Du lịch sinh thái; Đầm phá Tam Giang; Dịch vụ du lịch sinh thái Ecotourism; Tam Giang lagoon; Tourism service


This study was conducted to reinforce the hypothesis that ecotourism in Quang Loi commune’s lagoon created differences in income and lagoon resource protection of different beneficiary groups. Data was collected through secondary sources, 3 key informant interviews and interviews of 62 households in three household groups: tourism service, fishing, and aquaculture households.  The results reveal that ecotourism services in Quang Loi commune started in 2010 and thrive since 2017, relying on the advantages of the local natural resources. Local community organized and provided tourism services such as: sightseeing on the lagoon, fishing experience, dining and accommodation, and some other services. By joining such services, labors in ecotourism service households earned 39.07 million VND/ year, which significant contributed to improve household’s income. Ecotourism service households, therefore, had higher income than that of fishing group and aquaculture group (85.15 compared to 72.29 and 60 million VND, respectively; p value < 0.05). The lagoon environmental protection activities such as: lagoon night patrol, waste collection, propaganda and advocating for lagoon environmental protection, etc. were paid more attention by the local community since the development of ecotourism. Similarly, there was a significant higher participation time of tourism service households in the above activities in comparison with the rest groups (p value < 0.05). The lagoon environment and resources was assessed to be improved by local residents. This result implicates that ecotourism development is a suitable strategy to improve the local people's livelihood and Tam Giang lagoon resources protection currently.


  1. Anup, K. C., Rijal K. and Sapkota R. P. (2015), Role of ecotourism in environmental conservation and socioeconomic development in Annapurna conservation area, Nepal, International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 22(3), 251–258.
  2. Aryal C. and Maharjan K. K. (2018), Assessment of Ecotourism Potential of Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, Eastern Nepal, Journal of Tourism & Adventure, 1(1), 48–67.
  3. Bansal S. P. and Kumar J. (2011), Ecotourism for Community Development: A Stakeholder’s Perspective in Great Himalayan National Park, International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 2(2), 31–40.
  4. Clifton J. and Benson A. (2006), Planning for Sustainable Ecotourism: The Case for Research Ecotourism in Developing Country Destinations, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14(3), 238–254.
  5. Degang W. and Xiaoting H. (2006), Coincidence and Upgrade: A Typical Case Study of Rural Ecotourism Development, Chinese Journal of Population Resources and Environment, 4(1), 45–53.
  6. Department of Capture Fisheries and Resources Protection of Thua Thien Hue province (2019), Report on the Implementation of Aquatic Protected Area Management in 2019 and the Plan for 2020, Thua Thien Hue.
  7. Nguyen Hong Giap (2002), Travel Economics (Book), Young Press, Ho Chi Minh City.
  8. Le Van Hoai (2017), Solutions to develop ecotourism in Ke Go lake nature reserve, Ha Tinh province, Journal of Science, Hue University, 126 (5D), 205–218.
  9. Hunt C. A., William H. D., Laura D. and Martha H. (2015), Can ecotourism deliver real economic, social, and environmental benefits? A study of the Osa Peninsula, Costa Rica. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 23(3), 339–357.
  10. Khanal L. (2019), Contribution of Ecotourism on household income: A study from Buffer zone of Shivapuri Nagarjun National Park, Nepal, North American Academic Research, 2(12), 220–231.
  11. Kiper T. (2013), Role of Ecotourism in Sustainable Development (Book chapter), Namık Kemal University, Turkey.
  12. Linsheng, Z., Buckley, R., & Ting, X. (2007), Chinese perspectives on tourism eco-certification, Annals of Tourism Research, 34(3), 808–811.
  13. Mehta, J.N., & Heinen, J.T. (2001), Does community-based conservation shape favorable attitudes among locals? An empirical study from Nepal, Environmental Management, 28(2), 165–177.
  14. Mitchell, J., & Ashley, C. (2010), Tourism and poverty reduction: Pathways to prosperity, London: Earthscan.
  15. Muchapondwa, E. (2003), The Economics of Community-Based Wildlife Conservation in Zimbabwe, Ph.D. Thesis, Goteborg University, Goteborg, Sweden.
  16. People's Committee of Quang Loi Commune (2019), Quang Loi socio-economic report 2019.
  17. Roe, D. and Elliott, J. (2006), Pro-poor conservation: The elusive win-win for conservation and poverty reduction? Policy Matters, 14, 53–63.
  18. Schellhorn M. (2010), Development for Whom? Social Justice and the Business of Ecotourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(1), 115–135.
  19. Shibia, M.G. (2010), Determinants of attitudes and perceptions on resource use and management of Marsabit National Reserve, Kenya, Journal of Human Ecology, 30(1), 55–62.
  20. Shoo R. A. and Songorwa A. N. (2013), Contribution of ecotourism to nature conservation and improvement of livelihoods around Amani nature reserve, Tanzania, Journal of Ecotourism, 12(2), 75–89.
  21. Snyman, S. (2014), The impact of ecotourism employment on rural household incomes and social welfare in six southern African countries, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 14(1–2), 37–52.
  22. Stem, C., Lassoie, J., Lee, D., and Deshler, D. (2003), How "eco" is ecotourism? A comparative case study of ecotourism in Costa Rica, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11(4), 322–347.
  23. Tessema, M.E., Ahsenafi, Z.T., Lilieholm, R.J., & Leader-Williams, N. (2007), Community attitudes to wildlife conservation in Ethiopia. In S. Weber and D. Harmon (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2007 George Wright Society Conference “Protected areas in a changing world”, 287–292, Hancock, MI: The George Wright Society.