The debate surrounding both the indicators involved within The Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria (GSTC) and the extent of their effectiveness within sustainable tourism has created many contrasting arguments within academia. At its core the GSTC aims to unite the international model of sustainable tourism with a set of unified criteria to which each and every business in the industry should aspire. The criteria included in the GSTC focus on sustainable management, socio-economic, cultural heritage and environmental aspects of tourism and have drawn upon the merits of numerous other labels to arguably create the most extensive set of criteria yet seen within a certification programme.
Certification programmes, however, are not without their flaws and the GSTC is not immune to the critiques that have plagued many of its rivals. My own small scale project into certification schemes highlighted some interesting results which in the main corresponded with much of the existing literature on the subject. I analysed the findings from two perspectives, the consumer and the enterprise.
What the GSTC, as well as many of its contenders in certification, does not do is address the consumer profile to which it is aimed. The demand for sustainable lifestyles, I found, does exist, but without the funding, marketing and promotion to push these labels into the limelight there simply is not the consumer demand for certification. This is particularly apparent when the consumer is unaware of what the label represents and for what it has been awarded. It is fundamental that labels are truly transparent. The consumer is a skeptical beast that needs to trust what it is buying into understand fully the implications involved in not only the label, but their current purchasing decisions.
From the enterprise perspective the confusion surrounding eco certification is perhaps even more perplexing. There exists a very real pressure to work towards sustainable tourism and certification proves to be one way for businesses to ‘prove’ their efforts and be awarded a label in return. In reality many businesses do not need to alter many of their existing practices as the labels can often be too simplistic in their criteria, thus exacerbating the greenwash affect that is plaguing the market. For those businesses wanting the more elite of labels a substantial amount of money can be frequently invested and as of yet there is no evidence to suggest that this investment is worthwhile, especially as previously noted there is little consumer demand for the labels. Ultimately a business will want an increased market share for the efforts made and this aspect has not been openly addressed by the GSTC. Equally there appears to be little information supplied as to how the objectives of the scheme are to become a reality for the enterprises involved. Most crucial in this debate is the ‘one size fits all’. Where the GSTC differs from most certification schemes is the global market into which it is aimed and the presumption that one set of criteria can be applicable to all countries involved both on a national and local scale. This is potentially its unique selling point but also its largest downfall.
The GSTC cannot guarantee that this certification label will become embedded within the consumer conscience in the tourism industry and cannot therefore reassure the enterprises involved that they will reap the tangible benefits of financial investment within certification. It is not only the consumer that requires trust in a label, but the enterprises also.
Despite such critiques, however, it is important to note that these schemes do promote a more sustainable management system within the market. If those involved, even on a small scale, can become more economically, socially and ecologically more responsible in their actions just to be rewarded with a label then it is to be commended. Certification is by no means failing to alter the face of responsible tourism, it is just a much slower process than previously assumed. Certification needs international support by the governments, businesses and crucially the public to succeed in its objectives, without any one of these the certification schemes will only continue to penetrate a much smaller percentage of the market than its potential suggests.
