The Downside of Ecotourism

The term ecotourism has been around for decades but the misunderstanding and overuse of the term has led to a lack of environmental success in a CO2 sucking industry. Places like Machu Picchu now receives over 6,000 visitors a day during peak season, making it hard to properly conserve the historical site.

According to the World Travel and Tourism Council, tourism as a whole makes up 10% of global GDP and supports over 319 million jobs. That is a huge industry but it also has a huge environmental impact. Air traffic alone accounts for 5% of CO2 emissions globally and the number of air passengers is expected to only grow, reaching 13 billion by 2030. In addition, tourists often use more resources than locals, eating at restaurants, using more water, generating more waste, and driving rental cars. Often desired tourist destinations are ones of natural beauty, with high densities in coastal, mountain, and lake areas. These environments are more susceptible to environmental degradation and increased traffic to protected areas can affect conservation efforts. A potential solution: eco-tourism. 

Ecotourism was defined in 1990 by the The International Ecotourism Society (TIES) with a focus on, “responsible travel to natural areas that conserves the environment and improves the well-being of local people”. It has good intentions: natural conservation and benefiting locals. Often eco-lodges do have greener accommodations but they can often be in remote locations, therefore requiring more carbon emissions to get there. Human presence in isolated areas will always have effects on the local land and wildlife no matter how much it is tried to be controlled. The more popular eco-tourist destinations become, the harder it is to limit the impact. 

A great example of this is Machu Picchu. Tourism is the second largest industry in Peru. Machu Picchu specifically is a highly sought-after tourist destination. The tourism there has had a huge impact on the environment. UNESCO recommended the Peruvian government to limit numbers to 2,000 a day to reduce the degradation. Instead, the government switched the ticketing process to half-day tickets, effectively increasing daily numbers from 2,500 to over 6,000, with an additional 500 a day on the Inca Trail. The lack of infrastructure supporting these numbers leads to an even higher impact. There is only one bathroom at the entrance and human waste is a huge problem. The closest village, Aguas Calientes, has resorted to pumping human waste into the Urubamba River. Increases in garbage, especially plastic water bottles, on the Inca Trail also contributes to uncontrolled waste. Jobs provided to locals are seasonal, often poorly paid, and have a huge physical cost. Machu Picchu had the potential to be a great eco-tourist site but overcrowding and mismanagement has led to a lack of conservation and hurting local communities. Yet, it still viewed and even advertised as eco-tourism. 

The term ecotourism is now over used. It has been stretched from its original purpose to encompass any nature-related travel and to many is synonymous with sustainable. This is far from true and with companies using greenwashing, consumers are not sure what they are paying for. Greenwashing is when organizations falsely advertise through an environmentally-friendly lens. In tourism this is often increased by inconsistencies in certifying bodies. Or in something as simple as have a sign in the bathroom promoting water conservation. This has a huge impact on the effectiveness of ecotourism when people who are trying to be environmentally conscious end up supporting the wrong businesses. Eco-tourism also tends to draw from a wealthier demographic, with 57% of people making over $150.000 saying they would book an eco-tourist trip, compared to 16% at $34,000. This is largely influenced by the higher price of eco-tourist trips. If ecotourism is to decrease the large environmental impact of tourism as a whole, it has a lot of work to do to limit greenwashing, overcrowding, and transportation effects while increasing affordability, minimizing local impact and supporting local communities. 

DEVIN O’DONNELL

Devin’s interest in travel was cemented by a multi-month trip to East Africa when she was 19. Since then, she has continued to have immersive experiences on multiple continents. Devin has written for a start-up news site and graduated from the University of Michigan with a degree in Neuroscience.

The Inca’s Sacred Site of Machu Picchu 

Machu Picchu has turned into one of the most visited sites in South America. It’s deep history and architecture draw enthusiasts in. 

Located in the Andes Mountains of Peru, Machu Picchu is believed to have been a royal estate or a sacred religious site. It sits at 7,970 feet above sea level overlooking the Urubamba river and covers 80,000 acres. It’s been estimated to have been built and inhabited in the mid 14th to mid 15th century by the Incas. This archeological site is one of the few well-preserved remnants of the Inca civilization. 

The Incas were very skilled builders; they constructed Machu Picchu using a technique called “Ashlar.” This involves cutting stone so precisely that mortar, a material often used to bind stones together, was unnecessary. Not only did they not use mortar, but  they did all of it without the help of metal to cut the stones. With no record of wheels being used, the stones were likely pushed up the steep mountains by strong men over the years. Built on land frequented by seismic activity, the site has been able to stay intact despite being built atop two fault lines. The stones are called “dancing stones” as they do not break but rather move in rhythm to the earth’s motion when an earthquake occurs. Thus, demonstrating the Incas were intentional when building Machu Picchu. 

Archeologists have identified different sections of the site, making up Machu Picchu: a residential neighborhood, a royal district, a sacred area, and a farming zone. It is believed that the inhabitants harvested potatoes, coca leaves and corn. However, the most appreciated of the three was corn. It was seen as a symbol of power and a sacred state crop. The Inca people grew their food between mountain peaks due to freezing temperatures and uneven terrain. Agriculture terraces were efficient and built as steps into the slopes of the mountain. 

Discovered in July 1911, Machu Picchu was found by Yale graduate and American explorer Hiram Bingham III. Bingham was in search of  Vilcabamba, a secret stronghold mountain used against Spanish rule. However, after many failed attempts at locating it, he arrived in Cusco. He was met by Melchor Arteaga, a Quechua-speaking resident who led Bingham to the ruins of Machu Picchu, which were hidden under vines. The following year, Bingham returned to lead in the excavation of the ruins. While excavating, he was sure that Machu Picchu was Vilcabamba. Still, it wasn’t until the mid-20th century that this theory was disputed.

Historians estimate that the population in Machu Picchu was about 1,000-1,200 Inca people. The Incas are believed to have only inhabited the historic site from 1438-1471 and abandoned it a century later due to the Spanish conquest. While escaping to safer locations, the people destroyed any trails and evidence that connected Machu Picchu to the Inca Empire. The site was left untouched for centuries until Bingham discovered it again in 1911 in the dense jungle of Peru.

Machu Picchu is Peru’s most visited attraction and one of the most well-preserved examples of Inca architecture. It has been named a UNESCO World Heritage Site since 1983 and one of the Seven Wonders of the World in 2007. The adept engineering of the Incas can be seen throughout Machu Picchu and continues to bring in visitors from around the world.

Jenn is a Communications Studies graduate based in Los Angeles. She grew up  traveling with her dad and that is where her love for travel stems from.  You can find her serving the community at her church, Fearless LA or  planning her next trip overseas. She hopes to be involved in  international humanitarian work one day.