See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/232818446

Sustainable tourism: A state‐of‐the‐art review

Article  in  Tourism Geographies · February 1999

DOI: 10.1080/14616689908721291

CITATIONS READS

584 3,081

1 author:

Richard W. Butler
University of Strathclyde
135 PUBLICATIONS   9,237 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Change on a remote island over half a century View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Richard W. Butler on 22 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Tourism Geographies

ISSN: 1461-6688 (Print) 1470-1340 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtxg20

Sustainable tourism: A state‐of‐the‐art review

Richard W. Butler

To cite this article: Richard W. Butler (1999) Sustainable tourism: A state‐of‐the‐art review,
Tourism Geographies, 1:1, 7-25, DOI: 10.1080/14616689908721291

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14616689908721291

Published online: 18 Apr 2007.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 11348

View related articles

Citing articles: 135 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rtxg20

Download by: [92.38.126.149] Date: 29 January 2016, At: 10:22

 Sustainable tourism:
a state-of-the-art review

Richard W. Butler
Department of Management Studies, University of Surrey, UK
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

Abstract

The topic of sustainable tourism has emerged in the last decade as a result of
discussions from the report Our Common Future. This paper reviews the develop-
ment of the term, beginning with a discussion of the confusion arising from the
imprecise and conflicting definitions of the concept, and the need to distinguish
between sustainable tourism and the development of tourism on the principles
of sustainable development. The paper then reviews the environmental focus
of discussions of sustainable tourism and argues for the need to ensure that
the concept includes and is applied to the human environment as well as the
physical environment. Attention then shifts to problems of carrying capacity,
control of tourism development, and the relevance of the term to mass or conven-
tional tourism. The paper concludes with a discussion of the future direction of
sustainable tourism and the likelihood of development moving in this direction.

Keywords: sustainable tourism, definitions, development, capacity, control, mass

tourism

Introduction

The profound and rapid changes that have taken place in the world in the
past two decades have been mirrored in changes in tourism. Global polit-
ical and economic reorganizations have resulted in the expansion of tourism
both in a spatial sense and in terms of a significant increase in the size of
the tourist market. Although these changes have been rapid and, in many
cases, unanticipated, they have not had revolutionary effects upon tourism;
rather, they have enabled it to grow in an evolutionary fashion. Changes
•in the environmental sphere, however, appear likely to be more fundamental

R 1461-6688 © Routledge 1999 Tourism Geographies 1(1), 1999, 7-25

 8 Butler
and even revolutionary in terms of their effects upon tourism, perhaps
because they have been slower in coming to the fore and could be viewed
as long overdue. If there is a single factor that has the potential to change
the nature of tourism more than any other, it is the introduction of the con-
cept of 'sustainable development'. Since the appearance of the term a decade
ago, it has achieved worldwide recognition and widespread, if superficial,
acceptance. Summit meetings of world leaders, policy statements, legisla-
tion, the response of industry and marketing shifts - and perhaps even
changes in the behaviour of tourists - all suggest that some basic changes
may be taking place in specific elements of tourism at different scales.
Geographers have long been interested in the relationships between
tourism and the environments, both physical and human, in which it oper-
ates, and it is logical that they would be particularly interested in the
discussion and application of sustainable development in the context of
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

tourism. This longstanding interest is manifest in the excellent work that

has been undertaken by geographers in the field of tourism (e.g. Mathieson
& Wall 1982; Murphy 1985; Pearce 1989, 1995; Hall 1994; Hall &C
Jenkins 1995). With a few exceptions, however, geographers, like many
other researchers in tourism, have been reluctant to take a critical view
of sustainable development and the way it has been applied to tourism.
Perhaps this is because the concept is a particularly attractive one to
anyone who has concerns about the abuse of the environment, which
includes most geographers, and because many of the principles of sustain-
able development are in line with many of the basic principles of sensible
resource and environmental management. Irrespective of the reason, many
writers about tourism appear to have accepted rather unquestioningly the
basic proposition that sustainable development is inherently good and
appropriate for tourism, and that its adoption will solve many of the
negative problems that have resulted from the development of tourism. A
few dissenters have argued that this is not necessarily the case (Butler
1993; Wheeller 1993; Wall 1996) and that sustainable development is
neither always possible nor even always appropriate in the context of
tourism, but the concept still appears to have broad support, often based
apparently on little but optimism.
Here, I discuss the state of the art of knowledge and research on sustain-
able development in the context of tourism with a focus on geographical
research. The paper proceeds by first examining the problem of the defi-
nition of sustainable development, with the argument that many of the
problems relating to the concept owe their origins to the lack of agree-
ment and clarity over the meaning of the concept. This is followed by a
discussion of the difference between sustainable development as a concept
and its particular application to tourism and the confusion and ambiguity
which have arisen in this area. This confusion has been accentuated by
the linking of specific forms of tourism, such as 'alternative' tourism, with
 Space: Sustainable tourism 9

sustainable development and a willingness to treat these forms as synony-

mous with the concept. Although further discussion on the meaning of
the concept is important, a great deal more attention must be paid to the
problem of how to operationalize the concept and make it applicable in
appropriate situations to tourism. Related to this is the issue of whether
the concept is the same when applied to the human and social world as
it is in the context of the environmental sphere, and whether sustainability
is achievable within the same parameters in each situation.
Particular attention is paid to three specific features related to the applic-
ability of sustainable development to tourism, namely carrying capacity,
control over tourism and mass or conventional tourism. These represent
the real challenges to the acceptance and successful application of sustain-
able development, and to date the problems which they represent have
not been fully resolved. The paper concludes with a brief discussion on
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

the future of 'sustainable tourism' and the role in its development that
might be played by the geographic academic community.

The meaning of sustainable development

In the preparation of the presentation on which this paper is based,

I requested input from colleagues with respect to the content and issues.
Several colleagues responded and suggested that a discussion on defini-
tions of sustainable development was not necessary, since its meaning was
clear, and that what was more important was a focus on ways in which
it could be applied (A.M. Williams, University of Exeter, personal commu-
nication). Initially, I agreed with that sentiment, for a great deal has been
written on the topic over the last decade (see, for example, articles in the
Journal of Sustainable Tourism). However, further examination of the
literature suggested that some discussion of the meaning of the term - at
least in the context of tourism - was warranted, not because there is
no definition, but because there are so many (Stabler & Goodall 1996)
(Table 1). As other writers have pointed out (Wheeller 1993), that there
are so many interpretations of the term has meant that each individual
has been able to claim that his or her use of the phrase is appropriate.
One result has been that the wide acceptance of the term noted above in
many cases is simply acceptance of the phrase but not its implications.
The original definition of sustainable development was provided by the
Brundtland Commission in Our Common Future as 'development that
meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs' (World Commission on Environment
and Development 1987: 43). This definition has been subject to a wide
range of interpretation. On the subject of tourism, as Wall (1996) has
pointed out, the Commission was silent, perhaps reflecting the all too
 10 Butler
Table 1 Definitions of sustainable tourism
Tourism which meets the needs of present tourists and host regions while
protecting and enhancing opportunity for the future. (World Tourism
Organization 1993: 7)
Sustainable tourism is tourism and associated infrastructures that: both now
and in the future operate within natural capacities for the regeneration and
future productivity of natural resources; recognize the contribution that people
and communities, customs and lifestyles, make to the tourism experience;
accept that these people must have an equitable share in the economic benefits
of local people and communities in the host areas. (Eber 1992: 3)
Tourism which can sustain local economies without damaging the environment
on which it depends. (Countryside Commission 1995: 2)
It must be capable of adding to the array of economic opportunities open to
people without adversely affecting the structure of economic activity.
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

Sustainable tourism ought not interfere with existing forms of social organiza-
tion. Finally, sustainable tourism must respect the limits imposed by ecological
communities. (Payne 1993: 154-5)
Sustainable tourism in parks (and other areas) must primarily be defined in
terms of sustainable ecosystems. (Woodley 1993: 94)
Sustainable tourism is tourism which develops as quickly as possible, taking
into account of [sic] current accommodation capacity, the local population and
the environment, and:
Tourism that respects the environment and as a consequence does not aid its
own disappearance. This is especially important in saturated areas, and:
Sustainable tourism is responsible tourism, (quoted in Bramwell et al. 1996a:
10-11)

frequent ignoring or ignorance of tourism by policy makers. The result

has been a tremendously varied usage of this definition in the context of
tourism, just as the term has met with similar varying interpretations in
other contexts. It has become a form of ideology, a political catch phrase
and, depending on the context in which it is being used, a concept, a
philosophy, a process or a product (Wall 1996).
Coccossis (1996) has suggested that there are at least four ways to
interpret tourism in the context of sustainable development: a sectoral view-
point such as the economic sustainability of tourism; an ecological viewpoint
emphasizing the need for ecologically sustainable tourism; a viewpoint of the
long-term viability of tourism, recognizing the competitiveness of destina-
tions; and a viewpoint accepting tourism as part of a strategy for sustainable
development throughout the physical and human environments.
Recognition that the concept is not value-free is crucial to an understanding
of the concept, but, as Bramwell points out, this is not a point which is often
 Space: Sustainable tourism 11
made in the literature, with the resulting assumption by many that it is a sin-
gle unified concept (Bramwell et al. 1996b: 23). In their review of the prin-
ciples and practice of sustainable tourism management, Bramwell et al.
(1996a: 5) note seven dimensions of sustainability: environmental, cultural,
political, economic, social, managerial and governmental. It is clear that
researchers and decision makers in each of these dimensions have differing
interpretations of the concept, which explains its widespread acceptance and
equally widespread misuse and abuse.
It is unlikely, therefore, that there will ever be a totally accepted defi-
nition of sustainable tourism that is universally applied, because the very
success of the term lies in the fact that it is indefinable and thus has
become all things to all interested parties. To the tourist industry, it means
that development is appropriate; to the conservationist, it means that prin-
ciples articulated a century ago are once again in vogue; to the
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

environmentalist, it provides a justification for the preservation of signif-

icant environments from development; and to the politician, it provides
an opportunity to use words rather than actions. Only to the tourist does
it really mean or provide nothing other than, in most cases, as Wheeller
(1993) has bitingly observed, an opportunity to feel good while enjoying
oneself.

'Sustainable' tourism

One of the major problems with the concept of sustainable development

has been the way in which the single word 'sustainable' has been applied
to a variety of activities based on the assumption that it carries with it
the ideological and philosophical implications of the concept (Harrison
1996). In the case of tourism, the result has been the appearance and
widespread adoption of the term 'sustainable tourism', often without any
attempt to define it (Hunter and Green 1995). I have argued elsewhere
(Butler 1993) that this is not only unfortunate but extremely misleading.
'Sustainable' is a widely used term with a specific meaning; it is the adjec-
tival form of the verb 'to sustain ('to maintain or prolong'; Collins Concise
Dictionary 1995: 1189). In the context of tourism, an appropriate defin-
ition of sustainable tourism is 'tourism which is in a form which can
maintain its viability in an area for an indefinite period of time' (Butler
1993: 29). Thus, tourism at places such as Niagara Falls in North America,
or in London, Paris or Rome, is eminently sustainable. It has been
successful in those locations for centuries and shows no signs of disap-
pearing. With such a definition, the emphasis is on the maintenance of
tourism, but in many cases tourism is competing for resources and may
not be the 'best' or wisest use of resources in these or other locations in
the long term.
 12 Butler
The above definition, however, is not what is generally implied by the
term 'sustainable tourism'. Rather, based on the current literature, what
is normally meant by that term is as follows:

tourism which is developed and maintained in an area (community, envi-

ronment) in such a manner and at such a scale that it remains viable
over an infinite period and does not degrade or alter the environment
(human and physical) in which it exists to such a degree that it prohibits
the successful development and well being of other activities and processes.
(Butler 1993: 29).

The difference between these definitions is not merely a matter of seman-

tics. The definition of sustainable tourism above says very little about
anything except the future of tourism. This is, as Wall (1996) has noted,
a single sectoral approach, something that is at odds with the concept of
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

sustainable development, which by its very nature is holistic and multi-

sectoral. Thus sustainable tourism is not automatically the same as tourism
developed in line with the principles of sustainable development. As long
as it is taken to be so, then ambiguity and confusion will continue. The
need to define the type of tourism being studied or developed beyond the
catch-all of 'sustainable' is therefore crucial, if knowledge about the
sustainability of tourism is to be expanded.

Alternative forms of tourism and sustainability

Compounding the ambiguities discussed above has been the tendency to

link a variety of forms of tourism with the concept of sustainable devel-
opment. The majority of these are forms of tourism which can be
characterized as being 'green' or 'alternative', in the sense that they are
not part of mass or conventional tourism (Smith and Eadington 1992).
An unfortunate corollary of this linkage has been the automatic assump-
tion that mass tourism is automatically non-sustainable and, therefore,
has nothing to do with sustainable development. Indeed, some of the most
ardent critics of mass tourism are the most fervent supporters of sustain-
able development and alternative forms of tourism, in the apparent belief
that support of the latter will make the problems of the former disappear
(Croall 1995).
This is a problematic development for two reasons. First, it is almost
impossible to have a form of tourism development that does not have
impacts upon the location in which it occurs. The naive assumption that
tourism which is nature-focused will automatically be sustainable may not
only be incorrect but also harmful. Small-scale developments of tourism,
all other things being equal, could reasonably be expected to have fewer
and less severe impacts than large-scale developments, and thus be more
 Space: Sustainable tourism 13

sustainable. They may not be fully sustainable, however; and, in reality,

all other things are rarely equal. Many forms of alternative tourism, such
as ecotourism, are located in highly sensitive and vulnerable environments,
some of which cannot withstand even moderate levels of use, and which
often have little or no infrastructure to deal with development. The
resulting impacts, small though they may be individually, may become
serious because of the location in which they occur or because of their
cumulative effects.
Second, it has yet to be proven that all examples of mass tourism are
unsustainable. While such evidence as exists tends to suggest such a view,
the relatively small amount of empirical research into the effects of mass
tourism development leaves a great deal unexplained. More importantly,
this assumption appears to have led researchers away from the difficult
but much more important task of resolving how mass tourism can be
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

made more sustainable (Wheeller 1993; Bramwell etal. 1996a; Wall 1996).
The key problem with sustainable development in the context of tourism
is not ensuring the continued introduction of small-scale, environmentally
and culturally appropriate forms of tourism, but how to make existing
mass tourism developments as sustainable as possible. Studies on this
aspect of sustainable development, such as that by Prat (1996) on the
Costa Brava, are extremely rare.

Sustainable development of tourism in different environments

Much of the discussion on sustainable development and tourism has been

in the context of the environment in which tourism occurs (Eagles 1994;
McCool 1994), and in many cases the settings examined have been in the
Third World (Cater and Lowman 1994). This focus probably results from
the fact that, in many ways, it is much easier to examine new or proposed
developments in virgin or 'greenfield' sites and to argue how they could
be made more sustainable, rather than deal with mature and declining
urban tourism destinations. In addition, the tourism industry has not been
slow to appreciate the marketability of the concept of sustainable devel-
opment. It has realized that to ignore the groundswell of support for the
concept would leave it vulnerable to criticism and possibly stringent regu-
lation, if not prohibition, in certain localities. In many cases, therefore, it
has adopted the concept of sustainable development in name if not in
operation. Thus many small-scale tourist operations in a wide variety of
locations have suddenly begun to call themselves 'sustainable' (and often
'ecotourist') in the hope of successfully competing for the 'appropriate
tourist'. In this context, it is important to remember that the tourist
industry is comprised of many small but highly competitive operations as
well as the well-known and often criticized multinational conglomerates.
 14 Butler
Too many inappropriate or poorly operated small-scale developments in
the wrong location can be just as harmful and non-sustainable as a single
large development.
The overwhelming focus of attention on the environmental context has
been effectively criticized by, among others, Craik (1993: 3), who asked the
highly pertinent question, 'Why is sustainable development almost invari-
ably reduced to, and articulated in terms of, environmental matters?' One
answer to this very valid query is that sustainable development as a con-
cept emerged in the context of the second global wave of environmental
concern. It coincided with increasingly obviously visible environmental
impacts of tourism in mature destinations, and growing political support
for environmental protection. In the context of tourism, however, it should
have been clear to all those involved that tourism, like most forms of
resource use, straddles both the physical and the human worlds. It can have
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

just as severe and far-reaching impacts upon the human (cultural, social)
resources of tourist destinations as it does on the physical (vegetation,
wildlife, water, etc.) resources (Mathieson and Wall 1982). Indeed, this prin-
ciple has been recognized by the World Tourism Organization, which sug-
gested that sustainable tourist development should meet 'the needs of
present tourists and host regions while protecting and enhancing opportu-
nity for the future' (World Tourism Organization 1993: 7). However, rel-
atively little attention has been paid to date by researchers in determining
how sustainability in the context of the human environment could be deter-
mined. Craik (1995) is one of the few to suggest a specific framework for
such an approach, although there are indications that other researchers are
increasingly accepting that sustainable development must be accepted as
having a human component that is equally as important as the more tra-
ditionally accepted environmental focus (for examples, see Briguglio et al.
1996a, 1996b).
A second aspect of sustainable development that has received little atten-
tion is the application of the principles to tourist sites in the developed world,
particularly in urban and highly developed areas. Two recent papers
(Bramwell et al. 1996a; Zelfde 1996) provide some evidence of a develop-
ment of interest in these areas. The edited volume by Priestley et al. (1996)
has an encouragingly wide range of topics within it, including several deal-
ing with the human component of tourism in developed areas, although,
despite the title of the volume, the discussion on sustainability is rather lim-
ited. The fact remains, however, that the bulk of the literature and policies
which do exist on tourism and sustainable development have a clear empha-
sis on environmental matters and new, often small-scale developments, gen-
erally related to natural or heritage features (Ecologically Sustainable
Development Working Groups 1991; McCool 1994; Croall 1995; Hunter &
Green 1995). Relatively few authors have focused attention on the applica-
tion of the concept to the human and social elements and the different frame-
 Space: Sustainable tourism 15

works that are required for successful implementation (Nelson et al. 1993;
Craik 1995; Bramwell et al. 1996b; Briguglio et al. 1996a, 1996b; Squire
1996), and their efforts have been concentrated in the last few years only.
To many people in tourism and other fields, the concept of sustainable devel-
opment is still, unfortunately, tied firmly and often exclusively to the
physical environment.

Major unresolved issues in sustainable development

In the context of tourism there remain a number of key, as yet unre-

solved, issues with the concept of sustainable development, including its
relationship with carrying capacity, with control of development and oper-
ation, and with mass or conventional tourism. These issues are clearly
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

related to each other, and arise because of the nature of tourism devel-
opment, the nature of the tourism industry and the role of the public
sector in tourism in many destinations. In addition, and related to the
difficulties stemming from the ill-defined nature of the concept, are the
problems of measurement and monitoring. Whether the concept of sustain-
able development is anything new is a subject that needs considerable
discussion, but readers familiar with writings on conservation dating back
from the turn of the century may be forgiven for thinking that it is simply
a version of that concept with a new face. Certainly, the writings of
Meadows et al. (1972) a quarter of a century ago in The Limits to Growth
raised very similar issues and sentiments to those expressed in Our
Common Future (World Commission on Environment and Development
1987).
The key term in this concept is the one of 'limits'. However much
proponents of development may ignore the fact, implicit in the concept
of sustainable development is the idea of limits. In the case of tourism,
this is normally expressed in terms of numbers of tourists, although implicit
in this is the associated infrastructure development and landscape modi-
fications. While thinking on carrying capacity has been modified greatly
since the 1960s, when researchers were seeking the 'magic number' of
visitors who could be accommodated at a specific site, the issue of volume
still remains (Butler 1996). Although it is generally accepted that numbers
alone are not an entirely satisfactory measure of the effects of tourism,
there is little doubt that, in almost all tourism contexts, there is a maximum
number of tourists who can be successfully accommodated (however
'successful' is defined). Once this number is exceeded, a range of nega-
tive and sometimes irreversible effects take place. These impacts may take
some time to manifest themselves in certain areas (e.g. changes in envi-
ronmental quality), whereas in others their effects may be felt almost
immediately (e.g. resident attitudes). In most cases, there is no clear
 16 Butler
threshold and the effects are often cumulative, sometimes in a linear but
not necessarily simple relationship, depending on a wide range of vari-
ables. The fact remains, however, that in almost every conceivable context,
there will be an upper limit in terms of the numbers of tourists and the
amount of development associated with tourism that the destination can
withstand (Shipp 1993). Once these levels are exceeded, a number of
things occur, normally in undesirable form. The nature of tourism itself
changes, the nature of the destination changes, the attractivity and hence
the viability of the destination declines, and tourism becomes no longer
sustainable in its original form. If overuse and overdevelopment continue
unabated, then any form of tourism may become unsustainable in that
destination (Butler 1991; Cooper 1996; Zanetto & Soriani 1996).
Given this scenario, one would expect that proponents of sustainable
forms of tourism or sustainable development encompassing tourism would
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

include limits to growth in any proposed development. Such limits would

be based on the ability (capacity) of the resources (human and physical) to
absorb the effects of tourism so that tourism and other activities and attrib-
utes would be able to be maintained over the long term. This is a point
made by Bramwell et al. in their excellent discussion of a framework for
sustainable tourism: 'A key element of setting targets for sustainable
tourism is the establishing of the tourism carrying capacity of a destination
area' (1996b: 61). In fact few, if any, development proposals identify or
propose such limits. If sustainable development principles are included in
development plans in anything more than name only, they are normally
couched in vague terms which are long on emotion and short on specifics.
This is explained, in part, by the fact that researchers and policy makers
in tourism have never grasped the nettle of carrying capacity or limits and
have never produced measures that could be used in such contexts (Butler
1996). The urgent need to take such steps at the local level as well as at
more senior levels of government has been stressed more strongly recently
(Coccossis &C Parpairis 1996; Johnson and Thomas 1996).
This problem relates directly to that noted above of measurement of sus-
tainability. A few examples of proposed measures appeared in the volume
Tourism and Sustainable Development: Monitoring, Planning, Managing
(Nelson et al. 1993), including those by Kreutzwiser (1993), Payne (1993)
and Marsh (1993), but all of these are speculative and none are based on
empirical research. The idea of measures or indicators of the nature of
tourism are not new. The need for performance indicators in plans and
management strategies for tourism development has been noted by
Getz (1982), Gunn (1994), Inskeep (1991) and the World Tourism
Organization (1993) among others, and yet these calls have rarely been
translated into action. Without such indicators, the use of the term 'sus-
tainable' is meaningless. It becomes hyperbole and advertising jargon of the
kind so brilliantly criticized by Wheeller (1993, 1994). In England, the
 Space: Sustainable tourism 17
Countryside Commission concisely summarized the need for, and the result
of an absence of, monitoring: 'A commitment to monitoring is essential.
Without any commitment to measuring impact on either a qualitative or
quantitative basis, it is impossible to decide whether one is moving towards
sustainable tourism or away from it' (Countryside Commission 1995: 9).
The points raised in the above discussion stem in many cases from the
fact that, despite the many agencies and private sector elements involved
in the promotion and development of tourism, there are few bodies whose
function is to control tourism once it has been developed. Indeed, one of
the key issues is how tourism could be controlled given the nature, variety
and motivations of the industry and the participants. Tourism researchers
with few exceptions have tended to ignore the issue of control of tourism
and, by implication, the politics of tourism. Richter's (1989) early work
raised some of the issues in the context of Asian tourism, but not until
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

more recently has there has been an overall review of the political realm
of tourism and its implications (Hall 1994; Hall & Jenkins 1995). The
absence of research and discussion on the political aspects of tourism -
and the reverse, the ignoring of the political implications of tourism devel-
opment and the changes it brings by decision makers and their advisors
- is yet another example of the isolation of tourism from the world in
which it exists. While there are examples of good discussion of the policy
implications of sustainable tourism (see, for example, Pigram 1990), the
links between policy and politics are often not developed. Wall (1996)
has commented eloquently on the problems of dealing with tourism from
a single sector viewpoint and the need to consider the context in which
tourism occurs and the systems with which it interacts. The political system
of control is one of these, and a particularly important one when consid-
ering controls on the amount, type and rate of development that are
inevitable in the case of sustainable tourism development.
This leads to the third major issue identified above, namely the rela-
tionship of sustainable development to mass or conventional tourism.
Writers critical of mass tourism (e.g. Poon 1993; Croall 1995) often
propose what are termed 'sustainable forms of tourism' as the ideal alter-
native, and in so doing imply, if not state categorically, that the two forms
of tourism are incompatible. It is clear that many examples of mass tourism
development are not sustainable by any definition of the term, and the
difficult position many established destinations find themselves in at the
current time is evidence of this (Dickinson 1996; Prat 1996; Vera &C Rippin
1996). However, to take such evidence and conclude that sustainable devel-
opment principles can only be applied to small-scale, sensitive new
developments in greenfield sites is shortsighted. In the first case, as many
authors have pointed out (Butler 1991; Wall 1993a, 1993b; Wheeller
1993; Pearce 1995), mass tourism is incredibly popular and is not going
to disappear or be replaced by 'alternative' tourism.
 18 Butler
Tourism is a phenomenon that has demonstrated continuous growth for
at least half a century at the global scale, and most of this growth has been
in mass tourism. While the most rapid growth in recent years appears to
have been in specialized forms of tourism, such as ecotourism, the actual
numbers of tourists involved in these forms are very small compared to
those engaged in 'mass' tourism (World Tourism Organization 1995). Also,
as these new forms of tourism become increasingly popular, there is every
likelihood that they will become varieties of mass tourism; indeed, many
of them are taking on such characteristics very rapidly as they expand. The
increase in numbers, the intensive marketing, the need for large accom-
modation and transportation units, the changes in the product itself, and
the resultant impacts on destinations are all familiar trends in mass tourism.
To assume that they will remain sustainable, if indeed they ever were sus-
tainable in anything but name, is naive and not supported by research.
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

Where tourism has been in existence for long periods of time, for exam-
ple in capital cities and at specific 'marked' sites such as the Pyramids,
Niagara Falls and the Alps, with few exceptions it has continued to survive
by changing its products or enlarging its market. Neither of these techniques
is sustainable in the strict sense of the term as used by the World Commission
on Environment and Development. However, the basic attractions in such
places still exist to a large degree, although certainly not in an unchanged or
pristine form. Where tourism has existed for a long time based on natural
attractions but involving large numbers of visitors, we see major problems
in many areas. The numbers of visitors require and generally result in the
establishment of facilities and an infrastructure to meet their needs, with the
result that the natural areas lose some of their naturalness and hence their
attractivity. As tourist numbers and facilities increase, the market changes
and many visitors who were attracted by the natural features and the absence
of development and large numbers of tourists no longer come, going instead
to other, less developed sites. The natural 'capital' of these sites is being
reduced by development and they are becoming less sustainable, although
numbers may be stable or even still increasing.
The mass market for tourism shows no signs of decreasing; indeed, as
new countries of origin in Asia, such as Japan and Korea, provide ever
larger numbers of tourists, it shows every evidence of continuing to increase
for the foreseeable future. Existing and future destinations of this mass mar-
ket should be the focus of efforts at achieving sustainability in tourism for
two reasons. First, it is simply inappropriate in this day and age to develop
destinations that do not strive to be as environmentally and socially benign
as possible, and hence as close to sustainability as feasible. The environ-
ments and residents of destination areas deserve such consideration, as do
the visitors themselves. Second, if such destinations rapidly decline in qual-
ity and attractiveness because of poor planning and development, tourists
will desert them and seek new destinations at an increasingly rapid rate.
 Space: Sustainable tourism 19
The benefits of tourism will not be maximized but will only be compressed
into a short period. New destinations will have to be established to meet
the new demand and the same process will continue to escalate until there
are literally no more suitable destinations or no areas willing to accept
tourism, a process discussed by Plog (1974) more than 20 years ago.

Conclusions

In trying to identify where the state of the art of current research on

tourism in the context of sustainable development stands is rather diffi-
cult. There is now a sizeable body of literature on this subject, which is
growing rapidly. The topic has even resulted in the appearance of a journal
{Journal of Sustainable Tourism) devoted to this field. A great deal more
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

research by geographers and others has been conducted and is just reaching
the publication stage (Pigram &c Wahab 1997; Hall &C Lew 1998; C.
Becker, University of Trier, personal communication). Thus one cannot
conclude simply that there is little written and that much remains to be
done, nor can one argue that the key questions have been resolved.
Although a great deal has been written, particularly in the last 5 years,
I feel that much research does still remain to be undertaken.
The key problem, in my mind, is the current inability to define to the
satisfaction of all, or even most, of the stakeholders in tourism, exactly
what is meant by 'sustainable tourism'. As noted above, this remains a
major problem and, because ambiguity exists, almost any form of tourism
can, and often is, termed sustainable. Related to this fundamental issue
is the question of how sustainability might be monitored and measured
if and when a satisfactory definition of sustainable tourism is established
and accepted. It is clear that current research in all disciplines involved
with tourism has not really tackled the problem of monitoring the effects
of tourism in any context. Despite the real need to benchmark and monitor,
first called for many years ago (Mathieson 8>C Wall 1982), such efforts
have, by and large, been at best sporadic and non-systematic. Given the
hype that exists in industry and political circles to persuade people that
much is being done to achieve sustainable tourism, there is implicit, if
not overt, opposition to research that might show that very little new or
existing tourism development is sustainable, or at best that a decision on
its sustainability cannot be made for many years to come. Also, many
proponents of the idea of sustainable tourism seem unwilling to accept
that, because an operation calls itself sustainable, it may not be so in
reality.
To assess the real impacts of tourism and the level of sustainability
achieved requires in-depth longitudinal research and environmental,
economic and social auditing. This requires stable funding and a willing-
 20 Butler
ness on the part of researchers to commit to a research programme for
a considerable period of time. There is very little evidence that this sort
of commitment currently exists and good long-term research on sustain-
able development in tourism or any other field is extremely scarce (Wall
1996). One can argue, therefore, that the greatest research need is to
develop measures of sustainability and to apply these to existing and new
forms of tourism development to help determine what affects sustain-
ability and how it can be achieved; in other words, to operationalize the
concept and evaluate it in operation. This is far more complex than it
sounds because, as discussed above, a multi-sectoral approach is essen-
tial, and this requires much more than simply estimating the direct effects
of tourism on the physical and human environments of destination areas.
Even when the elements and processes of sustainability are identified
and understood, there is still no guarantee that it will be practised in
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

destination areas. It will be necessary, if sustainability is to be achieved,

to ensure that all stakeholders are willing participants in the process. If
the industry, at all scales, cannot be persuaded that it is in its own direct
interest to commit to some principles of sustainability, then efforts of
other stakeholders will have little effect. If the public sector is not willing
to educate and, if necessary, enforce sustainable policies and actions, then
few are unlikely to follow them. Simply listing appropriate actions and
strategies and calling for their adoption (Table 2), as some governments
have done (Tourism Canada 1990), is but a first step - specific action
and enforcement are necessary as well. If local residents cannot see the
short-term as well as long-term benefits to themselves of sustainable poli-
cies, they will subvert or ignore them. Finally, if the tourists themselves
do not enjoy or anticipate satisfaction from sustainable forms of tourism,
they will not participate and not visit destinations geared to offer this
type of tourism. One of the other tasks facing researchers, if they wish
to ensure the application as well as the understanding of sustainable devel-
opment of tourism, is to find ways to ensure the necessary policies and
actions are acceptable to all stakeholders in tourism.
Simply saying that all is well and that sustainable tourism is the way of
the future because there is a growing interest in the concept will not ensure
its adoption or success. At present, there is a disturbing tendency, in the
desire to promote sustainable tourism, to claim that any small-scale, envi-
ronmentally or culturally focused form of tourism is sustainable, particu-
larly where it is developed by or for local residents. In the absence of
accurate and reliable indicators and monitoring, one cannot comment on
the sustainability of any enterprise until many years after its establishment,
and only then, after comparing its operation and effects, to the state of the
environment at the time of its establishment. Given that the term sustain-
able development did not enter the lexicon until 1987, it is still too soon
to say if anything created since then is truly sustainable or not.
 Space: Sustainable tourism 21
Table 2 An action strategy for sustainable tourism development: the role of
government

Governments should:
1. Undertake area- and sector-specific research on overall tourism effects
2. Support the development of tourism economic models
3. Assist and support lower levels of governments to develop their own
tourism development strategies in conjunction with conservation strategies
4. Develop standards and regulations for environmental and cultural impact
assessments, monitoring and auditing of existing and proposed tourism
developments
5. Apply sectoral and regional environmental accounting systems for tourism
6. Design and implement public consultation techniques and processes in
order to involve all stakeholders in making tourism-related decisions
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

7. Develop and implement new economic indicators which define national

well-being in the sustainable development sense
8. Design and implement educational and awareness programmes which will
sensitize people to the issues of sustainable tourism development
9. Develop adequate tools and techniques to analyse the effect of tourism
development projects on heritage sites and ancient monuments as an
integral part of cultural and environmental impact assessment
10. Develop design and construction standards which will ensure that tourism
development projects are sympathetic with local culture and natural
environments
11. Ensure that carrying capacities of tourism destinations reflect sustainable
levels of development and are monitored and adjusted appropriately
12. Enforce regulations for illegal trade in historic objects and crafts, unofficial
archaeological research, the prevention of erosion of aesthetic values and
desecration of sites
13. Regulate and control tourism in environmentally and culturally sensitive
areas
14. Include tourism in land use planning
15. Create tourism boards that involve all stakeholders
16. Ensure that all government departments involved in tourism are briefed on
the concept of sustainable development
17. Ensure that tourism interests are represented at major caucus planning
meetings that affect the environment and the economy
18. Ensure that national and local tourism development agreements stress a
policy of sustainable tourism development
Source: Tourism Canada (1990).
 22 Butler
References

Bramwell, B., Henry, I., Jackson, G., Prat, A.G., Richards, G. and van der Straaten,
J., eds. 1996a. Sustainable Tourism Management: Principles and Practice.
Tilburg, Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
Bramwell, B., Henry, I., Jackson, G. and van der Straaten, J. 1996b. A frame-
work for understanding sustainable tourism management. In Sustainable
Tourism Management: Principles and Practice, ed. W. Bramwell, I. Henry, G.
Jackson, A.G. Prat, G. Richards and J. van der Straaten, pp. 23-72. Tilburg,
Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
Briguglio, L., Archer, B., Jafari, J. and Wall, G. eds. 1996a. Sustainable Tourism
in Islands and Small States: Issues and Policies, Vol. 1. London: Cassell.
Briguglio, L., Butler, R., Harrison, D. and Filho, W. eds. 1996b. Sustainable
Tourism in Islands and Small States: Case Studies, Vol. 2. London: Cassell.
Butler, R.W. 1991. Tourism, environment, and sustainable development.
Environmental Conservation 18(3): 201-9.
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

Butler, R.W. 1993. Tourism - an evolutionary perspective. In Tourism and

Sustainable Development: Monitoring, Planning, Managing, ed. J.G. Nelson,
R.W. Butler and G. Wall, pp. 27-44. Waterloo, Ontario: University of
Waterloo (Department of Geography Publication 37).
Butler, R.W. 1996. The concept of carrying capacity for tourism destinations: dead
or merely buried? Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research 2(3-4):
283-93.
Cater, E. and Lowman, G. 1994. Ecotourism: A Sustainable Option? New York:
John Wiley.
Coccossis, H. 1996. Tourism and sustainability: Perspectives and implications. In
Sustainable Tourism? European Experiences, ed. G.K. Priestley, J.A. Edwards
and H. Coccossis, pp. 1-21. Wallingford, Oxford: CAB International.
Coccossis, H. and Parpairis, A. 1996. Tourism and carrying capacity in coastal
areas: Mykonos, Greece. In Sustainable Tourism? European Experiences, ed.
G.K. Priestley, J.A. Edwards and H. Coccossis, pp. 153-75. Wallingford,
Oxford: CAB International.
Cooper, C. 1996. The environmental consequences of declining destinations.
Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research 2(3-4): 337-46.
Countryside Commission. 1995. Sustaining Rural Tourism. Cheltenham, UK:
Countryside Commission (CCP 483).
Craik, J. 1993. The cultural limits of tourism in pacific rim countries. Paper
presented at the International Conference on Sustainable Tourism in Islands
and Small States, Valletta, Malta, November 1993.
Craik, J. 1995. Are there cultural limits to tourism? Journal of Sustainable Tourism
3(2): 87-98.
Croall, J. 1995. Preserve or Destroy: Tourism and the Environment. London:
Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.
Dickinson, G. 1996. Environmental degradation in the countryside: Loch Lomond,
Scotland. In Sustainable Tourism? European Experiences, ed. G.K. Priestley,
J.A. Edwards and H. Coccossis, pp. 22-34. Wallingford, Oxford: CAB
International.
Eagles, P.F.J. 1994. Understanding the market for sustainable tourism. In Linking
Tourism, the Environment and Sustainability, ed. S.F. McCool and A.E. Watson,
pp. 23-33. Ogden, UT: USDA (General Technical Report INT-GTR-323).
Eber, S., ed. 1992. Beyond the Green Horizon: A Discussion Paper on Principles
for Sustainable Tourism. Godalming, UK: Worldwide Fund for Nature.
 Space: Sustainable tourism 23
Ecologically Sustainable Working Groups. 1991. Final Report - Tourism. Canberra,
ACT: Commonwealth of Australia.
Getz, D. 1982. A rationale and methodology for assessing capacity to absorb
tourism. Ontario Geography 19: 92-101.
Gunn, C. 1994. Tourism Planning. Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.
Hall, C.M. 1994. Tourism and Politics: Power, Policy and Place. London: John
Wiley.
Hall, C.M. and Jenkins, J. 1995. Tourism and Public Policy. London: Routledge.
Hall, C.M. and Lew, A.A., eds. 1998. Sustainable Tourism: A Geographical
Perspective. London: Addison Wesley Longman.
Harrison, D. 1996. Sustainability and tourism: Reflections in a muddy pool. In
Sustainable Tourism in Islands and Small States: Issues and Policies, Vol. 1,
ed. L. Briguglio, B. Archer, J. Jafari and G. Wall, pp. 69-89. London: Cassell.
Hunter, C. and Green, H. 1995. Tourism and the Environment: A Sustainable
Relationship? London: Routledge.
Inskeep, E. 1991. Tourism Planning: An Integrated and Sustainable Development
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

Approach. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Johnson, P. and Thomas, B. 1996. Tourism capacity: A critique. In Sustain-
able Tourism in Islands and Small States: Issues and Policies, Vol. 1, ed.
L. Briguglio, B. Archer, J. Jafari and G. Wall, pp. 118-36. London: Cassell.
Kreutzwiser, R. 1993. Desirable attributes of sustainability indicators for tourism
development. In Tourism and Sustainable Development: Monitoring, Planning,
Managing, ed. J.G. Nelson, R.W. Butler and G. Wall, pp. 243-48. Waterloo,
Ontario: University of Waterloo (Department of Geography Publication 37).
Marsh, J. 1993. An index of tourism sustainability. In Tourism and Sustainable
Development: Monitoring, Planning, Managing, ed. J.G. Nelson, R.W. Butler
and G. Wall, pp. 255-8. Waterloo, Ontario: University of Waterloo
(Department of Geography Publication 37).
Mathieson, A. and Wall, G. 1982. Tourism: Economic, Social and Physical Impacts.
London: Longman.
McCool, S.F. 1994. Linking tourism, the environment, and concepts of sustain-
ability: Setting the stage. In Linking Tourism, the Environment and
Sustainability, ed. S.F. McCool and A.E. Watson, pp. 3-7. Ogden, UT: USDA
(General Technical Report INT-GTR-323).
Meadows, D.H., Meadows, D.L., Randers, J. and Behrens, W.W. 1972. Limits to
Growth: A Report for the Club of Rome's Project on the Predicament of
Mankind. New York: Universe Books.
Murphy, P.E. 1985. Tourism: A Community Approach. New York: Methuen.
Nelson, J.G., Butler, R.W. and Wall, G. eds. 1993. Tourism and Sustainable
Development: Monitoring, Planning, Managing. Waterloo, Ontario: University
of Waterloo (Department of Geography Publication 37).
Payne, R. 1993. Sustainable tourism: Suggested indicators and monitoring tech-
niques. In Tourism and Sustainable Development: Monitoring, Planning,
Managing, ed. J.G. Nelson, R.W. Butler and G. Wall, pp. 249-54. Waterloo,
Ontario: University of Waterloo (Department of Geography Publication 37).
Pearce, D.G. 1989. Tourist Development. London: Longman.
Pearce, D.G. 1995. Tourism Today: A Geographical Analysis. London: Longman.
Pigram, J.J. 1990. Sustainable tourism: Policy considerations. Journal of Tourism
Studies 1(2): 2-7.
Pigram, J.J. and Wahab, S.A.E., eds. 1997. Tourism, Sustainability and Growth.
London: Routledge.
Plog, S.C. 1974. Why destination areas rise and fall in popularity. Cornell Hotel
and Restaurant Administration Quarterly (February): 55-8.
 24 Butler
Poon, A. 1993. Tourism, Technology, and Competitive Strategies. Harmondsworth,
UK: CAB International.
Prat, A.G. 1996. Back to a sustainable future on the Costa Brava. In Sustainable
Tourism Management: Principles and Practice, ed. W. Bramwell, I. Henry,
G. Jackson, A.G. Prat, G. Richards and J. van der Straaten, pp. 121-46. Tilburg,
Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
Priestley, G.K., Edwards, J.A. and Coccossis, H., eds. 1996. Sustainable Tourism?
European Experiences. Wallingford, Oxford: CAB International.
Richter, L. 1989. The Politics of Tourism in Asia. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii
Press.
Shipp, D., ed. 1993. Loving Them to Death? Sustainable Tourism in Europe's Nature
and National Parks. Grafenau: Federation of Nature and National Parks of
Europe.
Smith, V.L. and Eadington, W.R. 1992. Tourism Alternatives. Philadelphia, PA:
University of Pennsylvania Press.
Squire, S. 1996. Literary tourism and sustainable tourism? Promoting 'Anne of Green
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

Gables' in Prince Edward Island. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 4(3): 119-34.

Stabler, M.J. and Goodall, B. 1996. Environmental auditing in planning for sustain-
able island tourism. In Sustainable Tourism in Islands and Small States: Issues
and Policies, Vol. 1, ed. L. Briguglio, B. Archer, J. Jafari and G. Wall, pp. 170-96.
London: Cassell.
Tourism Canada. 1990. An action strategy for sustainable tourism development.
Workshop paper for Globe '90 Conference, Vancouver, BC, Canada, October
1990. Ottawa, Ontario: Tourism Canada.
Vera, F. and Rippin, R. 1996. Decline of a Mediterranean tourist area and restruc-
turing strategies: The Valencian region. In Sustainable Tourism? European
Experiences, ed. G.K. Priestley, J.A. Edwards and H. Coccossis, pp. 120-36.
Wallingford, Oxford: CAB International.
Wall, G. 1993a. International collaboration in the search for sustainable tourism in
Bali. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 1(1): 38-47.
Wall, G. 1993b. Towards a tourism typology. In Tourism and Sustainable
Development: Monitoring, Planning, Managing, ed. J.G. Nelson, R.W. Butler
and G. Wall, pp. 45-58. Waterloo, Ontario: University of Waterloo (Department
of Geography Publication 37).
Wall, G. 1996. Is ecotourism sustainable? Environmental Management 2(3-4):
207-16.
Wheeller, B. 1993.Sustaining the ego. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 1(2): 121-9.
Wheeller, B. 1994. Ecotourism: A ruse by any other name. In Progress in Tourism
Recreation and Hospitality Management, Vol. 6, ed. C.P. Cooper and A.
Lockwood, pp. 3-11. London: John Wiley.
Woodley, S. 1993. Tourism and sustainable development in parks and protected
areas. In Tourism and Sustainable Development: Monitoring, Planning,
Managing, ed. J.G. Nelson, R.W. Butler and G. Wall, pp. 83-96. Waterloo,
Ontario: University of Waterloo (Department of Geography Publication 37).
World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. Our Common Future.
New York: Oxford University Press.
World Tourism Organization. 1993. Sustainable Tourism Development: Guide for
Local Planners. Madrid: WTO.
World Tourism Organization. 1995. Summary of Statistics. Madrid: WTO.
Zanetto, G. and Soriani, S. 1996. Tourism and environmental degradation: The
northern Adriatic Sea. In Sustainable Tourism? European Experiences, ed. G.K.
Priestley, J.A. Edwards and H. Coccossis, pp. 137-52. Wallingford, Oxford:
CAB International.
 Space: Sustainable tourism 25
Zelfde, J. van t'. 1996. Environmentality at Disneyland Paris. In Sustainable
Tourism Management: Principles and Practice, ed. W. Bramwell, I. Henry, G.
Jackson, A.G. Prat, G. Richards and J. van der Straaten, pp. 87-102. Tilburg,
Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.

Biographical note

Professor Richard Butler was born in England and educated at Nottingham

(BA Hons) and Glasgow (PhD) Universities. He taught at the University
of Western Ontario from 1967 to 1997, specializing in the geography of
tourism and recreation. He is Past President of the International Academy
for the Study of Tourism and a Past President of the Canadian Association
for Leisure Studies. His main fields of research have been the evolution
Downloaded by [92.38.126.149] at 10:22 29 January 2016

cycle of resorts, the social impact of tourism, sustainable tourism and

tourism on islands. (Department of Management Studies, University of
Surrey, Guildford, Surrey GU2 5XH, UK; e-mail: [email protected])

Résumé: Le tourisme durable: un état de la question

Le thème du tourisme durable a émérgé dans la dernière décennie, sute aux discus-
sions sur le rapport Notre Futur Commun. Cette contribution s'intéresse d'abord
au développement du terme lui-même, en commençant par une discussion sur la
confusion engendrée par des définitions imprécises et controversées du concept, et
sur le besoin de distinguer entre tourisme durable d'une part et développement
touristique fondé sur les principes du développement durable d'autre part. Elle
examine ensuite l'aspect environnemental des discussions sur le tourisme durableet
plaide pour la nécessité d'affirmer un concept, et ses applications, qui concerne
l'environnement autant humain que physique. L'attention est ensuite portée aux
problèmes de capacité de charge et de controle du développement touristique ainsi
qu'à la pertinence du terme pour le tourisme de masse (ou conventionnel).
La conclusion discute de l'orientation future du tourisme durable et de la prob-
abilité d'un développement dans cette direction.

Mots-clés: tourisme durable, définitions, développement, capacité de charge,

controle, tourisme de masse

View publication stats