How many visitors are too many visitors? Carrying capacity analysis for tourist destinations
How many visitors are too many visitors? Carrying capacity analysis for tourist destinations
Carrying capacity is defined as the number and type of visitors that can be accommodated in an area without unacceptable social consequences or negative environmental impacts (Jimenes et al 2007). Other authors define it as the degree of tourism use (number of people) that an area can support, ensuring maximum satisfaction for tourists, as well as minimum impact on natural and cultural resources (Botero Saltarén et al 2008).
Carrying Capacity has been used as a methodology to assist in planning for public use, giving a maximum number of people that can visit a site at one time. It takes into account the biophysical characteristics of the site, the conservation and experiential criteria desired by site managers, and the manageability of the site.
Carrying Capacity is broken down into three: Physical Carrying Capacity is determined solely by the spatial characteristics of the site. Actual Carrying Capacity is obtained by including biophysical parameters and desired experience conditions. The Effective Carrying Capacity reflects the management capacity of the site managers, and is subject to change depending on the control measures exercised at the site. It is the latter that is used as a public use planning measure to determine the maximum daily visitation of the site.
When using the Carrying Capacity as a management tool for a site, since it is only a number of people over the maximum number of people in a site, it is advisable to complement it with other factors such as the recreational opportunity of the site, which can range from a primitive experience where little presence of people is desired and a situation with a high contact with nature. To an experience with a higher density of people and more altered environments (CIPAM__ROVAP).
Clarity about the objectives of the site and the experience you want to provide, along with the ability to manage it, are key to successful and effective planning, and facilitate better results when planning the visit of tourists.
A controversial case that is currently in conversation is the carrying capacity of Manuel Antonio National Park, one of the most visited national parks in the country, and an iconic destination of the advertising campaigns launched by the ICT, which attracted 329,611 visitors in 2021, being 20191 its peak visitation year. An issue of public use planning and visitor management that has become politicized and demonstrates how public policy influences conservation capacity.
As a visitor to Manuel Antonio, both as a tourist and as a guide, I have seen changes in management over the last 20 years that are reflected in the tourist experience and the conservation of the site. From the closures made by the Ministry of Health due to inadequate wastewater management, to the investment made in improving tourism infrastructure and implementing regulations on the entry of food to protect the integrity of the park's fauna.
We went from crossing the estuary to enter the park to getting up early and standing in line for more than an hour. From having almost unrestricted access just by paying the entrance fee to making reservations many days in advance, all of these factors are governed by the decisions made by those in charge of the site. All of these factors are governed by the decisions made by the site managers. Who benefits from increasing the carrying capacity to numbers greater than what the site allows? The simple answer is no one because it generates a gradual deterioration of the site. Starting with the fact that the higher the density of people, the more uncomfortable the experience on the site becomes and it influences their enjoyment, which translates into their intention to return or recommend the site. On the other hand, without the natural attractions there would be no site visitation either, each visitor creates an impact, in noise, erosion, space, contamination, need for resources, etc. The externalities of visitation are absorbed by the ecosystem, so extending its use beyond the ecosystem's capacity is counterproductive for everyone, including the host community.
Maintaining a carrying capacity that respects the ecological integrity of the site, and the management capacity, favoring the recovery of the ecosystem is to protect the resource for future visitors. And that makes the tourism operation sustainable over time, being congruent with the principles of conservation and tourism that have characterized our country.
