While working on a research paper on climate adaptation in tourism, I had an eye-opening consultation with a Kerala-based social enterprise.
Over a decade of working in local villages, they developed a strong community tourism model that embeds tourism into the existing agrarian routine of farmers, and allows travellers to authentically engage with the community. Since inception, their primary audience has been conscious travellers from Europe, seeking slow travel and meaningful experiences that bring economic and social prosperity to regions of Kerala off the typical tourist trail.
Flying guilt – or flygskam – though, has had unintended consequences. The same conscious travellers, ridden by flying guilt in recent years, have repeatedly cancelled their trips to the region. Their decision to pursue lower footprint travel that doesn’t involve flying has directly impacted community tourism in these parts of Kerala, where tourism revenue beautifully supplemented increasingly unpredictable agricultural incomes.
As someone who often finds herself struck by flying guilt, I’m learning that the idea of flying – or not flying – is a lot more complex.
What is flygskam anyway, and how did it start?
Flygskam, a Swedish term that translates to flying shame or flying guilt, acknowledges the environmental impact of flying. It refers to the increasingly common feelings of shame or guilt while taking a flight.
It started as a social movement in Sweden, led by climate activist Greta Thunberg, and quickly became a worldwide flight shaming movement. The goal is to encourage people to think about their flying footprint, and reduce it as much as possible.