Few people would disagree that travel has the potential to do a lot of good as well as a lot of bad.

Obviously ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are not absolute attributes and what may be considered ‘good’ in the short-term for one person or one community may not be so good for them in the long-term and may well at the same time be ‘bad’ for some other person or some other community group. 

As perhaps a helpful reminder, here are just some of the ‘good’ outcomes that travel can deliver:-
- Put money directly into the pockets of communities and individuals who might otherwise struggle to access a decent or regular income
- Help spread understanding between foreign visitors and host communities
- Help keep alive traditions that might otherwise not survive
- Help diversify an economy
- Help deliver much-needed funds for conservation and environmental protection projects

And here are some of the ‘bad’ outcomes that travel can deliver:-
- Contribute funds towards regimes that have questionable human rights records
- Contribute directly or indirectly towards environmental damage or pollution
- Cause disharmony and tension in a community or region by patronising one establishment over another one
- Potentially lead some people to assume that a destination is problem-free due to its inclusion in our portfolio

As an ethical tour operator, we’re always trying to ensure we’re doing as much ‘good’ as we can while minimising any associated ‘bad’. But getting this balance right– or even being able to discuss the nuances of any such decision - can be very difficult, especially in a world where healthy debates all too quickly have a tendency to become polarised and overheated.

So how do we decide if we should or shouldn’t offer trips to a particular destination or not? 

Naturally, if our decision to offer a destination has only ‘good’ outcomes, then it’s a no-brainer – let’s do it! And likewise if it only has ‘bad’ outcomes then it’s a no-brainer too – let’s not do it!

However what happens when – as in many cases – any decision we might make has both ‘good’ and ‘bad’ outcomes; and a decision to do no ‘bad’ will also mean removing the ‘good’ we might otherwise have done? While special interest groups, looking at our decision-making from a particular ‘pro’ or ‘anti’ stance might view the decision as simple and uncontroversial, for us, as an apolitical tour operator without any particular agenda, it is often much more nuanced and complicated.

We cannot claim a scientific approach to all our decision-making – and admittedly ‘public opinion' or ‘trending attitudes’ may sometimes play a part in pushing us towards a particular course of action -  but when faced with such dilemmas, here is a guide – compiled in part with reference to the guidelines produced by the not-for-profit association Roundtable Human Rights in Tourism - to some of the questions we will investigate in order to be able to make an informed and what we consider to be, the best overall decision.

Is our envisaged tour safe?

We would never run any tour that we didn’t deem to be safe. It goes without saying that no trip can ever be said to be risk-free but by keeping ourselves fully aware of the potential risks through various platforms (including our local partners, governmental advisory forums and independent security analysts) and by adopting a flexible attitude towards re-routing (or cancellation, if required) at all times, we would never run a trip that knowingly endangered any of our clients or local partners. We are definitively not danger-seekers.

Is our envisaged tour viable?

Some tours may be both legal and safe but unable - for logistical reasons - to be run in the way we would want to. Such factors could include the availability of suitable entry visas, flights and border crossings as well as reliable local partners, accommodation, transport and guides that meet our standards. Viability is a key aspect of tour design and planning.

What ‘good’ would our envisaged tour bring to the people, communities and environment that we’re visiting?

This forms a key part of our discussions with our local partners as we look at all the individual elements of a tour – accommodation, transport, restaurants, guides etc – and try to ensure that our tours benefit not just our clients but also our hosts. There is often a balance to be struck here as ultimately there is no benefit in us promoting a tour which has the potential to offer huge benefits to the destination country if it doesn’t sell, or if the tour does not deliver a positive experience for our clients also. As destinations evolve, this aspect of our decision-making needs constant review and forms a major part of the work of our Product & Operation teams.

What ‘bad’ would our envisaged tour bring to the people, communities and environment that we’re visiting?

It is important for us to be aware of any such aspects of our tours and to tackle them head-on. In some cases we may be able to minimise the ‘bad’ with a simple change to our envisaged accommodation or transport provision but in many cases there will be a price to pay (not necessarily financial) to minimising such aspects. Where it’s unavoidable, we will sometimes highlight this through our tour literature or through insights offered by guides; and sometimes we will avoid a region, experience or destination altogether if we feel the ‘bad’ significantly outweighs the ‘good’. Such decisions are never taken lightly and are always open to review. 

It’s perhaps worth noting that our default stance is that travel of the kind that we offer here at Wild Frontiers can typically do more ’good’ than ‘bad’. And while some people may call for a boycott of certain destinations, such action is not our preferred way of operating. By removing ourselves from any particular destination, we are depriving everyone in a destination of the potential benefits of our trips. And while we’re by no means perfect, we are at least very mindful and sincere in our aims to do more ‘good’, do less ‘bad’ and keep dialogues and connections open with our partners all over the world…assuming, of course, that it’s legal, safe and viable to do so!

Travel often poses some very difficult questions and we think it’s OK to be conflicted about the rights or wrongs of travelling to a particular destination as such decisions are rarely black or white. Travel will always remain a personal choice and we hope that this blog has gone some way to explaining the rationale behind our decision-making process. Now it’s up to you to come to your own conclusions.

For more, you can read our ‘Is it ethical to travel to controversial destinations?’ blog written by our Content Manager, Hayley.