Before you go...

If you are planning a trip to Antarctica, read about ASOC's Antarctica Tourism Campaign, which supports regulation of commercial Antarctic tourism. ASOC is concerned about the rapid growth of commercial tourism, which presently is not regulated by the Environment Protocol, including size of ships, number of visitors to various areas, on-shore infrastructure development, use of helicopters and other issues that affect the environment. Note that ASOC is not opposed to tourism but does believe that it should not be left unregulated.

ASOC'S Antarctic Tourism Campaign

Although Antarctic tourism began in the late 1950s, it remained at low levels until the early 1990s when it took off. From a base of 4,698 tourists in the 1990/91 summer, annual numbers have risen to 24,281 in the summer of 2003/04. But if one adds the staff and crew to the passengers, the figure for 2003/04 has been calculated as 44,266. Although tourist residence time is shorter, this means that vastly more tourists than scientists and support staff on national programs now visit the Antarctic each year. Industry figures project a continuing increase in tourism numbers through this decade.

Although the majority of these tourists still travel in small-medium sized vessels, the industry is rapidly diversifying. Large passenger vessels (without any ice-strengthening) capable of carrying up to 800 passengers (and with correspondingly large crews) are now active in the Antarctic. Mass-tourism has arrived. Alongside this, niche-marketed "adventure tourism" has developed - just about anything you may want to do involving aqualungs, parachutes, skis, motorbikes, etc can now be pandered to by commercial operators. Large numbers of people now land at key wildlife and historic sites in Antarctica and, increasingly, light aircraft, helicopters and all-terrain vehicles allow penetration further in from the coast. So-called "fly-sail" operations, whereby tourists are ferried by aircraft to ships in Antarctica, thus increasing the throughput of passengers, have commenced in the past two seasons.

Within a relatively short time, as the numbers of tourists continue to increase, and as the present Soviet-era fleet chartered by the tourism industry reaches obsolescence, we may see the emergence of air-supported mass tourism in Antarctica - and the concomitant calls for accommodation ashore, airstrips, etc. The problems of tourism, familiar everywhere else, have arrived in Antarctica, and ASOC is making the point that this requires the sorts of checks and controls that the tourism industry reasonably has to accept just about everywhere else. The alternative is a free-for-all.

What makes Antarctica a particular concern is that there is no regulation of tourism at present. Apart from an obligation to conduct prior Environmental Impact Assessment - which tourism operators, like everybody else are expected to do - there is essentially no constraint on where you can go, what you can do, and how many of you can do it.

The practical consequence of this is that tourism is already exerting pressures on the Antarctic environment, and the increasing commercial interest is changing the nature of the Antarctic political regime. Increasingly, commercial benefit, rather than concern for the environment, science, or international cooperation, is driving the Antarctic political regime. This (coupled with similar trends in fishing, lingering interest in minerals and an emerging interest in bioprospecting) threatens to unpick the delicate accommodation on sovereignty at the heart of the 1959 Antarctic Treaty.

Remarkably, for close to a decade after the adoption of the Protocol no state sought to seriously examine the Antarctic tourism industry or suggest any need to effectively regulate it. In the absence of such interest, the industry developed an entrenched and influential position in the Antarctic Treaty system. Encouragingly, a number of key Antarctic states (led by France and New Zealand) have recently recognised the importance of tourism regulation. But the industry, and its association (IAATO) still argue that industry "self-regulation" is all that is required.

ASOC has argued that this is certainly not adequate, nor equitable. Over the past several years ASOC has argued that the Antarctic Treaty states must take responsibility for regulating Antarctic tourism, in order to secure the Antarctic environment and protect the political stability of the Antarctic Treaty system. Whatever the good intentions of present industry members, the nature of commercial tourism is such that its unrepresentative nature, self-interest and structural instability make it an inappropriate sole guardian for some 10% of the surface of the earth.

With generous funding from the Goldman Foundation since 2002, ASOC has been able to establish a dedicated Antarctic Tourism Campaign focused on raising public awareness of the issues posed by Antarctic tourism, and putting the case for appropriate regulation of the industry before Antarctic states and the Antarctic Treaty system.

Our case is not that there should be a prohibition of Antarctic tourism. It is a legitimate activity. But its legitimacy is contingent. Tourism must be subject to some constraints, and it must not compromise Antarctica's established designation as a natural reserve, devoted to peace and science. If it is not to become a destructive facet of human activity in Antarctica, it cannot increase endlessly and it has to accept some limits on the types and locations of activities.

Key Documents

Know Before You Go Pamphlet

ASOC Information Papers: