dossier sur le tourisme et le développement durable

Meeting the stakes and turning tourism into a driving force of Mediterranean sustainable development
Meeting the stakes and turning tourism into a driving
force of Mediterranean sustainable development
Even if there are very many « sustainable » initiatives at all levels of Mediterranean tourism,
they have proved to be insufficient faced with the future problems and the stakes that will have
to be taken up.
Presently marked by a strong spirit of competition and mainly focussed on a seaside model, the
Mediterranean tourism does not sufficiently enhance the cultural and environmental potential of
the Mediterranean region. It is characterized by poorly controlled evolutions (explosive growth in
supply and demand after the launching of the destinations), by risks of economic unsustainability
(benefits badly redistributed and unfavourable currency balance sheet for national
and local economies, dependence due to the tourism mono-activity), by risks of social unsustainability
(insecure and badly-paid jobs), as well as by environmental risks.
In the mature destinations, competition and tourist product standardization lead to diversification
of activities that are often similar from one place to another (golf courses, seawater therapy,
aquatic parks, etc.) and focussed on the littoral only. Moreover these activities are not always
well suited to the resources. Littoral rehabilitation operations prove to be necessary but are not
much numerous for too expensive.
In the developing destinations, it is difficult to keep under control the seaside model growth. At
local level tourism benefits are generally insufficient to finance fight against pollution and
environmental nuisance. Seasonality is there often highlighted, thus infrastructures are
oversized. The increase in the number of second homes can contribute to the urban sprawl, to
the agriculture disappearance and to the land deprivation of local populations. Preventing
additional degradation becomes a priority.
In emerging or potential destinations, the most beautiful coastal spots are coveted and are
preys for investors who exert strong pressure to get and manage them. “Foreign enclaves” are
developed and their benefits often completely elude the local populations.
To keep tourist development under control in the mature destinations, the point is to reduce
social and environmental impacts by rehabilitating the existing facilities and by developing
alternative solutions in order to limit pressure on the coast. In the emerging destinations, many
problems can still be avoided if care is taken to avoid impasses offering only short-term
prospects. In some fully developing destinations, the boom of tourism development poses the
risk of going far beyond the plans expected initially.
The tourism sector, too rooted in a market logic, is lacking in long-term vision and is widely
subordinated to economic operators, notably foreign tour operators. It leaves most often the
tourism sector in the hands of financial and industrialists whose objective is a quick return on
investment. Even if some Mediterranean countries have put in place sectional policies, the lack
of using relevant indicators make them often only serve private interests and the profits
generated by tourism are in many cases repatriated to the investing countries. The lack of
availability of local capital for investment in tourism limits the possibilities for the destinations to
choose the projects implemented.
These operators strengthen the notion of mono-activity by directing most of the economic
activities to tourism and thus making the other sectors fragile. Faced with the economic power
of the big players in tourism, the development strategies in the Mediterranean countries remain
marked by a spirit of competition rather than one of cooperation. Market reasoning puts hotels
at the centre of tourism and this contributes to making it too homogeneous and generalised.
The services are the same and the same arguments are used to convince clients, so the best
argument to motivate the client’s choice is the price. Specificities of the destination are not
78