Draft:Greenwashing in Ecotourism

Within the second decade of the twenty-first century, ecotourism has been rising to combat global warming and conscious of the earth’s degeneration. However, many tourist attractions that deem themselves eco-friendly are in reality greenwashing. This deception stems from “the intersection of two firm behaviours: poor environmental performance and positive communication about environmental performance," 1 meaning many people are not being as environmentally friendly as they say they are.

Merriam Webster Dictionary defines it as "the act or practice of making a product, policy, activity, etc. appear to be more environmentally friendly or less environmentally damaging than it really is" 2 Jay Westervelt, an environmentalist, originated the word, greenwashing in 1996 to encapsulate how he felt about the hospitality industry. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652618308722?via%3Dihub. 3] Ecotourism at its core is to “travel to relatively undisturbed natural areas for study, enjoyment, or volunteer assistance”4 focusing on plants, animals, neighboring caretakers, their relation between each other, and their respective needs. Martha Honey categorized seven criteria for sustainable development (5); each

1. Involves travel to natural destinations.

2. Minimizes impact.

3. Builds environmental awareness.

4. Provides direct financial benefits for conservation.

5. Respects local culture.

6. Supports human rights and democratic movements

7. Provides financial benefits and empowerment for local people.

A sustainable development balances the needs of the present and the future according to the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). The growing demand in this economy is what “drives firms to develop green marketing strategies to show consumers their good corporate image and social responsibility”(6), which is impactful when it is factual. Yet, this is not always the case.

While a large-scale example of greenwashing in ecotourism can be found in Bali,

Indonesia (6)↓ smaller examples are overlooked such as one that happened in Boothbay Maine, United States. On March 28, 2018,

Boothbay’s Board of Selectmen voted 4-1 on Wednesday to accept a proposed settlement with Coastal Maine Botanical Gardens that overturns a decision by the town’s Board of Appeals and allows the gardens to proceed unhindered with a $30 million expansion. The Settlement resolves a federal lawsuit filed in December by the botanical gardens against the town alleging the town had violated the garden’s 14th Amendment right to due process. But members of a group that opposed the expansion - including one family who filed suit against the town - say selectmen had made up their minds well before Wednesday’s meeting, and that the town did not publicize the prosed agreement beforehand.7

The expansion includes building large facilities, parking lots, gardens and trails which would cause runoff to disrupt neighboring homes yards and the town’s water supply. The Boothbay Region Water District along with surrounding concerned year-round residents “cited, among other concerns, further degradation of the water quality of nearby Knickerbocker Lake, already listed by the state as “most at risk from new development… “There’s a provable threat,” he [a resident who was interviewed] said. “The [Department of Environmental Protection] made errors.””7 The local community must be involved with and receive income and other tangible benefits (potable water, roads, health clinics, etc.) from the conservation area and its tourist facilities,” (6) according to Costa Rica–based ecologist Daniel Janzen. In this legal case, the surrounding residents are not happy with the greenwashing of an ecotourism place that should be practicing what it champions, taking care of the environment.


 * For more information see Chapter 5 of The Mediation of Sustainability: Development Goals, Social Movements, and Public Dissent by Ben Harbisher (2023)