|
Last Updated
|
Certification: Media and Ecotourism
From 2001-2003 Planeta.com conducted a global workshop
focusing on the pros and cons of ecotourism certification. A
Summary
and a Certification
Guide are recommended reading.
|
|
Jonathan B. Tourtellot, National Geographic
Traveler
Consumers cannot demand what they do not know exists.
This is where the travel media come in. Many of us would love
to be able to cite reliable accreditation or sustainability
ratings (as well as using them to guide our own decisions about
places to publicize). Certification without consumer awareness
seems unlikely to achieve its purpose.
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ecotourism_certification/message/87
Rob Rachowiecki, Author, Lonely Planet guides to Costa Rica,
Peru and Ecuador
Occasionally, readers (or the merely curious) ask
me why I don't include an ecotourism rating for the hotels,
restaurants and tour guides/operators which I describe in my
books. After all, some other books do. My answer includes the
following reasons:
1) As a researcher of a guidebook, I simply don't have enough
time to properly research all places and give them an accurate
ecotourism rating.
2) A lack of a rating can be a black mark for many perfectly
good organizations. Whenever I read a list of certified places,
I always find several which I think should have been included,
but aren't. Why aren't they? Probably because of lack of time
to research the place, or lack of communication/understanding
between the place and the author. It's not fair to have a
listing which is incomplete.
3) A rating list tends to get thrown on the cover of the
book **NOW WITH ECO-RATINGS!!** by well-meaning editors/publishers.
It's a green selling-tool for the book, even though it is
a far from perfect list.
4) Finding an NGO (or even a for-profit certification company)
that will rate establishments also runs into trouble. For
political, financial, time and other reasons, many 'eco-establishments'
are omitted. For example, one group might stick only to corporate
establishments, and perhaps do a good job at suggesting ways
to make those hotels more eco-conscious and provide a certification.
Another group will work with small rural locally-run cabins
and do a good job too. But both ends of the spectrum only
look at a small percentage of the establishments. Melding
all these together into a cohesive whole is very difficult.
5) Government attempts at certification run foul of political
and funding considerations. As Ron mentioned, the Costa Rican
government-run certification program has a 1999 website and...???
They are not reliable.
6) Cultural mores are often incompatible with certification
programs. Many NGOs and for-profit certifiers are based in
1st world countries and, despite the best will in the world,
often cannot make the 'right connection' with cultural sensitivities
in 3rd world countries. This is not meant as a blanket criticism.
I think that 1st world certifiers often do a lot of good certifying
1st world eco-establishments. And the few local attempts in
3rd world countries, despite their inevitable political and
financial problems, often make a real difference on a local,
sub-country level. However, bringing the two together is fraught
with cultural and other problems.
From my point of view, I think that certification from any
"outside" (i.e. one that is not directly involved in eco-tourism)
organization, be it a local or foreign NGO, a government organization,
a guidebook researcher, or a for-profit certifier, is unreliable
and unfair as a blanket system for use within a country (let
alone globally). Therefore I am unable to use these efforts
in my guidebooks as a rating system.
However, I do feel that there is room for guiding readers
of my guidebooks to eco-sensitive establishments. Sometimes,
it is simply by mentioning that a company or hotel has received
some kind of an award. Other ideas are following up on local
recommendations with a visit and inspection, and an accurate
write-up. Also helpful is talking to local NGOs and getting
a consensus. Obviously, this cannot cover every establishment,
and this is why I won't include a complete certification system.
And, to avoid giving a worthy place a black mark by omission,
I won't bring special attention to eco-places with green stars
or green leaves or green fishes or green Martians. But those
readers who dig a little bit will find some guidance.
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ecotourism_certification/message/78
Beatrice Blake, Co-author, New Key to Costa Rica
I do think that guidebook writers could band together
to provide the marketing incentives and consumer recognition
that would make a rating system work. I'd like to reply to some
of Rob Rachowiecki's reasons why it wouldn't work:
>1) As a researcher of a guidebook, I simply
don't have enough time to
>properly research all places and give them an accurate ecotourism
rating.
Response 1: Maybe if we all worked together, we would
have enough time.
>2) A lack of a rating can be a black mark for many
perfectly good
>organizations. Whenever I read a list of certified places,
I always find
>several which I think should have been included, but aren't.
Why aren't
>they? Probably because of lack of time to research the
place, or lack of
>communication/understanding between the place and the author.
It's not fair >to have a listing which is incomplete.
Response 2: if we could agree on mutual guidelines and
check with each other about all the places, we could avoid
this. There were several reasons that some places were not
included in our survey. First, they had to agree to be interviewed.
Second, perhaps they did not meet our requirements because
of lack of recycling arrangements in a whole area, making
the whole area problematic for tourism. Third, we removed
any establishment from our list that we received complaints
about. Fourth, only about half the places we interviewed
made our list. Some hotels were excellent in the conservation
aspect, but if they had poor community relations, they might
not make it. Others scored high in the community aspect
but didn't have enough going for them in conservation practices.
We believe that there's no long-term chance of conservation
without the community being directly benefited by it
>3) A rating list tends to get thrown on the cover
of the book **NOW WITH
>ECO-RATINGS!!** by well-meaning editors/publishers. It's
a green
>selling-tool for the book, even though it is a far from
perfect list.
Response 3: Again, why don't we work together to make
it perfect? Guidebooks are one of the only and one of the
best marketing tools that small or locally-run places have.
I will always go out of my way to check out a locally-owned
place. But I don't include them if they are not together
enough to provide a welcoming atmosphere for guests.
>4) Finding an NGO (or even a for-profit certification
company) that will
>rate establishments also runs into trouble. For political,
financial, time
>and other reasons, many 'eco-establishments' are omitted.
For example, one
>group might stick only to corporate establishments, and
perhaps do a good
>job at suggesting ways to make those hotels more eco-conscious
and provide
>a certification. Another group will work with small rural
locally-run
>cabins and do a good job too. But both ends of the spectrum
only look at a
>small percentage of the establishments. Melding all these
together into a
>cohesive whole is very difficult.
Response 4: I agree. In the New Key rating, we limited
ourselves to establishments that attracted people to themselves
by their proximity to a natural area or by their ownership
of a private reserve. The private reserve aspect is something
that I have not seen mentioned enough in this discussion.
For example, conservation has become much more popular on
the Osa Peninsula when campesinos see that they can make
more money guiding tourists through the forested parts of
their farms than from selling the lumber. According to JeffLangholtz's
1998 study, 60% of Costa Rica's private nature reserves
are involved in ecotourism. These reserves provide buffer
zones to the National Parks, and act against environmental
threats like poaching and logging. Ecotourism used as a
way to finance large-scale private reserves with conservation
easements is an important lesson that Costa Rica can teach
the world
>5) Government attempts at certification run foul of
political and funding
>considerations. As Ron mentioned, the Costa Rican government-run
>certification program has a 1999 website and...??? They
are not reliable.
Response 5: Even though the CR government certofocatopm
(CST) is well-thought out and run by sincere people, the
result is that it helps big hotels who are savvy about getting
certified compete with the visionary certification businesses
that made Costa Rica famous. It is also hampered by the
complete lack of trust that the tourism community has in
the government's Tourism Institute. So, Black Sheep Inn,
don't wait for the government to come up with something
good. I waited for the CST, who swore that they would be
doing the exact same thing as the New Key green rating was
doing. But of the 68 hotels which appear on our green rating,
only 7 appear on the CST list.
>6) Cultural mores are often incompatible with certification
programs. Many
>NGOs and for-profit certifiers are based in 1st world countries
and,
>despite the best will in the world, often cannot make the
'right
>connection' with cultural sensitivities in 3rd world countries.
This is not
>meant as a blanket criticism. I think that 1st world certifiers
often do a
>lot of good certifying 1st world eco-establishments. And
the few local
>attempts in 3rd world countries, despite their inevitable
political and
>financial problems, often make a real difference on a local,
sub-country
>level. However, bringing the two together is fraught with
cultural and
>other problems.
Response 6: I agree. So let the guidebook writers who
really understand the country culturally help make ratings
work in their country of expertise.
>From my point of view, I think that certification
from any "outside" (i.e.
>one that is not directly involved in eco-tourism) organization,
be it a
>local or foreign NGO, a government organization, a guidebook
researcher, or
>a for-profit certifier, is unreliable and unfair as a blanket
system for
>use within a country (let alone globally). Therefore I
am unable to use
>these efforts in my guidebooks as a rating system.
Response 7: I don't agree with you here. You know how
many tourism and ecotourism and conservation organizations
there are in Costa Rica. Maybe someday they will get together,
but I don't see it happening soon. It would be easier for
the guidebook writers to get together.
>However, I do feel that there is room for guiding
readers of my guidebooks
>to eco-sensitive establishments. Sometimes, it is simply
by mentioning that
>a company or hotel has received some kind of an award.
Other ideas are
>following up on local recommendations with a visit and
inspection, and an
>accurate write-up. Also helpful is talking to local NGOs
and getting a
>consensus. Obviously, this cannot cover every establishment,
and this is
>why I won't include a complete certification system. And,
to avoid giving
>a worthy place a black mark by omission, I won't bring
special attention to
>eco-places with green stars or green leaves or green fishes
or green
>Martians. But those readers who dig a little bit will find
some guidance.
Response 8: Why make readers have to dig when its hard
enough for them to get information about real ecotourism
projects in the media? Let's help the readers and the worthy
projects.
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ecotourism_certification/message/228
Beatrice Blake
Ronnie Cummins, Rose Welch, Anne Becher, Jane Segleau
Earle, Deirdre Evans Pritchard, as well as many other consultants
and I developed a "green rating" for ecotourism hotels which
has appeared in the book since 1990. My motivation for doing
the rating was that I could see that people's businesses were
being affected by what we put in the book. I wanted to use the
power of the book to influence businesses to use ecologically-sound
practices, and wanted to give tourists criteria for distinguishing
truly green businesses from those that were just jumping on
the eco bandwagon. I felt I was aiding and abetting the destruction
of Costa Rica's natural wonders by helping bring tourists to
the country, and wanted to do something. Because of limited
time and funds, we just interviewed hotels that billed themselves
as ecotourism businesses and that responded to our announcement
of the survey. Only about half of the hotels that responded
made it onto our list. Anne Becher wrote detailed evaluations
to each lodge, telling them what they could do to improve, trying
to make our effort into an educational experience for those
surveyed. We were doing this with our own funds and with very
little help or encouragement from our publisher.
When the Costa Rican government proposed doing its own rating
system, I hoped that their CST would take over doing the same
job we had done, but I am very disappointed in the skewed
message given by their results (see "The CST and The New Key"
on Planeta.com). A large industrial hotel on a major highway
can get the same eco-rating according to their system as a
small jungle lodge that has been actively preserving the environment
for years.
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ecotourism_certification/message/100
Jonathan B. Tourtellot, National Geographic Traveler
Ron has set forth a good analysis of the media situation,
and Beatrice Blake, who's worked in the trenches more than many
of us, has suggested that guidebook writers put their heads
together. To follow up on her suggestion, a short-term proposal:
We need to compile a list of sustainability indicators the
media can use, even if they have to be quick-and-dirty ones,
assuming the following line of reasoning holds: 1. We want
to encourage better practices in tourism, an industry that
so far pays too little attention to destination stewardship--not
only ecologically, but also in terms of culture, aesthetics,
cuisine, architecture, heritage, and all the other elements
that create a distinctive sense-of-place.
2. Certifications, ratings, awards, etc. are one way to
do that, IF they create a business incentive.
3. Consumer demand can provide such an incentive.
4. Consumer awareness depends on the media, as does presentation
of information that consumers can act on.
5. An emergency already exists in much of the touristed
world, and some kind of actionable information is needed immediately.
Certainly one of the best pools of talent for doing this are
guidebook writers. We must, however, be realistic. Many such
writers are on tight budgets and schedules, sometimes having
as little as an hour to check out a single resort--hardly
enough time to evaluate its effluent processing methods or
the quality of its community relations.
While academic, systematic, and detailed work on certification
should continue and accelerate, such methods do take time
and money. But it is not necessary to have perfect certification
or ranking methods in place; in many places, we will be doing
well simply to get the issue on the public table.
So I ask this conference: What simple, easy-to-observe indicators
of sustainability can guidebook writers and travel writers--and
alert tourists themselves--look for?
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ecotourism_certification/message/218
Ron Mader, Planeta.com
Reflecting on the comments made this week, I would
like to suggest that Planeta.com host a follow-up workshop in
5 or 6 months to provide room for a little perspective. This
workshop has generated more than 200 messages and more than
a dozen links to in-depth reports and profiles. Second, I would
like to focus special attention on the role of the media. In
November Planeta.com will host a conference/workshop focusing
on improving media relations and media responsibilities.
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ecotourism_certification/message/224
Bruce Conord, Co-author, Adventure Guide to the Yucatan, Adventure
Guide to Costa Rica
Although we have an "attitude" in our writing and
a bent to sustainable/eco-tourism, we also have the issue of
environmental damage that our own promotion of tourism may contribute.
A good solution? Buy our books and don't go. Part of the writing
slant in our guides results in at least ignoring or at best
criticising the most egregious examples of irresponsibility,
while promoting places that try to limit their impact.
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ecotourism_certification/message/289
Bruce Conord
The criteria and oversight of the certification process
is what is in question, not so much the pros and cons of "marketing
eco-tourism." Either you promote eco-tourism or you don't --
and if you don't, you also run the risk of general tourist development,
especially on playas. Secondly, critics of the certification
label can argue that unless tourists themselves choose certified
hotels or attractions over non-certified facilities, the actual
effort to meet the criteria for certification on the part of
the owner may not be, in the short term, financially worth it.
One example might be the ubiquitous "canopy tours" in Costa
Rica, where a certification might be applied, despite the cutting
or damage to some trees to make the run faster or higher. If
it's a good ride, tourists will be in line, certification or
not. The good that may come out of this effort may be more regional
planning, at least that's my personal hope. The rivers and forests
of Central America know no boundaries except ones carved into
the landscape by overdevelopment.
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ecotourism_certification/message/259
Ron Mader, Planeta.com
We will follow-up the discussion of certification
issues -- pro and con -- in our November 2001 Media, Environment
and Tourism Conference.
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ecotourism_certification/message/315
|
SEMINARS
Learning never ends. See if one of our seminars
is right for you. |
|
|
|
|
