A quick sustainability quiz:
- What's the more carbon-friendly way for a couple to get across Australia, flying or driving?
- In the US, which mode of transport produces more carbon dioxide per passenger, train or bus?
- True or false: A company with a platinum Earthcheck certificate is more sustainable than one with a bronze.
- True or false: Hotels in water-scarce countries generally consume less water than hotels in water-rich countries.
- Which nationality of traveller is more concerned about sustainability, Danish or Indian?
The answer to No. 1 is "flying"; not only would clients burn a lot of
gas crossing that continent, but they'd add carbon emissions for each
hotel night.
No. 2: "Bus." Not true everywhere, but train occupancy in the U.S. is so low that rail's usual advantage over buses is lost.
No. 3: False. Earthcheck's categories are based on a company's longevity in their program, not how green they are.
No. 4: False.
No. 5: Indian. Only 45% of Danes express concern, among the lowest reported in the world.
These are not so much trick questions as ones whose answers are
counterintuitive. Collectively, they prove a point. Equator Analytics
CEO Edmund Morris, who gave this test to attendees at the Adventure
Travel Trade Association's (ATTA) World Summit in Hokkaido, Japan, last
week, was making the case that expecting tourists to make informed
decisions is not a good bet.
His message was not intended to provide the audience with an excuse
for inaction – sustainable travel is "nonnegotiable," he said – but
rather to drive home that the path to sustainability is hard and
complicated.
His presentation also suggests that the onus for activating
sustainable travel options falls not to travellers but to hoteliers,
tour operators, travel advisors, airlines and the destinations
themselves.
Because rolling out effective programs requires serious effort,
there's the temptation to simply look at what others are doing and cut
and paste their solutions. But as his quiz demonstrated, approaches are
often intensely location-specific. One size does not fit all.
The time, rigor and research required to create an effective program
requires a data-intensive approach, but Morris advised against throwing
statistics at consumers. "There's a story in the data," he said, and
that's what must be distilled.
For example, he said, a poster promoting travel to Bhutan could show a
photo of stunning beauty with the simple caption, "There are three
carbon-negative countries in the world. We're one of them."
If there was a subtheme to the entire conference, it is that the
responsibility for sustainable travel falls on the industry rather than
travellers. The customer, ATTA CEO Shannon Stowell pointed out (and
Morris demonstrated), is not always right.
In a subsequent "climate leaders workshop," the notion that action
must take local conditions into consideration was re-emphasised. If, for
instance, flight-shaming were to result in flight bans, it would be
devastating to Greenland, according to Hjortur Smarason, the former head
of that island's tourism board. He said that, ironically, flights have
become more critical to Greenland because of the effects of global
warming; it has dramatically reduced glaciers, impacting transportation
to areas whose connectivity has traditionally been dependent on sleds
and snowmobiles (there are no roads connecting cities in Greenland).
To minimise the impact of aviation emissions, however, Air Greenland
purchased lighter, more fuel-efficient planes and used the resulting
fuel savings to purchase sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). (The session
was sponsored by Neste, a former oil company that pivoted to SAF
production in 2013.)
Small-group discussions divided attendees among buyers, destinations
and suppliers. I joined the buyers, who wrestled with the topic of what
to do and how to message it.
We shape demand, one participant suggested. A tour operator could,
for instance, require that all passengers pledge that they won't take
more than one long-haul trip per year.
Although that suggestion was not met with enthusiasm, it did lead to a
discussion around verification, particularly throughout the supply
chain.
Ted Martens, sustainability director of Natural Habitat Adventures,
said that even though most tour operators don't own anything, they can
partner with suppliers. His company, he said, co-invested with lodges in
Africa to buy electric safari vehicles.
Ultimately, there was consensus that, broadly speaking, it's better to take incremental steps than do nothing.
During an onstage interview, Intrepid Travel executive chairman
Darrell Wade said he became a vice chair of the World Travel and Tourism
Council because of the serious issues facing the 250 multinational
travel companies making up its membership.
Picking up on the theme that taking action is better than complaining, Stowell said, "There's no value in doom-and-gloom."
And, Wade added – not necessarily in contradiction – "There's no value in bullshit, either."
What became clear at the summit is that separating effective programs
not only from BS but from well-intentioned but wrong assumptions, can
often be as vital as it is difficult.
Source:Travel Weekly