As tourists sip their drinks at sunny pavement cafes this summer, they may feel slight unease that perhaps their presence isn’t entirely welcome. This season has seen a renewed wave of major protests against tourists for pushing out residents and homogenising culture in popular destinations.
Anti-tourist placards and gatherings have appeared in Portugal, Athens, Mallorca and Tenerife. Tourists have even been sprayed with water pistols by angry inhabitants of Barcelona.
Anti-tourism protests are not new, and they do not always share the same motivations. But one common grievance is that local economies are not improved by tourism, while the social costs of hosting mount.
But are these anti-tourism sentiments justified? Tourism contributes around 5% of EU economic activity, supporting jobs and businesses both directly and indirectly. Without tourism many places would be economically poorer. But protesters in Mallorca have argued that tourists take up space on beaches, put a strain on public services and drive the cost of housing above a level that residents can afford.
The economic pros and cons of tourism suggest the protesters have a point. But they are also missing the bigger picture.
An estimated 1.3 billion international tourist trips took place in 2023. These tourists spent over US$1.5 trillion (£1.2 trillion) on their trips. For comparison, that is roughly the size of the Spanish economy. If tourism were a nation, it would be a G20 member.
What’s more, because international travellers earn money in their home country and spend it in another, international tourism is counted as an export. In 2022 international tourists spent almost €370 billion (£312 billion) in the 27 EU countries, for example. This export income helps to balance the cost of imports and pay for things such as food and fuel not available locally.
Nonetheless, there remains a concern that such economic inputs come at too high a cost. In January the then head of Florence’s Galleria dell’Accademia controversially criticised how the city had sold its soul to tourists.
But tourism revenues help provide foreign exchange earnings, create jobs, encourage infrastructure investments and boost tax revenues. In turn these inputs promote economic development and increase welfare, as well as reduce income inequality.
Globally, the tourism industry is a significant source of employment. In 2019, prior to the pandemic, travel and tourism accounted for 10.5% of all jobs. In some Caribbean islands more than 90% of all jobs are in the tourism sector.
Crossover benefits of hosting tourists are felt in other industries too. Food and drink producers sell their products to tourists, for example, and farmers can diversify their incomes by offering tourist experiences such as wine-tasting tours.
Tourism generates a large amount of economic activity, therefore. But research shows that the income that remains in a destination is often limited by leakage rates. There are estimates that for every US$1 million spent by tourists in the Seychelles, less than half of this stays in the local economy. This income can leak out from the destination because of imports such as food and fuel that are not available locally. Leakage also occurs when tourist facilities are foreign owned.
There are undoubtedly downsides to tourism development. The influx of people into popular destinations can add to issues of crowding in public services and shared spaces.
Tourism is also often accused of causing urgent economic problems, such as forcing up the cost of housing for locals. But these are often driven by more complex and alternative factors.
Research in London, a city facing an extreme problem of supply scarcity and growing numbers of “generation rent”, found that Airbnb plays a relatively insignificant part in increasing housing costs. A study in South Carolina in the US meanwhile showed that short-term holiday rentals can boost hospitality micro-entrepreneurs and help residents to maximise the economic potential of their homes by renting out spare rooms.
What can tourists do?
Ultimately, what unites many anti-tourism protesters is a demand for respect. Indeed, research has shown that over-tourism is not merely an issue of overcrowding, but a long-term issue resulting from inappropriate treatment of residents in the process of tourism development.
Tourists can demonstrate that they respect hosts and help to alleviate anti-tourism feelings by finding ways to ensure their holiday is as economically beneficial to the destination as possible.
Spending money at smaller-scale and locally owned businesses puts more money into the local economy. Large multinationals can out-compete local businesses and worsen economic inequality. Foreign-owned businesses typically increase leakage rates as they send profits back to their headquarters.
Choosing more sustainable operators, services and destinations tends to bring economic positives. In Mauritius, for instance, the government has invested in sustainable tourism planning, enhancing economic growth and bringing benefits for residents.
Visiting places that are less typically touristic spreads economic advantages around. In Scotland, nature tourism supports around 39,000 full-time jobs.
It can be easy to scapegoat tourists and tourism for deeper-seated economic problems. Tourists are a highly visible, and frequently very annoying, presence. But without them destinations would be poorer, while persistent economic problems would likely remain. Challenging governments, policy-makers, corporations or institutions might be a better use of protesters’ energy.
Brendan Canavan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
