A comparison of the perceived environmental impacts of consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife tourism

Abstract

The tourism industry is seen as the fastest-growing industry in the world and is recognised as a necessity of human life. This industry can broadly be divided into mass tourism and alternative tourism, with alternative tourism forming part of natural area tourism. Natural area tourism consists of a variety of tourism subsectors, of which wildlife tourism forms part. Africa as a tourism destination has experienced extraordinary growth in the wildlife tourism industry, especially within the framework of consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife tourism. Consumptive wildlife tourism includes activities such as the capturing or killing of animals, while non-consumptive wildlife tourism includes activities where animals are neither caught nor killed. It is argued that consumptive wildlife tourists (hunters) result in a greater environmental impact upon nature and wildlife than non-consumptive wildlife tourists (ecotourists), because it is believed that the impact from consumptive wildlife tourists, although on a smaller scale, is more intense and concentrated. The questions arise what impact non-consumptive wildlife tourists, who want to escape from other tourists, have on the hundreds of natural area destinations around the world. These tourists raise the risk of hit-and-run tourism, causing an influx of such tourists to the latest wild spot, followed by the abandonment thereof once discovered and degraded by their activities, which can cause severe environmental impacts. Therefore, the primary research goal of this study was to compare the perceived environmental impacts of both consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife tourists. In order to achieve the primary research goal, four objectives were set and reached during various stages of the study. First, a literature overview of the background of natural area tourism was conducted. The second objective was to analyse the existing literature pertaining to the impact natural area tourism has on the environment, with a specific focus on consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife tourism. The third objective was to discuss the empirical results as obtained from the data collected from two populations, namely the reserve management (supply side) and the consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife tourists (demand side) who participated in the research, in order to determine the perceived impacts these two markets have on the environment at the game reserve. The fourth objective of the study was to draw conclusions and propose recommendations regarding the literature review and the empirical results. This research was conducted on a game reserve in Namibia that hosts both consumptive and non-consumptive tourism on the same premises. The study adopted a qualitative research method in order to encapsulate all necessary information, while non-probability sampling techniques were used for both research populations (supply and demand side). The reserve management (supply side) was purposefully sampled, and the consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife tourists (demand side) were conveniently sampled. Data were collected through the use of semi-structured interviews for both research populations. The interviews for the reserve management were conducted in September 2019 at the reserve itself, from which seven respondents were interviewed. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, online interviews were used to collect data for the consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife tourists who had visited the game reserve during the past three years. In total, ten consumptive and ten non-consumptive wildfire tourists were interviewed.