Due to climate change and other environmental impacts that humans as a species are having on Earth, we are noticing and feeling the significant changes taking place. The pristine and untouched areas of the world are disappearing and it seems like instead of focusing on preserving them it seems that we are about to accelerate the destruction of these places.

I think it is important to consider the drivers of profitability for eco tour operators. The most obvious one is a melting earth. Climate change has allowed for these huge ships to navigate to the North Pole and this accessibility is allowing for more ships to come through. Longer summers allow tour operators to continue providing services which traditionally they could not at certain times of the year. As a whole the fact that people know that the earth is melting is the ultimate incentive to see what is left of it before it disappears. This creates a demand which any tour operator would be more than willing to accommodate.

There is also the sense of adventure and idea that somehow you are saving the earth by going on an eco tour. People pay top dollar to go to these remote areas to feel like an adventurer, to be one with something special on this Earth only to go home and continue growing a carbon footprint. They have a right to feel this way because 1. people pay for that feeling and 2. the tours are marketed to feel as if you are saving the environment.

I am not against eco tourism, but I believe in regulating it heavily to encourage environmental preservation and awareness. Governments should provide tax incentives to eco tour operators for every eco-friendly step they take. There should be a limit on how many travelers can access certain areas and most of all, focus more operator revenue and tax revenue on steps to make significant positive impacts on the environment which is being visited. Creating financial reserves for maintaining that specific location but also for use in case of emergencies like the sinking of the Explorer.

I understand that there are funds and organizations focused on similar environmental issues already, but I do not believe that the amount of funding they receive correlates to the number of tourists coming though. The more exposure, the more potential damage hence the need for more funding to these organizations.

Pristine and beautiful areas of the world aren’t the only places of concern. Historical sites like Machu Picchu are crumbling due to the amount of tourists visiting the ruins. According to the Times Online, in 1992 only 9,000 people visited Machu Picchu, last year that number reached 700,000.

I believe that a market for alternative products within the umbrella of ecotourism, will emerge and given government support, they will emerge faster eventually redefining ecotourism itself. What I mean is, instead of the traditional approaches to exploration and tours, operators will find alternative methods of bringing people to such locations with even less impact on the environment.

I like to believe that we as a whole are moving in the right direction to solve these issues. Ecotourism is, in my opinion, a powerful tool in preserving the environment. It opens people’s eyes and is a dominant force in the travel industry. Like many new areas of business, there is a time where regulation is almost nonexistent, this can only go on for so long before the real impacts can be assessed and the damage undone. I don’t like regulation at all, but when it comes to the environment and more specifically, delicate eco systems, I think the Earth can use as much help as it can get.

Seb

sebtobler@collidingcontinents.com

*Join our group on Facebook.com. Search for Colliding Continents in 'Groups.'