Tourism in South Africa: An Own Goal?

Rob Stringer
10 September 2010

In June 2010, Make Travel Fair launched a new annual travel writer competition called The Backdoor (Write Your Way in). Competition entrants submitted essays responding to the question: “A major sporting event creates a large influx of tourism to the host destination. What are the implications and benefits of that influx of travellers to a destination like South Africa?”

The three winners have been announced and The Travel Word is honoured to present the top three essays. The following is the third-place finisher.

There’s something repugnant about carbon calculations. In an age of green enlightenment, it seems whatever recreational pursuit we might want to indulge in, we’re instantly informed of the carbon footprint that such a heinous activity leaves.

The angel on our shoulder has been replaced by a sandal-wearing environmental protestor, who whispers in our ear every time we decide it’s a chilly day and we’d rather drive to the local shop. The imp at our other ear somehow seems more sympathetic to the needs of modern life.

The Carbon Footprint

It was inevitable then that the then South African Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (along with the Norwegian Embassy) should release a report on the carbon footprint of the 2010 World Cup. The party-pooping assessment estimated a staggering 2.8 million tonnes of CO2 emissions would be produced – a notable shortfall from the carbon neutrality aimed for by the event authorities. If the numbers mean nothing to you, the figure is allegedly roughly equivalent to the production of 20 cheeseburgers for every man, woman and child in the UK. I work this out as 1200 million burgers. See? Staggering.

The report’s conclusion, of course, should be taken with a generous serving of salt. However it’s also inevitable that, in practice, the report will have a minimal impact on the behaviour of the majority of World Cup supporters, who, while flying to Durban’s newly built King Shaka International Airport, will quite understandably wonder how their own personal holiday activity could possibly have an effect on the environment. Meanwhile, about 1200 million burger wrappers will float ominously around Cape Town’s Green Point stadium.

The Regional Effects

Prophecies of global-warming doom aside, it would be churlish not to consider the environmental impact that such an event could have on South Africa on a regional scale. When we picture the Rainbow Nation, all 1.27 million square kilometres of it, we envisage the natural: acres of burning savannah and Bushveld, a haven for charismatic predator and graceful prey, diverse cultures, modern-wonder-of-the-world Table Mountain, and penguins dipping and diving near the former prison cells of Robben Island. South Africa enjoys the third-highest level of biodiversity in the world, and generously, it has brought its wild side to tourists, courtesy of game drives, and adventure sports ranging from bird-watching to diving with sharks. It’s likely that with such abounding opportunities, many travellers this summer will at some point during their stay swap their vuvuzelas for their videophones.

However the country is also home to 2,000 plant species on the endangered list, not to mention about 20% of its mammals being under threat, including the black rhinoceros and African elephant – some impressive creatures that could do without the waste, pollution and, especially pertinent to the area, the unsustainable use of water associated with large influxes of people.

Packed World Cup stadium. Photo courtesy of Flickr/Jason Wojciechowski

For the well-informed visitor, ecotourism provides a pleasing balance of memorable experience and a clean conscience. This ‘responsible’ tourism ostensibly exists for visitors to enjoy pristine areas of natural beauty with a low environmental impact, and designs on providing education, funds for conservation and local empowerment. South Africa itself boasts a well-maintained network of protected areas and shrewd conservation practices. Yet scratch the surface of ecotourism, and the hidden costs are revealed: the displacement of local communities for the creation of parks, disputes over land use, the creation of amenities for the unwitting do-gooder and the channelling of money away from other long-term conservation strategies – and let’s not even go into the carbon produced from the often-lengthy journeys required to see such exotic locations. The little protestor on the shoulder is a-whispering again.

South African Wildlife Acclimation

It’s not just the economy that can suffer. The tooth-and-clawed natives are also affected by such an invasion of tourists. Just as footballers learn to acclimate to the audiences of thousands around them and grow begrudgingly accustomed to the snapping of the paparazzi, South Africa’s wildlife is all too much at risk of acclimating to their human spectators, with arguable potential for human/animal conflict and unpredictable change in animal behaviour brought about by disruption of feeding and nesting. In Kenya, it’s been noted that cheetahs have been driven off their reserves by tourists, increasing the risk of inbreeding and endangering the species even more than they are already. (They are listed as ‘vulnerable’ with a decreasing population on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.)

Does Ecotourism Ameliorate or Exacerbate Concerns?

Its intentions are honourable and it can increase environmental awareness; if wisely managed, it can still be one of the most conscientious ways of seeing animals in their natural habitats. But South Africa’s wildlife-encountering opportunities reveal a heart of far greater darkness. A tabloid newspaper recently revealed that a number of game lodges are aiming to tempt World Cup fans with packages allowing them to shoot animals in an activity known as ‘canned hunting,’ in which the animals – notably the big cats – are bred, released and pursued. At over £15,000 a pop, the sport is strictly for the wealthy (and opportunistic) and it’s a fair bet that the average footy fan wouldn’t miss a game to indulge.

With such a range of environmental threats to South Africa being increased this summer, it’s gratifying to see control measures being put in place. A partnership between the Global Environment Facility, the United Nations Environment Programme and the South African Department of Environmental Affairs has brought about an initiative comprising an array of projects seeking to minimise the event’s environmental impact. Across six of the nine host cities, the programme aims to reduce energy consumption through solar panels on public street lights, traffic lights and billboards, and is carrying out a ‘Green Passport’ programme, distributing a booklet containing information on responsible tourism to 100,000 spectators. At 32 pages each, it’s hard not to wince at the irony of 100,000 Green Passports being discarded by the roadside. The plans to allow visitors to be able to assess their own carbon footprints also have doubtful potential (‘Hey kids! Who’s game for some number-crunching fun?’), but then nobody ever claimed that environmental education was a speedy process.

Long Street in Cape Town, South Africa. Photo courtesy of Flickr/Anne Froehlich

Nor is it a process that can be easily achieved on a large scale. The environment is closely linked with the economy, and often dependent on it, and it’s indubitable that the World Cup is sure to boost opportunities for guesthouse owners, restaurants, transport companies, local attractions and cultural activity. A healthy respect for a country’s environment can begin with a healthy respect for the country itself. If well managed, South Africa’s tourism can perform wonders for conservation and green living. Audits and assessments will encourage good practise, conscientious consumers can encourage the running of sustainable businesses and (in our wildest dreams) generated wealth could be invested back into promoting conservation measures and new environmental initiatives.

Tourism itself needn’t be a case of simply standing back to see a country with a pair of binoculars. South Africa has countless opportunities to actually participate in hands-on rural development initiatives, conservation expeditions and, perhaps most importantly, education. These are invaluable ways of redressing the environmental and sociological balance that can be knocked during holiday seasons.

The Environmental Consequences Remain Unwritten

South Africa stands canned and cornered like one of its magnificent lions, staring curiously down the barrel of a hunter’s rifle. Whether it’s shot or released remains to be seen, and the decision lies with not just the masses descending for the football but on its own people, government and the hordes of tourists that wish to see this stunning country in the future. With the enormous investment channelled into venues and amenities for the year’s big event, South Africa will have to work hard to continue to make use of its new and improved infrastructure, public transit systems and energy resources in the long term – even years after football fans have skipped or trudged their ways home.

And while British visitors perform an autopsy on Rooney’s performance and Capello’s curious methods, perhaps we should also use the consequences of mass tourism observed at the event as an example to study for the approaching London Olympics 2014. South Africa should at least provide us with some food for thought – and hopefully fewer than 1200 million cheeseburgers worth.