Building better collaborative management between protected area managers and the tourism...

Australia-wide, the tourism sector is valued at over $60 billion per annum, with at least a third being in the nature, eco and adventure tourism sector. With increasing tourist numbers, the problem becomes one of managing tourism in protected areas, to protect and maintain the values that attracted

tourists in the first place. However, because of their training and other factors, many protected area managers often find it easier to manage natural resources rather than visitors. This often results in misunderstandings through to animosity between protected area managers and the tourism industry. Improving their relationship has the potential to ensure that protected areas are used sustainably by the industry as well as reducing management costs through more efficient practices and cost sharing. Collaboration can lead to better decisions that are more likely to be implemented by participating parties. Collaborative management also relies on knowing which tools help or hinder such collaboration. As part of this study, qualitative research methods, such as ethnography, interpretivism and action research are used to determine current efforts that foster or hinder collaboration. In using action research, this research will explore, through working with protected area managers and the tourism industry, which tools are most likely to build successful collaboration.

**********

Tourism is one of the world's leading and fastest-growing industries. Protected areas have always attracted people and natural-area tourism is one of the fastest-growing snbsectors of tourism worldwide (Newsome, Moore, & Dowling, 2002). Australia-wide, the tourism sector is valued at over $60 billion per annum, with at least one third falling in the nature, eco and adventure tourism sector (Buckley & Sommer, 2001).

With increasing tourist numbers, the problem becomes one of managing tourism in protected areas, to protect and maintain the values that attracted tourists in the first place. However, because of their training and other factors, many protected area managers often find it easier to manage natural resources rather than visitors. They regularly place the natural environment and its management ahead of visitor management (McArthur, 1994). Managers' perceptions form the basis for their actions and strategies; they purposively rely on their perceptions (Starbuck & Mezias, 1996). Misunderstandings through to animosity between protected-area managers and the tourism industry area are a recognised concern. Improving these relationships has the potential to ensure that protected areas are used sustainably by the industry as well as reducing management costs through more efficient practices and cost sharing.

In many ways, providing tourism products in protected areas is a partnership between several parties. Two parties crucial to the success and sustainability of such tourism are the tourism industry and protected-area managers (Worboys, Lockwood, & De Lacy, 2001). Little is known about the perceptions they have of each other, the industry and protected areas. How well managers and this industry are able to work together strongly influences the quality of the tourism product, the satisfaction of visitors, and the protection of the natural resource base on which the industry depends. An important associated issue is how well the diversity of staff within protected area agencies engage with and support tourism priorities.

Buckley (2000) noted that protected-area managers are facing the dilemma of allocation of financial resources and the question of priorities and perspective, as well as conservation versus recreation. Protected area managers are concerned that an increase in tourism within protected areas might threaten conservation aspects of the area. However, as Buckley (2000) stated, park managers are seeking funds from tourism to contribute to operating costs. An associated concern is that financial imperatives may reduce the ability of managers to manage for conservation if tourism becomes a higher priority than conservation. In Australia, however, it is recognised that a high importance in managing protected areas is conservation over recreation (Buckley & Summer, 2001).

This project will analyse the perceptions managers and members of the tourism industry using protected areas hold regarding each other, tourism, sustainable development, and the current and future management needs of the industry. A particular focus will be exploring the diversity of perspectives within protected area agencies within Western Australia (WA). For example, rangers may hold very different views regarding the tourism industry in comparison to scientists, managers and/or senior policy makers. As Wondolleck and Yaffee (2000) highlight, attitudes and perceptions held by individuals, groups and organisations often push people apart through lack of trust and stereotyped "us versus them" images.

Collaboration can lead to better decisions that are more likely to be implemented by participating parties (Wondolleck & Yaffee, 2000). It can also enhance the capacity of agencies to deal with problems in the future. Forming relationships across organisational boundaries through collaboration is also a means of building support for needed management direction (Wondolleck & Yaffee, 2000). Collaborative management also relies on knowing which tools, for example, innovative licensing, partnered certification or facilitation, help or hinder such collaboration. This study will explore, through working with managers and the tourism industry, which tools are most likely to build collaboration.

Research Question

The generated research question guiding this study is "How can the working arrangements between protected area managers and the tourism industry be enhanced to achieve sustainable management of tourism in protected areas?"

Approaches, Methods and Techniques

Research Design

In order to answer the research question, interpretivism and action research will be used. Both are features of qualitative research (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Qualitative research is suited to matters that require an empathic understanding of societal phenomena, recognition of the historical dimension of human behaviour and the subjective aspects of the human experience (Babbie, 1990; Creswell, 1994; Frankfort-Nachmias & Nachmias, 1992; Neuman, 2000).

Ethnography and participant observation are interpretive approaches and are used to explore the nature of organisational subcultures and ideologies and to investigate a small number of cases in detail (Atkinson & Hammersley, 1994; Babbie, 2001; Spradley, 1979). The goal of using ethnography is to understand why people act the way they do. The subjects become informants while the researcher wants to learn what is meaningful and relevant to the subjects being studied (Spradley, 1979; Spradley, 1980).

The second approach, action research, can be broken down into several components. The objective of action research is "not just to describe or understand or to explain social reality. Action research wants to improve a situation" (van Beinum, 1999, p. 12). In essence, the process of applying action research is a collective effort to gain new knowledge. In a social or organisational context this will be achieved through participant interactions (Levine, 1999). As Levine (1999) states, the communication and observation that occurs between the researcher and the participants creates the basis for gaining new knowledge and changing the systems.

Conducting action research involves the researcher working with the participants of the study to solve a problem. This will be achieved through a range of techniques, for example, convening workshops, facilitating parties working together on a common issue, and pre-and post-testing. Through "role-taking", for example, acting as the facilitator, the researcher tries to understand the participants as well as possible (van Beinum, 1999).

Research Methods

To answer the stated research question, the project will be divided into four stages, with each stage being reliant on the previous one. To get an insight into the various management practices WA-wide, this research covers different locations, ranging from the Kimberley to the Pilbara, down to the South-West and Great Southern region.

Stage 1. This stage will comprise analysis of the perceptions that protected area managers and members of the tourism industry using protected areas have of each other, tourism, sustainable development, and the industry's current and future management needs. A particular focus will be exploring the diversity of perspectives regarding tourism within protected area agencies. For example, rangers may hold very different views regarding the tourism industry compared to Aboriginal elders, managers and/or senior policy makers. Information on these perspectives will be collected through participant observation and in-depth face-to-face interviews with representatives from both sectors throughout WA. The collected information will be used for cultural mapping as a means of showing the intersections between different sectors (protected-area policy-makers/managers/ rangers/tourism tour leaders/managers), and to demonstrate the influence of culture on collaboration.

Stage 2. This stage will be to examine current efforts of collaborative approaches between protected area managers and the tourism industry in protected areas. Observed collaboration efforts will be analysed, assessed and evaluated to determine best practice cases.

Stage 3. This stage will involve experimenting with a range of techniques aimed at enhancing the ability of these diverse players to work together to provide sustainable nature tourism. These techniques will be tested on participants involved in Stage 1. Managers involved in these "experiments" will be surveyed pre- and post-intervention to determine the influence of the various techniques on their perceptions of the others involved, as well as other facets of their perceptions explored in Stage 1. Information on the effectiveness or otherwise of the techniques will also be gathered via participant observation (Atkinson & Hammersley, 1994; Reason, 1994).

Stage 4. Stage 4 will be to develop and provide a set of principles and guidelines for managers on the optimal working arrangements for those involved in nature tourism and protected area management, based on the findings from Stages 1, 2 and 3.

Significance of the Findings to Stakeholders and Contribution to Knowledge

Stakeholders, such as protected area agencies, managers, and the tourism industry, will get a set of principles and guidelines for optimal working arrangements. In addition, they will receive models of collaborative best practice with an emphasis on sustainability. Furthermore, this research will result in financial benefits, as its outcomes will improve resource allocation as resource efficiencies are achieved. Another important group benefiting from this research will be tourists to protected areas who will be able to experience tourism that is gaining from the sharing of knowledge and responsibilities by the industry and protected area managers.

A significant contribution to existing knowledge in the field will be achieved by being the first study to identify and describe the culture and subcultures of protected area managers and the tourism industry in relation to protected area tourism. Furthermore, the intersections of these cultures will be identified and illustrated. The research will contribute to theoretical understanding of the perceptions and attitudes held by managers and members of the tourism industry towards tourism and each other as well as of the behaviour exhibited by both. An additional contribution will be the understanding of cultural influences on working arrangements and abilities to collaborate.

Contribution to methodology will be twofold: first, by developing and applying cultural mapping in a natural resource management setting, and second, by using action research to manipulate the provision of tourism services in protected areas. These two strategies of qualitative research have been used in a range of other settings, but never to explore collaborative management in protected areas.

Acknowledgements

This research is an outcome of a project funded by the Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre, established by the Australian Government and the Department of Conservation and Land Management, WA.

References

Atkinson, P., & Hammersley, M. (1994). Ethnography and participant observation. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 248-261). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Babbie, E.R. (1990). Survey research methods. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Babbie, E.R. (2001). The practice of social research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson Learning.

Buckley, R. (2000, May). Wilderness in Australia: What's happening in a world context. Paper presented at Wilderness Science in a Time of Change conference in Missoula, Montana.

Buckley, R., & Sommer, M. (2001). Tourism and protected areas partnerships in principle and practice. Gold Coast, Australia: CRC for Sustainable Tourism.

Creswell, J.W. (1994). Research design qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Frankfort-Nachmias, C., & Nachmias, D. (1992). Research methods in the social sciences. London: Edward Arnold.

Levine, J.M. (1999). Action research paradigms. In D.J. Greenwood (Ed.), Action research (Vol. 8. pp. 25-38). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

McArthur, S. (1994). Acknowledging a symbiotic relationship. Better heritage management via better visitor management. Australian Parks and Recreation, Spring, 12-17.

Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Neuman, W.L. (2000). Social research methods, qualitative and quantitative approaches. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Newsome, D., Moore, S.A., & Dowling, R. (2002). Natural area tourism ecology, impacts and management. Sydney, Australia: Channel View.

Reason, P. (1994). Three approaches to participative inquiry. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative research (pp. 324-339). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Spradley, J.P. (1979). The Ethnographic Interview. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Spradley, J.P. (1980). Participant Observation. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Starbuck, W.H., & Mezias, J.M. (1996). Opening Pandora's box: Studying the accuracy of manager's perceptions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 99-117.

van Beinum, H. (1999). On the Design of the ACRES Program. In D.J. Greenwood (Ed.), Action Research (Vol. 8, pp. 3-24). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Wondolleck, J.M., & Yaffee, S.L. (2000). Making collaboration work: Lessons from innovation in natural resource management. Washington, DC: Island Press.

Worboys, G., Lockwood, M., & De Lacy, T. (2001). Protected area management principles and practice, South Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press.

Correspondence

Agathe Wegner, PhD candidate, Murdoch University, Division of Science and Engineering, South Street, Murdoch, WA 6150 Australia. Email: A.Wegner@murdoch.edu.au

Agathe Wegner,

Susan A. Moore and

Jim Macbeth

Murdoch University, Australia