9.1 Sustainability
Alice L. McLean
Since the term sustainability was first popularized and clearly defined in 1987, its definition has been much debated among scholars and practitioners working to study and implement sustainable development and, more recently, sustainable tourism. Depending on how it is interpreted, it can embody human-centered or Earth-centered practices, varying from an emphasis on the use of natural resources for economic growth to the protection and restoration of a destination’s natural elements for the well-being of the environment and the community.
Within tourism this interpretive leeway has often translated into widely divergent practices. Those primarily focused on profit aim to develop tourism that can sustain growth over generations without further degrading the environment. Those primarily focused on the well-being of nature, on the other hand, value biodiversity and the well-being of the environment over financial growth. These different tacks have the power to lead to radically different futures. In everyday reality, sustainable tourism development incorporates both ways forward—one prioritizing economic growth and the other prioritizing biodiversity and the health of the environment. The dueling priorities, in fact, appear on a spectrum with tourism entities often crafting their own working definitions to suit their end goals. As one pair of hospitality scholars explains, “sustainable tourism is a nebulous concept and to some extent has been moulded to fit the needs of conservationists, governments, communities, and developers” (Page & Connell, 2020, p. 414).
Key Takeaway
Since its popularization in 1987, sustainability has been interpreted along a spectrum from human-centered economic growth to Earth-centered environmental protection, leading to varied—and sometimes conflicting—approaches in tourism. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed deep flaws in mass tourism models and sparked momentum toward regenerative tourism, emphasizing living systems thinking, Indigenous knowledge, community well-being, and environmental restoration.
Significance to Regenerative Tourism: The differing viewpoints that fall under the rubric of sustainability and the ongoing harms of tourism labeled as “sustainable” underscore that a shift in thinking is necessary. Rather than focusing intently on economic benefits, tourism must embrace systemic change that centers resilience, ecological balance, and genuinely regenerative practices that heal ecosystems and support local communities.
Significance to Tourism: Tourism faces a crossroads between extractive models that harm destinations and community-led, regenerative approaches that prioritize local control, biodiversity, and cultural integrity. Understanding and addressing these tensions is crucial for the industry’s long-term viability and for protecting the social and environmental health of destinations worldwide.
In 2020, when the pandemic caused an international halt to travel, the industry took stock and began to call for a major shift in tourism practices and goals. Key tourism leaders had begun promoting a regenerative framework prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, but the global disruption amplified and underscored the need for systemic change that could buffer the industry from such shocks in the future. The halt of tourism led many more professionals to understand the urgent need to re-envision the future of tourism. As one scholar describes, the “pandemic has made us realise that to move forward we need to look backwards – to our roots, our ancient ways of living – the indigenous philosophies and knowledge” (Hussain, 2022, p. 3).
Although many within the industry have long prioritized the health of the environment, the statistics that came to light prior to and during the pandemic demonstrated an enormous gap between where tourism will be in 2030 and where it should be as defined by the 2015 World Charter for Sustainable Tourism +20. Of the 17 Sustainability Development Goals (SDGs) set for 2030, over 80% will not be met. The pandemic also highlighted the overdependence of some regions on mass tourism and even showcased scenarios where the financial, physical, and social well-being of residents had been severely harmed by the introduction of tourism to their region. Harmful scenarios often play out in response to extractive tourism in which wealthy investors profit from the natural resources and beauty of a less developed destination without providing benefit to the community or to the conservation of the destination’s environment.
Attributions
- Figure 9.2: Sustainable Development Goals, by the United Nations, is available in the public domain.
- Figure 9.3: Sustainable and Regenerative Tourism Table, by Hannah Adams for WA Open ProfTech (© SBCTC), is licensed under CC BY 4.0.
Meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. In tourism, achieving sustainability requires balancing economic viability, social equity, and environmental health. Regenerative tourism views sustainability as a baseline, aiming not just to sustain but to improve and restore ecological and community health.
This form of tourism uses a destination’s geographical and cultural wealth for profit that does not benefit local residents and treats nature as a resource for human profit. Enclave resorts, for example, often pollute the environment where they are built, as the waste and sewage created by tourists exceeds the capacity of the region’s infrastructure. On small islands, this can leave locals without clean drinking water and degrade the aesthetic quality of the destination in such a way that it compromises future tourism.
