Probably the most significant series of interna- tional agreements for tourism policy at the macro level of policy making are those concerned with trade. International tourism trade issues are usually dealt with on either a bilateral or multi- lateral basis, although unilateral action may be taken by governments when they feel that their interests are being impeded. Many bilateral trade agreements relating to tourism are usually in the area of transport (e.g. air transport agree- ments) or investment (e.g. protection for foreign investment under most-favoured-nation status),
although increasingly agreements with respect to security and migration, including visa require- ments, are also significant. Multilateral negotia- tions are often conducted under the auspices of international organisations. Three international trade organisations with an interest in tourism are the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and the World Trade Organization (WTO). Organisations with a more specific in- terest in tourism activities include the World Tourism Organization, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the Customs
The regional state
The local state
Growth triangle The International scale of governance
NATION STATE B NATION
STATE A National government
State A
Regional government
State A
Local/city government
State A
National government
State B Supranational
body
Supranational body, e.g. IOC Supranational
body
International
body International interest group
National interest group
Regional government
State B
Local/city government
State B Bilateral
international relations
Intermistic relations, e.g. sister cities
International place/
destination promotion Intermisticrelations, e.g. cross-border
cooperation Supranational scale of governance
Figure 6.6 Contemporary multi-level governance
Note: Extensive international- and transnational-related networks as a result of continued multilateral growth in policy actors, e.g. environment human rights, and growth in intermistic relations including sister cities and international associations. Development of multi-level regional governance structures to manage economic performance, e.g. growth triangles. Broadening of international destination promotion concept to include place promotion and the ‘world city’ concept.
Source: Hall, C.M. (2005a) Tourism: Rethinking the Social Science of Mobility, Prentice Hall, Harlow. Reproduced with permission.
Cooperation Council (CCC), and regional bodies such as the Tourism Council of the South Pacific (TCSP) and the Tourism Program of the Organi- zation of American States.
At the global level the United Nations Con- ference on International Travel and Tourism in Rome in 1963 was perhaps the first to highlight the role of tourism in economic development and in improving international relations, with the conference considering ‘that it is incumbent on governments to stimulate and coordinate national
tourist activities’ (1963: 17). Despite the economic significance of tourism to many countries and to the global economy as a whole, the establishment of trade regimes for tourism has not had the high profile of the agricultural or manufacturing sec- tors. This is most likely because of tourism’s posi- tion as a service industry and as an ‘invisible’
export or import in many countries’ trade bal- ances. Such a situation has meant that, for many years, tourism was not taken seriously as a prior- ity area for international policy development,
particularly in developed countries (Kearney 1992; Hall 1994; Davidson and Maitland 1997;
Dredge and Jenkins 2007). However, economic restructuring of traditional industries and the recognition of service industries, including tele- communications and finance, as potential growth poles for economic development and employment purposes in western economies has increased interest in tourism. Indeed, the Uruguay Round of GATT, concluded in December 1993, gave sub- stantial attention to mechanisms to encourage freer trade in the area of services that has since been taken up in the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS).
GATS defines four ways (or “modes”) to trade services:
1. services supplied from one country to another, such as international telephone calls; officially known as “crossborder supply” (mode 1);
2. consumers or firms making use of a service in another country, such as tourism; officially termed “consumption abroad” (mode 2);
3. a foreign company setting up subsidiaries or branches to provide services in another country, such as foreign banks; officially named “commercial presence” (mode 3);
4. individuals travelling from their own country to supply services in another, such as
consultants; officially referred to as
“presence of natural persons” (mode 4).
Liberalising trade in these types of services is designed to allow easier movement of companies, capital and people across boundaries and bor- ders. Nevertheless, the place of tourism in GATS’
negotiations is at times almost as problematic as the pace at which agreements are reached within the WTO. For example, with respect to the UN World Tourism Organization’s proposed annexe of tourism to GATS, the European Community (EC) was the only WTO member to formally sub- mit a reaction to the proposed annexe. Although the EC stated its support for ‘the main intentions’
of the proposal, it did not explicitly endorse the establishment of a new tourism annexe to GATS.
Instead, the EC proposed that the list of sectors intended to be included in the annexe were too
broad, as well as also noting that air transport services were currently excluded from GATS’ ne- gotiations, and that some of the issues raised by the sponsors could be better addressed in the WTO’s Working Party on Domestic Regulation (WPDR) (Dunlop 2003). Interestingly, Dunlop (2003: 10) also noted that the EC, along with the United States, suggested that sustainable develop- ment needed to be considered within the annexe, with the EC stressing ‘the importance of access to high-quality environmental services – a key offen- sive negotiating interest for the EC (and US) in the GATS negotiations’, which would have signif- icant impact in a wide range of countries with respect to tourism trade with the EU. In addition, the EC sought to use any annexe to eliminate re- strictions on foreign direct investment in tourism.
The organisation that has historically proba- bly focused most on trade liberalisation in the area of tourism services is the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development based in Paris. Created in 1961, the OECD groups 30 member countries in an organisation that,
provides governments a setting in which to discuss, develop and perfect economic and social policy.
They compare experiences, seek answers to com- mon problems and work to coordinate domestic and international policies that increasingly in today’s globalised world must form a web of even practice across nations. (OECD 1999)
OECD countries produce two-thirds of the world’s goods and services and account for about 70 per cent of the world’s international tourism trade. However, the OECD does not perceive itself as an exclusive club, instead regarding membership as limited only by a country’s com- mitment to a market economy and a pluralistic democracy.
Although the OECD provides economic sta- tistics and forecasts, the latter of which may be particularly influential in affecting investment flows and currency exchange rates, it is as a policy forum that the OECD has had the most significant long-term effect on tourism policy, particularly with respect to international tourist trade liberalisation (Davidson and Maitland 1997) and the enhancement of international
tourism trade. Although more recently it has taken an overt interest in tourism and climate change (Agrawala 2007).
As the OECD’s website stated at the beginning of 2007, ‘The OECD produces internationally agreed instruments, decisions and recommenda- tions to promote rules of the game in areas where multilateral agreement is necessary for individual countries to make progress in a globalised economy’ (OECD 2007). At an informal level the policy debate within the OECD leads to
‘policy learning’ between countries, by which we mean that elements of policies and institutional arrangements in one country are modelled on an- other country’s experiences. This has been partic- ularly important with respect to the organisation of tourism at the national, and even state/
provincial level in Australia, Canada and New Zealand, for example. In formal terms policy dis- cussion can lead to the development of formal agreements, e.g. by establishing legally binding codes for free flow of capital and services.
In examining obstacles to trade in interna- tional travel and tourism, a number of issues that affect tourist trade can be identified:
• Government attention to tourism is usually focused more on promotion of inbound tourism rather than on a more general approach that deals with reduction or removal of restrictions to human mobility on a multilateral basis.
• Governments have not usually assessed the impact of laws and regulations specifically on tourism, as there are very few tourist or tourism-specific laws.
• Government international trade and diplomatic policies often conflict with, and override, tourism policies. This is particularly the case with respect to security policies in a post-9/11 environment.
• International organisations that focus on trade issues have historically addressed tourism primarily in piecemeal fashion and not with tourism as an integral unit. This is changing with respect to the OECD and GATS, although because of the diffuse nature of tourism in many policy fields substantial
gaps still remain, particularly as new issues arise.
• There is only limited coordination among international organisations on tourism matters.
Obstacles to tourism can also be classified as to whether they constitute tariff or non-tariff barriers. Non-tariff barriers include travel allowance restrictions, restrictions on credit card use, limitations on duty-free allowances, and advance import deposit-like measures (e.g. com- pulsory deposits prior to travel). Tariff barriers include import-duty measures, airport departures or airport taxes, and subsidies, for example a consumer-subsidy measure such as an official preferential exchange rate for foreign tourists or price concessions. Although tourism tariff barri- ers may be lowered by specific tourism agree- ments, tariffs are usually dealt with under broader multilateral negotiations on tariff reduc- tions on trade in goods and services, e.g. the World Trade Organization, or negotiations within a specific trading bloc such as the Euro- pean Community, the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) or the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between Canada, Mexico and the United States; or through bi- lateral agreements, e.g. the Closer Economic Relations agreement between Australia and New Zealand (Hall 1994). In addition, attempts to liberalise international trade in tourism services are also encouraged through the action of inter- national organisations such as the UNWTO and the WTTC.
The World Tourism Organization
The UNWTO is the leading international policy organisation in the tourism field, being particu- larly influential in less developed nations and in the United Nations’ system of organisations of which it is a member. In 1998 its membership in- cluded 138 countries and territories and over 350 Affiliate Members representing local government, tourism associations, private sector companies and educational institutions. In 2006, the UNWTO’s membership comprised 150 countries,
seven territories and more than 300 Affiliate Members.
According to the Statutes of the World Tourism Organization:
1. The fundamental aim of the Organization shall be the promotion and development of tourism with a view to contributing to economic development, in- ternational understanding, peace, prosperity, and universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion. The Organization shall take all appropriate action to attain this objective.
2. In pursuing this aim, the Organization shall pay particular attention to the interests of the develop- ing countries in the field of tourism. (UNWTO, 1970, Article 3. The Statutes came into force on 2 January 1975 in accordance with Article 36) Although a member of the United Nations system its origins predate the establishment of the UN. The World Tourism Organization was originally formed in 1925 as the International Union of Official Travel Publicity Organizations based at The Hague in the Netherlands. After the Second World War it was renamed the Interna- tional Union of Official Travel Organizations (IUOTO) and moved to Geneva. As international tourism and the corresponding complexity of intergovernmental relations with respect to tourism grew in the 1960s, IOUTO sought to have a stronger role in international tourism and the United Nations system in a similar fashion to the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the Inter- national Civil Aviation Organization. In Decem- ber 1969 the UN General Assembly passed a resolution that recognised such a role, with the resolution being ratified in 1974 by 51 of the nations whose official tourism organisations were members of IUOTO.
In 1975 IUOTO was renamed the World Tourism Organization, with its first General Assembly being held in Madrid, where the Secre- tariat was also installed in the following year at the invitation of the Spanish government, which provided a building and other financial assistance for the organisation. In 1976 the organisation
became an executing agency of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and in 1977 a formal cooperation agreement was signed with the United Nations itself. Although full (na- tional) and affiliate memberships have grown over the years, it is noticeable that a number of OECD member countries, such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States, were not members of the organisation for many years. In part this is because officials from these countries, while cooperating with the organization, rightly or wrongly do not perceive the organisation as
‘providing value for money’ and, perhaps, do not have the influence on the direction of the organi- sation’s policies and undertakings they might wish. However, this position has shifted substan- tially given that in 2003 the UNWTO became a specialised agency of the United Nations.
One of the greatest challenges facing the UNWTO is the generation of funding to finance its activities, which is leading to an increasing focus on partnerships with industry and, possibly, changes in the focus of UNWTO’s organisational philosophies. UNWTO is primarily financed by members’ contributions. Full Members, open to all sovereign states, pay an annual quota calcu- lated according to the level of economic develop- ment and the importance of tourism in each country. Associate Membership is open to territo- ries not responsible for their external relations.
Membership requires the prior approval of the government that assumes responsibility for their external relations. Affiliate Members consist of organisations and firms that work in the tourism and travel sectors and which pay an annual fee (€2,000 in early 2007). Affiliate membership requires endorsement by the government of the state in which the headquarters of the applicant is located.
Such is the importance of public–private part- nerships that in 1998 the UNWTO announced the composition of a Strategic Group to advise the UNWTO Secretary-General on implementa- tion of an active public–private partnership within UNWTO. The members of the Strategic Group were announced as being, representing the government sector: Brazilian Tourism Board President Caio Luiz de Carvalho; Egyptian
Tourism Minister Mamdouh El Beltagui;
Maldives Tourism Minister Ibrahim Hussain Zaki; Honorary UNWTO Secretary-General Antonio Enriquez Savignac; Swiss Tourism Chief Peter Keller; and the Tunisian Tourism Minister Slaheddine Maâoui. Representing the private sec- tor were: Martin Brackenbury, chairman of the UNWTO Business Council and President of the International Federation of Tour Operators;
Geoffrey Lipman, President of the World Travel and Tourism Council; Isao Matsuhashi, Chair- man of the Japan Travel Bureau and the Japan Association of Travel Agents; Bill Norman, Pres- ident and CEO of the Travel Industry Associa- tion of America; and Stefano Torda, Deputy Secretary-General of confederazione generale del commercio (CONFCOMMERCIO) and formerly tourism director of Italy (WTO 1998e). The composition of the group is interesting as it con- veys an appreciation of the networks that exist both within and between the UNWTO and other organisations. These networks now have a for- mal structure within the UNWTO through the Affiliate Member category.
Affiliate members have the opportunity to par- ticipate in UNWTO policy fora and may also be in a better position to enter into partnership arrange- ments with the UNWTO in development projects.
According to the UNWTO (WTO 2007c):
Affiliate membership in the World Tourism Organi- zation offers a chance to participate in the give and take of the international tourism business at its very highest levels. Members not only benefit from increased exposure and visibility, they gain access to all UNWTO meetings and seminars. They find out about new business opportunities and they have a chance to influence policy makers on issues vital to the positive growth of the tourism industry – issues such as travel advisories, taxation, the Global Code of Ethics, the Tourism Satellite Account and short- term market forecasts.
At the policy level the activities of the UNWTO have been substantial. Although its outputs may be regarded as soft international law their influence is still significant. For exam- ple, former UNWTO Secretary-General Antonio Enrìquez Savignac attended the Rio Earth Summit in 1992 and was instrumental in getting tourism
included in Agenda 21as one of the only indus- tries capable of providing an economic incentive for preservation of the environment (WTO 1999). Although sustainable development has been one focus of WTO policy activity, other areas such as trade liberalisation (WTO 1998a, 1998b), public–private partnerships (WTO 1998c, 1998d) and health and safety have also been important. Examples of such policy meas- ures include the development of:
• Tourism Bill of Rights and Tourist Code (1985, resolution of Sofia conference)
• Recommended Measures for Safety
• Creating Tourism Opportunities for Handicapped People
• Health Information and Formalities in International Travel
• WTO Statement on the Prevention of Organized Sex Tourism
• The Manila Declaration on World Tourism (1980)
• The Hague Declaration on Tourism (declaration of the Inter-Parliamentary Conference on Tourism, jointly organised with the Inter-Parliamentary Union) (1989)
• The Bali Declaration on Tourism (1996)
• Global Code of Ethics for Tourism (1999)
• International Year of Ecotourism (2002)
• Tourism 2020 Vision.
Soft law initiatives such as the Manila Decla- ration on World Tourism in 1980 had a consider- able impact on the tourism policy process in some countries as it helped redefine the concept of tourism impacts to include the sociocultural dimension (Davidson and Maitland 1997). Simi- larly, the Hague Declaration on Tourism, which built on the Brundtland Commission’s call for
‘sustainable development’, helped establish sus- tainable tourism as a national and regional policy concern in some member countries (Davidson and Maitland 1997).
In addition to its policy function, the WTO also has substantial influence on national and regional tourism development and plays an im- portant role as a land-use and tourist resource planner. This function is significant not only for its direct impact on tourism development,
particularly in developing countries, but also be- cause it illustrates the manner in which the activ- ities of international bodies operate at lower scales of the tourism policy and planning process all the way through to the regional and local level, affecting various stakeholders at all these levels. The UNWTO acts as an executing agency of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), while other planning and development activities are secured through consultancies and financing from other national and international agencies. According to the WTO (1999), US$4.4 million worth of development activities was undertaken in 42 countries in the operating period 1996–97. In 2001–02 the figure was 70 countries with a value of US$2.5 million (World Tourism Organization 2007a). Examples of UNWTO planning and development projects include:
• strategy for environmentally sustainable development of India’s Andaman Islands (1996);
• tourism master plan in Ghana (1996);
• reconstruction and development plan in Lebanon (1997);
• action plan for sustainable tourism development in Uzbekistan (1997);
• Tourism Master Plan for Pakistan (2001);
• Tourism Master Plans for eight Chinese provinces (2000–2002);
• development of national parks in Rwanda (1999);
• tourism development strategy for Moldova (1999);
• integrated development programme for Palestinian Authority (2000).
Although the UNWTO has a significant role to play in tourism at the international level, the growth in international tourism has also led to the development of international organisations with interests in tourism, particularly at the supranational level. Private sector organisations such as the WTTC, the OECD and supranational organisations such as the EC and the Organization of American States are all competing for policy ascendancy in influencing international tourism policy debate and the subsequent development of
international agreements on tourism matters.
Substantial policy shifts have occurred in recent years, including within the UNWTO, where greater emphasis has been given to liberalisation of trade and encouragement of further develop- ment. The observations of Burns in 1994 still apply to the present day:
it is clear . . . that WTO is actively promoting the expansion of tourism at a global level. WTO sur- vives not so much through its membership fees (gov- ernments and affiliates) but through spin-off activities such as consulting and project manage- ment. It therefore actually needs more tourism! (in Davidson and Maitland 1997: 119)
A sustainable UNWTO therefore requires tourism to continue to exist and grow. That the UNWTO perceives itself as assuming the leader- ship role in world tourism is beyond doubt.
As the UNWTO Secretary-General, Francesco Frangialli, stated, ‘In the absence of the European Union’s capacity to make itself felt in the tourism sphere, the World Tourism Organization remains today the principal body concerned with tourism cooperation between European countries’ (WTO 1998f). With the Secretary-General adding that it was unfortunate that the world’s two most important tourist areas, Europe and the United States, lack overall strategies and vision for tourism development (WTO 1998f). Neverthe- less, both Europe and the Americas have signifi- cant supranational bodies developing strategies for tourism development.