Tourism research has long framed the natural environment as a fragile asset requiring protection from tourism-induced harm — generating important insights into impact mitigation, but producing a blind spot: the measurable benefits that ecosystems provide to tourism remain largely unrecognized. This research note documents an ecosystem services gap — the disconnect between the ecosystem services (ES) framework, now central to environmental science and policy, and its near-absence from tourism journals. Drawing on bibliometric evidence, structured literature review, and proof-of-concept examples from ES valuation research, I argue that closing this gap is both analytically necessary and practically urgent. Reframing ecosystems as productive assets rather than passive constraints would strengthen welfare-based arguments for conservation investment and open new avenues for tourism demand modeling and policy design.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aliza Fleischer (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: