The Tramuntana And Institutional Failure

Theodore Pratt, the American journalist (long passed away), is one of my favourite Mallorcan anti-heroes. Little of or about Mallorca was spared from the vitriol he unleashed in what became an infamous article which appeared in "The American Mercury" in 1933. By contrast with what he had to say of other subjects, the Tramuntana mountains emerged relatively unscathed. Well, he did say that they were dramatic, even if he then went on to describe them as bare, grey and mostly inaccessible. They were evidence, according to Ted, of Mallorca's physical characteristics: not exceptional in his opinion.

Pratt was, it should be said, pretty even-handed. His jaundiced view of Mallorca was reserved for more or less everything. He couldn't have been accused of being biased in favour of certain aspects at the expense of others. He was, though, not unique in offering criticism of what was otherwise acquiring the title of the paradise island and which had, by the time he wrote, been dubbed the island of calm for some twenty years: and that description was from the painter Rusiñol, who was to capture what he perceived as a very different Tramuntana.

George Sand, almost one hundred years before Pratt, had launched insults directed at the locals (and some other subjects) which were at a comparative level of abuse. Unlike Pratt, she wasn't run off the island; she and Chopin left of their own accord. But also unlike Ted, she didn't engage in criticisms of the mountains; she was rather taken by the landscape.

One mentions these differing perspectives of the mountains - each of them by foreigners (Rusiñol was from Catalonia) - as they can seem to sum up what might be considered to be a certain ambivalence towards the Tramuntana by the residents of Mallorca: an ambivalence which appears to be reflected at institutional levels on the island.

This ambivalence might equally be defined as indifference or, in the estimation of historian Angel Morillas, as "low self-esteem" held by the people of Mallorca when it comes to the Tramuntana. Morillas is Unesco's representative in Spain. He is also a member of Unesco's council of monuments and sites, the one which awarded the Tramuntana World Heritage Site status five years ago. He had been closely associated with the award in the advance of its being granted. In September 2008, for example, he had attended a conference in Pollensa which addressed the processing of the award nomination. At that conference were representatives of various schools from Pollensa, Alcudia and elsewhere.

The presence of those people from Mallorca's education sector now appears pertinent, with a question - just as pertinent - being how much the island's schools do to inform and educate the young generation about the mountains and the very patrimony - that of dry stone formations - which was to prove to be key to the awarding of World Heritage status.

Morillas attended another conference at the weekend. It was in Selva and was organised as a way of celebrating the fifth anniversary. During his presentation he referred to the lack of self-esteem, a rather curious way of putting it, one thinks: it might be better explained as the mountains not being held in high esteem by the islanders. Morillas argued that there was a lack of knowledge of the "gem" that is the Tramuntana range. He called, therefore, for greater input by schools and levelled criticism at the University of the Balearic Islands. What does the university do for the mountains? Not very much was his answer to his own question.

As curious as styling the attitude as one of lack of self-esteem is the fact that Morillas should feel it necessary to highlight it. One would have the impression, given the amount that was written and said about the mountains at the time of the heritage award and has been since, that there is an island-wide attitude of high regard. Clearly not. Morillas will know better than I, and I am not about to disagree with him.

It is an unfortunate fact that in the years since the award was granted, there seems to have been an incoherent approach to promotion of the mountains as well as maintenance of their prized assets - the dry stone paths, walls, terraces and other structures. The fault lies at an institutional level, and not only with, if Morillas is right (and who's to argue with him?), the university.

There are of course any number of people and sources who inform and who heap praise on the mountains. Many of them are foreigners who write, paint and provide blogs and websites. The Pratt view of the mountains is certainly not the prevailing one. But then it often does seem to fall to others, and not the island's institutions, to act as promoters of Mallorca - mountains, beaches, villages and the rest. The institutional failure to promote is not discriminatory.

Photo: the templete at Son Marroig (Deia), one of the Tramuntana's iconic spots.

Saving The Tramuntana: Tourism confusion

Movements have occurred in the Tramuntana mountains. Their landscape has altered. Only partially but significantly, topped and tailed by Pollensa and Calvia. The mountains' political landscape has been given a gloss of red but also of green, and it doesn't come any greener than in Pollensa. Here, the new mayor is Miquel Àngel March, the former and long-time spokesperson for GOB, Mallorca's eco-enviro group/watchdog. In Calvia the earth has not moved quite so dramatically in swallowing up the Partido Popular - an old-school socialist sort is in charge - but new-school socialism, as with Més, the eco-nationalist variety, hovers in the background.

There are nineteen municipalities which are embraced - either wholly or in part - by the mountains, over a third of all of Mallorca's municipalities. Each has its interest in the Tramuntana, each has its say about conservation, preservation, management and tourism. But rising above them are the peaks of the Tramuntana consortium and the Council of Mallorca. Their landscapes are also altering, along with their personnel, and at the Council this change might involve its presidency falling to the former mayor of one of the smaller municipalities: Miquel Ensenyat of Més, the ex-mayor of Esporles.

The mountains are thus far from immune to political change. On the face of it, in conservation and preservation terms, the mountains might be said to have got a result. One-time GOB here, eco-nationalists there: how green tinged with red are their valleys. And for the Save the Tramuntana campaign, the movement of the political furniture might also represent a result. The mountains will be saved.

Did you know that there was a Save the Tramuntana campaign? Well there is. And you can sign its petition, its civil manifesto at Change.org*. But why do the mountains need saving? Wasn't the UNESCO declaration - the World Heritage Site - all to do with saving? Yes, but according to the campaign organisers, the guidelines and objectives for making the Tramuntana "a sustainable natural and cultural landscape" are not being met because of a "lack of political will (and) the difficulties of co-ordination between the different administrative organs". "Designations have been used more as a tourist attraction than a guide to protect our environment." (Designations include the UNESCO declaration.)

The campaign is principally concerned with the effects of tourism. It says: "The Serra de Tramuntana must not repeat the excesses committed elsewhere on the Mallorcan coast. We do not want the opportunistic short-term attitude nor the institutional indifference to give way to mass tourism and the inevitable and irreversible destruction of our values, our landscape, our traditions and the Mediterranean way of life".

Mass tourism? In the mountains? Possibly so. But the mass is not the mass of overcrowded beach resorts, unless this is supposed to refer to, for example, Puerto Sóller. The Tramuntana in Calvia does not extend to the resorts there, while Puerto Pollensa is just outside the Tramuntana zone. I'm guessing it is more a reference to the volume of tourists, while the campaign also refers to activities - motorbiking for example - which are "abuses" and that threaten the mountains with being turned into a "theme park".

The organisation of the Tramuntana, post-UNESCO declaration, doesn't appear to have been terribly effective. The campaign has a point here, but has this been because of a lack of political will and difficulties of co-ordination or does the whole management of the Tramuntana within a tourism framework suffer from the lack of a clear vision as to what is wanted from the mountains?

A point about the UNESCO declaration is that if there are abuses which threaten conservation and preservation, the status of World Heritage Site can be and will be taken away. A further point, and one expressed to me by a leading authority on tourism marketing, Professor David Carson, is that the declaration was the worst thing that could have happened to the Tramuntana. Why? Because it imposes so many constraints that tourism development is hindered. It isn't as if the declaration is against tourism development - it most certainly isn't - but it has to be done in line with principles of conservation and preservation, which apply to land, buildings, people and ways of life.

With the change in the political landscape, a more sympathetic attitude towards the campaign's objectives may be obtained. But again, one comes back to what the vision actually is. The campaign calls for "a model of quality tourism ... without being elitist." Would this be in line with the Més desire for greater sharing of the spoils of tourism? And would it therefore not be as it is in Pollensa? In a profile of Miquel Àngel March, it says that he is from a town which is the "capital of the tourist elite in Mallorca". What do we want from the mountains?

* www.salvarlatramuntana.com.

A Questionable Benefit: Palma and World Heritage

Palma wants to become a World Heritage Site. The great and good had gathered for the annual gala at which the city doles out its annual awards and were informed that at the next meeting of the city's council a proposal would be put forward for a commission of "experts" to examine the presentation of the city's candidature to receive the UNESCO accolade. Assuming the proposal is accepted, and the opposition parties already know about it and would appear not to be ill-disposed to the idea, what would it mean? Would it mean anything? Why bother?

What are the criteria for becoming a World Heritage Site and would Palma actually qualify? Above all else, a site should supposedly have "outstanding universal value" and then it should meet at least one of ten criteria, so does Palma meet any of them? Without going through all of them, it is probably fair to say that it does. For example, under "interchange of values" (which can be reflected in, for instance, architecture, monuments or landscapes), there has been such an interchange. Or was, going back in time. How about "human creative genius"? One might make an argument for the Cathedral being representative of this.

A case could therefore be made for being a candidate, but what benefits might accrue from the award? The most obvious one is for tourism, and it is the one which is most frequently cited, but this is a benefit which is removed from what the UNESCO award was originally aimed at, which was to protect sites that were under threat from human or natural intervention. UNESCO first swung into action in the 1950s when a campaign to relocate the Abu Simbel temples in southern Egypt was successful; the temples had been threatened by being flooded by the building of the Aswan Dam. A tourism benefit may have followed as a consequence of the relocation, but it was the protection which was of uppermost importance.

The protection aspect is still critical. Mallorca's only physical World Heritage Site at present is the Tramuntana mountain range, and the awarding of its heritage status came with caveats regarding developments that could or could not take place; if they are ones which UNESCO disagree with, then the award can be taken away. But while protection is key to the whole exercise, benefits from tourism have tended to assume greater importance in the minds of some of those places which seek heritage status. It does, after all, carry some kudos. Or does it?

Mallorca may only have the one site at present, but the number of sites worldwide grows and grows. There are currently just under 1,000, which might not sound a lot when spread across the globe, but there must come a point at which the award has a diminishing return because it is no longer particularly exclusive or uncommon. In Spain as a whole there are 44 awards, not all of them physical because the Mallorcan Sibil·la chant is one of them, but out of this 44, 13 are cities in a broad sense of the word. For example, in Ibiza some 85 square kilometres were declared a World Heritage Site for biodiversity and culture in 1999. I wonder how many people know this and how many are influenced by the existence of the award, in much the same way as I wonder how many people are influenced by the whole of Menorca being a biosphere reserve (a different UNESCO award) since 1993. Menorca hasn't benefited because promotion has been poor. The same can be said for Ibiza, and the same can certainly be said for the Tramuntana. Its award was made in 2011 and since then ...?

In 2007, the consultants PriceWaterhouseCoopers presented a paper to the UK Government's Department for Culture, Media and Sport which looked at the costs and benefits of World Heritage status. The report's conclusions gave plenty of grounds for believing that the award was of dubious value. The process of bidding costs money - at least 400,000 pounds in direct terms, so it was said - and was increasing because there was that much more competition to obtain an award. This isn't a huge cost, but the report suggested that offsetting this against obvious benefits was very difficult. A key issue it raised was that to do with "causality or additionality"; in other words and putting it bluntly, would the award make any difference?

For a city such as Palma, which is already heavily geared towards tourism, it could well be concluded that World Heritage status would have negligible impact. And there is just the possibility that the award, because of the protection element, could in fact have a negative impact as the strings which come attached to World Heritage status can stifle development. In an article in October I looked at the proposal for Palma's transformation in line with the concept of the "creative city". While this would retain existing culture, it could nonetheless be an example of development that UNESCO would frown upon. What, therefore, is more important to Palma? To have the flexibility to develop in ways not dependent upon tourism or to be told by a United Nations body what it can or cannot do in return for an award which brings with it a questionable benefit?