Catégories
Issues Sustainable tourism

Who is Carbon Neutral in Tourism in Québec?

Visitors to and from Québec contribute to Greenhouse Gas emissions (GHG), regardless of the mode of transport, distance traveled, or the activity undertaken during a stay. To date, no study assessed neither travelers’ nor the tourism sector’s contributions to GHG emissions, or attitudes or actions towards mitigation in Québec. This creates a knowledge gap about net reductions, and about compensations for unavoidable emissions. In this context, the aim of this article is to provide a brief overview of carbon neutrality in Québec’s tourism sector.

Offset Providers

The choice of offset providers internationally continues to augment, while the Carbon Catalogue presently lists 12 providers across Canada with an offset price range of 12.50 $ to 39.90 $ per ton CO2e.(1) For those wishing to purchase offsets from organizations based in Québec, the four principal providers include Planetair,(2) Carbone Boréale,(3) Zero GHG Inc.(4) and ZÉRØCO2.(5)

(1) Planetair is a not-for-profit organization managed by the Unisféra International Centre, also a non-profit organization. (2) Planetair is the exclusive distributor of Myclimate, one of the most respected offset supplier worldwide, since all their projects conform to the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)* and Gold Standard.** These projects finance only renewable energy and energy efficiency projects in various developing countries. Planetair plans to offer Canadian projects in the future depending on sales volumes.

(2) Carbone Boréale (CB) is both a program, and a laboratory of researchers at the University of Québec in Chicoutimi. CB offsets finance tree plantations in a deforested area of Québec and contributes to supporting research. The plantations are verified and managed according to ISO 14064-3 norms, and are registered by the Canadian EcoProjectsTM GHG.(3)

(3) ZeroGHG Inc. is a private consultancy firm offering offsets in a variety of renewable and energy efficiency projects in addition to their consulting services to develop GHG reduction strategies, quantifying emissions and performing audits. ZeroGHG projects are located in various countries, and at least 80% must meet CDM* and Gold Standard**.(4)

(4) ZÉRØCO2 is a private enterprise selling offsets that finance reforestation projects in various communities. Since 2006, ZERØCO2 has reforested more than 20 hectares of land, creating green spaces equivalent to just over 40 football fields in the heart of communities. (5)

Indirect Offset Sellers

Some tourism businesses have partnered up with various offset-selling organizations. For example, since 2007, Air Canada (AC) encourages its customers to purchase offsets via non-profit organization ZeroFootprint that invests in forest restoration project in British Columbia. To date, AC customers bought $187,612 of offsets, equivalent of 11725 tones of GO2.(6) In contrast, Air Transat does not sell offsets for reasons relating to the efficiency of such projects in their ability to solve climate change related problems amongst other reasons.(7)

For those traveling by rail, VIA Rail also does not directly offer offsets to its customers, however it also encourages its customers to calculate their GHG emissions with Tree Canada, an Ottawa-based offset company. Since 1990, VIA Rail has reduced its GHG by 15% approximately, although it is responsible for only 0,03% of total GHG emissions compared to 13% generated by motorists in Canada.(8) For travelers that hire vehicles, numerous car rental companies also offer carbon offsets on-line such integrated into their reservation forms such as Alamo, Enterprise and National Car Rentals amongst others.(9)

Tourism Operations Buying Offsets

Some Québec and other travelers to Québec probably purchase offsets, however none of the above named organizations had data available at the time of writing this article about their clients. Some tourism operations also buy offsets in Québec, but no study assessed their transaction value to date.

Some accommodation establishments also have a carbon neutral policy. For example, the Chicoutimi Hotel has been offsetting its heating and electricity use and has been encouraging its clients to offset their stay with CB.(2) Since 2006, the hotel l’Auberge des Seigneurs in St-Hyacynthe has been offering Eco-Friendly Packages to its clients and in 2008, it has also engaged to calculate guest’s travel related GHG contributions amongst other environmentally friendly services.(10) This establishment also compensates emissions of meetings and events held in the hotel by planting trees. Similarly, in an effort to be carbon neutral, Novotel Montreal plants a tree for every online booking. (11)

Montreal based tour company, Karavanniers du monde has also taken climate change mitigation serirosly and since January 2009, its price structure includes carbon compensation costs with Planetair. (2, 12) The company’s client’s base is approximately 97% Québécois and based on discussions with the operation’ owner, there have been no complaints at all concerning the price increase resulting from mandatory carbon compensations. On the contrary, clients are pleased to see such an effort by the company. Some other travel companies such as Omnitour, Voyages Tour Étudiants also offers offsets to its customers. (2) Similarly, since 2006, the regional-based operation WeLa Aventure organizes eco-friendly hiking and cycling trips in the Saguenay,(13) and it compensated for its clients travel related CO2 emissions to and from the region via supporting tree plantations by ZIP Saugenay (14) and the cooperative COOP4Temps.(15)

Increasingly festivals and events across Québec are also eco-friendly, and some compensated for GHG emissions.(16) For example, since 2008, Montreal’s International Jazz Festival is carbon neutral.(17) Both Québec and Montreal Convention Centers offer eco-friendly events with their partner organizations (18, 19) and both centers offer offsetting as an option for such events. For example, In 2004, the Québec Convention Centre committed to reducing its energy consumption by 33% per m2 and its total GHG emissions by 50%.(20) Since 2007, it hosted 32 eco-friendly events of which 7 involved carbon compensations.

At Montreal’s Jean-Drapeau Park (JDP), sustainable development policy integrates GHG mitigation and compensation strategies for the organization and activities (about 100 events per year) on the park’s territory. (21) JDP created a fund (Fonds Oxygène) to implement this policy, and partners and suppliers will be asked to contribute to this fund, which will finance specific environmental improvement projects (22). Additionally, drivers to JDP will be required to pay $1 extra to leave their vehicles in the parking to help offset GHG emissions with CB.

Conclusion

Although it is well known that carbon compensation projects do not represent an ultimate solution to mitigating GHG emissions, the purchase of offsets in credible projects can raise awareness, and provide funds towards worthwhile initiatives.(23) Although buying offsets in tree plantations remains controversial, in certain cases they can deliver net environmental improvements, while buying offsets in renewable energy projects and technology developments permit a shift away from using fossil fuels.

This brief synopsis of the situation in Québec shows that carbon neutrality in the tourism sector is a patchwork. The analysis also highlights the need for measuring net contributions of greenhouse gases by the travel and tourism sector in order to enable a coordinated approach to assessing how this could be effectively mitigated.

* CDM certifies emission reductions that are sold on the voluntary market and it ensures that developed countries’ carbon credits comply with Kyoto Protocol regulations.
** The Gold Standard is an independent organization that certifies carbon credits sold on the voluntary market. Such carbon credits need to meet sustainable development objectives. This means that a carbon-offset project must lead directly to a net GHG emission reduction. Gold Standard does not certify forestry projects.

Sources:

(1) Carbon Catalogue Project: Find a Carbon Offset: Canada. Last Consulted Apr 25, 2009.  http://www.carboncatalog.org/projects/canada/
(2) Planetair. Offset Projects. Last Consulted Apr 2, 2009. http://planetair.ca/
(3) Éco-conseil. Plantations Compensatoires de GES. Last Consulted Apr 15, 2009.  http://dsf.uqac.ca/eco-conseil/ges/frame_ges.html
(4) ZeroGHG Inc. Last Consulted Apr 25, 2009.   http://www.zeroghg.com/
(5) ZeroCo2. Last Consulted Apr 15, 2009.  http://zeroco2.com/welcome.php
(6) Air Canada. Carbon Offset Program. Last Consulted Apr 25, 2009.  http://www.aircanada.com/en/travelinfo/traveller/zfp.html?src=hp_ql
(7) Transat AT (2009) Greenhouse gas reduction and fuel management. Last Consulted Apr 2, 2009. http://www.transat.com/en/social.responsibility/gas.reduction.fuel.management.aspx
(8) Via Rail Canada. Environment: Helping To Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions Last Consulted Apr 17, 2009. http://www.viarail.ca/corporate/en_environment/reducing_greenhouse_gas.html
(9) Terra Pass Inc. (2009) Rental Car Carbon Offset Program Proves Most Popular With Consumers. Published on-line in Earth News, April 6, 2009. Last Consulted Apr 25, 2009.  http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/rental-car-carbon-offset-program-proves-most-popular-with-consumers775734.shtml#%23
(10) l’Auberge des Seigneurs à St Hyacynthe. Last Consulted Apr. 24, 2009.
http://www.hoteldesseigneurs.com/notre_environment.asp
(11) Novotel Montréal Centre. http://www.novotelmontreal.com/home/novotel_news.shtm Last Consulted June. 2, 2009.
(12) Karavaniers du Monde. Destinatons: Fiche technique. Last Consulted Apr. 3, 2009.  http://www.karavaniers.com/voyages/calendrier/?voyage_depart=134
(13) Wela Aventure. Horaire et parcours. Randonnées des cols du Fjord 2009. Fiche d’information. Last Consulted Apr 25, 2009. http://www.welaaventure.com/
(14) ZIP Saguenay. Réalisations. Last Consulted Apr 27, 2009.  http://www.zipsaguenay.ca/zipsaguenay/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=1&id=5&Itemid=12
(15) Coop Quatre Temps. Mission. http://www.coop4temps.com/ Last Consulted Apr 27, 2009.
(16) Réseau québécois des femmes en environnement. Sustainable Event. Last Consulted Apr 2, 2009. http://www.evenementecoresponsable.com/
(17) Festival International de Jazz de Montréal. Une édition 2008 carboneutre. Last Consulted Apr 27, 2009.  http://www.montrealjazzfest.com/Fijm2008/planetAir_fr.aspx
(18) Centre des congrès de Québec. Développement Durable. Évennements éco-responsables. Last Consulted Apr 27, 2009.  http://www.convention.qc.ca/tiki-index.php?page=devdurable_eve_resp
(19) Palais des congrès de Montréal. Environnement. Last Consulted Apr 2, 2009. http://www.congresmtl.com/fr/visiteurs/environnement.aspx
(20) Centre des congrès de Québec. Lauréate du prix Stellaris: Efficacité Énergétique. Press Release 2 April, 2004. Last Consulted Apr 2, 2009. http://www.convention.qc.ca/tiki-read_article.php?articleId=41
(21) Société du parc Jean-Deapeau (2009) Politique de développement durable. Montréal. 8 p.
(22) Société du parc Jean-Deapeau (2009) Fonds Oxygène.Le fonds de compensation de gaz à effet de serre Montréal. 4 p.
(23) Broderick, J. (2008). Voluntary Carbon Offsets. A Contribution to Sustainable Tourism? In Sustainable Tourism Futures. Perspectives on Systems, Restructuring and Innovations. In Gössling, S., Hall, C.M. and Weaver, D.B. (Eds.). Routledge, New-York. 169-197.

Catégories
Around the world Sustainable tourism

A portrait of Québec’s tourism sector in 2009 in its path towards sustainable development

The need to develop tourism based on sustainability principles is a part of a general tourism policy framework since 2005 in Québec(1) and most tourism sub-sectors also have set broad objectives based on this basis, including the Ski-doo Federation (2). Although sustainability is well accepted across Québec’s tourism sector, in practice it is not a central part of it, even though many businesses and organizations have implemented numerous measures to improve their performance. In this context the action of a few appears ad-hoc.

Collaborative Initiatives

To date none of the 21 tourism regions had produced a comprehensive regional scale sustainable development strategy with a clearly articulated vision, set of achievable short and long-term objectives and progress measure indicators. Yet, tourism is an important economic activity in Québec and in 12 regions it directly generates at least 3% of all income (3). Tourism has much more potential to be sustainable, since most regions have rich natural and cultural resource bases and diversified economies. Although natural resource exploitation forms the foundation of many regions across Québec, there is much untapped potential to expand tourism in these areas, thereby achieving greater economic integration. Untapped potentials also remain between biodiversity conservation and tourism development on private and public lands besides the protected area networks managed by the Provicial Parks Authority, la Sépaq and Parks Canada.

In some regions such as the Laurentians, concrete initiatives have been undertaken towards strategically integrating tourism into the regional economy through the Provincial Government’s Accord Program (4). In other regions a shift towards increased collaboration between stakeholders is occurring by the establishment of various cooperatives. Examples include the Lac Saint Pierre Biosphere Reserve (5), l’Échappé Bleue (6), Le Parc Aventures Cap Jaseux (7) and V.E.R.T.E. cooperatives (8). There are probably numerous other locally driven projects, but to nobody has examined their socio-economic value or general importance.

There are also 23 territorial areas across Québec with Local Agenda 21 (LA21) strategies (9) and one of the best examples with a strong tourism orientation includes the municipality of Baie-Saint-Paul. There, an LA21 process and willingness and leadership by certain stakeholders continue to enable greater community interaction as part of the redevelopment planning of Le Massif Resort (10).

Operational Changes to Improve Performance

Some tourism operations have a longer history of functioning according to sustainability ideals such as the Le Baluchon rural resort (11) and the zoos in Granby and Saint-Félicien (12, 13). However, very few businesses have a transparent Corporate Social Responsibility strategies, such as those published by the Granby Zoo(12) and Transat AT (14). Many tourism operations have reduced their energy and water use and waste output via different mechanisms, but their overall impact is not evaluated. Hotels in Québec seem to be making visible progress, especially since the Québec Hotel Association has its own Reser-Vert certification program (15), and the CITQ also recently modified its rating system to include environmental considerations and carries out checks on behalf of the Canadian Hotels Associations of Green Key rated establishments (16). Since recent years, numerous events including conferences and festivals are increasingly organized as ecologically and socially responsible, such as Montreal’s International Jazz Festival (17). Many other tourism operations also have supply chain management policies and source various products locally and or produced responsibly. Abitibi-Témiscamingue is the first ‘green’ Tourism Region awarded by Recyc-Québec for achieving more than 80% waste recuperation for its office operations (18).

Besides environmental efforts, some tourism businesses are also making contributions to improving north-south relations. For example, L’Auberge l’Autre Jardin (19) has been directly providing financial benefits to developing countries via its support of Carrefour Tiers Monde. Similar actions can be observed by Parc Safari that sells fair-trade products from developing nations (20). Sustainability news about small and medium enterprises (SME) in Québec is not well documented, which suggests limited progress. Since SMEs comprise about the majority of the tourism industry (21), it might be worthwhile to examine their progress, and issues so that appropriate tools could help them implement change towards sustainability.

Quebec’s tourism includes a variety of products to help reduce its greenhouse gas emissions such as a vast bike network developed by Vélo-Québec (22), the Bixi bike in Montreal (23) and the bio buses in Old Quebec and Montreal (24). Some businesses and events are also carbon neutral, but their profiles and numbers has not been documented. For example, Karavaniers du monde is the first tour operator in Quebec to include the cost of carbon offsets in its pricing (25). Climate change does not seem to be a preoccupation of the Quebec tourism sector, despite the vulnerability status of some products notably ski, snowmobile and various other outdoor activities (26).

Some sub sectors in Québec have a long history of encouraging businesses and visitors alike to reduce their environmental impact, notably Québec’s Adventure and Ecotourism Association (27). How many visitors to and from Quebec travel environmentally consciously is not known. Undoubtedly Québecois travelers are increasingly ethically minded. Since 88% of tourists in Québec are of domestic origin, consumers locally need more indication about industry’s progress so they can choose responsibly (28).

Where to next?

Various operational changes to improve environmental and social performance of the tourism sector are occurring at all scales, but nobody knows the real progress in the absence of benchmark indicators. Québec is not ahead nor behind other Canadian Provinces but there has not been a national study to compare progress at this scale. Québec’s tourism sector is in the beginning phase of operationalizing sustainable tourism and the above examples highlight the need for a Provincial scale action plan combined with a set of feasible progress indicators.

The support tools and knowledge network to put sustainable tourism principles into action is growing across Québec, and numerous institutions offer special training to improve human resource capacity, in responsible environmental managers that is directly applicable to tourism (29).

There is also a growing amount of effective tools and mechanisms reported from outside Québec to help implement change rapidly and help sustain a viable and responsible industry sector. However, local leadership remains an important key driver to implementing any action plan. There needs to be more leadership from government and industry to move the fragmented sub-sectors forward and to provide a coordinated approach to the entire process in Québec. The tools are wide ranging, and many remain unexplored potentials in Québec, including financial incentives and voluntary measures.

Sources:

1. Ministère du Tourisme du Québec (2005) Towards a Sustainable Tourism. Tourism Policy of Québec. Governemenet du Québec: Québec City. 37 p.

2. La Fédération des clubs de motoneigistes du Québec (2008) Plan d’action quinquennal de la FCMQ pour l’environnement. La Fédération des clubs de motoneigistes du Québec (FCQM): Montreal. 8 p.

3. Sauvé, R. La reconnaissance de l’industrie touristique dans l’économie locale et régionale. Presentation at the International Symposium on the Sustainable Development of Tourism. March 17 to 19, 2009. Québec City, Canada. Available at: http://www.bonjourquebec.com/mto/activites/symposium-developpement-durable/fr/programme-mercredi.html

4. Ministère du développement Économique Innovation et Exportation. Accord Program. Last accessed 14 April, 2009. [http://www.mdeie.gouv.qc.ca/index.php?id=3715]

5. La réserve mondiale de la biosphère du Lac-Saint-Pierre. Coopérative de solidarité de la réserve mondiale de la biosphère du Lac-Saint-Pierre. Last accessed 14 April, 2009. [http://www.biospherelac-st-pierre.qc.ca/content/cooperative.html].

6. L’Échappé Bleue. L’Échappée bleue. Coopérative de Tourisme durable. Last accessed 14 April, 2009. [http://www.lechappeebleue.com].

7. Le Parc Aventures Cap Jaseux. Qui sommes-nous. Last accessed 14 April, 2009. [http://www.capjaseux.com/-Qui-sommes-nous-.html].

8. La Coop V.E.R.T.E. Qui nous sommes? Last accessed 14 April, 2009. [http://www.coopverte.com/coopverte/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=19&Itemid=37].

9. Gagnon, C. and E. Arth. Guide des Agendas 21e siècle locaux. Les Agendas 21e siècle locaux québécois. Last accessed 14 April, 2009. [http://www.a21l.qc.ca/9544_fr.html].

10. Le Massif. Territoire Le Massif. The development project. Last accessed  14 April, 2009. [http://www.lemassif.com/en/territoire_le_massif/the_development_project.php].

11. Le Baluchon. About the Baluchon. Last accessed 14 April, 2009. [http://www.baluchon.com/inn-accomodation/index_ang.cfm].

12. Zoo Granby (2006) Réalisations en responsabilité sociale et environnementale. Zoo de Granby: Granby. 24 p.

13. Zoo Sauvage de Saint-Félicien. Au sujet du CCBB/Zoo Sauvage. Last accessed 14 April, 2009. [http://www.borealie.org/page.php/fr/1/4.htm].

14. Transat A.T. (2008) Transat for Sustainable Tourism. 2008 Corporate Social Responsibility Report. Transat AT Inc: Montreal, Québec. 44 p.

15. L’Association des hôteliers du Québec. RéserVert, le Programme de reconnaissance en développement durable. Last accessed 14 April, 2009. [http://www.reservert.com/fr/page.php?label=r%E9servertleprogramme].

16. Corporation de l’industrie touristique du Québec. CITQ is mandated by the Hotel Association of Canada for the Green Key Eco-Rating Program visits. Last accessed 14 April, 2009. [http://www.citq.info/EN/classification.asp].

17. Festival International de Jazz de Montréal. Une édition 2008 carbon neutre. Last accessed 14 April, 2009. [http://www.montrealjazzfest.com/Fijm2008/planetAir_fr.aspx].

18. Bisson, K. Là où commence un tourisme plus vert. Last accessed 16 April, 2009. [http://lafrontiere.canoe.ca/webapp/sitepages/content.asp?contentid=87930&id=836&classif=].

19. L’Auberge Autre Jardins. Mission et historique. Last accessed 15 April, 2009. [http://www.autrejardin.com/auberge.php].

20. Ranger, J.-P. Tourisme durable. Parc Safari. Presentation at the International Symposium on the Sustainable Development of Tourism. March 17 to 19, 2009 Québec City, Canada. Available at http://www.bonjourquebec.com/mto/activites/symposium-developpement-durable/fr/programme-mercredi.html

21. Ministère du Tourisme du Québec. Programmes et services aux entreprises touristiques. Last accessed 15 April, 2009.  [http://www.bonjourquebec.com/mto/ministere/index.asp].

22. Laraue, S. Tourisme durable et velo. Presentation at the International Symposium on the Sustainable Development of Tourism. March 17 to 19, 2009 Québec City, Canada. Available at http://www.bonjourquebec.com/mto/activites/symposium-developpement-durable/fr/programme-mardi.html

23. Montreal Tourism. BIXI: Montreal’s Brand New Public Bike System. Last accessed 15 April, 2009. [http://www.tourisme-montreal.org/Press/Whats-hot/News/bixi-montreal-s-brand-new-public-bike-system].

24. Société de Transport de Montréal. For one year, 155 STM buses to run on biodiesel in downtown Montreal (Press Release). Last accessed 15 April, 2009. [http://www.stm.info/English/info/a-biofiche.htm].

25. Karavaniers du monde. Cuba. Mère des Caraïbes. Informations Techniques. Last accessed 15 April, 2009. [http://www.karavaniers.com/voyages/calendrier/?voyage_depart=134].

26. Singh, B. and C. Bryant (2006) Impact et adaptation aux changements climatiques pour les activités de ski et de golf et l’industrie touristique : le cas du Québec. Rapport préparé pour Ouranos Inc. Département de géographie, Université de Montréal: Montréal. 404 p.

27. Aventure Écotourisme Québec. Leave No Trace Program. Last accessed 15 April, 2009. [http://www.aventure-ecotourisme.qc.ca/content/templates/content_en.asp?articleid=46&zoneid=10].

28. Tourisme Québec (2009) Le tourisme au Québec en bref – 2007. Ministère du Tourisme du Québec: Québec. 16 p.

29. Villeneuve, V. Chaire en éco-conseil. Last accessed 15 April, 2009. [http://www.uqac.ca/recherche/organismes/chaire_ecoconseil.php].

Catégories
Accommodation Sustainable tourism

Greening American hotels: some practical measures implemented so far by the lodging sector

The number of certified green hotels continues to grow, but the eco-efficiency measures implemented vary widely among establishments. For many hotels, a sustainability strategy includes working towards carbon neutrality, community involvement, supporting conservation initiatives and participating in a range of certification programs. However, not all hotels are green, and often even basic measures have not been taken to improve performance, as outlined in the recent findings of the 2008 American Hotel and Lodging Association (AH&LA) and Smith Travel Research Report (1) (referred to as the AH&LA Report in this analysis). This study presents data based on a total of 10,350 responses, or 23% of the entire sector in the United States.

Measure 1: Linen/towel reuse programs

Linen reuse programs have emerged as one of the oldest and most popular forms of energy conservation measures since they directly result in cost savings on labour, water, energy and detergent use. This measure is an easy way to improve resource efficiency, and research suggests that 75% of guests who have the opportunity to participate in such programs, do (2). Furthermore, guests are more likely to reuse their towels when they know other guests are doing it, as the research shows that signs focussing on environmental benefits are less effective than signs that point out the level of participation of other guests. According to the AH&LA Report, 67% of establishments had a linen/towel reuse program in 2008, compared to 52% in 2004 (1). Analysis by price segment shows that 63% of economy hotels have adopted the program, while 76% of luxury hotels have. Larger hotels are more likely to implement this program than smaller establishments.

Measure 2: Liquid soap dispensers

Greenlodgingnews.com estimates that approximately ten billion shower amenity packaging pieces are thrown away annually by the world’s hotels (3). The installation of liquid soap dispensers is an eco-efficiency measure that saves 70% on waste production and reduces operational costs because cleaning staff do not have to replace amenities daily. According to the AH&LA Report, the use of liquid soap dispensers increased from 6% in 2004 to 22% in 2008 across surveyed hotels. Analysis by price segment shows that 15% of budget hotels, compared to 20% of luxury establishments, have installed liquid soap dispensers in their establishments, while the size of a hotel seems to have no effect on the rate of installation.

Measure 3: In-room energy management sensors

The UNEP estimates that the accommodation sector contributes 21% of all tourism-generated CO2 emissions globally (4). In addition, maintaining the heating, TV and lights in empty rooms can cost up to 20% of a hotel’s electricity budget. Many hotels have installed in-room energy monitoring systems in recent years in an effort to be eco-efficient. The manufacturers of some sensors report that the savings in energy costs due to monitors provide a return on investment within just one year. These monitoring systems function automatically and are time-savers for management staff, who do not have to manually adjust the controls in each room (5). Of course, energy use per-room can also be reduced if guests simply pay attention to switching things off themselves and if hotel managers book one floor at a time (6). This measure can help reduce energy consumption, especially during low occupancy periods. The AH&LA Report shows that, across the United States, 25% of establishments had in-room energy management sensors in 2008, compared to 15% in 2004 (1). By price segment, 38% of budget hotels had installed this tool, compared to 32% in the luxury segment. In terms of hotel size, larger hotels appear to have installed sensors in greater numbers than smaller hotels have.

Measure 4: Recycling programs

The implementation of recycling programs can be difficult since it depends on the availability of additional infrastructure and considerable logistics to deal with the waste collected (4). This is particularly true in remote and isolated areas. However, hotels are implementing recycling programs slowly, and trends suggest a general rise. According to the AH&LA Report, in 2008, 40% of establishments in the United States had recycling programs, compared to 32% in 2004 (1). A comparison according to price segment shows that only 21% of budget hotels recycle, compared to 56% of luxury establishments. It seems that mid-sized hotels with 20 to 129 rooms are less likely to recycle when compared to smaller hotels and those with more than 130 rooms.

Measure 5: Energy-efficient lighting

A lot of hotels have replaced their incandescent light fixtures, especially hallway lighting, with T5 and T8 fluorescent lamps. In many cases, government organizations provide incentives via subsidies and rebates to encourage this practice. According to the AH&LA Report (1), in 2008, 68% of all American hotels had energy-efficient lighting installed, and there were very few differences in implementation according to either price segment or room range.

Measure 6: Water saving programs

The UNEP estimates that tourists typically use four times more water when travelling, compared to staying at home (4). Some fixtures such as efficient bathroom faucets and dual-flush toilets can help hotels reduce their water use between 20% and 40%. The number of products on the market to improve water efficiency is on the rise and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has a voluntary partnership program called WaterSense, which labels designated products and services that conserve water. The AH&LA Report shows that water saving programs had been implemented by 46% of surveyed establishments across the United States in 2008. According to price range, 64% of budget hotels had done so, compared to 50% of luxury hotels. Analysis according to the size of the hotel shows no clear pattern in implementation; however, it seems that larger hotels are more active in saving water resources.

Conclusions

Like any business, a hotel needs to respect its triple bottom line in order to stay competitive. While green programs offer significant cost savings, the guest response to these programs (impact on loyalty, price sensitivity) can also provide a significant market opportunity (7). According to the Market Metrix Hospitality Index Survey (8), overall, guests who rank a hotel’s green program highly are willing to pay at least 7% more for their room compared to other guests. These same guests also stay longer, are happier with their stay and are more likely to consider the loyalty program as “very important” in selecting a hotel. Hotels with highly ranked green programs also experience half as many guest-reported problems (according to the same survey).

Forbes listed the following as America’s greenest hotels for 2008 (9):

  • Marriott New York City
  • Wyland Waikiki, Hawaii
  • Bison Quest Sanctuary and Spa, Montana
  • Seaport Hotel Boston
  • Hotel Triton (Kimpton), San Francisco
  • Lookout Point Inn, Arkansas
  • Banyan Resort, Key West Florida

Sources

(1) Smith Travel Research (2008) Lodging Survey. Lodging, Facilities, Trends 2008. Report prepared for the American Hotel and Lodging Association. Washington, DC, 245 p.

(2) Goldstein, N.J., Cialdini, R.B. and Griskevicius, V. (2008) “Room with a Viewpoint: Using Social Norms to Motivate Environmental Conservation in Hotels.” Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 35, October.

(3) Greenlodging News (2008) “’Green’ Definitions Can Confuse Conscientious Amenity Purchasers.” www.greenlogingnews.com Last accessed 20 September 2008.

(4) United Nations Environment Programme, Sustainable Consumption & Production Branch (2008) Environmental Impacts of Tourism. www.unep.fr/scp/tourism/sustain/impacts/environmental/ Last accessed 20 September 2008.

(5) Butler, J. (2008) “The Compelling ’Hard Case’ for ’Green’ Hotel Development.” Cornell Hospitality Quarterly 49 (3) 234-244.

(6) Maycock, P. (2008) “Four easy ways to cut carbon and costs.” Hotel News Now. 28 August 2008. www.hotelnewsnow.com Last accessed 28 August 2008.

(7) Houdré, H. (2008) “Sustainable Hospitality: Sustainable Development in the Hotel Industry.” Industry Perspectives: A White Paper Series from Cornell University, School of Hotel Administration, The Center for Hospitality Research, No. 2.

(8) Barsky, J. (2008) Do customers really care about “green”? Market Metrix http://www.marketmetrix.com/ Last accessed 20 September 2008.

(9) Forbes Traveler (2008) “America’s Greenest Hotels 2008.” http://www.forbestraveler.com/resorts-hotels/green-hotels-us-2008-slide.html?partner=msnbc_greenhotels Last accessed 20 September 2008.

Catégories
Issues Sustainable tourism

Sustainable purchasing policies: Does your business have one?

Green purchasing or sustainable procurement is a tool to mitigate the environmental impacts of consumption. It simply means looking at what products are made of, where they come from, how they are made and how they will be disposed of at the end of their life cycle. Green purchasing is also an initiative to consume responsibly and move towards a more sustainable society.

Most governments, large companies and, increasingly, small and medium enterprises in tourism have some sort of purchase or procurement policy that incorporates environmental and socially responsible objectives. The number of tourism businesses that operate with a green purchase policy has not yet been quantified. The public sector spends 45-65% of its budget on procurement, which amounts to 13-17% of the GDP of OECD nations. Overall, tourism has the potential to significantly improve its sustainability performance by implementing green purchase policies because it is an industry that consumes products and services from almost every economic sector. For example, some hotel chains like Scandic as well as the Resort Municipality of Whistler have integrated sustainable purchasing goals into their procurement policies and developed a number of resource tools to encourage better purchasing choices.

What is a sustainable green product?

In simple terms, sustainable products must meet one the following criteria: they must be made from abundant and/or renewable sources, recyclable, organic, made or grown locally, powered efficiently, durable (i.e., have a long life cycle) and/or be reusable. In effect, a sustainable product best meets the aims of environmentally responsible management at all stages of the product’s life cycle. Life cycle analysis is a very important part of responsible consumption. It refers to the analysis of all the stages involved in the production and consumption of something:

  • materials initially used to produce it
  • amount of energy used to extract materials
  • waste outputs involved in acquiring the raw materials
  • manufacturing processes
  • consumer use
  • maintenance
  • final disposal

Traditional products do not reflect the full cost of their social and environmental impact. For example, the price of polluting products such as chemicals and non-biodegradable products does not include the cost of cleaning up the pollution they cause. Instead, this cost is the responsibility of the communities affected and is usually paid by public funds. It is almost impossible for a tourism business or consumer to analyze the life cycle of every product. To make it easier to identify more socially responsible products, a variety of organizations are developing standards, labels and certification programs (see figure with logos). In Canada, Environment Canada’s Environmental Choice Program provides a list of products that have been tested and certified environmentally responsible throughout their life cycle. Such products are the least damaging compared to alternatives on the market and they are permitted to display the EcoLogo. Various other organizations across North America and elsewhere offer certification for a diverse range of products.

It is difficult to assess products that are not labelled. It is also necessary to pay close attention to labels and marketing tactics as the market is currently being saturated with “environmentally friendly” products that do not truly live up to their claims. A product can be assessed by checking product Websites and obtaining information directly from suppliers. If a company does not have a clear description of their sustainability policy, it is also advisable to check its accreditation for general compliance with standards as well as whether it belongs to Canadian Business for Social Responsibility (CBSR).

Why sustainable purchasing should be the norm

Green purchasing influences the market by encouraging businesses to offer more innovative and sustainable options. Besides being generally more responsible, businesses enjoy numerous other advantages by adopting a sustainable purchasing policy. This includes many savings, especially over the long term, as well as an enhanced brand image. As consumers are becoming increasingly green-oriented, companies who have already embraced more responsible practices are realizing opportunities to differentiate themselves from competitors. Other specific benefits can include:

  • savings due to lower operating costs because energy, water and other resources are used more efficiently
  • savings from lower waste management fees
  • easier compliance with environmental regulations
  • avoidance of unnecessary health and safety risks associated with toxic product use

It must be noted that several of these benefits may only be realized over the medium or long term. When companies who have adopted sustainable purchasing policies educate the public and build awareness of their economic and environmental benefits, employees develop a sense of pride across the organization.

Practical steps for implementing a sustainable purchasing policy

1. Reconsider each purchase

A lot of businesses consume products that are not necessary. To determine whether a specific product needs to be purchased, the following questions must be asked:

  • How does this product contribute to the company’s service?
  • Can the company deliver its service without this product?
  • (if relevant) Has the product been used to the end of its life cycle?

In the case of consumable items, it is worthwhile to assess the possibility of reducing the rate of consumption. Reducing the purchase of unnecessary items will create savings for purchasing or encouraging more sustainable products.

2. Rent, lease or buy it second-hand

Infrequently used products like office furniture, tools, machines and computers, for example, can be also rented, leased or even shared with other businesses. Renting means that the initial purchase price is reduced, so it saves money and avoids the risks and costs associated with disposing of these products. Some companies that purchase durable goods are legally responsible for the waste and recycling of their products. In the case of renovations and building, construction materials can increasingly be purchased recycled or second-hand.3. Choose a durable or longer life productIt is better to choose products that are longer lasting and, preferably, multifunctional to reduce one’s overall rate of consumption. This requires comparing the cost of a non-disposable version with a less durable or disposable product to determine the cost per use and estimate whether money can be saved. For example, throwaway items such as foam cups can be replaced with recyclable equivalents, including glass. Most products on the market, like light bulbs and batteries, have “longer life” versions. Products such as electronics and machinery have a long service life and can often be repaired.

4. Choose products or services designed to address specific environmental or social concerns
If possible, it is preferable to choose labelled products that have been tested by reliable organizations. If a labelled product is not available, consider the following:

  • For all chemical-based products, check the product’s content. Cleaning products, fertilizers, lighting, paints, piping and wood products all have specific assessments to show how toxic they are and these are often available on government department web pages or other publicly accessible sites. Certain computer hardware components and cleaning products contain toxic ingredients such as formaldehyde, mercury, lead, cadmium, chromium, phosphate and volatile organic compounds. These products need to be replaced with low polluting, less toxic alternatives. For example, oil-based paints have water-based equivalents and so on. Some plastics and furniture can emit gas, which is not only harmful to the environment in general but also dangerous to human health.
  • For all non-perishable products, check whether the product can be recycled and reused. These include products such as toner cartridges, oils, glass, plastics, paper, pens, beverage containers, batteries, and so on.
  • For products that use water and/or energy, check the availability of more efficient alternatives that use less of these resources. This applies to anything from plumbing fixtures, to kitchenware and light bulbs.
  • Check whether the product is recyclable, or contains recycled materials or reusable parts. Sometimes new products are available from recycled materials and the purchase of these items promotes recycling instead of using virgin materials. These products are labelled to show the percentage of content that was produced from recycled sources. Some products are made from materials that are less and less abundant and nearly exhausted, including furniture.
  • For products that use non-renewable energy such as petrol-based fuels, check whether alternatives exist that use a cleaner source of energy or renewable energy. This applies particularly to cars. The variety of fuel-efficient equivalents is growing rapidly in all vehicle categories and in Quebec the government provides a tax rebate for buyers of some hybrid vehicles.
  • For perishable food items, check whether they have been organically and/or locally grown. If you run a dining establishment, you must pay particular attention to foods like fish to avoid serving species whose stocks are overharvested. Sustainable Seafood Canada is a coalition of conservation organizations that has developed a guide to encourage sustainable consumption patterns.
  • For imported products from less developed nations, check whether they have been produced in accordance with fair trade principles.

5. Source products locally as possible

In an effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it is really important to source as much as possible from local sources.

How to get started?

Implementing a sustainable purchasing policy will take time because purchasing staff need to consider trade-offs. This includes environmental objectives versus operational requirements, price competitiveness and product quality and availability. For most tourism businesses, implementing a sustainable purchasing policy will not be easy because of the need to strike a balance between these aspects. However, it is better to start with a simple plan that can be improved continually. Organizations that have implemented such sustainability actions have the following advice:

  1. develop a clear policy statement about the organization’s vision and objectives regarding sustainability, including a new purchasing plan with clear priorities
  2. involve everyone in the organization in the process
  3. set clear, measurable targets for implementation
  4. regularly monitor the organization’s progress towards achieving the objectives

Sustainable purchasing is an effective tool that helps businesses prevent pollution at the source. It is also an effective way to educate everyone to be responsible. As purchasing affects every phase of the production process, from the extraction of raw materials to waste management, via responsible consumption, an organization’s financial and environmental performance can improve because every buying decision has an impact on the economy, the environment and society. Buying “green” products helps suppliers that produce responsible products to realize economies of scale. This reduces their costs and encourages a wider distribution of their product, probably at lower prices. Today’s responsible products are produced at low volumes and cost more partly because the market is still small. This should change as demand increases.

Every person and every business needs to be more responsible and change today. Consumers cannot shop the planet out of its problems, but responsible patterns of consumption will help mitigate some issues.

Sources:

Catégories
Sustainable tourism

Compensating your emissions by planting trees? Know the pros and cons and the dos and don’ts.

The popularity of carbon-neutral travel continues to grow, although no reliable figures have been published on the size of this market. Traveling or doing business carbon neutral is a voluntary, market-based option to compensate for the greenhouse gas emissions caused. Using a web-based calculator, one simply calculates the emissions caused and then buys some credits from a company that promises to plant enough trees to absorb an equivalent amount of harmful emissions during their lifetime. For example, Air Canada currently offers this service through the non-profit organization Zerofootprint. Since the launch of the program in May 2007, Air Canada clients have offset 2224 metric tonnes of C02, resulting in 445 trees being planted in a forest restoration project in Maple Ridge, British Columbia. This is equivalent to taking 727 cars off the road for one year.

Purchasing carbon credits in a tree plantation is popular because it is simple to understand and presents a good clean green image. From a business perspective, the establishment of forest carbon sinks is estimated to be 90% cheaper than developing and implementing energy efficiency technology. Although planting trees is a move in the right direction, one needs to be aware of the issues surrounding carbon sequestration projects.

Issues

It is recognized that trees play a part in reducing atmospheric greenhouse gases. If managed appropriately, tree plantations can help address other environmental problems and generate income. They can also cause problems.

  1. Forestry projects only store carbon while the trees are alive. If the trees are harvested, die or get destroyed naturally or by other mechanisms (such as fire), then carbon gets released back into the atmosphere. When this happens, a client’s emissions are not actually offset or compensated for.
  2. Once a forest is established, it is complicated to measure how much carbon is absorbed during the life of the project and this is a current subject of debate amongst scientists.
  3. The Earth does not have the physical land available to absorb the excess emissions already in the atmosphere. Not all land currently available is suitable for carbon sink plantations due to biogeographical and other reasons.
  4. The effectiveness of a plantation depends on the type of tree species planted. Agroforests with multiple tree species have higher carbon storage capacity, greater biodiversity and are likely to provide more benefits to local livelihoods. Monoculture plantations, of non-native eucalyptus or pine trees, for example, provide no biodiversity value, little habitat provision, disturb hydrological cycles, intensify the use of chemicals and pesticides and can increase soil acidity. Unfortunately, many people buy carbon credits in such monoculture projects.
  5. The establishment of carbon sink plantations by developed countries in developing countries has been problematic because they threaten local communities, who risk displacement and loss of access to traditional lands. These communities are often not compensated adequately for their losses.
  6. Since sequestration projects lack regulation, companies can take advantage of the situation to over-exaggerate or inflate their projects’ estimated benefits.
  7. Planting trees does not directly result in a move away from using fossil fuels. It compensates for emissions, rather than cutting pollution at its source. This is why some organizations do not offer carbon credits from sequestration projects. Rather, they focus on renewable energy and energy efficiency projects, which support a transition away from fossil fuel dependence.

What to do

  1. Try to reduce your emissions, while traveling and in daily life.
  2. If cutting down is not an option, try to substitute with the best available alternatives.
  3. If neither of the above is an option, then continue traveling or doing your business carbon neutral, but be selective in supporting tree projects.

If you decide to buy carbon credits in tree plantations look for:

  • Permanent plantations (<100 years) or projects under protection
  • Local native species and multiple species
  • Projects with long lived and hardwood species (or the most appropriate native species)
  • Projects with the resources to manage the plantations to ensure survivorship and longevity
  • Additionality (i.e. projects that would not have happened without your purchase)
  • Insurance on the project so the company can replace trees if lost or damaged (fire, drought, etc,)
  • Well-organized, transparent projects with low administration costs
  • Projects that have additional environmental benefits (such as habitat provision)
  • Projects that provide genuine sustainable development benefits to local communities
  • Projects that retire the carbon credit you bought – so it cannot be sold again
  • Projects that incorporate local people’s needs and knowledge
  • Projects certified and verified by an independent third party

The climate change solution requires social change – and a move towards greener energy in all sectors. The more we rely on carbon sinks to offset greenhouse gases in the short term, the more we delay the transition to alternative energy, and the harder it will be to reach emission targets in the long term. Carbon sinks should supplement an alternative energy revolution, not replace or delay it.

Finally, travelers can take matters into their own hands, rather than relying on carbon credit companies. For example, when you take a holiday, calculate the amount of emissions you need to offset using one of the web-based calculators. Then, make up for this yourself before and after the trip, by not driving your car or by purchasing energy-efficient products for the household. Individuals and companies now have the opportunity to be proactive in addressing their travel-related carbon footprint.

Notes
1. In this paper, greenhouse gases refer to those recognized by the Kyoto Protocol: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydro fluorocarbons, per fluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride.

Sources:
– Air Canada Carbon Offset Program [http://www.aircanada.com/en/travelinfo/traveller/zfp.html?src=hp_ql]. Last accessed November 20, 2007.
– Priskin, J. and Stenhouse, R.N. (2007) Des végétaux pour voyager : les avantages et les inconvénients des contreparties de la fixation du carbone par la séquestration dans les forêts. Téoros. 26(3) p. 68-71.
– Zerofootprint [http://www.zerofootprint.net] Last accessed November 20, 2007.

Catégories
Sustainable tourism

Understanding the certification jungle

Welcome to the jungle of quality labels and certification programs! There is certainly a lot to choose from. Are these marks of recognition a sign of quality, a guarantee of success or simply a marketing tool? Do travellers care about them and can they distinguish among them? The following article explores many of these questions and provides a few answers. It was prepared by Michèle Laliberté of the Tourism Intelligence Network of the ESG-UQAM Chair in Tourism (University of Quebec at Montréal):

Everyone wants to boast a mark of distinction

Among the most prestigious international distinctions is “UNESCO World Heritage Site.” The European Union recently announced plans to develop a similar quality label as a way of developing culture and heritage tourism and enhancing its prestige and educational value.

Europe abounds with a variety of eco-labels, Tourism Australia has launched an ecotourism certification program, and the Quebec adventure and ecotourism sector boasts a quality program managed by the Bureau de normalisation du Québec. The Ministère du Tourisme du Québec is restarting its Démarche Qualité Tourisme total quality program. Under the aegis of the World Tourism Organization (WTO) and with funding from both the Quebec and Canadian governments, the World Center of Excellence on Tourist Destinations (CED) recently opened in Montreal. It is currently developing criteria to measure the excellence of destinations.

In the US, five hotels are proudly displaying their certifications from the US Green Building Council. Every year, the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) hands out its Tourism for Tomorrow Awards and is currently studying the possibility of establishing an accreditation for organizations which meet sustainable development standards. In Quebec, Grands prix du tourisme recipients proudly feature their awards in their advertising campaigns. And, although primarily a marketing association, the prestigious Relais & Châteaux hotel chain, synonymous with luxury, is not open to just anyone.

And the list goes on. Classifications, certifications, social labels, quality labels, labels of origin, eco-labels, major awards, luxury banners… if recognition is what you seek, there is certainly a lot to choose from!

It goes without saying that growing consumer awareness of the environment and the negative impacts of tourism has led to an inevitable reassessment of tourism practices. Certification is one way to prove one’s commitment and provide a guarantee of good practice. More and more, the principles of sustainable development are key to establishing criteria and creating new labels.

Advantages for businesses

Committing to a certification program or total quality approach is not easy. It is very time-consuming and can even lead to a complete overhaul of work processes. In a business climate where customers are demanding and often enjoy a wealth of options, more and more companies are looking for a seal of quality, recognition or distinction to:

  • improve their services and product quality
  • reassure consumers and provide a guarantee
  • distinguish themselves from the competition
  • enhance their visibility and reputation
  • access new markets
  • improve business practices and increase productivity
  • and, to some extent, reduce the negative impacts of tourism

Even certification has its failings

The stars used to rank hotels are undoubtedly the most recognized travel rating system in the world. But who awards these stars? They can come from tour operators, the hotel itself, recognized organizations with very different criteria from one region to the next, or even – with the advent of Web 2.0 – internet users (also read:
You haven’t heard the last of Web 2.0!).

As a traveller, how often have you lamented the disparities in evaluations from different regions and the lack of uniformity among the various programs? In fact, many organizations would like to establish an international certification system, but this may only be a pipe dream.

The challenges? How can international standards take into account the realities of different regions, and how can mass tourism products and niche tourism products meet the same standards? How can a community have a say in the decision-making process, and how can small businesses rally the technical, financial and human resources to take on heavy, costly procedures?

These same questions apply domestically as well. To be “certified” means to ensure that something is true, to provide a guarantee of… what, exactly? Many companies, having understood the promotional benefits of certification, will go so far as to declare themselves certified, even if they are not. This is not uncommon in the case of various “eco” products.

Ambiguous surveys and an ideological debate

Can a “seal” truly influence consumer choices, and do travellers care about evaluation criteria when selecting a certified business or do they simply have faith in the “seal”? Do travellers know which criteria distinguish a 4-star hotel from a 2-star hotel? And do they know that rating systems differ from one country to the next?

In response to these questions, here are some survey results to answer these questions and point out some contradictions:

“Green” programs are definitely very popular! A survey by the Hotel Association of Canada shows that 60% of Canadians feel that membership in an environmental program is a major factor in their choice of hotel. In Quebec, this percentage is 72%, the highest of any Canadian province. Many other surveys illustrate the popularity of environmental programs, both in Canada and around the world.

If something has a “green” label, then it must be good! Various surveys indicate there is still a high level of confusion and lack of understanding when it comes to eco-labels. Consumers support certifications and quality labels, but they are rarely able to distinguish among them or understand their true meaning.

When travellers are on vacation, their principles take a break as well! On one hand, an Orbitz survey reports that 63% of people would pay more to stay in a “green” hotel and 67% attach importance to the “eco-friendliness” of a destination. On the other hand, according to a Starwood survey, most Americans leave their environmental conscience at home because 70% of frequent travellers state they do not waste water at home, while this percentage drops to 18% when they are in a hotel.

Although respect for the environment is now an integral part of contemporary mores, vacations are associated with freedom and a lack of restrictions. Consequently, high principles and good habits also go on holiday. Consumers are exhibiting an openness and commitment to the state of the environment, but tourists’ positive attitude towards eco-labels is not a guarantee of environmentally responsible behaviour.

Says Marie-France Turcotte, “Certifications have the potential to make a modest contribution to meeting a major challenge, that of changing business practices and tourist consumer habits.” So, the question is, should travellers purchase a product on the pretext that it is certified, or do we need to become accountable as travellers, companies and social actors? The answer is, no doubt, both.

With the growth of certifications, businesses will probably face the same dilemma they do vis-à-vis distribution channels: which one will improve their position in the wonderful world of competition, increase their visibility and make them the chosen one of consumers? Start strategizing!

Sources:
– Boyd, Christopher. “Green Hotels Are Cleaning Up – Embracing an Eco-friendly Philosophy Resonates with Tourists,” The Orlando Sentinel, July 9, 2007.
– Breaking Travel News. “Survey: US Travelers Stress Eco-friendly Travel,” April 12, 2007.
– Delisle, Marie-Andrée and Louis Jolin. Un autre tourisme est-il possible? Presses de l’Université du Québec, 2007, 144 pages.
– ehotelier.com. “Survey: Most Americans Drop their Green Habits when They Check-in to Hotels,” July 10, 2007.
– Le Figaro.fr. “Vers une liste du ‘Patrimoine de l’Europe’,” May 22, 2006.
– Hotel News Resource. “As Hotels Focus on Environmentally Friendly Programs, Awareness among Hotel Guests Lags,” July 24, 2007.
– Hotel News Resource. “Leaving Home often Means Leaving Green Routines behind according to New Survey from Element Hotels,” July 10, 2007.
– HSMAI. “Asian Hospitality Leaders at HSMAI Roundtable Call for Standardization of Ratings System for Asian Hotels,” July 17, 2007.
– Karantzavelou, Vicky. “Six out of 10 Canadians Want To Stay at Green Hotels,” [www.traveldailynew.com], June 10, 2005.
– Parnières, Émilie. “Le tourisme responsable: Convergence de deux démarches de labellisation,” Veille info tourisme, May 2005.
– Salerno, Neil. “Stars & Diamonds – Do They really Matter any more?” Hotel News Resource, January 31, 2007.
– Turcotte, Marie-France. L’écotourisme entre l’arbre et l’écorce – Labels et certifications d’écotourisme et de tourisme. Le contexte et la portée, Presses de l’Université du Québec, 2006, p. 348-369.
– World Travel & Tourism Council. “Big Companies Must Show how Green They Are,” November 24, 2006.

Catégories
Sustainable tourism Transportation

Understanding the dynamics of carbon credit purchasing from offsets when traveling carbon neutral

Voluntary carbon compensation, or carbon offsetting is applicable to anything that contributes to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions1. It means paying an extra for buying carbon credits in offset projects, so that the emissions caused are balanced out. To be carbon neutral, the quantity of carbon credit purchased need to equal the quantity of emissions caused.

Being carbon neutral in tourism is mostly associated with the transport sector, but increasingly, hotels, events, and even car rental companies offer the possibility to neutralize their carbon footprint. Carbon neutrality is not yet mainstream, however, it is heading in that direction. For example, in 2005 0,5 % of British Airways passengers traveled carbon neutral and the figure is estimated to be 1 % presently. Some reports suggest the voluntary carbon market grew up to 1000 % between 2002 and 2005. However, as it is not regulated, a number of issues have emerged that require awareness.

Carbon compensation in context

The voluntary purchase of carbon credits is outside the Kyoto mechanism, and it represents an important part of climate change mitigation for individuals, as well as businesses. It is also an example of a voluntary application of the
polluter-payer principle. The Kyoto Protocol is a mandatory framework to signatory countriesand includes three principal mechanisms:

  1. Emission trading in pollution quotas
  2. Clean Development Mechanism projects (CDM)
  3. Joint implementation projects (JI)

Emission trading is an allowance-based measure that sets a limit on the amount of pollution permitted by Kyoto countries. Those emitting more than permitted must buy credits from those that pollute below limits on the carbon market, for example via the European Union Emission Trading Scheme. At present this affects mainly power companies and the manufacturing sector, and excludes tourism and the airline industry, although the latter is under significant pressure for inclusion.

Project-based measures include specific projects that will result in GHG reduction. Offset projects create new carbon credits and include renewable energy production, energy efficiency technology development and carbon sequestration. Kyoto-based projects are administered by signatory national governments and two types exist. « Clean Development Mechanism » (CDM) projects permit industrialized nations to invest in projects located in developing countries, to contribute to their sustainable development, while « Joint Implementation » (JI) includes projects between industrialized countries. When travelers purchase carbon credits to compensate or neutralize their activities, in general, they are not contributing to such projects. Exceptions include organizations such as « Atmosfair ».

Voluntary carbon credit purchasing does not equate to emission reduction in absolute terms, because the pollution still occurs. Thus, an effort is still required by everyone to reduce emission contributions. Researchers suggests that to achieve a 10 % reduction of GHG emissions from aviation, the purchase of voluntary carbon credits would need to increase by a factor of 400.

10 things to be aware of before choosing to be carbon neutral

1. Type of organizations selling carbon credits
Estimates indicate that more than 40 organizations sell carbon offsets and their growth and expansion has lead to certain transparency issues. Some are profit and others are non-profit organizations and they are all located in industrialized countries. They all verse a % of the money to offset projects that can be anything between 25 % and 90 %. Hence, some keep significant proportions for operating costs.

2. Variations in emission calculations
Recent research suggests significant differences (as much as a factor of 3) exist between the carbon calculators of individual offset organizations, thus, there is a need for standardization to improve credibility. Calculators need to be informative and accurate. The more parameters used, generally the more accurate the carbon calculation should be. In the case of emissions from flying, a good calculator will include the exact distance flown based on actual routes, take account of radiative forcing at different altitudes depending on the length of flight, occupancy rate, and the type of plane.

3. Cost of carbon credits
The price per ton of carbon offset is variable between organizations because the voluntary carbon market is outside the Kyoto mechanism and hence, it is not regulated, nor standardized. Buying carbon credits currently varies from $ CAD 3 to $ 43 per ton.

4. Type and quality of projects supported
Of the three main types of offset projects the most favorable include emission-free energy generation (wind, biomass, solar, geothermal) and new technology developments (any new products that use less energy such as hybrid vehicles).

When buying into these projects, the main issue relates to additionality; a debated concept in carbon accounting. What is important to know before purchasing carbon credits is whether the projects supported will genuinely result in GHG emission reductions. The question to ask is, if I did not finance this project, would it have occurred? If yes, then it is not a real reduction project, because its financing was not from carbon credit purchasing.

5. Beware of tree plantations
Intending carbon neutral travelers need to be well-informed about carbon credits that finance tree plantations. Evidence suggests problems and controversies surround such projects, and consequently some organizations do not even offer any carbon credits in them. The singular action of tree planting will not solve climate change problems for many reasons, notably because it does not lead to a reduction of fossil fuel reliance (Refer to next edition of the Globe-Veilleur on this subject).

6. Buying high-quality carbon credits
Voluntary offset companies can either operate in or outside (mostly) of the Kyoto framework. The advantage of buying credits from organizations associated with Kyoto, is that emission reductions are verified under a regulatory framework administered by national governments.

7. Project standard credit labels
Presently there are no standards to judge the performance of voluntary offset projects, although several are currently being developed. The Gold Standard Foundation offers a quality label to both Kyoto-based and to several voluntary based projects. Thus, it is currently the most reliable label. Such projects are rigorous, and tested for environmental quality by registered third parties. Gold standard projects exclusively focus on renewable energy and energy efficiency projects.

8. Buying future carbon credits: forward purchasing
Travelers also need to be aware that some organizations sell carbon credits in either already existing projects or in future projects. The purchase of future credits creates some risk, because the proposed project may not be realized and or under-perform. However, investing in projects upfront is important in generating funds to start new offset projects.

9. Location of offset projects
Some of the offset projects are located in developing countries and some have created a variety of environmental and social problems, such as people getting displaced from their land and losing access to resources on which their livelihood depends. Thus, it is important to check that the projects are verified and meet standards, so they deliver long-term benefits to the areas where they are developed.

10. Most credible offset organization?

Two recent studies evaluated offset organizations and the most recommended include « Atmosfair », « Climate friendly », « Myclimate » and « NativeEnergy ».

What next?

The above issues need to be addressed to ensure that additional expenditures by travelers and the tourism industry towards negating fossil fuel use are created with the desirable outcome for which they are intended.

Climate change is a global problem that needs global solutions. Thus, if the tourism industry is to keep its confidence in carbon compensation schemes, it needs a standardized method for carbon calculating and the projects it invests in need to be certified and accredited by a relevant global organization.

In the meantime, it is important to reduce GHG emissions and move away from the use of fossil fuels that contribute to climate change. If going carbon neutral, we need to ensure that carbon credits are purchased in quality projects, preferably clean energy and energy efficiency.

1: Carbon refers to carbon dioxide as a gas. Carbon offset projects sometimes involve compensating for other greenhouse gases. The Kyoto Protocol recognizes six gases as contributors to global warming, including carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydro fluorocarbons, per fluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride.

Sources:
– Anonymous. The Economist (2007) Carbon offsets: ripping off would-be greens? The Economist, 382(8520) p.61.
– Anonymous. The New Internationalist (2006) Special report on carbon related issues. The New Internationalist. July. Issue no.391.
Atmosfair website. Last visited 4 July, 2007.
Climate Friendly website. Last visited 4 July, 2007.
– Heughebaert, A. (2006) Étude comparative des programmes de compensation volontaire des emissions de C02 par les passagers d’avions. Institut de Gestion de l’environnement et de l’aménagement du territoire. Université Libre de Bruxelles. 98 pp.
– International Civil Aviation Organization 2007. Presentations and statements from the ICAO Colloquium on Aviation Emissions with Exhibition, held in Montreal Canada 14 – 16 May 2007.
Gold Standard Foundation website. Last visited June 11, 2007
– Gössling, S., Broderick, J., Upham, P., Ceron, J., Dubois, G., Peeters, P. and Strasdas, W. (2007) Voluntary Carbon Offsetting Schemes for Aviation: Efficiency, Credibility and Sustainable Tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(3) p.223-248.
– Kollmuss, A. and Bowell, B. (2007) Voluntary Offsets for Air-Travel Carbon Emissions. Evaluations and Recommendations of Voluntary Offset Companies. Tufts Climate Initiative. 53 pp.
-Luzadder, K. (2007) Agent Issues: Carbon-offset programs: a reality check. www.travelweekly.com. June 14, 2007. 5 pp.
Myclimate website. Last visited 4 July, 2007
NativeEnergy website. Last visited 4 July, 2007
-Tufts Climate Initiative (2006) A Consumer Handout. Flying Green. How to protect the Climate and Travel Responsibility. Tufts Climate Initiative. 5 pp.
United Nations Framework on Climate Change website. Last visited 28 June 2007.

Catégories
Issues Sustainable tourism

Is flying really that sinful?

The tourism industry already has a plethora of environmental issues to address, but more than ever, flying is considered as the biggest sin. Travelers are increasingly preoccupied with the environmental and social ethics of their consumption patterns and some reports claim that more people choose not to travel, in an attempt to curb their contribution to anthropogenic climate change. For example, a recent bulletin of the Canadian Tourism Commission reported that 29 % of UK travelers confirm having already cut back on air travel because of environmental concerns. Thus, the travel and tourism sector need to demonstrate it is taking its share of responsibility towards sustainable development. If not, more consumers may continue to choose to avoid travel, which will adversely impact on the entire tourism sector.

Atmospheric pollution from aircrafts contributes 2 % to 3 % to global greenhouse gas emissions annually, which is less than other sectors, such as road transport, forestry, or agriculture. According to current scenarios of civil aviation carbon dioxide emissions, in 2050 they will increase by factors of 3.3 to 5. Thus, if aviation emissions continue to grow while other sectors reduce their emissions, the relative importance of tourism’s contributions to greenhouse gas emissions will grow. Consequently, tourism involving flying will become a more significant contributor to environmental problems.

The problem

At least the airline industry is addressing the problem and it was the first sector to commission a special report to determine its baseline performance from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 1999. A recent International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)1 conference, and first ever on aviation emissions, outlined the nature and magnitude of the current problem. Discussions also extended to mitigation measures, where the tourism sector has an important role to play. However, the near absence of tourism industry representatives at the conference is a clear sign that many opportunities remain for a cooperative approach to finding solutions to current problems.

Scientists today confirm that new aircrafts are more efficient than the average car on the road. Engine fuel consumption and aircraft fuel burn per seat improved 70% since the 1960s. Nonetheless, planes use non-renewable natural resources, and between 1990 and 2004, fuel consumption by the aviation sector increased by 2 to 3% per year. Despite alternative fuel technology developments, kerosene remains the primary fuel for planes in the short to medium term. Alternate fuel developments continue to deliver major advances, however fuel source and production raises other environmental issues. In addition, unlike conventional fuels, alternative fuels such as biofuels are currently not regulated nor standardized.

Aircraft emissions are complex and many scientific uncertainties remain. There is pollution from fossil fuel combustion on the ground and in the air at high altitudes. Besides the well-known carbon dioxide emissions, planes also emit water vapors, nitrous oxides, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, sulfur gases, soot aerosols and metal particles. At high altitudes these gases behave differently and emissions also change the radiation balance of the troposphere. Planes also contribute to condensation trails that cause cirrus cloud formation, which is unique to aviation in the climate change debate.

Today the aviation sector’s target for 2020 is to reduce fuel burn and carbon dioxide emissions by 50%. It is currently estimated that technological improvements alone can bring more than 1% improvements per year. In order to achieve further engine innovations from technology development means environmental trade-off between low gas and noise emissions (especially nitrous oxides) and these also impact on operational costs. Thus powerful research and development advances are needed, coupled with appropriate programs and strong collaboration effort by stakeholders, such as airlines, airports, traffic managers, regulators and governments.

The ICAO conference also included discussions about local air quality and emission standards for aviation. Although standards exist for several gases2, presently there are none for particulate matter and carbon dioxide. The setting of standards is a very complex procedure. Current research is investigating how to enable appropriate monitoring and standard setting of aviation emissions.

At airports aircraft are responsible for about 50 % of the emissions produced on average. Other emissions result from ground transportation and use of support equipment. Airport efficiency is highly variable at different destinations, thus many opportunities exist to improve operations. For example, the time taken to taxi in and out, take-off climb and subsequent descent and landing procedures contributes very differently to emissions. For example, on average (all flights globally) it is estimated that 6.5 kg of carbon is emitted per passenger during take off and landing, compared to 0.02 kg per passenger at cruising level. There appears significant emission and fuel burn savings by optimally assign aircraft amongst available altitudes. Calculations also suggest that current traffic flow is inefficient and rerouting may improve emission performance as well prevent conflicts (with other planes, weather and on ground). Even a 2 km reduction in average distance flown by planes could lead to over 200 million km of travel per year, resulting in over 2 million tones of carbon dioxide savings.

Major issues remain

Although mitigation measures via technology and traffic management promise continued improvement in the future, market-based solutions are also part of the solution. However, questions still remain as to who is really accountable for aircraft emissions? Is it fuel suppliers, aircraft operators, airport and navigation service providers, or the manufacturers? Or is the end user, i.e. travelers? Or – the tourism industry responsible for destination marketing?

Current market-based solutions to greenhouse gas emissions include taxes, carbon trading and voluntary reduction mechanisms, such as carbon compensation schemes. Environmental taxes are already part of tourism at several destinations in various forms and they are not generally popular with everyone. Since the early 1990s several European airports notably in Switzerland, France, Sweden, UK, Germany have implemented local air quality charges to respond to local air pollution problems.

Aviation fuel is currently exempt from taxes. Some transport research3 suggests that the potential impact of a carbon tax on international tourism would be small. Even if a very high global tax of $ 1000 per tone of carbon emitted were applied in the year 2010, it would not change travel behavior and only reduce carbon dioxide emissions from aviation by 0.8 %. Under such a scenario, tourist destinations on short haul flights may see a decline in international tourist numbers. Island destinations would be losers in general. Eastern and Central Europe and countries such as China and India would gain, while Western Europe, the Americas and Africa would lose. Modeling also suggests that a carbon tax on aviation fuel would affect medium distance flights least.

The ICAO conference also offered discussions about voluntary reduction mechanisms. There is a clear increase in carbon neutral travel and the carbon market is growing exponentially. However this raises new issue concerning the credibility and the effectiveness of carbon compensation mechanisms (the next topic to be covered by J.Priskin in a forthcoming Globeveilleur).

Where to next

The ICAO conference suggests the airline sector needs to be a part of post Kyoto (2012), thus it endorses development of an emission trading system for international civil aviation. Air transport is, and has been an enabler of economic growth and it is a catalyst for growth. ICAO believes that global problems need global solutions and we need a co-coordinated approach to problem solving. The airline industry also knows that it will take Promethean solutions to improve the sector’s environmental performance.

As global forecasts suggest a growth of international arrivals by air, averaging up to 5 % till 2015, the tourism industry cannot continue to hide behind its clean image because it is a part of the service sector. Nor can it conveniently stay focused on destinations, and ignore that travel to and from them is up to 90 % of environmental problems, such as contributions to greenhouse gas emissions.

The good news is that some segments of the tourism market are showing signs of willingness to pay, although attitudes are highly diverse (Figure 1). Last May, the Canadian Tourism Commission reported that nearly 70% of Canadians would be willing to pay an extra $ 10 or more for every $ 1000 they spend on air travel, if the funds collected were used to develop sustainable resources of energy (Figure 1)

Figure 1: Amount Canadians are willing to pay to offset carbon emissions when traveling by air

JP_2007-07_vol_avion_conf_grphq1

Source: Canadian Tourism Research Institute, The Conference board of Canada.

Notes:

1. International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations created in 1944 by the Chicago Convention. It has 190 contracting States and one of its strategic objectives is to minimize the adverse effect of global civil aviation on the environment. ICAO has a Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP), composed of public and private sector reps and NGOs representing the aviation industry.

2. At present emission standards exist for carbon monoxide, nitrous oxides, unburned hydrocarbons and smoke.

3.. This research was on international tourism only and also excluded business travel for data reliability purposes concerning international arrivals by air.

Sources:
– Canadian Tourism Commission (2007) Travelers Keen on Going Green. Tourism Intelligence Bulletin Issue 39, May 2007. – Canadian Tourism Research Institute, The Conference board of Canada, Vancouver. 5 pp.
– International Civil Aviation Organization 2007. Presentations and statements from the ICAO Colloquium on Aviation Emissions with Exhibition, held in Montreal Canada 14 – 16 May 2007. [http://www.icao.int/EnvClq/CLQ07/Documentation.htm]
– Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1999) Special Report: Aviation and the global atmosphere. Summary for policy makers. Geneva. 23 pp.
– Tol, R. S. J. (2007) The impact of a carbon tax on international tourism. Transportation Research. Part D 12. p. 129-142.
– United States Environmental Protection Agency (2000) Aircraft Contrails Factsheet. EPA430-F-00-005. Washington DC. 6 pp.
– Weissman, A. (2007). Binge Flying, sinful travel and paranoia. [www. travelweekly.com] 21, 2007. 2 pp.

Catégories
Issues Sustainable tourism

Going Carbon Neutral – The Greening of Travel

In the face of growing concerns about climate change, businesspeople, rock stars, and increasingly ordinary travelers are going ‘carbon neutral’ to counterbalance their contributions to greenhouse gas emissions. This trend is an important step towards improving the environmental performance of travel.

Tourism contributes to human-induced climate change, because it consumes non-renewable natural resources en-route and at the destination. Transportation constitutes approximately 80% of the total environmental impact of an average tourist while the rest is attributed to consumption of various goods and services such as accommodation, hospitality, entertainment, activities and so on. However, since tourism is a non-traditional industry involving many economic sectors, no comprehensive statistics exist on its exact resource consumption pattern.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates that globally, the transportation sector contributes about 13% of all carbon dioxide emissions, with passenger aviation alone representing 2 3%. The percentage attributed to other tourism-related land or sea transport is not commonly documented. Both tourism and passenger aviation are forecast to grow 4-5% respectively per annum till 2015. Thus, the growth of the travel industry remains one of the biggest issues in sustainable tourism.

The aviation industry continues to invest substantially to ‘green’ the sector and mitigate its contribution to climate change. The rest of the tourism industry also continues to improve its eco-efficiency, but milestones are yet to be made across the entire sector. For example, aircraft fuel efficiency improved 5% in 2004-2005 alone and an A380 or a B787 can transport 100 passengers for 3 L of fuel per km, which compares favourably to most cars. However, no air travel can be considered sustainable at the moment, due to the burning of non-renewable fossil fuels. Additionally, airplanes emit many noxious gases, whose impact is 4 times worse at 30 000 feet than at ground level.

Therefore, individual travellers must become more responsible via their consumption patterns. Although there is a trend towards ‘greener’ consumerism, recent research indicates that most tourists are not fully aware of their individual environmental impact or contributions to climate change. Despite the growing surcharges on air travel, the real price of travelling does not reflect its true environmental costs.

Options to mitigate the impacts of travel

Two options exist to improve the sustainability of travelling. One is to reduce emissions directly and the other is to compensate for the pollution. At some destinations, one can sometimes choose less polluting forms of transport, as well as ‘more responsible’ tourism products and services. Since simply travelling less is not favourable in terms of economic development, option 2 becomes a necessity.

Carbon neutral travel involves the voluntary purchase of carbon credits in offset projects, which compensate for the emissions generated. The cost and choice of carbon-offset projects depends on where one buys the offsets (Table 1). Most companies offer a range of investment options in energy efficient technology or Renewable Energy Certificates in wind, solar, biomass or geothermal power. The contribution to carbon sequestration projects via tree plantations is also a common mechanism.

Voluntary emission offsetting is a growing trend and globally it has grown from 1 million tonnes of carbon in 2001 to 9.5 million tonnes in 2004. There are no readily available statistics on the size of the overall voluntary carbon market, and certainly none yet for the tourism sector. The Kyoto Protocol outlines compulsory and voluntary strategies to compensate for emissions. The tourism industry, including the aviation sector is not (yet) regulated, so at present it has no obligation to address matters concerning climate change. In 2005, British Airways launched its own carbon offset scheme and encourages its clients to contribute to sustainable energy projects. In fact, carbon neutral travel is a mechanism to assuage one’s guilt about travel and consumption. For this reason, some people don’t agree with emission compensation because it is perceived as the ‘right to pollute.’

Table 1: Emissions estimates and the equivalent cost of offset certificates
offered by five companies for a return plane between Montreal and Orlando.

** based on emission calculations provided on the websites of respective
companies for a return trip of 3500 km. Currently, the average price for
a tone of C02 equivalent from the voluntary offset market is $1.25 at the corporate rate.

Some offset projects are controversial, as most have inherent disadvantages. For example, biodiesel from crops such as sugar and corn raises issues about genetic engineering. Further questions surround the real benefits of certain projects in developing countries, such as monoculture tree plantations for carbon sequestration. These plantations also lead to biodiversity loss, amongst other problems, and their effectiveness is altogether questionable. In the Kaikora District of New Zealand, the local council provides tourists with the opportunity to plant a tree during their visit, which is numbered and can be revisited in the future.

Overall, emission offsetting has been criticized because of costs, measures and certification and because compensating does not put pressure on people to switch from using fossil fuels to renewable energy. It also does not regulate polluting activities. Nonetheless, it needs to be encouraged as an interim measure. Clearly, the use of alternative energy from renewable sources will appear more viable and cost effective as technology advances.

In the meantime, travellers can choose to travel more responsibly by investing in offset projects, especially in technology, that will ensure a more sustainable future. In any case, sustainable development implies the ‘polluter pay’ principle and so travellers must improve their environmental performance. As Table 1 shows, the costs are not exorbitant. But first and foremost, travellers need to be educated about the consequences of their impact and the associated benefits of counteracting them before they can choose to become more responsible.

* Carbon refers to carbon dioxide gas. Carbon offset projects sometimes involve compensating for other greenhouse gases.

Sources:
– Baral, A. and Guha, G.S. (2004) «Trees for carbon sequestration or fossil fuel substitution: the issue of cost vs benefit.» Biomass and Bioenergy, 27 p.41-55.
– Becken, S. and Lane, B. (2006). «Air travel and the environment. An interview with Hugh Somerville.» Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14(2) p.216-219.
– Becken, S., Simmons, D. G. and Frampton, C. (2006) «Energy use associated with different travel choices.» Tourism Management, 24. p. 267-277.
– Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (2005) «News Release: Carbon offset scheme launched.» 12 September, 2005. 2 pp.
– Gössling, S., Bredberg, M., Randow, A., Sandström, and Svensson, S. (2006) «Tourist Perceptions of climate change: A Study of International Tourist in Zanzibar.» Current Issues in Tourism, 9(4-5) p.419-435.
– Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1999) «Special Report: Aviation and the global atmosphere. Summary for policy makers.» 23 pp.
– Lynes, J. K. and Dredge, D. (2006) «Going Green: Motivation for environmental commitment in the airline industry. A case study of Scandinavian airlines.» Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14(2) p.116-138.
– Van Kooten, G.C., Eagle, A.J., Manley, J. and Smolak, T. (2004) «How costly are carbon offsets?
A meta-analysis of carbon forest sinks.» Environmental Science and Policy, 7 p. 239-251.
– Various authors (2006) «New Internationlist.» July 2006. Issue 391.
Sur le web:
Atmosfair
Climate Care
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
International Air Transport Association website
My Climate via Sustainable Tourism International
Native Energy
Carbon Neutral Company

Catégories
Products and activities Sustainable tourism

Opportunities and Issues in eco-adventure tourism in Quebec (Conference Report)

The eco-adventure sector of Quebec is comprised of small to medium sized businesses with vast variations in client numbers and profits and this year’s annual AÉQ* conference highlighted the numerous challenges facing this industry. These are not radically different from those in other developed countries, but are typical of an emerging sector constrained by having to adhere to strict principles.

In the era of sustainable development, the social and environmental responsibility of businesses is paramount and this is remains a challenge in Quebec on many levels. Although a clear effort has been invested to organize eco-adventure tourism in Quebec, certain areas need improvement. Many of the issues, as their solutions are complex and interrelated, including small profits, acute seasonal fluctuations in visitor numbers, leadership, organizational structures and governance. This article is not an exhaustive discussion of all issues, but is a general report of what has been highlighted during the conference this year.

Human resource problems

Although economic trends suggest eco and adventure tourism continues to grow, numerous businesses seem to struggle with small profits, recruiting and keeping competent guides, ensuring fairness and equality of salaries (especially in remote areas and in winter). The reality of eco-adventure guides is difficult, in the face of very low salaries and limited professional recognition, as there are no industry standards for their employment in Quebec. This creates inequitable situations between businesses, as well as guides who are trained and experienced, and those who are not, and between guides from certain institutions and those belonging to professional associations. The ratio of « real’ employment opportunities in Quebec in adventure and ecotourism guiding vs. the number of trained guides on the job market is also an issue.

Regional development

The contribution of eco and adventure tourism to regional development is variable across the regions of Quebec. In general, regional development remains a big challenge for numerous reasons, notably in remote areas with limited infrastructure and service provision.

As elsewhere in the globe where regional economies are traditionally dependent on natural resources, Quebec struggles to favorably and quantitatively present ecotourism. For example, a mining company is often ready to invest 500 million $ and guarantees 300 jobs for 30 years. In the same region, an ecotourism company can say that 10 guides may be needed over this period (if all conditions remain favorable). This is difficult to resolve, but can be addressed firstly by having reliable studies that monitor the net social, economic and environmental benefits of ecotourism in Quebec.

Furthermore, it appears that the eco and adventure sector has a low profile in certain regions and is not always actively involved in important decision-making processes. A solution may be to be more proactive and communicate with elected members, as well as the general community, who need to be informed and educated about the values of ecotourism. Ecotourism can be relatively easily integrated into existing economic and social structures and harness partnerships that have multiple benefits. It appears that Quebec needs a more precise vision for eco and adventure tourism in each region, as well as a series of strategies and implementation plans for the medium and long-term in an economic, social and environmental sense.

Resources and Environment

The long-term prosperity of the industry depends on access to quality natural resources, which was a recurring theme throughout the conference. Equally, the threats created by extraction industries were emphasized (especially forestry and hydroelectric dams). The question of protected areas is a continuing issue and concern remains over the small % of protected areas in Quebec compared to global trends. The global challenge of providing access to protected areas whilst maintaining the quality of resources is equally pertinent in Quebec.

Quebec’s eco and adventure sector is working towards reducing negative environmental and social impacts through Leave No Trace, a proactive international program, adapted and implanted via AÉQ and its partners. The program aims to reduce and avoid negative impacts via education, research and partnerships, while ensuring the needs and satisfaction and needs of users. Although everyone agreed on the importance of the program, the reality of implementation and adaptation remains a challenge, often due to practical difficulties.

Products and Marketing

Quebec has a range of eco and adventure products, but it could improve its positioning in the face of fierce global competition as an eco-destination. How to sell Quebec’s winter ‘appropriately’ and ‘hot’ remains probably the biggest challenge. Given the climatic extremes, businesses could diversify their product and be more polyvalent. There is a need to create more networks around regional product themes, as highlighted by the noteworthy case of the ‘Appalachian Trail’. Many opportunities also remain to develop more combined ‘nature and culture’ products in Quebec. As it was well noted, if Americans can successfully develop products such as ‘in the footsteps of Henry D. Thoreau’, why can’t Quebec offer ‘along the trails of Vigneault’ on the Côte Nord? The regional product possibilities are festinating.

There is still room in Quebec’s eco-adventure sector to establish more local and regional cooperatives along the principles of solidarity as was highlighted, by the noteworthy case of Cap Jaseux. Similar opportunities exist in all regions between tour operators, hotels and others. Such cooperatives allow resource and knowledge sharing, and encourage product complementarities by reducing doubling-up. Furthermore, cooperatives enable more focus on creating unique, and high quality experiences. Although such alliances give synergy for the industry, the risks associated were well acknowledged. The case of Quebec Maritime also illustrated the values in regional networking for more efficient destination marketing.

Conclusion

Quebec’s eco-adventure sector is well on its way in implementing the principles of ecotourism, despite some challenges. Overall the industry is increasingly conscientious to ecologically manage business and clients, but some work remains in this area. Ecotourism has an important role to play in Quebec, primarily to be ahead of the rest of the tourism industry in implementing the principles of sustainable development and show how tourism can positively contribute to economic diversification in a responsible fashion. The latter is also the responsibility of the whole tourism sector, given recent policy orientations in Quebec. Aside from the above issues, work remains in other areas such as establishing a quality certification program and the monitoring of industry via reliable indicators. This could raise the profile of the sector and better inform decision-makers and reassure potential investors.

Source: http://www.aventure-ecotourisme.qc.ca/