Navigation – Plan du site
Tourisme et ressources naturelles

Public use and Ecotourism Policies in Brazilian and Canadian Protected Areas

Utilisation publique et politique d’écotourisme dans les aires protégées brésiliennes et canadiennes
Fabricio Scarpeta Matheus et Sidnei Raimundo

Résumés

Brésil et le Canada ont deux des plus grands réseaux d´aires protégées du monde, tous les deux basés dans le modèle d’aires protégées établi par les États-Unis au XIXe siècle. Cependant, ils ont des politiques distinctes quand il s´agit de l'usage du public et de l'écotourisme à l'intérieur de ces zones. Les lignes directrices canadiennes ont une plus grande focalisation sur les activités de loisirs et de détente, dans une utilisation plus permissive de ses ressources à des activités visant à grande échelle le tourisme. D'autre part le Brésil a un objectif plus limité sur les activités à faible impact avec une forte composante de l'éducation et les restrictions d'activités au sein de ses aires protégées de l'environnement. A partir de cette approche, cet article analyse les politiques publiques brésiliennes et canadiennes pour le développement du ecotourisme à l'intérieur d’aires protégées et de la façon dont ils abordent les trois principaux aspects de l'écotourisme: conservation de l'environnement, education environmental et la participation de la communauté locale.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

Introduction

1Since the establishment of the modern model of protected areas (PAs), with the creation of Yellowstone National Park in 1872 in the United States – the wilderness concept, protected areas, besides their conservation objectives, are configured as important recreational areas for local communities and for tourists and day trippers in general.

2Following the US trend, Brazil created its first National Park in 1937, the Itatiaia National Park. However, use of these territories by local communities and visitors in general for leisure and recreation activities started to develop only in the 1980’s.

3On the other hand, in Canada, PAs are much more geared towards recreation, with a wide range of activities and a considerably higher number of visitors. Especially in the province of British Columbia, where provincial protected areas have a double objective equally important: recreation and conservation. “Parks are set aside for recreational use... but also for conservation. They have a role both in attracting tourists... and in preserving wilderness” (Ministry of Lands and Parks, 1991: 7).

4In order to demonstrate these differences, data from Parks Canada (2013), institution responsible for managing the Canadian federal protected areas, indicate that its 44 national parks received more than 20 million visitors in the 2011/2012 season. Brazilians National Parks, the only category of federal protected area that has some sort of visitation control, also in 2011 received 4.8 million visitors, representing an increase of 17% compared to 2010. Of this total, approximately 50% are concentrated in just two Parks, Tijuca (where the statue of Christ the Redeemer is located) and Iguaçu (home of the biggest waterfalls in the world), the other 19 PAs received the remaining 50%, resulting in an average of 100,000 visitors a year (ICMBIO, 2013).

5These differences may be caused by a multitude of reasons, ranging from the purchasing power of the population, to the local culture, to public policy for the encouragement of public use in protected areas.

6Canadian guidelines for public use have a greater focus on leisure and recreation activities in a more permissive use of its natural resources and activities geared to large scale tourism. Examples are the presence of hunting and fishing activities within its PAs and permission for campfires. Brazil, on the other hand, has a much more limited focus on low-impact activities, such as ecotourism, with a strong component of environmental education and restrictions of activities within protected areas.

7Both views are well summarized by two theoretical on protected areas, one American and one Brazilian. Alfred Runte (2010: 01) points out that, as much as the perception of protected areas has changed since the nineteenth century, "the understanding of parks is the need for visitors". On the other hand, in Brazil, Milano (2001) points out that public use activities should always be linked to an educational component, stimulating visitors learning, and not as simply entertainment.

1. Public Policy

8One definition of public policy that is more wide, but directly related to the objectives of this study, is the one proposed by Gilles Massardier (2003: 84): “Public policy is a set of multiple actions, more or less coordinated, a production process of tangible management devices of a social life field collectively assumed”.

9Massardier (2003) points out aspects that are also addressed by other authors, and goes further, noting that the actions implemented by the government can be more or less coordinated. They do not necessarily deal with actions performed within a plan or a structured public policy. They can be actions performed by the government that point a direction that can be identified, even though they do not demonstrate unity. Another point highlighted by the author is the production of tangible devices that can be normative instruments recognized as laws, decrees or plans, but can also be presented in other formats, for example, programs or projects that demonstrate the government direction. In that sense, public use policies must be established considering all policies applied to PAs: conservation, tourism, etc., in an integrated analysis of the set.

2. Protected areas

10Internationally, the term "protected areas" is perhaps the most usual to designate natural spaces specially protected. This recognition is mainly a result of the actions developed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), one of the most active international associations that deal with the subject. IUCN defines protected areas as: “A clearly defined geographical space, recognized, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long-term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values” (Dudley, 2008: 8).

11Along with this definition, IUCN has also established six different categories of protected areas, each providing specific objectives and characteristics, as shown in the following table.

Table 1. Protected areas categories – IUCN

Category

Primary objective

1.a. Strict Nature Reserve

To conserve regionally, nationally or globally outstanding ecosystems, species (occurrences or aggregations) and/or geodiversity features: these attributes will have been formed mostly or entirely by non-human forces and will be degraded or destroyed when subjected to all but very light human impact.

1.b. Wilderness Area

To protect the long-term ecological integrity of natural areas that are undisturbed by significant human activity, free of modern infrastructure and where natural forces and processes predominate, so that current and future generations have the opportunity to experience such areas.

2. National Park

To protect natural biodiversity along with its underlying ecological structure and supporting environmental processes, and to promote education and recreation.

3. Natural Monument

To protect specific outstanding natural features and their associated biodiversity and habitats.

4. Habitat / Species Management

To maintain, conserve and restore species and habitats.

5. Protected Landscape / Seascape

To protect and sustain important landscapes/seascapes and the associated nature conservation and other values created by interactions with humans through traditional management practices.

6. Protected Area with Sustainable Use of Natural Resources

To protect natural ecosystems and use natural resources sustainably, when conservation and sustainable use can be mutually beneficial.

Source: Dudley, 2008.

12The next sections present the protected areas definitions in Brazil and Canada, as well as an introduction to the legislation that deals with the matter in these countries, their management systems and categories of PAs. The two countries adopt criteria similar to those proposed by IUCN, both for management and for categorization of protected areas, with some specifics that will be further explored in the following items.

2.1. Brazil

13The discussion of protected areas in Brazil dates back to the early nineteenth century, motived by problems related to the impacts of human activity. In 1861, in order to ensure water quality in Rio de Janeiro, Dom Pedro II, emperor of Brazil, called the botanical Major Manuel Gomes Archer to reforest the riparian forests of the Tijuca Massif, where in 1961 Tijuca National Park was created.

14However, since before the creation of the first Brazilian Park, in 1937, until the present day, the country's legislators have developed a normative framework on the protection of the environment and protected areas in Brazil. Several laws were created to establish rules and regulations for different categories of protected areas.

15In this context, on July 18th, 2000, Federal Law No. 9985 was enacted, which regulates the art. 225, § 1, items I, II, III and VII of the Brazilian Constitution, and established the National System of Protected Areas (SNUC, in Portuguese). The purpose of this new law was to consolidate all regulatory acts related to protected areas in Brazil and update the management of the country's PAs, from “Protected areas with sustainable use of natural resources” to Strict Nature Reserve” as established by IUCN.

16With the institution of the SNUC it was also possible to standardize the concepts and definitions related to protected areas in Brazil, through the enactment of the Federal Law all government agencies of the country adopted the same definition, which is: “territorial space and its environmental resources, including jurisdictional waters, with relevant natural characteristics, legally instituted by the state, with conservation objectives and defined limits, under special administration regime, to which appropriate protection guarantees are applied” (Brasil, 2000).

17Protected areas are divided into two major groups in the national system: Full Protection, whose aim is to preserve nature, and where it is only admitted the indirect use of its natural resources, except in cases provided by law; and Sustainable Use, which seeks to harmonize nature conservation with sustainable use of a portion of its natural resources.

18Both groups are divided into categories, the first being composed of five different types and the second of seven. The categories are similar to those proposed by IUCN, but with some specific features, as detailed in Table 2.

Table 2. Protected areas categories - SNUC

Category

Primary objective

Full protection

Ecological Station

Preservation of nature and conduction of scientific research.

Biological Reserve

Full preservation of biota and other existing natural attributes in their limits without direct human interference or environmental changes.

National Park

Preservation of natural ecosystems of great ecological relevance and scenic beauty, making possible the conduction of scientific research and the development of educational activities and environmental interpretation, recreation in contact with nature and ecotourism.

Natural Monument

To preserve rare, unique or great scenic beauty natural sites.

Wildlife Refuge

To protect natural environments that ensure conditions for the existence and reproduction of species or communities of local flora and resident or migratory fauna.

Sustainable use

Environmental Protection Area

To protect biological diversity, discipline the occupation process and ensure the sustainable use of natural resources.

Area of Relevant Ecological Interest

To maintain natural ecosystems of regional or local importance and regulate the permissible use of these areas in order to make it compatible with nature conservation objectives.

National Forest

To ensure the sustainable multiple use of forest resources and scientific research, with an emphasis on methods for sustainable exploitation of native forests.

Extractive Reserve

To protect the livelihood and culture of traditional extractive populations, and ensure the sustainable use of natural resources of the area.

Fauna Reserve

Suitable for technical and scientific studies on the sustainable economic management of wildlife resources.

Sustainable Development Reserve

To preserve nature and, at the same time, to ensure the conditions and means necessary for reproduction and improvement of the ways and the quality of life and exploitation of natural resources of traditional communities, as well as enhance, preserve and improve the knowledge and techniques of environmental management developed by these populations.

Private Reserve of Natural Heritage

To preserve biological diversity.

Source: Modified from BRASIL, 2000.

19Categories National Park and Natural Monument are basically the same as those proposed by IUCN, using even the same nomenclature. Others, such as the Sustainable Development Reserve and Extractive Reserve, can be seen as variations of the category VI of IUCN – Managed Resource Protected Area. Generally speaking, the categories proposed by the SNUC, divided into Full Protection and Sustainable Use, are a way to cope with environmental, political, economic and social aspects of different regions, covering since areas with little or no human impact, reaching even urban areas in the case of Environmental Protection Areas.

2.2. Canada

20Canada recognizes and adopts the IUCN´s definition and model of protected areas, despite having some specific categories. In this country, the federal PAs are managed in an integrated way by three different bodies (Environment Canada, 2013):

  • Environment Canada, responsible for managing the National Wildlife Areas and Migratory Bird Sanctuaries;

  • Fisheries and Oceans Canada, manages the Marine Protected Areas, among other actions to improve marine ecosystems; and

  • Parks Canada, institution in charge of managing National Parks and National Marine Conservation Areas.

21Following are presented the characteristics of each of these categories of protected areas at federal level.

Table 3. Protected areas categories - Canada

Category

Characteristics

National Wildlife Areas

Areas created and managed for the purposes of wildlife conservation, research, and interpretation.

Migratory Bird Sanctuaries

Areas that provides safe refuge for migratory birds in the terrestrial and marine environment.

Marine Protected Areas

Areas ecologically significant, with species and/or properties that require special consideration.

National Parks

A country-wide system of representative natural areas of Canadian significance. By law, they are protected for public understanding, appreciation and enjoyment, while being maintained in an unimpaired state for future generations.

National Marine Conservation Areas

Marine areas managed for sustainable use and containing smaller zones of high protection. They include the seabed, the water above it and any species which occur there. They may also take in wetlands, estuaries, islands and other coastal lands.

Source: Environment Canada, 2013.

22The first three categories focus on habitat conservation as a way to protect Canadian wildlife, analogous to the Biological Reserves established by SNUC, while the Marine Protected Areas aim to the species maintenance for fish production. The last two, managed by Parks Canada, are similar to the National Park category proposed by IUCN and also adopted by the SNUC in Brazil.

3. Public policies for the development of public use in protected areas

23Before the analysis of public policies and different understandings of public use in protected areas, it is worth noting the importance of visitation in these areas. As previously mentioned, ICMBio data show that the number of visitors in federal PAs has been growing in recent years. Similarly, the São Paulo state protected areas administered by the Forestry Foundation, registered a substantial growth (76%) between the years 2011 and 2012, from approximately 1.3 million to 1.7 million visitors.

24In British Columbia the number of visitors in protected areas has remained stable since 2006, with about 20 million people a year. Another relevant fact is that 90% of the province's population have used a provincial park at some time. Such data demonstrates the magnitude of the activity in this country when compared to Brazil.

3.1. Brazil

25In Brazil, ICMBio, an agency established in 2007 under the Ministry of the Environment, is responsible for propose, implement, manage, protect, enforce and monitor protected areas created by the federal government. Both institutions, MMA and ICMBio, have edited instruments to regulate public use in PAs:

Table 4. Federal Pubic Policies - Brazil

Public Policy

Description

Federal Decree n.º 84.017/1979

Approves the Brazilian National Parks Regulation.

Federal Law n.º 9.985/2000

Establishes the SNUC, considered the main legal framework f Protected Areas in Brazil.

Federal Decree n.º 4.340/2002

Regulates the SNUC.

MMA Normative Act (Portaria) n.º 120/2006

Approves the document "Guidelines for visitation in protected areas".

ICMBio Normative Instruction n.º 08/2008

Establishes rules and procedures for the provision of services related to visitation and tourism in federal protected areas for visitors conductors.

MMA Normative Act (Portaria) n.º 366/2009

Sets the prices for the collection of tickets, administrative and technical services provided by the Chico Mendes Institute for Biodiversity Conservation.

ICMBio Normative Act (Portaria) n.º 135/2010

Updates the price list for the collection of tickets for protected areas under management of the Chico Mendes Institute for Biodiversity Conservation.

Source: Authors

Figure 1. Brazil protected area map

Figure 1. Brazil protected area map

Source: Ministry of the environment of Brazil 2013, Cadastro de conservação Web.31 Mars 2013

26Other documents and actions developed by ICMBio related to public use in PAs were also examined, such as the document "Tourism in Parks", which has the concession plans for 12 national parks, and the bidding documents for outsourcing of services.

27In December of 2006, the Forest State System (SIEFLOR, in Portuguese) was created in São Paulo. Through SIEFLOR, a large part of the state's protected areas began to be managed by the Forestry Foundation. Forestry Institute, the former governing body of these areas, remained responsible for the Production Areas, the Experimental Stations and most State Forests, as well as for research in all PAs. The Forestry Foundation is currently responsible for the administration of 94 PAs in the State of São Paulo.

28The objectives of the new system were to improve management and optimize public actions for conservation, reducing bureaucracy of protected areas management processes. SIEFLOR is part of a remarkable change in the management of PAs. This change also had an effect on policies aimed at public use, as will be presented.

29Several legal instruments that outline what can be understood as a public policy for the development of public use in PAs have been identified in the State, and only one resolution was enacted before the new Forest State System, as the following list.

Table 5. State Pubic Policies – Sao Paulo

Public Policy

Description

State Decree nº 25.341/1986

Approves the Sao Paulo State Parks Regulation.

SMA Resolution nº 32/1998

Regulates public visitation and accreditation of guides, agencies, operators and environmental monitors for ecotourism and environmental education in state protected areas.

SMA Resolution nº 59/2008

Regulates the administrative procedures for the management and supervision of public use in the full protection protected areas of the Forest State System.

SMA Resolution nº 61/2008

Regulates the creation and duties of the Ecotourism Advisory Council of the Sao Paulo State Secretariat for the Environment.

SMA Resolution nº 32/2010

Regulates environmental infractions, administrative sanctions and administrative procedures for imposing penalties.

F.F. Normative Act nº 73/2009

Establishes the procedures for preparing the Public Use Emergency Plan for protected areas with consolidated activities of public visitation

F.F. Normative Act nº 152/2011

Establishes the procedures for preparing the Risk and Contingency Management Plan for the full protection protected areas of the Forest State System.

F.F. Normative Act nº 153/2011

Regulates the rafting activity in the protected areas managed by the Forestry Foundation.

State Decree nº 57.401/2011

Establishes the Partnership Program for Protected Areas established by the State of São Paulo and which are under the administration of the Forestry Foundation.

F.F. Normative Act nº 182/2013

Regulates the public visitation timetable in the protected areas managed by the Forestry Foundation.

F.F. Normative Act nº 183/2013

Regulates the criteria for the use of bicycles inside protected areas managed by the Forestry Foundation.

F.F. Normative Act nº 191/2013

Regulates the collection system of tickets, services and use of facilities and equipment installed in the protected areas administered by the Forestry Foundation.

Source: Authors

30It is important to point out that while there are few legal instruments edited before SIEFLOR, the Forestry Institute was already discussing public use, as well as implementing practical actions, since the late 1970s. Also, training events were carried out for the Institute staff and working groups to develop studies and activities related to the theme were created.

31In order to understand the state public policies, programs and projects developed by the Secretariat for the Environment and the Forestry Foundation related to public use were further evaluated, especially the Ecotourism Development Project in the Atlantic Forest Region in the State of São Paulo and the Trails of São Paulo program.

3.2 Canada

32The Canadian Protected Areas system is almost as old as the American, with the creation of the first National Park in 1885. In addition, Canada was the first country to create a specific agency for the management of its national parks and other categories of PAs, Parks Canada, founded in 1911 under the name of Dominion Parks Service.

33Currently, Parks Canada has several normative acts regulating public use and other related activities in the protected areas under its administration. The main ones are presented below.

Table 6. Federal Pubic Policies – Canada

Public Policy

Description

Parks Canada Agency Act

Establishes the Agency and the format that it assumes today, as well as its responsibilities and organization.

Canada National Parks Act

This act is the main regulation of protected areas in Canada.

National Parks of Canada Aircraft Access Regulations

Regulates aircraft access in protected areas.

National Parks of Canada Business Regulations

Establishes the procedures and criteria for issuing permits for business development within protected areas.

National Parks of Canada Camping Regulations

Establishes the criteria for the request for camping permits.

National Parks of Canada Cottage Regulations

Specific rules to regulate the construction and renovation of cottages.

National Parks of Canada Domestic Animals Regulations

Establishes the rules and conditions for domestic animals inside protected areas.

National Parks of Canada Fire Protection Regulations

Presents the criteria for the management and the control of fire within protected areas.

National Parks of Canada Fishing Regulations

Establishes the need for authorization for different types of fishing and for different species.

National Parks General Regulations

Establishes norms for the use of public areas within the parks, use of recreational facilities, dangerous activities, restricted and prohibited activities, necessary permits, heritage conservation, water use, conduct of visitors, among others.

Visitor Activity Guidelines

Establishes guidelines for four activities: Mountain Biking Guidelines; Traction Kiting Guidelines; Guided Interpreted Canopy Walks, Zip Lines, Via Ferrata and Aerial Parks Guidelines; and Community gardens.

Source: Authors

Figure 2. Canada protected area map

Figure 2. Canada protected area map

Source: Ministry of the environment of Brazil 2013, Cadastro de conservação Web.31 Mars 2013

34In the province of British Columbia, the BC Parks is the institution within the Ministry of Environment, responsible for managing five categories of protected areas, as listed above. The province's protected areas system began with the creation of Strathcona Provincial Park in 1911, and today comprises more than 1,000 areas. The first areas have been created with the main objective of generating recreational opportunities for the population and develop the tourism sector in the region. With the publication of the Park Act in 1965, protected areas have gained an increased focus on environmental conservation, based on the understanding that the quality of the visitor experience results from careful management of its natural and cultural attributes. Nonetheless, even with this increased attention, the system of protected areas in the province of British Columbia has a dual policy, seeking a balance between conservation and recreation (Ministry of Lands and Parks, 1991).

35The system of protected areas of British Columbia has greatly increased in the late twentieth century, from about 400 PAs in 1986, reaching 1,030 in 2013. However, in a contradictory manner, the budget and the number of employees of BC Parks have been falling ever since. This reduction policy comes with a number of other actions, such as the cancellation of environmental interpretation programs, the closure of areas to the public in some seasons and the outsourcing of recreation and maintenance services (Clayton et al., 2011).

36The main identified normative acts that establish the public policy for the development of public use in the British Columbia provincial parks are presented below.

Table 7. Provincial Pubic Policies – British Columbia

Public Policy

Description

Protected Areas of British Columbia Act

Presents all categories of protected areas managed by BC Parks.

Park Act

The general rules for Parks, Recreation Areas and Conservancies are established by this act.

Park, Conservancy and Recreation Area Regulations

The Regulation presents a wide range of elements, from permits, to the management of waste and ending with the park rangers attributions.

Striking the Balance

One of the main policies of BC Parks is not formalized in a legal act, but reported in an internal document.

BC Parks Program Plan 2007-2012

The objective of this plan is to translate the British Columbia government strategies for protected areas in a document.

Source: Authors

Conclusion

37It becomes clear, through the study of the public policies from both countries that they reflect the realities in which they operate, especially regarding the economic development and the combating of social inequality. The different approaches of how to involve the local communities is a good example of this, with a concern to increase recreational opportunities for the residents of the regions where protected areas are located in the Canadian province and, on the other hand, in the State of Sao Paulo, policies focus on generate employment and income for the surrounding communities.

38One of the most remarkable features of the BC Parks policies that resonate in all decision-making on protected areas of the province is its dual focus in both conservation and recreation. But, one aspect that is not written on any policy and probably has the biggest impact on the protected areas is the services outsourcing. As pointed by Eagles et al. (2010), since 1989 the BC government changed from the national park management model to the public and for-profit combination model, which is amongst the most poorly evaluated in relation to the criteria of good governance.

39In Brazil, at first glance, what can be seen is a major focus of policies that regulate state protected areas in the conservation of the environment. Public use and recreation activities, when mentioned, are within an environmental education context. This focus limits the potential of tourism activities inside protected areas and, that way, does not contribute to generate income for the local communities, one of the main written goals of the public policies.

40The analysis shows that the focus of the public policies in recreation, as in the Canadian case, or conservation, as in the Brazilian case, does not configured as the main factor for its results, although it plays an important role. The outsourcing policy, which is already adopted in British Columbia and is beginning to be implemented by the Brazilian government, has affected more forcefully the three elements of ecotourism: environmental conservation, environmental awareness of visitors and involvement of local community.

41Finally, the conservation in both countries is being directly affected by the outsourcing policies. There has been an increase in the negative impacts caused by human activities, which have a bigger relationship with the lack of monitoring and enforcement, resulting from the decline in human and financial resources, than with the kind of recreation activity developed inside the protected areas.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Brasil (2000). “Lei Federal n.º 9.985, de 18 de julho de 2000”, Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, Brazil: 1, 19 de jul. 2000.

Clayton, J., B. Bradley and G. Wynn (2011). “One Hundred Years of Struggle: The Ongoing Effort to Establish Provincial Parks and Protected Areas in British Columbia”, BC Studies, Victoria, Canada, 170: 5-15.

Dudley, N. (2008). Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories, Gland, Switzerland: IUCN, 2008.

Eagles, P. F.J., M. Havitz, B. Mccutcheon, W. Buteau-Duitschaever and T. Glover (2010). “The Perceived Implications of an Outsourcing Model on Governance within British Columbia Provincial Parks in Canada: A Quantitative Study”, Environmental Management, Asheville, USA, 45: 1244–1256.

Environment Canada (2013). Protected areas. Web. 31 Mar. 2013.

ICMBio (2013). Visitação nas unidades de conservação cresceu 17 % em 2011, Chico Mendes Institute for Biodiversity Conservation, Web. 31 Mar. 2013.

Massardier, G. (2003). Politiques et action publiques, Paris: Armand Colin.

Milano, M. S. (2001). Conceitos e princípios gerais de ecologia e conservação”, In: Fundação o boticário de proteção à natureza (Ed.). Curso de administração e manejo em Unidades de Conservação, Curitiba, FBPN: 1-55.

Ministry of Lands and Parks (1991). Striking the balance, Victoria, Province of British Columbia.

Parks Canada (2013). Parks Canada Attendance 2008-09 to 2011-12, Web. 31 Mar. 2013.

Runte, A. (2010). National Parks: the American history, 4th edition, Lanham, USA, Taylor Trade Publishing.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Figure 1. Brazil protected area map
Crédits Source: Ministry of the environment of Brazil 2013, Cadastro de conservação Web.31 Mars 2013
URL http://etudescaribeennes.revues.org/docannexe/image/9344/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 112k
Titre Figure 2. Canada protected area map
Crédits Source: Ministry of the environment of Brazil 2013, Cadastro de conservação Web.31 Mars 2013
URL http://etudescaribeennes.revues.org/docannexe/image/9344/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 76k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Fabricio Scarpeta Matheus et Sidnei Raimundo, « Public use and Ecotourism Policies in Brazilian and Canadian Protected Areas », Études caribéennes [En ligne], 33-34 | Avril-Août 2016, mis en ligne le 02 juillet 2016, consulté le 20 octobre 2017. URL : http://etudescaribeennes.revues.org/9344

Haut de page

Auteurs

Fabricio Scarpeta Matheus

MSc; Conservation Analyst of WWF-Brazil; fabriciomatheus@usp.br

Sidnei Raimundo

PhD, Professor; University of Sao Paulo; sraimundo@usp.br

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

Licence Creative Commons
Les contenus d’Études caribéennes sont mis à disposition selon les termes de la Licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale 4.0 International.

Haut de page
  • Logo Université des Antilles
  • Logo DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals)
  • Logo ERIHPLUS (European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences)
  • Revues.org