Natural World Heritage sites and associated issues

Golden Mountains of AltaiRussia

Outline

• Three spots of Altai Republic in Southern Siberia were included in the World Heritage List in 1998.

• Research question: does increased visitation have positive or negative impact on Altai reserves?

• Method: literature review.• Main conclusion: increasing tourist visitation does

harm to Altai reserves because of divergence between Western concept of ecotourism and local ecotourism practice.

Background. Territory. • 3 separate areas of Altai Republic are

inscribed in the World Heritage List: - Altaisky Zapovednik and a buffer zone

around Lake Teletskoye; - Katunsky Zapovednik and a buffer

zone around Mount Belukha; - the Ukok Quiet Zone on the Ukok

plateau. • The total area covers 1,611,457 ha. • Altai Republic has borders with China,

Mongolia and Kazakhstan• Endangered animal species such as

snow leopard

Background. Socio-economic dimension.

• WWF and UNDP have included parts of the Altay kray and Altay Republic in their definition of the Altay-Sayan Ecoregion for purposes of conservation and development projects partially funded by the GEF of the World Bank.

• Indigenous people: tribal-Altaic groups such as the Telengit of the Chu River area, who number only several thousand in population.

• The local economy is heavily dependent on mining and agriculture.

• Rural people now impoverished include both ethnic Slavic and non-Slavic indigenous people.

Background. Tourism in Altai Republic.

• Regional government is eager to develop tourism, marketing the Altay as ‘the Switzerland of Asia’.

• The number of tourists: - In 2009 – 1.05 mln (5,834 foreigners) - in 2010 - 1.2 mln (9,398 foreigners);• International travelers are stopped by distance,

problems with internal travel, and visa issues.• Main tourist activities: fishing, hunting, hiking,

white water rafting, skiing, heli-tours.

Literature reviewBraden K. & Prudnikova N. (2008). The Challenge of Ecotourism Development in the Altai Region of Russia. Tourism Geographies: An International Journal of Tourism Space, Place and Environment, 1-21.Problem: Western supranational organizations (UNESCO, WWF) provide one set of expectations, rhetoric and definitions that do not always match internal Russian concepts of nature tourism. Centres of political and financial power - Moscow and St Petersburg - act as portals for Western-based development plans but may be challenged to serve local stakeholders or nature conservation goals in the peripheral Altay.

Literature review (cont.)

Research question: what is the real, on-the-ground understanding of an ecologically sustainable tourism ethic for the Altai?Method: A qualitative research (set of interviews with locals, authorities and private tourist firms, analyze of official data).Conclusion: Demand creates supply. The question may truly be, not what is the Russian understanding of ecotourism, but who are the tourists and how do they conduct themselves?

Literature review (cont.)

Framework for centre–periphery relations in Altay ecotourism interests

Literature review (cont.)

Western concept• Ecotourism should provide

sustainable benefits to nature conservation.

• It should provide sustainable benefits to local communities.

• Western eco-tourists tended to be older, better educated and with a higher income than mass tourism clients

Russian reality• Illegal hunting tours for reach and

powerful tourists. Hunting fees are not returned for sustainable wildlife conservation.

• Many tourist companies are owned by urbanites in distant cities. Locals don't benefit from tourism.

• Russians eco-tourists are young people with low income; people with higher incomes would choose resorts or have access to travel internationally.

Analysis. Tourism issues.

• Increased frequency of forest fires; • Accumulation of garbage and waste on the banks

of rivers and lakes; • With licenses for trophy animals officially costing

$US20–100, but tour companies charging $US1,500–2,000 per trophy – corruption.

• The issue of eco-tourist norms in Russia may depend on the Russian clients themselves as much as attracting more foreign visitors.

Conclusion

• Background was analyzed, the literature was reviewed.

• Research question is answered: increased visitation have negative impact on Altai reserves.

• Recommendations for future investigations: what measures should be done to change the situation?

THANK YOU!