Dear “Earth Talk”: What exactly
constitutes “ecotravel” or “ecotourism”?
— Jeannette Peclet, Norwalk, Conn.
Although tour operators and travel agents around the
world may tout their trips as “ecotours,” environmentally
conscious travelers take a variety of considerations into account when
determining whether any given excursion qualifies as such. The
International Ecotourism Society defines ecotourism as “travel to
natural destinations that minimizes impact, builds environmental awareness,
helps fund conservation, and respects and sustains local cultures while
supporting human rights and democracy.”
According to the United Nations Environment
Programme, ecotourism is defined as travel focused on “the
observation and appreciation of nature as well as the traditional cultures
prevailing in natural areas.” UNEP emphasizes that ecotours must
contain educational features, be organized for small groups by locally
owned businesses, minimize negative effects “upon the natural and
socio-cultural environment,” and support the protection of natural
areas by generating income for the host communities to use in conserving
and sustaining their natural and cultural resources.
Recent studies indicate that as much as 7 percent of
all tourism worldwide operates under some sort of “eco” label.
One recent survey concluded that 8 million U.S. travelers have taken at
least one “ecotourist” holiday; another concluded that
three-quarters of all Americans have taken a trip involving nature and the
outdoors. In the Asia-Pacific region, ecotourism accounts for 20 percent of
all travel. Meanwhile, in Africa, where most visitors travel to nature
reserves and game parks, the figures are even higher. The Kenya Wildlife
Service, for instance, estimates that 80 percent of visitors come to see
wildlife.
But the debate over what types of travel constitute
ecotourism has meant that a wide range of dining, lodging, and
transportation vendors advertise themselves as “green”
regardless of whether their operations meet the criteria defined by TIES
and other groups. As Jim Motavalli writes in E/The
Environmental Magazine, “A beachfront
hotel tower built of imported materials with absentee owners and no local
employees is not an eco-resort, even if it does offer its guests the option
of not washing their towels.”
And travelers should keep in mind that
“adventure” travel or “nature-based” tourism trips
are not necessarily environmentally friendly. In fact, tour operators
offering access to remote scenic and wild locations need to take extra care
so that their trips do not endanger the very flora, fauna, and geological
features they are offering to showcase. Sad stories of so-called ecotourism
run amok — where overvisitation has led to trampled landscapes and
damaged wildlife habitat — abound from the Galapagos Islands and
Mexico’s Chiapas region to the coastal caves of Thailand, the reefs
of Hawaii, and beyond.
The moral of the story then, is “buyer
beware.” Consumers should do their homework and ask travel vendors a
lot of questions about how they operate to discern whether they are harming
or helping local environments and cultures.
For more information: The International Ecotourism
Society, www.ecotourism.org; United Nations Environment Programme,
www.unep.org.
Send questions to “Earth Talk” in care of
E/The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881, or e-mail
earthtalk@emagazine.com.
This article appears in Jun 23-29, 2005.
