Ashveen Kutowaroo FCG PMP® LLM MSc
Founder & Policy Advocate
JP Narayan Centre for Sustainable Development and World Peace
I recently attended the launch event of a report on sustainable tourism by the International Financial Corporation. Following the event, two questions remained on my mind. The first one was financial: Can public-private partnerships accelerate climate-smart tourism projects without increasing long-term public debt? The second one was more brain-racking: With more than 40 hotels already holding sustainability certifications, how do we measure whether these labels are actually reducing carbon emissions and environmental damage, rather than simply using these for branding and commercial purposes only?
These are not technical questions reserved for economists or environmental consultants. They go to the heart of Mauritius’ future. Tourism is not merely another sector of the economy: It is the bloodstream of the nation. According to the recent World Bank Group Country Climate and Development Report, tourism-related industries account for roughly 20 per cent of Mauritius’ GDP, 13.5 per cent of employment, and 37 per cent of exports.
Yet the same report warns that, under a business-as-usual scenario, tourism revenues could decline by between 6 and 11 per cent by 2050 because of rising temperatures, coastal erosion, coral reef degradation and climate-related damage to infrastructure, if concrete action is not undertaken. In simple terms, Mauritius faces a paradox – The country depends heavily on tourism, but the current tourism model may however be contributing to environmental pressures that threaten the very beauty visitors come to experience.
The challenge now is no longer about attracting tourists alone. It is about deciding what kind of tourism Mauritius wishes to build for the next generation.
The temptation and danger of debt
For a small island state with currently limited fiscal space, climate resilience comes with a hefty price tag. The World Bank estimates that Mauritius will require approximately US$5.6 billion in additional climate-related and structural investments between 2026 and 2050 to counter the impact of climate change. These investments, though not optional, range from coastal protection and renewable energy infrastructure to water management systems and tourism diversification.
Naturally, governments cannot finance everything alone.
This is where public-private partnerships, commonly known as PPPs, enter the discussion. In theory, PPPs allow governments to collaborate with private investors to build infrastructure and deliver services while sharing risks and costs. For Mauritius, the attraction is obvious. Private capital could accelerate projects such as eco-tourism infrastructure, renewable energy systems for hotels, sustainable transport networks, wastewater treatment facilities, and climate-resilient coastal developments. But PPPs are not magic. If poorly negotiated, they can create hidden liabilities for taxpayers for decades. Around the world, there are examples where governments entered ambitious infrastructure partnerships only to discover later that guaranteed returns, operational subsidies or rescue packages eventually fell back onto public finances. The Ébène Car Park stands as a practical example of how public-private partnerships can support modern infrastructure development in Mauritius. Developed through a collaboration between the state-owned property group Landscope (Mauritius) Ltd and the private joint venture Laxmanbhai & Co (Mauritius) Ltd – IREKO Construction Ltd, the project demonstrates how shared investment and expertise can help address urban mobility and parking challenges in emerging economic hubs such as Ebène.
Mauritius already carries a public debt level estimated at around 88.5 per cent of GDP in 2025. That figure alone explains why the first question raised during the IFC presentation was so important. The real issue is not whether PPPs should exist. The real issue is what kind of PPPs Mauritius should pursue. A climate-smart PPP should not simply transfer public land or public guarantees to private operators. It should be designed around measurable environmental outcomes, transparent accountability and long-term national resilience.
For example, if a hotel consortium receives incentives for a sustainability project, the agreement should contain binding targets related to renewable energy usage, water efficiency, waste reduction and coastal preservation. Otherwise, the country risks socialising the risks while privatising the profits.
The World Bank report itself cautions that PPPs require stronger legal frameworks, better institutional capacity and careful monitoring of contingent liabilities. That warning deserves serious attention.
Sustainability certificates: genuine progress or elegant marketing?
Mauritius has, over the years, become increasingly proud of its sustainability-labelled hotels.
Many establishments now display international eco-certifications, sustainable tourism badges, or climate-conscious branding. These initiatives should not be dismissed lightly. Some hotels have genuinely invested in solar energy, water recycling systems, reef protection initiatives and reduced plastic consumption. Yet the second question raised at the presentation strikes at an uncomfortable reality. How do we distinguish between authentic environmental transformation and corporate greenwashing?
A sustainability certificate on a hotel website means little if the surrounding lagoon continues to deteriorate, if groundwater is overexploited, or if waste disposal systems remain inadequate. The tourism sector globally has become very good at the language of sustainability. Terms such as “eco-luxury”, “carbon-neutral”, “green destination” and “responsible travel” are now powerful marketing tools. But climate change does not respond to marketing campaigns. It responds to measurable emissions, measurable pollution levels and measurable ecological recovery.
Mauritius therefore needs a far more rigorous system of monitoring and verification.
Instead of counting how many hotels hold certificates, authorities and industry bodies should begin publicly tracking indicators such as:
- Actual annual carbon emissions per occupied room
- Water consumption per guest night
- Percentage of renewable energy used
- Waste recycling and reduction rates
- Reduction in single-use plastics
- Coral reef health in adjacent marine zones
- Coastal erosion data near hotel developments
- Wastewater treatment performance
- Biodiversity preservation outcomes
These indicators may sound technical, but they are the only way to determine whether sustainability claims are translating into real environmental gains. Otherwise, certifications risk becoming little more than prestige labels aimed at environmentally conscious tourists abroad. The irony is that many visitors today are becoming more sophisticated. International travellers increasingly want proof, not promises. They want transparency, traceability and evidence. In that sense, rigorous environmental accountability could actually strengthen Mauritius’ competitiveness rather than weaken it.
Water: the hidden crisis behind tourism growth
Perhaps the most overlooked issue in the tourism debate is freshwater. Mauritius is already facing increasing water stress. The CCDR report notes that average annual rainfall has declined by 8 per cent since the 1950s and could decline by another 13 per cent by 2050.
Meanwhile, tourism remains heavily water-intensive. Luxury hotels require enormous quantities of water for pools, landscaping, laundry services, spas and guest consumption. Yet only around 3 per cent of total rainfall is effectively utilised because of limited storage infrastructure and high losses in distribution systems.
This creates a difficult moral and economic question. Can Mauritius continue expanding high-volume coastal tourism while simultaneously facing worsening water scarcity?
The World Bank argues that Mauritius must transition towards a “high-value, low-volume” tourism model. In practice, this means attracting visitors who spend more while placing less pressure on natural resources. Such a transition will not be easy. It requires a fundamental shift in mindset. For years, tourism success was often measured by arrival numbers alone. More tourists meant more growth. But climate realities are now forcing countries like Mauritius to ask a deeper question: growth at what environmental cost?
The opportunity hidden inside the crisis
Despite the alarming climate projections, Mauritius still possesses significant advantages. The island has political stability, a sophisticated financial sector, strong international connectivity and an established tourism brand. Unlike many destinations, Mauritius also retains the possibility of repositioning itself early before climate pressures intensify further. The country could become a regional leader in climate-smart island tourism if it moves decisively. That means investing seriously in renewable energy, marine conservation, inland eco-tourism, sustainable agriculture linked to tourism supply chains, and climate-resilient infrastructure. It also means involving local communities more directly in tourism development.
Too often, sustainability conversations remain confined to conference rooms, consultants and international institutions. Yet fishermen, small guesthouse operators, artisans and coastal residents are often the first to experience environmental decline directly.
A climate-resilient tourism strategy cannot simply protect investor confidence. It must also protect livelihoods, ecosystems and social stability.
A question of credibility
Ultimately, the future of Mauritian tourism may depend less on slogans and more on credibility. International investors, tourists and climate finance institutions are increasingly scrutinising whether countries are genuinely transitioning towards sustainable models or merely adapting the language of sustainability for commercial purposes.
Mauritius therefore stands at an important crossroads. If PPPs are transparent, well-regulated and outcome-driven, they could unlock major climate investments without dangerously expanding public debt. If sustainability certifications are backed by independently verified environmental indicators, they could elevate Mauritius as a genuinely credible green destination. But if climate resilience becomes reduced to branding exercises and financial engineering, the country risks creating an illusion of sustainability while environmental vulnerabilities quietly deepen underneath. Climate change is no longer a distant scenario discussed only in international summits. In Mauritius, it is already reshaping coastlines, water systems, coral reefs and economic risks.
The real question is no longer whether Mauritius should pursue sustainable tourism. The real question is whether the country has the courage to measure sustainability honestly, finance it responsibly, and redefine tourism before climate realities redefine it first.
