Provide Details of resource rights regime where relevant
tourism activities are encouraged inside the protected areas while accommodation is encouraged outside the areas in order to reduce environmental impact.
Local people (e.g., individuals, communities, co-operatives)
National external (individual, groups. e.g., hunters, anglers, photographers, tourists)
International external (individual, groups. e.g., hunters, anglers, photographers, tourists)
If more than one box ticked, please provide more details
the tourism is community based, and the service provided is to tourists (from China or abroad).
Is the use part of a strategy to generate conservation incentives, to finance conservation, or to improve tolerance/stewardship?
Unknown/not recorded
Is there evidence that the use is affecting the conservation status of the species? HIDE
Unknown/not recorded
Is there evidence that the use is affecting natural selection?
Unknown/not recorded
Is there evidence that the use is affecting poaching of illegal wildlife trade?
Unknown/not reported
Is there any evidence that this use of the species is having a knock-on effect on the status of non-target species
Yes, it is having a negative effect (e.g., prey depletion, stress, disrupted breeding, movement, sleeping, feeding patterns)
Yes, negative (e.g., it destroys/ degrades it due to over-use)
Yes, considered unsustainable
Additional Details (if available)
At the same time, CBET has reduced fuelwood collection and timber forest and bamboo shoot harvesting, but the treatment effect is not significant. This has ultimately led to a significant increase in wild plant collection.
Additional Details (if available)
With respect to eco- logical impacts, CBET has significantly raised households’ conservation attitudes, but has also increased natural resource extraction, especially at high altitudes.
At high altitudes, it has significantly in- creased household income and wellbeing and simultaneously improved the biodiversity conservation attitude. However, it has also led to sig- nificantly increased collection of fuelwood and wild plants as well as timber forest and bamboo shoot harvesting, thereby generating a sig- nificantly negative ecological impact. In low-altitude areas, CBET has not significantly increased household income, but it has improved in- dividual well-being and conservation attitudes. At the same time, CBET has reduced fuelwood collection and timber forest and bamboo shoot harvesting.
Details of assessment carried out
With respect to eco- logical impacts, CBET has significantly raised households’ conservation attitudes, but has also increased natural resource extraction, especially at high altitudes.
At high altitudes, it has significantly in- creased household income and wellbeing and simultaneously improved the biodiversity conservation attitude. However, it has also led to sig- nificantly increased collection of fuelwood and wild plants as well as timber forest and bamboo shoot harvesting, thereby generating a sig- nificantly negative ecological impact. In low-altitude areas, CBET has not significantly increased household income, but it has improved in- dividual well-being and conservation attitudes. At the same time, CBET has reduced fuelwood collection and timber
Social effects in high-altitude areas are significant, but it has also produced significant negative ecological effects. By contrast, CBET in low-altitude areas has achieved positive social effects without causing severe negative ecological impacts.
Has a valuation of financial flows from this use at the site/national/international level been recorded
CBET significantly increases household income in high- altitude areas, promotes infrastructure construction, improves trans- portation, and boosts local employment opportunities.
Regardless of the altitude, CBET significantly improves households’ biodiversity con- servation attitude
Has any assessment of socio-economic sustainability been recorded
Yes, considered sustainable
Details of assessment
The results show that CBET (Community-Based Ecotourism) has achieved desirable social outcomes, significantly increasing local households' income and well-being, especially for those at high altitudes.
Has the use of the species been recorded as resulting in changes to human health in this record?
Unknown/not recorded
Has the species in use been noted as being of particular disease risk to humans?
Unknown/not recorded
Has the use of the species resulted in changes to animal welfare in this record?
Unknown/not recorded
Are there particular practices which have increased the risk to human or animal health or welfare in the use of this species?
Unknown/not recorded
Does the use of this species increase susceptibility to pathogen spread?
Unknown/not recorded
Unknown/not recorded
Strong community governance/institutions/rights for wildlife management
Present
Supportive policy and legislative framework
Absent
Adequate capacity to implement and enforce governance arrangements
Absent
Good alignment of legal protections with local cultural values and traditional
Absent
Support from NGOs
Absent
Support from Government
Absent
High financial returns from use
Present
Abundant population of target species
Absent
Biological characteristics of target species
Absent
Capacity building of community
Absent
Establishment and implementation of species and/or area management plan
Absent
Effective private sector approach engagement through certification
Ma B, Yin R, Zheng J, Wen Y, Hou Y. Estimating the social and ecological impact of community-based ecotourism in giant panda habitats. J Environ Manage. 2019 Nov 15;250:109506. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109506.
Threats/pressures impacting the species at the scale of this record