Building on existing frameworks and good practices at international, national and regional level, this report presents a set of indicators to measure and monitor the socio-cultural, environmental and economic impacts of tourism in the four Spanish regions of Andalusia, Catalonia, Navarra and the Region of Valencia. The process of selecting indicators was informed by key policy issues and priorities identified at the regional level, including economic benefits, seasonality, local resident perceptions, accessibility, climate change mitigation and water management. The measurement framework includes 21 core indicators (measured by 47 core metrics), which are complemented by nine supplementary indicators (measured by ten metrics) to capture regional specificities. As it is difficult to measure, effectively communicate, and make progress on 47 core metrics simultaneously, a sub-set of ten priority metrics has been selected to monitor key policy issues across the three pillars of sustainability.
Measuring and Monitoring the Sustainability of Tourism at Regional Level in Spain
Abstract
Regional indicators to monitor the sustainability of tourism provide a more granular picture of the societal, economic and environmental impacts of tourism, and help guide decision-making for more sustainable tourism development both at the regional and national level. Ultimately, the impacts of tourism need to be within a region's ecological limits and meet the region's social and economic foundation (Raworth, 2017[1]). With more solid evidence on the impacts of tourism on their destinations, regions can develop targeted policies for regional tourism development, and can, together with national governments foster policies to spread both the benefits and pressures from tourism in a more balanced fashion.
Regional indicators to monitor the sustainability of tourism need to be grounded in the specific circumstances and needs of regions, while allowing for comparability across regions, as well as internationally where possible. The indicator framework presented in this report hence builds on an in-depth analysis of the policy priorities and the existing measurements of tourism sustainability in the four Spanish regions. The analysis identified end users’ needs and priorities, gathered information about existing tourism information systems in each region, mapped data availabilities and gaps, and identified the capacity constraints, as well as overall challenges and opportunities for the development of a coherent system of indicators to measure the sustainability of tourism across the four regions.
The indicators need to provide information on tourism sustainability through a small, implementable selection of meaningful measurement parameters. They need to strike a balance between what can be measured immediately and more ambitious indicators that may require the development and use of new or additional data sources and measurement techniques. Finally, indicators need to be easy to communicate and respond to the needs and concerns of different stakeholder groups, such as policymakers and public operators, the private sector, academia, and civil society.
Overall, the common set of indicators to monitor the sustainability of tourism in the four Spanish regions was developed according to the following key criteria and considerations:
Policy relevance: All indicators need to have a clear policy purpose and rationale for including them. They need to capture key tourism sustainability issues for the regions, as identified by regional and national tourism strategies and evidence on the key pressures and challenges around tourism sustainability in the regions.
User needs: Indicators need to provide a solid evidence base that can inform the design of tourism policies and programmes, fostering sustainable tourism development and sustainable destination management. Indicators must meet the needs of various stakeholders and provide a common ground for discussing tourism sustainability and related policy areas such as transport, finance, agriculture and others.
Target setting: Indicators need to be linked to clear targets, or quantifiable desired outcomes, ideally aligned with tourism sustainability policies, strategies and plans. As such, indicators should help assess progress towards achieving regional, national or international strategic goals.
Data quality and timeliness: Indicator compilation relies primarily on data from official statistical sources. Official data sources, including from national and regional statistical institutes, provide a standardised and consistent approach to data collection, ensuring accuracy and comparability of the results across different regions and time periods. Alternative data sources will be explored and tested for specific indicators to obtain relevant complementary information. Data used for compiling the indicators needs to be available regularly and updated with no major time lags to create consistent data series.
Geographical coverage: Indicators should use data that provide geographically representative samples. The geographical coverage should be based on international standards. Following the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS) and the OECD classification of territorial levels (TL), the set of indicators is compiled at regional level (NUTS2 / TL2), which in Spain represents 17 autonomous communities and 2 autonomous cities.
Comparability: Ideally, indicators should allow for benchmarking performance across regions and provide comparability vis-à-vis existing international frameworks. While benchmarking to (comparable) regions can provide valuable insights, tracking changes within a given region over time is crucial for achieving progress towards sustainable (tourism) development.
Ease of communication: Indicators need to be easily understandable and user-friendly, referring to concepts and ideas that are not difficult to grasp.
Financial viability: Resource constraints often represent a major impediment to the continued compilation of indicators. Thus, there should be a clear indication of the personnel, institutional and financial resources allocated to produce the indicators. Such constraints make the case for a careful selection of indicators that focus on key policy issues and which are realistic to implement.
Economic, social and environmental sustainability have been widely recognised as the three key dimensions or pillars of sustainable tourism development and sustainable development more broadly (UNEP & UNWTO, 2005[2]). Sustainable tourism development requires “finding a balance between environmental, economic, and social impacts” (OECD, 2020[3]). Against the background of the tourism sector’s heterogeneity, the multiplicity and fragmentation of stakeholders and sustainability as an area of public interest, governments must play a key role in driving progress towards achieving this balance (UNEP & UNWTO, 2005[2]). This is why, governance is increasingly listed as a fourth pillar or dimension of tourism sustainability. For instance, the International Network for Sustainable Tourism Observatories (INSTO) by UN Tourism or the European Tourism Indicators System (ETIS), as well as the frameworks developed by Finland and Slovenia, include a governance pillar that serves as an overarching strategic dimension for sustainable destination management.
As outlined in Chapter 2, a range of international, national, regional and private-sector frameworks for measuring the sustainability of tourism exist. These frameworks or indicator systems organise the indicators around three to five dimensions. While most adopt the above-mentioned dimensions (environmental, social, economic, governance), some depart from them. For instance, the Netherlands include “Political strength” – encompassing the existence and regular updating of policies and plans, monitoring and data (NBTC, CBS, CELTH, 2023[4]). Given the importance of culture for tourism (OECD, 2008[5]), and vice versa, some frameworks capture tourism’s social and cultural aspects within one separate category (e.g., ETIS, Eurostat Working Group, Austria, Finland).
These categorisations help structure indicator systems and guide efforts towards balancing different dimensions of sustainability. In an ideal scenario, tourism activities should contribute to environmental, social and economic sustainability (Elkington, 1997[6]; Seuring and Müller, 2008[7]). In practice, however, it is difficult to achieve multiple sustainability objectives simultaneously due to competing policy priorities and trade-offs that can result in progress for one pillar of sustainability being made at the expense of another. The pillar-based structure may oversimplify the complex interrelations between the dimensions, which include both synergies and trade-offs. Some frameworks seek to reflect the interdependencies, e.g., in terms of labour conditions, by including a “socio-economic” dimension (EU Tourism Dashboard, GSTC). Under the Data & Development Lab, the Netherlands have developed a framework for balancing impacts and carrying capacity across three and six categories respectively, seeking to reflect the complex interactions at work (NBTC, CBS, CELTH, 2023[4]).
The proposed indicator framework to measure and monitor the sustainability of tourism in the four Spanish regions is structured around four dimensions: Governance, Economic, Socio-cultural and Environmental (Figure 3.1). Interrelations are taken into consideration by adopting a systemic ‘economy-in-society-in-nature’ view. Governance is placed at the core, cross cutting all other dimensions, as a foundational pillar of sustainable tourism development. More specifically, the four dimensions cover the following:
The governance dimension reflects the need to establish sustainable management practices as a prerequisite for improving the economic, social and environmental aspects of tourism. The sustainable management of tourism involves the strengthening of governance structures, including regional and local ones, and giving a strong voice to local communities (OECD, 2020[3]). This dimension evaluates the extent to which sustainability is integrated into regional tourism planning and management strategies, as well as the degree of stakeholder participation in decision-making processes.
The economic dimension provides insights into the economic aspects of tourism that are essential for understanding the role of tourism in local and regional development. It encompasses the production and consumption of goods and services related to tourism activities, including visitor spending and the output of tourism industries as benefits for the local economy. This dimension also captures employment opportunities in tourism industries, as well as potential economic vulnerabilities due to seasonal and market patterns, created by tourism flows. Leveraging opportunities offered by the digital transition is key to improve efficiency of business processes and promote the tourism offer.
The socio-cultural dimension encompasses various tourism-related aspects that impact local communities and their cultural heritage. It recognises that tourism can have both positive and negative effects on the social and cultural aspects of a destination and seeks to ensure that tourism development respects and benefits local communities and their way of life. Sustainable tourism development requires active participation of local communities, considering their needs, interests, and values. It also involves promoting cultural diversity and heritage preservation, while mitigating negative impacts of tourism, such as the commodification of culture or resident displacement. Tourist satisfaction gives an indication on tourist experience’s impact on well-being as well as the attractiveness of destinations.
The environmental dimension covers tourism impacts on ecosystems and the ways in which natural resources are used by tourism activities. Understanding the environmental impacts of tourism can help to minimise negative effects and develop sustainable practices that conserve natural resources and protect the environment. Minimising tourism’s ecological footprint is important in its own right, but it is also pivotal to the future of tourism itself, which often relies on natural environments, such as scenic landscapes, clean water, and biodiversity, and therefore has a direct stake in their preservation. Among other aspects, the dimension captures low-carbon transport modes, renewable energy use and water consumption.
Given the interrelated nature of sustainability dimensions, the allocation of policy issues to discrete pillars poses challenges; some indicators affect two or more sustainability dimensions. This is for instance the case for the indicators around equal employment opportunities or vulnerability due to market dependency – both capture social as well as economic impacts of tourism activity.
The indicator framework presented in this report includes core as well as supplementary indicators. The core indicators represent the set of indicators common to all four Spanish regions. They respond to the criteria and considerations illustrated at the start of this chapter, capturing the most critical policy issues faced by the four Spanish regions for sustainable tourism development, while also responding to feasibility and data availability requirements.
Supplementary indicators complement the core indicators. Their compilation is optional, and they are defined as meeting one or more of the following criteria:
They capture regional specificities,
They present measurement challenges for all or some of the regions, or it is not possible to obtain comparable information across regions,
They are not tourism-specific but capture aspects relevant to tourism.
As outlined above, the indicator framework for this activity is structured around four primary dimensions: Governance, Economic, Socio-cultural, and Environmental. Within these dimensions, 11 key policy issues have been identified that participating regions are facing in their efforts to advance the sustainability of tourism (Figure 3.1). The project identified the key policy issues based on desktop research, analysis of key strategic documents, fact-finding meetings, technical workshops as well as feedback collected through a written piloting evaluation.
To measure and monitor progress relative to these key policy issues, the project has identified 21 core indicators. Each of the core indicators includes one or more metrics (47 in total). Table 3.1 provides an overview of the policy issues and associated core indicators across the four dimensions. The table also illustrates through colour coding how the piloting phase has improved compilation readiness.
Under the Governance dimension, one key policy area and one corresponding indicator have been identified, measured by three metrics:
Sustainable tourism management: The extent to which sustainability is integrated into regional tourism planning and management strategies.
Under the Economic dimension, three key policy areas, six indicators, and 15 metrics have been identified to monitor and assess:
Benefits to the local economy: including the value-added generated by tourism in the regions, the share of employment derived from touristic activities and occupancy rates, among others.
Reduced seasonality: the extent to which tourism management results in more equally distributed tourism flows over the year.
Reduced vulnerability: to capture elements that can influence the economic vulnerability of tourism at the regional level, such as the dependence on few markets and few airline companies.
Under the Socio-cultural dimension, four key policy areas, seven indicators, and 16 metrics have been identified to monitor and assess:
Local community sentiment: to help ensure that tourism development respects and benefits local communities and their way of life and mitigates negative impacts of tourism, including the displacement of residents.
Attraction of visitors: The achievement of tourist satisfaction.
Inclusive tourism employment: in particular looking at the participation of women and youth in tourism and providing indications on the quality of jobs in tourism.
Accessibility in tourism: through adequate infrastructures and information, in order to foster tourism that is accessible to all.
Under the Environmental dimension, three key policy areas, seven indicators, and 11 metrics have been identified to monitor and assess:
Climate change mitigation: focusing on actual tourism-related emissions, especially those linked to air travel, green mobility infrastructure and renewable energy use to help reduce the climate footprint of tourism.
Water management: to cover both the water consumption of tourism activities and the quality of water in touristic sites.
Protected areas management: to monitor tourists’ access to protected areas, with a focus on national parks.
Nine supplementary indicators with ten metrics complement the core set of indicators to capture regional specificities or account for metrics that require methodological improvements to obtain comparable tourism-specific data (see Table 3.2).
As it is difficult to understand, effectively communicate and make progress on 47 core metrics simultaneously, a sub-set of ten priority metrics has been selected from the core set. Building on initial analysis, workshop discussions and the written piloting evaluation, these metrics help prioritise action towards sustainable tourism development despite resource constraints (see Table 3.3 for list of metrics and rationale for including them).
References
[6] Elkington, J. (1997), Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business, Capstone.
[4] NBTC, CBS, CELTH (2023), Valuable tourism is working on balance [Waardevol toerisme is werken aan balans], https://data.stagingmag.nl/929/issues/39690/496844/downloads/nbtc_ddl_publicatie_v3_def.pdf.
[3] OECD (2020), OECD Tourism Trends and Policies 2020, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/6b47b985-en.
[5] OECD (2008), The Impact of Culture on Tourism, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264040731-en.
[1] Raworth, K. (2017), Doughnut economics: Seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist, Chelsea Green Publishing, White River Junction.
[7] Seuring, S. and M. Müller (2008), “From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16/15, pp. 1699-1710.
[2] UNEP & UNWTO (2005), Making Tourism More Sustainable - A Guide for Policy Makers, https://doi.org/10.18111/9789284408214.