Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / e i a r

Environmental impact assessment of mountain tourism in developing regions:

A study in Ladakh, Indian Himalaya
Davide Geneletti , Dorje Dawa
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Trento, Via Mesiano, 77, 38050 Trento, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Mountain tourism in developing countries is becoming a growing environmental concern due to extreme
Received 25 August 2008 seasonality, lack of suitable infrastructures and planning, and interference with fragile ecosystems and
Received in revised form 12 December 2008 protected areas. This paper presents a study devoted to assess the adverse environmental impacts of tourism,
Accepted 15 January 2009
and in particular of trekking-related activities, in Ladakh, Indian Himalaya. The proposed approach is based
Available online 23 February 2009
on the use of Geographical Information System (GIS) modeling and remote sensing imageries to cope with
Keywords:
the lack of data that affect the region. First, stressors associated with trekking, and environmental receptors
Trekking potentially affected were identied. Subsequently, a baseline study on stressors (trail use, waste dumping,
GIS camping, pack animal grazing and off-road driving) and receptors (soil, water, wildlife, vegetation) was
Impact map conducted through eld work, data collection, and data processing supported by GIS. Finally, impacts were
Spatial modeling modeled by considering the intensity of the stressors, and the vulnerability and the value of the receptors.
Scoping The results were spatially aggregated into watershed units, and combined to generate composite impact maps.
The study concluded that the most affected watersheds are located in the central and southeastern part of
Ladakh, along some of the most visited trails and within the Hemis and the Tsokar Tsomoriri National parks.
The main objective of the study was to understand patterns of tourism-induced environmental degradation, so
as to support mitigation interventions, as well as the development of suitable tourism policies.
2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In many developing countries, tourism is widely acknowledged
as a way to stimulate local economic development, thanks to service
provision, job opportunities, and overall foreign revenues (WTO, 2005;
Gurung and DeCoursey, 2000; Brohman, 1996). Tourist ows have
been increasingly growing in the South: according to recent estimates,
international tourist arrivals in developing countries represent roughly
one third of international arrivals worldwide (WTO, 2007; Gssling,
2000). Environmental degradation is one of the shortcomings com-
monly associated with tourism in developing regions (Brohman,
1996). This is caused by a number of factors, among which poverty and
the difculty to earn an alternative livelihood, the lack of infrastruc-
tures, and the lack of policies and planning. Frequently, in developing
countries, tourism policies are outdated, incomplete, or poorly applied
(Singh, 2002), and tourist attractions, such as natural parks, do not
have management or land use plans (Nepal, 2000).
The environmental impact of tourism is particularly critical in
mountain regions, where the above-mentioned factors are magnied.
Mountain communities are typically less afuent than their counter-
Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 0461 882685; fax: +39 0461 882672.
E-mail addresses: davide.geneletti@ing.unitn.it (D. Geneletti),
dorje.dawa@gmail.com (D. Dawa).
parts in lowland regions, and poverty is still a fact in many moun-
tainous areas, even in developed nations (Godde et al., 2000; Messerli
and Ives, 1997). Infrastructure development is hampered by difcult
access and harsh climate (Singh and Mishra, 2004). The drawing of
policies and plans is less effective in mountain areas, because histor-
ically these areas have been of marginal concern for decision-makers,
and therefore neglected in development priorities (Messerli and Ives,
1997). Moreover, policy implementation is undermined by political
instability, which often characterises mountain areas due to their
proximity to national and international borders (Nepal and Chipeniuk,
2005). On top of these factors, there are peculiar conditions of moun-
tain areas that make them more vulnerable, such as environmental
fragility and tourism seasonality. High-altitude ecosystems are inher-
ently fragile and characterised by low resiliency, and therefore they
are particularly susceptible to human interference, such as soil and
vegetation trampling, disturbance to native wildlife, and waste dump-
ing (Arrowsmith and Inbakaran, 2002; Buckley et al., 2000). High-
altitude recreation sites are characterised by extreme seasonality,
because accessibility and favorable climatic conditions are restricted
to the short summer season. Consequently, human-induced distur-
bances on the environment are concentrated in this period, that is also
the peak season for several biological processes, such as mating,
vegetation growth, migration, spawning, etc.
Tourism in mountain regions worldwide has developed rapidly in
the last decades (Moss and Godde, 2000; Price, 1992). Hence, it is not

0195-9255/$ see front matter 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2009.01.003
230 D. Geneletti, D. Dawa / Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242
surprising that mountain tourism in developing countries is becoming
a growing environmental concern, as testied also by the scientic
literature (Saffrey, 2000; Tonderayi, 2000). Recent studies related to
recreational ecology showed that mountain tourism in developing
regions had adverse effects on natural areas, protected areas, and
wetlands (Stevens, 2003; Buntaine et al., 2006). For example, in Nepal,
which experienced an unprecedented tourism growth in the past
25 years, the impact of tourism development on forest resources and
alpine vegetation biodiversity has been well documented (Stevens,
2003), as well as its impact in terms of air pollution and noise (Shah
et al., 1997). Typical mountain recreation activities in developing
countries include trekking, climbing expeditions, cultural tours, river
rafting and bird gazing. In particular, high-altitude mountain trekking
experienced a signicant rise in popularity over the last decade that
has lead to a steep increase in the number of trekkers (Chatterjea,
2007; Nepal and Nepal, 2004). Trail use is one of the fastest growing
recreational activities, and it is causing widespread impacts on eco-
systems (Lynn and Brown, 2003).
In Ladakh, a remote region located in Indian Himalaya, trekking-
related tourism has been steeply increasing in the last decade. Tourism
in Ladakh is characterised by all the factors described above: extreme
seasonality, lack of suitable infrastructures and planning, and high
interference with fragile ecosystems and protected areas. Despite
the rapid pace of development, tourism is still a nascent industry in
the region, and its effects have been poorly studied so far. This paper
presents a study devoted to assess the adverse environmental impacts
of tourism, and in particular of trekking-related activities in Ladakh.
The proposed approach is based on the use of Geographical Infor-
mation System (GIS) modeling and remote sensing imageries to cope
with the lack of data that affect the region. Basic environmental data
layers were generated, combined with tourism ow information,
and used to model the spatial distribution of environmental impacts.
Eventually, the main objective of the study is to understand patterns
of tourism-induced environmental degradation in Ladakh, and to
support future mitigation interventions, as well as the development of
suitable tourism policies. The paper is structured as follows. Section 2
contains a literature review on the environmental impacts of moun-
tain trekking. Section 3 provides a geographical and environmental
prole of Ladakh, as well as a description of tourism trend in the
region. Section 4 presents the method adopted to conduct the study,
whose results are then described in Section 5. Finally, Section 6 dis-
cusses the ndings of the paper, and Section 7 draws some conclusions.
2. Environmental impacts of trekking
Typical physical impacts caused by trekking are trail widening
and incision, multiple treads, muddiness, soil erosion and compaction
(Leung and Marion, 2000; Monz, 2000; Buckley et al., 2000). Biologi-
cal impacts include vegetation trampling and degradation (e.g., root
exposure), forest thinning (e.g., use of rewood by campers), decrease
in biodiversity (e.g., loss of fragile species), wildlife disturbance,
habitat fragmentation, and introduction of exotic species (Buckley
et al., 2000; Leung and Marion, 2000; Marion and Leung, 2001). Waste
dumping in campsite areas or along the trail may result in surface and
groundwater pollution (Leung and Marion, 2000). Pack animals,
besides contributing to the above-mentioned impacts on soil and
vegetation, may cause overgrazing in favorable located grasslands,
with subsequent loss of productivity and biodiversity (Cole et al., 2004;
Buntaine et al., 2006; Leung and Marion, 2000). Additionally, trekking
activities determine a number of indirect impacts, such as increase in
trafc, and therefore air and noise pollution, off-road driving, land
occupation, soil loss and deforestation due to the construction of
campsites, accommodations, and tourism infrastructures in general
(Stevens, 2003; Shah et al., 1997; Buckley et al., 2000).
Most of the literature reviewed on trekking impact assessment
proposes small-scale and eldwork-based analyses. In particular, a
common approach to trekking impact assessment consists in carrying
out eld surveys to compare environmental conditions around trails
and in undisturbed areas. Deng et al. (2003) adopted this approach,
and developed a set of soil and vegetation impact indices, by surveying
both selected visited spots, and control areas. Analogously, Chatterjea
(2007) employed a transect-oriented sampling framework to system-
atically quantify the impacts of hiking on a set of soil properties (e.g.,
moisture, compaction, inltration rate, organic matter content, root
density, litter cover), using undisturbed areas as a reference. Nepal
and Way (2007) found signicant differences in a set of variables (e.g.,
herbaceous cover, exposed soil, species richness), measured in control
plots and in plots located nearby trails with different intensity of use.
Leung and Marion (1999) proposed a survey method to describe the
location and extent of common trail problems. Similarly, Nepal and
Nepal (2004) adopted a method based on the collection of trail data
in critical areas to characterise overall trail conditions, as well as to
determine the state of site variables (e.g., aspect, slope, soil type and
moisture, vegetation cover) and impact indicators (e.g., incision, root
exposure, multiple treads). Subsequently, regression analysis was used
to associate trail conditions with both environmental and human-
related variables. Farrell and Marion (2001) conducted eld observa-
tions to classify the magnitude of trail impacts in a national park, and to
correlate it with the level of use.
Fewer studies addressed the impact of trekking-related actions,
such as camping, pack animal grazing and waste dumping. Marion and
Cole (1996) conducted a plot study around campsites to correlate
trampling intensity with soil and vegetation conditions (vegetation
cover, oristic dissimilarity, soil thickness, felled trees, etc.). Smith and
Newsome (2002) surveyed biophysical variables (tree damage,
erosion, tree seedlings, woody debris, etc.) to compare the impacts
of high-use formal campsites and low-use informal campsites. Cole
et al. (2004) conducted plot surveys to study the effects of pack stock
grazing on mountain grasslands in three characteristic meadows
within a national park. Kuniyal (2005) quantied and characterised
the different types of waste left behind by trekkers in the Himalayas
trails, and proposed sustainable management options. Knight and Cole
(1995) investigated the effects of visitors on wildlife behavior. Miller
et al. (1998) conducted a similar study, specically focused on bird
communities.
A common feature of the studies found in the literature is the fact
that they were carried out at a plot scale, using extensive eld obser-
vations and measurements. Very few publications presented applica-
tions at regional scale, based on the use of GIS modeling. Arrowsmith
and Inbakaran (2002) used GIS to model the effects of trampling,
and to estimate environmental resiliency to human impact in a
national park. Regional-scale trail sensitivity maps were carried out
by Whinam et al. (2003) by combining basic GIS layers. Cakir (2005)
predicted trail problem locations using GIS-derived data as input for
degradation models. However, these three works focused on specic
elements of trail use, rather than addressing the impact of trekking
and its related activities as a whole within a study region.
3. Prole of Ladakh
The region of Ladakh belongs to the State of Jammu and Kashmir
(India), and it is divided into two districts: the Kargil district and the
Leh district (Fig.1). The region borders with Pakistan occupied Kashmir,
Chinese occupied Aksai Chin, Tibet, and Lahul Spiti (Himachal Pradesh,
India). Elevation ranges from 2900 to 7600 m asl. Ladakh hosts three
mighty parallel mountainous ranges of the Himalayas: the Zaskar, the
Ladakh and the Karakoram Ranges. Between these, the rivers Shayok,
Indus and Zaskar ow. The region has a population of about 400,000.
Apart from Leh, the capital city with a population of 30,000, settle-
ments are small and mainly scattered around the banks of major rivers
and streams. Leh district has 112 inhabited villages and one unin-
habited village, and Kargil district has 129 villages (LAHDC, 2004). The
 D. Geneletti, D. Dawa / Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242 231

Fig. 1. The Ladakh region and its location in India (International borders drawn according to UN maps no. 3953 Rev. 1 and No 4140 Rev.2. The UN does not ofcially endorse or accept
all boundaries). Map projection: UTM; Datum: WGS84.

region is spread over an area of 45,000 km2, which makes Leh the
largest district in India.
From an ecological standpoint, Ladakh belongs to the Trans-
Himalayan ecosystem (Namgail et al., 2006), that is a high-altitude
cold desert, where ora and fauna are characterised by low distri-
bution density, as well as high adaptation to elevation and aridity. The
region has a complex hydrological system of rivers, lakes and enclosed
basins that allowed the development of important wetlands. These
ecosystems function as oases of productivity in an otherwise arid
environment. They host varied plant communities, including most of
the bushes and trees found in the region, as well as a diverse wildlife,
including an abundant migratory bird fauna (Humbert-Droz and
Dawa, 2004). There are several protected areas in the region, among
which: Hemis National Park, Changthang High-altitude Wetland
Reserve, which is recognized by the Ramsar Convention on wetland
conservation, and Karakoram Wildlife Sanctuary, whose boundaries
have been not delineated yet.
Economically, most people rely on subsistence agriculture (Good-
all, 2004). The main crops are wheat, barley, pulses and potatoes. In
addition, horticulture has been developing rapidly in recent years. The
main productions are apricot and apple, and in western Ladakh also
almond and grape are grown. The fruit production is either marketed

Fig. 2. Digital elevation model and main trekking trails of Ladakh.

232 D. Geneletti, D. Dawa / Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242

Table 1
Scoping matrix.

Receptors Impacts Stressors

Trail Waste Camping Pack Off-
use dumping animal road
grazing driving
Physical Soil Soil
degradation
Water Groundwater
pollution
Surface water
pollution
Biological Wildlife Habitat
fragmentation
Habitat
disturbance
Vegetation Vegetation
trampling/
damaging
Overgrazing

Potentially signicant impact, Minor impact (not studied).

in Leh or supplied to the defense forces stationed in the region (LAHDC,
2001). The region has inherent physical constraints, like prolonged
winter, scanty rainfall, rugged mountain terrain, and limited avail-
ability of fertile land. Therefore, agriculture is mainly conned to the
river valleys. Nevertheless, agriculture and pastoralism are the main
livelihoods in the region, although these traditional sectors have been
adversely affected by the development of tourism and government
services (Bhatnagar et al., 2006). There are vast stretches of desert
available for irrigation facilities, but land reclamation projects for
agriculture and afforestation were largely unsuccessful and economic-
ally unfeasible.
In the last 30 years, tourist inow pattern in Ladakh can be divided
into three phases (Department of Tourism, 2007): Phase I (1974
1989), Phase II (19892002), and Phase III (2002present). Phase I
presented a slow and steady growth in tourist inow, that peaked in
1989 with about 25,000 visitors. Phase II showed high uctuation:
from less than 8000 to slightly over 20,000 visitors per year. Finally,
Phase III is characterised by an exponential growth, which reached
50,000 visitors in 2006. Each of these phases was governed by two
main factors: policies and accessibility. Steep decreases in Phase II
were determined by political crisis aroused in Himalayan states and
regions (Dhariwal, 2005), whereas abrupt increases were fuelled
Fig. 3. Tourist, porter and pack animal inow on trekking trails (2006).
by Indian domestic tourist policies, as well as improvement of civil
aviations and infrastructures. The growth of Phase III is being pro-
pelled by a more stable political situation, by the crisis affecting neigh-
boring Himalayan states, and by the investment in marketing and
promotion. A map showing trekking trails that were operating in 2006
is presented in Fig. 2.
4. Methods
The adopted method is structured into three typical sequential
stages of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): scoping, baseline
study, impact modeling. Scoping aims at determining the most impor-
tant impacts to be taken into account, and consequently at setting the
content and the boundaries of the study (EC, 2001; Wood, 2000).
Scoping required to identify the sources of disturbance (or stressors)
associated with the activity under analysis, the environmental com-
ponents potentially affected (or receptors), and the impacts caused by
their interactions (Treweek, 1999). A baseline study on receptors and
stressors was then conducted through eld work, data collection, and
data processing supported by GIS. Finally, impacts were modeled by

Table 2
Overview of the approach to model the selected environmental impacts.

Impact Stressor intensity Receptor vulnerability Receptor value

Soil degradation by trail use
Soil degradation by off-road
driving
Groundwater pollution by
dumping
Groundwater pollution by camping
Surface water pollution by
dumping
Surface water pollution by
camping
Habitat fragmentation by trail use
Habitat disturbance by trail use
Habitat disturbance by camping
Habitat disturbance by off-road
driving
Vegetation trampling by camping
Vegetation damaging by off-road
driving
Overgrazing by pack animals
Trekker, porter, pack animal inow
Off-road tracks and vehicles inow
Amount of waste in dumping sites
along trails
Camper inow, average waste
production
Amount of waste in dumping sites
along trails
Camper inow, average waste
production
Trekker, porter, pack animal inow
Trekker, porter, pack animal inow
Camping size and campers inow
Vehicles inow
Camping size and campers inow
Off-road tracks and vehicle inow
Pack animal inow
Soil erosion susceptibility (RUSLE)
Soil erosion susceptibility (RUSLE)
Groundwater pollution vulnerability
Groundwater pollution vulnerability
Distance from surface water bodies
Distance from surface water bodies
Trail fragmentation index
Distance between trails and habitat areas
Distance between camping sites and habitat areas
Distance between off-road tracks and habitat areas
All vegetation types considered equally vulnerable
to camping
All vegetation types considered equally vulnerable
to off-road driving
Grassland vulnerability to overgrazing
Soil fertility index
Soil fertility index
All groundwater bodies considered
equally valuable
All groundwater bodies considered
equally valuable
All surface water bodies considered
equally valuable
All surface water bodies considered
equally valuable
IUCN classication of endangered species
IUCN classication of endangered species
IUCN classication of endangered species
IUCN classication of endangered species
Vegetation naturalness
Vegetation naturalness
All grasslands considered equally valuable
 D. Geneletti, D. Dawa / Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242 233

Fig. 4. Dumping sites and campsites.

considering the intensity of the stressors, and the vulnerability and
the value of the receptors. The results were spatially aggregated and
combined to generate composite impact maps.
4.1. Scoping
Scoping was performed by using authors' knowledge of the
study area (one of the author has excellent knowledge of Ladakh
environment and trekking trails), and complement it with eld
surveys and interviews with local government, research centres and
environmental NGOs ofcers. Fieldwork was conducted during the
summer months of 2005 and 2006. Following an approach commonly
adopted in EIA, the receptors were identied by decomposing the
environment into physical components (soil and water), and
biological components (wildlife and vegetation). Stressors included
the actual trail use, waste dumping, camping, grazing by pack animals,
234 D. Geneletti, D. Dawa / Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242
Fig. 5. Off-road driving tracks and vehicle inux in the Changthang region.
and off-road driving. As shown by the scoping matrix presented in
Table 1, the main impacts originated by the interaction between
stressors and receptors are: soil degradation, groundwater and surface
water pollution, wildlife habitat disturbance and fragmentation,
vegetation trampling, and overgrazing. All interactions (impact
types) considered potentially signicant have been addressed in this
study, as described below.
Trail use causes signicant effects in terms of soil degradation, due
to erosion on the steeper slopes and trampling, which affects physical
soil properties, such as water storage. Disturbance and fragmentation
of wildlife habitat were also considered as important because trekking
routes criss-cross the habitat areas of endangered species, and the
presence of tourists may cause temporal or permanent habitat loss
(Geneletti, 2008). The effects of trail use on vegetation were con-
sidered less signicant, due to the general absence of vegetation on
trails. As to dumping, its potential impact on both groundwater and
surface water bodies was considered. Campsites affect soil and vege-
tation due to the presence of the facilities and trampling by campers.
Water pollution caused by waste disposal, and disturbance to wildlife
habitat by campers were also addressed. Although campsites might
cause disruption of habitat patches, this was considered a minor
effect, due to the compactness and small size of camping sites. Pack
animals may cause overgrazing, especially where the slope allows
easy access to nearby grasslands. Finally, the signicant impacts of
off-road driving include damage to soil and vegetation structure, and
wildlife disturbance. Habitat fragmentation was considered as a minor
effect, because most off-road tracks do not interfere with the pattern-
ing of habitat patches.
4.2. Baseline study: stressors and receptors
Regarding stressors, information on overall tourism presence,
trail use, and bed occupancy was collected at relevant governmental
agencies in Leh. Subsequently, a eld survey was carried out in three
sample areas, that were chosen among the most-visited sites: Markha
Valley, Nubra Valley, and Changthang wetlands (see Fig. 2). The
eldwork aimed at understanding the relationship between the
number of tourists and the intensity of the selected stressors, such as
waste disposal (location of dumping sites and amount of waste),
presence of porters and pack animals, overgrazing, etc. In the Markha
Valley, the survey focused on the Markha trail, the most-trekked path
by visitors in Ladakh. This trail has a length of 70 km, and was entirely
surveyed. Along this trail, campsites and informal dump sites were
mapped using a Global Positioning System (GPS), and the amount and
type of waste disposed by trekkers were estimated. Direct observations
were conducted, complemented by interviews with campsite owners,
ponymen and porters. In all three areas, eldwork included data col-
lection at hotels and campsites, as well as interviews with local tour
operators. Additionally, in the Changthang area, vehicle inow data
available in checkpoint register books were collated, and off-road
driving areas were mapped. The information collected in the sample
areas was used to estimate the intensity of the stressors in the rest of
the trails of the region, under the assumption that they are pro-
portional to the distribution of tourist ows. As a result, for each trail
the following data were generated: trekkers and porters inow;
location of dumping sites and amount of waste; size, capacity and
occupancy of campsites; pack animal heads along the different trails.
Regarding receptors, at the time this research was initiated, there
were very few environmental data available for Ladakh, due to re-
moteness, security reasons, and lack of expertise. Joshi et al. (2006)
carried out a oral biodiversity characterisation in Trans-Himalayan
ecosystems using global land cover facilities, and then developed a
vegetation cover map for Ladakh. Most of other environmental studies
in Ladakh focused on the geological setting of the region (Jade et al.,
2004; Weinberg and Dunlap 2000). Therefore, in order to generate a
spatial database with a suitable scale for this study, available data were
collected and integrated with layers generated from scratch, such as
land cover, Digital Elevation Model (DEM), and precipitation maps.
A land cover map was obtained by classifying satellite imageries
freely available on the Internet acquired by Landsat TM and ETM+
sensors. Ladakh depicts a land cover with scarce vegetation, pre-
dominantly with barren rock and barren soil, followed by snow and
glaciers cover, patchy vegetation in the valley bottom and sparse
bushes along the hilly region (Joshi et al., 2006). Low chlorophyll
 D. Geneletti, D. Dawa / Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242
Fig. 6. Vulnerability maps of environmental receptors (1: high vulnerability, 0: no vulnerability). a) Soil erosion susceptibility, b) Groundwater vulnerability, c) Trail fragmentation index, d) Overgrazing vulnerability.

235
236 D. Geneletti, D. Dawa / Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242

Fig. 7. Watershed-based impact maps combined along stressors. a) Trekking, b) Camping, c) Dumping, d) Pack animal grazing, e) Off-road driving.
 D. Geneletti, D. Dawa / Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242
content, high mountain topography, uneven vegetation cover make
land cover classication from satellite imageries particularly complex.
Therefore, supervised and unsupervised classications were improved
by computing indices to separately discriminate vegetation, water,
and glaciers: the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI,
Myneni et al., 1995), the Normalized Difference Snow Index (NDSI,
Sidjak and Wheate 1999), and the Static Water Index (SWI, Gao,
1996). Eventually, all the indices were aggregated and overlaid to
produce a land cover map for the study area. Barren rocks and barren
soils were then classied mostly through visual interpretation. The
classication process was supported by ground truths. More details on
the method used to classify land cover can be found in Dawa (2008).
The 90-m resolution freely available DEM generated by Shuttle
Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) was used in this study. At the time
the research was initiated, the available SRTM data required intensive
editing due to the presence of voids, i.e., lack of elevation data, that
affected water bodies and areas with complex topography. Voids were
lled using the techniques proposed by Dowding et al. (2004), and
integrating the results with other available sources of elevation data.
A rainfall precipitation map was generated by interpolating global
climatic variable obtained from Climate Research Unit, University of
East Anglia (New et al., 2002). Further details on the methods adopted
to generate the DEM and precipitation layers can be found in Dawa
and Geneletti (2008). Habitat maps showing the distribution of six
animal species, a soil map, and a groundwater map were provided by
the Wildlife Institute of India. Habitat maps were available for the
following species: Siberian ibex (Capra ibex sibirica), Tibetan argali
(Ovis ammon hodgsoni), Ladakh urial (Ovis orientalis vignii), Hima-
layan blue sheep (Pseudois nayaur), Tibetan gazelle (Procapra
picticaudata), Tibetan wild ass (Equus kiang), Snow leopard (Uncia
uncia), Brown bear (Ursus arctos). Soil and groundwater were mapped
at 1:100,000 scale, using the USDA classication system (Soil Survey
Staff, 1999) and a fuzzy approach to estimate groundwater abundance,
respectively. All input maps were converted in raster form, using a 30-
m cell size.
4.3. Impact modeling and mapping
An environmental impact can be dened as a change in the state
of an environmental parameter caused by a human-induced activity.
Impact modeling requires knowledge on the intensity of the activity,
as well as on the vulnerability and value of the receiving environ-
mental component. For each impact type identied in the scoping
phase, these three factors were estimated (Table 2). Regarding activity
intensity, the data previously collected were used to generate maps, in
which each stressor received an intensity value (e.g., trail map in
which each trail is assigned the number of visitors). To this purpose,
the following data were used: trekker inow; location of dumping
sites and amount of waste; size, capacity and occupancy of campsites;
pack animal heads; off-road tracks and vehicle inow. Receptor vul-
nerability and value were modeled through the approach briey
described below (full details can be found in Dawa, 2008).
Regarding the impact on soil, soil erosion susceptibility was
modeled by applying the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation
(RUSLE; Renard et al., 1997):
E = RKLSCP 1 Impact maps were generated by spatially combing the intensity of
Where:
E Average annual soil loss [ton ha 1];
R Rainfallrunoff erosivity factor [MJ mm ha 1 h 1];
K Soil erodibility factor [(ton ha 1) (MJ mm ha 1 h 1) 1];
LS Topographic factor [dimensionless];
C Cover management factor [dimensionless];
P Support practice factor [dimensionless].
237
The value of different soil units found in the study area was
assessed by considering their fertility, which was estimated by using
soil type and texture of soil association 1 and soil association 2 (Soil
Survey Staff, 1999), according to formula:
SFI = 2 = 3asso1 + 1 = 3asso2 2
Where:
SFI Soil fertility index
asso1 Fertility of association 1 (soil class)
asso2 Fertility of association 2 (soil class)
Regarding the impact on groundwater, vulnerability to pollution
was assessed by combining in a multicriteria fashion runoff estimates
(based on soil, land use and hydrologic condition) with groundwater
mapping data. To this purpose, the approach proposed by Gemitzi
et al. (2006) was applied, even though, due to data limitation, some
of the factors related to aquifer characteristics were not taken into
account. All groundwater bodies were considered to have the same
value. Regarding the impact on surface water, vulnerability to pollu-
tion was assessed simply by computing the distance from pollution
sources to streams and lakes. Also in this case, all surface water bodies
were considered equally valuable. As to wildlife habitat fragmenta-
tion, the vulnerability was computed using the Infrastructure Frag-
mentation Index (Romano, 2002), adapted to trail segments:
X 
IFI = LsWs NpA = P  3
Where:
IFI Infrastructure fragmentation index [dimensionless];
Ls Length of trail segment (m);
Ws Weight for the segment (m);
A Area of habitat units prior to fragmentation (m2);
Np Number of fragmented patches (dimensionless);
P Perimeter of habitats units prior to fragmentation (m).
The vulnerability of wildlife to disturbance was assessed simply by
computing the distance from the sources (trails, camping sites, off-
road tracks) to habitat patches. As regards value, the importance of the
different animal species was assessed according to the IUCN Red List
classication system, by assigning high value to critically endangered
species, intermediate values to endangered and vulnerable species,
and low value to low-risk species. Regarding the impact on vegetation,
all vegetation types were considered equally vulnerable to trampling
and damaging by camping and off-road driving. This was due to the
high sensitivity of all high-altitude vegetation types. Vegetation values
were assessed by resorting to a naturalness scale (see Usher, 1986),
according to which higher values were assigned to natural vegetation
types (grasslands, riverside formations, etc). Finally, grassland
vulnerability to overgrazing was estimated by combing slope and
distance from water points. The method relies on the work of Bailey
et al. (1996), according to which grazing of large herbivore animals is
largely controlled by the presence of water and by the slope factor. All
grasslands were considered equally valuable.
the stressor (e.g., a trail map in which each trail is assigned the
number of visitors) with the vulnerability and the value of the
receptor (e.g., a map representing soil vulnerability to erosion and a
soil fertility map, respectively). In this work, empirical models linking
intensity and vulnerability of the impact types were lacking, or
impossible to apply due to data limitations. Therefore, maps of stressor
intensity and receptor vulnerability and value were rst normalized
over a 01 value range to make them comparable, and then multiplied
by one another. In this way, a dimensionless 01 impact scale was
 238
D. Geneletti, D. Dawa / Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242
Fig. 8. Watershed-based impact map combined along receptors. a) Soil b) Water c) Wildlife d) Vegetation.
 D. Geneletti, D. Dawa / Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242
Fig. 9. Watershed-based composite impact map (impact of all stressors on all receptors).
constructed, where one corresponds to the highest impact (i.e., highest
intensity occurring in the most vulnerable and valuable areas), and
zero to no-impact conditions.
In order to improve the visualisation of impact distribution and
the readability of the results, impact maps were aggregated and
combined. The aggregation aimed at representing impacts at water-
shed level, rather than at cell level. Watersheds were selected because
they represent meaningful units in terms of both ecological processes
and land-use management. The study area was rst subdivided into
watershed units using the hydro-processing functions of the GIS ILWIS
3.2. Then, each watershed was assigned a value representing the aver-
age impact value occurring within its boundaries. Map combination
was then performed by summing watershed-level impact maps along
the columns and rows of the scoping matrix. As a result, ve impact
maps that summarise the overall impacts of each activity (trail use,
dumping, camping, pack animal grazing and off-road driving), and
four impact maps that summarise the overall impact on each envi-
ronmental component (soil, water, wildlife and vegetation) were ob-
tained. Finally, a combination of all impact maps was also performed
to generate a composite map of all activities on all environmental
components. Map combinations were performed by simple summa-
tion, without giving preference weights to the different factors.
5. Results
The estimated number of trekkers, porters and pack animals along
each trail is presented in Fig. 3. As can be seen, Markha trail is by far
the most visited one with over 3000 trekkers per season, whereas six
other trails, located in central and southwestern Ladakh, are also quite
popular. Fig. 4 (a) shows the location of dumping sites and the estimated
239
amount of wastes disposed during the tourist season, which is about
100 days long. Informal solid waste dumping sites along trails are
associated with campsites for overnight stops. In Fig. 4(b), campsites
with seasonal tourist presence are depicted. Seasonal vehicle inow
estimated for 2006 is represented in Fig. 5. This activity is particularly
widespread in Changthang due to vast and at highland.
Modeling vulnerability of the different environmental components
lead to the results presented in Fig. 6. This gure shows soil erosion,
groundwater, wildlife habitat fragmentation, and overgrazing vulner-
ability models. The Zaskar region resulted particularly susceptible to
soil erosion, due to climatic conditions and soil types characterised by
high erodibility. The valleyoors of the Zaskar Range and the lower
part of Changthang wetlands are the areas more vulnerable to ground-
water pollution. Grasslands prone to overgrazing are scattered in
small patches within the lower slopes and close to water bodies.
Wildlife habitat areas most vulnerable to fragmentation are located
in the southern and central part of the Zaskar Range, as well as in
the south-western sector of the Ladakh Range. As to receptor values,
highest soil fertility is found along the narrow valleybottoms, thanks
to alluvial depositions; wildlife values are highest where the Snow
leopard and the Ladakh urial are present, both classied as endan-
gered by the IUCN Red Lists; vegetation naturalness is higher
especially along water bodies, but also in grassland patches.
Due to the high number and poor readability of the cell-level impact
maps, only impact maps aggregated at watershed level and combined
along the row and columns of the scoping matrix are presented here.
Fig. 7 shows the composite impact maps of the ve activities on all
environmental components, and Fig. 8 presents the composite impact
maps on the four environmental components. As can be seen, impacts
caused by overgrazing and off-road driving concentrate in few areas
240 D. Geneletti, D. Dawa / Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242
along the Markha trail (Nimalang and Kandala), and within the Moore
Plains and Changthang wetlands, respectively. Trail use-related impacts
are highest along the Markha valley trail, Hunder trail, Lamayuru trail,
and trails located in the Changthang wetlands. These trails have high
inux of tourists, pack animals and porters, and cross areas chactac-
terised by valuable and often vulnerable environmental components.
Predictably, impacts generated by campsites show a similar pattern,
which is directly related to bed-occupancies, and hence tourist inow.
Soil degradation is most critical in the central part of the region and
around the Changthang wetlands, due to both trekking and off-road
driving. The composite impact map of all activities on all environmental
components (Fig. 9) shows the patterns of tourism-induced environ-
mental degradation in the region. The most affected watersheds are
located along a strip of land that goes from the northernmost part of the
Darcha trail through the Lamayuru, Markha and Rupsho trails, and
clustered in the proximity of the Changthang wetlands, and particularly
around the Moore Plains area.
6. Discussion
The study provided many useful insights into the environmental
consequences of tourism in Ladakh. Camping and waste dumping are
critical trekking-related factors in the region because trails are not
provided with waste bins and campsites are often informal and poorly
planned, due to the rapid and recent tourism growth. In general, waste
accumulation is high when the campsite is far from settlements,
whereas it tends to be lower when there are villages thereby. There-
fore, the problem is particularly serious in remote and poorly-
accessible areas. More specically on the spatial distribution of
impacts, a striking factor is that, despite the vastness of the region,
tourist ows concentrate in very few trails. All remaining trails are
virtually unknown to tourists. To fully understand the burden borne by
the visited trails, one must notice that trekking expeditions in the
region make use of roughly seven pack animals and ve porters every
ten tourists (see Fig. 3).
In Changthang area, off-road driving pose a threat to the unique
assemblage of ora and fauna species hosted by the wetland, several
of which appear in the IUCN Red List. Changthang is not signicantly
affected by overgrazing, due to large availability of grasslands, and
the low presence of pack animals. However, this area is affected by
vegetation damage, which represents a problem also in areas
where campsites are located nearby riverside vegetation strips
(e.g., Darcha trail). Together with the Nubra Valley, Changthang
wetlands are also particularly affected by campsites, because they
have been opened to tourism only recently, and therefore have few
hotels and tourism infrastructures. By comparing the composite
impact map (Fig. 9) with the location of protected areas in the region,
it can be concluded that two areas are particularly exposed to
environmental degradation by tourism presence: the Hemis and the
Tsokar Tsomoriri National Parks. Hemis National Park resulted badly
affected by tourism, mainly due to its proximity to the city of Leh, the
main tourist hub of the region. This Park does not have a management
plan, and the analysis conducted here could be used to suggest a
zoning scheme or other forms of managements that can help prevent
further environmental degradation.
Most studies related to tourism impact in Ladakh addressed the
socio-economical aspects (Norberg-Hodge, 1992; Michaud, 1996).
Very few studies were carried out on the environmental consequences
of tourism development, and their purpose was to describe the envi-
ronmental conditions and highlight critical issues, rather than to
model and assess tourism impacts (Jina, 1994; Jina, 1996; Humbert-
Droz and Dawa, 2004). The lack of environmental data that affected
the region when this research was initiated forced us to invest a lot of
resources into the construction of a suitable geographical database.
Hence, tools as remote sensing imageries and GIS were largely em-
ployed for the baseline study, as well as the impact analysis. Fieldwork
was conducted to validate data layers and to collect locally available
data (e.g. from travel agencies), but also to conduct survey of the most
visited sites. The study can be improved by carrying out campaigns to
collect plot-scale data, aimed at complementing and validating the
models, and in some cases also at quantifying impacts that here were
predicted using dimensionless scales. For example, attempts can be
made to predict the amount of yearly soil loss in the different water-
sheds. Another possible improvement concerns the estimation of
receptors' vulnerability and value. In some cases, these factors were
considered not to change across the study area. This was mainly due to
lack of data that did not allow to meaningfully conduct more detailed
analysis (e.g., it was difcult to assign different values to grasslands
without species information). Additional eld surveys, as well as the
use of high-resolution and/or hyperspectral remotely sensed images,
can help overcome this limitation. For example, grasslands could be
classied and assessed according to species composition or biomass.
However, given the size of the region, eldwork-based analysis must
be targeted at selected impact hotspots. The nal output of this research
is instrumental to the identication of such hotspots.
7. Conclusions
The rise in the popularity of high-altitude mountain trekking
induced a steep increase in trekkers over the last decade in Ladakh, as
in many other Himalayan states and regions. As a consequence, moun-
tain tourism has become an important source of income, providing a
signicant contribution to the economic development of the region.
However, tourism development is posing a threat to the conservation
of Ladakh environment, due to the fragility of its ecosystems, as well as
the lack of adequate infrastructures, policies and planning tools. This
study aimed at providing a rst contribution to this problem. Over-
views of the most critical areas were generated, by overlapping the
distribution of sensitive and valuable environmental resources, with
the one of trekking-related activities.
The scale at which the study was conducted is suitable to support
the drawing of tourism policies and plans. One of the immediate
decisions the local authorities will have to face relates to the possi-
bility of opening the whole region to tourism. Currently, approxi-
mately half of the region is accessible to tourists. Opening the rest
of the region is still a controversial issue, due to national security
reasons. Environmental concerns could have a stake in this, and play
a role in decision-making, provided that the environmental impacts
of current and future tourism strategies are studied, modeled and
disseminated. If new areas are opened to tourism, measures must be
taken to prevent environmental degradation, and these measured can
be inspired by the results of this research. The results of the study
can also be used to suggest impact mitigations. For example, trekker
inow could be diverted towards less sensitive areas (e.g., outside
some of the protected areas) or more homogeneously distributed
among the different trails.
A nal consideration is that impacts of tourism as a whole are
difcult to estimate because tourism comprises a complex network of
direct and indirect effects. This study addressed impacts directly
related to trekking, which is the most popular tourist activity in the
region. The research can be extended to include other types of envi-
ronmental impacts. In particular, an issue that emerged as very sig-
nicant during the study is the urban development within and around
the city of Leh, largely driven by tourism. Both legal and illegal
buildings are mushrooming, often occupying poorly suitable locations,
such as riversides and low hills. Hotels and other tourist infrastruc-
tures are encroaching the agricultural land in middle and upper Leh.
Houses, or the mere walls, are built in the outskirts of the city and
on the surrounding hills to occupy vacant land while awaiting for
its value to increase. Urban sprawl in Leh, and its relationship with
tourism growth, must be studied and monitored in order to support
the proposal of suitable spatial planning policies.
 D. Geneletti, D. Dawa / Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242
Concluding, there is a gap in the scientic literature with respect to
comprehensive analyses of tourism and trail use impacts at regional
scales, as presented in Section 2. This type of analyses are perhaps of
less concern in developed nations, given that tourist areas, especially if
located within natural parks, are often covered by high-resolution
data, and accompanied by detailed sector studies (Geneletti and van
Duren, 2008). However, in poorly studied areas, such as mountain
regions of developing countries, large scale researches that address a
broad range of impact types can provide a signicant contribution to
tourism planning and management.
Acknowledgments
One of the authors received a fellowship from the TRIL programme
of Abdus Salam International Center for Theoretical Physics, Trieste.
We are grateful to the Wildlife Institute of India, and in particular to
Dr. Asha Rajvanshi for providing some of the baseline data, as well
valuable advices.
References
Arrowsmith C, Inbakaran R. Estimating environmental resiliency for the Grampians
National Park, Victoria, Australia: a quantitative approach. Tour Manag 2002;23:
295309.
Bailey DW, Gross JE, Laca EA, Rittenhouse LR, Coughenour MB, Swift DM, et al. Response
of mountain meadows to grazing by recreational pack stock. J Range Manag
1996;49:386400.
Bhatnagar YV, Wangchuk R, Prins HHT, van Wieren SE, Mishra C. Perceived conicts
between pastoralism and conservation of Equus Kiang in the Ladakh Trans-
Himalaya, India. Environ Brief 2006;38:93441.
Brohman J. New directions in tourism for third world development. Ann Tour Res
1996;23:4870.
Buckley RC, Pickering CM, Warnken J. Environmental management for Alpine tourism
and resorts in Australia. In: Godde PM, Price MF, Zimmermann FM, editors.
Tourism and development in mountain regions. Wallingford: CABI Publishing;
2000. p. 2745.
Buntaine MT, Mullen RB, Lassoie JP. Human use and conservation planning in Alpine
areas of Northwestern Yunnan, China. Environ Dev Sustain 2006;9:30524.
Cakir, J.F. Modeling trail degradation using eld and GIS methodologies: a comparative
study parks, recreation and tourism management. PhD thesis, North Carolina State
University, 2005.
Chatterjea K. Assessment and demarcation of trail degradation in a nature reserve,
using GIS: case of Bukit Timah nature reserve. Land Degrad Dev 2007;18:50018.
Cole DN, Wagtendonk van JW, McClaran MP, Moore PE, McDougald NK. Response of
mountain meadows to grazing by recreational pack stock. J Range Manag 2004;57:
15360.
Dawa, D. Environmental impact assessment of tourism development in Ladak, Indian
Himalaya. PhD thesis, University of Trento, 2008.
Dawa D, Geneletti D. Environmental impact of trekking in Trans-Himalayan ecosystems
a study of a highly visited trail in Ladakh. In: Borsdorf A, Sttter J, Veulliet E, editors.
Managing alpine future. Proceedings of the Innsbruck Conference, October 1517,
2007. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences Press; 2008. p. 6270.
Deng J, Qiang S, Walker GJ, Zhang Y. Assessment and perception of visitors environ-
mental impacts of nature tourism: a case study of Zhangjiajie National Forest Park,
China. J Sustain Tour 2003;11:52948.
Department of Tourism. Unpublished report on tourism ow in Ladakh, Leh, 2007.
Dhariwal R. Tourist arrivals in India: how important are domestic disorders. Tour Econ
2005;11:185205.
Dowding S, Kuuskivi T, Li X. Void ll of SRTM elevation data principles, processes and
performance. Images to decisions: remote sensing foundation for GIS applications.
Kansas City, MO: ASPRS Fall Conference; 2004. September 1216.
EC (European Commission). Scoping in environmental impact assessment. A practical
guide. Brussels: Directorate General for Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil
Protection; 2001.
Farrell TA, Marion JL. Trail impact and trail impact management related to visitation at
Torres Del Paine National Park, Chile. Leisure 2001;26:3159.
Gao BC. NDWI a normalized difference water index for remote sensing of vegetation
liquid water from space. Remote Sens Environ 1996;58:25766.
Gemitzi A, Petalas C, Tsihrintzis VA, Pisinaras V. Assessment of groundwater vulner-
ability to pollution: a combination of GIS, fuzzy logic and decision making tech-
niques. Environl Geol 2006;49:65373.
Geneletti D. Impact assessment of proposed ski areas: a GIS approach integrating
biological, physical and landscape indicators. Environ Impact Asses Rev 2008;28:
11630.
Geneletti D, van Duren I. Protected area zoning for conservation and use: a combination of
spatial multicriteria and multiobjective evaluation. Landsc Urban Plan 2008;85: 97-110.
Godde MP, Price MF, Zimmermann FM. Tourism and development in mountain regions:
moving forward into the new Millennium. In: Godde PM, Price MF, Zimmermann
FM, editors. Tourism and development in mountain regions. Wallingford: CABI
Publishing; 2000. p. 1-25.
241
Goodall SK. Rural-to-urban migration and urbanization in Leh, Ladakh. Mt Res Dev
2004;24:2207.
Gssling S. Sustainable tourism development in developing countries: some aspects of
energy use. J Sustain Tour 2000;8:41025.
Gurung CP, DeCoursey MA. Too much too fast: lessons from Nepal's Lost Kingdom of
Mustang. In: Godde PM, Price MF, Zimmermann FM, editors. Tourism and devel-
opment in mountain regions. Wallingford: CABI Publishing; 2000. p. 23954.
Humbert-Droz B, Dawa S. Biodiversity of Ladakh strategy and action plan. Calcutta:
Sampark; 2004.
Jade S, Bhatt BC, Yang Z, Bendick R, Gaur VK, Molnar P, et al. GPS measurements from the
Ladakh Himalaya, India: preliminary tests of plate-like or continuous deformation
in Tibet. Geol Soc Amer Bull 2004;116:138591.
Jina PS. Tourism in Ladakh Himalaya. New Delhi: Indus Publishing; 1994.
Jina PS, editor. Recent researches on the Himalaya. New Delhi: Indus Publishing; 1996.
Joshi PK, Rawat GS, Padilya H, Roy PS. Biodiversity characterization in Nubra valley,
Ladakh with special reference to plant resource conservation and bioprospecting
biodiversity and conservation. Biodivers Conserv 2006;15:425370.
Knight RL, Cole DN. Factors that inuence wildlife responses to recreationists. In: Knight
RL, Gutzwiller KJ, editors. Wildlife and recreationists: coexistence through manage-
ment and research. Washington, DC: Island Press; 1995. p. 719.
Kuniyal JC. Solid waste management in the Himalayan trails and expedition summits.
J Sustain Tour 2005;4:391410.
LAHDC. District statistical handbook of Leh and Kargil. Technical report, Ladakh
Autonomous Hill Development Council, 2001.
LAHDC. District statistical handbook of Leh and Kargil. Technical report, Ladakh Auto-
nomous Hill Development Council, 2004.
Leung YF, Marion JL. Assessing trail conditions in protected areas: application of a
problem assessment method in Great Smoky mountains National Park, USA.
Environ Conserv 1999;26:2709.
Leung Y, Marion JL. Recreation impacts and management in wilderness: a state-of-
knowledge review. In: Cole DN, McCool S, Borrie WT, O J, Loughlin , editors. Wilder-
ness science in a time of change conference. Wilderness Ecosystems, Threats, and
ManagementOgden, UT: USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station;
2000. p. 2348.
Lynn NA, Brown RD. Effects of recreational use impacts on hiking experiences in natural
areas. Landsc Urban Plan 2003;64:7787.
Marion JL, Cole DN. Spatial and temporal variation in soil and vegetation impacts on
campsites. Ecol Appl 1996;6:52030.
Marion JL, Leung YF. Trail resource impacts and an examination of alternative assess-
ment techniques. J Park Recreat Admi 2001;19:1737.
Messerli B, Ives JD, editors. Mountains of the world: a global priority. New York:
Parthenon; 1997.
Michaud J. A historical account of modern social change in Ladakh (Indian Kashmir)
with special attention paid to Tourism. Int J Comp Sociol 1996;37:286300.
Miller SG, Knight RL, Miller CK. Inuence of recreational trails on breeding bird com-
munities. Ecol Appl 1998;8:1629.
Monz C. Recreation resource assessment and monitoring techniques from mountain
regions. In: Godde PM, Price MF, Zimmermann FM, editors. Tourism and devel-
opment in mountain regions. Wallingford: CABI Publishing; 2000. p. 25574.
Moss LAG, Godde PM. Strategy for future mountain tourism. In: Godde PM, Price
MF, Zimmermann FM, editors. Tourism and development in mountain regions.
Wallingford: CABI Publishing; 2000. p. 32338.
Myneni RB, Hall FG, Sellers PJ, Marshak AL. The interpretation of spectral vegetation
indexes. IEEE Trans Geosci Remote Sens 1995;33(2):4816.
Namgail T, Fox JL, Bhatnagar YV. Habitat shift and time budget of the Tibetan Argali: the
inuence of livestock grazing ecological research. Ecol Res 2006;22:2531.
Nepal SK. Tourism in protected areas. Ann Tour Res 2000;27:66181.
Nepal SK, Nepal SA. Visitor impacts on trails in the Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) National
Park, Nepal. Ambio 2004;33:33440.
Nepal SK, Chipeniuk R. Mountain tourism: toward a conceptual framework. Tour Geogr
2005;7:31333.
Nepal SK, Way P. Comparison of vegetation conditions along two backcountry trails
in Mount Robson Provincial Park, British Columbia (Canada). J Environl Manag
2007;82:2409.
New M, Lister D, Hulme M, Makin I. A high-resolution data set of surface climate over
global land areas. Clim Res 2002;21:1-25.
Norberg-Hodge H. Ancient futures: learning from Ladakh. San Francisco: Sierra Club
Books; 1992.
Price MF. Patterns of the development of tourism in mountain environments. Geo
Journal 1992;27:8796.
Renard K, Weesies F, McCool D, Yoder D. Predicting soil erosion by water: a guide to
conservation planning with the revised universal soil loss equations (RUSLE). Agric.
Handbook Washington D.C.: USDA; 1997.
Romano B. Evaluation of urban fragmentation in the ecosystems. Proceedings of the
International Conference on Mountain Environment and Development (ICIMED),
Chengdu; 2002. October 1519.
Saffrey A. Mongolia's tourism development race: case study from the Gobi
Gurvansaikhan National Park. In: Godde PM, Price MF, Zimmermann FM, editors.
Tourism and development in mountain regions. Wallingford: CABI Publishing;
2000. p. 25574.
Shah J, Nagpal T, Brandon CJ. Urban air quality management strategy in Asia, a
guidebook and a series of city reports. Washington, DC: The World Bank; 1997.
p. 1-188.
Sidjak RW, Wheate RD. Glacier mapping of the Illecillewaet iceeld, British Columbia,
Canada, using Landsat TM and digital elevation data. Int J Remote Sen 1999;20:
27384.
242 D. Geneletti, D. Dawa / Environmental Impact Assessment Review 29 (2009) 229242
Singh S. Tourism in India: policy pitfalls. Asia Pac J Tour Res 2002;7:4559.
Singh RB, Mishra DK. Green tourism in mountain regions reducing vulnerability and
promoting people and place centric development in the Himalayas. J Mt Sci 2004;1:
5764.
Smith AJ, Newsome D. An integrated approach to assessing, managing and monitor-
ing campsite impacts in Warren national park, Western Australia. J Sustain Tour
2002;10:34359.
Soil Survey Staff. Soil taxonomy: a basic system of soil classication for making and
interpreting soil surveys. 2nd ed. USDA Agric. Handb, vol. 436. Washington, DC: U.S.
Gov. Print. Ofce; 1999.
Stevens S. Tourism and deforestation in the Mt Everest region of Nepal. Geogr J
2003;169:25577.
Tonderayi D. Amenity migration and tourism in the Eastern Highland Bioregion of
Zimbabwe: policy planning and management considerations. In: Godde PM, Price
MF, Zimmermann FM, editors. Tourism and development in mountain regions.
Wallingford: CABI Publishing; 2000. p. 297322.
Treweek J. Ecological impact assessment. Bristol: Blackwell Publishing; 1999.
Usher MB. Wildlife conservation evaluation. London: Chapman & Hall; 1986.
Weinberg RF, Dunlap WJ. Growth and deformation of the Ladakh Batholith, Northwest
Himalayas: implications for timing of continental collision and origin of calc-
alkaline batholiths. J Geol 2000;108:30320.
Whinam J, Chilcott N, Ling R, Wyatt P. A method for calculating environmental
sensitivity to walker trampling in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage
Area. In: Buckley R, Weaver DB, editors. Nature-based tourism, environment
and land management. Wallingford, Oxfordshire: CABI International Publishing;
2003. p. 15166.
Wood C. Screening and scoping. In: Lee N, George C, editors. Environmental assessment
in developing and transitional countries. Chichester: Wiley; 2000. p. 7184.
WTO (World Tourism Organization). Tourism's potential as a sustainable development
strategy. Madrid: World Tourism Organization; 2005.
WTO (World Tourism Organization). Yearbook of tourism statistics 2005. Madrid:
World Tourism Organization; 2007.