Biologically-Respectful Tourism - LinkBC

While examining this directive on a National level, the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS) reported on the ‘good, the
bad and the ugly’ in “the largest national park system in the world” (2009, p. 1). Their 2009 report stated that “the pace of park
creation slowed” from previously‐praised levels in 2008 with “just under 10% of Canada’s lands and less than 1% of our oceans and
freshwater permanently protected,” an insignificant change from the year prior (ibid, p. 1).
THE SUSTAINABLE TOURISM AGENDA
On the surface, a biodiversity strategy might be easily confused with advancing sustainability, a concept gaining momentum in the
common lexicon since its introduction by the 1987 World Commission on Environment and Development (UNEP‐WTO, 2005 p. 8),
“a process to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (ibid).
The United Nations World Tourism Organization (WTO) advocates that all tourism should be sustainable on four levels:
environmentally, economically, socially and culturally (p. 2). However, linking the term “sustainable” to “development” slants and
narrows the focus, forcing concepts to be viewed through the lens of development.
Furthermore, Smith (1992) suggests that the economy wins when pitted against the
environment (p. 39).
When one considers the magnitude of the combined and cumulative impacts of regional,
national and global tourism on natural systems, a severe ‘ecological footprint’ (WWF,
2010b) is evident and is clearly unsustainable. The Living Planet Report tells us that
“business as usual” is not an option (WWF & the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation
and Development, 2010b, p. 3).
Yet, in their recent policies and principles brief, BC’s provincial Tourism Industry Association (TIABC) mentions sustainability only as
a prefix to growth (2011, p. 6‐7). Such oversight might appear to support the notion our province’s lead tourism Association sees the
travel agenda as business as usual. TIABC acknowledges that “global ecosystems and social justice systems are under pressure” and
that “decreasing environmental quality and increasing volatility are impacting businesses” (p. 18). Rather than suggesting actions to
mitigate these impacts, however, they suggest “businesses and destinations that demonstrate good environmental and social
stewardship will be better positioned to meet the changing expectation” and can thus capitalize on the ‘trend’ (p. 18).
Lansing & De Vries (2007) propose that the rise in consumer consciousness is indeed being exploited; travellers are being lured into
a false sense they are participating on a “morally preferable” and “personally fulfilling” journey while falling for a ‘marketing ploy’
(p. 81).
As a further impediment, within the biological realm, not all species are valued equally. Newsome, Dowling & Moore (2005) bring
to light the issue of selective significance in their book Wildlife Tourism. Their studies stress that most people identify concern and
interest for specific mammals, and birds over reptiles, or invertebrates, or other life forms (Bart, 1972, Green et al, 2001, Moscardo
et al, 2001, Shackley, 1996 as cited by Newsome, Dowling & Moore, 2005, p. 8).
TOWARDS BIOLOGICALLY‐RESPECTFUL TOURISM VERSUS SUSTAINABLE TOURISM
While it might be possible to ‘sustain’ discriminatory wildlife viewing in favour of much‐loved mega fauna, for full biologicallyrespectful
tourism to occur, wildlife tourism, as well as any nature based travel, will need to embrace a wider natural history scope.
The UNEP‐WMO (2002) define biodiversity as “the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial,
marine, and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species,
between species, and of ecosystems” (p. 3). They explain that biodiversity stresses three levels – genetic, species and ecosystem
(p. 3).
Petrosillo et al (2007) argue that biodiversity stewardship results will only be achieved by changing the way people think about the
conservation of species and ecosystem diversity (p. 29). Such a change could move away from the protection of key commercial
Page 6