eu indicator toolkitcertess.culture-routes.lu/system/files/work/etis toolkit detailed... · data...

European Tourism Indicator System

Detailed Indicator Reference Sheets

For Sustainable Destinations

DG Enterprise and Industry

February 2013

EUROPEAN TOURISM INDICATOR SYSTEM DETAILED INDICATOR REFERENCE SHEETS

2 | P a g e

This document has been commissioned by the European Commission as a deliverable of the Study

on the Feasibility of a European Tourism Indicator System for Sustainable Management at

Destination Level. It was developed by:

Main Authors

Professor Graham Miller, The University of Surrey

Dr Louise Twining-Ward, Sustainable Travel International

Dr Murray Simpson, The INTASAVE Partnership

Other Contributors

Heather Clyne, The University of Surrey

Rachel McCaffery, The INTASAVE Partnership

Peter Krahenbuhl, Sustainable Travel International

Marilyn Larden, Sustainable Travel International

Robert Chappell, Sustainable Travel International

Antonio Pezzano, Sustainable Travel International

Brian Mullis, Sustainable Travel International

Ted Manning, Tourisk Inc.

© European Union, 2013

The content of this publication does not reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Responsibility for

the information and views expressed in the publication lies entirely with the author(s).

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.


3 | P a g e

Table of Contents

Detailed Indicator Reference Sheets ...................................................................................................... 4

Section A: Destination Management ...................................................................................................... 5

A.1 Sustainable Tourism Public Policy ................................................................................................ 5

A.2 Sustainable Tourism Management in Tourism Enterprises .......................................................... 7

A.3 Customer Satisfaction ................................................................................................................... 9

A.4 Information and Communication ............................................................................................... 11

Section B: Economic Value .................................................................................................................... 13

B.1 Tourism Flow (volume & value) at Destination .......................................................................... 13

B.2 Tourism Enterprise(s) Performance ............................................................................................ 18

B.3 Quantity and Quality of Employment ......................................................................................... 23

B.4 Safety and Health ........................................................................................................................ 26

B.5 Tourism Supply Chain ................................................................................................................. 28

Section C: Social and Cultural Impact ................................................................................................... 31

C.1 Community/Social Impact ........................................................................................................... 31

C.2 Gender Equality .......................................................................................................................... 35

C.3 Equality/Accessibility .................................................................................................................. 38

C.4 Protecting and Enhancing Cultural Heritage, Local Identity and Assets ..................................... 42

Section D: Environmental Impact ......................................................................................................... 45

D.1 Reducing Transport Impact ........................................................................................................ 45

D.2 Climate Change ........................................................................................................................... 49

D.3 Solid Waste Management .......................................................................................................... 52

D.4 Sewage Treatment ...................................................................................................................... 55

D.5 Water Management ................................................................................................................... 57

D.6 Energy Usage .............................................................................................................................. 61

D.7 Landscape and Biodiversity Protection ...................................................................................... 64

D.8 Light and Noise Management .................................................................................................... 67

D.9 Bathing Water Quality ................................................................................................................ 69


4 | P a g e

Detailed Indicator Reference Sheets

This part of the Toolkit has a reference sheet for each core and optional indicator.

Core indicators are marked in GREEN . Optional indicators are in BLUE . Optional indicators are

those that are not considered essential for destinations just starting their use of indicators. Those

destinations that have advanced their monitoring work would be expected to work with some of the

optional indicators.

For each indicator, a table is provided with methods for monitoring the indicator. The method sheets

include reason the for monitoring, data requirements, unit of measurement, terms that have been

defined in the glossary, data collection instructions, method to calculate the result of the indicator,

frequency of data collection, reporting format, any international benchmarks that may exist,

suggested actions, and any additional references.

These reference sheets should provide a useful starting point for monitoring. The specifics of data collection responsibility will be different from place to place. Destinations are encouraged to make notes on this table regarding who is responsible for collecting the relevant information on each indicator.

Core Indicator: A.1.1 The indicator goes here – when this box is green it's a core indicator. Blue boxes are for optional indicators.

Reason for measuring This part explains why it is important to measure this indicator

Data requirements What information is needed, e.g. crime data, noise policy

Units of measurement What units to use when recording the information, e.g. $. %

Terms in glossary Terms used in the indicator that are explained in the Glossary- See http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/index_en.htm

Data collection instructions

Destination Management Survey, Visitor Survey, Resident Survey, Enterprise Survey or other official data such as waste reports, water reports, crime reports, etc.(will depend on indicator)

Method of calculation How to calculate the result based on the data collected

Frequency of data collection

How often a destination is expected to collect new information

Reporting format How to best display/analyse the information

International benchmarks Any international points of reference are here

Key Stakeholders/users Who will need to act on the indicator results

Suggested actions What results are they likely to need to take if the information is under the expected target?

References Any points for further reading

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/index_en.htm


5 | P a g e

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

Core Indicator: A.1.1 Percentage of the destination with a sustainable tourism strategy/ action plan, with agreed monitoring, development control and evaluation arrangement

Reason for measuring Planning is the first step towards long-term sustainability. This indicator seeks to determine if a destination has a sustainable tourism policy and actionable plan, and if so, the completeness of it.

Data requirements The plan and/or policy document

Units of measurement %

Terms in glossary Sustainable tourism plan/ Sustainable tourism action strategy


Destination Management Survey

Method of calculation

Total number of destination villages/towns with action plan ÷ total number of destination villages/towns * 100 = % of the destination with sustainable tourism strategy/action plan OR Total population of areas with tourism strategy/action plan ÷ total population * 100= % of population with sustainable tourism strategy/action plan


Every one to two years

Reporting format Pie chart

International benchmarks N/A

Key Stakeholders/users Destination Managers, Policy Makers

Suggested actions Extension of plan to cover entire destination area

References

Check UNWTO Guidelines for Policy-making and Planners http://pub.world-tourism.org:81/epages/Store.sf/?ObjectPath=/Shops/Infoshop/Products/1396/SubProducts/1396-1


6 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: A.1.1.1 Percentage of residents satisfied with their involvement and their influence in the planning and development of tourism

Reason for measuring Consultation is vital to sustainable tourism. This indicator seeks to understand if interested residents are engaged with tourism planning, and if so, if they are satisfied with their involvement and influence.

Data requirements Results of resident survey


Terms in glossary Resident Resident satisfaction


Resident Survey


Total number of resident respondents satisfied with their involvement and influence in the planning and development of tourism ÷ total number of resident respondents * 100 = % of local residents satisfied with their involvement


Annual



Key stakeholders/users Destination Managers, Policy Makers

Suggested actions Review policies and procedures for involving residents in planning

References http://www.e-unwto.org/content/u01642/?p=4283cf23e9c0437da9fe576ebe925bd8&pi=0

Optional Indicator: A.1.1.2 Percentage of the destination represented by a destination management organisation

Reason for measuring Ensuring communities are represented is crucial to sustainability. This indicator measures the extent to which they are included.

Data requirements Policy documents showing the jurisdiction of the DMO


Terms in glossary Destination Management Organisation (DMO)




Total number of communities with a DMO ÷ total number of communities * 100 = % of communities with a DMO OR Total population of areas represented by the DMO ÷ total population * 100= % of population represented by DMO


Every two to three years




Suggested actions Consider including residents outside the DMO area to participate

References


7 | P a g e

A.2 Sustainable Tourism Management in Tourism Enterprises

Core Indicator: A.2.1 Percentage of tourism enterprises/establishments in the destination using a voluntary verified certification/labelling for environmental/quality/sustainability and/or CSR measures

Reason for measuring

Certification is an indication of industry interest and implementation of sustainable business practices. This indicator looks at the percentage of tourism enterprises that have had an independent verification of their sustainability practices and allows Destination managers and policy makers to create incentives for participation.

Data requirements List of certified businesses, list of all registered tourism businesses


Terms in glossary Certification/labelling Environmental/quality/sustainability


Enterprise Survey

Method of calculation Total number of tourism enterprises certified ÷ total number of tourism enterprises * 100 = % of tourism enterprises certified


Annual


International benchmarks By 2007, total certified tourism products in Europe were estimated to be between 6000 and 10,000; and globally there were just less than 15,000 certified businesses and products.

Key stakeholders/users Destination Managers

Suggested actions Actions to encourage increased certification by tourism enterprises

References http://www.responsibletravel.org/resources/documents/reports/Ecotourism_Handbook_III.pdf


8 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: A.2.1.1 Number of tourism enterprises/establishments with sustainability reports in accordance with the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)

Reason for measuring This indicator seeks to determine the number of enterprises that have submitted a globally accepted sustainability report.

Data requirements List of businesses reporting, list of all tourism businesses

Units of measurement Percentage of businesses

Terms in glossary Global Reporting Initiative


Enterprise Survey

Method of calculation Total number of tourism enterprises that have submitted a GRI ÷ total number of tourism enterprises * 100 = % of enterprises that have submitted a GRI


Annual

Reporting format Bar chart to show progress over time

International benchmarks As of July 2012, there were 80 tourism/leisure organisations with GRI sustainability reports in Europe and 118 worldwide.


Suggested actions Raise awareness and encourage more businesses to submit GRI reports. Highlight those that do.

References http://database.globalreporting.org/


9 | P a g e

A.3 Customer Satisfaction

Core Indicator: A.3.1 Percentage of visitors that are satisfied with their overall experience in the destination

Reason for measuring The quality of the visitor experience affects the ability of the destination to generate economic benefits. This indicator investigates visitor satisfaction.

Data requirements Results of visitor survey


Terms in glossary Visitor satisfaction


Visitor Survey

Method of calculation Total number of visitors responding as satisfied with overall experience ÷ total number of visitor respondents * 100 = % of visitors satisfied with overall experience


Every one or two years as resources allow

Reporting format Bar chart showing change over time

International benchmarks Brussels – 95.68% of visitors satisfied with overall experience (2012) Northern Ireland – 99% of visitors satisfied with overall experience (2003)

Key stakeholders/users All

Suggested actions Low scores require further analysis. Matching the data with visitor profiles and tourism products can help provide a more in-depth picture and identify issues to focus on.

References

http://www.tci-research.com/ http://visitbrussels.be/bitc/static/front/img/db/img_8999.pdf UNWTO practical guide to destination management: section 1.9 Maximising Visitor Satisfaction


10 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: A.3.1.1 Percentage of repeat/return visitors (within 5 years)

Reason for measuring Visitors who return and become loyal, repeat visitors are often more economically beneficial to the destination. Monitoring the percentage of repeat visitors is important.



Terms in glossary Repeat/return visitor


Visitor Survey

Method of calculation Total number of repeat/return visitor respondents in last 5 years ÷ total number of visitor respondents in last 5 years * 100 = % of repeat/return visitors in last 5 years


Annual

Reporting format Bar chart showing trend



Suggested actions Further analysis into satisfaction levels

References


11 | P a g e

A.4 Information and Communication

Core Indicator: A.4.1 The percentage of visitors who note that they are aware of destination sustainability efforts


Publicly announcing support for a move towards greater sustainability is important. This indicator focuses on ensuring public awareness of the destination’s sustainability position and alignment with its policies, actions and results.



Terms in glossary Official tourism information


Visitor Survey

Method of calculation Total number of visitors who note that are aware of sustainability efforts ÷ total number of visitors * 100 = % of visitors who note they are aware of destination sustainability efforts


Annual


International benchmarks N A

Key stakeholders/users Destination Managers, Tourism Enterprises, Residents, Policy Makers

Suggested actions Increase the sustainability content of marketing materials

References


12 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: A.4.1.1 The percentage of businesses that communicate their sustainability efforts to visitors in their products, marketing, or branding

Reason for measuring Educating visitors about the sustainability issues and initiatives in the destination is one of the roles of a sustainable destination. This indicator measures the sustainability content of visitor information.

Data requirements Results of enterprise survey


Terms in glossary Destination visitor information


Enterprise Survey

Method of calculation Total number of businesses that communicate sustainability to visitors ÷ total number of businesses * 100 = % of business that communicate their sustainability efforts to visitors


Annual



Key stakeholders/users Destination Managers, Tourism Enterprises, Residents, Policy Makers

Suggested actions Increase the sustainability content of marketing materials

References


13 | P a g e

Section B: Economic Value B.1 Tourism Flow (volume & value) at Destination

Core Indicator: B.1.1 Number of tourist nights per month

Reason for measuring The number of tourist nights is a primary indicator of tourism volume in the destination. This indicator measures average volume per month throughout the year, revealing seasonal patterns in the destination.

Data requirements Number of visitors, tourists, and tourist nights

Units of measurement Occupancy rate (the closest industry standard measure)

Terms in glossary Tourist nights



Visitor Survey


Tally number of tourist nights every month Tally total number of tourist nights annually ÷ 12 = Average number of tourist nights per month


Monthly Annually

Reporting format Bar chart by month for fiscal/reporting year


Key stakeholders/users Destination Managers, Tourism Enterprises

Suggested actions Monitor annual trends determine if tourism is increasing or decreasing tourist nights

References

NOTES: Note: destinations such as parks with few overnight visitors should use tourist days per month (B 3.1.1.2) Regional and national tourism statistics usually collect the total number of tourist nights in the region or the country. In most cases they only include commercial accommodation (not residential tourism), but they represent good estimations. Furthermore, most are geographically divided into municipalities or small destinations and temporarily split by months. If these figures are available, it is ideal and there is no need to collect further data on this. If not, it is necessary to collect the data at the destination level. This can be done by the destination representatives who can ask for data directly from the different commercial tourism accommodation enterprises since they have their own occupancy registers.


14 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: B.1.1.1 Relative contribution of tourism to the destination's economy (% GDP)

Reason for measuring This measure shows how important tourism is to a destination. A high percentage may suggest economic vulnerability due to over reliance on tourism.

Data requirements

Total value of tourism in the destination made up of revenue generated from all tourism businesses and their subsectors and related activities. Total value of the destination’s economy.


Terms in glossary Relative Contribution


Total value of tourism can only be accurately calculated using in-depth survey and economic tools such as Satellite Accounting. Destination Management Survey

Method of calculation Total economic value of tourism ÷ total economic value of destination (GDP) * 100 = % of GDP derived from tourism


Annual

Reporting format Pie chart, stacked graph

International benchmarks

In 2011, the direct contribution of tourism to Europe’s GDP was 2.9% and the total contribution (direct + indirect + induced income) was 7.9%. Direct contribution ranged from 1.6% in Lithuania and Germany to 14.5% in Malta, while total contribution ranged from 4.2% in Lithuania to 27.7% in Malta.

Key stakeholders/users Policy Makers, Destination Managers

Suggested actions Monitor annual trends to better forecast economic impacts and develop policy

References http://www.wttc.org/eng/Tourism_Research/Economic_Data_Search_Tool/


15 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: B.1.1.2 Number of ‘same day’ visitors in high season and low season

Reason for measuring Comparing day and overnight visitors is important. While overnight visitors have a higher trip spend, day visitors are often important for retailers.


Units of measurement Number of people

Terms in glossary Same day visitors


Visitor Survey

Method of calculation Total number of same day visitors in the high season Total number of same day visitors in the low season


Annually

Reporting format Bar graph by month for fiscal/reporting period


Key stakeholders/users Policy Makers, Destination Managers, Tourism Managers

Suggested actions Monitor annual trends

References http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Tourism_trends

NOTES: European tourism statistics are currently limited to at least an overnight stay; as of 2014, outbound same day visits will be covered as well.


16 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: B.1.1.3 Daily spending per same day visitor

Reason for measuring To better understand the spending patterns and economic impact of day visitors and compare these patterns over time with overnight visitors


Units of measurement Local currency

Terms in glossary Daily spending Same day visitors


Visitor Survey


Tally daily spending per same day visitor respondents ÷ total number of respondents = Average daily spending per same day visitor Total annual spending by same day visitors ÷ total number of annual same day visitors ÷ 365 = Average daily spending per same day visitor


Annual

Reporting format Pie chart of spending pattern, comparative bar chart of overnight and same day spending

International benchmarks In the UK, average daily spending per same day visitor, including those visits where no money was spent, was £34 (€42.84) in 2011.

Key stakeholders/users Policy Makers, Destination Managers, Tourism Managers

Suggested actions Low tourist spending would suggest the need for product development and reinvestment in destination services

References http://www.visitengland.org/Images/GBDVS%20Main%20Annual%20Report%20FV3%20-%2025%20%20May%202012_FINAL_tcm30-32969.pdf


17 | P a g e

Core Indicator: B.1.2 Daily spending per tourist (accommodation, food and drinks, other services)

Reason for measuring Monitoring tourist spending is a good way of showing the direct economic impact of tourism to the destination.



Terms in glossary Daily spending


Visitor Survey


Tally daily spending per tourist respondents (in total and by item)÷ total number of respondents = Average daily spending per tourist/spending by item Total annual spending by tourists ÷ total number of annual tourists ÷ 365 = Average daily spending per tourist


Annual

Reporting format Bar chart compared with day visitors

International benchmarks In Europe, average daily spending per tourist was €64 for all holiday trips in 2011.

Key stakeholders/users Policy Makers, Destination Managers

Suggested actions Research and analysis on ways to enhance visitor spending and value chain connections

References http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-12-028/EN/KS-SF-12-028-EN.PDF


18 | P a g e

B.2 Tourism Enterprise(s) Performance

Core Indicator: B.2.1 Average length of stay of tourists (nights)

Reason for measuring The economic value of tourism multiplies as the length of visitor stay increases. Monitoring average length of stay is an important pulse on enterprise and destination performance.

Data requirements Tourism data reports

Units of measurement Number of nights

Terms in glossary Tourist nights



Visitor Survey

Method of calculation Tally the total tourist nights per respondent ÷ total number of respondents = Average length of stay per tourist


Annual

Reporting format Bar graph

International benchmarks In Europe, the average length of stay was 5.4 nights for all holiday trips in 2011

Key stakeholders/users Tourism Enterprises, Destination Managers

Suggested actions Should average length of stay begin to trend downward, investigate potential causes (limited attractions or activities, reduced value for price)

References http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-12-028/EN/KS-SF-12-028-EN.PDF


19 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: B.2.1.1 Average length of stay of same day visitors (hours)

Reason for measuring The longer visitors stay in a destination, the more they spend. Increasing the average hours spent in a place and monitoring that increase is a useful indicator of performance.

Data requirements Tourism data reports

Units of measurement Number of hours

Terms in glossary Same day visitors



Visitor Survey

Method of calculation Tally the total number of hours spent by same day respondents ÷ total number of same day respondents = Average length of stay per same day visitor


Annual




Suggested actions Should average length of stay begin to trend downward, investigate potential causes (limited attractions or activities, reduced value for money)

References


20 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: B.2.1.2 Percentage of ten largest tourism enterprises involved in destination management/cooperative marketing


Working collaboratively is an indication of the level of trust among members of the tourism community and it ensures diverse perspectives are included in sustainable tourism development. The indicator measures to what extent tourism businesses are collaborating.

Data requirements List of ten largest tourism enterprises in destination (by number of employees). Results of Enterprise survey


Terms in glossary Cooperative marketing


Enterprise Survey

Method of calculation Number of ten largest tourism enterprises participating in cooperative marketing ÷ 10 * 100 = % top ten largest tourism enterprises involved in cooperative marketing


Annual

Reporting format Pie Chart



Suggested actions Determine if there are opportunities to extend collective marketing, looking at good practice from other destinations

References


21 | P a g e

Core Indicator: B.2.2 Occupancy rate in commercial accommodation per month and average for the year

Reason for measuring Occupancy rates measure the efficiency of accommodation stock utilisation. A sustainable destination fills up its rooms year-round.

Data requirements Accommodation occupancy report


Terms in glossary Occupancy rate (by room) Commercial accommodation




Total number of overnight stays in commercial accommodations per month ÷ total number of commercial accommodation rooms available * day in month * 100 = Occupancy rate in commercial accommodations per month Sum of monthly occupancy rates for the year ÷ 12 = Average monthly rate for the year Total number of overnight stays in commercial accommodations annually ÷ 12 ÷ total number of commercial accommodations rooms available * 365 * 100 = Average monthly occupancy rate for the year


Monthly Annual

Reporting format Bar chart for reporting period, pie chart

International benchmarks In 2011, the average occupancy rate was 64% in commercial accommodation in the UK.

Key stakeholders/users Hoteliers, Destination Managers

Suggested actions Monitor trends over time, address seasonality issues, and use to consider applications for further room development

References http://www.visitengland.org/Images/UKOS%20Annual%20summary_FINAL_290512_tcm30-32955.pdf


22 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: B.2.2.1 Average price per room in the destination

Reason for measuring Price per room is important because it reflects the revenue the destination gains from accommodation. When combined with occupancy rates it reflects the revenue potential of the destination.

Data requirements Price per room, average occupancy rates


Terms in glossary Revenue per available room (REV PAR)


Enterprise Survey (accommodations)


Method of calculation Tally average room rate for all available rooms throughout the destination. Result ÷ x Occupancy % = Revenue per available room


Annual

Reporting format Bar chart

International benchmarks In 2011, average REV PAR was €66.17 in Europe, ranging from €54.07 in Spain to €75.68 in Italy. In city destinations, REV PAR ranged from €42.36 in Birmingham to €187.35 in Venice.

Key stakeholders/users Hoteliers, Destination Managers

Suggested actions REV PAR will illustrate the average price for each room and should act as a baseline for monitoring trends in destination value

References http://www.hotelnewsnow.com/articles.aspx/7359/STR-Global-Europe-results-for-2011


23 | P a g e

B.3 Quantity and Quality of Employment

Core Indicator: B.3.1 Direct tourism employment as percentage of total employment

Reason for measuring To understand the role of tourism in job creation and the sector’s relative value in terms of employment generation.

Data requirements Results of employment reports and analysis


Terms in glossary Direct tourism employment



Method of calculation Total number of residents directly employed by tourism ÷ total size of destination labour force * 100 = % of local residents directly employed by tourism


Annual


International benchmarks In Europe, direct tourism employment was 3.3% of total employment in 2011, ranging from 1.6% in Lithuania to 15.7% in Malta.


Suggested actions Monitor trends to better understand the growth or decline of tourism jobs

References http://www.wttc.org/site_media/uploads/downloads/european_union2012.pdf


24 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: B.3.1.1 Percentage of jobs in tourism that are seasonal

Reason for measuring A true measure of tourism’s employment generation and value needs to consider the seasonal variation in employment.

Data requirements Results of employment report


Terms in glossary Seasonal


Enterprise Survey

Method of calculation Total number of seasonal tourism jobs ÷ total number of tourism jobs * 100 = % of tourism jobs that are seasonal


Annual


International benchmarks In 2007, 24% of hotel and restaurant employees and 30% employed in tourist accommodation had a seasonal job in Europe


Suggested actions Try to find opportunities for tourism jobs that are year-round and not subjected to seasonal variations

References http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Tourism_employment

NOTES: The percentage of jobs that were seasonal ranged from 6% in Estonia and Romania to 55% in Poland for the hotel and restaurant sector and from 7% in Romania to 41% in Greece for tourist accommodation in 2007.


25 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: B.3.1.2 Percentage of tourism enterprises providing student internships


The skill level of tourism employees is indicative of the quality of the employment. This indicator helps assess the how many local tourism enterprises are helping to train the next generation of travel and tourism professionals.

Data requirements Results of Enterprise survey


Terms in glossary Student internships


Enterprise Survey

Method of calculation Total number of tourism enterprises providing student internships ÷ total number of tourism enterprises * 100 = % of tourism enterprises providing student internships


Annual



Key stakeholders/users Tourism Enterprises, Destination Managers, Policy Makers

Suggested actions If this is low, more opportunities for student internship should be considered.

References


26 | P a g e

B.4 Safety and Health

Core Indicator: B.4.1 Percentage of tourism enterprises inspected for fire safety in the last year


Public safety is a critical component of destination management and business operations. Keeping track of which properties and have been inspected improves inter-departmental co-ordination and helps ensure an enterprise does not consistently avoid inspection, and, therefore, present a risk to visitor safety.

Data requirements Health and Safety Records, Results of Enterprise Survey


Terms in glossary Fire safety


Enterprise Survey

Method of calculation Total number of tourism enterprises that have been inspected for fire safety ÷ total of tourism enterprises * 100 = % of tourism enterprises inspected for fire safety


Annual




Suggested actions Hotels that are not inspected should be contacted and the situation resolved in accordance to internationally accepted standards

References


27 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: B.4.1.1 Percentage of tourists who register a complaint with the police

Reason for measuring Increasing crime rates against tourists and by tourists can be a warning sign for other types of social impacts in the destination

Data requirements Crime reports, statistics


Terms in glossary


Crime Reports

Method of calculation Total number of tourists who registered a complaint with the police ÷ total number of tourists * 100 = % of tourists who registered a complaint with the police


Annual



Key stakeholders/users Tourism Enterprises, Destination Managers, Government Officials

Suggested actions Should rates reports exceed target or rise unexpectedly, action to reduce these crimes should be taken

References


28 | P a g e

B.5 Tourism Supply Chain

Core Indicator: B.5.1 Percentage of tourism enterprises actively taking steps to source local, sustainable, and fair trade goods and services


Responsible purchasing helps to strengthen local economies and reduce environmental impacts. If a destination is aware of the local purchasing decisions the destination can leverage that purchasing power to provide a greater amount of local, sustainable, and fair trade products and services.



Terms in glossary Local goods and services Sustainable goods and services Fair trade goods and services


Enterprise Survey

Method of calculation Total number of tourism enterprises actively sourcing ÷ total number of tourism enterprises * 100 = % of tourism enterprises actively taking steps to source local, sustainable, and fair trade goods and services


Annual




Suggested actions Establish a program to encourage responsible purchasing practices

References http://destinet.eu/topics/sustainable-supply-chain-management/


29 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: B.5.1.1 Percentage of the destination covered by a policy promoting local, sustainable and/or fair trade products and services

Reason for measuring Implementing a policy to promote responsible purchasing helps to leverage the purchasing power of the destination to provide a greater amount of local, sustainable, and fair trade products and services.

Data requirements Results of Destination Management Survey


Terms in glossary Sustainable goods and services Fair trade goods and services




Total amount of destination covered by a policy of promoting local sustainable and/or fair trade products and services ÷ total size of the destination * 100 = % of destination covered by a policy promoting local, sustainable and/or fair trade products and services


Annual




Suggested actions If the result is rather low, encourage more enterprises to consider responsible purchasing practices

References


30 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: B.5.1.2 Percentage of tourism enterprises sourcing a minimum of 25% of food and drink from local/regional producers

Reason for measuring Sourcing local products increases the economic value of tourism. Tracking this figure will help DMOs explore ways to increase the connection between tourism and local agriculture.



Terms in glossary Local/Regional


Enterprise survey


Total number of tourism enterprises that source a minimum of 25% of food and drink from local/regional producers ÷ total number of tourism enterprises * 100 = % of tourism enterprises sourcing a minimum of 25% of food and drink from local/regional producers


Annual

Reporting format Stacked bar graph



Suggested actions If the result is rather low (>20%), encourage more enterprises to consider responsible purchasing practices

References


31 | P a g e

Section C: Social and Cultural Impact C.1 Community/Social Impact

Core Indicator: C.1.1 Number of tourists/visitors per 100 residents

Reason for measuring The density of tourists/visitors in comparison to residents offers a suitable indicator for understanding the social impact of tourism on residents. This is referred to as the ‘penetration ratio’.

Data requirements Number of tourists

Units of measurement Number of tourists/visitors

Terms in glossary



Method of calculation Total number of tourists* average length of stay/total residents*365/100


Annually


International benchmarks In Europe, the average tourism intensity was 446.3 tourists per 100 residents in 2009.


Suggested actions When visitor density is high, it is important to identify any bottlenecks (e.g. parking, pedestrian areas) that could alleviate resident stress and improve the visitor experience.

References http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Tourism_statistics_at_regional_level


32 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: C.1.1.1 Percentage of residents who are satisfied with tourism in the destination (per month/season)


Checking on resident satisfaction on a regular basis is an important gauge for visitor experience. Being alert to changes in levels of resident satisfaction and taking action where necessary is fundamental to sustainable tourism.

Data requirements Resident surveys, tourism studies during peak season


Terms in glossary Resident satisfaction


Resident Survey


Number of residents who responded “satisfied” or better ÷ total number of residents who responded * 100 = % of residents satisfied with tourism Repeat for each month/season/year


Monthly Seasonally Annually




Suggested actions Should the results be less than an agreed percentage, destination managers and tourism enterprises need to engage with residents to determine how to better plan tourism development and activities

References


33 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: C.1.1.2 Number of beds available in commercial visitor accommodation per 100 residents

Reason for measuring This is a way of measuring the relative impact of tourism on residents’ way of life.

Data requirements Tourism census for accommodations and beds

Units of measurement Number of beds

Terms in glossary Available beds Commercial accommodation



Method of calculation Total number of visitor beds in commercial accommodation ÷ total number of residents * 100 = Number of available beds per 100 residents


Annually



5.7 bed places available per 100 residents in Europe (2009) Average bed places available in the 14 European regions with the highest number of tourist bed places per 100 residents = 51.1 beds places (2005)


Suggested actions

When the number of beds per 100 residents rises sharply it might be time to have a public meeting about the impacts of accommodation development. This is a particular concern if occupancy rates average under 60%.

References

http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=tour_cap_bed&lang=en http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-08-001/EN/KS-SF-08-001-EN.PDF

Notes: 28,388,523 / 498,000,000 * 100 residents = 5.7 bed places per 100 residents (EU-27 bed places available in 2009/population of EU-27 in 2009)


34 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: C.1.1.3 Number of second/rental homes per 100 homes


Having large numbers of rental properties can change the nature of a destination, particularly when rental properties outnumber resident homes. Keeping a check on the balance of rentals and residencies can help address this issue before it becomes a problem.

Data requirements Number of second homes Number of resident homes

Units of measurement Number of second/rental homes

Terms in glossary Second/rental homes




Total number of homes ÷ 100 = N factor Total number of second/rental homes ÷ N factor = Number of second/rental homes per 100 homes Total number of second/rental homes ÷ total number of homes * 100 = Number of second/rental homes per 100 homes


Every three years



EU Regions - Nord-Pas-de Calais, Zeeland and West Flanders second/rental homes: 20% (2004), Catalonia: 23% (2005), Southern North Sea coast: 2% (2001). In some seaside resorts, second and holiday homes can reach 75% of all residencies.


Suggested actions

When the ratio of second home / rental properties becomes close to 40% of resident homes (or another agreed to percentage), it is time to gauge public concerns and address the impacts of second home development.

References http://www.deduce.eu/IFS/IFS22.pdf


35 | P a g e

C.2 Gender Equality

Core Indicator: C.2.1 Percentage of men and women employed in the tourism sector

Reason for measuring This standard measurement will show the impact of tourism on women’s employment. It can be particularly powerful when compared with percentages in other sectors.

Data requirements Number of employees in the tourism sector Number of male employees Number of female employees


Terms in glossary -


Enterprise Survey


Total number of men employed in tourism ÷ total number of tourism employees * 100 = % of men employed by tourism Total number of women employed in tourism ÷ total number of tourism employees * 100 = % of women employed by tourism


Annual

Reporting format Stacked bar graph, pie chart


Among European countries for which data are available, two out of every three people employed in the tourist accommodation sector were female. Romania has 72% employment of women in tourism. Malta (38 %) and Italy (49 %) are the only countries where women did not hold the majority of the jobs in the tourist accommodation sector (2007).


Suggested actions An unbalanced situation could mean that career and education programs need reviewing to ensure they are open and appealing to all.

References http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Tourism_employment


36 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: C.2.1.1 Percentage of tourism enterprises where the general manager position is held by a woman

Reason for measuring To ensure both men and women are equitably represented at varying levels tourism employment, including management positions.

Data requirements Employment and economic impact reports


Terms in glossary Management positions


Enterprise Survey

Method of calculation Total number of tourism enterprises with a woman general manager ÷ total number of tourism enterprises * 100 = % of tourism enterprises where the general manager is a woman


Annual

Reporting format Stacked bar graph, pie chart

International benchmarks 22% of key positions in tourism are held by women (2010)


Suggested actions

Where the percentage of women in managerial positions is dramatically less that the percentage of women in the sector, particularly when compared with other sectors, programmes should be developed to help recruit and support women moving up the career ladder.

References UNWTO Global Report on Women in Tourism 2010


37 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: C.2.1.2 Average wage in tourism for women compared to average wage for men (sorted by tourism job type)

Reason for measuring This indicator establishes whether women and men in similar positions/levels in the tourism industry are getting similar pay rates.

Data requirements Employment and economic impact reports

Units of measurement Percentage parity

Terms in glossary -


Enterprise Survey


Tally all salaries of women (per each job type) ÷ total number of women employed in that job type = Average wage of women by job type Tally all salaries of men (per each job type) ÷ total number of men employed in that job type = Average wage of men Compare the two averages by type


Annual


International benchmarks Globally, women in tourism are typically earning 10% to 15% less than their male counterparts (2010).

Key stakeholders/users DMO, women in business

Suggested actions If pay is found to be quite different (<10%) for men and women, investigation may be needed. Policy / programmes resulting in an equitable ratio would need to be developed.

References UNWTO Global Report on Women in Tourism 2010


38 | P a g e

C.3 Equality/Accessibility

Core Indicator: C.3.1 Percentage of commercial accommodation with rooms accessible to people with disabilities and/or participating in recognised accessibility schemes


It is important for a destination to be able to accommodate people with disabilities. This measurement will help raise awareness of the accessibility of the destination. Where the percentage is very low, it may also draw the attention of hoteliers who identify a market opportunity.

Data requirements Reports on accessibility at commercial accommodations


Terms in glossary Commercial accommodation Accessibility Accessibility schemes


Enterprise Survey


Total number of commercial accommodation with rooms accessible to people with disabilities and/or participating in recognised schemes ÷ total number of commercial accommodations * 100 = % of commercial accommodations with rooms accessible to people with disabilities


Annual

Reporting format Clustered bar graph (accommodations, attractions, public transport)



Suggested actions DMOs can encourage accessible accommodation by listing accessible businesses in their brochures and online marketing

References http://www.accessibletourism.org, http://www.tourismforall.org.uk/


39 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: C.3.1.1 Percentage of destination served by public transport that is accessible to people with disabilities and people with specific access requirements

Reason for measuring Destinations need to be accessible to all visitors

Data requirements Results on accessibility coverage of local public transport systems

Units of measurement % of land area

Terms in glossary Local transport Accessibility



Method of calculation Total area (in km2) of coverage by accessible public transport ÷ total area (in km2) * 100 = % of destination (in km2) covered by accessible public transport


Annual

Reporting format Spatial representation


Key stakeholders/users Transportation Services, Destination Managers

Suggested actions Low levels of coverage may be indicative of the need invest in accessible transport

References http://www.sagetraveling.com/Public-Transportation/


40 | P a g e

Core Indicator: C.3.2 Percentage of visitor attractions that are accessible to people with disabilities and/or participating in recognised accessibility schemes

Reason for measuring DMOs need to ensure visitors with limited mobility can access public attractions. This indicator can be used to highlight good practice.

Data requirements Enterprise Survey results on accessibility at attractions


Terms in glossary Accessibility Accessibility schemes


Enterprise Survey


Total number of visitor attractions accessible to people with disabilities and/or participating in recognised schemes ÷ total number of visitor attractions * 100 = % of visitor attractions accessible to people with disabilities


Annual

Reporting format Clustered bar graph (accommodations, attractions, public transport)



Suggested actions Where a low number of attractions are accessible, investment may need to be made in consultation with groups promoting accessible tourism.

References ENAT (European Network for Accessible Tourism)

NOTES: Some natural/cultural attractions are not suitable to be converted for accessibility such as

those under protection, or those in inaccessible locations e.g. caves.


41 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: C.3.2.1 Percentage of visitors satisfied with the accessibility of the destination for those with disabilities or specific access requirements

Reason for measuring Monitoring visitor satisfaction with accessibility helps planners know whether they are meeting visitor needs.

Data requirements Results of accessibility reports for the destination


Terms in glossary Accessibility


Visitor Survey

Method of calculation Tally satisfaction level with accessibility from customer respondents ÷ total number of customer respondents * 100 = % satisfaction level of customers with accessibility


Annual




Suggested actions Visitor feedback should be collected, and, where consistent complaints or suggestions about accessibility are received, action needs to be identified.

References


42 | P a g e

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

Core Indicator: C.4.1 Percentage of the destination covered by a policy or plan that protects cultural heritage


Ensuring the entire destination is included in cultural heritage policies is important. Having a policy to identify, protect and enhance the built (tangible) and other expressions cultural heritage e.g. music, (intangible) is vital to the sense of place and resident pride. Measuring this clearly identifies any shortfall.

Data requirements Cultural heritage protection and enhancement policies


Terms in glossary Cultural heritage



Method of calculation Total number of destination villages/towns with policy or plan ÷ total number of destination village/towns * 100 = % of the destination with cultural heritage policy or plan


Annual



Key stakeholders/users DMOs

Suggested actions Where policies only cover part of the destination, they may need to be extended.

References http://ethics.unwto.org/en/content/tourism-and-intangible-cultural-heritage


43 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: C.4.1.1 Percentage of residents who have positive or negative views on the impact of tourism on destination identity

Reason for measuring This indicator is a barometer of tourism’s cultural impact.

Data requirements Community meeting minutes, resident surveys


Terms in glossary Destination identity


Resident Survey


Total number of residents with positive view of tourism impact ÷ total number of resident respondents * 100 = % of residents who have a positive view on the impact of tourism on destination identity Total number of resident respondents with negative view of tourism impact ÷ total number of resident respondents * 100 = % of residents who have a negative view on the impact of tourism on destination identity


Annual



Key stakeholders/users

Suggested actions Where negative views are high, concerns should be addressed through an inclusive participatory process.

References http://socib.academia.edu/AmyDiedrich/Papers/799615/Local_perceptions_of_tourism_as_indicators_of_destination_decline


44 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: C.4.1.2 Percentage of the destination’s biggest events that are focused on traditional/local culture and assets

Reason for measuring Holding events focused on local culture can be an effective means of increasing pride.

Data requirements Calendar of events


Terms in glossary Traditional / local culture (may include sports) Local assets



Method of calculation Total number of biggest tourism events (in revenue or visitor number) based on traditional/local culture/assets ÷ 10 * 100 = % of biggest ten events focused on traditional culture


Annual



Key stakeholders/users DMO, Department of Culture

Suggested actions Where there are low numbers of events and high tourist interest in culture, developing this aspect of the tourism events calendar is recommended

References


45 | P a g e

Section D: Environmental Impact D.1 Reducing Transport Impact

Core Indicator: D.1.1 Percentage of tourists and same day visitors using different modes of transport to arrive at the destination (public/private and type)

Reason for measuring Tracking the mode of transport used by visitors helps flag the need to increase the availability of sustainable transport options.

Data requirements Transportation reports


Terms in glossary Modes of transport


Visitor Survey


Total number of tourist and visitor respondents using public transportation to arrive at the destination ÷ total number of tourist and visitor respondents * 100 = % of tourists and visitors using public transportation to arrive at the destination Total number of tourist and visitor respondents using private transportation to arrive at the destination ÷ total number of tourist and visitor respondents * 100 = % of tourists and visitors using private transportation to arrive at the destination Repeat private transportation for: car, motorcycle, RV, boat, other


Annual


International benchmarks In 2005, the distribution of different transport modes for overnight trips of 4 nights or more in Europe was Air = 25.1%, Private and hired vehicle = 57.2%, Bus, coach = 7.2%, Rail = 7.9%, Other = 2.7%

Key stakeholders/users DMOs, transportation authorities/companies

Suggested actions Strategy to increase availability of sustainable transport options

References http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Tourism_and_sustainable_development


46 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.1.1.1 Percentage of visitors using local/soft mobility/public transport services to get around the destination

Reason for measuring Tracking the use of traffic reducing, environmentally-friendly (soft mobility) transport options can help to inform local transportation policies.


Units of measurement Percentage

Terms in glossary Soft mobility Local transport


Visitor Survey


Total number of visitor respondents using local/soft mobility/public transport services to get around the destination ÷ total number of visitor respondents * 100 = % of visitors using local/soft mobility/public transport services to get around the destination


Annual


International benchmarks In Europe, bus/coach/rail was the primary mode of transport for 15.1% of overnight trips of 4 nights or more in 2005.

Key stakeholders/users DMO, transportation authorities

Suggested actions Strategy to promote the use of sustainable transport options

References http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Tourism_and_sustainable_development


47 | P a g e

Core Indicator: D.1.2 Average travel (km) by tourists to and from home or average travel (km) from the previous destination to the current destination

Reason for measuring This information helps identify the cost of distance and the environmental impact of attracting short-haul visitors. It also adds to visitor profile information for marketing purposes.


Units of measurement Km

Terms in glossary -


Visitor Survey


Tally total km travel by tourist respondent travelling from home ÷ total number of tourist respondents = Average travel (km) by tourist Tally total km travel by tourist respondent travelling from another destination ÷ total number of tourist respondents = Average travel (km) by tourist from another destination


Annual

Reporting format Table



Suggested actions Promotional activities emphasising short-haul travel and alternative modes of travel to the destination, such as rail.

References


48 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.1.2.1 Average travel (km) by same day visitors from and to destination

Reason for measuring This information helps to identify the cost of distance and the environmental impact of attracting day visitors from nearby areas.


Units of measurement Km

Terms in glossary -


Visitor Survey

Method of calculation Tally total travel (km) by same day visitor respondents ÷ total number of same day visitor respondents = Average travel (km) by same day visitors


Annual




Suggested actions Promotional activities emphasising travel from nearby areas and alternative modes of travel (coach, rail, etc.)

References

NOTES: European tourism statistics are currently limited to at least an overnight stay; as of 2014, outbound same day visits will be covered as well.


49 | P a g e

D.2 Climate Change

Core Indicator: D.2.1 Percentage of tourism enterprises involved in climate change mitigation schemes—such as: CO2 offset, low energy systems, etc.—and “adaptation” responses and actions

Reason for measuring Business engagement in mitigation activities is a sign or increased awareness and success of DMO incentives.

Data requirements Climate change reports, programs, events, news


Terms in glossary Climate change mitigation

Climate change adaptation response


Enterprise survey


Total number of tourism enterprises involved in mitigation and adaptation ÷ total number of tourism enterprises * 100 = % of tourism enterprises involved in climate change mitigation schemes and adaptation actions


Annual

Reporting format Clustered bar graph (tourism enterprises, destination)


Key stakeholders/users DMO, environmental agencies, hotel/tourism associations

Suggested actions Where this is low (>30%), programs may need to be developed to increase awareness of the issues related to climate change

References http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/DTIx1047xPA-ClimateChange.pdf


50 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.2.1.1 Percentage of the destination included in climate change adaptation strategy or planning

Reason for measuring Including the whole destination in climate change initiatives is important. This indicator monitors how much is missed in order to encourage inclusion.

Data requirements Climate change reports, programs, events, news


Terms in glossary Climate change adaptation strategy



Method of calculation Total amount of destination included in climate change adaptation plan ÷ total size of the destination * 100 = % of destination included in climate change adaptation strategy or plan


Annual

Reporting format Clustered bar graph (tourism enterprises, destination)


Key stakeholders/users DMO, environmental agencies

Suggested actions Where this is low, DMO may need to work with environmental agencies to plan for uncovered areas

References

http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/climate/national-adaptation-strategies http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/DTIx1047xPA-ClimateChange.pdf


51 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.2.1.2 Percentage of tourism accommodation and attraction infrastructure located in “vulnerable zones.”

Reason for measuring This indicator is designed to raise awareness of climate-related vulnerability.

Data requirements Land use and zoning reports


Terms in glossary Vulnerable zones


Enterprise Survey


Total number of tourism accommodations and attractions located in “vulnerable zones” ÷ total number of accommodations and attractions * 100 = % of tourism accommodations and attractions located in “vulnerable zones”


Annual




Suggested actions Where this is high, efforts to engage the tourism industry in mitigation and adaptation will also need to be high

References http://cca.eionet.europa.eu/docs/TP_1-2011


52 | P a g e

D.3 Solid Waste Management

Core Indicator: D.3.1 Waste volume produced by destination (tonnes per resident per year or per month)

Reason for measuring This indicator measures the size of the solid waste footprint of the destination. Keeping track of absolute volume is a means to assess the effectiveness of waste reduction initiatives.

Data requirements Waste and recycling reports, landfill statistics

Units of measurement Kg per month

Terms in glossary -


Waste report


Tally total volume of waste produced per month ÷ total number of residents = Waste per resident per month Tally total volume of waste produce per annum ÷ total number of residents = Waste per resident per year


Monthly Annually



In Europe, 524 kg of municipal waste was generated per resident/year in 2008, which varied from 306 kg in the Czech Republic to 802 kg in Denmark. Every international tourist in Europe generates at least 1 kg of solid waste per day, and up to 2 kg/resident/day for the USA (UNEP 2003).

Key stakeholders/users DMO, waste management agency, hotel/tourism association

Suggested actions Where trends are initially high or are not improving over time, policy or multi-stakeholder meetings may be necessary to assess and mitigate the problem.

References

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/8-19032010-AP/EN/8-19032010-AP-EN.PDF http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/88/documents/ger/GER_11_Tourism.pdf


53 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.3.1.1 Percentage of tourism enterprises separating different types of waste

Reason for measuring Keeping track of private sector engagement shows the effectiveness of awareness initiatives and the need for incentives in this area.

Data requirements Waste stream audits, policies, management plans


Terms in glossary Waste separation


Enterprise Survey

Method of calculation Total number of tourism enterprises involved in waste separation activities ÷ total number of tourism enterprises * 100 = % of tourism enterprises involved in waste separation


Annual

Reporting format Clustered bar chart (waste, water, energy)



Suggested actions When this percentage is low, the DMO should work with above stakeholders or policy makers to promote and encourage waste separation.

References

http://sutour.ier.uni-stuttgart.de/englisch/downloads/sutour_lores_en.pdf http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/WEBx0015xPA-WaterWaste.pdf


54 | P a g e

Core Indicator: D.3.2 Volume of waste recycled (percent or per resident per year)

Reason for measuring Recycling is one way to reduce landfill waste. This indicator tracks the success of recycling initiatives.

Data requirements Waste and recycling reports, landfill statistics

Units of measurement %, tonnes

Terms in glossary Recycled


Waste report


Tally total volume of recycled materials ÷ total volume of waste * 100 = % of waste recycled Tally total volume of recycled materials per year ÷ total number of residents = Total volume recycled per resident per year


Annual



In Europe, 40% of waste was land filled, 20% incinerated, 23% recycled and 17% composted (2008). The Member States with the highest recycling rates for municipal waste were Germany (48% of waste treated), Belgium and Sweden (both 35%), Ireland and the Netherlands (both 32%) and Slovenia (31%). Composting of municipal waste was most common in Austria (40%), Italy (34%), the Netherlands (27%), Belgium (25%), Spain and Luxembourg (both 20%).


Suggested actions Collaborative efforts and/or policy will be needed to increase recycling efforts and incentives can be provided for enterprises using recycled goods

References http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/8-19032010-AP/EN/8-19032010-AP-EN.PDF

Notes: In destinations where there are more visitors than residents volume of waste per visitor may be more appropriate.


55 | P a g e

D.4 Sewage Treatment

Core Indicator: D.4.1 Percentage of sewage from the destination treated to at least secondary level prior to discharge

Reason for measuring Sewage discharge treatment is fundamental to sustainability. Tracking this information helps to identify and treat problem areas where they exist.

Data requirements Sewage treatment and discharge maps


Terms in glossary Secondary sewage treatment


Sewage reports

Method of calculation Total amount of sewage treated at least at secondary level prior to discharge ÷ total amount of sewage * 100 = % of sewage treated at least at secondary level prior to discharge


Every three years

Reporting format Map


Key stakeholders/users DMO, waste management/sanitation agency, hotel/tourism association

Suggested actions Where this is low, an action strategy will be needed to drive change

References http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Water_statistics#Wastewater_treatment

NOTES: Tertiary wastewater treatment is most common in the Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Italy, Sweden and Greece, where at least four in every five residents are connected to this type of wastewater treatment. In contrast, no more than 1 % of the population is connected to tertiary wastewater treatment in Romania and Bulgaria (2011).


56 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.4.1.1 Percentage of commercial accommodation connected to central sewage system and/or employing tertiary sewage treatment

Reason for measuring Central sewage or tertiary systems are the most effective in reducing water-borne pollutants. Raising awareness of the scale of this issue in the destination is the first step towards finding a solution.

Data requirements Sewage treatment and discharge maps


Terms in glossary Central sewage system Tertiary sewage treatment


Sewage reports


Total number of commercial accommodations connected to central sewage system/tertiary sewage treatment ÷ total number of commercial accommodations * 100 = % of commercial accommodations connected to central sewage system/tertiary sewage treatment


Every three years

Reporting format Pie chart, map


Key stakeholders/users DMO, waste management/sanitation agency, hotel/tourism association

Suggested actions Where this is low, actions for increasing the coverage of central sewage treatment should be explored to protect the long-term health of the destination, its residents and visitors

References http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/WEBx0015xPA-WaterWaste.pdf

NOTES: The United Nations Environment Programme Mediterranean Action Plan Priority Actions Programme (UNEP/MAP/PAP) (2001) estimated that 48 per cent of the largest coastal cities (over 100,000 inhabitants) have no sewage treatment systems, 10 per cent possess a primary treatment system, 38 per cent a secondary system and only four per cent a tertiary treatment system (Hall, 2006).


57 | P a g e

D.5 Water Management

Core Indicator: D.5.1 Fresh water consumption per tourist night compared to general population water consumption per person night


Tracking fresh water consumption in tourism enterprises and comparing this with resident usage highlights the water footprint of the tourism sector and the need for conservation measures where needed.

Data requirements Water usage reports, monthly utilities, annual tourist nights, population

Units of measurement Litres

Terms in glossary -


Enterprise Survey Destination water usage report


Total fresh water consumption related to general population (per year or per month) ÷ total number of residents = fresh water consumption per resident (per year or per month) Total fresh water consumption related to tourism (per year or per month) ÷ total number of tourists nights (per year or per month) = fresh water consumption per tourist night Compare


Annual



Each tourist consumes 300 litres of freshwater per day on average, whereas “luxury” tourists can consume up to 880 litres. By comparison, average per capita residential consumption in Europe is estimated at 241 litres per day (2011).

Key stakeholders/users DMO, water authorities, hotel/tourism associations

Suggested actions Increased awareness of importance of and investment in water-saving programmes for the tourism sector

References http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/88/documents/ger/GER_11_Tourism.pdf


58 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.5.1.1 Percentage of tourism enterprises with low-flow shower heads and taps and/or dual flush toilets/waterless urinals

Reason for measuring Tracking tourism enterprise engagement in water conservation activities helps gauge the success of water conservation initiatives that will result in saving money for enterprises.

Data requirements Water usage report, policies, management plans


Terms in glossary Low-flow shower heads Dual flush toilets Waterless urinals


Enterprise Survey


Total number of tourism enterprises with low-flow shower heads and taps and/or dual flush toilets/waterless urinals ÷ total number of tourism enterprises * 100 = % of tourism enterprises with low-flow shower heads and taps and/or dual flush toilets/waterless urinals


Annual


International benchmarks Flow rates should be a minimum of: 2.2 gallon per minute, low flow faucets and aerators; 2.5 gallon per minute, low flow showerheads; 1.6 gallons per flush toilets or composting toilets; or No-flush urinals.

Key stakeholders/users DMO, water authorities, hotel/tourism associations

Suggested actions Increased awareness of the importance of and investment in water-saving programmes for the tourism sector



59 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.5.1.2 Percentage of tourism enterprises using recycled water

Reason for measuring Using recycled grey water can be an effective reduction strategy for garden irrigation. This indicator tracks how widely implemented these initiatives are at the tourism enterprise level.



Terms in glossary Recycled water


Enterprise survey

Method of calculation Total number of tourism enterprises using recycled water ÷ total number of tourism enterprises * 100 = % of tourism enterprises using recycled water


Annual



Key stakeholders/users DMO, water authority, hotel/tourism associations

Suggested actions Where uptake is low and water scarcity is high, greater emphasis will need to be placed in recycling technologies, particularly for high water users such as golf courses



60 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.5.1.3 Percentage of water use derived from recycled water in the destination

Reason for measuring Using recycled grey water can be an effective reduction strategy for garden irrigation. This indicator tracks how widely these initiatives are implemented at the destination level.



Terms in glossary Recycled water


Destination Water Report

Method of calculation Total volume (or similar measure) of recycled water used in the destination ÷ total volume (or similar measure) of water used * 100 = % of water use derived from recycled water in the destination


Every three years


International benchmarks In 2005, 3.7% of water use was derived from recycled water in European Mediterranean countries

Key stakeholders/users DMO, water authority, hotel/tourism associations

Suggested actions Where recycling rates are low and water scarcity is high, greater emphasis will need to be placed on recycling technologies in discussion with destination authorities

References

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Water_supply_and_recycling_statistics http://www.sbla.com.cy/site/sala_website/PRESENTATIONS/DR%20ANGELAKIS%20CYPRUS%20WORKSHOP.pdf


61 | P a g e

D.6 Energy Usage

Core Indicator: D.6.1 Energy consumption per tourist night compared to general population energy consumption per person night

Reason for measuring The energy consumption of the tourism sector is a crucial piece of information for tourism development and planning. Reducing the tourism energy footprint will also save enterprises money.

Data requirements Energy usage reports, monthly utilities, annual tourist nights, population

Units of measurement Percentage resident/tourist consumption

Terms in glossary Energy consumption


Enterprise survey

Destination energy usage report


Total energy consumption related to general population (per year or per month) ÷ total number of residents = fresh energy consumption per resident (per year or per month) Total energy consumption related to tourism (per year or per month) ÷ total number of tourist nights (per year of per month) = energy consumption per tourist night Compare


Annual


International benchmarks World daily energy consumption per capita is estimated at 135MJ (a value that includes energy generation and industry).

Key stakeholders/users DMO, energy authorities, hotel/tourism associations

Suggested actions Increased investment in energy-saving programs for the tourism sector

References http://www.unep.org/greeneconomy/Portals/88/documents/ger/GER_11_Tourism.pdf

Notes: There is no systematic international country dataset on energy consumption from tourism activities.


62 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.6.1.1 Percentage of tourism enterprises that have switched to low-energy lighting

Reason for measuring Tracking tourism enterprise engagement in saving energy like using low energy lighting helps gauge the success of energy-saving programs and initiatives.

Data requirements Energy usage report, policies, management plans


Terms in glossary Low-energy lighting (e.g., LEDs)


Enterprise Survey

Method of calculation Total number of tourism enterprises that have switched to low-energy lighting ÷ total number of tourism enterprises * 100 = % of tourism enterprises that have switched to low-energy lighting


Annual




Suggested actions Increased investment in energy-saving programs for the tourism sector

References http://www.setcom-project.eu/uploads/media/SETCOM_Broschuere_final_02.pdf


63 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.6.1.2 Annual amount of energy consumed from renewable sources (Mwh) as a percentage of overall energy consumption

Reason for measuring This indicator tracks the destination’s progress in converting to renewable sources of energy.

Data requirements Energy usage reports, monthly utilities, annual tourist nights, population

Units of measurement Mwh

Terms in glossary Renewable energy


Enterprise Survey

Destination energy usage report


Tally total amount of renewable energy consumed per annum Total amount of renewable energy consumed per annum ÷ total amount of energy consumed per annum * 100 = % of total energy consumed that came from renewable sources


Annual



Renewable energy sources accounted for 9.0 % of the Europe’s gross inland energy consumption in 2009. In Latvia and Sweden, over one third of the energy consumed was derived from renewable and more than a quarter in Austria. The renewable energy target for Germany is 45% by 2030.


Suggested actions Destination-wide discussion of goals for renewable energy

References http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Renewable_energy_statistics http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/3258-SwitchedOn.pdf


64 | P a g e

D.7 Landscape and Biodiversity Protection

Core Indicator: D.7.1 Percentage of destination (area in km2) that is designated for protection


Protected areas are crucial for development control and wildlife conservation. The measurement indicates the level to which a destination demonstrates commitment to protection and recognises the significance of biodiversity.

Data requirements Land use maps

Units of measurement Percentage

Terms in glossary



Method of calculation Total geographic area (km2) designated as protected within the destination ÷ total geographic area (km2) of the destination * 100 = % of destination designated as protected


Every three years

Reporting format Table, Map

International benchmarks In Europe, protected areas range from 3% of Turkey to 36% of Slovenia (2010)

Key stakeholders/users DMO, Environmental agencies, Tour Operators Association

Suggested actions Where land/marine areas are not well protected, community consultation may be needed to set aside land for this purpose.

References http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/percentage-of-terrestrial-protected-areas


65 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.7.1.1 Percentage of local enterprises in the tourism sector actively supporting protection, conservation, and management of local biodiversity and landscapes.

Reason for measuring Tourism enterprises are significant beneficiaries of investment in protected areas, so it is important to track the sector’s contribution to conservation.

Data requirements Biodiversity and conservation programs, policies, management plans


Terms in glossary Biodiversity and landscape protection


Enterprise survey


Total number of tourism enterprises actively supporting local protection, conservation and management ÷ total number of tourism enterprises * 100 = % of tourism enterprises actively supporting local protection, conservation, and management


Annual

Reporting format Clustered bar graph (pollution)


Key stakeholders/users DMO, Environmental agencies, Hotel/Tourism Associations

Suggested actions Development of programmes for philanthropy and discussion of opportunities for charitable contributions of time and/or money

References http://www.cbd.int/doc/programmes/tourism/tourism-manual-en.pdf


66 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.7.1.2 Percentage of destination covered by a biodiversity management and monitoring plan

Reason for measuring This is an indicator of the activities of conservation agencies and the degree of management of biodiversity in the destination.

Data requirements Environmental impact assessments, monitoring reports

Units of measurement % of land area

Terms in glossary Biodiversity monitoring




Total area (in km2) within the destination covered by a biodiversity management and monitoring plan ÷ Total area (in km2) of the destination * 100 = % of destination (in km2) covered by a biodiversity management and monitoring plan


Every three years

Reporting format Table of species


Key stakeholders/users DMO, Environmental agencies, Hotel/Tourism Associations

Suggested actions Increase awareness of the need to manage and monitor biodiversity

References http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data#c5=all&c11=biodiversity&c17=&c0=20&b_start=0


67 | P a g e

D.8 Light and Noise Management

Core Indicator: D.8.1 The destination has policies in place that require tourism enterprises to minimise light and noise pollution

Reason for measuring Light and noise pollution can cause significant disturbance to residents and local wildlife. This indicator monitors efforts by the tourism industry to minimise this impact.

Data requirements Destination policies

Units of measurement Existence of policies

Terms in glossary Light pollution Noise pollution



Method of calculation Yes or No


Every three years

Reporting format Traffic light



Suggested actions Where these policies are not in place and noise and light pollution is identified as a problem area for residents, tourism enterprises will need to be engaged in collaborative problem solving.

References http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc10/EDOC12179.htm

Notes: The acoustic nuisance scale begins at 65 dB. In European countries where reliable statistics are available it is considered that around 40% of the population is exposed to noise levels exceeding 55 decibels (dB) during the day and 22% of the population to levels of more than 65 dB. Over 30% of the population is believed to be exposed to noise levels exceeding 55 dB during the night (2010). 99% of the population In Europe and the United States (excluding Alaska and Hawaii) live under a polluted night-time sky.


68 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.8.1.1 Percentage of the destination and percentage of population covered by local strategy and/or plans to reduce noise and light pollution

Reason for measuring Light and noise pollution can cause significant disturbance to residents and local wildlife. This indicator highlights destination policies in this area.

Data requirements Destination policies


Terms in glossary Light pollution Noise pollution




Total amount of destination covered by local strategy/plans to reduce noise and light pollution ÷ total size of the destination * 100 = % of destination covered by local strategy and existence of plans to reduce noise and light pollution Total population covered by local strategy/plans to reduce noise and light pollution ÷ total population of the destination * 100 = % of population covered by local strategy and existence of plans to reduce noise and light pollution


Annual




Suggested actions Where this is not in place and identified as an issue on resident surveys, community meeting could be held to discuss/identify key sources of pollution and suggest mitigation strategies

References http://ec.europa.eu/environment/noise/greenpap.htm


69 | P a g e

D.9 Bathing Water Quality

Core Indicator: D.9.1 Level of contamination per 100 ml (faecal coliforms, campylobacter)


Tourist health and safety is a core element of sustainability. These bacteria can cause illness and are indicative of poor waste water treatment. Publicising this information raises awareness of the need to improve management systems.

Data requirements Water quality reports

Units of measurement ml

Terms in glossary Contamination Colony forming unit (CFU)


Water quality reports

Method of calculation Data collection via water sampling


Monthly On-going

Reporting format Data

International benchmarks MCL (Maximum Contaminant Level) – Coliform Bacteria CFU/100ml of water =<1

Key stakeholders/users DMOs, environmental agencies, Hotel/tourism associations

Suggested actions Where closures are high the hotel/tourism association will need to lobby for research into causes and regulatory change to penalise polluters.

References http://www.extension.purdue.edu/extmedia/WQ/WQ-15.html http://www.tvdsb.ca/uploads/ScienceProbeware/fecal_coliform.pdf


70 | P a g e

Optional Indicator: D.9.1.1 Number of days beach/shore closed due to contamination

Reason for measuring Beach closures have a significant impact on the economic viability of a beach resort. Making this information public increases awareness of the need to resolve water quality issues.

Data requirements Beach closures, contamination reports

Units of measurement # of days

Terms in glossary Contamination


Contamination Reports

Method of calculation Tally of beach/shore closure days due to contamination


On-going Annual



Key stakeholders/users DMOs, environmental agencies, Hotel/tourism associations

Suggested actions Where closures are high, improved research into causes and regulatory change to penalise polluters is needed.

References http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/european-bathing-water-quality-in-2011

Notes: In 2011, 207 bathing waters were banned or closed in Europe (1 %), 57 more than in 2010. Some closures may be related to marine life rather than pollution.