Weaknesses of Carrying Capacity
The main criticism of carrying capacity is that is fundamentally flawed conceptually and practically. Conceptually, the notion of an inherent carrying capacity assumes a stable and predictable world, a "J-shaped" curve in the relationship between use level and impact, and techno-scientific view of what are essential value judgments. On the practical level, it is difficult to calculate a maximum number of visitors because this is also dependent on other factors like the way in which the tourists behave ‘a large group of bird Watchers moving through a landscape will have a different impact compared to a similar sized group of school children.’ In the case of natural heritage like national parks, visitor impacts change with seasons. What is important is the acceptability or appropriateness of these impacts, an issue that is largely dependent on social and cultural value systems with science having an input.
UNESCO (the organization responsible for administrating the World Heritage list) has expressed a concern that the use of Carrying capacity can give the impression that a site is better protected than it actually is, it points out that although the whole site may be below carrying capacity part of the site may still be crowded.
In the context of tourism in wildlife sanctuaries Singh (2013) writes, ‘carrying capacity’ is a concept to be thought about when we intend for ‘sustainable versus full harvest/utilization of resource for a purpose’. In wildlife sanctuaries ‘full utilization of infrastructure or resource for tourism’ is a remote mandate, unthinkable. Hence, in stead of ‘carrying capacity’ it is recommended to have a set of guidelines for regulating tourism without much disturbing the wildlife. That will perhaps be sustainable for both wildlife conservation and tourism industry.
Read more about this topic: Tourism Carrying Capacity
Famous quotes containing the words weaknesses of, weaknesses, carrying and/or capacity:
“One of the baffling things about life is that the purposes of institutions may be ideal, while their administration, dependent upon the faults and weaknesses of human beings, may be bad.”
—Mary Barnett Gilson (1877–?)
“One of the baffling things about life is that the purposes of institutions may be ideal, while their administration, dependent upon the faults and weaknesses of human beings, may be bad.”
—Mary Barnett Gilson (1877–?)
“Dandyism is the last flicker of heroism in decadent ages.... Dandyism is a setting sun; like the declining star, it is magnificent, without heat and full of melancholy. But alas! the rising tide of democracy, which spreads everywhere and reduces everything to the same level, is daily carrying away these last champions of human pride, and submerging, in the waters of oblivion, the last traces of these remarkable myrmidons.”
—Charles Baudelaire (1821–1867)
“The terrifying message of gay liberation is that men are capable of loving their brothers. It should be sweet news to every woman in the world, for, if the capacity of men to love whom they have been taught to treat as competitors and enemies can transcend their education, the world can begin to heal.”
—Jane Rule (b. 1931)