Antarctica is a fragile continent where people are not meant to exist. However, we do go there, and through technological innovation, we thrive, leaving our footprint on this continent through science, commercial activities and through our mere presence. It is now recognised that this human presence may directly threaten the stability Of Antarctica and may also alter the environment through activities conducted on national and global scales. Therefore, it is also on such scales that decision-makers must consider how to reduce impacts that are found to be more than minor. This report identifies how the capacity to create impact and effect change is collective. The global community, national governments and Antarctic programmes, and individuals all have the capacity to impact upon Antarctica, directly and indirectly. The actions of these groups should be defined by decision-making criteria, used by national govemments to form rules and guidelines that aim to reduce any major human footprint in Antarctica. At present there is a gap between high-level policy and ground-level management. The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) used to access activities in Antarctica is limited, as it does not fully consider cumulative impacts and fails to recognise qualitative value judgements, such as the intrinsic value Of Antarctica. A more strategic approach is warranted, where a vision for the future of Antarctica is used as the basis for decision-making. This provides a target to work towards and does not allow cumulative effects to threaten future stability. Ultimately, with global endeavour, an overall Antarctic-wide vision and collaborative decision-making framework on how to reduce the human footprint may be developed. The international cooperation that exists through the Antarctic Treaty System provides a better opportunity of achieving such a goal in Antarctica than on any other continent on Earth. Antarctica is a fragile continent where people are not meant to exist. However, we do go there, and through technological innovation, we thrive, leaving our footprint on this continent through science, commercial activities and through our mere presence. It is now recognised that this human presence may directly threaten the stability Of Antarctica and may also alter the environment through activities conducted on national and global scales. Therefore, it is also on such scales that decision-makers must consider how to reduce impacts that are found to be more than minor. This report identifies how the capacity to create impact and effect change is collective. The global community, national governments and Antarctic programmes, and individuals all have the capacity to impact upon Antarctica, directly and indirectly. The actions of these groups should be defined by decision-making criteria, used by national govemments to form rules and guidelines that aim to reduce any major human footprint in Antarctica. At present there is a gap between high-level policy and ground-level management. The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) used to access activities in Antarctica is limited, as it does not fully consider cumulative impacts and fails to recognise qualitative value judgements, such as the intrinsic value Of Antarctica. A more strategic approach is warranted, where a vision for the future of Antarctica is used as the basis for decision-making. This provides a target to work towards and does not allow cumulative effects to threaten future stability. Ultimately, with global endeavour, an overall Antarctic-wide vision and collaborative decision-making framework on how to reduce the human footprint may be developed. The international cooperation that exists through the Antarctic Treaty System provides a better opportunity of achieving such a goal in Antarctica than on any other continent on Earth.