This is an article that I have written for Carbon Credentials and is also published on its website.
TUI Travel Plc (First Choice, Thompson, etc.) launched their 3-year sustainability strategy last week and it makes for an interesting read, and indeed was the catalyst for this article. According to the strategy, travel and tourism is the main source of foreign exchange in a third of developing countries but is responsible for only 5% of global CO2e emissions.
Tourism in some way helps redistribute wealth from richer nations to poorer ones and the aviation industry acts as a conduit in the process. Revenue received from tourists helps (hopefully) to improve the economy of the nation being visited and should eventually improve social elements such as education, healthcare, etc.
However, these benefits come at a price: environmental pollution caused by the tourists. The most significant probably being carbon emissions from aviation, which presents a dilemma. On the one hand tourism should be actively encouraged and promoted to help improve the economies of poorer states and nations, but on the other hand it should be discouraged to combat climate change.
The mantra of the Bruntland Report, which has been embraced by the TUI Travel Plc strategy, is central to managing this dilemma: do more with less. And from January this year, that is precisely what the aviation industry will have to do as a result of its inclusion in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS). The industry’s recent growth rate has considerably increased its carbon footprint and its projected growth has been cited as one of the reasons for its inclusion. For example, Government’s perhaps rather ambitious expectation is that the industry’s contribution to total UK emissions will rise from 9% in 2005 to 29% in 2050.
The cost of the EU-ETS to passengers is estimated to be negligible in comparison to the total ticket price (circa €9 or £8) but is likely to increase as the scheme progresses[1] – this cost arises from airlines having to purchase allowances for the carbon they emit throughout the year. But if airline companies adopt the same strategy as TUI Travel Plc and seek to reduce their aviation emissions by 6% over the next 3 years then this cost should be stabilised if not reduced.
Despite the objections of some non-EU based firms, it appears that including the aviation industry in the EU-ETS could help drive sustainable tourism. But it will require more firms like TUI Travel Plc to tackle the dilemma head-on by embedding sustainability into their corporate DNA and moving beyond compliance.
[1] EU ETS and Aviation, SN05533, House of Commons Library, www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN05533.pdf
TUI Travel Plc (First Choice, Thompson, etc.) launched their 3-year sustainability strategy last week and it makes for an interesting read, and indeed was the catalyst for this article. According to the strategy, travel and tourism is the main source of foreign exchange in a third of developing countries but is responsible for only 5% of global CO2e emissions.
Tourism in some way helps redistribute wealth from richer nations to poorer ones and the aviation industry acts as a conduit in the process. Revenue received from tourists helps (hopefully) to improve the economy of the nation being visited and should eventually improve social elements such as education, healthcare, etc.
However, these benefits come at a price: environmental pollution caused by the tourists. The most significant probably being carbon emissions from aviation, which presents a dilemma. On the one hand tourism should be actively encouraged and promoted to help improve the economies of poorer states and nations, but on the other hand it should be discouraged to combat climate change.
The mantra of the Bruntland Report, which has been embraced by the TUI Travel Plc strategy, is central to managing this dilemma: do more with less. And from January this year, that is precisely what the aviation industry will have to do as a result of its inclusion in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS). The industry’s recent growth rate has considerably increased its carbon footprint and its projected growth has been cited as one of the reasons for its inclusion. For example, Government’s perhaps rather ambitious expectation is that the industry’s contribution to total UK emissions will rise from 9% in 2005 to 29% in 2050.
The cost of the EU-ETS to passengers is estimated to be negligible in comparison to the total ticket price (circa €9 or £8) but is likely to increase as the scheme progresses[1] – this cost arises from airlines having to purchase allowances for the carbon they emit throughout the year. But if airline companies adopt the same strategy as TUI Travel Plc and seek to reduce their aviation emissions by 6% over the next 3 years then this cost should be stabilised if not reduced.
Despite the objections of some non-EU based firms, it appears that including the aviation industry in the EU-ETS could help drive sustainable tourism. But it will require more firms like TUI Travel Plc to tackle the dilemma head-on by embedding sustainability into their corporate DNA and moving beyond compliance.
[1] EU ETS and Aviation, SN05533, House of Commons Library, www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN05533.pdf
RSS Feed
