Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
Low-carbon tourism industry strategy
The tourism sector's reaction to climate change has involved two different but
related responses: mitigation and adaptation strategies. Mitigation refers to
attempts to reduce the impact of tourism on climate change, while adaptation
refers to attempts to adapt tourism to climate changes and minimize climate
change risks. The tourism sector will also need to make adaptations in
response to national mitigation strategies related to GHG emissions, hence the
concepts are related. For instance, as a sector totally reliant on transport,
national and international mitigation policies related to GHG emissions are
likely to increase costs of transport and impact tourism mobility. There are
implications for slow travel. For example, it could be argued that slow travel
should become a major mitigation response, as part of a cultural change, asso-
ciated with travel and trip distance reduction.
The Stern Review (2006) suggests GHG emissions can be cut in four ways:
1 reducing demand for emissions-intensive goods and services
2 increased efficiency
3 action on non-energy emissions, such as avoiding deforestation
4 switching to lower-carbon technologies for power, heat and transport.
Within the tourism sector, the World Tourism Organization (2007) identified
four major mitigation strategies related to the above:
1 reducing energy use
2 improving energy efficiency
3 sequestering carbon through sinks
4 increasing the use of renewable energy.
Each of these is considered in turn, with a focus on transport for tourism, as
is the idea of eco-labelling that cuts across all the above strategies (see Table
2.3 for a summary).
Reducing energy use
Much energy use for transport could be reduced if tourists were to adopt, to a
greater degree than hitherto, pro-environmental behaviour. The theory relevant
to pro-environmental behaviour is discussed in Chapter 3; however, here a
more industry- and policy-led perspective is considered. Eco-efficiency is a tool
'to discover how economic growth can be achieved with the lowest possible
level of emissions' (Peeters et al, 2009, p303). Based on an eco-efficiency analy-
sis of tourism, Peeters and Schouten (2006) suggest marketing should focus on
sourcing markets closer to destination areas. This involves restructuring desti-
nation portfolios (Peeters et al, 2008) and may involve de-marketing, where
marketing is discontinued to more distant source markets.
Alternatively, policy mechanisms might increase the cost of travel or
develop other barriers that affect behavioural change, including modal shift
to low-carbon travel. These types of governmental intervention are not new to
tourism. The use of visas, previous limitations on the amount of money a
