Ecolabels in tourism: what are they and why so many?

May 2005

We are perhaps familiar with labels on our tins of tuna declaring that the fish were caught in a dolphin-safe manner, or honey being "honeybadger-friendly" or sustainably harvested timber as being labelled "good wood". However, many of us may be nonplussed by a Green Globe 21 Ecotourism Certified label on an Egyptian resort brochure, a Bronze Eco-Rating for a tented camp in Kenya, or a Silver rating from the Heritage Environmental Rating Programme for a luxury, Cape hotel. What are these tourism-related labels (or are they gradings?)? What do they mean? Do they certify anything or are they yet more manifestations of "greenwash"? And why are there apparently so many, once you start to take notice?

In order to answer some of these questions, we need to delve into dry, academic definitions a little. Firstly, ecolabels in tourism are most commonly awarded as the result of a certification process (ecolabels are not the same as awards, for example the The World Legacy Awards that "recognise leading examples in the tourism industry that are helping to protect our planet's natural and cultural heritage"). Ideally, certification in tourism is:

A voluntary procedure that assesses, audits and gives assurance that a business, facility, product, process, service or management system meets specific standards. It awards a marketable logo - the ecolabel - to those that meet or exceed baseline standards.

It should be pointed out that ideally the procedure should be driven by an independent third party to lend credibility, and that "specific standards" generally mean standards of ecological best practices. Certification is most often used in relation to a type of tourism known as ecotourism - itself a contested, misunderstood and often abused concept. Put succinctly, ecotourism is:

Ecologically sustainable tourism with a primary focus on experiencing natural areas that fosters environmental and cultural understanding, appreciation and conservation,

(Ecotourism Australia)

although there are more detailed and value-laden definitions. Increasingly ecotourism is expected to actively educate the traveller, and directly benefit nature conservation, local communities and cultures.

By now, it should be becoming clear that certification is a tool - in a suite of tools - that environmentalists and academics hope to use to encourage certain types of tourism. On the one hand it is hoped that consumer choice of travel products will be influenced by ecolabels, and on the other, that the tourism industry values ecolabels as sources of competitive advantage. In short, it is hoped that certification becomes an effective market-driven mechanism for reducing the environmental impacts of tourism and ensuring that it benefits the natural environment. Ambitious ideals indeed.

It is generally accepted that there are three types of tourism certification, namely, mass tourism, sustainable tourism and ecotourism certification. Mass (or conventional) tourism certification is applied in the mass market or conventional tourism industry. Such schemes are typically well funded and marketed and the best known, but also the most narrow, often focusing on environmental impacts and cost-saving processes. Green Globe 21 and ECOTEL (there are no certified hotels in Africa) are the better known international examples, while Qualitour's Heritage scheme is active in South Africa.

Sustainable tourism certification measures sustainability according to environmental, socio-cultural and economic criteria. Examples are Costa Rica's CST and Blue Flag for beaches. South Africa is the only country in Africa with Blue Flag beaches - fourteen at last count.

Ecotourism certification covers businesses and products that claim to be involved in ecotourism and thus sets higher standards, with an emphasis on ecological sustainability. Green Globe 21's ecotourism certifications, Europe's PAN Parks, Australia’s Eco Certification Program, Eco-Rating in Kenya and SmartVoyager in the Galapagos are examples. Strangely, Green Globe 21, the only truly global certification, does not appear to have a single member, outside of the Seychelles, in southern and eastern Africa, where some of the world's premier ecotourism destinations are located.

So it is perhaps important, as a traveller, to understand what is being certified. Some schemes certify a commitment to improve practices, others the implementation of a process, such as an environmental management system, while others certify the attainment of environmental performance objectives. Increasingly, a hybrid of process and performance certification is becoming the norm. But, as observed earlier, many of these schemes limit themselves to assessing the management of environmental impacts of operations, yet increasingly tourists, so the experts tell us, are interested in the quality of the natural resources at the destination (e.g. whether it is pristine, unspoilt, quiet, peaceful, etc.). Expect to see ecolabels  increasingly highlight the "green" (quality) as opposed to the "grey" (process, performance) aspects of travel. 

Some labels, however, are less concerned with the natural environment, and more with socio-economic factors. Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa (FTTSA), as an independent initiative of the World Conservation Union (IUCN) in South Africa,  launched the Fair Trade in Tourism Trademark in 2000. The trademark "is not a conventional ecolabel" and is "compatible with other labels, brands and grading systems", FTTSA claims. It focuses on fairness, justice and equity in tourism business practices and aims to address North-South inequalities in trade. It is clear, however, that FTTSA is endorsed and promoted by the South African government in its responsible tourism guidelines.

Clearly there are more than enough certification schemes for the number of "isms" in tourism, a not inconsiderable number in its own right with more types of "tourisms" appearing regularly as the industry seeks differentiation in the minds of travellers - and to appeal to travellers' consciences (see Some "New Tourisms").

In 2002 the World Tourism Organisation (WTO) reported some 500 voluntary certification initiatives of which 59 were regarded as "comprehensive" schemes. Most had appeared since 1996, at an accelerating rate, and most originated in the developed world (or First World) and certified its products. Considering that most ecotourism, for example, involves travel from the First World to nature destinations in the developing world (Third World), the seeds of an anomaly are clear to see.

And predictably, a backlash from the Third World, in lockstep with loosely-related and emerging concerns about globalisation and global trade inequities, has gathered steam. We will explore this theme more fully in the next article in this series entitled Ecolabels in tourism: eco-colonialism or eco-protectionism?

Notwithstanding the "North - South" divide around tourism ecolabels, a more fundamental criticism has been evident for some time. Consumer (tourist) buying behaviour has proved to be immune to the ecolabel's stamp of approval. Research has unsurprisingly revealed confusion, fuelled by the sheer number and diversity of ecolabels. But unexpectedly it has also shown that even though travellers show environmental concern and a willingness to pay a premium for environmentally responsible travel when surveyed, these attitudes do not translate into changes in buying behaviour.

The third article in this series considers whether ecolabels in tourism have a future.

This article is based on a research application entitled Ecolabelling, certification and accreditation: elements of a possible model for the ecotourism industry in southern and eastern Africa, submitted to the University of Stellenbosch in April 2004 by Ralph Pina (contact the author), chairman of ecoAfrica Travel, in partial fulfilment of an M Phil in Environmental Management. The application's references are listed here.