1

Coral Reefs; The Home of Unsustainable Ecotourism

MAF 472 Final Paper

Caroline Salvaneschi

MAF 472
Professor Moore
December 2, 2015

2
Abstract
Coral Reefs are one of the most diverse and valuable ecosystems on the planet. These underwater
ecosystems, also known as underwater rainforests, take up only 0.1% of the earths ocean
floor, but they are home for about 25% of all marine species. This includes about 4,000 species
of fish, 800 species of hard corals, and hundreds of unknown other species (NOAA., 2008). The
importance of coral reefs to the marine ecosystem and marine research cannot be overstated.
These reefs are also home for many undiscovered organisms just waiting to be discovered.
Researching this biodiversity could be the key to finding new medicines. Studies have already
shown promise in treatments that could serve as cures for cancer, arthritis, human bacterial
infections, viruses, and other diseases, all based off of coral reef plants and animals. The coral
also provides a time capsule of sorts, showing how the oceans have changed over thousands of
years. This is done by analyzing the carbons within the age layers of the coral, just like the rings
of a tree. Coral reefs also act as buffers for the adjacent shoreline, protecting close to a half
billion people who live on those shores. By buffering the waves, the reefs prevent erosion,
property damage, loss of life, and protect wetlands, ports, and harbors.
The reefs provide not only environmental benefits but many economic benefits as well.
Coral reefs provide economic and environmental services for the fishing and tourism industries.
Coral reef fishing has a commercial value in the U.S of approximately 100 million dollars
annually and accounts for upwards of 25% of the catch in developing counties with reef fishing
industries (Costanza et al., 1997). Reefs provide millions of jobs and billions of dollars in
tourism revenues through markets for diving, fishing trips, hotels, restaurants, and other
businesses near the reefs. The annual economic value from coral reefs is estimated to be between

3
$29.8-37.5 billion, says NOAAs Ocean Service Education program. These economic benefits are
amazing; especially considering reefs covers less than .1% of the Earths surface.
These extremely valuable reefs are also extremely vulnerable, and simple changes to the
reefs environment can cause major impacts on the coral. Changes in sea level, sea surface
temperature, chemical exposure, and salinity are the most common reasons for reef decline.
There are two kinds of threats, natural and anthropological, and the both can change a
reefs ecosystem and effect the coral. Natural impacts are impacts caused by the earths natural
processes; this includes natural disasters, el nin, tides, earthquakes, coral diseases, etc. The
silver lining of natural impacts is that the effects are relatively short lived, and in these cases, the
reefs can rebuild over time. With Anthropological impacts this is not often the case.
Anthropological impacts are sustained stresses caused by human activity, and its these long-term
stresses that devastate coral reefs. Examples of anthropological threats are pollution, fishing, and
direct human contact. Anthropological impacts like CO2 pollution and global warming are two of
the biggest causes of problems being seen with reef health today. Stopping or just slowing global
warming and CO2 pollution is a slow moving process that must be addressed by the whole world.
Direct human contact activities and local pollution are impacts that can be avoided much easier
and at a local level. A few regulations and protected areas within a reef would be enough to help
the reefs substantially. Fifty-eight percent of the world's reefs are threatened by human activity
like overexploitation and coastal development, those are all anthropological threats and many of
these anthropological direct contact threats are a result of tourist operations.

4
Introduction
Ecotourism is commonly the kind of tourism that puts people into direct contact with the
reef, and this direct contact is causing reef health to decline. This is controversial because the
ecotourism market defines itself as environmentally responsible. Can these activities be allowed
to continue and be marketed as ecotourism if the tourist are the ones degrading the reefs? In
addition, scientists add to this problem, as the vulnerability of the reef has made the reef a
trendy place to research. Is this research all legitimate or is it causing the reef to decline even
faster? This is the questions being answered in this paper.
By analyzing and explaining the real impacts ecotourism has on reefs ecosystems and
their precious resources, the contradiction that is common in most ecotourism operations going
on everyday all over the world will become clear. Ecotourism is a popular tourism market today
because its believed that ecotourism is a more environmentally friendly form of tourism that
brings the tourists into nature, but by putting the ecofriendly tourist into these ecosystems they
for putting those ecosystems at risk, maybe these ecosystems are better off untouched.
The real life example that is the focus of this paper is the Great Barrier Reef. First, this
paper will go into explaining the Great Barrier Reef and help develop an understanding about
how important the reef is and how it is being threatened. Then, it will look at what activities are
responsible for the reefs decline, and most importantly, which of those activities are being
marketed and operated by the tourism industry. The rest of the paper will provide an in-depth
analysis of the tourism that is taking place on this particular reef. It will look into how much
tourism is taking place on the reef, and it will show the extent that the direct contact impacts
tourist are having on the reef. The paper will attempt to create an understanding of the impact

5
tourists are having and is that reason alone enough to debunk the perception of these tourism
activities as truly ecotourism.
To prove that these activities should not in fact be considered ecotourism, this paper will
go over what ecotourism is defined as, by using Weavers widely excepted definition explained
in his Encyclopedia of Ecotourism article. By looking at how these harmful tourist activities are
marketed to the tourist, are tourists being misled about the impacts of these activities by using
ecotourism as a smokescreen or are the tourist themselves in a tourist bubble. Are they so
driven to get this authentic travel experience that they are blind to elements of their vacation that
they dont want to see, like environmental cost?
This work will also look into how the vulnerability of the reef has become part of the
tourist product, using Amelia Moores work, Climate Changing Small Islands: Considering
Social Science and the Production of Island Vulnerability and Opportunity, where her idea of
institutionalizing vulnerability in Small island nation, can it also be applied to the Great Barrier
Reef. Seeing how this vulnerability has caused the tourist market to evolve, and more
specifically looking into if institutionalizing the idea of vulnerability has caused the reef
exploitation even more. This vulnerability has also brought on a massive amount of research on
the reef, and these researchers are going to be critiqued in the same way the tourist will be. This
paper will analyze their research, looking to see if their contact with the reef is justified and if
their research is important. What is to be feared is scientific tourism, a concept from Wests
work, Tourism as Science and Science as Tourism: Environment, Society, Self, and Other in
Papua New Guinea, where scientists or students do illegitimate work in tourism location, work
where the tourism comes first and science comes second. The Great Barrier Reef has become a
mainstream place to research and study but there should be better limitations on what researchers

6
should be permitted to do on the reef, and not for people who use science as an excuse to go visit
the reef. Before looking into these topics, this paper is going to give some background about the
current state of the Great Barrier Reef and exactly what activities and research operations are
going on with the reef and what are the management policies in place today to help manage the
direct contact with the reef.

Tourist Dominance in the Great Barrier Reef

The Great Barrier Reef is the largest reef on the planet and is consists of up of 3000 coral
reefs and 1050 islands. Its covers an area roughly the size of Italy and stretches 2300 km along
Australias northeast coast. It is a dominating factor in the countries economy (What Australia is
doing to manage the Great Barrier Reef pg. 1.). The reefs economic value is about 7 billion
Australian dollars annually, 5.7 Billion in USD, and creates jobs for more than 68,000 people.
The tourist industry is the driving factor behind these numbers. Tourists are responsible for about
80% of the economic value of the reef and 90% of the jobs. Recreation is the next largest
industry involved with the reef. Recreational activity only includes residents and their fishing,
boating, sailing and household expenditures on recreational equipment. These activities
contribute only 175 million in USD and 2400 jobs, numbers that are dwarfed by the tourism
industry. This has been reported in The Great Barrier Reef Marine Parks Economic Contribution
of the Great Barrier Reef. Conclusion; tourism is the dominating industry taking place on the
reef and its activities are responsible for the majority of anthropological impacts the reef faces.
Approximately 2 million tourists come to the reef each year to vacation. These tourists
partake in activities like snorkeling, scuba driving, reef cruises, and many tours like swimming
with sting rays, turtle watching, and catamarans. Each of these activities impacts the reefs in

7
different ways. Scuba driving, and snorkeling can cause physical damage to the reef. Maybe the
person kicks the reef coral by accident or intentionally breaks off a piece to collect. The
sunscreen that the swimmers wear to protect their skin is toxic to the reef. Boat activities can
cause damage if the boat or anchor comes in contact with the reef. Cruises and other boats
pollute with theirs fuels and waste disposal. Resort development causes pollution on the reef
with fertilizer run-off and waste. All these activities have a major impact on the reef, some say up
to half the reef has seen degradation in the form of bleaching over the past 30 years. Higher
water temperatures, low salinity, low water quality and pollution all cause coral bleaching.
Granted, global warming and CO2 is responsible for the bleaching, but water quality and
pollution also contribute to the anthropological impacts affecting the reef. However, as
mentioned earlier, tourism on the reef is an easier dynamic to control, compared to controlling
the globes warming and CO2 output.
There are some policies in place today to protect the reef, like a ban on the disposal of all
dredging materials within the reefs ports. There are also fines issued for reef mistreatment. The
Australian government has spent billions of dollars over the years on research, reef restoration,
and water quality improvement. Other then the fines and regulations put in places within the
National Marine Park to stop tourist from touching or collecting on the reef, and a small amount
of zoning, the tourists are allowed on any part of the reef. It is clear that the government isnt
interested in hindering the tourist market, which is easy to understand when tourism makes up
80% of the over 7 billion dollars the reef earns annually. The problem is that the tourism market
doesnt acknowledge the impacts they are having on the reef. Many tourists feel that some of the
money they pay for their vacation goes into the reefs protection efforts, resulting in tourist and
resorts feeling as if they are part of the solution and not part of the problem. Some ecotourism

8
resorts on the reef say they that they impose zero impacts on the reef and even go as far to saying
that their tourists make the reef a better place. The next part of this paper is going address this
contradiction of the tourist impact with a focus on ecotourism.

How Tourism on the Reef is Perceived

The dominance of tourism on the reef has caused the lack of action against direct contact
degradations. Management officials do acknowledge that their tourism market does contribute to
the reefs decline to some extent, through pollution and physical damage, but they have made no
action to ban or limit tourism in any part of the reef. The government doesnt focus much on the
tourism impact and focuses largely on the impact of global warming. It seems that the
government and more specifically the Department of the Environment is not trying to bring to
light the impacts the tourism market. They value the income from tourism so much that they are
willing to pay the cost of their impact on the reef. Granted, the government does put millions of
dollars towards protecting the reef, but the tourism market is not the major contributor to these
funds, as some tourist think. Reef restoration on the Great Barrier Reef is funded mostly by
taxes, private investors and a government trust. To be fair, tourism does contribute to the
restoration effort though the economic activity and money they bring to the region but tourists
use this as a reason to be guilt free during their visit and contact with the reef. Ecotourism is
another reason why tourists continue to perceive themselves as not a part of the problem. All of
this is fueling the continued reef degradation.
This idea is seen in Zo A. Meletis and Lisa M. Campbell work, Call It Consumption!
Re-Conceptualizing Ecotourism as Consumption and Consumptive. In this work they write
about the contradiction of ecotourism being the sustainable solution, when they are really just

9
making the environmental degradation problems worse. It states we argue that categorizing
ecotourism as non-consumptive is not only inaccurate, but also has consequences for both
environments and people. (Campbell and Meletis. 2007)
The hunting industry can be used as an example of this misconception. Most hunters
consider themselves Eco-tourists. Ecotourism is partly defined as non-consumptive, and
consumptive is defined as a removal or depleting practices. If hunting is killing wildlife and
removing them from nature, which is direct and intentional consumption of nature, how could it
commonly be labeled as a form of ecotourism, which is again defined as non-consumptive? This
illustrates how far these obvious contradictions can go, like hunters thinking of themselves as
conservationists. These misconceptions of ecotourism cause consumptive practices to continue,
and it is misleading to consumers of the real impacts they impose on nature.
This hunting ecotourism example can be compared to the reef due to the fact that all
tourism activities on the reef are considered ecotourism because the Marine Park permits only
eco-friendly activities, meaning that this non-impact misconception is seen throughout reef
tourism. This is concerning because ecotourism dominates the reef and we now know ecotourism
is misleading and un-realistic regarding its impact.
It can be said that ecotourism is at least partially to blame for the continuing degradation
on the reef by tourism. Tourists believe they are not harming the reef because they are Ecotourists during their visit to the reef, and to them this means their contact with the reef could not
possibly cause harm or it would not be called ecotourism, creating the need to answer question
like, why is tourism on the reef marketed as eco-tourism? And what should be done to make
tourist realize their true impacts?

10
Ecotourism on the Reef
Meletis and Campbells work does not call for the end of ecotourism practices, they are
just looking for those industries to be re-conceptualized, and not just conform to western
expectations of a natural non-consumptive experience. This answers the questions of why
tourism on the reef is marketed as ecotourism, it is to meet westerners expectations. Then, how
to help make the tourism realize their true impacts? The market has to be re-conceptualized.
Westerners are attracted to the idea of going into untouched nature and having a
sustainable form of tourism, that is why the ecotourism market has become so popular recently.
Tourists are looking for the authentic experience and ecotourism offers that. Weaver in his work
Encyclopedia of Ecotourism describes ecotourism to the world as a way to fund conservation
and scientific research, protect fragile ecosystems, benefit rural communities, promote
development in poor countries, enhance ecological and cultural sensitivity, instill environmental
awareness and a social conscience in the travel industry, satisfy and educate the discriminating
tourist, and, some claim, build world peace. With this you can see how ecotourism became
popular very quick in the 70s with the environmental movement, and people started to want that
nature based alternative to mass tourism.
Looking at the Great Barrier Reef, from the 1970s to the 1990s, the world started to
realize the severity of the reef decline. Statements were being made like 1/3 of the reef has
vanished in the past 15 years. As a result, the modern tourist, like the tourist of the 70s
environmental movement, is looking for an environmentally friendly way to visit the reef. With
the pressure of the public eye due to the reefs decline, the Australian tourist market worried that
this would cause the loss of their tourist market. Ecotourism was turned to as a more ecofriendly
form of tourism. They created the Marine Park in 1975, the Ecotourism Association of Australia

11
in 1992 and the worlds first National Ecotourism Accreditation Program in 1996, which gives
marketers the ability to label their tourist as sustainable. By doing this they have catered to the
expectations of the tourist through ecotourism. This phenomenon can be explained by the
Tourist Gaze (Stronza. Pg. 271), a theory that explains how the host feels the need to meet the
tourists expectations. In the case of the Great Barrier Reef, the tourist did not like seeing the
decline of the reef, so the host, Australia, adapted their tourism market as an ecotourism
destination. This was very successful, and it is responsible for the flourishing tourism economy
you see in Australia today.
Australia did a great job at marketing this new ecotourism destination. Part of this new
tourism market is the Australian Eco-Tourism Accreditation Program. This program has a large
variety of different certification logos, all used to brand your tourism business as certified
ecotourism. The ECO Certification program assures travelers that certified products are backed
by a strong, well managed commitment to sustainable practices and provides high quality naturebased tourism experiences. Eco-Tourism Australia. Many of the tourist operations on the reef
and resorts on the shoreline carry this seal. All operation and activity within the Marine Park
must be considered eco-friendly to be permitted.
What gave this market the power to transform to ecotourism was institutionalizing the
vulnerability of the Great Barrier Reef. This institutionalization is used by Moore, using small
island developing state (SIDS) as an example:
A common general characterization of small islands and small island states is
vulnerability to economic shock and natural disaster, and fragile ecosystems (van der
Velde et al. 2007) small islands as a general category and to small island states and
SIDS as an institutionalized and politicized category, although one of the points of this

12
piece is that even the general concept of small islands has beenand continues to be
institutionalized in specific ways. In terms of small islands and the phenomenon of
anthropogenic climate change. (Moore pg. 117)
In this example, she explains how SIDS has been institutionalized as a term that means
vulnerable. That is a policy tool for the SIDS to be categorized as vulnerable by a creditable
source because this recognition can drive a lot of change towards sustainability. This
institutionalization can be seen at the Great Barrier Reef with their vulnerability as well. Many
organizations came forward and used the GBR as the prime example to show how all reefs are
being threatened, mainstreaming the idea of the Great Barrier Reef as vulnerable. They took this
recognition to help fund the complete overhaul of this new tourist product, which became
sustainability and ecotourism. This label of vulnerabity on the Great Barrier Reef also attracted
another kind of Eco-touristthe scientific tourist whos presence on the reef can have just as
much impact as any tourist operation.

Illegitimate research on the Reef

Scientific tourism is an idea used in Wests article, Tourism as Science and Science as
Tourism: Environment, Society, Self, and Other in Papua New Guinea, she explains scientific
tourism as a form of ecotourism that is linked not to science but to self-fashioning and
individual gain. Scientific tourists may be seeking an educational adventure that they can turn
into symbolic capital on their return home, a way into the world of science, or an experience that
can be turned into economic capital through publication in popular magazines (West pg. 597).
The way to look at this is people who go to destinations as tourist first and a scientist second.
People who travel as scientific tourist are doing for personal gain, maybe for money or as an

13
excuse to go to a beautiful location. The problem with scientific tourism is their focus on
personal gain. This means they probably arent concerned for the wellbeing of the location their
studying. As a result, your research yield results that isnt helpful for the location, or their not
answering the right questions to help that location. This is most common in attractive locations
with vibrant ecosystems. One of the most obvious explanations of this kind of tourist are school
internships and work-studies. Both are driven by personal gain used to achieve academic goals.
They are going to get credits, and thesis research but they are tailoring the research to what the
institution wants to see, not to benefit society, the research location, or to have any real life
applications. In many cases, undergrad students do field work to replicate studies that have
already been done to see if they can get the same result, and the real result is those students are
gaining experience with no positive outcomes for society.
The Great Barrier Reef is extremely popular with the scientific tourist. The reef has a
massive ecosystem with thousands of coral and ocean species to study. It is also a breathtakingly
beautiful environment, which attracts the scientific tourist, as opposed to the researchers who are
coming for true scientific inquiry. Many students come to the reef as part of an environmental
science study experience. They come to the Great Barrier Reef partly due to the popularity of the
reef. Its attractive to many young college students to go to the biggest reef in the world.
There is a lot of other academic work done on the reef to help restoration efforts.
Restoration efforts are a much more welcome form of work on the reef, and if it is done properly
the reef will benefit greatly. Proper restoration can turn back the clock on the reefs decline
caused by nutrient run out, coastal development, and direct contact. The projects include
restoring wetlands and coastal river flows to help filter out the pollutants and freshen the waters.
Other projects are article reef and nurseries, which are effective only if monitored properly.

14
Operations like coral nurseries and article reefs require a huge amount of maintenance over a
long period. It is easy to see how a project can be started by scientific tourists and never truly
followed through on. Due to their limited amount of time spent on the reef, maybe only a single
semesters time, and lack of motivation, their restoration project would most likely yield little
help to the coral reef. This is not to say that scientific research and scientists should not be
permitted to the reef. On the contrary, they are critical to saving the reef by helping to understand
how the reef has been impacted, how much coral bleaching has accelerated or decreased, and
what can do done to help the reef recover properly. Concluding this science is fundamental to the
reefs health, but you have been cautious and permit only research that is legitimate, creditable,
and proving helpful to the reef or society.
Tourism and scientific tourism both have a major presence on the reef, and they both can
be categorized as ecotourism. Due to the fact that the Great Barrier Reef Marine park covers the
entire reef area, part of their monitoring is to only permit operations that are eco-friendly and
sustainable, really only allowing ecotourism operations. Many of the hotels on the shoreline
carry the eco-certified logo, meaning they also consider themselves ecotourism operations, but
are they really ecotourism or are they just misleading consumers?

Conclusion
A problem with Ecotourism is it can be defined in many ways, but the main three
principles Weaver recognizes are Nature based, environmentally educating, and sustainably
managed (Weaver et. al. pg 6). When looking at tourist activities happening on the reef and on
the coastline adjacent to the reef, do they encompass these three principles? Yes, for nature based
because the tourist are visiting largest reef ecosystem in the world, making the tourism very

15
nature oriented. Also yes for environmentally educating, as many of the operations and tours
teach about the reef, and its about the wildlife, impacts, and even its decline. Education is very
much apart of the reef tourism, people come to learn and experience its wildlife up close,
especially the scientific researchers. The principle that is in question is sustainably managed,
can tourism on the Great Barrier Reef even really be sustainable managed. The Great Barrier
Reef is one of the most threated ecosystems on the planet. Many experts believe that if the reefs
decline continues it will fall victim to complete desecration. At this point in time the reefs are not
seen as sustainable ecosystems, which makes ecotourism on the reef inappropriate because it is
by definition sustainable tourism. Ecotourism on the reef is making an already unsustainable
environment decline even faster.
Calling tourism on the reef sustainable/ecotourism doesnt seem rational, the problem is
the common tourist doesnt see it in this rational way. People see ecotourism as a guilt free
environmental responsible form of tourism, and they are blind to its impacts. Ecotourism is said
to be eco-friendly but at same time its degrading the environment by exploiting it for the tourist
market, this contradiction is not understood by the common tourist. This misconception of
ecotourism need to be debunked because categorizing ecotourism as non-consumptive is not
only inaccurate, but also has consequences for both environments and people (Metelis and
Campbell 2007). If some light is shed on the real meaning and implications of ecotourism, the
tourist may opt out of this consumptive form of tourism, and this will in turn protect
environments including the reef. People will understand that it better to keep these ecosystems
un-touched. As a final remark this paper does not call for the abolishment of all tourism related
to the Great Barrier Reef, but it has to be re-conceptualized to the tourist so they can make a
more educated decision about if their visit is worth the damage they may impose on the reef. Its

16
understood that this re-conceptualization will hurt to reef tourism market and but it has to be
done. Coral reefs are ecosystems that the world cant afford to loss and any measures that can be
done to protect the reef must be taken.
Discussion
In this paper I focused a lot on the contradictions and critiques of ecotourism. I picked the
Great Barriers Reef because it was shocking to me to see such a massive sustainable and eco
tourist market on one of the most unsustainable ecosystems on the planet. I started by applying
Metelis and Campbells work first, because their example of hunting as ecotourism can be
applied to my example of the reef tourism. Hunters mis-conceive themselves as Eco tourist in the
same way reef tourist see themselves as Eco tourist.
Metelis and Campbells paper is also where I draw my conclusion, which is being the
need to re-conceptualizing tourism on the reef, as not ecofriendly. To support this calm, I had to
go in-depth on what ecotourism is defined as to convince that it wasnt ecotourism. I used
weavers definition to prove what ecotourism was, so I could prove that the reefs tourist wasnt.
Once you understand that ecotourism must be sustainability managed, its then easy to see that
that is impossible to accomplish a sustainably managed tourism market on an unsustainable reef.
Then, I explained how it was possible for this inappropriate ecotourism market to be the
reality today on The Great Barrier Reef. This Ecotourism market come out of the 70s with the
decline of the reef and the environmental movement. Then I used Moores explanation of the
institutionalization of the vulnerably, and used it to show how it fueled the ecotourism market.
As a result of this vulnerability you see a huge increase in scientific research on the reef. I used
Wests work to explain what scientific tourist are, how they would be attracted to this reef, and
the impacts they cause. I also illustrated the how much the reef is valued economically to the

17
country of Australia. I used this information to show how tourism dominated the Great Barrier
Reef. This helped to explain why they felt the need to adjust and create ecotourism market, and it
helped the tourism market survive. This is where I introduced the idea of the tourist gaze from
Stronzas work, to show how theres a pressure to accommodate to tourists needs. They did it
because they know it would continue to bring tourist to the reef.

18
Bibliography
Australian Government. Department of the Environment. What Australia Is Doing to Manage the
Great Barrier Reef. N.p.: n.p., 2013. Print.
"Corals: Importance of Coral Reefs." NOAA National Ocean Service Education:. N.p., 2008. Web. 09
Dec. 2015.
Costanza, Robert. The Value of the World's Ecosystem Services and Natural Capital 387.6630 (1997):
253-60. Web. 9 Dec. 2015.
Deloitte Access Economics. Economic Contribution of the Great Barrier Reef. N.p.: Great Barrier Reef
Marine Park Authority, 2013. Print.
"ECO Certification Ecotourism Australia." ECO Certification Ecotourism Australia. N.p., n.d.
Web. 11 Dec. 2015.
Meletis, Zo A., and Lisa M. Campbell. "Call It Consumption! Re-Conceptualizing Ecotourism as
Consumption and Consumptive." Geography Compass 1.4 (2007): 850-70. Web. 11 Dec. 2015.
Moore, Amelia. "Climate Changing Small Islands: Considering Social Science and the Production of
Island Vulnerability and Opportunity." Environment and Society: Advances in Research Environ
Soc Adv Res 1.1 (2010): 116-31. Web. 9 Dec. 2015.
Weaver, D. B. "Ecotourism in the Context of Other Tourism Types." The Encyclopedia of
Ecotourism(2000): 73-83. Web. 11 Dec. 2015.
West, Paige. "Tourism as Science and Science as Tourism: Environment, Society, Self, and Other in
Papua New Guinea." CURR ANTHROPOL Current Anthropology 49.4 (2008): 597-626. Web. 9
Dec. 2015.