Businesses think they’re on top of carbon risk, but tourism destinations have barely a clue: Professor

February 10, 2019

Tourism accounts for approximately 8% of emissions, much of it from planes ... A Qantas Boeing 747-400 flying at approximately 11,000 metres over Starbeyevo in Moscow, May 2010. By Sergey Kustov http://www.airliners.net/photo/Qantas/Boeing-747-438/1729381/L/ (CC BY-SA 3.0) via Wikimedia. https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=16496086
Click here for your invitation to write for "Good Tourism" ... Feel free to pass it on.

Less energy- and car­bon-intens­ive slow travel could be the future of tour­ism in far-flung des­tin­a­tions, accord­ing to Susanne Beck­en of Grif­fith University.

The dir­ect­ors of most Aus­trali­an com­pan­ies are well aware of the impact of car­bon emis­sions, not only on the envir­on­ment but also on their own firms as emis­sions-intens­ive indus­tries get lumbered with taxes and reg­u­la­tions designed to change their behaviour.

Many are get­ting out of emis­sions-intens­ive activ­it­ies ahead of time.

But, with hon­our­able excep­tions, Australia’s tour­ism industry (and the Aus­trali­an author­it­ies that sup­port it) is rolling on as if it’s busi­ness as usual.

This could be because tour­ism isn’t a single industry – it is a com­pos­ite, made up of many indus­tries that togeth­er cre­ate an exper­i­ence, none of which take respons­ib­il­ity for the whole thing.

But tour­ism is a huge con­trib­ut­or to emis­sions, account­ing for 8% of emis­sions world­wide and climb­ing as tour­ism grows faster than the eco­nom­ies it con­trib­utes to.

Tour­ism oper­at­ors are aim­ing for even faster growth, most of them appar­ently obli­vi­ous to clear evid­ence about what their industry is doing and the risks it is buy­ing more heav­ily into.

If tourism destinations were companies …

If Aus­trali­an tour­ist des­tin­a­tions were com­pan­ies they would be likely to dis­cuss the risks to their oper­at­ing mod­els from high­er taxes, high­er oil prices, extra reg­u­la­tion, and changes in con­sumer preferences.

Avi­ation is one of the biggest tour­ism-related emit­ters, with the regions that depend on air travel heav­ily exposed.

But at present the des­tin­a­tion-spe­cif­ic car­bon foot­prints from avi­ation are not recor­ded, mak­ing it dif­fi­cult for des­tin­a­tions to assess the risks.

A recent paper pub­lished in Tour­ism Man­age­ment has attemp­ted to fill the gap, pub­lish­ing nine indic­at­ors for every air­port in the world.

The biggest emit­ter in terms of depart­ing pas­sen­gers is Los Angeles Inter­na­tion­al Air­port, pro­du­cing 765 kilo-tonnes of CO₂ in just one month; Janu­ary 2017.

When tak­ing into account pas­sen­ger volumes, one of the air­ports with the highest emis­sions per trav­el­ler is Buenos Aires. The aver­age per­son depart­ing that air­port emits 391 kilo­grams of CO₂ and travels a dis­tance of 5,651 km.

The ana­lys­is used Bris­bane as one of four case studies.

The average distance travelled from Brisbane is 2,852 km, a span exceeded by Auckland (4,561 km) but few other places, which means air travel cannot easily be replaced.
The aver­age dis­tance trav­elled from Bris­bane is 2,852 km, a span exceeded by Auck­land (4,561 km) but few oth­er places, which means air travel can­not eas­ily be replaced.

Brisbane’s share of itin­er­ar­ies under 400 km is very low at 0.7% (com­pared with des­tin­a­tions such as Copen­ha­gen which has 9.1%). That indic­ates a rel­at­ively low poten­tial to sur­vive car­bon risk by pivot­ing to pub­lic trans­port or elec­tric planes, as Nor­way is plan­ning to.

The aver­age dis­tance trav­elled from Bris­bane is 2,852 km, a span exceeded by Auck­land (4,561 km) but few oth­er places.

As it hap­pens, Bris­bane Air­port is work­ing hard to min­im­ise its on-the-ground envir­on­ment­al impact, but that’s not where its greatest threats come from.

The indic­at­ors sug­gest that the des­tin­a­tions at most risk are islands, and those “off the beaten track” – the kind of des­tin­a­tions that tour­ism oper­at­ors are increas­ingly keen to develop.

Queensland’s Out­back Tour­ism Infra­struc­ture Fund was estab­lished to do exactly that. It would be well advised to shift its focus to products that will sur­vive even under scen­ari­os of extreme decarbonisation.

They could include low-car­bon trans­port sys­tems and infra­struc­ture, and a switch to domest­ic rather than inter­na­tion­al tourists.

Exper­i­ence-based travel, slow travel and stayc­a­tions are likely to become the future of tour­ism as hol­i­day­makers con­tin­ue to enjoy the things that tour­ism has always delivered, but without trav­el­ling as much and without burn­ing as much car­bon to do it.

An industry con­cerned about its future would start trans­form­ing now.

Fea­tured image: Tour­ism accounts for approx­im­ately 8% of emis­sions, much of it from planes … A Qantas Boe­ing 747 – 400 fly­ing at approx­im­ately 11,000 metres over Starbeyevo in Moscow, May 2010. By Sergey Kustov (CC BY-SA 3.0) via Wiki­me­dia.

Dr Susanne Becken
Dr Susanne Becken

This art­icle by Susanne Beck­en, Pro­fess­or of Sus­tain­able Tour­ism and Dir­ect­or, Grif­fith Insti­tute for Tour­ism, Grif­fith Uni­ver­sity, (and a “GT” Insights con­trib­ut­or), was ori­gin­ally pub­lished on The Con­ver­sa­tion, Janu­ary 8, 2019. It has been repub­lished on the “GT” Blog under a Cre­at­ive Com­mons license. (The “GT” Blog used a dif­fer­ent fea­tured image.) Read the ori­gin­al art­icle.

The Conversation

Related posts

Follow comments on this post
Please notify me of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.