A Comparative Study of the Evolution of Tourism Policy in Spain and Portugal
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Repositorio Institucional Universidad de Málaga A comparative study of the evolution of tourism policy in Spain and Portugal Fernando Almeida Garcia , http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2014.03.001 Abstract The purposes of this study are to analyze and compare the way in which tourism policy has evolved in Spain and Portugal. Our study covers an extensive period of time, enabling the similarities and differences between the two processes and the effects of the main factors involved to be highlighted phase by phase. We start by looking at the genesis of tourism authorities, whose principal objective was to promote the countries and improve their external image. We will then see how the onset of mass tourism led to changes in strategy, which now sought to maximize revenue in order to fund national development. The third phase will deal with the restructuring of the countries' respective tourism authorities, whereby policies and planning were tailored to accommodate the changes that had occurred in the sector. We will conclude by suggesting a series of topics for debate, notably the Latin model of tourism development. Graphical abstract Keywords Tourism policies; Development; Spain; Portugal 1. Introduction Tourism is a complex product in which economic and political factors combine with those of a geographical and recreational nature (Hall, 1998). As such, tourism policy may be defined as a multidisciplinary field related with the mixed science that is tourism itself (Bote Gómez and Marchena Gómez, 1996, Edgell, 1990 and Koster, 1984). In this context, definitions of tourism policy vary, though it is worth noting the view ofHall and Jenkins (1995), who feel that tourism policy is whatever governments choose to do or not to do with regard to tourism — an interpretation that provides tourism researchers with a wide investigative scope (p. 8). In any event, research into tourism policy must focus first and foremost on those government measures taken with the aim of influencing tourism. No clear consensus exists regarding the way in which the study of tourism policy should be approached, or the fields of interest that it ought to include. There is an economic angle which considers tourism policy as a branch of the economy characterized by a series of idiosyncrasies (Sessa, 1976). The growing importance of tourism, and particularly its impact on both national and regional economies, has led in turn to an increase in the number of studies into tourism policy (Hall & Jenkins, 1995). These studies have tended to adopt a neutral standpoint, focusing on the achievements of tourism rather than on the social and territorial imbalances that it brings (Lea, 1988). The difficulties encountered in generating development contrast sharply with the praise heaped by governments on tourism's contribution to economic development at both national and regional levels (Hillali, 2007, Jenkins, 1980, Lamb, 1998 and Williams and Shaw, 1988). In the case of Spain and Portugal, there have been numerous studies into tourism strategy as an area of economic policy (Aguiló Pérez and Vich Martorell, 1996, Bote Gómez and Marchena Gómez, 1996, Cals, 1974, Martins Viera, 1997 and Monfort Mir, 2000). Political science, too, has taken an interest in tourism policy, in spite of its initial indifference to tourism itself (Richter, 1983, p. 313), which it considered a frivolous and superficial field (Hall & Jenkins, 1995, p. 5), and of the difficulties faced by tourism specialists in attempting to define the exact nature of tourism policy. The role played by tourism policy within the larger field of political science has evolved to such an extent that some authors now claim that the former must be viewed separately from the latter (Velasco González, 2005, p. 172). Political scientists have taken a variety of approaches to tourism policy. For example, Velasco González (2004) identifies two different focuses: (i) a general view that analyzes all of the public and private sector measures taken that influence tourism, and which has wider implications for fields lying outside the boundaries of the tourism sector, such as the environment, infrastructure, economy and public safety; and (ii) a narrower angle which focuses only on those governmental measures and decisions that specifically affect areas of the tourism sector itself, e.g. the hotel industry and the catering trade (pp. 66–74). Our study combines these two approaches, albeit with greater emphasis on the second. Research into tourism policy has generally focused on specific countries, analyzing the subject as a branch of national policy and approaching the task in large, regional blocks (Hall, 1991 and Lickorish, 1991). To date, there has been relatively little analysis contrasting the tourism policies of different countries, though several interesting studies have been carried out in Europe (Swarbrooke, 1993). Spain and Portugal, however, have rarely been compared, despite their geographical proximity and the existence of socio-economic processes that are common to both (Map 1). Most of the references to these countries currently available are to be found either in studies dealing with tourism in Europe in general, Southern Europe or the Mediterranean area (Akehurst et al., 1993, Apostolopoulos et al., 2001 and Jenner and Smith, 1993), or in series of publications compiled by international organizations such as the OECD and the WTO. Worthy of special mention are the analyses of tourism policy in Spain and Portugal undertaken by Williams, 1984 and Williams, 1993) Willians & Shaw (1998), which assess the role played by tourism in both national economic development and regional imbalance; however, none of these studies deal specifically with the two countries alone. Our study of Spain and Portugal adopts a similar approach to the one taken by Williams, albeit with the inclusion of other facets such as the process via which national tourism policy is constructed. Map 1. Location of the study area. Spain and Portugal. Source: Elaborated by author. An examination of Spain and Portugal's shared history reveals parallel development as far as tourism policies and models are concerned, although the tourism processes in the two countries also display certain differences due to their contrasting socio- economic development. Spain and Portugal's relationship with tourism has varied over the course of the one hundred plus years studied. The evolution of tourism policy can be divided into the three main stages related to major socio-economic phases identified in this study (seeTable 1 and Appendix 1 and Appendix 2). These three stages are consistent with the proposal of several authors who have analyzed the cycles of tourism policy (Fayos-Solá, 1996a, Fayos-Solá, 1996b and Garay and Cánoves, 2011). Table 1 Tourism policy phases in Spain and Portugal. Source: Elaborated by the author 1900-1950 1951-1975 1976-2012 Initiation Development Maturity Pre-Fordist phase Fordist phase Post-Fordist phase Source: Elaborated by the author. The pre-Fordist phase: During this first stage, comprising the first years of the 20th century, both countries behaved in an almost identical fashion. Our analysis of this period, which is based largely on administrative and historical factors, reveals an extensive exchange of information between the two countries, despite the reciprocal indifference exhibited by their respective governments (De La Torre Gómez and Vicente, 1998 and Halpern Pereira, 1984), who were more interested in the opportunity that tourism provided for raising their countries' profiles abroad than in its economic benefits. The period also saw the establishment of a series of tourism policy procedures that would remain in place for decades to come. This stage has more frequently been studied in Spain (Esteve Secall and Fuentes García, 2000, Fernández Fúster, 1991, Moreno Garrido, 2007 and Pellejero Martínez, 1999) than in Portugal (Cunha, 2009 and Pina, 1988). The Fordist phase: The second stage – between 1950 and 1975 – brought a series of important developments. The Iberian nations now understood that tourism held the key to economic growth. Franco's dictatorship used tourism to improve Spain's foreign image (Correyero & Cal, 2008, pp. 17–21), as did Salazar's in Portugal, although to a lesser extent (Almuiña Fernandes, 2002). This phase also marked the first major divergence between the two countries in terms of tourism policy: whereas the Spanish government committed itself fully to mass tourism as a means of maximizing revenue and investment, the Portuguese opted instead to maintain a more gradual rate of tourist growth. In fact, mass tourism was the dominant theme during this period, and tourism-based development is the facet of tourism most frequently studied by both Spanish and Portuguese authors (Cals, 1974, Cunha, 2009, Esteve Secall and Fuentes García, 2000,Figuerola Palomo, 1999 and Martins Viera, 1997). The post-Fordist phase: During the third stage of our study, Spanish and Portuguese society began to act in unison. The dictatorships in both countries ended in successive years (1974 and 1975), they joined the European Union (1986), adopted the euro (2001) and experienced similar economic ups and downs. However, their respective administrative structures and tourism planning procedures took vastly different paths. While Spain's heavily centralized policy was replaced by a decentralized system overseen by its autonomous communities