REPORT ON FEASIBILITY FOR

REGULAR ASSESSMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS
AND SUSTAINABLE TOURISM
IN EUROPE

Type of Document:
Final report
Prepared by:
Francesc Romagosa, Roger
Milego,
Jaume Fons (UAB),
Christoph Schrder (UMA)
Silvia Giulietti, Rastislav
Stanik (EEA)

Date:
December 2014

Universidad de Malaga
ETCSIA
PTA - Technological Park of
Andalusia
c/ Marie Curie, 22 (Edificio
Habitec)
Campanillas
29590 - Malaga
Spain
Telephone: +34 952 02 05 48
Fax: +34 952 02 05 59

Contents
1

Introduction ............................................................................................... 5

Background .............................................................................................. 7
2.1
Tourism, environment and sustainability in Europe ......................... 7
2.2
Recent key trends of tourism in Europe ........................................... 9
2.3
Tourism impacts on environment ................................................... 11
2.4
Environmental threats for tourism.17
2.5
Tourism impacts on environment and health at a glance............... 18
2.6
Response and prospects ............................................................... 19

Proposal for a structure of the reporting mechanism ......................... 21

Inventory of relevant tourism-related indicators, data and sources of

information ............................................................................................. 25

Conclusions ............................................................................................ 29

References .............................................................................................. 35

1 Introduction
Tourism is a social, cultural and economic phenomenon which entails the movement of
people to countries or places outside their usual environment for personal or
business/professional purposes.
These people are called visitors and tourism has to do with their activities. A visitor is
classified as a tourist if his/her trip includes an overnight stay. As such, tourism has
implications on the economy, on the natural and built environment, on the local
population at the destination and on the tourists themselves (World Tourism
Organization).
Tourism and recreational activities represent fundamental opportunities for job creation
and development at local and regional level in the European Union (EU). They are
based and have impacts on human, territorial and natural capital and are strongly
dependent on the status of the natural assets.
In order to monitor and assess the impacts as well as the sustainability trends of tourist
destinations and actors, the European Environment Agency (EEA) is going to explore
the possibility to refresh and develop the base for a regular reporting mechanism on
environmental impacts and sustainability of tourism (TOUERM Tourism and
environment reporting mechanism).
The TOUERM would like to contribute to improve the information process at EU level
and also help develop a more integrated European dimension of robust and effective
tourism policy. The main objective of this paper is to set the base to evaluate the
feasibility for a regular assessment of environmental impact and sustainability trends of
tourism. More specifically, this evaluation, carried on in consultation with the EIONET1
Tourism expert group, is based on:

Review existing data relevant for assessment of environmental impacts and

sustainability trends of tourism. Link between statistical (mainly socioeconomic) and spatial data;
Review of relevant European Topic Centre on Spatial Information and Analysis
(ETC SIA) assessment for tourism (e.g. land use pressures/land use impact);
Review of previous works on tourism (coast, Alps) and relevant ESPON
projects (e.g. ATTREG);
Classification of environmental and socio economic impacts, based on existing
scientific literature;
Overview of the existing national reporting systems on tourism and environment
at EU level.

The European environment information and observation network (Eionet) is a partnership network of the European Environment
Agency (EEA) and its member and cooperating countries. It consists of the EEA itself, six European Topic Centres (ETCs) and a
network of around 1000 experts from 39 countries in over 350 national environment agencies and other bodies dealing with
environmental information.

2
2.1

Background
Tourism, environment and sustainability in Europe

Some first analysis in the draft SOER 2015 (State and outlook on the european
environment report) confirm that tourism and environment have a multifaceted and
mutual relation. As one of the ever growing economic sectors in the last decades,
despite the most recent worldwide financial crises, tourism continues to develop, basing
its growth especially on human, territorial and natural capitals of European regions,
thus acting also as a factor of territorial cohesion (Committee of the Regions, 2006).
Meanwhile recreational and accommodation infrastructure, modes of transport, energy,
waste, food and water supplies related to tourism activities impact on the quality of
environmental assets, the status of natural resources, in ecologically sensitive areas and
other biodiversity hotspots, particularly in islands,coastlines or mountain regions as well
as on the quality of life for citizens when it comes to some of the most popular touristic
cities in Europe.
Adversely affecting the environment implies jeopardizing the future development of the
sector, which is strongly dependent on the status of the natural assets. Nevertheless
recent trends show that tourism can be considered as a pioneer sector for the testing and
adoption of low environmental impact technologies and solutions in the energy,
construction and transport sectors. Tourism has also been a pioneer sector in the
implementation of the principles of sustainable development. In this sense, sustainable
development applied to tourism not only means to make optimal use of environmental
resources and maintain ecological processes and biodiversity, but also to respect the
socio-cultural authenticity of host communities, and to provide socio-economic benefits
to all stakeholders in the destination. In other words, tourism, if it is wanted to be
sustainable, should try to find a balance between the three dimensions that make up
sustainability (environmental, socio-cultural, and economic aspects) (UNEP & World
Tourism Organization, 2005).
Europe is the 1st world tourist destination, with the highest density and diversity of
tourist attractions. Five Member States (France, Spain, Italy, the United Kingdom and
Germany) are among the worlds top 10 destinations for holidaymakers2. As a result,
this industry has become a key sector of the European economy. In 2010, 3.4 million
enterprises employed an estimated 15.2 million people (Eurostat).
The sector's competitiveness is closely linked to its sustainability, as the quality of
destinations is strongly influenced by their natural and cultural environment and their
integration into local communities. Firstly EU policy aims to promote tourism in order
to maintain Europe as a leading destination, and maximize the industry's contribution to

Accounting for 52% of all international arrivals worldwide, Europe reached 563 million tourist arrivals in 2013, 29 million more
than in 2012 (World Tourism Organization, 2014).

growth and employment. The Lisbon Treaty specifically acknowledges the importance
of tourism (Article 195). The EC Communication 30.6.2010 COM (2010) 352 "Europe,
the world's No 1 tourist destination a new political framework for tourism in Europe"
represents the most recent general policy reference for the sector and establishes main
priority actions, among them there is the promotion of development of sustainable,
responsible, high quality tourism.
As tourism is a composite industry (fig.1), the required policy responses to the
multitude of significant environmental sustainability related challenges3 it has to face
are fragmented and dispersed in the vast acquis communautaire4, as a comprehensive
policy reference doesnt yet exist.

Fig. 1. Components of the tourism system

This policy fragmentation which also applies to data availability and reporting
activities for the broad sectorial spectrum, and specifically for its environmental
dimension - affects information processes, planning and coordinating activities among

These challenges mainly concern: 1. energy consumption and supply, water quality, consumption and management, 2. waste
production and management, 3. loss of biodiversity from land conversion, overexploitation of natural resources or introduction of
invasive alien species, pollution and disturbance of wildlife, 4. landscape and heritage management.
4

For example: Water Framework and Marine Strategy Framework Directives, the EC proposal for a framework directive on
Maritime spatial planning and integrated coastal management as well as two recent EC legislative proposals tackling emissions from
Recreational watercraft (COM(2011)456final and COM(2013)18 final).

not just public agencies but also between the industry or the public and the private
sector.
In this respect the EC encourages a coordinated approach for multinational initiatives5 in
order to:
-

improve the visibility and sustainability of tourism - including a consolidation of

the whole knowledge base, as for ETIS6
increase sustainable growth, as in the recently published EC Communication on
Coastal and Maritime Tourism (COM(2014), 86 final).

A further recent noticeable initiative by the EC (DG Enterprise in cooperation with

Eurostat) is the launch of the European Virtual Tourism Observatory, a platform
gathering and storing relevant data and analysis of the sector, though still mostly socioeconomic.
2.2

Recent key trends of tourism in Europe

In recent decades European tourism has changed deeply, in terms of seasonality,

frequencies, destinations, interests and demography7 (EUROSTAT, 2013). Europe has
also become the worlds largest source region of tourists taking trips all over the world.
Outbound8 tourism generated just over half of all international arrivals with 4 EU
member states among the top 10 spenders9 in international tourism (WTO, 2014).
Beside and despite the mass flows that usually occur at peak periods and lead to high
environmental pressures, especially in coastal regions, islands and mountains, new
growing trends take place throughout the year, during the off season, also in some cities
that experience constantly high demand. The continuous diversification and
specialisation of tourism niches - is the result of globalised cultural and communication
trends, an internet-based economy and affordability of holidays and travel to ever
broader strata of the population (Alan A. Lew, n.d.).
In 2012 some 51.3 % of the EU-28s population took part in tourism, and made least 1
trip of at least 4 overnight stays during the year, ranging from 10.0 % in Romania to
78.7 % in Sweden.

Such as the Knowledge Networking Portal for Sustainable & Responsible Tourism (Destinet, http://destinet.eu/), the European
Destinations of Excellence (EDEN, http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/eden/index_en.htm )
6

The European Tourism Indicators System for Sustainable Management at Destination Level.

In 2011 people aged over 65 made 29 % more trips and 23 % more overnight stays than 2006. Their tourism expenditure grew by
33 % and accounted for 20 % of all tourism spending of Europeans, compared with just 15 % in 2006. They made more and longer
trips. This group of tourists is expected to grow fast as in 2010, 17 % of the population was 65 years old or more and by 2060, this
figure is expected to be close to 30 %.
8
9

Residents who travel to another country.

China, Germany, US, UK, Russian Federation, France, Canada, Japan, Australia, Italy.

In 2012, Spain was the most common tourism destination for non-residents (h 21.6 % of
the total accommodation expenditure), followed by Italy and France, which together
accounted for 48.7 % of the total nights. As for tourism intensity, in 2012, the
Mediterranean destinations of Malta, Cyprus and Croatia, as well as the Alpine and city
trip destination of Austria were the most popular (EUROSTAT 2013).
Nights spent by tourists in relation to the resident population of a certain destination
show the huge importance of tourism to many of the EUs coastal regions and, even
more so, to its islands and most of the Alpine region. In the context of the sustainability
of tourism, it can also be seen as an indicator of potential tourism pressure.
When it comes to the the spatial distribution of density of bed places per Km2 (Map 1) it
results that the higher accomodation density is in the expansion of built-up areas, in
particular in coastal, mountain and lake areas, where it increased environmental
pressure on protected and other natural and seminatural territories, but also in regions
with capital and other major cities, where they contributed to the urban expansion.

Map 1. Tourism bed places per Km2 in Europe (NUTS 3)

Moreover, to these figures and numbers it should be added the supply and demand for
residential tourism, that is generally excluded from many tourism statistics, but it is also
a form of tourism and it annually moves milions of people throughout Europe. We are
referring to the second homes and apartments that are not included in the regulated
tourism lodging. In many European countries this type of tourism lodging can be very
important and highly concentrated in several areas, such as the coastal fringe and the

10

Alpine ski areas surroundings. For example, in Sweden around one third of second
homes are 100 m from the shore (both seashore and lakeshore) (EEA, 2003). During the
1990s and the 2000s there was a rapid growth in the number of second homes in many
countries, such as Spain, France, Italy (Guisan & Aguayo, 2010; UNECE, 2011).

2.3

Tourism impacts on environment

The impacts of tourism can be classified as economic, physical and social.

Environmental impacts fall within the physical class. They are varied and complex,
have distinct geographical patterns and also temporal intensity (seasonality) and
therefore their clasification is not simple. They can be considered in terms of:
1. broad or general categories that relate closely to the categorisation of tourist
assets or attractions found in physical, biological, socioeconomic, natural, built
and cultural environments;
2. the nature of the impacts over time or space, including: short-term or long-term
impacts; positive or negative impacts; local, regional and even global impacts;
and direct, indirect or induced impacts. To some extent these reflect the
characteristics of the tourism industry; and
3. environmental components, such as Ceballos-Lascurins (1996) classification
of direct tourism impacts on geological exposures, minerals and fossils, soils,
water resources, vegetation, animal life, sanitation, landscape aesthetics and the
cultural environment (Wong, 2004).
Tourism impacts can also be broadly classified in two categories, direct and indirect.
Direct impact is caused by the presence of tourists, indirect impact by the infrastructure
created in connection with tourism activities (Ceballos-Lascurin, 1996). In general,
they vary according to the number and nature of tourists, characteristics of the site and
approach to development of tourism facilities.
A general and complete list of environmental impacts of tourism is shown in Table 1.

11

Table 1. Environmental impacts of tourism

1. Depletion of natural resources

Pressure on natural resources by increased consumption in areas
where resources are already scarce, in relation to the
quality/quantity of local resources.
1.1 Water resources
Tourism industry generally overuses water resources
resulting in water shortages, degradation of water supplies,
generation of greater volume of waste water, overpumping
for golf courses can cause saline intrusion into groundwater.
1.2 Local resources
Tourism can generate increased pressure on short-supply
local resources, resulting in their greater extraction and
transport, the demand has usually seasonal character (such as
the use of wood in alpine areas or overfishing, causing
shortage for local people, in coastal areas)
1.3 Land degradation and conversion
Increased construction of tourism and recreational facilities
(use of land for accomodation, including second homes,
infrastructure and use of building materials) has increased
pressure on resources such as minerals, fossil fuels, fertile
soil, forests, wetlands, biodiversity habitat fragmentation, and
scenic landscapes.

12

2. Pollution
Air emissions, noise, solid waste and littering, release of sewage,
oil and chemicals, architectural/visual pollution.
2.1 Air pollution and noise
a. Air pollution is continuously increasing in response to
increased transport by air, road and rail, and transport
emissions and emissions from energy production and use
are linked to acid rain and global warming on global
level, and photochemical pollution on local level.
b. Noise pollution from airplanes, cars, buses, recreational
vehicles such as snowmobiles and jet skis is causing
annoyance, stress and even hear loss for humans and
distress to wildlife.
2.2 Solid waste and littering
In areas of high concentration of tourist activities and natural
attractions, improper disposal can spoil natural environment,
rivers, scenic views and roadsides, degrade appearance of
water and shoreline and threatens marine life, also since
trekking expeditions usually leave behind waste and
unnecessary equipment, this practice combined with lack of
collection or disposal facilities in remote areas causes
degradation of mountain environment.
2.3 Sewage
Increased number of recreational facilities often leads to
increased sewage pollution of seas, lakes and rivers
surrounding tourist attractions, damage of flora and fauna,
damage to coral reefs by increased nutrients flow and algae
growth covering coral reefs, another possible danger is
change in salinity and transparency of water with impacts on
coastal environments, sewage pollution can threaten health of
humans and animals.
2.4 Aesthetic pollution and cultural impacts
Tourism often fails to integrate its structures such as facilities
themselves, roads, employee housing, parking, service areas and
waste disposal facilities, with natural features and indigenous
structures and architecture, archaeology, art and industrial
heritage. It can have negative impacts on landscape, gateway
communities outside protected areas and other host
communities.

13

3. Physical impacts
Are not caused only by tourism-related land clearing and
construction, but by continuing tourist activities and long-term
changes in local economies and ecologies.
3.1 Physical impacts of Tourism Development
a. Construction activities and infrastructure development
(sand mining, beach and sand erosion, soil erosion,
extensive paving, land degradation, loss of wildlife
habitats and deterioration of scenery, habitat/ecosystem
alteration and fragmentation)
b. Deforestation and intensified or unsustainable use of land
(clearing of forested land for ski resorts, draining and
filling of coastal wetlands for tourism facilities and
infrastructure, causing disturbance and erosion of local
ecosystems, even destruction in long term)
c. Marina development (changes in currents and coastlines,
erosion and destruction of habitats, damage of coral reefs,
disruption of land-sea connections)
3.2 Physical impacts from Tourist activities
a. Trampling impacts on vegetation: breakage and bruising
of stems, reduced plant vigor, reduced regeneration, loss
of ground cover, change in species composition
impacts on soil: loss of organic matter,
reduction in soil macro porosity, decrease in air and water
permeability, increase in run-off, accelerated erosion
b. Anchoring and other marine activities (tourist activities in
marine areas can cause direct degradation of marine
ecosystems with subsequent impacts on coastal protection
and fisheries)
c. Wildlife disturbance effects (including synurbization, as
the adaptation of animal wildlife to urban development)
d. Hazard introduction effects (introduction of alien species,
diseases, hazards from negative behaviour)

14

4. Environmental impacts of tourism

4.1 Loss of biological diversity
Tourism (esp. natural tourism) is closely linked to biodiversity
and attractions created by rich and varied environment. It can
also cause loss of biodiversity by excessive use of land and
resources and by exceeding carrying capacity of ecosystems.
Loss of biodiversity means loss of tourism potential. Tourism
can also introduce alien species causing disruption and
destruction of ecosystems.
4.2 Depletion of the ozone layer
Refrigerators and air conditioners containing ozone depleting
substances (ODS) are still used in the hotel and tourism
industry. Emissions from jet aircraft are also a significant
source of ODS. By 2015, it is predicted that half of the annual
destruction of ozoe layer will be caused by air travel.
4.3 Climate change and GHG emissions
Global tourism is closely linked to climate change and GHG
emissions. Tourism accounts for about 50 % of traffic
movements and through rapidly expansing air traffic is
presents a significant contributor to the increasing
concentrations of GHG in the atmosphere (around 5% of total
emissions).

5. Positive impacts
5.1 Positive environmental and socio-economical impacts from
tourism
a. Financial contributions (economical growth of the region,
contribution to conservation of sensitive area through entry
fees, indirectly through revenues)
b. Improved environmental management and planning (sound
env. management of tourism facilities can increase benefits
to natural areas, planning for tourism development, owners
of second homes favour land use control and preservation),
reduction of consumption patterns and environmental
pressures
c. Environmental awareness raising (tourism brings people
into closer contact with nature, may increase awareness of
value of nature, lead to env. conscious behaviour and
activities, and may help stop the loss of biodiversity)
d. Protection and preservation (identification of value
pristine natural areas and subsequent protection, second
housing can have effect on conservation of rural housing
stock, bring empty and redundant properties back to use,
enhance the visual quality of rural areas)
15

e. Regulatory measures (helping to offset negative impacts of

tourism, reduction of negative impacts on natural
resources, such as regulation of daily number of visitors)
f. Recovery of dismissed industrial areas or brown fields and
their conversion in amusement parks
g. Impacts of continuous development of certification
programmes on the environmental quality and
sustainability
5.2 Positive psycho-sociological impacts
a. Developing positive attitudes towards each other
b. Learning about each other`s culture and customs
c. Reducing negative perception and stereotypes
d. Developing friendship
e. Developing pride, appreciation, understanding, respect and
tolerance for each other`s culture
f. Increasing self/esteem of hosts and tourists
g. Psychological satisfaction with interaction
(Source: Own elaboration based on Sunlu, 2003; Ghulam et al., 2013; Wong, 2004;
Bevan & Rhodes, 2005)
A broader perspective of the impacts of tourism on the environment can be offered by
the DPSIR approach (fig. 2), that takes into account the driving forces (trends and
actions), the pressures, the state, the impacts, and the responses.

16

Fig. 2. DPSIR - Impacts of tourism on the environmental assets and quality of life
at destination level

2.4 Environmental threats for tourism

While tourism can exert significant impacts on the environment, as it has been seen in
the previous section, it can also be affected negatively by the environment, with
negative consequences not only for the sector economy but also for the quality of life
and wellbeing of tourists and communities at touristic destination level. Tourism
industry and tourism activity rely very frequently on a) the natural conditions of the
environment; b) the human induced impacts on the environment coming from other
activities and industries different from tourism; and c) the unforeseen natural and
anthropogenic hazards. These threats can be classified, depending on their origin, as
natural and anthropogenic (see Table 2). However, many natural threats can be
aggravated by the anthropic action, like, for example, the accelerated sea level rise
provoked by the global warming (a consequence of the growing human-induced
atmospheric pollution).

17

Table 2. Environmental threats for tourism

1. Natural
1.1 Earthquakes
1.2 Tsunamis
1.3 Sea level rise
1.4 Landslides
1.5 Avalanches
1.6 Erosion coastal, soil erosion
1.7 Floods
1.8 Heavy rains, storms and hurricanes
1.9 Droughts
1.10 Heavy heat waves
1.11 Heavy cold waves
1.12 Large-scale wildfires
1.13 Volcanic eruptions (including toxic gas emissions SO2)
2. Anthropogenic
2.1 Water pollution
2.2 Air pollution and noise
2.3 Radioactive contamination
2.4 Excessive and unplanned construction resulting in loss of visual
attractiveness aesthetic pollution
2.5. Human induced forest fires
(Source: Own elaboration based on Calaretu & Bulin, 2012; Holtz et al., 2014)

2.5

Tourism impacts on environment and health at a glance

A tourist consumes 3 or 4 times more water per day than a permanent resident, while
non-tourist water use generally ranges between 100 and 200 litres/per person/day across
Europe (EEA, 2009).
Tourism transport by car cause the largest impacts on air quality10, whereas air transport
shows the largest share in GHG emissions (80% in 2000) in EU25. Rail, coach and ferry
represent almost 20% of all tourism trips, but are responsible for a very small
percentage of environmental impacts (Peeters et al., 2007). The most emission-intense11
mode of transport is cruise ships: direct air emissions of 0.330Kg CO2 per ALB KM12
have been estimated (Carnival corporation & PLC, 2008). Furthermore most cruises
start by flights to reach harbours, adding 10 to 30% of emission (Eijgelaar and others,
2010).

10

NOx, PM

11

Emissions are calculated by multiplying transport distances with averaged emission factors (i.e. averaged amount of CO2 emitted
for transporting one person over one kilometre)

12

Available Lower Berth KM (ALB KM).

18

Climate change and ever growing global travel and tourism are seen as one of
interacting drivers in plausible disease threat scenarious for introduction of novel
vector-borne diseases and shifts in transmission patterns of existing vector-borne
diseases for the EU by 2020, which together with the open borders policy across EU
member states and beyond poses particular challenges for local health care systems (Suk
& Semenza, 2001). In 2011 Europe was the main source of importation for measles in
the US. Several mosquito-transmitted diseases13 have expanded their range and local
transmission occurred in northern Italy in 2007 and southeast France in 2010 (Centers
for Disease Control (U.S.), 2014). The potential role of travellers in the emergence of
infectious diseases in Europe is higlighted in the illness patterns in travellers (Gautret et
al., 2012) and the changing distribution of vectors and vector-borne diseases in Europe
may be explained by interplay of factors (including changes in land use and human
behaviour) that may also be influenced by climate change (EASAC, 2010).

2.6

Response and prospects

According to a recent EU-28 survey, spending time in the sun or at the beach is the most
popular reason for going on holiday in 2014, mentioned by 46% of respondents. About
30% mentioned nature as one of their main reasons and 46% said that the natural
features of a holiday destination would persuade them to go back to the same place.
That confirms the persistent importance of natural capital for tourism survival and of the
sector sustainability for the environmental integrity of the destinations, especially in
areas with high proportions of sensitive ecosystems (EC, 2014).
Finally many years of investment in the sewage system and wastewater treatment have
led to Europes bathing waters being much cleaner today than they were 30 years ago,
when large quantities of untreated or partially treated urban and industrial wastewater
were discharged into water. Since 1990 significant improvements led in 2013 to more
than 90 % of bathing areas with good water quality (EEA, 2013).
New social trends, changes in the way tourism is produced and consumed and a more
progressive European tourism policy, fiscal measures and voluntary initiatives such the
Eco-labelling show that the sector greening is indeed taking place and is not related
strictly to alternative or niche market segments but to the whole.
Europe has far more green and sustainability certification programmes than any other
region of the world, covering all types of tourism suppliers. Many are still showing
limited effectiveness in terms of significant costs saving and increased consumer
demand. The challenge is now to provide more coherence and confidences in labelled
services and products. To this effect EU funded projects such as VISIT and Ecolnet are
working to achieve agreement with leading initiatives on standards, criteria and

13

Like the ones caused by chikungunya virus. Chikungunya virus was largely restricted to Africa and Asia until it began to appear
on islands of the Indian Ocean in 2005, after an outbreak in Kenya in 2004. From there, it crossed to the Indian subcontinent in
2006, touching off major disease outbreaks, especially in southern India.

19

indicators for, respectively, effective eco-labels and ecotourism services to contribute to

a genuine conservation and sustainability effort. The European Charter for Sustainable
Tourism in protected areas also plays an important role to this regard.
Europe accounted for 21% of GHG emissions in 2005 from accommodation in spite of
its larger share of tourism volume. This is due to more efficient energy use and cleaner
sources of power generation such as hydroelectric and natural gas. These emissions will
grow at a rate of 3.2% annually, reaching 728 Mt CO2 by 2035, but they will not be
distributed evenly across the globe as Europe is expected to decrease its share on global
emissions by 10% in 2035 as compared to 2005 (World Economic Forum, 2009).
In 2020 car will be still the backbone of tourism while the aircraft will take the main
share for kilometres travelled as today. For just 20% of all trips air travel will be
responsible of 85% GHG emissions.
Passengers/kilometres are expected to rise from 5 billion to more than 13 billion over
the period 2010-2030 in the world and the intra-Europe route will remain among the
world top 5 routes during 2030-2040 (ICAO 2013 Environmental Report n.d.). Europe
will also continue to lead in international arrivals that are expected to increase from 57
per 100 of population to 89 in 2010-2030 (World Tourism Organization, 2011).
Main actors, such as airlines and cruises, as well as hotels and resorts operators
respectively involved in initiatives like the Single European Sky ATM Research
programme14, the Clean North Sea Shipping (CNSS)15 or the Sustainable Cruise16
projects, the International Tourism Partnership (ITP)17, show only some of the most
recent examples of commitment and good practices in regard to greening the sector.

14

SESAR programme is targeting a significant enhancement of the European air traffic management system to minimise
environmental impacts. http://www.sesarju.eu/environment/sesar%E2%80%99s-environmental-objectives-994
15

CNSS project will focus on emission and greenhouse gas reduction, http://cnss.no/

16

An EU Life + financed project on the reduction, re-use and recycling of waste produced on board in order to improve the
contribution of the maritime sector to the European commitment against climate change. http://www.sustainablecruise.eu/en/
17

The International Tourism Partnership (ITP) brings together the worlds leading international hotel companies to provide a voice
for environmental and social responsibility in the industry, http://www.tourismpartnership.org/about-us .

20

3 Proposal for a structure of the reporting

mechanism
What follows is a first proposal for the main structure and content of the reporting
mechanism. It takes into account the mutual relation between tourism and
environmental assets quality, within a policy context which is still a bit fragmented, and
the opportunity to progress towards a harmonized EU level information process on
impacts and sustainability trends:

Tourism in multiple contexts

This part could be an introduction to illustrate the multiple dimensions of
tourism and to define the approach taken for the report. Some aspects that could
be addressed (thinking to go from general aspects to more specific ones):
o Tourism in global context (position of Europe in global context Europe
as receptor and Europeans as tourists to other continents)
o Overview on the crosscutting elements of tourism: involvement of
multiple economic sectors, multiple ecosystem services related
supporting tourism,
o Main policies in sustainable tourism and link to other policies (e.g.
resource efficiency, consumer policies,).
o Different types of tourism (according to its concentration in time and
space, purposes, offers, products, etc.) according to definition of the
relevant organizations engaged in the sector
o Different actors (small enterprises, etc.)
o Brief review of prevailing consumption concepts of tourists or the most
frequent patterns of tourist behaviour and consumer awareness

How to characterise sustainable tourism?

Instead of starting to present pressures and impacts it would be worth to focus on
the positive perspective-message (including ecological benefits, as well as social
and economic benefits) while also listing different forms and definitions of
sustainable tourism (low-impact tourism, ecotourism, etc.).

Trends in tourism
This is the main objective of the reporting and will be based on the most
meaningful indicators focussing on issues specific to tourism.
o Main pressures of tourism, also those driven by consumer
behaviour/demand. Type of pressure differentiated by regions (mountain,
coast, urban) and by type of tourism product.
o Trends of new products (looking for authenticity, untouched nature, etc.)
o Environmental impacts (negative/positive).
On site
Exogenous (travel)
Identification of hot spots
o Responses.
21

Good practices (Governance at different levels, including

transboundary regions; corporate social responsibility; labelling;
voluntary actions; communication and awareness
Tools (measures and instruments)
Effectiveness of policies/measures

Indicators will be the basis of the reporting since they will allow comparing
trends and dynamics through time on a regular basis. For that it is proposed the
use of a specific template for the indicators to be used as a building block for the
reporting (see the template proposal below). In particular, it is here also
suggested to provide an additional section to present some local examples. It
may well happen that some indicators are developed at NUTS level. Providing
an additional window with few local examples may complement and help to
better understand the related indicator at a more detailed scale.

Specific focus (thematic approach)

This could be a section providing a crosscutting analysis with other topics
relevant for tourism. The focus could change in each report.
In accordance with the 7th EAP Living well within the limits of our planet,
possibilities to explore and approach the idea of carrying capacity linked to
natural environment and ecosystem services, as data could be available only
for small surface of territories because it strongly depends on properties and
sensitivities of each territory/given zone and also on the type of tourism
activities. .
Tourism and climate change. Potential impact (tourism vulnerability in
relationship with urban vulnerability indicators), benefiting from ongoing
national and international projects.
Co-benefits of tourism in rural/mountain areas? Mixed uses.

It is clear that the report has to be based on existing data quantitative and measurable
indicators for evaluation. In this case the report covers only limited number of indicators
and related field of mutual impact tourism - environment.
In order to mitigate this limitation a solution could be to produce yearly reports focused
on indicators populated by available statistical data, and in some intervals (e.g. every 3
5 years), to produce reports based on data provided by surveys and covering wider
fields of relationship tourism / environment in more details (see Conclusions).
Indicator fact sheet
In order to systematize the production of the indicators it is proposed to use a common
form or template: the indicator fact sheet. The fact sheet is structured to cover all the
relevant components of the indicator including both the assessment and the technical
specifications (data, methodology, uncertainties, and references) (Table 3).

22

The proposed structure follows closely the template used by the EEA in the core set of
indicators18.
Table 3. Proposal of indicator fact sheet
Indicator
code)

name

(Indicator

ASSESSMENT

Assessment of the indicator

Indicator Name

Indicate if there are sub-indicators and name(s)

Key policy question

Main question to which the indicator provides an

understanding.

Key message

Main message(s) from the assessment.

Key assessment

Assessment. Possibility to include sub-indicators. Maps

and figures also go here.

Specific policy question

Specific question to which the indicator provides an

understanding. It could be seen as an in depth analysis of
the key policy question.

Specific assessment

Assessment of the specific policy question.

Examples

Selected examples/case studies that would help to better

understand the indicator or to show specificities at higher
resolution to indicate the limitations or boundary
conditions of the indicator. Only if they are relevant.
Possible contribution of the expert group.

SPECIFICATIONS

This section provides the technical description of the

indicator

Indicator definition

Complete description of what the indicator is showing. If

relevant mention the reporting unit.

DPSIR

Position of the indicator within the DPSIR framework.

Maybe reproduce the full scheme highlighting the
indicator. This would provide a more complete picture
and also the link of one single indicator with the rest of
indicators.

Justification
Rationale

18

Description of the relevance of the indicator and why it

has been included in the tourism indicator set. It should
also provide the scientific basis behind. It would be
relevant to mention if the indicator is widely accepted
and used in other frameworks, member states,

http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators#c5=&c7=all&c0=10&b_start=0

23

References

References mentioned in the rationale to provide support

and evidence of the relevance of the indicator and
scientific soundness.

Policy context
Policy context

European policies related to the indicator. It could also

refer to international conventions from the European
perspective (direct role of the EC).

Targets

If any. Sometimes may be qualitative

Related policy
documents

References to any policy mentioned in the previous

sections.

Methodology
Methodology for
indicator calculation

Description on how the indicator is developed (details of

needed steps to reproduce the indicator).
Indication of units

Methodology for gap

filling

How missing data has been filled in.

References

References for the methodology.

Data specifications

Data sources used for the calculation of the indicator,

including the link to sources or metadata.

Uncertainties
Methodology
uncertainty

To what extent the methodology adds or has some

component of uncertainty. Probably this will not be the
case in most indicators.

Data sets uncertainties

Probably the most frequent uncertainty in the tourism

indicators, linked to different data quality provided by
countries even if it has been compiled by an European
institution.

Rationale uncertainty

Open issues left in the rationale of the indicator.

Uncertainties in the assumptions made in the rationale.

Further work

Either by improving the methodology or by using new

upcoming data. Mention the time projection: further
work ad short, mid or long term.

Ownership and contacts

24

4 Inventory of relevant tourism-related

indicators, data and sources of
information
This section is dedicated to an initial inventory or identification of relevant tourismrelated indicators, data and sources of information, able to be useful in a future regular
process of assessment of environmental impacts and sustainability of tourism at a
European scale (mainly using indicators and spatial data).
All these data and sources of information should, in a later stage, be classified, selected
and combined or further implemented in order to identify and define those key
indicators or spatial data that should be used in a future regular assessment of tourism at
European scale.
Specifically, the data that has been identified includes:
-

A proposal of tourism indicators (EEA, 2003). This is a proposal of indicators

related to environmental impact, management and monitoring of tourism activity in
Europe made by the EEA between 2001 and 2003. In its assessments, the EEA aims
to evaluate indicator trends in the light of EU or internationally agreed policy
objectives or targets. In the absence of such clear objectives and targets, an indicator
set for tourism and the environment has to encompass all the components of tourism
that may affect the state of the environment and social patterns. The aim of this
proposal was not to be exhaustive, but to highlight the different environmental
problems that the sector faces and to make more transparent those areas where
additional policies need to be developed. The TOUERM indicator set had been
developed in collaboration with Eurostat (Tourism Unit), OECD, the World
Tourism Organisation (WTO), UNEP, and a number of regional and national
organisations concerned with tourism. This is a long-term vision of an ideal list
and some of the proposed indicators could not at that stage be quantified. Where
data availability problems had prevented a Europe-wide analysis, national examples
or proxy indicators had been used. Key indicators from the list were already
included within the EEA core set of indicators developed within the national focal
points/EIONET network (refer to Signals reports). The indicator set covers the most
important aspects of the tourism and environment system and includes ecoefficiency indicators. To support the further development of the indicators, the
current list should revised by countries at the national level. They are based on (and
want to give answer to) several policy questions which are considered still up to date
and oriented the reasoning on the available data sources analysis:
1. What are the environmental impacts of tourism?
1.1 What is the tourism's contribution to GHG emissions and air
pollution?
25

1.2 What are the direct resources consumptions by tourism?

1.3 What are the impacts of leisure activity on the biodiversity,
vegetation and on soil erosion?
1.4 What are the environmental risks caused by tourism activities?
1.5 What is the waste generation by tourism?
1.4 What are the environmental risks caused by tourism activities?
1.5 What is the waste generation by tourism?
1.6 What is the performance of the waste and wastewater treatments of
tourism?
1.7 How is tourism concentrated in space?
1.8 What are the impacts of tourism development (construction, activities
and infrastructure development) on the natural environment?
1.9 What are the reverse impacts of the environment on tourism?
2. Are we getting better at managing tourism demand to preserve
natural resources?
2.1 What are the most tourism intensive regions in Europe?
2.2 What are the potential conflicts in land use by tourism (with other
activities)?
2.3 Are we going to manage the space allocation for intensive tourism on
vulnerable areas?
2.4 Are tourism destinations preventing against natural risks?
2.5 How is the demand for visiting Europe increasing?
2.6 Who are the tourists travelling in Europe and what for?
2.7 Do tourists prefer spending nights in the least environmental impacts
accommodations forms?
2.8 Are we optimizing the use of existing tourism infrastructures
capacity?
2.9 Do we better spread the tourism season over the year?
2.10 Are we using more friendly environmental modes of transports for
tourism?
2.11 Are we going better at managing the tourism mobility?
2.12 Are we travelling further for tourism?
2.13 How can tourism help protect the environment?
3. What characterizes and drives the demand for tourism?
3.1 Are we reducing the spatial pressure from tourism infrastructures?
3.2 Are we improving the inter-modality of the transport system to match
the tourists needs?
3.3 What trend does tourism take in the European economy?
3.4 Is the demand for sustainable tourism products increasing?
4. Are we moving towards a better internalization of the external costs
of the tourism sector?
4.1 What are the environmental costs resulting from tourism activity?
4.2 Are we more directing taxes revenues from tourism to the
preservation of the environment?

26

5. How effective are environmental management and monitoring tools

towards a more integrated tourism strategy?
5.1 Are tourism companies more environmentally responsible?
5.2 Are destinations managers establishing integrated tourism plans?
5.3 Are Member States setting up some national sustainable tourism
development strategies (and monitor them)?
5.4 Is the European Union more supporting environmentally-friendly
tourism?
The proposal is made up by a total of 39 indicators (see Annex 1). They were
abandoned for several years and were not applied or calculated anymore. However,
they represent the starting point in the review process of identification and selection
of lead indicators, especially the ones still updated by EUROSTAT, for regular
assessment of environmental impacts and sustainability of tourism in Europe.
-

A selection of EEA existing data sets related to tourism. The table shows a
selection of 42 existing data sets taken from EEA that can potentially be used for the
development of tourism indicators (due to their direct or indirect relationship with
tourism). Relevance for tourism has been defined according to how direct is the
relationship of the dataset with tourism and/or its environmental impact /
sustainability (see Annex 2). The selection has been done on the basis of a list of
220 EEA data raw that covers different topics such as elevation, freshwater,
biodiversity, transport, etc.

The list of the tourism related data at EUROSTAT. The list shows the currently
available and relevant tourism data for all of the European countries, especially
concerning annual and monthly data on tourism industries such occupancy of tourist
accommodation establishments, capacity of tourist accommodation establishments,
tourism intensity and density, annual data on trips of EU resident, that can be useful
to measure tourism pressures on the environment as well. Most of the data is only
available at national level (there are only two exceptions with the data at NUTS 2
level) (see Annex 3).

A selection of other data (mainly from ESPON). Selection of 16 different types of

data elaborated by ESPON or ESPON-GEOSPECS at NUTS 2, NUTS 3 or LAU2
level that have a certain level (medium or high) of relevance for tourism analysis,
according to the direct or indirect link of the project to tourism issues, and could be
complementary to the EEA previously identified data (see Annex 4).

A selection of reports related to tourism. Many thematic areas deal with tourism
and its related indicators. Therefore, a set of 14 recent reports covering the EU and
the EEA member countries have been reviewed in order highlight their relevance for
the scoping paper and use them as reference for the upcoming reports. Additionally,
tourism related indicators appearing in these reports could be identified and included
in the data review. Only EEA, ETC and ESPON reports have been included in the
27

review due to their territorial coverage. Other global, national and subnational
reports could be added if necessary for the scoping paper (see Annex 5).
-

The list of the indicators for sustainable tourism destinations (ETIS) proposed
by the European Commission (2013). The European Tourism Indicator System
(ETIS) aims to contribute to improving the sustainable management of destinations
by providing tourism stakeholders with an easy and useful toolkit. It wants to help
stakeholders to measure and monitor their sustainability management processes, and
enable them to share and benchmark their progress and performance in the future. It
covers four main sections (A. Destination management; B. Economic value; C.
Social and cultural impact; D. Environmental impact), with 27 core indicators and
40 optional indicators, thought to be used on a voluntary basis (see Annex 6).

The status of the National data/reporting systems was collected using

questionnaires that were sent to national experts related to EIONET Tourism Expert
working group. Experts from 13 Member states, covering the whole EEA (from
Iceland to Greece, Portugal to Finland) completed the questionnaire and provided
information about existing national reporting systems, their characteristics as well as
additional information about regional or sectorial reporting systems (see Annex 9).

Finally, the Workshop that took place in Copenhagen in July 2014 allowed to share
all the previous sources of data and proposals of indicators among the EIONET
tourism national experts from different European countries. Their opinions and
comments were collected during the workshop and during the following weeks as
well. This allowed to create a table integrating their views on the EEAs 2003
proposal of indicators, the ETIS system of indicators, the DPSIR scheme, the
potential data sources, and the perceived relevance / feasibility of each indicator
(low, medium, high) (see Annex 10).

28

5 Conclusions
The background section has stressed and confirmed the strong relationship existing
between tourism and environment. Tourism exerts a wide range of impacts on the
environment and it also receives other threats from the environment as well. These
problems are very clear in Europe, a key tourism destination at the World level. The
analysis of these aspects under the DPSIR scheme and the use of indicators emerges as
an urgent need. This report has started to work towards this direction, making an initial
compilation of data and relevant indicators to consider in order to do a regular
assessment of the environmental impacts of tourism in Europe and its sustainability.
The inventory of indicators, data and sources of information has made evident,
however, some criticalities that here we could point out in order to take them into
account for the next stages of the task, that mainly they will consist of selecting and
prioritizing a list of key indicators to be developed and calculated in order to establish a
regular reporting mechanism. In consequence, some of the topics to be considered are
the following ones.
- Different types of data. One of the most common type of data that makes up the
existing systems of indicators for sustainable tourism (such as ETIS and similar
ones) are statistical data (most of them provided by surveys carried out to different
types of stakeholders, i.e. tourists, enterprises, employees, etc.), but the data EEA is
mainly working with is spatial data. Both types of data are difficult to combine since
most of statistical data is available at a more general scale (NUTS 2 or NUTS 3,
generally) than spatial data (available in most cases in a Raster form). Furthermore,
most of the ETIS indicators are difficult to be applied to the whole European territory
since they are mainly based on specific surveys carried out destination by destination
(in these cases, it would be necessary to carry out thousands of surveys). In this
sense, for a system as the one that the EEA wants to create it would initially seem
more reasonable to use preferably the spatial data.
- Statistical data. However, some statistical data -such those at local scale- will
probably be considered useful to be included in the regular assessment. In this sense,
there is the key problem of data availability and comparability (as data coming from
different sources may have different methodology, quality, time and scale reference,
etc.). For instance, some key data should be provided by EUROSTAT, but it should
be checked it out: a) whether these data are available or not, b) in the case that they
are available, if they are available for the whole European territory or not, c) at what
scale they are available (it is important to use the same scale in order to make
comparisons), and d) if there are temporal series or not, among other related
questions. When EUROSTAT could not provide some data, those data could be
29

asked to the respective national tourism, environmental or statistical authorities, but

with the risk of not obtaining the whole European picture. It would be important that
some statistical data were available at least at municipal level, but we presume that in
many cases this will be very difficult to obtain (i.e. seasonal population, second
homes, same day visitors, etc.).
National Data/Reporting Systems: National reporting or information systems have been
assessed via first-hand review, a dedicated questionnaire and during the TOUERM
workshop in Copenhagen. Slovakia is the only country which provides a dedicated
report on tourism and its impact on the environment.19 It is published by the Slovak
Environmental Agency and follows the DPSIR model in order to understand causalconsequential correlations between an activity of human being and state of the
environment by means of D-P-S-I-R causal chain link and in such way to offer an
innovative view of the state and trend in the environment through the integrated
assessment20. It provides a regular (every 2 years) review of indicators describing
tourisms impact on the environment as well as the level of environmental efficiency of
tourism.
In a set of other countries, tourism is part of the environmental status reporting (HR, IT,
DE, RS). In most countries, nevertheless, national data collections for touristic data rely
above all on statistical information gathered by national statistic agencies. Most of the
indicators and variables available at national level are the same as reported to and
published by Eurostat. In this context, Spain and Italy prepare more specific data
collections, while Germany focusses on the effects and outlook of national tourism
policies.
Spain and Italy evidence the high importance of its tourism sector by offering additional
tourism information through national and regional data collections. The Spanish
national Institute for Tourism Studies (Instituto de Estudios Tursticos) provides indepth information about tourism specific issues such as low-cost airlines, tourism
mobility at Spains borders, as well as results of regular targeted surveys (labour
market, visitors surveys, etc.). Italys ISTAT as well as the National Tourism Research
Institute (ISNART) conduct specific surveys on tourism.
Additionally, several countries have established monitoring systems about tourism in
protected areas (HU, IS, DE) or have developed studies on tourism and climate change
(PT, IT). Other countries such as Hungary and Latvia are working on dedicated actions
for ecotourism or have developed action plans dedicated to tourism and environment. In
Ireland, for instance, the National Tourism Development Authority (Filte) published its
Environmental Action Plan 2007-2009 calling for research and management activities to
foster the harmonization of tourism and environment.21 The Netherlands, in turn,

19

http://www.enviroportal.sk/spravy/spravy-o-zp/sprava/663/78/en
http://www.enviroportal.sk/spravy/spravy-o-zp/kapitola/78/en
21
http://www.noticenature.ie/files/Tourism-and-the-Environment.pdf
20

30

included the tourism sector into their Green Deals22 initiative to promote sustainable
growth.
At sub-national level, the Catalonian Tourism Observatory, the Basque Tourism
Observatory and the Andalusian Territorial Information System on Tourism are
different examples in Spain of further initiatives that intend to monitor tourism-related
data sets on different scales. Furthermore, several European regions such as the Baltic
Sea region, have developed their own indicator and information system (e.g. BASTISBaltic Sea Heritage Tourism Information System23), which have a strong market
orientation and are finally based to a great extent on the same national statistical data.
Other portals such as DestiNet24 work as exchange platforms of knowledge and, to some
degree, of data, dedicated to destination development. Italy prepares an Environmental
Data Yearbook which provides an overview of tourism data and its related impact on
the environment, presented at NUTS2 level.
Despite all this diversity and non-homogeneous framework of national tourism and
environment reporting systems, an additional positive element for reflection on further
potential development of informing on tourism sector related performances at European
level is the existing information flow on tourism national statistics feeding the European
Virtual Tourism Observatory. In this context all EU Member Countries already provide
annual reports on tourism mostly socio-economic data - and country profiles are
available too.
- Spatial data. Regarding spatial and cartographic data, some questions would also
emerge when considering possible problems for a regular assessment, some of them
similar to the statistical ones previously explained: the lack of detailed and high
resolution data, the territorial coverage (EU28, EE39...), the unit of reference
(NUTS, LAU, Raster...), the availability of temporal series, etc.
- EIONET Tourism and environment expert group feed-back. Some comparisons
between ETIS and the EEA (Annexes 7 and 8) proposed core set of indicators and
their mapping to the impacts of tourism (according to impacts listed in table 2,
paragraph 2.3) show that:
- Both ETIS and EEA proposal cover the most of listed impacts, with the sole
exception of depletion of ozone layer
- Land degradation is only addressed by the EEA proposal while ETIS is the
only one to provide an indicator for positive psycho-sociological impacts,

22
23
24

http://www.government.nl/issues/energy-policy/green-deal
www.bastis-tourism.info
www.destinet.eu

31

In some cases ETIS and EEA proposal show a certain degree of

complementarity with regard to indicators responding to the same impact (ex.
Loss of biodiversity).

The incorporation of comments made by the EIONET national tourism and environment
experts on the EEAs 2003 proposal of indicators and the ETIS system of indicators,
allowed to obtain a general overview of the perceived relevance / feasibility of each
indicator (Annex 10). However, as some of the experts underlined, there is a general
problem of data availability in most of the cases. This aspect should be taken into
account during the process of selection of indicators, as homogeneity of data and results
should be granted for all Europe if the objective of indicators is also to compare
territories and trends.
Some of the recommendations made by the national experts include:
-

Availability of data is one of the crucial criteria for assessing the relevance of
indicators (avoid indicators which need extensive new data collection or
measurements; use available data or data available with moderate effort);
Indicators should be in priority based on existing data flows;
Each lead indicators should involve simultaneously tourism and environmental
considerations;
Coverage of indicators should be as large as possible of the DPSIR spectra;

The indicators responding to the following policy questions were evaluated as of high
relevance based on the countries feedback. Table 4 summarizes their feasibility, in
terms of data availability and analytical complexity for the policy questions and their
relevance (meaning those evaluated as highly relevant) for the reporting mechanism.
Table 4. Feasibility if highly relevant indicators
Policy question

Relevance

Feasibility

1.1 What is the tourism's contribution to air quality and climate High
change? (TOUR1)

Medium

1.2 What are the direct resources consumptions by tourism? High

(TOUR2, 3, 4A)

Medium

1.4 What are the environmental risks caused by tourism activities? High
(TOUR9)

Medium

1.5 What is the waste generation by tourism? (TOUR11)

High

Medium

1.6 What is the performance of the waste and wastewater High

treatments of tourism? (TOUR13)

Medium

1.7 How is tourism concentrated in space? (TOUR14)

High

High

1.8 What are the reverse impacts of the environment on tourism? High
(TOUR8)

High

2.2 What are the potential conflicts in land use by tourism (with High

Medium

32

other activities)? (TOUR4B)

2.9 Do we better spread the tourism season over the year? High
(TOUR22)

High

2.12 Are we travelling further for tourism? (TOUR34)

MediumLow

High

3.1 Are we reducing the spatial pressure from tourism High

infrastructures? (TOUR15A, 15B)

Medium

4.1 What are the environmental costs resulting from tourism High
activity? (TOUR40A)

Low

5.3 Are Member States setting up some national sustainable High

tourism development strategies (and monitor them)? (TOUR47)

Low

5.4 Is the European Union more supporting an environmentally- High

friendly tourism? (TOUR47)

Low

This summary shows that those indicators based on existing data flows (TOUR8 bathing water quality) or on general tourism statistics (TOUR14, TOUR22) are easy to
use for the reporting mechanism as they are highly complete and covering most of
Europe. But indicators based on tourism statistics are background indicators for other
indicators addressing more directly tourisms impact on the environment, particularly
regarding resource use and contamination (policy questions 1.x) which were the mostly
focused on by the countries feedback. The feasibility of developing these indicators,
assessed as medium, is required but attached with some methodological and analytical
problems that will have to be solved during the implementation process. General data on
the resource consumption (energy, water, land) or contamination (waste, waste water,
air pollution) are available, but the proportion of tourism has to be estimated for the
whole of Europe. Finally, there are a few indicators that are evaluated as low regarding
the feasibility of creating the indicators. Mainly this is because of missing consistent
data at European level and a high degree of uncertainty, particularly regarding the
environmental costs resulting from tourism (TOUR40A).
The feedback on the proposed indicator set, provided by several participating country
representatives, showed very interesting contributions to the elaboration of the indicator
system. New data sources were provided or methodologies proposed. Local or national
case studies may be the starting point for European-wide data collections if the high
degree of relevance requires it. This is the case, for instance, for air pollution data which
depends on data on modal split, kilometre estimation and person kilometres of tourists.
These data are available for some countries and may be estimated or derived from
national data collections for other countries.
In a first step, the highly relevant indicators should be further developed. This includes a
detailed data review and a methodological proposal for each of the proposed indicators.
A preliminary mapping of these indicators will serve to validate the feasibility and
33

highlight remaining data and methodological gaps. However, if it finally appeared

problems of data availability or difficulties in the data collection for some of the highly
relevant indicators, there could be proposed the development of alternative indicators
made by available data, such as the included in Annexes 2, 3, and 4, among other
sources.
Taking all of this into account, one final reflection would be the need of making a deep
analysis of availability and easiness of obtaining of data before making the selection of
key indicators for the regular assessment. More specifically, it should be taken into
account the recommendations proposed by several authors, such as the consideration of
the specific conditions shown in Table 5.

As mentioned earlier, several countries already have developed or have proposed to

start working on indicators. The Report on Tourism and its Impact on the Environment
by the Slovak Environmental Agency is already a very valuable starting point to take
into account as it presents a series of indicators to be adapted at European level. In turn,
missing indicators in this report on, e.g. air quality or emissions by tourism could be
provided by a common approach at European level. France suggested some alternative
indicators, particularly on the economic return of tourism in order to account for the
overall environmental costs of tourism. Iceland in turn, suggested several indicators on
the effects of outdoor tourism on biodiversity. Some Mediterranean countries (HR, IT,
ES) highlighted particular impacts of and risks for tourism such as wood fires or water
scarcity. These examples show that besides a core set of highly relevant indicators (as
shown in table 4), a sub-set of regional and thematic indicators could be defined for
dedicated analysis of different tourism types (e.g. nature tourism, cruise tourism) or
different type of regions (e.g. mountain, coastal, urban tourism).

34

Table 5. Conditions for a good indicator

Condition
Relevance
Scientific precision
Measurability
Transparency
Adaptability
Comparability
Updating
Cost efficiency well
balanced
Territorial representation
Temporal representation
Sensitivity
Communication
Participation

Meaning
Relevant to the research programme
Scientifically well founded
Containing the necessary and reliable data to proceed to
its calculation
Clear as regards its methodology and the selection of
parameters
Adaptable to specific characteristics of the territory
Producing comparable results
Using updated data
Efforts expended in data collection well balanced with
information ultimately obtained
Possibility of mapping using georeferenced data
Showing trends over time
Sensitive to spatial and temporal changes
Results easily communicated and understandable to all
Meeting the needs and interests of target audience

(Source: Torres-Delgado and Saarinen (2014)

35

36

6 References
Bevan, M., Rhodes, D., 2005, The Impact of Second and Holiday Homes in Rural
Scotland, Research from Communities Scotland, Edinburgh, UK.
Calaretu, B., Bulin, D., 2012, Environmental Threats for Tourism Development, The
Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest.
Carnival Corporation, PLC, 2008, 2008 Annual Report.
Ceballos-Lascurin, H., 1996, Tourism, ecotourism, and protected areas, IUCN, Gland,
Switzerland, and Cambridge, UK in collaboration with the Commission of European
Communities.
Centers for Disease Control (U.S.), 2014, CDC health information for international
travel 2014: the yellow book.
Committee of the Regions, 2006, Sustainable tourism as a factor of cohesion among
European regions, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities,
Luxembourg.
Holtz, D., Markman, A., Cell, K., Ekwurzel, B., 2014, National Landmarks at Risk,
Union of Concerned Scientists, Cambridge, USA.
EASAC, 2010, Climate change and infectious diseases in Europe, Statement of
European Academies Science Advisory Council,
http://www.easac.eu/fileadmin/PDF_s/reports_statements/Climate_change_and_infectio
us_diseases_in_Europe.pdf
EC, 2014, Flash Eurobarometer, Preferences of Europeans towards tourism, Eurostat,
Feb 2014.
EEA, 2003, Europes environment: the third assessment, European Environment
Agency,
Copenhagen,
Denmark,
http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/environmental_assessment_report_2003_10EEA
, 2009, Water resources across Europe confronting water scarcity and drought, EEA
Report, 2/2009, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark.
EEA, 2013, European bathing water quality in 2012, EEA Report, 4/2013, European
Environment Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Eijgelaar, E., Thaper, C., Peeters, P., 2010, 'Antarctic cruise tourism: the paradoxes of
ambassadorship, last chance tourism and greenhouse gas emissions', Journal of
Sustainable Tourism, 18(3), pp.337-354.
EUROSTAT, Tourism statistics at regional level - Statistics Explained,
(http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php?title=Tourism_statistics
_at_regional_level&printable=yes) accessed March 20, 2014.
37

EUROSTAT, Tourism industries - economic analysis - Statistics Explained,

(http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Tourism_industries__economic_analysis) accessed March 13, 2014.
EUROSTAT, C. D., 2013, Ageing and tourism in the European Union.
Gautret, P. et al., 2012, 'Infectious diseases among travellers and migrants in Europe,
EuroTravNet 2010', Eurosurveillance, Vol. 17, Issue 26, 16-26,
http://www.eurosurveillance.org/images/dynamic/EE/V17N26/art20205.pdf
Ghulam R. , Afrin S., Rahman A., Islam F., Hoque F., 2013:, Environmental effects of
tourism, American Journal of Environment, Energy and Power Research Vol. 1, No. 7,
pp. 117-130.
Guisan, M.-C., Aguayo, E., 2010, 'Second homes in the spanish regions: evolution in
2001-2007 and impact on tourism, GDP and employment', Regional and Sectoral
Economic Studies, Vol. 10, issue 2, http://www.usc.es/economet/reviews/eers1026.pdf
Hall, C. M., Dieter K. M., 2004, Tourism, Mobility and Second Homes: Between Elite
Landscape and Common Ground, Cromwell Press, Great Britain.
Hiltunen, M. J., 2004, 'Second housing in Finland Perspective of mobility', 13th
Nordic Symposium in Tourism and Hospitability, Aalborg, Denmark.ICAO, 2013,
Environmental Report, (http://cfapp.icao.int/Environmental-Report-2013/) accessed
March 20, 2014.
Lew, A. A. (n.d.), 'Long Tail Tourism: New geographies for marketing niche tourism
products',
Academia.edu
(http://www.academia.edu/225125/Long_Tail_Tourism_New_geographies_for_marketi
ng_niche_tourism_products) accessed March 13, 2014.
Peeters, P., Szimba, E. and Duijnisveld, M., 2007, 'Major environmental impacts of
European tourist transport', Journal of Transport Geography 15(2), pp. 8393.
Plan Bleu, 2012, 'Seaside tourism and urbanisation: environmental impact and land
issues', Blue Plan Notes, 21, 4 pp.
Sunlu U., 2003, Environmental impacts of tourism, in: Camarda D., Grassini L. (eds.),
Local resources and global trades: Environments and agriculture in the Mediterranean
region. Bari: CIHEAM, p. 263-270. (Options Mditerranennes : Srie A. Sminaires
Mditerranens; n. 57). Conference on the Relationships between Global Trades and
Local Resources in the Mediterranean Region, 2002/04, Rabat (Morocco).
Suk, J. E., Semenza, J. C., 2001, 'Future Infectious Disease Threats to Europe',
American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 101, No. 11, 2068-2079,
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3222407/pdf/2068.pdf
Torres-Delgado, A., Saarinen, J., 2014, Using indicators to assess sustainable tourism
development: a review. Tourism Geographies, 16(1), pp. 31-47.

38

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2011, The Impact of Globalization
on National Accounts, United Nations, New York and Geneva,
http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/stats/groups/wggna/Guide_on_Impact_of_global
ization_on_national_accounts_FINAL21122011.pdf
UNEP, World Tourism Organization, 2005, Making tourism more sustainable. A guide
for policy makers, Paris, France, and Madrid, Spain.
Wong, P. P., 2004, Environmental impacts of tourism. In Lew A. A., Hall C. M.,
Williams A. M. (eds.): A Companion to Tourism, Blackwell Publishing Ltd., pp. 450461.
World Economic Forum, 2009, The Travel & Tourism Competitiveness Report 2009,
Geneva, Switzerland.
World Tourism Organization, 2011, Tourism towards 2030: global overview, World
Tourism Organization, Madrid, Spain.
World Tourism Organization, 2014, UNWTO World Tourism Barometer, Vol. 12, April
2014, Madrid, Spain.

39

ANNEX 1. Proposal of tourism indicators (EEA, 2003)

Generic
questions
1. What
are the
environ
mental
impacts
of
tourism
?

40

Policy questions

Code

1.1 What is the TOUR1

tourism's contribution
to air quality and
climate change?

Indicator title

Description

Air pollution by Atmospheric pollution of transport

tourism transport modes for tourism by pollutant
approached by the share of tourism
purpose in the passenger demand
(holidays, leisure, visit to friends,
business; excluding commuting
and shopping)
1.2 What are the direct TOUR2 Energy use by Energy use by transports for
resources
tourism; energy use by tourism
tourism
consumptions
by
facilities:
accommodations
tourism?
(collective and private) and sports
and leisure equipments
TOUR3 Water
use
by
tourism
use
by Water
infrastructures versus water use by
tourism
Households (% urban water use)
and Horeca sector (% industry
water use) ; - population variations
and urban water use variations for
selected countries or regions
TOUR4A Land
take
by Area of land taken by the tourism
establishments
for
tourism
accommodation: number of hotels,
equipments
(accommodations, campsites, holidays dwellings, flat
golfs and marinas) rental, centres, and second homes
* average square meters taken by
unit, national level; number of 18holes golfs fields * average area
per unit, number of boat places in

Position in
DPSIR

Data
availability

Status
(responsability)

country
example: FR

long
term
(TR/AP/TOUR)

examples
long
term
(FR, DE, AU, (TOUR/EN)
UK)

examples
long term (WTR,
(FR, ES, IE, TOUR)
IT, PT)

EU level

short
term
(TOUR/TE)

marinas

1.3 What are the TOUR5B Potential

impacts leisure activity
disturbance
on
on the biodiversity?
biodiversity from
tourism
and
recreational
activities
1.4 What are the TOUR9 Risks caused by ski
environmental
risks
activity
caused by tourism
(avalanches
activities?
occurrence)
1.5 What is the waste TOUR11 Waste generated
generation by tourism?
by tourism

Trends in disturbance of fauna and

flora species in selected areas
caused by tourism and recreation
activities; proxy: Protected areas
(UICN categories) in tourism
receiving regions
Number of avalanches in skiing
areas - time series

Total amount of waste generated

per month by country, versus
number of international tourists
arrivals and inhabitants, or in
selected tourism resorts per month
(in kg per capita) versus national
average of waste generated per
year
1.6 What is the TOUR13 Quality
of Percentage of collective services
performance of the
for waste and wastewater treatment
wastewater
waste and wastewater
services of tourism of the tourism establishments for
treatments of tourism?
accommodation, by types and total
accommodations
(or in tourism versus principal residences
regions)
1.7 How is tourism TOUR14 Tourism
density Number/ expansion of total bedconcentrated in space?
(bed-places
per places by km2 (NUTS 3)
km2)

lack of data

long
term
(TOUR/BDIV)

country
example: FR

long term
TOUR)

country
long term (WMF,
examples: FR, TOUR)
ES, IT

lack of data

EU
level short
term
(NUTS 3)
(TOUR/TE)

(TE,

long term (WTR,

TOUR)

41

1.8 What are the TOUR8

reverse impacts of the
environment
on
tourism?

2. Are we
getting
better
at
managi
ng
tourism
deman
d to
preserv
e
natural
resourc
es?

42

Bathing
water Number of bed-places in tourism
quality (in tourism accommodations by classification
(low-high capacity) as in % of
regions)
classification categorie (bad-good
water quality)
New
Global
warming Past temperature variations and
versus
tourism
potential impact on projections
destinations
(geographical
tourism
representation), evolution of snow
days and ski days in selected
moutain resorts, highest heat
weather days versus number of
tourist arrivals in tourism regions
2.1 What are the most TOUR12 Tourism intensity Number of nights spent or bedtourism
intensive
(bed-places
per places per inhabitant, at national
level and regional level (map)
regions in Europe?
inhabitant)

2.2 What are the TOUR4B Land

use
for
potential conflicts in
tourism activities
land use by tourism
(tourism
(with other activities)?
destinations
vs.
land cover)

Total
number
of
tourism
establishments
or
bed-places
accommodations by main type of
land cover area (versus conversion
of high valued nature ecosystem to
intensive tourism)
2.3 Are we going to TOUR19 Number of visitors Number of visitors in regional and
manage the space A
to protected areas national parks in a year (objective:
allocation for tourism
number of visitors/km2 and per
on sensitive areas?
day - peak month versus low
season)
2.4
Are
tourism TOUR10 Plans of prevention Number of tourism areas with a
destinations preventing
of natural risks in plan of prevention of natural risks
against natural risks?
versus other areas (performance)
tourism regions

country
example: FR

long term (WTR,

TOUR)

country
example: UK

long
term
(TOUR/AP/TE)

Fact sheet to short

term
update;
EU (TOUR/TE)
level (NUTS
3)

EU
level long
term
(NUTS 3)
(TE/TOUR)

examples
long
term
(Panparc,
(TOUR/BDIV)
Europarc, FR,
UK)

S/R

country
example: FR

long
term
(TE/TOUR)

2.5 How is the demand TOUR26 Tourism arrivals in

for visiting Europe
Europe (domestic
increasing?
vs. International,
by main European
regions)

2.6 Who are the TOUR29 Change

in
tourists travelling in
characteristics of
Europe and what for?
the
tourists'
purposes
and
profiles (age and
sex)

TOUR38 Change in type of

organization
of
stays (in % of
total)

2.7 Do tourists prefer TOUR33 Overnights spent

spending nights in the
in
tourism
least
environmental
accommodations
impacts
accommodations
forms?

Number of tourism arrivals

/population, by country and at EU
level/ world = domestic inbound
plus international inbound minus
outbound tourism (nights spent)/
population, 1985-2000, aggregated
for all countries.
Number of tourism trips (or nights
spent) by Sex and Age and by
Tourism purposes (holidays and
business, domestic and outbound)
by country and as in % of total,
time series, Sub-indicator: Tourism
purpose of visits (holidays /
business)
Number of nights spent (or trips)
by type of organization of stays
(direct reservation, tour operator
and package travel) and by tourism
purposes (as in % of total and %
change), EU agregated countries,
time series
Number of night spent by residents
and
non-residents
by
accommodation form (as in % of
total)

short
(TOUR)

term

Fact sheet to short

update
(TOUR)

term

Fact sheet to short

update
(TOUR)

term

Fact sheet to short

update
(TOUR)

term

43

2.8 Are we optimising TOUR18 Tourism

the use of existing
accommodation
tourism infrastructures
occupancy
rates
capacity?
(by
accommodation
forms)

2.9 Do we better TOUR32 Seasonality

of
spread the tourism
tourism
season over the year?
2.10 Are we using TOUR22 Modes of transport
more
friendly
used by tourists
environmental modes
of
transports
for
tourism?
2.11 Are we going TOUR21 Traffic density of
better at managing the
tourism transport
tourism mobility?

2.12 Are we travelling TOUR34 Growth in travel

further for tourism?
distance
for
tourism

44

Gross occupancy rate of hotels

rooms = number of rooms
occupied x 100 / number of days in
month x number of rooms
avalaible (by month following the
number of opened months in
tourism season), annual data by
country or monthly data for all
agregated countries - proxy: net
bed occupancy rate
Number of trips (departure) or
overnights by month (and as in %
of year)
Number of international tourism
arrivals or visitors by mode of
transport at the borders, by
country; - changes in use of modes
of transport for domestic tourism,
time series for selected countries
Traffic density on road of main
European importance: seasonal
variation of car traffic-jam by
hours.km (network length and
density)
Average distance travelled per trip
and per tourist (in km), by mode of
transport, by country, time series

EU level for short

hotels
only (TOUR)
(monthly and
annual
average)

term

Fact sheet to short

update
(TOUR)

term

Fact sheet to short

term
update.
(TR/TOUR)
Country
example: FR,
UK, BE, DE

country
long
term
examples: FR, (TOUR/TR)
UK

Fact
sheet long
term
(proxy
(TR/TOUR)
indicator: EU
level,
year
1996)

3
What
characterizes
and drives the
demand
for
tourism?

3.1 Are we reducing TOUR15 Construction

of
the spatial pressure A
tourism
from
tourism
accommodations;
infrastructures?
including second
homes (on coastal
zones)

TOUR15 Construction
of
B
tourist attractions
(golfs,
marinas,
amusement parks)

TOUR20 Development
of
recreational
activities in forests
areas

3.2 Are we improving TOUR23 Access to mass

the inter-modality of
tourism
the transport system to
destinations
by
match the tourists
public transport
needs?

Number of tourism establishments

for accommodation versus number
of
bed-places;
time
series
(evolution of land consumption per
tourist). Proxy second homes:
Number of individual residences
built versus number of inhabitants
in coastal areas by Coastal
reporting unit, time series
Evolution
of
the
number
harbors/marinas including their
capacity; number of golfs courses
and their superficy; km2 of skiing
areas as % of total area; time series
for selected countries
Percentage of forest land managed
for recreation and tourism to total
forest area; proxy: accessibility of
forests areas for recreation and
tourism (open access and closeness
to inhabitants / main cities)
Density of public transport
network
in
tourist
areas:
infrastructures
proximity
to
tourism destinations by type
(railway station, motorway exit,
airport, harbour) and by country
(% of tourism cities with each
mode of transport); - evolution of
the construction of airports in
tourism areas

EU level for long

term
collective
(TOUR/TE)
accommodati
ons only

lack of data

national level long

term
(proxy)
(TOUR/BDIV)

country
example: FR

long
term
(TOUR/TE)

long
term
(TOUR/TR)

45

TOUR25 Development
of
less environmentdamaging
transport system
for tourism travels
(services)
3.3 What trend does TOUR35 Economic value of
tourism take in the
tourism industry
European economy?
(GVA) as in %
total GDP

TOUR36 Household
expenditure
and
tourism
prices
(including holidays
packages)

3.4 Are tourists more TOUR39 Ecotourism

experimenting
products
ecotourism products?
penetration (as in
% of total)

4
Are
we
moving
towards
a
better
internalisation
of the external

46

4.1 What are the TOUR40 environmental

environmental
costs A
costs of tourism
resulting from tourism
activity?

Evolution in the use of alternative

services in tourism transport
system versus prices of services
(train+car
package
services,
luggages services, local means of
transport during tourism season)
Gross value added of tourism
industry
(and
%
change)
approached by receipts from
international
tourism
(total
receipts; total receipts per capita;
% receipts in GDP)
(a) Household final consumption
expenditure
for
tourism
(recreation, education and culture)
at constant prices European
level, time series, in billions
EURO and per capita, and as in %
of total household expenditure. (b)
Index of tourist consumer prices
(transport, education and culture,
hotels cafs restaurants)
Number of night spent in
agritourism
and
agrotourism
accommodations, number of ecotourism products and services
(offered by tourism and travel
agencies)
(a) expenditure to maintain/restore
exceptional natural sites open to
public per year and entrance fees;
(b) environmental costs of the
pollutions by transport for tourism,
versus evolution of the prices of

lack of data

Fact sheet to short

update
(TOUR)

term

Fact sheet to short

update
(TOUR)

term

examples in long term (TOUR)

DE, ES, FR,
IT, UK

lack of data

long
term
(TOUR/TR)

long term (TOUR)

transport modes and resources

(fuels)

costs of the
tourism sector?

4.2 Are we more TOUR40 Tourism

tax
directing
taxes B
revenue
and
revenues from tourism
environmental
to the preservation of
expenditure
the environment?
(internalisation of
the environmental
costs)

5 How effective
are
environmental
management
and monitoring
tools towards a
more
integrated
tourism
strategy?

5.1
Are
tourism TOUR41 Uptake
of
companies
more
environmental
environmentally
management
responsible?
systems by tourism
companies (EMAS,
EIA)
TOUR42 Ecolabels
of
tourism facilities
(% of total)

Tourist tax revenue / public

expenditure
for
tourism
development and as % of total tax
revenue;
Environmental
expenditure (PAC) by the public
and private sector (total, by type of
expenditure, by environmental
domain - in tourism receiving
regions); Public expenditure for
conservation of tourist sites and on
environmental information and
education in tourism receiving
regions
Number of tourism businesses
participating
in
recognized
environmental schemes (EMAS,
ISO14000) and % of SMEs, by
country or by group of products
and services, time series
(a) Number of eco-labels for
tourism accommodation by level
of implementation (local, national,
regional, European, international),
and in % of total eco-labelled
products
(b)
ecolabels
for
environmental quality of beaches
and harbours (blue flag by
country)

examples in long term (TOUR)

FR, ES, UK,
AU, DE, PT

lack of data

Fact sheet to short

update
(TOUR)

long term (TOUR)

term

47

5.2 Are destinations TOUR45 Progress

in
managers establishing
implementation of
integrated
tourism
integrated plans by
plans?
local stakeholders
in destinations
5.3 Are Member States TOUR46 Progress
in
setting
up
some
integration
of
national
sustainable
tourism
and
tourism development
environment into
strategies (and monitor
national strategies
them)?
and
monitoring
systems
5.4 Is the European TOUR47 EU support to
Union more supporting
sustainable tourism
a
environmentallyprojects
friendly tourism?

Number of Agendas 21 including

tourism issue; implementation of
Integrated Quality System on
coastal tourism areas, Strategic
Environmental Assessment in
tourism regions
Country
table:
institutional
organisation
of
tourism/
horizontal-vertical integration with
other policies/ existence of a
national strategy for sustainable
development and/or on sustainable
tourism/
tourism
indicators
(national/ local)
EC
Programmes/projects
for
sustainable tourism/total projects
(number and budget, and by
country-region)

qualitative
information

medium
term
(TE/TOUR)

qualitative
information

medium
(TOUR)

term

EU indicator medium
(partial)
(TOUR)

term

Note: filled with colour are those cells related to indicators at EU level which are still updated by EUROSTAT or could be substituted by
equivalent and relevant EUROSTAT indicators.

48

ANNEX 2. Selection of EEA existing data sets related to tourism and their possible direct/indirect correspondence to the EEA policy
questions

Data
Noise
Observation and
Information
Service for
Europe
AirBase - The
european Air
quality dataBase
Article 17
Habitats
distribution
Article 17
Species
distribution
Common
Database on
Designated
Areas v.10
Natura 2000 End2011
LandScan
Global
Population
Database 2011
Population
density grid for
2006 based on
GEOSTAT

Repository

Relevance
for tourism

Correspondence
to EEA policy
questions

Topic

Year

Format

Resolution/
scale

Air and Climate

2012

vector

1:100 000

EC

NOISE

High

1.3, 1.8

Air and Climate

Yearly

vector

1:10 000

EEA

EEA SDI

High

1.1, 1.8

Biodiversity

2006

vector

1:100 000

DG-Env

ETC/SIA

Medium

1.3, 2.3

Biodiversity

2006

vector

1:100 000

DG-Env

ETC/SIA

Medium

1.3, 2.3

Biodiversity

2011

vector

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

High

1.3, 2.3

Biodiversity

2011

vector

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

High

1.3, 2.3

Human
population

2011

raster

1 km2

Landscan

Landscan

High

1.5, 1.6, 2.1, 2.2

Human
population

2006

raster

1 km2

Eurostat

ETC/SIA

High

1.5, 1.6, 2.1, 2.2 49

Owner

Population time
9 series LAU2
1960-2011
10 CLC - 1990
CLC - 1990 100m
CLC - 1990 12
250m
11

13 CLC - 2000
CLC - 2000 100m
CLC - 2000 15
250m
14

16 CLC - 2006
17
18
19

20

21

22

50

CLC - 2006 100m

CLC - 2006 250m
CLC - Changes
(1990- 2000 and
2000-2006)
Corilis Dominant Land
Cover Types
2000
Corilis Dominant Land
Cover Types
2006
Land Cover
Flows 1990-

Human
population

19602011

vector

LAU2

DG-Regio

ETC/SIA

High

1990

vector/raster

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.2,2.2, 2.3, 3.1

1990

vector/raster

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1

1990

vector/raster

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1

2000

vector/raster

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1

2000

vector/raster

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1

2000

vector/raster

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1

2006

vector/raster

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1

2006

vector/raster

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1

2006

vector/raster

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1

Land use / land

cover

1990,
2000,
2006

vector/raster

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

High

1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1

Land use / land

cover

2000

vector/raster

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1

Land use / land

cover

2006

vector/raster

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1

Land use / land

cover

2006

raster

1 km2

EEA

EEA SDI

High

1.2, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1

Land use / land

cover
Land use / land
cover
Land use / land
cover
Land use / land
cover
Land use / land
cover
Land use / land
cover
Land use / land
cover
Land use / land
cover
Land use / land
cover

2000 and 20002006

Landscape
23
fragmentation
24 HNV Farmland
25 HNV Forest

26

27

28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

Natural
Susceptibility of
Soils to
Compaction in
Europe
Pan European
Soil Erosion
Risk Assessment
(PESERA)
Soil Erodibility
(K-factor) in
Europe
Green urban
areas
Imperviousness
2009 - 1km
Imperviousness
2009 - 20m
Imperviousness
changes 20062009
UMZ changes
1990-2000
UMZ changes
2000-2006
Urban Atlas

Land use / land

cover
LU-LC AgriForest
LU-LC AgriForest

2009

raster

1 km2

GISAT

ETC/SIA

Medium

1.2, 1.8, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1

2006

raster

1 km2

EEA

EEA SDI

Low

1.8, 2.2

2006

raster

1 km2

EEA

EEA SDI

Low

1.8, 2.2

Soil and bedrock

2008

vector

1:1 000 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.4, 2.4

Soil and bedrock

2004

raster

1 km2

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.4, 2.4

Soil and bedrock

2011

raster

10 km2

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.4, 2.4

2006

raster

100m

EEA

EEA SDI

Low

1.2, 1.8

2009

raster

1 km2

EEA

EEA SDI

High

1.2, 3.1

2009

raster

20m

EEA

EEA SDI

High

1.2, 3.1

2009

raster

20 m

EEA

EEA SDI

High

1.2, 3.1

2000

vector

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

High

1.2, 3.1

2006

vector

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

High

1.2, 3.1

2008

raster

10m

Eurostat

ETC/SIA

Medium

1.2, 3.1

Urban and
imperviousness
Urban and
imperviousness
Urban and
imperviousness
Urban and
imperviousness
Urban and
imperviousness
Urban and
imperviousness
Urban and

51

imperviousness
36
37
38
39

40

41

42

52

Urban
Morphological
Zones (UMZ)
Abstractions
Bathing sites
Discharges
European
catchments and
Rivers network
system (Ecrins),
lakes and
reservoirs
Status of bathing
water
Urban Waste
Water Treatment
Plants
(UWWTP)

Urban and
imperviousness

2006

vector

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.2, 3.1

Water
Water
Water

2012
2012
2012

vector
vector
vector

1:100 000
1:100 000
1:100 000

EEA
EEA
EEA

EEA
EEA
EEA

Medium
High
Medium

1.2
1.8
1.5, 1.6

Water

2012

vector

1:250 000

EEA

EEA SDI

Medium

1.2

Water

19902012

point vector

EEA

EEA website

High

1.8

Water

20072011

point vector

1:100 000

EEA

EEA SDI

High

1.5

ANNEX 3. Tourism related data available at EUROSTAT

Monthly data on tourism industries

o Nights spent at tourist accommodation establishments - monthly data (by country)
o Nights spent by non-residents at tourist accommodation establishments - 1990-2011 - world geographical breakdown - monthly data
(by country)
o Arrivals at tourist accommodation establishments - monthly data (by country)
o Arrivals of non-residents at tourist accommodation establishments - 1990-2011 - world geographical breakdown - monthly data (by
country)
o Net occupancy rate of bed-places and bedrooms in hotels and similar accommodation (NACE Rev. 2, I, 55.1) - monthly data (by
country)

Annual data on tourism industries

o Occupancy of tourist accommodation establishments
Arrivals of residents/non-residents at tourist accommodation establishments (by country)
Nights spent at tourist accommodation establishments by residents/non-residents (by country)
Nights spent at tourist accommodation establishments by country/world region of residence of the tourist (by country)
Nights spent at tourist accommodation establishments by NACE (by country)
Nights spent at tourist accommodation establishments by NUTS 2 regions (by NUTS2)
Nights spent at tourist accommodation establishments by coastal and non-coastal area (from 2012 onwards) (by country)
Nights spent at tourist accommodation establishments by degree of urbanisation (from 2012 onwards) (by country)
Net occupancy rate of bed-places and bedrooms in hotels and similar accommodation (NACE Rev. 2, I, 55.1) (from 2012
onwards) (by country)
o Capacity of tourist accommodation establishments
Number of establishments and bed-places (by country)
Number of bed-places by NACE (by country)
Number of establishments and bed-places by NUTS 2 regions (by NUTS2)
Number of bed-places by coastal and non coastal area (from 2012 onwards) (by country)
53

54

Number of bed-places by degree of urbanisation (from 2012 onwards) (by country)

Annual data on trips of EU residents

o Participation in tourism for personal purposes (number of tourists) (by country)
o Participation in tourism for personal purposes (tourists as share of total population) (by country)
o Participation in tourism for personal purposes by age group (number of tourists) (by country)
o Number of trips quarterly data (by country)
o Number of trips by country / world region of destination (by country)
o Number of trips by purpose (by country)
o Number of trips by length of stay (by country)
o Number of trips by country/world region of destination (by country)
o Number of trips by mode of accommodation (by country)
o Number of trips by month of departure (by country)
o Number of trips by mode of transport (by country)
o Number of trips by sex (by country)
o Number of trips by age group (by country)
o Number of trips by educational attainment level (ISCED11) (from 2012 onwards) (by country)
o Number of trips by household income (from 2012 onwards) (by country)
o Number of trips by activity status (from 2012 onwards) (by country)
o Number of nights spent by purpose (by country)
o Number of nights spent by length of stay (by country)
o Number of nights spent by country/world region of destination (by country)
o Expenditure by expenditure categories (from 2012 onwards) (by country)
o Average expenditure per trip (from 2012 onwards) (by country)
o Average expenditure per night (from 2012 onwards) (by country)

ANNEX 4. Selection of other data (mainly from ESPON)

#

Data

Aggregate impact of climate change on Europes

regions
Change in exposure to coastal storm surge events
Combined adaptive capacity to climate change
Combined economic sensitivity to climate change
Potential impact of climate change on tourism
Potential impact of climate change on World
Heritage Sites

Hours of sunshine in February

Hours of sunshine in July

Yearly average of sunshine

ATTREG Typology by attractiveness for
different working-age populations
ATTREG Typology by forms of attractiveness
Multimodal potential accessibility, absolute level
Potential accessibility by air
Employment in Supporting and auxiliary
transport activities; activities of travel agencies
Employment in marine related sectors

1
2
3
4
5

10
11
12
13
14
15

16 Total employment - Hotels and restaurants

Year

Resolution/scale

Owner

Repository

Relevance
for tourism

Climate

2071-2100

NUTS3

ESPON

ESPON DB

Medium

Climate
Climate
Climate
Climate

2071-2100
2005-2011
2071-2100
2071-2100

NUTS3
NUTS3
NUTS3
NUTS3

ESPON
ESPON
ESPON
ESPON

ESPON DB
ESPON DB
ESPON DB
ESPON DB

Medium
Medium
Medium
High

Climate

2071-2101

NUTS3

ESPON

ESPON DB

Medium

Climate

2008

LAU2

ESPON DB

Medium

Climate

2008

LAU2

ESPON DB

Medium

Climate

2008

LAU2

ESPON DB

Medium

Tourism

2001-2008

NUTS2

ESPON

ESPON DB

Medium

Tourism
Transport
Transport

2001-2008
2001,2006
2001,2006

NUTS2
NUTS3
NUTS3

ESPON
ESPON
ESPON

ESPON DB
ESPON DB
ESPON DB

Medium
Medium
Medium

Employment

2005

NUTS2

ESPON

ESPON DB

High

Employment

2001-2009

NUTS2

ESPON DB

High

Employment

2008

LAU2

ESPON
ESPON GEOSPECS

ESPON DB

High

Topic

ESPON GEOSPECS
ESPON GEOSPECS
ESPON GEOSPECS

55

ANNEX 5. Selection of reports related to tourism

#

URL

Report name

Year

Balancing
the
future of Europe's
coasts

knowledge base for

integrated
management

http://www.eea.e
2012
European bathing uropa.eu/publicat
(and
water quality in ions/europeanpreviou
bathing-water2012
s years)
quality-2012

http://www.eea.e
uropa.eu/publicat
ions/europeanbathing-waterquality-2012

http://www.eea.e
in uropa.eu/publicat
ions/adaptationin-europe

Adaptation
Europe

http://www.eea.e
TERM 2012: The
uropa.eu/publicat
contribution
of
ions/transporttransport to air
and-air-qualityquality
term-2012

56

2013

2013

2012

Institution

EEA

EEA

EEA

EEA

Topic

Relevance for tourism

Other comments

Overview of relevant data for coastal areas (both

socio-economic and environmental), being areas of
concentration of tourstic activities.
Overview of policies, Data on development and economic value tourism
knowlegde base and in coastal areas
assesssments
for Qualitative assessment of potential environmental
coastal regions
issues related to tourism
References to data portals and new coastal
indicator sets

Quality
waters

of

bathing

Indicator collection of bathing water quality for

Yearly update
beach areas.

Link
to
OECD
report on Climate
change
in
the
Review of adapatation Adaptation strategies and policies of tourism
European
Alps:
policies and rsisks and activities to climate change, with scenarios for
Adaption
Winter
opportunities
form different European sub-region
Tourism and Natural
climate change
Hazards
Management
Transport indicators
Yearly
update,
related
to Data on transport (e.g. air passenger transport)
TERM as reference
environmental and air could be linked to tourism activities.
for TouERM (??)
quality
targets
in
Europe

http://www.eea.e
Climate
change, uropa.eu/publicat
impacts
and ions/climatevulnerability
in impacts-andvulnerabilityEurope 2012
2012

Europe's ecological
backbone:
recognising
the
true value of our
mountains

http://www.eea.e
uropa.eu/publicat
ions/europesecologicalbackbone
http://www.eea.e
uropa.eu/publicat
Protected areas in
ions/protectedEurope
areas-in-europe2012

http://www.eea.e
Towards efficient
uropa.eu/publicat
use
of
water
ions/towardsresources
in
efficient-use-ofEurope
water

Test to implement
Unpublished
tourist indicators in
report
EDEN destinations

2012

EEA

2010

EEA

2012

EEA

2012

2010

EEA

UAB

Information on past
Many links to major
and projected climate
Dedicated chapter on climate change impact on studies on climate
change and related
tourism, presenting the tourism climatic index
change impat on
impacts in Europe,
tourism
based on a range of
indicators.
Report
multifuncionality
mountain areas

Particularly, recopilation of economic and

on
geographic (accesibility, etc.) indicators related to
of
tourism.

Tourism as one economic value related to Link to relevant

Overview
of
the
protected areas, particular mention of ecotourism reports on tourism
current
(=> ecosystem service)
and protected areas)
state of protected areas

Report on integrated
water management for
efficient use of water
resources

Report
on
the
feasibility
of
implementation of the
sustainable
tourism
indicators from the EC

Tourism as an example of an economic sector both

affected by droughts and water scarcity and
dorughts, user of efficient solutions (desalination)
and driver of impacts => related water indicators,
water exploitation index, etc.

Sustainable tourism indicators system elaborated

by the Tourism Sustainability Group (TSG)
European Commission (previous stage of ETIS
system)

57

10

http://www.alpco
nv.org/en/Alpine
Sustainable
Knowledge/RSA
tourism in the Alps
/tourism/default.
html

11

http://forum.eion
et.europa.eu/etcsiaconsortium/librar
Deliverable
task
y/2012_subventi
2013#262_4_1
on/thematic_asse
Regional
ssments/141_mo
Cooperation
untain_center/su
pport_rsa4_part3
_number_of_bed
s

12

ATTREG
Attractiveness
of
European Regions
and
Cities
for
Residents
and
Visitors

http://www.espo
n.eu/main/Menu_
Projects/Menu_A
ppliedResearch/a
ttreg.html

2013

ESPON

13

ADES - Airports as
Drivers
of
Economic Success
in
Peripheral
Regions

http://www.espo
n.eu/main/Menu_
Projects/Menu_T
argetedAnalyses/
ades.html

2013

ESPON

58

2012

2013

ETC SIA /
UAB /
Alpine
Conventio
n

ETC SIA

Contribute to the 4th

Report on the state of Sustainable tourism definition, indicators and data
the Alps (RSA4) on
sustainable tourism

Contribute to the 5th

Report on the state of Tourism indicators for the Alpine space (Number
the Alps (RSA5) on of beds, settled area, etc.)
demographic changes
and employment

Analysis
of
attractiveness
of
regions and cities in
terms of mobility
attraction (both for
residential
purposes
and visits)
Analysis
accesibility
regional airports

Development of indicators showing numbers of

visitors and the attractivenes of regions for visitors;
interpretation of mobility patterns based on socioeconomic data.

of
Indicator development for accesibility by plane
by

14

EUROISLANDS The Development

of the Islands
European Islands
and
Cohesion
Policy

http://www.espo
n.eu/main/Menu_
Projects/Menu_T
argetedAnalyses/
EUROISLANDS
.html

2011

ESPON

Targeted analysis of
Analysis of attractiveness and socio-economic and
European
Islands,
environmental impact of activities (e.g. tourism),
regarding
cohesion
specific indicator development for island regions
and
territorial
development

59

ANNEX 6. European Tourism Indicator System (ETIS) - European Commission

Section A: Destination Management
Criteria
A.1 Sustainable Tourism Public
Policy

Indicator
Reference
A.1.1
A.1.1.1

A.2 Sustainable Tourism

Management in Tourism Enterprises

A.1.1.2
A.2.1

CORE indicators and OPTIONAL indicators

Percentage of the destination with a sustainable tourism strategy/action plan, with agreed
monitoring, development control and evaluation arrangement
Percentage of residents satisfied with their involvement and their influence in the planning
and development of tourism
Percentage of the destination represented by a destination management organisation
Percentage of tourism enterprises/establishments in the destination using a voluntary
verified certification/labelling for environmental/quality/sustainability and/or CSR measures

A.3 Customer Satisfaction

A.3.1

Number of tourism enterprises/establishments with sustainability reports in accordance with

the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)
Percentage of visitors that are satisfied with their overall experience in the destination

A.4 Information and Communication

A.3.1.1
A.4.1

Percentage of repeat/return visitors (within 5 years)

The percentage of visitors who note that they are aware of destination sustainability efforts

A.4.1.1

The percentage of businesses that communicate their sustainability efforts to visitors in their
products, marketing, or branding

Indicator
Reference
B.1.1

CORE indicators and OPTIONAL indicators

Number of tourist nights per month

B.1.1.1
B.1.1.2
B.1.1.3
B.1.2
B.2.1

Relative contribution of tourism to the destination's economy (% GDP)

Number of 'same day' visitors in high season and low season
Daily spending per same day visitor
Daily spending per tourist (accommodation, food and drinks, other services)
Average length of stay of tourists (nights)

B.2.1.1

Average length of stay of same day visitors (hours)

A.2.1.1

Section B: Economic Value

Criteria
B.1 Tourism Flow (volume & value)
at Destination

B.2 Tourism Enterprise(s)

Performance

60

B.2.2
B.2.2.1
B.3.1

Percentage of ten largest tourism enterprises involved in destination

management/cooperative marketing
Occupancy rate in commercial accommodation per month and average for the year
Average price per room in the destination
Direct tourism employment as percentage of total employment

B.4 Safety and Health

B.3.1.1
B.3.1.2
B.4.1

Percentage of jobs in tourism that are seasonal

Percentage of tourism enterprises providing student internships
Percentage of tourism enterprises inspected for fire safety in the last year

B.5 Tourism Supply Chain

B.4.1.1
B.5.1

Percentage of tourists who register a complaint with the police

Percentage of tourism enterprises actively taking steps to source local, sustainable, and fair
trade goods and services
Percentage of the destination covered by a policy promoting local, sustainable and/or fair
trade products and services
Percentage of tourism enterprises sourcing a minimum of 25% of food and drink from
local/regional producers

B.2.1.2

B.3 Quantity and Quality of

Employment

B.5.1.1
B.5.1.2
Section C: Social and Cultural Impact
Criteria
Indicator
Reference
C.1 Community/Social Impact
C.1.1

C.2 Gender Equality

CORE indicators and OPTIONAL indicators

Number of tourists/visitors per 100 residents

C.1.1.1
C.1.1.2
C.1.1.3
C.2.1

Percentage of residents who are satisfied with tourism in the destination (per month/season)
Number of beds available in commercial visitor accommodation per 100 residents
Number of second/rental homes per 100 homes
Percentage of men and women employed in the tourism sector

C.2.1.1
C.2.1.2

Percentage of tourism enterprises where the general manager position is held by a woman
Average wage in tourism for women compared to average wage for men (sorted by tourism
job type)

61

C.3 Equality/Accessibility

C.3.1

Percentage of commercial accommodation with rooms accessible to people with disabilities

and/or participating in recognised accessibility schemes

C.3.1.1

Percentage of destination served by public transport that is accessible to people with

disabilities and people with specific access requirements
Percentage of visitor attractions that are accessible to people with disabilities and/or
participating in recognised accessibility schemes
Percentage of visitors satisfied with the accessibility of the destination for those with
disabilities or specific access requirements
Percentage of the destination covered by a policy or plan that protects cultural heritage

C.3.2
C.3.2.1
C.4 Protecting and Enhancing
Cultural Heritage, Local Identity and
Assets

C.4.1

C.4.1.1
C.4.1.2
Section D: Environmental Impact
Criteria
D.1 Reducing Transport Impact

Indicator
Reference
D.1.1
D.1.1.1
D.1.2

D.2 Climate Change

D.1.2.1
D.2.1
D.2.1.1
D.2.1.2

62

Percentage of residents who have positive or negative views on the impact of tourism on
destination identity
Percentage of the destinations biggest events that are focused on traditional/local culture
and assets
CORE indicators and OPTIONAL indicators
Percentage of tourists and same day visitors using different modes of transport to arrive at
the destination (public/private and type)
Percentage of visitors using local/soft mobility/public transport services to get around the
destination
Average travel (km) by tourists to and from home or average travel (km) from the previous
destination to the current destination
Average travel (km) by same day visitors from and to destination
Percentage of tourism enterprises involved in climate change mitigation schemessuch as:
CO2 offset, low energy systems, etc.and adaptation responses and actions
Percentage of the destination included in climate change adaptation strategy or planning
Percentage of tourism accommodation and attraction infrastructure located in vulnerable
zones

D.3 Solid Waste Management

D.3.1

Waste volume produced by destination (tonnes per resident per year or per month)

D.4 Sewage Treatment

D.3.1.1
D.3.2
D.4.1

Percentage of tourism enterprises separating different types of waste

Volume of waste recycled (percent or per resident per year)
Percentage of sewage from the destination treated to at least secondary level prior to
discharge
Percentage of commercial accommodation connected to central sewage system and/or
employing tertiary sewage treatment
Fresh water consumption per tourist night compared to general population water
consumption per person night

D.4.1.1
D.5 Water Management

D.5.1
D.5.1.1

D.6 Energy Usage

D.5.1.2
D.5.1.3
D.6.1
D.6.1.1
D.6.1.2

D.7 Landscape and Biodiversity

Protection

D.8 Light and Noise Management

D.7.1

Percentage of destination (area in km ) that is designated for protection

D.7.1.1

D.9.1

Percentage of local enterprises in the tourism sector actively supporting protection,

conservation, and management of local biodiversity and landscapes
Percentage of destination covered by a biodiversity management and monitoring plan.
The destination has policies in place that require tourism enterprises to minimise light and
noise pollution
Percentage of the destination and percentage of population covered by local strategy and/or
plans to reduce noise and light pollution
Level of contamination per 100 ml (faecal coliforms, campylobacter)

D.9.1.1

Number of days beach/shore closed due to contamination

D.7.1.2
D.8.1
D.8.1.1

D.9 Bathing Water Quality

Percentage of tourism enterprises with low-flow shower heads and taps and/or dual flush
toilets/waterless urinals
Percentage of tourism enterprises using recycled water
Percentage of water use derived from recycled water in the destination
Energy consumption per tourist night compared to general population energy consumption
per person night
Percentage of tourism enterprises that have switched to low-energy lighting
Annual amount of energy consumed from renewable sources (Mwh) as a percentage of
overall energy consumption

63

Annex 7. Mapping commonalities and correspondences between 2003 EEA proposed indicators and ETIS indicators
EEA General
questions

EEA Policy questions

1.1 What is the

1.
What are the tourism's contribution
environmental to air quality and
impacts
of climate change?
tourism?

64

2003 EEA proposed

Possible equivalent
Description
Indicator title
ETIS indicator
EEA proposed
(incl. code and data
Indicator
availability)
Air pollution by tourism Atmospheric pollution of None
transport
modes
for
transport
tourism
by
pollutant
TOUR1
approached by the share
country example: FR
of tourism purpose in the
passenger
demand
(holidays, leisure, visit to
friends,
business;
excluding commuting and
shopping)

1.2 What are the direct Energy use by tourism

resources
TOUR2
consumptions
by
examples (FR, DE, AU,
tourism?
UK)

Energy use by transports

for tourism; energy use by
tourism
facilities:
accommodations
(collective and private)
and sports and leisure
equipme nts

Energy
consumption
per
tourist
night
compared to general
population
energy
consumption
per
person night
(D61)

Water use by tourism

TOUR3
examples (FR, ES, IE, IT,
PT)

Water use by tourism

infrastructures
versus
water use by Households
(% urban water use) and
Horeca sector (% industry
water use) ; - population
variations and urban water
use variations for selected

Fresh water
consumption per tourist
night compared to
general population
water consumption per
person night (D51)

Possible complementary
ETIS indicator

Percentage of visitors
using
local/soft
mobility/public transport
services to get around the
destination (D11)
Average travel (km) by
same day visitors from and
to destination (D111)
Average travel (km) by
same day visitors from and
to destination
(D121)

countries or regions

Land take by tourism

equipments
(accommodations, golfs
and marinas)
TOUR4A
EU level

1.3 What are the

impacts of leisure
activity
on
the
biodiversity?

Potential disturbance on
biodiversity
from
tourism and recreational
activities TOUR5B
lack of data

1.4 What are the

environmental
risks
caused by tourism
activities?

Risks caused by ski

activity
(avalanches
occurrence)
TOUR9
country example: FR

1.5 What is the waste Waste

generated
generation by tourism? tourism
TOUR11

Area of land taken by the

tourism establishments for
accommodation: number
of hotels, campsites,
holidays dwellings, flat
rental, centres, and second
homes * average square
meters taken by unit,
national level; number of
18-holes golfs fields *
average area per unit,
number of boat places in
marinas
Trends in disturbance of
fauna and flora species in
selected areas caused by
tourism and recreation
activities;
proxy:
Protected areas (UICN
categories) in tourism
receiving regions
Number of avalanches in
skiing areas - time series

none

none

Percentage of tourism
accommodation and
attraction
infrastructure located
in vulnerable zones
(D212)

by Total amount of waste Waste volume

generated per month by produced by
country, versus number of destination (tonnes per

65

1.6 What is the

performance of the
waste and wastewater
treatments of tourism?

1.7 How is tourism

concentrated in space?

1.8 What are the

reverse impacts of the
environment
on
tourism?

country examples: FR, ES, international

tourists
IT
arrivals and inhabitants,
or in selected tourism
resorts per month (in kg
per capita) versus national
average
of
waste
generated per year
Quality of waste-water Percentage of collective
services
of
tourism services for waste and
accommodations (or in wastewater treatment of
the
tourism
tourism regions)
establishments
for
TOUR13
lack of data
accommodation, by types
and total versus principal
residences
Tourism density (bed- Number/ expansion of
total bed-places by km2
places per km2)
TOUR14
(NUTS 3)
EU level (NUTS 3)
Bathing water quality (in Number of bed-places in
tourism accommodations
tourism regions)
TOUR8
by classification (lowcountry example: FR
high capacity) as in % of
classification categories
(bad-good water quality)

Global
warming
potential
impact
on
tourism
country example: UK

66

Past
temperature
variations and projections
versus
tourism
destinations (geographical
representation), evolution

resident per year or per

month)
(D31)

Percentage of sewage
from the destination
treated to at least
secondary level prior to
discharge (D41)

none

Number
of
second
homes/rental homes per
100 homes (C113)

Level of contamination
per 100 ml (faecal
coliforms,
campylobacter)
(D91)
Number of days
beach/shore closed due
to contamination
(D911)
Percentage of tourism
enterprises involved in
climate change
mitigation schemes
such as: CO offset, low
2

Percentage of the
destination included in
climate change adaptation
strategy or planning
(D211)

of snow days and ski days

in selected mountain
resorts,
highest
heat
weather
days
versus
number of tourist arrivals
in tourism regions
2.1 What are the most Tourism intensity (bed- Number of nights spent or
2.
intensive places per inhabitant) bed-places per inhabitant,
Are we getting tourism
at national level and
TOUR12
better
at regions in Europe?
EU
level
(NUTS
3)
regional level (map)
managing
tourism
demand
to
preserve
natural
resources?
2.2 What are the Land use for tourism Total number of tourism
potential conflicts in activities
(tourism establishments or bedland use by tourism destinations vs. land places accommodations
(with other activities)? cover)
by main type of land
TOUR4B
cover area
(versus
EU level (NUTS 3)
conversion of high valued
nature
ecosystem
to
intensive tourism)
2.3 Are we going to Number of visitors to Number of visitors in
manage the space protected areas
regional and national
allocation for tourism TOUR19A
parks in a year (objective:
on sensitive areas?
examples
(Panparc, number of visitors/km2
Europarc, FR, UK)
and per day - peak month
versus low season)
2.4
Are
tourism Plans of prevention of Number of tourism areas
destinations preventing natural risks in tourism with a plan of prevention
of natural risks versus
against natural risks?
regions
TOUR10
other areas (performance)
country example: FR

energy systems, etc.

and adaptation
responses and actions
(D21)

Number of
tourists/visitors per 100
residents
(C11)
Number of beds
available in commercial
visitor accommodation
per 100 residents
(C112)
none

none

none

Percentage of the
destination with a
sustainable tourism
strategy/action plan, with
agreed monitoring,

67

development control and

evaluation arrangement
(A11)
2.5 How is the demand Tourism
arrivals
in
for visiting Europe Europe (domestic vs.
increasing?
International, by main
European
regions)
TOUR26

2.6 Who are the Change in characteristics

tourists traveling in of the tourists' purposes
Europe and what for? and profiles (age and sex)
TOUR29

Change in type of
organization of stays (in
% of total)
TOUR38

68

Number
of
tourism
arrivals /population, by
country and at EU level/
world = domestic inbound
plus international inbound
minus outbound tourism
(nights spent)/ population,
1985-2000, aggregated for
all countries.
Number of tourism trips
(or nights spent) by Sex
and Age and by Tourism
purposes (holidays and
business, domestic and
outbound) by country and
as in % of total, time
series,
Sub-indicator:
Tourism purpose of visits
(holidays / business)
Number of nights spent
(or trips) by type of
organization of stays
(direct reservation, tour
operator and package
travel) and by tourism
purposes (as in % of total
and % change), EU
aggregated countries, time
series

Number
of
tourist
nights per month
(B11)

none

Average length of stay

of tourists (nights)
(B21)

Daily spending per tourist

(accommodation, food and
drinks, other services)
(B12)

2.7 Do tourists prefer Overnights

spent
in
spending nights in the tourism accommodations
least
environmental TOUR33
impacts
accommodations
forms?

2.8 Are we optimizing

the use of existing
tourism infrastructures
capacity?

2.9 Do we better
spread the tourism
season over the year?
2.10 Are we using
more
friendly
environmental modes
of
transports
for

Number of night spent by none

residents
and
nonresidents
by
accommodation form (as
in % of total)

Gross occupancy rate of

hotels rooms = number of
rooms occupied x 100 /
number of days in month
x number of rooms
available
(by
month
following the number of
opened months in tourism
season), annual data by
country or monthly data
for
all
aggregated
countries - proxy: net bed
occupancy rate
Number
of
trips
Seasonality of tourism
TOUR32
(departure) or overnights
by month (and as in % of
year)
Modes of transport used Number of international
tourism arrivals or visitors
by tourists
TOUR22
by mode of transport at
Fact sheet to update. the borders, by country; Tourism accommodation
occupancy rates (by
accommodation forms)
TOUR18
EU level for hotels only
(monthly
and
annual
average)

Occupancy rate in
commercial
accommodation per
month and average for
the year
(B22)

Number
of
tourist Number of same day
nights per month
visitors in high season and
(B11)
low season
(B112)
Percentage of tourists
and same day visitors
using different modes
of transport to arrive at

69

tourism?

Country example: FR, UK, changes in use of modes

BE, DE
of transport for domestic
tourism, time series for
selected countries

the destination
(public/private and
type)
(D11)

Percentage of visitors
using local/soft
mobility/public
transport services to get
around the destination
(D111)
2.11 Are we going Traffic
density
of Traffic density on road of none
better at managing the tourism transport
main
European
tourism mobility ?
TOUR21
importance:
seasonal
variation of car traffic-jam
by hours/km (network
length and density)
2.12 Are we traveling Growth in travel distance Average distance traveled Average travel (km) by
further for tourism?
per trip and per tourist (in tourists to and from
for tourism
TOUR34
km),
by
mode
of home or average travel
country examples: FR, UK transport, by country, time (km) from the previous
series
destination to the
current destination
(D111)
Average travel (km) by
same day visitors from
and to destination
(D121)
3.
What
characterizes
and drives the

70

3.1 Are we reducing

the spatial pressure
from
tourism
infrastructures?

Construction of tourism
accommodations;
including second homes
(on coastal zones)

Number
of
tourism
establishments
for
accommodation
versus
number of bed-places;

Percentage of the
destination with a
sustainable tourism
strategy/action plan,

Percentage of the
destination covered by a
policy or plan that protects
cultural heritage

demand
tourism?

time series (evolution of

TOUR15A
EU level for collective land consumption per
accommodations only
tourist). Proxy second
homes:
Number
of
individual residences built
versus
number
of
inhabitants in coastal
areas by Coastal reporting
unit, time series
Construction of tourist Evolution of the number
attractions
(golfs, harbors/marinas including
marinas,
amusement their capacity; number of
golfs courses and their
parks)
TOUR15B
superficies; km2 of skiing
areas as % of total area;
time series for selected
countries
Development
of Percentage of forest land
recreational activities in managed for recreation
and tourism to total forest
forests areas
TOUR20
area; proxy: accessibility
national level (proxy)
of forests areas for
recreation and tourism
(open
access
and
closeness to inhabitants /
main cities)

for

3.2 Are we improving

the intermodality of the
transport system to
match the tourists
needs?

Access to mass tourism

destinations by public
transport
TOUR23
country example: FR

Density
of
public
transport
network
in
tourist
areas:
infrastructures proximity
to tourism destinations by
type (railway station,
motorway exit, airport,

with agreed
monitoring,
development control
and evaluation
arrangement
(A11)

(C41)

none

Percentage of the
destinations biggest
events that are focused on
traditional/local culture
and assets
(C412)

none

Percentage of destination
2
(area in km ) that is
designated for protection
(D71)
Percentage of destination
covered by a biodiversity
management and
monitoring plan.
(D712)

Percentage of visitors
satisfied with the
accessibility of the
destination for those
with disabilities or
specific access
requirements

Percentage of destination
served by public transport
that is accessible to people
with disabilities and people
with specific access
requirements
(C31)

71

harbour) and by country

(% of tourism cities with
each mode of transport); evolution
of
the
construction of airports in
tourism areas
Development
of
less Evolution in the use of
alternative services in
environment-damaging
transport system for tourism transport system
tourism travels (services) versus prices of services
TOUR25
(train+car
package
lack of data
services,
luggages
services, local means of
transport during tourism
season)

3.3 What trend does Economic

value
of
tourism take in the tourism industry (GVA)
European economy?
as in % total GDP
TOUR35
Fact sheet to update

72

Gross value added of

tourism industry (and %
change) approached by
receipts from international
tourism (total receipts;
total receipts per capita;
% receipts in GDP)

(C321)

Percentage of tourists
and same day visitors
using different modes
of transport to arrive at
the destination
(public/private and
type) (D11)
Percentage of visitors
using local/soft
mobility/public
transport services to get
around the destination
(D111)
Relative contribution of
tourism to the
destination's economy
(% GDP)
Direct tourism
employment as
percentage of total
employment
(B31)
Percentage of jobs in
tourism that are
seasonal

Household expenditure
and
tourism
prices
(including
holidays
packages)
TOUR36
Fact sheet to update

3.4 Are tourists more Ecotourism

products
experimenting
penetration (as in % of
ecotourism products? total)
TOUR39
examples in DE, ES, FR,
IT, UK

4.
Are we moving
towards
a
better
internalization
of the external
costs of the
tourism sector?

4.1 What are the

environmental
costs
resulting from tourism
activity?

Environmental costs of
tourism
TOUR40A
lack of data

(a)
Household
final
consumption expenditure
for tourism (recreation,
education and culture) at
constant
prices

European level, time

series, in billions EURO
and per capita, and as in
% of total household
expenditure. (b) Index of
tourist consumer prices
(transport, education and
culture,
hotels
cafs
restaurants)
Number of night spent in
agritourism
and
agrotourism
accommodations, number
of eco-tourism products
and services (offered by
tourism
and
travel
agencies)
(a)
expenditure
to
maintain/restore
exceptional natural sites
open to public per year
and entrance fees; (b)
environmental costs of the
pollutions by transport for
tourism, versus evolution
of the prices of transport
modes and resources
(fuels)

(B311)
Daily spending per
tourist
(accommodation, food
and drinks, other
services)
(B12)

Average price per room in

the destination
(B221)

none

Percentage of tourism
enterprises actively taking
steps to source local,
sustainable, and fair trade
goods and services
(B51)

none

Percentage of tourism
enterprises actively taking
steps to source local,
sustainable, and fair trade
goods and services
(B51)
Percentage of the
destination covered by a
policy promoting local,
sustainable and/or fair
trade products and

73

services
(B511)
4.2 Are we more
directing
taxes
revenues from tourism
to the preservation of
the environment?

Tourist tax revenue /

public expenditure for
tourism development and
as % of total tax revenue;
Environmental
expenditure (PAC) by the
public and private sector
(total,
by
type
of
expenditure,
by
environmental domain - in
tourism
receiving
regions);
Public
expenditure
for
conservation of tourist
sites
and
on
environmental
information and education
in
tourism
receiving
regions
of
tourism
5.1
Are
tourism Uptake of environmental Number
5.
more management systems by businesses participating in
How effective companies
environmentally
tourism
companies recognized environmental
are
schemes
(EMAS,
(EMAS, EIA)
environmental responsible?
TOUR41
ISO14000) and % of
management
SMEs, by country or by
and monitoring
group of products and
tools towards a
services, time series
more
integrated
tourism
strategy?

74

Tourism tax revenue and

environmental
expenditure
(internalisation of the
environmental
costs)
TOUR40B
examples in FR, ES, UK,
AU, DE, PT

none

Percentage of tourism
enterprises/establishme
nts in the destination
using a voluntary
verified
certification/labelling
for
environmental/quality/s
ustainability and/or
CSR measures
(A)

5.2 Are destinations

managers establishing
integrated
tourism
plans?

5.3 Are Member States

setting
up
some
national
sustainable
tourism development
strategies (and monitor
them)?

5.4 Is the European

Union more supporting
an
environmentallyfriendly tourism?

Ecolabels of tourism (a) Number of eco-labels

tourism
facilities (% of total) for
TOUR42
accommodation by level
of implementation (local,
national,
regional,
European, international),
and in % of total ecolabelled products (b)
ecolabels
for
environmental quality of
beaches and harbours
(blue flag by country)
Progress
in Number of Agendas 21
implementation
of including tourism issue;
of
integrated plans by local implementation
stakeholders
in Integrated Quality System
on coastal tourism areas,
destinations
TOUR45
Strategic Environmental
qualitative information
Assessment in tourism
regions
table:
Progress in integration of Country
tourism and environment institutional organisation
into national strategies of tourism/ horizontaland monitoring systems vertical integration with
TOUR46
other policies/ existence
qualitative information
of a national strategy for
sustainable development
and/or on sustainable
tourism/
tourism
indicators (national/ local)
EU
support
to EC Programmes/projects
sustainable
sustainable
tourism for
tourism/total
projects
projects
TOUR47
(number and budget, and

Percentage of tourism
enterprises/establishme
nts in the destination
using a voluntary
verified
certification/labelling
for
environmental/quality/s
ustainability and/or
CSR measures
(A21)
Percentage of residents
satisfied with their
involvement and their
influence in the
planning and
development of tourism
(A21)
Percentage of the
destination with a
sustainable tourism
strategy/action plan,
with agreed
monitoring,
development control
and evaluation
arrangement
(A11)
none

Percentage of the
destination with a
sustainable tourism
strategy/action plan, with
agreed monitoring,
development control and
evaluation arrangement
(A11)
Number of tourism
enterprises/establishments
with sustainability reports
in accordance with the
Global Reporting
Initiative (GRI)
(A211)

Percentage
of
the
destination covered by a
policy or plan that protects
cultural heritage

75

EU indicator (partial)

by country-region)

(C41)
Percentage of residents
who have positive or
negative views on the
impact of tourism on
destination identity (C411)
Percentage
of
local
enterprises in the tourism
sector actively supporting
protection, conservation,
and management of local
biodiversity
and
landscapes (D711)
Percentage of destination
covered by a biodiversity
management
and
monitoring plan (D712)

Legend:

Correspondent/equivalent
indicators

76

Complementary
indicators

Annex 8. Mapping of the indicators (from Annex 1, 6) to the impacts of tourism of Table 2
Environmental impacts of tourism
1.1 Water resources
1. Depletion of
natural
resources

1.2 Local resources

2.1 Air pollution and noise

2.2 Solid waste and littering
2. Pollution
2.3 Sewage
2.4 Aesthetic pollution and cultural impacts
3. Physical
impacts

4.
Environmental
impacts of
tourism at the
global level

5. Positive
impacts

impacts

ETIS by DG Enterprise (Annex 6)

TOUR3

D.5.1

TOUR32?

D.6.1?

TOUR4A, TOUR4B

1.3 Land degradation

3.1 Physical
development

EEA 2003 proposed indicators (Annex 1)

of

TOUR1

D.8.1

TOUR11

D.3.1, D.3.2

TOUR13

D.4.1, D.9.1

TOUR19A?

C.4.1

tourism TOUR15A, TOUR15B, TOUR20

3.2 Physical impacts from tourist activities

4.1 Loss of biological diversity

TOUR9, TOUR19A?
TOUR5B

D.7.1

TOUR1

D.2.1

4.2 Depletion of the ozone layer

4.3 Climate change

TOUR19A?, TOUR10, TOUR25,

5.1 Positive environmental and socio- TOUR40B, TOUR41, TOUR42,
economical impacts
TOUR46, TOUR47

TOUR39, A.1.1, A.2.1, A.4.1, B.1.1.1, B.3.1,

TOUR45, B.5.1, C.2.1, C.4.1, D.7.1, D.8.1

5.2 Positive psycho-sociological impacts

77

Annex 9. Questionnaire to national experts and summarized results of the questionnaires

Country:
1. Do you have a national reporting mechanism on tourism and environment?

Yes
No

If yes, please provide the following information:

- Name:
- Regular or ad hoc (if regular, please specify the frequency):
- Website and/or link for consultation and downloading:
2. Do you have a sub-national/regional reporting mechanism on tourism and
environment?

Yes
No

If yes, please provide the following information:

- Name:
- Regular or ad hoc (if regular, please specify the frequency):
- Website and/or link for consultation and downloading:
3. Does any of the above mentioned reporting mechanism feed data into
EUROSTAT, in particular, or into WTO on international reporting?

Yes
No

If yes, please specify which:

4. If you answer no to questions 1 and 2, is there any other national or

subnational/regional initiative related to reporting/monitoring tourism
impacts and sustainability trends worth to be mentioned?
If yes, please specify which

78

Yes
No

Country

Institution in charge

Spain

Tourspain (Ministry for

Industry, Energy and
Tourism)
Croation Environment
Agency
Institute of
Environmental
Protection and Research
(ISPRA)
No reporting

Croatia
Italy

Sweden
Bulgaria

No reporting

Germany

a) Federal Government
(Ministry for Economy)
b) Federal Agency for
Nature Conservation

Hungary

No reporting

Type of
indicator/reporting
system
Periodic reporting,
thematic questionnaires

Regularity

Link

Regionalized approaches

Monthly,
Yearly

Observatorio Turstico de Euskadi,

Sistema de Informacin Territorial del
Turismo de Andaluca

State of the environment

report
Italian Environmental Data
Yearbook

Every 4 years

http://www.iet.tourspain.es/esES/turismobase/Paginas/default.as
px
http://www.azo.hr/Reports11

Yearly

http://annuario.isprambiente.it/site
s/default/files/pdf/2012/annuario/
Turismo.pdf

a) Tourismuspolitischer
Bericht der
Bundesregierung ( national
tourism policy report; only
parts relate to
environmental issues)
b) Daten zur
Natur(Nature Data):
report of the Federal
Agency for Nature
Conservation on Nature
and Tourism

Every 4 years

http://www.bmwi.de/DE/Mediath
ek/publikationen,did=579736.htm
l

Monitoring impacts of tourism in

protected areas
Heritage Interpretation Site of the Year
competition from 2010 run by two
ministries responsible for (eco)tourism
and the Tourism Agency of Hungary
Strategy for Sustainable Tourism
Development of the Carpathians

79

Portugal

No reporting

Finland

No reporting

Greece

No reporting

Netherland
s

No reporting

Poland

Ministry of the
Environment
No reporting

Iceland

Serbia

80

Serbian Environmental
Protection Agency
(SEPA)

Participation in the coordinating group

about the ENAAC ( National Strategy
for Adaptation to Climate Change) and
drawing up the report about TOURISM
- Experts committee for an action plan
for sustainable tourism development in
Greece, in the context of the MOU
between UNWTO and the Ministry of
Tourism with further objective to launch
a National Sustainable Tourism
Observatory.
- On a regional level, the University of
the Aegean, has established since early
2013 the first Sustainable Tourism
Observatory in Europe under the
auspices of UNWTO, which monitors
the environmental, social and economic
impacts of tourism in the Aegean
archipelago
The Dutch government initiated Green
Deals to promote sustainable growth.
One of the sectors that is included is the
tourism sector (nature and leisure).
Ad hoc

www.mos.gov.pl
The data is available in rangers reports
and from these reports is transferred in
the yearly Environmental Status report of
all the Icelandic protected areas (114
areas). These data include statistics about
tourists and the state of the environment
within the protected area. No extensive
nor systematic data collection is yet
available for all the protected areas.

State of the Environment

Report of the Republic of
Serbia,

Regular
(yearly)

http://www.sepa.gov.rs/index.php
?menu=5000&id=13&akcija=sho
wExterna

Annex 10. Integration of proposal of tourism indicators (EEA, 2003), ETIS indicators (European Commission, 2011), DPSIR scheme,
and comments made by EIONET national experts (Workshop, July 2014)
Generic
questions

Policy
questions

Indicator title

Air pollution by tourism

transport

TOUR1

1. What
are the
environme
ntal
impacts of
tourism?

1.1 What is
the tourism's
contribution
to air quality
and climate
change?

Description

Code

D.1.1.

D.1.1.1.

Percentage of tourists and

same day visitors using
different modes of transport
to arrive at the destination
(public/private and type)
Percentage of visitors using
local/soft mobility/public
transport services to get
around the destination
Average travel (km) by same
day visitors from and to
destination

D.1.2.1.

Atmospheric pollution
of transport modes for
tourism by pollutant
approached by the share
of tourism purpose in
the passenger demand
(holidays, leisure, visit
to friends, business;
excluding commuting
and shopping)

Position
Overall comments
in
DPSIR
P
Highly relevant as transport is
the most impacting part of
tourism (DK)
Could be calculated from modal
split (known in DK, ES) and a
km estimation => standard set of
person kilometer emissions for
each type of transport
Define list of air pollutants
(following CSI004) and include
GHG emissions (FR, IS)

Potential data
sources

Relevance /
Feasibility

Eurobarometer, EU
SENSOR project, car
rental and coach
companies

High/Mediu
m

Highly relevant, but length of

travel has to be included (DK)

EU SENSOR project

Medium /
Medium

Indicator interesting but less

relevant in the 'big picture' as it is
the transport to and from the
destinations that contribute the
most to emissions (DK, IS, IT)
Indicator relevant but the average
length of travel needs to be
calculated for all types of tourists
also those staying overnight.
(DK) Possible to calculate
knowing the points of departure
and arrival. (ES)

Case studies (ES);

Local bus, bike rental
companies

Low / Low

Spanish tourism
surveys

Medium /
Low

81

Energy use by tourism

Energy use by transports

for tourism; energy use
by tourism facilities:
accommodations
(collective and private)
and sports and leisure
equipments

TOUR2

1.2 What are

the direct
resources
consumption
s by tourism?
D.6.1.

Energy consumption per

tourist night compared to
general population energy
consumption per person
night
Water use by tourism

TOUR3

82

Water use by tourism

infrastructures versus
water use by
Households (% urban
water use) and Horeca
sector (% industry water
use) ; - population
variations and urban
water use variations for
selected countries or
regions

3 Indicators
A) Energy use by transport =>
fuel consumption. Possible to
calculate knowing the length of
stay and the modes of
transportation (ES)
B) Energy use by facilities, can
be identified if the
establishments are requested to
do an annual environmental
reporting of their energy
consumption. Rate of renewable
energy production would be of
interest. Should include second
houses. (DK)
C) Energy use by sport and
lesiure equipments, less
important (DK).
The per person energy
consumption of local people may
be available but not specifically
for tourists. Estimations should
be applied.(IT, DK)

Downscaling of
national/regional data
Energy companies
Accomodation
esteblishments

High /
Medium

Statistics of overnight
stays + energy data

Medium /
Low

Indicator highly relevant in

particularly in arid regions of the
EU where tourism compete for
water with agriculture and other
sectors. But also other regions
are affected by ground water
extraction.(HR, IT, DK)
Important to measure trends

Eurostat survey about

Capacity of tourist
accommodation
establishments
EEA Waterbase
Local case studies
(ES)

High /
Medium

D.5.1.

Land take by tourism

equipments
(accommodations, golfs and
marinas)

TOUR4A

NEW
(IS)

Indicator relevant and should be

possible to calculate from
TOUR3 data (DK, IT)

Fresh water consumption per

tourist night compared to
general population water
consumption per person
night

Land taken by construction

of new parking lots, roads,
biking lanes, trails, view
points for tourism

Area of land taken by

the tourism
establishments for
accommodation:
number of hotels,
campsites, holidays
dwellings, flat rental,
centres, and second
homes * average square
meters taken by unit,
national level; number
of 18-holes golfs fields
* average area per unit,
number of boat places in
marinas
Square meters/km

Very relevant, but difficult to

distinguish tourism equipments
from other build environment.
GIS analysis required. (IT, DK,
ES, HR)

Interesting at municipality level,

for land planning in protected
areas. But detailed data
missing.(IS)

Eurostat survey about

Capacity of tourist
accommodation
establishments
EEA Waterbase
Local case studies
(ES)
Corine Land Cover,
Imperviouseness
Layer, Property
registers.

Change in soil sealing.

High /
Medium

High /
Medium

Low / Low

83

(Potential) Disturbance on
biodiversity from tourism
and recreational activities

1.3 What are

the impacts
leisure
TOUR5B
activity on
the
biodiversity?

New
1.3c What
are the
impact of the
leisure
activities on
the
vegetation
and on soil
erosion?

New

New

84

Trampling impacts on
vegetation: breakage and
bruising of stems, reduced
plant vigor, reduced
regeneration, loss of ground
cover, change in species
composition
Impacts on soil: loss of
organic matter, reduction in
soil macro porosity, decrease
in air and water
permeability, increase in
run-off, accelerated erosion
Anchoring and other marine
activities (tourist activities in
marine areas can cause
direct degradation of marine
ecosystems with subsequent

Trends in disturbance of
fauna and flora species
in selected areas caused
by tourism and
recreation activities;
proxy: Protected areas
(UICN categories) in
tourism receiving
regions

Needs to be re-defined.
Description is not clear (DE,
DK)
The data on IUCN-PA categories
is available (UNEP-WCMC), the
question is what is the definition
of a tourism receiving region.
Some IUCN categories allow
tourism and recreation; here
categories have clearly to be
differentiated. Protected area
data and data on tourism
receiving regions might not
align. (DE)
Alternatively, measure the size of
the population + tourists in
relation to the size of nature
areas as an indicator of potential
pressure on the
environment.(DK)
Proposal of Iceland

WTO, case studies

(ES), EU SENSOR
project, Art. 17 data
on conservation status
of flora and fauna.

Medium /
low

Low / Low

Proposal of Iceland

Low / Low

Proposal of Iceland

Low / Low

impacts on coastal protection

and fisheries)
Risks caused by ski activity
(avalanches valanghe occurrence)

Number of avalanches
in skiing areas - time
series

TOUR9
1.4 What are
the
environment
al risks
caused by
tourism
activities?

D.2.1.2.

Percentage of tourism
accommodation and
attraction infrastructure
located in vulnerable zones

Waste generated by tourism

1.5 What is
the waste
TOUR11
generation by
tourism?

Total amount of waste

generated per month by
country, versus number
of international tourists
arrivals and inhabitants,
or in selected tourism
resorts per month (in kg
per capita) versus
national average of
waste generated per year

A good question, but requires

more indicators. Include forest
fires, fragmentation.
Differentiate between types of
tourism.
Occurrence is a pressure. Impact
indicators could be:
TOUR9B : Exposure of ski
resorts to avalanches (not
assessed in FR but sufficient data
exist to run the related spatial
analysis)
TOUR9C : Exposure of sea
resorts to submersion (ditto) (FR)
Vulnerable zones must be
Modelled data on sea
defined (IS).
level rise, flooding
Suggestion: Tourism
accommodation in risk of nature
forces, combining data on sea
level rise, flooding, etc. with
accomodation locations.(DK)
Waste from tourism is highly
relevant. However, the critical
point is also the type of waste
and the waste treatment How
much of the waste is dumped in
landfills, how much is recycled,
incinarated for power generation
etc.(DK, HR)

EU SENSOR project,
Waste experts,
Eurostat data

High /
Medium

Medium /
Medium

High /
Medium

85

Waste volume produced by

destination (tonnes per
resident per year or per
month)
D.3.1.

1.6 What is
the
performance
of the waste
and
wastewater
treatments of
tourism?

Quality of wastewater
services of tourism
accommodations (or in
tourism regions)
TOUR13

D.4.1.

1.7 How is
tourism
concentrated
in space?

TOUR14

C.1.1.3.

86

Percentage of sewage from

the destination treated to at
least secondary level prior to
discharge
Tourism density (bed-places
per km2)

Number of second
homes/rental homes per 100
homes

Percentage of collective
services for waste and
wastewater treatment of
the tourism
establishments for
accommodation, by
types and total versus
principal residences

Number/ expansion of
total bed-places by km2
(NUTS 3)

If an average amount of waste

generation is assigned to
different types of
accommodation (TOUR11) the
overall waste generation can be
calculated at different levels
from the destination to national
level and for the entire EU. But
again, it is the waste treatment
that really tells about the effects
on the environment rather than
the amount of waste.(DK)
Highly relevant to identify the
treatment of wastewater from
tourism. (DK)
The treatment is not the main
issue, but the generation of
wastewater, and the capacity of
UWWTP (BE)
The question is how much
wastewater escapes treatment
(FR)
Can be calculated from the above
data in TOUR13 (DK)

EU Sensor project

High /
Medium

EEA waterbase, EU
Sensor project

High /
Medium

EEA waterbase

Medium /
Medium

Important indicator agreed by all, Eurostat, EU Sensor

some places have huge visits in a project
day but visitors sleep elsewhere,
this indicator might not be
always representative of the
actual pressures (IS)
Relevant, but data problems.
Suggestion to calculate it per
km2 (DK)

High / High

Medium /
Medium

Bathing water quality (in

tourism regions)

TOUR8

D.9.1.
D.9.1.1
1.8 What are
the reverse
impacts of
the
environment
on tourism?

Level of contamination per

100 ml (faecal coliforms,
campylobacter)
Number of days beach/shore
closed due to contamination
Global warming potential
impact on tourism

New

D.2.1.

Percentage of tourism
enterprises involved in
climate change mitigation
schemessuch as:
CO2offset, low energy
systems, etc..and
adaptation responses and
actions

Number of bed-places in
tourism
accommodations by
classification (low-high
capacity) as in % of
classification categorie
(bad-good water
quality)

Past temperature
variations and
projections versus
tourism destinations
(geographical
representation),
evolution of snow days
and ski days in selected
moutain resorts, highest
heat weather days
versus number of tourist
arrivals in tourism
regions

Very relevant and available. The

measurements of bathing water
quality is very relevant here and
is available for all or most of the
EU.
But, the description of the
indicator is misleading. (DE,
HR) Available data should be
used. (DK, ES, IT)
Better use general water quality
data. (DK)
Better use general water quality
data. (DK)
Needs some specification on the
different types of impacts (heat
waves, sea level rise, heavy
rainfalls, flooding, coastal
erosion, storms etc.).

Interesting, but similar to ecolabelling indicators (DK)

EEA bathing quality

reports

High / High

Low / Low

Low / Low
Local case studies to
global scenarios

Pilot studies (ES),

environmental
labelling schemes
(DK)

Low / Low

87

D.2.1.1

Percentage of the destination

included in climate change
adaptation strategy or
planning
Tourism intensity (bedplaces per inhabitant)

TOUR12

2.1 What are

the most
tourism
2. Are we
intensive
getting
regions in
better at
Europe?
managing
tourism
demand to
preserve
natural
resources?

Number of tourists/visitors
per 100 residents
C.1.1.

C.1.1.2

Number of beds available in

commercial visitor
accommodation per 100
residents

Land use for tourism

2.2 What are
activities (tourism
the potential
destinations vs. land cover)
conflicts in
land use by TOUR4B
tourism (with
other
activities)?

88

Number of nights spent

or bed-places per
inhabitant, at national
level and regional level
(map)

Total number of tourism

establishments or bedplaces accommodations
by main type of land
cover area (versus
conversion of high
valued nature ecosystem
to intensive tourism)

Not specifically linked to

tourism. Many
regions/municipalities have
adaptations plans. (DK)
General indicator with available
data (IT, DK, ES), measuring the
"social" intensity (not territorial
which is done in TOUR 14).
Some specific indicators at
national level available (HR
overlays density (number of
nights/inhabitant/sq. km) with
geogr. position of protected areas
and get pressure points)
The real density is found in
TOUR14 - this one measures the
social tourism intensity in % of
local population. (DK)
Very relevant to illustrate social
intensity, particularly for small
communities like islands.(IS)
Again, this is a social indicator
not one that measures the spatial
tourism intensity (DK)
Very relevant to illustrate social
intensity, particularly for small
communities like islands. (IS)
Very relevant. But as discussed
in TOUR 4A, the Corine data
does not separate tourism from
other build areas and calculations
are needed but possible. Problem
with second houses remains.
(DK, IS, HR)

Low / Low

Eurostat statistics

Medium /
High

Eurostat statistics

Medium /
High

Eurostat statistics

Medium /
High

Corine land cover and

other spatial data on
high nature
ecosystems

High /
Medium

Number of visitors to
2.3 Are we
protected areas
going to
manage the
TOUR19
space
A
allocation for
tourism on
sensitive
areas?

TOUR10
2.4 Are
tourism
destinations
preventing
against
natural
risks?

A.1.1.

Plans of prevention of
natural risks in tourism
regions

TOUR26

B.1.1.

Number of tourism
areas with a plan of
prevention of natural
risks versus other areas
(performance)

S/R

Percentage of the destination

with a sustainable tourism
strategy/action plan, with
agreed monitoring,
development control and
evaluation arrangement

Tourism arrivals in Europe

(domestic vs. International,
by main European regions)

2.5 How is
the demand
for visiting
Europe
increasing?

Number of visitors in
regional and national
parks in a year
(objective: number of
visitors/km2 and per day
- peak month versus low
season)

Number of tourist nights per

month

Number of tourism
arrivals /population, by
country and at EU level/
world = domestic
inbound plus
international inbound
minus outbound tourism
(nights spent)/
population, 1985-2000,
aggregated for all
countries.

Types of PAs should be

differentiated as they have
different access rules and
impacts. An assessment of the
density of touristic
infrastructures inside or near any
kind of protected areas (using
spatial analysis) may be
suggested.(DE)
Indicator needs to specify the
types of risks to include. (DK)
The indicator needs clarification.
The question is whether this is
tourism specific or a regional
planning tool. (BE)
Relevant indicator. Similarly, an
analysis of sites charters (e.g.
NATURA 2000 objective
documents) could provide a
quantitative evaluation of the
way tourism is taken into account
in the protected area
management (DE, DK)
General indicator with available
data. (DK, IS, IT) Good baseline
indicator but not so important for
environment monitoring.
Question: What are main
European regions?

National data on
visitors, regional
surveys. (DE, DK, IS)

Medium /
Medium

Low / Low

Surveys

Eurostat, national
statistics.

General indicator with available Eurostat, national

data. (DK, IS, IT) Good baseline statistics.
indicator. What could be the
reference unit.

Medium /
Low

Low / High

Medium /
High

89

Change in characteristics of
the tourists' purposes and
profiles (age and sex)

TOUR29

2.6 Who are

the tourists
travelling in
Europe and
what for?

2.7 Do
tourists
prefer
spending
nights in the
least
environment
al impacts

90

B.1.2.

Number of tourism trips

(or nights spent) by Sex
and Age and by
Tourism purposes
(holidays and business,
domestic and outbound)
by country and as in %
of total, time series,
Sub-indicator: Tourism
purpose of visits
(holidays / business)

Daily spending per tourist

(accommodation, food and
drinks, other services)

Number of nights spent

Change in type of
organization of stays (in % of (or trips) by type of
organization of stays
total)
(direct reservation, tour
operator and package
TOUR38
travel) and by tourism
purposes (as in % of
total and % change), EU
agregated countries,
time series
Average length of stay of
tourists (nights)
B.2.1.
Overnights spent in tourism
accommodations
TOUR33

Number of night spent

by residents and nonresidents by
accommodation form
(as in % of total)

Good baseline indicator. Some

calculations (gender, age) has to
be done. (IT, DK, IS)

Eurobarometer,
Eurostat, national
statistics

Medium /
High

Interesting indicator to evaluate

economic impact vs.
Environmental impact.

National surveys,
statistics.

Medium /
Medium

Not strictly relevant for

environment. (DK)

National
surveys/statistics

Low / Low

Not strictly relevant for

environment. (DK

National and EU
statistics

Low / High

National and EU
Background indicator to
statistics
calculate other environmentally
related indicators (water, energy,
waste). The indicator does not
relate directly to the question.

Low / High

accommodati
ons forms?

Tourism accommodation
occupancy rates (by
accommodation forms)

2.8 Are we
TOUR18
optimising
the use of
existing
tourism
infrastructur
es capacity?

B.2.2.

Occupancy rate in
commercial accommodation
per month and average for
the year
Seasonality of tourism

TOUR32
2.9 Do we
better spread
the tourism
Number of tourist nights per
B.1.1.
season over
month
the year?
Number of same day visitors
B.1.1.2.
in high season and low season

Gross occupancy rate of

hotels rooms = number
of rooms occupied x
100 / number of days in
month x number of
rooms avalaible (by
month following the
number of opened
months in tourism
season), annual data by
country or monthly data
for all agregated
countries - proxy: net
bed occupancy rate

Number of trips
(departure) or
overnights by month
(and as in % of year)

Not strictly relevant for

environment.

National and EU
statistics

Low / High

Not strictly relevant for

environment.

National and EU
statistics

Low / High

Very important background

indicator. Indicates sectorial
pressure on environmental
components (IS, HR)
Important background indicator.

National and EU
statistics

High / High

National and EU
statistics
National and Eu
Statistics

Medium /
High
Medium /
Medium

Good background indicator

91

Modes of transport used by

tourists

TOUR22
2.10 Are we
using more
friendly
environment
al modes of
transports
for tourism?

D.1.1.

D.1.1.1.

2.11 Are we
going better
at managing
the tourism
mobility?

2.12 Are we
travelling
further for
tourism?

92

Percentage of tourists and

same day visitors using
different modes of transport
to arrive at the destination
(public/private and type)
Percentage of visitors using
local/soft mobility/public
transport services to get
around the destination
Traffic density of tourism
transport

Number of international
tourism arrivals or
visitors by mode of
transport at the borders,
by country; - changes in
use of modes of
transport for domestic
tourism, time series for
selected countries

Traffic density on road

of main European
importance: seasonal
variation of car trafficTOUR21
jam by hours.km
(network length and
density)
Growth in travel distance for Average distance
travelled per trip and per
tourism
tourist (in km), by mode
TOUR34
of transport, by country,
time series
Average travel (km) by
tourists to and from home or
D.1.2.
average travel (km) from the
previous destination to the
current destination
Average travel (km) by same
D.1.2.1 day visitors from and to
destination

See Tour1 => the important thing National statistics

is to have the length of transport

Medium
/Medium

Same indicators as under

question 1.1

Same indicators as under

question 1.1

Not strictly relevant for

environment.

Low / Low

Very relevant indicator and

needed to calculate TOUR1.

National surveys

High /
MediumLow

Very relevant indicator and

needed to calculate TOUR1.

National surveys

High /
MediumLow

Very relevant indicator and

needed to calculate TOUR1.

National surveys

High /
MediumLow

Construction of tourism
accommodations; including
second homes (on coastal
zones)

TOUR15
A

3.1 Are we
3 What
reducing the
characteriz
spatial
es and
pressure
drives the
from tourism
demand for
infrastructur
tourism?
es?

A.1.1.

C.4.1.

Percentage of the destination

with a sustainable tourism
strategy/action plan, with
agreed monitoring,
development control and
evaluation arrangement
Percentage of the destination
covered by a policy or plan
that protects cultural
heritage
Construction of tourist
attractions (golfs, marinas,
amusement parks)

TOUR15
B

C.4.1.2.

Percentage of the
destinations biggest events
that are focused on
traditional/local culture and
assets

Number of tourism
establishments for
accommodation versus
number of bed-places;
time series (evolution of
land consumption per
tourist). Proxy second
homes: Number of
individual residences
built versus number of
inhabitants in coastal
areas by Coastal
reporting unit, time
series

Complex, but very important

indicator that shows the spatial
pressure on land. Requires
clarification. (DK, IS, IT)

Land use data.

High /
Medium

Sames as under 2.4

Specification needed.
Comparability is required: What
is a destination? (DK)
Evolution of the number
harbors/marinas
including their capacity;
number of golfs courses
and their superficy; km2
of skiing areas as % of
total area; time series
for selected countries

Complex, but very important

indicator that shows the spatial
pressure on land. Requires
clarification. (DK)

Clarification needed. Not strictly

related to environment impact.

Low / Low

Land use data.

High /
Medium

Low / Low

93

Development of recreational
activities in forests areas

TOUR20

D.7.1.
3.2 Are we
improving
the intermodality of
the transport
system to
match the
tourists
needs?

94

Percentage of forest
land managed for
recreation and tourism
to total forest area;
proxy: accessibility of
forests areas for
recreation and tourism
(open access and
closeness to inhabitants
/ main cities)

Percentage of destination
(area in km2) that is
designated for protection

Percentage of destination
covered by a biodiversity
D.7.1.2.
management and monitoring
plan.
Density of public
Access to mass tourism
transport network in
destinations by public
tourist areas:
transport
infrastructures
proximity to tourism
destinations by type
(railway station,
TOUR23
motorway exit, airport,
harbour) and by country
(% of tourism cities
with each mode of
transport); - evolution of
the construction of
airports in tourism areas
Percentage of visitors
satisfied with the accessibility
C.3.2.1. of the destination for those
with disabilities or specific
access requirements

Difficult to measure as forest is a

multi-use area (DE) . Proxies
may allow measure the pressure
on forests. (DK)

Low / Low

Clarification needed, what is a

destination. If not, the reference
unit is not clear and
comparability is not feasible
Clarification needed, what is a
destination. If not, the reference
unit is not clear and
comparability is not feasible
Interesting indicator to evaluate
the accesibility, linked to
TOUR1 (IS)

Low / Low

Not strictly relevant for

environment.

Low / Low

Low / Low

Medium /
Medium

C.3.1.

Percentage of destination
served by public transport
that is accessible to people
with disabilities and people
with specific access
requirements
Development of less
environment-damaging
transport system for tourism
travels (services)

TOUR25

3.3 What
trend does
tourism take
in the
European
economy?

D.1.1.

D.1.1.1

Percentage of tourists and

same day visitors using
different modes of transport
to arrive at the destination
(public/private and type)
Percentage of visitors using
local/soft mobility/public
transport services to get
around the destination

Evolution in the use of

alternative services in
tourism transport system
versus prices of services
(train+car package
services, luggages
services, local means of
transport during tourism
season)

Not strictly relevant for

environment.

Low / Low

Related to TOUR 1 and modes of

transport indicator.

Medium /
Low

See question 1.1.

See question 1.1.

95

Gross value added of

Economic value of tourism
industry (GVA) as in % total tourism industry (and %
change) approached by
GDP
receipts from
international tourism
(total receipts; total
receipts per capita; %
receipts in GDP)

TOUR35

B.1.1.1.

B.3.1

B.3.1.1.

Relative contribution of
tourism to the destination's
economy (% GDP)
Direct tourism employment
as percentage of total
employment
Percentage of jobs in tourism
that are seasonal
Household expenditure and
tourism prices (including
holidays packages)

TOUR36

96

(a) Household final

consumption
expenditure for tourism
(recreation, education
and culture) at constant
prices European level,
time series, in billions
EURO and per capita,
and as in % of total
household expenditure.
(b) Index of tourist

Good background indicator. But

not strictly related to
environmental aspect of tourism.
In addition to the trend
indicators TOUR35, TOUR36,
we would like to suggest the
following explanatory variable:
total income of the tourism
sector divided by the number of
night stays, somehow
expressing a notion of quality
and sustainability from the
touristic area perspective (jobs
and wages provides by tourism,
economic development that
benefit also to residents, impacts
of tourism on social context, etc.)
(FR)
Good background indicator. But
not strictly related to
environmental aspect of tourism
Good background indicator. But
not strictly related to
environmental aspect of tourism
Good background indicator. But
not strictly related to
environmental aspect of tourism
Good background indicator. But
not strictly related to
environmental aspect of tourism

Eurostat and national

statistics

Low / High

Eurostat and national

statistics

Low / High

Eurostat and national

statistics

Low / High

Eurostat and national

statistics

Low / High

National statistics

Low /
Medium

consumer prices
(transport, education
and culture, hotels cafs
restaurants)

B.1.2.

B.2.2.1.

Daily spending per tourist

(accommodation, food and
drinks, other services)

Good background indicator. But

not strictly related to
environmental aspect of tourism

Average price per room in

the destination
Ecotourism products
penetration (as in % of total)

Not strictly relevant for

environment.
Interesting indicator for
sustainable tourism offer.

TOUR39

3.4 Are
tourists more
experimentin
g ecotourism
products?

B.5.1.

B.5.1.1.

Percentage of tourism
enterprises actively taking
steps to source local,
sustainable, and fair trade
goods and services
Percentage of the destination
covered by a policy
promoting local, sustainable
and/or fair trade products
and services

Number of nights spent

inagro-tourism
accommodations,
number of eco-tourism
products and services
(offered by tourism and
travel agencies)

The number of tourist

accommodation facilities with a
national/international eco-label is
measured for some countries as
indicator of sustainable tourism.
(DK)
Not directly linked to tourism

Eurobarometer

Some national
statistics and case
studies

Low /
Medium

Low /
Medium
Medium /
Medium

Medium /
Low

Low / Low

97

Environmental costs of
tourism

(a) expenditure to
maintain/restore
exceptional natural sites
open to public per year
and entrance fees; (b)
environmental costs of
the pollutions by
transport for tourism,
versus evolution of the
prices of transport
modes and resources
(fuels)

Tourism tax revenue and

environmental expenditure
(internalisation of the
environmental costs)

Tourist tax revenue /

public expenditure for
tourism development
and as % of total tax
revenue; Environmental
expenditure (PAC) by
the public and private
sector (total, by type of
expenditure, by
environmental domain in tourism receiving
regions); Public
expenditure for
conservation of tourist
sites and on
environmental
information and
education in tourism

4.1 What are

the
environment
TOUR40
al costs
A
resulting
from tourism
activity?
4 Are we
moving
towards a
better
internalisat
ion of the
external
costs of the
tourism
sector?

98

4.2 Are we
more
directing
taxes
revenues
TOUR40
from tourism
B
to the
preservation
of the
environment
?

Difficult to define if damage is

caused by tourism.
Pollution is already measured
under TOUR1(DK)
In addition to TOUR40A,
TOUR40B, some indirect costs
on the environment do result
from oversizing infrastructures
by comparison with local
population needs (water
treatment plants, energy
networks, roads, etc.). These
environmental costs may be
assessed indirectly by using an
indicator of extra economical
costs.
These environmental costs may
be assessed indirectly by using
an indicator of extra economical
costs.(FR)
Interesting indicator, but difficult
to operationalize (DK).

High / Low

Medium /
Low

receiving regions

5 How
effective
are
environme
ntal
manageme
nt and
monitoring
tools
towards a
more
integrated
tourism
strategy?

Number of tourism
businesses participating
in recognized
environmental schemes
TOUR41
(EMAS, ISO14000) and
% of SMEs, by country
or by group of products
and services, time series
Ecolabels of tourism facilities (a) Number of ecolabels for tourism
(% of total)
accommodation by level
of implementation
(local, national,
regional, European,
international), and in %
TOUR42
of total eco-labelled
products (b) ecolabels
for environmental
quality of beaches and
harbours (blue flag by
country)
Uptake of environmental
management systems by
tourism companies (EMAS,
EIA)

5.1 Are
tourism
companies
more
environment
ally
responsible?

Proposal to change the question

to: Are tourism companies
adopting environmental action
plans or management tools.

International and national labels

can be used. The question is the
criterion for an eco-label to be
counted here. (DE)

Medium /
Low

International label
registers

Medium /
Low

99

Percentage of tourism
enterprises/establishments in
the destination using a
voluntary verified
A.2.1.
certification/labelling for
environmental/quality/sustai
nability and/or CSR
measures
Number of Agendas 21
Progress in implementation
including tourism issue;
of integrated plans by local
implementation of
stakeholders in destinations
Integrated Quality
System on coastal
TOUR45
tourism areas, Strategic
Environmental
5.2 Are
Assessment in tourism
destinations
regions
managers
Percentage of residents
establishing
satisfied with their
integrated
A.1.1.1. involvement and their
tourism
influence in the planning and
plans?
development of tourism
Percentage of the destination
with a sustainable tourism
strategy/action plan, with
A.1.1.
agreed monitoring,
development control and
evaluation arrangement
Country table:
5.3 Are
Progress in integration of
institutional
Member
tourism and environment
organisation of tourism/
States setting
into national strategies and
horizontal-vertical
up some
monitoring systems
integration with other
national
TOUR46
policies/ existence of a
sustainable
national strategy for
tourism
sustainable development
development
and/or on sustainable
strategies
tourism/ tourism
(and monitor

100

This indicator mixes several

measures. It may be better to
focus on CSR for the social
responsibility here and on the
environmental issues in the
indicators above (DK)

Low / Low

Agenda 21 has a reference unit,

but more clarification is needed.
(DK)
The Destination Quality System
can provide this information.
(ES)

Medium /
Low

Not strictly relevant for

environment.

Low / Low

Same as under 2.4

Very relevant, but difficult to

compile. We need consensus
how to measure this phenomena.
(IT, HR, DK)

High / Low

indicators (national/
local)

them)?

A.1.1.

A.2.1.1.

Percentage of the destination

with a sustainable tourism
strategy/action plan, with
agreed monitoring,
development control and
evaluation arrangement
Number of tourism
enterprises/establishments
with sustainability reports in
accordance with the Global
Reporting Initiative (GRI)
EU support to sustainable
tourism projects

TOUR47

5.4 Is the
European
Union more
supporting a
environment
ally-friendly
tourism?

C.4.1.

C.4.1.1.

D.7.1.1.

Percentage of the destination

covered by a policy or plan
that protects cultural
heritage
Percentage of residents who
have positive or negative
views on the impact of
tourism on destination
identity
Percentage of local
enterprises in the tourism
sector actively supporting
protection, conservation, and
management of local

Same as under 2.4

EC
Programmes/projects for
sustainable tourism/total
projects (number and
budget, and by countryregion)

Relevant, but very complicated

to measure. (IT, DK)

Expert judgement

High / Low

Same as in Policy question 3.1.

above

Not strictly
environmental

101

biodiversity and landscapes

D.7.1.2.

Percentage of destination
covered by a biodiversity
management and monitoring
plan

Same as under TOUR 3.2. above

Note: filled with grey colour are those indicators included in the ETIS system. The green ones are newly proposed indicators by the
national experts.

102