I received a comment here last week that made me think again about what Sustainable Tourism means to me.

It is the case that once you have attached a label to a thing or a concept you treat it as if it were an absolute truth. It is therefore healthy to stop and see it from a different perspective occasionally.

Much has been written about sustainable tourism and you can find references all over the web but at its heart is the concept of sustainable development “which implies meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development).

It is quite easy to see tourism as the antithesis of sustainability as we jet around the world, discarding our waste, depleting water resources and polluting cultures as we go; but then just about everything about our modern lifestyle is detrimental to the planet and unsustainable.

Travel is part of the human psyche with the freedom to travel a human right and I think the world would be a much poorer (spiritually as well as economically) place were we all to stop travelling.

With that right, of course, comes responsibility. Inevitably places will change once the tourists arrive. For example over the course of some 20 years I have seen Chaweng Beach on Ko Samui, Thailand, change from an almost deserted stretch of coast into a bustling collection of hotels, restaurants, bars and shops.

The problem is that, more often than not, resorts like that (and there are of course many thousands more examples) are not planned with sustainability in mind. Over time they will put an untenable drain on resources and eventually destroy the very reason the destination attracted visitors in the first place.

That is the type of change we must guard against if we are to meet the “needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”

Perhentian Beach, East Coast Malaysia. Credit: Tourism Malaysia

Naturally that is where the concept of sustainable tourism comes in and aims to engage all stakeholders in the planning and execution of tourist developments. The idea of a win-win-win for the local environment (social and physical), the consumer and the industry is especially important for me as it appeals to my sense of fairness.

The problem I have found with the concept of sustainable tourism is that, once you start researching it, you are soon faced with even more concepts: responsible travel, eco-tourism, green travel, nature-based tourism, carbon-offsetting, community-based tourism, cultural tourism, poverty tourism etc. All of a sudden you have a glossary of terms some of which are vague, some contentious and others, according to Justin Francis, MD, responsibletravel.com, simply distracting.

I wonder how many eco-lodges have been built on land cleared of plants, trees and people especially for the purpose of a nature-based experience! I am sure such things can happen through ignorance but equally they can happen as a deliberate ploy to use the “eco” badge as no more than a marketing device. It all becomes buzzwords and noise.

Block out the noise, get back to basics and it’s about promoting and developing tourist experiences that “meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.

In 2005 the World Tourism Organization called upon the United Nations General Assembly and others to “fully recognize tourism, when sustainably developed and managed, as an effective tool to realize the Millennium Development Goals” and especially poverty alleviation. Sustainable tourism for me then is about being custodians of the land for future generations while at the same time taking care of those in the present. It’s about finding the balance between environmental integrity, social justice and economic development.

A tall order? Definitely. Worthwhile? Absolutely.

This week I was reading what travel to Asia might look like in 2023.

In brief the four scenarios proposed were:

Boom and burst – we are all going to be richer (in the UK at least!) and travel more. Look out for a theme park at Mount Everest base camp and controlled entry into busy cities.

Divided disquiet – we are going to be fighting over scarce resources and rushing off to see places before they disappear.

Price and privilege – high fuel prices will make travel a luxury for the elite.

Carbon clampdown – we would each be given a carbon allowance to pollute equally.

None of them make good reading and while it might take longer than 14 years for some (or more likely a combination) of these scenarios to potentially exist we all need to be mindful of the possibilities. Yet at the same time we should not accept them as inevitable.

I believe that the growing popularity of Responsible Travel is a force that can be used to fashion positive change in the industry; and, given the industry’s vast global reach, in the world at large. Thanks to people like Justin Francis at Responsible Travel.com the movement has been driven as much by elements within the industry as by consumer demand.

Those elements tend to be leaders of small specialist company’s with a purpose higher than simply creating shareholder value. These types of business Neil Crofts calls Authentic Businesses : they “generate profit through the pursuit of a profound and positive purpose.”

My own business principles have always been ethically grounded and thus it is no great leap for me to subscribe to the notion of authentic business.

I believe that a growing band of consumers are looking for more authenticity in every aspect of their lives and especially in their travel choices.

Futurist Dr Ian Yeoman “talks about how the world economy has changed tourist identity and value patterns to something more simple which is accelerating the trend of inconspicuous consumption.” Prof Yeoman took his soothsaying further forward to 2030 and had a less apocalyptic perspective than this week’s report: “New experiences, luxury, culture and authenticity are some of the trends that will shape the future of world tourism. The tourist wants to sample the ethnicity of the destination, increasingly interests in culture, food and sport are shaping the way people approach their choice of holiday.”

I have no doubt that the excesses that exist in some tourist destinations today will still exist in 14, 21 or 121 years: it has always been the human way to pursue hedonism.

However I want to believe that Prof Yeoman is correct in his prediction that authenticity will play an increasingly important role within the industry; and I for one will be participating in that particular future.

True authentic businesses work in partnership with their customers and I believe that, all the time like-minded people are coming together to promote and purchase responsibly and sustainably, the less-desirable scenarios summarised above can be avoided.

It is for that reason I am always on the look out for authentic travel businesses in south east Asia (like The Sarojin in Khao Lak, Thailand) to promote, so please contact me if you know any.

In the meantime, what are your predictions for the future of travel?

The key question for me is, over the longterm (well, we are all going to have to work until we’re 90 aren’t we?), how can I use my 25 years of travel industry experience as a specialist tour operator in a worthwhile way?

Until recently, in my spare time, I was a school governor and a trustee of a children’s charity but those tenures have ended and now I am looking for something else. I have always been interested in a responsible approach to travel, and a great believer in authentic travel experiences, so the idea of pursuing something in this line appeals. Especially if it meets one of the aims of this site, namely to bring positive change to the lives of under-privileged children in south-east Asia (not all of them, of course, just as many as possible).

Two of my favourite tours at Magic of the Orient were community-based, although I don’t think the phrase ‘Community based tourism” had been coined when we first started promoting them back in the mid 1990s. One tour was to a hilltribe village in Northern Thailand and the other to a longhouse in Sarawak, East Malaysia (aka Borneo). In both cases the community had built accommodation especially for tourists and in both cases the community were involved in planning and running the set-up. These projects brought income to the community via bed and lodgings, guiding services and souvenir purchases.

Here is a definition of CBT from the Thailand Community Based Tourism Institute (1997):

“CBT is tourism that takes environmental, social, and cultural sustainability into account. It is managed and owned by the community, for the community, with the purpose of enabling visitors to increase their awareness and learn about the community and local ways of life”.

Unfortunately, however, there does not appear to be just one definition. According to Harold Goodwin, a recognized authority on Responsible Tourism, “there is no agreement about the meaning of CBT and ….. whenever the words are used the meaning needs to be made clear”.

OK that’s fair enough so we always need to qualify CBT whenever we talk about it but wait! According to a study by Goodwin, the model is not sustainable: “.. evidence suggests that average bed occupancy achieved by CBT initiatives is around 5% and that this unsustainable.”

What? So is there any point? Goodwin goes on: “The research has demonstrated that there are a number of initiatives which are not CBT which have demonstrated very considerable employment, local economic development and collective community benefits….”

OK, so this is more positive. There are initiatives that are not CBT that are successful. Hmm. So if there is an initiative that is deemed successful does it matter that it is not CBT?

This also begs the question. “how is success measured”? For me, back when we started promoting such tours, the motivation was twofold: 1) to give remote communities the opportunity to benefit from tourism and 2) to provide our clients with an authentic experience. For me it was essential that the hosts were proactive participants rather than passive recipients as in ‘goldfish bowl’ tourism: the tours to Paduang villages – the so-called longneck tribes – in Northern Thailand are examples of passive tourism and, in my opinion, are abhorrent . Simplistically, if these objectives were met, it was successful and certainly the two tours referred to above are still operating today (I shall write more about them later).

Also it must surely depend upon whether the initiative is intended to be the sole provider for a community or whether it is to be incremental income. Given the vagaries of the travel industry I would suggest that the initiative should always be for incremental income.

If we forget, then, the constraints of labels and think instead in terms of (lower case) community based tourism, surely this opens up a wide range of possibilities.

What do you think: is Community Based Tourism no more than academic theory; just more marketing hype with little real value over the long-term; or is it a concept worth pursuing?

It was in 1997 that bird flu first appeared in Hong Kong and started talk of a modern-day pandemic. It appeared again in 2003 and since then the virus has gone on to claim lives around the world.

The reality is that influenza , no matter what the strain, is a killer, with hundreds of thousands of lives lost every year.

The concern at the World Health Organisation is that these new strains of influenza could lead to a spread of the disease at a pandemic rate. I am sure the organisation will always err on the side of caution.

Buffeted by bird flu, it was also in 2003 that Asia had to contend with SARS, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, which started in China and spread quickly through the region and around the world.

It was not long before people were wearing masks on the streets of Hong Kong and Singapore just as they are now in Mexico City. Procedures were established to monitor the health of arriving passengers and these same procedures, and monitoring equipment, have been rolled out again in the battle against influenza.

According to this report from Reuters:

Vietnam scans temperatures and looks for signs of respiratory infections from people arriving from U.S., Canada and Mexico. Health official says people should take precautions similar to those in 2003 when Asia battled SARS: wear face masks and report to authorities fever and coughing whose cause is unknown.

Singapore – Scanners measure temperature of passengers from U.S. just before they undergo immigration checks. Health ministry says members of public are advised to postpone or avoid non-essential travel to Mexico.

Thailand – Temperature screening checkpoints at Suvarnabhumi Airport.

With two cases of swine flu now confirmed in the UK, passengers from here I suspect are also being screened.

At the time of writing there appear to be no reported cases of swine flu in Asia and with these preventative measures in place we can only hope that continues to be the case.

Naturally anyone travelling anywhere at the moment is going to be concerned, however, unless the Foreign & Commonwealth Office advises against travel to a destination in Asia, a disinclination to travel will not qualify for an insurance claim.

No one can give us comfort at the moment because there are too many unknowns surrounding this latest strain of influenza. All any of us can do, in the event of feeling unwell after travelling, is to report (by phone) to our GP. As an aside it is always a good idea to do this if feeling flu-like symptoms after returning from Asia because malaria can start in this way (unlikely but it can happen).

Announcing the latest promotion, the Malaysia Airlines Stimulus package, yesterday, Dato’ Sri Idris Jala, the airline’s Managing Director/ Chief Executive Officer, said, “This is the best time for the public to travel as such incredible offers are given only during a downturn! Customers are the ones to truly benefit during this time as we are looking for innovative ways to boost load factors and revenue.”

The stimulus package has been aimed at all sectors of the market with 9 strands to the promotion:

First and Business Class

1. Premium Match

Malaysia Airlines will match the price of one’s previous travel on another airline for flights above 3 hours.

This applies for First and Business Class travel.

Asean and International travel

2. Business Companion

50% discount is offered for your companion’s business class travel.

Domestic, Asean and International travel

Economy Class

3. Economy +

Pay economy class fares but enjoy business class travel privileges including access to the lounges and accrual of Enrich miles.

Domestic, Asean and International travel

4. Balik Kampung

Enjoy all inclusive RM69 fares for travel within the Peninsular & within East Malaysia

RM99 for travel between East and West Malaysia

Domestic only

5. Weekend Getaway

Special fares for long weekend travel

ASEAN only

6. Kids Fly Free

For every 2 adult economy class tickets purchased, a child below 12 years old travels for free

Domestic and Asean travel

7. MHFlex, 1+1

Purchase 1 economy class ticket, and your companion gets a free ticket on flights operated by Malaysia Airlines

Domestic and Asean travel

8. 80% discounts off domestic & ASEAN

Enjoy low fares when you book online

Domestic and Asean travel

9. Grab-A- Deal

Special fares for selected destinations are available online from time to time

Domestic, Asean and International travel

For further information visit malaysiaairlines.com

I think there is chance there are so many offers around at the moment that the consumer is spoilt for choice. I can see also the temptation to hold on just in case a better offer comes along. If you are flexible and do not mind whether you travel or not then that is a reasonable stance. However, if you are set on visiting Asia sometime this year I recommend finding a fare at a level and at a time you are comfortable with and book it. Then don’t think about looking again and get on with booking and anticipating the rest of the vacation.

I cannot really see how anyone can fail to be happy with their Asia vacation purchase at the moment because the travelling public surely has never had it so good.

Preah Vihear Temple (From Wikipedia)

The face-off between Thailand and Cambodia over the disputed ‘ownership’ of Preah Vihear continued over the weekend and at least 2 soldiers were reportedly killed.

The Preah Vihear temple is a UNESCO World Heritage site from the Khmer period. Its relative inaccessibility means that at the moment it is not on the main tourist trail as this snippet from Wikipedia explains:

“From Cambodia, the temple can be approached via Tbeng Meanchey in Preah Vihear province or from Siem Reap in Siem Reap province via Anlong Veng. Although the highway is bitumen when it leaves Siem Reap, both roads are (occasionally) graded gravel once they begin to approach the Dangrek escarpment.

From Thailand it can be approached from the Kantharalak district (amphoe) of the Sisaket province. Cambodia allows day-trip access to the temple on a visa-free basis from Thailand. Cambodia imposes an entrance fee of US$5 or 200 baht for foreigners (as of 2006, reduced to 50 baht for nationals of Thailand), plus a fee of 5 baht for processing a copy of the passport. In addition, Thailand imposes an access fee of 400 baht for entering the National Park.”

Naturally no one is going to visit the temple as this dispute continues but no doubt each side see it as a ‘cash cow’ for the future.

Phimai Temple (From Wikipedia)

In the meantime visitors to Cambodia can of course visit the heart of the Khmer Empire at the Angkor Archaeological Park. Visitors to Thailand interested in seeing Khmer architecture can visit Phimai Historical Park in Thailand’s north-east.

I see from the report in the Straits Times that representatives from the governments of Thailand and Cambodia will be meeting in Phnom Penh on Monday and Tuesday which will hopefully put an end to this loss of life which, to me, makes no sense.

My understanding was the ban would not affect foreigners but what if it did apply to everyone? Like most people, I suspect, I enjoy sitting down with a cold glass of something alcoholic while on vacation; but having to abstain for a short while really wouldn’t bother me.

There is precedence for enforced abstinence, albeit on religious rather than health & safety grounds.

The best known is probably the Holy Month of Ramadan when Muslims commemorate the revelation of the Holy Quran to the Prophet Mohammed. During this month Muslims are required to fast from dawn until dusk, abstaining from eating and drinking, sex and smoking. The impact of this on tourists, in Dubai for example, is that “visitors should not be seen eating in public places during Ramadan. During Ramadan all Muslims fast from sunrise to sunset. Eating, drinking and smoking in public areas during daylight hours should be avoided.

Hotels provide meals at restaurants that are not exposed to the public view in the fasting hours.” Ramadan this year is 21 August until 19 September 2009.

So no booze during the day and consumption behind closed doors at night. Does that put tourists off visiting at that time? I don’t know: what do you think?

Let’s look at another case: Nyepi Day, a Hindu holiday in Bali.

On this day the island stops. Everything is quiet: there is no transport, which includes aircraft (the airport is closed) and tourists must stay inside their hotels. This is even more dramatic than banning alcohol but does it put tourists off visiting at that time? Well in all my years of arranging holidays to the island I did not experience any negative reactions. Nyepi Day this year is on Thursday 26 March.

My view is that if we are going to visit other countries we must respect their laws and mores; if we are unhappy about them for any reason then obviously we can choose not to go. Personally I think Thai New Year is a lot of fun and I am sure it would continue to be so with or without the alcohol. What do you think?

Denizen joins the company’s existing 9 brands and, for those that do not know (I didn’t), according to the marketing hype the word means ‘citizen of the world’. I am going to skirt around the discussion concerning the true meaning of the word because that would ruin my thread. Bear with me.

Denizen is a so-called lifestyle brand, it is aimed at the luxury end of the market. It is for those who “desire and deserve the best hotel experiences, both on an emotional and a functional level”. It is reportedly for “globally-conscious modern travelers.”

It might seem an odd time to launch a luxury brand, and obviously I do not know whether there was the option to hold-off, but the point here for me is the recognition that today’s traveller is changing.

The current Global Financial Crisis (GFC) has accelerated the change. Shangri-La Hotels and Resorts, for example, has introduced free WIFI and wired Internet for every guest. We all have this ‘need’ to keep in touch 24/7.

Hilton Hotels will not have come up with their concept on a whim and there must be a market for it. At the moment though, those who are travelling are staying for shorter periods and, probably, downgrading their accommodation either within a category or from one level to another.

The majority of us are being far more cautious in the way we spend our money and what used to be important to us – brand names in the bathroom and spas – is perhaps not so much.

Yet, with money so tight, right in the middle of the worst recession in 60 years, how is it that the citizens of Great Britain donate more money en masse to Comic Relief than ever before?

Well, call me romantic but I think it is because we have an innate sense of community which, during these difficult times, is drawing us closer together : we are even more sensitive to the pain of others. We might have to forego some luxuries as our disposable incomes shrink but that is nothing compared to losing a child to malaria or a loved-one in child-birth.

I think perhaps many of us were reassessing what is important to us even before the GFC (I know I was but that might just be an age thing): the GFC has simply accelerated that trend. I am convinced that those who can afford to travel will continue to do so but priorities will be different. The travel industry will have to change accordingly; and change quickly.

I am sure there will always be the luxury traveller (well who doesn’t like a bit of pampering?) but will we have to redefine what that means?

We all know there is much doom and gloom around at the moment but I am convinced that we citizens of the world, acting together, can pull ourselves out of this quagmire far faster than pundits are currently predicting. The trick is not to rely too much on governments and financial institutions: just look at the phenomenon that is Comic Relief and believe in people power.

So, fellow citizens, let’s tell the travel industry what we want from it today and let’s get travelling again.