Summary

The principal drawback of the notion of tourism sustainability lies in its inherent ambiguity, multifaceted nature and, as Mihalic [1] states, the often sluggish pace of its implementation. The concept of social responsibility enables each group of tourism actors to acquire the knowledge, attitudes and mindsets required to engage in sustainable behaviour whilst undertaking tourism activities. It facilitates an understanding of the consequences of their behaviour, prompts them to consider their options and priorities, and encourages them to decide how and to what extent they will fulfill their responsibilities. At the same time, it is necessary to go beyond the “marketing framework” of declaring and implementing social responsibility and connect it in a planned and holistic manner with the solution of fundamental destination problems, with the needs of local residents and with the sustainable development of the destination [2]. But the structures of society, especially Euro-Atlantic values, do not sufficiently accommodate this responsible behaviour. In particular, there is a lack of understanding and application of the concept of ecosystem services, a strongly anthropocentric conception of the role of humans in the Earth’s ecosystems, and a very limited ability to go beyond self-interest in drawing on the so-called “tragedy of the commons”. The Euro-Atlantic civilisation has gradually created an attitude of entitlement, which automatically demands a continuous growth of its welfare. However, wise people say that it is impossible to grow on a finite planet. If the welfare is not currently growing, it is considered a failure of the relevant authorities. The success of this society is judged primarily by the results visibly leading to an increase in well-being and/or the well-being of other members of society. However, the consequences of their actions on the state of subsistence resources and living conditions for the future generations play a zero or marginal role in this assessment.