Hitesh Mehta: Ecotourism’s heavy hitter

Today, ecotourism is on the rise and major hotel chains such as Ritz Carlton and Starwood (NYSE: HOT) are creating offshoot “eco-brands.” Mehta, a landscape architect with the southern Florida planning and landscape architecture firm EDSA, is now the longest-serving member of the International Ecotourism Society and generally considered the world’s foremost expert in ecotourism. He is the primary editor of the International Ecolodge Guidelines and the author of chapters on site planning and architectural design, as well as a respected academic.

When Mehta first took an interest in ecotourism, the term “ecolodge” was defined as a nature-dependent tourist lodge that met the philosophy and principles of ecotourism.

Since then Mehta has refined the definition to 10 overarching principles that are widely used as ecolodge guidelines, three of which he deems essential to any development claiming to be an ecolodge:

1. Some portion of any money made by the hotel from tourism must go toward protecting the local environment;
2. The establishment must be doing something beyond employment to benefit the local population; and
3. The lodge must provide tourists with a rich, interpretive experience that introduces them to local culture and ecology.

In addition to the three core principles, an ecolodge must incorporate at least two of the seven remaining principles to qualify as an “authentic” ecolodge, Mehta says. A hotel calling itself an ecolodge must also be located in nature. “You can’t have an ecolodge in downtown Manhattan,” Mehta says, “and you can’t have one between a Sheraton and a Marriott (NYSE: MAR), even if it’s on a beach.”

Mehta spoke with Sustainable Industries Journal from a locally owned resort in Antigua, where he was working on a new book about authentic ecolodges and watching the World Cup of Cricket.

SIJ: In your opinion, what are the consequences of ecotourism’s recent popularity?

Mehta: I think over the last four or five years it has started to be looked upon as something that is for real and not a trend. It’s here to stay, and it has become mainstream. Now that visibility has increased, there’s more demand for ecotourism, which means supply is increasing. This creates more competition, and so authenticity has increased as well. On the negative side, people are hopping on the bandwagon and greenwashing.

People who do nature tours into the forest have started calling them eco-tours. Or there are lodges that, because they’re in nature and they ask you to keep towels on the rack to save water, think they can call themselves ecolodges. I call them the fish-and-chicken vegetarians of the ecotourism industry. They know it’s popular so they use the word ‘ecotourism’ to sell.

SIJ: What are the greatest challenges involved in turning a profit in ecotourism?

Mehta: To date, most ecolodges have been started by mom-and-pop kind of people. They are very committed and want to make a difference, but they tend to come from a naturalist or sociologist background, rather than a marketing or finance background, so consequently they don’t do enough marketing, and they tend not to have a lot of business sense. Another big challenge for ecolodges are the travel-safety advisories issued by the United States. Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair and their administrations tend to put advisories on any countries they’re having problems with, whether they are truly unsafe for travelers or not. This affects tourism in general, but especially ecolodges, since they tend to be located in rural areas.

SIJ: What are the largest expenses incurred in designing an ecolodge compared with a conventional hotel?

Mehta: Alternative technology is usually the big expense — solar panels, wind power, lowwattage light fittings. And, if you really want to go the authentic way, you’ll want to do a lot more analysis in the planning phase. Conventional lodges are always taking shortcuts on that, which results in a lot more impacts in the end because they haven’t considered social and environmental issues.

SIJ: What are the primary criticisms you’ve heard from environmental activists about ecotourism? How about from developers? How do you answer them?

Mehta: Some activists feel that ecotourism takes people deeper into places that were probably not accessible before, which creates a chance for greater damage to those areas. I look at that whole thing in two ways — those who are greenwashing and not following the principles of ecotourism are causing legitimate concern for activists. But I don’t see anything wrong with taking a few people into deeper areas as long as it is done sensitively. In fact, doing so can also generate money for improved protection of those areas.

For developers, the problem with ecolodges is that ecotourism requires low-impact development, and they won’t make as much money as they would with a larger resort. They also cannot cut corners on an ecolodge that they would on a typical hotel project. And, they have to leave some of the money made in the development in the host country. With traditional hotels, the bulk of the money made goes back to the home country of the developer. American ecotourists are some of the most aware and have the most money, but there is not one single ecolodge on mainland U.S. soil. Why? Because developers want to build quickly and make large profits as soon as possible.

That’s not to say that there’s no money in ecolodges. As with any green building when you use alternative technologies, up front you will spend more, but in the long term you will save money, and there are thousands of examples of that. Also ecolodges, especially today, get fantastic marketing and free press, which is worth a lot of money, and it’s also a way to distinguish a property as unique, which helps edge out competition.

SIJ: Which of your projects do you view as the most successful?

Mehta: The Crosswaters Ecolodge in China. It’s not just a matter of monetary success.

Although, I can’t see why it won’t bring in a lot of money; rooms are $400 a night. It is successful on many other levels. Not only did it win the top award in landscape architecture in the world [from the American Society of Landscape Architects], but in a place like China where everyone is just interested in totally destroying the environment and polluting rivers, this project has made a lot of people aware — government officials, tourists, businesspeople — that you can build in an environmentally sustainable way and still make money. It is really getting the word out.

SIJ: How important is it that, in addition to respecting natural resources in its design and operations, an ecolodge incorporates a connection to nature in its appearance and feel?

Mehta: I consider myself one of the people at the forefront of this, really pushing the appearance and feel aspects of ecolodges. One of the criteria I came up with is that an ecolodge needs to fit within either the physical or cultural context of its surroundings. I think this is very important; you can’t have an Islamic-looking building in the Everglades or a big bright pink and orange stucco building in Yellowstone. It doesn’t make sense.

The feel is very important as well, and it’s something we have been really questioning and putting into practice. The whole approach when building ecolodges needs to be what I call a quadruple-bottom-line approach. I am of the strong belief that even with positive triple-bottom line a project is not necessarily sustainable. There’s a fourth, metaphysical dimension. If you don’t respect the energies flowing through the site, you cannot have sustainability.