Meredith Paterson
Scorching sand, ice-cream, cold waves, sizzling bbqs; these are the elements of the kiwi summer holiday. After a hard working year, we can’t wait to relax at the beach, holiday bach or our favourite camping spot. Some of us load up the caravan, strap the kayaks to the roof and head to the other side of the country. Others catch a cheap flight down to the South Island. Wherever we go, family, friends and relaxation are usually on the agenda.
We just LOVE our summer holidays! As a relatively isolated island nation overseas travel has also become important to many kiwis. In particular, the ‘Overseas experience’ (OE) has become a rite of passage for younger generations. It is a way for us to experience the big wide world, meet new people and learn about other cultures.
But overseas travel isn’t just for young adventurers. Around the world, more and more people go on an overseas holiday every year. It is estimated that in 2010, tourists will take 1 billion trips abroad. However, not everyone gets to go on holiday and only a tiny percentage of the world’s population travels overseas. Most of these people come from rich, developed countries (the minority world).
Going on holiday puts us in a privileged minority, but we don’t even think much about it. After all, we deserve a break. We rarely consider the impact we have on people and places by being there. But photographs and footprints are not the only remainders of our holidays. Our travels do have affects beyond ourselves.
Tourism and climate change
Climate change may well be the biggest threat the world will see. The impact of tourism and travel on this issue is coming to light. Air travel is recognised as the most polluting form of transport and accounts for 3-5% of carbon dioxide emissions released internationally per year. Sustainable Travel International calculates that even a relatively short flight, Auckland to Sydney, will release 2.06 tonnes of carbon dioxide for two people. Several strategies, including taxing airlines and getting airlines to buy ‘carbon credits’, have been suggested to reduce emissions.
Many airlines are countering their pollution by offering carbon off-setting. Carbon off-sets seek to cancel out the carbon emissions from flights by donating money to environmentally focused organisations, who support renewable energy and reforestation projects. Air New Zealand offers customers the option to off-set their carbon emissions by purchasing Trust Power wind farm credits.
Critics argue that carbon off-setting is only prolonging climate change. “The only way to reduce emissions is not to create them,” argues Pamela Nowicka, author of The No-Nonsense Guide to Tourism. “We must use and develop non-harmful forms of transport”. Eco-tourism has become a popular guilt free alternative to mainstream travel. The International Ecotourism Society defines ecotourism as “responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment and improves the well-being of local people.” In New Zealand guided walks around the Catlins and diving in the Poor Knights Islands are a couple of activities offered in the name of eco-tourism. Evidently, making your holiday environmentally friendly does not mean taking the fun out of it.
Is holidaying a human right?
We take holidays for relaxation, pleasure, family time and new experiences. Some travel to ‘rediscover’ themselves or as religious pilgrimages. In minority world countries, like New Zealand, holidays are considered necessary for ‘the good life.’ But not everyone has the means to go on holiday.
The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights states in article 24 that “everyone has the right to rest and leisure… and periodic holidays with pay.” Article 13 also states that “everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and return to his country.” Unfortunately, these human rights along with others, are really only available to the minority of those who can afford it.
In developing countries (the majority world not only do most people miss out on the benefits of a holiday, but they often pay the price of other people’s holiday. Tourist developments can destroy natural environments, create waste and exhaust natural resources. There have been many cases where the tourism industry undermines human rights. Prime beach front land has been snatched from locals who are forced to find new homes, locals working in hotels or resorts are commonly underpaid and forced labour has been used to make tourist areas presentable.
The World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC) believe that travel and tourism “can help raise living standards and alleviate poverty in undeveloped areas.” This is a mighty claim. We can’t assume money paid by tourists stays in the country and benefits the locals. Pamela Nowicka claims that “from 50 to 95 percent of money spent by a tourist will leave the country it was spent in.” This is known as ‘leakage.’ Nowicka cites Thailand as an example saying it is “estimated that 70 percent of all money spent by tourists ended up leaving Thailand via foreign-owned tour operators, airlines, hotels, imported drinks and food and so on.”
TAKE ACTION
But the WTTC are right. Travel and tourism can help fight against poverty. However, it is up to us to find out how our money can be used to best impact the local community and ensure our environmental damage is minimized.
Become an ethical tourist:
- F
ind locally owned and run lodges, restaurants and activities whose profits stay in the community.
- Use the least damaging form of transport. It’s difficult to avoid flying if we want to go overseas. We can’t take a train under the Tasman Sea to visit our Aussie neighbours! But, we can take direct, longer flights, which are more fuel efficient. And we can use local transport, buses, trains and ferries when we are in country.
- Next year, instead of loading up the caravan and crossing the Island to your regular beach, why not try something different? There are many cycle paths that allow you to explore a different side to the country. The Department of Conservation also offers well kept walk ways and informative signs throughout the country. A national park is never far away. Eco-tourism adventures are also widely advertised on the internet.
Being an ethical tourist does not have to mean spending more money. It just means doing your research, asking questions and caring about the impact of your holiday.
LEARN MORE
The No-nonsense Guide to Tourism Pamela Nowicka
The Ethical Travel Guide Polly Pattullo and Orely Minelli
(Both books available from Global Focus Aotearoa library)
www.ecotourism.org
www.sustainablestuff.co.uk
www.ecotourism.co.nz
www.maketravelfair.com
www.tourismconcern.org
www.responsibletourism.org.nz
en join a laughter club. The concept of laughter clubs was started in India about 10 years ago by Dr Kataria, who was doing research into the health benefits of laughter. He went to the local park gathering friends and family to come and laugh with him. It started with a few jokes with friends and has grown into a world wide phenomenon. There are now 5000 clubs all over the world, including a couple in NZ!
According to its website, PRODUCT(RED) is neither a charity nor a campaign, but an “economic initiative that acts to deliver a sustainable flow of private sector money to the Global Fund.” The key word here is sustainable. Rather than simply asking these corporations to donate a chunk of money to the Global Fund, a sustainable and longer lasting flow’ of money is created through giving a percentage of the profits from consumer purchases. Sounds good right? Before we can dig any deeper into this issue though, we need to know what exactly holds together the PRODUCT(RED) initiative.
If you went over to your local hospital with a group of friends and volunteered to clean and repaint the entire children’s ward, only to demand afterwards that you all be shown on the 6 o’clock news so that the entire country can see what great people you are, would this be considered socially acceptable? No, of course it wouldn’t be.
differences in the amount they actually contribute and the small proportion of the retail cost which actually finds its way to the fund. For instance, one percent of all spending on American Express’s (RED) card goes to the Global Fund as does fifty percent of the net profit from the sale of Gap (RED) items, and just $8.50 from the sale of a Motorola (RED) Motorazr. In effect, companies are contributing relatively little while being portrayed through PRODUCT(RED) marketing as giving generously to the cause.
Many critics have also ignored a crucial statistic which blows their argument into tiny fragments: the amount of money raised for the Global Fund is now over four times more than the amount the private sector had contributed prior to the establishment of PRODUCT(RED). An increase of over four times their original funds! Surely you can’t say that PRODUCT(RED) is just an attempt by companies to improve their corporate image if they’ve managed to quadruple the finances of the Global Fund within a two year period?
Whatever the motivation of PRODUCT(RED) companies, the initiative has undeniably made a real difference to the medical treatment of AIDS victims in Africa. Does it really matter that the companies are in it for themselves or that only a tiny proportion of the funds are actually going to the Global Fund? No. I don’t think that’s the important thing.