A review on sustainable tourism concept
Today I am thrilled to introduce this extremely useful article
by Amanda Williams, owner of the travel blog A Dangerous Business. I asked Amanda to
write this piece because of her expertise in the area and to add some clarity
to an issue that is so often misunderstood. I know you will enjoy this
thoughtful explanation of the true definition of sustainable tourism.
Especially in recent years, the term “sustainable” has
been increasingly paired up with words like “travel” and “tourism” to
denote a desired way of operating. Hotels want to be “sustainable.” Tour
companies want to be “sustainable.” And travelers are increasingly concerned
with only spending their money on “sustainable” ventures.
But what exactly does “sustainable tourism” even mean?
To most people, “sustainable” is synonymous with “eco-friendly.”
They think of geothermal-powered hotels, conservation efforts, and companies
concerned with their carbon footprints.
And it’s true that being environmentally-conscious is a big part
of being sustainable. But it’s not the only thing to consider. An attraction or
destination can be as “green” as green can be, and still not be sustainable.
When it comes to sustainability, there are actually three
“pillars” to consider: environmental, economic, and socio-cultural. Tourism has
to be sustainable in all three areas to truly be considered “sustainable
tourism.”
Environmental Sustainability
The environment is obviously important to tourism. Both the
natural environment (such as beaches, forests, waterways) and the built
environment (such as historic buildings and ruins) must be preserved for an
area to be environmentally sustainable. Environmental sustainability means
making sure resources in an area (whatever they may be) can be preserved for
use by future generations. It’s much more than just being “green.”
Socio-cultural Sustainability
When an area starts being visited by tourists, there are bound
to be some social and cultural impacts of those tourists on the host community.
Locals may see increased congestion and overcrowding in towns and cities,
perhaps an increase in crime, the introduction of new languages and values, and
perhaps even an influx of migrant workers to be employed in the tourist
industry. Socio-cultural sustainability, then, means minimizing these negative
impacts and focusing on more positive ones, such as promoting cultural exchange
and preserving local traditions. This can usually be achieved by getting the
locals involved in the tourism industry. Having the community involved will not
only offer visitors a more genuine experience, but the locals will be more
likely to see tourism in a positive light because they will be proud of it.
Economic Sustainability
The last pillar of sustainability revolves around perhaps the
most important part – the money. Many people don’t take into account economics
when thinking about sustainability, but it’s really the key to making a tourism
venture sustainable. Economic sustainability means building linkages and
reducing leakages – essentially, keeping the money local. A hotel or company
owned and operated by a foreigner is not likely to contribute much to the local
economy – the money will likely leak overseas instead. This is not sustainable.
Not only should the community be involved in tourism, but they should also all
share in the financial benefits gleaned from it.
Why Does it Matter?
So why should we care about sustainability?
Well, the fact is, sustainable tourism actually benefits
everyone involved, and not just one half of the equation. Unsustainable tourism
might be fine from the point of view of the tourist, but it’s unlikely to
benefit or gain support from the host community.
And, at the end of the day, tourism should not be a one-way
street. Everyone involved should be benefiting from it in one way or another.
So, the next time you’re torn between two attractions or
destinations or hotels or tour companies, consider these points: Which one is
locally-owned? Which one is more eco-friendly? Which one employs local people?
Which one contributes the most to the local economy? Which one is more
sensitive to its impacts on the host community?
No comments:
Post a Comment