Transcript Environmental trends * Will tourism respond to environmental and

Environmental trends – Will tourism
respond to environmental and
energy pressures?
12th EUROPEAN TOURISM FORUM Tourism – a Force for Economic
Growth, Social Change and Welfare 17-18 October 2013 The Palace of
the Grand Dukes of Lithuania, Vilnius
C. Michael Hall
Docent, University of Oulu, Finland; Visiting Professor,
Linneaus University, Sweden & University of Eastern
Finland; Professor, University of Canterbury, New
Zealand
[email protected]
http://canterbury-nz.academia.edu/CMichaelHall
2
The concept of sustainability in tourism is
incredibly successful
•
-
Innovation and diffusion of the concept over time
modern origins in late 1980s
From two academic papers in 1989 to >60 in 2009
A dedicated journal, numerous dedicated texts and
courses
- Widespread adoption of the term in government at all
scales, industry organisations, individual firms and nongovernment organisation policies and statements
- Is has become a part of the lexicon of business and of
governments, especially with respect to the policy
context within which they operate
UNWTO forecasts
3
Yet… tourism is less sustainable than ever
• In environmental terms:
- More emissions in absolute terms
- Greater resource use (energy, land use, water)
- Increased contribution to biodiversity loss / species introductions
• But then we keep being told… “Travel & Tourism accounts for 255
million jobs globally. At US$6 trillion (9% of GDP) the sector is a key
driver for investment and economic growth” (WTTC, 5 June 2013).
• The growing contribution of tourism to environmental change while
simultaneously being promoted as a means of economic growth
suggests that sustainable tourism development is a significant policy
problem. Maybe even a policy failure? As presently constituted
tourism is not a form of green growth.
• “much tourism growth, as with much economic growth in general, is
already uneconomic at the present margin as we currently measure
it given that it is leading to a clear running down of natural capital”.
• Tourism is experiencing an enormous environmental subsidy
The sustainable tourism ‘standard
model’
A more accurate sustainable tourism model
THE ENVIRONMENT / NATURAL CAPITAL
A reallocation of natural capital from nature’s economy
to human economy in the process of generating
economic growth? (and social change and welfare?)
Do efficiency improvements mean that we
reduce the level of natural resource consumption
and the level of environmental impact?
K
Natural capital
allocated to wildlife
/ environment
GDP
Source: Adapted from Hall, 2010
Natural capital allocated to
human / tourism economy
and society. Everything in
the previous model of
‘balanced’ sustainable
tourism fits in here
TIME
Tourism sector emissions and mitigation
targets and forecasts
•IEA (2009): Air travel almost quadruples between 2005 and 2050 with an average worldwide
growth rate of 3.5% per year, but over 4% worldwide until 2025
• IMO (2009): Absolute emissions from shipping will grow by 1.9–2.7% per year up to 2050
• Boeing (2012): Growth in global aircraft fleet from 19 890 in 2011 to 39 780 by 2031; airline
traffic in revenue passenger kilometres: 5% per year
• Airbus (2012): Growth in revenue passenger kilometres by 150% between 2011 and 2031
(averaging 4.7% per year), with the global fleet of passenger aircraft growing from 15 560 to
32 550 in the same period
Source: Gössling et al. 2013
Emission Reduction Targets and
Suggested Action in Aviation
International
Civil Aviation
Organisation
(ICAO)
International Air
Transport
Association (IATA)
Aviation Global
Deal Group (AGD
group)
International
Business
Aviation Council
(IBAC)
IEA / OECD
Emission
projection
and
Reduction
Goal
Improvement
in fuel
efficiency of
at least 2%
per year until
the year 2050
-50% until 2050,
stabilisation by 2020
(base year 2005)
-50% to -80% by
2050, up to -20%
by 2020
• Carbon-neutral
growth by 2020;
• fuel efficiency
as per ICAO
• A reduction in
its total CO2
emissions by 50%
by 2050 relative
to 2005.
3 to 4-fold increase in
emissions to 2050 in
baseline scenario.
• “Extremely
challenging” Blue
Shifts scenario still
results in considerable
emissions growth in
2050 over 2005
GHG
considered
CO2
CO2
CO2
CO2
CO2
Suggested
measures
Biofuels
• technology
• Improving
operational efficiency
• Building and using
efficient
infrastructure
• Positive economic
instruments to
provide incentives
Energy efficiency
measures
Air traffic
management
Biofuels
Open and
unlimited emission
trading with other
sectors
Technology,
Infrastructure
and operator
best practices
Alternative fuels
Market based
measures
Technology,
Infrastructure and
operator best
practices
Alternative fuels
Market based
measures
O dear, we forgot something…
• Three types of rebound effects are frequently identified in the literature.
1 the direct rebound effect, which is manifested in increased demand for
the same product or service. For example, the switch from a 6-litre to a
3-litre car may result in additional journeys being made in the 3-litre
car.
2 the indirect rebound effect, expressed in increased demand for
different products or services. For example, the change from a 6-litre
to a 3-litre car may result in consumers taking more holidays by air.
3 the structural or macroeconomic rebound effect. For example, because
more consumers drive 3-litre cars, overall demand for petrol is lower,
causing relative prices to fall and creating an incentive for increased
demand for energy-using products in other sectors.
• The level of a rebound effect is generally defined as the percentage of an
efficiency-boosting measure/technology that is offset by a rise in
demand
• The 50-50 rule of thumb:
– ‘in the long term and on average, combined rebound effects of at least 50%
must be assumed. In other words, energy efficiency improvements in an
economic system will on average yield half the theoretical savings potential
of efficiency technologies and measures’ (Santorius 2012).
How large?
• Barker et al. (2009) modeled the potential long-run rebound
effects resulting from the global energy efficiency measures
incorporated into the IPCC’s 4th Assessment Report and
estimated that
– for transport there would be a worldwide direct rebound of 9.1% in
2020 and 9.1% in 2030, and a macroeconomic rebound of 26.9% in
2020 and 43.1% in 2030. The total rebound effect for transport is
36.0% in 2020 and 52.2% in 2030.
– Residential/services buildings have an even higher estimated total
rebound of 44.3% by 2020 and 60.6% for 2030. The estimated total
global rebound effect on the IPCC’s] estimates is 31.5% of the
projected energy savings potential by 2020, rising to 51.3% by 2030.
• If applied to tourism this means that by 2030 the impacts of
energy-efficiencies on emissions reduction will potentially be
more than halved and that the reduction in the total potential
gains in energy efficiencies over the period to 2035 are cut by
more than 35% - leading to a potential doubling of tourism
emissions.
The limits of containment
• Efficiency standards for appliances or production
processes harbour the greatest risk of evoking
rebound effects.
• Real income gains and falls in market prices that
arise from efficiency increases can theoretically be
absorbed by ecotaxes. However, this would require a
complex taxation scheme with sector- and productspecific tax rates, which would be difficult to
implement.
• In theory rebound effects cannot arise if resource
use is limited by caps (absolute upper limits).
However, unless caps are introduced globally,
rebound effects can still occur via international trade
and increased imports – including tourism.
Efficiency and sufficiency in sustainable tourism development
PRODUCER BEHAVIOUR
ECO-EFFICIENCY
More productive use of materials
and energy.
PRODUCTION
Efficiency
DRIVERS
FOR
CHANGE
EXTERNAL
INTERNAL
Regulation; Cost of
energy; System
change; Polluter
pays
Value change;
Ethical & social
responsibilities
Sufficiency
CONSUMPTION
CONSUMER
BEHAVIOUR
Source: After Hall 2009
Increased product life spans
Changed consumer behaviour
Restructure socio-technical system
SLOW / SUSTAINABLE
CONSUMPTION
Changed consumption patterns
leading to reduced throughput of
products and services and less
energy.
Same or increased
personal travel demand.
‘Business as usual’. No
fundamental change in
destination choice or
consumption choices:
‘Green Growth’ / ‘Green
Economy’ Continued run
down of natural capital if
primary policy approach
SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT /
STEADY-STATE
TOURISM
Restructure, Redistribute
Reduction in personal
demand and distance
travelled; reuse and
recycle. Fundamental
change in demand to
emphasise ‘local’
destinations, short supply
chains and reduce resource
consumption and distance
travelled: ‘Reorientation’ /
’Degrowth’ Recessionary if
implemented in isolation
from other measures.
Sustainable consumption policies
Approach
Scale
Understanding of
decision-making
consumption
is…
Utilitarian
(consumer
sovereignty;
green
economics)
individual
The means for
increasing
utility
Social &
psychological
(Behavioural
economics /
green
consumerism /
ABC model)
individual
Cognitive
information
processing on
basis of rational
utilitymaximisation
Response to
psychological
needs, behaviour
and social contexts
Systems of
provision /
Institutions
(degrowth,
steady-state
tourism)
Community,
society,
network
Dominant
paradigm of
“ABC”: attitude,
behaviour, and
choice
Constrained /
shaped by sociotechnical
infrastructure and
institutions
Satisfier of
psychological
needs; cultural
differentiator;
marker of social
meaning and
identity
Routine habit,
inconspicuous
rather than
conspicuous
Tools to achieve
sustainable
consumption
Green labelling, tax
incentives, pricing
(including carbon
trading), education
Dominant forms of
governance
Nudging - making
better choices through
manipulating a
consumer’s
environment
Markets (marketization
and privatization of
state instruments)
Markets (marketization
and privatization of
state instruments)
Networks (publicprivate partnerships)
Social marketing to
encourage behavioural
change and promote
sustainable lifestyles
and behaviour
Short-supply chains,
Hierarchies (nation
local food, local tourism state and
supranational
institutions)
Communities (publicprivate partnerships,
communities)
The value of utilising all approaches to
governance: IATA airline online reporting
and offsetting opportunities 2009 vs 2013
Social
World
2009
2013
Tech.
Infra.
Oper.
Econ.
Calcul
Book.
ator
38.4% 29.5% 28.1% 20.5% 20.5% 19.1% 14.2%
EU28+ 41%
4 2009
World
Env.
36%
36%
32%
30%
30%
26%
9.4%
17%
50.6% 40.9% 26.4% 26.4% 26.4% 26.4% 16.1% 14.5%
EU28+ 61%
4 2013
56%
39%
39%
39%
39%
23%
23%
FFPs
3.5%
2%
3.4%
2%
*Env. refers to Environmental, Tech. refers to Technology Improvements; Infra. refers to
Infrastructure Developments; Oper. refers to Efficient Operations; Econ. refers to Economic
Measures.
*Book, refers to capacity to offset when booking; FFPs refers to Frequent Flyer Points
Global ecological footprint and conceptualising growth and biophysical capacities
Can we go beyond the first three
letters of the alphabet?
• Need to engage in third-order policy learning by which some of the basic
paradigms and assumptions are questioned with respect to tourism
development. Beyond the dominant paradigm of “ABC”: attitude,
behaviour, and choice to actually change systems of provision.
• Will tourism respond to environmental and energy pressures? Regulation has
a vital role, along with consumer pressure and environmental and
resource costs.
• In tourism governance far too much attention has been given to the
assumption that a well-designed institution is “good” because it facilitates
cooperation and networking rather actually focussing on the norms and
values of institutional arrangements and their potential outcomes.
• What, after all, is the point of encouraging governance mechanisms such
as partnerships, network development, self-regulation, codes of conduct
and individual responsibility if they continue to have no practical effect on
the sustainability of tourism and consumption?
• If the ethical value of responsible tourism by “individual choice” leads to
increased emissions from lifestyle and travel actions and worsening
environmental change then how ethical or responsible is it?