Antarctica: balancing conservation and tourism in a fragile frontier

Antarctica, a true wilderness

“Antarctica is a true wilderness with no permanent inhabitants and no central government,” says Machiel Lamers, Associate Professor at Wageningen University's Environmental Policy Group. Instead, the continent is governed by the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS), a remarkable international agreement involving 57 countries – 29 of them having a ‘consultative status’, or decision power. The treaty promotes peace, science, and environmental protection, banning military activity, mining, and territorial claims to ensure Antarctica is used solely for peaceful and scientific purposes.

Lamers has been conducting research in this region since the early 2000s, contributing to a series of broader Dutch scientific initiatives. “Countries involved in the Antarctic Treaty can only participate in decision-making if they demonstrate significant research activity in Antarctica,” Lamers explains. This has led the Netherlands to invest in projects such as Pro-Act and ANTARC-SHIP, which also includes contributions from the department of Environmental Sciences, and institutions like Utrecht University and Groningen University. In the last two years, Cajiao and Obermann have joined his team focusing on the environmental impacts of tourism in the area and the options for management and regulation.

Antarctica on your bucket list

Challenges like climate change, growing tourism, and geopolitical interests show the need for continued efforts to safeguard Antarctica's future. Among these, the rapid growth of tourism has become a significant concern. Visitor numbers have surged from 7,500 in 1990 to 75,000 in 2020, reaching 122,000 during the last season. It's not just the numbers but also the changing nature of tourism that worries researchers like Lamers and Cajiao. “Not long ago, tourists visiting Antarctica were deeply knowledgeable about the region before embarking on their journey,” says Cajiao. “Joining an expedition required a strong interest, extensive preparation, and significant time and effort.” This has changed substantially in recent years. New purpose-built expedition cruise vessels have entered the market, climate change has extended the travel season, and scientific infrastructure has unintentionally opened the door for tour operators, attracting a new wave of visitors. “Today, many people visit for a family holiday or simply because Antarctica is on their bucket list,” says Cajiao.

Navigating tourism regulations

Regulating tourism in Antarctica is particularly challenging, as the region is a global common governed collectively by the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) through consensus decision-making. Many tour operators are part of the International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators (IAATO), which implements voluntary guidelines to promote safe and environmentally responsible travel. However, as Cajiao points out, “While most of them try to minimise their impact, they also benefit from the growing interest in the area. The sector can’t restrict itself in terms of growth.”

Research-driven policy solutions

Efforts to establish a regulatory framework for tourism are underway among the 29 consultative parties of the ATS, with the Netherlands taking a leading role. The goal is to reach an agreement for a comprehensive regulatory framework by 2028. “Our research aims to equip policymakers with the science outputs they need to make informed decisions on regulating tourism,” explains Lamers. Part of his work focuses on quantifying the carbon emissions of tourism in the region and fostering environmental stewardship among tour operators. “Previously, research mostly examined the local effects of tourism,” he adds. “Now, we’re looking at the bigger picture, for example, PhD candidate Anisja Obermann explores the potentials and limitations of self-regulation, proposing tools to manage tourism flows and their impacts effectively.”

Cajiao’s research complements this effort by analyzing the human impacts of both research and tourism, assessing site sensitivity and the effects of visits, as well as examining the shared use of facilities like airstrips by tourists and scientists. “The shared use of facilities, such as airstrips, increase the volume and frequency of tourism,” she explains, emphasising the cumulative effects of shorter, more frequent trips. While establishing regulations will take time, the impact of her research is already making a difference. “When we linked the damage to moss beds on Barrientos Island to tourism activity, the area was closed,” she recalls. Lamers adds, “IAATO tour operators often take proactive measures to address environmental concerns, even before regulations are enforced. They’re not waiting for states to tell them what to do and -overall- take research outcomes and advise on local impacts seriously.”

Should one run a marathon on Antarctica?

Cajiao notes that climate change is significantly impacting tourism in Antarctica. “The region is now accessible over a longer period, from October to April, and tour operators are venturing further into the area to provide tourists with an authentic ‘wilderness’ experience.” The growing number of visitors raises a critical question: what is the purpose of tourism in this fragile region? “Do we want to expose the area to purely recreational activities, like the recent ultramarathons held there? Or should it be a place where people gain insight into the vastness and vulnerability of ecosystems?” Cajiao asks. This also ties into a broader global issue—the surge in tourism worldwide. “Some people might just travel for a selfie, which does nothing to benefit the local ecosystem at all,” says Cajiao. Lamers adds: “For many visitors, going to Antarctica is a life-changing experience. And it is! It’s a breathtaking, unparalleled environment. But the vital question remains: how does this surge in tourism impact the fragile ecosystems that make it so unique?”

Towards restrictive measures

Together with colleagues from the WUR chair groups Earth Systems and Global Change and Cultural Geography, Lamers is investigating management measures, such as restrictions or compensation mechanisms, to address these challenges. “There are many hurdles before such restrictions on site visits, tourist numbers or ships could be implemented,” he explains, “but the goal is to assess and control the impact tourism has on ecosystems and find ways to contribute to the area’s conservation.” By measuring, monitoring, and providing insights into the acceptability of impacts and regulatory options, researchers aim to create leverage points for action. “Even if we can’t achieve this by 2028, we hope to at least spark a broader discussion about the value of Antarctica’s ecosystem to tourists and how that value can be reinvested in its preservation.”