Aboriginal Interpretation in Australian Wildlife Tourism
Journal of Ecotourism, Vol: 7, Issue: 2, Page: 116-136
2008
- 668Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage668
- Downloads656
- Abstract Views12
Article Description
This paper evaluates Aboriginal cultural interpretation at wildlife attractions and on wildlife tours in Australia. The sites included 14 wildlife parks or zoos; three Aboriginal owned emu or crocodile farms; and 16 wildlife tours, river cruises or resorts with Indigenous interpretation of wildlife. Telephone interviews were conducted with 35 manage (nine Indigenous) and 26 Indigenous staff at wildlife attractions that included verbal or written Aboriginal wildlife interpretation. The Indigenous guides verbally presented both traditional uses and personal stories about Australian wildlife followed by Aboriginal 'Dreaming' or creation stories about totemic animal species. Non-Indigenous staff explained traditional Aboriginal uses of wildlife followed by biological facts and species information. The responses in this study highlight cultural differences in animal attitudes and approaches to wildlife use or interpretation. According to staff, tourists benefit from the inclusion of Aboriginal interpretation at wildlife sites by broadening their mind dispelling myths learning/education about Aboriginal cultures, novelty and excitement from visitors, increasing cultural awareness and developing more positive attitudes towards Indigenous people. Some guidelines for wildlife attractions and tours to develop and present Aboriginal cultural interpretation of Australian wildlife are also identified.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know