Limiting tourism can be seens as all 3 but it depends on how you think of it but in my opinion it is a neceassary trade off and an example of good stewardship when done properly. Forest in Costa Rica are super fragile. Too much tourist and the noise can damage the forest and have a negative impact on the animals. When we went on the forest walk Jose was telling our group to be quiet because if we were too loud then we would distract the animals. Restricting the harmful tourism side can help out the ecosystem rather than creating a damage to it.
At the same time, some locals business heavily depend on tourism to benefit their business. They draw in most of their profit through tourism such as AMA. Jobs are produced from toursim such as hotels, restraints, and transportation. Even if you are not directly correlated towards tourism other industries can be negatively affected. Visitors can be also frustrated if their was limited activities to do because of minimum tourism. For me I would have been very frustrated if Costa Rica had minimum tourism activity because I wouldn’t of been able to have the “full experience” of Costa Rica. I believe it is most important to find the right balance in between these 2 because you’d get the best of both worlds.