Republished content: Read the original post

Usually my answer is no. Why? Because I believe boycotts generally cause more harm to local people than they do government regimes. And they do very little to stop groups from committing animal welfare or human rights atrocities. Can you think of a single country with a squeaky-clean record on human rights, animal welfare, freedom of speech, or environmental protection?

Egypt scored worst for human rights in 2021, according to Statista, Japan slaughters dolphins each year in Taiji, Botswana has been evicting San Bushmen from their ancestral lands, Brazil is clearing swathes of Amazon rainforest, while Saudi Arabia is home to one of the world’s most oppressive regimes for women, where it is also illegal to be LGBTQ.

If we start boycotting whole destinations for ethical reasons, where do we stop? In my experience, responsible tourism can hold the greatest benefits for marginalised people, or those struggling as a result of the ethical issues at hand.

The key is ensuring our money goes where it’s needed: straight to communities, not governments. The question isn’t “should” we travel to destinations with poor ethical records. The question is, “how” do we travel in a way that supports the people and environments that most need it.

I believe in promoting holidays, not destinations – holidays that provide local people with sustainable incomes, protect habitats and champion the conservation of endangered species.

While I rarely support country boycotts, I do believe in boycotting some types of holidays or activities that go against these aims – things like big cruises, orphanage volunteering, elephant-back riding or visiting zoos.

None of this is black and white and, of course, there are exceptions. In response to pleas from our Ukrainian partners, Responsible Travel has removed any trips to Russia. Standing in solidarity with them while another country invades theirs without provocation feels like the right thing to do.

Before Russia, the only country we had boycotted was Myanmar, in response to the democratically elected leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s call to do so. At the time, most of the hotels were in the military junta’s hands and it was very difficult to travel in a way that ensured tourist income reached local people.

If you are travelling to a controversial destination, I believe that one of the most powerful things you can do is to be informed. If you are visiting somewhere with poor women’s rights records, find a trip that specifically visits women’s co-operatives or supports female-owned enterprises. If animal welfare is an issue, avoid restaurants selling whale meat, or sanctuaries making their animals perform. Let your money do the talking and make sure it stays in local hands.