Sustainable Tourism Development:
A Critique
Zhenhua Liu
The Scottish Hotel School, University of Strathclyde, Curran Building, 94
Cathedral Street, Glasgow G4 0LG, United Kingdom
Sustainable tourism has become an increasingly popular field of researchsince the late
1980s. However, the sustainable tourism debate is patchy, disjointed and often flawed
with false assumptions and arguments. This pape r is a brief critique of some of the
weaknesses in the sustainable tourism literature. In par ticul ar, it explores six issues
that are often overlooked but must be addressed in research: the role of tourism
demand, the nature of tourism resources, the imperative of intra-generational equity,
the role of tourism in promoting sociocultural progress, the measurement of
sustainabil ity,and forms of sustainable development. Finally, it is argued that in order
to transform research on sustainable tourism to a more scientific level, a systems
perspective and an interdi sci plinar y approach are indispensable .
Introduction
Since the late 1980s, sustainable development has become a buzzword in
development studies in g eneral and in tourism research in particular.
However, a literature review led the author of this paper to the belief that the
‘muddy pool’ (Harrison, 1996) of debate on sustainable tourism is patchy,
disjointed and at times flawed. Indeed, ‘little appears to have been written, in
depth, on the meaning and implications of sustainable tourism development’
(Hunter & Green, 1995: 69). Most research ‘had advanced little beyond the stage
of formulat ing and discussing various principles and assumptions’ (Komilis,
1994: 65); while the case studies which explore the ways of applying sustainable
principles to practice, often through small eco- or alternative tourism projects,
provide at be st a micro solution to what is essentially a macro problem
(Wheeller, 1991: 93).
With a full appreciation of the contributions mad e by numerous writers
towards the progress in tourism research, this paper attempts to make a brief
critique of the research o n sustainable tourism. However, it does not intend to
inveigh against the litera ture at large; rather, it is a personal observation of the
debate about tourism and sustainability. Indeed, it is a glimpse at the other side
of the susta inable tourism debate, the side that has largely been overlooked,
neglected or conveniently an d implicitly assumed as unimportant or irrelevant
by some writers. Furthermore, many of the issues discussed here have already
been identified in varying contexts by some of the most insightful researchers in
the field though only a very small amount of representative work c ould be
reviewed and acknowledged in this paper.
0966-9582/03/06 0459-17 $20.00 /0 © 2003 Z. Liu
JOURNAL OF SUS TAINABL E TOURISM Vol. 11, No. 6, 2003
459
The Concept of Sustainable Development
The concept of sustainability has its origins in the environmentalism that grew
to prominence in the 1970s. The explicit idea of sustainable develo pment was
first highlighted by the International Union for the C onservation of Nature and
Natural Resources (IUCN, 1980) in its
World Conservation Strategy
. In 1987, the
Brundtland Commission Report defined sustainable development as ‘develop-
ment that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of
future generations to meet their own needs’ (WCED, 1987: 43). The Commission
further emphasised that sustaina ble development is not a fixed stateof harmony,
but rather a dynamic process of c hanges which ‘are all in harmony and enhance
both current and future potential to meet human needs and aspirations’(WCED,
1987: 46).
In tourism, there are a multitude of definitions for sustainability and s ustain-
able development (Butler, 1999b; Page & Dowling, 2002 ). The World Tourism
Organisation (WTO, 2001) prefers the following definition of sustainable devel-
opment:
Sustainable tou rism d evelopment meets the needs of present tourists and
host regions while protecting and enhancing opportunities for the fu ture. It
is envisaged as leading to management of all resources in such a way th at
economic, social and aesthetic needs can be fulfilled while maintaining
cultural integrity, essential ecological processes, biological diversity and
life support systems.
Prosser (1994) highlights four forces of social change that are driving this
search for sustainability in tourism: dissatisfaction with exis ting products;
growing env ironmental awareness and cultural sensitivity; realisation by desti-
nation regions of the precious resources they possess and their vulnerability; and
the changing attitudes of developers and tour operators.
Sustainability has been widely viewed as holding considerable promise as a
vehicle for addressing the problems of negative tourism impacts and main-
taining its long-term viability. It is praised by Br amwell and Lane (1993) as a
positive approach intended to reduce the tensions and friction created by the
complex interactions between t he tourism industry, tourists, the environment
and the host communities so that the long-term capacity and quality of both
natural and human resources can be maintained. Cater (1993)identifies three key
objectives for sustainable tourism: meet ing the needs of the host population in
terms of improved living standards both in the short and long term; satisfying
the demands of a growing number of tourists;and safeguarding the naturalenvi-
ronment in order to achieve both of the preceding aims. Farrell (1999) highlights
the ‘sustainability trinity’ which aims at the smooth and transparent integration
of ec onomy, society and environment.
Sustainability, sustainable tourism and sustainable development are all
well-established terms that have been used loosely and often interchangeably in
the literature. Butler (1999b) and Harris and Leiper (199 5) are among the few
scholars who have tried to explore the differences between these terms. Without
being preoccupied with a semantic debate about the terminology, in this short
article, ‘sustainability’ is broadly c onsidered state-focused which implies steady
460 Journal of Sustainable Tourism
life conditions for generations to come; ‘sustainable development’ is more
process-oriented and associated with managed changes that bring about
improvement in conditions for those involved in such development. Similarly,
sustainable tourism is conveniently defined as all types of tourism (conventional
or alternative forms) that are compatible with or contribute to sustainable devel-
opment. It should also be noted t hat development does not necessarily involve
‘growth’ as it is essentially a process of realising ‘specific social and economic
goals which may call for a stabilisation, increase, reduction, change of quality or
even removal of exist ing products, firms, industries, or other elements’ (Liu &
Jones, 1996: 217).
Key Issues to be Addressed
The author feels that the following are among the main weaknesses of the
sustainable literature which must be addressed if we are to advance further in
this field of research.
(1) While emphasising the sustainability of tourism resources, no due attention
has yet been paid to that of tourist demand, especially at the destination
level, where a sustained flow of tourists cannot be taken for granted though
this might be the case at the global level .
(2) When discussing resource sustainability, it is often limited to the pr eserva-
tion a nd conservation of resources and fails to appreciate that resources are a
complex and dynamic concept, evolving with changes in the needs, prefer-
ences and technological capabilities of society.
(3) While emphasising intergenerational equity, no due attention has yet been
paid to intra-generational equity, that is, the fairness of benefits and costs
distribution among the stakeholder groups of tourism development. Where
such attempts were made and community involvement was advo cated,
many writers fail to recognise that the host population is often not empow-
ered to take control of the dev elopm ent process.
(4) While emphasising the interests of the host population, an overwhelming
majority of the writers in the field appear to have a view that the destination
community should reap the economic benefits of tourism but keep its culture
intact. Many argue that the social and cu ltura l impacts of to urism are
primarily negative and any tourism-related socio-cultural changes should
be avoided.
(5) The determination of the absolute level and pace of development has not
been without problems as well. Many tourism organisations and academics
have searched for ways to set the limit or threshold to tourism growth,
through identifying carrying capacities and indicators of sustainable devel-
opment, but with limited success.
(6) The means and instruments advocated for achieving sustainable tourism are
often fraught with simplistic or naïve views. Many writers and practitioners
enthusiastically promote ecotourism, alternative tourism, responsible
tourism, soft tourism, low-impact tourism, community tourism, and so on,
as the path to sustainable tourism development. But experiences show that
none of these forms can be relied on as the way forward for a sustainable and
growing tourism industry worldwide.
Sustainable Tourism Development: A Critique 461
Is Sustainable Tourism Solely a Supply Issue?
Sustainable tourism requires both the sustainable growth of tourism’s contri-
bution to the economy and society and the sustainable use of resources and
environment. Neither can be achieved without a sound under standing and
proper management of tourism d emand. But demand issues have generally been
ignored in the sustainable tourism debate, with the exception of few writers (e.g.
Butler, 1999b; Middleton & Hawkins 1998) and the case of on-site visitor
management which is often used as an impact control measure. This is probably
because the concept of sustainability was originally taken, rather conveniently
and with little adaptation, from the general sustainable development literature
where a constant or increasing overall demand for resources is a giv en condition.
However, as demand patterns and economic structures change, no industry, and
in particular no industry at the national or regional level, could or should assume
that there is a constant or increasing flow of demand for its outputs and thus
focus solely on resource issues.
Tourism development is both supply-led and demand–driven. The provision
of tourist facilities and services may arise as a response to growing demand or
aim to stimulate tourist demand. Whatever the initial impetus, successful devel-
opment in the long term necessitat es a balance of supply and demand in terms of
range, quality, quantity and price. An evolution on one side of the demand-
supply equation will usua lly be accompanied by changes in the other, whether
this represents growth, stagnation, decline or some qualitative transformation.
Moreover, the nature and extent of the demand and the associated facilities and
services pr ovided will also d irectl y influence the broader aspects of develop-
ment (Pearce, 1989). Indeed, ‘Tourism development is a dynamic process of
matching tourism resources to the demands and preferences of actual or poten-
tial tourists’ (Liu, 1994: 21).
Generally speaking, the demand determinants push a tourist into a travel deci-
sion while the supply factors pull the tourist towards a pa rtic ular destination.
The size and preferences of global tourist demand are determined by variables in
generating countries, whereas the spatial di stribution of tourist flows will be
influenced by the competitiveness of various tourist destinations.
Globally, tourism has been growing rapidly during the last half a century,
from 25 million international touristarrivals in 1950 to 698 million in 2000 (WTO,
2002), and is expected to grow at an average annual rate of 4.3% until 2020(WTO,
1998). However, no destination can take th e growth of its tourism industry for
granted as increasing tourist demand will be shared by, and distributed across,
many competing destinations. Therefore, for each individual resort or country, it
is unrealistic and pernicious to assume that there is alwaysan increasing demand
for its product, and ignore changes in the tourist market. The tourism industry is
also vulnerable to external events. For instance, the September 11th terrorist
attacks in America led to an 11% decline in world international tourist arrivals
during the final fou r months of 2001 (WTO, 2002). The remarks made by Levitt
(1960) 40 years ago are still pertinent: there is no such thing as a growth industry.
There are only companies organised and operated to create and capitalise on
growth opportunities. Industries that assume themselves to be riding some auto-
matic growth escalator invariably descend into stagnation.
462 Journal of Sustainable Tourism
Even though the total scale of world tourism demand is predicted to increase
in the foreseeable future, the types and quality of products tourists search for are
changing constantly. Tourists are becoming more experienced, more critical ,
more quality conscious and seek new experiences as well as ‘good value for
money’. Furthermore, tourist destinations across the world are facing increasing
competition from other leisure industries and other destinations as well as
constantly changing touristtastes and behaviours. Some well-established tourist
resorts in th e Mediterranean have already experienced stagnation or even
decline and have started to differentiate their largely homogeneous offerings by
developing new products, improving the quality of existing products and pene-
trating new markets (Morgan, 1998). In order to develop tourism sustainably,
demand management, in terms of finding enough tourists to fill capacities, is
often more critical than resource m anagement since tourist demand usually fluc-
tuates more frequently and abruptly than tourist resources. For instance, in 1997
global international tourist arrivals increased by 2.4% but one fifth of the WTO
member countries recorded a decline in visitor numbers from abroad (WTO,
1999).
The motivations, preferences and percep tions of touri sts influence the tourism
resource itself in the sense that they determine what object o r site becomes a
tourist attraction and its relative value in the marketplace. Tourists never buy
‘resources’, they go to tourist destinations, visit attractions and use facilities. The
dynamic nature and cha nging value of various kinds of tourist resources can
largely be explained by the evolution of tourism demand. For instance, before the
mid-18th century, nature was not normally regarded as an attraction. The Alps,
where s ome of the world’s most popular scenic and ski resorts are located, was to
be avoided during the Grand Tour.
Demand management is a lso important in sustaining tourism resources in that
effective marketing can channel tourist demand to places that are more
impact-resilient, such as urban a nd seaside built environments rather than to
more fragile wilderness areas. Purpose-built a ttr actions such as theme parks,
and resort towns like Orlando and Las Vegas in the USA can absorb millions of
tourists and reduce the touristic pr essure on the natural environment. Other-
wise, the world will find it difficult to cater for the extra one billion international
tourists projected by WTO (1998) in 20 years’ time in national parks and heritage
sites. Visitor management techniques can also be applied to select or deselect
tourists, control their flows and influence their behaviour through promotion
and education.
Is Tourism Resource a Fixed Entity?
It has been argued that tourism is a resource industry and natural environ-
mental assets are the very foundation upon which all to urism rests and are
usually the most succ essful in attracting tourists. This perhaps partly explains
why the sustainable tourism literature has overwhelmingly focused on the pres-
ervation and conservation of natural resources. However, sustainable resources
management requires a broader and better understanding of the characteristics
of t ourism resource.
Sustainable Tourism Development: A Critique 463