Cruising and sustainability along the Inland Passage

Note on the source. This source should be read with caution: it may be funded by the sector, a draft or a thesis, or rely on self-reported or modelled data. See the limitations below.

The question

What socio-economic and environmental costs does loosely regulated cruise tourism generate along the Inland Passage (Alaska and British Columbia), and what management framework could make it more sustainable for communities, cruise lines and the environment?

The method

Critical reflection chapter based on secondary sources (industry reports, 2007 Canadian port statistics, press and regulatory documents from 2005-2009); no original data collection.

What the study finds

4.1 hoursaverage time ashore for passengers and crewAccording to the chapter, most of the 1.6 million passengers and crew who went ashore in 2007 stayed on land for just 4.1 hours on average, too short for local businesses to reach them or for visitors to get to know the place.

90%of excursion buyers booking through the cruise lineCiting secondary sources, the chapter reports that almost two in three cruise passengers (67%) buy only duty-free goods in line-affiliated shops, and that 90% of excursion buyers book through the cruise line instead of a local operator, so part of the spending escapes the destination.

≈ Cdn$169estimated impact per passenger in CanadaAn industry estimate (BREA) cited in the chapter credits 2007 spending by passengers, crew and suppliers with more than Cdn$1.5 billion in direct and indirect impact in Canada (about Cdn$169 per passenger) and almost 10,000 full- and part-time jobs.

US$50Alaska state tax per passengerFollowing a 2006 voter-approved initiative, Alaska levies a US$50 state tax per passenger, on top of port taxes in Ketchikan (US$7) and Juneau (US$8). The same rule requires discharge permits and independent inspectors on every ship.

Fears that the new taxes would drive ships and passengers away did not materialise: departures, visitors and spending rose in 2007-2008. According to press sources cited, the law brought the state over US$100 million, almost a fifth of which went to port towns for cruise-related works.
In 2008 Alaska's environmental agency issued ten violation notices and cited eight ships for air pollution, although the cruise industry association played this down (10 violations out of 224 readings). The text also reports felony convictions for dumping waste at sea against every major cruise line.
The chapter proposes voluntary limits on the number of ships in port each day, a shift towards smaller ships and ports, and subsidies or credits encouraging lines to hand excursions to local guides and firms so more spending stays local.

Why it matters for ports and cities

The case illustrates two common problems at ports of call: very short stays and spending that largely ends up outside the community. It also suggests that a per-passenger levy earmarked for environmental checks and port works did not curb traffic in the years observed.

Limitations

No original data: figures come from industry reports, press articles and websites, often cited second-hand; the tone is partly argumentative. Data refer to 2007-2009.

Full reference and source

Ringer, G. (year n/a). Beyond the Cruise: Navigating Sustainable Policy and Practice in Alaska’s Inland Passage. Capitolo 13 del volume 'Cruise Tourism in Polar Regions' (pp. 205–220); editore non indicato nel documento.

Read the original study ↗

Summary written by the ODYBOAT Observatory in our own words. Tables and figures belong to the authors.