New Issues in Polar Tourism

During the recent decade, academic interest in polar tourism certainly reached a new peak. The reasons for this development are plentiful. An important reason is of course the growing numbers of tourists arriving in polar regions and the associated attempts of commercial and noncommercial stakeholders to attract even more tourists to polar destinations. This and other changes, such as global climate change, imply new challenges and opportunities for polar regions, warranting research on tourism in the area. This chapter introduces some of the themes discussed in the scientific literature: definition of polar regions, environmental dimensions, and business and community perspectives. Moreover, the chapter reviews some of the institutional changes occurring in polar tourism research. Finally, the chapter provides an overview of the contributions to this research volume.

This chapter will address questions of what polar tourism is and how it has been researched. These questions serve to allow the field to look back upon its research and reflect. However, looking back is not enough. Within a group such as the International Polar Tourism Research Network (IPRTN), we must also attempt to venture forward and ask: how should polar tourism be researched? On the surface these questions seem simple, but when one dives deeper, there is considerable complexity to consider. This chapter will put such questions in context by offering expert reflection on them from three perspectives: academic, community, and industry. This will be done within a geographical scope of both poles and across decades of work. While one can never expect to capture absolutely everything about these questions, this chapter will hopefully contribute to an ongoing conversation of research practices and research relevance moving into the future.

This chapter discusses the Anglo-American hegemony of academic writing about Arctic tourism. This is often reckoned as a periphery and this term is also discussed. It is argued here that this hegemony results in some off accounts. The chapter shows how some of the writing about Arctic tourism in academic books and journals tends to be very inaccurate and general, adding to a perception of these geographical areas as less developed and modern. However, it is also shown that there are research rather indicating the opposite – that the “periphery” is an integrated part of a global hybridity, but also that to break the hegemony is a challenging matter.

Tourists engage with narrative as they experience location, construct place, and act or perform within produced space. Northern and southern polar and subpolar regions offer multiple opportunities for narrative engagement. When conceptualizing tourists’ narrative engagement with location, place, and space in the sub-Antarctic and in Antarctica, it is interesting to consider tensions, consistencies and inconsistencies, and coherence and incoherence produced when activities and processes occurring on this part of the earth’s surface are grouped and analyzed either vertically or horizontally. Many engagements with the area are organized vertically, along two axes. One vertical axis is through Southern Australia, New Zealand, and various islands to the Ross Sea. Another vertical axis runs from the tip of South America, through various islands, to the Antarctic Peninsula. Alternatively, the sub-Antarctic may be conceived of horizontally as a distinct circumpolar domain lying between specified latitudes. Both of these analytic approaches, vertical and horizontal, involve the sub-Antarctic being described in ways which are themselves narratives of appropriation in that the descriptions are framed as persuasive communications intended to privilege one approach over the other.

Academic study of sub-Antarctic tourism traditionally has embraced a horizontal approach, while the industry is organized vertically. This chapter examines the implications of this divergence for tourists’ personal production of narrative, the provision of public and normative narratives, and the development of a compelling sub-Antarctic tourism research agenda.

The states that jointly manage Antarctica were not yet able to reach consensus on a number of specific Antarctic tourism management issues. While recognizing that many factors influence the international decision-making process, this chapter aims to explore one rarely discussed philosophical factor that may be of great significance for understanding the difficulties in reaching consensus: the possible differences in the human-nature relationship among the Consultative Parties (CPs) and expert organizations. Based on an explorative analysis of relevant documents, it is concluded that CPs and expert organizations consistently reject the “mastery” attitude, both in general Antarctic policy instruments and in tourism-specific documents. The relevant documents relating to two subthemes (the acceptability of permanent land-based tourism facilities and large-scale adventure or sporting events) show that there is a strong tendency to use “rational arguments” that do not reflect human-nature relationships; however, a closer look reveals that underneath these relatively neutral positions, substantially different human-nature attitudes appear to be hidden. These differences may not block consensus regarding general policy statements on Antarctic tourism, as these statements leave sufficient space for different interpretations; however, different attitudes towards nature may well constitute a hurdle in reaching consensus on concrete management issues. It is most likely that CPs with different human-nature relationships have different views on what the specific “values” of Antarctica are and how these values could best be protected, and, consequently, it is also most likely that these CPs have different opinions on what norms should be set in respect of specific tourism developments. This makes it understandable that the approach of the ATCM to focus strongly on (the desirability of) norm setting is not always successful. Underlining the explorative nature of this study, the authors would recommend further research on human-nature relationships in the Antarctic tourism context. More knowledge and consciousness of differences in human-nature attitudes might invite stakeholders to search for management solutions based on a greater understanding of each other’s convictions.

The Madrid Protocol requires that before any kind of activities are conducted in Antarctica, the possible environmental impacts need to be assessed. Five case studies were investigated to assess the effectiveness of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) system with respect to predicting and managing the effects of visitor activity in the Ross Sea region of Antarctica. Investigated EIAs included the decommissioning of the Greenpeace World Park Base, Cape Evans; Taylor Valley Visitor Zone, Taylor Valley; the decommissioning of the Vanda Station; occupation of the Loop Moraine campsite, both in the Wright Valley and McMurdo Dry Valleys; and the occupation and restoration of the ice-free storage area for the Cape Roberts Drilling Project, Cape Roberts.

The assessed sites were situated on a variety of landforms, soil parent materials, and local climates. At each site, the history of the site was known, and the time since last disturbance was well constrained. Assessment of the present state of the sites and accuracy of the EIA predictions compared with the actual impacts were carried out in the austral summers of 2008/2009 and 2009/2010 using visual soil assessment methods.

At each of the five case studies, the standard of physical landscape recovery was higher than anticipated. Each case study demonstrated a high standard of EIA compliance, appropriate remediation of the site post-event, and follow-up monitoring where promised. Cleanup practices were of a high standard in each of the case studies investigated. The raking out of tracks, redistribution of disturbed stones, and careful backfilling of excavations all assisted in the rehabilitation of the formerly disturbed sites to near their predisturbed condition.

Although the EIA process may seem superficial, with a lot of form filling, the process is effective as it raises environmental awareness and motivates visitors to take responsibility for their “footprint” on the environment.

The interrelationship between tourism development and polar environments became a hot topic in the last decades. Since climatic changes lead to altered ecosystems including the alteration of species, composition in areas with previous icy and hostile conditions, especially the use of polar landscapes, came into touristic focus. However, the Southern Ocean surrounding Antarctica has been an exceptional destination to experience nature and follow the path of adventurers since its discovery. To fulfill the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (Environmental Protocol) with the aim to protect the Antarctic area as well as possible, the procedure of granting a permit for tourism activities is well developed in German legislation. For decades, Germans have accounted for more than 10% of all tourists enjoying the special landscape during a cruise to Antarctic coasts. This puts them in the top 3 of the world together with American and British tourists. Since 2000, the German Federal Environment Agency recorded information on German tourist activities in the area of Antarctica from yearly post-visit reports. These data may support discussions on possible steps toward required regulations for polar tourism in the near future. Some aspects of land-based tourism on the Antarctic continent, and especially on the Antarctic Peninsula and islands nearby, are highlighted with regard to the potential consequences within the frame of environmental protection and climate change. Due to the lack of knowledge which impedes thoroughly environmental assessments for all touristic activities, the German Federal Environment Agency aims to encourage research and political institutions to support the development of a concept of sustainable tourism for the Antarctic Treaty area.

Rapidly increasing tourist flows to the Arctic North have put focus on the sustainable development of tourism in natural environments. The Wild North project shows how different stakeholders in a network across the Arctic North deal with the need for a development of sustainable use of wildlife in a tourism context by using interdisciplinary research, active cooperation, and exchange of knowledge. The wildlife focused in this international project consists of arctic foxes, whales, seals, and birds. The project demand came from the tourism industry and was taken up by public organizations and academies within nature protection and tourism management. The project has also the maintainability of a destination in focus together with its sustainability.

This chapter explores the growth of tourism in Iceland in the context of tourism policy and strategy as it manifests in the wake of the financial crash in autumn 2008. Tourism in Iceland has grown from being practically nonexistent in the mid-twentieth century to being one of the three key sectors of the economy. This growth and the role of tourism in the economy has been sporadically recognized with interest in tourism in public debates and policy flaring up in times of crisis in the nation’s primary industries. Similarly, after the 2008 credit crunch, great hopes were tied to tourism and a kind of gold rush mentality ensued. The main tenent of the pro-tourism argument is the economic value of tourism and this argument is readorned each time tourism surfaces in public policy. Thus, tourism policy is seen as recurring, thus maintaining the tourism production system, ultimately producing Iceland as a tourism destination. The chapter concludes by arguing that the recurrence of policy in the context of Icelandic tourism fundamentally challenges expectations and hopes tied to tourism in the wake of the economic recession of 2008.

Recent research shows that many polar tourism entrepreneurs are not ready to adapt to climate change even though some areas within the polar north are more exposed and adaptive capacities of entrepreneurs vary. Moreover, sensitivities of communities to climate change are dependent on the importance of current and future winter tourism in the locale relative to other industries, thus questioning whether communities should focus on winter-tourism development. Current trends reveal a promulgation of a four seasons’ approach to tourism in Polar Sweden in order to reduce sensitivities. However, there is also further winter-tourism development potential since the north inland of Sweden is more secure than many other European winter sport destinations. An important question is as follows: how can regions in the polar north capitalize on their natural assets and develop winter tourism without risking a lock-in effect through increased regional sensitivity to climate change? This chapter maps the exposed area in Polar Sweden and generates basic climate impact scenarios for the future based on plausible alternatives due to climate change and tourism business and institutional development. The discussion utilizes the Arctic Tourism Innovation System (ATIS) framework, where the necessary roles and complementary relationships of institutions and entrepreneurs in creating sustainable paths for polar communities are highlighted.

Kilpisjärvi is the northernmost village in western Finnish Lapland, located in the middle of the highest mountains of Finland. The region has been reindeer herding area of Sámi people for centuries but has also attracted skiers and hikers since 1930s. During the last few decades, tourism has increased strongly in the area, comprising now about 1,400 beds. We studied the discourses of tourism development and their underlying values by interviewing permanent dwellers and Norwegian cottage owners. Six different discourses were distinguished: (1) nature and scenery, (2) economy, (3) transformation as a place, (4) reindeer herding, (5) planning and administration, and (6) possibilities to influence decision-making. The first discourse stressed that tourism development and building should adapt to fragile nature, while economic discourse stressed tourism as the most important means of livelihood in the village. Contradictory values and identities of the place were expressed among the respondents, some seeing the beauty and close-knit community to be lost and others seeing the transformation positive. Reindeer herding contradicted tourism strongest, having both areal and cultural conflict. Governance was seen as an important tool in steering development, but many respondents considered that it was taking into account only economic aspects. Many villagers saw their influence in decision-making weak. We conclude that it is important to include the social implications and the diversity of local discourses in tourism development and land use planning. Transparent and genuine participatory planning would promote sustainability and allow decisions and development which would satisfy larger parts of local population than presently.

In Europe, the public right of access is most widely applied in the Nordic countries. So-called everyman’s rights give everyone the basic right to roam freely in the countryside, no matter who owns or occupies the land. What makes everyman’s rights problematic is that they do not cover activities which damage the environment or disturb others, but the understanding of damage and especially disturbance is situational and depends on subjective valuation. There has been a lot of debate around everyman’s rights over the past decade. Also, several surveys have been made for administrative purposes. By analyzing argumentation in recent discussion in the Internet, we evaluate in the article what are the most urgent issues at stake in Sweden and Finland. Our results show that the discussed themes vary from private ownership and national identity to commercialization and lifestyle. Especially berry pickers from Asian countries and the commercialization of recreational nature use have generated as well extreme nationalistic arguments as worried expressions of the ownership rights. A more moderate stance is to suggest negotiations between parties and to give more information in public. New devices to conceptualize the use of nature in a different way are slowly emerging but are not yet adapted to public common sense discussion.

National parks in peripheral areas are often promoted as tool for regional development and a way of restructuring resource-based economies into tourism. Though not always embraced by local communities, tourism businesses are generally expected to be in favor of new park establishments. However, the coalition between environmentalists and tourism entrepreneurs has recently been challenged. The purpose of this chapter is to analyze discourses regarding the establishment of national parks in Arctic areas. This is done regarding the proposed Vindelfjällen National Park in northern Sweden. Using discourse analysis of media debate, public documents, and interviews, it is demonstrated that struggle over national parks is not only about tourism development but also wider concern regarding the management of Arctic environments. In this context it is not possible to simply classify stakeholders in local, national, and international. Interests differ in both arenas and mirror rather a general struggle over control of northern areas. Hence, tourism development is used just as an arena for negotiating issues of governance and power.

Dark tourism and battlefield tourism have tended to focus on the social aspects of visits, such as marketing and interpretation, yet largely ignore the cultural and spiritual dimensions of these sites of death and loss. This chapter addresses these shortcomings through an examination of two well-known indigenous battlefields sites and outlines the potential lessons learned from these sites for the Canadian north. The goals of this chapter are both to (a) provide a contextual overview of issues related to the recognition and development of indigenous sites of death, loss, and battlefields, including cultural dissonance, and (b) explore these processes with reference to the Canadian North. We will address some of the limitations that have been noted in dark and battlefield tourism, including the tendency to focus on European sites or sites of colonial “victories” which perpetuate grand “colonial” narratives, while arguing for the need to recognize commemorative, cultural, and spiritual aspects. We also provide a rationale as to why most sites in Northern Canada have been excluded from the dark and/or battlefield narratives.

Although the goal of this book was not to pursue a distinct research question but rather illustrate the multitude of thematic issues that are currently being investigated in the polar Norths, two topics, the governance of ecological resources and the ways in which polar communities manage to create agency through various development strategies, emerged throughout the book. In order to illustrate this agency, the content of this book has been divided into three parts: conceptualizing polar tourism and polar regions, politics and the environment, and business and community perspectives, thus without a separation between Arctic and Antarctic research. In this concluding chapter, a summary of the issues in polar tourism highlighted in this book is made, and a comment on the current state of the research field is offered, with some suggestions for future research.