), 110–112.

Wang, W. H., Wang, S. Q., Xu, W. B., Qi, R. M. & Wang,

W. Z. (1995). Characterization of organic compounds

in sediments of Kunming Lake in Beijing. Acta Scientiae

Circumstantiae, 4, 178–185.

Wang, X. L., Piao, Z. J., Sun, Y. P., Cha, Y. J. & Hwang,

Y. H. (1999). Environmental impacts of tourism in the

Changbaishan Biosphere Reserve, Northeast China.

Chinese Journal of Ecology, 18(3), 46–53.

Wang, Z. R. & Hao, X. B. (1988). Study on environment

quality change in Zhangjiajie National Forestry Park.

China Environmental Science, 8(4), 23–30.

Wang, Z. J., Cai, J. & Zhang, Q. X. (2003). Elementary

study on tourism impacts on soil in Yunmeng Mountain

National Forestry Park. Journal of Hebei Forestry

Science and Technology, 10, 12–15.

Watson, A. E., Niccolucci, M. J. & Williams, D. R.

(1993). Hikers and Recreational Stock Users: Predicting

and Managing Recreation Conflicts in Three Wilder-

nesses (Research paper INT 468). Ogden, UT: US

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermoun-

tain Research Station.

Wei, X. L. (2003). A quantitative analysis of ecotourism

impacts on forest resources. Journal of Beijing Forestry

University, 25(1), 65–68.

Comparative Review of Research on Environmental Impacts 45

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014

Wei, X. L., Jiang, C. Q. & Zhang, S. G. (2003). The

mechanism of ecotourism’s impacts on forest resource.

World Forestry Research, 16(1), 15–19.

Wei, Z. J., Yang, J. & Han, G. D. (1999). The

management of rangeland for tourism. Neimenggu

Grass Industry, 13(3), 34–37.

Wen, C. H., Yang, G. H. & Wang, H. (2002). Integrated

indicator system of ecotourism environmental load

capacity in Nature Reserve. Argo Environment

Protection, 21(4), 365–368.

Whinam, J. & Comfort, M. (1996). The impact of

commercial horse riding on Sub-Alpine environments

at Cradle Mountain, Tasmania, Australia. Journal of

Environmental Management, 47(1), 61–70.

Wong, P. P. (1998). Coastal tourism development in

Southeast Asia: Relevance and lessons for coastal zone

management. Ocean & Coastal Management, 38(2),

89–109.

World Trade Organization/United Nations Environ-

mental Programme (WTO/UNEP) (1992). Guidelines:

Development of National Parks and Protected Areas

for Tourism. Madrid, Spain: World Tourism

Organization.

Yi, Y. M., Liu, Z. H. & Liu, Z. G. (2003). Study on

environment motoring system of ecotourism. Territory

& Natural Resources Study, 25(1), 67–68.

Zhang, J., Xu, B. & Na, S. H. (2003). Establishment of

conservation system of ecotourism environment in

forest parks. Journal of Northeast Forestry University,

31(4), 20–23.

Zhang, X. M. (2004). From theoretical framework to

practical application: The research progress of tourism

environmental carrying capacity. Resources Sciences,

26(4), 78–88.

Zhao, H. H. (1983). Discussion on tourism environmental

capacity issues in Suzhou. Urban Planning, 7(5), 46–53.

46 Xiang Huang et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

McM

aste

r U

nive

rsity

] at

08:

47 2

2 O

ctob

er 2

014