52003DC0716

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS - Basic orientations for the sustainability of European tourism [SEC(2003) 1295]

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

I. Introduction

II. Challenges and objectives of sustainable tourism

III. Where we stand: The state of the art

IV. Facing the challenges: the policy option

V. Implementing tourism sustainability: Basic orientations for a European Community approach

1. The general concept of future action

2. The European Community contribution

a) In the international context

b) Within Europe

3. What the Commission intends to do.

4. What other stakeholders can do

VI. Conclusions

Annex 1 Major trends in tourism: the scenario driving the future of the sector

Annex 2 Important challenges and major private and public governance objectives for the sustainability of European tourism

Annex 3 Examples of initiatives and contributions of international and European stakeholders

Annex 4 Community policies and initiatives with a favourable effect on the sustainability of European tourism

Please note that all underlined parts in the printed version of the text are so because of the hyperlinks inserted in the electronic version; they have no other significance.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Ensuring the economic, social and environmental sustainability of European tourism is crucial both as a contribution to sustainable development in Europe and world-wide, and for the viability, continued growth, competitiveness and commercial success of this economically highly-important sector. The challenges for sustainable European tourism are linked to both the consumption patterns, in particular seasonal spread and travel for the purpose of tourism, and its production patterns, i.e. the value chain and the tourist destinations. Sustainable tourist behaviour and good public and private governance are key to changing unsustainable tourism patterns.

Stakeholders at all levels, have started to prepare the ground for better matching of sustainability requirements in tourism and using its potential for sustainable development. Although not specifically targeting the tourism sector, the European Community contributes significantly to these efforts with a wide range of policies and measures that favour sustainable development, both in its global responsibilities and within the European Union.

The Commission, therefore, considers the right pathway to the sustainability of European tourism to be reinforcing the existing framework for action and making best use of it. This means relying mainly on the positive effects of established Community policies and measures, while enhancing them, and on initiatives in favour of the sustainability of tourism that stakeholders other than the Community undertake in this field. Some specific measures to fill gaps should complement this approach.

In the international context, the Community approach is thus to continue its policy of promoting the sustainability of tourism as a matter of trade and of assistance to the developing countries. It seeks reinforced co-operation for sustainable tourism with United Nation bodies and other international organisations, in respect of its global responsibility and in Europe.

The Commission envisages several measures for strengthening the Community contribution to the sustainability of European tourism. These aim at increasing the benefit from European Governance and from the various Community policies and measures affecting European tourism and its sustainability. The Commissions also wants to enhance co-operation with the World Tourism Organisation and between all stakeholders of the tourism sector in Europe.

The Commission intends to launch a Tourism Sustainability Group composed of representatives of the various stakeholder categories. This group will have the task of drafting a detailed framework for action, which allocates specific activities to the individual stakeholders and include an agreed timetable for implementation. The Commission is willing to promote and support the implementation of activities defined by the group.

Specific initiatives will concern better monitoring and reporting of the sustainability of tourism, activities that further sustainable tourism consumption patterns by European citizens, and promoting sustainability in the tourism value chain and destinations. The development and use of appropriate information tools and networks will assist these initiatives.

The Commission expects other stakeholders in Europe to contribute significantly to the efforts for implementing sustainable tourism. This concerns European citizens and tourists, private sector enterprises, tourist destinations and public authorities, and civil society stakeholders. The Commission plans to regularly report back on the progress of implementing these basic orientations.

I. Introduction

Tourism is one of the most important and expanding sectors of the world economy and that of the EU. It can contribute significantly to achieving the objectives of maintenance of high and stable levels of economic growth and employment, social progress which recognises the needs of everyone, and effective protection of the environment and prudent use of natural resources. For this to be sustained globally and in the EU requires that stakeholders care for the fabric on which tourism depends.

The limits of the natural, economic, social and cultural resource base, which define the economic sustainability of the sector, would be unable to cope with indefinitely continuing expansion of European tourism. However, with specific strategies, tourism activity can be realigned to meet sustainability requirements, new challenges and demands from changing tourism trends and activities (see Annex 1), and increase revenues.

The Plan of Implementation adopted at the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development calls for a focus on sustainable tourism development and outlines actions to change unsustainable patterns of consumption and production, which are also highly relevant for sustainable tourism. There is growing demand at European level for the identification of strategic guidelines and measures necessary to achieve sustainable tourism development and appropriate sustainable development models for each type of tourist destination.

In the same way that tourism is a global phenomenon that is shaped locally, the sustainability problems linked to it range from global ones that need to be solved globally, to local ones that require action on the ground. However, tourism is a sphere of primarily local and regional responsibility. Tourism-related measures largely need to be devised and implemented locally, in order to address the specific needs and limitations that exist.

On the other hand, many Community policies significantly affect the various activities of the tourism sector. The choices made in these policies have a major effect on the development of tourism and its sustainability, both generally and on the ground.

Article 2 of the Treaty establishing the European Community lists the promotion of sustainable development of economic activities as one the Community's tasks. Tourism has great potential for contributing to the achievement of sustainable development objectives, and Article 3(u) of the Treaty provides for Community action to comprise measures in the field of tourism for the purposes set out in Article 2. The sustainability of tourism must be in line with the overall orientation for sustainable development defined for the EU in the European Sustainable Development Strategy (SDS).

Since the mid-1990s, the sustainable development of tourism has become a priority for EU Institutions. In its Communication Working together for the future of European tourism of November 2001, the Commission proposed to further "promote sustainable development of tourism activities in Europe by defining and implementing an Agenda 21". This issue received strong support from the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.

This Communication aims at promoting further progress towards the sustainability of tourism in Europe and worldwide. Its basic orientations provide the European Commission's input, at this stage, to a broad Agenda 21 process for sustainable European tourism. It is intended to stimulate multi-stakeholder efforts in this field, across all territorial and administrative levels, and outlines how the Community and the other stakeholders can further contribute.

II. Challenges and objectives of sustainable tourism

* Main challenge: sustainable activity and growth

The central challenge for the tourism industry, its businesses and destinations, is: how can the tourism activity in Europe and world-wide, and the growth expected over the next two decades, be managed in such a way as to ensure that it respects the limits of its resource base, and of those resources' capacity to regenerate, whilst being commercially successful? As the product is largely based on environmental, cultural and social quality, the sector - if not managed sustainably - is at risk of deteriorating or even consuming its own income-generating resource base, and thus of being economically and socially unsustainable.

Sustainable tourism development is linked to a growth in quality rather than in quantity. Quality consciousness of tourists is also a prerequisite for sustainable development, and both sustainability and quality need to be integrated. They are indispensable for the competitiveness of the tourism sector. The competitiveness of tourism enterprises and tourist destinations requires efficiency that can pay for sustainability and an optimal sustainable yield. In turn, quality of the workforce, regard for the local society, and a lower impact on the environment set free money for resource-efficiency.

The specific challenges of key importance for the sustainability of tourism (see Annex 2) exist both throughout Europe and world-wide, but their specific nature and intensity may vary from place to place. They are in general greater where tourism activity and dependence on tourism are particularly high. Moreover, there can be additional challenges specific to particular geographical areas, such as the Mediterranean and the Alps. So-called mass tourism can also be managed in sustainable ways: identifying and implementing them is a particular challenge, but this promises to be the biggest contribution to the sustainability of tourism.

* A balanced approach to the three pillars of sustainability

Sustainable tourism is tourism that is economically and socially viable without detracting from the environment and local culture. It means business and economic success, environmental containment, preservation and development, and responsibility towards society and cultural values three facets that are interdependent.

The sustainability of tourism concerns particularly important aspects such as competitive and socially-responsible tourism enterprises, the possibility for all citizens to participate in tourism, good employment opportunities in the sector and benefits from tourism activities for local communities. It requires the preservation of cultural integrity, the incorporation of environmental issues and of the protection of heritage resources in tourism measures.

Multi-partnership solutions and good governance, which improve the participation of all the stakeholders, offer the possibility of moving the industry forward and of overcoming lack of coherence between the practices of these stakeholders.

* Sustainable consumption patterns

One of the most wide-ranging problems of leisure tourism in Europe is its concentration on specific, restricted periods of the year, which is linked both to climate and the cultural and socio-economic rhythm of everyday life. This result in temporary saturation of the communication infrastructure, tourist facilities, and the carrying capacity of destinations, which gives rise to reduced quality.

While beneficial to the recovery of resources and local society, off-season operation needs and leaves enormous over-capacity. It requires a very large workforce that lacks permanent employment and often suffers poor conditions, with negative effects on qualification levels, service quality and business competitiveness. This explains why the sector cannot attract and retain the workforce required.

The second crucial influence on sustainability, mainly from an environmental point of view, stems from the transport needed for travelling. The tourism boom of the past 50 years has been made possible mostly with the help of environmentally less-friendly car and air transport, which has become increasingly easier and cheaper. This has encouraged the use of the car also for long-distance travel and boosted tourism air travel, including short-haul trips. Today, there is a growing tension between the development of European transport infrastructure and services, the mobility requirements of tourism in the context of available connections to destinations, the capacity to serve them, and related costs.

However, travel intensity in Europe will increase further. Tourists are increasingly opting for more individual choices and, largely through the use of electronic means, this involves looking for personally-tailored products and trying to optimise the ratio between quality and positive experience, on the one hand, and the price of the product, on the other.

Alongside the significant growth in tourism, a changing demographic structure will result in the demand for types of tourism changing. For example, cultural and natural heritage tourism is expected to grow the most. However, for the entire tourism population the traditionally big segments, the so-called mass tourism that is overwhelmingly controlled by the international tour operators, will continue to be the most important ones in terms of quantity.

In addition, more tourists with special needs that must be catered for to enable them to fully benefit from tourism want to travel. Apart from the 10 % of the population formally recognised as disabled in one way or another, a growing number of tourists can be expected to suffer from reduced mobility as a result of a temporary disability or age.

Consumer behaviour as a result of price, quality and image is almost exclusively determined by individual interest. Currently, few tourists are interested in sustainability. But, by informing consumers adequately through easily understandable messages within the sector's broadly distributed means (promotion brochures, catalogues and guide books), developing their sustainability thinking, and influencing and convincing people through clear signals, it is possible to provoke sustainable consumption patterns, triggering changes in the product offered. Young people are a particularly important target group in this respect. This must include raising consciousness of quality as an integrated product feature and new approaches to get the message across to tourists that quality and sustainable tourism have their price.

* Sustainable production patterns

Sustainable value chain

As is the case with the consumers, tourism suppliers follow traditional behavioural patterns, often bound by narrow economic imperatives, particularly pronounced vertical interdependence between tourism businesses providing the various components of the extremely diverse and composite tourism product and decisions based on price.

Sustainable tourism value chain management involves competitive enterprises and a level playing field for competition. It is related to quality management for the production of goods and services. For economic profit not to be produced at the expense of social and environmental aspects, the sector needs to internalise socio-economic and environmental cost to get its prices right, mainly through the use of appropriate market-based systems.

Sustainable tourism value also means optimising employment and social benefits, i.e. the sector's enterprises implement the concept of corporate social responsibility. This includes learning opportunities and good quality jobs for qualified and motivated staff to provide high-quality tourism services, certification systems to promote sustainable production and consumption patterns, and the use of innovation and new technologies where appropriate. It also requires strengthened social dialogue and additional power given to the social partners at all levels of conception and implementation.

Sustainable destination development

Together with the individual service components of the value chain, the destination as a whole forms the overall tourism product. The different activities and policies of destinations that combine public and private interests are therefore important for sustainable production. In most parts of Europe the traditional cultural landscape provides the suitable natural and cultural resource which is a prerequisite for the tourism product. Heritage resources, the communications infrastructure, hospitality and tourist facilities are further basic resources of a tourist destination. Wise land-use is a crucial factor in sustainable destination development.

Tourism requirements in this respect, and in relation to local cultural identity and local resident needs, have in some cases generated tensions at destination level. Competitive high-quality tourism needs to respect the carrying capacity of its natural and cultural areas. A range of destinations - in particular some coastal zones and islands in the southern part of Europe, some mountain resorts and certain cities - have experienced the negative effects of a tourism development to a level that exceeds their carrying capacity. Furthermore, where the local development of destinations with a limited economic base, such as islands, is heavily based on tourism, this risks resulting in a fragile and over-dependent 'mono-economy' without the desired indirect effects on other aspects of the local economy, such as agriculture and crafts.

Added to this are two regionally very different phenomena closely connected to tourism: secondary and third-age residence in many European tourist destinations, and one-day visits, which at certain locations within easy reach of agglomerations can far outweigh normal tourism activity. Although in most cases combined with relatively low spending, such activities can help to mitigate the negative effects of off-season low demand. But it is far more likely that, in addition to certain permanent negative local impacts such as contributing to the urbanisation of valuable landscape and increased land prices and costs of living, high numbers of day-visitors at weekends and holidays with good weather or for special events during high season will considerably increase demand and pressure on resources, transport infrastructure and services used by tourism, except for accommodation.

Ensuring good prospects for European tourism requires the preservation of its regional diversity as a competitiveness asset, ensuring quality and considering community well-being in tourist destinations, conserving or restoring European coastal zones and mountain areas, protected areas and cultural heritage sites as the basis for attractive destinations, protecting the environment and heritage resources, and using them wisely, and promoting sustainable inter- and intra-destination mobility. It also depends on a level playing field for the local providers in relation to those who market the tourist product and requires tourism-generated profits to flow back to the destinations.

III. Where we stand: The state of the art

Many initiatives

Many stakeholder groups have started to respond to the challenges (see Annex 3). Basic orientations for the sustainability of European tourism can build upon a large amount of work and documents outlining important processes and principles. Networks are being established to exchange or divulge useful information and to encourage the uptake of best practice.

Through a set of policy measures, also the European Community has started to contribute to sustainability, including that of tourism, both in a global and a European context (see Annex 4). Although they mainly target sustainability issues more generally, across economic sectors, these elements can significantly contribute to the development of European tourism.

European tourists globally represent the biggest demand, and European companies the biggest stake in international investment in the tourism sector. In the public sphere, in accordance with the current work at international level, the EU assists tourism development as an important tool in fighting poverty and improving social conditions, especially in the world's poorest countries. In 1998 the Commission presented A European Community strategy to support the development of sustainable tourism in the developing countries as an essential policy base, which the Council took up in a Resolution of 30 November 1998.

The Community's global responsibility also extends to sustainable trade in services. In addition to implementing existing commitments, the Community wants to further liberalise the tourism sector in the framework of the World Trade Organisation-GATS. Remaining restrictions to trade in this sector need to be substantially reduced in a way that is compatible with other agreements supporting sustainability and does not negatively affect the conditions of local communities and their rights. Neither should the right of local governments to determine sustainable tourism development, the local natural and cultural assets, the quality of service, protection of consumers' and workers' rights, or public safety be reduced.

The sustainability of tourism in the Mediterranean basin is a particular challenge. It could profit from an improved Euro-Mediterranean Partnership and from Community support to implementation of the MEDA programme, in particular when regional authorities and other stakeholder categories important for tourism are associated as partners. Likewise, the fragile areas in the North of Europe could benefit from enhanced partnership in this region.

The European Environmental Agency has established some key indicators and is working to develop a 'Tourism and environment reporting mechanism'. In addition, the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) is a reference for territorial development regarding tourism, as is the Protocol on Tourism and Recreation under the Alpine Convention. For these initiatives, transposition to the regional and local level will be important to mark progress.

At a national level certain countries are drawing up National Sustainable Development Strategies that include tourism or more specific tourism sector national plans. Regionally, several tourism monitoring and indicator system prototypes are being designed and tested.

Slow progress

Despite these many initiatives, which exist from international down to local level and are available everywhere, there is still no significant change from unsustainable patterns of consumption and production in European tourism. European tourism is not yet adapting in a fundamental manner to sustainability requirements with regard to tourism transport and to the seasonal spread of leisure tourism and its economically, socially and environmentally unsustainable effects. Nor has there so far been sufficient effect on production in the tourism value chain or on tourist destination development.

Apparently, there is neither the information nor the incentive to take up these initiatives sufficiently on the ground, where tourism is shaped. Since socio-economic and environmental costs are not internalised, there is rather an adverse incentive. Furthermore, consumption behaviour is formed individually, and tourism takes place locally. Policies targeting them need to be devised and implemented at this level. The success of sustainable production initiatives and contributions is thus determined principally at SME and local destination level.

One major handicap for transposing initiatives into successful concrete action at the 'sharp end' of the industry is that managers' face many issues and their priorities are determined at the local market level. In addition, there is poor communication from the top down: messages formulated in complex language at high level do not reach local and regional players and citizens. Making publications available and Internet dissemination do not create sufficient ownership on the ground. Tourists generally do not have access to or understand the rather complicated information needed to assess the sustainability effects of their behaviour. Therefore, action is needed to associate, involve and address these players more directly, and to formulate easily accessible messages that are easy to understand.

IV. Facing the challenges: the policy option

The slow progress recorded suggests that the economic, social and environmental sustainability of European tourism as a contribution to sustainable development both in Europe and worldwide, and as a condition for the viability, growth, competitiveness and commercial success of the sector, needs a reinforced approach that addresses the various challenges in a coherent manner. This approach must build on the involvement and optimum active contribution of all stakeholders concerned, at all levels, and focus on:

* The merits of subsidiarity and of the prevailing 'bottom-up' approach to address the issues;

* The need to look at individual components, sub-sectors, areas and aspects, and particular problems related to them, rather than treat tourism and its sustainability as a single issue;

* Consumer information to ensure market forces are exerted to promote sustainable consumption and production patterns;

* The need to recognise the particular nature of SMEs and micro-enterprises;

* The need to ensure the social and economic viability, as well as the environmental sustainability, of rural and coastal communities.

These considerations need to be taken into account when choosing the European Community policy option to face the challenges for the sustainability of European tourism. An extended impact assessment of possible policy options and the public consultation show that both a comprehensive approach shaped as a genuine Community policy, and the total renunciation of Community activities in this context are to be ruled out (see SEC(2003) 1295). Instead, the existing framework for action should be reinforced and used to the best advantage.

Feedback on the comments received during the public consultation

This also takes account of the majority of comments received during public consultation held in preparation of this Communication (see SEC(2003) 1295, chapter 7. and appendix). However, some went largely beyond the scope of the subject matter, targeting general or global sustainability issues or representing extreme views, so that a feedback was not possible or not appropriate in this context.

As a result of the public consultation, the Commission confirms that there are many models for achieving sustainable tourism development, that tourism and its sustainability are primarily consumer driven, and that economic success is essential for achieving sustainability. This requires an approach that targets as many stakeholders as possible, favouring consensus-building. The consultation also resulted in a reinforced recognition of the territorial (land use) dimension, and of the issues linked to climate change, for sustainable tourism. Although, to some extent, seasonal spread is one of the issues of tourism sustainability hard to deal with, it is a major challenge that needs to be considered in a European context.

The Commission does not favour the idea of introducing regulatory instruments because voluntary instruments developed for sustainable tourism have had of little success so far. However, in exceptional cases regulation cannot in principal be excluded, if it is part of a recognised Community policy. Taking account of comments referring to co-ordination and integration of the various existing Community policies affecting tourism sustainability, also in relation to liberalisation, the Commission confirms its intention to reinforce integration of sustainability concerns into Community policies and initiatives affecting European tourism and to enhance their effect on it in order to support the sustainability of the sector. It follows the line of dealing with all aspects of sustainability and not only selective ones.

Although these basic orientations foresee that measures will be gradually shaped during the process still to come, they are as concrete as possible with regard to specific measures. In general, the comments strongly supported the suggested measures, and added further details or precision. But a number of them wanted the conception of action and the Community contribution extended, mostly requiring, in one form or another, specific Community funding for sustainable tourism or measures that would need considerable financial commitment. At this stage, it is not intended to give follow-up to these requests.

Regarding a Tourism Sustainability Group, a few comments questioned its usefulness, whereas others confirmed that such a group is key to the success of efforts. While local and regional authorities representation in this group was strongly supported, opposition arose to it being led by the tourism industry, even from the industry itself. Indeed, the creation and work of this group is seen as a crucial measure, but its details take account of the comments received. Chapter V.3. also largely integrates the comments with regard to the other measures, but the process still to come will define how they will be shaped and implemented in detail.

Regarding the contribution of other stakeholders, the comments received added useful information, and put additional emphasis on consumers and on the importance of education in this respect. The importance of those stakeholders that operate on the ground was particularly underlined, whereas that of international stakeholders was viewed with some reservation. For the major part these comments were used to enrich, to revise and to fine-tune chapter V.4. But they also showed the need to further discuss controversial issues, such as the sustainability of so-called mass tourism, the potential market dominance of major tour operators, and the usefulness of environmental taxes, in particular at tourist destinations.

The two basic elements of a feasible way forward for facing the challenges are reliance on:

* effective implementation of existing initiatives and reinforced efforts of stakeholders, other than the Community, who are active in this field; and

* Community activities, of which two basic types can be distinguished:

- optimising the effect of Community policies and measures on the sustainability of European tourism, and

- the definition and implementation of complementary tourism-specific measures to promote sustainability throughout the Community, which particularly target support of and involvement in other stakeholders' initiatives, and which fill gaps left by the Community policies and measures affecting tourism.

The Commission considers this co-operative and pro-active multi-stakeholder approach, which also aims at bridging the remoteness of the Community from the players on the ground, as the right road to the sustainability of European tourism.

V. Implementing tourism sustainability: Basic orientations for a European Community approach

1. The general concept of future action

Within and beyond Europe, the sustainability of European tourism needs policy measures at every level from global to local, to address patterns of consumption and of production in the tourism value chain. Tourism stakeholders 2 enterprises, workers and destinations, national administrations, and regional and local authorities 2 bear the prime responsibility for defining tourism policy frameworks and implementing measures. Self-regulation in the various sub-sectors and at the appropriate levels, and the work of specialised international and European bodies, including standardisation organisations, can spur progress in implementation.

Whilst action focusing on issues linked to seasonal concentration and on sustainable tourist travel generally needs to be dealt with above the local and regional level, local authorities and the tourism private sector are nonetheless the key stakeholders for the sustainability of tourist products. They have to formulate their own Agenda 21 at local or sub-sector levels. To do so, they need policy hints and guidelines resulting from a voluntary process, broadly based on regional, local and non-public stakeholder involvement, albeit endorsed at European level. Bodies representing the tourism industry, regional and local authorities and civil society interests need to commit themselves to this process, contributing their knowledge, experience and views and promoting the message to public and private players at all territorial levels.

The overall approach of the European Community will rely essentially on initiatives by directly responsible and specialised stakeholders, and on activities under those Community policies that affect the sustainability of European tourism. Its implementation needs to reflect the fact that the level of tourism activity and dependence on tourism vary across Europe's vast and diverse territory, as do the intensity and specific nature of challenges for the tourism industry and for sustainability.

The great diversity of European tourism, the subsidiarity principle and the lack of specific powers in this area mean that the European Community itself can only undertake complementary activities, and encourage stakeholders to put policy measures into practice, inter alia by:

* stimulating the coherence and effective contribution of Community policies and of complementary measures in the sphere of tourism,

* actively participating in global and international processes, interlinking with international governmental bodies, and bringing together the activities of major international players,

* practising and promoting the principles of good governance, through:

- ensuring adequate Impact Assessment of any relevant Community measure or initiative,

- furthering the coherence of national policies in relation to Community activities, and between the policies of the different Member States,

- liaising, consulting and co-operating with international and European non-public bodies that represent the tourism industry and other stakeholder interests, and

- furthering good governance at all levels and encouraging the various stakeholders, as well as their representative bodies, to find joint approaches to sustainability in the different tourism sub-sectors;

* helping European, national, regional and local private and public stakeholders to assume their responsibilities for the sustainability of tourism production, in particular through:

- the use of available Community instruments,

- promoting the exchange of good practice and dissemination of information, and flexible co-operation, partnership and networking between stakeholders across Europe, and

- drawing together expertise on under-researched issues in order to contribute to stakeholder guidance.

2. The European Community contribution

a) In the international context

The Community will continue its policy with regard to sustainable trade in services (including environmental considerations), international environmental governance, and positive synergies between trade liberalisation, economic growth, environmental protection and social development, using Sustainability Impact Assessment (SAI).

The WSSD Plan of Implementation put emphasis on sustainable tourism development as a contribution to social, economic and infrastructure development and to sustainable development in the developing parts of the world, and as an issue of protecting and managing the natural resource base of economic and social development. The Community will examine how this emphasis can be better reflected in its Development Policy and aid programmes. It will continue to ensure that the Commission's European Community strategy to support the development of sustainable tourism in the developing countries of 1998, and the subsequent Council Resolution of 30 November 1998, guide the relevant measures.

Increasing the emphasis on sustainable tourism development in developing countries could include considering joining forces with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and with the World Tourism Organisation (WTO) to step up work on its Sustainable Tourism - Eliminating Poverty (ST-EP) special initiative. The Community intends to reinforce its co-operation also in other relevant initiatives undertaken by international bodies, such as the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the WTO, and the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI).

b) Within Europe

With regard to a demand-oriented approach and to improving the stakeholder value chain and destination development, focal areas of action will be:

* consumer-oriented awareness raising,

* multi-stakeholder partnerships and networks,

* governance and policy integration at each level,

* capacity building, good practice and stakeholder commitment to sustainability, and

* multi-stakeholder monitoring and reporting.

Sustainable tourism information, policy tools and best practice need further development. There is an urgent need for reliable carrying capacity analysis techniques, development of user-friendly sustainability reporting mechanisms, and better statistical monitoring and indicator systems to provide information for managing tourism supply and demand. These tools need to be conceived in such a way as to be optimally adapted to local conditions.

3. What the Commission intends to do.

The Commission is planning a number of provisions for putting the further European Community contribution to implementing tourism sustainability into concrete form.

a) Firstly, the Commission will use suitable working arrangements to enhance the contribution of Community policies to the sustainability of European tourism.

The Commission will use the Impact Assessment tool to integrate sustainability concerns into Community policies and initiatives affecting European tourism.

Impact Assessments undertaken in preparation for the Commission's annual Legislative and Work Programme, and during its implementation, help to identify beforehand the initiatives that are likely to affect tourism. They should make it possible to evaluate the potential contribution of these initiatives to furthering the sustainability of tourism. Reinforced consultation and dialogue, both with interested parties and within the Commission, provide an opportunity to bring the concerns of all tourism stakeholders to bear.

The Commission will prepare and implement an internal work programme for enhancing the effect of the various Community policies on European tourism in order to support the sustainability of the sector.

With regard to the Community policy fields that affect the wide range of challenges to be addressed, this work programme will aim at both improving the effectiveness of existing legislative and non-legislative instruments and defining additional initiatives where appropriate. Based on a detailed analysis of the various Community policies, it will be a joint open co-ordination effort between the stakeholders and Commission services concerned. A guide will indicate the Community support available for the sustainability of tourism.

Policy fields relating to entrepreneurship and competitiveness, employment, learning and a skilled workforce, good environmental performance as well as natural resources and cultural heritage, are examples of subjects that require special attention. However, this work will also include the issue of how the Community can help to improve data and indicators on the sustainability of European tourism. Based on the methodological work done in the field of tourism and environmental research and statistics, Eurostat intends to elaborate a methodological manual for the measurement of the sustainable development of tourism and to test a selected number of indicators with its help. The results of this work are expected to deliver recommendations on how to compile statistical data on tourism sustainability.

b) Secondly, the Commission will encourage stakeholder synergies and co-operation.

The Commission will develop a co-operation agreement with the World Tourism Organisation (WTO) in the field of sustainable tourism.

The agreement is intended to identify the fields and measures of co-operation, in two respects: (1) specific arrangements regarding WTO initiatives for sustainable tourism which particularly target Europe; and (2) European Community technical co-operation in, and support for, global WTO initiatives for sustainable tourism and their implementation in Europe. This can also include activities in developing countries for the promotion of sustainable tourism development as a contribution to poverty alleviation, in connection with the above-mentioned ST-EP initiative.

The Commission favours the involvement of EU Member States (in their capacity as WTO members), of the tourism industry and the civil society groups concerned, and of any other appropriate stakeholder, in the preparation of the agreement and its implementation.

The Commission will launch a Tourism Sustainability Group composed of representatives of the various stakeholder groups, with the task of steering and monitoring the coherent implementation of specific activities to be undertaken by these stakeholder groups.

To be effective, this group, which is crucial for implementing tourism sustainability, must be a joint effort between all the stakeholders concerned, using the method of open co-ordination. The Commission will define the initial representation in close consultation with the various stakeholder representatives. In co-operation with public stakeholders at various levels and civil society organisations, the different core players in the European tourism industry need to show particular commitment to, and ownership of, this group.

A first task of the group will be to draft, discuss and table a detailed framework for action which allocates specific activities to the individual stakeholder groups, includes an agreed timetable for implementation, and forms a very important further contribution to the broad European Agenda 21 process for sustainable tourism. The Commission would be prepared to contribute to the multi-stakeholder efforts with activities as specified below, under c).

The group will also be responsible for regularly evaluating the implementation of the measures provided for in the framework for action. It will be asked to set up and manage at European level a system to monitor the sustainability of the tourism sector. This will also make it possible to report periodically on progress made in this field. For this purpose, and as a tool to fulfil the Community commitments undertaken in the international context, the Commission will continue, together with other public and private stakeholders, the work undertaken in the field of sustainable tourism indicators.

The Tourism Sustainability Group needs to provide value also for the players on the ground. It can guide the use of the Local Agenda 21 tool in tourist destinations, and the preparation of a model for local destination monitoring and indicator systems to ensure that destinations do not follow divergent monitoring principles and deliver comparable results. It can also encourage the bottom-up development of tools and good examples of tourism sustainability, adapted to local conditions.

c) Thirdly, the Commission could assist the promotion of sustainable patterns of tourism consumption and production, and the better transfer of approaches, initiatives, instruments and good practice to the players on the ground.

It will focus on promoting and strengthening voluntary efforts and change in the realm of the various stakeholders, their capacity building, and the exchange and take-up of good practice.

* Regarding sustainable tourism consumption in Europe, the Commission wants an initiative that involves all stakeholders and focus on the two core issues of sustainable consumer choices in leisure tourism, i.e. appropriate seasonal spread and sustainable tourism transport. Stakeholders with a major influence and/or knowledge in this field should meet regularly to address the problem of the seasonal character of tourism. They should appraise the evolution of seasonal spread, its consequences and the factors influencing it, and develop ideas for improving it and mitigating negative effects of seasonal concentration. Concerning sustainable tourism transport, the Commission is already launching a specific action targeting this issue from a European perspective, which aims at involving all stakeholder groups concerned. After the current preparatory phase, and based on solid information on the tourism travel behaviour of Europeans, it will examine whether it is possible to produce a quantitative model and a stakeholder-oriented assessment of the transport-related impact of current European tourism. A competition for innovative approaches and sustainable production and consumption patterns in European tourism with more sustainable transport uses run by the European tourism sector might follow. Furthermore, the Commission will examine how to promote effective consumer-oriented stakeholder initiatives, including those undertaken by the media. Such initiatives aim at raising awareness and developing sustainability thinking with regard to tourism activities. They need to provide consumers with the necessary transparent information, for example on the advantages and disadvantages that specific tourist products have for sustainability. This can favour sustainable tourism consumption attitudes and, increasingly, change unsustainable patterns of tourism and create incentives for sustainability. Some of the issues will be to better understand tourists' consumption patterns, to provide easily accessible messages in simple language (e.g. in the form of a Charter of the rights and duties of tourists), and to further the tourism sustainability education of young people.

* Regarding initiatives for encouraging the development and adoption of good practice in sustainable production throughout the European tourism sector and among its stakeholders, the Commission favours in particular promoting the principles of governance and fostering Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) practices as a specific initiative within the European Multi-stakeholder Forum on CSR. Focusing on the enterprises of the sustainable value chain, in particular SMEs and micro-enterprises, this needs to involve, for implementation purposes, appropriate intermediaries to reach these enterprises. Concrete activities to which the Commission could contribute include:

- co-operation in the UNEP co-ordinated Tour Operators Initiative and in efforts to extend this approach to other tourism branches and to European tourism SMEs,

- tourism sector multi-stakeholder platforms for promoting the different elements and tools to implement CSR practices among European tourism enterprises, and

- multi-stakeholder efforts for sustainability in the tourism value chain, in particular with regard to awareness raising, effective communication and dissemination of knowledge, and on-the-ground promotion of CSR and its elements, such as learning, working and social conditions, sustainable products, and sustainability reporting and transparency.

* Likewise, activities have to specifically target tourist destinations, promoting their sustainable development and management, and a strengthened ability of local players to better take into account the spatial and land use dimension of tourism. The Commission could contribute to such activities by supporting and co-operating in, for example:

- large-scale initiatives to achieve a wide use of the instrument of Local Agenda 21 in European tourist destinations as a central effort for sustainable tourist destination development and management, and corresponding encouragement measures,

- the development, refinement and use of reliable and locally adaptable techniques to analyse, manage and enhance sustainable tourism carrying capacity and its different elements, including the assessment of the mutual impacts between tourism and cultural heritage, which needs pursuing research and taking into account the potential input of cultural heritage research for sustainable tourism,

- exchange between European tourist destinations on sustainable development and management issues, including the use of market-based instruments, implementation of the carrying capacity concept, integrated management of quality and of sensitive areas and sites, and sustainability monitoring and reporting of tourist destinations,

- a bottom-up approach to define and implement, together with Member States, regional and local authorities and their representative bodies, and bodies representing European tourist destinations, awareness campaigns and effective communication and dissemination of knowledge on these issues of sustainable tourist destination development and management, and

- the development and dissemination of good practice.

These initiatives also need to emphasise the positive link between the sustainability and quality of tourism, be it from the consumption or the production point of view. Sustainability is part of the quality of the tourist product, the value chain and the destinations. Tourists must be made aware of the fact that sustainable quality has its price and that this price is worth paying.

For some of the above purposes, the Commission will examine the possibility of using target-based tripartite agreements or similar arrangements when other stakeholders are involved in addition to public authorities.

* Furthermore, the Commission favours the creation and use of information tools and networks, which involve and target the different types of stakeholders, for good governance at destination and enterprise level, and for disseminating good practice. This includes fully exploiting the potential for better use of information and communication technologies (ICT). These can facilitate direct dialogue between the various stakeholders, help develop it at the interface between tourists and tourism operators, and can be used regularly to evaluate progress towards the sustainability of European tourism. Provided they deal with relevant considerations in sufficient breadth, the subject, nature and origin of the tools, networks and stakeholders can be as wide as possible. In this context, the Commission will also seek a solution to ensure long-term viability, up-dating and wider use of helpful tools and networks that have already been created with Community financial support.

4. What other stakeholders can do

The Commission expects the stakeholders to be involved with these measures and to contribute to the utmost to ensuring their success. While emphasising the interrelationships between the contributions of national governments, tourist destinations and their local authorities, and private enterprises, it sees the following roles for the various stakeholders:

* European citizens and tourists

For tourism to be sustainable, citizens must increasingly become responsible tourists who generally favour sustainability, and tourism professionals need to commit themselves to sustainability. All parties should seek out, and be actively provided with, better information about sustainable tourism, and be willing to make responsible purchasing and travel decisions.

Sustainable tourism can only be a success if consumers buy its products. Clear information, awareness and media presentation are crucial concerns, both for the tourist and his behaviour, and for the citizen in the tourist destination. Coherent and reliable pointers to identify sustainable tourism products and services will help tourists to make informed choices on what products to buy and from whom, with whom they travel, and who deserves their loyalty.

* Private sector enterprises and social partners

In tourism, as in other sectors, better use of the wide range of available pertinent instruments and tools helps to develop products which respond both to changing and new markets and business messages that favour sustainability and to increasing sustainability requirements. The tourism trade can influence tourist consumption patterns with regard to seasonal spread, transport and sustainable products, for instance through information and pricing.

Getting the price right means recognising the costs of and opportunities for implementing sustainable patterns of production and consumption, making consumers and producers pay the full social and environmental costs of their activities, and accounting for wider economic, environmental and social costs and effects. In this context, the tourism trade should develop and propose solutions to achieve sustainability that are feasible in a situation of low profit margins and low spending by tourists.

Open governance requires businesses to assume responsibility in conducting their operations in an economically viable manner that takes into account environmental and social issues. This means full implementation of appropriate CSR practices for tourism value chain services and enterprises of any kind and size, opting for sustainable methods and products, and using a business assessment and reporting system that includes not only a financial, but also a social and environmental balance sheet.

Transparent product information, including guidebooks, helps to change consumption patterns, and opting for sustainable consumer lifestyle choices provides business advantages. Recognised management, auditing, certification and product labelling make efforts visible and attract sustainability-conscious consumers. Capacity-building, learning programmes for staff and enhanced e-business capability make it easier to adapt to the new way of doing business.

Participating in processes such as Local Agenda 21, the Integrated Quality Management of destinations, and the preservation and maintenance of heritage, are important attributes of a sustainably managed enterprise within the tourism economy, and prevent potential conflicts and sanctions. A responsible attitude to destination development and product delivery also means involving local communities and indigenous peoples in the development approach by discussing business policies and decisions with the local stakeholders.

The tourism economy must recognise that it is the right of the local population and their authorities to control local social and cultural development and landscapes. This requires business decisions that benefit local residents, tourists and the landscape, in particular when the product is based on indigenous cultures and their territories. Enterprises involved in tourism services and tourism development should participate in carrying capacity assessment and the application of the tools used for respecting social and environmental requirements.

The other social partners, i.e. tourism workers and trade unions, can contribute to increased job opportunities and quality employment conditions. Multi-activity employment, equitable part-time work, improved learning opportunities, and integrated work-unemployment-education packages can secure longer-term job opportunities. This is linked to the issues of flexibility, of higher levels of education and skills on the part of employees, and of an approach to employment that is based on greater sector and geographical mobility.

The Commission sees a need for trade associations and other bodies representing stakeholder interests to launch, at all levels, a broad discussion with their members on the sustainability of the sector and its activities. This includes sustainability information and awareness-raising measures, and effective arrangements for self-regulation. They should also provide trend data and sector information for better policy making with regard to tourism sustainability.

* European tourist destinations and public authorities

The Local Agenda 21 process is an important way to further the sustainability of tourist destinations. Local governments play a key role as leaders, political promoters and facilitators of this process, guaranteeing transparent monitoring and assessment with sufficient comparable data. As decision-makers and honest brokers among different interests they can combine a broad knowledge of the local situation and players with extensive responsibility and power, and as disseminators they can reach almost all local stakeholders.

To best perform their task of providing a sustainable tourist product, tourist destinations and public authorities at all levels of government should adopt the good governance principles of openness and transparency, participation, accountability, effectiveness and coherence, and use of interdisciplinary and integrated approaches. They should activate partnerships of public authorities, private business, and other civil society groups, which all could have a direct input into these governance-by-partnership processes through appropriate stakeholder fora.

A diversified local economy helps avoid the negative effects of a development that is over-dependent on tourism and provides multi-activity employment opportunities. Local public authorities also need to devise policies for coping with the impacts of secondary and senior residence and day-visitors on their tourist destination, and with destination life cycle issues. Inter-disciplinary land-use management at regional and local level is central to the process of integrating sector and thematic considerations in tourist destinations. Impact assessment procedures and monitoring and indicator systems as decision-support mechanisms should assist policy integration and effective policy-making at regional and local levels.

Regional and local authorities play an important role in developing the practical instruments that make those who generate social and environmental costs pay for them, this also being in the interest of discharging public budgets. They are also key to using Structural Funds for enhancing the sustainability of tourist destinations and to reporting on it. Destinations and public authorities should assess whether public management balances economic development with social cohesion and environmental protection and also use annual reporting systems that comprise not only a financial but also a social and environmental balance sheet.

Most tourist destinations and public bodies need to improve sustainability performance. They can involve themselves in the development, promotion and use of market instruments, voluntary agreements, and labelling and certification schemes. They can influence the consumption patterns of tourists with regard to seasonal spread, transport and sustainable products, in particular through organisational measures, promotion and incentives.

Quality and carrying capacity considerations should guide the performance and development of tourist destinations. Together with other public and private stakeholders active in their territory, and with a view to creating 'Learning Areas' in the tourism sector, regional and local authorities should implement suitable training and education schemes for sector practitioners.

Tourist destination managers and other public authority bodies need to be familiar with the core documentation of sustainable tourism. Their sustainability knowledge and skills enhancement should in particular target areas of strategic importance for sustainable tourism development, such as inter-disciplinary teamwork, monitoring and reporting, use of new technologies, networking mechanisms and workforce issues.

Local and regional governments and their representative bodies have a key role to play in the changes and efforts needed to enhance the institutional capacity required to progress towards the sustainability of destinations, and for furthering effective arrangements for self-regulation.

* International organisations and national governments

Continued and broadened sustainable tourism efforts on the part of relevant international organisations and bodies will allow the European Community to reinforce its co-operation and join forces with them in this sphere, while benefiting from and contributing even more effectively to global experience and exchange of ideas.

However, the effective implementation of the many international and European activities needs important efforts to be undertaken by national governments and tourism authorities. Member States should actively participate in the initiatives undertaken by international organisations and bodies and support measures to promote tourism sustainability at any level at which they have influence. The Commission calls on them to give high political importance to the sustainability of tourism, including arrangements for the widest possible staggering of holidays throughout Europe and making tourism consumption patterns an educational subject.

Tourism should be an important issue in National Sustainable Development Strategies, with sufficient room for regional and local initiatives. In addition, national governments have a particular responsibility for widely promoting the principles of good governance and for using impact assessment procedures and monitoring and indicator systems as aids to policy integration and effective policy-making.

It is the role of national governments and regional authorities to give the necessary weight to the sustainable development of tourism and its infrastructure and to assisting sustainability initiatives and capacity building of other tourism stakeholders, both when using their own funds and those provided by the European Community. Planning use on an integrated basis, and effective spatial planning, is key to moving towards sustainable tourism.

Member States and regions need to share good practice on issues such as sustainable transport links, design of new developments, and large-scale visitor management techniques. Together with international organisations, they have a vital role in providing and exchanging trend data and comprehensive and co-ordinated statistical knowledge to shape, monitor and update efforts for sustainable tourism , and in consistently evaluating their impact and the situation.

* Civil society groups

As a leading voice in the sustainable development implementation process, civil society groups can use their high social and media acceptance to favour the raising of consumer awareness and a sense of sustainability on the part of the tourism workforce. They can provide a valuable interface between citizens, authorities and the private sector.

Environmental and other non-governmental organisations (NGOs) can assist public and business stakeholders with constructive, solution-oriented contributions and provide innovative approaches, specific solution-oriented expertise and the experience from pilot projects. This should be combined with a deeper involvement in sustainable tourism policy-making as well as the benefits of capacity-building measures. NGOs would need to develop their own effectiveness at regional and local levels, so that representative associations could interface with tourist destinations and public authorities in appropriate stakeholder fora.

VI. Conclusions

The Commission expects other stakeholders to contribute to efforts to achieve sustainable tourism. This concerns European citizens and tourists, private sector enterprises, European tourist destinations and public authorities, and civil society stakeholders.

It would like to begin the gradual implementation of the measures selected in 2004. Its intention would be to do this in co-operation with the Council, the other Community institutions and with international bodies active in this field, as well as with the active participation of the tourism industry and civil society representatives.

The Commission expects to report back to the Council and other Community Institutions on the progress of implementation in the autumn of 2005 in a sufficiently-detailed form for an Agenda 21 for European tourism to be prepared no later than 2007. This can also serve as a sector-specific contribution to the programme in support of European initiatives to accelerate the shift towards sustainable consumption and production, as provided for in the Plan of Implementation adopted at the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development.

Annex 1

Major trends in tourism: the scenario driving the future of the sector

European tourism today

Tourism and its growth continue to be one of the major economic and social phenomena of our time, with a global dimension. It comprises a wide variety of products and destinations, involving many different public and private stakeholders with very decentralised competencies often at regional and local levels. Tourism is now an important part of the world economy, and Europe's largest single industry, with continuing prospects for increasing employment. Its development depends particularly on transport as essential facilitator, and related policies.

Since 1980 the tourism boom has seen international arrivals in European destinations double. Europe is the most-visited tourist region in the world, representing today nearly 60% of worldwide international tourism activity. The signs are that growth is set to continue - in a fiercely competitive global market. Numbers in Europe are expected to further increase considerably, and Europe will remain one of the principal markets for tourism to other parts of the world.

Current European Community tourism is largely internal. Only 13 % of its recorded activity is attributed to visitors from non-member countries. As for the tourism of EU citizens, in the recent past three-quarters stayed within the EU. About four-fifths of European tourism is leisure tourism, which also means that the choice of destination is relatively discretionary. The rest is for other purposes, which normally do not allow a free choice of destination.

In the current EU, all this activity involves over two million tourism enterprises, employing 7.7 million people, a figure expected to rise by approximately 15 % over the next ten years. In 2001, the tourism industry delivered about 5% of EU GDP, a figure that rises to over 12% when the wider tourism economy is taken into account. Nearly 99% of European tourism enterprises are SMEs, however some large corporate companies manage a significant proportion of the volume of trade, particularly at an international level.

While numbers are high in European tourism, and expected to further increase to a considerable extent, there is a weakness in the yield generated, especially recently. Nevertheless, tourism remains one of the European economy sectors with the best prospects.

Current global circumstances

Recent security crises and health scares, which have attracted widespread media attention and triggered confusing government reaction, have generated changes in tourism patterns and demand that also reflect a current slowing of economic growth world-wide. Businesses, in particular, are cutting their travel costs. Unemployment, security fears, tighter security precautions, which make travelling less easy, and higher charges to pay for them deter travel. There is also a reluctance to visit certain destinations for political and safety reasons.

As a result, tourists are turning to their domestic markets and short-haul destinations and they are reducing holiday spending. For Europe, this means decreased inbound tourism from overseas and Europeans are travelling less to other parts of the world and staying closer to home. Airline capacity has been significantly reduced, so that it will be difficult to meet any rapid increase in demand should tourism patterns revert to what they were previously.

Mid-term and long-term demographic and social change

Demographic change will have a major impact on tourism trends and demand. The proportion of people over 60 in the developed countries will grow from 20% to one-third over the next half-century. They are likely to retain their independence for longer, and health, spa and 'keep fit' tourism is among the segments likely to benefit from it. They increasingly spend longer periods in tourist destinations considered to provide pleasant living conditions, in particular in the South and off-season. More of them are changing their place of residence more or less permanently to regions which are important tourist destinations or have the potential to be so.

This change, and the growth of minority groups in developed societies, will result in new product demand. Younger people, however, will continue to require 'youth travel' products, and people increasingly tend to consider themselves 'young' even beyond their twenties. More and smaller households, higher disposable incomes and more flexible working patterns will lead to even more short-break holidays and a demand for higher quality services. Improved freedom of movement and a culture of lifelong learning should encourage the willingness to travel and seek new experiences, not just those confined to ordinary leisure tourism.

Changing political attitude and increasing economic pressures

While levels of government support for tourism are expected to be reduced, increased awareness of environmental responsibilities could result in further regulation to protect the environment affecting in particular, adventure tourism. The prospect of higher taxes, charges and pricing to control environmental pressures, of rising costs related to strengthened consumer protection, the cost of improved accessibility for disabled people, and higher insurance premiums will all put increased pressures on the private sector to provide its product at a price that the consumer expects. Competition between destinations and private-sector enterprises, within the vertically-integrated sector, will become tighter. They will respond with closer (more direct) contact with their markets and (potential) customers, within Europe and internationally, by greater co-operative use of new technology for more cost-effective promotion, marketing and information provision.

Changes in the transport sector

The continued growth of low-cost airlines using regional airports will favour destinations deserved by them, in particular in pint-to-point service, and the growth of the short-break segment. New fare structures and the e-market will change booking behaviour and favour personally composed and 'non-standard' products, as against package tours, both in short-haul and long haul travelling. Similar fare structures applied to cruises could lead to more flexible products, particularly in the Mediterranean area. Both scheduled and charter airlines, among which limits are increasingly dwindling, will further limit their fleet to the capacity promising maximal yield. This reduces their ability to meet rapid rises and peaks in demand. They will still face the potential problem of fuel shortages and price rise due to political problems.

The current growth rate of individual tourism road transport is not likely to continue. It will be more the discomfort of using the car than increasing cost which will discourage using the car for tourism transport. For the management of the limited infrastructure carrying capacity of important urban destinations, the success of the congestion charge in London could see this being applied in other cities, accompanied by limitations on the movement of tourist coaches and an increased use of public transport. Government efforts to reduce congestion and pollution from road transport will mean that rail travel will increase, if public financial support is given, as the relative advantage of using private cars for tourism diminishes.

Annex 2

Important challenges and major private and public governance objectives for the sustainability of European tourism

Challenges of key importance for the sustainability of tourism are:

* the lack of skilled manpower for certain jobs, and the difficult social and working conditions in the sector;

* the development of transport and its effect on traffic flows: as tourism necessarily depends on transport, this sector deserves specific attention also with regard to sustainability, in particular limiting its environmental impacts, including the issue of climate change;

* a potential impact of tourism development on the economic and social conditions of the local population, such as price increases and cost of living, and the risk of detaching culture from its local context and divorcing it from its role for the local society, and losing local authenticity of socio-cultural expressions as a consequence of globalised tourism development and investment;

* the use of heritage resources, the need to protect the environment, and increasing exposure to natural and man-made risks;

* potential shifts in the choice of destination, whether or not in high season, as a result of major consumer trends and external factors, including changing features of regional climate and extreme weather events;

* potential further trend towards the concentration and increased vertical integration of tourist services; and

* the adoption and incorporation of new information and communication technologies as a factor of competitiveness.

Major objectives regarding good private and public governance for sustainable tourism are:

* the integration of sustainable tourism development into overall economic, social and environmental development strategies;

* integrated sector policies and overall coherence across all levels;

* multilateral environmental agreements and sustainable international trade polices;

* the development and adoption of corporate responsibility reporting and sustainability accounting in both the public and private sectors;

* using Local Agenda 21 specifically for tourist destinations, including at regional level;

* the use of value chain and destination development monitoring and indicator systems; and

* participation of citizens, both as consumers and in the work place.

Annex 3

Examples of initiatives and contributions of international and European stakeholders

The global Agenda 21 process is of fundamental importance for the tourism sector. In 1999, the UN Commission for Sustainable Development's (CSD) adopted a decision on Tourism and Sustainable Development, which includes an international work programme on sustainable tourism development. The Plan of Implementation adopted at the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) adds to this. Its guidance for changing unsustainable patterns of consumption and production (items 13 to 22) is highly relevant for and directly applicable to the tourism sector. It also specifically refers to the promotion of sustainable tourism development as an issue of protecting and managing the natural resource base for economic and social development; and to sustainable tourism that contributes to social, economic and infrastructure development; and to sustainable development in the developing parts of the world (items 41, 52 (g) and 64).

Regarding sector-specific initiatives at the global level, in 1996, the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC), the World Tourism Organisation (WTO) and the Earth Council drew up an Agenda 21 for the Travel and Tourism Industry. In 1999, the WTO General Assembly adopted the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism, which is a comprehensive document committing the tourism sector also to sustainability principles. The WTO also published a Guide for Local Authorities on Developing Sustainable Tourism and a Declaration on Tourism and Climate Change.

The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) / Convention on Biological Diversity produced International Guidelines for Sustainable Tourism (Guidelines for activities related to sustainable tourism development in vulnerable terrestrial, marine and coastal and mountain ecosystems). UNEP also co-ordinates the Tour Operators Initiative, which develops voluntary guidelines for responsible corporations and contributes to the Global Reporting Initiative. Whereas both initiatives tend to focus on large enterprises, the tourism sector requires that SMEs should also be fully aware of how to implement more responsible business activity.

A multi-stakeholder Tourism Industry Report issued for the 2002 WSSD lists initiatives with which the tourism industry and certain of its major stakeholder groups have responded to sustainable tourism development, emphasising the crucial importance of strong partnerships between the different stakeholders. On the same occasion, the WTO tabled several tourism-specific contributions, including a publication on Tourism and Poverty Alleviation, from which it developed together with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) the special ST-EP (Sustainable Tourism - Eliminating Poverty) initiative. Furthermore, WTTC issued a publication on Corporate Social Leadership for the Travel & Tourism Industry as a business response to the challenge of sustainable development.

Relevant work was also undertaken by international Non-Governmental Organisations in the spheres of culture and nature. The International Cultural Tourism Charter presented by the International Council on Monuments and Sites gives principles and guidelines for managing tourism at places of cultural and heritage significance. The International Friends of Nature issued Ten Guidelines for a Sustainable Development of Tourism.

Several other documents, measures and exchanges of best practice particularly focus on Europe, such as a Charter for Environmentally Sustainable Tourism that was recently presented by the Network of European Private Entrepreneurs in the Tourism Sector (NET), and the European Charter for Sustainable Tourism in Protected Areas. The Council of Europe European Landscape Convention offers clarification on the approach to ensure the preservation of the regional diversity of Europe as one of the cornerstones for sustainable European tourism. Regarding a large geographical area of particular importance for tourism in Europe, the Alpine Convention comprises a Protocol on Tourism and Recreation that addresses particularly sustainability issues.

For the local level, the UN Local Agenda 21 process is of the utmost importance. It is regarded as a key tool for the management of a sustainable tourism process, offering guidance for local territorial management, i.e. in tourist destinations, forging the use of monitoring and indicator systems to ensure the quality of sustainable development. A number of municipalities are involved in its implementation, which is particularly promoted by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), an international association of local governments implementing sustainable development, and its European Secretariat. Recently (2003), UNEP published case studies and first lessons regarding Tourism and Local Agenda 21 - The Role of Local Authorities in Sustainable Tourism.

A number of initiatives at various levels are focusing on the issue of indicators. The World Tourism Organisation has worked on the methodology for the identification and application of sustainable tourism indicators. In 1997, it published a practical guide (What Tourism Managers Need to Know) to their development and use. It recently set up a new task force, with the participation of the European Environmental Agency, to produce a set of guidelines for the definition and application of sustainability indicators in tourism. The European Environmental Agency also co-operates in the development of institutional, environmental, socio-cultural and economic performance indicators, the "European Indicators for Sustainable Tourism Development in Destinations", which is undertaken in the framework of the mainly civil society led EU project VISIT (Voluntary Initiatives for Sustainability In Tourism) that the European Commission supports under the Life financial instrument for the environment. In 2001, the German Federal Environmental Agency issued a publication on Indicators for the development of sustainable tourism in the Baltic Sea Region.

At all levels, a wide variety of relevant initiatives address the development of information tools to encourage sustainable production and consumption patterns in the tourism sector. A recent (2002) WTO publication on Voluntary Initiatives for Sustainable Tourism shows the extent to which European products and services have taken a leading role in voluntary eco-labelling initiatives. With about 40 regional, national and international eco-labels for tourism in Europe, these schemes are so plentiful that it is questionable whether tourists can obtain reliable guidance on sustainable consumption. The above-mentioned VISIT project has also started developing a standard that allows the identification of the European tourism eco-labels with a high environmental quality.

Alongside these initiatives, the ISO 9000 group of standards on quality management systems and ISO 14000 group on environmental management can be relevant to the tourism sector. A number of tourism enterprises are implementing them.

Annex 4

Community policies and initiatives with a favourable effect on the sustainability of European tourism

- Governance, better regulation and policy integration

European Governance and Better Regulation provide approaches and instruments that support moves to make tourism sustainable. Transversal integration of sector policy-making and implementation ensures an adequate account of sustainable concerns in a cross-sector industry like tourism. Impact assessment crucially contributes to integration and improves the quality and coherence of policy design. Beyond the planned pilot applications, tripartite agreements as instruments of voluntary undertakings that do not involve binding legal commitments might help also to promote the sustainability of tourism.

Article 6 of the Treaty establishing the European Community requires the integration of environmental protection. The Council has adopted resolutions, conclusions or strategies for achieving environmental integration and sustainable development within specific policy areas, a number of which are relevant to sustainable tourism development.

The Community Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) strategy and the related Recommendation, which outline the way to promote ICZM, are particularly relevant for tourism activities and tourist destinations. Member States have been asked to develop national ICZM strategies by spring 2006. Commission publications identify and promote best practice in the field of Integrated Quality Management of Tourist Destinations.

- Sustainable entrepreneurship, business practice and employment

The EU enterprise policy strategy and related measures, such as the simplification of the business environment, the European Charter for Small Enterprises and the European Observatory for SMEs, have the potential to contribute to the sustainability of the European tourism sector. EU action to promote entrepreneurship and SMEs, such as business support measures and networks, access to finance and measures in favour of small businesses and specific target groups, can help foster sustainable tourism enterprises.

The sustainability of tourism can particularly benefit from a joint stakeholder effort to promote and develop Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). The Commission Communication on CSR provides the reference for its further development, including in the tourism sector. An important element is the invitation for companies with at least 500 staff to publish a "triple bottom line" in their annual reports that measures performance against economic, environmental and social criteria, and the recognition, measurement and disclosure of environmental issues in the annual accounts and annual reports of companies.

European competition policy ensures an economically sustainable business world and an adequate level playing field for sustainable business. It backs integrating environmental considerations into Community policies. Merger control sees to it that continued concentration at the level of the intermediaries, combined with vertical integration and enhanced buying power of travel organisers, does not lead to deterioration in competition in the market, with adverse effects on local suppliers, small operators and the final consumers. Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection explore new forms of aid for environmental purposes as a means of promoting sustainable development in application of the 'polluter pays' principle, while avoiding any conflict with that of internalisation of costs.

Sustainable tourism can benefit from the approaches and instruments outlined in detail in the Commission Communication on integrating environmental issues with economic policy. Economic instruments, in particular market instruments for achieving functioning markets for environmental goods and services, offer a good pathway towards integration of environmental and economic policies in this sector. Negotiated agreements, perhaps for a geographical area or sub-sector, leave industry with great flexibility in reaching agreed targets, provided that most of the firms concerned are represented and can be expected to join the agreement. Environmental as well as other taxes can play a significant role for cost internalisation. Tourism environmental taxes can be an important instrument to make polluters pay. Where necessary, levying charges or offering payments that put a price on environmental resources corresponds well to the diversity of the tourism sector.

The main lines of the European Employment Strategy (EES), the annual EU guidelines for employment in the Member States, and the related recommendations addressed to each Member State can be reaffirmed for the tourism sector. Developing entrepreneurship and job creation, improving employability, encouraging adaptability of businesses and their labour force, and strengthening equal opportunities policies for women and men are fundamental areas that could accordingly be explored in regard to tourism potential for job creation.

A socially sustainable tourism sector and its attractiveness for a skilled work force can benefit from the European Community efforts and work on issues in the field of quality working and employment conditions, such as social dialogue and consultation, social co-operation, collective agreements and bargaining, social protection and mutual information on it, disability, ageing policy, co-ordination of social security schemes and social inclusion. The Commission efforts with regard to making a European area of lifelong learning a reality are also beneficial for the tourism sector, in particular with a view to Learning Areas, so that the tourism industry has all the skills necessary for innovation available to it.

- Sustainable transport and energy

The White Paper on "European transport policy for 2010: time to decide" and its Action Plan are of prime importance for the sustainability of European tourism.

The White Paper outlines how to achieve tourist transport that is more efficient, sustainable and of higher quality. The proposed strategy and measures are designed to gradually break the link between constant transport growth and economic growth in order to reduce congestion and the pressure on the environment while maintaining the EU's economic competitiveness and developing a quality transport policy for Europe's citizens. The proposed measures concerning transport safety, low congestion, sustainable mobility, passengers' rights, better quality of transport services, and sustainable infrastructure meet the concerns of tourists and local population and significantly affect the tourism product and life in destinations.

The White Paper stresses the importance of a balanced growth between the different modes of transport thanks to policy measures to achieve a regulated market opening and to internalise the external costs of transport, the latter in addition to targeted investments in the networks which ensure a fair competition between the different modes of transport. Eliminating technical and institutional transport barriers between the Member States and creating a true common transport market will favour sustainable tourism transport. The Trans-European transport network (TEN-T) infrastructure for the different modes of transport and its traffic management systems also facilitate tourism and will do so in accordance with sustainability requirements.

Community achievements and measures in the field of energy favour sustainable tourism development. The White Paper Energy for the future - renewable sources of energy sets out the objectives and the related timetable of actions with regard to types of energy that are highly important for the tourism sector, in the form of an Action Plan. Key actions in the White Paper's 'Campaign for take-off' explicitly refer to tourism-related applications.

- Wise use, management, promotion and enhancement of natural resources and of heritage: protected areas and natural and cultural heritage

To respect bio-diversity, cultural values and cultural heritage the Commission encourages and promotes the assessment of the tourism carrying capacity of ecosystems, habitats and sites, the exchange of best practice among public and private tourism interests and the development of international guidelines for sustainable tourism. It has published guidance on the issue of developing sustainable tourism within protected areas and on the basis of heritage. The objectives and measures set out in the European Community Bio-diversity Strategy are directly relevant for sustainable tourism, including required special conservation and protection measures and particular attention to the tourism impact on Europe's Nature 2000 sites.

Many Community-funded measures and projects provide good practice on how sustainable tourism can create opportunities to make good use of heritage and to enhance the great potential of cultural heritage-based tourism for sustainable economic development and job creation. The Culture 2000 programme, which aims at promoting a common cultural area characterised by both cultural diversity and a common cultural heritage, and several other European programmes with a cultural dimension, can help explore these opportunities.

- Environment policy

The Community environment policy has a major relevance for the sustainability of European tourism. Besides the measures, instruments and tools mentioned with regard to the wise use and management of biological diversity and natural heritage (see above), and to environmental information, management and assessment (see below), issues such as water, waste water and waste management directly affect the tourism sector.

The 1976 Bathing Water Directive has set binding standards for bathing waters throughout the European Union, which are currently subject to a revision under a new directive. The annual Bathing Water Report and Tourist Atlas show the quality of bathing waters. Safe water to swim or play in is an important factor in tourists' choice of a destination, for which clean water is an important argument to attract visitors.

Regarding waste water and waste, the Community measures for prevention and those dealing with treatment, reuse, recycling, disposal or incineration are of direct interest and crucial for the tourism value chain and for sustainable tourist destinations. Preventing and combating local environmental noise is also an issue of major importance for the environmentally-sustainable management of tourist destinations.

- Financial support for sustainable tourism development: the funds in favour of economic and social cohesion

The Structural Funds and their Community initiatives, in particular Interreg and LEADER+, the Phare programme, and Community support for pre-accession measures for agriculture and rural development (SAPARD), all provide good possibilities for supporting tourism-related measures. The Commission publication on "Making the best use of the Structural Funds in the sector of Commerce and Tourism" further promotes this role. Renovation and development of villages and protection and conservation of the rural heritage, and encouragement for tourism activities, are measures eligible under Article 33 of the current Council Regulation on EAGGF support for rural development, outside objective 1 regions from EAGGF Guarantee.

The Cohesion Fund and the Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-accession, respectively finance major environment and transport infrastructure projects that contribute to achieving the objectives of the Community's environment policy and the Trans-European Transport Network and can be of large-scale importance for further tourism development in Europe.

- Implementing new technologies

The Commission has highlighted the steps to be taken to ensure that European enterprises can take maximum benefit from e-economy, including those in the tourism sector, for which the potential impact of ICTs is high. The Commission eEurope 2005 Action Plan: An information society for all invites the private sector to work with the Commission and Member States to achieve the eEurope objectives. Explicitly referring to tourism, the plan announces that the Commission, in co-operation with Member States, the private sector and regional authorities, will define e-services to promote Europe and to offer user-friendly public information.

Furthermore, the Priority thematic area of research "Information Society technologies" under the sixth framework programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities contributing to the creation of the European Research Area and to innovation (2002-2006) provides good opportunities for supporting tourism-related projects.

- High-quality information, management tools, observation and measurement

Better-quality and easily-accessible information on the environment and on practical matters helps shape opinions and thus individual tourists' decisions that support sustainability. The extension of the Community eco-label scheme to services started with the sub-sector of tourist accommodation, the first service sector for which ecological criteria were developed. Likewise, a wide uptake of the Community Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) by the tourism sector to evaluate, report and improve environmental performance, together with rigorous and independently-verified environmental or sustainable development performance reports, is to be favoured.

Community legislation requires an Environmental Impact Assessment for certain tourism and leisure installation projects and for plans and programmes which set up the framework for development consent. Integrated Product Policy contributes to the minimising of the environmental impact of products through all phases of their life cycle. Tourism stakeholders can benefit from information on industry and product policy areas that are already being developed and tested, such as eco-industries, and from the possibilities offered by Community law to public purchasers who wish to integrate environmental considerations into public procurement procedures.

An important tool to ensure sustainability during the whole life cycle is the use of an 'Early warning system for the identification of declining tourist destinations and of preventive best practices', on which the Commission has issued a specific publication. Current Commission work on harmonised criteria for good accessibility of tourist sites and infrastructures for disabled people is expected to result in information that will help observing and measuring this aspect of the sustainability of European tourism.

The logical point to look for in reliable tourism-related indicators is the identification of key impact areas of tourism that can be measured directly as outputs from the conduct of tourism businesses and visitors at destinations. Eurostat is launching preparatory work to draw up a methodological manual on the measurement of sustainable development in tourism.

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER - COMMUNICATION ON BASIC ORIENTATIONS FOR THE SUSTAINABILITY OF EUROPEAN TOURISM - Extended impact assessment - {COM(2003)716 final}

Introduction

'Sustainable tourism development meets the needs of present tourists and host regions while protecting and enhancing opportunities for the future. It is envisaged as leading to management of all resources in such a way that economic, social and aesthetic needs can be fulfilled while maintaining cultural integrity, essential ecological processes, biological diversity, and life support systems'. (World Tourism Organisation definition)

The Commission's Working group on environmental protection and sustainable development of tourism (2001) added:

'It also needs the involvement and commitment of all concerned stakeholders.'

The Extended Impact Assessment has been conducted on the basis of a consultation document on 'Basic orientations for the sustainability of European tourism' that largely corresponded to a first draft of the Communication. The document was the subject of an Internet public consultation from 25 April to 31 July 2003 and of a broad tourism multi-stakeholder dialogue, whose results, described under Section 7 of this report, have been included in the impact assessment.

This Communication spells out the approach and action required to improve the sustainability of European tourism and how the European Community, and particularly the European Commission, can contribute to the sustainability of European tourism and to provide stakeholders with basic orientations on the way to implementing sustainable tourism.

In defining this approach it was considered that it must be general enough to provide for sufficient flexibility at the appropriate implementation level. This approach recognises that there is no single model for implementing sustainable tourism management practices, as many different models for achieving sustainable tourism management exist.

Assessing the policy options in such a framework has proved to be a difficult task. The nature of the issues and of the options presented means that quantification of the impacts is not feasible. Techniques such as cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis cannot be used. Therefore, a qualitative assessment based on multi-criteria analysis was chosen as the most effective technique.

SUMMARY

* THE CHALLENGES

The challenges to be met in order to ensure the sustainability of tourism alongside the current benefits that tourism can bring concern the risk of consuming its environmental, cultural and social quality assets, so that it would lose its privileged competitive position in the global tourism market, with its potential to create employment being severely damaged.

The major challenges mainly comprise unsustainable patterns of tourism consumption (tourist behaviour) and production (practices of enterprises and destinations as tourism providers), in particular with regard to: a) the temporal and spatial concentration of tourism activity (that results in overcrowding and low quality, and requires enormous overcapacity); b) travel patterns with intensive transport use (e.g. leisure tourism counts for half of medium and long-distance transport, and tourism-related air transport is expected to double in a decade); and c) the interaction between climate change and tourism (resulting in reciprocal effects).

These challenges need to be managed through a coherent and integrated partnership in dialogue with all tourism stakeholders to balance the different interests and objectives.

* THE OVERALL OBJECTIVE

The overall objective is to promote further progress towards the sustainability of tourism in Europe and world-wide, stimulating multi-stakeholder efforts to this end across all territorial and administrative levels, and to outline how the Community and the other stakeholders can contribute further. The Communication builds upon the international and EU approach on sustainable development, the relevant policies and initiatives that impact tourism, and third party initiatives with a view to exploiting synergies through a partnership approach. This is expected to provide better integration and coherence between territorial levels and more effective action at the right level with adequate monitoring.

* THE POLICY OPTIONS

Four policy options were identified for reaching the objective: (A) a comprehensive Community policy in the field of tourism; (B) a scenario of non-action by the EU; (C) relying on existing contributions inside and outside the Community; and (D) reinforcing the existing framework and improving it with suitable measures. Generally speaking, these options differ with regard to the intensity in dealing with sustainability at Community level and correspond to different degrees of subsidiarity and proportionality.

Options (A) and (B) either did not find sufficient Member State support or were considered contradictory to the Community approach to sustainability. The reliance on subsidiarity decreases from Option (B) to (C) to (D) to (A), whereas proportionality and resources needed increase in the same order, but combined with strong political uncertainty for option (A).

* ASSESSMENT OF THE IMPACT OF THE POLICY OPTIONS

A no-action scenario or one which relies only on existing contributions (Options (B) and (C)) would fail to encourage sustainable tourism consumption and production, with no possibility of measuring and reporting on the impact of tourism in a transparent and reliable manner.

Options (A) and (D) are the most likely to achieve progress. However, implementing Option (A) would require substantial resources, and several Member States and certain industry bodies, in particular most of those representing European private entrepreneurs in the tourism sector, strongly oppose it. Option (D) is most effective and flexible in meeting the challenges whilst respecting the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and enabling individual solutions to be found for challenges in each type of destination.

Option (D) has the potential to better fine-tune Community policies affecting tourism, so that they are more effectively used and enhanced, and better coordinated internally. It promises better synergies and close dialogue with relevant stakeholders, and makes it possible to assist SMEs in meeting both consumer demands for quality and local communities, peripheral regions and candidate countries with a flexible approach that recognises the diversity of the European tourism industry and destinations. It provides for greater consideration of corporate social responsibility issues in tourism and results in greater benefits in the short term with multiplier effects increasing over time. It can serve as a sector-specific contribution to changing unsustainable patterns of consumption and production, to which the Community has been committed since the Johannesburg 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development.

* IMPLEMENTING THE PROPOSAL, MONITORING AND REPORTING

Implementation (starting in 2004) will be based above all on the initiatives of responsible stakeholders and on tourism-related Community policies and programmes. The Community role will be a catalytic one, stimulating further input in the areas of: (a) Community contribution to governance and sustainability of European tourism by a systematic use of the Impact assessment tool to integrate sustainable tourism concerns into related Community measures, and by appraising their effectiveness in this respect; (b) cooperation with stakeholders, fostering cooperation with the World Tourism Organisation and launching a Tourism Sustainability Group to allocate specific activities and responsibilities to the various tourism stakeholders, and to steer, monitor and evaluate the implementation of this process; and (c) awareness raising and proactive dissemination of best practices regarding sustainable tourism consumption and production patterns.

* STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

The Commission involved all interested stakeholder groups and worked with a steering group to receive regular external feedback on its work and ideas. The input from this process served to draft a consultation document for the 3-month Internet consultation, and for this Extended Impact Assessment (ExIA). The outcome of the open consultation, the feedback from the usual interlocutors in regular consultations, and the comments by other services in the internal steering group that accompanied the ExIA were integrated into the draft Communication.

* COMMISSION DRAFT PROPOSAL AND JUSTIFICATION

A reinforcement of the existing framework, with the addition of suitable tourism-specific measures, provides a feasible and appropriate EU approach with regard to both the important challenges and the proportionality and subsidiarity principles. The objectives and challenges identified are dealt with through an integrated and cooperative approach with all stakeholders. It is fully compatible with the existing Community policy framework regarding related Community competencies, and it requires a modest resource input that can be managed with the existing human resources of the Tourism Unit and the recently shown cooperative attitude of most Commission services on tourism-related issues.

1. What issue/problem is the policy/proposal expected to tackle?

* What is the issue/problem in a given policy area expressed in economic, social and environmental terms including unsustainable trends?

The tourism sector is facing a series of challenges that need to be tackled to ensure tourism sustainability alongside the current benefits that tourism can bring. Tourism is affected by policies such as those relating to employment, regional development, environment, consumer protection, health, safety, transport, taxation and culture. Table 1 gives an overview of the main issues and related challenges to be addressed.

Table 1: Issues and problems of European tourism

general:

* Temporal and spatial concentration of tourism activity.

* Impact of extreme weather events on tourism.

* Low consumer awareness of sustainable tourism.

* Insufficient sound sustainable destination management.

economic:

* Risks / quality gaps that European tourism industry may not remain competitive.

* Risk of supply market dominance linked to further integration of tourism suppliers.

* Lack of internalisation of socio-economic and environmental costs.

* Challenges from greater use of and dependency on Information Technologies

* Shortages of skilled workers.

* Partial over-capacity in large infrastructure and in enterprises.

* Insufficient sustainable economic investment and infrastructure development in destinations and local communities.

* Partly insufficient secondary effects on the local economic development (re-spending more income received by the sector within the destination economy) that complement the initial direct effects of tourism.

* Changes in the European demographic structure and tourist preferences that lead to increasing demand for alternative forms of tourism and for sustainable management of classical types of tourism activity.

social:

* Underdeveloped social responsibility in tourism.

* High number of staff without continuous employment with a potential effect on qualification levels and service quality

* Risk of losing social and cultural environment and not creating sufficient social capital for local communities.

* Increasing number of tourists with special needs, and gaps in tourism for all.

* Risk of not matching tourist safety requirements.

Environmental:

* Air pollution caused by travel patterns and tourism transport.

* Pollution at destinations.

* Degradation of natural and cultural resources at destinations.

* Geographical shift of environmental load to areas not sufficiently equipped.

* Difficulties in the sphere of land use and land management.

* What are the risks inherent in the initial situation?

Through its current patterns of consumption and production, tourism can have negative impacts on the economic, social and environmental pillars of sustainability. The risk of consuming its environmental, cultural and social quality assets could drive European tourism to lose its privileged competitive position in the global tourism market.

During the past 50 years, European tourism has experienced a more or less steady, high growth. Over the same period it has been confronted with a wide range of changes in demand, regional increase and decrease of tourist flows, differences in tourists' motivations and expectations, and organisation of supply [1]. A major risk is that of incompatibility between safeguarding natural and cultural local resources as well as the community identity and their tourist use and the need to build a consensus among the different supply stakeholders and coordinate their actions. The tourism sector is characterised by a fragmented approach and the insufficiently coordinated strategy at the decision-making level.

[1] European Commission: 'Early warning system for identifying declining tourist destinations, and preventive best practices' (http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/ services/tourism/studies/tno/tno_en.pdf).

Temporal and spatial concentration of tourism activity

The monthly distribution of tourism activity in Europe shows that the high peak of tourism in the summer months has continued without interruption alongside the overall increase of tourism throughout the year. The temporal concentration of tourism activity accompanied by a spatial concentration on specific destinations creates further impact on natural and cultural resources at the destination, as well as the quality of the experience for the tourist. In addition, tourist facilities may be empty or suffer from low occupancy/visitor rates for many days of the year. Italy, for instance, is reported to have an index of utilisation of bed-places in hotels and similar accommodations of almost 70% in summer but only around 20% in low season. [2] Off-season operation leaves over-capacity in large infrastructures and in enterprises. It results in high numbers of staff without continuous employment who may suffer poor conditions, with negative effects on qualification levels and service quality.

[2] Eurostat: 'Tourism statistics-yearbook' data 1990, 1995, 1997-2000. Eurostat: 'Tourism and the environment' (http://europa.eu.int/comm/eurostat/Public/ datashop/print-product/EN?catalogue=Eurostat&product=KS-NP-02-040-__-N-EN&mode=download).

Travel patterns and increasing transport use

Tourism has been identified as the main growth factor behind the increase in demand for passenger transport with predictions speaking of passenger air travel doubling by 2010, compared to 1995 [3]. From these data, transport is expected to become the most important environmental impact due to tourism, with travel to and from destinations being responsible for 90% of the energy used in the sector. Innovations in technology have meant reduced journey times, improved capacity, and a decrease in real terms in transport prices, including the prices of cars and airfares. The decrease in travel costs, mainly for air transport (more acute because of low-cost carriers), has increased the attractiveness of intra-European travel and personal mobility with an even larger share of the population being able to travel and shorter and more frequent trips being encouraged. This, in turn, has placed significant demands on the transport systems in the resorts themselves.

[3] European Environmental Agency: 'Tourism indicators' http://themes.eea.eu.int/ Sectors_and_activities/tourism/indicators.html.

For intra-European tourism, the impact of the increasing demand for transport use is accompanied by the existing travel patterns which show the private car as the dominant transport mode (58%), followed by air (31%) and rail travel (10%). Although the use of rail travel has been declining, the demand for this mode by both business and holiday travellers is starting to increase in some European countries. On the other hand, air travel has grown dramatically in the last 30 years, more than any other transport mode. Passenger-kilometres have increased by 7.4% per year on average since 1980 [4].

[4] European Commission: 'Structure, performance and competitiveness of European tourism and its enterprises'. http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/ services/tourism/studies/pwc/pwc_en.pdf

Climate change and tourism

Recent extreme weather events have attracted public attention to the challenge posed by the potential impacts of climate change for a number of holiday destinations. Tourism, like many other economic sectors, has an inter-relationship with climate change that results in reciprocal effects (the tourism and travel induced emission of greenhouse gases which contribute to climate change and climate change might inter alia affect tourism).

The degree of the impact of climate change on tourism cannot yet be properly forecast. But, there are some predictions and working hypotheses that speak of direct impacts on the choice of destinations (regarding both the time and the location for taking holidays). Some might become less attractive as temperature and humidity increase above comfort levels, and others might turn more attractive as mild temperatures become more of a certainty. Rainfall changes, floods and droughts are also reported to directly affect tourism choice. But there are also indirect impacts such as, for instance, the link between a rise in sea level and its effect on coastal erosion, and the decrease of snow cover and thence of skiing in mountain resorts [5].

[5] EEA: 'Europe's environment: the third assessment' http://reports.eea.eu.int/ environmental_assessment_report_2003_10/en.

* What are the underlying motive forces?

The sustainable development of European tourism is a prerequisite for its future competitiveness and for using its potential to create employment. This has been repeatedly confirmed in the various documents adopted by the Commission, the Council and the other Community Institutions. Secondly, as tourism is one of the most important sectors in the economy, its sustainability contributes significantly to the overall progress in sustainable development. Such progress will suffer if tourism is not managed and developed in a sustainable way, i.e. if its current patterns of consumption and production persist.

* Who is affected?

The tourists as consumers

Tourism products and services are consumer driven. The role that tourists as consumers can play in reducing the impact of the problems through a more sustainability-oriented demand illustrates the potential of consumer awareness of sustainable tourism to trigger changes in the product offered. Enterprises and destinations need to pay more attention to environmental issues in the future [6]. So far, environmental care is a major issue for the big players in the tourism market who also use the marketing potential of environmental care for their businesses. In addition to the price and quality offered, consumers have started considering the environmental effort of the company as a determinant of choice. There is still much to be done to increase sustainability awareness among tourists. How far the willingness to pay more for sustainable products and services could go is still an issue subject to debate [7].

[6] See note 1.

[7] e.g.: ABTA Research October 2000 (Association of British Travel Agents): '85% of people thought it was important that tourism should not damage the environment, and that 64% would be willing to pay £10 to £25 extra to ensure standards were met, representing a 2 - 5% price increase on a £500 holiday.'

Changes in the demographic structure of Europe may have an influence on new tailor-made tourism products and services. The European population is getting older but staying active longer. Thus, older people will become more important to the tourism market, increasing the overall number of tourists and potentially demanding different types of tourism.

The Tourism SMES

Currently, SMEs, because of low consumer awareness, mostly consider that these issues are unimportant, but a trend towards higher awareness is taking place. For instance, the accommodation sector has started to use reusable products (about 20% of accommodation SME companies consider environmental care as a top priority [8]). SMEs need to build further on these experiences.

[8] See note 4.

Industry representatives recognise that there is an increasing trend for developing new forms of tourism, especially those related to nature and wildlife, rural areas and culture, and that these are influencing traditional package tours [9]. This type of tourism is expected to grow faster than any other market segment. So-called eco-tourism is expected to grow 20% annually world-wide compared with just 7% for tourism overall [10].

[9] WTTC, IFTO, IH&RA, ICCL & UNEP (2002): 'Industry as a Partner for Sustainable Development: Tourism'

[10] Worldwatch Paper Institute Paper 159: 'Travelling Light: New Paths for International Tourism' 2001. http://www.worldwatch.org/pubs/paper/159/ .

Ethical issues are also gaining importance for tourism enterprises. Research suggests that, following the trend in other economic sectors, social responsibility and corporate citizenship are expected to increase in importance in the tourism industry [11]. This means implementation of adequate CSR practices for tourism value chain services and enterprises of all kinds and sizes, and looking at the sustainable methods and products available.

[11] See note 9.

European Tourism SMEs, despite increasing consolidation and vertical integration, still dominate the sector, with over 99% of companies employing fewer than 250 individuals. However, a few large companies manage a significant proportion of the volume of trade, particularly at an international level. Optimising the synergy between producers and travel organisers and between different modes within a sub-sector of the tourism industry is likely to remain very important to competitiveness.

By using information technology (IT), tourism SMEs should be able to compete with larger players. However, the uptake of IT has not yet achieved an optimal threshold [12].

[12] See note 4.

The tourism workforce

Positive social impacts arise mainly through tourism's contribution to employment, worker training and the development of SMEs. The sector employs a significant proportion of women, minorities and young people. In developed countries, unemployment levels are especially high for unskilled labour, thus additional demand for low-skilled labour is of high economic and social value.

The seasonal concentration of demand results in high numbers of staff without continuous employment who may suffer poor conditions, with negative effects on qualification levels and service quality. This in turn has an impact on the competitiveness of the supply chain, as quality in the tourism product cannot be achieved without the skill and motivation of the workforce. In addition, the industry has serious shortages of skilled workers [13].

[13] See note 9.

Tourist destinations

Tourism services together with the destination itself make up the tourism experience.

Tourism can support economic development and is an important element of many countries' economies. The inflow of revenue to tourist destinations creates business turnover, household income, employment and government revenue.

Tourism can be more effective than other industries in generating employment and income in less-developed, often peripheral, regions with limited alternative opportunities for development. Tourism affects the economy beyond the industry itself. A proportion of the sector's income is respent in the destination's wider economy, thereby creating further economic activity. These indirect effects can exceed the initial direct effects (tourism income not only creates jobs in the tourism industry itself but also in associated industries, such as agriculture, transport, manufacturing, etc.)

SMEs believe that inadequate public infrastructure hinders their growth, as recent analysis shows [14]. Infrastructure issues are becoming more acute with the continuing increase in passenger travel. However, increased environmental concerns may affect infrastructure development; for example, proposals for airport expansions are often fiercely disputed. Tourism can also contribute to better infrastructure such as improved water supply or waste treatment, leading to greater environmental protection.

[14] See note 9.

Cultural assets are a basic resource of tourist destinations. However, tourism risks contributing to the homogenisation of global products and services that lack local identity. Local identity is at particular risk where the ratio between tourists and locals is high.

Sustainable tourism entails the preservation of local cultures.

The impact of terrorist attacks in the recent past has focused more attention on tourism safety and security issues. As part of the image of destinations these are key issues in tourism and destination marketing which need to be addressed at decision-making level. The need for marketing organisations to demonstrate that destinations are safe for tourists has become increasingly important since consumer awareness is growing rapidly. Similarly crisis and risk management in the tourism industry has become important for all tourism stakeholders.

Natural resources are a basic resource of a tourist destination, and sustainable destination development requires the protection of both the environment and natural resources. Scenery is the main factor in choosing a destination for 49% of European holidaymakers [15]. Although very few Europeans report specific problems encountered on holiday, when they do it is the general state of the environment (9%) and the state of the environment in the tourist areas they visit (8%) which are highlighted. Thus, environmental degradation can threaten the viability of the industry. Negative impacts from tourism (see table 1) occur when the environmental carrying capacity of a destination is exceeded. Sound environmental destination management can reduce the environmental impact of tourism especially in fragile ecosystems.

[15] European Commission (1998): 'The Europeans on Holiday 1997-1998', A Eurobarometer Survey.

However, tourism can also raise awareness of the value of environmental assets and contribute financially to the creation and conservation of natural parks and protected areas. The relationship between tourism and the environment is complex and varies according to a range of factors including the number and seasonal variation of tourists, the concentration, the recreational activities they pursue, the type of environment affected and the infrastructure and management in place.

* What would happen under a "no-policy change" scenario?

A no-policy change scenario would fail to reverse the unsustainable trends in European tourism and fail to cope with the issues and problems of tourism sustainability. Continuing growth of tourism would over-proportionally augment the risks inherent in the situation which are marked by its partially unsustainable patterns of consumption and production, and make them materialize. More sustainable consumption and production patterns in the tourism sector would not be encouraged, and there would be no possibility of measuring and reporting on the impact of tourism in today's society in a transparent and reliable manner.

This scenario would lack a strong and cooperative partnership between the public authorities, trade organisations and unions, the private sector and society, and which would allow responsibility for delivering and ensuring tourism sustainability to be shared. It would mean that governments neither integrate tourism concerns into the overall set of related policies, nor set up, in consultation with all stakeholders, a capacity-building framework with realistic objectives to facilitate an uptake of existing and future guidance for the implementation of sustainability management practice.

Without sustainable development, European tourism's quality and future competitiveness, and its potential to create employment, would be severely damaged. Overall progress in sustainable development would suffer as well. In Europe, certain tourist destinations would enter into a phase of decline that they could not overcome, with important negative effects on the entire local economy and social tissue linked to it.

In conclusion, although the potential for a sustainable growth of European tourism exists, it would be jeopardised if policy did not change.

3. What main objective is the policy/proposal expected to reach?

* What is the overall policy objective in terms of expected impacts?

The overall policy objective of the Communication is to promote further progress towards the sustainability of tourism in Europe and world-wide, stimulating multi-stakeholder efforts to this end across all territorial and administrative levels and to outline how the Community and the other stakeholders can further contribute to them. This overarching objective is expected to be achieved through the following three specific objectives:

* a balanced approach based on the three pillars of sustainability;

* sustainable consumption patterns; and

* sustainable production patterns in the supply chain and sustainable destination development.

* Has account been taken of any previously established objectives?

The Communication takes into account relevant policies and documents at EU and global level that focus on sustainable development and sustainable tourism (see Table 2). The approach developed builds upon existing Commission and third party initiatives and sets up new ones, in order to tackle the challenges and achieve the objectives without duplicating efforts, in a broad partnership with all tourism stakeholders.

The Communication addresses objectives such as sustainable consumption and production patterns, quality development and the competitiveness of the industry, the case for the production of new jobs and improvement of working conditions in existing employment, the protection and restoration of the environment and natural resources as well as respect for the carrying capacity, and corporate social responsibility.

The results of the consultation that the draft has undergone confirm the objectives set and support the fact that the horizontal objectives might be further broken down when dealing with implementation at the appropriate level.

Through the chosen cooperative approach, sustainable tourism is expected to contribute to the overall EU sustainable development strategy by providing better integration and coherence between territorial levels and more effective action at management level with adequate monitoring.

In addition, through the link to the Sustainable Development Strategy, the Communication links to existing approaches in the Member States and to relevant EU milestones, such as the 'Lisbon Process', designed to make the EU the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, and the 'Cardiff Process' on integrating environmental issues into other areas of policy. The Sixth Environmental Action Programme will also play an important role, setting binding environmental objectives for the EU over the decade to 2010. Finally, the Communication also responds to the outcome of the Plan of Implementation of the World Summit on sustainable development regarding tourism through the development of a transparent multi-stakeholder process.

Table 2: Overview of previously established objectives

European Union

Reference // Objectives/messages relevant to Sustainable Tourism

'Tourism and Employ-ment' Process // Messages from European Conference on Tourism and Employment*, Luxembourg European Council on Employment**, Council of Ministers (Tourism) ***, conclusions and recommendations of the High Level Group on tourism and employment****:

* the need to improve the quality and competitiveness of European tourism;

* the need to help SMEs and promote partnerships at all levels;

* the need to create a favourable environment for tourism; and

* the need to improve the quality of human resources;

Messages from the Report of the working groups*****:

* the need to highlight the fundamental role of information, knowledge and its dissemination;

* the need for competent human resources motivated by medium and long-term prospects;

* the integration of environmental policy and the promotion of sustainable tourism;

* the need for European harmonization of the concept of quality of tourism services and infrastructures, and its assessment and monitoring;

* the need to speed up the integration of information society tools and services in all tourism activities and businesses, in particular SMEs; and

* the need for a network of stakeholders involved and a generalized partnership, particularly those in the field to ensure implementation of all the recommendations.

"Working Together for the future of European tourism" // * "to create the conditions and provide the basis for sustainable, high-quality tourism and competitive European tourism businesses"; and

* "increasing the basic knowledge of this economic activity, increasing the competitiveness of its business, improving the sustainable development of tourism in the EU and its contribution to job creation".

EU Strategy for Sustainable Development // * limit climate change and increase the use of clean energy;

* address threats to public health;

* manage natural resources more responsibly;

* improve the transport system and land use management;

* combat poverty and lack of social cohesion; and

* deal with the economic and social implications of an ageing population.

6th Environ-ment Action Programme "Environ-ment 2010: Our future, our choice" // * emphasising climate change as an outstanding challenge and contributing to stabilising greenhouse gases concentrations;

* protecting, conserving, restoring and developing the functioning of natural systems, natural habitats, wild flora and fauna with the aim of halting desertification and the loss of biodiversity, both in the EU and on a global scale;

* contributing to a high level of quality of life and social well being for citizens by providing an environment where the level of pollution does not give rise to harmful effects on human health and the environment and by encouraging a sustainable urban development;

* better resource efficiency and resource and waste management to bring about more sustainable production and consumption patterns, thereby decoupling the use of resources and the generation of waste from the rate of economic growth and aiming to ensure that the consumption of renewable and non-renewable resources does not exceed the carrying capacity of the environment;

"European transport policy for 2010: time to decide" // * achieve a transport system that is more efficient, sustainable and of higher quality; and

* "break the link gradually between transport growth and economic growth" by "shifting the balance between the modes of transport".

Communi cation on Corporate Social Responsibil ity // * increase the knowledge about the positive impact of CSR on business and societies in Europe and abroad, in particular in developing countries;

* develop the exchange of experience and good practice on CSR between enterprises;

* promote the development of CSR management skills;

* foster CSR among SMEs;

* facilitate convergence and transparency of CSR practices and tools;

* launch a Multi-Stakeholder Forum on CSR at EU level;

* integrate CSR into Community policies.

Global and International

Reference // Objectives/messages relevant to Sustainable Tourism

Agenda 21 for the Travel and Tourism Industry // Overall aim for the Government departments, national tourism authorities and representative trade organisations:

* "To establish systems and procedures to incorporate sustainable development considerations at the core of the decision-making process and to identify actions necessary to bring sustainable tourism development into being."

WSSD Plan of Implementa tion // * "fundamental changes in the way societies produce and consume are indispensable to achieve global sustainable development", it adds that these changes should be promoted by all countries, and should involve governments, relevant international organisations, the private sector and all major groups;

* "(...) to increase the benefits from tourism resources for the population in host communities while maintaining the cultural and environmental integrity of the host communities and enhancing the protection of ecologically sensitive areas and natural heritages (...) and (...) in order to contribute to the strengthening of rural and local communities.";

* the importance of the development of integrated water resources management in general;

* the importance of integrated and sustainable development of coastal zones because they are critical in "sustaining economic prosperity and well being of many national economies";

* the protection of the marine environment from land based activities (like tourism);

* the importance of the protection and conservation of mountain environments; and

* the importance of biodiversity and its protection and conservation.

* "an effective institutional framework for sustainable development at all levels is key to the full implementation of Agenda 21 (...) and meeting emerging sustainable development challenges" (item 137). It adds that good governance is essential to achieve sustainable development

Global Code of Ethics for Tourism // * "(...) to promote an equitable, responsible and sustainable world tourism order, whose benefits will be shared by all sectors of the society in the context of an open liberalized international economy (...)"

* European Commission (1997): Employment and Tourism: guidelines for action, Final Report, Luxembourg 4-5.11.1997.

** European Council of Luxembourg, 21-22.11.1997

*** Conclusions of the Tourism Council of 26.11.1997

**** European Commission (1998): European Tourism - New partnerships for employment: conclusions and recommendations of the High Level Group on tourism and employment, October 1998

***** The complete text of the reports of the five Working Groups is available at http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/ services/tourism/index.htm

4. What are the main policy options available for reaching the objective?

* What is the basic approach for reaching the objective?

The basic approach for reaching the objective of further promoting progress towards sustainability of tourism in Europe and world-wide depends on the policy option chosen. The following policy options were considered:

A) a comprehensive genuine Community policy in the field of tourism;

B) a non-action scenario;

C) relying on established contributions, i.e.

a) building on the activities of other stakeholders, and

b) integration of the sustainability of European tourism into established Community measures;

D) reinforcement and best use of the existing framework for action.

* Which policy instruments have been considered? What are the trade-offs associated with the proposed option? What "designs" and "stringency levels" have been considered?

A) Comprehensive Genuine Community Policy in the Field of Tourism

This option means the strongest Community involvement in the development of a genuine Community policy in the field of tourism. It would include the formulation and implementation of tourism-specific actions, requiring a greater input of resources from the Commission.

The Commission favoured this option until a few years ago, and many consultation respondents supported it. However, given the reality in the field of tourism and the position of some Member States on such an approach, this option cannot be considered feasible for achieving rapid progress towards sustainability in European tourism. Furthermore, any legislative approach would be opposed by the tourism industry.

Bearing in mind that the European tourism industry involves many different public and private stakeholders with very decentralised competencies, often at regional and local levels, it can be considered that this option would not be compatible with the principle of subsidiarity. Solutions to issues that can best be dealt with at the local level do not benefit from a generalised European framework. A 'top-down' approach cannot be expected to demonstrate identifiable or quantifiable added value. The concerns of SMEs which dominate the industry can be better addressed otherwise.

B) Non-Action Scenario

A wide range of stakeholder initiatives and contributions address various aspects of sustainable tourism at different levels, although consideration of the current challenges faced by the European tourism sector suggests that the existing initiatives and contributions by the different stakeholders have not yet achieved a sustainable managed European tourism.

Under the 'non-action' scenario, the Commission would rely on these activities without taking any further action, either in terms of general policies that may affect tourism or specific tourism measures. This would represent a reduction in European-wide action compared to the current situation and to the measures provided for in the different Community policy fields.

Consultation responses demonstrate that experience to date has shown that 'bottom-up' environmental initiatives can work effectively, and there is strong support for voluntary initiatives, particularly from industry representatives. However, they also suggest that this is not sufficient. Given the importance of the tourism sector to the EU economy and the associated magnitude of both social and environmental impacts, it can be considered that certain Community-level action in this field is needed.

In general, most stakeholders consider this option unacceptable. Some stress that although voluntary schemes are an important step towards more responsible tourism. However, owing to their proliferation, their benefits and effectiveness are not sufficiently clear, particularly to consumers. In addition, even if voluntary measures were to gain acceptance, they would not be enough to prevent negative impacts from tourism.

C) Relying on Established Contributions

This option uses a two-fold approach based on both building on the activities of other stakeholders and the effect of established Community measures on the sustainability of tourism. The latter aspect distinguishes it from the 'non-action' scenario (B), with a significant Community activity, but not one targeted on tourism. It would not further stakeholder initiatives through specific Community support and involvement from the tourism point of view. The principle of subsidiarity would be respected: responsibility for tourism-specific initiatives would remain entirely with these stakeholders.

The tourism sector benefits from a number of EU-wide initiatives to promote sustainability in general. With regard to the Community contribution to the sustainability of European tourism, this option relies exclusively on these policies and measures, excluding any tourism-specific Community activities to improve sustainability. It does not allow for any human or financial resources to be used by the Commission in the sphere of tourism.

But this option fails to address the specific challenges faced by the tourism industry adequately. Some stakeholders emphasise the importance of ensuring that general Community measures take account of tourism sustainability, but few of them consider this to be sufficient.

D) Reinforcement and Best Use of the Existing Framework for Action

Building on the previous options, Option D strengthens the existing framework for action by reinforcing existing stakeholder initiatives, other than those of the Community, in this field, and further involves the Commission by:

* optimising the effect of Community policies and measures on the sustainability of European tourism; and

* the definition and implementation of complementary specific measures in the sphere of tourism for the purpose of promoting sustainability throughout the Community, which particularly targets the support of and involvement in other stakeholders' initiatives and which fills the gaps left by Community policies and measures affecting tourism.

This approach enables stakeholders to take action at the appropriate level and acknowledges the important role of the tourism industry in the move towards sustainable development. Thus, the principles of both subsidiarity and proportionality are potentially respected.

This option is in line with the conclusions at its seventh session of United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD7) as well as those of the European Tourism Forum. It coincides with a repeated call for the Commission to strengthen the coordination between Community policies affecting tourism. A double approach was identified, which favours using the full potential of a range of Community policies and organising coordination and cooperation with all stakeholders on subjects of common interest. This option has received strong support from stakeholders who advocate explicit guidance towards sustainable tourism rather than a reliance on other guidance affecting tourism practices by default. Stakeholders believe that the Commission should be more active when reinforcing the existing framework for action, in order to act in proportion to the magnitude of impacts. The main challenge this policy option has to address is the question of how coordination at a European level can make efforts at a local level more efficient or effective.

* Which options have been discarded at an early stage? How are subsidiarity and proportionality taken into account?

Options A) and B) could have been discarded at an early stage, owing to a lack of Member State support or to being politically incompatible with the general Community approach to sustainability. Nevertheless, to get the widest possible picture, all options were assessed in terms of the extent to which they address challenges and objectives.

The different policy options relate to several degrees of intensity in dealing with sustainability at Community level, and therefore take subsidiarity and proportionality into account differently, as indicated above for each of the options (see table 3)

The reliance on subsidiarity decreases from Option B) to C) to D) to A), whereas proportionality increases in the same order, together with the level of resources needed to implement them, but is combined with a high degree of uncertainty for option A). The latter option also risks going beyond the reality of the tourism sector, which often operates at regional and local levels. Its lower reliance on subsidiarity is not matched by a true perspective of significant additional benefits.

There is greater confidence that Options D) and A) will meet the objectives of the proposal. Options B) and C) reflect either a general withdrawal from the sustainability policy or one sector, i.e. tourism, with particular added value for sustainable development in general. They have no potential of significant improvements in currently unsustainable trends and would be a step backwards compared to the current situation.

Table 3: Assessment of the policy proposals with regard to the subsidiarity and proportionality principles

>TABLE POSITION>

5. What are the impacts - positive and negative - expected from the different options identified?

Since the nature of the issues and of the options presented means that quantification of the impacts is not feasible, techniques such as cost-benefit analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis were not used. The assessment of the impacts was therefore carried out on the basis of a Multi-Criteria Analysis that made it possible to measure, at least in a qualitative sense, how well the options were expected to perform against each criterion. The selected criteria (see Table 4) were deemed complete, operational and satisfactory for the assessment of the policy options in a manner that permitted the impacts to be assessed without creating difficulties in assessing input data and making communication of the analysis more complex.

Table 4 : Criteria for analysing the policy options

// Criteria

1st group: Policy framework // Developing consumer awareness

// Achieving integration and coherence between policies and approaches

// Developing transparent multi-stakeholder processes

// Developing monitoring systems and information dissemination

2nd group: Targeting consumption // Reducing seasonality

// Sufficient provision of infrastructure

// Increasing access to tourism for all citizens

// Promoting sustainable inter and intra destination mobility

3rd group: Targeting enterprises // Availability of skilled, qualified staff for tourism sector

// Use of quality and environmental management tools

// Use of new information and communication technology

4th group: Targeting destinations // Ensuring community well-being in destinations

// Respecting and maintaining the diversity of cultural heritage

// Respecting environmental carrying capacity

* What are the expected positive and negative impacts of the options selected, particularly in terms of economic, social and environmental consequences, including impacts on management of risks? How large are the additional ('marginal') effects that can be attributed to the policy proposal, i.e. those effects over and above the "no policy change" scenario?

In order to give a qualitative description of the way each option performs against each of the selected criteria/modes of action, the scale shown in Table 5 was devised to determine how the measures addressed the criteria.

Table 5 Scale for scoring options against criteria

++ // Measure very likely to positively address the criterion

+ // Measure likely to positively address the criterion

? // Impacts in relation to criterion uncertain or subject to existing/further policy measures

The Assessment Summary Table (AST) in Table 6 presents the impact information in a consistent and transparent manner that highlights the most important impacts of the selected options.

Table 6 Assessment Summary Table

>TABLE POSITION>

Assessment of Option A): Comprehensive Genuine Community Policy

No details exist as to how a comprehensive genuine Community policy on tourism would be adopted in practice. It can be assumed, however, that it may have the overall effect of integrating the currently dispersed direct and indirect Community actions. It could also be assumed that it would facilitate action towards addressing specific tourism-related challenges that may not be addressed elsewhere.

Option A could improve performance against criteria, where other options are potentially less comprehensive, through the adoption of specific measures to address particular challenges. Areas where this might be necessary include ensuring provision of sufficient infrastructure, increasing access to tourism for all citizens, promoting sustainable inter- and intra-destination mobility, increasing the availability of skilled staff, and ensuring community well-being in destinations.

In other areas, Option A) may perform less well than other options. For example, although Option A) could have an integrating effect on Community actions, it may potentially reduce coherence and integration between policies and approaches, as tourism aspects would be assumed to be addressed under the comprehensive policy and thus might be neglected under other policies. Areas of conflict, or 'grey areas', may arise where a comprehensive tourism policy required action beyond that specified by existing policies. Examples might include sustainable inter- and intra- destination mobility or environmental carrying capacity (e.g. land management or water resources).

There might also be difficulties in defining tourist destinations and activities subject to a comprehensive policy, whilst recognising the diversity of the sector. This may constrain stakeholder action and innovation in addressing local issues and/or the effectiveness of a tourism policy. Stakeholder action is essential for addressing challenges relating to environmental and social factors, for example ensuring community well-being, maintaining the cultural heritage and respecting the environmental carrying capacity of destinations, where local solutions are needed. However, the Bathing Water Directive provides an example where specific areas (i.e. bathing beaches) have to be designated, and a similar approach could potentially be adopted to define sustainable tourist destinations. Similarly, Natura 2000 sites require local authorities to manage part of their area differently, and in accordance with stricter requirements, from the remaining area. Adopting a tourism policy may provide greater support to addressing the challenges for both destinations and enterprises.

Option A) bears a particular risk of additional administrative burden on local authorities and enterprises (SMEs) that is not matched by its added value. Moreover, the challenges facing tourism are acute, and it is unlikely that a comprehensive policy can be adopted and implemented within a sufficient timeframe to ensure action in the short to medium term. In the longer term, and assuming that issues concerning the definition of the tourism sector and potential overlaps with other policies are effectively dealt with, a comprehensive policy may provide greater stability and recognition for the European tourism sector.

Assessment of Option B): Non-Action Scenario

A non-action scenario relies exclusively on the existing initiatives and contributions that stakeholders other than the European Community undertake at various levels, ranging from international to local, and those that they might still develop. During the last decade, an increased stakeholder dialogue, in both the private and public sectors, has resulted in mainly voluntary initiatives to address and diminish social and environmental impacts, while enhancing the economic benefits of tourism activities. These initiatives have taken various forms and represent all sectors of the travel and tourism industry.

Significant issues such as better governance, seasonal spread and sustainable transport are addressed only to a very limited degree by existing initiatives. They require a level of coordination and initiative that is difficult to achieve by many of these stakeholders, or they remain at too high level to have an effect on the ground. Initiatives undertaken by global organisations to encourage action by local stakeholders, for example the Tour Operators' Initiative and World Tourism Organisation guidance for tourism managers and local authorities, may be too far removed and general to encourage uptake by local stakeholders. While these initiatives deal to some extent with environmental and social issues, economic issues related to the quality of supply receive less consideration. This risks, in turn, prolonging the degradation of the environmental and cultural environment as the bulk of enterprises concentrate their efforts on attracting customers.

Past stakeholder initiatives to develop consumer awareness and promote the use of environmental management tools illustrate the problem of lack of efficiency due to a lack of coordination. 40 regional, national and international eco-labels for tourism have been developed at various levels in Europe, but their adoption by the industry is as yet limited. Tourists cannot know all of them, compare them, and assess their information value.

When focusing on one aspect of sustainability, uncoordinated initiatives bear potential for conflicts with other objectives. For example, a one-sided local action that aims to limit tourist numbers so as to respect the local carrying capacity may not be compatible with the social objective of favouring tourism for all, i.e. for of those with lower incomes, when combined with yield optimisation or raising additional revenue. It could also shift tourism to other destinations where it is not managed sustainably, increasing concentrations and thus exacerbating negative trends.

Whilst the effect of the many individual initiatives launched and provided for by stakeholders other than the European Community cannot be assessed in detail, it can be assumed that the current unsustainable trends highlight areas where Option B) would fail to address the objectives of the proposed Communication. Overall, relying on Option B) to deliver progress on sustainable tourism at the European level could increase uncertainty that the objectives would be met, since the relatively uncoordinated nature of existing, largely voluntary, initiatives means that they could end at any time and with no alternative approach in place.

Assessment of Option C): Relying on Established Contributions

Option C) provides additional benefits to Option B) in those areas where a higher level, coordinated approach to address the issues more effectively can be achieved under established Community policies and measures. For example, the Transport White Paper provides a more coherent approach by promoting the overall concept of sustainable mobility. Consideration is given to the provision of infrastructure, as part of trans-European networks and through structural funds, and environmental protection is promoted through a large number of Community measures and legislation. For example, the introduction of an EU eco-label for tourism accommodation in 2003 may in due course provide added value as consumer awareness is improved.

However, many established Community measures appear too general to address the specific challenges of the tourism sector. Therefore, Option C) is limited in the extent to which it will effectively meet all of the criteria, particularly in the medium-term. For example, broad policies integrate sustainability concerns across a range of sectors at a high level, but it is unlikely that this alone will facilitate the integration and coherence of policies and approaches at lower levels. Another key issue for the competitiveness of the tourism industry, and thus economic sustainability, is the availability of skilled and qualified staff. The effect of seasonal concentration or spread has a significant influence on this issue, in addition to the other factors affecting it. Thus measures to increase the skills of the European workforce in general are not sufficient in the tourism sector without addressing current seasonal concentration.

Option C) provides some additional economic, social and environmental benefits compared to Option B), but many of the existing initiatives and Community policies and measures are too broad for their impact on tourism to be assessed with any accuracy. Instead, they provide a coordinated approach to issues that would otherwise be addressed in isolation at the local level, for example transport. Option C) corresponds more or less to the current situation regarding Community involvement in the issue of tourism sustainability. The fact that, nevertheless, unsustainable trends in tourism do not change would suggest that this existing framework is not sufficient to make adequate progress in this field.

Assessment of Option D): Reinforcement of Existing Framework

In reinforcing the existing framework (Option C), Option D) provides added value related to the majority of criteria. This results from a greater degree of coordination, increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of action and potentially achieving benefits faster and in a more targeted way by being adapted to the specific problems than might occur under the existing framework. A good example of this is consumer awareness. Despite some evidence of already increasing awareness and demand for responsible tourism, sustainable consumer behaviour is so vital to progress towards sustainable tourism that action taken under Option D) could advance this trend and provide benefits sooner than may otherwise be expected.

In this context, the promotion of sustainable tourism consumption and production patterns, and corresponding proactive best practice dissemination can be a core action of Community involvement for dealing with the major challenges affecting tourism. Option D makes it possible for the Commission to participate in specific measures for addressing these challenges, including that of seasonal spread. Such measures can provide considerable added value to efforts to reduce the unsustainable trend in tourism activity insofar as this trend is not driven by strong forces such as climate and lifestyle, which may be beyond the control of the Commission, irrespective of any policy option. It is, therefore, important that activities as those designed to address sustainable inter- and intra- destination mobility, are supported by measures to raise consumer awareness to ensure the best possible chance of improvements.

A reinforcement that aims to specifically address the sustainable development of tourist destinations can be expected to provide a wide range of significant economic, social and environmental benefits by supporting industry, the local community and the environment. It would assist the identification of specific local impacts (which may be on air, water, land or local communities) that may not be sufficiently or specifically addressed by stakeholder initiatives or existing Community policies (under Options B) or C). In this way, Option D provides the flexibility to address the regional diversity of the tourism sector and enables individual solutions to be found for destination challenges. It adds clear value, not only for sustainability in the tourism sector, but in general.

The provision of sufficient infrastructure (such as transport networks, waste management and water treatment facilities), the availability of skilled, qualified staff, respecting and maintaining the diversity of cultural heritage and increasing access to tourism for all citizens are the criteria least improved by Option D). This reflects an emphasis on operational aspects, such as better governance, and environmental aspects of sustainability rather than the socio-economic aspects. However, again, this option has the potential to better fine-tune non sector-specific Community policy measures in the above-mentioned fields, so that they become more effective for the tourism sector, and through this in general in the areas where sustainability problems are biggest. Given the significance of the current situation regarding the availability of skilled and qualified staff, further specific measures to address this shortage and improve working conditions can substantially improve the value of this option and its likelihood of achieving progress towards sustainable tourism.

Better coordination and use of the different Community policies and measures affecting tourism, an enhancement of this effect, and stakeholder participation when assessing their impact, is particularly important potential of this option. It will be crucial in optimising the benefits of Community action in general on tourism sustainability. It will also foster governance at all levels and facilitate integration and coherence between policy areas, ensuring that the views of, and impacts on, SMEs are properly addressed in this process.

The Communication also points out the need to encourage stakeholder synergies and cooperation among stakeholders. Option D) provides the opportunity for enhancing cooperation with other major players in the field of tourism sustainability. Likewise, it makes it possible to set up a multi-stakeholder group that steers the actions that the various stakeholders concerned undertake for achieving further progress towards the sustainablity of European tourism, and monitors this progress. Both steps can be seen as an important move towards supplementing the commitments to be included in a European sustainable tourism agenda (a future Agenda 21 for European Tourism), and the transposition into Europe of the tourism-relevant parts of the Plan of Implementation adopted at 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development.

* Are there potential conflicts and inconsistencies between economic, social and environmental impacts that may lead to trade-offs and related policy decisions?

Given that all the options aim to address the same challenges, all of them experience the same potential areas of conflict, but to a different degree. A substantial issue is ensuring that tourism is accessible to everyone, whilst protecting the cultural and environmental resources of destinations. Likewise, provision of infrastructure may conflict with environmental objectives. However, because of its very nature, i.e. depending on good environmental conditions and an active social contribution, tourism can only be economically successful when respecting the two other aspects of sustainability.

None of the options considered is based on the assumption of restricting tourism growth: rather the aim is to manage it with sustainable effect. Option D) makes it possible for the Commission to participate in specific measures for addressing the issues of seasonal spread and carrying capacity, which are vital in reducing negative social and economic impacts of tourism growth, while at the same time strengthening a bottom-up approach and the key responsibility of local and industry stakeholders. Therefore, this option is also most likely to minimise conflict between economic, environmental and social impacts in the shortest possible term and in the most targeted and effective way. Nevertheless, it remains fully compatible with the existing Community policy framework regarding related policy fields.

* Are there especially severe impacts on a particular social group, economic sector (including size-class of enterprises) or region?

The analysis suggests that there are three specific categories that may be particularly affected:

A) Small and Medium-sized Enterprises

SMEs as a specific group is dominant in the tourism sector. They may currently lag behind larger companies in terms of their use of new technology and communication and may experience greater staffing problems as well as paying less attention to the environmental and social impacts of their activities. All these factors may reduce the quality of the service offered and thus their competitiveness. However, the increasing market for cultural and natural tourism provides a good market opportunity for SMEs, where tourists are likely to favour small, locally-run enterprises over the larger, global brands. The policy approach selected will have the potential in particular to assist SMEs in meeting consumer demand for quality.

B) Local communities and peripheral regions

Local communities as tourist destinations are significantly affected by tourism activities. Although tourism provides economic benefits, social discontent may arise from so-called mass tourism, especially where this may not sufficiently respect local cultures. The policy option selected is particularly well placed to avoid current trends exacerbating these issues through measures to address sustainable destination development and management. It facilitates an improved social environment for local communities, particularly through multi-stakeholder processes involving communities to a greater extent than at present.

Measures to manage tourism patterns, and particularly transport options, may disproportionately affect peripheral regions, above all islands. Their tourism business largely depends on air travel and benefits significantly from the increase in cheaper air travel that do not internalise environmental costs. Thus any measures that would result in discouraging or limiting air travel is likely to impact heavily on the tourism economy of peripheral regions. This example emphasises the need for a flexible approach which recognises the diversity of the European tourism industry.

C) Disabled people

Current levels of accessible tourist facilities restrict the potential for travel of the 10% ofthe population of the EU who are disabled. Under the selected policy option, greater consideration of corporate social responsibility, and actions to improve access, can address this issue.

* Are there impacts outside the Union on the Candidate Countries and/or other countries ("external impacts")?

Measures to be taken with regard to the sustainability of European tourism are intended to bring equal benefits across Europe and, as far as possible, world-wide. The policy option selected was, among other reasons, chosen because of its capacity to allow optimal adaptation of concrete measures to the specific geographical conditions, including those above and beyond the current EU of 15 Member States. Overall, there are no negative external impacts expected from these measures.

However, managing tourist patterns may result in certain geographical shifts in tourism. It might be that, at least temporarily, for price reasons or because of not wanting to change patterns, a part of the market will favour tourism activities at places that do not address sustainablity issues, thus increasing pressures on vulnerable destinations and fragile resources, including those outside the EU. It is not possible to assess the degree to which this might occur. On the other hand, the fear may exist that more sustainable tourism consumption patterns might mean Europeans travelling less to non-EU and distant destinations. Those locally responsible for these destinations need to recognise the fact that tourism which is viable and sustainable in the long-term cannot depend excessively on long-haul tourists, as is currently the case for many of the non-European destinations that have recently emerged. Some of the more-advanced developing countries have therefore started to pay particular attention to neighbouring and domestic tourism markets. Even the least-developed countries have an interest in gradually doing the same.

* What are the impacts over time? What are the results of any scenario, risk or sensitivity analysis undertaken?

Certainly, European tourism needs time to achieve sustainability. Nevertheless, the objective is that progress in this field is, in the medium-term, bigger than the quantitative growth in the sector, according to the scenario for the future of tourism, and its sustainability, as summarised in Annex 1 of the Communication; this objective is also known as "decoupling".

One reason why existing initiatives may currently be unsuccessful is that many have been implemented relatively recently and may not yet have reached their full potential. Thus, over time, relying on them could prove to be more effective than today. However, it is unlikely that, even in the long term, issues of better governance, seasonal spread, sustainable transport, etc., can or will be addressed by individual stakeholders. Likewise, many of the Community policies and measures addressing sustainabilty issues are relatively new and thus greater benefits may arise from these actions at some time in the future, the tourism sector being no exception.

However, given the scenario for the future of tourism, and its sustainability, there is no time to lose. Thus, one of the major reasons for selecting the policy option of tourism-specific reinforcement and best use of the existing framework for action was that this is the best way to provide benefits sooner than may be expected from the other options that were considered, with effects increasing over time. The desired achievements can also serve as a sector-specific contribution to the programme in support of European initiatives to accelerate the shift towards sustainable consumption and production, as provided for in the Plan of Implementation adopted at the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development.

6. How to monitor and evaluate the results and the impact of the proposal after implementation?

* How will the policy be implemented?

On the basis of the policy option selected, the Communication foresees a general concept of future action for implementation ranging from global to local, both in the international context and within Europe, in order to address the need for sustainable consumption patterns and sustainable tourism production. According to their different level of responsibilities, the need for local stakeholders to formulate their own Agenda 21 at the territorial or sub-sector levels has been stressed.

The selected policy option sets out the framework for delivering, on the basis of a multi- stakeholder voluntary process, specific hints and guidelines. A high degree of commitment from bodies representing the tourism industry, national/regional/local authorities and civil society groups must be developed in order for the process to start and be implemented at the various territorial levels.

Thus, implementation will be based above all on the initiatives of directly responsible and specialised stakeholders and on activities under those Community policies and measures which affect European tourism. To ensure that these initiatives and activities for European tourism are effective as possible, the Communication proposes to put into concrete form the further European Community contribution to implementing tourism sustainability in the international context and within Europe through a number of provisions.

The implementation of this general concept of future action by the European Community needs to take into account the fact that the level of tourism activity and the dependence on tourism vary across Europe's vast and diverse territory, as do the intensity and specific nature of challenges for the tourism industry and for sustainability. This great diversity of European tourism, the principle of subsidiarity and the lack of a specific competence mean that the European Community itself can only undertake guidance and complementary activities and further the practical application of the sustainable tourism concept.

More concretely, implementation will mean further action in the following areas:

a) Working arrangements fostering the contribution of Community policies to the sustainability of European tourism.

The Communication highlights the role of the Impact assessment as an instrument to aid the integration of sustainability concerns into related Community policies with an impact on tourism. As acknowledged in the Commission Internal Guidelines on the IA procedure, in undertaking an extended impact assessment a wide range of possible economic, environmental and social impacts should be considered as well as identifying who is affected and when the different impacts will occur. Thus, any policy should be assessed in terms of its economic, environmental and social impact on tourism policies.

Furthermore, it is proposed to prepare and implement a Commission internal work programme for enhancing the effect of the various community policies concerning European tourism in supporting the sustainability of the sector. This work programme should be the result of an open coordination process and will emphasise policies and measures aimed at meeting the challenges of sustainable tourism supply. A guide addressed to tourism stakeholders on support for sustainable tourism is planned as additional aid.

b) Encouraging stakeholder synergies and cooperation.

One element is a cooperation agreement with the World Tourism Organisation in the field of sustainable tourism.

The second, crucial element is launching a Tourism Sustainability Group. Its first task will be to allocate specific activities and responsibilities to the various tourism stakeholders, and to steer, monitor and evaluate the implementation of the agreement(see below).

c) Promotion of sustainable tourism consumption and production, and the better transfer of approaches, initiatives, instruments and good practice to the players on the ground.

Ad-hoc multi-stakeholder targeted actions are planned to raise awareness, appraise the evolution of the identified major challenges and provide tailor-made tools and guidance. They will focus on tourism consumption patterns (tourists as responsible consumers), on good governance and the CSR practices of tourism sector enterprises, on sustainable tourist destination development and management, and on information tools and networks in support of the other measures.

In some cases, such as the promotion of governance principles and sustainable tourist destination development and management, the Commission will further work through already existing instruments (such as the European Multi-stakeholder Forum on Corporate Social Responsibility) and explore the feasibility of target-based tripartite agreements.

It is planned to begin the gradual implementation of the measures adopted in 2004, in cooperation with the Council, the other Community Institutions and with international bodies active in this field, as well as with the active participation of the tourism industry and civil society representatives. Furthermore, the Commission will report back to the Council and the other Community Institutions in the autumn of 2005 on the progress of implementation, in a sufficientlydetailed manner for an Agenda 21 for European tourism to be drafted no later than 2007.

* How will the policy be monitored?

Monitoring and evaluation of these instruments is an essential part of the policy itself, and these tasks will be performed as part of the work of the above-mentioned Tourism Sustainability Group. The group will be asked to set up and manage a "European-level system to monitor the sustainability of the tourism sector", delivering an annual report to measure the progress achieved.

This instrument is intended to monitor progress over time and to ensure the overall consistency both of EU policy and instruments and of national policies and will feed back into the policy decision-making process at the right level. With a view to monitoring and reporting sustainable tourism and providing a tool to fulfil Community commitments undertaken in the international context, the Commission will continue, together with other public and private stakeholders, the work undertaken in the field of sustainable tourism indicators.

The group can also guide the use of the Local Agenda 21 tool in tourist destinations and the preparation of a model for local destination monitoring and indicator systems to ensure that destinations make use of the same principles of monitoring and deliver comparable results. It can also encourage the bottom-up development of tools and good examples of tourism sustainability adapted to local conditions.

* What are the arrangements for any ex-post evaluation of the policy?

Since these "Basic orientations for the sustainability of European tourism" are the Commission's input at this stage to a broad Agenda 21 process for sustainable European tourism which is open-ended, no specific ex-post evaluation is foreseen. The process will continue and evaluation is expected to take place within regular monitoring of these instruments. The Tourism Sustainability Group will be responsible for regularly evaluating implementation of the measures provided for in the action framework.

7. Stakeholder consultation

* Which interested parties were consulted, at what point in the process, and for what purpose?

The Commission started drafting the document on the basis of the results of a working group to promote environmental protection and sustainable development in tourism [16]. The purpose was to speed up the development of Agenda 21 in Europe with the guidance provided by an external steering group [17], under the chairmanship of the Commission, composed of experts from international bodies, national administrations and other tourism stakeholder groups, including environmental NGOs.

[16] Commission Communication to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Working together for the future of European tourism. COM/2001/0665.

[17] The Steering Group on Agenda 21 met six times.

During the process of implementation of this measure it emerged that the European Agenda 21 for Tourism required a step-by-step process where the Commission would mainly play a facilitator role and the prime responsibility would be based at the level of other stakeholders. The Commission has regularly reported on the results of the work undertaken with the help of this steering group to all interested European stakeholders.

In April 2003, the Commission service responsible for the work finalised a document for public consultation, which was based on the work done so far and developed the policy options, the approach, and the possible measures and other considerations discussed above and now to be found in the Communication.

Between 25 April and 31 July, the Commission invited all interested parties to actively examine, contribute to and submit their comments on the consultation document. In so doing, they could also refer to any other relevant document, whether mentioned in the document or not, and comment on it. European citizens and tourists, private sector enterprises, European tourist destinations and public authorities, and civil society stakeholders were called upon to deliver their views regarding the policy options, the concept of action and the Community contribution, the measures that the Commission could envisage, and the vision of what other stakeholders should do.

From the Internet open consultation, the Commission received reactions from a total of nearly 100 organisations and individuals. The outcome of that consultation and the summary of comments received are appended to this document. All reactions can be consulted on the site http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/ services/tourism/consultation/index.htm. In addition, the European Commission actively identified and asked for comments from its usual interlocutors in regular consultations with tourism stakeholders, in particular representatives of national administrations responsible for tourism policy, at a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Tourism in early September 2003.

An Inter-Departmental Steering Group [18], set up to oversee the preparation and running of the Extended Impact Assessment, provided an opportunity to facilitate and smooth the task of assessing the impacts of the Commission Communication with the assistance of relevant Commission services.

[18] The ISG on the EIA on the Communication met three times.

* What feedback on the comments received was provided?

The Commission took account of the majority of comments received (see appendix). However, some of them largely went beyond the scope of the subject matter, targeting general or global sustainability issues, or they represented obviously an extreme minority view, so that a feed back was not possible or not appropriate in this context. A number of comments also resulted from the fact that messages put into the document had not been well understood, although they corresponded to the concerns expressed in the comment.

Generally, the language of the document was improved to make better readable for end-users and to avoid biased terms and expressions. The Commission acknowledges that there are many models for achieving sustainable tourism development. Therefore, it also continues an approach that targets as many stakeholders as possible, favouring consensus-building.

With regard to the challenges, views and objectives formulated in the consultation document, the comments confirmed the need to recognise that tourism and its sustainability is primarily consumer driven. Moreover, the Communication now more clearly acknowledges that economic success is essential for achieving sustainability. The consultation also resulted in a reinforced recognition of the territorial (land use) dimension, and of issues linked to climate change, for sustainable tourism. On the other hand, it added evidence to the fact that certain issues of tourism sustainability can hardly be dealt with. Although, to some extent, seasonal spread is one of them, the Commission does not follow the minority position that this is a minor challenge or should not be considered in a European context.

In the light of little success of voluntary instruments developed for sustainable tourism, which was recorded as state of the art, some comments asked for regulatory instruments. This idea was not specifically taken on board, although in exceptional cases regulation cannot be principally excluded, if it is part of a recognised Community policy. A number of comments referred to insufficient co-ordination and integration of the various existing Community policies affecting tourism sustainability. In particular, unconditional liberalisation was seen as not appropriate. These comments resulted in expressing, in a clearer way that leaves no doubts, the Commission's position and intention in this respect in the Communication, and to be more cautious with certain statements, e.g. that relating to the current benefits of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership.

Regarding the policy options, some comments doubted the evidence provided with regard to them, and questioned whether some of them are valid to be considered or allow a neutral choice. There was a minority view that the Community should not at all or not specifically deal with tourism issues and/or sustainability in relation to tourism. On the other end of opinion, comments continued to ask for a fully-fledged Community tourism policy. However, the overwhelming majority supported the policy option taken-up in the Communication, and that also was confirmed by the Extended Impact Assessment.

A number of comments wanted the conception of action and the Community contribution being extended. Most of them required, in one form or another, specific Community funding for sustainable tourism or measures that would need considerable financial commitment. The Communication does not give follow-up to these requests. Certain comments asked for focusing, in a few cases exclusively, on the entrepreneurial aspect and/or a co-ordination role. Whereas the Communication provides for reinforced integration of sustainability concerns into Community policies and initiatives affecting European tourism, and for enhancing their effect on European tourism in order to support the sustainability of the sector, it also follows the line of dealing with all aspects of sustainability, and not only the entrepreneurial ones.

The measures that the Commission could envisage were the subject of the biggest proportion of comments. Partly, it was criticised that they were not sufficiently precise. Although the approach followed for these basic orientations is that measures will be gradually shaped during the process still to follow, the Communication tries to be as concrete as possible with regard to them. However, all together, the comments very much supported the suggested measures, and added further details or precision that could be taken on board.

The most controversial measure was that regarding a 'European Multi-Stakeholder Monitoring and Steering Group for Tourism Sustainability'. In addition to the requests of making the denomination and description of this group easier to understand and clearer, its usefulness was questioned, whereas other comments confirmed that such a group, with the mandate that had been roughly indicated, is key to any other measure and to the success of efforts. While it was strongly supported that local and regional authorities must also be represented in this group, strong opposition arose against it being led by the tourism industry. Even the tourism industry itself largely seems not to want this. The Communication continues to see the creation and work of this group being a crucial measure, but takes account of the other comments with regard to it. It also largely integrates the comments with regard to the other measures, but leaves it to the process still to follow, how they will be shaped and implemented in detail.

Finally, regarding what other stakeholders should do, a number of detailed comments requested to include further stakeholder groups, and to put even more emphasis on consumers, including the importance of education in this respect. The role of those stakeholders that operate on the ground was particularly emphasised, whereas the importance of international stakeholders was seen with some reservation. This chapter also gave rise to continuing some controversial debate known from other occasions, such as with regard to so-called mass tourism and the market dominance of big tour operators, and the polemic concerning environmental taxes, in particular at tourist destinations. For the major part these comments were used to enrich, to revise and to fine-tune this chapter.

8. Commission draft proposal and justification

* What is the final policy choice and why?

The final Community policy choice made for these 'Basic orientations for the sustainability of European tourism', which are an important input to a broad Agenda 21 process for sustainable European tourism, is to reinforce the existing framework for action and to use it to the best advantage. In practical terms this policy will rely on:

* effective implementation of existing initiatives and reinforced efforts of stakeholders, other than the Community, who are active in this field; and

* activities of the Community, of which there are two basic types:

- optimising the effect of Community policies and measures on the sustainability of European tourism, and

- the definition and implementation of complementary tourism-specific action to promote sustainability throughout the Community, which particularly target support of and involvement in other stakeholders' initiatives and which fill gaps left by the Community policies and measures affecting tourism.

This cooperative and pro-active multi-stakeholder approach aims to bridge the remoteness of the Community from the players on the ground as the right road to sustainability for European tourism. It is expected to address the challenges that need to be tackled to ensure tourism sustainability alongside the current benefits that tourism can bring. Given the cross-sector nature of tourism, areas such as employment, regional development, environment, consumer protection, health, safety, transport, taxation and culture will be touched upon.

* Why was a more/less ambitious option not chosen?

In the current situation, a reinforced framework for action provides a feasible, and the most appropriate, approach with regard to the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity. It is capable of dealing with the objectives and challenges identified in a suitable manner by means of an integrated approach within the European Union and in closer cooperation with all stakeholders.

A more ambitious option, i.e. a comprehensive approach as part of a genuine Community policy, risks not corresponding sufficiently to the diversity of the sector and involving an administrative burden on local authorities and enterprises (particularly SMEs) that is not matched by added value. This may constrain stakeholder action and innovation in addressing local issues and/or the effectiveness of a tourism policy. Moreover, the challenges facing tourism are acute, and it is unlikely that a comprehensive policy can be adopted and implemented within a sufficient timeframe to ensure action in the short to medium term, in particular because of the need for the agreement of all Member States.

A less ambitious option, i.e. the total renunciation of Community activities or only relying on established contributions, would correspond more or less to the current situation. This would fail to provide the specific Community contribution needed to trigger sufficient changes in favour of the sustainability of European tourism and to address the objectives of this Communication, and is therefore to be ruled out.

* What are the trade-offs associated with the option chosen?

There are no trade-offs associated with the option chosen. It is fully compatible with the existing Community policy framework regarding related policy fields.

* If current data or knowledge are of poor quality, why should a decision be taken now rather than be put off until better information is available?

Currently existing limited data and knowledge of the tourism sector hinder an accurate quantitative analysis of the impact of tourism. However, despite this weakness, the perceived economic, social and environmental sustainability issues and problems of European tourism, which are both linked to its current consumption and production patterns, and to its further quantitative growth, suggest continuing unsustainable trends of the sector. They show the need to take a decision now on the basic orientations to follow and on initial measures to be launched, and not to put the decision off until better information is available.

The Commission Communication 'Working together for the future of European tourism' identified the need for further work on improving tourism information, communication and statistics on tourism. The Commission has already started to mobilise existing competence and support centres for the development of knowledge and observation regarding tourism, in order to increase the availability of the necessary knowledge and tools for all stakeholders.

Likewise, the Commission has taken the necessary steps, in coordination with the public and private stakeholders concerned and with their support, to introduce Tourism Satellite Accounts (TSAs) in order to improve current statistical information as it exists in Europe (regarded as insufficient from both the qualitative and the quantitative points of view) and to fully reflect the impact and economic importance of tourism as an economic sector.

* Have any accompanying measures to maximise positive impacts and minimise negative impacts been taken?

At the current stage, it is too early to launch additional or accompanying measures to further increase the positive impacts of the policy option chosen. The plan is for them to be defined by the proposed Tourism Sustainability Group and implemented through the planned Commission internal work programme for enhancing the effect of the various Community policies and measures affecting European tourism to support its sustainability.

No negative impacts were identified.

Appendix

Outcome of the Internet based public consultation

(25 April - 31 July 2003)

1. International, European & transnational stakeholder bodies and initiatives

- WTO (World Tourism Organisation).

- WTTC (World Travel & Tourism Council)

- ETC (European Travel Commission)

- ETAG (European Travel & Action Group)

- NET (Network of European private Entrepreneurs in the Tourism Sector)

- ECATRA (European Car & Truck Rental Association)

- ECTAA (Group of National Travel Agents and Tour Operators' association within the EU)

- EFCO & HPA (European Federation of Campingsite Organisations and Holiday Park Associations)

- ETOA (European Tour Operators Association)

- EUFED (European Union Federation of Youth Hostel Association)

- HOTREC (Confederation of National Associations of Hotels, Restaurants, Cafés and Similar Establishments in the European Union and European Economic Area)

- IFTO (International Federation of Tour Operators)

- INSULEUR (Network of the Insular Chambers of Commerce and Industry of the European Union)

- EAPME (European Association of Craft, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises

- ETLC (European Trade Union Liaison Committee on Tourism) / EFFAT (European Federation of Food, Agriculture and Tourism Trade Unions)

- EUTO (European Union of Tourist Officers)

- AEBR (Association of European Border Regions)

- AEM (Association Européenne des élus de Montagne)

- CRPM- Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions of Europe

- ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives)

- IFN (International Friends of Nature)

- EUROPA NOSTRA, two individual reactions

- Green Globe 21

- eCLAT (Virtual network of researchers on climate change, environment and tourism)

- ECOCLUB S.A. - International Ecotourism Club

- ECOSERT Project Partnership - European Cooperation to achieve Sustainable Environmental Regional development through Tourism

- ECOTRANS e.V. - European network of experts and organisations in Tourism, Environment and Regional Development

- NEWtours - Network of excellence for sustainable tourism and transport

- Tourism-Site - Information network for sustainable development of tourist destinations

- Arc Latin - Arco Latino (59 NUTS III municipalities across the Mediterranean coastline)

- MIO-ECSDE. Mediterranean Information Office for Environment, Culture and Sustainable Development

- SMART - Sustainable Model for Arctic Regional Tourism (Project partnership consortium)

- SUT-Governance (EC R&D FP5 project, co-ordinator: Institute for Technology Assessment and System Analysis, Karlsruhe Research Centre)

2. National tourism administrations and authorities, and national agencies

- Secrétariat d'Etat du Tourisme, France

- BMWA (Bundenministerium für Wirtschaft und Arbeit), Austria.

- Ministry of Trade and Industry, Finland

- Turistdelegationen (Swedish Tourist Authority)

- State Secretariat in charge of tourism, Hungary

- Det Kongelige Nærings- og Handelsdepartement, Norway

- Bundesamt für Naturschutz (German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation)

- Umweltbundesamt (German Federal Environmental Agency)

3. Regional and local authorities, tourism offices and development bodies

- Agence Développement Local, Ville de Durbuy (Belgium)

- Ulm/Neu-Ulm Tourismuszentrale -Tourism office (Baden-Württemberg/Bayern, Germany)

- Municipality of Tengen (Baden-Württemberg, Germany)

- Agencia Valenciana del Turisme (Spain)

- Canary Islands' Tourism Observatory (Spain)

- Municipality of Calvià (Balearic Islands, Spain)

- Municipality of Girona (Catalunya, Spain)

- Municipality of Lloret de Mar (Catalunya, Spain)

- CESR (Economic and Social Council) Aquitaine (France)

- CESR (Economic and Social Council) Bourgogne (France)

- Coordinamento delle Regioni per le politiche del Turismo italiano (Italy)

- Région Autonome de la Vallée d'Aoste (Italy)

- Regione Sicilia (Italy)

- Provinces Noord Brabant, Limburg and Zeeland (The Netherlands)

- Mikkeli District Tourist Service (Finland)

- LGA/LGIB - Local Government Association / Local Government International Bureau (UK)

- Welsh Tourist Board and the Welsh Local Government Association (United Kingdom)

- South West England - Regional Sustainable Tourism Group (United Kingdom)

- Cornwall Tourist Board (United Kingdom)

- Kent County. Tourism Office (United Kingdom)

- Birmingham Tourism Office (United Kingdom)

- Prague City Development Authority (Czech Republic)

4. National and local associations, unions and bodies

- Nationalparkamt Müritz (Germany)

- WWF-Greece

- ALEFPA- Association Laïque pour l'Éducation, la Formation, la Prévention et l'Autonomie (France)

- FNE - France, Nature, Environment (France).

- CONFCOMMERCIO (The Italian General Confederation of Trade, Tourism, Services and SMEs) & CONFTURISMO (Italian representative of the tourist sector).

- Vereniging OSO - Organisations for Open Air Recreation (Netherlands)

- Austrian Federal Economic Chamber, Tourism and Leisure Industries Division (Austria)

- Service Union United (Finland)

- Coventry and Warwickshire Chamber of Commerce (United Kingdom)

- Church of England National Rural Office (United Kingdom)

- Church Heritage Forum, Archbishops' Council (United Kingdom)

- Sustrans - Sustainable Transport Charity (United Kingdom)

5. National and local networks

- Finnish University Network for Tourism Studies. Research and Training Institute (Finland).

- EHTF - English Historic Towns Forum (United Kingdom)

- Scottish Tourism and Environment Forum (United Kingdom)

- Cornwall Sustainable Tourism Project (United Kingdom)

6. Enterprises

- B.A.U.M Consult and Knowledge Networking (Germany)

- Stattreisen (Germany)

- Accor Group (France)

- Michelin (France)

- Vivacances (France)

- Gheanet Tourism Consultants (Italy)

- Turismo Mediterraneo s.r.l. (Sardegna, Italy)

- Rachel Dodds - Sustainable/Eco Tourism and Tourism Marketing Consultant (United Kingdom).

7. Research & education

- Universidad de Málaga (Spain)

- CSST - Centre for Sustainable Tourism and Transport & NHTV - Breda University of International Education (The Netherlands).

- London Metropolitan University, International Institute for Culture, Tourism and Development (United Kingdom).

- University of Brighton, Centre for Tourism Policy Studies (United Kingdom), two individual reactions.

- University of the West of England, Centre for Environment & Planning-Bristol (United Kingdom).

- Centre for Responsible and Sustainable Tourism Development (Serbia).

- Márcia Cambraia Belderrain, University of São Paulo (Brazil)

Summary of comments from the Internet based public consultation

The reference of this summary is the document published for public consultation on the Internet (http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/ services/tourism/consultation/cons_en.pdf). The summary lists those comments that demand added or improved formulations in relation to the consultation document, or disagree or request deletion. Comments made by different organisations and individual may contradict each other. Details can be accessed via http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/ services/tourism/consultation/index.htm.

1. General remarks:

Add / improve

* Sustainable tourism development guidance must be communicated in plain language targeted on end-users. The font size and layout should make the end-user want to read the text.

* Figures and percentages should indicate source data.

* Acknowledge that there are many models for achieving sustainable tourism development.

* Refer only to things that affect the tourism sector over which the sector (public and private operators) has a great deal of or at least some direct influence (therefore exclude areas such as strategic infrastructure and transport).

* To tackle sustainability problems with regard to tourism we need global environmental governance as a proactive mix of policy (transport, energy and environment), awareness raising amongst consumers and other stakeholders and corporate responsibility of the tourism industry. An effective policy can only be arrived at if we try to influence the major driving forces.

* Pay more attention to the social dimension of sustainability: CSR and the social dialogue merit further emphasis.

* A public and formal commitment from all stakeholders would help the implementation of sustainable tourism a great deal.

* Sustainable tourism demands real leadership, rather than management. Abandon the idea of pleasing all stakeholders ('citizens are the basis of power in a democratic society, stakeholders are the basis in an oligarchy').

* Define the timing, budgetary and technical means for implementing the objectives and measures selected and set priorities according to annual exercises.

2. Analysis of the challenges, views and objectives

Add / improve

* The governance dimension should be added to the three classical pillars of sustainability (the institutional dimension).

* Link all the challenges to the appropriate territorial policy level to provide for a flexible approach.

* Stress that economic growth is fundamental for mainstreaming sustainable policies in tourism.

* Recognise that tourism is consumer-driven and not production-led. Put the emphasis on changing attitudes and demand patterns, as well as on implementation at local level.

* Sustainable tourist behaviour cannot be divorced from 'sustainable consumer behaviour'. Local inhabitants have a crucial role in leading consumers/tourists by example.

* Regarding the supply chain, sustainability cannot rely on voluntary measures only (such as schemes and CSR). Legislation should not be discarded.

* Accept that tourism can be a driver for other economic sectors in order to mitigate current over-dependence on tourism in fragile areas (e.g. islands).

* Security (e.g. terrorist threat) and safety issues (both linked to natural risks or human caused risks) are also major challenges for European tourism.

* Preserving European cultural heritage diversity is a challenge for future European tourism.

* Pay more attention to land use, water and transport as the main threats for sustainability.

* Learn from the ECOPROFIT project regarding a European Programme on Sustainable Tourism and from the PEER project (Partnerships for Extended Entrepreneurial Responsibility in the Tourism Sector) regarding the issue of sustainability reporting of European Tourist destinations.

* Use the WTO definition of a local tourist destination.

* Eliminate doubts regarding the compatibility between cost internalisation and decoupling economic growth from social and environmental costs.

* CSR for the hospitality sector should not be planned, carried out and assessed by a single tourism stakeholder.

* Replace references to 'adequate employment' with 'quality employment'.

* Replace the term 'handicapped' with 'disabled'.

* Explain that a fundamental part of the 'well-being of tourist destinations' is the need to share profits with source market operators.

* Choice of destination is 'discretionary' rather than 'arbitrary'.

Disagree / delete

* Avoid negative considerations such as 'narrow economic imperatives' that do not favour the mutual respect and understanding of the three sustainability pillars.

* If seasonality is a regional aim, then it should be coped with at that level.

* Seasonality is not one of the major challenges, since it is in many cases a natural phenomenon with which many destinations have learnt to live. The real problem is the 'intra-seasonal fluctuations' in visitor numbers that put uneven pressure on tourism systems and resources.

* Do not put the onus on production, bur rather recognise and manage the pressures that create the demand and lead to seasonality (cultural preferences, employment patterns, annual holiday and public holiday restrictions, academic requirements, etc...).

* Assess the difficulty most European consumers have in developing sustainable consumption patterns due to the lack of transparency in an increasing vertically-integrated market.

* Acknowledge that climate change is a challenge (tourism is responsible for 10% of world-wide greenhouse gases and it is also suffering from climate change effects (high temperatures, water quality and shortages, etc.)).

* Do not assume automatically that cultural or heritage-oriented tourism is more 'sustainable' than other forms of tourism: treating culture/heritage as a 'tourism product' detaches culture from its local context and divorces it from its role in the maintenance and development of civil society.

3. Analysis of the state of the art

3.1 Initiatives and contributions of a wide range of stakeholders

Add / improve

* Consider that all initiatives and contributions that have not succeeded are of voluntary nature. Although it is good to have general statements, declarations and basic guidelines, the situation and the nature of the challenges demand responses that integrate the legal, economic and governance points of view.

* Since there are many stakeholders involved in sustainability, the document should either narrow its focus to things it can change or broaden it to include all those whom we need to influence (all sub-sectors of the tourism industry and related complementary supply).

* The role of many local authorities in putting forward sustainable tourism agendas is not sufficiently acknowledged since most of them do not form part of established international networks or have contacts with relevant international bodies. Whether it is a good thing or a bad thing, local stakeholders are the ones with main responsibility for tourism. 'Tourism takes place locally and policies need to be devised and implemented locally in order to address the specific needs and limitations of the destination'.

* Tourism workers and trade unions must be added to the list of stakeholders that are currently developing sustainability for tourism.

* Consider the reasons behind the failure of SMEs' response in taking up sustainability initiatives: 'if you want business to be an agent of change, you have to change the behaviour of its clients'. SMEs' concern is to meet the needs of their customers.

* Consider that for an effective implementation of the many action programmes and guidelines developed at international level there is a need for national/regional sustainable development strategies.

* Mention the tourism-related initiatives in supranational regions within the EU (e.g. The Nordic countries, the Alps and coastal regions) as well as the need for integration of the regional objectives.

* Refine references to existing initiatives of other stakeholders (e.g. as for the TOI, Global Code of Ethics, the 1999 CSD7, etc.) and add some more fundamental initiatives regarding tourism and fair trade, human rights, CSR, and consolidated environmental NGOs' contributions.

Disagree / delete

* Do not regard the contribution of a stakeholder segment as insufficient if indicators to measure insufficiency are not provided.

3.2 Initiatives and contribution of the EC

Add / improve

* Better incorporate the work (policies and programmes) done or being done in other Commission services regarding sustainable tourism development (e.g.: the 6th Framework Programme).

* Consider that most European policies and programmes do not serve an integrated approach that reflects the needs and concerns at regional and local level and therefore are far from benefiting them.

* Adopt a more proactive and supportive role for local and regional initiatives to adopt sustainable tourism policies.

* Integrated Quality Management is a valuable tool to ensure a more competitive tourism industry which will secure environmental, social and economic benefits for the host community and is based on a partnership approach with the main stakeholders.

* Invest in better statistical information generally and on sustainability in particular.

* Explain how the 'reporting mechanism' would be able to provide useful information without becoming a burden.

* Assess the impact of current liberalisation in the tourism sector before pursuing further liberalisation rounds. If services are provided in another country, the workers posted there should benefit at least from the labour standards and working conditions applicable in that country. Further liberalisation should not affect 'service quality, consumer protection, labour standards and public safety'. Do liberalisation of trade and sustainable trade occur at the same time in tourism? (Assess whether competition is working against local communities in the opening up of tourism markets in developing countries). Analyse whether the GATS decision may overrule other international agreements such as the international Biodiversity Convention.

* Do not overstate the benefits of the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership: so far it is mainly focused on a EuroMed Free Trade Area, with its main impact on sustainable trade.

* Pursue a real European-wide Eco-label for tourism destinations.

4. The Commission Communication's policy options

Add / improve

* Consider how the Commission Communication's objectives can be achieved given the absence of any reference to tourism in the Convention for the Future of Europe and the incoming IGC.

* Further consider a true Community policy for tourism related research (including the mutual interaction between tourism and climate change), data and statistics, benchmarking and incentives to other EC policies influencing tourism and its sustainability.

* Reinforce the role of the Tourism focal point within the EC to ensure a leading role for sustainable tourism and maximise the potential of Community action. Although funding for tourism purposes is available, the lack of an ad-hoc tourism programme hinders synergies.

* In a reinforced framework for action the Commission should listen to both industry and trade unions' representatives to find common solutions to the existing problems.

* The selected policy option should be subject to the proactive development of the principles of subsidiarity (formal dialogue with regional and local authorities, partnerships and implementation of real tripartite agreements).

* How could coordination at European level make efforts at local level more efficient?

Disagree / delete

* Vague policy options and little evidence provided in favour of the policy selected.

* The Commission has not been neutral when presenting the policy options.

* Subsidiarity and action at the local level most involved in the customer/supplier relationships are more appropriate.

5. The concept of action and the Community contribution

Add / improve

* Take a stronger lead in coordinating and funding partnerships.

* Provide support/incentives to industry, and SMEs in particular, to encourage the development and adoption of sustainability good practices.

* Coordinate information collation and sharing, supported by research as appropriate, including case studies, good practice guides and cost/benefit analyses. Present information in a practical and user-friendly manner, with good practices being disseminated as 'guidance' rather than 'compulsion'.

* Fund consumer awareness and guidance initiatives, working with the media.

* Improve the coordinating role within the European Commission, aiming to ensure that the interests of tourism are fully taken into account in the preparation of legislation and in the operation of programmes and policies which are not themselves conceived in terms of tourism objectives.

* Set up a comprehensive and reliable statistical framework in order to assess, benchmark and monitor tourism development. Support regional tourism observatories.

* Sustainability reporting mechanisms and CSR should also consider the concerns of tourism workers.

* Prepare a Community programme to support and implement sustainable tourism destination management (which could be implemented within the EU regional policy): in so doing the EC would be shifting policy responsibilities to other stakeholders and providing the means to implement these processes.

* The period 2003-2006 should be devoted to awareness raising and to the establishment of partnership and cooperation mechanisms in order to provide the necessary input to implement sustainable guidance at regional/local level for the programming period 2007-2013.

* Promote special forms of tourism (e.g.: cultural and maritime tourism) and take advantage of events with a global dimension to getthe message across.

* Implement specific action plans for fragile areas such as the Mediterranean islands.

* Make the distinction between tourism within Natura 2000 sites (where tourism should be limited and have positive effects on nature conservation and social wellbeing) and outside protected areas (where the elimination of negative tourism impacts should be the objective).

Disagree / delete

* The Commission's role should be limited to the entrepreneurial aspect of the tourism sector, other related aspect being dealt with at the relevant Commission sector level.

* Is WTTC a truly representative international body?

6. The measures that the Commission could envisage

Add / improve

* In general, the measures should be more concrete, precise and coercive enough to be effective.

* Recognise the particular requirements of SMEs and micro-enterprises.

* Consider legislation if it is the only way to effect change.

* Design at least one specific measure related to training and education.

- The Commission will use the Impact Assessment tool to integrate sustainability concerns into Community policies and initiatives affecting European tourism

This measure should allow the involvement of all stakeholder groups in the impact assessment. Present the most significant developments regarding tourism-related IA annually.

Integrate tourism as a measure in the operational Interreg III A programmes as well as in the PHARE-CBC, TACIS and MED programmes between neighbouring regions.

Exploit the advantages of the synergy between tourism, agriculture, forestry, environmental politics and small and medium-sized companies.

- The Commission could prepare and adopt an action plan for enhancing the effect of the various Community policies and measures affecting European tourism to support the sustainability of the sector.

This measure needs realistic targets and achievable actions, and should improve the capacity and leadership of local authorities, encouraging the latter to take up the principles of governance within these decision-making levels and sustainable tourism planning.

The action plan should include issues of equal access to the tourism product and the benefits of tourism, and also equal opportunities within the tourism industry.

The Commission might undertake an analysis of skills and labour transfer in the sphere of tourism to facilitate transnational cooperation between regions and hence it being taken account of in the national action plans for employment. Study the role of immigrants as a working force for tourism and its impact on local economy.

Laying down European standards for the mutual recognition of tourism qualifications would be valuable and would help create employment opportunities through the placement of employees regardless of their nationality.

Local authorities and destination managers would welcome a comprehensive guide to all Commission policies, programmes and studies which relate to sustainable tourism, and to identifying potential funding support for projects in this field.

Study the relationship between biggest TTOO and local tourism suppliers and its effects on competition. Favour local partnerships to counterbalance Tour Operators' market dominance.

Further assess the impact of the accession of new member states in terms of tourist numbers, labour force and new market destinations.

- The Commission could propose a co-operation agreement with the World Tourism Organisation (WTO) in the field of sustainable tourism.

Identify fields and measures of cooperation defining EC support for WTO global initiatives. Local government must be involved in the preparation and implementation of the agreement via associations such as the Council of European Municipalities and the Regions.

There are other UN agencies that have been substantially involved in sustainable tourism initiatives that should also be included in the scope of this measure. EC-WTO agreement could also expand to sustainable development cooperation in third countries with a particular focus on poverty alleviation strategies through tourism (support a Community-based tourism development in developing countries).

Consider the possibility of a joint partnership between the EC and WTO to take over and manage the EuroVelo network.

- The Commission could launch a European Multi-Stakeholder Monitoring and Steering Group for Tourism Sustainability.

To add value such a group (supported also by the WTO) must have specific and deliverable objectives. The Commission, not the industry, should lead it, and all stakeholders should be part of all similar groups (e.g. on issues such as seasonality, transport, etc., trade unions have also a role to play). Research, measurement and monitoring must enable both the private and public sectors to adapt to changing needs and demands and better manage demand and supply.

Local and regional governments should be represented via pan-European associations.

Study whether this group can be set up within a Europe-wide network of universities with tourism development units committed to working with non-academic institutions in the private and public sectors in the field of sustainable tourism policy ('this would accord well with the principles of the 6th RTD framework programme which seeks inter alia to support the creation of 'knowledge societies' in a wide swathe of policy areas'). Therefore consider including the last measure within this measure.

The development of sustainable tourism information, policy tools and best practice do need further development to facilitate benchmarking and the analysis of information relating to sustainable tourism needs to be developed in a manner which can accommodate the requirements of all different types of destinations.

However, work in this field should respect the principle of subsidiarity and build on work already undertaken within Member States. Getting businesses involved in reporting is challenging, but essential, so the system has to be user-friendly and not too technical. It would be preferable to see workable national systems in place before setting up a European-level system. If, in the future, a European level system is seen to be feasible, we would need to ensure that the European and national systems dovetail and the relevant expert groups in Member States consulted.

Non-tourism stakeholders have a critical role to play in the sustainability of tourism. They can best represent the sustainable development goals and objectives of the host or resident population. Therefore they may also be part of this measure and the following one.

- The Commission could launch a wide-ranging initiative, involving all relevant stakeholders, to further sustainable tourism consumption patterns in Europe. This initiative could focus on the two core problems regarding sustainable consumer choices in leisure tourism, i.e. seasonality and sustainable tourism transport.

The European round table of stakeholders obviously has to be more than just a talking shop and should look into whether realistic action can be taken.

Build on consumer information to ensure market forces are exerted to promote sustainable management. The business case is not sufficiently won since we need to convince business that acting sustainably helps it to save money, that there are markets looking for sustainable products and that the public sector will help them to find them. Inform tourists on how to prevent damage and harm to the environment, the landscape and agriculture.

Provide reliable and user-friendly information on quality standards in hotels.

With regard to seasonality, illustrate the benefits of staggering holidays in the private and public sector and the impact of pension reforms on the tourism sector in the long term. Improve the quality of tourism-related products and services and expand the transport and economic infrastructures to improve the accessibility of tourist areas and to facilitate crossing borders and the local public transport with the objective of lengthening the season and the duration of tourist visits.

Take account of the changes in the demographic structure and design tailor-made programmes catering for special groups (e.g. the young, the elderly and the disabled etc.)

- The Commission could prepare and launch a package of special measures for promoting the principles of good governance and fostering Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) practices throughout the European tourism sector and its stakeholders as a specific initiative within the European Multi-stakeholder Forum on CSR..

The Commission could provide guidance on the principles of good governance and CSR, but these principles will be best promoted to tourism businesses via member state and regional tourism bodies who can set such guidance within a national or regional context. Consider whether it is possible to do this with large transnational corporations, since for micro-enterprises and SMEs it will be quite difficult.

- The Commission could prepare and launch a package of special measures aimed at the promotion of sustainable tourist destination development and management.

The platform of European tourist destinations for dealing with issues of sustainable tourist destination development and management should be open to all destinations in order to facilitate the exchange of good practice and allow for benchmarking and skills transfer between resorts.

The approach taken by the National Tourism Best Value Group in the UK could serve as the model for the pan-European Platform of destinations. IQM provides a tool to achieve it. All the other measures mentioned should be incorporated into the IQM process.

The idea of a consumer awareness campaign should be developed further before judging whether action at a European level could be effective, although a consistent message across Europe could have an effect. It could be effective and useful if seen as a pan-European issue and if one message is seen by tourists all over Europe. It would achieve economies of scale if resourced nationally or at a European level. There is certainly a need for greater coordination of current initiatives and a need to encourage sharing of experience in what works and what does not in influencing consumer choice.

Support the demand for sustainable tourism products and subsequently give an ad-hoc follow-up to public initiatives to support enterprises.

Tri-partite agreements also need further development and evaluation that might be done via pilot initiatives.

Assess whether this measure (make a link to the ESDP) might be funded by the 6th RTD programme, ensure that the management of cultural heritage sites is included in this programme, and study whether Local Research Bodies can be considered beneficiaries of the Community framework programme and could be covered under the last measure.

- In addition, the Commission could promote the development and use of information tools and networks that involve and target the various types of stakeholders, in order to disseminate best practice and good governance regarding the sustainability of European tourism, at destination and enterprise level.

Disseminate information through the internet, reliable representatives and networks and consider the coordination of the policies and best practices identified. Action regarding exchange of best practices should follow this circle: awareness, information, dissemination, follow-up and feedback.

The WTO can also help in implementing this and the previous measure through its Destination Management Task Force and the Cooperation Network for the Sustainable Management of Coastal Destinations.

Disagree / delete

* Tourism SMEs cannot cope and benefit from existing legislation and information.

* Any suggested action plan should itself be subject to consultation before implementation. Therefore avoid references to vague action plans. Caution if the Commission intends to impose an action plan on communities.

* Cooperate with the WTO rather than pursuing working agreements.

* A 'round table' of stakeholders to consider the problems of seasonality is unlikely to make a significant contribution to the pressures felt at local level, and the perspective is likely to be too broad and the ability to influence too remote.

* More information is needed before considering whether target-based agreements can be valuable.

7. What other stakeholders should do.

Add / improve

* The key stakeholders should also include the host communities, service providers to the tourism industry and the community sector.

* European stakeholders should also be added to the list of those who share a prime responsibility for implementing tourism sustainability.

* Identify the roles and responsibilities of the actors within the tourism consumer chain.

* Indicate how individuals would assume their responsibility through awareness raising in fostering sustainable consumption.

* The overall aim should be to get the consumer to equate sustainable good practice with a quality product.

* Reflect on entering sustainable development principles for tourism in primary schools.

* Industry operators might draft and follow a self-regulation code based on sustainable principles. Refer to the role of tourism and hotel companies in making extensive use of energy, water and waste efficiency and saving measures; the need to favour soft mobility and transport means and take up sustainable technologies.

* Consider the impact of market concentration in the European tourism industry in providing an available range of choices for customers wishing to make a sustainable choice.

* Tourism development may help in the questions related to the development needs of border regions and to their weaknesses: promoting economic diversification, creating new employment opportunities and second jobs.

* Set up an annual sustainable tourism award supported by the private sector.

Disagree / delete

* This chapter generally repeats the statements of the first three paragraphs of chapter 5.

* Do not exaggerate the influence of international organisations, such as WTO or UNEP, in local tourist development.

* Trade unions' role should appear separately to the unspecified 'other stakeholders'

* Include chambers of commerce and industry among 'other stakeholders'

* Further research the potential of tourism environmental taxes.

* Do not favour mass tourism in regions with a tendency to be greatly dependent on tourism since it might result in further dependencies and imbalance in the economic structure of the region.

* Pay more attention to the possible indirect effects of tourism, such as creating new markets for local products and services.