I began this unit by making the claim in ‘Studying Tourism: Let’s begin’ that there had never been a more exciting and challenging time to be studying tourism than right now. It is exciting because there are so many interesting new developments emerging out of communications and information technologies that are changing tourism practices in so many ways. And challenging because we know that tourism can have significant negative economic, socio-cultural and environmental consequences. And some of the impacts that tourism is having now on environments and societies are at a very significant level.

Now more than ever, we must develop new ways of understanding, doing and managing tourism if it is to become more sustainable. In other words, the need for reliable, evidence-based knowledge and theory to inform practice (such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions) has never been as important as it is now.

And so this is why we now deal with the subject of sustainable tourism in our final Topic Gateway. My own view is that there is no more important topic to be addressed if we are committed to ensuring that tourism is practised in such a way as to maximise the economic, socio-cultural and environmental benefits but, at the same time, reducing to (below) acceptable levels, the economic, socio-cultural and environmental costs.

The concept of sustainability provides us with a conceptual or theoretical framework within which we can understand these impacts and work towards resolving them so that we can create a tourism industry and indeed tourism system that provides real benefits for individuals, communities, businesses and governments but at the same time, as I have just said, minimises the social and environmental costs.

Living in the Anthropocene

Ecologists and geologists have now largely agreed that we are now living in a new geological epoch, a subdivision of the ‘geological timescale’. And the geological timescale of course stretches back to when the earth first formed, which is considered to be 4.5 billion years ago. So in order to understand geological time and the various events that occurred, geologists divide the timescale into eras and epochs. Up until the last decade or so, the consensus was that we were living in the Holocene epoch.

However, most geologists now accept that we have entered into a new epoch and this epoch, for the first time is characterised by the impacts of humans on the geological record. In other words, for the first time in the several hundred thousand years of our species’ existence on the earth, we are now leaving our imprint on the geological record. This imprint is caused by the globally significant human-induced changes that have occurred to atmospheric systems, hydrological systems, geological systems and biospheric systems.

The new epoch is termed the Anthropocene. Anthropo comes from the word anthropos, meaning human. The Anthropocene, unlike the epochs that preceded it, is characterised by human (or anthropogenic) impacts on environmental processes. In other words, it is human activity, rather than biological, geological, hydrological and atmospheric processes, that is now driving change in the earth’s systems.

Sir David Attenborough recently spoke at the World Economic Forum, held in Davos, in January, 2019. He acknowledged that we were now living in the Anthropocene and urged world leaders that they must now tackle climate change.

Ecologists have termed the period beginning at the time of the Industrial Revolution up to the present day, The Great Acceleration. Acceleration in this context refers to the rapid and sustained increase in a number of key indicators of environmental health such as:

• World Population
• Deforestation
• Ocean Acidification
• Carbon Dioxide levels
• Land Degradation
• Fishing Levels.

Finally, and I know this is all sounding terribly negative, we also need to be aware of another term that is used by many ecologists called ‘The Sixth Extinction’. What they mean by that is that we have now entered into a period of mass extinction of plant and animal species. Although extinctions of plant and animal species is a natural occurrence (as Darwin’s Theory of Evolution tells us), it is the rate at which extinctions are taking place and the number of species involved, which is of critical concern, as well as the overall loss of animal biomass, that is the actual number of individual animals that are dying.

Indeed, a recent study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (2017) estimates that up to 50% of all animals (that is, individual animals, not animal species) on the planet may have been lost (ie died) over the past few decades. In other words, in 2019, the world has only half the number of animals that it had in 197 or 1980.

Australia has a terrible record of species extinctions, especially of mammals. Since the arrival of Europeans in the late 18th century, 25 species of mammals have become extinct. Possibly the most ‘famous’ is the Tasmanian tiger or thylacine, the last remaining individual thought to have been an animal at a zoo in Hobart which died 7 September, 1936.

The last thylacine died in a Hobart Zoo, 1936. No thylacine has ever been positively sighted since then. People were responsible for making this incredible animal, extinct.

And what about koalas?

Although it is very difficult to estimate how many koalas lived in Australia at the arrival of Europeans, most estimates that I have seen suggest it would have been more than 5 million. The estimates today, in 2019, vary from as low as 50,000 to 200,000 koalas left in the wild. Think about that. In a period of a couple of hundred years, koala numbers have gone from around 5 million to 200,000 or less. Indeed, koalas were so numerous in the late 1800s that they supported a koala fur industry that resulted in (just from the fur trade in south-eastern Queensland) a million koala skins sold in 1919 and more than two million skins were exported overseas in 1924.

Can the contemporary tourism industry contribute to koala conservation?

So what do we mean by ‘sustainability’ and ‘sustainable development’?

There are many definitions of ‘sustainability’ depending on who is making the definition and for what purpose. In general terms, something that is sustainable is something that is able to continue indefinitely without impacting negatively on its future. In the context of society, sustainability refers to achieving a balance or homeostasis between human populations and their need for resources and the resources that are available.

There is a distinction between renewable and non-renewable resources.

Renewable resources are those which are able to keep replenishing under natural conditions, such as the various forms of renewable energy: solar, wind, tidal, waves and geothermal. Other renewable resources are timber, food crops and domesticated animals used in agriculture.

Non-renewable resources are those of which there is a finite supply on earth. As these resources are used the total quantity is reduced. These include fossil fuels (gas and oil), minerals, and coal.

Water is a little bit difficult to easily categorise. In one sense it is a non-renewable resources because at a global level virtually no ‘new’ water is added to the water cycle. So there is a finite amount of water on the planet. However, water is ‘recycled’ through the water cycle and is made available as a resource provided that it has not been contaminated.

By the way, only about 0.3% of the earth’s water is available as drinking water for humans. The rest is in the oceans, in groundwater or the atmosphere or in the polar ice caps.

With respect to sustainable development, the United Nations uses this definition which is very commonly used:

In essence, balance is attempted to be achieved between the three ‘pillars’ of sustainability: economic, social and environmental. These three pillars are often expressed in the term: the triple bottom line. It is no longer sufficient for a business or industry or indeed government to be only interested in the economic or financial bottom line: we MUST take into consideration the social and environmental impacts of business activity.

Pressures on natural resources

All life depends on a healthy physical or natural environment – there can be no quality of life if the quality of the ecological resources that we depend upon: clean air, clean water, healthy food etc is compromised. So underpinning ecological sustainability is the maintenance of the ‘life support systems’ upon which all life (including humans) depends.

Yet, we know that the human population as of January 2019 is estimated to be 7.7 billion and that it is forecast to grow to 9.7 billion by 2050 (United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2019). Does the Earth have the resources to adequately support a population of this size? How much more forest will need to be cut down to grow crops and farm animals to feed and clothe this population? How does the world deal with the wastes produced by such a population?

Do we even know what the maximum population is that the earth can sustainably support? Have we already exceeded it?

Globally significant environmental issues include climate change, overpopulation, deforestation, especially of tropical rainforests, loss of biodiversity, pollution, overfishing, ocean acidification and plastic waste.

United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

In 2016, the 17 Sustainable Development Goals which had been adopted earlier in 2015 by UN member countries came into force. Here is a visual representation of the 17 goals:

The UN World Tourism Organization has identified Goals 8, 12 and 14 as goals that have particular relevance to tourism and which could benefit from sustainable tourism development. There are of course other goals that relate to tourism.

Sustainability and tourism

Now one of the major challenges for tourism is that, as you well know, tourism depends on movement of tourists from their origin in the Tourism Generating Regions along Transit Regions to any number of Tourist Destination Regions. And the vast bulk of tourist movements use non-renewable (and hence unsustainable) fuels to power those movements. AND, the fuels that are used also give off carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change.

So the very awkward and challenging question that the tourism industry and governments have to consider is how can sustainable tourism be realised if tourism depends so much on non-renewable, greenhouse gas emitting energy? For example, is an ecotour in the Amazon region of south America really an example of sustainable tourism if the tourists who are participating in it have flown there on a greenhouse gas emitting aircraft?

So that is the first dilemma that tourism faces when we are considering sustainability and sustainable practices.

In addition, as we saw in Topic Gateway 6, tourism can have significant negative impacts on the economies, societies and cultures, and environments along transit routes and at destinations. Again, such negative impacts are not conducive to sustainable practices or sustainable development.

The Sustainable Tourism Triangle

It can be useful to conceptualise the dimensions of sustainable tourism at a destination as a triangle (see image below). The three points on the triangle represent the environmental, social and economic values present in a destination region.

According to this model, a sustainable tourism destination is reached when environmental, community and economic values are balanced and resolved through collaboration and compromise. A situation is reached whereby the environmentally sustainable, economically competitive and community well-being and harmony are enhanced through tourism.

Examine the Sustainable Tourism Triangle below. This is another conceptual model, or theoretical model. Think about how the model is constructed. Is this an effective way to represent the concept of sustainable tourism?

Do you think it is possible to balance the environmental, economic and social values and impacts of tourism for a destination region? How would this be achieved? Where on the triangle do you think the values and impacts of tourism sit for tourism destination regions with which you are familiar?

Contemporary issues relating to sustainability of tourism

Let us look at some contemporary issues relating to sustainability of tourism.

Unintended consequences of Airbnb

Let us take, as our first example, Airbnb. Airbnb can be an excellent way of increasing accommodation capacity at destinations with limited capacity through conventional accommodation such as hotels, motels and the like. And it is a great way of adding additional capacity during special events and festivals.

Many tourists enjoy the greater diversity of accommodation experiences that are available through Airbnb as well and appreciate the closer contact with local residents. Many Airbnb properties are located in residential areas rather than in tourism-zoned areas so tourists can get a more ‘authentic’, localised experience by staying at an Airbnb.

And, finally, in many cases, the cost is less if you are staying at an Airbnb than a similar quality property provided by the tourism industry. For the Airbnb hosts, of course, it provides some additional income by making use of a resource that might otherwise be under-utilised (for example a spare bedroom) and can create more social opportunities for hosts.

However, Airbnb can also create very significant negative impacts and these are occurring right now in many cities that are already popular with tourists such as in Amsterdam, Berlin, New York, Venice, and, closer to home, in Byron Bay and the Gold Coast. Why?

Well, what is also happening is that people or businesses with entire apartments or houses that they used to rent out as long-term rentals (for more than a year at a time to residents) are now being used as Airbnb properties (for tourists) because it can be more profitable for the owners of these properties. As fewer long-term rentals are available, this then pushes up the cost of rents of those that are still available, meaning that many people can no longer afford to rent them and they leave and move further away from the city. So, for instance in Venice, many Venetians can no longer afford to live on the island of Venice and have been forced to move to the mainland and travel back on to the island for work. Neighbourhoods change drastically as fewer and fewer people actually live in them long-term and the local shops selling groceries etc either close or are converted into shops selling souvenirs to tourists. The sense of place and the sense of community begins to be significantly changed.

Another criticism that the industry makes of Airbnb and similar accommodation sharing platforms is that the owners of the homes being advertised on Airbnb do not usually comply with the stringent regulations and codes that a commercial hotel or other accommodation property does. Compliance with these regulations costs these properties money which of course is factored into the cost of each room. Airbnb properties can be ‘rented’ more cheaply because the owners don’t usually have to comply with those regulations. So, for example, a commercial hotel must ensure that there is safe escape in case of fire. An Airbnb apartment in a 300-year-old building in Florence may have no fire escape or evacuation route, perhaps not even a fire extinguisher or fire blanket.

Here is a BBC News article/opinion piece written by Professor Daniel Guttentag, College of Charleston, South Carolina, that explains the problems of Airbnb.

And this is a short three minute video which explains the problems and issues in Venice specifically.

In addition, by increasing the available accommodation capacity of a city, it means that the number of tourists, which had once been capped by the available capacity of accommodation provided by the tourism industry, continues to grow, leading to problems associated with exceeding the carrying capacity of a destination. Over-crowding and congestion, over-use of resources such as water, increased amounts of garbage can all result, leading to a significant reduction in the quality of the amenity of a destination.

These problems have spurred on the formation of a social movement known as ‘Overtourism’ or ‘antitourism’ and there have been anti-tourist protests in a growing number of internationally famous destinations such as Amsterdam and Barcelona. The ‘social licence’ that is, the unwritten agreement between the local community and tourism, for tourism to take place, is under threat at some destinations.

Let us look at another significant issue that is affecting the notion of sustainable tourism…

Global climate change and tourism

As we have already seen, climate and weather are key variables in the enjoyment of destinations by tourist and they figure in tourists’ decision-making about where they would like to travel to. The ‘pleasure periphery’ is underpinned by warm climates that enable people to enjoy outdoor recreation such as swimming and lying on the beach.

Severe weather events such as cyclones, hurricanes, tsunamis, floods and droughts, can also have a significant impact on tourist satisfaction and indeed, safety.

Increased sea temperatures and also increased levels of acidity in the sea water caused by greater concentrations of carbon dioxide lead to the deaths of corals and coral reefs. We know from scientific research and monitoring that The Great Barrier Reef is under significant threat and is already significantly damaged.

Increased sea levels can lead to significant ecological damage to islands through sea water incursion into ground water and through high tides, as well as completely submerging islands if sea level rises to high. Island nations such as Maldives, Fiji, Indonesia and Kiribati and Tuvalu are especially vulnerable to inundation caused through rising sea levels.

Take a look at this video about the impacts of climate change – and especially sea level rise – on the island nation of Kiribati (pronounced, Kiribas).

If we look at the growth in global air travel, we find that annual rates of growth have been around 5% and future growth rates are likely to be between 4% and 6% (Becken and Hay, 2007). Many airports around the world have intentions for major expansions.

But we also know that international aviation is an important source of global greenhouse gas emissions. And recent research demonstrates that tourism accounts for 8% of total global greenhouse gas emissions. Please take a read of this Conversation article which features this research:

The carbon footprint of tourism revealed (it’s bigger than we thought).

So, what can be done? What can the tourism industry do to cut their greenhouse gas emissions and what is the role of government to enforce these cuts?

There are two broad strategies: mitigation and adaptation.

Mitigation

These are initiatives and programs that work towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The Kyoto Protocol and its successor, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, are international treaties that are designed to encourage or compel countries which have signed up to it, to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by target dates.

Australia, which is a signatory to the Paris Agreement has a target of reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by between 26 and 28% (of 2005 levels) by 2030. What this represents is approximately 50% reduction per head of population and about a 60% reduction in the ‘emissions intensity’ of the economy by 2030 (http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/publications/factsheet-australias-2030-climate-change-target)

However, many scientists believe that these targets set by the Paris Agreement, designed to keep the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius above the levels at the time of the Industrial Revolution, will still not result in halting the globally significant impacts of climate change. Many argue that the increase in temperature must be limited to a maximum of 1.5 degrees to prevent significant and long-term impacts to climate and to the life which depends on it.

Adaptation

Given that there will be an inevitable time lag in reducing impacts even if increases in climate are restricted to 1.5 degrees, there is still a requirement for many destinations to implement strategies that enable them to adapt to the changes brought about by climate change. Adaptation initiatives can include:

• installing and maintaining desalination plants for destinations that will be impacted by severe and long-lasting droughts (at the time of writing, Sydney had just started to use the desalination plant that had been built a decade earlier)
• ensuring that both staff and guests understand what to do in the case that a severe weather event such as a cyclone or tsunami occurs
• identifying, through signage, evacuation pathways, that people can take in the case of tsunamis
• diversification of the tourism product through the creation of alternative tourist attractions such as walking trails at destinations such as the Australian Alps, which are likely to be significantly affected by climate change through shortening of the skiing season
• ensuring monitoring systems are in place to alert destination communities and tourists about disease outbreaks and health risks (such as malaria).

If you are particularly interested in the challenges facing the Australian tourism industry from climate change take a look at this report, released in 2018 by the Climate Council of Australia titled Icons at risk: Climate Change Threatening Australian Tourism.

Plastic pollution and tourism

This is another exceedingly complex and difficult problem that is creating global ecological and social problems. According to World Wildlife Fund (https://www.wwf.org.au/get-involved/plastics#gs.B3FdFGcl) Australians produce more than three million tonnes of plastic waste each year but only about 12% of this is recycled. The rest goes into landfill or finds its way into water courses and then into oceans. It is estimated that about 130,000 tonnes of that plastic will find its way into the oceans.

What happens then?

Once the plastic is in the oceans, it is eaten by animals such as marine turtles that mistake the plastic bags for jellyfish, and which lead to their slow death. Sea birds also mistake bits of plastic for fish and other aquatic animals and eat this themselves or feed it to their nestlings, again causing death. Whales and dolphins have also been found with stomachs full of plastic. Plastic bags also wrap themselves around corals, leading to their death. In addition, huge ‘gyres’ or patches or islands of plastic materials are being created when plastics – especially small ‘microplastics’ the size of confetti or smaller converge and assembled into these floating masses. Much plastic material, ranging in size from microplastics through to plastic water bottles, straws etc are washed up on beaches at many tourist destinations.

Now of course the tourism industry alone is not solely responsible for plastic pollution. But it, like many industries, does create considerable amounts of plastic pollution. And plastic pollution has a significant impact on the quality of resources that tourism depends upon such as beaches and coastlines, rivers and lakes.

What can the tourism (and hospitality) industries do to address the problem of plastic pollution?

Sustainability at destination communities

Some academics have broadened the meaning of sustainable development into a concept that implies long-term viability of good quality natural and human resources to include the quality of life for host communities, visitor satisfaction, and conservative use of natural and social resources (Ahn, Lee and Shafer 2002). A common theme in these perspectives is that sustainable tourism development includes a focus on attaining some level of harmony among stakeholder groups to develop a desirable quality of life that lasts.

For some communities, the need to develop and manage tourism sustainably has become a primary concern. Authors in the field of tourism planning have stressed the need for local community involvement and cooperation in planning process (Telfer 2003). Conversely, communities are well recognised as a significant component in the development and attraction of a particular tourist destination. However, how a community responds to tourism development has changed (ibid). The growing complexity of communities and relationships between them are considered to pose challenges for the sustainable development of tourism. As Richards and Hall (2001: 1) explain:

Human communities represent both a primary resource upon which tourism depends, and their existence in a particular place at a particular time may be used to justify the development of tourism itself. Communities are a basic reason for tourists to travel, to experience the way of life and material products of different communities. Communities also shape the ‘natural’ landscapes which many tourists consume … sustaining particular communities has therefore become an essential element of sustainable tourism.

Scheyvens (2003) suggests that it is essential to consider the multiple ways in which host communities need to be empowered if they are to have a genuine and influential role in managing tourism in their areas in the future. As she explains, ‘there is a strong rationale for host communities to play a role in managing tourism when they are the ones faced with the most direct consequences of poorly planned and managed tourism’ (Scheyvens 2003: 248).