Resource Management
Dec. 2008
RM-17

Achieving Sustainable Tourism in Hawai‘i
Using a Sustainability Evaluation System
Linda J. Cox1, Melanie Saucier1, John Cusick2, Harold Richins3, and Bixler McClure4
CTAHR Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Management, 2UH Mānoa Environmental Center,
3
UH Mānoa School of Travel Industry Management, 4UH Mānoa Department of Geography

1V

isitor arrivals in Hawai‘i for 1995–2006 showed
consistent growth, and currently about 7.5 million
visitors are expected each year to visit Hawai‘i and join
the resident population of just over one million (DBEDT2007) to enjoy the islands’ beauty and natural resources.
According to Honey (2002), the number of visitors that
support environmentally and socially responsible tourism
is increasing, yet at the same time the state faces soaring
energy costs, continuing degradation of native habitats, finite
potable water resources, and increasing public sensitivity
to its economic dependency on tourism. Examples of theincreasing public concern include last year’s legislative
initiative to cap visitor numbers and statewide opposition
to short-term accommodations in residentially zoned neighborhoods. Policy makers responded to these concerns, inpart, by initiating the Sustainability 2050 Task Force as ameans to engage public participation in designing a visionthat secures some degree of self-sufficiency within the stateby the year 2050 (Hawai‘i 2050 Plan 2008). However, thecurrent Hawai‘i Tourism Strategic Plan 2005–2015 (HTA2005) suggests an expanded scope for tourism development
and gives little consideration to long-term environmental orcultural issues that must be addressed to achieve sustainability. Given today’s economic climate, many are focusedon maintaining Hawai‘i’s share of the global tourism market. This heightened level of focus on economics may takeresources away from the efforts to check environmental
degradation, deal with insensitivity toward the state’s existing social and cultural structure, and address public uneasewith the status quo, which many feel must be addressed inorder to embrace sustainability.

This publication presents an overview of sustainable
tourism and outlines the current situation in Hawai‘iwith the intention of helping the public understand how
tourism in Hawai‘i can become more sustainable. As
Cox and Cusick (2006) pointed out, the complexity ofsustainability challenges the ability of a single institution
to ensure implementation of long-term planning by public
and private stakeholders. The first section below presents
definitions of sustainable tourism and ecotourism, which
will be needed in order to design a vision in this area.
The next section is an overview of the existing sustainable
tourism and ecotourism efforts in the state. Finally, thecomponents of a system designed to encourage sustainable tourism are discussed and recommendations formoving forward are summarized.
Defining sustainable tourism and ecotourism
Widespread confusion regarding the concepts of sustainable tourism and ecotourism often results in public
officials and the visitor industry using these terms interchangeably. The World Tourism Organization (www.
wto.org) defines “sustainable tourism” as tourism thatmeets the needs of present tourists and host regions
while protecting and enhancing opportunities for the
future of the tourist sector. WTO has concluded thatsustainable tourism guidelines and management practices are applicable to all forms of tourism in all typesof destinations. Sustainable tourism, according to WTO,
is based on sustainability principles, which refer to theenvironmental, economic, and socio-cultural aspects ofdevelopment. Sustainability implies that a suitable bal-

Published by the College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources (CTAHR) and issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Andrew G. Hashimoto, Director/Dean, Cooperative Extension Service/CTAHR, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu, Hawai‘i 96822.
An equal opportunity/affirmative action institution providing programs and services to the people of Hawai‘i without regard to race, sex, age, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, disability, marital status, arrest and court record, sexual orientation, or status as a covered veteran. CTAHR publications can be found on the Web site <http://www.ctahr.hawaii.edu/freepubs>.

UH–CTAHR

Achieving Sustainable Tourism in Hawai‘i . . .

ance must be established between these three dimensions.
Hunter and Green (1995) developed a list of criteria forsustainable tourism, including• Follow ethical principles that respect the culture andenvironment of the area, the economy and traditional
way of life, and the political patterns.
• Involve the local population, proceed only with theirapproval, and provide for a degree of local control.
• Keep intra-generational equity in mind, including fair
distribution of benefits and costs.
• Plan and manage tourism with regard for the protection of natural environment for future generations.
• Plan in a manner integrated with other economic sectors.
• Continuously assess to evaluate impacts and initiate
action to counter any negative effects.
“Ecotourism” is a term that was coined in the late1970s when “mass tourism” reached its peak and people
began to realize that the mass tourism experience isolated
them from the host culture and damaged the environment. Some people view ecotourism as a niche market
that incorporates an environmentally friendly and culturally protective approach. Others consider it a luxury
available only to wealthy travelers who are trying to havea unique experience while not feeling guilty about doingso, or a term used by companies trying to take advantage
of a niche market. Honey (2002) identified eight elementsof authentic ecotourism. These include• travel to natural areas• minimized impacts• building environmental and cultural awareness forhosts and guests• providing direct financial benefits for conservation• providing financial benefits and empowerment for
local communities• respect of local culture• sensitivity to the host country’s political environmentand social climate• support of human rights and international labor agreements.
Ecotourism is defined more narrowly than sustainable
tourism, in that ecotourism is a subset of sustainable
tourism and not all types of sustainable tourism can beconsidered ecotourism (see diagram, p. 3). Sustainable
tourism, in general, requires that sustainable management practices are followed, and adherence to these2

RM-17 — Dec. 2008

practices is a common thread through both of thesetypes of tourism.
Sustainable tourism and ecotourism
in Hawai‘i
Tourism has been Hawai‘i’s largest economic sector since
the early 1960s (Hawai‘i Tourism Authority 2005). As
growth slowed in the 1990s, policymakers began to looktoward niche markets, including ecotourism, for continued growth. The Hawai‘i Ecotourism Association (HEA)
was formed as an outcome of the statewide Conference
on Ecotourism held in Waikiki in October 1994. The
conference planning committee members continued tomeet throughout 1995 to form HEA and quickly signed
on over 100 members. In 2001, HEA obtained a grantfrom the Hawai‘i Tourism Authority (HTA) to develop acertification program entitled Hawai‘i Pono. The effort
did not produce a program, because HEA members could
not agree on the process or content for such a program.
Then, the events of September 11, 2001 had a considerable negative impact on the tourism sector and shiftedfocus away from development of niche markets toward
maintenance of the existing market. HEA members likewise struggled to keep their businesses profitable, and by
2007 membership had dwindled to half of its peak.
In spite of the state’s focus on mass tourism in recent
years, some work has been done to develop a clearer
understanding of sustainable tourism and ecotourism
by policymakers. HTA defines sustainable tourism as
maximizing “social and economic benefits to Hawai‘i’scommunities and businesses while respecting, nourishing,preserving and enhancing Hawai‘i’s natural, cultural andhuman assets” (HTA 2005), while the Hawai‘i Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism(DBEDT) describes sustainable tourism as “managing
tourism so as to sustain the environmental and social
vibrancy of Hawai‘i for the people of our state” (DBEDT2005). Clearly, the definitions used by these agencies are
not the same, which presents challenges as the policymakers behind Sustainability 2050 strive to make the state
more sustainable. At the same time, HTA (2005) also
proposed the following definition for ecotourism:
Ecotourism in Hawai‘i is an economically, socially andenvironmentally sustainable activity that responsibly andauthentically connects visitors with Hawaii’s natural andcultural landscapes, resulting in beneficial exchanges
among these landscapes, the host community, and thevisitor.

UH–CTAHR. . . Using a Sustainability Evaluation System

Sustainable tourism and ecotourism
components
Nature-based
tourism
Ecotourism

Sustainable tourism
Urban
tourism

Coastaltourism

Source: (Bien 2004)

While these definitions provide some clarification of official positions, which can serve to provide a vision forsustainable tourism, Mak (2008) indicated that the Statelacks an overall plan for sustainable tourism, which will
make the goal of becoming sustainable very difficult toreach. Hunter and Green (1995) concluded that planning
is a major component in the criteria for sustainable tourism and, therefore, the state should initiate a comprehensive planning effort in order to make progress.
Achieving sustainable tourism
Once the vision for sustainable tourism is agreed uponand clearly articulated, then a system to determine how
to measure progress toward this vision is needed. Carrying capacity, the amount of use that a natural resource oreven a community can withstand without being damaged
for future use, has been a key component for measuring progress because it sets benchmarks with whichto assess progress as suggested by Hunter and Green(1995). Carrying capacity identifies the cultural, social,and ecological limits to tourism growth, but estimating
carrying capacity, particularly cultural or social carrying capacity, is challenging. Reducing use or holding
growth to a limit is equally as challenging. For example,
Vieth and Cox (2001) found that the 1977 Hanauma Bay
Beach Park Site Development Plan estimated the recommended optimal use level or “capacity” for Hanauma Bay
at 1,363 people per day, using the Bureau of Outdoor

RM-17 — Dec. 2008

Recreation and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ beachcapacity standards. However, the actual use of Hanauma
Bay increased from about capacity in 1975 to about fivetimes the recommended capacity in 1999. Currently,
an educational program, which involves the mandatory
viewing of a four-minute video and beach closures oncea week, is used at Hanauma Bay in an effort to increase
the carrying capacity so that the average daily visitor
count of 3,000–3,500 can be more easily sustained without damaging the environment. While Hanauma Bay’s
management plan has increased the carrying capacity,
the ecosystem still shows signs of damage.
The difficulties associated with estimating carrying
capacity as the basis for an absolute limit to use havedecreased interest in this approach in recent years.
The approach strives to reach a compromise between
resource protection and recreational use by identifying
a maximum use ratio rather than an absolute number,
although the methods for relating the ratio to all elementsof sustainability are not clearly defined.
Economic theory suggests that any effort to restrict
supply in order to achieve sustainability will cause aprice increase. The higher price caused by restrictions
will mean that businesses, in order to survive, will target customers with a higher willingness to pay. These
customers will tend to have higher incomes and be moreenvironmentally conscious. Thus, a move toward limits
in order to become more sustainable will result in businesses targeting environmentally conscious visitors thathave higher incomes and are willing to pay a higher price.
The state’s visitor profiles will undergo a fundamental
change, which is likely to result in tourists frequenting
more “local” recreational areas. Potential conflicts may
arise as rural and small regional communities without
sufficient infrastructure to accommodate more visitors
are increasingly frequented by tourists.
Long-term survival of tourism requires that the state
and the tourism sector embrace sustainability initiatives, and a strategic effort that includes identification ofbenchmarks indicating progress will be required to bringabout a permanent change in the sector’s management
practices. Kozak and Nield (2004) concluded that quality and eco-labeling systems have a number of potential
benefits as a means of tracking tourism’s sustainability
performance. The tourism sector is familiar with reliable,measurable indicators of satisfaction, such a Fodor’s star
rating system for hotels, which are aimed at ensuring that
service providers conform to various practices. These
3

UH–CTAHR

Achieving Sustainable Tourism in Hawai‘i . . .

types of measures include (1) quality indicators thatreflect how consumers feel about the services, which arereadily available from a variety of sources; (2) health,hygiene, and safety indicators that are often regulatedby the government; and (3) sustainability indicators thathave been developed in tourism destinations internationally. Hawai‘i has systems in place for emphasizing
and monitoring the first two types of indicators, but nostatewide system is in place for producing and monitoringsustainability in the tourism sector (DBEDT 2005).
Around 100 programs worldwide certify tourism sustainability, with 78 percent of these being based in Europe
and 68 percent focusing on accommodations (Bien 2004).
Without such a system, visitors will never know whether
a firm is truly utilizing sustainable tourism practices orif it is “greenwashing,” i.e., presenting itself as sustainable when it does not comply with generally accepted
standards (Bien 2004). Australia and Costa Rica haveprograms that are considered to be models of effective
certification programs that contribute to furthering thegoals of socially responsible tourism (Medina 2005).
Recently, HEA developed an ecotourism operator
review process to certify that that the operator conforms
to HEA’s definition of ecotourism. However, few haveparticipated in the program, and it is not considered to
be an “official” statewide certification program (www.
hawaiiecotourism.org). In addition, DBEDT manages
the Hawai‘i Green Business Program, which establishes
a level of performance for sustainable business practices
and is run by the Department of Health’s Waste Minimization Program, The Chamber of Commerce of Hawai‘i,and DBEDT’s Clean Hawai‘i Center. It is a voluntary program that is based on self-evaluation by hotel businesses
and provides for three levels of participation. Hotels area major target group for the program, and recently many
hotels have decided to participate. Businesses must meetthe following criteria to be recognized as green (http://
hawaii.gov/dbedt/info/energy/resource/greenbusiness):• Monitor, record, and post rates of water and energy
usage and solid and hazardous waste generation.
• Participate in ongoing training opportunities andprovide incentives to encourage management andemployee participation.
• Inform customers about the business’ efforts to meet
the Green Business Standards.
• Assist at least one other business in learning about
the Green Business Program and encourage them toenroll.
4

RM-17 — Dec. 2008

The efforts by HEA and DBEDT represent the state’s
two organized efforts for tourism businesses to assess
their level of sustainability. Both programs are voluntary,
require self-assessment, and have had limited participation.
Many sustainable tourism and ecotourism initiatives
focus exclusively on certification. However, certificationis only one component, and without addressing all thecomponents of an assessment system it has a very low
possibility of being effective. At the same time, manydifferent interest groups need to be involved at various
points in the process of implementing and maintaining
a sustainable tourism system. In Hawai‘i these groups
include organizations and businesses in the tourism sector, customers of the tourism industry, and members of
the public who are affected by tourism or are interested
in the ecological and economic health of the state.
Three types of standards are found in sustainability
evaluation systems used around the world (Honey 2002).
These include prescriptive standards that outline how
efforts will be accomplished, performance standards
that outline what will be achieved, and management
system standards that specify the elements of sustainable
management processes. The standards used by HEA
and DBEDT in their voluntary certification program are
generally prescriptive and are limited in both approachand potential for success in achieving useful outcomes.
Potentially, a sustainability evaluation system that includes all three types might be most useful. Advantages
and disadvantages exist each type (Table 1).
Performance-based standards that set benchmarks forminimally acceptable levels are becoming more common
than prescriptive or management-system approaches
and are considered to be more effective (Rivera 2004).
Standards may also vary depending on whether they
are evaluated using a conform/not-conform system or adegree-of-conformity system. For example, a standard
to reduce waste by 50 percent allows for a yes/no assessment, while a standard calling for waste reduction by 50
percent, 75 percent, or 85 percent identifies the degreeof participation, which is more effective (Rivera 2004).
The key to a sustainability evaluation system is determining who conforms, who does not, and the validity ofthe determination. Assessment and certification systems
vary depending on who is responsible for completingthe assessment and who is responsible for ensuring thata product, service provider, or management system conforms to a standard. The three basic types are:

UH–CTAHR. . . Using a Sustainability Evaluation System

RM-17 — Dec. 2008

Table 1. Types of sustainability evaluation systems (based on Honey 2002).
Type

ExampleAdvantages

Disadvantages

Prescriptive
How efforts will beaccomplished

Strict use of Energy Star
and water saving appliances and fixtures

Applicant knows
what is required

No test of the final product,
while restricting innovation
and alternative solutions

Performance
What will be achieved

Solid waste reduction by
50 percent

Allows alternative
solutions

More ambiguity and imprecision, with the burden of
proof on the applicant

Management system
Elements of sustainable
management processes

Monitor utility usage
and waste stream

Allows alternative
solutions

No requirements to improve performance• First-party assessment/certification involves the suppliers assessing themselves and declaring themselvesin conformance. For example, HEA and DBEDT assessments are done by the businesses themselves, sothey are considered to be “first party.” At the sametime, HEA and DBEDT certify their assessment
programs, so they are considered to be first-party
certification programs.
• Second-party assessment/certification involves the customers or purchasers assessing the suppliers and/or theirproducts and assuring that they are in conformation.
• Third-party assessment/certification is done by anindependent organization not related to the supplier or
the purchaser, and it may be mandatory or voluntary.
If the third party is a recognized standards-developing
organization, the standards are “formal,” while thoseorganizations that are more ad hoc and do not reflect a
broad-based consensus are consider to provide “informal” standards. The status of the standard-developer
and their range of uses help determine which standards
are formal and which are informal.
Tourism certification programs mandated by governments are more rigorous and expensive than voluntary,private-sector programs. Voluntary programs around theworld examine conventional tourism, sustainable tourism, and ecotourism, although their quality varies greatly(Bien 2004). Rivera (2004) concluded that third-party
assessment/certification is most effective.

Accreditation is the process used to certify the certifiers, which is crucial to third-party systems that rely heavily on accreditation to provide credibility. No international accreditation program exists for tourism, although
work is now underway to establish such a program. Most
accreditation systems use the same evaluation methods as
are used in certification, but peer review is also utilized
as an option. Generally, the peer review process includes
self-evaluation, on-site assessment by auditors, and judgment by an accreditation body. Because, in general, thegoal of accreditation is to enhance credibility with clientsand the public, everyone involved needs to understandthe scope of the accreditation program (Honey 2002).
HEA’s and DBEDT’s programs are not accredited.
The long-term goal of a sustainability evaluation
system is to gain the recognition of the tourism sector
and those associated with it so that they rely upon theaccreditation program. Accreditation and recognition address credibility, but acceptance requires that producers
and customers understand the benefits of certification.
A complementary marketing effort will be needed toalert all stakeholders about issues to ensure that thesystem evolves over time to produce the desired benefits.
Once acceptance occurs, the marketplace is expected
to provide an incentive to certified suppliers so that anincreased return on investment results in the tourism
sector’s willingness and ability to fund the program inorder to support the system.
5

UH–CTAHR

Achieving Sustainable Tourism in Hawai‘i . . .

Conclusion
Movement toward sustainable tourism is a long-termgoal that will require changes in the tourism sector thatneed to be outlined in a strategic sustainable tourism planand implemented over the long term. According to Mak(2008), Hawai‘i does not have such a plan, and its absence
will prevent the state from moving toward sustainable
tourism in any meaningful way. The process of establishing a sustainability evaluation system to ensure that
progress toward this goal occurs requires an open dialog
that includes important stakeholders and others who may
be interested and prevents any one interest group fromcontrolling the discussion (Medina 2005). A commitment
to political progress is also needed, as change may be athreat to the beneficiaries of the status quo. Sustainability
in the tourism sector will not come about in a short periodof time, nor can conflict be avoided; therefore, care must
be taken to resolve differences.
At the same time, major stakeholders who prefer a
grading mechanism within a certification system to apass/fail approach need to be acknowledged, and these
options should be considered, because a grading mechanism provides a means of tracking progress, thereby providing management with some incentives for changing
behaviors. A useful system will need to be supported by
tourism-sector groups, government operators, and customers. In addition, plans must include a self-financing
component in order to be successful. One way to proceed
is to implement a particular international certification
program within the state, with its more generic yet welltested standards. Another approach would be to have
local Hawai‘i-based policymakers begin the process bybuilding on the work that has been done both locally andinternationally to develop a program that is unique to the
Hawai‘i and acceptable to diverse stakeholder groups.
Literature cited
Bien, A. 2004. A simple user’s guide to certification forsustainable tourism and ecotourism. The International
Ecotourism Society.
Cox, L.J., and J. Cusick. 2006. What is Sustainable
Development? University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources,
Resource Management 14. 4 p. www.ctahr.hawaii.
edu/oc/freepubs/pdf/RM-14.pdf.

6RM-17 — Dec. 2008

Hawai‘i 2050 Sustainability Task Force. 2008. Hawai‘i
2050 Sustainability Plan.
Hawai‘i Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism. 2005. Planning for sustainable
tourism in Hawai‘i: Economic and environmental
assessment modeling study.
Hawai‘i Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism, Green Business Program website.
http://hawaii.gov/dbedt/info/energy/resource/greenbusiness. Accessed 12 September 2008.
Hawai‘i Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism. 2007. Research and Economic
Analysis Division visitor plant inventory.
Hawai‘i Ecotourism Association. 2008. www.hawaiiecotourism.org. Accessed 10 September 2008.
Hawai‘i Tourism Authority. 2005. Hawai‘i Tourism Strategic Plan (2005–2015).
Honey, M. 2002. Ecotourism and certification setting
standards in practice. Island Press, Washington,
D.C.
Hunter, C., and H. Green. 1995.) Tourism and the environment: A sustainable relationship? Routledge,
New York.
Kozak, M., and K. Nield. 2004. The role of quality andeco-labeling systems in destination benchmarking.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism 12(2): 138–148.
Mak, J. 2008. Developing a dream destination: Tourism
and tourism policy planning in Hawaii. University of
Hawai‘i Press.
Medina, L.K. 2005. Ecotourism and certification: Confronting the principles and pragmatics of socially
responsible tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism
13(3): 281–295.
Riveria, J. 2004. Institutional pressures and voluntary
environmental behavior in developing countries:
Evidence from the Costa Rican hotel industry. Society
and Natural Resources 17: 779–797.
The World Tourism Organization. www.unwto.org. Accessed 4 August 2008.
Vieth, G., and L.J. Cox. 2001. Sustainable use management of Hanauma Bay. University of Hawai‘i at
Mānoa, College of Tropical Agriculture and Human
Resources, Resource Management 11. 2 p. www.ctahr.
hawaii.edu/oc/freepubs/pdf/RM-11.pdf.