Debatespotting: Travel Rants attacks industry bodies' overseas events
July 29, 2008
There's a lively debate on Travel Rants about ABTA's Travel Convention taking place overseas (it is common for ABTA, ITT and AITO to hold conferences abroad).
I've pointed out that all registrations include a carbon offset premium, and Kevin at Travolution has commented that,
In my opinion, conferences are often hosted overseas to 1) get the delegate numbers 2) introduce travel companies to new products/regions 3) provide a positive environment for business to get done.
In addition to that, decamping to the UK for environmental reasons would be read as a tacit admission that flying is wrong.
Travel bodies won't want to be seen to think that - not least because they don't think it.
Some other issues that have come up:
- Leisure vs business travel: is flying for pleasure fine, but flying for business wrong?
- Leading by example: should industry events stay at home, or work to demonstrate that sustainable travel is possible?
Take a look, and/or let us know what you think below.
Nathan Midgley
Martin Couzins
Comments (2)
I agree with you guys, we need to prove that travel is not all evil. But as one comment on travel-rants said, people moan but how many take action in their own lives. We experience this trying to get customers to pay any kind of carbon offset, the interest is nearly zero.
Posted by Nick | July 30, 2008 10:31 AM
Posted on July 30, 2008 10:31
Thanks Nick. If the argument was whether these events could look for better and more innovative ways to mitigate their effects on the environment, I wouldn't have a problem with that.
But as you say it's the job of the industry to demonstrate that travel can be force for good, and you don't achieve that by staying at home.
However, I do think you could argue that the industry isn't making that point well enough (some of the consumer comments on TR certainly suggest it isn't).
Posted by Nathan Midgley | July 30, 2008 12:49 PM
Posted on July 30, 2008 12:49