Increasing flow tourist to the Antarctica is a phenomenon that raises concerns about the impacts on this destination, not only by the potential environmental effects, but also by the continue spread of tourist activities. The demographic and social travel shifts toward the diversification of tourism products worldwide, might have an influence on the development or the depletion of natural resources in the South Pole.
Antarctica is recognized as a tourist icon for the green-travelers all over the world for having the largest whale sanctuary (Travel Weekly Australia), for being the biggest sweet water reservoir of the planet earth (), and for being one of the final frontiers for adventure fans. The arising numbers of arrivals to Antarctica, its facilities and its marketing have settled it in the consolidation stage of the tourism life cycle, which brings multiple advantages, but at the same time risks (Butler 2006, p6). According to the annual report of International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators (IAATO), more than 46,000 tourists visited the zone during the 2007-08 season, most of them arrived by ship to the Antarctic Peninsula from the tip of South America. Compared with the size of the continent, this amount would seem low, nevertheless it should be taken into consideration that human activities in Antarctica take place from October to February, and that the visits to the continent are concentrated at less than 35 sites. Moreover, the dispersion of tourist activities is rising up quickly. Since 2004 the proliferation of “Fly-Sail” or “Fly-Cruise” packages, excursions by helicopter, scuba diving, marathons, sky expeditions among others, have claimed the attention of selective market segments that look for self/improvement, authentic and non forgettable experiences (Dwyer, et al., 2009). Regarding to projection for year 2020 in Antarctica, the number of seaborne tourist will increase by 430 per cent, and land-based tourists by 757 per cent in year 2016 (IAATO 2008). Would this panorama bring sustainable growing for the continent?
A brief analysis of the current internal situation of Antarctica, and the environmental vulnerability of the continent, make this a concerning issue. From one hand, seven nations claim to control portions of it, though those claims are not recognized under international law. Also, there is a lack of policy that controls the cruises operation, hence 5% of tour operators do not fulfill the requirements stated in the protocol above named , what would drastically complicate a furthest panorama. Indeed, the monitoring system of the carrying capacity of Antarctica needs to be updated according with the dynamic of demand. In addition to this, the pollution problems, as result of seaborne transportation, would definitely impact into the conservation of the area. Also, security safe programs to prevent disasters or coalitions have not been complete arranged because of the location of the destination.
From the other hand, there are outlines that improve the panorama. The tourism activity in the pole is being ruled by International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators (IAATO), since seventeen years ago. Furthermore, the existence of the “Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty”, and the elaboration of “Rule on Environmental Impact Assessment of Nongovernmental Activities in Antarctica”, supports the labor of IAATO. So far, the increase of sensitiveness for natural areas, environmental awareness, and boost of economical activities that reinvest partially in research in the continent, input the positive impacts of tourism.
From my point of view, the future trends would bring more harm than benefits to the destination here analyzed. The massive flow of tourists would cause irreparable damages on the conservation of ecosystems, would generate conflicts between stakeholders (tour operators vs. scientific community), there would be a overcharge on the carrying capacity (receiving more than 500 passengers per cruise), there would be a potential increase of illegal tour operators. Moreover, if there is a massive arrival of tourist, with no limitation, there will not be a sustainable tourism, and then the melting process of glaciers would accelerate, consequently would not be a physical heritage for future generations.
Bibliography:
- Bastmeijer, K (2009) “Long Term Strategy for Antarctic Tourism: The Key to Decision Making within the Antartic Trety System”, Elmsford, New York.
- Baltimore (2008), Report of the International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators, IAATO, United States of America.
- Reed Business Information Australia (2008), “Antartica”, Travel Weekly Australia, Ltd, p.33
- <URL: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/04/06/clinton.antarctica.tourism/index.html>
- <URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/22/travel/22pracantarctic.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1>
- <URL: http://www.iaato.org/press.html>
- <URL: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080926100703.htm>
Wow! I had no idea so many people travel to Antartica! And the predictions of growth are terrible for the environment.
I agree with you Ana, that this development, and not even mention the future growth, will have more negative impacts than benefits. I am bit surprised about the fact that IAATO, being conformed by members of countries such as Australia, Canada, Netherlands and New Zealand, to mention some of them; are not integrating strict environmentally friendly management policies in the development of the tourism activity. I believe it´s such a pitty!
Good article!
Yes indeed, a major problem for the environment. However, I do think that, provided that there is a clear international legislation, there could be a form of sustainable tourism to Antarctica. First of all, I think a further spread of tourism activities should be encouraged in order to diminish the impacts on the environmental carrying capacity of the peninsula (where mostly all tourism is locate).
Furthermore, I think awareness amongst visitors about their impact on the place they are visiting could be created by only allowing new forms of ‘clean’ transport towards Antarctica. It will probably cause a shock in the cruise industry but I think it is a good idea for 1) involving the (profit-making) private sector in the actions for sustainable tourism and because 2)it will cause a (temporary) stagnation in the growth because of higher prices for the tourists and because of the transition period in which the cruiseline companies will have to change their polluting cruises into clean and sustainable forms of transport.
I think the tourism development of Antarctica should focus in that direction because we have to admit, it would be a shame that the tourism industry would loose such a nice peace of world.
And yes, very nice article :)
Hi Carla and Allan, thanks for your comments. Allan, Antarctica is considered worldwide as a vulnerable continent. There tourist operation can accelerate the deterioration process of ecosystems, therefore agree with you about the idea of sustainable transportation. However, I consider that it will not help drastically in the diminution of pollution, because there are no mechanisms that can regenerate totally the damage that fuels or human foot print cause over nature. Hence, I would support the position of the Secretary of State of the United States, Hillary Clinton, to limit and strength control to tour operators in Antarctica, so that the area avoids the massive arrival of people and protects at maximum level the conservation of its unique resources.