Effects of Ecotourism on Forest Loss in the Himalayan Biodiversity Hotspot Based on Counterfactual Analyses

Ecotourism is developing rapidly in biodiversity hotspots worldwide, but there is limited and mixed empirical evidence that ecotourism achieves positive biodiversity outcomes. We assessed whether ecotourism influenced forest loss rates and trajectories from 2000 to 2017 in Himalayan temperate forests. We compared forest loss in 15 ecotourism hubs with nonecotourism areas in 4 Himalayan countries. We used matching statistics to control for local-level determinants of forest loss, for example, population density, market access, and topography. None of the ecotourism hubs was free of forest loss, and we found limited evidence that forest-loss trajectories in ecotourism hubs were different from those in nonecotourism areas. In Nepal and Bhutan, differences in forest loss rates between ecotourism hubs and matched nonecotourism areas did not differ significantly, and the magnitude of the estimated effect was small. In India, where overall forest loss rates were the lowest of any country in our analysis, forest loss rates were higher in ecotourism hubs than in matched nonecotourism areas. In contrast,in China, where overall forest loss rates were highest, forest loss rates were lower in ecotourism hubs than where there was no ecotourism. Our results suggest that the success of ecotourism as a forest conservation strategy, as it is currently practiced in the Himalaya, is context dependent. In a region with high deforestation pressures, ecotourism may be a relatively environmentally friendly form of economic development relative to other development strategies. However, ecotourism may stimulate forest loss in regions where deforestation rates are low

Transhumance, livestock mobility and mutual benefits between crop and livestock production

Grazing-based livestock production, named pastoralism, is classified into nomadism, transhumance and agro-pastoralism. Transhumance is characterised by the seasonal and recurring movement of livestock whereby seasonal grazing areas and routes for livestock movement are fixed. All grazing based livestock production systems including transhumance are constrained globally for a variety of reasons. The major threats to the system are globalisation, nationalisation or privatisation of rangelands, national parks and community forestry policies restricting free grazing and shortage of labour. The collapse or decline of such social-ecological systems (SESs), which have existed for over 1000s years, often induces adverse impacts on societies and ecosystems. Here we review the literature on transhumance, and discuss reasons for transhumance, and the associated advantages and disadvantages of livestock movement in transhumance. Our review also focuses on how the integration of crop and livestock production in transhumance derives mutual benefits. The review indicates that the seasonal movement of livestock is an ecological necessity in areas with harsh climates and low pasture production. Transhumance is also a herders’ adaptive management to adjust to variable grazing resources and environmental conditions. The disadvantages of seasonal movement of livestock such as greater herding labour required and expenditure of more energy for livestock, are far outweighed by the ecological advantages. Some of these are: to minimise grazing competition and to protect rangeland pastures from being overgrazed. Our review also indicates that the integration of crop and livestock production derives mutual benefits and contributes for their enhanced sustainability