Eco-tourism often involves visiting remote and fragile ecosystems, which raises concerns about the impact on local cultures and indigenous communities. What problems can this cause? How can these problems be resolved?
Eco tourism industries frequently offer a tour to remote and fragile ecosystems, which increases concerns about how it affects cultural preservation and local communities. The highly relevant issues bring a number of problems and solutions regarding this issue, which I will expound in the elucidate paragraph.
First and foremost, the impacts of ecotourism on the culture would be decreasing the authenticity of the heritage sites. This means that services will be established to accommodate tourists, where fresh and natural looks of such sites can be disrupted. For example, many ritual spots in Kintamani, Bali have lost their beauty and uniqueness. Furthermore, local people can strongly adapt tourists’ attitude and behaviour to provide hospitality, resulting in the loss of cultural identity. It is evident that indigenous youth in remote areas are most likely affected by hybrid cultures, the native and the western together, which include dress, dance and music.
By contrast, there is a notable solution for this issue, firstly, the head of local tribes must create acculturation strategies to retain unique language, food and customs. According to the Tourism Research Journal, this aims to bring harmony and increase cross cultural interaction. Moreover, another solution is to empower native inhabitants participating in sustainable tourism practices. This means that they have to manage tourism flow and avoid compromising the disruption of environment and cultural assets. Ni Luh Djelantik, an Indonesian cultural activist, eagerly advocates conflict resolution between the natives and tourists so as to maintain traditional values and beliefs of Balinese.
To sum up, how tourists visit local ethnic and natural environments carries out detrimental effects such as the disappearance of valuable cultural assets along with its future hereditary generation. Nevertheless, the plausible alternatives include the conduct of assimilation policies and the active involvement of indigenous community.
- In many cities planners tend to arrange shops schools offices and homes in specific areas and separate them from each other Do you think the advantages of this policy outweigh the disadvantages 84
- Nowadays people tend to have children at an older age Do the advantages of this outweigh disadvantages 80
- In many cities planners tend to arrange shops schools offices and homes in specific areas and separate them from each other Do you think the advantages of this policy outweigh the disadvantages 56
- With the recent development in technology like e books some people feel that the printed media like books newspapers and magazine will soon be a thing of the past Others feel that those forms of media will never disappear Discuss both of the views and giv 95
- Although it is generally illegal physical punishment continues in many countries Some argue that parents should have the right to punish their children in this way Do you agree or disagree 84
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 287, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ing this issue, which I will expound in the elucidate paragraph. First and foremost, the i...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 638, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...lution between the natives and tourists so as to maintain traditional values and beliefs...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, look, moreover, nevertheless, regarding, so, then, as to, for example, such as, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 10.4138276553 163% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1726.0 1615.20841683 107% => OK
No of words: 295.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.85084745763 5.12529762239 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14434120667 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05950560508 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 176.041082164 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.664406779661 0.561755894193 118% => OK
syllable_count: 547.2 506.74238477 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.2038230259 49.4020404114 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.285714286 106.682146367 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0714285714 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.42857142857 7.06120827912 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.297540820332 0.244688304435 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0808885342346 0.084324248473 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0593195132617 0.0667982634062 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16111518419 0.151304729494 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0685022654381 0.056905535591 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 24.78 50.2224549098 49% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.65 12.4159519038 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.42 8.58950901804 133% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 78.4519038076 161% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 287, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ing this issue, which I will expound in the elucidate paragraph. First and foremost, the i...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 638, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...lution between the natives and tourists so as to maintain traditional values and beliefs...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, look, moreover, nevertheless, regarding, so, then, as to, for example, such as, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 10.4138276553 163% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 41.998997996 86% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1726.0 1615.20841683 107% => OK
No of words: 295.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.85084745763 5.12529762239 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14434120667 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05950560508 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 176.041082164 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.664406779661 0.561755894193 118% => OK
syllable_count: 547.2 506.74238477 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.2038230259 49.4020404114 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.285714286 106.682146367 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0714285714 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.42857142857 7.06120827912 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.297540820332 0.244688304435 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0808885342346 0.084324248473 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0593195132617 0.0667982634062 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16111518419 0.151304729494 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0685022654381 0.056905535591 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 13.0946893788 128% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 24.78 50.2224549098 49% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.65 12.4159519038 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.42 8.58950901804 133% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 78.4519038076 161% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.