Since its introduction into mainstream society two decades ago, ecotourism has become an international phenomenon. Claimed by its proponents to endorse ecologically, socially, and economically sustainable travel to natural areas, ecotourism is in many ways the conceptual fusion of conservation and development. Yet, despite the optimism often associated with the phenomenon, the question of the degree to which it actually contributes to development, however defined, has become a controversial issue. Theorists and practitioners hold a variety of opinions of ecotourism, ranging from cautious optimism (Honey 2008; Ross & Wall 1999) to outright rejection (Carrier & Macleod 2005; Wheeller 2003). Unfortunately, research shows that the poorest of the poor generally bear the burden of ecotourism initiatives without receiving an equitable share of the associated benefits (Stem et al. 2003; Western & Wright 1994). In response, a sustainable livelihoods approach is proposed as a practical means of understanding the complex livelihood strategies employed by indigenous populations. While tourism research has often focused on the economic impacts of ecotourism initiatives, current livelihoods discourse suggests that the poor draw on a wide range of assets and incorporate a variety of livelihood strategies, in their pursuit of economic gain (Ashley 2002; Ashley et al. 2001; Bebbington 1999; Bennett et al. 1999; Zoomers 1999). This discourse is especially timely for pastoral populations living adjacent to protected areas in Kenya. Recent changes in government policy have promoted the subdivision of land for private ownership (Homewood et al. 2009; Leserogol 2005; Lamprey & Reid 2004), an unexpected transformation that has led to the adoption of ecotourism as a sustainable livelihood strategy. Informed by development theory, tourism theory, and property rights theory, the purpose of this research was to examine the effect of different land tenure regimes on the distribution of benefits accrued from various ecotourism initiatives, and how those benefits impact the livelihoods of the pastoral Maasai living on the periphery of the Maasai Mara National Reserve. Culturally-appropriate, participatory research methods were combined with the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework to document an indigenous perspective on livelihood sustainability. By adapting the conceptual framework to include cultural and historical capital, it served as a lens for viewing and identifying the culturally embedded meaning associated with the recent privatisation of Maasai property. These changes include: significant increases in income generated from ecotourism initiatives, an increased desire to cultivate land, an enhanced capacity for participating in the decision-making process, and greater diversification in local livelihood strategies. However, the empirical evidence also demonstrated that changing property regimes have led to the increased sedentarisation of these semi-nomadic people, resulting in modifications to their pastoral culture, reductions in their herd sizes, and the occasional obstruction of wildlife migratory patterns through the construction of permanent fences.

Since its introduction into mainstream society two decades ago, ecotourism has become an international phenomenon. Claimed by its proponents to endorse ecologically, socially, and economically sustainable travel to natural areas, ecotourism is in many ways the conceptual fusion of conservation and development. Yet, despite the optimism often associated with the phenomenon, the question of the degree to which it actually contributes to development, however defined, has become a controversial issue. Theorists and practitioners hold a variety of opinions of ecotourism, ranging from cautious optimism (Honey 2008; Ross & Wall 1999) to outright rejection (Carrier & Macleod 2005; Wheeller 2003). Unfortunately, research shows that the poorest of the poor generally bear the burden of ecotourism initiatives without receiving an equitable share of the associated benefits (Stem et al. 2003; Western & Wright 1994). In response, a sustainable livelihoods approach is proposed as a practical means of understanding the complex livelihood strategies employed by indigenous populations. While tourism research has often focused on the economic impacts of ecotourism initiatives, current livelihoods discourse suggests that the poor draw on a wide range of assets and incorporate a variety of livelihood strategies, in their pursuit of economic gain (Ashley 2002; Ashley et al. 2001; Bebbington 1999; Bennett et al. 1999; Zoomers 1999). This discourse is especially timely for pastoral populations living adjacent to protected areas in Kenya. Recent changes in government policy have promoted the subdivision of land for private ownership (Homewood et al. 2009; Leserogol 2005; Lamprey & Reid 2004), an unexpected transformation that has led to the adoption of ecotourism as a sustainable livelihood strategy. Informed by development theory, tourism theory, and property rights theory, the purpose of this research was to examine the effect of different land tenure regimes on the distribution of benefits accrued from various ecotourism initiatives, and how those benefits impact the livelihoods of the pastoral Maasai living on the periphery of the Maasai Mara National Reserve. Culturally-appropriate, participatory research methods were combined with the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework to document an indigenous perspective on livelihood sustainability. By adapting the conceptual framework to include cultural and historical capital, it served as a lens for viewing and identifying the culturally embedded meaning associated with the recent privatisation of Maasai property. These changes include: significant increases in income generated from ecotourism initiatives, an increased desire to cultivate land, an enhanced capacity for participating in the decision-making process, and greater diversification in local livelihood strategies. However, the empirical evidence also demonstrated that changing property regimes have led to the increased sedentarisation of these semi-nomadic people, resulting in modifications to their pastoral culture, reductions in their herd sizes, and the occasional obstruction of wildlife migratory patterns through the construction of permanent fences.

Ecotourism is a popular tool for biodiversity conservation and local community development. It has long been argued that the depth of community involvement and support is imperative in creating effective and sustainable ecotourism programs, although widespread community involvement is rarely achieved in practice. Local perceptions of the benefits and impacts of ecotourism development and held values for the resources utilized in ecotourism activities may influence community support and decisions to be involved; however, little is understood as to why such perceptions exist. This research highlights community perceptions of ecotourism and held values for sea turtles and explains the emergence of these perceptions within two villages on the Caribbean island of St. Kitts. Data were collected through face-to-face community surveys, key-informant interviews, and participant observation during the summer of 2012. The field data revealed that community members did not perceive ecotourism to be widely beneficial, but instead viewed the government, people who work in the tourism industry, and tourists themselves to benefit from ecotourism practices. Further, community members perceived ecotourism as negatively affecting poor people, people who do not work in the tourism industry, and the environment. These perceptions of who or what is affected by ecotourism development were traced back through centuries of political-ecological processes on St. Kitts that have mediated local people’s relationship with their land and resources, as well as their relationships with each other. The results of this research suggest a focus on the role of ecotourism in amending the persistent marginalization of local people from their resources by applying a participatory development approach to ecotourism development through collaboration with existing community groups and social networks.

The ecotourism industry is experiencing increasing popularity as the demand grows for tourism that is environmentally sensitive, informative, and beneficial for local communities. For over a decade, Lao PDR, an underdeveloped country, has been promoting its 20 National Protected Areas as ecotourism destinations. These ecotourism projects are positioned as tools for protecting natural resources and reducing poverty, and are generating hope for the creation of local sustainable development. At this point in time, however, the Lao government lacks effective strategies for ensuring their long term success. This thesis was designed to address this concern by analysing the potential for one of these projects, Xe Pian ecotourism, to contribute to local sustainable development. The current outcomes of the Xe Pian ecotourism project were analysed and input was sought from all stakeholders concerning ideas for desirable strategies. Kiet Ngong village, located inside the Xe Pian NPA, Lao PDR, was selected for case study. Data was gathered by employing mostly quantitative methods consisting of semi-structured interviews, informal and formal interviews, private walks and observation, and questionnaire surveys. The findings illustrated that ecotourism in Kiet Ngong has impacted local livelihoods and other environmental, economic, social, and cultural factors in both positive and negative ways. However, the positive effects of Xe Pian ecotourism were found to be more significant than the negative effects. Importantly, Kiet Ngong residents expressed optimism about the future of ecotourism and have claimed that any negative consequences cannot discourage their desire for continuing ecotourism development. This research also revealed that the stakeholders involved in the project are able to offer a variety of strategies for resolving problems that have arisen along the way. Results from this study identified three main points that need to be addressed in order to maintain Xe Pian ecotourism, namely the promotion of economic and political empowerment of the local population, the development of external and internal regulations, and the adoption of a community-based ecotourism approach. Further recommendations are offered for the policy planners of both the government and the project‘s administrative bodies, as well as for the residents of Kiet Ngong. These are followed by additional suggestions for further study.