The national park FUJI-HAKONE-IZU is also facing the waste
managing problem. The increase of visitors caused an uncontrolled increase of
the waste on the mountain.
The previous mentioned bad manners of the tourists are affecting
the surrounding environment. Visitors are throwing the waste on their way to
the peak and this has a detrimental effect on the national park. In 2013 Mt.
Fuji was designated as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Which increased the number
of visitors. The vision of the UNESCO was to manage the national park as a
cultural landscape and the interpretation strategy supposed to be adopted by
the end of 2014. According to the report in 2016, the threat is the lack of
fully functional management system. The report is also informing the light improvement
in the management of the waste.
On the graph below we can see the number of waste collected by a
group of volunteers. In 2013 was collected over ninety-five tones of
Neverthless the garbage collection is a short term solution.
By taking a long term strategy decision the situation can be
improved meanfully. Below can be seen the suggestion that would help the
First suggestion is the increase the number of the bins. The
possibility, of throwing the waste to the place that is meant for it, will
increase, if a visitor will have a chance to use the bin instead of throwing
the wrap of consumed good in the nature. Since in general the awareness of the
importance of the environment protection is rising. The visitor would have a
Second suggestion, is to provide the visitors the information
about location of the bins and also the information what impact has
unscrupulous behaviour on the surrounding environment.
The information can be provided by the adding the location of the
bins on the leaflet. The visitor will be aware of the distance to the
possibility to use the containers.
the distance information can be provided on the signs showing the remoteness to
The notice can be also placed on the waste
In order to control the protection of the surrounding environment,
management should hire the staff, which would indicate the visitors to keep the
In the awareness of the financial heft of the previous
propositions, there should be an environmental fee collected. There was a try
in the past, done by the management, to collect the financial wherewithal. But the fee was only volunteer,
and the requirement was provided only in Japanese language. The suggested fee
was 1000 ¥, which is approximately seven euros. There can be a discussion about
the justness of the collection a fee for the visitation of a cultural heritage.
In the case of national park Fuji-Hakone-Izu, this act has a substantiation of
protection and maintaince of the environment. The management can not prohibit
the visitation of the mountain, but can interpretate the protection prevention.
By taking the right managerial decisions the impact
on environment of over three hundred thousands visitors per year might be reduced.
impact on the surroundings is also offering the idea of demarketing of the
destination. Demarketing is aspect of marketing that deals with discouraging visitors
in general or a certain class of visitors. Demarketing measures related to
‘product’ include limiting recreational activities by defining specific areas
where they can be conducted, limiting the duration of activities and closures
of sites or features in the park. The measures related to ‘place’ are the use
of a booking system, limiting visitor numbers and group sizes, commercial
licensing and limiting signage. Measures related to ‘price’ are not usually
extensively used in the national parks. The promotional demarketing measures
applied include stressing restrictions and appropriate environmental behaviour
in promotional material and non-promotion of certain areas or experiences in
this strategy was not applied. But according to the previous suggestions, the
requirement of the so called ,,green fee”, can have discouraging affect on the potentional