Sustainable Tourism: Ideological, Achievable, or Restrictive?
Author: Jessica Arnold
1 Commentries
This discussion paper looks at sustainable tourism, and how achievable it really is. It also looks at the methods used and whether conservation is about preservation or restriction. Having existed for so long and with so little evidence of sustainability being achieved, is it all in fact just an ideology?
Key words: Sustainable; restriction; ideology; achievable; environment.
Sustainable tourism is defined by Swarbrooke (1999, p. 3) as "development which meets our needs today without compromising the ability of people in the future to meet their needs". Sustainable tourism is a relatively new concept and therefore problems have arisen in its development, mainly around how to put it into practice, as there are issues about uncertainty of the meaning of the term (Butler, in Hall & Lew, 1998). Sharpley (2009) suggests that although the ideals and principles of sustainable tourism have been around since the early 1990's there is limited evidence to show if they are being achieved.
Sharpley (2009) further states that although there is a substantial amount of academic resources and research into sustainable tourism development, there is a large gap between academia and evidence of the theory working when put into practice. There are perhaps just too many different components of the industry for it to ever become truly sustainable. Honey (2008) claims that in an industry as large as tourism, with its multiple stakeholders and components, it is difficult to believe that tourism can ever be truly sustainable - an eco-tourist may travel to a sustainable resort in deepest Peru, but the carbon emissions from their transport means their journey is not sustainable.
In order to attempt to achieve some form of sustainability in a destination France (1997) states that the best way forward is to look at the main aim of the sustainability, such as conservation of a forest, and make that the priority over the tourists and the locals in order to minimise conflicts. This strategy was used across the Maldives when the Environmental Protection and Preservation Act (EPA) was put into place: the EPA was put into place through recognition of the need to protect the natural environment and its resources for future generations across the entire Maldives, prioritising the conservation needs over others as they were most important at the time (World Tourism Organization, 2000). This seems like the best way forward for the Maldives, however in the case of Pulau Sipdan Marine Reserve (Mintel, 2010) the diving companies which operated there were causing too much damage to the coral reefs and the area is now a no-diving zone for anyone. France (1997) is not in favour of restriction or exclusion of tourists from destinations unless it is in an extreme case, such as one where it is the only option left.
Without some form of restriction there are dangers of sustainable tourism becoming just another form of mass tourism, with all of its problems (Swarbrooke, 1999). The whole principle of sustainability is to combat the effects that have occurred as a result of tourisms popularity, particularly that of mass tourism. If the principles implemented do not include limiting carrying capacity or even completely restricting access to some destinations or attractions, then sustainable tourism will inevitably become just another form of mass tourism.
As said by Sharpley (2009), Swarbrooke (1999), and Wight (1998) thus far there has been too much emphasis on the academic side of this area in tourism and not enough on discovering how well the changes are working to make it a more sustainable industry. Perhaps in the near future there will be more evidence of sustainable practices in action to establish how well they are working, in order to learn how to incorporate these ideals into the whole system as suggested by Page et al (2001).
"Sustainable tourism is an unattainable myth... we should not treat sustainable tourism as an absolute but rather as a relative term...we must accept that sustainable tourism is a continuous journey to a destination we will never reach, because wholly sustainable tourism is probably unattainable, and also because our idea of what constitutes sustainable tourism will undoubtedly change constantly" (Swarbrooke, 1999, p. 358). This quote from Swarbrooke does not bode well for the future of the sustainable tourism industry, and unless larger tourism organisations are willing to implement sustainable practices it is most likely unachievable.
Unless the entire industry attempts to become sustainable, through working closely with each other and with other industries, there is currently more evidence to support the argument that sustainability is not achievable, and is in fact just an ideology.
Bibliography:
Page, S.J. Brunt, P. Busby, G. and Connell, J. (2001) Tourism: A Modern Synthesis. London: Thomson Learning.
Sharpley, R. (2009) Tourism Development and the Environment: Beyond Sustainability? London: Earthscan.
Swarbrooke, J. (1999) Sustainable Tourism Management. Oxon: CABI Publishing.
Key words: Sustainable; restriction; ideology; achievable; environment.
Sustainable tourism is defined by Swarbrooke (1999, p. 3) as "development which meets our needs today without compromising the ability of people in the future to meet their needs". Sustainable tourism is a relatively new concept and therefore problems have arisen in its development, mainly around how to put it into practice, as there are issues about uncertainty of the meaning of the term (Butler, in Hall & Lew, 1998). Sharpley (2009) suggests that although the ideals and principles of sustainable tourism have been around since the early 1990's there is limited evidence to show if they are being achieved.
Sharpley (2009) further states that although there is a substantial amount of academic resources and research into sustainable tourism development, there is a large gap between academia and evidence of the theory working when put into practice. There are perhaps just too many different components of the industry for it to ever become truly sustainable. Honey (2008) claims that in an industry as large as tourism, with its multiple stakeholders and components, it is difficult to believe that tourism can ever be truly sustainable - an eco-tourist may travel to a sustainable resort in deepest Peru, but the carbon emissions from their transport means their journey is not sustainable.
In order to attempt to achieve some form of sustainability in a destination France (1997) states that the best way forward is to look at the main aim of the sustainability, such as conservation of a forest, and make that the priority over the tourists and the locals in order to minimise conflicts. This strategy was used across the Maldives when the Environmental Protection and Preservation Act (EPA) was put into place: the EPA was put into place through recognition of the need to protect the natural environment and its resources for future generations across the entire Maldives, prioritising the conservation needs over others as they were most important at the time (World Tourism Organization, 2000). This seems like the best way forward for the Maldives, however in the case of Pulau Sipdan Marine Reserve (Mintel, 2010) the diving companies which operated there were causing too much damage to the coral reefs and the area is now a no-diving zone for anyone. France (1997) is not in favour of restriction or exclusion of tourists from destinations unless it is in an extreme case, such as one where it is the only option left.
Without some form of restriction there are dangers of sustainable tourism becoming just another form of mass tourism, with all of its problems (Swarbrooke, 1999). The whole principle of sustainability is to combat the effects that have occurred as a result of tourisms popularity, particularly that of mass tourism. If the principles implemented do not include limiting carrying capacity or even completely restricting access to some destinations or attractions, then sustainable tourism will inevitably become just another form of mass tourism.
As said by Sharpley (2009), Swarbrooke (1999), and Wight (1998) thus far there has been too much emphasis on the academic side of this area in tourism and not enough on discovering how well the changes are working to make it a more sustainable industry. Perhaps in the near future there will be more evidence of sustainable practices in action to establish how well they are working, in order to learn how to incorporate these ideals into the whole system as suggested by Page et al (2001).
"Sustainable tourism is an unattainable myth... we should not treat sustainable tourism as an absolute but rather as a relative term...we must accept that sustainable tourism is a continuous journey to a destination we will never reach, because wholly sustainable tourism is probably unattainable, and also because our idea of what constitutes sustainable tourism will undoubtedly change constantly" (Swarbrooke, 1999, p. 358). This quote from Swarbrooke does not bode well for the future of the sustainable tourism industry, and unless larger tourism organisations are willing to implement sustainable practices it is most likely unachievable.
Unless the entire industry attempts to become sustainable, through working closely with each other and with other industries, there is currently more evidence to support the argument that sustainability is not achievable, and is in fact just an ideology.
Bibliography:
Page, S.J. Brunt, P. Busby, G. and Connell, J. (2001) Tourism: A Modern Synthesis. London: Thomson Learning.
Sharpley, R. (2009) Tourism Development and the Environment: Beyond Sustainability? London: Earthscan.
Swarbrooke, J. (1999) Sustainable Tourism Management. Oxon: CABI Publishing.