Introducing the GSTC Destination Stewardship Starter Kit

How can a destination get started with the destination stewardship process? Tiffany Chan, GSTC Destinations Coordinator, shares best practices outlined in the new GSTC Destination Stewardship Starter Kit, developed by GSTC’s Destination Stewardship Working Group.

Defining destination stewardship

Destination stewardship is a process by which local communities, governmental agencies, NGOs, and the tourism industry take a multi-stakeholder approach to maintaining the cultural, environmental, economic, and esthetic integrity of their country, region, or town. In other words, to ensure that the destination retains and enhances the distinctive attributes that appeal to both residents and tourists. It requires a clear mandate, measurement of standards, community buy-in, and stakeholder collaboration. Practicing destination stewardship is crucial in ensuring that a destination remains attractive, authentic, and sustainable.

The Destination Stewardship Starter Kit has been developed by the Global Sustainable Tourism Council (GSTC), led by their Destination Stewardship Working Group (DSWG), to support destinations in their transition towards a stewardship approach. It is intended for destination managers, policymakers, and other stakeholders who are involved in tourism development and management, including public and private sectors, community members, and non-governmental organizations. It is particularly relevant for destinations where there is external pressure to better manage tourism impacts, or when an essential shift to destination stewardship is recognized.

Getting started

This starter kit aims to provide a set of initial steps that destinations can take to shift towards a stewardship approach, though it is important to acknowledge that the process is distinctive to each destination. The steps offered in this starter kit serve as a guide and, therefore, it is not mandatory to follow them in a specific sequence. The recommended steps are below.

Destination Stewardship Starter Kit – Recommended Steps

Although the starting point for each destination may differ based on their specific needs and circumstances, sustainable management is foundational when it comes to a holistic approach to destination stewardship. Criterion A1 of the GSTC Destination Criteria (GSTC-D) summarizes the importance of a highly inclusive planning group. It is inclusive in terms of a “whole-government” approach, as well as ongoing and meaningful engagement with stakeholders from the community and tourism-related businesses.

What does a governing body look like? Criterion A1 takes care not to prescribe the structure of a council, whether it be an effective organization, department, group, or committee. A model destination council should comprise an area with permanent inhabitants and multiple stakeholders. It may or may not be the official DMO, but should incorporate DMO participation. Council activities should also involve a diversity of destination stakeholders and encourage the engagement of local communities.

Collaboration is key in the sustainability journey

Build a team of leaders

Get started by involving one or two individuals. Implementing a comprehensive sustainability program is challenging. There needs to be someone who leads the process and is dedicated to making it successful. Once the leader(s) has been identified, a planning team should be formed. The team should consist of a small group who have a clear role and responsibilities. Identify and bring together individuals who are passionate about sustainable tourism and committed to a long-term vision. Organized the team in a way that allows continuity for when members leave and are replaced by others.

Identify key stakeholders

Stakeholders also play a vital role in developing and implementing sustainable tourism practices. Identify potential stakeholders and partners within the destination, including local government officials, tourism organizations, hospitality businesses, and community leaders.  Look at potential projects with partners that are easy to get started and will have a big impact. Establish a stakeholder committee that includes the public & private sectors, NGOs, and the community. Include marginalized stakeholders that may be left out of the planning process. Many of the elements of sustainability plans are done by people outside tourism. Understand the work being done by those that can have a big influence.

This is not a comprehensive list, but rather a baseline of potential stakeholders. Each destination will have a variety of different stakeholders. Conduct stakeholder mapping to identify all the potential stakeholders that exist within your destination.

Involve the local community and engage stakeholders

Raise awareness among the general public to ensure the active participation of the entire community. Involving the local community and relevant stakeholders helps to create a sense of shared responsibility for the long-term sustainability of the destination, which can lead to greater success in achieving sustainable tourism goals. Gauge how residents feel about tourism in their community through surveying and/or public forums. Consider creating a listening advisory council. Engage with a diversity of stakeholders and include specific key players who can bring value.

Overall, the Destination Stewardship Starter Kit provides a practical roadmap to prioritizing governance and management strategy, creating a baseline for measurement, and setting achievable targets for sustainable tourism development. The outlined criteria and steps serve as a starting point for destinations to adopt a stewardship approach. It is important to note that destination stewardship is a continuous process of growth and improvement, and not simply a one-time checklist. Ultimately, prioritizing holistic governance, a multi-year management strategy, and continuous monitoring with adaptations will help kickstart your sustainability journey.

Download the Destination Stewardship Starter Kit

Highlighting Destination Stewardship in Seville: Collaboration, Standards, and Good Policy

Good destination stewardship planning requires more than good intentions. It requires genuine and diverse community collaboration, setting and following rigorous standards, and good public policy that enables action. Tiffany Chan, Destinations Program Coordinator at the Global Sustainable Tourism Council (GSTC), describes the key themes and main takeaways from the 2022 Global Sustainable Tourism Conference.

Sustainability is only effective if it is a collaborative process

After a two-year hiatus during the pandemic, the Global Sustainable Tourism Council’s (GSTC) 2022 Global Sustainable Tourism Conference resumed in person on December 12th-15th in Seville, Andalusia, Spain at FIBES Sevilla, the city’s Exhibition and Conference Centre. With 350 delegates from 61 countries and hundreds of viewers joining the livestreams, it was the largest GSTC conference yet.

Destination stewardship was one of the main themes, in addition to tourism adaption to climate change, mainstreaming sustainability standards, green mobility and accessibility. Below are the key takeaways from three particular sessions:

  • Destination Stewardship Councils
  • National Tourism Programs Using Existing Sustainable Tourism Standards
  • NTOs Engaging and Promoting Certification of Businesses.

People fill the FIBES Conference and Exhibition Centre in Seville, eager to learn and collaborate at the largest GSTC conference to date. [Photo courtesy of GSTC]

Destination Stewardship Council Approaches

The relationship between tourism and a destination is complex and requires a collaborative approach. In the Azores, the perception of stakeholders varies from island to island, as do local problems. Carolina Mendonça stresses the importance of stakeholder engagement to ensure they are part of the process. Azores DMO created an action plan based on the commitment of relevant stakeholders, identifying successful actions, and reviewing the process of unsuccessful actions. Nine green teams, public working groups, and local organizations were involved to ensure active participation of the entire community.

“You need to have people who are committed to reaching the goal. It is not possible to start the process without it,” states Stefano Ravelli from DMO Valsugana. Valsugana’s approach to cooperative engagement emphasizes the importance of communicating values, talking to tourists, and investing in residents – the ambassadors of the destination. In doing so, they developed a kit for operators to effectively communicate what sustainability means. “You don’t have to convince anybody. It’s just a matter of explaining the journey.”

Tree planting in the Azores during the 2019 post-conference tour to offset the carbon footprint. [Photo courtesy of GSTC]

A similar approach is also seen in another Italian town nearby. Through Eggental Tourismus’ certification process, Stephanie Völser quickly learned that sustainability is the main thread and overarching theme of the destination’s strategy. A participatory process – such as engaging partners, stakeholders, and municipalities – before the certification process allowed for general consensus and understanding of important sustainability matters. Eggental also organized working groups with a variety of members, which provided meaningful engagement with stakeholders from the community.

In the mountain town of Park City, Utah, extreme periods of visitation during high season put a strain on the community. “The community of Park City is afraid it will lose itself to the destination of Park City,” quoted Morgan Mingle. A situation assessment on resident sentiment was conducted as part of the destination’s planning process. Community buy-in ensures that local residents and stakeholders are aware of the scope and that sustainability is not just about the environment. In the formation of a destination stewardship council, Park City tried to bring in as many diverse perspectives and conflicting interests as possible to ensure that all voices are heard and approaches are agreed upon. This process helped to understand stakeholders’ needs.

Putting people first is a key design for the sustainable management of a destination. Starting with the “why” allows everyone to understand the common goal. Certification is not necessarily the end goal, but an ongoing process. A long-term multi-year strategy is required for continuous improvement. As a result, holistic management that includes citizen participation can enrich communities and provide the means to preserve natural environments and cultural heritage with many benefits to local residents.

Using Existing Sustainable Tourism Standards is Beneficial for National Tourism Programs

National sustainable tourism certification programmes add credibility and promotion, but why are there so many different approaches? Some destinations develop their own programmes from scratch, which can be time-consuming and costly, while others use the framework and criteria from existing standards to build their own national certification system. Some base their program on a range of international certifications, while others opt to work with the one scheme that best suits their needs.

The European Travel Commission, representing 32 national tourism organizations in Europe, published a handbook last year emphasizing the importance of a national approach towards planning, developing and implementing sustainability in tourism through certification. International certifications can be white-labelled and tailored to the needs of any destination. According to the handbook, it is easier to adapt or adopt an existing standard or a scheme than create a whole new one. It specifically recommends the GSTC framework.

Thus, designing a sustainable tourism program to achieve national goals is a varied process. Four national schemes were examined at GSTC2022: Visit Estonia Sustainability Plan, Sustainable Travel Finland, Green Scheme of Slovenian Tourism, and Switzerland Tourism’s Swisstainable Strategy.

According to Liisa Kokkarinen, Head of Sustainable Development at Visit Finland, the first step is difficult but the most crucial. Visit Finland struggled to find an existing program that directly served both destinations and businesses when they started this process. They wanted the entire industry to be on the same journey. The Sustainable Travel Finland program is built on the GSTC Criteria. It is regarded as a pathway to ensure tourism businesses and destinations start by committing as the first of seven steps.

Slovenia Green took on the existing Green Destination standard in Slovenia and adapted it to the Slovenian model and brand. The Green Destinations standard is internationally recognised, which was an important factor for Slovenia Green when choosing a standard to white label. Slovenia Green is not only a certification program but an important tool on a national level that is recognized by the ministry. It started as a manual for hotels and developed into a certification program six years later in 2015. “The main aim of our sustainable Slovenia Green program is that it provides evaluation and improvement to more responsible tourism management and I think this is one of the main advantages that a national program can bring to the destination. It is our job as a national tourism organization to really give the tools and information to businesses and smaller destinations who might not have the time or resources.” Slovenia Green is owned and managed by the Slovenian Tourist Board, working alongside accredited partner Good Place and international partner Green Destinations.

Tourists stroll a street in historic Tallinn, Estonia, now in the early stages of a national green program. [Photo by Jonathan Tourtellot]

Estonia is in the early stages of developing its national program. They first started by surveying which methods countries are using and realized that for a small country, it didn’t make sense to build a certification program from scratch. They decided to instead adopt an existing certification program. Visit Estonia participated in the Green Destination program in 2020 by piloting 7 destinations. After a successful pilot phase, the Estonian sustainability scheme is on the trajectory of becoming its own national-level green program. Liina Maria Lepik, Head of International Services at the Estonian Tourist Board also agrees that the first step in creating awareness and commitment from tourism companies and destinations is the hardest, but most crucial. It is a learning-by-doing process, so sharing success stories and knowledge within countries, but also with other countries that are on a similar journey is important.

The national “Swisstainable” program builds on existing credentials, like this restaurant’s certificate tied to the Entlebuch Biosphere Reserve. [Photo by Jonathan Tourtellot]

On the other hand, the Swissstainable program is neither a label nor a new certification scheme, but is referred to as a holistic approach that builds on existing certification to provide guidance and orientation for guests. “Recognizing existing forms of credentials allows us to consider many positive developments without having to establish a time-consuming control system,” explained Helena Videtic, Sustainability Manager, at Switzerland Tourism. The Swisstainable program focuses on organizations and businesses.

When asked about the key factors for success when starting a national program, the four destinations offered the following advice:

  • Ensuring that you have a clear structure to see the path that you are taking, with easy first steps and small success stories to help build momentum and motivation to get to the final stage.
  • Understanding the needs and obstacles of key stakeholders and partners.
  • Recognizing that when it comes to sustainability, many businesses and destinations often don’t have the capacity or knowledge, or don’t know where to start. This can be overwhelming.
  • Having a simple, ready-to-use, and easy-to-understand program is also key when providing tools and knowledge as a national tourism authority.

Destination sustainability requires good public policy that informs private-sector practices

Criterion A4 of the GSTC Destination Criteria states that the destination should regularly inform tourism-related enterprises about sustainability issues and provide guidance with the implementation of sustainability practices. As such, DMOs must take an active role in engaging with the private sector to encourage more sustainable forms of services and experiences.

Realizing sustainability goals in Singapore as a nation is guided by the Singapore Green Plan 2030. Singapore has engaged with over 27,000 stakeholders, working with private and public partners to take action, share expertise, and co-create sustainability solutions. Certification is a key part of Singapore Tourism Board’s strategy, strongly encouraging tourism stakeholders to obtain internationally recognized certification in accordance with the GSTC Criteria. However, as Cherie Lee, Chief Sustainability Officer of the Singapore Tourism Board, mentions, “Certification is not the end all be all. It is a learning journey to see how to continue to improve and strengthen sustainability performance.” Tourism enterprises that want to become certified can receive financial support from STB, as well as training opportunities and participation in an accelerator program working to develop innovative sustainable solutions.

“All private companies that apply for funding with Innovation Norway have to answer to the 5 areas: Value creation, Ripple effects, Guest satisfaction for priority target groups, Attractive local communities and happy residents, and Climate footprint.”

Norway’s sustainable destination program started with four small destinations and now 28 destinations are approved to be part of the main process. This is in addition to 30 more destinations already in the early stages. “Most who aren’t involved are calling and want to be involved in the sustainable destination program,” said Knut Perander, Head of Tourism Development at Innovation Norway. Innovation Norway measures DMOs on the certification rate of businesses in the destination. All private companies that apply for funding with Innovation Norway have to answer to the 5 areas: Value creation, Ripple effects, Guest satisfaction for priority target groups, Attractive local communities and happy residents, and Climate footprint.

The Mauritius Tourism Authority is committed to sponsoring 60 tourism small- and medium-sixes enterprises (SMEs) to achieve certification with the financial support of other partners. Almost 90% of tour operators in Mauritius are SMEs. The Mauritius Innovation Framework, developed by the Sustainable Island Mauritius (SIM) project, was inspired by the GSTC Criteria, as well as the local standard MS 165 2019, also known as Blue Oasis Certification “Strong adherence to the GSTC Criteria is the only path to achieving ambitions at the local and international level,” explained Lindsay Morvan, Director of the Mauritius Tourism Authority. Mauritius is also in the process of becoming a GSTC Accredited Certification Body, the first government body to apply for GSTC Accreditation.

Elephants draw photographer attention in Chobe, Botswana, which stresses sustainable destination criteria, essential for tourism. [Photo by Jonathan Tourtellot]

Botswana was one of the early adopters of the GSTC Destination Assessment. According to Mafila Richard Malesu, Environment & Eco-Certification Manager of Botswana Tourism Organisation, it was an eye-opening experience. “I put emphasis on Destination Criteria because it is more than just dealing with an individual operator; you are looking at the whole destination and seeing how united are we and how are we in achieving our goals.” He also stressed the importance of involving the private sector and stakeholders in certification. The collaboration of private and public sectors can create a good model to ensure that conservation efforts are in place and tourism companies are profitable.

Upcoming Destination Stewardship Sessions at GSTC2023

At the closing ceremony, three GSTC Conferences were announced: GSTC2023 Antalya (May 2023), GSTC2024 Sweden (April 2024), and GSTC2024 Singapore (November 2024).

Destination Stewardship will be one of the four main themes at GSTC2023 in Antalya, Türkiye, focusing on Port Destinations, Coastal Destinations, and Rural Tourism.

Recordings of the conference’s sessions can be found on the GSTC YouTube channel.

People Power: Rebuilding a Region with ECO at Heart in Australia

Another winner from the Top 100 – Every year, Green Destinations organizes the Top 100 Destination Sustainability Stories competition, which invites submissions from around the world – a vetted collection of stories spotlighting local and regional destinations that are making progress toward sustainable management of tourism and its impacts. From the winners announced this year, we’ve selected two more stories, this time from Japan and Australia, that showcase different reasons for engaging the local community. Synopses by Samantha Bray. Top 100 submission by Whitney Edwards, Marketing Officer, Marketing & Tourism, Central Coast Council.

Surfers are drawn to the beaches of the Central Coast. [Photo courtesy of Green Destinations]

The need for a sustainable tourism strategy

Just 90 miles north of Sydney, the Central Coast region of New South Wales, Australia, offers an eco-tourism wonderland of national parks, state forests, bushland, nature reserves, beaches, inland waterways, and mountains. The landscape wonders are enhanced by thriving communities and Aboriginal cultural sites numbering in the thousands, some between 7,000 and 20,000 years old. However, in 2020 it was recognized that something important was missing – a sustainable tourism strategy to effectively promote and protect the region’s greatest assets.

The Central Coast Council began pursuing creation of this strategy while battling financial and administrative challenges, COVID-19, and various natural disasters. It was the best of times, and it was the worst of times to take on a tourism management overhaul. The Council’s acceptance into Ecotourism Australia’s Destination Certification Program, funded by WWF-Australia, provided the guidance, resources, and accountability for the Central Coast on their journey to be one of New South Wales’ leading sustainable tourism destinations, with tangible results.

Steps
In part, steps taken included:

  • In 2020, the Central Coast Council set a goal of becoming a certified ECO Destination, internationally recognized through the GSTC-accredited Green Destination Standard, by World Environment Day 2022.
  • Working backwards from World Environment Day with expert support from the Australian ECO Destination network, program milestones were set for Engagement, Application, Audit, Certification, and Marketing.
  • The Council hosted a streaming of the Global Eco Asia-Pacific Tourism Conference for tourism operators, offering connections and insights from passionate sustainability professionals.
  • A pilot industry event with inspiring guest speakers brought together 60 eco-conscious tourism operators, resulting in an ECO Operator Incentive of $500 offered by WWF-Australia for individual operators to pursue ECO certification. A cohort of 15 businesses was formed.
  • Stakeholders were engaged for six months of discussions, coaching, consultations, and workshops. Complex ECO criteria were broken down for each type of stakeholder. Topics focused on livability, visitor dispersal, and industry product development, as well as how to become more sustainably oriented tourism marketers, council officers, land managers, and business owners. Strategies explored ranged from cycling more, littering less, and plastic-free events, to accessible beaches, water quality mapping, and responsible dog ownership.
  • The Council compiled information to respond to the 87 ECO criteria of the certification program, submitting the Central Coast’s application in April 2022.
  • The region hosted an independent destination auditor, who conducted 20 interviews with stakeholders and 10 site visits.

Results
In June 2022, the Central Coast became an Australia ECO Destination, in time for World Environment Day. Cross-sectoral partnerships enabled the consolidation of data into one platform, engaging teams on waste, waterways, estuary, energy management, natural assets & biodiversity, economic development, heritage, planning, events and placemaking, community programs, and visitor services. The resulting Central Coast Destination Management Plan (2022-2025) has outlined strategies and tactics for collaboration, education, and empowerment to meet shared goals.

Visitors kayaking in Glenworth Valley. [Photo courtesy of Green Destinations]

In addition, ecotourism ideals have been integrated into all tourism and marketing roles and content. Data between 2020 and 2022 shows that while visitation numbers were down due to COVID, guests were staying over 10% longer and spending nearly 30% more. Social media, media, and website metrics all point to increased brand awareness. The range of initiatives in progress have been woven into the destination brand, showing that each small project adds up in a big way on the journey towards more sustainable destination management.

Cultivating Comprehensive Destination Stewardship with GSTC Criterion A4

? Destination Stewardship Report – Vol. 3, No. 1 – Summer 2022 ?

Sustainability in tourism destinations requires not only the commitment of government and nonprofit organizations, but also the work of the private sector to maintain places in ways such that they can be enjoyed for years to come. DMOs need to encourage that. Randy Durband, CEO of the Global Sustainable Tourism Council, explains how GSTC’s Destination Criterion A4 offers guidance. 

Criterion A4: Enterprise Engagement and Sustainability Standards

Destination stewardship requires good public policy and strong private sector practices. The Destination Management Organization (DMO) has a role in both, not just the first.

The DMO needs to provide guidance and encouragement to the private sector to operate more sustainably. That is the focus here: the DMO encourages continuous improvement on the sustainability practices of the businesses that are directly serving the visitors.

What makes a destination “sustainable”? It’s public sector-provided infrastructure — roads, parks, clean and safe water, clean and efficient energy — and the preservation of natural and cultural heritage, but also the types of products and services produced and offered by businesses.

Sustainable consumption in tourism is far more than tangible products, such as food and souvenirs purchased by the visitor. Consumption in tourism includes more money and time spent on services than on physical products. Those services include accommodations, transportation, guiding and interpretation, and the attractions visited. A broad view of sustainable tourism products and services is needed, one that looks at the core elements that all visitors require.

A resort on Mexico’s Riviera Maya posts its allegiance to the UN’s SDGs. [Photo by Jonathan Tourtellot]

Businesses serve the visitor directly.  Businesses operate the physical facilities and modes of transport that visitors use. They also provide most of the less tangible services and experiences.

Criterion A4 of the GSTC Destination Criteria and its Performance Indicators underscores that DMO’s must take an active role in engaging with the private sector. This is needed to encourage more sustainable forms of services and experiences. Let’s look at the text:

A4 Enterprise engagement and sustainability standards

The destination regularly informs tourism-related enterprises about sustainability issues and encourages and supports them in making their operations more sustainable. The destination promotes the adoption of sustainability standards, promoting the application of GSTC-I Recognized standards and GSTC-I Accredited certification schemes for tourism enterprises, where available. The destination publicizes a list of sustainability certified enterprises.

      Performance Indicators for Criterion A4:

  1. Evidence of regular communication of sustainability issues to tourism-related businesses (media, meetings, direct contact etc.).
  2. Sustainability support and advice to tourism-related business – available and promoted.
  3. Number and percentage of businesses certified against tourism sustainability standards (and whether GSTC recognised/accredited), with targets for wider outreach.
  4. Evidence of promotion of certification schemes.
  5. List of tourism-related certified enterprises, kept up to date.

This criterion calls for an active role by the DMO in encouraging and/or requiring businesses to operate more sustainably. DMOs can do so in a variety of ways:

  • Awareness-raising through seminars, newsletters, classroom training, etc.
  • Incentives for good performance, such as discounts in tourism promotion activities for businesses with evidence of sustainable practices
  • Subsidies for good performance
  • Mandates for good performance

In other words, carrots and sticks, with as many carrots as possible … but sticks when necessary.

Examples of carrots, that is, encouragement, incentives, and subsidies:

  • Costa Rica’s national government operates a tourism business certification scheme for sustainability, and provides discounts to certified businesses for presenting their business at international trade fairs and other forms of international promotion.
  • Singapore set a target that 60% of hotels gain certification to the GSTC framework by 2025 and are encouraging businesses to adhere to the goal in a variety of ways.
  • Jeju Island, a province in South Korea, set targets for full conversion to electric vehicles (EV’s) that included several years advance notice before an eventual mandate that will require all rental car companies to convert fully to EV’s in their fleets.

An example of mandates comes from Türkiye, where the Ministry formed an agency to develop and operate a Green Tourism program. Included in this is a mandate that all hotels in the country gain certification by GSTC-accredited Certification Bodies by 2030. Those hotels not in compliance will be subject to losing their business licenses enforced by Türkiye’s central government. But the mandate is softened by the implementation of a stepwise scheme. This allows for each hotel to climb a ladder to certification via two steps. The hotel provides evidence of compliance to the national standard at each step (the national standard complies with the GSTC Criteria formally through the GSTC Recognized program). This process must be completed between 2022 and 2030.

Wisconsin, USA, has a state-endorsed environmental program. [Photo courtesy of Wisconsin Department of Tourism]

Making It Verifiably Systemic

It’s useful to break down systematic approaches to sustainable tourism into these elements:

  • Attributes – such as greenhouse gasses, energy, plastic, fair labor practices, cultural heritage preservation, ecosystem conservation, animal welfare.
  • Measurement – as shorthand for measuring, evaluating, rating, scoring, and reporting.
  • Verification – providing evidence that you are managing and making improvements on the attributes you claim to be improving. This can include awards or certification, or any form of reporting that is reviewed to some degree by external and impartial parties – i.e., objectively verifiable. (Self-assessments or any form of “self-verification” are not truly verification — let’s call it “talking about yourself.”)

DMO’s should not be boastful if their local businesses are striving for improvement in only a very few attributes. “We recycle” is a wonderful claim, but are you doing anything else?

Are you measuring and benchmarking and rewarding improvement? Are you measuring how much actually gets recycled in those lovely bins scattered about? Are the businesses seeking external and impartial verification of their claims? The guests can see the recycle bins, but they cannot see back of house whether the sorting continues; that requires external verification through auditing.

All of these are essential.

And, let’s be honest: Even if a DMO is doing great work on complying with GSTC-D Section A on Sustainable Management, if they are not encouraging and rewarding excellence by the businesses within their jurisdiction, can they make any claims of sustainability as a destination?  I think not. Criterion A4 is vital to the compliance of Section A in its entirety.

A “sustainable destination” should be a combination of both DMO and the private sector achieving this recognition together. In other words, the DMO and other public agencies must collectively score well on Section A of GSTC-D – AND the private sector should have gained high percentages of strong, meaningfully verified progress on their journey to sustainability. Hotels should have their buildings certified by LEED, BREEAM, or similar and their operations certified by a GSTC-Accredited Certification Body. Tour operators, agencies, and transport companies should have high percentages of clean energy vehicles in use and should be certified sustainable themselves. Other businesses are part of B-Corp, constantly working to increase their scores.

We at GSTC are working on systems to count hotels at destinations in order to determine the percentage that are certified sustainable. We’ll seek ways to do the same for Destination Management Company (DMC)’s, such as local inbound operators and transport providers. This relates directly to Performance Indicator “3” of Criterion A4.

Criterion A4 speaks to all of the above. How many of a destination’s businesses are seriously addressing what number of attributes?  Are they properly measured, with external verification? Without such significant metrics, a destination’s claim to being “sustainable” rings rather hollow.

Summer 2021 Destination Stewardship Report Is Out

[Above: The Pennsylvania Wilds. Photo: Ellen Rugh.]

The Summer (3Q) edition of the Destination Stewardship Reportwas released on 28 July 2021, beginning the DSR’s second year of online publication as a joint project with the Global Sustainable Tourism Council. This issue includes articles from Vermont, Palau, Pennsylvania, and two from Chile, plus reports on two webinars, a set of resources for tourism recovery, new publications, news links, and upcoming events and webinars.

Topics range from overtourism avoidance and localizing supply chains to sustainable regional planning and collaboration, along with a human-to-human tourism approach and better conservation awareness.

To see the stories in this issue exactly as they appear in your in-box, go to: https://destinationcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Summer-2021-1.0.html You can subscribe for free here.

Spring 2021 Destination Stewardship Report Just Out

Longest Destination Stewardship Report Yet

On 14 April 2021 we were pleased to send out the Spring (2Q) edition of the Destination Stewardship Report, completing its first year of online publication as a joint project with the Global Sustainable Tourism Council. You can subscribe for free hereStories in this issue:

  • The Nisga’a Offer an Indigenous Tourism Model – How to present an indigenous culture “written in the land” to tourists? Bert Mercer, economic development manager for Nisg̱a’a Lisims Government, describes the process of tying together a culturally sensitive tourism experience for visitors to the Nisga’a First Nation in British Columbia, Canada.
  • Saving Cultural Heritage: The Singapore Hawkers Case – Drives for sustainability may sometimes overlook the endangered arts and traditions that make a place and a culture come to life. The World Tourism Association for Culture & Heritage (WTACH) aims to rectify that. In Singapore, Chris Flynn, WTACH’s CEO, discusses a particularly delicious case – one recently recognized by UNESCO.
  • Doing It Better: Sedona, Arizona – Prompted by a restive citizenry and a responsive city council, the DMO for the city of Sedona, Arizona, USA, now acts in effect as a destination stewardship council. That’s unusual. For part of our ongoing project to profile places with effective, holistic management, Sarah-Jane Johnson takes a deep dive into Sedona’s story. This is the sixth in the Destination Stewardship Center’s profiles of exemplary places with collaborative destination management in the spirit of GSTC’s Destination Criterion A1.
  • Japan’s Journey Toward Sustainability –  It’s a tall order for a large country to change its national policy and commit to improving stewardship for hundreds of its tourism destinations, but Japan is taking tentative steps in that direction, spurred on by one young official and a lot of collaborators. GSTC’s Emi Kaiwa reports on how this tentative change of heart came about, what’s happened to date, and how far it has to go.
  • Once Overrun, Dubrovnik Plans for Sustainability – Dubrovnik, Croatia, a UNESCO World Heritage city, is known as the ‘Pearl of the Adriatic Sea’, its historic city center surrounded by original medieval stone walls – and until recently, thronged with cruise ship passengers. In 2017, that began to change.
  • Opinion: A Chance to Tame Cruise Tourism – Cruise critic Ross Klein argues that now is the time for port cities to gain control of cruise tourism crowds, explaining three ways to do that – and why it won’t be easy. But if not now, when?
  • Report: “Reset Tourism” Webinar Series – Destination Stewardship – Held on 25 March 2021, the first webinar of the Future of Tourism Coalition‘s four-part “Reset Tourism” series drew 500 registrants. These webinars are intended to help destinations emerge from the Covid crisis with new forms of governance and collaboration that will enable a more holistic and sustainable approach to tourism management and development.
  • Webinar Report: Measuring Destination Happiness – A massive webinar to mark last month’s “International Day of Happiness” yielded some serious pointers for destinations seeking a broader measure of successful tourism recovery than counting revenue and arrivals.“Covid has shown us we can’t be happy on an unhappy planet” was one message for destinations around the world, report DSC associates Marta Mills and Chi Lo – the point being that local contentment should be part of the tourism equation: “A good place to live is a good place to visit.”
  • New App to Assess Sustainability of Tourism Communities – Assessing the sustainability of destinations and acting on the findings can be a complex, expensive task. Dave Randle explains the workings of a new app that his Blue Community Consortium underwrote to assist with that process. Some university students gave the app’s first step, assessment, a revealing field test on seven Florida destinations. Here’s what the app does, and what the students found.

To read these stories plus information on announcements, upcoming events and webinars, and publications, go to the Spring (2Q) edition of the Destination Stewardship Report. And please comment!                       — Jonathan Tourtellot, Editor

Just Out: Winter 2021 Destination Stewardship Report

The third issue of the DSC/GSTC e-quarterly Destination Stewardship Report, Winter 2021, mailed out on 4 February. To get the next e-mail issue, subscribe for free. You can read the following feature stories in this issue live online HERE, with links to these feature stories:

The Riviera Maya’s Queen of Green: What She’s Learned Mexican activist Beatriz Barreal has worked for years to steer the booming Riviera Maya toward sustainability. Purdue’s Dr. Jonathon Day recently interviewed this one-woman force for improving stewardship to find out what lessons she has learned in the process.

Even in Affluent Norway, Innkeepers Have Struggled Pandemic closures have left the lodges of the fjords flirting with failure. Arild Molstad reports on one couple who – “showing true viking spirit and eco-courage” – believe they can beat the odds by going greener still. Their story holds a lesson for all destinations.

Doing It Better: ≠Khoadi-//Hôas, Namibia Namibia’s award-winning ≠Khoadi-//Hôas conservancy has often been cited as a success story in both conservation and community benefit. As part of our ongoing project to profile places with effective, holistic management. Our editor, Jonathan Tourtellot, takes a tourist-eye view of this community-run destination. This is the fifth in the Destination Stewardship Center’s series on collaborative destination management in the spirit of GSTC’s Destination Criterion A1.

Overtourism and Undertourism Ecotourism specialist Dr. Anna Spenceley has been thinking a lot about the issue of visitor management and overcrowding, limits of acceptable change, and carrying capacity in protected areas. So she wrote a report about it for the World Bank:Tools for Protected Areas.

For some tools in action, read A Taiwanese Island Boosts Tourist Capacity – Sustainably. For 20 years, ecotourists have been eager to tour a biodiverse volcanic island off the coast of Taiwan. But what happens when both locals and tourists complain about the stringent conservation limits on visitation set by government and academics? Monique Chen explains how stakeholders have harmonized ecological carrying capacity and local economics.

Neolocalism and Tourism Much tourism depends on sense of place, but unchallenged market forces often favor lookalike franchises over more distinctive local businesses. Dr. Christina Cavaliere has co-edited a new multi-author book that makes the case for neolocalism, a movement through which businesses can help destinations retain and deepen their identities, and which also supports Covid recovery. She summarizes the book’s contents.

See the e-mailed version of the Destination Stewardship Report for additional information:

  • Announcements, including events (online during the pandemic)
  • Publications
  • Upcoming webinars

Destination Stewardship Report is an e-mailed quarterly collaboration between the Global Sustainable Tourism Council  and the Destination Stewardship Center. You can read previous issues here:
   Autumn 2020
   Summer 2020 – Inaugural Issue

Note: If you use Gmail, look for your e-mailed copy where Google insultingly files it: in its “Promotions” folder. Despite our efforts, other services may also trap it in a spam folder.

Just Out: the Autumn Destination Stewardship Report

Welcome to the GSTC/DSC
e-quarterly
Destination Stewardship Report Autumn 2020
Summer 2020 – Inaugural Issue

How can destinations plan better for a post-Covid recovery? What have we learned about tourism during the ongoing crisis? The Autumn edition of the Destination Stewardship Report addresses both those questions with examples and practical guidance, providing links to these feature stories:

  • From sustainability leaders and destination mangers worldwide, a white paper laying out ten practical ways to plan a more lasting, regenerative, and community-compatible tourism recovery.
  • From Korea, the example of how a hard-working industrial city saved a natural bamboo habitat for migrating egrets, creating a new ecotourism attraction that revitalized the impoverished neighborhood next door.
  • From Serbia, its borders closed during the crisis, a look at what happens when a sudden influx of resort-pampered Serbs discover their own hinterland: lots of profits for rural residents – at a cost. [One anecdote reports a similar pattern in the US state of New Hampshire over the summer.  —Ed.]
  • From Mallorca, Spain, plans that attempt to anticipate and prevent overtourism as travel restrictions loosen, with mixed opinions on the likelihood of success.
  • From the Columbia Gorge, USA, the fourth in our series of “Doing It Better” profiles about destinations working toward holistic management – in this case, a tourism alliance that unites the two states bordering the Columbia River.
  • From another thought leader, a better way to calculate return on investment as destinations emerge from the crisis, demonstrating that by using data science you can measure the hidden benefits of good stewardship. “Not everything that counts is counted,” goes the saying, but now it can be – affecting policy accordingly.
  • Plus, selected news stories and the latest on the Future of Tourism Coalition, which now has over 300 companies, agencies, and NGOs as signatories to its Guiding Principles.

Please read the latest Destination Stewardship Report here, comment, and propose your own contributions by contacting us.


This jointly sponsored e-quarterly is a collaboration between the Destination Stewardship Center and Global Sustainable Tourism Council (GSTC)  – and in time, maybe others. Our goal is to provide information and insights useful to anyone whose work or interests involve destination stewardship. It’s an all-volunteer experiment, so its success will depend on your interest, feedback, and content contributions. Join us, and help each other. You can subscribe for free here.You can read the e-mail version here and the feature articles on our webpages.                                    —Jonathan Tourtellot, Editor

For more information and participation please contact us.

  • About  the Global Sustainable Tourism Council  GSTC establishes and manages global sustainable standards, known as the GSTC Criteria. There are two sets: Destination Criteria for public policy-makers and destination managers, and Industry Criteria for hotels and tour operators. The GSTC Criteria form the foundation for accreditation of certification bodies that certify hotels/accommodations, tour operators, and destinations as having sustainable policies and practices in place. GSTC does not directly certify any products or services; but it accredits those that do. The GSTC is an independent and neutral USA-registered 501(c)3 non-profit organization that represents a diverse and global membership, including national and provincial governments, NGO’s, leading travel companies, hotels, tour operators, individuals and communities – all striving to achieve best practices in sustainable tourism. www.gstc.org
  • About the Destination Stewardship Center  The DSC is a volunteer-driven nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting the world’s distinctive places by supporting wisely managed tourism and enlightened destination stewardship. We gather and provide information on how tourism can help and not harm the natural, cultural, and social quality of destinations around the world. We seek to build a global community and knowledge network for advancing this goal. Join us and learn more at www.destinationcenter.org.

Doing It Better: Crown of the Continent

[Above: Rocky Mountain skyline at Glacier National Park, Montana. All photos by Jonathan Tourtellot.]

Editor’s note: As destinations plan for eventual recovery from the pandemic, they have an unprecedented opportunity to manage tourism more effectively. With this post about North America’s “Crown of the Continent,” we offer the third in our profiles of destination organizations that approach the standard set forth in the Global Sustainable Tourism Council’s critical destination-management Criterion A1, which reads in part:

“The destination has an effective organization, department, group, or committee responsible for a coordinated approach to sustainable tourism, . . . for the management of environmental, economic, social, and cultural issues.”

This holistic requirement seems obvious, yet very few places around the world come close to meeting it. Below is Ellen Rugh’s profile of another one that does: the “Crown of the Continent.” We hope this information will provide other places with ideas on how better to manage tourism’s hazards and benefits. To join in our search for more examples of holistic destination management, or submit a candidate for profiling, read more here.

Crown of the Continent Geotourism Council –
Montana, Alberta, and British Columbia

N.B. – This report was compiled before the onset of the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. It is based on Destination Stewardship Center questionnaire responses and follow-up interviews.

Introduction

Since 2006, the Crown of the Continent Geotourism Council has become a strong and active transboundary partnership, characterized by a high level of commitment, cooperation, and collaboration between local stakeholders in Alberta, British Columbia, and Montana. Although not a legally mandated organization, the Council has found their success, their respondents told us, by carefully selecting a group of individuals “who are all willing to work beyond borders, and while they can have varying opinions about how to resolve certain issues, they all strive for the same end goals.” Covering a 7.3-million-hectare region (18 million acres), the Crown of the Continent Geotourism Council prides itself on the vast number of stakeholders within their network, including crucial tribal relationships. The Council focuses on creating local experiences for  visitors, allowing any local residents, from tourism practitioners to the mom down the street, to propose sites and attractions for the Council to include in its MapGuide, so long as they meet the principles of geotourism as originally put forth via National Geographic: “Tourism that sustains or enhances the geographical character of a place – its environment, culture, geology, aesthetics, heritage, and the well-being of its residents.”

Geographic Description

The Crown of the Continent encompasses Crown of the Continent mapapproximately 73,000 sq kilometers (about 28,000 sq miles). Its transboundary jurisdiction includes the Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park and the surrounding lands and communities in Alberta, British Columbia, and Montana, including five First People nations. The region includes within its jurisdiction over 680 sites, attractions, and accommodations.

Context

The Crown of the Continent Geotourism Council’s transboundary partnership was created through their first catalyst project, a National Geographic Geotourism MapGuide, in an effort to implement cooperative projects that expand or enhance visitor and resident opportunities and encourage sustainable businesses through geotourism activities, including stewardship, education, and regional promotion. Such a task becomes crucial in an area dotted by small towns, whose voice in protecting the natural and cultural heritage of the area may not typically be heard, and the National Geographic requirement for citizen participation provided an opportunity for them.

To maintain their success as a transboundary organization, the Crown of the Continent Geotourism Council thrives on effective partnerships and attributes success to “the relationships, a shared pride in the region, and the potential to develop the economies of the communities while stewarding, enhancing, and celebrating our special character of place.” The Council’s network is enormous, with 33,099 e-newsletter subscribers as of 2016. With their flexibility and reputation for collaboration, the Crown says that “stakeholders often approach us for assistance, because we know so many people in the region and have a vast database. Especially in an 18 million acre region, connecting with the locals and connecting the locals with each other, is one of our most valuable assets.”

The iconic Prince of Wales Hotel presides over Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta.

To leverage such a vast network, 195 volunteer field experts within the Council provide recommendations for what the Council features on their platforms and MapGuides. These authentic “hyperlocal” tourist offerings comprise the community-based businesses, organizations, and points of interest that would be typically overlooked by an outsider. Field experts may be an officially nominated tourism practitioner or just a resident citizen with a passion for sharing her locale with others. The Council acknowledges that these locals hold the most knowledge and connection to the place. Their recommendations on the best places to visit, places to stay, and things to do are then vetted by the project coordinator under National Geographic oversight. Crown of the Continent takes pride that each nomination shared with visitors is a place most respected and regarded by locals.

Activities

The Council labels themselves a content development and curation program. All content within their website, MapGuides, and social media pages must meet geotourism principles as originally set forth by National Geographic.

Crown of the Continent MapGuide (center) amid brochures on display at a local business.

The Council promotes buying local; employing locals; green purchasing; staying in eco-friendly and locally-owned unique lodging; participating in human-powered activities; volunteering; visiting First Nation and Tribal Lands, designated dirt roads, and scenic routes; and stepping away from your car. Starting in 2016, the Council has sent their listed organizations and businesses a window decal and digital link badge that identify them as a National Geographic Crown of the Continent Destination, all at no charge.

While the Council does not have the capacity to plan events and activities on their own, they do promote unique and authentic festivals and events on their website and MapGuide, including powwows, Earth Day Celebrations, sustainable-forestry tours and programming, bioblitzes, wildlife and wildflower festivals, heritage and culture celebrations, rodeos, volunteer opportunities, and “Green” contests. Both local residents and visitors may participate in these activities.

Given their broad network and insight on all of the unique offerings throughout the region, the Council develops trip plans that focus on hyperlocal experiences and moving the visitor (and residents) around the region. As the Council explaines, visitors typically come to the region with a preplanned “Plan A” (typically, Glacier National Park or Waterton Lakes National Park), and once they arrive, usually decide on their “Plan B” (places to go, places to stay, and things to do outside of the National Parks).

Farm-owned market and coffee shop in Fernie, B.C. typifies the Crown’s “hyperlocal” recommendations for tourists.

With so many different experiences available, the Council coaches local businesses on how to steer visitors towards unique, authentic, and hyperlocal experiences by advising on digital marketing strategies, customer service techniques, and suggested messaging when recommending experiences. The Council says that most businesses have a desktop copy of the physical National Geographic Crown of the Continent Mapguide to use as a quick reference, and their website has a “Trip Plan” feature that allows businesses to create custom Trip Plans for their respective customers. These Trip Plans can be shared via their social media platforms, sent as an email, or embedded as a widget on their website.

Give its vast land coverage, the Council has found it difficult to take a direct lead on product development. Their strength is in giving others the tools to develop distinctive experiences through capacity building, networking, and promotion. However, they will jump in when a special project arises, such as in 2016, when they assisted in the creation of “Crown of the Continent: The Wildest Rockies,” a large-format photo exhibition and book. The exhibition was displayed in the C.M Russell Museum, the Montana State Capital, the US Senate Building’s Russell Rotunda, and the Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park. Hard copies of the book are still sold in Glacier National Park Conservancy’s online bookstore.

Organizational Structure and Governance

Given the bureaucratic complications that arise from being transboundary organization, the Council is not filed as a 501(c)3 or (c)4. Instead, it operates under a fiscal agent, the Whitefish Convention & Visitors Bureau, in Montana.

The Council is composed of 8-10 Executive Committee members and one project coordinator, representing over 730 businesses and organizations. The Executive Committee, who holds final decision-making authority, comprises representatives from the three major funding organizations, plus a combination of representatives from different agencies focusing on tourism, culture, or heritage. The Council tries to maintain at least one tribal representative on their Executive Committee at all times. Each member at-large provides beneficial input and fulfills a wide range of duties for the Council. The Executive Committee, along with anyone else affiliated with the Council, strives to adhere to geotourism principles.

There are no term limits for Executive Committee members, and because the organization does not require any formal mandates, there is no official election process. Instead, the organization has found their success by carefully selecting a group of individuals “who are all willing to work beyond borders, and while they can have varying opinions about how to resolve certain issues, they all strive for the same end goals.” Executive Committee members are involved depending on their available time commitment and employment status with their respective organizations. If an Executive Committee member wishes or needs to be phased out of the Executive Committee, the Committee selects a replacement at the Annual Executive Committee Retreat. When family health forced a key popular leader to step down during the Council’s formative years, the organization was thus able to carry on with relative ease. The Council’s goal is to always have someone representing the three core funders and the fiscal agent, plus like-minded conservation organizations, government entities, business owners, tribes, and DMOs.

This Executive Committee sets the long-term and annual strategic work plan. Special projects may require forming sub-committees. Most often, these groups include one or two Executive Committee members and several other individuals such as representatives from nonprofits, government agencies, businesses, DMOs, or people with a skill set that will elevate that project.

Informally, the Crown of the Continent Geotourism Council also organizes an arrangement of partners and members, with “partners” being those who disperse any information and announcements throughout the Crown’s network, and “members” being those who have passed the vetting process and are represented within the Council’s website and MapGuide. Last, the Council has an arrangement with volunteer field experts, who provide the hyperlocal recommendations that would be typically overlooked by an outside visitor.

Sustainability and Stewardship

The Council focuses all of their work in supporting the principles of geotourism and good destination stewardship, thus creating a model in which sustainability ties into every project. The “Events and Things to Do” listings on their website include information about “Leave No Trace” practices, wildlife encounter tips, volunteer opportunities, appropriate conduct when visiting cultural and heritage sites, who and how businesses support local conservation, and preservation and community beautification efforts.

• Indigenous peoples. The Council also takes care to include  indigenous/tribal partners in all quadrants of the Crown of the Continent, actively seeking feedback from the First Peoples’ representatives who serve on the Executive Committee as partners. Indigenous/tribal content has been vetted and approved by respective First Nations before it is published. Each First Nation provides a strict list of places, experiences, and stories that are allowed to be shared. Even for content that may not seem directly related to First Peoples, the Council tries to share the cultural story behind a place. The goal is to be a platform for First Peoples to tell their stories in their voices.

• Restorative activities. In one case, the Council partnered in the planning, creation, and promotion of the Castle Parks in Alberta, an ecologically strategic piece of land of within Yellowstone-Yukon corridor previously viewed as a government-owned no-man’s land. Lack of enforcement, extractive industry, boondocking, and motorized vehicles had caused significant deterioration and degradation to sensitive ecosystems.

Save-the-Castle demonstrators, Alberta.

The Council helped push for proper planning, monitoring, and infrastructure for upgrading the area into park status, and promoting it via social media and the MapGuide.

• Climate mitigation. The Council has partnered with the Thompson Okanagan Tourism Authority to coordinate routes for installing electric charging vehicles across British Columbia. The British Columbia section is complete all the way to Crowsnest Pass, where Alberta is picking up the route. Most of the charging infrastructure has been installed in the Alberta section of Crown of the Continent and south to the U.S. border. Montana has begun the EV station installation process. Several other routes throughout the Crown are in development as an asset to both locals and tourists.

Managing Tourism Sustainably

While the Council does not have a formalized plan for addressing overtourism or mass tourism, they claim that given the nature of the region, most tourism products offered do not lend themselves to mass tourism, and it has not posed a threat thus far other than at overburdened Glacier National Park.

Saint Mary Lake, a popular photo stop in oft-overtouristed Glacier National Park, Montana.

As the Council strictly adheres to the principles of geotourism, they focus all activities on authentic, local experiences that benefit local communities, dispersing visitors around the region and away from the national park. The Council helps promote recreational opportunities, especially trail systems beyond park boundaries. The policy is to follow strict criteria on what gets promoted, checking whether the area is ecologically or culturally sensitive, the trail is in good condition, and existing trailhead infrastructure (parking, outhouse, signage, etc) can support increased visitation.

The Council is helping to create a State of the Crown of the Continent Report to better understand and communicate a multitude of indicators for the region. This will direct future work, provide a measurement of the region’s health – of what’s going well and what isn’t – and provide a nonpolitical document that can be used to argue the importance of supporting, enhancing, and sustaining the region.

Additionally, the Council compiles a running list of areas and points of interest that they will not promote on their platforms, as the areas are either too fragile to handle increased visitation or are sacred sites. The Council works closely with government agencies, conservation organizations, and tribal representatives to ensure this list, for internal use only, is always up to date.

Community Engagement

The Crown of the Continent Geotourism Council encompasses stakeholders representing 53 organizations, tribal nations, agencies, and businesses,[1] who have contributed time, expertise, and/or financial support. The Council also has had an arranged partnership with National Geographic, which has cobranded their website and assists in the development and printing of the Crown of the Continent MapGuide. During the creation of this project, an even broader set of stakeholders were included to provided nominations, comments and ideas. The Council operates as an open‐invitation advisory committee of interested individuals, and has a networking relationship with local nonprofit organizations and universities, allowing all parties to leverage key resources. Says the Council Coordinator, Sheena Pate, “Our networking ability remains our greatest strength. Our government partners leverage to their advantage our nimble ability to move freely throughout the Crown of the Continent and our desire to always be connecting the region, since they are restricted on travel abilities and their already mandated work.”

Her tips for other destinations: “Bring together the willing. Be sure to have diversity of opinions.” The network is what gives their Council heft. “We find great joy in connecting those who work in their silos and have yet to realize their connection to other silos. We’re always putting the ‘puzzle pieces’ together and connecting what might be seen as differing voices.” The common ground? “Ultimately most of those living and working in the region are here because of the sense of place and outdoor heritage.”

The Crown of the Continent Geotourism Council does not serve as the locality’s official DMO. Each partner DMO contributes annually to the direction, planning, and funding of the transboundary partnership, while pursuing initiatives in their local jurisdictions that align with goals of the Geotourism Council. The Council claims that their success as a whole is an aggregation of all stakeholders, both DMOs and others, creating individual successes within their jurisdictions.

Furthermore, the Council not only works across the international border, but also across tribal nations. The Council reports that building these relationships has been pivotal, not only for responsible tourism development, but for external affairs as well: “Receiving the trust of local tribal groups is one of the most important things a destination stewardship council can do. While state and provincial governments within the Crown of the Continent jurisdiction have been working to accomplish this for years, they have moved in such a structured way. The Crown has been able to build trust much more quickly, through an informal, personal approach.” Tribal groups work with the Council directly on updating and adding points of interest on MapGuide and website.

Local business, Crowsnest, Alberta.

The Council also serves on the planning committee for the annual Roundtable on the Crown of the Continent. The conference focuses on overarching issues, and the Council pulls in business and organization participation, recruits regional and national presenters and keynotes, solicits sponsors, and assists with marketing the conference. Tribal members, residents, students, government agencies, non-profit organizations, industries, and businesses all attend. The Council has lately shifted to an advisory role in order to give more attention to repeating the success of its 2018 Business of Outdoor Recreation Summit.

Funding

As of 2019, the Council’s budget falls at approximately $75,000 annually, predominantly funded by the Montana Department of Commerce’s Office of Tourism & Business Development, the Kootenay Rockies Tourism, and the Alberta Southwest Regional Alliance.  This funding covers the project coordinator salary, website hosting and maintenance, branding, and any additional special projects, travel, and conferences. The Whitefish Convention & Visitors Bureau acts as the Council’s fiscal agent for free. Additional funding may be called upon for special projects, such as a MapGuide reprint.

Business and organizational membership is free including representation on the Crown of the Continent platforms (website, MapGuide, and social media). The Council says “no one pays to play” since these members already provide indirect financial support by paying membership fees to the Regional Tourism Alliances or Convention and Visitors Bureaus who, in turn, support the Council.

Measures of success

The Crown does not collect data as an organization. Instead, each region gathers its own visitor statistics, which the Council will evaluate to determine the quality of the visitors and tourism experience. Looking beyond visitation quantity, they seek to measure visitor demographics, such as income and age, as well as identifying each visitor’s length of stay, locations, and spending. They have found an increase in length of stay, with visitors more often frequenting local businesses. Lastly, they try to determine whether the most frequented businesses and accommodations are those that give back to the community or share messages of conservation.

Commentary

The Crown of the Continent Geotourism Council may prove that anything is possible if you put your mind to it and stay true to conscious, ethically minded stances. While sharing a similar set of geographic borders and tourism assets compared to B.C.’s Thompson Okanagan, this Council has taken a vastly different organizational approach. By bringing together the willing and a diverse set of stakeholders, the Council makes decisions that stretch far – opting for quality over quantity. With limited funding, Council members appear to be doing an excellent job of pushing their resources based on what is most important for that year, although I would love to see them expand their funding, add on another full-time staff, and get capacity to implement greater long-term strategy. With the funding that they do receive, the Council feels confident in their budget every year, even with a small selection of donors, due to their invaluable transboundary relationships across the US-Canadian border and across tribal nations, plus the thousands of stakeholders participating within their network. The National Geographic Geotourism MapGuide being critical to its genesis, the Crown of the Continent Geotourism Council demonstrates the value of a catalytic project that can blossom into much more robust initiatives.

On the other hand, the Council lacks an official mandate. While this allows for flexibility, it does create vulnerability. In fact, many other geotourism councils that started under the same National Geographic program have since fallen out of existence or lack true authority, which shows us both the fragility of unofficial organizations, but also the strength of the Crown in overcoming adversity and taking the correct course of action. Furthermore, while the National Geographic name provides major brand recognition, the arrangement is vulnerable. Funding may be needed to maintain this label, or National Geographic may drop the program. Last, given the changing landscape in technology and smartphone reliance, I wonder if evolving their successful MapGuide project from a mobile-friendly website into a true smartphone app will be critical in coming years.

We would like to collect more concrete examples of project implementation, both successes and failures. Our interviews were able to highlight a few examples, but limited timing still left us wanting more.  —Ellen Rugh

[1] Organizations that have participated in the Crown of the Continent Geotourism Council include:
1) Alberta Ministry of Tourism, Parks and Recreation
2) Alberta Southwest Regional Alliance
3) Alpine Artisans Inc
4) Blackfeet Nation
5) Blood Tribe/Kainai Nation
6) Bureau of Land Management, United State Department of Interior
7) Castle Crown Wilderness Coalition
8) Chinook Country Tourist Association
9) Chinook Institute for Community Stewardship
10) College of the Rockies, Tourism Knowledge Cluster
11) Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes
12) Continental Divide Trail Alliance
13) Cowboy Trail Tourism Association
14) Dames on the Range
15) Fernie Chamber of Commerce/Tourism Fernie
16) Flathead Beacon
17) Flathead Convention and Visitor Bureau
18) Frank Slide Interpretive Centre
19) Glacier Country Regional Tourism Commission
20) Glacier National Park
21) Glacier Natural History Association
22) Southwest Montana Regional Tourism Commission
23) Henry P. Kendall Foundation
24) Kalispell Chamber / Convention & Visitor Bureau
25) Kootenay Rockies Tourism, British Columbia
26) Ktunaxa Nation
27) Miistakis Institute
28) Montana Department of Tourism and Business Development
29) Montana Scenic Loop
30) National Geographic Society, Center for Sustainable Destination
31) National Parks Conservation Association
32) National Park Service, United States Department of Interior
33) Pekisko Group
34) Rocky Mountain Grizzly Centre
35) Central Montana Regional Tourism Commission
36) Seeley Lake Chamber of Commerce
37) Sonoran Institute
38) Sustainable, Obtainable Solutions
39) Swan Valley Connections
40) The Sustainability Fund of Kalispell, Montana
41) Top 10 Scenic Drives in the Northern Rockies
42) Trail of the Great Bear
43) Travel Alberta
44) U.S. Forest Service, United State Department of Agriculture
45) University of Calgary, Program of Environmental Design
46) University of Montana, Center of Natural Resource and Environmental Policy
47) University of Montana, Institute for Tourism and Recreation Research
48) Waterton Lakes National Park
49) Waterton Park Chamber of Commerce
50) Whitefish Convention and Visitor Bureau
51) Wilburforce Foundation
52) Wildsight
53) Yellowstone-to-Yukon Conservation Initiative

Revising GSTC’s Destination Criteria

? Destination Stewardship Report – Summer 2020 ?

The GSTC Destination Criteria (GSTC-D) were revised last year with global public consultation. The criteria were first developed through a stakeholder consultation process leading to their initial publication (Version 1.0) on 1st November 2013. In 2018 the first revision of the GSTC-D began. The process has taken over a year to complete, including two rounds of global public comment, with final approval reached in December 2019. GSTC’s International Standards team explains what the criteria are, what they are for, how the revision process worked, and the main changes that have resulted.

The Elaborate Process of Revising Your GSTC Destination Criteria
By Kelly Bricker and Richard and Jackie Denman

In this article:
Introduction
The process

  • To whom do the criteria apply?
  • What are the criteria for?
  • What standard revision process has been followed?
  • Stakeholder engagement
  • Targeted stakeholder consultation

The results

  • Key themes emerging from the consultation
  • A structure toward increased understanding
  • New for 2.0 – Performance indicators and SDGs

Introduction
The GSTC Destination Criteria (GSTC-D) were first developed through a stakeholder consultation process leading to their initial publication (Version 1.0) on 1st November 2013. In 2018 the first revision of the GSTC-D was initiated. The process has taken over a year to complete.

Oversight of the revision for the GSTC-D has been provided by the GSTC’s International Standards Committee (ISC). The group is comprised of a small number of tourism professionals with experience of sustainability standards and certification, drawn from across five continents. A final version of the revised GSTC-Destination-Criteria-v2.0 was approved by the GSTC Board at their meeting on December 6th 2019.

The purpose of this article is to summarise and provide a formal statement of the process that has been followed in undertaking the revision. But first, a brief introduction is required.

To whom do the Criteria apply?

The GSTC-D have been designed for destinations[1]. The criteria do not relate to a single body but rather to a named place that can be uniquely identified.   The criteria simply require that the condition described pertains in that destination, irrespective of what body may be responsible for it or how or by whom any related action is implemented.

The scope of the GSTC-D is broad and the criteria can be applied to a wide range of destinations. They may be in any part of the world and of any type (e.g. urban, rural, mountain, coastal or mixed). The criteria can relate to large destinations (e.g. sizeable cities or regions) and to small ones (e.g. national parks, clusters of local communities, etc.).

While the GSTC-D relate to the place, not to a body, many of the criteria may nevertheless be taken up by and applied through a destination management organisation which is responsible for a coordinated approach to sustainable tourism within the destination. The existence of such an organisation is a central requirement of the GSTC-D. It should be noted that this organisation is not necessarily a local authority or public sector body and requires the involvement of both the public and private sector.

Some of the criteria refer to enterprises. These may be individual businesses but they may also be other forms of facility, operation and undertaking. For example, they could include museums, festivals, public buildings and monuments, not only commercial businesses such as hotels or paid attractions.

What are the criteria for?

Uses of the criteria include the following:

  • Serve as the basis for certification for sustainability
  • Serve as basic guidelines for destinations that wish to become more sustainable
  • Help consumers identify sound sustainable tourism destinations
  • Serve as a common denominator for information media to recognize destinations and inform the public regarding their sustainability
  • Help certification and other voluntary destination level programs ensure that their standards meet a broadly accepted baseline
  • Offer governmental, non-governmental, and private sector programs a starting point for developing sustainable tourism requirements
  • Serve as basic guidelines for education and training bodies, such as tourism schools and universities
  • Demonstrate leadership that inspires others to act.

The Criteria indicate what should be done, not how to do it or whether the goal has been achieved. This role is fulfilled by performance indicators, associated educational materials, and access to tools for implementation, all of which are an indispensable complement to the GSTC Criteria.

What standard revision process has been followed?

ISEAL is a non-governmental organisation whose mission is to strengthen sustainability standards systems for the benefit of people and the environment. The GSTC is committed to following the guidance of ISEAL in developing and implementing the global sustainable tourism criteria. The GSTC-D revision process has been informed by the ISEAL Code of Good Practice: Setting Social and Environmental Standards, Version 6.0 – December 2014. This is referred to as the ISEAL Standard-Setting Code.

At their first meeting on the GSTC-D revision, held on 21st September 2018, the ISC was presented with a paper containing a systematic review of the outcomes, requirements, guidance and aspirational good practice as contained in the ISEAL Code.   Broadly, these covered:

  • Transparent procedures
  • Published Terms of Reference, covering the need for, and scope of, the standard, stated outcomes and associated risks
  • Stakeholder identification
  • Public availability of a summary of the process
  • Public consultation, giving stakeholders sufficient time to provide input and opportunity to see how their input has been considered
  • A consultation process which is open to all and seeks to achieve balance of interests
  • Seeking to address constraints faced by disadvantaged stakeholders
  • Striving to achieve consensus
  • Clear decision-making procedures and protocols.

In reviewing the requirements of the ISEAL Standard-Setting Code, the ISWG has focussed on Section 4 (General Provisions) and Section 5 (Standards Development Revision). The process that was subsequently followed has been based on the requirements contained therein.

The key stages of the revision process are set out below.

Timeline Action
September 2018 Systematic assessment and presentation of the requirements of the ISEAL Standard Setting Code
21st September 2018 Meeting of the ISC to consider the ISEAL requirements, consider the revision process and request preparation of the Terms of Reference
October/November 2018 Planning of the process and timetable. Drafting of Terms of Reference and initial consultation questionnaire.
27th November 2018 Publishing Terms of Reference for GSTC-D revision
December 2018 – 31st March 2019 First round public consultation, via Survey Monkey. The survey was framed around the then current GSTC-D (Version 1.0), seeking comments and suggestions for improvement overall and for each of the criteria.
January – March 2019 Direct inputs invited and received from key stakeholder organizations.
March – May 2019 Review of first round consultation, with assessment and resolution of all comments received.
16th May 2019 Meeting of ISWG, to receive report on first round consultation and consider first draft of proposed revised GSTC-D.
16th June – 18th August, 2019 Second round consultation via Survey Monkey. The survey was framed around the proposed revised GSTC-D, seeking comments on the re-organised structure and on each of proposed revised criteria.
September – October 2019 Review of second round consultation, with assessment and resolution of all comments received.
18th October 2019 Meeting of ISC, to receive report on second round consultation and consider proposed amendments of the draft revised GSTC-D.
October 2019 Completion of final draft of revised GSTC-D, with addition of preamble, performance indicators[2] and cross-reference to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
30th October 2019 Circulation of final draft of revised GSTC-D to ISC and Destination Stewardship Working Group (DSWG) for comment
November 2019 Review and resolution of final comments and suggestions from members of the ISC and DSWG; preparation of final amended revised GSTC-D (GSTC-D v.2)
27th November 2019 Proposed GSTC-D v.2 circulated to members of ISC
6th December 2019 Proposed GSTC-D v.2 put to GSTC Board for approval

The revision process has been fully documented. Key documents relating to each of the stages include the following:

  • GSTC Criteria Revision and ISEAL Compliance, September 2018.
  • Revision of GSTC-D: Terms of Reference, 27th November 2018.

Includes: GSTC-D need, scope, objectives and uses, outcomes risks; key requirements of the process, program stages and timetable, stakeholder mapping, outreach and promotion.

  • Report of first round consultation and suggested criteria revision, 3rd May 2019.

Includes: details of respondents; handling of comments, key topics raised; draft revised GSTC-D.

  • Report of second round consultation and suggested criteria revision, 26th September 2019.

Includes: details of respondents; comments on structure and individual criteria; proposed final revision of criteria

  • Report of final draft of criteria revision, with indicators and reference to SDGs, 29th October 2019.

Includes: note on drafting of additional elements.

  • GSTC-D Vs2.0 final draft, November 2019.

Separate documents, as Excel spreadsheets or Word tables, were also produced after each round of consultation, showing all the individual comments received and the response to each of them.

Stakeholder engagement

The importance of stakeholder engagement in the revision process has been fully recognised by the GSTC. Information on the communication activity and the level and nature of the response is summarised below. The revision of the GSTC-D has been heralded and documented on the Council’s website. https://www.gstcouncil.org/gstc-criteria/criteria-revisions/. This has invited participation in the first and second round surveys, with a click-through to the questionnaires. Invitation to participate was also prominent in GSTC’s stakeholder communication activity.

Calls to participate in the first public consultation included:

  • 13,770 accumulative recipients of our newsletters, members’ bulletins, media/press list, and invitations to those specifically signed for updates about the GSTC Criteria Revision. This also includes a list of 177 NTOs and 135 Trade Associations.
  • 4,050 accumulative impressions on social media GSTC official pages (not including other shares in groups and by other organizations and individuals).

In addition, all those known to have been GSTC-Recognized under the prevailing GSTC-D Criteria were invited.

Calls to participate in the second public consultation included:

  • 8,410 accumulative recipients of our newsletters, members’ bulletins, media/press list, and invitations to those specifically signed for updates about the GSTC Criteria Revision.
  • 6,250 accumulative impressions on social media GSTC official pages (not including other shares in groups and by other organizations and individuals).

In addition, all those known to have been GSTC-Recognized under the prevailing GSTC-D Criteria were invited, AND, those participating in the first-round of consultation.

In addition, the above numbers do not include promotion by partners such as PATA, WTTC, IUCN etc. (see below)

The first-round consultation survey received 88 unique responses and generated a total of 883 comments on the original GSTC-D criteria, some of which were multi-faceted. A significant proportion of the respondents (72%) had not previously engaged with GSTC criteria development. The second-round consultation received a total of 95 responses, of which 57 contained comments on the draft revised set of GSTC-D criteria, generating a total of 312 comments. Respondents in both rounds were primarily from Europe, Latin America/Caribbean and North America. The nature of the organizations represented amongst the respondents to both surveys is shown in the table below.

Nature of organization 1st round 2nd round
Consultancy 21% 25%
Non-Profit Organization or NGO 18% 18%
Government Agency (national, provincial, municipal, or other) 6% 16%
Destination Management Organisation or Partnership 0% 9%
Certification Body 5% 9%
Academia 16% 9%
Other (please specify) 18% 9%
Travel & Tourism Industry – private enterprise; any subsector, any role 15% 5%
None 1% 2%

Targeted stakeholder consultation

The GSTC’s Destination Stewardship Working Group (DSWG) has played an important role in the GSTC-D revision process. The group is made up of a number of individuals with particular knowledge and interest in destination management. The aim of the group is to assist destinations in maintaining their cultural, environmental and socio-economic integrity through implementing the GSTC’s Destinations Programme. At the outset, DSWG was asked to consider an initial possible re-ordering and re-grouping of the criteria. This formed an important and very helpful input in parallel to the first-round consultation and was carefully considered alongside individual comments from the consultees. Members of the DSWG also submitted comments on the initial draft of the proposed revised criteria. They were also consulted on the final draft, and their comments influenced the final amendments to the criteria and indicators.

A number of additional bodies with a high level of specialist knowledge, engagement and expertise in environmental, social and cultural sustainability in the tourism sector were directly invited to make comments and suggestions on the revision of the GSTC-D. These included:

  • ICOMOS: International Council on Monuments and Sites
  • ECPAT: Every Child Protected Against Trafficking
  • IUCN: International Union for the Conservation of Nature – Tourism and Protect Areas Specialist Group
  • WWF: World Wildlife Fund

The process of revision of the GSTC-D was borne in mind during much of the work of the GSTC during the period. In particular, two dedicated workshops were held as part of large GSTC gatherings. These took place in Africa and Asia, both continents that were under-represented amongst respondents to the public consultation. The workshops were held in:

  • Maun, Botswana, on December 9th 2018, during the GSTC 2018 Global Conference (150 delegates from 26 countries)
  • Chiang Mai, Thailand, on March 1st 2019, during the GSTC Asia-Pacific Conference (250 delegates from 25 countries).

Both of these workshops had a diverse participation, including government officials, private sector and community-based organizations.

Key themes emerging from the consultation

During the first-round consultation, certain key topics were raised by a number of consultees, either directly or by implication, as being underplayed in the original criteria, amongst which the following deserve particular mention:

  • Management responsibility. The existence of some form of coordinating body responsible for destination management and sustainability was seen as a fundamental requirement. It needs to involve civil society, alongside the public and private sectors, and to have sufficient capacity to perform its functions. It should be the first criterion.
  • Strategy. The destination management strategy should also include an action plan. It should be monitored and reviewed, have political support and relate to wider policies.
  • Over-tourism. Concern about over-tourism was frequently mentioned. Comments pointed to a need for overall visitor management, including issues of visitor volume and dispersal. Regulation of operations, e.g. sub-letting, is a related topic.
  • Resident engagement and feedback. While public participation and feedback from residents was included in the original criteria, it was felt that it should have more emphasis and be seen as an important aspect of overall management to be covered in Pillar A. There should also be a greater emphasis on community awareness and capacity building with respect to tourism.
  • Visitor engagement. Visitors should be better informed about sustainability and their reaction to this should be included in visitor surveys.
  • Enterprise engagement. Tourism enterprises are key stakeholders and there should be a stronger reference to engaging with them beyond promoting sustainability standards.
  • Retention of income locally. Support for local tourism businesses and local supply chains should be seen in the context of reducing economic leakage and fostering linkage.
  • Visitor sites. The original terminology for sites and attractions was considered to be confusing. Management should address the area around key sites as well as within them.
  • Intangible cultural heritage. This was considered to be a gap and should be covered specifically in the criteria.

These topics, along with certain others, were reflected in the changes proposed in the first draft of the revised GSTC-D.

A structure toward increased understanding

The re-arrangement of the GSTC Destination Criteria into four sections, each with two or three sub-sections, is shown below. This new structure was designed to introduce a clear logic and to make the criteria more coherent and easier to understand. The order of the sections and sub-sections was not intended to indicate the relative importance of each topic.

SECTION A: Sustainable management

A(a) Management structure and framework
A(b) Stakeholder engagement
A(c) Managing pressure and change

SECTION B: Socio-economic sustainability

B(a) Delivering local economic benefits
B(b) Social wellbeing and impacts

SECTION C: Cultural sustainability

C(a) Protecting cultural heritage
C(b) Visiting cultural sites

SECTION D: Environmental sustainability

D(a) Conservation of natural heritage
D(b) Resource management
D(c) Management of waste and emissions

The revision also sought to refine the language used, with careful wordsmithing designed to ensure the clarity of each criterion.

New for 2.0 – Performance indicators and SDGs

The performance indicators presented alongside the Destination Criteria are designed to provide guidance in measuring compliance with the criteria. They are not intended to be the definitive set or all-inclusive, but to provide a solid sample set for users of the GSTC-D in developing their own indicator sets. The performance indicators essentially provide a suggested list of circumstances, factors, evidence and actions to be looked for in a destination when assessing compliance with the criteria.

Application of the criteria will help a destination to contribute towards the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals. Against each of the Destination Criteria, one or more of the 17 SDGs is identified, to which it most closely relates.

———————–

[1] A destination has been defined by the World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) as: “A physical space with or without administrative and/or analytical boundaries in which a visitor can spend an overnight. It is the cluster (co-location) of products and services, and of activities and experiences along the tourism value chain and a basic unit of analysis of tourism. A destination incorporates various stakeholders and can network to form larger destinations”.

[2] Suggested performance indicators are also published for each criterion, although these do not undergo a formal stakeholder evaluation process and are not considered part of the standard per se.