There are various themes related to Mallorca's tourism which crop up with regularity and those which surface far less regularly. The first category includes the controversies surrounding all-inclusives, off-season tourism and holiday rentals, while the latter includes the subject of tourism volume. These controversies would naturally form a part of any discussion of tourism volume, but the complexities raised by each of them in isolation are not of the same order of complexity entailed in the consideration of tourism volume. It is more complex because any adjustment to this volume pre-supposes a fundamental change in the nature of Mallorca's tourism, were there to be a planned reduction in the number of tourists, which is typically what the volume debate means.
It was reported last week that the Confederación de Patronales Turísticas de Baleares (CPTB), which is the body which represents a host of non-hotel, complementary offer businesses, had called for a reduction in tourist numbers. It hadn't and it has tweeted to that effect, just in case there was any misunderstanding. The call for a reduction came from the Més political grouping, one that combines the PSM socialists (with their Mallorcan nationalist beliefs) and others on the left, including the Greens. The CPTB had in fact only expressed a desire for tourists with greater purchasing power. Més agreed but wanted fewer of them.
Over the years, there have been discussions about the nature of tourism and about its mass in Mallorca. One can go back to the fallout from the oil crisis in the 1970s in order to discover the first really serious discussion. The shock of a sudden decline in tourist numbers (it took four to five years for numbers to recover) led some to wonder if this unexpected reduction might not in fact be beneficial. Such a thought didn't linger. Come the 1990s, and there was a boom in construction that didn't match that of the 1960s but nevertheless contributed to a major increase in tourist numbers. Economic advancement demanded ever more volume and ever more mass.
But some politicians were uneasy. Maria Antonia Munar, the president of the Council of Mallorca, was one of them. Another was the tourism minister in the first Antich PSOE administration from 1999 to 2003, Celesti Alomar. Munar made references to the need for more "quality" tourists over mere quantity. Alomar went further. He even spoke of the end of mass tourism.
No one has ever gone as far as Alomar, but the question of volume has continued to be an issue which has bubbled under the tourism surface without ever erupting into a full and frank debate. It is one that should be had, but because of its complexity and potential negativity it is studiously avoided in political circles. The complexity is such that any strategy for reduction would have to be considered alongside a strategy for what would compensate for any reduction.
Why should there be a reduction in any case? The stock answer, and the one which Més subscribes to, is the resource one. Land, services, the environment cannot cope with more volume or even with the existing volume. But is this true? What actually might be considered to be the point at which the volume of tourism is too great, and has it indeed been reached or passed? One of the foremost authorities on the subject, Dr. Ivan Murray at the university in Palma, has been unable to come up with what should be the ideal tourism population, except to have noted that twelve million tourists spread across the Balearics constitute "an aberration without comparison in the whole world".
It might be considered to be an aberration, but how can one be certain that it is? Where Murray is on firmer ground is when it comes to the contribution that this volume makes. He has discovered, among other things, that in 2008 a 35% increase in tourist numbers over those in 2003 had been required in order to realise the same level of tourism expenditure five years before. It was a discovery that was to prove to be not that dissimilar to one that the hoteliers federation were to make. But where the hoteliers wanted more tourists, Murray argued there should be fewer.
It has been known for years that there is a percentage of tourists who are either neutral in terms of their "profitability" for Mallorca or who represent a loss. As it costs more to service these tourists than they contribute, then why not cut them adrift and so reduce the tourism volume? It isn't as easy as this, though, and one reason why not is that politicians, regardless of what some might have said, cannot be boastful if numbers fall. Increases are what matter. They are the stuff of political machismo.
Showing posts with label Resources. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Resources. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 23, 2014
Saturday, November 30, 2013
Pouring Cold Water on Mallorca's Tourism Growth
Currently, Mallorca receives in the region of nine million tourists a year, over half of them pressed into a period of around fourteen weeks in summer. Such a concentration of humanity leads to the August peaks of total population of the island (residents, tourists and transient workers) when there are, not untypically, 60% more people than in December. In 2012, for instance, on 4 August there were 1,350,000 people as opposed to 843,000 on 23 December. Were the island to in fact receive 100 million tourists over this seven-year period, this would correspond to an increase of just under 60% of what it would receive based on current figures. It would be an enormous increase - 5.3 million more tourists per annum.
On the face of it, if this 100 million were to in fact be a realistic and achievable number, then the island's tourism future would indeed be very rosy. But how achievable would it be? Allowing for the taking-up of hotel occupancy slack, especially in the lower months of the summer, the capacity wouldn't be there. Even if there were the capacity, it doesn't follow that tourists would come in the great numbers that would be needed to make up for what, based on current levels, would be a missing 37 million tourists over seven years.
What might make a difference would be a relaxation of rules on private holiday accommodation (something that would be most unlikely) and something of a construction boom (also unlikely). While there are new hotel projects in the offing, these would not amount to anything like the number of places that would be required.
One has to conclude, therefore, that the report was, at best, an exaggeration. At worst, it was just plain wrong and complete rubbish. Moreover, behind the glowing headline of 100 million tourists was the absence of some pretty obvious questions. Would Mallorca actually want so many tourists and would there be the infrastructure, not just in terms of accommodation, to allow for so many tourists?
Santa Margalida is a town with one of Mallorca's leading tourist resorts, Can Picafort. At present, the town's regular population is no more than 12,000 people. In summer, this can double, thanks to tourists who are primarily accommodated in Can Picafort. There is a limit at the moment on tourist places in the municipality. The maximum is 13,000.
Under an old urban ordinance, the total number of people that Santa Margalida could ultimately accommodate was set at 50,000. This was a figure arrived at years ago and one that did of course envisage significantly more development than has actually occurred. The town hall has now revised this number down to 34,000, but this 34,000 is a limit which does not foresee any meaningful expansion of regulated tourist accommodation, i.e. hotels. It is a theoretical figure which sets a limit on urban development of a residential nature, one that would see the resident population almost doubling but one that is not about to be attained in the foreseeable future.
Town halls do, in theory and usually in practice, have the final say on urban planning matters. The Balearic Government attempted to shift the goalposts on this where tourism accommodation was concerned but was forced to back down in the face of opposition from the town halls and the Council of Mallorca. The town halls do also have responsibility for certain vital services, such as water supplies. And it is these services, as much as anything else, which have to make projections of such a massive increase in tourism numbers highly questionable. If Santa Margalida is indicative of other towns, then it will not be attained.
Such an increase does, though, raise a question which is difficult to answer. Difficult but not impossible. And that is what might be the maximum number of people that Mallorca could support at any one moment in time? Water supplies are one part of the equation. There are others - airport capacity, roads, medical services, emergency and security services, power as well environmental impact. It would not be impossible to create computer models which might give an indication, but, and setting aside possible impacts of climate change, water supplies would be the most important factor.
In this regard, German research published in the journal "Land Use Policy"** highlights the harmful nature of a Mallorcan drive towards ever more "quality" tourism and so the use of water for domestic consumption, pools, golf courses etc. in what are often non-tourism areas of the island. This research echoes the so-called "Benidorm effect", the one by which high concentrations of tourists in limited areas are vastly more efficient in terms of managing resources than a sprawl of tourism. But as can be seen from what Santa Margalida are doing, there is no desire or intention to make its tourism denser.
100 million tourists might sound like good news, but could such a level of tourism be sustained? Where water is concerned, almost certainly not.
** Hof and Schmitt, "Urban and tourist land use patterns and water consumption: Evidence from Mallorca, Balearic Islands", "Land Use Policy", 2011.
http://xesc.cat/ET2050_library/docs/med/water_mallorca.pdf
Index for November 2013
Aznar's memoirs and the Madrid bombs - 3 November 2013
Balearics regional election and party leadership - 16 November 2013
Bank financing of tourist resort renewal - 4 November 2013
Catalan or Mallorquín - 18 November 2013
Doctor Who in Spain - 20 November 2013
Golf tourism - 14 November 2013
I Need Spain slogan - 19 November 2013
IB3 and its costs - 12 November 2013
Illegal rural property - 10 November 2013
Illesbalears.es - 21 November 2013
Innovation and Mallorcan culture - 27 November 2013
Mallorcan place names' ancient origins - 29 November 2013
Millennials and tourism - 15 November 2013
Muro pumpkin autumn fair - 1 November 2013
Olive oil dispensers - 24 November 2013
Palacio de Congresos - 13 November 2013
Poster designs: Pollensa and Muro fairs - 9 November 2013
President Bauzá interview on La Sexta - 26 November 2013
PSOE and national leadership - 11 November 2013
Sa Pobla Japanese tourism - 23 November 2013
Second casino and PP fallout - 25 November 2013
Smart all-inclusive resorts of the future - 2 November 2013
Solar energy law - 8 November 2013
Tourism growth in Mallorca and water resources - 30 November 2013
Tubular Bells, The Exorcist and Mallorca - 28 November 2013
Turespaña director-general - 5 November 2013
Unsold properties - 6 November 2013
Weather in November in Mallorca - 17 November 2013
Winter tourism products - 7 November 2013
Friday, January 07, 2011
Too Many People: Mallorca's population
The population of Calvia now exceeds 50,000 - 53,765 if you like precision. In 1979 the number of inhabitants was just over 11,000. Population growth in Mallorca as a whole, from a census of 1981 up to 2008 was over 300,000, a percentage rise of nearly 60%. In Calvia, as in other parts of the island, the growth can be partly attributable to immigration; it exceeds emigration by a factor of roughly one-third. Prediction for further growth in population, during this current decade, is less dramatic - at around 7% - but this might not be accurate; from 2000 to 2008, the island's population went up by 170,000, a 25% rise.
The increase in population raises all manner of issues, not least one related to the diversity of the population; in Calvia the foreign population is 20,000, 37% if you prefer, of which 6,000 are British. The trend is not as marked in other municipalities, but foreign populations are still significant; around 8% British in Pollensa for instance, slightly less in Alcúdia. In more general terms, population increase asks questions of housing, education, health, transport and resources.
One can view the population increase in two ways - either positively or with alarm. On the plus side is the potential for wealth and demand creation; downsides include the environmental impact. As a matter of policy, the Spanish Government wanted an increase in population, growth having stalled after the early boom years of the 60s and 70s. The so-called "baby cheque", now dropped, was partly designed to give an incentive to growth. Not that it really worked, and Spain remains one of the lowest spenders on family benefits in Europe.
Where there has been population growth in Spain, it has been uneven, with Mallorca and the Balearics having the highest, double that of the national average. But the at-times dramatic rise in the local population begs the question as to whether there should be a limit, and if so, what it is.
Answering the question is far from easy. Economists and those engaged in demographics studies find it difficult to agree as to models of optimum population, so much so that many have abandoned the word "optimum" as it is too difficult to arrive at. Much of the theoretical basis for population studies is fairly ancient, one such basis being the social welfare model onto which has been grafted concepts such as happiness (Cameron's happiness index is not as stupid as it might sound). In general terms though, overcrowding and congestion are bad things as they lead to environmental damage and a loss of welfare, be it through crime or social breakdown, of which immigration might, say might, play a part.
None of this, however, gets us any nearer to being able to say with any degree of certainty whether Mallorca's population is set to become too large or if it already is too large. Indeed, the contrary may well be the case; there may be scope, a necessity even, for an increasing population.
Fundamentally though, the size of the population boils down to the ability to sustain it and to provide for it. And in Mallorca's case, the situation is complicated by the size of its temporary population - tourists.
Between 10 and 12 August in 2008, the number of tourists in the Balearics peaked. There were 1,930,000, the overwhelming majority being in Mallorca. This represented more than a doubling of the number of people on the island. To put this into some perspective, Mallorca is roughly the size of Essex. At peak times in the season, its population exceeds that of what is a densely populated county. But it has a very different geography. Congestion and overcrowding might well be said to occur, especially because of the uneven spread of people.
Ivan Murray, an academic at the Universitat de les Illes Balears, has made the point that Mallorca's level of tourism is all but unsustainable; it's too high in other words. He has also made the point that over the period from 2003 to 2008, the number of tourists needed to realise a million euros of tourist expenditure rose by 35%. What he is saying, therefore, is that the economic returns from the temporary population have slumped. Quite alarmingly so. And yet to provide for this decline, there is still the pressure on resources, be they water, electricity or other services. If the social welfare model places such a premium on the environment, and it does, then it can be argued that, because of diminishing returns from tourism and the overwhelming reliance upon tourism (80% of GDP), the temporary population actually creates a negative.
The logic of Murray's argument, not one that he advocates, is more construction for tourism in order to compensate for these diminishing returns. Though Mallorca is still relatively "unconstructed", further construction would be in existing centres. Indeed, it should be, if one adheres to the notion of the "Benidorm effect" of more efficient super holiday hubs. But then these would create localised overcrowding; the tipping point of too high a population would be reached, if it hasn't already been.
The conclusion from all this is that, while there may well be scope for the permanent population of Mallorca to increase, there may well not be if one adds in the temporary population. Not at current levels at any rate. But to not increase that temporary population means, where Murray is concerned, a loss of economic well-being. And none of this takes account of what might occur going forward - the greater strain on resources, water especially, because of climate change.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
The increase in population raises all manner of issues, not least one related to the diversity of the population; in Calvia the foreign population is 20,000, 37% if you prefer, of which 6,000 are British. The trend is not as marked in other municipalities, but foreign populations are still significant; around 8% British in Pollensa for instance, slightly less in Alcúdia. In more general terms, population increase asks questions of housing, education, health, transport and resources.
One can view the population increase in two ways - either positively or with alarm. On the plus side is the potential for wealth and demand creation; downsides include the environmental impact. As a matter of policy, the Spanish Government wanted an increase in population, growth having stalled after the early boom years of the 60s and 70s. The so-called "baby cheque", now dropped, was partly designed to give an incentive to growth. Not that it really worked, and Spain remains one of the lowest spenders on family benefits in Europe.
Where there has been population growth in Spain, it has been uneven, with Mallorca and the Balearics having the highest, double that of the national average. But the at-times dramatic rise in the local population begs the question as to whether there should be a limit, and if so, what it is.
Answering the question is far from easy. Economists and those engaged in demographics studies find it difficult to agree as to models of optimum population, so much so that many have abandoned the word "optimum" as it is too difficult to arrive at. Much of the theoretical basis for population studies is fairly ancient, one such basis being the social welfare model onto which has been grafted concepts such as happiness (Cameron's happiness index is not as stupid as it might sound). In general terms though, overcrowding and congestion are bad things as they lead to environmental damage and a loss of welfare, be it through crime or social breakdown, of which immigration might, say might, play a part.
None of this, however, gets us any nearer to being able to say with any degree of certainty whether Mallorca's population is set to become too large or if it already is too large. Indeed, the contrary may well be the case; there may be scope, a necessity even, for an increasing population.
Fundamentally though, the size of the population boils down to the ability to sustain it and to provide for it. And in Mallorca's case, the situation is complicated by the size of its temporary population - tourists.
Between 10 and 12 August in 2008, the number of tourists in the Balearics peaked. There were 1,930,000, the overwhelming majority being in Mallorca. This represented more than a doubling of the number of people on the island. To put this into some perspective, Mallorca is roughly the size of Essex. At peak times in the season, its population exceeds that of what is a densely populated county. But it has a very different geography. Congestion and overcrowding might well be said to occur, especially because of the uneven spread of people.
Ivan Murray, an academic at the Universitat de les Illes Balears, has made the point that Mallorca's level of tourism is all but unsustainable; it's too high in other words. He has also made the point that over the period from 2003 to 2008, the number of tourists needed to realise a million euros of tourist expenditure rose by 35%. What he is saying, therefore, is that the economic returns from the temporary population have slumped. Quite alarmingly so. And yet to provide for this decline, there is still the pressure on resources, be they water, electricity or other services. If the social welfare model places such a premium on the environment, and it does, then it can be argued that, because of diminishing returns from tourism and the overwhelming reliance upon tourism (80% of GDP), the temporary population actually creates a negative.
The logic of Murray's argument, not one that he advocates, is more construction for tourism in order to compensate for these diminishing returns. Though Mallorca is still relatively "unconstructed", further construction would be in existing centres. Indeed, it should be, if one adheres to the notion of the "Benidorm effect" of more efficient super holiday hubs. But then these would create localised overcrowding; the tipping point of too high a population would be reached, if it hasn't already been.
The conclusion from all this is that, while there may well be scope for the permanent population of Mallorca to increase, there may well not be if one adds in the temporary population. Not at current levels at any rate. But to not increase that temporary population means, where Murray is concerned, a loss of economic well-being. And none of this takes account of what might occur going forward - the greater strain on resources, water especially, because of climate change.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
High Density: Sustainable tourism
Say "Benidorm" and the image the name is likely to conjure up is one of high-rise holiday hell or the sit-com's Garvey family arguing around the pool at the Solana Resort. It is unlikely to suggest itself as a model of eco-sensibleness. But that is what it is.
Back in 2008 the head of tourism research at Sheffield Hallam University, John Swarbrook, coined the expression "ego-tourism" to refer to the trend towards tourism in parts of the globe where the eco-system is fragile; in Africa or South America, for instance, or the Antarctic, and why would anyone want to go there anyway? There was and is a confusion as to what "sustainable tourism" means. It doesn't mean wealthy tourists heading off for remote areas where it is impossible to sustain them. Unlike Benidorm which, back in 2008, was already being held up as something of an ideal for eco-tourism.
And it is again being lauded for this ideal. A report entitled "Sustainable Holiday Futures", carried out on behalf of Thomson Holidays, refers to the "Benidorm effect". What this means is that, in terms of environmental management and the use of resources, it is far better to pack tourists into a relatively confined area rather than have them lolling around on hammocks on sparsely populated desert islands, trekking through the rain forest or hacking across ice fields with some Huskies.
It may not appeal to the inner romantic of the tourist, but Benidorm is infinitely better for the eco than it is for the ego. Why? Well, clustering tourists into what the report terms "super-holiday hubs" means less environmental damage, so long as the resort is geared up for monitoring and managing resources.
In the case of Benidorm, it is already evident that sensible environmental measures have been adopted, such as lights switching off automatically in hotels, low-energy lighting on the prom, foot pump-operated taps to save water, everything being pretty much in walking distance and local sourcing of food. "High density, low impact" goes the thinking. It's a variant on the old "pile 'em high, sell 'em cheap" retail philosophy of Jack Cohen. The greater the volume, the lower the cost of environmental harm. And not just in-resort.
The report's compilers, The Future Laboratory, point also to the benefits of Benidorm when it comes to the devil of eco-unfriendliness, i.e. carbon. A family of four travelling from the UK consumes 2.2 tonnes of carbon by going to Benidorm, as opposed to 15.8 tonnes on a seemingly more environmentally-friendly hiking tour of Chile.
Sustainable tourism and the managing of environmental resources are concepts often spoken about, not least by politicians who probably have the same limited handle on what they really mean as do tourists. As with everything else of a tourism nature, it is the tour operators, Thomson (and therefore TUI) in this instance, who are taking the lead.
The understanding of the issues by tourists is, though, getting better, and what Thomson are doing is to enhance this understanding. Even relatively simple innovations, such as the Waterpebble, a device for monitoring water usage, given away as a gift to holidaymakers, are intended to heighten consciousness of the environment and resources whilst on holiday.
TUI has been beating the environmental drum in Mallorca for some time and has looked to make environmental righteousness in hotels a selling point for its German clients. I have tended to think that environmentalism is an easier sell to the generally more eco-conscious Germans, but British tourists appear to be catching up. The report says, for example, that 29% of holidaymakers currently monitor their energy and water usage whilst on holiday.
If the "Benidorm effect" were to be repeated in Mallorca, then what might this involve? There are of course holiday centres which could just as easily become "super-holiday hubs", and not just single resorts. Whole conurbations like that on the bay of Alcúdia might become one, but there would be an issue with transport. Specifically, nonetheless, Alcúdia has taken a step in the right direction with its laudable project for recycling water for use by hotels.
It might also be that more isolated, smaller resorts would have to be abandoned. There could never be "high density" in somewhere like Cala San Vicente. Might it indeed be environmentally more efficient to develop Puerto Pollensa further and create higher density there?
These sorts of questions arise from what Thomson are talking about, and they are ones of a strategic nature that we know that Mallorca's decision-makers aren't very good at answering. But the future is being envisioned, and it is one that could create a rather different tourism landscape to the one that currently exists in Mallorca.
* For more information about the "Sustainable Holiday Futures" report, go to the Communications Centre on Thomson's website, www.thomson.co.uk.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Back in 2008 the head of tourism research at Sheffield Hallam University, John Swarbrook, coined the expression "ego-tourism" to refer to the trend towards tourism in parts of the globe where the eco-system is fragile; in Africa or South America, for instance, or the Antarctic, and why would anyone want to go there anyway? There was and is a confusion as to what "sustainable tourism" means. It doesn't mean wealthy tourists heading off for remote areas where it is impossible to sustain them. Unlike Benidorm which, back in 2008, was already being held up as something of an ideal for eco-tourism.
And it is again being lauded for this ideal. A report entitled "Sustainable Holiday Futures", carried out on behalf of Thomson Holidays, refers to the "Benidorm effect". What this means is that, in terms of environmental management and the use of resources, it is far better to pack tourists into a relatively confined area rather than have them lolling around on hammocks on sparsely populated desert islands, trekking through the rain forest or hacking across ice fields with some Huskies.
It may not appeal to the inner romantic of the tourist, but Benidorm is infinitely better for the eco than it is for the ego. Why? Well, clustering tourists into what the report terms "super-holiday hubs" means less environmental damage, so long as the resort is geared up for monitoring and managing resources.
In the case of Benidorm, it is already evident that sensible environmental measures have been adopted, such as lights switching off automatically in hotels, low-energy lighting on the prom, foot pump-operated taps to save water, everything being pretty much in walking distance and local sourcing of food. "High density, low impact" goes the thinking. It's a variant on the old "pile 'em high, sell 'em cheap" retail philosophy of Jack Cohen. The greater the volume, the lower the cost of environmental harm. And not just in-resort.
The report's compilers, The Future Laboratory, point also to the benefits of Benidorm when it comes to the devil of eco-unfriendliness, i.e. carbon. A family of four travelling from the UK consumes 2.2 tonnes of carbon by going to Benidorm, as opposed to 15.8 tonnes on a seemingly more environmentally-friendly hiking tour of Chile.
Sustainable tourism and the managing of environmental resources are concepts often spoken about, not least by politicians who probably have the same limited handle on what they really mean as do tourists. As with everything else of a tourism nature, it is the tour operators, Thomson (and therefore TUI) in this instance, who are taking the lead.
The understanding of the issues by tourists is, though, getting better, and what Thomson are doing is to enhance this understanding. Even relatively simple innovations, such as the Waterpebble, a device for monitoring water usage, given away as a gift to holidaymakers, are intended to heighten consciousness of the environment and resources whilst on holiday.
TUI has been beating the environmental drum in Mallorca for some time and has looked to make environmental righteousness in hotels a selling point for its German clients. I have tended to think that environmentalism is an easier sell to the generally more eco-conscious Germans, but British tourists appear to be catching up. The report says, for example, that 29% of holidaymakers currently monitor their energy and water usage whilst on holiday.
If the "Benidorm effect" were to be repeated in Mallorca, then what might this involve? There are of course holiday centres which could just as easily become "super-holiday hubs", and not just single resorts. Whole conurbations like that on the bay of Alcúdia might become one, but there would be an issue with transport. Specifically, nonetheless, Alcúdia has taken a step in the right direction with its laudable project for recycling water for use by hotels.
It might also be that more isolated, smaller resorts would have to be abandoned. There could never be "high density" in somewhere like Cala San Vicente. Might it indeed be environmentally more efficient to develop Puerto Pollensa further and create higher density there?
These sorts of questions arise from what Thomson are talking about, and they are ones of a strategic nature that we know that Mallorca's decision-makers aren't very good at answering. But the future is being envisioned, and it is one that could create a rather different tourism landscape to the one that currently exists in Mallorca.
* For more information about the "Sustainable Holiday Futures" report, go to the Communications Centre on Thomson's website, www.thomson.co.uk.
Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
