Machiel Lamers

Heading into Uncharted Territory? Exploring the Institutional Robustness of Self-Regulation in the Antarctic Tourism Sector

This paper analyses the main strengths and weaknesses of self-regulation in the Antarctic tourism sector. Ostroms theory of collective action and especially the design principles for robust management of common pool resources provide the framework for this analysis. The paper notes the rapid growth and diversification of tourism in Antarctica over the past two decades. It examines why formal tourism legislation has been limited because of the complex governance structure in Antarctica. It describes the self-regulation of tourism management that occurs through the International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators (IAATO). The success of IAATO is attributed to the high degree of organisation in the sector, largely because of the perceived benefits of membership. Continued incentives for self-organisation are needed but changing circumstances may lead tour operators to believe that IAATO membership is no longer advantageous. The paper shows that, under current conditions, the Antarctic tourism self-regulatory regime is a robust institution. However, with increasing numbers of tourists and operators the institutional structure may be weakened in the future.

Facing the elements: analysing trends in Antarctic tourism

Purpose – Tourism in Antarctica is rapidly growing and diversifying, which raises concerns about its impacts and the robustness of the current regulatory regime. Focusing on the analysis of past developments and trends of Antarctic tourism, this paper aims to describe the future opportunities for tourism in Antarctica. Design/methodology/approach – Using literature on the recreation opportunity spectrum (ROS) and ecotourism opportunity spectrum (ECOS), the paper analyzes the future opportunities of Antarctic tourism and the key factors that determine the window of opportunity for Antarctic tour operators. Findings – The analysis shows that tourism opportunities in Antarctica are defined by a combination of factors, which the authors integrate into an Antarctic tourism opportunity spectrum (ATOS). The paper argues that the opportunity settings for tourism in Antarctica vary from operations of increasing scale and efficiency to the continued development of smaller scale niche products, both of which will continue to diversify and drive the development of tourism in Antarctica. Research limitations/implications – The paper is an attempt to transfer the concept of ROS, originally designed for the operational level of national park management, to the more strategic level of tourism trends in Antarctica. The research findings are based on stakeholder interaction within a limited number of countries. Practical implications – The paper is a potential source of information and advice for policy makers and managers of Antarctic resources, as well as scholars interested in Antarctic tourism issues. Originality/value – The paper contributes to the ongoing debate on the regulation of tourism in Antarctica.

Perspective: Strategic challenges of tourism development and governance in Antarctica: taking stock and moving forward

Antarctic tourism has grown rapidly in volume and diversified into an ever wider range of activities, transport modes and destinations. Antarctica is a global commons, which limits the range of options for regulating tourism development. This configuration has raised concerns and debates among academics, policy makers and interest groups about the challenges for regulation and management in the long term. Based on a literature review of recently published research and policy papers, this article takes stock of the current state of knowledge about the strategic challenges facing Antarctic tourism regulators and proposes ways forward for research and policy. Three clusters of strategic challenges are presented: addressing collective interests in the face of increasingly diverging interests of actors; the complex nature and indeterminacy of Antarctic tourism processes and impacts across different spatial and temporal scales; and the reliance on shared responsibility in developing and implementing tourism policy. In light of these strategic challenges, this article outlines aspects that need to be improved if a more strategic governance approach is to be embraced towards Antarctic tourism. The paper posits that a collective strategy on Antarctic tourism should be positioned at the heart of Antarctic tourism regulation and should be developed to address upcoming challenges more comprehensively and consistently. Finally, besides identifying policy instruments capable of contributing towards this strategy, independent monitoring and observation systems ought to be created to guarantee impartial checks and balances with regard to Antarctic tourism.

Institutional elements for adaptive water management regimes. Comparing two regional water management regimes in the Rhine basin

In times of rapidly changing physical and regulatory environments, adaptiveness is one of the central parameters of sustainable water management. To investigate how different institutional settings are able to adapt to new conditions, two organisational settings in the Rhine basin are compared: the German water association Wupperverband and the Dutch water board Hoogheemraadschap De Stichtse Rijnlanden (HDSR). To facilitate comparison, the institutional settings of both regulatory systems are analysed based on empirical data, and using the Institutional Analysis and Development framework (IAD) (Ostrom 2005).

Reaching Consensus on Antarctic Tourism Regulation: Calibrating the Human-Nature Relationship?

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