Editing Ecotourism (section)

===Small scale, slow growth, and local control===
The theory of [[underdevelopment]] tourism describes the behavior of [[Multinational corporation|multinational corporations]] that control the development of ecotourism and reap the main benefits, which may lead to a loss of development ownership by local communities. This may limit the control of local communities over natural resources and raise discussions about the unequal distribution of ownership and benefits of tourism resources.These corporations finance and profit from the development of large-scale ecotourism that causes excessive environmental degradation, loss of traditional culture and way of life, and exploitation of local labor. In [[Zimbabwe]] and Nepal's Annapurna region, where underdevelopment is taking place, more than 90 percent of ecotourism revenues are expatriated to the parent countries, and less than 5 percent go into local communities.<ref name="Ziffer">{{cite book |last=Ziffer |first=K. |title=Ecotourism: the uneasy alliance |year=1989 |publisher=Conservation International/Ernst and Young}}</ref>

The present sustainability challenges in ecotourism initiatives have drawn attention to small-scale, slow-growth, and locally community-based tourism development models, which are thought to be better suited to meeting long-term ecological and social objectives. Local peoples have a vested interest in the well-being of their community and are therefore more accountable to environmental protection than multinational corporations, though they receive very little of the [[profit (economy)|profits]]. The lack of control, [[westernization]], adverse impacts to the environment, and loss of culture and traditions outweigh the benefits of establishing large-scale ecotourism. Additionally, culture loss can be attributed to cultural [[commodification]], in which local cultures are commodified to make a profit.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Johnston |first=Alison |date=2000 |title=Indigenous Peoples and Ecotourism: Bringing Indigenous Knowledge and Rights into the Sustainability Equation |journal=[[Tourism Recreation Research]] |volume=25 |issue=2 |pages=89–96 |doi=10.1080/02508281.2000.11014914 |s2cid=168101298}}</ref>

The increased contributions of communities to locally managed ecotourism create viable economic opportunities, including high-level management positions, and reduce environmental issues associated with poverty and unemployment. Because the ecotourism experience is marketed to a different lifestyle from large-scale ecotourism, the development of facilities and infrastructure does not need to conform to corporate Western tourism standards, and can be much simpler and less expensive.<ref>{{cite book |last=Soifer |first=Jack |year=2008 |title=Entrepreneuring Sustainable Tourism |isbn=978-989-95976-0-0}}</ref> There is a greater [[Fractional-reserve banking|multiplier effect]] on the economy, because local products, materials, and labor are used. Profits accrue locally and [[import]] leakages are reduced.<ref name="Cater">{{cite book |last=Cater |first=E. |editor1-last=Cater |editor1-first=E. |editor2-first=G. |editor2-last=Lowman |title=Ecotourism in the third world—problems and prospects for sustainability, in Ecotourism: a sustainable option? |year=1994 |publisher=[[John Wiley & Sons]] |location=United Kingdom}}</ref> The Great Barrier Reef Park in Australia reported over half of a billion dollars of indirect income in the area and added thousands of indirect jobs between 2004 and 2005.<ref name="weaver"/> However, even this form of tourism may require foreign investment for promotion or start-up. When such investments are required, communities must find a company or non-governmental organization that reflects the philosophy of ecotourism; is sensitive to their concerns, and is willing to cooperate at the expense of profit. The basic assumption of the multiplier effect is that the economy starts with unused resources, for example, that many workers are cyclically unemployed and much of industrial capacity is sitting idle or incompletely used. By increasing demand in the economy, it is then possible to boost production. If the economy was already at full employment, with only structural, frictional, or other supply-side types of unemployment, any attempt to boost demand would only lead to inflation. The multiplier impact is frequently employed in ecotourism research to demonstrate the driving force behind tourism expenditure on the local economy.  However, there are still differing opinions in macroeconomics on the multiplier theory's validity, and different schools of thought have different understandings of the circumstances for its use and the mechanism by which it works.

As an example, consider the government increasing its expenditure on roads by $1&nbsp; million, without a corresponding increase in taxation. This sum would go to the road builders, who would hire more workers and distribute the money as wages and profits. The households receiving these incomes will save part of the money and spend the rest on consumer goods. These expenditures, in turn, will generate more jobs, wages, profits, and so on with the income and spending circulating the economy.

The multiplier effect arises because of the induced increases in consumer spending which occur due to the increased incomes – and because of the feedback into increasing business revenues, jobs, and income again. This process does not lead to an economic explosion not only because of the supply-side barriers at potential output (full employment) but because at each "round", the increase in consumer spending is less than the increase in consumer incomes. That is, the [[marginal propensity to consume]] (MPC) is less than one so that each round some extra income goes into saving, leaking out of the cumulative process. Each increase in spending is thus smaller than that of the previous round, preventing an explosion.