Beyond Greening - Tourism Watch

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Beyond Greening: Reflections on Tourism in the Rio-Process | Positioningpaperhand from reduced income associated with decreased tourism arrivals. The UNWTO argues –in line with industry lobbies – that climate regulations must not put a disproportionateburden on the tourism sector and must not impair its ability to grow.Tourism NGOs have described these concerns as "highly simplistic" and have called for aserious and differentiated debate on tourism and poverty alleviation in the UNFCCCnegotiations. The travel and tourism industry has to date protected its business interests in thename of poverty alleviation. However, it is urgent to highlight the complex social, cultural,economic and environmental impacts of tourism in destinations, particularly as these affectworkers and communities, and to draw attention to the irresponsible stance of the tourismindustry in the UNFCCC process. The debate on the role of tourism in achieving a "greeneconomy" must go beyond the statements repeated ad nauseam, presenting only the positiveeconomic spin-offs of tourism growth. It is time seriously to debate the consequences of therapid growth of the tourism sector and its impacts on the climate, biodiversity and naturalresources and human well-being and development.NGOs have endorsed a position paper on the occasion of the 17th Conference of the Parties(COP17) in Durban, in which they outlined the myths around tourism and climate changefrom a human rights based perspective and sustainability approach. The position paper wasendorsed by over 30 groups from the global South and North 30 .Tourism will certainly be one of the victims of climate change when tourism destinations suchas the Maldives and Pacific islands are affected by rising sea levels, and snow cappedmountains lose their snow due to global warming and become unattractive to tourists. But thetourism sector is also one of the "culprits". It accounts for an estimated five percent ofanthropogenic CO 2 emissions, but its overall contribution to climate change, if measured asradiative forcing of all greenhouse gases, is in the order of 5.2-12.5 percent (Scott et al., 2009).Aviation accounts for 40 percent of tourism’s CO 2 emissions, road transport for 32 percentand accommodation for 21 percent. The remaining seven percent arise from activities bytourists (four percent) and other forms of transport (three percent), including cruise ships. Itis forecast that carbon emissions from tourism will grow by 162 percent during the period2005-2035 (UNWTO, 2008).However, under the UNFCCC, only emissions from aviation are negotiated, together withemissions from shipping (the so called bunker fuels or bunkers). In a recent study, authorsworking with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) conclude thatconsidering the best available estimates for non-CO 2 effects, global aviation contributed 4.9percent, in the worst scenario even up to 14 percent to man-made climate change in 2005 (Leeet al., 2009). These climate impacts from air travel are caused by a relatively small fraction ofaround two percent of the world population that actively takes part in air travel. So far thenegotiations on bunker fuels have been conducted in a half-hearted way. After so many years,the bunkers are still not subject to any binding emission reduction targets. Bunker fuels arenot bound by the Kyoto Protocol. In 1997, the responsibility to reduce aviation and shippingemissions was handed over to the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) andInternational Maritime Organization (IMO). Both organizations were commissioned todevelop a suitable climate protection mechanism for the sector. Both have failed miserably.After 15 years, the ICAO and IMO are yet to come up with significant, internationally bindingtargets.30Tourism Watch (2011): Last call to Durban. Beyond Numbers: A call for social, economic and climate justice in tourism48
Beyond Greening: Reflections on Tourism in the Rio-Process | PositioningpaperNeither ICAO nor UNWTO, for that matter, have ever gone beyond their defensive stance,nor have they made any concrete proposals regarding the design of regulative climatesolutions for the aviation sector, the securing of funds to finance adaptation measures indeveloping countries, or ways forward on how to deal with the principle of "common butdifferentiated responsibilities" of the Convention.The oft-painted picture that tourism growth equals revenues, which equals poverty alleviation,is highly simplistic, as is the notion that this calculus would be undermined by any kind ofbinding climate commitment. The World Development Movement (WDM) has released areport with the New Economics Foundation (NEF), investigating the impact that haltinggrowth in UK aviation would have on tourism in developing countries. It was noted that thelion’s share of global tourism takes place between developed countries. About 60 percent of allinternational tourist arrivals can be attributed to the group of Highly Developed Countries,whereas only ten percent of tourists travel to developing countries. Initially halting growth inaviation can be achieved by focusing on short haul flights, which needs the carrot of better railservices and the stick of higher taxes on aviation as well as an end to massive airportexpansion. Such measures would not affect developing countries.The group of Least Developed Countries (LDCs) receives only 1.2 percent of global tourismarrivals. If growth in UK outbound tourism to developing countries were to be curbed, thiswould have only a minor impact on the economic growth of countries that receive aproportionally large number of UK tourists. If outbound long haul travel from the UK werelimited, the economies of Kenya, Thailand and the Dominican Republic would lose between0.1 and 0.4 percent of GDP growth by 2020 (WDM and NEF, 2008). Therefore measuresmight be needed to compensate such countries or exclude them from measures to reducegrowth in long haul travel.The report of the UN Secretary-General's HighlevelAdvisory Group on Climate ChangeFinancing foresees measures might impact airtravel by increased costs of around two to threepercent (AGF, 2010). Research indicates that anysuch negotiated taxation will negligibly reducedemand, especially for long-haul travel, which isless elastic than short-haul travel due to a lack ofgood substitutes for long journeys as compared toshort journeys that can be undertaken by car,train, or boat (IIED, 2011).It must also be questioned how much of theincome generated from tourism eventually reaches the poor. Various studies show that asmuch as 85 percent of tourism revenues "leak" out of developing countries (cited in Bolwelland Weinz, 2008), due to various factors, most notably the power of international touroperators (Broham, 1996), foreign ownership and the high import propensity of tourism(Jules, 2005). Moreover, the share of tourism revenue that stays in the national economy doesnot automatically benefit poor people. As many examples show, tourism investments indeveloping countries often narrowly benefit the small elites, leaving the local populationwithout access to the tourism market or to decent jobs.There are examples where tourism development creates or reinforces poverty by deprivinglocal communities of their economic base. Poor households and communities tend to be lessresilient against the negative socioeconomic, cultural and/or environmental impacts of49
Page 1 and 2: Beyond Greening: Reflections on Tou
Page 5 and 6: Environmental Stewardship: Governan
Page 47: Beyond Greening: Reflections on Tou
Page 99 and 100:
Beyond Greening: Reflections on Tou
Page 101 and 102:
Beyond Greening: Reflections on Tou
show all

Beyond Greening - Tourism Watch

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?