The results of ecotourism policies in protected areas in Brazil and Can-ada

Authors

  • Fabricio Scarpeta Matheus University of Northern British Columbia
  • Sidnei Raimundo Universidade de São Paulo

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7784/rbtur.v11i3.1336

Keywords:

Policy. Protected area. Public use. Ecotourism.

Abstract

Theme purpose: Policies and definitions on ecotourism address, basically, three aspects: environmental conservation, environmental awareness of visitors and involvement of local communities. From that approach, objective of this study analyzes the results of public policies for public use development inside protected areas. Methodology and approach: The analysis was accomplished through the case study of two protected areas, Alto Ribeira Tourist State Park (PETAR), located in the State of Sao Paulo, in Brazil, and Strathcona Provincial Park, situated in the province of British Columbia, Canada. The multiple case study was based on two sources of evidence, the identified public policies documents, and interviews with the various stakeholders: government, local community and visitors. The analysis of documents and interviews was performed through the content analysis technique. These public policies were discussed in the light of the conceptual bases of protected areas and public use, as well as the legal acts on public use in protected areas in both countries. Among the key findings, it is highlighted that the focus of the policies in permissive activities, as in the Canadian case, or in its restriction, like in Brazil, is not the most significant aspect for the conservation of the environment. Originality of the document: The outsourcing policy, already adopted in British Columbia and that starts to be deployed in Sao Paulo, has impacted more directly the three analyzed aspects.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Published

2017-09-14

How to Cite

Matheus, F. S., & Raimundo, S. (2017). The results of ecotourism policies in protected areas in Brazil and Can-ada. Revista Brasileira De Pesquisa Em Turismo, 11(3), 455–479. https://doi.org/10.7784/rbtur.v11i3.1336