The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Wildlife Viewing Preferences of Visitors to Protected Areas in South Africa: Implications for the Role of Ecotourism in Conservation
Abstract
Ecotourism has a potentially vital role to play in conservation by generating economic incentives for nature conservation. However, some authors contend that this potential may be limited by narrow viewing preferences among visitors to protected areas, suggesting that most tourists are primarily interested in seeing charismatic mega-fauna largely confined to government or privately-owned parks. We assessed viewing preferences among tourists at four protected areas in South Africa to test the validity of this contention. Mega-herbivores and large carnivores were the most popular species, particularly among first-time and overseas visitors, but African visitors and experienced wildlife viewers were more interested in bird and plant diversity, scenery, and rarer, less easily-observed and/or less high-profile mammals. Several of these favored species are extinction prone and often absent from wildlife areas due to sensitivity to human encroachment and competition with more abundant species. Hence, ecotourism may provide incentives for the conservation of intact guilds, and management for ecotourism may align more closely with biodiversity conservation objectives than suggested by critics. This potential could be enhanced by diversification of tour operator advertising to feature aspects of biodiversity other than the ‘big five’. Nonetheless, charismatic mega-fauna have a vital flagship role by attracting most overseas and first-time visitors to protected areas.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Collapse of the world’s largest herbivores
Ripple, W. J., Newsome, T. M., Wolf, C., Dirzo, R., Everatt, K. T., Galetti, M., Hayward, M. W., Kerley, G. I. H., Levi, T., Lindsey, P. A., et al. (2015) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.1400103 · Cited by 1,229
Self-citationEcotourism and the development of indigenous communities: The good, the bad, and the ugly
Coria, J., & Calfucura, E. (2012) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.10.024 · Cited by 419
Humans and Scavengers: The Evolution of Interactions and Ecosystem Services
Moleón, M., Sánchez-Zapata, J. A., Margalida, A., Carrete, M., Owen-Smith, N., & Donázar, J. A. (2014) · BioScience · doi:10.1093/biosci/biu034 · Cited by 257
Lion hunting behaviour and vegetation structure in an African savanna
Loarie, S. R., Tambling, C. J., & Asner, G. P. (2013) · Animal Behaviour · doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2013.01.018 · Cited by 123
The impact of land reform on the status of large carnivores in Zimbabwe
Williams, S. T., Williams, K. S., Joubert, C. J., & Hill, R. A. (2016) · PeerJ · doi:10.7717/peerj.1537 · Cited by 28
“They can also bring in large revenues through tourism (Barnes, 2001; Lindsey et al., 2007) and hunting (Jorge et al.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Lindsey, P. A., Alexander, R., Mills, M. G. L., Romañach, S., & Woodroffe, R.
- Venue
- Journal of Ecotourism
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2007-05
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 19-33
- ISSN
- 1472-4049 (ISSN-L)
- 1747-7638
- OpenAlex
- W1982687149
- Cited by
- 287
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 16.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Wildlife Viewing Preferences of Visitors to Protected Areas in South Africa: Implications for the Role of Ecotourism in Conservation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2167/joe133.0
- The paper
- Lindsey, P. A., Alexander, R., Mills, M. G. L., Romañach, S., & Woodroffe, R. (2007). Wildlife Viewing Preferences of Visitors to Protected Areas in South Africa: Implications for the Role of Ecotourism in Conservation. Journal of Ecotourism. https://doi.org/10.2167/joe133.0
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.