Regardless of current travel restrictions imposed by the outbreak of COVID-2019, tourism remains an engaging cultural practice, economic activity, and educational possibility. It is a powerful tool for recreation and social integration. However, tourism inevitably puts pressure on natural resources: it largely depends on air transport and thus contributes to air pollution and climate change. The fashion for everything “green” and “environmentally friendly” is taking over the world, and human perception filters have already tuned for keywords, which are often inaccurate. Green leaflets and the inscriptions “eco” appear on disposable tableware, plastic bags, and other non-eco-friendly items. The notion of sustainable tourism often follows this trend creating misconceptions and false impressions. Rural tourism and green tourism, which are getting increasingly popular, should be reviewed. The extensive use of the term “sustainable tourism” can easily be misleading for both an ordinary tourist and the owner of a tourist estate starting a business. Strict policies are necessary to avoid unfaithful practices in tourism. This essay aims to review its impact and to prove that even the sustainable model of tourism is still a long-term burden for environmental resources and local communities.
Sustainability and tourism have different goals, which creates potential conflicts of interest on various levels. Tourism-related business activities “can have negative impacts on a tourism area, specifically, on the natural, historical and cultural environment; on the community of residents; and on tourists” (Modica, 2016, p. 9). However responsible the practices are, visitors inevitably transform parks, lakes, rivers, beaches, ancient urban areas, and tourist attractions. The mere fact of human presence changes natural places of interest. Regardless of rising environmental awareness, human intervention remains a factor that changes wildlife. For example, such seemingly sustainable practices as watching dolphins and seals in the wildlife can become a potential cause of stress for these mammals. If the goal is to observe the untouched wildlife, it is not untouched anymore, as long as humans are involved. Thus, a paradox emerges as the short-term benefits finally damage business and the end-users: the tourists who pay to enjoy the untouched nature. It contributes to the idea that tourism can hardly be sustainable by definition.
If sustainable tourism aims to let visitors enjoy the places untouched by the human presence, this idealistic project is technically complex to implement. The purpose of such travels is to study specific natural and cultural features. It is an acquaintance with the traditional life of the locals, or with the wild nature. For some time, the tourists feel like a part of it and then disappear without leaving any traces. However, in reality, in the long term, eco-tourism leads to environmental degradation like mass-tourism, only at a slower pace. What is more, poor integration of local communities leaves small room for tourists’ immersion into their cultures (Aslam et al., 2016). Thus, the quest for authenticity, which is often the core of rural tourism as a form of sustainable tourism, is often problematic. Tourists inevitably change the environment, and it undermines the idea of harmonious eco-friendly travels.
What is more, considering that the long-term aim of sustainable tourism is to preserve local cultures, one more challenge is communication. For example, the communities of Sri Lanka are more and more aware that it is impossible to serve tourists with the help of their regional languages Sinhala and Tamil (Aslam et al., 2016). The logical decision for the communities is to master foreign languages, primarily English, to serve the tourists. On the other hand, this requirement troubles an already shaky balance between the authentic experience and the high-quality service. If the adepts of rural tourism seek genuine and authentic immersion into the culture, then they are risking getting biased experience. If a rural community can only use basic English, this affects both the representation of the indigenous culture and the impressions tourists get. A considerable part of linguistically marked verbal communication remains inaccessible. It problematizes the educational dimension of sustainable tourism in culturally diverse regions.
On the other hand, sustainable tourism can be beneficial for local communities where there are few other economic opportunities. If the communities can manage viable economic opportunities on their local level, it reduces unemployment and poverty with minimum pressure on the environment. The infrastructure and facilities should not necessarily meet the Western corporate standards, which makes it both more authentic and economically efficient. One of the key features of tourism is the intangibility of the product (Modica, 2016). It is not easy to define and measure the exact results of sustainable touristic activity, both for the end-user and the provider. Coordinated action and strategic management can make the whole process more predictable, efficient, and competitive. The principles of sustainable tourism – small scale, slow growth, and local control – show that this model is the least harmful to cultural and natural environments. The sustainable model remains the least harmful alternative to the large-scale mass-market pattern. It can serve as an efficient alternative to mass tourism if it is further developed and adapted to environmental needs.
The problem with this approach is that it is not easy to engage local communities in policymaking. In recent decades, tourism has been developing in relatively remote areas, such as Nepal and the outland regions of India. It provides such alternative forms of tourism as eco-tourism and rural tourism both as a local initiative and as a response to growing external demand. As such, it started to play a significant role in rural development. The problem is that the residents themselves are not always interested in policymaking and tourism planning: developing countries still do not fully recognize the participatory approach (Aslam et al., 2016). The lack of awareness and understanding among the communities makes it challenging to implement balanced managerial decisions, which are essential for the notion of sustainability.
To sum up, tourism is significant as both individual experience and economic tools operate on the community’s level and influence large-scale global commercial interests. In this essay, these dimensions of personal and social impact apply to the phenomenon of sustainable tourism. This phenomenon was identified as conscientious traveling to natural areas, which contributes to the protection of nature and improves the well-being of the population. It was shown that practical implementation makes it difficult to apply this scenario to wildlife preservation and regional sustainability. The evidence proves that the notion of sustainability is problematic when it comes to such an activity as tourism.
References
Aslam, M., Cooper, M. J., Othman, N., & Lew A. A. (2016). Sustainable tourism in the global south. Communities, environments, and management. (Aslam, M., & Cooper, M. J., Eds.). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Modica, P. (2016). Sustainable tourism management and monitoring. Destination, business, and stakeholder perspectives. FrancoAngeli.