Assessing The Tourism Carrying Capacity of The LPPCHEA

Assessing the Tourism Carrying
Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Las Pias Paraaque Critical Habitat Ecotourism Area
Aaron Julius M. Lecciones, UAP, MSc
PLAN 222 Dr Candido Cabrido, Jr
Introduction
Characteristics of LPPCHEA
Defining Tourism Carrying Capacity
Methodology for Carrying Capacity Assessment
Results and Discussion
Conclusion
Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of

the LPPCHEA
Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the

LPPCHEA
INTRODUCTION
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Background and Rationale
Positive current account balance
Priority development areas
Highest growth potential for job generation
Provides 10% of national employment
Drives private and foreign investment in infrastructure
NEDA, 2011. Philippine Development Plan 2011-2016, Pasig City: National Economic and Development Authority.
DOT, 2011. Philippines Tourism Overview and Directions 2011-2016, Manila: Department of Tourism
Tourism is seen as an important contributor to the Philippine

economy (DOT, 2011; NEDA, 2011).
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Introduction
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Introduction
PhP186.15B or US$4.4B worth of receipts in 2014 (2014 GDP: PhP2.196T)
Expected US$6B in 2015
PhP4,149.29
Per tourist
10.40
nights on
average
PhP43,152
Spent per
trip
4.68M
Foreign tourist
arrivals (2014)
9.56% annual increase
27.91M
domestic
tourists (2014)
iECONOMICS, 2015. Philippines Gross National Product. Internet. Online. Available: http://ieconomics.com/philippines-gross-national-product-forecast. Accessed: 9 May, 2015.
DOT, 2014. PH tourism registers 9.56% growth; tourism receipts up by 15.1%. [Online]
Available at: http://www.gov.ph/2014/02/13/ph-tourism-registers-9-56-growth-tourism-receipts-up-by-15-1/ [Accessed 8 May 2015]
Tourism by numbers (DOT, 2011; DOT, 2014; iECONOMICS, 2015):
Tourists visit the country for its natural beauty, culture, adventure,
medical, or similar recreation
Tourists shop for local crafts and delicacies, sightsee, go on beach
holidays, scuba dive, and engage in various cultural, nature and
adventure experiences.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Introduction
critical habitats and sensitive or

fragile environments such as
riparian areas, coral reefs, lakes,
small island, and other foreshore
and wetland areas
Island geography
a predominance of tourism
sites are based primarily on the
natural environment
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Introduction
Ecotourism sites are primarily natural sites and can include a component of
cultural and adventure activities
mass tourism is based mostly on the 3S Sea, Sand, and Sun
With the varied activities conducted on these tourism sites, the

increase in tourists, and the predominantly fragile status of tourism
sites in the country, differing land use regimes put pressure on a
shared ecosystem
Lopez, H. G. & Baez, H. H. S., 2010. Tourism Theory and Practice, Tunja: Pedagogical and Technological University of Colombia.
Tourism sites are both home to commercial tourism activities and

indigenous flora and fauna
Commercial tourism activities include mass tourism and ecotourism
activities (Lopez & Baez, 2010).
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Introduction
[] to sound and manageable environmental practices in

the development and promotion of tourist destinations as
well as enhancement of tourism products and services.
Furthermore, tourism development must be socially and
environmentally sustainable and economically viable and inclusive.
The Midterm Philippine Development Plan (2011, p. 87) states that

tourism in the country must adhere
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Introduction

Exacerbated in areas of rapid growth and poverty (Alister & Geoffrey, 1982).
Overuse in tourism areas can deteriorate land resources

overcrowding or congestion can result in resource damage and
degradation (IUCN, 1996).
The gradual shift of tourism from a Fordist to Post-Fordist paradigm
(Arva & Deli-Gray, 2011) witnessed in developed countries has not
been the case in many developing countries like the Philippines.
Alister, M. & Geoffrey, W., 1982. Tourism: economic, physical, and social impacts, London: Longman
IUCN, 1996. Tourism, ecotourism, and protected areas: Assessment, monitoring and management techniques. [Online] Available at:
https://portals.iucn.org/library/efiles/html/Tourism/section9.html [Accessed 2 May 2015]
Arva, L. & Deli-Gray, Z., 2011. New Types of Tourism and Tourism Marketing in the Post-industrial World. Applied Studies in Agribusiness and Commerce, Volume 5, pp. 33-37.
Damage to the environment by tourism is well documented
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Introduction
10
Burns, P. M. & Holden, A., 1995. Tourism: A New Perspective. 1st ed. New York: Prentice Hall.
Despite the push by industry and government to develop greener

forms of tourism from mass tourism modern forms of tourism are
not fully capable of generating less impact on tourism environments
(Burns and Holden, 1995).
Tourism Carrying Capacity Assessments is a way to determine the
threshold of environments to absorb the impact of tourism activities
and is a means towards ensuring a secured future growth for the
tourism sector.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Introduction
11
The study will not however discuss the dynamics of varying limits to ecological
thresholds that might be experienced in the study area nor its implication on
policy and management than have a concomitant effect on overall carrying
capacity.
DENR, 2012. Saving the Last Coastal Frontier: Framework Plan for the Coastal Lagoon of Las Pinas and Paranaque. Quezon City: Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
The Las Pias Paraaque Critical Habitat Ecotourism Area or

LPPCHEA is one of many tourism sites that is both a tourism area and
a critical habitat for several species of migratory birds (DENR, 2012).
This study aims to measure the tourism carrying capacity of selected
tourism activities in LPPCHEA.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Introduction
12

LPPCHEA
CHARACTERISTICS
OF LPPCHEA
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
13
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
14
Located between 14.481158, 120.971586 and

14.502763, 120.988237 the southwest
portion of Metro Manila.
bounded by Pasay City on the northeast; by
Bacoor, Cavite on the southwest; and Manila
Bay on the west.
Straddling along the Manila- Cavite Coastal
Road
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
15
Long Island is at the southwest portion (Las

Pias City)
Freedom Island is at the northeast part
(Paraaque City)
covers approximately one hundred seventy

five hectares (175 has.)
encompasses two (2) land masses
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
16
Is between the political-administrative

jurisdiction of Las Pinas and Paranaque
No actual population but is adjacent to 8
coastal barangays
These are Brgys. Zapote, Pulanglupa, Elias
Aldana, Ilaya, Manuyo Uno, and Daniel
Fajardo in Las Pias City and Brgys. La Huerta
and San Dionisio in Paraaque City
Only a few number (less than 20) of
permanent residents stay on the islands and
are mostly caretakers, there are however
incidences of ISF encroachment.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
17
Las Pinas City is fifth poorest in

the 4th district of NCR
Paranaque is home to 25,073
informal settlers among which
Brgy San Dionisio is prominent.
There are incidental instances of
informal settlers in the LPPCHEA
and are engaged in informal jobs
vending, fishing, shell
cultivation, etc.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
18
Land Cover / Present Land Use

LPPCHEA is predominantly
covered by mudflats, both in the
north and south islands.
Soil quality is relatively good due
to presence of organic materials
114 hectares of mudflats in
surrounding waters
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
19
Plant Species
Mangroves are the predominant
plant species
Mangroves are salt-tolerant trees
adapted to living in salt and
brackish water conditions and are
critical spawning, nursery, feeding
and temporary shelter areas not
only to fishes but other animals,
including wild birds
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
20
Plant Species
The DENR-ERDB introduced three (3) Rhizophora
species of mangroves along the Cavite-Manila
Coastal Road sometime between 1998 and 2001
8 species of mangroves thrive in the area
Bungalon (Avicennia marina)
Kulasi (Lumnitzera racemosa)
Pagatpat (Sonneratia alba)
Bakauan (Rhizophora spp.)
Pototan (Bruguiera sexangula)
Nipa (Nypa fruticans)
Tabigi (Xylocarpus granatum)
Saging-saging (Aegiceras corniculatumI)
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
21
Lies within the migration path of

migrant birds escaping the harsh
Siberian winter
Wild Bird Club of the Philippines
documented 80 migrant and
resident wildbird species.
14 species of gastropods
23 species of bivalves
8 species of juvenile sub-adult
sized fish
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
22
milkfish (Chanos chanos),

dusky frillgoby (Bathygodius forma
fuscus),
striped poly fish (Leiognathus fasciatus),
long-arm mullet (Valamugil cunesius),
silver sillage (Sillago sihana),
fourlined terapon (Pelates
quadrilineatus),
fringe scale sardinella (Sardinelle
fimbria) and
whipfin silverbiddy (Gernes
filamentousus).
Mangroves in the area have:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
23
44 bird species
29 are migratory
15 resident bird species (including endemic
Philippine Duck, Anas luzonica).
In the area around LPPCHEA there are recorded

52-80 bird species (WBCP, DENR)
Vulnerable and Endangered species include:
Philippine Duck (Anas luzonica)
Chinese Egret (Egretta eulophotes)
Avian species in the LPPCHEA as recorded by

DENR-NCR Integrated Environmental Monitoring
Program:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
24
Migratory birds feast on mudflat species from

August to April.
Number of birds feeding and roosting reaches
5,000 heads per day
1,000 heads of Black-winged Stilts (Himantopus
himantopus) shore birds.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
25
LEGAL and INSTITUTIONAL

FRAMEWORK
LPPCHEA is the first critical habitat
established in the country and the
first to be proclaimed by a
President
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
26
This document defines, among others, the legal bases for its
establishment and the specific geographic area under the jurisdiction of
LPPCHEA.
LEGAL and INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

PROCLAMATION 1412
Issued on 22 April 2007, Presidential Proclamation No. 1412 formally
establishes the Las Pias-Paraaque Critical Habitat and Ecotourism Area
(LPPCHEA).
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
27
the Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA);

Department of Tourism (DOT);
the City Governments of Las Pias and Paraaque;
Non- Government Organizations (NGOs) and Peoples Organizations (POs) with a
direct stake in the area.

PROCLAMATION 1412-A
This directs all relevant departments and instrumentalities under the executive
branch to ensure the preservation of existing mangrove, mudflats and
ecosystems in the area defined under Proclamation 1412
directs the DENR to convene and chair a Manila Bay Critical Habitat
Management Council composed of representatives from:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
28

REPUBLIC ACT 9147 (WILDLIFE RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND
PROTECTION ACT)
Section 25 of R.A. 9147 provides the legal basis for the DENR Secretary in
declaring a particular geographical areaespecially those outside the
coverage of R.A. 7586 or the National Integrated Protected Areas System
Act of 1992 like LPPCHEAas a critical habitat.
The same law defines a critical habitat as areas where threatened species
are found and moves to protect it from any form of exploitation or
destruction which may be detrimental to the survival of the threatened
species dependent therein.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
29

EXECUTIVE ORDER 111
E.O. 111 establishes the guidelines for ecotourism development in the
country to ensure the sustainable use, development, management,
protection and conservation of the countrys environment and natural
resources and cultural heritage for the enjoyment of the present and
future generations.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
30

PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 1085
Issued during the heydays of military rule in the country, P.D. 1085
formally conveys the ownership and administration of reclaimed foreshore
and offshore land in the Manila Bay, more particularly the area where the
Manila-Cavite Coastal Road now stands, to the Public Estates Authority
(PEA), now Philippine Reclamation Authority (PRA).
Based on this issuance, LPPCHEA is owned by the PRA, hence a member
of the Management Council and involved in the preparation of the
management plan.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
31
REPUBLIC ACT 7160 (THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES)

The law is meant to empower local government units (LGU) by granting them
greater autonomy from central agencies and offices. As such, it lays down the
basis for greater involvement of LGUs in the conceptualization, development and
implementation of national government projects or undertaking within their
territorial jurisdiction.
Sections 2 and 26 of R.A. 7160 mandates the conduct of consultations with the
local government units, nongovernmental organizations, and other sectors
concerned of any government initiated projects or program that may cause
pollution, climatic change, depletion of non-renewable resources, loss of crop
land, rangeland, or forest cover, and extinction of animal or plant species.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
32

REPUBLIC ACT 8550 (THE PHILIPPINE FISHERIES CODE OF 1998)
R.A. 8550, or simply the Fisheries Code of 1998, provides the guidelines
for, among others, the utilization, management, development,
conservation and protection of fishery resources.
Of specific importance for LPPCHEA is Section 94 of the law which makes
the conversion of any mangrove area into fishponds or any other
purposes unlawful.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
33

REPUBLIC ACT 9275 (PHILIPPINE CLEAN WATER ACT OF 2004)
As its title suggests, R.A. 9275 is intended to protect all water bodies in
the country, including the wetlands and mudflats of LPPCHEA, against
pollution by providing water quality standards and regulations, as well as
penalties for violations of the same.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
34

PROCLAMATION 2152
Declares all mangrove swamps as forest reserves. As such, it makes
conversion of mangroves to fishponds illegal.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
35
ORDINANCE NO. 754-07

This is an ordinance directing the registration of fishing vessels weighing five (5) gross
tonnage and below to register with the city government. This is in keeping with Executive
Order No. 305 mandating the devolution of said function from the Philippine Coast Guard
(PCG) and into the local government unit concerned.
ORDINANCE NO. 238-95, SERIES OF 1995 (AMENDED)
An Ordinance prohibiting the littering of garbage, refuse, waste materials, remnants
human or animal excrement, animal cadavers and the like on any public, road street, alley
and sidewalks; deputizing elementary and high school students to apprehend an issue
citations, tickets to any violation; granting a 255 share of the fine collected to the student
fund apprehended a violation and imposing a penalty for any violation thereof.

LOCAL ORDINANCES
Las Pias City
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
36
ORDINANCE NO. 350-9, SERIES OF 1997

An ordinance prohibiting spitting in government offices and other public places
and providing penalties for violations thereof.
An ordinance providing for the efficient and environmentally-sound collection,
transportation, processing, storage and disposal of solid waste within the city of
Las Pias providing penalties for violations thereof.

LOCAL ORDINANCES
Las Pias City
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
37

An ordinance providing for the standard method of mandatory waste segregation
at source in the city of Paraaque.
ORDINANCE NO. 06-02 (104)
An ordinance that aims to protect the natural resources and environment of the
city against pollution and deleterious fishing methods.

LOCAL ORDINANCES
Paraaque City
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
38

LOCAL AGREEMENTS
MANILA BAY DECLARATION (2001), AS AMENDED
The Manila Bay Coastal Strategy, which is a product of a series of
consultations with stakeholders, embodies the visions and action programs
for the restoration of Manila Bay.
It was adopted by various stakeholders, with former Pres. Gloria MacapagalArroyo as witness, in October 2001 in an event called the Manila Bay
Declaration.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
39

LOCAL AGREEMENTS
BOULEVARD 2000 FRAMEWORK
Then Pres. Fidel V. Ramos issued on February 24, 1995 Administrative Order
No. 176 creating the Presidential Task Force Boulevard 2000.
The Task Force, Chaired and Co-chaired by the Secretaries of the DPWH and
the DENR respectively, with the General Manager of the PEA as Vice-chair, is
responsible for the preparation, integration and coordination of all
development plans, projects and programs in the Boulevard Reclamation
Area. This project shall be considered a priority infrastructure project of the
government.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
40

INTERNATION AND REGIONAL AGREEMENTS
CONVENTION ON MIGRATORY SPECIES (CMS,1994)
Originally signed in 1979 at Bonn, Germany, CMS is an agreement that
endeavours parties to work together in the protection of migratory species
among states within their migration routes.
CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY (CBD,1992)
CBD is a treaty aimed at conserving biological diversity, the sustainable use
of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising
out of the utilization of genetic resources.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
41

INTERNATION AND REGIONAL AGREEMENTS
CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES OF
WILD FAUNA AND
FLORA (CITES)
Also known as the Washington Convention, CITES is a multilateral treaty that aims
to ensure that trade of wild animals and plants across signatory countries does not
threaten the survival of the species in the wild.
INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE CONSERVATION OF WETLANDS
(RAMSAR CONVENTION)
The RAMSAR Convention is an environmental treaty that provides framework for
national action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of
wetlands and their resources in member countries.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
42

SUPREME COURT MANDAMUS
The Supreme Court directed government agencies to cleanup and/or restore the
Manila Bay, and thereafter the preservation of the water quality of the bay after the
rehabilitation process.
The agencies that were ordered by the Supreme Court in its Decision in G.R. Nos.
171947-48 in their different capacities were the Metropolitan Manila Development
Authority (MMDA), Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR),
Department of Education (DepEd), Department of Health (DOH), Department of
Agriculture (DA), Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), Department
of Budget and Management (DBM), Philippine Coast Guard (PCG), the Philippine
National Police Maritime Group, and the Department of the Interior and Local
Government (DILG).
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
43
Poor institutional coordination

and collaboration
Different stakeholders and service
orientations increase difficulty
Disorganised participation of NGOs
and Pos
Differences in interests and
attitudes of stakeholders
CRITICAL ISSUES IN LPPCHEA

Institutional and attitude issues
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
44
regulating or outright
restriction of their access to the
coastal lagoons and mudflats is
difficult
Local population derives livelihood
from local fishing
Comprising policies of
environmental conservation and
livelihood

Fishing related Issues
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
45
Optimal and efficient land use is

difficult because of competing
uses
Differing territorial jurisdiction
Coordination of zoning ordinances
Land is owned by Philippine
Reclamation Authority (PRA)

Land use issues
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
46
Solid and Liquid Wastes

Location makes LPPCHEA a
garbage sink
Only 9 of 17 cities in MM have a
SWM plan in place
Municipal and industrial effluents
Commercial ships, trading ships,
small fishing boats

Pollution
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
47
Solid and Liquid Wastes

Low levels of DO
Acceptable levels for nitratesnitrogen and phosphatephosphorous compounds are 0.2
mg/l and 0.4 mg/l respectively

Pollution
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
48
Safety of aviation and birds

Inconclusive status regarding bird
strikes and commercial aviation
Airports and bird habitats can coexist if properly managed

Bird strikes
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
49
High rate of soil erosion

Garbage scouring and siltation are
the two major causes of soil
erosion

Soil Erosion
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
50
Wise Use management and

strategy
Strict Zone (SZ);
Recreational Zone (RZ); and
Sustainable Use Zone (SU).
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
51
Strict Zone (SZ)

devoted to habitat restoration and
biodiversity enhancement. Public
access to said areas, therefore, is
strictly limited. The mangrove areas,
salt marshes and mud flats (north
and south lagoons) are all part of the
Strict Zones.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
52
Recreational Zone (RZ)

The stretch of the Long Island,
except the mangrove areas and
lagoons, and certain portions of
Freedom Island are designated as
Recreational Zones. Visitors are
given free access to this area.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
53
Approximately 1,000 meters of

beach head for beach walking
Recreational Zone (RZ)

Approximately 3,000 meters of
nature trails and boardwalks
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
54
Sustainable Use Zone (SU)

reserved for use and access of local
communities for livelihood
development purposes. Fishing,
shellfish collection, and other low
impact economic activities will be
allowed here.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
55

LPPCHEA
Defining Tourism
Carrying Capacity
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
56
UADES, 2002. DEFINING, MEASURING AND EVALUATING CARRYING CAPACITY IN EUROPEAN TOURISM DESTINATIONS. Athens: University of the Aegean, Department of
Environmental Studies.
Carrying Capacity Assessment for Sustainable Tourism Development: A Proposal for the Saint Martins Island
Derives from wildlife ecology where it has been used to define the
maximal population size of a certain species that an area can support
without reducing its ability to support the same species in the future.
Carrying capacity has been described as an appropriate tool for beach
management, as it enables the preservation of the high quality and
quantity of coastal resources whilst meeting not only the current needs,
but also securing long-term economic and ecological benefits for future
generations (UNEP/PAP, 1997:8)
Planners have enlarged the definition of carrying capacity by including
many variables inherent to man-made systems (Hall and Lew, 1998)
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
57
World Tourism Organization (1994) definition of TCC is:

The maximum number of people that may visit a tourist destination at the
same time, without causing destruction of the physical, economic, sociocultural environment and an unacceptable decrease in the quality of visitors'
satisfaction"
tourism carrying capacity arises from a perception that tourism cannot

grow forever in a place without causing irreversible damage to the local
system (Coccossis and Mexa, 2004)
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
58
"The maximum number of people that use tourism site without

unacceptable effect on environmental resources while meeting the demand
of tourists".
Luc Hens defined the tourism carrying capacity as
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
59
Tourist attractions are assets which cannot be reproduced

Treated as a public good where market mechanisms do not show their normal
allocative functions
A maximum number of users visiting tourist attractions lead to their saturation,
resulting in a poorer quality of tourist experience
Negative effects are felt collaterally:
Diminished environment
Lower quality of tourist demand
Lower economic utility
It is understood in concept that:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
60
Negative impacts can be controlled by a threshold for capacity which is the

proxy indicated by the maximum number of visitors.
If the physical capacity of a tourist attraction is determined by a maximum
number of visitors there at one point in time, the balance can be maintained by
physically limiting the number of visitors at a time.
Public goods in the form of tourism assets usually have an additional
contingent value attached to them. If the real price were to be paid then the
visitors would pay enough to absorb higher saturation rates and thresholds
would adjust.
Any increase in supporting facilities would have both a negative and positive
impact on the area.
It is understood in concept that:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
61
Descriptive
Evaluative
EU-UADES, 2002. DEFINING, MEASURING AND EVALUATING CARRYING CAPACITY IN EUROPEAN TOURISM DESTINATIONS. Athens: University of the Aegean, Department of
Therefore, setting a carrying capacity for a tourist destination is used as a

management tool towards a comprehensive and sustainable development
of tourism in a particular area (EU-UADES, 2002).
A study by the European Union and University of Aegean, Greece
generated a framework for TCC divided into two parts:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
62
Describes how the system under study works, including physical, ecological,
social, political and economic aspects of tourist development. Within this context
of particular importance is the identification of:
Constraints: limiting factors that cannot easily be managed. They are not
flexible, in the sense that the application of organizational, planning and
management approaches, or the development of appropriate infrastructure
does not alter the thresholds associated with such constraints.
Bottlenecks: limiting factors of the system which managers can manipulate
(numbers at a particular place).
Impacts: elements of the system affected by the intensity and type of use. The
type of impact determines the type of capacity (ecological/physical, social etc)
Descriptive Framework
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
63
Describes how an area should be managed and the level of acceptable impacts.
This part starts with the identification (if it does not exist already) of the desirable
condition/preferable type of development. Within this context goals and
management objectives need to be defined, alternative actions evaluated and a
strategy for tourism development formulated. Of key importance is the
identification of:
Goals/objectives: define the type of experience or other outcomes that a

tourism setting for destinations should provide
Evaluative criteria: specify acceptable levels of change
Evaluative Framework
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
64
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
65

LPPCHEA
Methodology for Carrying

Capacity Assessment
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
66
The Tourism Carrying Capacity Assessment used in this study is adapted

from by Cifuentes and Ceballos - Lascurain which is a IUCN adopted and
endorsed.
Further modifications from the assessment methodology are made to
incorporate realities in available data for LPPCHEA and are broadly based
on the modifications in the study in Carrying Capacity Assessment for
Sustainable Tourism Development: A Proposal for the Saint Martins
Island.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Methodology for Carrying Capacity

Assessment
67
The Physical carrying capacity (PCC) and Effective Real Carrying Capacity
(ERCC)
The activities to be assessed in LPPCHEA are:

Board walking
Bird watching
Beach walking
The levels that will be assessed are:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222

Assessment
68
Definition: PCC is the maximum number of tourists that can physically fit into
or onto a specific area, over particular time:
PCC = A D Rf
Where:
A: available area for use (m2);
D: tourist density (tourists / m2);
Rf: Rotation factor (number of visits per day).
The Physical carrying capacity (PCC)
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222

Assessment
69
A is determined by particular conditions of the considered area.

In natural areas, this parameter can be determined by natural boundary
such as mountain range, river, stream or safety demand.
In conservation area, where tourism is developed, the available area can
be estimated from the length of track in that area or the total area where
tourists can do camping or walking.
The tourist density or the area required per tourist D is the area needed
for a tourist who can undertake activities comfortably.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222

Assessment
70
Assumptions:
Groups of 6
Rotation factor is the number of permissible visits over a specified time

(usually calculated by daily open hours) and expressed by:
Rf = Open period / average time of visit
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222

Assessment
71
Definition: ERCC is the maximum number of tourists that is permitted by the

local conditions and management capacity without influencing the tourists
demand:
where: Cf (corrective factors or limiting factors) are factors which have negative
impact on tourism activities and assessed by limiting threshold which used for
identifying impact level of a factor.
Effective Real Carrying Capacity (ERCC)
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222

Assessment
72
Cf=M1/Mt
M1: limiting magnitude of variable;
Mt : total magnitude of variable.
These factors are selected based on tourism activities and local conditions of the
study area.
In consideration of tourism activities at National Parks, the following factors should
be taken into account: environmental safety, conservation, natural resources
managements, tourism activities, planning and local factors such as human
resources, the contribution of tourism to local economic development, social
crimination
where limiting factors can be determined by:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222

Assessment
73
Computable (quantitative or semi-quantitative derived values).

Easily surveyed and collected (by field research, including qualitative values).
For purposes of this study environmental indicators used to indicate

sensitivity of environment and development as well as other indicators for
calculating TCC will be selected based on the following chracteristics:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222

Assessment
74
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
75

LPPCHEA
Results &
Discussion
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
76
Board walking
Bird watching
Beach walking
The Framework Plan for the

Coastal Lagoons of Las Pias and
Paraaque has specified detailed
use of the 175 hectares of land
area including associated waters.
Only the recreational zones are
allowed for tourism activities
The following activities are
calculated for TCC:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Results
Calculating the TCC of the LPPCHEA
77
Boardwalks and nature trails: 3,000

meters
Beach walking: 1,000 meters
All three activities are considered

to have the same person-activity
densities.
Within the recreational area are:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Results
78
There are however typhoons and other weather related disturbances

which subtracts approximately 2 months worth of visitor time.
Therefore the practical adjustment for measurement is for an 10 monthperiod annually.
Seasonal Adjustment:
The Island receives tourists throughout the year with most bird watching
activities done between August and April. For the rest of the year, coastal
clean-ups are the regular activities and are classified under beach walking.
For the purpose of the study there is no significant peak tourist months
described by data or by anecdotal interviews.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Results
79
Total Length of areas covered by tourist activities: 3,000 m

Average Length of beach coastline and boardwalk/nature trail per person: 2.0
m per person
Number of people in each group: 6 persons
Distance between two groups in beach: 5m
Average time for using walkable areas: 3 hours
Beach using period: 6 hours (safe hours, high tide in daylight)
Physical Parameters: To calculate Effective Real Carrying Capacity (ERCC),

factors that affect tourist's comfort such as the necessary distance
between two people and the distance between two groups on a route
should be considered. Therefore the following physical parameters are
included:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Results
80
(x 62) + (x 1)5 = 3000

x = 176 groups
Tourism activities occupy 6 hours a day, each tourist takes about 3 hours:
Rf = 6/3
Number of visits per day = 2
Let x to be the maximum number of groups going into the beach for
swimming and bath. The number of groups is expressed by equation:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Results
81
PCC = A D Rf
PCC = x 6 2 = 1766 2
= 2,112 visitors/day
Thus, the maximum number of tourists that LPPCHEA could

physically serve is about 2,112 visitors/day.
PCC is the maximum number of tourists that can physically fit into or onto a
specific area, over particular time:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Results
82
Corrective Factors:
Bad Weather/ Ship Cancellation (Cf 1)
Infrastructure limiting factor (Cf 2)
Management Limiting Factor (Cf 3)
Safety factor (Cf4)
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Results
83
Corrective Factors:
Bad Weather/ Ship Cancellation (Cf 1)
Bad weather contributes significantly to tourism in LPPCHEA, including
storms, storms surges, overcast weather, this averages to about 5 days of every
month
M1: 5 12= 60 days
Mt: 30 12= 300 days
Thus, Cf 1= 60/300 = 20%
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Results
84
Corrective Factors:
Infrastructure limiting factor (Cf 2)
Based on interviews and filed observations the quality of infrastructure present
on the LPPCHEA can be assessed qualitatively as 80% in bad condition.
M1: 80% in bad condition
Mt: 100 for perfect condition
Thus, Cf 2= 80/100 = 80%
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Results
85
Corrective Factors:
Management Limiting Factor (Cf 3)
Service management includes controlling high quality services, supplying news
service activities, fresh water and energy (fuels) supply, waste and sewerage
management.
Based on field observations and interviews management can be rated at 50%.
M1: 50% under poor management
Mt: 100 for perfect management
Thus, Cf 3= 50/100 = 50%
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Results
86
Corrective Factors:
Safety factor (Cf4 )
Areas identified under recreational areas are assess by field observation to
have present hazards and potential risk to tourists safety is rated at
approximately 30%.
M1: 30% assessed to have present hazards and potential risk
Mt: 100 for no hazards
Thus, Cf 4= 30/100 = 30%
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Results
87
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Results
The Effective Real Carrying Capacity (ERCC) of the LPPCHEA is 236

visitors/day.
From the previous assessment, ERCC of the Saint Martins Island can be
computed as:
88
Total average visits in 2014:

4000 visitors for general sightseeing
3000 visitors for coastal cleanup activities
Which translates to:

7000 / 10 / 30 = 24 visitors per day.
Based on calculating PCC and ERCC it is determined that The Effective

Real Carrying Capacity (ERCC) of the LPPCHEA is 236 visitors/day.
Interviews of LPPCHEA Management (Rey Aguinaldo) shows the following
statistics:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Discussion
89
At 24 visitors per day, LPPCHEA is currently only carrying about 10% of its
potential capacity.
This indicates that with the current situation the LPPCHEA can still expand
its tourism volume without significant changes to management strategies,
this does not however indicate that this current situation is ideal, efficient,
nor recommended.
The major threat to tourism is therefore still mainly pollution, politicaladministrative policies, and threats from urban land use and ISF livelihood
conflicts.
However, this study notes that the very poor infrastructure and underequipped management team hampers the full potential use of the
LPPCHEA, which if properly addressed can help strengthen resiliency of
the LPPCHEA ecosystem to its major threats.
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Discussion
90

LPPCHEA
CONCLUSION
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
91
The existing 236 visitors per day become the threshold for guiding
development parameters for tourism facilities.
Proper development is made to increase the capacity of the LPPCHEA to cater
to tourists to increase its draw on tourists and enhance financial feasibility of
the operations which in turn will help in paying maintenance and operating
costs.
A comprehensive feedback and monitoring system be put in place to
dynamically assess the carrying capacity of the LPPCHEA.
A more detailed tourism carrying capacity framework be used once sufficient
baseline indicators database have been established.
The study notes that only 10% of the current capacity of the LPPCHEA is
used by extant tourism activities.
It is recommended that:
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
Recommendations
92
A. Lecciones |
PLAN222
SALAMAT!
9 May 2015
Thank you very much!

Assessing The Tourism Carrying Capacity of The LPPCHEA

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Assessing The Tourism Carrying Capacity of The LPPCHEA

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Assessing the Tourism Carrying

Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Background and Rationale

Positive current account balance

Priority development areas

Highest growth potential for job generation

Provides 10% of national employment

Drives private and foreign investment in infrastructure

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Tourism is seen as an important contributor to the Philippine

Background and Rationale

PhP186.15B or US$4.4B worth of receipts in 2014 (2014 GDP: PhP2.196T)

Expected US$6B in 2015

9.56% annual increase

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Tourism by numbers (DOT, 2011; DOT, 2014; iECONOMICS, 2015):

Background and Rationale

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Background and Rationale

critical habitats and sensitive or

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Background and Rationale

With the varied activities conducted on these tourism sites, the

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Tourism sites are both home to commercial tourism activities and

Background and Rationale

[] to sound and manageable environmental practices in

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

The Midterm Philippine Development Plan (2011, p. 87) states that

Background and Rationale

Overuse in tourism areas can deteriorate land resources

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Damage to the environment by tourism is well documented

Background and Rationale

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Despite the push by industry and government to develop greener

Background and Rationale

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

The Las Pias Paraaque Critical Habitat Ecotourism Area or

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Located between 14.481158, 120.971586 and

Long Island is at the southwest portion (Las

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

covers approximately one hundred seventy

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Is between the political-administrative

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Las Pinas City is fifth poorest in

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Land Cover / Present Land Use

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Assessing the Tourism Carrying Capacity of the LPPCHEA

Lies within the migration path of

milkfish (Chanos chanos),