World University Of Bangladesh

Assignment on;
lawachar

Submitted to;

Md.Abdul Latif Mahmud

Lecturer
World University Of Bangladesh

Submitted by;

Tazrian Nahian
30/B (Id : 311)
Rifath ibne bashar roll
316 id (31/A)

1
ABSTRACT
National Parks in Bangladesh aim to balance nature conservation and local development.
Recently a co-management approach has been adopted to elaborate National Park
management plans jointly with local people. In Lawachara National Park, ecotourism is one
of the main instruments for its development. This research focuses on local people’s
perceptions of the contribution of ecotourism to sustainable development and the role of co-
management in it. A list of social, economic, environmental and institutional impacts of
ecotourism was developed and 105 interviews were executed. The results revealed three
groups: satisfied,
economic dissatisfied and overall dissatisfied people. Awareness of National Park policies,
being involved in ecotourism in terms of activities or jobs, gender and length of residence
were found to be major factors influencing satisfaction levels. This study indicates that
ecotourism interventions, which result from the co-management projects at Lawachara
National Park, have not yet realized their aims in terms of contributions to sustainable
development.
Introduction
One of the greatest challenges the world is facing in the 21st century is to balance nature
conservation and development. Ecotourism is increasingly seen as an opportunity for
sustainable development as it addresses both nature conservation and poverty
reductionSustainable development comprises four dimensions: social, economic,
environmental and institutional The social dimension stipulates that all individuals have
access to resources and facilities they need to live a healthy and dignified life. Cultural
expressions and activities are an important aspect of people’s livelihoods and therefore are
integrated in the social dimension. The economic dimension specifies the satisfaction of
human needs for material welfare. This implies an economy which supports employment and
livelihoods. The environmental dimension describes the need to protect biodiversity as well as
to reduce the pressure on the physical environment. Whereas the first three dimensions refer
to a more traditional interpretation of sustainability, the fourth institutional dimension
emphasizes participation of stakeholders, including local people, decentralized decision
making, information sharing and shared responsibilities Participation of stakeholders,
however, is considered a crucial precondition for tourism planning to evolve with minimum
negative impacts Participation of stakeholders, however, is considered a crucial precondition
for tourism planning to evolve with minimum negative impacts Although the institutional
dimension has received less attention than the three other dimensions, research has found that
all four dimensions contribute to resident satisfaction with ecotourism.

2
Perceptions of ecotourism impacts

Obviously perceptions of ecotourism impacts are highly subjective and situational. Several
recent studies indicate that there is a widely shared agreement on the economic benefits of
ecotourism, especially by means of creating jobs and income .But as Stronza and Gordilla
(2008, p. 449-450) argue “economic benefits may be paramount to success, but noneconomic
ones can also influence chances for conservation. These include new skills, broader
experiences in managing people and projects, strengthened abilities to negotiate with
outsiders, and expanded circles of contacts and support for community efforts”. On the other
hand, studies also show concerns with respect to the social and environmental costs of
ecotourism. Ecotourism can also lead to perceptions of decreased quality of life and of the
quality of the environment, for example due to pollution or exhaustion of resources . It is also
widely acknowledged that communities are not homogeneous in their perceptions of local
development issues. Factors that influence this heterogeneity are often education, gender, and
age . Abdollahzadeh & Sharifzadeh (2012) found in their study on rural residents’ perception
towards tourism development in Iran that medium-educated people, women and people
employed in the tourism industry were the most positive about tourism development.
Similarly, Kuvan and Akan (2012) found that having a share in tourism development
influences perceptions positively. Similarly, perceptions of planning and management also
differ between different community groups .

Ecotourism and co-management in Lawachara National Park, Bangladesh

This article contributes to the debate on tourism-conservation-development, by means of

investigating the social, economic, environmental and institutional impacts of ecotourism, and
the role of co-management by presenting a case study from Bangladesh. In Bangladesh,
biodiversity protection is still in its infancy. In 2011, less than 2% of the total land area was
protected. Protection takes place by means of National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries.
Lawachara National Park (LNP), in the northeast of Bangladesh, is one of the 17 National
Parks but also one of the smallest (see also Ahsan, 2007). Traditionally all National Parks in
Bangladesh were managed by the Forest Department (FD), but their success was limited.
Biodiversity in LNP has been seriously threatened by direct and indirect impacts due to the
land uses of various groups (NACOM, 2004). Illegal forest harvest, a rail line and road
passing through the Park, uncontrolled tourism, mining for gas, and military use for training
are the main threats for biodiversity. An important underlying reason is the persistent poverty
in Bangladesh. Bangladesh is one of the poorest countries (155 in position out of 182

3
countries) in the world and positioned 129 out of 169 countries (score 0.469) in the Human
Development Index (UNDP, 2010). The case of Bangladesh clearly illustrates that
biodiversity loss and poverty are linked problems (NACOM, 2004).

To increase biodiversity protection and reduce poverty in Bangladesh, collaborative

management programs of national parks were set up, aiming at a sustainable development for
national parks and surrounding local communities.
Since early 2000, co-management initiatives have been developed for some of the protected
areas in Bangladesh. The Forest Department worked with USAID to jointly
develop a project called the ‘Nishorgo Support Project’(NSP) as a five year pilot project to
strengthen protected area management by more active local participation in forest resource
management (Mollah & Kunda, 2004; Sharma, DeCosse, Roy, Khan, & Mazumder,2007).
Since 2006, local communities around LNP are involved in the Co-management Committee
(CMC) and in activities such as joint patrolling in the forest, training for and local
involvement in different Alternative Income Generation (AIG) activities and awareness
generation on forest protection (NSP, 2006). NSP aims at reducing the dependency of the
local communities on the natural resources by involving them in ecotourism. Some specific
ecotourism objectives of NSP are: encouraging ecotourism in suitable zones and develop
visitor amenities; building infrastructure within protected areas to enable better management
and provision of visitor services at protected areas; and creating AIG opportunities for
key local stakeholders (NSP, 2006).
This research aims at examining the perceptions of local people as well as people involved
directly in the co-management initiatives of (i) the contribution of ecotourism to sustainable
development and (ii) the role of co-management. First the methods are being presented,
followed by the results. Based upon the perceptions of social, environmental, ecological and
institutional impacts by local inhabitants and NSP-official, three groups will be distinguished:
satisfied, economic dissatisfied and overall dissatisfied people. The final section discusses the
results and presents the main conclusions.

Rationals
LNP is situated in the northeastern part of Bangladesh, 160 km northeast of the capital Dhaka.
The size of the Park is 1250 hectares; another 281 hectares has been proposed for including
within the NP area (FSP, 2000; Mollah & Kunda, 2004; NSP, 2006). The forest of LNP is a
semi-evergreen and mixed deciduous. The biodiversity of LNP is diverse and consists of 293
faunal species, such as the Hoolock gibbon, leopard cat and King Cobra, and 167 floral

4
species. It is also an attractive ecotourism destination due to its aesthetic beauty, dense high
forests, undulating slopes and hillocks based landscape, historical and cultural values and
ethnic diversity, surrounding eye catching tea gardens at the border of south-east, south and
east sides of the forest and coffee plantation at the west side (NACOM, 2003; NSP, 2006).
Data collection and selection of respondents
This research project conducted semi-structured interviews with both local community
members and people involved in the NSP. There are 18 villages in close proximity of LNP
(<5km) with approximately 4000-4500 households. People are extremely poor (85-90%) and
depend largely on natural resources for livelihood opportunities (DeCosse, 2006). Villages
also differ in ecotourism activities and visitor numbers. This dependency on both natural
resources and ecotourism can be classified into high, moderate and minor level of dependency
(Hossain, 2007; Mollah & Kunda, 2004; NSP, 2006; NACOM, 2003, 2004). Three villages
within each dependency level were selected: Lawachara Punji, Magurchara Punji and
Duluchera (major dependency level); Radhanagar, Chatakchara and Garopalli (moderate
dependency level); Langurpar, Ballarpar and Bongaon (minor dependency level). Interviews
with community members were conducted in each of the villages. A snowball sampling
method was followed as villagers needed to be familiar with ecotourism activities and co-
management as regards to Lawachara National Park. A local guide helped to initiate the first
interview. In each village between 7 and 15 community members, all belonging to different
households, participated in the interview. In total, 30 interviews were held in each
dependency level, leading to a total of 90 interviews. Interviews were conducted face-to-face
in the native language (Bengali) or tribal languages. In the latter case, a translator assisted the
interviewing. People involved in the NSP-project can be differentiated in three

ECOTOURISM IN LAWACHARA NATIONAL PARK

Groups: (i) the Forest Department (FD), the government authority responsible for the
management of LNP, (ii) the International Resources Group (IRG) and its two domestic
NGOs i.e., Rangpur-Dinajpur Rural Service (RDRS) and Nature Conservation Management
(NACOM), who were responsible for supervision and support, and (iii) members of the Co-
Management Committee (CMC) who were directly involved in the decision-making process
of ecotourism development. Respondents were selected from different levels of hierarchy
within the organization (field level officials as well as higher level officials). In total, 15 NSP-
officials (5 from each group) have been interviewed.The total number of conducted
interviews was 105 (with a response rate of 75%). Data were collected from November 2008
to January 2009.

5
Interview design
The interview design was semi-structured, with closed and open questions. This article deals
with the closed questions. The four dimensions of ecotourism were used as a starting point to
develop a list of indicators. The selection was determined on the basis of current ecotourism
activities and objectives (NSP, 2006), the existence of the co-management approach and
experiences with surveys carried out in National Parks throughout the world (Choi &
Sirakaya, 2006; Cottrell et al., 2007; Cottrell & Raadik, 2008; Cottrell & Raadik-Cottrell,
2012; Tsaura et al., 2006). Five indicators for each dimension were selected (see Table 1). For
each indicator the respondent had to indicate the perceived satisfaction and the perceived
contribution of the co-management approach by means of a 5-point Likert scale and a ‘don’t
know’ answer. Besides, people were interviewed about demographic and socio-economic
variables (gender, age, education, income, sources of income, duration of living, etc.),
involvement in ecotourism activities, awareness of NSP-project, and an overall quality rating
of tourism development around LNP. Data Analysis We used both descriptive and
multivariate analysis techniques. First, this research applied a selected number of K-means
cluster analyses to determine the distribution and possible groupings of respondents (Stevens,
1999). A three cluster solution that could be interpreted consistently was chosen. To analyze
differences between groups we used cross tabulations and Anova. We used the measures of
association Cramer’s V and Eta2, that not only test for significant differences, but also
indicate the proportion of total variability explained by theindependent variable (Stevens,
1999).We present results significant at p < 0.001 (***), < 0.01 (**) and <0.05 (*) level.
Results
Characteristics of the respondents
Fifty-eight percent of the respondents were male and 42% were female (Table
10 BIRGIT ELANDS, MD. WASIUL ISLAM, RENÉ VAN DER DUIM
1). Most NSP-officials were male. Respondents were on average 36 years old, NSP-officials
being slightly older than local villagers. The literacy rate of the respondents was 84%. The
average education level of local people was in-between primary and high school. NSP-
officials were much higher educated than local people. None of them was ecotourism
specialist or had a professional background in ecotourism. On average, local people lived 27
years in the village and their total income was 75.8 US $/month (1$ =78.1 Bangladeshi Taka)
in 2009. Sources of income were – people could indicate two sources of income - agriculture
(58%), business (32%), services (12%), and tourism (8%). Nineteen percent of the
interviewed local residents reported no sources of income at all. About one-fifth of the local
people were involved in tourism activities focusing on LNP. Though the awareness of the
NSP-project amongst villagers was high (98%), the awareness of the co-management

6
approach and tourism activities was much lower (57% and 36% respectively). Locals living in
a village with major or moderate dependency on natural resources and ecotourism were more
aware
compared to the other villagers. Regarding the overall quality of tourism
development in the LNP area (measures at a scale from 1 to 10), remarkably NSP-officials
were less positive than local residents (5.3 and 7.3 respectively).

Table 1: Socio-economic characteristics and awareness of NSP contents

(standard deviation between brackets)

All Local NSP Statistics

(N=105) people officials
(n=90) (n=15

Age2 35.7 34.7 (9.8 41.9 (9.7) Eta2=.06

(10.1

Education1,2 3.3 (1.8) 2.8 (1.3) Eta2=.47 6.3 (1.5)

Length of residence - 27.1 - Eta2=.08*

- Major (11.4)
dependency village 23.1
- Moderate 30.9
dependency village 27.2
- Minor
dependency village

Income2 - 75.8 - -
(32.4)

Sources of income - 58 - -
(% yes, more than
one answer possible)
2
- Agriculture

7
COTOURISM IN LAWACHARA NATIONAL PARK

Perceptions of ecotourism impacts at LNP

Generally speaking respondents were reasonable satisfied with current ecotourism
developments (see Table 2). People were most satisfied with improved environmental
awareness (M=4.1) and least satisfied with increased educational opportunities (M=3.5). As
Cronbach’s alpha for each type of impact appeared to be reasonable (social: α=.71) to strong
(economic: α=.88), the items were further analyzed at the level of impact type. People were
least satisfied with the economic impacts of ecotourism (M=3.6). For example, they were
rather negative about the sharing of the benefits among local people and
theinfrastructureimprovements. People were most satisfied with the environmental impacts
(M=3.8). They BIRGIT ELANDS, MD. WASIUL ISLAM, RENÉ VAN DER DUIM

8
emphasized that ecotourism contributed to biodiversity conservation and solid waste
management, but also improved local people’s and visitors’ environmental awareness. Here
the publicity of LNP in different media to visit the place and also to conserve its biodiversity
and overall environment played a role, as well as the efforts of the local eco-guides to inform
and motivate the visitors about the wild and special environment of LNP and its surroundings.
The movement of visitors to the Park and its surrounding areas also encouraged more and
more people to conserve
the natural resources and thus reducing the illegal felling from the Park.

9
Regarding the social impacts (M=3.7), the respondents opined that ecotourism hadstimulated
local people to practice their indigenous culture by being dressed in traditional clothes, selling
handicrafts and souvenirs and performing different cultural shows for their guests. Criminal
activities in their area were also reduced. Finally, regarding the institutional impacts (M=3.7),
people were least satisfied with the way ecotourism was developed in close cooperation with
local entrepreneurs and most satisfied with facilitation and communication provided by the
project. The research did not reveal any statistical significant differences for satisfaction
levels between NSP-officials and community members regarding the social, economic,
environmental and institutional impacts, nor did we find any differences
14BIRGIT ELANDS, MD. WASIUL ISLAM, RENÉ VAN DER DUIM
for villages with varying levels of dependency. Perceptions of contribution of co-management
at LNP In general, 43% of the community members were not aware of the co-management
program. Respondents who were aware of the co-management program indicated that
ecotourism impacts were positively influenced by the co-management initiatives (see Table 2).
Again, due the high internal consistency values, a scale was constructed for the contribution
of co-management on each sustainability impact. Co-management was perceived satisfactory
for all the dimensions. Respondents were most satisfied with the institutional dimension
(M=3.8), for example ‘access to decision making and training have been improved’ (M=4.4).

10
They were least satisfied with the social dimension, illustrated by the fact that respondents
were neutral about the contribution of co-management in enhancing the quality of life (food,
clothing) through ecotourism (M=3.4). NSP-officials were much less satisfied with the
contribution of co-management than local people (mean values for social, economic,
environmental and institutional dimension of NSP-officials in between 0.5 and 0.7 lower than
local people, all significant for p<0.5). As they were involved with the co-management, they
might have had higher expectations of decision-making and might have been more critical
about the achievements being made. Again, the level of dependency of villages on natural
resources and tourism did not influence satisfaction ratings. Between satisfaction and
dissatisfaction In this research it was assumed that people perceive ecotourism contributions
differently. The satisfaction dimension was used as a basis for a K-means cluster analysis. A
three cluster solution was found to be appropriate; both in terms of contents and on the basis
of statistical significance (see Table 3). A small part of the respondents (n=9) were not
analysed due to many missing values. The three groups of respondents can be characterised as
follows: Satisfied people (n=59, 61%): people belonging to this group were positive about the
contributions of ecotourism to sustainable development, whether economic, environmental,
institutional or socio-economic; Economic dissatisfied people (n=20, 21%): this group
consisted of people who had doubts about the contributions of ecotourism in economic terms;
on the other hand they might be called environmental optimists as they were most satisfied
with these impacts; Overall dissatisfied people (n=17, 18%): these people were sceptic
towards the environmental, institutional and economic contributions of ecotourism. The three
groups represent different perceptions of LNP’s ecotourism development. Whereas the overall
dissatisfied people were rather negative about the overall quality of tourism development
(M=5.2), the economic dissatisfied

11
Female respondents were more satisfied than male respondents. This might be explained by
the fact that some local (mainly ethnic) females, who were not used to earn money, started
small businesses, such as the selling of handicrafts, cultural shows, and clothes manufacturing.

12
On average, people living for a long time in the area were most dissatisfied, whereas people
with a short residence were most satisfied. As length of residence is correlated with age
(Pearson rho .58***), we suggest that older have experienced more changes and are
lessinvolved in ecotourism activities and therefore were not so easily impressed by the
impacts of ecotourism. The three satisfaction clusters appeared to be statistically insignificant
for both types of respondents and dependency level of villages. It seemed that NSP-officials,
responsible for implementing the co-management approach and management plan, more often
belong to the category ‘satisfied people’ than local residents. Inhabitants of villages with a
major and minor resource dependency seemed to be more satisfied than inhabitants from
villages with a moderate dependency. Communities with a moderate resource dependency
had a high awareness, but a much lower involvement, which might cause more dissatisfaction
due to higher expectations. Besides, local people in these villages had the longest period of
residence, which was negatively correlated with satisfaction. Villages with a major resource
dependency .
ECOTOURISM IN LAWACHARA NATIONAL PARK 17 are most familiar with the NSP-
project and are most often involved in ecotourism activities. Finally, most of the interviewed
people in the communities with a minor resource dependency level belong to the satisfied
people; although they do notbenefit directly, they do not experience disadvantages as well.
Conclusion
Since early 2000, co-management initiatives have been developed for some of the protected
areas in Bangladesh to enhance both biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction. The
‘Nishorgo Support Project’ was developed to strengthen protected area management by
stimulating active local participation in forest resource management. The development of
ecotourism was one of the focal areas. For co-management to be effective, local communities
and local voices should be fullyacknowledged (Stronza & Gordillo, 2008). Perceptions of key
stakeholders on ecotourism impacts offer important information for planning and sustainable
management (Elands & Van Marwijk, 2012). This research examined these local views and
voices by studying the perceptions of the social, environmental, economic and institutional
impacts of ecotourism in Lawachara National Park in Bangladesh. Almost all respondents
were able to assess the social, environmental, economic impacts. A clustering of respondents
based on the perceived contributions ecotourism can make to conservation and development
revealed three groups: satisfied people; economic dissatisfied; and overall dissatisfied people.
Awareness of National Park policies, being involved in ecotourism, in terms of activities or
jobs, gender and length of residence were found to be the major factors influencing
satisfaction levels. These results are consistent with other studies (Cottrell & Raadik-Cottrell,
2012; Rao et al., 2003; Lai & Nepal, 2006) that indicate that communities are heterogeneous
in relation to the perceived ecotourism impacts and that satisfaction levels are correlated with

13
involvement in ecotourism activities (Abdollahzadeh & Sharifzadeh, 2012). Similarly, this
research confirms that gender differences in perceptions are important with reference to
development options (Abdollahzadeh & Sharifzadeh, 2012; Rao et al., 2003). The assessment
of the institutional impact, which measured the co-management achievements, proved to be
difficult. Respondents either ‘did not know’, were unable to assess the institutional aspect of
sustainability or might have been reluctant to reveal their true feelings. This substantiates the
need for improved communication between resources managers and local communities
(Cottrell & Raadik-Cottrell, 2012) and the need to formulate an ecotourism management plan
at LNP which guides all the activities related to tourism in an integrated and systematic way
(see also Ashan, 2007). It should also have a stronger focus on the way ecotourism can be
beneficial to those who still live in poverty. As Leikam, Otis, Raymond, Sielken, and
Sweeney (2004) argue, it socially and politically BIRGIT ELANDS, MD. WASIUL ISLAM,
RENÉ VAN DER DUIM unacceptable to exclude local stakeholders living next to or within a
protected area without providing them with viable economic alternatives, nor is it acceptable
to exclude them from the decision making processes. In both respect in LNP there is still a lot
of work to do.Ecotourism still generates only limited benefits to only limited numbers of local
people. Results showed that about half of the local respondents were not aware of the co-
management approach even at the final stage of the NSP. Awareness of the new rules of game
is a crucial precondition for local participation in co-management schemes. Involvement of
stakeholders in co-management requires transferring of information to and good
communication with those who should be involved. This necessitates human resource
development programs to build up the necessary capacity to the locals and officials to develop
and promote co-management at LNP. Being the custodian of LNP, the Forest Department
should be committed more to work in close collaboration with the local community people as
well as other relevant actors to address the tourism-conservation-development nexus in
Bangladesh.

References
Abdollahzahed, G.,Sharifzadeh, A. (2012). Rural resident’s perceptions toward
tourism development: a study from Iran. International Journal of Tourism
Research. DOI: 10.1002/jtr. 1906.
Ahebwa, M.W. (2012).Tourism, Livelihoods and Biodiversity Conservation. An
Assessment of Tourism Related Policy Interventions at Bwindi Impenetrable
National Park (BINP), Uganda. PhD thesis.Wageningen: Wageningen
University.
Ahebwa, M.W., Van der Duim, V.R., Sandbrook, C.G. (2012).Private-Community
partnerships: investigating a new approach to conservation and development

14
in Uganda. Journal of Conservation and Society, 10(4), 305-317.
Ahsan, M.M. (2007). Perceptions of tourism by indigenous communities living in and
adjoining Lawachara National Park. In J. Fox, J.R. Bushley, S. Dutt, & S.A. Quazi
(Eds.), Making conservation work: linking rural livelihood and protected area
management in Bangladesh (pp. 131-148). Honolulu: East-West Centre.
Alkan, H., Korkmaz, M., Tolunay, A. (2009).Assessment of primary factors causing
positive or negative local perceptions on protected areas. Journal of
Environmental Engineering and Landscape management, 17(1), 20-27.
Bramwell, B., Lane, B. (Eds.) (2000).Tourism Collaboration and Partnerships: Politics,
Practice and Sustainability. Clevedon: Channel View.
Choi, H.C., Sirakaya, E. (2006). Sustainability indicators for managing community
tourism. Tourism Management, 27, 1274–1289.
Cottrell, S.P., Vaske, J.J., Shen, F., Ritter, P. (2007). Resident Perceptions of
Sustainable Tourism in Chongdugou, China. Society & Natural Resources, 20,
ECOTOURISM IN LAWACHARA NATIONAL PARK 19
511-525.
Cottrell, S.P., Raadik, J. (2008). Socio-cultural benefits of PAN Parks at Bieszscady
National Park, Poland. Matkailututkimus, Finnish Journal of Tourism Research,
1, 56-68.
Cottrell, S.,& Raadik-Cottrell, J. (2012). The Protected Area Network of Parks:
monitoring the balance between nature conservation and sustainable
tourism. In K.S. Bricker, R. Black, &S. Cottrell (Eds.),Sustainable Tourism & The
Millennium Development Goals: Effecting Positive Change (pp. 307-325)
Burlington, USA : Jones & Bartlett Learning, LLC, an Ascend Learning
Company.
DeCosse, P.J. (2006). The Role of Alternative Income Generation (AIG) Activities in
Nishorgo's Strategy for Conservation of Protected Areas. USAID Contract no.:
388-C-00-03-00050-00, Dhaka: Nishorgo Support Project.
Elands, B.H.M., & Van Marwijk, R.B.M. (2012). Policy and management for forest and
nature based recreation and tourism. Forest Policy and Economics, 19, 1-3.
Fisher, H., Magginis, S., Jackson, W., Barrow, E., & Jeanrenaud, S. (2008). Linking
conservation and poverty reduction: Landscape, people and power. Gland:
IUCN.
FSP (Forestry Sector Project) (2000). First Five Year Management Plan for
Lawachara National Park. Vol.1: Management Plan. Dhaka: Forest
Department, Ministry of Environment and Forests.
Holladay, P.J.,& Ormsby, A.A. (2011). A comparative study of local perceptions of

15
ecotourism and conservation at Five Blues Lake National Park, Belize. Journal
of Ecotourism, 10,2, 118-134.
Hossain, M.S. (2007). Report on Socio-Economic Field Surveys at Nishorgo Pilot Sites.
Dhaka: Nishorgo Support Project.
Kothari, A., Singh, N., & Saloni, S. (Eds.) (1996). People and protected areas: Towards
participatory conservation in India.New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Kuvan, Y.,& Akan, P. (2012). Conflict and agreement in stakeholder attitudes:
residents’ and hotel managers’ views on tourism impacts and forest-related
tourism development. Journal of Sustainable Development, 20(4),571-584.
Lai, P., & Nepal, S. (2006). Local perspectives on ecotourism development in
Tawushan Nature reserve, Taiwan, Tourism Management, 27(6), 1117-1129.
Lane, M.B. (2001). Affirming new directions in planning theory: Co-management of
protected areas. Society and Natural Resources,14, 657–671.
Leikam, G., Otis, S., Raymond, T., Sielken, N., & Sweeney, T. (2004). Evaluation of the
Belize Audubon Society Co-Management Project at Crooked Tree Wildlife
Sanctuary and Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary Student Project. Ann
Arbor; University of Michigan.
Mollah, A.R.,& Kunda, D.K. (2004). Site Level Appraisal for Protected Area Co-
Management: Lawachara National Park. Prepared for International Resources

16