TourismForumInternational (TFI) at the Reisepavillon in Hanover, 3 6 February 2005

Big is beautiful How good is mass tourism for development?

Date: Time: Place: Opening:

3 February 2005 19:30 - 22:30 Neues Rathaus Hannover, Hodlersaal Dr hc Herbert Schmalstieg, mayor of Hannover Dr Martin Tampe, Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) Sector Project Tourism and Sustainable Development Ms Ellen Bermann, Viaggi del Ventaglio, Tour Operators Initiative (UNEP-TOI) Mr Harold Goodwin, Responsible Tourism, Pro Poor Tourism Mr Heinz Fuchs, eed-Tourism Watch Ms Susy Karammel, Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) Sector Project Tourism and Sustainable Development Roland Streicher, ReNatour, forum anders reisen

Moderator: Prof Dr. Ludwig Ellenberg, Humboldt University in Berlin Panel:

In his opening speech, Hannovers mayor, Dr Herbert Schmalstieg, looked back on the fifteen-year development of the Reisepavillon from a small exhibition to a trade fair which the state capital Hannover takes an interest in and supports. Tourism today, he said, has changed and developed, generating new issues. Among them is the role tourism plays in the economies of travel destination countries following the tsunami disaster. Schmalstieg emphasised that the tsunami is just one more of the many emergencies in developing countries that both industrialised and developing countries urgently need to deal with and for which the requisite financial resources must be provided. Schmalstieg referred to the commitment shown by the city of Hannover, which at the municipal level supports a reconstruction project in Sri Lanka. Travel should, in the mayors opinion, also stimulate interest in confronting global problems. This evenings panel debate, he concluded, offers an outstanding opportunity to do so. Dr Martin Tampe welcomed the guests to the official opening ceremony of Tourism Forum International (TFI) 2005. Looking ahead to the scheduled TFI events, Tampe said that in addition to topics on which general unanimity prevails, such as sex tourism, controversial subjects had also been deliberately chosen. This was true of the evenings panel discussion, which concerned put simply mass tourism vs. eco-tourism. Tampe saw German development cooperation as being bound to pursue certain goals, including poverty reduction, conservation of natural resources, education and improvement of living conditions. The thesis that travel is bad for development is oversimplified. Tourism can also help shape framework conditions that could open up development opportunities and combat poverty. Whether tourism produces positive or negative impacts depends on various factors, such as governance and keeping certain agreements. Here, he said, development cooperation has the task of continually probing sore points and broaching controversial topics. Controversies must be worked through so that joint perspectives and mutual goals can be developed for tourism. With this in mind, Tampe wished those present a constructive, controversial

discussion. Dr Ludwig Ellenberg opened the discussion by arguing that people prefer smallscale tourism, small hotels in which the guest does not feel at all like a tourist, to large-scale tourism with its anonymous fortress-like hotels. Nevertheless, large-scale tourism is needed in order to concentrate the masses of travellers and channel off the negative impacts they generate. Today ways are being sought to make mass tourism less damaging and thus more sustainable. So Ellenberg began the discussion by asking the five experts on the panel how large-scale tourism could help to promote positive development. Mr Harold Goodwin stressed that mass tourism really does have some positive effects. Tourists did not want their vacation photos to show their giant hotels and preferred instead pictures of the little restaurant around the corner. This meant that small businesses could also benefit from mass tourism. Even so, the balance Goodwin drew was only a modest one: Pro-poor tourism has now existed since 1998 and in these seven years little has been done to let the poor profit more from tourism. Most programmes and projects in the tourism sector are large-scale and not tailored to the community level. Goodwin pointed out that although promotion of small and micro-enterprises in the tourist sector does offer good development possibilities, organisations such as the British Department for International Development (DFID) are still not oriented to this. Ms Susy Karammel reported that GTZ pays great attention to poverty reduction in developing countries through sustainable forms of mass tourism. All-inclusive resorts, too, could render a contribution to positive development. In the scope of an ongoing study, GTZ has conducted a screening process in three countries (Jamaica, the Dominican Republic and Nicaragua) and seven hotel complexes with a total of 2,500 employees. In respect to jobcreation, Karammel said, large hotels with two to three employment positions per room showed up better than small eco-lodges. The wages, too, were better than in small hotels. With regard to working conditions, she noted that the findings varied. Respondents at allinclusive resorts in Jamaica mentioned good training and career possibilities. Mr Heinz Fuchs stressed that the opportunities and risks of mass tourism are closely related, and wondered how they could be made discernable. Fuchs compared tourism to soccer, where there are concentrations of those representing supply and demand and where control has been assumed by financial managers who are interested above all in profit. In fact, however, Fuchs sees tourism as a team sport which is a matter of coordination and fair play, where different game cultures come together and the rules of sport are in force. In the lower leagues, i.e. in small-scale tourism, a more friendly football is played, while in the higher categories of mass tourism play is rougher. The positive effects of tourism are the democratisation processes it encourages and an increased cultural exchange which, however, has still not reached a satisfactory level. Tourism offers a chance for poverty reduction, but one which is not yet sufficiently used, and consequently mass tourism is not presently an instrument for poverty reduction. Mr Roland Streicher began his remarks with the question how mass tourism could be transformed for the better. To achieve far-reaching improvements in the sustainability of tourism, the major tour operators have to be brought on board. The large number of customers of the major companies provides enormous leverage for introducing measures toward sustainability, such as abandonment of throw-away packaging. The small operators of sustainable travel did indispensable pioneer work with the goal of growing into the market. The problem with mass tourism, Streicher said, is that it leaves too little money behind in the destination countries. But even ecologically compatible hiking-tourism can become a problem when too many people take it up. According to Streicher, four actors are important in making mass tourism sustainable: first, policy-makers must provide back-up support. Second, tour operators must pitch in and help. Here the small ones are easily persuaded, but the big operators are first and foremost interested in shareholder value and the related attitude that ecology doesnt pay. Third, an intensive dialogue must be conducted with the people in destination countries, and this must be done before projects and programmes begin and not, as often happens, afterwards, when it is too late for real participation. Fourth, the customers 2

played an important part as the demand for travel continued to increase. For the forum anders reisen, the current path to the objective of more sustainable tourism consists of further growth for small businesses while at the same time discussing the introduction of more sustainable forms of tourism with the large travel operators. Ms Ellen Bermann saw encouraging signs in the travel market: the model of sustainability is followed more and more by all travel operators as they recognise that otherwise there will soon be no more business. The large operators have especially great influence, e.g. on account of their negotiating power vis--vis the governments of destination countries. Besides that, they are influential with consumers, who for their part also exercise power through their buying decisions: that the large travel operators offer sustainable tourism packages also sends a signal to the consumers and influences their purchasing behaviour. If such packages were offered more often, they would also be in greater demand. The consumers, too, bear a responsibility: they must be prepared to pay the right prices for tourism products. Generally, small, medium-sized and large travel operators play different roles in the development of socially and environmentally sound tourism. What is important is that they are all moving in the same direction. Dr Ludwig Ellenberg, looking at the GTZ study presented, raised the question of whether the goal would have been reached if a future survey indicated that all those working in the tourist industry in destination countries were satisfied with their jobs. Naturally those working in tourism in developing countries earn more than in other sectors and many of their family members also live from these comparatively good wages, said Mr Heinz Fuchs. Nevertheless it is important to think further, for good wages for a part of the population also aggravate tensions among social groups. In addition, good wages becomes relative when compared, e.g. to the price travellers pay for one night in a hotel. Ms Ellen Bermann, too, took a critical view of the thesis: if the profit stays in the tourism sector, it does not promote development. Economic diversification is also needed, as development based solely on tourism is accompanied by a risk that is too great for the countries. Tourism, she suggested, should thus be planned within a wider framework. Mr Harold Goodwin emphasised that people in destination countries are in a kind of crossfire of interests. Women in Zimbabwe, for example, are glad to be able to assume the function of water carriers in tourism. At the same time it is unfortunate that there are no better qualified and better paid jobs for them in the hotels. But often the alternative is that there is no paying position for them at all. The governments of destination countries must pave the way for responsible tourist development, said Ms Susy Karammel. Jobs are created by tourism beyond the boundaries of the sector itself, e.g. at suppliers and in agriculture and transportation. In the subsequent round of questions and comments from the audience, Mr van Virt pointed out that the human dignity of those employed in tourism and having to do with tourists is more important than the money they earn from travellers. Small-scale tourism projects can meet this demand better than large ones. Ms Bodenkamp brought up the question of whether people always say what they really think in response to surveys such as GTZs, or if they do not tend in fact to make false statements guided by their interests. Susy Karammel referred to the indispensability of studies in systematically reflecting patterns of opinion. The opinions uttered in the study are clearly differentiated, she stated, and in an anonymous polling situation people were able to express themselves freely. Ms Ellen Bermann noted that the concept of happiness differs from one culture to the next. Dr Martin Tampe laid stress on the fact that the GTZ study, besides the question of incomes, also investigates other social and ecological aspects which due to lack of time had not been presented that evening. Ms Riedmiller reported that in her experience the large tour operators squeeze the small ones out of the market and that mass tourism has considerable social side effects. In 3

Muslim countries or regions such as Zanzibar, contact with tourists caused culture shock which led to growing harassment of women tourists and to an increase in fundamentalist trends from which local women also suffered. This shows that mass tourism does indeed have negative impacts as well. Dr Ludwig Ellenberg took up Harold Goodwins statement that hardly any progress had been achieved in the past seven years towards sustainable tourism. What must be done in order to ensure that the next seven years arent equally fruitless? he asked the panel members. Mr Harold Goodwin answered that he was suspicious of fast results. People were willing to do something, and a lot was happening on a small scale. But, he added, not much money was available for these small-scale projects and that made the work difficult. More effective work could certainly be done with financial resources on the order of millions. Ms Ellen Bermann emphasised that implementing participation-oriented project approaches and measures is better than pumping large sums of money into big projects. She added that it is important to build networks in the field of sustainable tourism in order to make work there more efficient. Seeing matters for once from another viewpoint is also productive. Ms Susy Karammel said that GTZ in its future work will approach the travel industry about becoming partners in the area of sustainable tourism. Mr Heinz Fuchs criticised the perspective taken by the GTZ study. Greater attention must be paid, he continued, to the question of how regional development can be structured to be more socially and environmentally sound and how tourism could contribute to this. In comments from the audience, Mr Haberstor observed that tourism is basically a reflection of the Western way of life. Small travel operators could do more to educate tourists in order to reduce culture shock to a minimum. He noted that a mixture of large and small operators is important. Mr Schrei commented that arguments expressed on the tourism question often stem from a bad conscience, and it was his impression that the GTZ study somewhat relieved this situation. But it is important, he felt, that partnerships be formed at the same eye level. It is simply no good transplanting Western culture to developing countries in the form of hotels. Dr Ludwig Ellenberg summarised the results of the discussion up to that point in three parts. First, he saw a trend in recent years for actors in the field of sustainable tourism to evolve from unyielding fundamentalism to flexible realism. Second, sustainable tourism is still a niche phenomenon and not yet a solution to the sectors problems, because it lacks the necessary volume. Third, this means that mass tourism must be made socially and environmentally sound. His last question was: what had the panel members learned from the discussion? Mr Roland Streicher answered that it was important to have the findings of the GTZ study. Finally, definite standards had been set that would be significant in evaluating work in the future. Ms Ellen Bermann pointed out that it was good to have a range of different comments, from critical to optimistic. Tourist behaviour could not be separated from the behaviour of the same people in their daily lives at home. Consequently, awareness-raising also starts at home. Mr Harold Goodwin referred to the Zanzibar example cited by Ms Riedmiller, which in his eyes showed very clearly the responsibility of the consumers. If the question were posed of which is better for development, a factory or a hotel, he would choose the hotel. In his opinion, tourism offers more possibilities for development. But here, too, things have to be differentiated. There are better and worse factories. He would prefer a Nike shoe factory to the notorious example of the chemical plant in Bhopal. Ms Susy Karammel commented that mass tourism has impacts that go farther, not all of which had been discussed on the present evening. Cooperation with large travel operators to identify approaches in common is important to development of a widespread socially and environmentally sound tourism. Mr Heinz Fuchs discerned a trend toward cheaper travel that at the same time is worth less. Value should once more be restored to travel. He 4

stressed that new ways need to be found to mobilise customer interest in sustainable travel, such as building-block systems for assembling attractive socially and environmentally sound trips. There are grounds for optimism, as the large operators have begun to become more transparent with regard to the sustainability of their travel programmes. Social standards and codes of behaviour now in existence must also be applied in the future, he concluded. Dr Ludwig Ellenberg closed the session, summing it up with the observation that although the discussion had not added much to existing knowledge, what the participants already knew had been better sorted out and put in order within the various contexts. He thanked the panel members and mentioned the conference programme of the Tourism Forum International from 4 to 6 February 2005. Dr Martin Tampe thanked the city of Hannover in conclusion for the good cooperation that had characterised the Tourism Forum International for the past four years.