The pilot area of Auronzo di Cadore (Belluno) - Università Ca

Climate change
and its impacts
on tourism in the Alps
The pilot area
of Auronzo di Cadore (Belluno)
Eds. Stefano Balbi,
Laura Bonzanigo & Carlo Giupponi
Centro Euro-Mediterraneo
per i Cambiamenti Climatici
Università
Ca’Foscari
Venezia

Climate change and its impacts
on tourism in the Alps
-
The pilot area of Auronzo di Cadore (Belluno)
Summary of the activities carried out in Veneto
within the ClimAlpTour project
eds.
Stefano Balbi
Laura Bonzanigo
Carlo Giupponi
The ClimAlpTour project was funded by
the European Union Territorial Cooperation
as part of the Alpine Space Programme 2007 - 2013
Euro-Mediterranean Centre for Climate Change
Via Augusto Imperatore 16
73100 Lecce
www.cmcc.it
ISBN 978-88-97666-01-1
First printing 2011
Copyright 2011 © Regione del Veneto
All rights reserved
graphics and editing
blumilk.net / Grafiche 2AM
printing
Grafiche 2AM - Venezia

work group
Balbi S. 1,2 , Bonzanigo L. 1,2 , Dissegna M. 3 , Giupponi C. 1,2 , Moretto D. 1 ,
Pasutto I. 3
1 Ca’ Foscari University, Venice
2 Euro-Mediterranean Centre for Climate Change
3 Veneto Region, Forests and Parks Unit
attribution of the work tasks
Stefano Balbi carried out the preliminary fieldwork, the organisation
and management of the two workshops, the development of climate
scenarios, the construction and application of the agent based model
(as part of his PhD thesis), and the editing of the present report / Laura
Bonzanigo organised and managed the two workshops, carried out the
social network analysis, the definition and quantification of the indicators,
the ClimAlpTour e-tool configuration, and edited the present report
/ Maurizio Dissegna coordinated the whole ClimAlpTour project
on behalf of the Veneto Region / Carlo Giupponi coordinated the scientific
aspects of the Auronzo case study, and particularly the environmental
indicators’ modelling and the ClimAlpTour e-tool creation and
configuration / Daria Moretto contributed to both the definition and
assessment of the indicators, as part of her MSc thesis in Environmental
Economics, and the organisation and running of the two workshops /
Isabella Pasutto contributed to the preliminary fieldwork and the project
management on behalf of the Veneto Region.
acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the support of Paolo Angelini from the Italian
Ministry of Environment, Land and Sea who coordinated the Italian
partners of the project and its Information and Communication features.

1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
2
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
4
4.1
4.1.1
4.1.2
4.2
4.2.1
4.2.2
5
5.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
Table of Contents
Introduction: the ClimAlpTour project
Project’s rationale
Partnership
Scientific objectives
Project’s structure
Future exploitation of results
Veneto Region’s case study: Auronzo di Cadore
Research objective
Pilot area’s description: Auronzo di Cadore
NetSyMoD methodology for the ClimALpTour project
NetSyMoD in Auronzo di Cadore
Phase 1 / Actors’ Analysis
Participants’ identification
Interviews with potential stakeholders
Outputs of the analysis
Actors’ identification for the workshop
Criteria Selection
Possible actions of tourism developments
Phase 2 / Problem Analysis and Creative System Modelling
Future from stakeholders perspective: analysis
of three scenarios of Auronzo winter tourism’ development
in 10/15 years
Scenarios
The conceptual model
Participatory strategy’s consolidation
Attribution of weights to the main factors
of a winter holiday in the Alps
SWOT analysis
Phase 3 / DSS design
Modelling the indicators
Climate Projections
Agent-Based Model (AWS1.0)
8
8
8
9
10
10
12
12
13
15
17
20
20
21
22
25
26
26
28
29
29
30
33
33
34
36
38
40
42

5.1.4
5.2
6
6.1
6.1.1
6.2
6.3
7
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Other indicators
Inserting data into the ClimAlpTour e-tool
Phase 4 / Analysis of Options
Presentation of results and weighting of criteria
Results of strategies’ assessments and discussion on outcomes
Auronzo ClimAlpTour e-tool application’s key messages
Auronzo di Cadore, consideration on the exercise in the area
Conclusions: ClimAlpTour’s key messages
Table of Figures
Project’s structure
Map of the Municipality of Auronzo di Cadore
The Three Peaks of Lavaredo (2,999 m)
Main methodological phases of the NetSyMoD approach
NetSyMoD in Auronzo di Cadore: methods & tools
Emerging social network
Quality of interactions
GIS map of areas of interest
for potential future development strategies
Cognitive map of tourism in Auronzo
Strategy SKINT after brainstorming
Strategy ALTSKI after brainstorming
Strategy BYDSNW after brainstorming
Distribution of factor’s weights
ScenDPSIR interface
Example of Google Earth based exercise
Simile interface
ClimAlpTour e-tool’s catalogue of indicators
Analysis Matrix (AM)
From AM to Evaluation Matrix (EM)
Indicators’ clustering
Weight elicitation exercise
Results of strategies’ evaluation with the ClimAlpTour e-tool
43
44
47
47
49
50
51
53
10
13
14
15
19
23
25
30
31
31
32
33
34
37
40
43
44
45
45
46
48
49

Fig. 23
Fig. 24
Tab. 1
Tab. 2
Tab. 3
Tab. 4
Tab. 5
Tab. 6
Tab. 7
Tab. 8
Tab. 9
Tab. 10
Tab. 11
Tab. 12
Tab. 13
Tab. 14
Tab. 15
Tab. 16
Tab. 17
Strategies ranking after weights’ elicitation (scenario B1)
Sustainability triangle of the strategies evaluated (scenario B1)
List of Tables
Categories considered for the workshop
List of interviews per category
A sample of questions
for the social network characterisation’s phase
Characteristics of Auronzo’s social network
Quality of interactions’ average scores (1-6)
List of actors to invite to the workshop
Criteria’s ranking
Identification of tourism development actions
Development scenarios
for Auronzo’s winter tourist offer in brief
Factors characterising winter tourism
Average weight and coefficient of variation per factor
SWOT analysis
IPCC climate change scenarios utilised in Auronzo
Indicators selected to load into the ClimAlpTour e-tool
Monthly change signals for temperature and precipitation
Impact of climate change on Auronzo
Outcome of collective weighting
50
50
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
27
29
34
36
36
38
39
41
47
48

Preface
The mountain area of the Veneto Region covers a third of its entire surface.
Here the importance of tourism, and especially winter tourism, has
grown constantly in time, making it a primary source of alpine wealth
and a driver for the regional economy. However, in the last decade, different
studies have highlighted a phase of stagnation for what concerns
tourist fluxes, partly due to a lower attractiveness of the mountain tourism
offer. This might depend on different social and economic factors,
but also on the impacts of climate change, whose occurrence makes it
difficult to secure a sufficient snow cover throughout the entire winter
season, particularly at lower elevations.
In this context, the project ClimAlpTour (Climate change and its impacts
on tourism in the Alps), funded by the European Union as part of the
Alpine Space Programme 2007 – 2013 and led by the Veneto Region,
analysed one of today’s most burning issues: the impacts of climate
change on tourism in the Alpine arc with particular focus on the economic,
social and environmental factors related to both summer and
winter activities.
The Alpine arc is characterised by both a highly heterogeneous landscape
and very dissimilar climatic conditions, which shape the region’s
overall richness in terms of ecosystems and habitats. Thus, climate
change does not affect this territory homogeneously. The partnership
of the ClimAlpTour project, in its attempt to cover this diversity, lists
representatives of the entire Alpine region including institutions from
Italy (Veneto, Piedmont, Aosta Valley, Lombardy, Autonomous Province
of Bolzano), Austria (Vienna and Tirol), France (Rhone Alpes), Germany
(Bavaria), Slovenia, and Switzerland.
Such comprehensiveness and the involvement of several local institutions
through whose collaboration partners were able to analyse issues
and peculiarities of tourism in these areas. The project revolved around
the analysis of several pilot sites, which alpine were considered by experts
to possess particularly significant and representative tourist and
environmental conditions. The initial surveyed data included climatic
data, market data, and other economic and social parameters.

One of the main objectives of ClimAlpTour was to establish and offer
to the local administrations a decision support system for differentiating
tourism supply while adapting to possible future changes in alpine
weather conditions due to climate change.
The Veneto Region selected the pilot area of Auronzo di Cadore and
Misurina because it presented great opportunities – in many instances
still not fully exploited – for further developments of tourist seasons.
This destination, which traditionally has been alpine well positioned
in terms of summer tourism, is now attempting to improve the winter
season supply, taking into consideration strong neighbouring competitors
and environmental sustainability.
The study reported herein describes the project’s experience within the
Municipality of Auronzo di Cadore. Two participatory workshops alpine
were conduced with the inclusion of a representative set of local stakeholders,
which led to the identification and evaluation of alternative
strategies for winter tourism development within a framework of adaptation
measures to climate change.
The President of the Veneto Region
Luca Zaia

1 / Introduction: the ClimAlpTour project
1.1 / Project’s rationale
ClimAlpTour “Climate change and its impact on tourism in the Alpine
Space”, is a 3-year research project, which started in September 2009, financed
by the European Commission within the Alpine Space Programme
2007-2013 - European Territorial Cooperation (Objective 3 of the Regional
Policy 2007-2013) and will end in December 2011. It aims at dealing with
the internationally recognized issue of the effects of climate change on alpine
tourism, with specific reference to winter tourism and winter sports
in some areas of the Alps (e.g. Italian Alps, French Alps, Slovene Alps, etc.)
and to all-seasons tourism in other areas (e.g. German Alps). The issue
of providing appropriate strategies to ensure a balanced development of
tourism, the preparation of appropriate adaptation policies at the national,
regional and local level and the assessment of the economic and social effects
of climate change on tourism were issues of crucial interest in several
studies.
There is a widespread consensus that Alpine tourism needs to be rethought
and both public institutions and private stakeholders have to meet
the challenge of a new idea of tourism which goes beyond the traditional
vision of winter sports. This project addresses in particular the need to provide
both a sound knowledge of the different aspects of the impact of climate
change on alpine tourism and concrete adaptation strategies to apply
in selected areas. The choice to directly and indirectly involve local actors
(e.g. municipalities) was led by the intention to bring concrete outcomes
on the alpine territory and to foster the inclusion of the consideration of
the effect of climate change on tourism in the policy agendas. On the other
hand the need to increase the awareness of these issues also at the international
level suggested to assure the involvement in the project of national
institutions participating in international conventions (e.g. Italian Ministry
of Environment, Land and Sea Protection) and of an international institutions
dealing with environmental and sustainable development issues in
several mountain regions worldwide, such as for instance United Nations
Environment Programme.
1.2 / Partnership
Il partenariato e i casi di studio hanno interessato l’intero arco alpino. La
partecipazione di tutti e sei gli stati alpini e il coinvolgimento di aree geo-
8

Partners are listed in
the language of their
own country, followed
by the country code and
their acronym within the
project
(1)
graficamente e orograficamente diverse ha permesso una visione piuttosto
esauriente del turismo montano in Europa. L’obiettivo centrale è stato
quello di consentire un’analisi delle peculiarità del turismo stagionale, invernale
e “all-season”, proponendo soluzioni e strategie differenziate di
sviluppo turistico.
The partnership and the pilot studies cover the whole Alpine arc. The participation
of partners from six alpine countries aims at assuring a wider
perspective over the issue of alpine tourism. The need to include different
geographical locations, different orographic conditions and different tourist
strategies was central in this project, thus allowing the analysis of the
peculiarities of seasonal tourism, snow tourism and all year tourism.
The partnership includes different typologies of institutions ranging from
universities and research institutes to national public administrations.
Veneto Region - Directorate for Forest and Mountain Economy (RV) is the
lead partner. Other partners, both EU and non-EU, are (1) : / European Academy
Bolzano (IT), (EURAC); / Alpenforschungsinstitut GmbH (DE), (AFI);
/ Ente Regionale per i Servizi all’Agricoltura e alle Foreste (IT), (ERSAF);
/ Haute école spécialisée de Suisse occidentale Valais, Institut Economie
& Tourisme (CH), (HES-SO); / Hochschule für Technik Rapperswil, Institut
für Landschaft und Freiraum (CH), (HSR); / HTW Chur, Institut für
Tourismus- und Freizeitforschung (CH), (HTW); / Hochschule München,
Fakultät für Tourismus (DE), (HM); / Institut Universitaire Kurt Bösch (CH),
(IUKB); / Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare
(IT), (MATTM); / Regione Autonoma Valle d’Aosta, Direzione Ambiente (IT),
(RAVA Env); / Regione Autonoma Valle d’Aosta, Direzione Turismo (IT),
(RAVA Tour); / Unione Nazionale Comuni Comunità Enti Montani (IT), (UN-
CEM); / United Nations Environment Programme in Vienna (AT), (UNEP);
/ Universität Innsbruck, Institut für strategisches Management, Marketing
und Tourismus (AT), (UIBK); / Université de Savoie, Institut de la Montagne
(FR), (InstMont); / World Wide Fund for Nature (IT), (WWF); / Znanstvenoraziskovalni
center Slovenske akademije znanosti in umetnosti, Geografski
inštitut Antona Melika (SI), (ZRC SAZU).
1.3 / Scientific objectives
The project ClimAlpTour studied 24 pilot cases around the Alpine arc,
through which it aimed at the following six scientific objectives: (1) to analyze
different possible impacts of climate change on the alpine tourist sector
and their complex interrelation; (2) to provide an overview of tourist areas
in the Alps where the effects of climate change can be stronger according
to climate scenarios; (3) to analyze adaptation and management strategies
for tourist sector which better fit in the alpine region, considering changes
in customer perception and new alpine strategies for tourism industry; (4)
to select a set of parameters and to identify common trends in order to
feed an algorithm being able to deliver possible strategies according to the
features of the examined tourist sites; (5) to build a web electronic tool
9

Fig. 1
Project’s structure
for stakeholders being able to make a first assessment of the local impact
of climate change and to provide hints for possible adaptation strategies;
(6) to apply the most important strategies developed in the framework of
the project in pilot areas along the Alps with a direct involvement of local
authorities, stakeholders and the public aiming at raising the awareness of
policy makers, business sector and all relevant actors on the topic of climate
change and its effect on the economy (mainly in the tourist sector).
1.4 / Project’s structure
The project was organised around seven work-packages, summarised below
(Figure 1). (WP1) Project preparation, Application Form, Partnership
Agreement (WP2) Project management, Management of work flow and
budget (WP3) Information and publicity, website, expert hearing, conferences
(WP4) Data survey, Collection of existing data, datasets, indicators
(WP5) Impact analyses, environmental, social, economic analysis of
climate change impact on tourist locations (WP6) Adaptation strategies,
tailored adaptation strategies for pilot areas (WP7) Awareness raising, Information,
education, communication activities for stakeholders, tourists,
general public and policy makers
1.5 / Future exploitation of results
Results of the ClimAlpTour project aim to support activities of: (1) policy
makers (local, regional, national), who can get valuable advice in new
policies design for tourist alpine areas, to improve their attractiveness in
all seasons and can implement concrete strategies for their territories (especially
local actors); (2) business community (hotels, resorts managers,
tourist operators, business clusters, advisory companies), who can get information
on expected change in alpine tourism and develop strategies to
counteractive negative impacts and consider new opportunities; (3) civil
society (citizens, workers, students), who can know future trends and be
10

eady to adapt; (4) NGOs, who can promote campaigns based on sound
scientific knowledge to inform the public about risks and opportunities of
climate change in tourist sector; (5) academic community, who can use
project outcomes to start new research in different fields; (6) international
institutions (UN, OECD, Alpine and Carpathians Convention), who wish to
share the experience with other mountain areas.
Project results are expected to be concretely implemented in some pilotareas
along the Alpine arc and general guidelines for alpine tourism will
be spread also in other regions and worldwide as a positive experience to
be possibly replicated elsewhere. The concrete implementation of innovative
tourist strategies in some alpine locations selected in this project as
pilot-areas is likely to bring positive results to the alpine economy and to
increase the tourist attractiveness of the alpine space, by making a wise use
of the consequences deriving from climate change to the different destinations
analysed within this project.
The sustainability of the results is assured thanks to the will of partners to
actively work for trying and implementing project main findings on their
own territories. In addition, the project website (www.climalptour.eu), with
the most relevant products is available for the public and all the interested
stakeholders beyond the project closure.
11

Box 1
The report in brief
2 / Veneto Region’s case study:
Auronzo di Cadore
Climate change is already significantly affecting the European Alpine Region
beyond the average temperature signals that have been registered at a
global level (IPCC 2007). Not even climate sceptics may deny the evidence
of a 50% decrease of glaciers’ volume since 1850 (Castellari 2008). Establishing
whether this change is human-induced or not remains beyond the
scope of this study, which explores what it may imply for winter tourism
in the Alps and how local development can be driven to take this new state
into account.
2.1 / Research objective
The ultimate aim of this study was to discuss about the future of Auronzo
with its people through a significant set of representatives, and more specifically
about the prospects for revitalising winter tourism’s performances
in a sustainable manner and the possible strategies to achieve that goal.
This report discusses the activities carried out by the research team in order
to achieve this objective.
Context / Municipality of Auronzo di Cadore located in the province of
Belluno, in the Veneto Region, in the North-east of Italy. It covers a vast
area (22.000 ha) which includes Misurina with its lake and the most famous
mountain of the Dolomites, namely the “Three Peaks of Lavaredo”
part of the UNESCO world heritage since 2009.
Problem / How to develop winter tourism in the next 40 years, in a
context of climate change scenarios and market demand that are not
favourable?
Objectives / To compare four adaptation strategies: a. the pursue of the
traditional downhill ski-intensive paradigm (SKINT), b. an alternative
light ski-oriented post-modern development (ALTSKI), c. the process of
diversification and enlargement of tourist offer beyond-snow (BYDSNW),
d. no change from present situation or, in other words, “business as
usual”(BAU).
Of specific interest / The focus on holistic and dynamic socio-ecosystem
analysis; / The involvement of local actors in a participatory process;
/ The treatment of spatial heterogeneity.
Methods & tools / Implementation of the NetSyMoD framework for
participatory modelling and decision support, and in particular the fol-
12

Fig. 2
Map of the Municipality
of Auronzo di Cadore
lowing combination of approaches and tools: 1. Social network analysis
(AGNA, Pajek) 2. Conceptual mapping (IHMC Cmap) 3. Geographic Information
System (Idrisi) 4. System dynamics (Simile) 5. Agent-based
modelling (AWS1.0) 6. Decision-support system (ClimAlpTour e-tool)
2.2 / Pilot area’s description: Auronzo di Cadore
The Municipality Auronzo di Cadore is located in the province of Belluno,
in the Veneto Region, in the north-east of Italy (see Figure 2). It covers a
vast area (22,000 ha), which includes Misurina with its lake and the “Three
Peaks of Lavaredo”, the most famous mountains of the Dolomites, part of
the UNESCO world heritage since 2009.
The town Auronzo di Cadore (866 m on the sea level) hosts nearly the entire
population of the municipality of approximately 3,600 inhabitants. It is
located in the Ansiei River’s valley, on the shores of the artificial Santa Caterina
Lake. The lake basin is 3 km long and is endowed with beach facilities
that periodically host motor nautical and canoe competitions. Misurina
is a small settlement 25 km from Auronzo, placed at an altitude of 1,754 m
beneath the Three Peaks of Lavaredo (Figure 3), which are accessible both
through several mountain paths and through a toll regulated carriageway.
The local economy depends on tourism, which at present is focused primarily
on the summer season, whereas the winter season remains weak,
with only 25% of yearly arrivals (Regione Veneto 2009). Indeed, hiking (200
km of signed mountain paths and 10 alpine refuges) and relax are the main
elements of attraction. The total hosting capacity is of approximately 7,300
beds of which around 1,700 in the hotel sector and the remainder in the extra-hotel
sector (B&Bs, lodgings, and so forth). 75% of the hotels’ beds are
located within 1 or 2 starred facilities. In 2008, 63,700 arrivals and 305,400
tourist nights were registered, showing a slight decrease from the previous
year. The last 10 years have witnessed the increase of arrivals but the contraction
of average stays.
Notwithstanding the presence of two small downhill ski-areas and two
13

Fig. 3
The Three Peaks of Lavaredo
(2.999 m)
cross-country ski-centres, some hotels do not even open for the winter
season. The four ski-lifts of Mount Agudo, which reach a maximum elevation
of 1,600 m, connect seven ski-pistes for a total 15 km. In the locality of
Palus San Marco, halfway between Auronzo and Misurina, there lays the
Somadida Forest, one of the province’s largest, which becomes a crosscountry
ski-centre (with nine loops of a total 52.5 km) during the winter
season. The Marmarole sled-dog centre and an ice-kart circuit are also located
in Palus. In addition, Misurina, which has an hosting capacity of approximately
500 beds is endowed with two ski-lifts of Col de Varda (from
1,756 m to 2,220 m) that connect five ski-pistes, and 17 km of cross-country
ski loops. Recently, the Community Council begun to consider options for
stimulating winter tourism. At present, there exist several projects of skiareas
development. The most ambitious is located in Marzon valley, a few
km from the main village, which would connect the valley to the ski-area
of Misurina (with an average altitude over 2,000 m). After a preliminary
consultation with the local public administration, there emerged their preference
for a study on how to develop winter tourism in the next 40 years,
in a context of climate change (warming effect on snow availability) and
market demand (ageing population) that is not favourable.
2.3 / NetSyMoD methodology for the ClimALpTour project
The chosen methodology, named NetSyMoD (Network Analysis - Creative
System Modelling - Decision Support), is a flexible but comprehensive methodological
framework that was developed during several years of research
conducted by Prof. Carlo Giupponi (www.netsymod.eu). In order to facilitate
the decision-making process, this methodological approach assembles various
tools that aim primarily at the identification of key actors within a given
decision-making context, and then at their involvement in those develop-
14

Fig. 4
Principali componenti
metodologiche
dell’approccio NetSyMoD
ment phases where models of analysis are constructed (Figure 4).
The NetSyMoD logo (middle of Figure 5) is a symbolic picture of the limited
resources available (e.g. water in the carafe), and of the various users
(glasses) with different needs (varying quantity and colour). The main
phases that constitute the NetSyMoD fabric are:
1. Actors’ analysis / to identify all the potential carriers of interest/
experts on the matter under discussion. The proposed method suggests
the organisation of brainstorming sessions with a limited sample
of stakeholders, all of whom should be grounded on the issue, who sin-
15
gle out those most apt to attend the participatory phases. A “snow-ball”
technique is often applied as it allows selecting a whole group of actors
interested in the decision-making project, whether directly or indirectly.
This phase includes a Social Network Analysis (SNA), which aims to represent
the relationship between the identified stakeholders of a given
social network. Such analysis permits to highlight roles, responsibilities,
and relationships of every actor within that network, which in turn
may lead to a second selection of stakeholders to invite to the successive
phases. This process both limits the risk for the participatory process to
be hindered by some powerful groups and ensures a high rate of representativeness
whilst at the same time maintaining the number in a
manageable size.
2. Problem Analysis / In this phase the problem (or conflict) at
hand is scrutinised from various perspectives and viewpoints. The environment
in which the problem is embedded is explored and the relevant
factors identified. The problems faced by environmental resource planners
and managers are complex and their drivers interwoven. It is necessary
to identify the most relevant aspects, by focusing on which the
major changes can be attained. The exploration of the problem includes
analyses of legal and institutional frameworks, as well as the economy
on various spatial levels and the state of environment. Future development
of main drivers and pressures are simulated using models which
assess alternative scenarios. Different stakeholders (identified in previ-

conceived during the
EU FP5 project MULINO
“MULtisectoral, INtegrated
and Operational Decision
Support System for
sustainable use of water
resource at the catchment
scale”
(2)
16
ous step, Actor analysis) hold different perceptions and beliefs about
what are the causes of the problem or how it should be tackled. Different
techniques have been developed to surface tacit knowledge and deeply
held beliefs, including conflict assessment, problem-structuring methods,
discourse analysis. The individual perspectives are further elaborated
in the next step (Creative system modelling) to facilitate collective
learning and shared (agreed) boundaries of the problem. The main
outputs of this phase are: (i) a list of most relevant drivers governing
the perception of the problem at hand; (ii) a preliminary list of possible
solutions candidate to be assessed; (iii) A set of scenarios regarding the
future development of the main drivers and cause-effect relations; (iv)
an extensive list of indicators against which the performance of the possible
solutions (alternative options) should be measured.
3. Creative system modelling / (CSM), to represent in a correct
manner the knowledge, opinions, and the preferences of the stakeholders
involved. The key actors gather in a meeting during which the
problem is conceptualised through the construction of cognitive maps
- individual and/or collective. Such exercises, elicited according to the
context, allow the representation of the various understanding of the
system under analysis. During this phase one can also proceed to the
shared construction of the cause-effect chains, through either the conceptual
model DPSIR (Determinants, Pressures, State, Impacts, and Response)
or the elaboration of future scenarios that stimulate the identification
of potential solutions/ innovative approaches to the problem
under scrutiny.
4. DSS Design / In this phase, all the information gathered during
the previous phases of the NetSyMoD methodology are assembled
through the Decision-Support-System ClimAlpTour e-tool, an updated
version of mDSS, a software (2) , capable of managing the data required
for providing informed and robust decision in the following phase. The
latest version of the ClimAlpTour e-tool adds a multicriteria spatial analysis
to the previous mDSS versions. This is necessary to manage and
communicating the information flow between various process phases,
including exchange, transformation, integration, validation and documentation
of gathered knowledge. Many of the previous analyses employ
computer-based tools such as databases (and data management
systems), visualisation components, and simulation models. Different
tools are frequently assembled into a comprehensive Decision Support
Systems, normally employing various interconnected and adapted
components, controlled by an user interface.
This phase address all activities related to the development of interoperable
and useable software components; and collection of well-documented
and easily exchangeable data sets (including spatial data and
time series). In the end, one disposes of (i) seamless data flow between
various tools and software component; (ii) user interface which guides

17
user though various stages of the NetSyMoD process; (iii) quality assurance
regarding the integration of different components, and (iv) documentation
and report facilities which explain the process and facilitate
the interpretation of results.
5. Analysis of options / The analysis of options consist of evaluating
and choosing one (or more) solution to the problem (e.g. a policy measure,
plan or project) from a set of alternatives, or producing their complete
ranking. Numerous methods and techniques have been developed
in decision theory to make explicit (transparent) value judgements and
assess the extent to which different options may contribute to achieve
the pursued goals and objectives. Decision models result from the systematic
exploration of a ‘problem’, including its existence, boundaries
and structure. They comprise alternative courses of actions; decision
goals - translated into more tangible evaluation criteria - against which
the policies are weighed; and preferences, which describe how well the
various options satisfy the objectives. Decision methods help to avoid
inconsistencies underlying judgement and choice, and make decisions
more compatible with normative axioms of rationality. Furthermore, if
combined with deliberative techniques, decision methods render policy
processes transparent and informed the perspectives or viewpoints of
all actors. This is translated into a higher acceptance of the policies. The
ClimAlpTour e-tool allows the ordering of the various options under examination
and thus it facilitates the decision-makers’ final choice. Given
that the indicators selected then truly represents the various interests
and opinions of the actors, a multicriteria analysis is carried out - both
individually and collectively.
2.4 / NetSyMoD in Auronzo di Cadore
The work carried out in Auronzo di Cadore consists primarily of two workshops,
for whose organisation other parallel activities took place. Overall,
it aimed at raising awareness of climate change and its future impacts on
the tourist sector (WP7 of ClimAlpTour project). The process was structured
around the NetSyMoD phases, as visualised in Figure 5.
Actors’ Analysis (1) aimed at the selection of workshop’s participants. Field
data was processed with two softwares for SNA, namely AGNA (analysis)
and Pajek (visualisation). Problem Analysis (2) and Creative System Modelling
(3) led to consolidated strategies, visualised in IHMC Cmap, ranked by
stakeholders and assessed in terms of a Strengths/Weaknesses/Opportunities/Threats
framework (SWOT) frame. In the DSS design (4-5) phase, the
performance of each selected strategy under future scenarios was calculated,
utilising several modelling tools for quantifying various families of
(social, economic, and environmental) indicators. For instance, an agent
based model - AuronzoWinSim 1.0 (AWS1.0) - simulated the behaviour of
tourism demand and derived socio-economic indicators, whilst system
dynamics (Simile) and statistical models (SkiSim 2.0) were applied for cal-

culating environmental indicators, such as erosion and natural snow availability.
All these indicators contributed to inform the final e-tool settings,
which enabled us to prepare an Evaluation Matrix for the analysis of the
options/strategies to submit to the participants during the second workshop.
Finally, for the analysis of options (6), participants proceeded to the
assessment of the appropriateness of the strategies. After attributing relative
importance to the criteria of judgement, individual assessments were
mediated in the ClimAlpTour e-tool environment in order to produce one
preferred strategy, emerging as a group-decision.
The first workshop, held in Auronzo on 7th June 2010, aimed at (i) engaging
local actors interested in the promotion of winter tourism in Auronzo; (ii)
building and evaluate potential future scenarios of the tourist offer in 10-
15 years from now and consequential strategies that may be adopted; (iii)
contributing to local debate on tourism.
The second workshop, held in Auronzo on 24th September 2010, aimed
to fulfil five main objectives: (i) to present the instrument utilised for the
evaluation of the strategies refined during the first workshop; (ii) to present
the analysis work that followed the first workshop, both in terms of indicators
and models; (iii) to elicit weights for the evaluation criteria; (iv) to rank
the strategies with the ClimAlpTour e-tool’s multicriteria analysis option;
(v) To facilitate discussion on results.
The following chapters describe in depth the exercise carried out in Auronzo
for the definition and evaluation of alternative mid-term strategies
for the development of Auronzo as a successful winter destination.
18

Fig. 5
NetSyMoD in Auronzo
di Cadore: methods & tools
methods & tools
Implementation of the NetSyMoD framework for
participatory modelling and decision support, and
in particular the following combination of approaches
and tools
1 Social network analysis (Pajek, AGNA)
2 Conceptual mapping (Cmap, SIMOS, SWOT)
3 Geographic Information System (Idrisi)
4 System dynamics (Simile)
5 Agent-based modelling (AWS1.0)
6 Decision-support system (ClimAlpTour e-tool)
19

Box 2
SNA in brief
3 / Phase 1 / Actors’ Analysis
Social network analysis (SNA) focuses on relationships among social
entities, and on the patterns and implications of social relationships.
It entails a representation of social environment in terms of patterns
and regularities in relationships amongst interacting units (Wasserman
& Faust, 1999; Scott, 2000).
Main outputs / There are three main outputs from the SNA phase,
which will be an input into the preparatory phase for the Creative System
Modelling (CSM) exercise. / A list of key stakeholders/experts to be
involved in the next phases of NetSyMoD. This will limit the number of
participants to a manageable size, and ensure that no important actors
are left out of the exercise. / The analysis of power will highlight potentially
problematic actors and relations, whom the facilitator will need
to actively manage during the creative system modelling workshop. / A
conflict analysis on the basis of position and roles of actors within the
network, with the purpose of identifying key alleys and/or opponents,
and actors who are opinion setters.
SNA unfolds in five phases: participants’ preliminary identification, interviews
with a sample of stakeholders, successive characterisation of their
social network, identification of initial scenarios and criteria for their evaluation,
and actors’ final selection for the workshops.
3.1 / Participants’ identification
After a couple of preliminary visits to the field, the destination was charaterised
in terms of categories and main activities, that should have a stake
in the workshop in an attempt to represent all interests.
Given the very nature of the participatory process, designed to promote
everyone’s contribution, the number of attendances was narrowed to 20
on the basis of the organisers’ previous experiences in similar environment.
In addition, the organisers sought to include also a small sample of
participants that live outside the Municipality – but who could nevertheless
contribute to the debate because of their expertise in the matter under discussion.
Table 1 below illustrates the five main categories and the 20 subcategories
identified as potentially relevant participants of the workshop.
Given the competitiveness and different developments of the two main
20

Tab. 1
Categories considered
for the workshop
tourists’ destinations (Auronzo di Cadore and Misurina) within the Municipality,
at times it was necessary to consult for each category, one representatives
from each area. For instance, both Presidents of the two skiing
schools, the two companies managing the two skiing resorts, and so forth
were contacted.
In total, 41 names of individuals were chosen as representative of the categories
mentioned below in Table 1 that should be (possibly) interviewed
and perhaps invited to the workshop.
a
b
3.2 / Interviews with potential stakeholders
After providing a standard SNA questionnaire to a few “sample-tests”, this
was refined with their inputs and proceeded to the main structured-interviewing
phase that aimed primarily at assessing the reciprocal relationship
among actors. This part allowed the identification of the key actors and the
characterisation of their role and position with respect to the decision to be
taken. It also both highlighted past, present, and/or potential conflicts that
might hinder the development of the workshop and provided information
about the various actors’ opinions that were necessary for the organisation
of the workshop. The questionnaires comprised of four main parts:
1. General information about the interviewee and the institution that he/
21
CATEGORY SUB-CATEGORY
Government /
para-government
Tourist housing /
feeding
c Tourists' entertainment
d
e
Tourists' / events'
management
Facilities both
for locals and tourists
f Tourists
1 Public administration
2 Technical office
3 “Regole” (family communal bodies)
4 Hotels/Restaurants
5 Chalets
6 Agrotourisms
7 Estate-agents
8 Construction companies
9 Skiing Schools
10 Skiing resort
11
Skiing-unrelated activities
(indoor sports, spa, ice-karts, pubs)
12 Alpine guides
13 Italian Alpine Club (CAI)
14 Tourist office
15 Tourism board
16 Business
17 Press
18
Emergency organisations
(alpine rescue, civil protection body)
19 With holiday homes
20 Without holiday homes

(3)
As it appears, tourists
were excluded from this
round of interviews,
which had the specific
focus to contextualise
tourism supply in Auronzo
di Cadore.
Tab. 2
List of interviews
per category
she represented. 2. Social Network identification, where the interviewee
listed the frequency, quality, and nature of his institution’s interactions
with the others on the list. 3. Position’s analysis, where he/she could express
his/her opinion on the potential strategies to adopt and the criteria to
value the final choice against. 4. Conflicts’ analysis over the use of natural
resources for tourism’s purposes.
With the twenty stakeholders interviewed, the majority of the categories
was covered (Table 2) (3) . Respondents were also asked to mention other
potential actors for the workshop (the so-called “snowball technique”, that
reduces the possibility of leaving key actors unaccounted for). As a result,
the initial list was enlarged to comprise about 50 names belonging to the
first five categories elicited in. It should be specified here that the majority
of the actors interviewed represented more than one category. Although
theoretically they answered the questionnaire for one institution, overlapping
might have often occurred. For instance, the Municipality owns 80%
of the shares of the ski-resort Auronzo d’Inverno and is de facto the owner
of the Tourism board Auronzo-Misurina. When attempting to characterise
the relationship between the various institutions that operate in the area,
not only the presence of exchange, but also its typology and frequency in
terms of both data and information exchange and participatory planning
were assessed (Table 3).
3.3 / Outputs of the analysis
Once collected, the field data was inserted the data in the Pajek and the
AGNA (Applied Graph and Network Analysis) softwares that supported
22
MAIN
CATEGORY
a/e
INSTITUTIONS
Public admininistrator
(opposition)
and businessman
MAIN
CATEGORY
a Technical office c
c
INSTITUTIONS
Auronzo d'Inverno
(skiing resort)
Skiing school
Auronzo-Misurina
a Villapiccola land authority c Italian Alpine Club Auronzo
b Panoramic hotel c Fitness and spa centre
b
Rinbianco
alpine agritourism
c
Tourism Consortium
Auronzo-Misurina
b Estate-agent c Skiing school Tre Cime Misurina
b Padova alpine refuge c MisurinaNeve (skiing resort)
b
Misurina alpine malga
(agritourism)
c Alpine guide d
d Tourism consultant VAS
Tourist office Dolomiti
(provincia BL)
c Alpine guide e Monti sawmill

Tab. 3
A sample of questions
for the social network
characterisation’s phase
Fig. 6
Emerging social network
-
For reference number, see
Table 4. The different shapes
represent the categories,
which individuals belong to.
Is there any
interaction
between
your institution
and…
respectively the analysis and visualisation of the results. In Figure 6 and
Figure 7 below, the various institutions are represented as nodes, whereas
the edges that unite the nodes indicate the existence of institutional
interaction. The size of the nodes represents
the overall scores that each received from the
other interviewees. The thinner is the edge between
two nodes, the worst the frequency of
the actors’ interaction. The frequency of the
SNA is graphically represented below, if simplified
(Figure 6 below). For sake of simplification,
reciprocity was assumed.
As it appears in Figure 6, the social network
that emerges from this preliminary analysis
is very compacted. Although to different extents,
the interviewees are inter-related. No
sub-groups operate independently from the
others. The network density of 0.52 indicates
that 52% of the relationships that could occur
indeed materialise. Nevertheless, there emerges
some difference in the number of actors to
which each institution is connected: from a
minimum of 2 of “Civil Protection” (n.17) to a maximum of 20 of the “tourism
board Auronzo-Misurina” (n.11) and the Municipality’s technical office
(n.2). Strong interactions occur also with and between tourist entertainment
groups (alpine guides, skiing instructors, and so forth).
Table 4 summarises the number of relations of each institution considered.
It appears that both “estate-less” and “second-home” tourists have direct
contact with 73% of the other actors.
Not only social interactions vary in frequency, but their quality fluctuates
significantly (see Figure 7). Thus, respondents were asked to indicate the
quality of interaction with the other nodes. “1” stood for “appalling”, “6” for
“optimal”. Table 5 reports the average mark that each institution received
from the others in terms of quality of relationship. Although the average
remains quite positive, with an average score of 4.5 out of 6, Villagrande
land authority seems to score the worst result, with an average of 2.1 (scarce
quality). Conversely, the Consorzio remains at the top, together with MisurinaNeve,
the company that owns the lifts in Misurina. Alpine rescue,
which in terms of frequency was one of the lowest, is however recognised
23
How many
times per
year?
How do you
judge the
quality of
this interaction?
How often do
you ask info/
data exchange
to…?
How often
do you share
info/data
with…?
How do you
judge the
quality of
this info
exchange?

Tab. 4
Characteristics of Auronzo’s
social network
(*) relative to number of all
other nodes (self excluded)
as offering a good service by those who interact with the body.
The various institutions interviewed generally sought for a wider space for
participatory long-term strategic planning.
Although at times data and information are exchanged, only few collaborate
for planning and decisional activities, mainly for the organisation
of events (CAI, tourist office, sometimes the Municipality - often through
Tourism board, few hotels).
3.4 / Actors’ identification for the workshop
In light of the results discussed above, some actors were assigned priority.
Sometimes it occurred that the same person would fit into various
categories, hence the highest number of actors in the right column than
those actually invited to the workshops. In addition, four external actors
were invited, respectively from a mountain chalet in the region, which
opens in winter, a tourism consultant, a tourism entrepreneur who has
worked with surrounding countries and areas, and the press.
24
NODO NUMERO DI RIF.
PUNTO
(DEGREE)
* DEGREE
RELATIVO
Public administration 1 10 0.45
Technical office 2 19 0.86
Regole Villapiccola 3 9 0.40
Hotels / Rest Auronzo 4 15 0.68
Chalets 5 13 0.59
Agritourism 6 15 0.68
Estate agents 7 10 0.45
Italian Alpine Club (CAI) 8 13 0.59
Skiing school Auronzo - Misurina 9 14 0.63
Alpine guides 10 15 0.68
Tourism board 11 18 0.81
Businesses 12 13 0.59
Construction companies 13 6 0.27
MisurinaNeve 14 9 0.40
Tourist office Dolomiti 15 15 0.68
Civil protection body 16 2 0.09
Alpine rescue 17 5 0.22
Auronzo d'Inverno 18 12 0.55
“Estate-less” tourist 19 16 0.73
Second-home tourist 20 16 0.73
Hotels Misurina 21 16 0.73
Skiing school Tre Cime - Misurina 22 12 0.55
Regole Villagrande 23 11 0.50

Fig. 7
Quality of interactions
-
For reference number, see
Table 4. The different shapes
represent the categories,
which individuals belong to.
Tab. 5
Quality of interactions’
average scores (1-6)
25
INSTITUTION
Due to their non strategic role, at this stage of
the analysis, alpine rescue, civil protection,
and Regole Villapiccola were excluded.
3.5 / Criteria Selection
Interviewees ranked a list of evaluation criteria
from 0 (“I do not know”) to 1 (“useless”),
to 5 (“very important”), with the additional
possibility to express no opinion. The
selection of the criteria was determined on
the basis of the initial fieldwork and checked
with the sample actors before the interviewing
phase.
The criteria themselves have been classified
according to the three sustainability pillarssocial,
economic, and environmental.
AVERAGE
SCORE
1 Public administration 4.1 13
INSTITUTION
Construction
companies
AVERAGE
SCORE
2 Technical office 4.7 14 MisurinaNeve 5.7
3 Regole Villapiccola 3.7 15 Tourist office Dolomiti 5.6
4
Hotels / Restaurants
Auronzo
This section of the questionnaire aimed at the identification of some
indicators to utilise during the following workshop in the evaluation of
the various strategies identified.
Given the contained number of respondents and criteria, the individual
marks were aggregated in a simple manner: the cumulative mark of
3.5
5.2 16 Civil protection body 4.3
5 Chalets 4.3 17 Alpine rescue 5.2
6 Agritourism 4.6 18 Auronzo d'Inverno 5.4
7 Estate-agents 3.4 19 “Estate-less” tourist 4.7
8 CAI 5.2 20 Second-home tourist 5.3
9
Skiing school
Auronzo-Misurina
10 Alpine guides 4.7 22
5.2 21 Hotels Misurina 4.1
Skiing school Tre Cime
Misurina
11 Tourism board 5.8 23 Regole Villagrande 2.1
12 Businesses 4.8
4.3

Tab. 6
List of actors to invite
to the workshop
each criterion was calculated by summing the individual answers. Then,
x the first criteria per category of sustainability were aggregated. In order
to maintain anonymity, the order of the scores in the single answers
is random (Table 7).
3.6 / Possible actions of tourism developments
Similarly, respondents were also asked to rank certain actions according
to how useful they considered them for the development of more
competitive tourism in the Auronzo.
a
b
c
d
e
Those actions in Table 8 which ranked 5, 8, 9, 10, and 11 were outlined by
some interviewees and as such, not posited to all, which may explain
the higher presence of “0” and their overall low ranking. A better coordination
between the various stakeholders emerges as an utter priority
for the development of a sound strategy for the future.
The above results on criteria selection and development actions’ identification
contributed to the drafting of three (plus one foreseeing no
changes in the status quo) initial strategic options that were then refined
with stakeholders in the next phase.
26
CATEGORY SUB-CATEGORY N. OF PARTICIPANTS
Government /
para-government
Tourist housing /
feeding
Tourists'
entertainment
Tourists'/events'
management
Facilities both for
locals and tourists
f Tourists
1 Public administration x2
2 Technical office x1
3 “Regole” (family communal bodies) x1
4 Hotels/Restaurants x4
5 Chalets x2
6 Agrotourisms x1
7 Estate-agents x1
8 Construction companies x1
9 Skiing schools x2
10 Skiing resort x1
11
Skiing-unrelated activities
(indoor sports, spa, ice-karts, pubs)
12 Alpine guides x2
13 Italian Alpine Club (CAI) x1
14 Tourist office x1
15 Tourism board x1
16 Business x2
17 Press x1
18
Emergency organisations
(alpine rescue, civil protection body)
19 With holiday homes
20 Without holiday homes
x1

Tab. 7
Criteria’s ranking
Tab. 8
Identification of tourism
development actions
27
SOCIAL TOT RANK
Job opportunities Soc1 5 5 5 5 2 4 5 2 3 4 5 4 3 5 4 2 63 1
Social integration Soc2 4 4 5 5 2 3 5 2 3 4 3 4 2 3 3 2 54 3
Services Soc3 4 3 5 5 5 2 5 2 3 5 4 5 3 4 3 3 61 2
ECONOMIC TOT
Human fluxes in arrival Eco1 4 4 5 4 4 4 5 4 4 3 2 5 3 4 4 3 62 3
Apportionment
of the inv’s / benefits btw
whole area
Investment
costs / funding
Eco2 4 4 5 5 3 2 5 4 2 4 4 5 4 4 4 5 64 1
Eco3 5 3 4 2 5 5 3 4 2 3 4 2 5 4 5 3 59 4
Extra winter income Eco4 5 3 5 4 5 4 5 4 4 3 2 3 5 3 5 3 63 2
ENVIRONMENTAL TOT
Pollution Env1 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 5 2 5 5 3 5 5 3 5 72 1
Deforestation
--> landslides
Env2 4 3 5 3 3 3 5 5 2 5 5 3 5 2 3 2 58 3
Landscape Env3 4 3 3 4 2 3 5 4 2 3 4 5 5 4 3 5 59 2
SCENARIOS SCORE TOT RANK FEASIBILITY
To expand skiing area 2 3 5 4 3 4 4 5 5 4 3 5 5 4 4 4 64 2
To augment off-piste facilities
(snow shoes and back-country
itineraries, snowparks)
2 0 5 4 3 5 4 3 5 4 3 5 5 4 3 4 59 3
To open mountain chalets in winter times 3 4 0 4 5 5 4 4 2 5 4 2 5 4 4 4 59 3
To create more spa facilities 0 5 0 5 3 5 4 5 4 5 5 5 4 1 4 2 57 6
To solve fragmentation
tourist offices and operators
To invest in attractions for young tourists
(e.g. bars, climbing hall,..)
To promote experience exchange and
better collaboration with other resorts
5 4 5 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 1 5 1 4 66 1
0 0 5 3 0 4 4 5 4 4 3 5 4 5 1 3 50 7
5 5 4 4 5 4 0 2 1 5 4 5 3 5 3 3 58 5
To create natural parks (e.g. UNESCO site) 5 3 2 3 0 0 0 4 5 4 3 4 5 4 3 4 49 10
To develop the primary sector 5 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 14 11
To improve receiving capacities of the area
(and adapt them to new type of tourism)
To increase availability
of skiing unrelated activities
(e.g. ice-karts, sleigh pistes,…)
5 0 3 5 4 5 0 4 4 3 0 0 4 4 3 4 48 9
0 0 5 5 0 5 4 5 2 2 3 5 4 0 3 4 47 8
low
confidence
high
confidence
low
confidence
mid
confidence
mid
confidence

Box 3
Participatory development
of shared scenarios in brief
4 / Phase 2 / Problem Analysis
and Creative ve System Modelling
The problems faced by planners and managers are complex and their
drivers interwoven. It is necessary to identify the most relevant aspects,
by focusing on which the major changes can be attained. Different stakeholders
hold different perceptions and beliefs about what are the causes
of the problem or how it should be tackled. Different techniques
have been developed to surface tacit knowledge and deeply held beliefs,
including conflict assessment, problem structuring methods, and
discourse analysis.
Main outputs / (1) A list of most relevant drivers governing the perception
of the problem at hand (2) A preliminary list of possible solutions
candidate to be assessed (3) A set of scenarios regarding the future development
of the main drivers and cause-effect relations (4) An extensive
list of indicators against which the performance of the (5) The shared
mental maps elicited at the CSM workshop will be the underlying modelling
framework for tailoring the ClimAlpTour e-tool to the specific
needs (6) The qualitative and/or quantitative indicators to be used in the
choice phase with the DSS ClimAlpTour e-tool (7) A quantitative assessment
of these indicators, in addition to their identification
In this phase the problem of winter tourism development in Auronzo di
Cadore was scrutinised from various perspectives and viewpoints. The
key actors identified in the first phase contributed to the development of a
shared vision of the human-environmental system. The exploration of the
problem includes analyses of legal and institutional frameworks, as well as
the economy on various spatial levels and the state of environment. Future
development of main drivers and pressures are simulated using models
under alternative scenarios.
Moreover, since a shared model of reality is needed for the correct evaluation
of options, through the application of Creative System Modelling (CSM)
techniques, creative thinking and cognitive mapping, it was possible to facilitate
the process of participatory modelling and elicitation of knowledge
and preferences from actors, thus building a common understanding of
the problem. Moreover, CSM also provides a scientifically-sound basis for
the application of effective decision support systems (DSS), such as the
ClimAlpTour e-tool.
28

Tab. 9
Development scenarios
for Auronzo’s winter tourist
offer in brief
4.1 / Future from stakeholders perspective: analysis of three scenarios
of Auronzo winter tourism’ development in 10/15 years
4.1.1 / Scenarios
Scenarios are hypothetical sequences of events constructed with the purpose
of focusing attention over causal processes and decision points (Eden,
1998). Hence a scenario is a representation of a possible future with an explicit
effort to understand the forces that shape it.
The underlying idea that inspired this process was the identification of the
most robust among three active adaptation strategies that are presented, in
general terms, in Burki et al. (2007): (1) pursue of the traditional downhill
ski-intensive paradigm; (2) alternative light ski-oriented post-modern development;
(3) process of diversification and enlargement of tourist offer
beyond-snow.
On these bases and according to interviewees’ suggestions (Table 8), four
infrastructure-oriented and spatially-explicit alternative strategies for the
specific Auronzo context (SKINT, ALTSKI, BYDSNW, and BAU, see Table 9)
were extrapolated for winter development. The additional one suggests a
passive “business as usual” scenario.
These take into account various orientations towards tourism and the perception
of climate change from the local stakeholders’ viewpoint.
Each strategy consists of a defined set of non snow-related facilities (i.e.
accommodations, restaurants, retailers and others) and snow-related facilities
(i.e. downhill skiing areas, cross-country skiing areas, off-piste skiing
areas and snowpark) located in the areas of interests. In the map generated
with a geographical information system (GIS), Figure 8, there appear the
heterogeneous areas of interest in which the strategies and the simulation
take place.
In the first local workshop, the three alternative strategies were presented
and further tailored to the participants’ suggestions; in the second, they
were evaluated according and results discussed. Targeting the discussion
29
CURRENT (BAU)
/ Everything remains the same, no new investments
SKI-INTENSIVE (SKINT)
/ High-tech downhill skiing centre: construction of new lifts
/ Few hotels, restaurants, etc to frame the skiing offer
ALTERNATIVE-SKIING (ALTSKI)
/ New typology of skiing resort: free-ride skiing, nordic skiing, snow shoes
/ Few hotels, restaurants, etc to frame the skiing offer
BEYOND SNOW (BYDSNW)
/ Abandonment of investments in skiing (and artificial snow)
/ Auronzo becomes a specialised resort for wellness and for family tourism:
more non-snow related infrastructure (spas, sport centre, shopping, gastronomy, etc.)

Fig. 8
GIS map of areas of interest
for potential future
development strategies
on three distinct strategies and organising separate analyses might indeed
be unrealistic, as in practice the a preferred strategy would quite likely contain
elements of all three, but in this characterising phase it was considered
a necessary approach, as only thus one may acquire specific information
of each of the three alternatives and stimulate discussion about alternative
futures. The workshop was divided into two parts, respectively a brainstorming
one (diverging phase) over the proposed adaptation strategies and a
consolidation one (converging phase).
4.1.2 / The conceptual model
Within the three future development scenarios, organisers delineated alternative
development “packages” for the area, in terms of use of natural,
social, and economic resources. During the workshop, after an initial overview
of the current situation in Auronzo (Figure 9), these strategies were
refined through the use of cognitive maps, where stakeholders highlighted
fundamental and redundant aspects of each of the scenarios, by answering
to the following questions:
If we opted for a strategy like the proposed one: / What would be missing?
/ What would be redundant? / What should be reminded?
The development of visual representation of the elements characterising
the strategies was carried out by means of a specific piece of software (IHCM
Cmap) use also at the workshop for real time annotation and sharing of the
views of local actor.
Figures 10, 11, and 12 illustrate the results of this initial brainstorming phase.
The SKINT strategy (Figure 10) develops new ski-areas both in the lower
and in the upper part of the municipality. It includes a large project in Val
Marzon area, a 40 millions € cableway connecting the lower part of the
municipality to the “Tre Cime di Lavaredo”. Further ski-lifts and pistes are
located around Misurina and in Val d’Onge creating a fully connected skiarea
devoted to the tour of the Cadini peaks. At the same time the Monte
30

Fig. 9
Cognitive map
of tourism in Auronzo
Agudo area is doubled in size extending into Val da Rin. Two snowparks
become available: one in Auronzo and one in Misurina. The use of artificial
snow is significantly increased covering 50% of the ski-pistes and even
some cross-country tracks. Other limited non-snow facilities are created,
mainly restaurants and bars and two new kindergartens.
With the ALTSKI strategy (Figure 11) the same Val Marzon installation is
used to create the free-ride skiing/back-country tour of Cadini supported
by few ski-lifts but no artificial snow and pistes preparation, apart from
what already exists. This installation is thought to substitute the use of the
carriageway to the Tre Cime in summer, moving towards a more sustainable
mobility.
One bigger snowpark becomes available in Misurina. Cross-country skitracks
are further extended including itineraries dedicated to the snow-shoes
practitioners. Other limited non-snow facilities are created, mainly restaurants,
bars, rentals and a new kindergarten. Comprehensively investments
are inferior to the previous strategy and more flexible with regard to snow
conditions. According to the BYDSNW strategy, Figure 12, artificial snow is
abolished and the qualification of the receptive facilities is enhanced moving
the supply structure to higher standards and creating several new facilities
for wellness, kids and other indoor sports (i.e. a big pool-spa centre
in Auronzo).
Further shops are created to stimulate holidays’ shopping. All the investments
concern the non-snow-related facilities in order to move out from a snowdependent
tourism system.
31

Fig. 10
Strategy SKINT
after brainstorming
32
Fig. 11
Strategy ALTSKI
after brainstorming

Fig. 12
Strategy BYDSNW
after brainstorming
4.2 / Participatory strategy’s consolidation
4.2.1 / Attribution of weights
to the main factors of a winter holiday in the Alps
Building on ClimAlpTour’s WP6, participants ranked a list of eleven items
that tourists had previously singled out as the most influential factors for
their choice of an alpine destination in winter (Table 10). This allowed us to
promote coherence between the demand and supply sides.
Stakeholders, through the application of the methodology developed by
Simos (Simos, 1990), evaluated the above factors and attribute different
weights to them according to their relevance for the objective that is how
to make an Alpine destination attractive. One of the primary strengths this
methodology is that it greatly reduces possibility of individual biases of the
final outcomes. In Figure 13 below, there appear the results of the factors’
weighting.
The central box includes the central 50% for the average weights’ distribution
(between the second and the third quartile). The whiskers above and
below the box delineate the total range, from minimum to maximum.
Table 11 below illustrates the coefficients (weights and variability) related to
the main factors, which characterise the Alpine winter offer. It is interesting
to notice how factor A (snow-related activities) was given the highest average
weight whilst factor J (artificial snow-making) one of the lowest. It is
33

Tab. 10
Factors characterising
winter tourism
Fig. 13
Distribution
of factor’s weights
34
a Activities on the snow
b Outdoor activities not directly dependent on snow availability
c Outdoor activities in resorts and lower areas
d Culture
e Entertainment (shows, pubs, etc.)
f Gastronomy
g Wellness (sauna, Turkish baths, massages)
h
i
Training / schools (ski, other e.g. cooking courses, yoga, etc.)
Hosting facilities (hotels/hospitality)
j Adaptation (artificial snow-making)
k Car utilisation in the resort
also remarkable that in the WP6 results, factor
A ranked only 5th. Moreover, whereas during
the workshop, participants repetitively mentioned
mobility as one of the greatest problem,
in the analysis factor K (use of car in the resort)
ranks one of the lowest.
The outcome this exercise was then taken into
account when choosing the indicators for strategies’
evaluation.
4.2.2 / SWOT analysis
The SWOT analysis is a strategic planning
method used to evaluate the Strengths, Weaknesses,
Opportunities, and Threats of a given
project. It involves both specifying the objective
of the project and identifying the internal
and external factors that are favourable and
unfavourable to achieve that objective. During
the workshop, each participant filled in one SWOT-form for each of the
strategies, except BAU (Table 12).
The following peculiarities emerged from the SWOT analysis:
/ An objective agreement on the idea of a re-organisation of the tourist
sector with a better optimisation of the uniqueness of the Municipality’s

Tab. 11
Average weight and
coefficient of variation
per factor
Tab. 12
SWOT analysis
INTERNAL
FACTORS
Strengths and
weaknesses
related to internal
capacities and
willingness
EXTERNAL
FACTORS
Opportunities and
threats related
to the external
context to the
Municipality
territory; / A general awareness on the necessity
to differentiate the tourist offer: for instance,
alpine-skiing in Misurina and other activities
in Auronzo and other lower-lying areas; / The
inefficiency of public transport and the need of
connecting the various skiing resorts in the area
as one of the first obstacles to overcome; / The
high competitiveness with other resorts which
may hinder the success of SKINT, as several of
them are already more developed in that direction;
/ The uniqueness of territory itself may
become an obstacle for local development,
as a large share of the Municipality’s territory
falls within protected areas of the Dolomites.
/ An overall concord on the need to differentiate
the category “tourist” to respond more
adequately to their needs and the possibility of
their discordance: foreigners for spring breaks, families for weekends, offpiste
skiers, cross-country skiers, tourist with second-homes, non-sporty
mountain lovers, and so forth.
Overall, during this participatory phase, a wide variety of opinions was collected,
not only on the topic of winter tourism management but also about
possible evolution patterns of the area. These results seem well-suited to
promote further discussion between participants on the issue.
35
FACTOR NAME AVERAGE WEIGHT CV%
A Activities on the snow 0.109 32.197
B
Outdoor activities
not directly dependent on snow availability
0.090 41.846
C Outdoor activities in resorts and lower areas 0.078 58.632
D Culture 0.074 35.363
E Entertainment (shows, pubs, etc.) 0.089 37.671
F Gastronomy 0.104 23.436
G Wellness (sauna, Turkish baths, massages) 0.104 18.078
H
Training / schools
(ski, other e.g. cooking courses, yoga, etc.)
0.095 40.363
I Hosting facilities (hotels/hospitality) 0.105 26.997
J Adaptation (artificial snow-making) 0.076 46.819
K Car utilisation in the resort 0.077 51.252
- +
Strengths Weaknesses
Opportunities Threats
Total 1.000

Box 4
DSS design in brief
5 / Phase 3 / DSS design
Many of the previous analyses employ computer-based tools such as
databases (and data management systems), visualisation components,
and simulation models. Different tools are frequently assembled into a
comprehensive Decision Support System, normally employing various
interconnected and adapted components, controlled by an user interface.
This phase addresses all activities related to the development of
interoperable and useable software components, together with the collection
of well documented and easily exchangeable data sets (including
spatial data and time series).
Main outputs / Seamless data flow between various tools and software
component / User interface which guides user though various stages of
the NetSyMoD process / Quality assurance regarding the integration of
different components / Documentation and report facilities which explain
the process and facilitate the interpretation of results
In this phase, both the knowledge developed so far (previous phases of
the NetSyMoD methodology) and separate research on climate change
and social, economic, and environmental scenarios in Cadore were utilised
for designing the toolbox of procedures and software tools capable of
managing the data required for providing informed and robust decision in
the following phase. This is necessary to both manage and communicate
the information flow between various process phases, including exchange,
transformation, integration, validation and documentation of gathered
knowledge.
Hence, all information gathered was assembled in the ClimAlpTour e-tool.
In practice, the performance of each selected strategy was modelled under
future scenarios, utilising several modelling tools for quantifying various
families of - social, economic, and environmental - indicators. All these indicators
contributed to inform the final ClimAlpTour e-tool setting, which
enabled us to prepare first an Analysis Matrix (AM) and then an Evaluation
Matrix (EM) for the analysis of the options/strategies to submit to the participants
during the second workshop.
The ClimAlpTour e-tool allows end-users - local administrations, NGOs,
stakeholders in general - to explore alternative adaptation strategies with
36

Fig. 14
ScenDPSIR interface
reference to future climate change scenarios for each case study area. Such
exploration allows identifying strengths and weaknesses of alternative
strategies according to their performances regarding a set of evaluation criteria
developed upon the indicators analysed during project activities: e.g.
potential effects of the strategies on local employment, on environmental
compartments, etc.
Required inputs are: 1. downscaled climate change scenarios; 2. a list of
possible adaptation strategies/policies/actions; 3. estimated effects strategies
on the set of the selected evaluation criteria; 4. preferences and priorities
of the end users (e.g. weights assigned to the different criteria).
The structure of the ClimAlpTour e-tool input data is: 1. the core of the data
to be analysed is an AM with alternative adaptation strategy options on the
columns and evaluation criteria on the rows; 2. the cells of the matrix are
filled with the performance of each strategy (column) on every criterion
(rows) and may derive from surveys, modelling, contributions from local
experts, etc. Elaboration procedures, provided to consider scientific evidences,
local knowledge, interests, and preferences, are based on multicriteria
analysis methods developed upon previously existing algorithms and configured
according to the specific need of the project.
Outputs are: 1. strengths and weaknesses of each strategy option; 2. ranking
of the options according to the preferences expressed by the end-users involved.
The main features of the ClimAlpTour e-tool include the formalisation of
local problems and socio-economic and environmental systems according
to the DPSIR conceptual framework further developed to become a concep-
37

CLIMATE
SCENARIO
Tab. 13
CURRENT
A1B
B1
IPCC climate change
scenarios utilised in Auronzo
tual model of the climate change impacts and for the analysis of adaptation
measures (ScenDPSIR), as depicted in Figure 14, which simulates the
ClimAlpTour e-tool interface.
The DPSIR approach is adopted by the software interface in order to formalize
the problems by means of indicators. These are used to describe
the criteria upon which the selection of options is performed. Stakeholders
weight them according to their preferences in order to eventually identify
the preferred adaptation strategy and explore trade-offs between alternative
options based upon their strengths and weaknesses. In preparation of
the second workshop the most relevant indicators
were short-listed and quantified.
38
DESCRIPTION
There are no changes from the recent
past despite CO2 emissions
Rapid globalisation and economic
growth with total exploitation of all
Energy resources available (higher variation
of climate than B1)
More efficient technologies and socioeconomic
development oriented towards
services
5.1 / Modelling the indicators
A list of social, economic, and environmental
indicators emerged from both those identified
by stakeholders during the first workshop and
our judgements developed throughout former
project activities and literary reviews. From
those, 15 indicators were picked that were more
suitable to the evaluation of the strategies (see
Table 14). These criteria were selected on the
basis of both the preferences emerged during the first workshop and experts’
judgements. For instance, uniqueness and beauty of the territory was
often mentioned, hence our stress on those indicators with (either direct
or indirect) environmental relevance, such as air quality, erosion, visibility,
protected areas affected, garbage disposals, and so forth. In addition, the
poor state of public transport remained on the forefront during the whole
workshop: hence, during the calculation of air quality, for instance, experts
forecasted an improvement of the service by 30%. Lastly, amongst the various
inputs in AWS1.0, competitiveness of the neighbouring resorts, another
primary concern of our stakeholders, was considered.
Then, quantitative data needed for the assessment of the strategies were
collected, according to the previously defined criteria. In order to gather
data required for the evaluation of the strategies, several tools were utilised.
Firstly, the various types of available and relevant information concerning
the case study, including economic, demographic and biophysical timeseries,
were obtained by secondary sources. Secondly, other social and economic
indicators, such as employment opportunities, energy consumption
for snow-making, number of tourists, tourists’ peaks, and so forth, were
calculated by running AWS1.0. Here, the information available on the tourists’
ethnography aided the creation of the tourist profiles necessary for
the ASW1.0 simulation of tourist fluxes, in their turn needed to quantify
those indicators mentioned above. This information is for obvious reasons
incomplete, because one cannot adequately forecast the decision-making

Tab. 14
Indicators selected to load
into the ClimAlpTour e-tool
39
Category Name Description
1 ECON
2
3
4
5
ECON
/ ENV
ECON
/ SOC
ECON
/ SOC
/ ENV
ECON
/ ENV
Investment
costs
Energy
consumption
Tourists' expenditures
Total garbage
disposal
Water consumption
for
snow-making
6 ENV Air quality
7 ECON SCI affected
8 ECON Erosion
9
10
ECON
/ SOC
/ ENV
ECON
/ ENV
11 ECON
12
13
ECON
/ SOC
/ ENV
ECON
/ ENV
14 ECON
15
SOC
/ ENV
Arrivals
Tourists' peaks
Synergies with
summer
tourism
Long-term
sustainability
Innovativeness
Labour tourist
sector
Visibility
of skiing areas
Sum of costs per
sector per strategy
Average cost of
energy of a season
Average daily
expenditures per
visitor
Garbage disposal
per winter season
per number
of tourist nights
Water use
for artificial snow
CO2 captured
by forest - (C02transport
+ CO2hotels +
CO2ski-lifts)
Site of Community
Importance altered by
interventions
Delta tons of average
soil loss after each
strategy's
implementation
N. of arrivals,
Existing data
on guest structure
Standard deviation
of total daily visitors
over 40 seasons
Sum of contribution
of each strategy
to summer tourism
The strategy seems
appropriate from a
long-term-sustainability
perspective
Innovativeness of
strategy in terms of
green-initiatives, new
activities proposed,
type of tourism, niche
offer etc
Approximated with
variable cost of running
tourist facilities
Allows to associate
to each cell of the
urban landscape
the percentage of a
given ski area that is
visible from there, as
a function of terrain
topography and land
cover
Unit of
meas.
DPSIR Calculated with:
€ D AWS1.0
€ P AWS1.0
€/day I AWS1.0
ton I
AWS1.0 (tourist
nights), lit review
m3/y I AWS1.0
ton/y I
AWS1.0 for n. of
tourists and their
displacement, IDRISI
for ha deforested, lit.
review for average
CO2 emissions
ha S GIS/maps Region
ton I
RUSLE (Simile), GIS
(Idrisi), Google Earth
N° I AWS1.0
CV% P AWS1.0
0-4 D Experts' judgement
0-4 D Experts' judgement
0-4 D Experts' judgement
€ I AWS1.0
ha I GIS

Fig. 15
Example of Google Earth
based exercise
-
Polygons / areas
of intervention
Red polygons
/ current Auronzo
Light blue / SKINT
Pink / ALTSKI
Dark blue / BYDSNW
process of winter tourists, particularly with regards to the potential ones.
This is a knowledge gap that was partially covered with the simulation of
representative behaviours in winter tourism.
Thirdly, other sub-models (Simile and SkiSkim 2.0) were used for snow
days (SkiSim 2.0) and erosion (Simile). For other indicators, such as garbage
disposal, several sub-indicators were calculated separately, such as the
number of tourists and their average stay, the number of residents, and
the average yearly garbage disposal per person. In addition, GIS files were
created - Figure 15 - to proceed with the comparison of the environmental
impact of the strategies, particularly in terms of Site of Community Importance
(SCI) affected, erosion, and visibility.
Fourthly, some indicators were elicited by experts’ judgement through a Likert
scale (0-4), amongst others sustainability of the strategy and synergies
with summer tourism. Where relevant, indicators were matched against
the three different climate scenarios adopted (Table 13).
5.1.2 / Climate Projections
Data about projected weather conditions, concerning temperature, precipitation,
and snow cover were produced with the SkiSim 2.0 model (Steiger
2010), consisting of two main components: the snow model and the snowmaking
module. For the project, natural snow accumulation and melt are
simulated (first module). SkiSim 2.0 is able to create the requested daily
data for each altitudinal band (100 m) of the ski-area in form of time series
of 40 years. This becomes an input to AWS1.0, which reads the time series
40

Tab. 15
Monthly change signals
for temperature
and precipitation
at the initialization phase, according to the selected climate scenario. Then,
it passes the information to the simulated areas’ weather stations (i.e. reference
points), according to their elevation.
Climatic parameters were calculated on the basis of an absolute change
from the reference period (1961-1990) to the 20 year mean of two future periods
(2011-2030 and 2031-2050). In Table 15 we present the absolute changes
for temperature and the relative changes for precipitation deriving from
a downscaled regional circulation model, in the two scenarios of clima-
te change. The variations in temperature exhibit a coherent and univocal
message of temperature increase of more than one degree in both scenarios.
However the B1 shows more constant changes while the A1B is more
progressive, and in the end more severe, considering the two reference
periods. Conversely the variability of the precipitations is very different in
the two scenarios: while the A1B assumes a mean relative increase of 6 to
8% in both the periods of reference, the B1 assumes a drier fist period (CLI-
SP, 2009).
41
REMO UBA M
2006 A1B
ABS. ΔT
MEAN (ºC)
2011 - 2030 2031 - 2050
% ΔP
MEAN (MM)
ABS. ΔT
MEAN (ºC)
% ΔP
MEAN (MM)
Dec 0.56 -0.17 1.53 30.67
Jan 0.57 -1.15 1.45 -8.47
Feb 1.86 2.87 2.17 12.94
Mar -0.17 16.88 1.18 4.99
Apr -0.07 10.56 1.55 -0.4
Seasonal over the
20 year period
REMO UBA M
2006 B1
0.5ºC 5.80% 1.6ºC 7.90%
ABS. ΔT
MEAN (ºC)
2011 - 2030 2031 - 2050
% ΔP
MEAN (MM)
ABS. ΔT
MEAN (ºC)
% ΔP
MEAN (MM)
Dec 1.81 -31.56 1.45 -14.26
Jan 1.98 -21.74 2 20.63
Feb 1.83 21.24 2.08 0.07
Mar -0.45 7.58 0.11 9.5
Apr 0.78 -5.94 0.4 25.81
Seasonal over the
20 year period
1.2ºC -6% 1.2ºC 8.30%

5.1.3 / Agent-Based Model (AWS1.0 )
AWS1.0 is an agent-based model (ABM) developed ad hoc within the project
ClimAlpTour. An ABM model derives from the assumption that the aggregated
behaviour, which emerges from simultaneous operations and interactions
between several actors in the community, defines the functionality
of the system that one intends to model. AWS1.0 mapped the tourist
system in Auronzo, its heterogeneous elements, the behavioural rules and
their change in space and time according to climate scenarios, expectations,
trends, competition with other resorts, and so forth. It is a tool to
explore a system, without however pretending that it may give an exact
prediction of its future characteristics.
The model is an original concept in the sense that, to our knowledge, this
is the very first application of agent-based modelling to investigate adaptation
to climate change of winter tourism at a local level, integrating socio-economic
and environmental components, and adopting a complexity
science approach. The model, which has been firstly developed in Unified
Modelling Language (UML) (Bock et al 1999), is fully tailored on the case
study, the municipality of Auronzo di Cadore, located in the Dolomites.
However, it has the potential to be generalized and eventually become an
ontology of a generic winter tourism destination, especially for what concerns
its conceptual structure in classes.
The spatial representation is particularly relevant given the characteristics
of the system to be modelled that shows an extended geographical area
with an evident bipolarity emerging from the presence of two main villages,
Auronzo and Misurina, which stand at very different climatic and
environmental conditions, thus possess different elements of tourism attraction.
One further distinctive element that heavily influenced the model’s
design, and justifies per se the agent-based approach, was our interest
in representing the supply-demand structure of the local winter tourism
system capturing the multifaceted behaviour of its active components. In
particular for the Auronzo context, experts opted for simulating the decision-making
process of different typologies of winter tourists, including
those that are currently preferring other destinations or that are emerging
since recently as a post-modern social phenomenon of tourism fruition
(i.e. free-style and free-ride).
Tourists’ composition and their attitude towards the competing destinations
contribute to the societal dimension of the model, which together
with the climatic projections and the development strategies to be tested,
allow for the constitution of multiple integrated scenarios. These are to be
considered as a set of composed glimpses into reasonable futures. Such
formulation is also well suited for our case’s participatory context, in which
public and private actors, who constitute the supply side of the market,
could be involved. Yet, for obvious reasons, tourists’ participation could
42

For a more detailed
description of the model,
please refer to
Balbi et al. (2011)
Fig. 16
Simile interface
(4)
not be assured, especially with regard to the prospective ones. In the end,
results were produced for the indicators described in Table 14, for the four
strategies (4) .
5.1.4 / Other indicators
Not all the indicators were calculated by means of the AWS1.0 simulations,
as reported in Table 14. One of the new features introduced in the ClimAlp-
Tour e-tool was tested, namely that for live link with a system dynamic
simulation environment called Simile (by Simulistics). A rather simple ero-
sion model was thus developed for comparing soil losses which could derive
from developments, with the situation “ex ante”, based on the Revised
Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE). Figure 16 depicts the Simile interface
with a conceptual model in terms of stock & flow on the left and the simulated
losses over time in the graph on the right (with or without deforestation).
Having adapted the parameters of the model to represent the surface
interested by developments (average slope, vegetation cover, length of the
slopes, and soil erodibility), four runs were performed. This fed directly
the analysis matrix of the ClimAlpTour e-tool with the pertinent values of
estimated average soil losses.
43

Fig. 17
ClimAlpTour e-tool’s
catalogue of indicators
5.2 / Inserting data into the ClimAlpTour e-tool
The results of indicators’ calculations were then inserted them in the ClimAlpTour
e-tool (see Figure 17). When the ClimAlpTour e-tool saves a new
catalogue, it creates a .xls file which can be used for successive uses of the
tool. This adds value to our exercise as it makes it possible to replicate it in
similar contexts.
The previous exercises allowed us to fill in three Analysis Matrixes (AM),
one per climate scenario, where for each indicator calculated values per
strategy and per climate change scenario were provided (see Figure 18).
From the AMs, each indicator is normalised in Evaluation Matrixes (EM),
in order to produce comparative values, which the stakeholders weighed in
the next phases (Figure 19).
Due to this preparation, during the second workshop end-users could be
provided with a DSS, the ClimAlpTour e-tool, in which information and
knowledge acquired by the project are made efficiently manageable for
group decision-making, informing local communities about possible adaptation
strategies and their ranking according to the set of criteria previously
identified by the project and according to the preferences expressed by the
stakeholders and the experts involved.
44

Fig. 18
Analysis Matrix (AM)
fig. 19
From AM to Evaluation
Matrix (EM)
In order to both facilitate their weighting by the stakeholders and ensure
coordination with WP6’ criteria (see Figure 1), the 15 indicators were
grouped under seven criteria: environmental impact, economic costs with
environmental relevance, impact on local economy, impact on the tourist
sector, strategy feasibility, innovativeness, and long-term sustainability
(see Figure 20). In other words, the figure represents the interface between
this work and other activities on strategies’ analysis.
45

Fig. 20
Indicators’ clustering
46

Box 5
Evaluation of the
strategies in brief
Tab. 16
Impact of climate
change on Auronzo
6 / Phase 4 / Analysis of Options
Decision methods help to avoid inconsistencies underlying judgement
and choice, and make decisions more compatible with normative axioms
of rationality. Furthermore, if combined with deliberative techniques,
decision methods render policy processes transparent and informed
the perspectives or viewpoints of all actors. This is translated
into a higher acceptance of the policies.
Main outputs / Investing on the dimensions of winter tourism that are
detached from the activities based on snow seems like the safest way to
proceed for a destination with the characteristics of Auronzo di Cadore.
/ A BYDSNW strategy should however be linked to a project for the enhancement
of the public transportation as the in-destination transfer
needs of tourists may significantly increase. / An ALTSKI strategy could
be the way to mediate between the lifts industry, which has already
invested a lot in the past and the possible futures that the local winter
tourism will have to face. / Apart from the snow-related risks and costs,
a SKINT strategy could undermine the bulk of Auronzo’s traditional
tourism rather than building on it, turning such a choice into a strategic
error in the medium to long term. Lift operators should rather take into
account the optimization of the existing downhill skiing infrastructure
and the related services.
The analysis of options consists in evaluating and choosing one (or more)
solution to the problem (e.g. a policy measure, plan or project) from a set
of mutually exclusive alternatives, or producing their complete ranking.
In order to accomplish this phase, stakeholders
need to weigh the seven and, once results are
inserted into the ClimAlpTour e-tool, discus-
- +1.58°C +1.20°C
sion on the outputs ensues.
2031 - 2050 CURRENT A1B B1
Variation of average
winter temperature
Variation of average
winter precipitation
Snow days
per season
(max 126)
47
- +7.9% +8.3%
Auronzo 55 20 32
Misurina 121 111 113
6.1 / Presentation of results and weighting
of criteria
In order to explain the stakeholders that the
various indicators were calculated in three different
climate change scenarios, first the impact
that the three situations might have on the

Fig. 21
Weight elicitation exercise
Tab. 17
Outcome of collective
weighting
snow availability in Auronzo was described, as a driving factors for the development
of the resort’s winter offer (Table 16). The reader may notice the
difference in changes of snow days between Misurina and Auronzo, due
primarily to the higher altitude of the former.
The workshop then turned to individual weight
elicitation exercise (Figure 21).
48
CRITERIA
Each stakeholder has 100 points to allocate
among the criteria; the highest score goes to the
most important criteria, and the total must add
up to 100. Although this methodology is more
vulnerable to individual biases than the previously
utilised SIMOS, in terms of time needed
to calculate the result and insert them into the
ClimAlpTour e-tool, this one is much faster,
hence suitable to the half-day workshop.
As it appears from Table 17, the macro-criteria,
which describe impacts on local economy,
scored the highest marks (score 26.31), whereas
environmental criteria such as energy consumption
and total garbage disposal did not
seem to preoccupy stakeholders to any significant
extent (score 8.25).
CRITERIA’S
SCORES
Environmental impact 19.06
Economic costs with
environmental relevance
8.25
Impact on local economy 26.31
Impact on tourist sector 16.19
Strategy feasibility 9.19
INDICATORS
INDICATORS’
WEIGHTS (%)
Erosion 8.17
Air quality 8.17
Visibility 8.17
Water consumption
for snow-making
8.17
Total garbage disposal 3.54
Energy consumption 3.54
Tourists' expenditures 11.28
Labour tourist sector 11.28
Erosion 6.94
Tourists' peaks 6.94
Synergies with summer tourism 6.94
CSI affected 3.94
Investment costs 3.94
Long-term sustainability 11.56 Long-term sustainability 4.96
Innovativeness 9.44 Innovativeness 4.05

Fig. 22
Results of strategies’
evaluation with
the ClimAlpTour e-tool
6.1.1 / Results of strategies’ assessments and discussion on outcomes
The insertion of individual weights into the ClimAlpTour e-tool permitted
us to rank the strategies according to collective judgements for the three
chosen climate scenarios (Figure 22) and view the result in histogram- and
sustainability-triangle shapes (Figure 23; Figure 24). This was highly beneficial
for the stakeholders, as they could easily get a feeling of what strategy
dominated and why.
49
Figure 23 illustrates the histograms, whose
height resulted from the strategies’ evaluation.
Each represents one strategy, whilst the different
colours represent how the various indicators
contribute to the final outcome. Similarly, Figure
24 exemplifies the sustainability chart of the
four strategies. The inner triangle is the ideal
area, in which a strategy should be spotted, as
a consequence of the good balance among the
environmental, the social and the economic dimensions.
The results represented here partly
depend on the structure of the selected evaluative
criteria, which reflect primarily the economic
and environmental issues rather than
the social one, in accordance with the stakeholders’
priorities. Given the current indicator
structure, the second-best choice (ALTSKI) appears
to be slightly more sustainable than the
preferred one (BYDSNW).
Overall, the preferred strategy resulted to be BYDSNW for the three climate
scenarios. As shown in Figure 23, this development strategy seems more
suited for Auronzo di Cadore, compared to the others, due to several factors:
1. long term sustainability; 2. synergies with the summer tourism; 3.
capacity of incrementing the arrivals and tourist’s expenditures.
ALTSKI is robustly performing as the second-best option, showing higher
appropriateness in the “current” and “B1” climate scenario. A more extreme
future with considerable less snow precipitations may significantly
penalize this strategy. A SKINT strategy results to be particularly deficient
in terms of investment costs and environmental impacts, but it would be
desirable in terms of creation of job opportunities, increase of tourists’ expenditure
and containment of seasonality.
This result did not seem to surprise the majority of participants, notwithstanding
the fact that during the first workshop the participants attributed
the highest importance, in terms of influence in the choice of an alpine
destination, to snow-related activities (see Table 11). Hence, one may con-

Fig. 23
Strategies ranking
after weights’ elicitation
(scenario B1)
Fig. 24
Sustainability triangle of
the strategies evaluated
(scenario B1)
clude that the perception on the desirability of,
and the value attributed to snow-related activities
changed throughout the participatory process
as a consequence of merging local and scientific
knowledge and structuring the information
in an indicator-based framework. In fact,
before the first workshop, Auronzo’s development
strategies was still oriented towards the
development of ski-intensive activities despite
the fact that the competition of the neighbouring
destinations is exceptionally strong and the
possibility to connect with successful ski-tours
appears to be highly improbable.
6.2 / Auronzo ClimAlpTour e-tool application’s key messages
Investing on the dimensions of winter tourism that are detached from the
activities based on snow seems like the safest way to proceed for a destination
with the characteristics of Auronzo di Cadore. A BYDSNW strategy
should however be linked to a project for the enhancement of the public
transportation as the in-destination transfer needs of tourists may significantly
increase.
An ALTSKI strategy could successfully mediate between the lifts industry,
which has already invested a lot in the past and the possible futures that
the local winter tourism will have to face.
Apart from the snow-related risks and costs, a SKINT strategy could undermine
the bulk of Auronzo’s traditional tourism rather than building on it,
turning such a choice into a strategic error in the medium to long term. Lift
operators should rather take into account the optimization of the existing
50

downhill skiing infrastructure and the related services.
Given the already high cost of energy for the accommodations compartment,
in particular, local planners should focus on this issue before any
new investment is made. A sound reflection about renewable energy based
heating systems might be appropriate and could be part of a new marketing
strategy to characterise the destination.
Even without investments in new structures and facilities, a strategy may
be to focus on other issues that have not been considered here such as
the development of a public transportation (permanently linking Auronzo
to Misurina), or the enhancement of the standards of hospitality through
investments in formation and awareness raising, etc. However, sometimes
the costs of pursuing such kind of activities may require a greater magnitude
of tourism fluxes in order to sustain them. Hence it is important to
start developing tourism since today, in a proper direction.
All development strategies other than a BAU approach have the merit of
improving the tourism all year-seasonality. However, this is not a measure
that should be maximized per se (i.e. with a SKINT approach) renouncing
to the flexibility of the destination in facing the tourists evolving needs and
the natural cycles.
It must be acknowledged here that the framework of the assessment is
limited by the fact that the four strategies considered were so extreme that
very unlikely they could be implemented in a self-standing manner, while
a possible real world solution could arise from the integration of elements
belonging to different strategies. However, since the objective of the exercise
was to stir discussion on the topic of winter tourism development, this
remains an effective way to approach the issue. It must be clear that this
study is not suggesting to dismantle previous investments, but it is rather
exploring the most robust directions for new ones.
In a nutshell, Auronzo is certainly well characterized to focus on traditional
skiing families and BYDSNW activities, whilst Misurina could well become
a point of reference for the ALTSKI emerging paradigm.
6.3 / Auronzo di Cadore, consideration on the exercise in the area
The quantity of information obtained during the second half-day workshop
is certainly satisfactory: a wide variety of viewpoints emerged on the
topic of winter tourism management, particularly spurred by the analysis
of the histograms that resulted from the weight elicitation procedure. These
results suit well the promotion of further discussion between participants
on the issue. However, a concrete package of implementation measures
remained beyond the scope of this exercise.
One of the most significant outcomes was the awareness of stakeholders of
51

the need of defining a commonly agreed trademark for “Auronzo in winter”
and act accordingly. And, although economic rationale scored the highest,
stakeholders were deeply aware of the importance of environmental
indicators. In the discussion that followed the exercise, the uniqueness of
the Municipal landscape and the obligation to promote the UNESCO brand,
remained at the forefront. In terms of the preferred strategy, as expected,
participants agreed that the only option implementable would be a mixture
of the strategies analysed.
Participation has been intense and constructive. Local actors participated
actively in the exercise proposed and demonstrated awareness of both the
current situation and potential risks related to impacts of climate change.
In addition, they showed great creativity in identifying tailored strategies
and willingness to discuss them.
The participatory techniques adopted limited the unavoidable tensions between
different perspectives. Moreover, they enable a longer-term discussion
than the usual short-term political and administrative strategies. This
will be a key, if not the utmost, factor for facing future challenges in the
Municipality.
There seems to be a spread preference, as the ClimAlpTour e-tool application
in other pilot areas demonstrated, of the benefits that a less intensive
infrastructural development strategy may be the way to achieve environmental,
social, and economic sustainability. Generally, an intensive infrastructural
strategy is penalised by the high cost of construction and its potentially
negative impact on the environment.
52

(5)
In general, a ski resort is
considered to be snowreliable
if, in 7 out of 10
winters, a sufficient snow
covering of at least 30 to
50 cm is available for ski
sport on at least 100 days
between December 1 and
April 15.
7 Conclusions
ClimAlpTour’s key messages
The exploratory and experimental case study of Auronzo di Cadore led to
the development of a pilot application of the ClimAlpTour e-tool that could
best exploit its capabilities for decision support. Later, the authors successfully
tested its potentials for transferability and re-use in other Alpine
destinations’ contexts, two located within the Aosta Valley (Monte Rosa
and Valgrisenche) and two in Slovenia (Kranjska Gora and Soca Valley).
Altogether, both from this experience and stakeholders’ feedback, there
emerged the following conclusions.
1. The Alpine Region is extremely vulnerable but very diverse. The Alpine
Region in Europe is among the areas that are most rapidly affected
by climate change. However the local conditions are very different across
the region in terms of expected changes in climate, tourism typology and
intensity and capacity to adapt, making it impossible to envision a single
way to tackle the issue. The project analysed 24 pilot areas with diverse
environmental, social and economic conditions in order to provide a global
perspective on the Alpine tourism. The preliminary results of the project
confirm the lack of a single and simple strategy to cope with the issue at
stake throughout the Alpine arc.
2. Climate change is a source of opportunities and threats. Summer
tourism could benefit from climate change. Hotter summers (as in 2003)
would bring more people to the mountains and activities on fresh water
may become more viable. The tourism season could be extended. At the
same time droughts, and in general an intensified pressure on water resources,
are likely to happen more frequently in summer even in the Alps,
the Water Tower of Europe. Conversely winter tourism will be challenged
by the expected decrease in snow and ice cover. The negative implications
for winter tourism and sports mainly concern snow reliability. Nowadays
already 57 of the main 666 ski resorts of the European Alps are considered
to not be snow-reliable (5) . However, climate change is also an opportunity
for those resorts that are snow-reliable, as they will face less competition
in the future.
3. The future socio-economic scenarios are as crucial as the climate conditions.
In the last few decades, the positive trend of tourism demand in
tourism has decreased in Alpine destinations and the average duration of
the journey has diminished substantially. Many destinations have reached
their maturity stage and the market is now saturated. Globalization has ex-
53

ponentially increased the number of competitors and changed the behaviour
of travellers. The cost of energy is progressively eroding the margins
of return for the accommodation and the transportation compartments.
Water availability and cost is increasingly becoming an issue for the artificial
snow production. These elements are, per se, justifiable reasons to
question the traditional development model based on the ski-based “white
dream” which has prevailed since the seventies. On the contrary Alpine
tourism needs trademarks (e.g. Pearls of the Alps), innovativeness and flexibility.
4. Adaptation should be mainstreamed into long-term tourism planning.
Adaptation to climate change should not be considered in isolated
terms. Climate change is just another pressure that is adding up to tourism
systems already under pressure that have specific strengths and weaknesses.
While tourism demand is very adaptive and the tourists’ behaviour
is constantly and rapidly evolving, the tourism supply, meaning the Alpine
destinations as a whole, need more time to plan their actions in order to respect
their social, economic and environmental constraints. There certainly
are autonomous actions (e.g. artificial snow, ski-pistes design, etc. ) that
can be taken by the tourism suppliers, but the most crucial part of the adaptation
effort will be played by the so called “planned adaptation”. Therefore
adaptation should be regarded as a thoughtful and concerted process
of tourism development planning for the long-term, and definitely beyond
the mandate of one political administration. Climate change is but an opportunity
to involve the most appropriate set of local stakeholders into the
process of definition of the actions to be taken for improving the sustainability
of tourism within each Alpine resort.
5. There are “no regret” actions to be taken. Some tourism related issues
are particularly crucial for the Alpine Region beyond the impacts due to climate
change. An Alpine tourism destination needs to be identifiable. Local
culture, handicraft, gastronomy and agriculture are elements of strength,
among the destination’s specificities, and should be incentivised. Other
crucial factors that can have huge impact on the Alpine tourism are transportation
and energy. A sound reflection about how to improve their sustainability
might be appropriate for most of the Alpine resorts.
6. People of the Alps are ready. Raising the awareness of the stakeholders
including tourists, population and businesses on the impact of climate
change on tourism in the Alps is one of the goals of the whole project.
However, in the participatory workshops that have been taking place during
the duration of the project the local stakeholders have shown to be the
sentinels of the climatic changes that have already happened. They are
already deeply interested and aware about this issue. Moreover they have
expressed the desire for a higher degree of inclusivity and participation.
Indeed, what is still missing in many destinations is the capacity to let the
stakeholders sit together around one table and agree on the way to proceed
for improving the situation. In the pilot sites where it has been tested, the
ClimAlpTour e-tool has provided the opportunity and the methodology to
54

overcome this limitation. Moreover, the results of the ClimAlpTour e-tool
application have penalized the downhill skiing infrastructure- oriented adaptation
strategies (e.g. new ski-areas) emphasising that, when consulted
with the appropriate methodology, the local collective might have a coherent
and “climate-change-safe” vision of how the future of Alpine tourism
could look like.
What is particularly remarkable is the coherency of these key messages
with the International Commission for Alpine Protection (CIPRA)’s 2011 priorities,
where climate change and sustainable development lay at the forefront,
and various other studies: amongst others, OECD’s “Climate change
and the European Alps: adapting winter tourism and natural hazard management”
report (2007); and UNWTO’s Proceedings of the 1st International
Conference on Climate Change and Tourism (2003).
At this stage, the dissemination and the consolidation of the project experience
remains the key challenge for all the institutions involved in the
ClimAlpTour project. Following up, there already exist new European projects
that continue to pursue this research and cooperation theme, that will
benefit from this distinctive contribution.
55

References
56
Balbi et al. (2011). An Agent-Based In-
tegrated Assessment of Winter Tourism
Development in the European Alpine Region.
Submitted to Environmental Modelling & Soft-
ware.
Bourdeau, P. (2009). Mountain tourism in
a climate of change. Alpine space - man & en-
vironment 7, Global Change and Sustainable
Development in Mountain Regions. Innsbruck
University Press. Innsbruck, Austria.
Burki, R., B. Abegg, & H. Elsasser. (2007).
Climate change and tourism in the Alpine
Region of Switzerland. In Climate change and
tourism: assessment and coping strategies,
ed. B. Amelung et al, pp. 165-172. Maastricht.
Castellari, S. (2008). Climate change, im-
pacts and adaptation strategies in the Alpine
Space: some results from the INTERREG III B
project ClimChAlp. Proceedings of the confer-
ence on Mountains as Early Indicators of Cli-
mate Change. Padova, Italy, 17-18 April.
CIPRA (Commissione Internazionale per
la Protezione delle Alpi). (2011). Tourism in
Climate Change – 08/2011.
Climate Change Adaptation by Spatial
Planning in the Alpine Space (CLISP). (2009).
Report of Working Package 4- Vulnerabil-
ity Assessment. Task 4. 3. 3. 3 Processing
of regional climate model data & providing
climate projections for MRs (CLM and/or
REMO), Climate change exposure indica-
tors, The Alps. Website http://www.clisp.eu/
content/?q=node/229. Accessed August 2011.
Eden, C. & F. Ackermann (1998). Making
Strategy: The Journey of Strategic Manage-
ment. Sage Publications: London.
Giupponi, C. (2007). Decision Support Sys-
tems for implementing the European Water
Framework Directive: The MULINO approach.
Environmental Modelling & Software, 22(2):
248-258.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC). (2007). Contribution of Work-
ing Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report
of the IPCC, Climate Change 2007: The Physi-
cal Science Basis. Cambridge University Press.
Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Modello AuronzoWinSim, Website http://
www.dse.unive.it/clim/climalptour.htm . Ac-
cessed August 2011.
OECD. (2007). Climate change and the
European Alps: adapting winter tourism and
natural hazard management. Gennaio.
Provincia Autonoma di Bolzano, (2009).
ASTAT, Profilo dei turisti in Alto Adige: anno
turistico 2007/08, Info N. 29, May, 2009. Web-
sitehttp://www.provinz.bz.it/astat/it/mobili- ta-turismo/474.asp. Accessed August 2011.
Provincia Autonoma di Trento, Osservato-
rio Provinciale per il Turismo. (2007). La sta-
gione turistica invernale 2006/07 in Trentino.
Website http://www.turismo.provincia.tn.it/
osservatorio/pubblicazioni/pubblicazioni_re-
port/report_andamenti_stagionali/ . Accessed
August 2011.
Regione Veneto, (2010). Banca dati online.
Website http://statistica.regione.veneto.it/
dati_settoriali_turismo.jsp. Accessed August
2011.
Scott, J. (2000). Social Network Analysis: a
Handbook. London: Sage.
Simos, J. (1990). Evaluer l’impact sur
l’environment: Une approche originale par
l’analyse multicitere et la negociation. Poly-
techniques et universitaries Romandes, Laus-
anne.
Steiger, R. (2010). The impact of climate
change on ski season length and snowmak-
ing requirements in Tyrol. Climate Research,
43(3):251-262.
UNWTO (2003). Climate change and tour-
ism. Proceedings of the 1st International
Conference on Climate Change and Tourism.
Djerba, Tunisia. 9-11 April.
WWF (2006). Alpi e turismo: trovare il pun-
to di equilibrio. WWF Italia. February.

Climate change is already significantly affecting
the European Alpine Region beyond the
average temperature signals that have been
registered at a global level (IPCC 2007). Not
even climate sceptics may deny the evidence
of a 50% decrease of glaciers’ volume since
1850 (Castellari 2008). To establish whether
this change is human-induced or not remains
beyond the scope of this study, which specifically
explores what this may imply for winter
tourism in the Alps. The ClimAlpTour project
focused on how local development can adapt
to changing climatic circumstances in an advantageous
way for one of its prime economic
activity, tourism.