Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Enhancing Tourism's Potential for Employment'
15. 3. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 75/37 submit a drawing or illustration of the complex product to enable examination to take place under Article 48 (see below under Article 49a). compliance with the requirements for protection, otherwise there is a very real risk of innocent third parties being ‘litigated to death’ by the abusive application of the system. Article 49a: 3. 8. It is essential that examination under Article 48 should include at least some examination for Article 67: The principles relating to the examination 3. 9. of facts need to be specified more clearly. Brussels, 27 January 2000. The President of the Economic and Social Committee Beatrice RANGONI MACHIAVELLI Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Enhancing Tourism’s Potential for Employment’ (2000/C 75/14) On 10 May 1999 the Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned communication. The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 14 December 1999. The rapporteur was Mr Malosse. At its 369th plenary session (meeting of 26 January 2000), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 71 votes to two, with one abstention. 1. The background to the Commission’s communication 1. 1. The European Commission has forwarded to the Economic and Social Committee, along with the Council, the European Parliament and the Committee of the Regions, a Communication on the follow-up to the Conclusions and Recommendations of the High Level Group on Tourism and Employment, published in October 1998. Consequently, the Committee opinion will also examine the work of the High Level Group (HLG). 1. 2. The Communication is the most recent of the policy documents aiming to relaunch a European tourism policy, which has been ‘grounded’ since the November 1997 European Conference on Tourism, organised by the Luxembourg presi- dency. Since 1996, a proposal for a multi-year programme for European tourism, known as ‘Philoxenia’ (1), has been so successfully blocked by the Council that it would no longer appear to be on the cards (although the Commission does still include it in its strategy, when it mentions the Austrian presidency’s much watered-down compromise proposal). The Communication could, thus, provide the ‘new approach’ called for by the Committee in the own-initiative opinion it adopted at the plenary session of 24 and 25 March 1999 (2). 1. 3. The Communication draws deeply from the con- clusions of the High Level Group (HLG). Its primary point is the need for up-to-date, Europe-wide statistics on tourism activities, skills and the most notable current schemes. It sensibly makes a link between tourism and the National Employment Action Plans, European employment policy instruments set up following the Luxembourg jobs summit in 1997. Lastly, the Communication singles out a number of the proposals made in the HLG report, highlighting potential synergies of structural, research and development, education and training, and business policy instruments. The Communi- cation should devote more space to some of the HLG’s (1) COM(96) 168 final — OJ C 222, 31. 7. 1996, p. 9; OJ C 30, 30. 1. 1997, p. 103. (2) OJ C 138, 18. 5. 1999, p. 4. C 75/38 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 15. 3. 2000 suggestions, such as establishment of an observatory network. In its conclusions, the Communication rightly stresses the need to adopt a strategy and decide on priorities, but does not suggest an order of priorities. The present opinion is designed to make proposals, explore new avenues and suggest a list of priorities. To that end, the Economic and Social Committee has analysed the HLG report and the Commission communication alongside other factors, building on previous Committee opinions and new questions for consideration, raised largely by its contacts in the field. ‘a sector which is predominantly engaged in cross-border activity deserves a European policy with a stimulating, innovative and pro-active approach to sustainable business development, preferably within a consumer protection framework, and in harmony with other requirements, such as those of the environment, for example. ’ Our work will be based on a joint, comparative analysis of the Communication and the High Level Group’s Report. 2. The Committee’s stance and thoughts on the issue of tourism and employment 2. 1. The Committee has adopted several opinions on tourism, including an own-initiative opinion on Tourism and Regional Development (1), an opinion on the Community action plan for tourism (2), the opinion on the Philoxenia programme (3), and, more recently, the 1999 own-initiative opinion mentioned above. The Committee’s view is summed up in the following sentence taken from the latter: ‘Europe can no longer refuse to give the recognition — politically and in terms of policy-making — that the fastest-growing sector of its economy deserves because of its economic and social position. ’ 2. 2. The Committee has already ratified and endorsed the conclusions and recommendations of the High Level Group in its own-initiative opinion of March 1999. The Committee approves in principle the ‘new approach’, which turns its back on the ‘clientelistic’ practices of the past and replaces them with a more dynamic vision based on tourism’s contribution to job creation. While, for several reasons (difficulty in providing an accurate definition of the sector’s boundaries; seasonal and undeclared work, etc. ), the figures given in the Communication and the High Level Group’s Report (9 million jobs to date and between 2. 2 million and 3 million further jobs over the next ten years) are doubtless only estimates, they do show that the sector has a promising future, on a par with the new communication technologies. 2. 4. Implementation of an integrated job-creation strategy 2. 4. 1. is an ideal ‘test-bed’ for integrated job-creation strategies: There are several reasons why the tourism industry — its importance to the economy and its growth potential; — the impact of tourism on several other sectors (transport, commerce, etc. ) and the fact that it depends on these sectors; — the various sections of the population employed by the tourism industry, particularly the more vulnerable groups such as young people, women, and the unskilled; — the availability of unskilled, temporary and seasonal work; — tourism’s contribution to regional development: rural areas attempting to diversify, declining industrial areas looking for alternatives, urban areas aiming to raise the profile of their cultural heritage; — the way services adapt to changes in tourism demands, thus requiring a link-up with training or even research facilities. 2. 4. 2. Tourism experts quite rightly emphasise the fact that their industry is currently one of the few which are able to reconcile productivity and job creation. Indeed, the customer’s expectations as regards better quality and greater variety of the services are a source of job creation. 2. 3. Whilst the strategic concerns of the sector are clearly established, the role and status of Community policies to promote job-creation remain to be defined. Point 3. 2 of the Committee’s March 1999 own-initiative opinion kicks off the debate as follows: 2. 5. New skills for new professions (1) OJ C 332, 31. 12. 1990, p. 157. (2) OJ C 19, 21. 1. 1998, p. 116. (3) OJ C 30, 30. 1. 1997, p. 103. 2. 5. 1. In the tourism industry, customer needs change with population changes. Moreover, tourists are increasingly choosy about standards and activities, and they expect cultural and entertainment facilities to be updated. This exacerbates a number of problems relating to skills and training develop- ment. 15. 3. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 75/39 2. 5. 2. The problem is that training always lags behind labour market developments. It would therefore be better to prepare for them by acting on documented consumer/user needs, and by encouraging vocational and continuous training with a view to enhancing skills and qualifications. The need to pre-guess these trends opens up the prospect of lasting employment, and is in tune with the industry’s current development phase which calls for a more professional, listening approach. 2. 6. Back-up for changing tourism requirements Initially, 2. 6. 1. tourism was mainly the prerogative of well-off people in rich countries. Gradually, tourism spread to other sections of the population, thanks to economic growth, labour laws providing more time for holidays, and to the wider availability of transport. This was accompanied by the appearance of and the need to invest in new job-creating products to address new aspirations and cultural, sporting and countryside activities: theme parks, new air- and water sports, new slants on walking holidays, excursions, etc. In this context, 2. 6. 2. for example, the cultural sector provides a well of potential initiatives and jobs. A look at the figures for visits to monuments, museums, festivals and artistic events shows that very few of these are adequately exploited from the point of view of tourism. In several cases, a more professional approach would increase visitor numbers and create jobs. 2. 6. 3. Community action programmes can be harnessed by making this a Europe-wide search for new products, and by raising the profile of little-known heritage sites and initiatives. Inter-regional transfers of experience on concrete initiatives and strategies, and partnerships between companies from different countries should therefore be promoted. Useful examples are the Interreg programme and the Joint European Venture (JEV) which provide technical and financial support for joint business start-up projects — innovative job-creating initiatives — shared by a number of Member States. 2. 7. Working time — annualisation, flexibility and remuneration Employment in the tourism industry is seasonal and 2. 7. 1. insecure. As workers change jobs frequently, they have virtually for a no ties with any one company. Moreover, except fewhigh-flying posts, wages are also considerably below the average for other sectors. 2. 7. 2. If it is to be managed successfully, the seasonal nature of the work needs to be taken into account. All national legislation provides for rest days, and the requirements of seasonal work must be accepted, integrated and organised accordingly. 2. 7. 3. In many regions, targeted action has already been successful in extending the tourist season. Coordinating the staggering of holiday periods across Europe could promote this development further. Extending the tourist season in this way, reorganising working time, and expanding demand (new custom from non-European and eastern European tourists, introducing new social classes to tourism and developing new forms of tourism) will benefit employment. However, any sustainable benefit to employment 2. 7. 3. 1. is conditional on timely, forward-looking staff planning by companies and on jobs being offered at rates of pay and working conditions consonant with the labour market. 2. 7. 4. Moreover, if we consider the general trend towards shorter working hours, the new time schedules must take account of tourism’s specific needs. The tourism industry is heavily affected by the need to offer its services in spurts, out of synch with other economic sectors. This has a direct impact in terms of very distinctive working conditions. This problem must be addressed in depth, as the future of the whole sector largely depends on it. The quality of the services provided depends on staff availability and motivation. The social dialogue will thus have to reconcile the industry’s special requirements with concerns such as quality of life, quality of service and the potential for job creation through a reduction in working time. 2. 7. 5. Experience shows that saving money by cutting labour costs is incompatible with quality of service in this sector, and runs counter to the basic interests of the tourism industry and tourism businesses. Employers and employees thus share a long-term common interest, and this should make it possible to remove the often negative image young people have of the sector. The future of European tourism will also depend on how far it is able to attract the younger generations by offering good working conditions and good career pros- pects. Any initiative to raise the profile of the industry must therefore stress the need to advance the interests of the men and women it employs and provide them with training throughout their careers. Some hotel chains have built their success on these principles: attractive salary, career prospects and career-long continuous training. C 75/40 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 15. 3. 2000 In order to address these issues, 2. 7. 6. there must be ongoing talks between trades unions and trade organisations which are truly representative of the industry, particularly SMEs. The cross-border nature of tourism makes it vital that this dialogue should also be pursued at European level. Moreover, compiling a list of European best practice would provide added value. 3. 1. 4. The EU’s role — thanks to an exchange platform — will be to collect information at European and international (the experiment could be extended to Mediterranean level partner countries and to Central and Eastern Europe) with a view to developing information tools and framing performance indicators. Developing such a platform by building on a network of local observatories attached to tried-and-tested local systems, will make it possible to launch inter-regional cooperation projects and implement effective benchmarking schemes. 3. Comments on the Commission Communication 3. 2. Developing businesses 3. 1. Tourism information in Europe Although recent Commission progress on statistical 3. 1. 1. methodology for tourism makes it possible to get an overview of the sector (‘satellite’ accounts), and despite the fact that Eurostat provides common instruments and that the data are relatively harmonised, tourism is per se difficult to assess. It is now impossible to quantify the number of EU visitors in a Member State: people travel more frequently, and it is difficult to say whether it is a holiday, business trip, or whether they are travelling for family reasons, etc. There are more second homes, trips to visit friends are up, and there is also travel connected with seasonal employment and undeclared work, etc. 3. 2. 1. The European tourism industry is mainly composed of small and medium-sized operators. They often find it difficult to maintain a competitive edge (access to ‘tourism providers’, reputation, cutting edge advertising techniques, quality, consumer relations, etc. ). Another feature of the industry is the presence of a whole host of small ancillary operators who rely heavily on tourism: craft industry workers, trades people and the self-employed, etc. This situation, which differs from the United States 3. 2. 2. (highly concentrated activity) and from emerging-market countries where foreign companies or public monopolies dominate, is a source of strength for European tourism, with its diversity, the quality and originality of its facilities, and the fact that tourism service providers are in touch with their cultural environment, etc. ). 3. 1. 2. The only way to obtain reliable, exhaustive data on the impact of tourism activities and make forecasts will be to establish methods for definitions and surveys, which cover a sufficiently broad sample, comply with EU standards, and reflect the reality and needs of the public and private sectors. 3. 2. 3. Rather than resigning ourselves to the gradual disap- pearance of this European diversity, the EU should turn it into a trump card. We know that this great diversity of players provides the best guarantee of maintaining employment levels and of creating local jobs in tourist areas which are often regions where jobs are scarce (rural areas, less-developed regions, island or land-locked regions, etc. ). 3. 1. 3. In order to develop the analysis and zero in on current trends in the industry, the Committee suggests taking on board the HLG’s proposal for an ‘action relay and obser- vation network’ of existing regional and local bodies (tourist boards, agencies, chambers of commerce, etc. ) who are fully conversant with their markets and are the only ones who can understand what can be widely differing situations. These relay centres would also act as ‘Tourism Advice Centres’ providing the tourism industry with information, for instance as regards quality standards and research into customer expectations. It will be the role of the European Commission — in cooperation with the national and local authorities — to provide ‘seals of quality’ for these local organisations and training for their managers, and to ensure they operate as part of a properly structured European network (along the lines of the Euro-Info Centres). 3. 2. 4. Some regions of the EU have seen the downside of mass tourism: destruction of the natural environment, domination of the market by tour operators, watering down of local culture. In short, these regions become mere ‘tourist destinations’ and gradually lose their real assets, i. e. their traditional hospitality, the natural environment, their traditions and culture. At the drop of a hat, these ‘destinations’ can be dumped by the tour operators in favour of more distant, often non-European countries, thus compounding cultural devastation with economic stagnation. This shows the danger of staking all on tourism and of an imbalance between local business and the big tour operators which tend increasingly towards consolidation and often behave as if they were part of an oligopoly, setting out their terms on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. 15. 3. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 75/41 3. 2. 5. Partnerships between small and medium-sized enter- prises in the industry would seem to provide an excellent way of avoiding excessive domination by the tour operators, and of getting round the size problem. This is why the European Union should call on national and regional authorities to promote groupings and associations. At the cross-border level, the JEV programme — which provides excellent support for joint ventures between EU SMEs — should be the subject of specific promotion campaigns for the tourism industry. Moreover, that Community competition policy should look into relations between tour operators and the local tourism industry and try to redress the balance. is vital it Similarly, all Community actions to improve the 3. 2. 6. climate for SMEs will have a positive impact on the sector: reduced VAT rate on labour, cutting red tape, quicker payment procedures, stricter implementation of competition rules against monopolies or illegal agreements, a level playing field for all the industry’s players, including the cooperative and non-profit sector. In this respect, the Committee calls for a bolder approach from the Council, which recently refused to grant the tourism industry the option to apply a reduced VAT rate, despite the fact that it is undoubtedly one of the most labour-intensive industries. 3. 3. Public-private partnership The Committee believes 3. 3. 1. authorities — whether at local, national or Community level — have a vital role to play in devising and supporting tourism strategies. In the current climate, however, input from the private sector could help speed up the process. that the 3. 3. 2. Growth in the tourism industry often depends — for instance in the less-prosperous regions of the EU — on the availability of high-grade infrastructures such as water-treat- ment plant, for instance in coastal areas; coastal works; winter sports facilities; improvements to spa, sport, marina and airport facilities, etc. The authorities are often unable to cope with investment on this scale. The European Union can and must pitch in, using the structural policies for less-prosperous regions. It could also encourage, within the framework of its public procurement policy, public-private funding methods and franchises which allow private capital to access the projects. Community encouragement for this modern way of funding public interest projects would provide a useful contribution to boosting the potential of the sector. 3. 4. Tourism and research & development 3. 4. 1. The Communication rightly stresses the potential benefits of innovation and new technologies. In this respect, the contribution of the 5th RTD framework programme should be emphasised, particularly its horizontal priorities (‘innovation and SME participation’) and such key actions as ‘integrated development of rural and coastal areas’ and ‘the city of the future’. Unfortunately, these actions are beyond the scope of the vast majority of tourism industry operators. The Committee would stress the need for flexible support procedures for SMEs, which have untapped innovation poten- tial, and for targeted technology dissemination projects, implemented by industry organisations. In order to ensure the greatest possible degree of transparency and facilitate access — still unavailable to 98 % of operators — to the 5th RTD framework programme, the Committee calls for the creation of a user-friendly ‘information counter’ on the web, including help points (Euro Info Centres and Advice Centres). But, since European RTD does not stop with the 5th 3. 4. 2. RTD framework programme (which accounts for scarcely 4 % of research in Europe), the Committee believes that joint projects and actions must also be explored, by harnessing the shared cost facilities of the COST programme, and Treaty Articles 168 and 169 (ex Article 130k and l), on common actions governed by Eureka programme procedures. 3. 5. The role of social dialogue in employment and training/skills policies The Committee — like the High Level Group — 3. 5. 1. would stress here the importance of employment and train- ing/skills policies in promoting and providing stability for the sector. Social dialogue is crucial here, and — in view of the is particularly the industry — it cross-border nature of important that it should be European in scope. 3. 5. 2. We should also drive home the fact that Community action is particularly justified on the social and human level. The fear of social dumping between regions can lead companies to neglect investment in human resources (training, qualifications, skills development, staff motivation) or look for cheaper or less-skilled labour. Social dialogue on the main challenges facing the sector (training, working time, etc. ), conducted within the various main tourism zones (e. g. Mediter- ranean islands, mountain ranges), would provide an efficient way of identifying best practice and improving staff motivation and the quality of the services provided. C 75/42 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 15. 3. 2000 3. 5. 3. Experience of dialogue in the hotel and catering segment of the industry shows that new progress is possible, jobs and working time. Indeed, in particular on low-skill the employment guidelines suggest that annualisation is an appropriate response to seasonal work. 3. 5. 4. The Committee cannot hide its concern regarding the representativeness of the tourism authorities and the weak social dialogue in some Member States. It would seem essential to build on the best practice of some Member States to boost the role of the social partners and make them more representative, particularly of small and medium-sized enter- prises and seasonal workers. This greater attention to the real situation of the industry must also be supported and echoed at European level. 3. 5. 5. The Committee would hope that the Member States’ national employment plans will detail initiatives — financial included — which have been undertaken to boost employment in the field of tourism, and include the factors which have contributed to progress on social dialogue in the industry. businesses involved and, if necessary, additional Community funding. Moreover, the conference could launch specific programmes under Leonardo II to draw up blueprints for European programmes, twinning arrangements and schools networks. Joint studies should be conducted in the major cross-border tourism zones, to determine common skill requirements, even for company directors, and to plan the redeployment of existing training tools or the establishment of training courses. In addition to services (hotel management, provision 3. 5. 9. of accommodation, etc. ), strategies for developing a relevant skills qualifications base should be aimed at training ‘devel- opers’ to design packages combining several products: trans- port, leisure activities, gastronomy, culture, etc. This will involve building up across-the-board tourism skills. Sandwich courses and apprenticeships, the use of new communication technologies by service providers and developers, specific training for quality services, and language training are all features of tourism. The objective will be to provide in-depth, university-level training for ‘developers’ in a wide range of skills, to enable them to adapt to various types of activity. 3. 5. 6. Social partner discussions must also focus on training and mobility management, in order to improve skills levels and ensure seasonal workers can find additional employment elsewhere. 4. Other possible approaches to a ‘New European Tour- ism Strategy’ 3. 5. 7. As regards recognition of qualifications and access to the profession, the Committee would stress the need for full implementation of the principle of freedom of establishment, and for equivalence or mutual recognition of qualifications, in accordance with the studies undertaken within the framework of the ESC Single Market Observatory (1). For some professions, such as estate agents, coach firms and guides, there are still a number of obstacles to the freedom to provide services or to freedom of establishment. These are either de facto or legal obstacles. Whilst it is vital to provide consumer protection, it is also legitimate to guarantee freedom of movement and of establishment. 4. 1. Growth crisis 4. 1. 1. The ESC Opinion on Tourism and Regional Develop- ment adopted on 20 September 1990 (2) provided new food for thought in areas such as social tourism, cultural tourism, mountain- and agri-tourism. These issues are still relevant. The opinion highlighted the crisis in the tourism industry, which had become a victim of its own success (irregular supply side growth, damage to the environment, etc. ). Ten years on, the Committee’s analysis applies equally well: there is indeed a ‘growth crisis’. 3. 5. 8. With respect to training, the Committee regrets the fact that the Communication refers solely to financing by the European Structural Funds. Rather than funding, what is needed is a Europe-wide debate on vocational training for the tourism industry. The Committee would therefore suggest a ministerial conference for the year 2000, where both the Tourism and Education Councils could discuss the matter. In anticipation of the proposals which are likely to come out of the conference, the Committee might already suggest a major cross-border programme of placements and apprenticeships using regional and national funding, contributions from the Furthermore, despite promising figures, Europe’s 4. 1. 2. share of world tourism is steadily shrinking. While the number of tourists in the world is set to double in the next 20 years, Europe is likely to attract only 45-46 % of international tourism, in contrast to the current 60 %. Business travel and visits to over-crowded internationally-renowned sites (Rome, Athens, Paris, etc. ) are still doing extremely well. Traditional European holiday destinations, however, are often in decline for a variety of reasons: seasonal over-population, a fall in the quality of services, an increasing sense of insecurity, deterioration of the environment (quality of water, buildings, etc. ). (1) ESC opinion CES 789/98, OJ C 235, 27. 7. 1998, p. 10. (2) OJ C 332, 31. 12. 1990, p. 157. 15. 3. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 75/43 4. 1. 3. Tourism is an economically viable activity which deserves to be encouraged; it must also be properly managed. Whichever way one looks at it, tourism is not a neutral activity in either cultural or sociological terms. It brings together different people and communities. It impacts on economic practice and working conditions. It can upset the natural and urban environment: encroachment upon heritage sites, unsightly building projects, waste, destruction of fauna and flora. Seasonal mass tourism also forces the authorities to build extremely expensive infrastructure which is exploited for only a few months of the year. This makes it difficult to get returns on the investment, and the authorities concerned can end up in debt. Crime can also be an involuntary side-effect of tourism, with drug-related crime and prostitution amongst the offences. 4. 1. 4. Because of these potential hazards, local people react — sometimes violently — against tourism. Unbridled mass tourism can lead to frustration, with people feeling they have been robbed of their land, their traditions, culture and values: ‘it’s all give and no take’. This shows there is a desire to manage tourism successfully, and to square it properly with the natural environment and local culture. This type of tourism already exists in several EU regions, which have so far managed to escape mass tourism. In this context, the Committee would highlight the role of civil society organisations in the tourist regions. It should be possible for them to be involved and consulted — alongside industry experts and politicians — on a local sustainable development strategy for tourism. 4. 2. Tourism and the single market 4. 2. 1. A single market for tourism is far from complete. The euro will make the shortcomings and discrepancies even more obvious in a large number of areas. These were identified in the 1990 opinion(1), and include: — standard classification of tourist accommodation — cur- rently a real headache for European and other tourists; — interoperability of reservation systems; — recognition of qualifications and freedom of establishment; — security of payment systems, contract validity, payment deadlines, litigation procedures, etc. ; — organising seasonal tourist flows, as a purely national approach is meaningless nowadays. (1) OJ C 332, 31. 12. 1990, p. 157. 4. 2. 2. selling, which is growing thanks to the Internet. To these should now be added regulation of distance 4. 3. Tourism and culture 4. 3. 1. Europe’s cultural heritage has enormous potential and is a major trump card for the growth of provincial and city tourism. Lesser-known sites should be inventoried and integrated into an overall network. Cultural tourism requires marketing support. Investment must be channelled into the promotion and marketing of places of genuine cultural interest, in order to boost their visitor numbers and increase their financial viability and capacity to develop. 4. 3. 2. In terms of employment, this should spawn new professions where tourism meets culture: intermediaries, devel- opment project staff, research assistants, regional language promoters, information and promotion tool designers, multi- lingual staff, etc. This combination of tourism- and culture-ba- sed skills and resources is crucial for the growth of such tourism. 4. 3. 3. Furthermore, cultural tourism provides an indispens- able channel for furthering mutual understanding between peoples. Cultural tourism should not be concerned only with promoting our cultural heritage, but also with living culture and contemporary creativity. A new European strategy should include a joint effort to improve cross-border cultural sites; joint action to promote Europe’s cultural wealth to third country tourists; and use of the Structural Funds to raise the profile of our heritage and contemporary creativity. 4. 4. Tourism and European citizenship 4. 4. 1. The Committee is convinced that tourism plays a part in European integration. The establishment of the Schen- gen and euro areas is — in principle — a very positive and very practical step. This approach should be explored further, particularly the impact on employment and the potential for job mobility within the sector. Facilities for third country tourists should also be considered in this light. 4. 5. Tourism, cohesion and sustainable development 4. 5. 1. It is widely accepted that developing tourism in disadvantaged regions helps strengthen cohesion. However, a certain number of drawbacks (damage to the environment, unregulated urbanisation, lack of significant impact on the local economy, opposition from local people) do point to the need for prudence. C 75/44 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 15. 3. 2000 4. 5. 2. The strong pressure exerted by tourist developments on the immediate social and ecological environment is often at the root of negative phenomena that rebound on efforts to promote tourism. New ‘sustainable’ approaches to planning and developing tourism are needed. The expansion of tourism often entails the creation of specific types of infrastructure. Facilities that are only used for a short period of the year and that spoil the landscape are not uncommon. Current tourism systems are often based on the 4. 5. 3. concentration of a large number of people in small places for very short stretches of time. The result is a series of problems with waste management, water supply, energy and transport and how to run it. Environmental management is only one aspect of a 4. 5. 4. sustainable development approach, which also implies focused forward planning and a global perspective. 4. 5. 5. In this context, it is time for a fresh approach to tourism and cohesion, based on sustainable development, giving priority to the preservation of natural assets and leaning on the concepts of sustainable tourism and eco-tourism. 4. 5. 6. It is quite clear that when it comes to a European strategy to provide a real boost for the job-creating potential of tourism, the regions often need practical help more than money. Benchmarking at regional level would seem to fall within the remit of the EU. 4. 6. Social tourism 4. 6. 1. Making tourism available to as many people as possible is a major factor in job-creation. Employment guide- lines should therefore emphasise the snowball effect of various national measures for social tourism, and encourage them as part of (networks of tourist villages, initiatives for young people, schemes for older people, retirees, etc. ). the European single market 4. 6. 3. In the interests of social cohesion, ways must be found to avoid segregating the social classes. Tourism must further an inclusive society. 4. 6. 4. Opening up tourism to all social classes should not be seen as inciting ‘mass tourism’ and all the drawbacks that go with it: poor service, lack of cultural content, etc. On the contrary, tourism should be seen as a source of enrichment and discovery. Furthermore, experience shows that lower-income consumers are attracted to types of holiday which invite contact with different peoples and cultures: B&B, gîtes, walking and cultural holidays. 4. 7. Tourism and education 4. 7. 1. A Europe-wide scheme to stagger school holidays is bound to improve the quality of family tourism, and reduce pressure (environmental, economic, etc. ) on the busiest resorts and tourist areas. 4. 7. 2. Without wishing to under-estimate the complexity of the coordination exercise (traditions, climate, cultural context, etc. ), the Committee calls on the relevant European Councils (Education, Industry, Tourism) to look again at this issue. 4. 8. Tourism and enlargement EU enlargement will 4. 8. 1. increase tourism’s potential. First of all, customers from eastern Europe will come to discover our countries. Added to this is the often underesti- mated tourist attraction of those countries. Together, these two factors should provide a tonic for the tourism industry. It is therefore vital to involve central and eastern Europe in a European tourism initiative, for instance by setting up inte- grated initiatives for specific areas (Baltic Sea, Carpathian mountains, Oder river basin, etc. ). 4. 8. 2. All things being equal, the same reasoning could apply to the countries around the Mediterranean, as part of a tourism policy differentiated according to major attraction zones. 5. Recommendations: method and principles for Euro- pean action 5. 1. Whereas: 4. 6. 2. Measures must be taken to increase access to holidays for all, while taking care to prevent the formation of ghettos, of places catering only for the disadvantaged. the European venture has had a positive impact on 5. 1. 1. the growth of the tourism industry (freedom of movement for persons, ‘Schengen area’, single currency, etc. ); 15. 3. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 75/45 5. 1. 2. tourism has made a unique contribution to improv- ing the employment situation in Europe, mainly because it is one of the rare sectors which can reconcile productivity and job-creation; 5. 1. 3. it has been decided to recognise and preserve the local diversity of the European Union — including the enlarged Europe of the future — by emphasising the rich human, cultural and natural heritage; 5. 1. 4. the hazards of unbridled tourism pose a potential threat to the environment, heritage and cultural diversity, and could lead to a growth crisis for the industry; 5. 1. 5. and make it more secure in order to enhance its appeal; it is necessary to raise the profile of unskilled work 5. 1. 6. and variety of the services available; it is important to have a broad-based policy of quality those areas of the EU which are heavily dependent 5. 1. 7. on tourism are handicapped by infrastructure costs (especially island and remote peripheral regions); 5. 1. 8. the local tourism industry and tour operators; distortions of competition exist, particularly between 5. 1. 9. a European approach is warranted both on account of the self-evidently cross-border nature of the activity, and because the problems are much the same throughout the EU; an attempt to find common solutions thus seems more than justified on grounds of cost and efficiency; 5. 2. The Economic and Social Committee calls on the Council, the European Parliament, the Member States and the Commission to launch an Initiative for a European Tourism Strategy (IETS), to include: co-funding for pilot projects for exchanges of experi- 5. 2. 1. ence and benchmarking, particularly in areas such as defining local strategies, environmental protection, service quality, social dialogue and training for the new jobs in the industry, by drawing existing action relay and local tourism observation facilities into a structured network; Brussels, 26 January 2000. 5. 2. 2. fast-track access to existing Community instruments (European Structural Funds, enterprise policy, R&D policy, Leonardo Programme, JEV, LIFE programme, etc. ) to provide support for the regions which are most heavily dependent on tourism, and encourage innovation and partnership; 5. 2. 3. effective implementation of competition rules to tourism, in order to combat the distortions, monopolies and oligopolies which make life insecure for hundreds of thousands of the industry’s small businesses; 5. 2. 4. more extensive social dialogue, particularly at Euro- pean level, in order to improve skills, training and mobility levels, working conditions, working hours and job security; a study in leading sectors — and including experts 5. 2. 5. and consumer and employee organisations — into the case for a European Quality Charter with common standards and machinery for certification and assessment; useful details of the employment policies and social 5. 2. 6. dialogue arrangements the Member States would be asked to comply with under the National Employment Plans; immediate implementation of the IETS initiative in 5. 2. 7. the applicant countries, with particular regard to Phare and Sapard funding; annual publication of a Commission report on the 5. 2. 8. implementation of the strategy, the impact of Community policy on the industry (single market, CAP, external relations, social policy, etc. ) and the figures for allocation of European funding; 5. 2. 9. regular consultation by the European institutions of the economic and social operators in the sector, in particular to analyse the impact of European legislation and policy on tourism; an annual monitoring conference, 5. 2. 10. involving the Member States, the relevant partners (tourism professionals, employees, consumers, related activities, etc. ), the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee. The President of the Economic and Social Committee Beatrice RANGONI MACHIAVELLI