Linking Culture and the Environment

56 Sustainable Tourism Development on a ‘Mediterranean Isle’
transportation, housing, employment and the environment. In other words,
while these groups indicate support for sustainable strategies, they are, in
fact, more interested in maintaining tourism’s viability (Butler, 1993).
The fundamental difference between sustainable tourism and tourism
within the context of sustainable development is one few researchers
acknowledge (Wall, 1997). Sustainable tourism can simply mean the development
of the sector in a manner that ensures its long-term survival within a
destination (Butler, 1993). However, such an interpretation is confusing
(Butler, 1999). One could easily argue that tourism is sustainable in a destination
that has managed a steady growth pattern in visitation and spending
over an extended period of time. According to this definition there are numerous
examples of sites where tourism can be considered sustainable, precisely
because they are able to attract many visitors (e.g. Niagara Falls, Disney
World, Las Vegas, London, Paris; Butler, 1997). These destinations are not
only able to consistently lure large numbers of visitors because of their unique
attractions, but also because they maintain their appeal by constantly diversifying
their tourism product. The Disney Corporation periodically expands
its empire in central Florida by adding new theme parks while Las Vegas sees
a continuous flurry of activity in terms, for instance, of the construction of
ever-larger and increasingly luxurious hotels and the development of additional
convention space (Velotta, 2008). Nevertheless, while these destinations
are considered sustainable in terms of their ability to maintain their
tourist industry, they are not always sustainable in an environmental or
socio-cultural sense. After all, in these destinations ‘tourism is competing for
resources and may not [represent] the ‘best’ or wisest use of resources . . . in
the long term’ (Butler, 1999, p. 11).
Tourism within the context of sustainable development is, by contrast, a
far more complex idea. According to Butler (1993, p. 29) it can be defined as
the type of tourism that is developed and maintained in an area (community,
environment) in such a manner and at such a scale that it remains viable over
an indefinite period and does not degrade or alter the (host) environment to
such a degree that it prohibits the successful development and well-being of
other activities and processes.
Such a comprehensive interpretation of sustainable development
acknowledges that tourism does not occur in a vacuum. Whereas sustainable
tourism espouses the long-term survival of the sector regardless of its impact
on a destination’s other resources, tourism within a context of sustainability
recognizes the need for a comprehensive approach that balances tourism
development with that of other activities to safeguard the requirements of
future generations. Without clearly appreciating what these requirements
are, however, it is hard to identify that nature of sustainable development in
a tourism context.
The conceptual gap between a sector-specific interpretation and one representing
a holistic vision of integrated development indicates that the
embrace of ‘sustainability’ in the language of a growing number of groups
(e.g. industry representatives) should be regarded cautiously (Mowforth and
Munt, 2003). When talking about sustainable tourism, various stakeholders,