Heritage, Carbon, and Conservation: Reflections on the TSS Earnslaw in a Protected Landscape

Travelling aboard the heritage TSS Earnslaw on Lake Wakatipu, with the soaring peaks of Fiordland National Park rising in the distance, offers an evocative reminder of the layered histories embodied within protected landscapes. Launched in 1912, the Earnslaw is both a living museum piece and a symbol of regional identity. Yet its operation — still powered by coal and consuming roughly one ton per return journey, producing around 2.4 tonnes of CO₂ — foregrounds the central dilemma shaping contemporary heritage tourism: how can culturally significant experiences be maintained without undermining the ecological values of the very landscapes that make them meaningful?

Protected Landscapes as Living Social–Ecological Systems

Protected landscapes such as those found within the Te Wāhipounamu World Heritage Area are not solely conserved for their natural attributes. According to IUCN Category V principles, they represent areas where the interaction of people and nature has produced distinct ecological, cultural, and aesthetic features over time (Phillips, 2002). The Earnslaw, once vital transport infrastructure, is today a curated heritage experience that contributes to regional tourism economies and reinforces collective place identity.

Yet these same landscapes function as complex social–ecological systems, where tourism, local livelihoods, ecological processes, and governance structures interact dynamically (Morse, 2023). In such systems, heritage attractions can deliver meaningful social and economic benefits — but only if their impacts remain within the ecological thresholds necessary to safeguard landscape integrity.

Tourism, Emissions, and the Paradox of Heritage in National Parks

The operation of a coal-fired vessel within a national park region encapsulates a broader paradox in protected area tourism. On one hand, attractions like the TSS Earnslaw sustain jobs, stimulate local economies, and support community resilience (Clark, 2024; Clark, 2025). They also enable visitors to engage with regional histories and cultural narratives embedded in the landscape.

On the other hand, heritage tourism can impose measurable ecological costs. Tourism already contributes approximately 8% of global CO₂ emissions, and high-carbon experiences — even those with cultural value — challenge the sustainability commitments of both operators and destination managers (Higham & Font, 2021; Leung et al., 2018). In Aotearoa New Zealand, concerns have been raised about the cumulative pressures of visitor activity on fragile protected areas, from carbon emissions to infrastructure demands (Higham et al., 2019).

The Earnslaw thus stands at the intersection of heritage conservation, economic necessity, and environmental responsibility. Its continued operation raises difficult but necessary questions about what forms of heritage are compatible with the future of low-carbon protected landscapes.

Towards Integrated Landscape Governance

My doctoral research is positioned within these tensions and is guided by the question:

How can protected landscapes, historically designed for conservation and recreation, also act as drivers of local economic resilience and community wellbeing — without compromising their ecological integrity?

Addressing this question requires integrated governance approaches that recognise protected landscapes as multifunctional spaces. Scholars argue that sustainable tourism in such settings must align heritage values with emissions reductions, ecological monitoring, and community benefit-sharing mechanisms (Woodhouse et al., 2022; Yu et al., 2025). Tools such as ecological integrity assessments and resilience frameworks provide pathways for balancing cultural continuity with environmental limits.

Standing aboard the Earnslaw, watching coal being fed into its firebox as Fiordland’s mountains emerged through the steam, the contradictions of managing heritage in protected landscapes became powerfully tangible. This iconic vessel demonstrates both the significance of cultural heritage and the urgent need to reconcile it with contemporary sustainability imperatives.

As protected landscapes continue to serve conservation goals, provide recreational opportunities, and support local economies, examples like the TSS Earnslaw highlight the importance of developing nuanced, systems-based approaches capable of navigating competing values. These tensions do not diminish the value of heritage tourism — rather, they underscore the need for deliberate, adaptive strategies that enable cultural and ecological futures to coexist.

References

Baloch, Q. B., et al. (2022). Impact of tourism development upon environmental sustainability: A global analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research.

Clark, C. (2024). Building community resilience and adaptive capacity in a nature-based tourism destination. Journal of Travel Research.

Clark, C. (2025). Rewilding as a destination development phenomenon. Tourism Management (in press).

Higham, J., Espiner, S., & Fountain, J. (2019). The environmental impacts of tourism in Aotearoa New Zealand. Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment.

Higham, J., & Font, X. (2021). Code red for sustainable tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism.

Leung, Y.-F., et al. (2018). Tourism and Visitor Management in Protected Areas: Guidelines for Sustainability. IUCN.

Morse, W. (2023). Protected area tourism and management as a social–ecological complex adaptive system. Frontiers in Sustainable Tourism.

Phillips, A. (2002). Management Guidelines for IUCN Category V Protected Landscapes/Seascapes. IUCN.

Woodhouse, E., et al. (2022). Rethinking entrenched narratives about protected areas and human wellbeing. People and Nature.

Yu, M., et al. (2025). Landscape ecological integrity assessment to improve protected area management. Conservation (MDPI).