Stakeholder ecotourism management: exchanges, coordination’s and adaptations

Ecotourism presents itself with various opportunities, yet the management of tourism in protected and/or unprotected areas represents great challenges (Ullenberg, 2015, p. 34) one of which is the concept of stakeholder management.

According to Backman and Munanura (2015), stakeholders are key actors to achieve sustainable development through ecotourism (p. 98). Marulo (2012) agrees by demonstrating that its management affects the growth of ecotourism, and all stakeholders form the basis on which ecotourism stands and its success is dependent on the cooperation, communication and involvement of different stakeholders (p. 50). Byrd (2007) mirrors this idea by emphasizing the need for ecotourism to be developed, planned, and managed in a sustainable way whilst integrating all stakeholders throughout the entire process (p. 8).

Since Edward Freeman, in 1984, defined the term stakeholders as key groups or individuals that can affect or be affected by a company’s activities, there have been ongoing discussions and modifications in relation to who stakeholders are (Agüera, 2013).

Holistically speaking, the term stakeholder was redefined to a – ‘term as a series of voluntary agreements between adults who voluntarily affirm their commitment to the objectives and purposes of the corporation, as well as entering cooperative agreements with other individuals or groups’ (Byrd, 2007, p. 10). Examples of major ecotourism stakeholders that should be involved are as follows: tourists, suppliers, local governments, accommodation, tourism agencies, local communities, NGOs, ecological groups, to name just a few … (Dologlou, 2016, p. 20).

Besides stakeholders’ multifaceted definition and structures, Garrod (2003) states that the stakeholder theory has proved to be an efficient ecotourism management tool as it allows for the identification of key players and emphasizes the need of involvement (p. 15). Yet, the issue presented is that while stakeholder involvement is vital for ecotourism development, decisions are made “top down” by superiors/experts and local’s see this as not reflecting the opinions, and interest of their community (Hardy & Beeton, 2001, p. 168).

Kiper (2013) adds to this and explains that this occurs because there is an issue of competing interests between different stakeholders during the decision making process (p. 862). This is due to the complexity of ecotourism and the multidimensional aspect of stakeholders: as they are diverse, with different perspectives and varying interest (Darley & Moswete, 2012).

To shed a light into the above mentioned debates, this special issue brings out the following papers:

1. The article by Pyke, Law, Jiang and de Lacy examines the stakeholder engagement in constructive resilience to the impacts of bushfire in Austrailia;

2. The article by Jones, Beeton and Cooper brings up the complexities in stakeholder management at Mount Fuji in Japan;

3. The article by Schweinsberg, Darcy and Wearing explores the merits of employing Personal Construct Theory based repertory grids as a methodological tool to understand the subjective realities of local people within the ecotourism spectrum;

4. The article by Pookhao discusses articulates the connection between policy, tourism stakeholders and practices in relation to the commodification and authenticity of community based ecourism in Thailand;

5. The article by Towner points to the current stakeholder collaboration in the Mentawai Islands surfing tourism industry by exploring multiple stakeholder perspectives;

6. The article by Tham points to the directions of planning and stakeholder partnership as a case in Singapore for new destinations embarking on their ecotourism journey to ‘Envision Eden’;

7. The article by Tiberghien, Bremner and Milne illustrates the various aspects of the commodification of nomadic culture in a post-Soviet heritage and details the role authenticity plays in the planning and development of Kazakhstani tourism and local community participation and empowerment through stakeholder management;

8. The article by Palmer and Chuamuangphan points to the actors’ interactions as they relate to the use of resources and environment in the Chiang Rai province in Thailand. The factor of Involvement, among other issues, in community based ecotourism appears to be linked to an individual’s social standing or general position in society where is illustrated through a range of qualitative type of explorations; and

9. The article by Dangi and Gribb emphasizes partnership and collaboration among various stakeholders for resource sustainability and visitor satisfaction in Rocky Mountain National Park, USA.

With the above collections, the special issue aims to bring into the literature of stakeholder management a fresh look into its complexities, and its paradoxes. Consequently, it aims to highlight that ecotourism is complex due to the large range of stakeholders with different interests. Perhaps, it is instructive to look at such complexities as a way to manage ecotourism more effectively through an exchange between the different stakeholders, a coordination of their action and adaptation processes. The latter mechanisms can be clearly illustrated through the special issue which in effect aims to broaden the debate and to instill the importance of stakeholder management as a way of dealing with ecotourism challenges.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.