ATCM
The 46th Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM-46), that was held in Kochi, last month, highlighted the ongoing debate on Antarctic tourism.
Since the early 1990s, Antarctic tourism has witnessed a dramatic surge in tourist numbers, which have exploded from a few thousand to 1,18,089 tourists in 2023-2024.
The United States and China account for more than 40% of tourists to the Antarctic.
This growth is attributed to increased global interest in adventure travel and a desire to experience Antarctica’s unique landscapes and wildlife.
Tourists typically embark on multi-day expeditions on small to medium-sized ships, with some opting for larger cruises or fly-sail operations.
Activities range from wildlife observation and photography to mountain climbing and skiing.
Concerns
Antarctic tourism offers educational and economic benefits but also raises significant environmental concerns.
Increased human presence disrupts wildlife, damages fragile ecosystems, and risks introducing invasive species.
Ship traffic pollutes pristine waters, and tourism adds to the global carbon footprint.
Climate change exacerbates these issues by opening new areas for tourism while increasing ecosystem vulnerability.
Challenges of regulating tourism
The current governance framework for Antarctic tourism is fragmented and lacks clear regulations.
The Antarctic Treaty, that came into force in 1961, prioritises peaceful use and scientific research.
While the Madrid Protocol offers broad environmental guidelines, it lacks specific tourism regulations.
The responsibility for day-to-day management falls largely on the International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators (IAATO), a self-regulatory industry body
Many believe IAATO’s guidelines are inadequate to address the growing environmental pressures.
Despite recognising the need for a comprehensive tourism regulatory framework, the ATCM-46 failed to reach a consensus.
Unanimous agreement from all consultative parties is required for decisions, often slowing action and allowing national interests to impede progress.
While some countries push for strong regulations, others prioritise economic benefits or interpret Antarctic principles differently.
The current geopolitical climate further complicates international cooperation on Antarctic governance.
COMMENTS