Exploring the Leakage Effect in Tourism in Developing Countries

Transcription

DIPLOMA THESIS
INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES BAD HONNEF · BONN
TOURISM MANAGEMENT
EXPLORING THE LEAKAGE EFFECT
IN TOURISM
IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
-ISSUES AND IMPLICATIONS-
BY LEA LANGE
SUPERVISOR: PROF. DR. CLAUDIA SIMONS-KAUFMANN
DATE OF SUBMISSION: DECEMBER 28, 2011
Acknowledgements
A number of people have helped significantly in the realization of this thesis. Firstly, I would
like to thank the GIZ for instigating this interesting topic for my diploma thesis. Special thanks
go to Manuel Junck for his advice and help. I would also like to thank my tutor, Prof. Dr.
Claudia Simons-Kaufmann, who has been of particular assistance. I also appreciate the time
and efforts spared by all interview partners – particularly Matthias Beyer, who suggested
various valuable contributions for the completion of my thesis.
Abstract
Claims about the minimal economic benefits involved with tourism in developing countries
are often backed up with high leakage rates. These claims are particularly centered on forms of
mass tourism. However, confusion and incongruence persists whether the term leakage depicts
only the profits a destination cannot retain or also those that accrue at earlier stages of the
tourism value chain, which never reach the destination. This results in a wide range of
incomparable leakage rates. An in-depth analysis of relevant literature and three expert
interviews provide clarification and objectification on the subject issue. A case study on two
All-Inclusive resorts in the Dominican Republic discloses a relatively low import propensity
of food products (< 25%) and strong linkages to the local economy. The overall findings
reveal irregularities and problems among and in measuring methods, which are based on
different denominators. The significance and relevance of leakage varies with its definitions.
Further, insufficient contextualization in terms of the economic capacity of a destination and
the lacking comparison of retained tourism revenue to other sources of income, diminish the
significance of leakage as a representative indicator for the economic performance of tourism
in developing countries.
ii
Table of Contents
1.
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 INTRODUCTION TO THESIS ................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 RATIONALE FOR THE TOPIC ................................................................................................................................ 2
1.3 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................................................... 3
1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................ 4
1.5 DISSERTATION OUTLINE .................................................................................................................................... 5
2.
LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................................ 6
2.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................... 6
2.2 TOURISM AND ITS ECONOMIC RELEVANCE .......................................................................................................... 6
2.2.1 A Definitional Discussion of the Tourism Industry .................................................................................. 6
2.2.2 The Tourism Value Chain........................................................................................................................ 8
2.2.3 The Economic Relevance of Tourism in Developing Countries ............................................................. 10
2.2.4 The Multiplier Effect in Tourism ........................................................................................................... 12
2.2.5 Economic Impacts with Mass and Small Scale Tourism ....................................................................... 14
2.3 THE LEAKAGE EFFECT IN TOURISM ................................................................................................................... 17
2.3.1 A Definitional Discussion on Leakage ................................................................................................... 17
2.3.2 Why Leakage Occurs in Tourism in Developing Countries ................................................................... 22
2.3.3 Leakages in Other Economic Sectors .................................................................................................... 24
2.3.4 Diminishing Leakage by Linking Tourism to the Local Economy .......................................................... 25
2.3.4.1 Linkages ........................................................................................................................................ 25
2.3.4.2 Linkages to Food .......................................................................................................................... 27
2.4 APPROACHES TO MEASURE LEAKAGES .............................................................................................................. 30
2.4.1 Scale and Methods ............................................................................................................................... 30
2.4.1.1 Tourism Satellite Accounts (TSA) ................................................................................................. 31
2.4.1.2 Determining the Tourism Multiplier ............................................................................................ 32
2.4.1.3 Input-Output Analysis (I-O Model) ............................................................................................... 34
2.4.1.4 The Value Chain Analysis (VCA) .................................................................................................... 34
2.4.2 So Far Identified Problems with Capturing Leakage ............................................................................ 36
2.4.3 The Resulting Lack of Reliable Empirical Data ..................................................................................... 37
2.5 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF LEAKAGE RATES ............................................................................................................. 42
2.5.1 Neglected Aspects in the Interpretation of Leakage Rates .................................................................. 42
2.5.2 The Relevance of Leakage Rates .......................................................................................................... 44
2.6 CONCLUSION ON LITERATURE .......................................................................................................................... 45
3.
CASE STUDY ......................................................................................................................................... 48
3.1 THE INTERACTION OF ALL-INCLUSIVE RESORTS IN THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC WITH THE LOCAL ECONOMY ........... 48
3.2 TOURISM IN THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC .................................................................................................. 48
3.3 FINDINGS ....................................................................................................................................................... 49
4.
METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................. 55
4.1 RESEARCH METHODS ...................................................................................................................................... 55
4.1.1 Secondary Research: Literature and Secondary Data .......................................................................... 55
4.1.2 Primary Research: Expert Interviews ................................................................................................... 56
4.2 LIMITATIONS AND BIAS ................................................................................................................................... 60
iii
5.
DISCUSSIONS OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY RESEARCH FINDINGS ............................................ 62
5.1 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF LEAKAGE IN PRACTICAL FIELDS OF WORK ......................................................................... 63
5.2 DEFINITIONAL PERCEPTIONS OF LEAKAGE ......................................................................................................... 64
5.3 WHY LEAKAGE IS SUCH A CRITICAL ISSUE IN TOURISM........................................................................................ 66
5.4 THE INTERRELATION OF LEAKAGE AND FORMS OF TOURISM .............................................................................. 67
5.5 LINKAGES AND THE POTENTIAL TO REDUCE THE LEAKAGE EFFECT ....................................................................... 69
5.6 ISSUES WITH MEASURING LEAKAGE ................................................................................................................. 72
5.7 THE INTERPRETATION OF LEAKAGE RATES AND ITS RELEVANCE .......................................................................... 73
6.
CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................................... 77
7.
REFERENCES......................................................................................................................................... 81
8.
APPENDICES......................................................................................................................................... 86
APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW QUESTION OUTLINE (GERMAN) ................................................................................ 86
APPENDIX B: RAW DATA FOR HOTEL I .......................................................................................................... 88
APPENDIX C: RAW DATA FOR HOTEL II ......................................................................................................... 89
APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW SABINE MINNINGER ............................................................................................... 93
APPENDIX E: INTERVIEW MATTHIAS BEYER ................................................................................................... 99
APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW CHRISTIAN CARLÈ ................................................................................................. 107
List of Tables
TABLE 1: OBJECTIVES AND RESEARCH METHODS ..................................................................................................4
TABLE 2: TYPES OF LEAKAGE .......................................................................................................................... 19
TABLE 3: ISSUES WITH LOCAL FOOD SOURCING .................................................................................................. 29
TABLE 4: IRREGULARITIES IN COMPOSING LEAKAGE FIGURES ................................................................................ 37
TABLE 5: PROBLEMS WITH THE INTERPRETATION OF LEAKAGE FIGURES .................................................................. 44
TABLE 6: BASIC INFORMATION HOTEL I ............................................................................................................ 50
TABLE 7: BASIC INFORMATION HOTEL II ........................................................................................................... 52
TABLE 8: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AND LINK TO OBJECTIVES .................................................................................. 58
Table of Figures
FIGURE 1: THE TOURISM VALUE CHAIN ...............................................................................................................9
FIGURE 2: THE TOURISM MULTIPLIER AND LEAKAGE ........................................................................................... 13
FIGURE 3: CHARACTERISTICS OF MASS AND ALTERNATIVE TOURISM ...................................................................... 15
FIGURE 4: LEAKAGES IN TOURISM.................................................................................................................... 20
FIGURE 5: AN OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH APPROACHES IN THE LITERATURE ............................................................... 35
FIGURE 6: LEAKAGE IN RELATION TO DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFECTS ...................................................................... 41
FIGURE 7: IMPORT PROPORTION OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURE PER PRODUCT CATEGORY HOTEL I .......................... 50
FIGURE 8: PERCENTAGE OF IMPORTS PER PRODUCT CATEGORY HOTEL I ................................................................. 51
FIGURE 9: EXPENDITURE COMPARISON BETWEEN LOCAL AND IMPORTED FOOD AND BEVERAGE HOTEL I ...................... 51
FIGURE 10: IMPORT PROPORTION OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURE PER PRODUCT CATEGORY HOTEL II ....................... 52
FIGURE 11: PERCENTAGE OF IMPORTS PER PRODUCT CATEGORY HOTEL II .............................................................. 53
FIGURE 12: EXPENDITURE COMPARISON BETWEEN LOCAL AND IMPORTED GOODS FOR HOTEL II................................ 53
iv
List of Abbreviations
CBT
Community Based Tourism
EED
Evangelischer Entwicklungsdienst e.V.
GIZ
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit
LDC
Least Developed Countries
ODI
Overseas Development Institute
OECD
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
UNEP
United Nations Environmental Program
UNSC
United Nations Statistical Commission
UNCTAD
United Nations Conference on Trade and Developments
UNWTO
United Nations World Tourism Organization
SIDS
Small Island Developing States
TSA
Tourism Satellite Accounts
VCA
Value Chain Analysis
v
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION TO THESIS
Globally, tourism is a $3 billion a day business that all countries at all levels of
development can potentially benefit from. With growing developing country participation,
tourism has become a major contributor to their development and growth.’ (UNCTAD,
2010:1)
Recent estimates of the United Nations predict the number of international tourists to increase
by 43 million tourists per year, equating to an average growth of 3.3% annually (United
Nations, 2011). While the majority of international tourists originate from developed
countries, 40% of all international trips end in a developing country (UNCTAD, 2010).
Unmistakably, tourism continues to grow, particularly in developing countries, and alongside
it grows the need to maximize the economic benefits and to minimize the negative impacts for
the host regions. This need is reflected in the efforts of engaging in sustainable tourism
development and particularly, in developing countries, the lacking sustainability of the tourism
industry is a frequently discussed issue. Economic sustainability is concerned with aspects
such as local retention of tourism expenditure, high quantity and quality of local employment
through tourism (UNEP/UNWTO, 2005) and the integration of the general economy into
tourism supply networks (Widmann, 2004). However, criticism suggests that tourism only
leaves minimal economic benefits in host countries due to high levels of profit leakage,
particularly with forms of mass tourism (Mitchell& Ashley, 2007; Lacher & Nepal, 2010). In
this context, developing countries are often represented as the losers, who are exploited by
tourism and multinational corporations (Tourism Concern, 2008; Plüss, 2008). In fact, a lot of
disapproval on tourism in developing countries is circled around claims that “money does not
even reach the destination” or that “most of the profits flow out of the destination again”,
(Mitchell& Ashley, 2007). Such claims are often backed up with high profit leakages rates.
A foregoing definition of the term ‘leakage’ is required in order to proceed with the
introduction to this thesis. However, even in academic and scientific research, there is
confusion on what leakage actually comprises. Consequently, diverging definitions of leakage
circulate and resulting incongruent approaches to measure leakage lead to confusion in
handling leakage figures. Therefore, a substantial part of the investigation on leakage in this
research drifts into the debate of a lacking standard definition of leakage. It seems most
appropriate to base the underlying definition for this thesis on the few aspects of leakage,
1
which all researchers agree on. This depicts leakage as the part of foreign exchange earnings
that fails to be retained in the tourist receiving destinations, because of costs arising for
tourism-related imported goods and services and the repatriation of profits due to the operation
of foreign enterprises (UNWTO, 1995; Gollub et al., 2003; Lejarraja& Walkenhorst, 2007;
Mitchell& Faal, 2008; UNCTAD, 2010). This definition only contains elements that are
considered in all definitions and neglects various other factors the above cited authors consider
as part of leakage. As a result, literature suggests that the real significance of leakage rates in
tourism is yet to be discovered (Sandbrook, 2010) and this thesis aims to address this very
research gap.
1.2 RATIONALE FOR THE TOPIC
Since the GIZ instigated the topic for this thesis and supports the research in terms of data, the
enterprise will be introduced shortly in the following. The ‚Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH’ (formerly GTZ) is a federal enterprise
supporting the German Government in the field of international cooperation for sustainable
development. Its aim is fostering capacity development to improve the living conditions in
developing countries sustainably. To achieve this aim, the GIZ engages in the cooperation
with developing countries covering issues regarding political, ecological, economic and social
development. (GIZ, 2011). The sector project ‘Tourism and sustainable Development’ engages
in development cooperation in tourism with the aim to create awareness on the importance of
tourism as major driver for poverty reduction, local economic development and environmental
protection, among development agencies, the public and the private sector (Lengefeld, 2007).
The GIZ sector project ‘Tourism and sustainable Development’ has engaged in research
regarding the economic performance of various forms of tourism (ranging from All-Inclusive
tourism (AI tourism) to Community-Based Tourism (CBT)). The main aim of the GIZ in this
regard is to come up with reliable facts and data in order to reach an objectification of the
discussion on leakage. The discussions on this topic are highly controversial and in line with
the aim of the GIZ, this thesis shall investigate the core of the leakage effect in an objective
manner to provide clarification in the muddled claims on leakages from tourism in developing
countries.
2
1.3 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
This thesis aims to explore the leakage effect in tourism in developing countries by
elaborating the problems in defining, capturing and interpreting leakage rates in order to
finally draw conclusions on the relevance of leakage. In short, the resulting underlying
research question of this paper is: How representative are leakage rates as an indicator for the
economic performance of tourism in developing countries? The following objectives have
been set in order to achieve the research aim.
1st Objective: To examine different definitions of leakage
2nd Objective: To determine reasons for the occurrence of leakage and stereotypical
perceptions on the interrelation between different forms of tourism and leakage
3rd Objective: To investigate the potential to diminish the leakage effect with particular
emphasis on linkages to food sectors by examining the import propensity of two exemplary
hotels
4th Objective: To expose the irregularities and problems regarding the measurement,
comparison and interpretation of leakage rates
5th Objective: To develop a set of conclusions on the relevance of leakage rates as an indicator
for the economic performance of tourism and recommendations for the handling of leakage
rates
3
1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Primary and secondary research was conducted in order to achieve the aim and meet the
objectives of this thesis. The table below (Table 1) describes the research methods used to
meet the respective objectives.
TABLE 1: OBJECTIVES AND RESEARCH METHODS
RESEARCH METHOD
OBJECTIVE
Objective 1
Objective 2
Objective 3
Objective 4
Objective 5
By secondary research: reviewing relevant literature
By primary research: employing the results of three
expert interviews
expert interviews
Partially by including a case study based on secondary
data
expert interviews
By including a case study based on secondary data
Mainly by secondary research: reviewing relevant
literature
Partially by primary research: employing the results of
three expert interviews
By critically analyzing and comparing primary and
secondary research findings
Source: Author
4
1.5 DISSERTATION OUTLINE
In order to reach the main research aim, this dissertation deals with various contents and
methods. Building on this, the six different chapters have been arranged as follows:
Chapter 1 introduces and justifies the topic and outlines the aim and objectives and the
research methods chosen to achieve them.
Chapter 2 reviews and critically analyses relevant literature comprising the leakage effect in
tourism.
Chapter 3 presents a case study based on secondary data supplied by the GIZ screening the
linkages of two All-Inclusive hotels in the Dominican Republic to the local economy in
particular regards to food.
Chapter 4 explains the research methods employed to achieve the aim and objectives and
exposes limitations to the findings of this thesis.
Chapter 5 critically contrasts secondary and primary research findings.
Chapter 6 draws conclusions from the preceding analysis and deducts relevant
recommendations for the handling of leakage rates.
5
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE LITERATURE REVIEW
This literature review provides a detailed and critical analysis of the literature embracing the
leakage effect in tourism. The literature review aims to position the chosen research question
into its wider context and demonstrates the theoretical framework for this study as key
findings serve as a foundation for the primary research. The literature review covers four main
themes: tourism and its economic relevance in developing countries, the leakage effect in
tourism, approaches to measure leakage and the significance of leakage figures. The leakage
effect is a complex phenomenon and in order to examine its relevance, various underlying
subject areas need to be elaborated in advance. A discussion on the scope of the tourism
industry and the structure of the tourism value chain is followed by the elaboration of the
economic relevance of tourism in developing countries and the tourism multiplier effect.
Additionally, relevant stereotypical assumptions on the correlation of small and mass scale
tourism and economic impacts are reviewed. The first chapter (Chapter 2.2) thereby serves to
establish a contextual basis for the following chapters on leakage. Subsequently, the leakage
effect in tourism is investigated comprehensively. The leakage effect in tourism is approached
by a definitional discussion on leakage and a summary of the reasons for its occurrence. This
is followed by the discussion on the potential to link tourism to the general economy to
diminish leakages, with particular emphasis on linkages to food sectors. Approaches to
measure leakages are critically reviewed and problems with capturing leakage are deducted
from the discussed aspects. The resulting lack of reliable empirical data is illustrated followed
by neglected aspects in the interpretation of leakage rates. Finally, first conclusions on the
relevance of leakage rates as an indicator for the economic performance of tourism in
developing countries will be drawn from the reviewed literature.
2.2 TOURISM AND ITS ECONOMIC RELEVANCE
2.2.1 A Definitional Discussion of the Tourism Industry
The tourism industry demonstrates the framework for this thesis and in order to explore
tourism’s economic impacts and its measurement, the discussion on the extent of the tourism
industry is picked up introductorily. Tourism is a global economic activity and a
6
multidisciplinary subject embracing disciplines ranging from geography and ecology to
economics, transport studies and hotel and restaurant administration to even more abstract
subjects such as psychology and anthropology (Page& Connell, 2006:8). There is no
universally agreed tourism perspective and the nature and core of tourism still remains a
disputed subject (Smith, 1994; Theobald, 2005; Page& Connell, 2006). Whether tourism is a
business, an industry, a service or just a phenomenon depends on the point of view from which
tourism is examined and defined (Weaver& Lawton, 2002; Page& Connell, 2006; Mitchell&
Ashley, 2010). Often, tourism is referred to as an invisible export industry with no tangible
product (Page& Connell, 2006; Sadler& Archer, 1975) or ‘a multi-product industry that
encompasses a number of different economic activities’ (Wall& Mathieson, 2006:119). An
industry in turn is distinguished by a generic product and production process. For agriculture,
for example, the generic products are food and fiber; for the automobile industry it is personal
transportation (Smith, 1994:582). As tourism lacks a single production process, a generic
product and a locationally confined market, it cannot be depicted as an industry in the
conventional sense (Tucker and Sundberg, 1988 cited in Smith, 1994:583). Lejárraga and
Walkenhorst (2007:3) provide a more suitable definition by describing tourism as an economic
sector that is not defined by a single commodity, but more a cluster of interrelated industries.
In the 1993 international standard system of national accounts (SNA) tourism is not
recognized as a clearly identifiable sector of the economy (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010:8).
Resulting from the definitional issue above, there are also incongruent opinions on how far
tourism ranges. According to Weaver and Lawton (2002:47) ‘the tourism industry may be
defined as the sum of the industrial and commercial activities that produce goods and services
wholly or mainly for tourist consumption.’ However, this definition neglects the purchase of
goods and services, which are not produced wholly or mainly for tourists, because tourists also
consume goods and services that are not designed for their consumption. Smith (1994:592)
provides a helpful example illustrating the difficulties of defining the scope of the tourism
industry: At holiday destinations meals produced in restaurants are consumed by both, locals
and tourists. Tourists thereby turn a restaurant meal into a tourism product and it becomes part
of their tourism experience. From an empirical and statistical perspective the value of the
prepared meals accounts as an output of the foodservices industry. However, as a share of the
foodservices output is converted into a tourism product, parts of the sales would need to be
allocated to the tourism industry. Consequently, from a broader perspective ‘tourism
7
encompasses a multiplicity of economic activities spanning the agricultural, manufacturing,
and services sectors—including foods and beverages, furniture and textiles, jewellery and
cosmetics, and transportation and communication services, among many others’ (Lejárraga&
Walkenhorst, 2007:3). Evidently, ‘tourism is an economic activity which is a composite of
goods and services surrounded by rather unclear boundaries’ and therefore, a lot of spending
of tourists cannot be traced and recorded (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010:8). This issue of lacking
universal definitions and indistinct limitations of the scope of tourism is where the
impreciseness of defining and measuring leakage rates starts. Since tourism, as an industry, is
not consistently bounded, official tourism statistics remain contested (Theobald, 2005) and as
these represent the basis to measure economic impacts, the results may be inconsistently based
on different denominators. In order to systematically grasp tourism’s economic scope, the
tourism value chain needs to be examined.
2.2.2 THE TOURISM VALUE CHAIN
The tourism value chain can be described as ‘a continuum of related economic activities’
associated with tourists taking place in the tourist-generating as well as the tourist destination
region (Gollub et al., 2003:25). The tourism value chain also illustrates how benefits outside
the tourism sector are created through linked products, supporting industries, complementary
markets and distribution channels (Gollub et al., 2003). Therefore, the flow of tourist
expenditure can be traced along the value chain and helps identifying at which stages money
flows outside or out of the local economy. This explains why the tourism value chain is a
relevant framework for examining the leakage effect. As tourism is a global industry, it is in
the nature of the tourism value chain that tourism components are spread across different
regions, countries and continents and consequently, profits accrue at various stages. Yet, the
allocation of profits amongst the geographic regions is repeatedly discussed, especially since it
is often unevenly distributed amongst poor and rich countries along the value chain
(UNCTAD, 2010). The portion of profits accruing outside the destination region is depicted as
leakage by various researchers (Diaz, 2001; Gollub et al., 2003; UNCTAD, 2010). However,
this facet of leakage is controversially discussed and will be investigated in more detail at a
later stage of this thesis. Figure 1 shows an exemplary tourism value chain aligned
along consequent economic activities of a tourist consumer.
8
FIGURE 1: THE TOURISM VALUE CHAIN
Source: Gollub et al., 2003:23
9
As apparent in Figure 1, holiday planning only involves goods and services from the tourism
generating region. However, the figure does not directly indicate that parts of the payments to travel
agencies go to the destinations. The UNCTAD (2010) explains the procedures and transactions in
the tourism value chain: Prospect tourists buy at least one component -inevitably the transport to the
chosen destination- prior to their departure. Often, entire holiday packages are purchased at home
including accommodation and excursions. These packages are sold through travel agents and tour
operators, which act as intermediaries in selling holidays to other countries. In the natural course of
doing business like any intermediary, tour operators and travel agencies retain a part of the
customer’s payment, which never reaches the destination’s economy. A portion of the profit may
also go to international airlines and international hotel chains. Generalizations are difficult to draw,
but more advanced economies usually retain more income than less developed ones (UNCTAD,
2010). However, considering that production and trade are globalized processes, no destination
could capture the entire benefits of the tourism value chain (Gollub et al., 2003; Mitchell& Ashley,
2007; Mitchell& Faal, 2008). Since the leakage effect, the core of this research, is exclusively
criticized in the context of tourism in developing countries, the economic relevance of tourism in
developing countries will be examined in the following.
2.2.3 THE ECONOMIC RELEVANCE OF TOURISM IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
Tourism is a major contributor to the world economy (Huybers, 2007) and accounts to the top five
export earners in 150 countries of the world; in 60 countries, tourism even ranks highest (UNCTAD,
2010:2). It can bring impending economic benefits such as foreign exchange, employment and local
economic and social progress.
In order to discuss the impacts of tourism in developing countries, some definitions have to be
clarified in advance. Developed, developing and least developed countries classify as the following:
Developing countries are, according to the World Bank classification, countries with low or middle
levels of GNP per capita (with the exception of 5 high-income developing economies) (Soubbotina,
2004). Least developed countries can be classified as ‘low-income countries where, according to the
United Nations, economic growth faces long term impediments - such as low human resources
development’ (Subboutina, 2004: 69). Opposed to developing countries developed countries are
industrially advanced, with and a high standard of living. However, only 20% of the world’s
population lives in developed countries (Soubbotina, 2004). A distinctive differentiation between
10
developing, less or least developed countries would obscure the handling of literature employed.
Therefore, for this dissertation, the expression “developing countries”, as termed by Soubbotina
(2004), refers to all nations not considered as developed.
In 2008, 40% of all international trips ended in a developing country (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). The
UNWTO believes tourism to be of extreme importance in ‘economic growth, foreign exchange,
investment and job creating sectors’ in developing countries (Torres, 2002; Lipman, 2005:69;
UNCTAD, 2010). As the UNCTAD (2010:4) states
‘tourism accounts for 7 per cent of their goods and services exports and 45 per cent of their
commercial services exports, making it developing countries’ largest single services export.
For LDCs only, both of these figures were higher, at 9 and 65 per cent respectively. […]. In
23 of the 49 of the LDCs, international tourism is among the top three foreign exchange
earners, and for 7 it is their single largest revenue earner, inducing significant incomemultiplier effects and progress in terms of national income. By boosting per capita income
and human capital, tourism has been a decisive factor supporting graduation from LDC
status for countries such as Cape Verde, Maldives and Samoa.’
The Caribbean countries, for instance, predominantly live from international tourism (Clayton,
2009) and Africa’s share in global tourism ‘is much larger than its average share of world trade’
(Mitchell& Ashley, 2010:7). Taleb Rifai, the UNWTO secretary depicts tourism as the most
effective tool to combat poverty and advance development (Imlinger, 2009). Tax revenue from
tourism benefits the country at national and local level as the government can use it to invest in
health, education and infrastructure development (WTO, 2002). Furthermore, tourism brings the
consumers to the product and thereby, opens up significant export opportunities for developing
countries (Roe et al., 2004).
At the same time, there are also significant amount of drawbacks with tourism-lead economic
development and in order to get a true picture on tourism’s economic impacts the positive and the
negative sides have to be considered. Wall and Mathieson (2006:118) derived from several studies
from multiple authors that there is no linear relationship between the growth of tourism and the
economic benefits to the destination. In the Dominican Republic, for example, the amount of people
living below the poverty line increased while tourism experienced noteworthy growth (Suchanek,
2000). A common criticism on tourism is that a great proportion of the benefits derived from
tourism leaks to foreign countries (Hemmati& Koehler, 2000; Telfer& Wall, 2000; Page& Connell,
2006; Sandbrook, 2010), which leaves insignificant profits with the host community and only
reaches a small number of people (Britton, 1982). Evidently, there are very adverse opinions on
11
tourism and its contribution to economic development. Sandbrook (2010) summarizes a number of
widely used arguments in opposition to tourism-lead economic development, which are all closely
linked to each other. Tourism is criticized to involve a high level of external control and
consequently, local communities lack influence on tourism development (Scheyvens, 1999; Tosun,
2000). Concurrent to the lack of involvement and control, economic dependency on richer nations
persists, which undermines the autonomy of the poorer countries (Britton, 1982; Maurer, 1992;
Page& Connell, 2006). This is also referred to as the ‘dependency theory’, which roots back to
colonial power structures (Lehman, 1979 cited in Britton, 1982). The intrusion of industrialized
nations in the tourism industries of developing countries is also resentfully referred to as neocolonial domination (Wall& Mathieson, 2006:138). Economic dependency on tourism is also a
frequently criticized aspect in the context of tourism being highly vulnerable to change. For
countries, to which tourism demonstrates their biggest source of income, a slump in tourist arrivals
can be devastating (Dwyer, 2005; Page& Connell, 2006; Wall& Mathieson, 2008).
Nevertheless, tourism’s potential to advance economic development cannot be negated (Imlinger,
2009). Unlike products of other export industries, the tourism product is a highly differentiated one,
which is linked to numerous sectors of the national economy and thereby holds multipliable
potential (Sadler& Archer, 1975). The more tourism is embedded into local economic structures, the
more can the initial tourist expenditure circulate in the local economy. The tourism multiplier effect
will be explained in the following.
2.2.4 THE MULTIPLIER EFFECT IN TOURISM
Economic growth through tourism is predominantly driven by the multiplication of unit spending
through different sectors of the local economy (Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007). Once a tourist
spends money on a commercial tourist product, the money enters a cycle stimulating more indirect
revenues within the economy. This ongoing circulation of expenditures within the destination is
referred to as the tourism multiplier effect (Weaver& Lawton, 2002). Leakage is a fundamental
concept to the multiplier as in the successive circulation of money, leakages occur at each round
(Weaver& Lawton, 2002). The tourism multiplier is ‘a statistical expression of how much income or
employment (depending on whether one is referring to income or employment multipliers) is
generated by a certain amount of tourist spending’ (Page& Connell, 2006:353). Fletcher and Archer
(1991 cited in Wall& Mathieson, 2006:110), pioneers in the application of the multiplier theory to
12
tourism, defined multipliers as ‘the ratio of direct, indirect and induced changes in an economy to
the direct initial change itself.’ Accordingly, the multiplier measures three dimensions: The effects
of direct, indirect and induced tourism spending (Wall& Mathieson, 2006). These have been
described similarly by several researchers (Page& Connell, 2006; Wall& Mathieson, 2006;
Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2010) as follows: The direct effects of tourism on the economy refer to
the direct spending of tourists on tourism-related goods or services. Indirect impacts comprise all
tourists spending on non-tourism-related goods or services. Spending by tourist establishments (e.g.
Hotels) in non-tourist sectors such as food and beverage, equipment, merchandise and salaries also
accounts as indirect impact. Induced effects are a slightly abstract impact of tourism as they emerge
from the workers in the tourism industry who re-spend their income on goods and services in the
general economy. Whereas direct effects in the tourism sector are often obtained by hotel or
restaurant owners, who are often wealthy locals or internationals, ’the income generated through
indirect effects trickles down to the lower income layers of the economy’ (Mitchell& Ashley,
2010:72). In Figure 2, the successive circulation of direct spending and the resulting indirect and
induced spending is visualized.
FIGURE32:also
THEshows
TOURISM
AND LEAKAGE
Figure
that MULTIPLIER
a portion of revenues
cannot be retained by the local economy. This
Source: Weaver& Lawton, 2002:247
13
Figure 2 also shows that a portion of revenues cannot be retained by the local economy. This
portion is lost through the purchase of imports by suppliers, hotels and also through workers who respend parts of their income on imported goods or services or save it. Therefore, the ‘revenue lost to
the multiplier effect’, depicted in Figure 2 is, in other words, leakage from the local economy.
Criticism on tourism’s role in developing countries and involved leakage rates particularly circles
around the form and extent of tourism as tourist expenditure and involved leakage rates can vary
vastly. Therefore, observations and studies in the literature about the relationship of leakage and
forms of mass and small scale tourism will be investigated in the following.
2.2.5 ECONOMIC IMPACTS WITH MASS AND SMALL SCALE TOURISM
In the debate on tourism’s economic impacts on destinations, forms of mass and small scale tourism
often become subject of discussion. The type and extent of tourism is often coupled with the degree
of leakage and forms of mass tourism are commonly associated with high leakage (Hampton, 1998;
Weaver& Lawton, 2002). Therefore, at this point it shall be investigated whether the believed
correlation of type an extent of tourism with economic impacts and leakage can be confirmed. At a
national level, the fluctuation of leakage with mass and small scale tourism can barely be captured.
When examining leakage at a hotel or at a tourism package basis, the retained revenue can be
examined. Figure 3 stereotypically presents widely perceived prejudices of the economic
implications of mass and alternative tourism, where alternative tourism summarizes all forms of
small scale tourism (Weaver& Lawton, 2002). In this simplified illustration the degree of local
involvement and control is depicted as subject to mass or small scale tourism. Further, mass tourism
dominates the local economy, fails to create internal linkages to the economy and high leakage rates
and a low multiplier effect are the result (Weaver and Lawton, 2002:359). Mass tourism
accommodation is concentrated in tourist areas, is only large scale and not locally owned, but run by
large corporations.
14
FIGURE 3: CHARACTERISTICS OF MASS AND ALTERNATIVE TOURISM
Source: Weaver, 1998 cited in Weaver& Lawton, 2002:360
Evidently, with mass tourism there are commonly shared negative associations and high leakage
rates are usually associated to be coupled with mass and luxury tourism (Hampton, 1998; Weaver&
Lawton, 2002). Considering the quantity, high quality and diversification of products and services
demanded for these forms of tourism this assumption seems plausible (Diaz, 2001). Indeed, star
hotels, which are more commonly associated with mass tourism, have a negative image as identified
below.
15
‘Star hotels in developing countries have been presented as having minimal ties to the local
economy. With respect to food supply, it is often cited that due to their need for a secure
food supply system with high quality products, or for strong links to multinationals, star
hotels often import food’ (Telfer& Wall, 2000:441)
Nonetheless, this is an assumption that is generalized and repeated in the literature without
sufficient proof (Telfer& Wall, 2000). In fact, studies engaging with higher class hotel supply
chains have revealed that a surprisingly little amount of food is imported (Mitchell& Ashley,
2010:95). Especially, All-Inclusive Tourism is subject to criticism; as authors such as Suchanek
(2000) argue that more than 50% of the profit of All-Inclusive hotels is captured by foreign hotel
owners in other countries. Moreover, discretionary tourist spending (e.g. shopping, local transport,
cultural activities etc.) is limited as tourists spend the majority of their time within the resort
(Suchanek, 2000). Nevertheless, Mitchell and Faal (2008:viii) report that
‘experience from the Caribbean suggests that the procurement policies of AI resorts can
have a positive local economic impact, which could potentially off-set the loss of tourist outof-pocket expenditure. However, this is not automatic and is reliant upon on the commitment
and competence of resort management to the local economy and poor people within it.’
In Weaver and Lawton’s stereotypical representation small scale tourism is the idealized form of
tourism. This is confirmed by Robinson and Novelli (2005:1), who claim that ‘the niche tourism
approach appears to offer greater opportunities and a form of tourism that is more sustainable, less
damaging and, importantly, more capable of delivering high-spending tourists. Identical to
alternative small scale tourism, niche tourism involves a limited number of tourists in a more
sustainable manner (Robinson& Novelli, 2005). Community-Based Tourism, for example, is
gaining increased credit as a highly sustainable form of tourism (Robinson& Novelli, 2005).
However, also small scale tourism is a subject of criticism. As put forward by Diaz (2001:9) ‘lowleakage tourism can also equate to low-income tourism, resulting in lower total income and
therefore, limiting the possibilities for expansion and development by other sectors of the receiving
country’s economy’. Weaver and Lawton (2002:367) utter that Ecotourism, for instance, aims at
maintaining a region at a primitive, underdeveloped state for a more authentic experience for
tourists. Locals, however, may prefer large-scale tourism with more economic benefits (Weaver&
Lawton, 2002:367).
Summarized it can be said though, that mass scale tourism undergoes more criticism than small
scale tourism. However, it appears that generalizations are made without sufficient proof (Telfer&
Wall, 2000) and Weaver and Lawton (2002) argue that large and small scale tourism cannot be
16
stereotyped as good or bad; it very much depends on the circumstances at the destination. As the
UNWTO (2004) confirms, it should be kept in mind that ‘sustainable tourism development
guidelines and management practices are applicable to all forms of tourism in all types of
destinations, including mass tourism and the various niche tourism segments.’ It may be a more
feasible approach to judge tourism not by its scale, but more so by its nature. For example,
Backpacker tourism, which can take place at a small or mass scale, demands simple and cheap
services involving less capital-intensive infrastructure, which in turn facilitates local ownership and
management of accommodation, transport and restaurant facilities (Hampton, 1998).
A crucial factor in how successful tourism is for the local economy, be it mass or small scale, is how
well the tourism industry is interlinked with the local economy. The less it is interlinked, the higher
may be the leakage through the purchase of imported goods and services. After having established a
contextual basis, now the leakage effect in tourism has to be investigated thoroughly. Its definitions,
the reasons for its occurrence, its measurement methods and its significance and relevance will be
analyzed in the following
2.3 THE LEAKAGE EFFECT IN TOURISM
‘On the basis of high levels of reported leakage, critics of international tourism have claimed that
the industry does not leave significant revenue in host economies (e.g. Brown, 1998; Mbaiwa,
2005)’ (Sandbrook, 2010:126). Indeed, if revenue leakage is high benefits from tourism can be
severely diminished (UNCTAD, 2010). However, the term ‘leakage’ is used in a variety of
contrasting ways by tourism researchers (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010:79). Therefore, in the following
definitions of leakage are gathered and contrasted.
2.3.1 A DEFINITIONAL DISCUSSION ON LEAKAGE
The leakage effect in tourism is controversially discussed in publications and academic literature.
Reviewing literature on tourism’s economic impacts, it seems that there is confusion among
economists and campaigners criticizing tourism with what the term ‘leakage’ essentially comprises
(Mitchell& Ashley, 2010:79). Sadler and Archer (1975:181) already criticized in 1975 that a great
proportion of much needed foreign exchange earnings from tourism leaks out of the economy again;
however, up until today, there is no standardized definition of leakage. As depicted by Sandbrook
(2010:125) ‘leakage of tourism revenue has many definitions, but is broadly concerned with the
failure of tourist spending to remain in the destination economy, however defined’. Lejárraga and
17
Walkenhorst (2007:31) define leakage as ‘the portion that leaks into imports and pays foreign
factors of production’. This outflow can be caused by money spent on imported equipment,
materials, capital and other imported consumer goods or services to provide for the requirements of
international tourists (Page& Connell, 2008). Hemmati and Koehler’s (2000) definition grasps the
same aspects The UNCTAD (2010:9), however, defines leakage as
‘the process whereby part of the foreign exchange earnings generated by tourism, rather than
reaching or remaining in tourist-receiving countries, is either retained by tourist-generating
countries or other foreign firms.’
In this definition, even money that never reaches the destination is considered as leakage. The
UNWTO (1995:53) lists the following types of expenditure on imports as the main causes for
leakage:

Imports for materials and equipment for construction

The import of non-durable goods such as food and beverage

Repatriation of income obtained by foreigners

Repatriation of profits obtained by foreigners

Interests paid for foreign loans

Marketing expenses abroad
However, the extent of these six sources of leakage can vary significantly from country to country
(UNTWO, 1995). The term ‘repatriation’ implies that the money accrues at the tourist-receiving
destination, but is repatriated, i.e. ‘send back’ in form of profits to foreign firms or wages of foreign
workforce. Marketing expenses abroad are regarded as an imported service in the UNWTO
definition. Leakages can occur in a number of ways (Gollub et al., 2003) and several authors cluster
leakage into three types: internal, external and invisible leakages (Diaz, 2001; Gollub et al., 2003).
The table below (Table 2) briefly summarizes the different types of leakages for the ease of
understanding. While internal leakage distinctly depicts the expenditure for imported goods and
services as leakage (Diaz, 2001; Gollub et al., 2003) external leakage entails two different aspects,
which should be categorized separately. While the first aspect of external leakage refers to money
that has once accrued at the destination, the second aspect –structural or pre-leakage(Smith&
Jenner, 1992, cited in Mitchell& Ashley, 2010; UNCTAD, 2010)- describes the money that never
reaches the destination economy as it either remains in the tourism generating economy or goes to
international transport companies.
18
TABLE 2: TYPES OF LEAKAGE
TYPES OF LEAKAGE
DESCRIPTION
Internal leakage
Also referred to as import coefficient as these leakages primarily occur through
imports. The weaker the economy is in terms of producing quality goods and services,
the higher the imports (Diaz, 2001; Gollub et al., 2003). The UNCTAD (2010) simply
terms this as economic leakage
External leakage
Refers to tourism expenditures that accrue outside of the destination.
 Firstly, external leakages accrue to foreign investors through repatriated profit
earnings and amortization of external debt (Diaz, 2001; Gollub et al., 2003;
UNCTAD, 2010:10).

Invisible leakage
Secondly, they flow to external intermediaries for bookings or foreign-owned
transportation services to the destination (Diaz, 2001; Gollub et al., 2003). This
aspect of external leakage is also depicted as pre-leakage (Smith& Jenner, 1992,
cited in Mitchell& Ashley, 2010) or structural leakage (UNCTAD, 2010:10). This
leakage is retained by tourist-generating countries and does not reach touristreceiving countries (UNCTAD, 2010). It tends to occur in the early parts of the
tourism value chain and arises due to the very structure of the tourism value chain
(see Chapter 2.2.2) (UNCTAD, 2010:10)
Loss or opportunity cost that cannot be measured reliably, but which can constrain
noteworthy cumulative effects. It is mainly of financial nature i.e. tax avoidance
through international transactions, and off-shore investments (Diaz, 2001; Gollub et
al., 2003).
Source: Compiled by author based on Diaz, 2001; Gollub et al., 2003; UNCTAD, 2010; Mitchell& Ashley,
2010
Not all researchers segment leakage as in Table 2 though and understandings whether leakage
should comprise all three categories diverge. Mitchell and Faal (2008:1), for instance, state that
‘leakages are generally defined as the proportion of total holiday price that does not reach or
remain in the destination. Some leakages happen at the destination, when a tourist or hotelier
pays for goods or services that are imported. Others have sought to include in ‘leakages’ the
external payments that never make it to the destination country – such as travel agent
commissions, tour operator payments and foreign airlines. Defining these payments as a
‘leakage’ is misleading (Mitchell& Ashley, 2007a).
Thereby, Mitchell and Faal (2008) depict the part of external leakage, which flows to external
intermediaries for bookings or foreign-owned transportation services, i.e. structural leakage as an
inappropriate component. Similarly, the cited definitions of various researchers do not include
structural leakage as leakage (UNWTO, 1995; Hemmati& Koehler, 2000; Lejárraga& Walkenhorst,
2007, Mitchell& Faal, 2008; Page& Connell, 2008; Sandbrook, 2010). Figure 4 below illustrates
19
where leakage occurs. The linkage of the tourism economy to other sectors is depicted as leakage
from the tourism economy to the general economy. The leakage of the tourist spending spent on
pre-departure services outside the destination region is what Diaz (2001) and Smith and Jenner
(1992, cited in Mitchell& Ashley, 2010) depict as ‘pre-leakage’ as the money does not even reach
the destination economy.
FIGURE 4: LEAKAGES IN TOURISM
Source: Mitchell& Ashley, 2010:81 adapted from Lejárraga &Walkenhorst, 2006
Having listed a number of diverging definitions of leakage, some conclusions need to be drawn in
order to proceed with the discussion. The inclusion of the so called pre-leakage or structural leakage
into leakage calculations appears to be the main issue in the definitional discussion on leakage
because authors strongly disagree on this point. Therefore, there is incongruence whether leakage
comprises only
(a) the loss of money that reaches the destination’s economy, but cannot be retained flows
out of the economy again for tourism-related imported goods and services, repatriated profits
of foreign enterprises at the destination or wages of foreign workforce and destination
marketing cost overseas (UNWTO, 1995; Hemmati& Koehler, 2000; Lejárraga&
20
Walkenhorst,2007, Mitchell& Faal, 2008; Page& Connell, 2008; Sandbrook, 2010;
Mitchell& Ashley, 2010)
or
(b) definition (a) plus the pre-departure spending that never even reaches the
destination’s economy as it is lost to international airlines, tour operators, travel agencies
and hotel chains (referred to as structural leakage or pre-leakage) (Diaz, 2001; Gollub et al.,
2003; UNCTAD, 2010)
Consequently, a first important conclusion of the definitional discussion on leakage is that definition
(a) constitutes the minimum definition of leakage and at a maximum, leakage comprises all
components included in definition (b). Consequently, all reviewed authors agree that the aspects
grasped by definition (a) represent leakage (UNWTO, 1995; Diaz, 2001; Gollub et al., 2003;
Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007, Mitchell& Faal, 2008; Page& Connell, 2008; Sandbrook, 2010;
Mitchell& Ashley, 2010; UNCTAD, 2010). However, a number of researchers (Diaz, 2001; Gollub
et al., 2003 UNCTAD, 2010) regard definition (b) as the all-embracing definition of leakage in
tourism. Subsequently, the different definitions will be referred to as definition (a) and (b).
There is incongruence whether the second component of definition (b) (structural leakage/ preleakage) should be termed as leakage. Strong counterarguments against definition (b) can be found
in the literature. Mitchell and Ashley (2010) put forward that including pre-leakage means including
payments made for booking, insurance and travel services and thereby, even profit margins of
airlines, travel agencies and tour operators are accounted as leakage. This rockets leakage out of
proportion as ‘marketing, insurance, retailing, packaging, and long-haul flights are often 50 to 70
percent of total package cost and are normally provided by western tour operators and airline
companies’ as most of them cannot be supplied by the host destination (Mitchell& Ashley, 2007:1).
Mitchell and Ashley (2010:81) exemplify that including these profits in leakage calculations equals
to considering ‘the revenue of a coffee stand at Heathrow as a leakage from the Ethiopian coffee
farmers who supply the coffee’.
The fact that the contested component of the leakage definition is termed as structural (UNCTAD,
2010) or pre-leakage (Diaz, 2001) by those who regard it as integral part of leakage, is conflictive.
The UNCTAD (2010:9) states itself that structural leakage occurs due to the very structure of the
tourism sector and ‘even when strong linkages reduce economic leakage, structural leakage may
still be significant because a large share of international tourism expenditures never reach the
21
national economy’. Including structural leakage holds the premise that the destination region is
entitled to the entire value chain (Mitchell& Ashley, 2007), which is not reflected in the nature of
the tourism value chain (see Chapter 2.2.2). The result from this diverging understanding of leakage
is a wide range of percentages claimed as leakage proportion. These percentages range from 10% to
90% and are based on different denominator values. Before presenting a selection of claimed
leakage rates, the reasons for the occurrence of leakage in developing countries need to be examined
in order to enhance the understanding of why leakage occurs.
2.3.2 WHY LEAKAGE OCCURS IN TOURISM IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
Leakage, however defined, persists to be an issue in tourism in developing countries and whether
and where there is potential for improvement needs to be investigated. Leakage occurs because of
various global phenomena and structures. The main causes identified are globalization and the
resulting tendency for horizontal and vertical integration and foreign investment. Deficient
economic structures in developing countries demonstrate the core problem as this causes a
dependence on foreign investment and multinational corporations to compete internationally as a
tourism destination. The increased foreign control of the tourism industries in developing countries
leads to the leakage of profits, however.
‘The countries of the world have become increasingly integrated and interdependent through trade,
global capital flow and the internationalization of the production process’ (Ahunwan, 2003:1).
Globalization is a complex phenomenon affecting economic patterns of development (Ahunwan,
2003; Dwyer, 2005; Case& Fair, 2004) and tourism is both a feature and a cause of globalization
(Harrison, 2001). Therefore, global economic integration shapes the tourism value chain (Ahunwan,
2003) as horizontal and vertical integration emerge from globalization (Wall& Mathieson, 2006).
The result is increased efficiency, but in turn, profits leak to tourism-generating countries (Wall&
Mathieson, 2006). Another effect of globalization is that many multinational companies import
goods or services irrespectively of the availability in the local economy (UNCTAD, 2010:9), for
example to take advantage of economies of scale or to maintain global standards in their business
chain. Structural leakage (see Table 2) is therefore, mainly caused by these globalized structures,
which can barely be avoided. It may be necessary to lose a share of international tourism
expenditures to foreign airlines, tour operators, travel agencies and hotel chains (UNCTAD, 2010:9)
in order to get the tourist to the destination. Without these global structures, there would be no value
22
chain and no tourist (Mitchell& Faal, 2008) as part of the reason why tourism value chains are
increasingly international in developing countries is, because often these structures cannot be
supplied by the destination (UNCTAD, 2010).
Deficient economic structures in developing countries are the main reason for the occurrence of
leakage. High revenue leakages are more prospective to arise in developing countries with limited
economic diversification, including small island states (developing or developed), because local
industries often cannot meet excessive tourism demand and there is a lack of capital among locals to
invest (Weaver& Lawton, 2002; UNCTAD, 2010). This is due to deficient supporting supply
industries, infrastructure and inefficient distribution systems (Bull, 1995). As identified in Chapter
2.2.4, economic growth through tourism is predominantly driven by the multiplication of unit
spending through different sectors of the local economy (Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007). However,
deficient supporting supply industries at the destination often cause the need for imports and
linkages to the general economy remain minimal. The lack of capital among locals to invest in
tourism infrastructure (Bull, 1995) often leads to the dominance of foreign investment in the tourism
industries of developing countries (Wall& Mathieson, 2006).
In this day and age, foreign ownership is a common phenomenon and management and license
arrangements across different countries have become ordinary (Ahunwan, 2003:245). Foreign
investment, however, has very adverse effects on developing countries and is repeatedly listed as
one of the main reasons for high leakages as it hinders the full derivation of tourism income
(UNWTO, 2002). At the same time, foreign investment is also commonly acknowledged as a main
driver for tourism (UNCTAD, 2010). The UNCTAD (2007:7-8) refutes the common perception that
many developing countries are dominated by foreign investors and also the UNWTO states that
‘there is often confusion about levels of foreign ownership; local ownership is often masked by
franchise agreements and management contracts’ (UNWTO, 2002:34). Therefore, the UNCTAD
argues that a lot of these claims are unsubstantiated (UNCTAD, 2007). Nevertheless, it cannot be
denied that the higher the proportion of local ownership and local management of the tourism
establishments at the destination, the higher are the direct effects of tourism. A correlation between
foreign investment and leakage is evident, but Dwyer and Forsyth (1994:524) make a valid point by
saying that
‘if profits paid overseas are thought of as a "leakage" from the economy, then the initial
payment for the facility should be thought of as an "injection" that would not have occurred
except for the foreign investment. Over the longer term, there is no overall leakage’.
23
Foreign investment causes external leakage through repatriated profit earnings to foreign owners
(Diaz, 2001; Gollub et al., 2003; UNCTAD, 2010) (see Table 1). This leakage is inevitable,
however, in order to access sufficient sources of development finance for facilities and
infrastructure (Gollub et al., 2003). If a destinations economy is already strongly concentrated on
tourism (e.g. the Maldives, where 83% of employment comes from tourism and linked industries)
higher leakages might have to be accepted in return of jobs and income (Gollub et al., 2003:24). The
UNCTAD (2010:10) even goes that far to say that ‘some degree of leakage is intrinsically
associated with international trade transactions, and may be a necessary cost of conducting tourism’.
Furthermore, it should be recognized that tourism is not the only sector in which foreign investment
occurs. As put forward by the UNWTO (2002:34)
‘there is no body of evidence to confirm that the leakages associated with tourism are
typically greater than for other comparable export sectors, nor of any evidence that the
supposed levels of foreign ownership are any higher than for comparable sectors.’
This citation raises the question why foreign ownership and leakage are so commonly criticized in
tourism.
2.3.3 LEAKAGES IN OTHER ECONOMIC SECTORS
The previous section identified that globalized operations, foreign investment and deficient
economic structures in developing countries cause an increased leakage of tourism profits.
However, an aspect that is often neglected in the discussion on leakages in tourism is that financial
leakages occur in many economic sectors due to the same reasons mentioned above (Wall&
Mathieson, 2006). Indeed, tourism import-related leakages are inferior to leakages in other
economic sectors such as the manufacturing, agriculture and heavy industry (Diaz, 2001:8). In these
sectors capital and labour are more commonly sourced internationally (Perez-Ducy de Cuello, 2001
cited in Gollub et al., 2003:24). This would advocate for tourism as a preferred sector of
development as it generates more profits and has greater indirect and induced effects due to its
linkage to other economic sectors (Diaz, 2001; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). Fletcher (1989:517)
conducted research on the Korean economy, which revealed that tourism leakages in Korea were
only half as high as those from the majority of other sectors. Although, these data are very outdated
and Korea had a relatively low import propensity at that point in time (Fletcher, 1989) a general
tendency in leakage structures among economic sectors may persist until today.
24
International tourism in developing countries is discussed frequently as it is –as identified in
Chapter 2.1– among the top three foreign exchange earners in more than half of the world’s least
developed countries UNCTAD, 2010). Its role as a potential catalyst of economic development
(UNCTAD, 2010) draws attention to the industry. Consequently, it can be concluded that financial
leakage is not a particular characteristic of tourism, but is present in many sectors in developing
countries. As tourism is such an important industry in developing countries, leakages in tourism are
frequently discussed.
After having discussed why leakage occurs in tourism in developing countries, ways to diminish
leakages have to be considered. As structural leakage can barely be avoided (UNCTAD, 2010), the
following chapter deals with the reduction of internal leakages - or more specifically, the importcoefficient (Diaz, 2001). Furthermore, apart from the repatriation of profits and wages, the ‘import
coefficient’ is the only element, which all researchers depict as a component of leakage.
2.3.4 DIMINISHING LEAKAGE BY LINKING TOURISM TO THE LOCAL ECONOMY
2.3.4.1 LINKAGES
While there is a multitude of examples and causes for high leakages (Torres, 2003 cited in Lacher&
Nepal, 2010), there is a lack of research strategies to reduce leakage from the tourism industry
(Lacher& Nepal, 2010). Linkages play a two-sided role in the discussion on leakage. Linkages are
the ‘network of inter-sectoral supply relationships between the tourism economy and the rest of the
productive sectors of the domestic economy’ (Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007:16). For one, linkages
could be listed among the factors explaining why leakage occurs as deficient economic structures,
as identified in Chapter 2.3.2, obstruct creating linkages to the general economy. Lacking linkages,
in turn, lead to the increased reliance on imports, which causes leakage. Conversely, tourism’s
potential essentially lies in the possibility of linking the tourism sector to various other sectors at the
local level (UNCTAD, 2010) in order to evade the reliance on imports and to thereby reduce
leakage. More and more developing countries have introduced “tourism linkages programmes”
particularizing essential engagements to strengthen local linkages (UNCTAD, 2010). As clearly
identifiable in the illustration of the tourism value chain in Figure 1 linkages between the value
chain and other economic sectors can be numerous and diverse (UNCTAD, 2010). Key linkages
would support domestic ownership, develop a high-skilled domestic workforce and promote the
“localization” of supply chains (UNCTAD, 2010). The most common sectors forming linkages are
25
‘agriculture
and
commercial
fisheries,
transportation,
entertainment,
construction
and
manufacturing’ (Weaver& Lawton, 2002:249). Tourism facilities like hotels, restaurants or local
tour operators require goods and services to function including ‘basic infrastructure services such as
energy, telecommunications and environmental services’ (UNCTAD, 2010:7). Thereby, tourism can
create backward linkages to the economy via employment (Telfer& Wall, 1996). Taking into
account that tourism’s effects can go back to even more abstract items required by resort hotels such
as ‘pool cleaning equipment, kitchen utensils and bathroom sinks’(Weaver& Lawton, 2002:249),
the previously mentioned problem of defining clear boundaries to tourism as an economic activity
becomes apparent (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). The complexity of linkages again proves the difficulty
to grasp leakage - an aspect that will be picked up again in Chapter 2.4.
The linkage between sectors appears simple and obvious, but backward linkages can, of course,
only be established when the destination is capable of providing these services (Bélisle, 1983;
Telfer& Wall, 1996; Lundberg et al., 1995 cited in Weaver& Lawton, 2002). However, as identified
in the Chapter 2.3.2 , deficient economic structures in developing countries are problematic
(Sadler& Archer, 1975:182; Sinclair, 1998) and often linkages to the domestic markets are weak,
which causes leakage (Huybers, 2007). In contrast, if linkages succeed to be established, their
primary positive effects are fostering economic diversification and employment (UNCTAD, 2010).
While the linkage of tourism to supply sectors appears as an adequate approach to diminish leakages
as according to definition (a), the relationship between linkages and leakages is discussed
controversially in the literature. The UNCTAD (2010) identifies weak inter-sectoral linkages as one
of the key problems in developing countries and even goes that far to say that creating linkages to
the local economy is the only approach to reduce leakage. Poor linkages between tourism and local
sectors are often put forward ‘as an argument against tourism-led economic development’ (Huybers,
2007:xxi). Mitchell and Faal (2008:5) also believe in the potential of linkages as they claim that
‘strengthening linkages between tourism and the local economy is one of the most effective ways to
promote pro-poor tourism, because it directly engages with building linkages between the tourism
sector and poor people. At the same time, one could argue that the increased integration of the local
economy could amplify the dependence and therefore, vulnerability of the destination to unforeseen
changes in the tourism sector (Mitchell& Faal, 2008). Also, Lejárraga and Walkenhorst (2007) put
forward that maximizing linkages would result in an entire economy aligned to tourism. Rather,
they suggest, that linkages and leakages should be in a country-specific healthy balance and that
there is no general guideline. Therefore, in order to avoid an overdependence on tourism in the
26
economy, ‘developing the agricultural sector [for example] should ideally be with a national
strategy in mind, rather than basing its development solely on strengthening linkages with the
tourism sector’ (Mitchell& Faal, 2008:46). Furthermore, it is important to clarify that linkage and
leakage are not mathematical counterpoints. Linkages measure how tourism activity affects nontourism sectors and linkages and leakages are derived from different multiplier calculations
(Mitchell& Ashley, 2007; Sandbrook, 2010) (see Chapter 2.4.1.2).
All in all, arguments in favour of fusing tourism into the local economy outweigh claims against
fostering linkages (Telfer& Wall, 2000; Wall& Mathieson, 2006; Mitchell& Faal, 2008; UNCTAD,
2010). Ideally, the interplay between linkage, leakage and economic impacts should be that the
more diverse the linkages to the local economy, the larger the scale of local economic activity and
the lower the leakages (eg. UNCTAD, 2010). However, the incongruity of arguments emphasizes
the need for clarification in this subject.
In view of the fact that one third of tourism spending accounts to food (Bélisle, 1983:498),
maximizing linkages to local food sectors could have a significant impact on the level of leakage.
Telfer and Wall (2000) derive from their field research that by fostering local linkages to the food
sector, leakages can be reduced and multipliers can be enhanced. Therefore, linkages to the food
sector will be thoroughly investigated in the following. Besides, this part of the literature review
demonstrates a contextual basis for the case study presented in Chapter 3, which investigates the
linkages of hotels to the local economy in food and beverage procurement.
2.3.4.2 LINKAGES TO FOOD
‘There is a general recognition that there should be an increased reliance on local resources’ (Telfer
and Wall, 1996:636). According to the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture
(cited in Mitchell and Ashley, 2010) 60 to 80 cents of every tourism dollar spent on food and
beverage in the Caribbean leaks out of the local economy. At the same time, one third of tourism
spending accounts for food (Bélisle, 1983). The relationship between tourism and agriculture is
ambiguous, however. The sectors often compete for labour, land and water, although they could
also have a more symbiotic relationship, in form of local food supply (Maurer, 1992; Telfer& Wall,
1996; Mitchell& Faal, 2008). Stimulating the demand for local food and beverage through tourism
demonstrates a significant opportunity for the local economy to diversify and modernize and also, to
create more employment (Bélisle, 1983). Increased agricultural employment could particularly
create sources of livelihood for poorer parts of the population (Mitchell& Faal, 2008). The OECD
27
confirms that agricultural growth is considered as more important for poverty reduction than growth
in other sectors in developing countries; depending on the scale and structure of the economy and
climatic conditions (Loayza& Raddatz, 2006, cited by Cervantes-Godoy& Dewbre, 2010). In many
Small Island Developing States local agricultural production does not increase with increasing
tourism development, however (Hemmati& Koehler, 2000). Nevertheless, in the case of the
Dominican Republic, UN data shows a steady increase in food and agricultural productivity within
the last decade (UNdata, 2011) and the OECD identified agriculture is a main contributor for
poverty reduction in the Dominican Republic (Cervantes-Godoy& Dewbre, 2010). However,
whether this increase coincides with the strong and steady rise in tourist arrivals (Oficina Nacional
de Estadística, 2011) is not proven. The (UNCTAD, 2010:15) lists several governmental actions
that could help to develop and foster locals supply chains. Some of these aspects are:

fostering the productivity of the agricultural sector and its linkages to tourism

providing small scale businesses with education and training

encouraging hotels and restaurants to source supplies locally
In the efforts to localize supply chains, the accommodation sector plays a major role as it takes up a
significant amount of tourist spending and requires resourceful supply (Wall& Mathieson, 2006).
As opposed to international transportation, hotels are more integrated into local economic networks
- or at least have the potential to be integrated. There are a multitude of issues and factors that play a
role in strengthening the linkages between tourism and agriculture. In the literature various issues
with local sourcing have been discussed. The following table (Table 3) summarizes the identified
aspects. These include the type of accommodation, tourist behavior and preferences, quality and
reliability of food, volumes and capacities, the seasonality of tourism and agriculture as well as the
competitiveness of firms and persisting mistrust and lacking communication between international
hotels and local suppliers.
28
TABLE 3: ISSUES WITH LOCAL FOOD SOURCING
TYPE OF
ACCOMMODATION
TOURIST
BEHAVIOR AND
PREFERENCES
QUALITY&
RELIABILITY
VOLUMES&
CAPACITY
SEASONALITY
COMPETITIVENESS
LACK OF
COMMUNICATION
& MISTRUST
 Size& class of a hotel change conditions for local sourcing (Mitchell& Faal, 2008:47) (ties in with debate on mass- and small scale tourism
Chapter 2.2.5) =>The larger the hotels the higher the demand for high volumes of supplies
 Complex menu structures require an established& reliable supply system (Telfer& Wall, 2000) => larger/ higher class businesses tend to rely
more on imports (Mitchell& Faal, 2008) => higher leakages
 Luxury goods often cannot be supplied locally (Hemmati& Koehler, 2000)
 Hotel development is often rapid& uncontrolled in developing countries => instant demand for high quantities of agricultural products,
which cannot be met by local suppliers (Wall& Mathieson, 2006; Lacher& Nepal, 2010)
 Food consumption patterns vary with type, nationality and food culture of tourists (Bélisle, 1983; Telfer& Wall, 2000; Torres, 2002)
o Types of tourists can range from highly organized, conservative mass tourists to flexible, adventurous& spontaneous tourists, of
which the second is more likely to consume local food (Torres, 2002)
 In the Caribbean, local meals have proven to not sell well (Bélisle, 1983); however, this may vary from destination to destination
 The need for reliability, punctuality and consistent quality and quantity of food is one of the main issues leading to reliance on imports
(Hemmati& Koehler, 2000; Mitchell& Faal, 2008)
 Local food often lacks quality& hygiene (Hemmati& Koehler, 2000; Mitchell& Faal, 2008)
o This goes along with the technological lack of processing, distributing and storing agricultural products (Mitchell& Faal, 2008)
 Large hotels require large amounts of food
 Insufficient capacities of individual farmers to increase production or a lack of a surplus in production in the local agriculture (Telfer& Wall,
2000; Wall& Mathieson, 2006)
 Physical limitations such as an unsuitable agricultural climate also play a role (Mitchell& Faal, 2008)
 The difficulty of matching supply and demand is further complicated by the seasonality of tourism& agriculture (Mitchell& Faal, 2008)
 Peak holiday season and peak harvesting times may not overlap
 The lack of adequate facilities may hinder storage
 Absurdly, locally produced food is often more expensive than imported food =>links with the issue of globalization as small scale producers
cannot make use of economies of scale (Smeral, 1998; Hemmati& Koehler, 2000; Mitchell& Faal, 2008)
 International companies often have vertical monopolies or only work with established international businesses in supply networks
(Hemmati& Koehler, 2000)
 Issues concerning contract agreements with local farmers (Bélisle, 1983; Telfer& Wall, 2000; Wall& Mathieson, 2006)
 Purchasing and payment policies of large hotels are often incongruous with operations of small suppliers depending on prepayments due to
limited budgets (Telfer& Wall, 2000) => need for more communication and more flexible negotiations (Telfer& Wall, 1996)
 Lack of communication and understanding between tourist facilities and the agricultural sector (Telfer and Wall, 1996)
 Misunderstandings and prejudices between the sectors (Mitchell and Faal, 2008)
Source: Compiled by author based on Bélisle, 1983; Smeral, 1998; Telfer& Wall, 2000; Hemmati& Koehler, 2000; Torres, 2002; Wall& Mathieson,
2006; Mitchell& Faal, 2008; Lacher& Nepal, 2010
29
In 1983 Bélisle claimed that the interrelationship of tourism and food demand is an underresearched subject and up until today there is a lack of literature on this matter. The
majority of literature found on tourism and local food sectors during this very research is
limited to the Caribbean (Telfer and Wall (2000) confirm this phenomenon). Bélisle
(1983:510-511) identified four major research gaps within the field of food and tourism:

the relationship between food imports and leakages

the impact of tourism on local food prices

the reasons why a large proportion of food is imported and not produced locally

the correlation of local/international food sourcing and the quality, size, location
and ownership of a hotel
While partial aspects of these research gaps are covered in Table 3, these claims are still
confirmed in contemporary academic literature as for example by Telfer and Wall (2000),
Wall and Mathieson (2006) or Mitchell and Ashley (2010). Filling these research gaps
would provide some clarity in the debate on leakages and help interpreting numbers in the
right context. Especially, the impact of tourism on local food prices would call the
detriment of high leakages into question. A closer investigation on this issue is needed to
identify in how far the reduction of leakage rates through increased local food sourcing is a
favourable target. However, this exceeds the scope of this thesis and needs to be researched
separately.
To sum up, this section aimed at elaborating the issues involved with local food sourcing.
The majority of problems with local food sourcing can be lead back to the aspect of
deficient economic structures in developing countries. While so far, the focus was on
explaining what leakage comprises, why it occurs and how it could potentially be
diminished, the following chapter deals with the measurement of leakage rates and the
problems involved.
2.4 APPROACHES TO MEASURE LEAKAGES
2.4.1 SCALE AND METHODS
While definition (a) and (b) generally imply the measurement of leakage at a national
level, the scale at which leakage is measured varies. Leakages are most commonly
measured at a national level, but some studies also calculate leakages at regional level (i.e.
Sandbrook, 2010). Divergently, sometimes leakage is measured at a package price basis
(i.e. Sinclair, 1991 cited in Hemmati& Koehler and in Mitchell& Ashley, 2010) and in
30
studies such as the one by the GIZ employed for this thesis, hotels are investigated in order
to determine the leakage rate of the hotel’s operations. To say which approach is
appropriate depends on the purpose of research. For calculations based on the package
price or on hotel operations macroeconomic measuring methods do not apply. However,
for measuring leakage at a national or regional scale, such methods are relevant.
There are various methods to measure tourism-related revenue and revenue leakage.
Inconsistency in leakage rates does not only arise due to definitional issues (see Chapter
2.3.1), but also due to incongruent measuring methods. While this is a very complex topic,
only four methods to measure economic impacts and thereby, leakage will be introduced
briefly: The Tourism Satellite Account (TSA), the tourism multiplier, the value chain and
the input-output analysis. The methods are investigated in regards to their applicability to
definition (a) and (b) as well as their advantages and disadvantages. Apart from the
multiplier method, the methods and their applicability are revised by Mitchell and Ashley
(2010:18) in Figure 5. Subsequent to the presented methods, the issues with measuring
leakage based on the package price paid in the tourism generating region will be
elaborated.
2.4.1.1 TOURISM SATELLITE ACCOUNTS (TSA)
According to the OECD (2010), a core contributor in the development of the tourism
satellite account concept (TSA), the TSA enjoys international recognition as being the
principal method to measure the economic impacts of tourism on a country (Weaver&
Lawton, 2002). The TSA, approved by the United Nations Statistical Commission (UNSC)
in 2000 (Theobald, 2005), can be described as
‘a unique set of inter-related tables that show the size and distribution of the
different forms of tourism consumption in a country and contributions to gross
domestic product (GDP), national income, employment and other macroeconomic
measures of a national economy’ (Frechtling 2010:136).
The TSA has two dimensions: a monetary and a non-monetary one (Weaver& Lawton,
2002). Tourism-related consumption and output, identified from the demand and supply
side, is quantified in relation to other economic sectors and thereby reveal tourism’s
contribution to a nation’s gross domestic product (Weaver& Lawton, 2002; Theobald,
2005). In this dimension ‘total tourist consumption by product type, profits and wages of
tourism-related industries, net taxes obtained from tourism, and imports of tourism-related
goods and services can also be determined’ (Weaver& Lawton, 2002:246). Employment,
arrivals and departures represent the non-financial information of the TSA. The model is
31
greatly appreciated as it includes estimates on tourist’s discretionary expenditure on goods
(UNCTAD, 2010), which many other approaches do not. The TSA has a few drawbacks
though as summarized by Weaver and Lawton (2002): the scope, the negligence of the
multiplier effect and the time gap between data recording and data release. The problems
of scope relate to the issue that TSA can only be conducted at a national level (see Figure
5) (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). For countries where tourism is agglomerated in smaller
geographic scales these areas cannot be observed individually and tourism’s contribution
may look minor in the TSA, although in respective areas it might be a vital source of
income (Sandbrook, 2010). The issue of scale in measuring and comparing leakages will
be addressed in more detail in Chapter 2.5. The second problem with TSAs is that the
multiplier effect cannot be grasped entirely as indirect effects –for example the food
purchase of a hotel restaurant– cannot be grasped (Weaver& Lawton, 2002:246). However,
other authors put forward that additional Input-Output tables are used within the TSAs to
grasp the flow of tourism expenditure throughout the economy (Frechtling, 1999 cited in
Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). Furthermore, the time gap between data recording and the
publication of data can range up to three years due to the time and effort required and the
costs involved (see Figure 5). These issues leave noteworthy flaws with the TSA.
Especially, in developing countries the establishment of accurate TSAs is burdened by data
availability and quality (Gollub et al., 2003; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). Nevertheless, this
method is depicted to the most accurate one (Weaver& Lawton, 2002; Gollub et al., 2003;
UNCTAD, 2010) and it is increasingly applied (see Figure 5) (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010).
However, the TSA alone cannot grasp leakage as according to definition (b), as it solely
accounts impacts at the destination.
2.4.1.2 DETERMINING THE TOURISM MULTIPLIER
As opposed to all other methods mentioned here, which only have a very limited focus on
indirect and induced effects (see Figure 5), the multiplier analysis is a useful tool to grasp
the full picture of economic effects of direct, indirect and induced spending. Multipliers
can be calculated for regional areas as well (Wall, 1997). However, there are not only
different types of multipliers, but also differing definitions and approaches to measure
them, which lead to confusion among impact studies (Hughes, 1994; Lejárraga&
Walkenhorst, 2007; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). According to Lejárraga and Walkenhorst
(2007:30), this variance ‘has rendered cross-country comparability of multiplier effects—
linkages and leakages—unfeasible’. Furthermore, multiplier studies in different countries
32
are broadly dispersed in time, which makes it hard to compare linkages and leakages from
country to country (Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007). To measure economic impacts of
tourism the Keynesian multiplier can be employed (Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007). It
states ‘the amount of income generated per unit of tourist expenditure’ (Lejárraga&
Walkenhorst, 2007:31). The total Keynesian multiplier, measuring the entire economic
input of tourism spending, is composed by two sub-multipliers. Whereas the direct
Keynesian multiplier measures the first-round income effects in the tourism economy per
unit of tourist spending, the indirect one quantifies how much the remaining economic
sectors profit per unit of tourist spending (Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007). Evidently, the
multiplier method can only take money that reaches the destination into account
(concurrent to definition (a)). With the Keynesian multiplier method, leakage is solely ‘the
portion that leaks into imports and pays foreign factors of production’ (Lejárraga&
Walkenhorst, 2007:31). Therefore, leakage cannot be calculated for definition (b) with this
method. Sinclair (1998 cited in Mitchell& Ashley, 2010) argues that countries may only
receive a small share of the tourism expenditure spent internationally and still, the
multiplier may appear high due to strong linkages with other economic sectors. To capture
the leakage the difference between one and the Keynesian multiplier needs to be computed
(Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007:31). As according to Lejárraga and Walkenhorst
(2007:32), the Keynesian Multiplier calculation to grasp leakage works as follows:
Total Keynesian Multiplier = Tourism’s Contribution to the entire Economy
Tourist Expenditure
Leakage = 1 - Total Keynesian Multiplier
Linkages can be captured with the income ratio multiplier, which is the ratio of the indirect
and direct Keynesian multipliers (Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007:32). It can grasp how
much income is generated in the general economy for every unit of income generated in
the tourism economy. Thereby it can grasp linkages. As according to Lejárraga and
Walkenhorst (2007:32), the ratio multiplier calculation to measure linkages corresponds to
the following:
Ratio Multiplier = Direct Keynesian Multiplier
Indirect Keynesian Multiplier
Linkage = 1 + Ratio Multiplier
33
2.4.1.3 INPUT-OUTPUT ANALYSIS (I-O MODEL)
Input-Output models employ information from national accounts data (Mitchell& Ashley,
2010). ‘Foreigners’ expenditures for hotels and restaurants, travel agencies, tour operators
and tourist guides’ are recorded as travel services exports in national balance of payments
statistics (UNCTAD, 2010:5). The I-O model can measure the size of the tourism-related
economy and its significance for the macro economy. It can also measure these figures at
subnational levels (see Figure 5) (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). With the I-O model the scope
and nature of linkages can be measured and quantified and ‘second and further round
economic effects of tourism’ can be captured (Fletcher, 1989; Mitchell& Ashley,
2010:110) and leakages in form of imports can be measured reliably (Reis& Rua, 2009).
However, like the TSA and the Value Chain Analysis, the I-O model is very technical and
cannot grasp dynamic effects (i.e. substitution effect and spending patterns) (see Figure 5)
(Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). Consequently, the I-O model cannot grasp leakage as according
to definition (b).
2.4.1.4 THE VALUE CHAIN ANALYSIS (VCA)
The ‘Value Chain Analysis is a tool that enables the identification of stakeholders along a
chain of transactions, from conception through production to consumption and after-use’
(Mitchell& Faal, 2008:2). With this analysis the key processes and stakeholders in tourism
as well as the flow of benefits can be identified along all operations, from pre-departure to
their return home (Mitchell& Faal, 2008; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). In order to achieve
this, the entire value chain is mapped and all transactions from producer to consumer are
traced; thereby inter-sectoral linkages can be indentified (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010).
Further, leakages can be traced evaluating the flow of benefits in the value chain as the
VCA examines the whole chain of transactions from the tourism generating market to the
destination region. Consequently, this method is the only method that can grasp preleakage/ structural leakage. As apparent in Figure 5 the VCA only maps the value chain for
a tourism product and not for tourism at a regional or national scale. The VCA by itself
does not reveal anything about the impact of tourism on the macro economy nor on the size
of the tourism sector (see Figure 5) (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). The usage of the VCA to
measure leakage appears to be the most contested approach as its denominator value is the
package price for a tourism product (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). As stated before, ‘some
rather dramatic claims about the leakage of the benefits of tourism from developing
34
countries’ have evolved with the use of the VCA (Mitchell& Faal, 2008:17). Mitchell and
Faal (2008:18) put forward that the VCA ‘fails to recognize the important difference
between tourism and other types of trade – namely that tourism involves people interacting
directly with the market through out-of-pocket or discretionary expenditure’.
FIGURE 5: AN OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH APPROACHES IN THE LITERATURE
Source: Adapted from Mitchell and Ashley, 2010:18
35
2.4.2 SO FAR IDENTIFIED PROBLEMS WITH CAPTURING LEAKAGE
The introduction of the methods illustrates the problems involved with the measuring of
leakage. All methods grasp different aspects. Only leakage as according to definition (a)
can be grasped by all previously discussed methods and invisible leakage (see Table 2)
cannot be measured at all. Pre-leakage/ structural leakage can only be measured by the
VCA, which in turn cannot reliably measure all facets of the maximum definition of
leakage (definition (b)) and which only has limited applicability as it is based on a tourist
product.
Therefore, it revealed that, besides the fact that it is contested what accounts as leakage,
there are different methods to calculate leakage, which are incongruent. Leakages are
measured at different scales and not only the methods differ, but also within the methods,
such as the multiplier method, divergences lead to inconsistent results (Hughes, 1994;
Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007); especially, at the regional and local level, statistical data
is either not available or not presented in the form needed for a multiplier calculation
(Hughes, 1994). Lastly, also the data basis used for measuring methods varies as ‘tourism
expenditure extends over a wide range of businesses and hence, patterns of expenditure are
often difficult to determine’ (Wall& Mathieson, 2006: 119). This issue of defining clear
boundaries to tourism as an economic activity, explained in Chapter 2.1.1, entails problems
for economic impact studies as there are incongruent understandings to what accounts as
tourism income and thus, denominator values diverge (Smith, 1994; Hemmati& Koehler,
2000; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). An example for this issue was given by Smith (1994) in
Chapter 2.2.1 illustrating the difficulty of recording spending on goods and services, which
are only partially or not designed for tourist consumption.
The so far identified problems and irregularities regarding the composition of leakage
figures are an important finding for this thesis and are summarized in Table 4 for the ease
of understanding. These problems lead to a lack of reliable and transparent empirical data,
which will be illustrated in the following section.
36
TABLE 4: IRREGULARITIES IN COMPOSING LEAKAGE FIGURES
ASPECT
PROBLEM
SOURCE
Lacking standard definitions: Definition
(a) and (b) grasp entirely different
aspects (see Chapter 2.3.1 )
See Chapter 2.3.1 for
the respective sources
of definition (a) and (b)
Diverging scales at which leakage is
measured: at a national, regional,
tourism product level
Observation by author
Scale of Measuring
Leakage
Different methods grasp
definitional aspects of leakage
different
Measuring Methods
Incongruence within
Methods
Incongruence within methods (e.g.
multiplier method – different definitions
and measuring approaches)
Hughes, 1994;
Lejárraga&
Walkenhorst, 2007;
Mitchell& Ashley, 2010
Smith, 1994; Theobald,
2005; Hemmati&
Koehler, 2000;
Mitchell& Ashley, 2010
Definiton
Data Capturing and
Resulting Denominators
Unclear boundaries to tourism as an
economic activity
=> divergence in what is recorded as
tourism income (see Chapter 2.2.1 the
example of Smith (1994))
=> not all discretionary expenditure can
be traced and recorded, especially in
developing countries
Source: Compiled by author partially based on Hughes, 1994; Smith, 1994; Hemmati& Koehler,
2000; Theobald, 2005; Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010
2.4.3 THE RESULTING LACK OF RELIABLE EMPIRICAL DATA
Mitchell and Ashley (2010:81) confirm that there is a lack of empirical data to prove
claimed leakage rates. Considering the issues with measuring leakage outlined in Table 4,
it is not surprising that leakage figures diverge widely in values. To illustrate the diverging
estimates of leakage rates, a selection of claimed percentages will be presented. As a
consequence of the lack of empirical data, leakage claims `tend to be based on very old
recycled data, which get further distorted over time’ (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010:81). In order
to gain some transparency, where possible, the author sought to trace the indicated sources
for leakage figures and tried to identify on which definitional basis the estimates were
composed and which method was employed. In the following, the vast scope of numbers
cited in the literature will be demonstrated. Beforehand, an example for the inadequate
‘recycling’ of data will be presented.
Leakage figures employed in literature are often taken from other secondary sources as the
data collection for calculating leakage is very complex and time consuming and data
37
accessibility may be an issue. One example for the above mentioned ‘recycling’ of data is
the repeated citation of an UNWTO (1995) report, which various sources found during the
research for this thesis refer to (eg. Diaz, 2001:8; Gollub et al., 2003:24; EED
TourismWatch, 2007; UNCTAD, 2010:9). However, the UNWTO report has been cited
inaccurately. In the original UNWTO (1995:54) source it is stated that there is a broad
range of types and quantities of leakage differing from 40% to 50% of the economy of
Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and less than 10% of the economy of bigger and
more diversified countries. The UNCTAD (2010:9), however, cites the UNTWO (1995)
stating that ‘the average leakage for most developing countries is between 40 and 50
percent of gross tourism earnings and between 10 and 20 percent for developed and more
diversified developing countries.’ The UNCTAD (2010:9) clearly includes ‘structural
leakage’ into the leakage definition – corresponding to definition (b). At the same time, the
UNCTAD cites the UNWTO (1995) leakage estimations in the subsequent sentence, which
are only based on the six factors listed in Chapter 2.3.1, i.e. definition (a). Hence, the
figures are not cited in the right context.
At an earlier point in time, Gollub et al. (2003:24) and the EED TourismWatch (2007) both
quoted the same numbers as the UNCTAD does in 2010 (see citation above UNCTAD,
2010:9). Gollub et al. (2003:24), quotes the UNEP as source, which in turn sourced the
information from the UNCTAD - however no reference to a particular publication or year
is given. The EED TourismWatch (2007) uses the same numbers and indicates the
UNCTAD as a source; however, also, without any reference on a particular publication or
year. As the UNCTAD (2010) refers to the UNWTO (1995) report from 1995 in their
publication in 2010 though, it may be assumed that the UNCTAD has no other source for
this information. This in turn would mean that the numbers Gollub et al. (2003:24) and the
EED TourismWatch (2007) cite, in the end, both originate from the UNWTO source from
1995 as well; however, slightly altered in content and meaning. Moreover, it needs to be
mentioned that the UNWTO (1995) states these estimations on leakage, followed by the
affirmation that more precise information is needed on this matter. In this context, the
UNWTO (1995:54) criticizes an article published in the ‘Travel and Tourism Analyst’,
which replicates the estimations of leakage for 17 different countries, but does not reveal
the underlying assumptions of what is accounted as tourism-related import and leakage.
Examples for lacking explanations on how leakage estimates are composed, i.e. what is
considered as leakage, and where they originate from, can be frequently found in the
38
literature. A number of estimated/ calculated leakage rates will be presented in the
following in order to illustrate the issue.
Going back further than two decades, estimates on leakage rates have already been uttered.
Vorlaufer (1984 cited in Maurer, 1992) stated that leakage in bigger, more diversified
economies accounts to 35% and to about 40% to 60% in small island economies. Studies in
Thailand revealed that in 1987 56% of all tourism income leaked out of the economy
(Maurer, 1992). Leakage in fully import dependent countries such as Mauritius is reported
to reach 70% to 90% (Forschungsinstitut für Fremdenverkehr, 1982 cited in Maurer,
1992). While the data is clearly outdated, the claims of leakage rates in contemporary
literature are not less inconsistent.
Hemmati and Köhler (2000:25), for example, say that common estimates of leakages are
around 60% to 75%, whereas the EED TourismWatch (2007) reports on the successful
reduction of leakage rates in Kenya from 18% in the 1960s to 12% today. In contrast,
Gollub et al. (2003:22) refer to reported tourism leakage rates that are as high as ‘85
percent for African Least Developed Countries (LDCs), 80 percent in the Caribbean, 70
percent in Thailand, and 40 percent in India’. Gollub et al. (2003:22) indicate to the United
Nations Environment Program (UNEP, n.d.) as a source for this information without any
indication to a specific publication. Investigations by the author found that the numbers
cited by the UNEP (n.d.) again originate from secondary sources. The hyperlinks on the
UNEP homepage to the original sources (e.g. Caribbean Voice or Sustainable Living) of
the leakage rates are faulty however and the origin of the numbers as well as the related
data collection methods and the underlying leakage definition cannot be identified.
However, the underlying leakage definition in the article of Gollub et al. (2003) is the
maximum leakage definition (definition (b)) and considering the high percentages it may
be assumed that the numbers are based on definition (b). Similarly, Diaz (2001:8-9) notes
that ‘observed differences between paid and received prices for developing country
tourism services (lodging, food, entertainment, etc.) suggest external leakage or preleakage levels of up to 75 percent’. This indicates the use of the VCA because the price of
a tourism product is used as denominator. Likewise, a leakage rate of 62% to 78% in
Kenya has been determined by Sinclair (1991, cited in Hemmati& Koehler, 2000 and in
Mitchell& Ashley, 2010) for 14-night beach-only holiday to Kenya in 1990. Considering
that EED TourismWatch (2007) reports on leakage rates of 12% in Kenya, the VCA leads
to a significantly higher leakage result. Sandbrook (2010) and Mitchell and Ashley (2010)
criticize the use of the package price as a denominator, and thus, criticize the use of the
39
VCA for leakage calculations. Mitchell and Ashley (2010:82) depict Sinclair’s approach to
measure leakage as ‘misinterpretation’ because the inclusion of pre-leakage, in particular
flight prices, as well as the exclusion of tourist’s out of pocket spending rockets leakage
rates out of proportion. The money visitors spend in the destination demonstrate a major
financial inflow, which Mitchell and Ashley (2007) estimate to be around a third of total
holiday spending – a third which is most likely to not involve any major further leakages
(Mitchell& Faal, 2008; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). Mitchell and Faal (2008) sourced their
estimation on discretionary expenditure from large scale surveys interrogating tourists on
their spending behaviour conducted for a Tourism Master Plan for the Gambia. However,
of the methods introduced earlier, only the TSA includes reliable estimates on the tourist
expenditure on non-tourism-related goods or services at the destination (UNCTAD, 2010).
In contrast, Lejárraga and Walkenhorst (2007) report significantly smaller leakage figures.
They calculated the average direct and indirect Keynesian multipliers for 151 countries
grouped by income level and region based on data by the World Travel and Tourism
Council. As the leakage proportion is calculated with the Keynesian Multiplier (see
Chapter 2.4.1.2), which indicates that leakage is the portion that leaks into imports and
pays foreign factors of production, the underlying definition of their research corresponds
to definition (a). As Lejárraga and Walkenhorst (2007:31) state ‘the figure portrays a clear
association between leakages and the level of income: OECD countries exhibit the lowest
leakages, while low-income countries’ tourism is characterized by high levels of leakages.’
Looking at Figure 6, one can identify that on average the highest leakage would account to
38.3% in low-income countries. By region, the highest leakage occurs in Sub-Saharan
Africa where 38.5% of tourism income leaks out of the economy.
To sum up, cited leakage rates range between 10% and 90% and are often based on
secondary sources. Furthermore, the leakage rates have different underlying definitions and
the origin and data collection methods are often unclear. However, more leakage claims
tend to be based on the leakage definition (b). As this broad range of numbers show,
consistent measuring and standard definitions are needed in order to allow any assessment,
comparison, or conclusion and to avoid unsubstantiated ‘dramatic claims about the leakage
of the benefits of tourism from developing countries’ (Mitchell and Faal, 2008:17).
Sandbrook (2010:126) considers a progress in the issue of leakage measurement as vital to
the debate on tourism’s potential to help the eradication of poverty and even goes that far
to say that ‘the real significance of leakage rates has yet to be discovered.’ This claim
justifies the aim of this thesis. As Sandbrook argues, many leakage studies employ flawed
40
methods and use unsuitable, or more neutrally termed ‘varying’, data to compute leakages.
This issue of variance is also reflected in the diverging definitions of leakage.
Up until this point of the thesis, problems involving the definition, composition and
measuring of leakage have been identified. In the following chapter, the problems relating
to the analysis and interpretation of leakage will be determined in order to finally draw
conclusions on the significance of leakage rates as an indicator for the economic
performance of tourism in developing countries.
FIGURE 6: LEAKAGE IN RELATION TO DIRECT AND INDIRECT EFFECTS
Source: Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007:33
41
2.5 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF LEAKAGE RATES
While so far, the focus was on the definition, composition and measurement of leakage,
this section deals with the significance of leakage. Sandbrook (2010) and Mitchell and
Ashley (2007; 2010) represent the key sources for this section, as these are the only
identified publications, which touch on problems involved with interpreting leakage
figures. The first part of this chapter deals with the lacking contextualization of leakage
rates, which complicates the suitable interpretation of leakage figures. This issue occurs
irrespectively of diverging definitions and inconsistent approaches to measure leakage. The
second part will investigate the significance and relevance of leakage as according to the
literature.
2.5.1 NEGLECTED ASPECTS IN THE INTERPRETATION OF LEAKAGE RATES
The interpretation of leakage figures is an important aspect because quoted leakage rates
usually serve as an argument to back up claims about issues with tourism in developing
countries. Clearly, leakage rates always have a purpose in the line of argumentation;
however, a lacking contextualization of leakage rates can be observed in the literature. To
begin with, the previously identified issue that leakage rates lack explanations in regards to
the underlying definition and measuring methods impedes the adequate interpretation of
leakage rates. Irrespectively of the composition of the leakage figure however, the
negligence of economic scale and the failure to contrast retained revenue to other local
sources of income (Sandbrook, 2010) often deter purposeful and constructive conclusions
on cited leakage rates. These two factors will be further elaborated in the following.
The first factor concerning the interpretation is the issue of scale, which refers to two
aspects. The aspect Sandbrook (2010:132) criticizes is that leakage studies typically use a
scale of analysis, which is too broad to be useful in understanding the importance of
leakage in areas visited by tourists. He emphasizes that a host economy can range from a
little village to an entire country and that in some countries tourism is agglomerated in
small areas and big parts of the country remain untouched from tourism. Rural areas are
currently considered as high priority by development practitioners (Ellis and Freeman,
2005 cited in Sandbrook, 2010) and measuring leakage at a national scale does not
correspond to the trend of alleviating poverty at the local level (e.g. Community Based
Tourism (Sandbrook, 2010)). The second aspect relating to scale, is the failure to evaluate
leakage rates in the context of the economic capacity of a destination. Small island states or
42
small countries (e.g. Singapore or The Gambia) have such small economies that the output
of the economy often cannot meet the tourism-related demand for products and services;
especially, in mass tourism destinations (UNWTO, 2004). Wall 1996 (cited in Wall&
Mathieson, 2006:113) particularly emphasizes the problem of limited capacity of small
economies and argues that it is only plausible that small economies need to source supply
externally by importing.
The second factor regarding the interpretation of leakage rates is the failure to consider
leakage rates in relation to other sources of income in the host economies (Sandbrook,
2010). Leakages say little about the significance of retained income (Sandbrook, 2010) as
they are usually just quoted as a percentage without further elaboration. Leakage rates are
described as a problem and investigations to explore whether there are potential sources of
income, which would benefit the country more than tourism fail to materialize (Sandbrook,
2010). The retained revenue needs to be compared as a number, not as percentage, to other
sources of income of sectors that are available in the respective area. These other income
sources are often limited as Sandbrook (2010) shows with his example: Sandbrook
conducted research on leakages in communities surrounding a national park in Uganda and
although it revealed that only 25% of the tourism profits are retained, the residual revenue
from tourism is greater than the sum of all other revenue sources in the area combined
(Sandbrook, 2010:124). Sandbrook (2010:133) even goes that far to say that his study ‘will
affect upcoming research into leakage, because without considering retained revenue in the
local economic context, leakage rates are a poor indicator of the significance of tourism to
the host economy.’ Further, he states that
‘this finding seriously undermines the critical perspective on leakage and tourism
because it demonstrates that high levels of leakage do not necessarily negate the
potential of tourism as a tool for development in poor, rural areas of developing
countries’ (Sandbrook, 2010:133).
To sum up, three main issues occurring in the interpretation of leakage have been
identified: The lack of transparency, the lack of placing leakage rates into its economic
context and the lack of comparison to alternative sources of income. This important finding
has been outlined in Table 5 for clarification. These factors need to be considered in order
to evaluate the significance of a leakage figure. Mitchell and Ashley (2007) expose two
dangers with high leakage rates without sufficient contextualization. For one, such high
leakage rates appear discouraging and may urge policy makers to focus on other, less
prosperous economic alternatives. More importantly though, high leakages deter form the
43
actual issue and may ‘lead tourism policy-makers to focus on plugging ‘leakages’ to
external economies, instead of the more productive avenue of opening up linkages within
their economy’ (Mitchell& Ashley, 2007:2). In the following, first conclusions on the
significance of leakage as an economic indicator will be derived from the literature.
TABLE 5: PROBLEMS WITH THE INTERPRETATION OF LEAKAGE FIGURES
ASPECT
Transparency
Context
Comparison
PROBLEM
SOURCE
Lacking explanations for how leakage was
estimated/calculated when citing leakage
rates impedes an adequate interpretation
of data
The lack of considering leakage in context
to the economic scale and potential
impedes
drawing
conclusions
on
unexhausted potential to reduce leakage
as well as the significance of leakage
Wall, 1996 cited in
Wall& Mathieson,
2006; Sandbrook, 2010
The lack of comparing retained revenue to
alternative sources of income available
hinders evaluating the significance of
tourism in the respective area
Sandbrook, 2010
Source: Compiled by author partially based on Wall, 1996 cited in Wall& Mathieson, 2006;
Sandbrook, 2010
2.5.2 THE RELEVANCE OF LEAKAGE RATES
There are only few direct statements in the literature on the significance of leakage. As
Sandbrook (2010:134) puts forward
‘reducing leakage where feasible will always be desirable for host communities, but
where alternative sources of income are scarce, the significance of retained revenue
should not be underestimated.’
It becomes apparent, that the economic relevance of tourism elaborated at an earlier stage
of this thesis (see Chapter 2.2.3) is not reflected at all in a leakage rate. Furthermore,
leakage rates do not expose anything about the income distribution of retained revenue and
its significance for the local population (Sandrook, 2010). No potential solutions for
structural leakage/pre-leakage have been derived from the literature. In contrast, it is
depicted as a characteristic of the structure of the tourism industry (UNCTAD, 2010),
which implies that little can be done to change it. For that reason, the significance and
44
constructiveness of leakage as according to definition (b) is questionable. Mitchell and
Ashley (2010) have a strong opinion on the significance of leakage and state that ‘it is
another example of how loose and conflicting terms lead to claims that are not useful for
policy but obfuscate important development choices.’ They even go that far to say that
‘leakage is not a helpful concept’ (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010:79). This statement can only be
confirmed to a limited extent. Without questioning its relevance and meaning, the leakage
effect in tourism is discussed in various United Nations reports such as the UNCTAD
(2010), the UNWTO (1995) and the UNEP (n.d.) and various other academic sources
(Hemmati& Koehler, 2000; Diaz, 2001; Gollub et al., 2003; Lejárraga& Walkenhorst,
2007; Page& Connell, 2008). This suggests that leakage is not irrelevant in the discussion
on tourism’s economic impacts in developing countries.
2.6 CONCLUSION ON LITERATURE
To sum up, a number of problems regarding the composition of leakage figures and its
interpretation result from the reviewed literature. The literature review covered four main
themes: Tourism and its economic relevance in developing countries, the leakage effect in
tourism, approaches to measure leakage and the significance of leakage figures.
Firstly, the discussion on tourism and its economic impacts in developing countries
revealed that tourism is an industry with unclear boundaries, which is affecting the
accuracy of economic impact studies (Hughes, 1994). The economic relevance of tourism
in developing countries has been outlined in order to contextualize the discussion on
leakages. While drawbacks of tourism lead economic development exist, (Britton, 1982;
Maurer, 1992; Page& Connell, 2006), the tourism industry has been identified as a major
indispensible export industry for the majority of developing countries (WTO, 2002; Torres,
2002; Roe et al., 2004; Lipman, 2005; UNCTAD, 2010). Regarding forms of mass and
small scale tourism, generalizations on the related economic impacts and leakage proved to
be based on insufficient evidence (Telfer& Wall, 2000; Weaver& Lawton, 2002)
Furthermore, low-leakage tourism can also equate to low-income tourism (Diaz, 2001) and
generally, all forms of mass and niche tourism have the potential to be sustainable
(UNWTO, 2004). Reviewing definitions of leakage in the literature revealed that there is
confusion in the understanding of leakage and a minimum and a maximum definition of
leakage was deducted. In short, these definitions depict the following:
45
Definition (a): the loss of money that reaches the destination’s economy but cannot be
retained (UNWTO, 1995; Hemmati& Koehler, 2000; Lejárraga&
Walkenhorst,2007,
Mitchell&
Faal,
2008;
Page&
Connell,
2008;
Sandbrook, 2010; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010)
Definition (b): definition (a) plus the pre-departure spending that never even reaches
the destination’s economy (Diaz, 2001; Gollub et al., 2003; UNCTAD,
2010)
The literature identified that increasingly globalized operations (Ahunwan, 2003; Case&
Fair, 2004; Dwyer, 2005; UNCTAD, 2010) lead to increased foreign investment and
operations, which developing countries are dependent on (Wall& Mathieson, 2006;
Harrison, 2001) due to their deficient economic structures (Bull, 1995; Weaver& Lawton,
2002; UNCTAD, 2010). Foreign investment and operations however lead to leakage. The
investigation on the relationship of linkages and leakages revealed that arguments in favour
of fusing tourism into the local economy outweigh claims against fostering linkages to
other economic sectors. Linkages can only reduce leakage as according to definition (a). It
revealed that the majority of problems with local food sourcing can be lead back to the
aspect of deficient economic structures in developing countries (Bélisle, 1983; Telfer&
Wall, 2000; Wall& Mathieson, 2006; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). Various approaches to
measure leakages have been critically reviewed and problems and irregularities with
capturing leakage were deducted from all previously discussed aspects: the definitional
issue of leakage, the diverging scale of measuring leakage, different measuring methods,
incongruence within methods and issues with capturing data leading to inconsistent
denominators (see Table 4). The resulting lack of reliable and congruent empirical data has
been illustrated followed by neglected aspects in the interpretation of leakage rates.
Lacking transparency of underlying definitions and measuring methods, the failure to place
leakage rates into the economic context of the destination as well as the lack of comparing
retained revenue with other sources of income demonstrate the neglected considerations
concerning the interpretation of leakage (see Table 5). Finally, first conclusions on the
relevance of leakage rates as an indicator for the economic performance of tourism in
developing countries were drawn. The identified irregularities in the composition of
leakage (see Table 4) and the lacking contextualization of leakage rates (see Table 5)
diminish the meaningfulness of leakage. Although reducing leakage will always be a
desirable target for host economies, leakage rates alone prove to be of little significance for
46
evaluating the economic performance of tourism in a developing country (Sandbrook,
2010; Mitchell& Ashley, 2007). Nevertheless, leakage receives a considerable amount of
attention without its relevance being questioned (eg. UNWTO, 1995; Diaz et al., 2001;
Gollub et al., 2003; UNCTAD, 2010; UNEP, n.d).
47
3. CASE STUDY
3.1 THE INTERACTION OF ALL-INCLUSIVE RESORTS IN THE
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC WITH THE LOCAL ECONOMY
In order to investigate further into linkages of tourism to local food production sectors, an
exemplary case will be presented. The economic impacts of All-Inclusive hotels tie in with
the debate on mass and small scale tourism and related leakage rates (see Chapter 2.2.5).
Investigating the supply chains of an All-Inclusive hotel is an efficient approach to
transparently capture the origin of almost all food and beverage consumed by a tourist. The
hotels presented in this case study are both four-star All-Inclusive resorts. The data has
been collected by the GIZ in 2006 with the purpose to analyze the interaction of major
holiday resorts with the local economy in the Dominican Republic. The data collection
process at the hotels involved the examination of relevant business data including random
interviews with staff from different departments and levels as well as selected suppliers in
the region to confirm the origins of the agricultural produce. Relevant extracts from the
results have been selected and prepared for the purpose of this thesis. The additional hotel
data in Table 6 and 7 originates from the original research report, which cannot be attached
for data protection reasons. Hotel names and their location have been asked to remain
anonymous; however, it is relevant to mention that hotel I belongs to a major international
hotel chain. The raw data utilized for the preparation of Figures 7, 8 and 9 for hotel I and
Figures 10, 11 and 12 for hotel II is attached in Appendix B and C. To contextualize the
findings, a brief summary on tourism in the Dominican Republic will be given.
3.2 TOURISM IN THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC
The Caribbean is the most tourism-dependent region in the world (Padilla& McElroy,
2005; Clayton, 2009). The Dominican Republic, leading region for All-inclusive tourism
(Lengefeld, 2007; Suchanek, 2000), is the second largest country in the Caribbean and
takes up a significant share of this tourism (Padilla& McElroy, 2005). Tourism represents
its main source of foreign exchange earnings (Suchanek, 2000) and has experienced
significant growth – from 1990 to 2010, tourism income has increased fivefold (Oficina
Nacional de Estadística, 2011) and tourist arrivals (air arrivals only) came close to four
million (3.980.000) in 2009 (UNdata, 2011). The following section represents the findings
of the data collected by the GIZ.
48
3.3 FINDINGS
The following tables and charts present relevant findings of the investigation of the two
resorts. All facts and figures presented are sourced from the data collected by the GIZ in
2006. Table 6 and Table 7 summarize the basic information for hotel I and hotel II
respectively. Figure 7 and Figure 10 show the import propensity in relation to total
expenditure per product category. Figure 8 and Figure 11 illustrate the share of imports in
percentage without relation to the expenditure on the related product categories. Figure 9
and Figure 12 reveal an overall expenditure comparison between local and imported goods.
Both resorts show a relatively low propensity to import goods with less than 25% of total
expenditure being spent on imports (see Figures 9 and 12). Hotel I left more than 1.5
million US$ for food and beverage in the local economy in 2005, whereas Hotel II spent
just over 1 million US$ for consumer goods in the local economy as it has about 120
rooms less than hotel I. The hotels did not reveal the same amount of information;
unfortunately, hotel I did not disclose any data on the procurement of regular consumer
goods.
49
TABLE 6: BASIC INFORMATION HOTEL I
HOTEL I - BASIC INFORMATION 2005
Number of Rooms
532
Occupancy Rate
70%
Number of Guests
260.002
Number of Fixed Employees
509
Total Expenditure for Food and Beverage
US$ 1.950.104
Total Expenditure for Imported Food and Beverage
US $418.653
Total Expenditure for Local Food and Beverage
US $1.531.451
Source: Compiled by author based on GIZ data (see Appendix B)
Import Proportion of Total Annual Expenditure per
Product Category - Hotel I (2005)
Product Category
Meat
Fish
Seafood
Fruit and
Vegetables
Potatoes
Rice
Canned food
Alcoholic Beverages
Non-Alcoholic
Beverages
Coffee
$0
$100.000 $200.000 $300.000 $400.000 $500.000 $600.000 $700.000
Annual Expenditure in US$
Share of Annual Expenditure spent on Imports in US$
FIGURE 7: IMPORT PROPORTION OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURE PER PRODUCT CATEGORY
HOTEL I
50
Percentage of Imports per Product Category - Hotel I
(2005)
Product Category
10%
Meat
70%
Fish
Seafood
0%
Fruit and Vegetables
0%
100%
Potatoes
20%
Rice
70%
Canned food
20%
Alcoholic Beverages
20%
Non-Alcoholic…
0%
Coffee
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Percentage of Annual Expenditure
Percentage of Annual Expenditure spent on Imports
FIGURE 8: PERCENTAGE OF IMPORTS PER PRODUCT CATEGORY HOTEL I
FIGURE 9: EXPENDITURE COMPARISON BETWEEN LOCAL AND IMPORTED FOOD AND
BEVERAGE HOTEL I
51
TABLE 7: BASIC INFORMATION HOTEL II
HOTEL II- BASIC INFORMATION 2005
Number of Rooms
404
Occupancy Rate
76 %
Number of Guests
231.724
Number of fixed Employees
534
Total Expenditure for Consumer Goods
US$ 1.503.886,50
Expenditure on Imported Consumer Goods
US$ 353.757,72
Expenditure on Local Consumer Goods
US$ 1.150.128,78
Total Expenditure on Salaries (Before Tax)
US$ 1.810.507,92
Salaries to Local Employees (Before Tax)
US$ 1.473.036,20
Salaries to Foreign Employees (Before Tax)
US$ 337.471,72
Source: Compiled by author based on GIZ data (see Appendix C)
Import Proportion of Total Annual Expenditure per
Product Category - Hotel II (2005)
Product Category
Meat
Fish
Seafood
Potatoes
Rice
Canned Food
Alcoholic Beverages
Cosmetic Products
Textiles (eg.towels, sheets)
Toilet Paper
Cleaning Utensils
Office Paper
$0,00
$100.000,00 $200.000,00 $300.000,00 $400.000,00 $500.000,00
Share of Annual Expenditure spent on Imports in US$
FIGURE 10: IMPORT PROPORTION OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURE PER PRODUCT
CATEGORY HOTEL II
52
Percentage of Imports per Product Category - Hotel II
(2005)
Product Category
6%
Meat
60%
Fish
21%
Seafood
0%
Potatoes
0%
15%
Rice
0%
Canned Food
15%
Alcoholic Beverages
Cosmetic Products
100%
Textiles (eg.towels, sheets)
100%
Toilet Paper
100%
0%
Cleaning Utensils
100%
Office Paper
0%
20%
40%
60%
Percentage of Annual Expenditure spent on Imports
80%
100%
Percentage of Annual Expenditure
FIGURE 11: PERCENTAGE OF IMPORTS PER PRODUCT CATEGORY HOTEL II
FIGURE 12: EXPENDITURE COMPARISON BETWEEN LOCAL AND IMPORTED GOODS FOR
HOTEL II
53
Regarding food, for both hotels the highest spending on imports occurs in the purchase of
fish, as hotel I imports 70% of all fish purchases and hotel II imports 60%. The original
research report from the GIZ revealed that the main reason for the import of fish is price it is cheaper to import fish. Vegetables and fruit are solely sourced locally, which indicates
high agricultural activity. With hotel II it showed however, that the supplier of the hotel
imports asparagus, kiwis, grapes, peaches, plums and apples, which is not reflected in
Figures 10 and 11. It can be observed that the hotels import different goods; while hotel I
buys and imports a significant share of canned food (70%), hotel II spends less than half of
the amount on canned food, which it procures entirely local. While hotel I imports
potatoes, hotel II procures them in the local economy. Reasons why hotel I imports
potatoes are not given; as evident from looking at hotel II, potatoes are available in the
local economy. Both hotels import a proportion of rice – hotel I imports 20% of the
purchased rice and hotel II only imports 7%. Meat represents the largest expenditure for
both hotels. Hotel I imports 10% and hotel II 6% of total meat purchased (see Table 8 and
Table 11), which looks small as a percentage, but represents a significant amount of money
(see Table 7 and 10). Looking at hotel II, it becomes apparent that with other goods such as
towels, sheets, toilet paper or cosmetic products, the reliance on imports is higher.
Furthermore, about 80% of the wages paid by hotel II go to local employees and under
20% to foreign ones working in the Dominican Republic.
To term the overall result in leakage rates, the investigated hotels show an overall leakage
rate of 21% and 23% respectively in the procurement of consumer goods (predominantly
food and beverage). However, the findings do not reveal whether - and if so, how much of
the profit margin earned by the hotels is repatriated.
54
4. METHODOLOGY
This chapter aims at explaining and justifying the research methods used for the clear
purpose of investigating the significance of leakage as an economic indicator. In the
following, the research methods will be presented, followed by the elaboration of
challenges and limitations.
4.1 RESEARCH METHODS
The main data collection method employed in this research is based on secondary research
by critically analyzing the literature. As this thesis seeks to investigate and highlight
problems with generating reliable and comparable data of leakage, the additional creation
of data measuring leakage rates in selected regions or countries would not be of much
relevance for the research aim. Further, it would have been almost impossible regarding
the time and resources available for this research project. However, in order to obtain a
mix of methods and to illustrate the issue from different angles two supplementary
approaches have been included that will be contrasted with the literature. As a qualitative
component, three interviews serve to present experts’ perceptions and opinions on the
research topic. Also, a short case study based on secondary data was presented in the
previous chapter. In the following, employed secondary and primary research methods will
be presented.
4.1.1 SECONDARY RESEARCH: LITERATURE AND SECONDARY DATA
The secondary research for this thesis comprises the review and analysis of literature and
the utilization of secondary data collected by the GIZ for the case study. For the literature
component, a wide range of sources from academic and non-academic literature has been
employed. The author sought to draw on a reasonable distribution of old and recent
literature. Journal articles, books, reports from international organizations such as the
United Nations as well as from non-governmental organizations (e.g. Overseas
Development Institute) have been used to elaborate the current stage of research on
leakages. The comprehensive, in-depth review of literature constitutes the central part of
this thesis, as it is relevant for the fulfillment of all five objectives, and should be weighted
higher in relevance than the primary research findings or the case study. It builds a
foundation for the matter, highlights definitional issues and illustrates problematic aspects.
55
For the literature review, a top-down approach is used as general information is more and
more narrowed down to the core subject of the thesis – leakage (Saunders et al., 2009).
Building on the academic literature, a short case study of the Dominican Republic has been
incorporated. The secondary data employed for this example case has been originally
collected by the GIZ Sector Project “Tourism and Sustainable Development” in 2006 with
the target to analyze the interaction of major holiday resorts with the local economy.
Therefore, the collection purpose corresponds to the purpose of this dissertation. However,
only relevant parts of the data have been prepared, recalculated and illustrated for
comparability.
4.1.2 PRIMARY RESEARCH: EXPERT INTERVIEWS
In order to explore the significance of leakage rates as an economic indicator in developing
countries, expert opinions were gathered in form of interviews. In order to get perspectives
from various angles, one expert from a NGO (EED TourismWatch), one from a consulting
firm (Mascontour) and one from a tour operator (TUI Deutschland) have been chosen
respectively as interview partners. 1 More interviews were planned; however, potential
interviewees did not participate due to a lack of time or a lack of background knowledge
on the issue. The three interviews were conducted in a non-standardized manner and have
been held on a one-to-one basis via telephone. Non-standardized interviews can be semior unstructured and are referred to as qualitative research interviews (Saunders et al., 2009;
Kings, 2004 cited in Saunders et al., 2009). As the topic of this thesis is quite complex, a
list of themes (see Table 8) and questions helped to structure the conversation and to
ensure that relevant issues are covered (Saunders et al., 2009). This approach corresponds
to semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured interviews allow revealing the reasons for
the interviewee’s attitudes and opinions and permit that interviewees can explain and build
on their responses and for the conversation to be led to aspects that the interviewer had not
considered (Saunders et al., 2009). This allows adding or omitting questions during the
conversation (Saunders et al., 2009). As according to Saunders et al. (2009:321) data
obtained from non-standardized interviews place more emphasis on exploring the ‘why’
than the ‘what’. In this case it was relevant to get the opinions of experts in the field. The
design of the questions has been aligned to core problems identified in the literature as well
1
All interviews were held in German
56
as on aspects the author considered as relevant to accomplish the objectives. Some
questions have been slightly adapted to the professional context of the interviewees. This
particularly applies to the TUI interview, as a tour operator disposes of a bigger field of
intervention regarding the reduction of leakages. Six to nine questions were predefined and
the interviews took between 25 and 45 minutes. The predefined questions/themes and their
purpose and link to the objectives are summarized in Table 8.
57
TABLE 8: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AND LINK TO OBJECTIVES
QUESTION
QUESTION POSED
TO
AIM AND REASONING

In how far have you been involved with the topic „leakage” in
your field of work? / What do you know about the topic
„leakage” so far?
EED
Mascontour
TUI
How would you define leakage and what do you account as
part of a leakage rate? / What does leakage mean in your
definition?
 If applicable definition (a) and/or (b) was mentioned
EED
Mascontour
TUI

Why do you think that with tourism it is often criticized that
the destinations do not profit enough while leakage in other
industrial sectors is often significantly higher?
EED
Mascontour
TUI

In how far do you think is the degree of a leakage rate at a
destination dependent on the extent and type of tourism?
 If applicable examples such as All-Inclusive, CBT, niche
tourism, backpacker tourism were given
EED
Mascontour

The All-Inclusive concept is particularly subject of criticism –
would you say that with this form of tourism less money can
be retained in the country?
What do leakage rates itself reveal on the economic
performance of tourism at a destination?
Where do you see the main potential to reduce leakage?



TUI

EED
Mascontour
TUI
EED
Mascontour
TUI

58
To get an idea of the involvement of the
interviewee with the topic (important for the
choice and order of following questions)
Reveals the relevance and significance of
leakage
To obtain perceptions of leakage and its
definition
To find out whether definition (a) or (b) finds
more approval among the experts
Reveals the relevance and significance of
leakage
Seeking for an explanation why there is such a
debate on leakage in tourism
To identify the perceptions on different types
of tourism and the perceived degree of
leakage involved - In particular in regards to
All-Inclusive tourism as TUI and Mascontour
have been involved with research in the field
of All-Inclusive resorts and leakage
 Qualified and relevant arguments
possible as interviewees can back up their
claims with facts
To identify the perceived significance and
relevance of leakage and reasons for their
appraisal
To add different aspects to the findings from
the literature and from different
organizational backgrounds
LINK TO
OBJECTIVE
Objective 5
Objective 1
Objective 2
Objective 5
Objective 2
Objective 5
Objective 3
Where do you see the main difficulty in measuring and
comparing leakage?
In how far do you think is TUI, as the biggest tour operator in
Europe, capable of influencing to what extent developing
countries profit from tourism?
Do you have an overview from where your hotels obtain their
consumer goods (food and beverage)? Are there standards?
Does TUI attach importance to local value creation?
Looking at your webpage, it is striking that ecological and social
sustainability offers are dominant. Are the three pillars of
sustainability equally considered? In how far do you
communicate your efforts in towards economic sustainability to
the public?
Mascontour
TUI

TUI


TUI

TUI
Source: Author
59
To add aspects to the findings from the
literature
To add aspects from the perspective of a tour
operator, who has the biggest sphere of
practical action in terms of reducing leakage.
To reveal the significance of economic
sustainability and leakage reduction in the
corporate social responsibility efforts of a tour
operator
To reveal the significance of economic
sustainability and leakage reduction in the
corporate social responsibility efforts of a tour
operator
Objective 4
Objective 3
Objective 3
Objective 5
4.2 LIMITATIONS AND BIAS
A number of significant limitations arise with the research topic of this dissertation. This is
partially due to the lack of research on leakage, the lack of reliable data measuring leakage
and the impracticality for the author to gather representative primary research findings that
would allow generalization.
Some sources in the secondary research may not be official academic sources. However, the
debate on leakages is strongly centered within non-governmental organizations or other
associations dealing with tourism and tourism impacts and campaigning for more sustainable
tourism in developing countries. The lack of academic research on this issue may be led back
to the insufficiency of reliable data available. The increased reliance on sources from the
Overseas Development Institute (e.g. Mitchell& Ashley, 2010) and Sandbrook (2010) may be
prominent, in particular in Chapter 2.5, but can be justified by the distinct lack of
investigation on the issue of the interpretation and significance of leakage in academic
literature.
The macroeconomic context of the issue discussed limits the application of primary research
for a student research project as leakages can only be traced by national or regional statistics.
Although, investigating the supply chains of All-Inclusive hotels may not be representing the
focal point of the researched literature and research question, it was the only possibility of
integrating real data into this research. The case study is only an example and no
generalizations on the leakages and linkages of All-Inclusive hotels or general hotel supply
chains can be drawn from this illustration.
Similarly, the interviews only allow the demonstration of standpoints and opinions, but are no
valid source to confirm or reject key statements deducted from the literature. The manner in
which the interviewer interacts with the interviewee and in which the questions are asked
affects the data that is collected (Silverman, 2007 cited in Saunders et al., 2009). The author
ensured a neutral and unbiased manner of asking questions; however, with semi-structured
interviews, a conversation/ dialogue evolves and an unbiased conversation can barely be
ensured, which affects the validity of the data collected. At stages the interviewer
spontaneously added information from the literature in order to get a direct opinion on issues,
to steer the conversation more to the core issues or to enhance the quality of the conversation.
Further, after the first interview, some questions have been rephrased slightly and the
conversation was explicitly limited to economic impacts in advance in order to avoid off-topic
discussions. This should have been done for the first interview already and thus, impairs the
quality of the first interview. As well, one interviewee requested an outline of themes
60
discussed in order to prepare for the interview. These factors may have influenced the
responses of the interviewees. The author assured the interviewees that, although the thesis is
written for the GIZ, the research is carried out in an unbiased manner. However, as the
interviewees all know the standpoint of the GIZ on this topic, it may have affected their
answers or attitudes.
Additionally, the translation of the questions from German to English for the analysis may
affect the originality of the deliberate wording and phrasing. For example, in German leakage
[Sickerrate] also refers to the trickle-down effect, i.e. the proportion of income that ‘trickles
down to the poor’, which was mentioned by all three interviewees.
Lastly, this thesis solely focuses on the economic impacts of tourism; however one may
rightfully argue that tourism impacts on a destination should always be considered taking all
three pillars of sustainability, being social, ecological and economical factors, into
consideration. Where the economic benefit might be high, the ecological or social impacts
may be intolerably disastrous. Therefore, conclusions and recommendations of this piece of
work are only applicable from an economic viewpoint.
61
5. DISCUSSIONS OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY RESEARCH
FINDINGS
This chapter presents and discusses the primary research findings and weighs the opinions of
interviewees and the findings from the case study against the reviewed literature. Therefore, all
findings are brought together and analyzed in this chapter.
The interviews aimed at exploring the following aspects: The definitional problem with
leakage, its relevance in the interviewees’ field of work and as an economic indicator, the
relevance of type and extent of tourism in the debate on leakage and potential approaches to
reduce leakage. Further, the interviews also sought to explain why leakages in tourism are such
a frequently discussed issue. Problems with measuring, comparing and interpreting leakage
data have been touched on, too, but not in the detail the literature discusses the issue.
The first interview has been conducted with Sabine Minninger, who works for EED
TourismWatch as consultant for climate change, disaster prevention and tourism. EED
TourismWatch is an information service of the Church Development Service2 campaigning for
sustainable tourism, which regularly provides and reports background information about issues
concerning tourism in developing countries. The EED itself is an association of the Protestant
Churches in Germany acting in the field of development work. The second interview has been
carried out with Matthias Beyer, managing partner and senior consultant of Mascontour.
Mascontour is an international consulting firm working in the fields of tourism, regional
development and organizational consulting and has collected the data employed for the case
study in this thesis on behalf of the GIZ. Lastly, Christian Carlé, expert for sustainability
management3 from TUI Deutschland – the leading tour operator in Europe – has been chosen
as interview partner. As the TUI Travel PLC, parent company of TUI Deutschland, 4 owns
entire parts of the tourism value chain from tour operators, travel agencies to transport facilities
(airlines and cruise ships) and hotels, it is the interview partner with the biggest sphere of
action in terms of reducing leakage.
2
German: Evangelischer Entwicklungsdienst e.V. (EED)
Original job title: ‘Referent Nachhaltigkeitsmanagement’
4
For the ease of understanding TUI Deutschland will subsequently only be referred to as TUI
3
62
5.1 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF LEAKAGE IN PRACTICAL FIELDS OF WORK
Firstly, the relevance of leakage in the interviewees’ field of work should reveal the practical
significance and relevance of leakage rates contributing to the achievement of Objective 5. At
the same time, the level of involvement with leakages is important with regard to their views
and perceptions on following aspects of this analysis, which is why this matter is picked up
incipiently.
Beyer states that national leakage rates are only of minor relevance in practice. However, at a
smaller scale leakage rates prove to receive more attention among the interviewees. For
example, Beyer has carried out research investigating retained revenue of All-Inclusive hotels
on behalf of the GIZ, which implicitly involves the leakage effect at a tourism facility scope.
Minninger herself touched on the issue of leakage and its significance during her research in
the south pacific and criticized that not even the president from French Polynesia or Fiji knows
how high the leakages are for their country. TUI has also been involved in studies dealing with
leakage, in particular in the context of All-Inclusive hotels, partially also in cooperation with
the GIZ. In the interview with Carlé it revealed, too, that the aspect of leakage is embedded in
various aspects of sustainability. While tour operators predominantly promote social and
environmentally benign efforts, leakage is often implicitly involved. For example, TUI is
promoting regional, ecological food as environmental effort and training and educating local
workforce as social engagement. At the same time, these efforts help to reduce leakage by
relying on local supplies and workforce – aspects that will be further elaborated in the context
of diminishing leakage.
In the literature, the relevance of leakage for practical fields of work is not directly discussed.
However, Mitchell and Ashley (2007; 2010) repeatedly refer to policy makers, who may base
their decisions on indicators such as leakage rates. However, Mitchell and Ashley (2007) fear
that high leakage rates appear discouraging and may urge policy makers to focus on other
economic alternatives than tourism. Moreover, they note that high leakages deter from the
actual internal issues of a destination and cause policy makers to focus on external leakage
reduction, which they regard as less productive than the internal one. This indicates that
leakage rates are consulted in practical fields of work, such as policy decisions. However,
Mitchell and Ashley (2007; 2010) do not regard leakage as a helpful concept and indicate that
policy makers should abstain from leakages rates as an indicator. This concern however refers
to the relevance of leakage according to definition (b) - an issue which will be elaborated in the
following.
63
5.2 DEFINITIONAL PERCEPTIONS OF LEAKAGE
In line with Objective 1, diverging understandings of leakage in the literature have been
identified and clustered into a minimum and maximum definition of leakage. Primary research
should reveal the experts’ understanding of leakage and the reasons for their views, and
compare them to secondary research findings. For enhanced understanding of the basis for
discussion, the identified definitions of leakage from the literature are repeated at this point. At
a minimum leakage is
(a) the loss of money that has reached the destination, but cannot be retained as it
flows out of the economy again for tourism-related imported goods and services,
repatriated profits of foreign enterprises at the destination or wages of foreign
workforce and destination marketing costs overseas (UNWTO, 1995; Hemmati&
Koehler, 2000; Lejárraga& Walkenhorst,2007, Mitchell& Faal, 2008; Page& Connell,
2008; Sandbrook, 2010; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010)
and at a maximum leakages comprises
(b) definition (a) plus the pre-departure spending that never even reaches the
destination’s economy as it is lost to international airlines, tour operators, travel
agencies and hotel chains (also referred to as structural leakage/ pre-leakage) (Diaz,
2001; Gollub et al., 2003; UNCTAD, 2010).
Carlé, Beyer and Minninger all agree that leakage should only comprise imported goods and
services and hence, the money that never reaches destination should not be classified as
leakage. Therefore, the interviewees understanding of leakage corresponds to definition (a).
Carlé however, at first defined leakage similar to definition (b), which he sourced from
scientific studies. After being confronted with definition (a), he found that excluding profits,
which do not reach the destination, is a more adequate approach. Minninger and Beyer gave
examples to illustrate their understanding of leakages. Minninger referred to imports and
foreign investment and Beyer exemplified imported goods such as food and also more abstract
items such as tabs – anything that is not produced in the destination or does not correspond to
required quality standards. For imported services, Beyer gave the maintenances for air
conditioning carried out by a German firm in the Dominican Republic as an example. This
instance clearly refers to repatriated profits of companies economizing in the destination region
listed in definition (a). Regarding repatriated wages for foreign workforce, which is included as
64
leakage by the UNTWO (1995) in definition (a), Beyer argues that these foreign employees
spend parts of their income in the local economy on living costs. Therefore, he questions the
inclusion of this aspect as he argues that it is barely traceable how much of the wages is
repatriated. Moreover, it could be argued that wages are hardly ever entirely re-spent in the
economy in which the wages were earned as with international tourism tourists spend parts of
their wages outside their home country. With regard to the structural leakage included in
definition (b), Beyer has strong arguments against taking the package price of a trip as a basis
to calculate leakage:
‘…from my point of view, that is nonsense, because, who lives of that money? The
airline, the travel agent, possibly tour operators in the generating regions – they must
get something out of it, too. It doesn’t work otherwise. Therefore, it is money that never
reaches the destination anyways5.’
Beyer explains that he is familiar with the discussion on the profit distribution of package
holidays criticizing that only small fractions of package prices reach the destination, but in his
view, that is a separate issue to leakage. Beyer argues that including money that never reaches
the destination is not implied in the word ‘leakage’. He clarifies his claim by saying ‘a leakage
rate suggests that the developing country loses money, but that is nonsense in this case as the
country would have never even been entitled to those profits.’6 Herewith, Beyer criticizes the
inclusion of structural leakage/pre-leakage - criticism, which can be found in the literature, too.
Authors depict definition (b) as inadequate, because it implies that the destination ‘owns’ the
entire value chain (Mitchell& Ashley, 2007; Mitchell& Faal, 2008). Including structural
leakage implicitly depicts the tourism destination region as main shareholder in the value chain
and accounts any profit that is not accrued in the destination region as loss. However,
transportation costs and pre-departure spending are inevitable services. Carlé adds a new aspect
to the discussion by criticizing with definition (b) that, as leakage is regarded as detrimental,
employment creation would be rated inconsistently in Germany. Employment in the outbound
tourism segment in Germany would be rated negatively, while other employment creation, such
as in the automobile industry is valued positively, which is a valid and relevant point.
Concluding, it can be said that all three interviewees regard definition (a) as the appropriate
definition of leakage.
5
Original quote: ‚Aber das mit der Gesamtreise…. aus meiner Sicht ist es Blödsinn, weil, wer lebt davon?
Davon lebt die Airline, davon lebt das Reisebüro, unter Umständen der Reiseveranstalter in den Ländern hier die
müssen ja auch irgendwas davon haben. Anders geht’s ja gar nicht. Insofern ist es Geld, was so wie so nie da
ankommen würde.
6
Original quote: ‚Eine Sickerrate suggeriert ja immer, dass das Geld den Entwicklungsländern verloren geht,
aber das ist in dem Fall Quatsch, weil das Geld würde Ihnen nie zustehen.‘
65
5.3 WHY LEAKAGE IS SUCH A CRITICAL ISSUE IN TOURISM
The question why leakage is such a critical issue in tourism has only been touched on briefly in
the literature. This aspects links to Objective 5, as it partially reveals the relevance of leakage in
tourism. Furthermore, it relates to Objective 2 as in the search for an explanation why there is
such a debate on leakage, reasons for the occurrence of leakage in tourism, play a role, too.
Beyer confirms that leakage is a complex matter representing a ‘hot topic’ in common
discussions of tourism critics. He adds that leakage rates are often brought up as an argument to
say that promoting and fostering tourism in developing countries is inappropriate in
development cooperation. Similarly, Carlé notes that the discussion on leakages is a topic that
continually occurs in scientific reports. In the literature, it is not clearly identifiable why
leakage in tourism is such a frequently discussed issue. Indeed, the literature proves that
tourism import-related leakages are inferior to leakage in other economic sectors (Diaz, 2001).
At the same time, it revealed that leakages in tourism require attention, because tourism
development is one of the few profitable economic sectors for developing countries
(Hemmati& Koehler, 2000). Similarly, Carlé explains that tourism often demarcates the biggest
source of income in developing countries as only few other sectors are developed, which for
one leads to high leakages and secondly, naturally concentrates the debate on tourism when
economics in developing countries are subject of discussion. Minninger puts forward that
barely any industry is as international and uncontrollable as tourism and Carlé adds that as
tourism is a very tangible industry, leakage is more obvious and transparent - for example when
a tourist consumes an obvious non-local product. Minninger, Beyer and Carlé all see the cause
for the intensified debate on leakages in tourism in the nature of the tourism industry. However,
Beyer remarks that the debate on leakages in tourism relates to the commitment on FairTrade
standards with other products and thus, is embedded in other discussions, too. Yet, with
tourism the debate is exacerbated because, as identified in the literature, too (Roe et al., 2004;
Page& Connell, 2008), customer, product and producer collide at the destination while with
tangible products the production process is more abstract for the consumer. Similarly, Beyer
notes that the foreign domination of tourism in developing countries is prominent and this often
leads to the unsubstantiated claims that tourism is not fighting poverty. However, as identified
in the literature (UNWTO, 2002) there is no evidence proving that the level of foreign
ownership in tourism is higher than in other sectors and moreover, local ownership is often
‘masked’ by franchise agreements. The foreign domination may be more apparent in tourism
due to the factors mentioned above - the transparency and tangibility of the production process.
Additionally, Beyer sees ideology as a cause for the intensified debate on leakage, which he
66
explains by saying that holidays are associated with relaxation, sun and beach and as he states
‘many people can’t handle the fact that – as Klaus Lengefeld says – poverty can be fought in
slippers – to put it bluntly.’7 Summarizing, it revealed that tourism is often the most important
income source in developing countries and thus, leakage is frequently discussed. Furthermore,
the tourism production process is transparent and leakage becomes more tangible. Beyer made
an important point by alluding to FairTrade as this concept implicitly grasps the aspect of
leakage, too and thus, the debate in tourism may not even be so much more prominent than in
other sectors.
5.4 THE INTERRELATION OF LEAKAGE AND FORMS OF TOURISM
In partial fulfillment of Objective 2, stereotypical perceptions on the interrelation between
different forms of tourism and leakages were investigated through both, primary and secondary
research. In this regard, it is important to clarify that at a national level, the fluctuation of
leakage with mass and small scale tourism cannot be captured. However, when measuring
leakage at a regional or hotel level, the involved retained revenue of a prevailing form of
tourism can be examined. In the literature, common stereotypes about different forms of
tourism with respect to leakage are presented. With mass tourism there are commonly shared
negative associations as high leakage rates are more commonly associated to be coupled with
package and luxury tourism (Hampton, 1998; Weaver& Lawton, 2002). Especially, star hotels
in developing countries are believed to involve high leakage rates due to their need for reliable
and high-quality supplies, especially concerning food (Telfer& Wall, 2000). Telfer and Wall
(2000) confirm though, that this is an often repeated stereotype lacking sufficient proof.
Perceptions about All-Inclusive tourism diverge. While Suchanek (2000) claims that more than
50% of the profit of All-Inclusive hotels goes to the foreign hotel owners in other countries,
Mitchell and Faal (2008:viii) report that procurement policies can have a positive local
economic impact, which could compensate for the loss of discretionary expenditure. Similar to
observations in the literature, Carlé identifies that with the All-Inclusive topic the debate on
leakage is stoked up emotionally as generally, All-Inclusive hotels are associated with higher
leakage. He explains that with All-Inclusive it is more obvious to assume that the guest does
not leave the hotel and thus, local facilities cannot generate profit. However, he argues that in
an All-Inclusive hotel more food is consumed and this may benefit local farmers. Carlé regards
the actual difference between leakages involved in the All-Inclusive concept and other forms of
7
Original quote: ‚Ich glaube dass viele, ähm, nicht damit klarkommen […] da zitier' ich einfach mal Klaus
Lengefeld, dass man eben auch in Badelatschen die Armut bekämpfen kann - Überspitzt gesagt.‘
67
tourism as rudimentary. Minninger’s opines that leakage can be reduced with any form of
tourism if sustainable standards are ensured. In her view, leakage is very much determined by
the existence of policies steering tourism in the countries. She puts forward that ‘it doesn’t
matter whether you compare backpacker tourism […] or All-Inclusive tourism […] - if
everyone wants to drink coke, it doesn’t matter which form of tourism it is.’ The same view is
shared in the literature as the UNWTO (2004) emphasizes that any form of tourism can be
carried out in a sustainable manner including all forms of small and mass scale tourism.
Correspondingly, Beyer identifies the key challenge with any form of tourism is to ensure the
maximum benefit for the local population while considering social and environmental aspects,
too. However, Minninger underlines that, so far, small scale tourism is more controlled and
thus, more sustainable. Thereby, small scale tourism can guarantee that more revenue is
retained, while with package tours booked through big multinational tour operators, minimal
revenue remains in the destination. Therefore, she sees equal potential in all forms of mass and
small scale tourism, but only in small scale tourism the potential is exhausted so far. At the
same time, Beyer rightfully argues that with small scale tourism fewer profits are generated. A
similar line of argumentation was found in the literature stating that ‘low-leakage tourism can
also equate to low-income tourism’, which results in lower total income and therefore, also
entails less linkages to other sectors of the economy (Diaz, 2001:9). Likewise, Beyer explains
that fewer customers require fewer goods and services and thus, leakage may be small, but still,
mass scale tourism, such as All-Inclusive tourism, generates higher retained profits, although
proportionally leakage may look higher than with small scale tourism. Moreover, Beyer makes
a strong point by saying that the market has to act in response to demand and while many
Community Based Tourism projects fail, the All-Inclusive concept has proven to work,
experiencing one of the highest growth rates in tourism. Therefore, to tackle poverty at a larger
scale, it needs to be considered whether a tourism concept works. Beyer warns of drawing
generalizations on this subject though. Similar to the interviews and the literature, the case
study reveals that All-Inclusive tourism has the potential to ensure local profit retention. As
Minninger argues, too, the results of the GIZ research, i.e. the case study employed in this
thesis, does not allow generalizing that all All-Inclusive hotels make a significant contribution
to the local economy. However, the case study proves that All-Inclusive hotels can indeed
cause a large local economic impact, which is a very important finding. Consequently, it can be
concluded from both, primary and secondary research findings, that the debate on which form
of tourism is better is little constructive. Rather, it appears a more feasible approach to focus on
68
designing all existing forms of tourism as sustainable as possible, which is what Beyer
identified as the key challenge, too.
5.5 LINKAGES AND THE POTENTIAL TO REDUCE THE LEAKAGE EFFECT
In line with Objective 3, the potential to diminish the leakage effect has been investigated,
with particular emphasis on linkages to food sectors. Furthermore, the case study revealed the
import propensity of two exemplary hotels contributing to the achievement of Objective 3.
While in the literature, –also due to the limited scope of this thesis– the potential to reduce
leakages was primarily covered by discussing linkages of the tourism industry to other
sectors of the local economy, especially in regards to agriculture, the interviews revealed
further interesting aspects. The literature neglected approaches to reduce leakage as
according to definition (b) and as Mitchell and Ashley (2007) put forward the diverging
understanding of leakage entails entirely different issues and policy implications. While
leakage as according to definition (a) can be diminished by fostering local linkages, leakage
complying with definition (b) involves aspects such as vertical integration. As all
interviewees define leakage corresponding to definition (a), approaches to reduce structural
leakage are neglected in this thesis.
Minninger lists three ways of reducing leakage: sensitizing consumers, motivating businesses
to become more sustainable and introducing policies at the macro-level. She sees great
potential on the consumer side as the customer in the end decides how he spends his/her
holiday. She opines that if customers are informed and sensitized about issues in tourism, they
may prefer to see their money retained in the local economy. However, this means that
transparent and suitable offers are needed on the supply side. Therefore, Minninger’s regards
motivating tour operators to act sustainably on a voluntary basis as a relevant approach to
reduce leakage. She emphasizes the potential on a voluntary basis, such as certifications,
because companies are more likely to be committed and to communicate their efforts to the
public, which may instigate that other companies follow this movement. On the macro-level
Minninger suggests FairTrade standards or codes of conduct and law enforcements to protect
markets in developing countries. In the literature however, foreign direct investment is
identified as a main driver for tourism in developing countries (UNCTAD, 2010) and is
considered inevitable in order to access sufficient sources of development finance for facilities
and infrastructure (Gollub et al., 2003). In fact, Dwyer and Forsyth (1994) argue that if
repatriated profits are regarded as leakage, the initial foreign investment for a tourism facility
should be seen as an injection in the economy as no profits would have occurred at all without
69
the foreign investment. Therefore, it is questionable in how far the protection of markets is
desirable or necessary.
Carlé sees the potential to reduce leakage primarily in the professionalization of local
infrastructure implying fostering economic structures, local workforce and local supply chains.
Correspondingly, deficient economic structures have been identified as one of the main causes
why leakage occurs in the literature (Bull, 1995, Weaver& Lawton, 2002; UNCTAD, 2010).
Carlé particularly emphasizes the potential in agriculture, which has been stressed in the
literature as well (Bélisle, 1983; Mitchell& Faal, 2008; UNCTAD, 2010). He puts forward that
less machinery and knowhow is needed with agriculture than in the production of hotel
furnishing and equipment, for example. Carlé adds an important aspect by saying that small
peasant structures need to be organized into bigger structures. Bigger peasant enterprises are
more likely to be able to meet quantity, quality and reliability standards, which is needed
because, as identified in the literature, insufficient capacities of individual farmers to increase
production or a lack of a surplus in production in the local agriculture present a problem
(Telfer& Wall, 2000; Wall& Mathieson, 2006). As in the literature (UNCTAD, 2010) (see
Chapter 2.3.4.2), Carlé emphasizes the importance of training and educating local workforce as
international employees are often required in developing countries due to a lack of qualified
local workforce. While in the literature, it is regarded as a possible governmental action to
provide local small scale businesses with education and training (UNCTAD, 2010), Carlé sees
the aspect from a tour operators’ perspective. To be more specific, regarding the potential of
TUI to diminish the leakage effect in tourism, Carlé sees TUI’s sphere of action in the
sensitization of partners to use regional products and to train and educate local employees in
the hotels. Carlé underlines that TUI’s main potential lies in exerting influence on the hoteliers
as they are legally bound to TUI on a contract basis. Correspondingly, the literature identified
the accommodation sector to have the highest potential among tourism facilities to be
integrated into local economic networks as it takes up a significant amount of tourist spending
and requires resourceful supply (Wall& Mathieson, 2006). Carlé explains that with hotels, it
can be monitored whether they obtain local products where possible or whether they suggest
leisure activities to guests that can generate further local value creation. Further, the adequate
compensation of employees plays a role as this is another way of ensuring that tourism leaves
money in form of income in the country. While Minninger argues that it would be a noteworthy
contribution to poverty reduction to train and educate locals and to offer them higher qualified
employment opportunities, Carlé sees the exact same need and emphasizes that ‘sensitizing our
70
hotels for the topics education and training - that is our great lever’8. Carlé exemplifies that TUI
is currently investigating whether it is viable to build a school in North Africa dedicated to the
education and training of locals. This would correspond to Minninger’s suggestion of
motivating tour operators to act sustainably on a voluntary basis as a relevant approach to
reduce leakage.
The findings from the case study tie in with the identified potential of hotels to diminish
leakages as mentioned by Carlé and the literature, which identifies the accommodation sector
as a major potential facilitator to create local linkages (Wall& Mathieson, 2006). In the
literature, it is criticized that there is insufficient proof to confirm the common stereotypical
assumption that star hotels have minimal ties to the local economy and predominantly import
food to adhere to quality standards (Telfer& Wall, 2000). Regarding quality standards, Carlé
notes that quality and reliability issues are a common feedback of hotels justifying why they do
not source food locally, corresponding to identical findings from the literature (Hemmati&
Koehler, 2000; Mitchell& Faal, 2008). At the same time, the literature exposes that many
studies engaging with hotel supply chains have revealed that a surprisingly small proportion of
food is imported (Mitchell& Ashley, 2010); this is the case for the case study, too. The results
from the All-Inclusive hotel investigations show a relatively low reliance on food imports (less
than 25% for both hotels). Consequently, the finding in the literature that often 60 to 80 cents
of every tourism dollar spent on food and beverage in the Caribbean leaks out of the local
economy (Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture cited in Mitchell and
Ashley, 2010) is not reflected in the case study. Unfortunately, the case study only revealed
little information on the reasons for preferring imports over locally procured goods. Only with
fish, the biggest import for both hotels, more competitive prices revealed as a reason for the
high reliance on imports for hotel I (70% of annual procurement). This corresponds to the
finding of the literature that sometimes importing goods is cheaper than local procurement
(Smeral, 1998; Hemmati& Koehler, 2000; Mitchell& Faal, 2008). The fact that hotel I imports
100% of its potatoes while hotel II procures them locally, proves that other reasons apart from
availability play a role in procurement, presumably such as those identified in Table 3. Carlé
emphasized the efforts of hotels to cooperate with local suppliers; however, in the case of hotel
II, the case study exposes that local suppliers may partially import goods, too. Therefore, in
investigating and fostering the linkages of hotels to the local economic sectors, the supply
chains have to be monitored further than just to the direct supplier. The case study, by no
8
Original quote: ‚Dass man die Hotels […] sensibilisiert für das Thema Ausbildung von lokalen Arbeitnehmern
– da ist unser großer Hebel‘
71
means, allows generalizing that all All-Inclusive hotels create significant linkages to the local
economy and thus, have low leakage propensities. However, what the case study demonstrates
is that such large hotels (with about 400 rooms), supplying the entire food consumed by a large
amount of tourists during their stay, can make a significant contribution to the economy, if all
food supplies that can be sourced locally, in fact, are sourced locally. Beyer explains that in
order to reduce leakage, it is important to study the respective country’s economic situation, to
expose what the economy is capable of producing and to explore why available products or
services are not employed by the tourism industry. If the causes can be identified and the
destination is capable of supplying the good or service, steps can be taken. This relates to the
aspect of lacking contextualization in Table 5. Beyer exemplifies that in the Philippines
investigated hotel chains import items such as furniture, lamps or souvenirs, although there is
sufficient supply at the destination. While the local industries export their fabrics and the hotel
chains import, neither of the parties have considered looking for contractors locally. Carlé
notes, too that sometimes it may be the ignorance of the hotels that stops them from sourcing
locally. Beyer argues that a lot of unnecessary leakage is created through global hotel standards
such as cosmetic products, which links to the globalization aspect in the literature that some
multinational companies solely import products to maintain global standards in the hotel chain
or to exploit economies of scale (UNCTAD, 2010). Beyer and Carlé both note that this is due
to reasons of quality standards, which implies that there is a perceived quality associated with
standardization. A change in the perception could reduce the need for imported items.
However, as Beyer emphasizes, before drawing conclusions on the significance of leakage at a
destination, it has to be investigated what kind of goods and services are or can be supplied by
the country. This aspect blends in with the interpretation and significance of leakage, which
will be analyzed in more depth after elaborating the problems regarding the measurability of
leakage.
5.6 ISSUES WITH MEASURING LEAKAGE
As identified in the literature, problems with leakage arise not only due to definitional issues
(Sandbrook, 2010; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010), but also due to different measuring methods,
incongruence within individual methods, such as the multiplier method, and diverging data
bases used for calculations (see Table 4) (Hughes, 1994; Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007;
Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). While the reviewed literature investigated several measuring
methods in order to meet Objective 4, the interviews touched on the subject less technically.
Beyer and Carlé both see the lacking standard definition of leakage as an aspect impeding the
72
measurability. Both see issues in the traceability to grasp tourist spending and therefore,
leakage and Beyer adds that especially in developing countries, a lack of statistical data
represents a burden:
‘I really just know statements such as “approximately the leakage is…..” and you sense
and observe that it has never really been calculated, it is just estimated. There is
definitely quite a bit to left to on the part of academics and scientists to achieve
clarification on this issue’9
Likewise, Carlé finds that scientists are often plying with numbers, which are rather based on
vague estimations without sufficient ground or transparency. The lack of empirical data to
prove claimed leakage rates as well as the lack of information on the matter are criticized in the
literature, too (UNWTO, 1995; Mitchell& Ashley, 2007; Sandbrook, 2010). Additionally, the
uncritical recycling of data and the subsequent distorted interpretations are recognized as a
problem (Mitchell& Ashley, 2007; Mitchell& Faal, 2008) – a claim, which could be confirmed
by the author identifying the inaccurate ‘recycling’ of numbers from an UNWTO report from
1995 (see Chapter 2.4.3). The case study reveals an important aspect concerning the
measurability of leakage as All-Inclusive hotels can transparently be investigated in terms of
linkages and leakages and allow tracing where food a tourist consumes originates from.
However, for hotels in which meals are partially or not included, leakage can only be estimated,
which Carlé confirms to be a research gap that needs to be explored. Consequently, it appears a
more accurate approach to measure leakage at a smaller scale, which Sandbrook (2010) argues,
too, by saying that leakage rates at a national level are of little relevance evaluating the
significance of retained revenue at a regional level. Measuring leakage at a smaller scale and
investigating the reasons for leakage and unexhausted potential to reduce it at a larger scale
appears as a more practicable approach. This aspect leads to the problems involved with
interpreting given leakage rates and drawing conclusions on the relevance and significance of
leakage rates.
5.7 THE INTERPRETATION OF LEAKAGE RATES AND ITS RELEVANCE
Apart from the aspect of lacking standardized definitions and divergences in measuring
leakage, other aspects affect the significance of leakage irrespective of standardized definitions
9
Original quote: Ich kenn auch wirklich immer nur so Aussagen ‚ungefähr ist die Sickerrate so…‗ und da spürt
man oder da merkt man schon, dass ist nie wirklich berechnet worden, das sind mehr so Schätzungen.[…]Da ist
sicherlich von Seiten der Wissenschaft noch einiges zu machen, wenn man da wirklich mal Klarheit reinkriegen
will.
73
and standardized measuring methods. In line with Objective 4, a number of aspects that are
often neglected in the interpretation of leakage rates were identified in the reviewed literature.
These will subsequently be related to ideas expressed by the interviewees. In partial fulfillment
of Objective 5, conclusions on the relevance of leakage rates will be deducted from primary
and secondary research findings.
Firstly, lacking transparency in the literature impedes an adequate interpretation of data as a
distinct lack of explanations for how leakage was calculated or estimated when citing leakage
rates can be observed. This aspect has been grasped by Beyer and Carlé, as both, as mentioned
previously, argue that there is insufficient proof for highly claimed leakage rates, which implies
a lack of explaining the composition of claimed leakage rates. In the literature it is criticized
that leakage estimates are stated without explanations on how the estimate is composed
(UNTWO, 1995), which corresponds to Carlé’s statement that it is precarious to compare and
interpret numbers and percentages without being sure on what has been included in
calculations.
Secondly, in the literature, the lack of considering leakage in context to the economic scale and
economic potential has been identified as an impediment to draw conclusion on unexhausted
potential to reduce leakage as well as on the significance of leakage (Wall 1996 cited in Wall&
Mathieson, 2006; Sandbrook, 2010). It revealed that this issue of economic scale is particularly
relevant for small economies such as those of Small Island Developing States and small
developing countries. Their level of output is often insufficient to supply for the amount of
tourists. This aspect illustrates that in some cases, sourcing supply externally is inevitable
(UNTWO, 2004; Wall, 1996 cited in Wall& Mathieson, 2006). This aspect has been
emphasized previously by Beyer in the context of identifying ways to reduce leakage. Beyer
stresses that the significance of leakages in tourism for the local economy has to be investigated
thoroughly and individually for each destination. Corresponding to the findings in the literature
(UNTWO, 2004; Wall, 1996 cited in Wall& Mathieson, 2006), Carlé and Beyer both touch on
the issue of economic scale in the context of evaluating the significance of leakage rates. Carlé
states that the level of local value creation is highly dependent on the geographic location and
economic scope; i.e. whether the hotel is located in Turkey or the Maldives makes a big
difference. Likewise, Beyer highlights that high leakages are particularly common for countries
with a weak economy and an underdeveloped goods and services sector. Beyer explains that in
particular small island states may be more dependent on imports, which results in higher
leakages than for bigger economies. Consequently, as Beyer explains, leakage has to be
considered based on the endogenous potential of the destination, which means its potential to
74
supply goods and services to and in the tourism industry in relation to its current level of
involvement. For example, the case study revealed that fish presents the largest food import at
both hotels. In efforts to reduce leakage from the hotel operations, investigation is needed to
examine whether the Dominican Republic is capable of delivering the amount of fish needed,
economically and ecologically. It needs to be investigated whether the endogenous potential of
the local economy is fully exhausted or not and why leakage is high. Beyer notes that leakage
rates do not tell us quantifiably how much money remains in the economy and that for poverty
reduction leakage rates are only a partial aspect. Aspects, such as how much employment is
created, how much people earn from tourism and how they re-spend their income are relevant.
He exemplified that leakage may be as high as 80%, but if ten thousand people are employed
because of tourism, it is questionable whether the level of leakage presents a problem. Beyer
emphasizes that exactly those aspects have not been investigated in the context of leakages.
Similarly, Carlé notes that ‘it needs to be considered where the money flows and every channel
of leakage to needs to be evaluated individually – if that is even possible?’ 10 Minninger
highlights the relevance of other indices additionally to leakage rates. She opines that it is
important to take a close look at the circumstances at the destination and to consider indicators
such as the human development index as well. She elaborates that if the human development
index remains low despite significant tourism growth, it indicates that tourism benefits have not
reached the destination. Furthermore, Minninger criticizes the increased cost of living for locals
caused by tourism several times throughout the interview. Similarly, Beyer draws attention to
the same aspect in the context of linkages to local agricultural sectors as potential rises in prices
need to be considered. He exemplifies that if a hotel starts sourcing tomatoes locally, the
demand rises and if the tomato production cannot be increased, prices for tomatoes rise and this
happens at the expense of local consumers. This in turn, would be a negative aspect of linkages
and he emphasizes that an in-depth analysis of individual cases would be required to investigate
whether leakage or the price increase would create more damage. He stresses that no
generalization is possible is this field, but that this aspect needs attention. Likewise, the impact
of tourism on local food prices is listed as a research gap by several authors (Bélisle, 1983;
Telfer& Wall, 2000; Wall& Mathieson, 2006; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010). If applicable, rising
prices through local linkages would call the detriment of high leakages into question. This is an
aspect that is indeed relevant for drawing conclusions on the significance of leakage. If aspects
such as rises in prices are not considered, high leakages cannot simply be regarded as a
10
Zudem muss man gucken […] wo landet eigentlich das Geld? Und man muss im Prinzip jeden Kanal, den man
hat, einzeln bewerten – […] kann man das denn?‘
75
problem without investigating for the reasons of leakage. As mentioned before in the context of
the practical relevance of leakage, the literature identified two distinct dangers with high
leakages rates without sufficient contextual background (Mitchell& Ashley, 2007). High
leakage rates appear discouraging and may urge policy makers to focus on other economic
alternatives. Likewise, Beyer criticizes that leakages in tourism are commonly regarded as
problematic in public debates without sufficient proof and contextualization and at the same
time, resorts are believed to leave no economic impact for the destination. He explains that
tourism is a contested approach in international development cooperation anyways and that it is
frustrating to see that highly claimed leakage rates are ‘grist for the mills of those who did not
want tourism to be a part of development cooperation from the start, which makes it even
harder to commit in this field.’ 11
Regarding the significance of leakage, Beyer states that generally speaking, the lower the
leakage the better for the country and also Carlé agrees that leakage rates are an indicator,
which shows how much money remains in the local economy and in how far the country
profits. At the same time, as all three interview partners agree that that more than just leakage
rates are needed to assess how a country benefits economically, as for example income
distribution and the economic situation at the destination. Consequently, all three interview
partners opine that high leakages alone are not a representative indicator for the economic
performance of tourism.
The third aspect that was identified in the literature is closely related to the above elaborated
issue of considering the economic context. Leakage rates in themselves say nothing about the
significance of retained revenue in the local as retained revenue from tourism needs to be
considered in relation to alternative sources of income available. Neglecting this aspect hinders
drawing conclusions on the relevance of tourism to the host economy and thus, leakage rates
are not representative (Sandbrook, 2010). Furthermore, the relevance and significance of
leakage as according to definition (b) has to be considered separate to the relevance of leakage
as according to definition (a).
Consequently, the findings of the literature and the interviews revealed that in order to interpret
and analyze the significance of leakage, other economic factors have to be considered and more
importantly, without the economic context, leakages are poor indicators. The literature and the
interviewees agree, that leakage rates alone are not an indicator, which allows concluding that a
destination does not profit sufficiently from tourism.
11
Original quote: ‚[wenn dann so ne Argumente kommen], die sind dann Wasser auf den Mühlen derjenigen die,
die schon immer nichts mit Tourismus in der EZ anfangen wollten, ähm und das macht die Sache dann noch
schwieriger sich da zu engagieren‘
76
6. CONCLUSION
With the focus on developing countries, this thesis aimed to explore the leakage effect in
tourism by elaborating the problems in defining, capturing and interpreting leakage rates in
order to draw conclusions on the relevance and significance of leakage. The aim, as well as
the five objectives (see Chapter 1.3) have successfully been achieved in the course of this
dissertation. Key findings of the study will be presented following the sequence of the objectives.
The underlying research question (see Chapter 1.3) is answered in the elaboration of Objective
5.
In line with Objective 1, a minimum and a maximum definition for leakage have been
deducted from various depictions of leakage in the literature (see Chapter 2.3.1). Secondary
and primary research findings identified the loss of profits, which accrue outside the
destination region, referred to as structural or pre-leakage, as contested component of the
leakage definition. Definition (a) proved to be more adequate based on the findings from the
literature and the opinions of the interviewees.
Objective 2 entailed determining the reasons for the occurrence of leakage and stereotypical
perceptions on the interrelation between different forms of tourism and leakages. Leakage in
developing countries can be summarized as the result of increasingly globalized business
operations, deficient internal economic structures and their resulting dependence on foreign
investment and business operations. However, regarding the repatriated profits of foreign
firms, it should be bared in mind that no profit would have accrued at all if it was not for the
foreign investment for a tourism facility (Dwyer and Forsyth, 1994). The lacking
interconnectedness of tourism and local supply sectors is both, the consequence of deficiently
developed economic structures and a reason why leakage occurs through imports.
Generalizations on the level of leakages involved with forms of mass and small scale tourism
proved to be based on insufficient evidence (Telfer& Wall, 2000; Weaver& Lawton, 2002).
Primary and secondary research findings confirmed that the debate on which form of tourism
is better is little constructive. Leakage may appear lower in percentages for small scale forms
of tourism, but in absolute numbers, mass scale forms of tourism tend to make the more
significant economic contribution (Diaz, 2001). The case study proved that mass scale forms
of tourism such as All-Inclusive tourism can indeed cause a large local economic impact and
that for the particular examples given, leakage rates resulting from imports were relatively
low (< 25%).
77
The third Objective involved investigating the potential to diminish the leakage effect with
particular emphasis on linkages to food sectors by examining the import propensity of two
exemplary hotels. While the literature as well as the case study focused on linkages as an
approach to diminish the need for imports and thus, to diminish leakage, primary research
contributed other aspects, too. Most importantly, it revealed the need to expose what an
economy is capable of supplying and to subsequently explore why available products or
services are not procured locally by the tourism industry. Further suggested solutions
involved sensitizing both supply and demand sides for more sustainable tourism, introducing
policies at the macro-level and the professionalization of local infrastructure and workforce.
Identified problems with linkages to local food sectors (see Table 3) can be led back to
deficient economic structures. However, as suggested in the literature, too, the case study
revealed that, against common perceptions, the All-Inclusive exemplary hotels in the case
study showed strong linkages to local food production sectors. Nevertheless, the findings do
not allow generalizing that All-Inclusive hotels have strong linkages to the local economy.
In line with Objective 4, irregularities and problems regarding the measurement, comparison
and interpretation of leakage rates were exposed. Findings primarily relied on conclusions
from the literature, which are the definitional issue of leakage, the diverging scale of
measuring leakage, different measuring methods, incongruence within methods and
difficulties to trace tourist spending data leading to inconsistent denominators. Regarding the
interpretation, lacking transparency of underlying definitions and measuring methods, the
failure to place leakage rates into the economic context of the destination as well as the lack
of comparing retained revenue to other sources of income demonstrate the neglected
considerations concerning the interpretation of leakage. Concurrent to this finding, measuring
leakages at subnational scale, such as regionally or on a product basis as in the case study,
proves as more significant and accurate. Looking for solutions may in turn be more
appropriate at a broader scale when evaluating the capacities of other industries.
In fulfillment of Objective 5 conclusions on the relevance of leakage as an indicator for the
economic performance of tourism and recommendations for the handling of leakage rates are
implied. Objective 5 also contains the underlying research question of this thesis: How
representative are leakage rates as an indicator for the economic performance of tourism in
developing countries? As identified, the diagnosed irregularities in the composition of leakage
(see Table 4) and the lacking contextualization of leakage rates (see Table 5) diminish the
significance of leakage. Therefore, it is recommended to transparently reveal underlying
definitions and measuring methods, place leakage rates into the economic context of the
78
destination and compare retained revenue with other sources of income. The essential need
for a standard definition for leakage is self-explanatory. Primary and secondary research
revealed that reducing leakage will always be a desirable target for host economies, but that
leakage rates by themselves are poor indicators for the economic performance of tourism in a
developing country. Nevertheless, it is striking that leakage receives a considerable amount of
attention in the literature, often without questioning its relevance. All three interview partners
have directly or indirectly engaged in research in leakage as well. At this point, the relevance
and significance of leakage as according to definition (a) and (b), needs to be differentiated
clearly.
In regards to definition (a), the following conclusions on the relevance of leakage can be
drawn. For one, leakages expressed in percentages by themselves are not helpful to develop
policies or to take actions. Percentages alone are neither representative nor significant as they
do not reveal anything about the importance of the actual sum of retained revenue for the host
economy and comparing to other sources of income. Most importantly, primary research
revealed that placing leakage rates into the economic context is of particular importance, as
only if the gap between the potential and the actual supply capacity of an economy can be
determined, the need and room for action can be identified. A leakage rate could therefore be
highly valuable in combination with an evaluation revealing in how far the destination
exhausted its full economic potential and in how far it is possible to link more industries to
tourism.
With regards to pre-leakages/ structural leakages that demarcate the additive component of
definition (b), the literature and primary research findings revealed strong counterarguments
against this understanding of leakage, which proved it to be of little help in development
efforts. Indeed as revealed in primary and secondary research, they deter from the real issue
and make tourism appear as an unsuitable tool for development cooperation. It is in the nature
of the tourism industry that profits accrue in tourism generating regions, internationally for
transport services and in the destination region. Therefore, instead of implying a potential
room for action, structural leakage just highlights structural aspects of the tourism value
chain. Indeed, it can rightfully be described as a problem that with tourism in developing
countries, a relatively large fraction remains in the tourism generating regions. This should be
treated as a separate aspect to leakage, however, as it is an entirely different issue involving
dissimilar policy implications. To conclude, the outcome of this research shall not indicate
that leakages are not an issue; however, as confusedly presented and handled in current
79
debates and literature, leakage may not be as important as oftentimes argued by tourism
critics. In the following, resulting recommendations for future research will be given.
This thesis provides a first clarification on the irregularities and problems involved in
composing and interpreting leakage. However, further research is needed to apply these
aspects to relevant exemplary destinations. The case study employed in this thesis only
superficially identifies the import propensity of exemplary hotels. An extensive evaluation of
available supplies at a destination and investigations as to why local products are abstained
from would be needed in order to conclude on the real significance of leakage involved.
Extensive destination capacity analyses in combination with leakage indicators would be a
relevant approach for research towards the reduction of leakage rates. This however, was not
possible within the scope of this thesis. In this regard, such capacity studies should also take
ecological aspects into account. Similar to recommendations from the literature, the need for
researching the influence of tourism procurement on local food prices is emphasized again at
this point. Further research within forms of mass tourism is also required in order to be able to
make more substantiated statements about its economic contribution and more importantly, to
identify potential room for maximizing local profit retention. Furthermore, if definition (b)
persists as understanding for leakage, concrete investigation into solution approaches to
structural leakage/ pre-leakage is required. Otherwise, leakage as to definition (b) has little
relevance. However, as structural leakage figures are often used by tourism critics for the
purpose of drawing attention to deficits and shortcomings in tourism, it is unlikely that critics
will abstain from using this definition. Furthermore, the author opines that it questionable
whether it is helpful to include imports, which are required due to climatic or other inevitable
conditions at the destination, as leakage. Unless these products are abstained from, there is
minimal, if not no potential to change this occurrence. If the economic potential of a
destination is exhausted, it seems irrelevant to speak of leakage. If imports occur solely for
luxury purposes in order to establish global standards in the hotel chain or for cost
containment reasons in order to exploit economies of scale, the relevance to point out leakage
seems more justified.
80
7. REFERENCES
Ahunwan, B., 2003. Globalization and Corporate Governance in Developing Countries: A
Micro Analysis of Global Corporate Interconnection between Developing African Countries
and Developed Countries. Ardsley: Transnational Publishers
Bélisle, F.J., 1983. Tourism and Food Production in the Caribbean. Annals of Tourism
Research, 10 (3), pp.497-513.
Britton, S., 1982. The Political Economy of Tourism in the Third World. Annals of Tourism
Research, 9, pp. 331-358.
Brown, D.O., 1998. In Search of an Appropriate Form of Tourism for Africa: Lessons from
the Past and Suggestions for the Future. Tourism Management, 19 (3), pp. 237–245.
Bull, A., 1995. The Economics of Travel and Tourism. 2nd Edition. Melbourne: Longman
Case, K.E. and Fair, R.C., 2004. Principles of Economics. 7th Edition. New Jersey: Pearson
Prentice Hall.
Cervantes-Godoy, D.& Dewbre, J., 2010. Economic Importance of Agriculture for Poverty
Reduction, OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Working Papers, No. 23, OECD
Publishing. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/32/50/44804637.pdf [Accessed 30
November 2011]
Clayton, A., 2009. Climate Change and Tourism: The Implications for the Caribbean.
Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 1 (3), pp. 212-230.
Diaz, D., 2001. Symposium on Tourism Services: The Viability and Sustainability of
International Tourism in Developing Countries. Geneva, 22-23 February 2001,World Trade
Organization: Geneva
Dwyer, L. and Forsyth, P., 1994. Foreign Tourism Investment: Motivations and Impacts.
Annals of Tourism Research, 21, pp. 512-537.
Dwyer, L., 2005. Trends Underpinning Global Tourism in the Coming Decade. In W. F.
Theobald, ed. 2005. Global Tourism. 3rd Edition. Burlington: Elsevier, pp. 529-545.
EED TourismWatch, 2007. Sickerrate im Kenianischen Tourismus gesunken. [Reduced
Leakage in Kenyan Tourism] [Online] Informationsdienst Dritte Welt-Tourismus No. 47,
June. Available at: http://www.tourism-watch.de/node/837 [Accessed 1 December 2011]
Fletcher, J.E., 1989. Input-Output Analysis and Tourism Impact Studies. Annals of Tourism
Research, 16, pp. 514-529.
Frechtling, D., 2010. The Tourism Satellite Account – A Primer. Annals of Tourism Research,
37 (1), pp. 136–153.
GIZ, 2011. About GIZ [Online]. Available at: http://www.GIZ.de/en/profile.html [Accessed 3
December 2011]
81
Gollub, J., Hosier, A.,& Woo, G., 2003. Using Cluster-Based Economic Strategy to Minimize
Tourism Leakages [Online]. UNWTO. Available at: http://www.eunwto.org/content/n144p2/fulltext?p=c01b8f6de1c34acc875b1f8ea34c15cd&pi=0#section=7
922&page=1&locus=25 [Accessed 20 June 2011].
Hampton, M., 1998. Backpacker Tourism and Economic Development. Annals of Tourism
Research, 25(3), pp. 639–660.
Harrison, D., 2001. Less Developed Countries and Tourism: The Overall Pattern. In D.
Harrison, ed. 2001. Tourism and the Less Developed World: Issues and Cases. pp. 1-22.
Wallingford: CABI Publishing
Hemmati, M. and Koehler, N., 2000. Financial Leakages in Tourism. Sustainable Travel and
Tourism. pp. 25-29
Hughes, H.L., 1994. Tourism Multiplier Studies: A more Judicious Approach. Tourism
Management, 15 (6), pp. 403-406.
Huybers, T. ed., 2007. Tourism in Developing Countries. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
Publishing Limited
Imlinger, C., 2009. UNWTO-Chef: ‘Reisen das stärkste Mittel gegen Armut’. [UNWTO
secretary: ‚Travelling as the most powerful instrument to combat poverty] Die Presse
[Online] 21 November. Available at:
http://diepresse.com/home/wirtschaft/international/523118/index.do?from
=gl.home_wirtschaft [Accessed 2 July 2011].
Lacher, R.G. and Nepal, S.K., 2010. From Leakages to Linkages: Local-level Strategies for
Capturing Tourism Revenue in Northern Thailand. Tourism Geography. 12(19), pp.77-99.
Lejárraga, I. and Walkenhorst, P., 2007. Diversification by deepening linkages with tourism
[Online]. Washington: The World Bank. Available at:
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTEXPCOMNET/Resources/Lejárraga,_Diversification_
by_Deepening_Linkages_with_Tourism.pdf [Accessed 14 September 2011]
Lejárraga, I. and Walkenhorst, P., 2010. On Linkages and Leakages: Measuring the
Secondary Effects of Tourism. Applied Economic Letters, 17, pp.417-421.
Lengefeld, K., 2007. Fighting Poverty in Bikini and Slippers: The Contribution of
Mainstream Tourism to Poverty Alleviation. Eschborn: GTZ (GIZ) Sector Project Tourism
and Sustainable Development
Lipman, G., World Tourism Organization, 2005. WTO Liberalized Trade and Sustainable
Tourism: Elimination of Poverty (ST-EP) Inititative. In: Proceedings from the 2004 WTO
Tourism Policy Forum: Tourism’s Potential as a Sustainable Development strategy. George
Washington University, Washington, 18-20 October 2004. Madrid: WTO
Maurer, M., 1992. Tourismus und Dritte Welt [Tourism and the Third World]. Bern:
Forschungsinstitut für Freizeit und Tourismus der Universität Bern
82
Mitchell, J. and Ashley, C., 2007. ‘Leakage’ Claims: Muddled Thinking and Bad for Policy?
Opinion, London: Overseas Development Institute. Available at:
http://www.odi.org.uk/opinion/docs/112.pdf [Accessed 22 October 2011]
Mitchell, J. and Ashley, C., 2010. Tourism and Poverty Reduction: Pathways to Prosperity.
London: Earthscan
Mitchell, J., and Faal, J., 2008. The Gambian Tourist Value Chain and Prospects for ProPoor Tourism. Working Paper 289, London: Overseas Development Institute. Available at:
http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/docs/98.pdf [Accessed 22 October 2011]
Oficina Nacional de Estadística (ONE), 2011. Evolución del Sector Turismo por Año, según
Principales Indicadores, 1980-2010 [Annual development of the Tourism Sector, according
to Main Indicators]. Available at:
http://www.one.gob.do/index.php?module=articles&func=view&catid=107 [Accessed 30
November 2011]
OECD, 2010. Tourism Trends and Policies 2010. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Padilla, A. and McElroy, J.L., 2005. The Tourism Penetration Index in large Islands: The
Case of the Dominican Republic. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 13 (4), pp. 353-372.
Page, S. and Connell, J., 2006. Tourism: A Modern Synthesis. 2nd Edition. London: Thomson.
Plüss, C., 2008. Reisen gegen die Armut? – Nicht weiter frei zu Tisch! [Tourism for Poverty
Reduction? – No longer Invited for Free] Available at:
http://www.fairunterwegs.org/fileadmin/ContentGlobal/PDF/Reisen_gegen_die_Armut_nicht
_weiter_frei_zu_Tisch.pdf [Accessed 15 December 2011].
Reis, H. and Rua, A., 2009. An Input-Output Analysis: Linkages versus Leakages.
International Economic Journal, 23 (4), pp.527–544.
Robinson, M., and Novelli, M. 2005. Niche Tourism: An introduction. In: M. Novelli, ed.
2005. Niche Tourism: Contemporary Issues, Trends and Cases. Oxford: Elsevier, pp.1-11.
Roe, D., Ashley, C., Page, S. and Meyer, D., 2004. Tourism and the Poor: Analyzing and
Interpreting Tourism Statistics from a Poverty Perspective. Pro-Poor Tourism Partnership
Working Paper No.16. London: PPT Partnership: London. Available at:
http://www.propoortourism.org.uk/16_stats.pdf [Accessed 10 November 2011].
Sadler, P.G., and Archer, B.H., 1975. The Economic Impact of Tourism in Developing
Countries. In T. Huybers, ed. 2007. Tourism in Developing Countries. Cheltenham: Edward
Elgar Publishing Limited, pp. 177-190.
Sandbrook, C., 2010. Putting Leakage in its Place: The Significance of Retained Tourism
Revenue in the Local Context in Rural Uganda. Journal of International Development, 22,
pp.124-136.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., and Thornhill, A., 2009. Research Methods for Business Students.
5th Edition. Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.
Scheyvens, R., 1999. Ecotourism and the Empowerment of Local Communities. Tourism
Management, 20(2), pp. 245-249.
83
Sinclair, M.T., 1998. Tourism and Economic Development: A survey. In T. Huybers, ed.
2007. Tourism in Developing Countries. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, pp.
45-95.
Smeral, E., 1998. The Impact of Globalization on Small and Medium Enterprises: New
Challenges for Tourism Policies in European Countries. Tourism Management, 19 (4), pp.
371-380.
Smith, S.L.J, 1994. The Tourism Product. Annals of Tourism Research, 21 (3), pp. 582-595.
Soubbotina, T.P., 2004. Beyond Economic Growth: An Introduction to Sustainable
Development. [e-book] 2nd Edition. Washington: The World Bank. Available at:
http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/english/beyond/global/beg-en.html [Accessed 3
November 2011].
Suchanek, N., 2000. Ausgebucht – Zivilisationsflucht Tourismus. [Booked out – Tourism as
Escape from Civilization]. Stuttgart: Schmetterlingverlag.
Torres, R., 2002. Toward a better Understanding of Tourism and Agriculture Linkages in the
Yucatan: Tourist Food Consumption and Preferences. Tourism Geographies, 4 (3), pp. 282–
306.
Telfer, D.J. and Wall, G., 1996. Linkages between Tourism and Food Production. Annals of
Tourism Research, 23 (3), pp. 635-653.
Telfer, D.J. and Wall, G., 2000. Strengthening backward Economic Linkages: Local Food
Purchasing by Three Indonesian Hotels. Tourism Geographies, 2(4), pp. 421–447.
Theobald, W.F., 2005. The Meaning, Scope, and Measurement of Travel and Tourism. In W.
F. Theobald, ed. 2005. Global Tourism. 3rd Edition. Burlington: Elsevier, pp. 5-24.
Tosun C. 2000. Limits to Community Participation in the Tourism Development Process in
Developing Countries. Tourism Management, 21 (6), pp. 613–633.
Tourism Concern, 2008. Strategic Business Plan 2008 - 2011. Available at:
http://www.tourismconcern.org.uk/uploads/file/About%20Us/Strategic%20Plan.pdf
[Accessed 15 December 2011].
UNCTAD, 2007. FDI in Tourism: The Development Dimension. Geneva: United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development.
UNCTAD, 2010. The Contribution of Tourism to Trade and Development. Geneva 3-7 May
2010. Geneva: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
UNdata, 2011. Country Profile Dominican Republic [Online] (Updated 2 November 2011)
Available at: http://data.un.org/CountryProfile.aspx?crname=Dominican%20Republic#Trade
[Accessed 30 November 2011].
UNEP, n.d. Economic Impacts of Tourism [Online] (date of update unknown) Available at:
http://www.unep.fr/scp/tourism/sustain/impacts/economic/negative.htm [Accessed 23
November 2011].
84
UNEP and UNWTO, 2005. Making Tourism more Sustainable – A Guide for Policy Makers.
Paris: United Nations Environmental Program.
United Nations, 2011. News Centre - International tourist numbers to hit 1.8 billion by 2030,
UN report projects [Online] (Updated 12 Oct 2011) Available at:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=40029&Cr=tourism&Cr1= [Accessed 5
November 2011].
UNWTO, 1995. Políticas de Aviación y Turismo [Politics of Aviation and Tourism]. Madrid:
WTO (OMT).
UNWTO, 2002. Tourism and Poverty Alleviation. Madrid: World Tourism Organization.
UNWTO, 2004. Indicators of Sustainable Development for Tourism Destinations: A
Guidebook. Madrid: World Tourism Organization.
Wall, G., 1997. Scale Effects on Tourism Multipliers. Annals of Tourism Research, 24 (2), pp.
446-450.
Wall, G. and Mathieson, A., 2006. Tourism: Change, Impacts and Opportunities. Essex:
Pearson Education Limited.
Weaver, D., and Lawton, L., 2002. Tourism Management. 2nd Edition. Milton: John Wiley&
Sons Australia, Ltd.
Widmann, T., 2004. Regionalwirtschaftliche Bedeutung des Tourismus – Kleine Kreisläufe.
In C. Becker, H. Hopfinger and A. Steinecke, eds., 2004. Geographie der Freizeit und des
Tourismus: Bilanz und Ausblick [Geography of Leisure and Tourism: Balance and Outlook].
2nd Edition. Munich: Oldenbourg Wissenschaftverlag, pp. 403-414.
85
8. APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW QUESTION OUTLINE (GERMAN)
Orginial German Question
English Translation
In wie fern sind Sie bisher mit dem Thema
„Sickerraten/Leakage“ in ihrem Arbeitsfeld in
Kontakt gekommen? / Was wissen sie bisher
über das Thema „Sickerraten/Leakage“?
In how far have you been involved with the
topic „leakage” in your field of work? / What
do you know about the topic „leakage” so
far?
Was würden Sie als „Sickerraten/Leakage“
definieren und hinzuzählen? / Was verstehen
Sie unter dem Begriff „Sickerraten/Leakage“?
How would you define leakage and you
account as part of a leakage rate? / What
does leakage mean in your definition?
Warum denken Sie wird im Tourismus so häufig
kritisiert, dass ‚nichts im Land bleibt‘, wo doch
Sickerraten in anderen industriellen Sektoren oft
deutlich höher sind als die im Tourismus?
Why do you think that with tourism it is often
criticized that the destinations do not profit
enough while leakage in other industrial
sectors is often significantly higher?
In wie fern, denken Sie, ist die Höhe der
Sickerraten in einer Destination abhängig von
Form und Ausmaß des Tourismus?
In how far do you think is the degree of a
leakage rate at a destination dependent on
the extent and type of tourism
Das All-Inclusive Konzept wird ja insbesondere
kritisiert – würden Sie sagen, dass bei dieser
Form des Tourismus weniger Geld im Land
‚hängen bleibt‘?
The All-Inclusive concept is particularly
subject of criticism – would you say that with
this form of tourism less money can be
retained in the country?
Denken Sie, dass hohe Sickerraten den
wirtschaftlichen Erfolg des Tourismus in einem
Land beeinträchtigen?/ Was, finden Sie, sagen
Sickerraten über den wirtschaftlichen Erfolg/
Misserfolg des Tourismus in einer Destination
aus?
What do leakage rates itself reveal on the
economic performance of tourism at a
destination?
Wo sehen Sie das Hauptpotential Sickerraten
zu reduzieren?
Where do you see the main potential to
reduce leakage?
Wo, denken Sie, liegt die Hauptschwierigkeit in
der Messung und dem Vergleich von
Sickerraten?
Where do you see the main difficulty in
measuring and comparing leakage?
In wie fern sehen Sie sich, als Europas größter
Tourismus Konzern, in der Lage zu
beeinflussen, in welchem Maße
Entwicklungsländer, in denen Sie operieren,
vom Tourismus profitieren?
In how far do you think is TUI, as the biggest
tour operator in Europe, capable of
influencing to what extent developing
countries profit from tourism?
86
Haben Sie einen Überblick darüber, wo Ihre
Hotels in Entwicklungsländern ihre
Konsumgüter (insbesondere Essen und
Getränke) herbeziehen? Gibt es da Standards?
Wird auf lokale Wertschöpfungsketten Wert
gelegt?
Do you have an overview from where your
hotels obtain their consumer goods (food
and beverage)? Are there standards? Does
TUI attach importance to local value
creation?
Auf Ihrer Internetseite dominieren ja
Informationen zum Engagement im Bereich
„Umwelt und Soziales“ Meinen Sie, dass die
drei Säulen der Nachhaltigkeit bei TUI gleich
berücksichtigt sind? In wie fern tragen Sie ihr
Engagement zur wirtschaftlichen Nachhaltigkeit
nach außen?
Looking at your webpage, it is striking that
ecological and social sustainability offers are
dominant. Are the three pillars of
sustainability equally considered? In how far
do you communicate your efforts in towards
economic sustainability to the public?
87
APPENDIX B: RAW DATA FOR HOTEL I
Economic data pertaining to a four-star all-inclusive (AI) resort in the Dominican Republic
Number of rooms
532
Total area
7.9 hectares
Number of permanent employees
509
Occupancy 2005
70% (260,000 overnight stays)
Expenditure 2005
Per night
Running costs (energy, water/sanitation, garbage)
US$ 1,504,260
US$ 5.8
Personnel costs (salaries incl. mandatory tips, transport,
food, professional development)
US$ 2,695,786
US$ 10.4
Goods purchased (food + non-food) + services
(repair/maintenance, entertainment, security service)
US$ 2,921,503
(of which US$
1,950,104 for
agricultural produce)
US$ 11.2
Volumes, expenditures, origin of agricultural products at an AI resort in Dominican Republic
Product
Volume/month
Annual expenditure
Origin
Domestic/
local
share
Fish and seafood
7,000 kg
US$ 446,889 Fish: 70% imported
(50% fish, Seafood: 100% local
50% seafood)
US$
290,478
Meat and
sausage
18,000 kg
US$ 649,233 90% domestic/local
US$
584,310
Rice
US$ 36,790 80% domestic
Potatoes
US$ 17,373 100% imported
Fruits and
vegetables
55,000 kg
US$ 333,273 100% domestic/local
US$
29,432
0
US$
333,273
Non-alcoholic
beverages
6,000 l
US$
69,251
Alcoholic
beverages
4,000 l
US$
161,587
US$ 164,112 70% imported
US$
49,234
Canned food
Coffee
500 kg
Total expenditure for
agricultural products
US$ 1,950,104 per from Dominican
year Republic
88
US$
13,886
US$
1,531,451
(= 78.5%)
APPENDIX C: RAW DATA FOR HOTEL II
A través de suministros de bienes de consumo
Los gastos anuales para bienes de consumo del Resort X ascendieron en 2005 a 1,5 millones de US$12. Los
gastos más altos producen compras de carne, de mariscos, así como de frutas. El 76,5% (= 1,150,128.80 US$)
de los suministros de bienes de consumo se produce y adquire en la República Dominicana, mientras el 23,5%
(= 353,757.72 US$ en 2005) se tiene que importar. Productos como cosméticos, textiles, papel higiénico y papel
oficina son exclusivamente importaciones 13 . El siguiente cuadro demuestra los productos adquiridos más
importantes del resort, los gastos y el lugar de adquisición de los cuales.
Producto
adquirido por
el resort
Variedades
Cantidad
por mes
Precio RD$/
unidad
(kg, litro etc.)
Carne
Carne de res
Gastos al
año US$14
Lugar
de
compra
426,566.11 US$
Bola
1,080
65.20 RD$
25,398.02 US$
local
Ribeye imp.
400
129.40 RD$
18,669.07 US$
importado
Sirloin
82
245.00 RD$
7,246.17 US$
importado
Roti
3,586
71.00 RD$
91,832.64 US$
local
Roti s/ hueso
860
86.00 RD$
26,676.29 US$
local
Tapa
1,100
66.00 RD$
26,185.75 US$
local
Ribeye
266
90.00 RD$
8,634.81 US$
local
FM
105
96.00 RD$
3,635.71 US$
local
Filete
29
132.00 RD$
1,380.70 US$
local
Cerdo
2,600
20.00 RD$
18,755.64 US$
local
Chuleta Cong
946
53.00 RD$
18,084.04 US$
local
Chuleta fresca
3,100
51.00 RD$
57,024.35 US$
local
Costilla
940
51.00 RD$
17,291.25 US$
local
Pierna ahumada
250
55.25 RD$
4,981.97 US$
local
Pierna fresca
190
47.50 RD$
3,255.18 US$
local
Filete
155
85.00 RD$
4,752.03 US$
local
Pavo
290
60.00 RD$
6,275.92 US$
local
Pollo
6,800
25.00 RD$
61,316.50 US$
local
Muslo de Pollo
446
23.00 RD$
3,699.91 US$
local
Pechuga de
Pollo
519
54.00 RD$
10,108.57 US$
local
Producto
adquirido por
el resort
Variedades
Cantidad
por mes
Precio RD$/
unidad
(kg, litro etc.)
Gastos al
año US$
Lugar
de
compra
Otros carnes
Chivo
450
70.00 RD$
11,361.59 US$
local
Carne de cerdo
Carne de aves
Datos del año 2005 según la información del departamento de compras del resort (sin bebidas no alcohólicas).
En caso del Resort X se realizó además un chequeo de plausibilidad respecto al lugar de producción de las verduras y frutas. Una visita de dos
proveedores del resort en XY demonstró que en su mayoría tanto las verduras como las frutas requeridas son producidas en el país. Importaciones se
hace solamente en caso de espárragos, kiwis, manzanas, ciruelas, melocotones y uvas.
14 Ejemplo de calculación: Bola (carne de res): 1,080 (cantidad por mes) x 65.20 RD$ (precio por unidad) x 12 meses
/ 33.27 RD$ = 25,398.02 US$ por año.
12
13
89
Pescado
Pescado
174,615.15 US$
Carite
1,980
49.00 RD$
34,993.69 US$
importado
Carpia
261
62.00 RD$
5,836.61 US$
local
Chillo grande
360
140.00 RD$
18,178.54 US$
local
Chillo pequeño
430
105.00 RD$
16,284.94 US$
local
Coli rubia
410
72.00 RD$
10,647.43 US$
local
Dorado
1,580
45.00 RD$
25,644.73 US$
importado
Lambi
420
48.00 RD$
7,271.41 US$
local
Filete de dorado
290
67.00 RD$
7,008.12 US$
importado
Filete Merluza
200
46.00 RD$
3,318.30 US$
Local
Filete de mero
395
55.50 RD$
7,907.12 US$
local
Filete salmón
425
116.00 RD$
17,781.79 US$
importado
Salmón
ahumado
175
44.00 RD$
2,777.28 US$
importado
Salmón fresco
1,069
44.00 RD$
16,965.19 US$
importado
Mariscos
Mariscos
197,024.35 US$
Langostas
2,150
200.00 RD$
155,094.68 US$
local
Mejillones ½
concha
340
42.00 RD$
5,150.59 US$
importado
Cabeza calamar
2,200
15.50 RS$
12,299.37 US$
importado
Tubo calamar
1,234
55.00 RD$
24,479.71 US$
importado
Verduras
Verduras
111,733.13 US$
Papas
7,500
13.50 RD$
36,519.39 US$
local
Ajíes
200
35.00 RD$
2,524.80 US$
local
Cebolla blanca
750
18.00 RD$
4,869.25 US$
local
Lechuga
repollada
2,700
15.50 RD$
15,094.69 US$
local
Cebolla roja
1,400
23.00 RD$
11,614.07 US$
local
Repollo
1,150
7.00 RD$
2,903.52 US$
local
Tomates
1,700
19.00 RD$
11,650.14 US$
local
Apio
900
13.00 RD$
4,220.02 US$
local
Arroz selecto
3,750
14.00 RD$
18,935.99 US$
local
Arroz importado
460
20.5 RD$
3,401.26 US$
importado
Frutas
244,075.74 US$
90
Producto
adquirido por
el resort
Variedades
Cantidad
por mes
Precio RD$/
unidad
(kg, litro etc.)
Gastos al
año US$
Lugar
de
compra
Frutas frescas
Piña
14,600
11.00 RD$
57,926.06 US$
local
Chinola
1,400
14.00 RD$
7,069.43 US$
local
Guineo
5,800
6.00 RD$
12,551.85 US$
local
Lechosa
5,200
8.50 RD$
15,942.29 US$
local
Limón
3,300
39.00 RD$
46,420.20 US$
local
Melón
6,800
19.00 RD$
46,600.54 US$
local
Sandia
7,600
18.00 RD$
49,341.75 US$
local
Toronja
500
3.60 RD$
649.23 US$
local
Mandarina
2,100
10.00 RD$
7,574.39 US$
local
2,477.90 US$
Productos
enlatados
Productos
enlatados
Guandules
30
150.00 RD$
1,623.08 US$
local
Habichuelas
blancas
10
97.00 RD$
349.86 US$
local
Habichuelas
negras
10
140.00 RD$
504.96 US$
local
145,376.81 US$
Bebidas
alcohólicas
Bebidas
alcohólicas
Brugal añejo
300
87.00 RD$
9,413.89 US$
local
Brugal blanco
151
80
128.00 RD$
3,693.42 US$
local
Brugal blanco
175
83.00 RD$
5,238.95 US$
local
Brugal Carta
dorada
1,800
81.00 RD$
52,587.92 US$
local
Mac Albert
31
179.00 RD$
2,001.44 US$
local
Ron blanco
270
102.00 RD$
9,933.27 US$
local
Ron dorado
302
102.00 RD$
11,110.55 US$
local
Brandy
31
267.00 RD$
2,985.39 US$
local
Sambuca
38
150.00 RD$
2,055.91 US$
local
Amaretto
50
160.00 RD$
2,885.48 US$
local
Licor banana
50
160.00 RD$
2,885.48 US$
local
Triple sec
20
143.00 RD$
1,031.56 US$
local
Martini blanco
60
270.00 RD$
5,842.10 US$
importado
Martini rojo
60
285.00 RD$
6,167.72 US$
importado
Whisky JW R
10
688.00 RD$
2,481.51 US$
importado
W JB
45
323.00 RD$
5,242.56 US$
importado
Vat 69
34
225.00 RD$
2,759.24 US$
importado
Producto
adquirido por
el resort
Variedades
Cantidad
por mes
Precio RD$/
unidad
(kg, litro etc.)
Gastos al
año US$
Lugar
de
compra
Brugal carta
dorada
300
116.00 RD$
12,551.85 US$
local
Brugal carta
dorada peq.
500
25.00 RD$
4,508.57 US$
local
Bebidas no
alcohólicas
??
Cosméticos
4,200.18 US$
Cosméticos
Shampoo
4
180.00 RD$
259.69 US$
importado
Rinse
7
550.00 RD$
1,388.64 US$
importado
Cera para
depilar
20
150.00 RD$
1,082.06 US$
importado
Crema masaje
2
600.00 RD$
432.82 US$
importado
Gelatina
5
175.00 RD$
315.60 US$
importado
Aceite almendra
5
400.00 RD$
721.37 US$
importado
Textiles
Textiles
123,534.72 US$
Toallas
1000
200.00 RD$
72,137.06 US$
importado
Sabanas
500
275.00 RD$
49,594.23 US$
importado
Cortinas baño
20
250.00 RD$
1,803.43 US$
importado
Papel
higiénico
75
750.00 RD$
20,288.55 US$
importado
Productos
para lavar
285
458.87 RD$
47,169.69 US$
local
Papel oficina
86
220.00 RD$
6,824.17 US$
importado
Total de
gastos en
2005
1,503,886.50
US$
92
APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW SABINE M INNINGER
Date of Interview: 22th November 2011
Lea Lange: Wie definierst du den Begriff Sickerrate und auf welcher Grundlage berechnet
sich diese?
Sabine Minninger: Also ich habe mich dazu technisch nicht beschäftigt, ja? Sondern
die Sickerrate - ich war jetzt auch grad im Südpazifik und hab auch mal versucht
herauszufinden was das bedeutet. Also ich sehe das eher von ner
Menschenrechtssituation und ohne jetzt Zahlen zu folgen gibt es Indikatoren an denen
ich das bemesse. Wenn zum Beispiel Länder wie Ägypten, wo Tourismus nun mal
einen großen Anteil von ihrem Bruttosozialprodukt ausmacht - trotzdem die Menschen
eine Hunger Revolte starten weil sie sich die gestiegenen Lebenshaltungskosten in dem
Land nicht mehr leisten können dann ist das ein Indikator dafür, dass bei der breiten
Bevölkerung die Einnahmen für den Tourismus nicht angekommen sind. Der Beweis
dafür kam ja dann auch letztendlich jetzt mit dem arabischen Frühling das Leute eher
unzufrieden waren und ich denke wenn Tourismus nicht als Einkommens- oder
Entwicklungsmotor dargestellt wäre, wäre diese Unzufriedenheit vielleicht auch nicht
so hochgestoßen und man hat ja dann auch gesehen, dass ein paar Eliten und eine
Militärdiktatur letztendlich davon profitiert hat, von den Einnahmen aus dem
Tourismus.
Ja, also im Rahmen meiner Recherche sind Sickerraten hauptsächlich das, was durch Importe
oder durch ausländische Investoren in der Tourismus Branche aus den Destinationen
zurückfließt…. [unterbricht ]
Ach so, jaja genau, also als reine Definition, also technisch gesprochen ist es das: die
Einnahmen vom Tourismus, die nicht im Land bleiben, sondern wieder abfließen. Das
kann verschiedene Gründe haben wie zum Beispiel ausländische Investoren oder ja,
genau, durch ausländische Importe, die ins Land reinkommen und damit letztendlich
internationale Konzerne oder Unternehmen davon profitieren, die in den Ländern
wirtschaften
Also du bezeichnest Sickerraten auch als das was halt letztendlich bei der Bevölkerung nicht
ankommt und für falsche Zwecke verwendet wird oder……. [unterbricht ]
Nee nee nee, schon die Sickerrate, also diese Revenue leakage rate ist schon das, was
raus geht aus dem Land, die Sickerrate ist ja ins Ausland, also Investitionen, die ins
Ausland gehen, ja, und gar nicht erst im Land bleiben. Und dann gibt es natürlich noch
interne Probleme des Tourismus, das ist dann aber nicht die Sickerrate, die Revenue
leakage rate, das ist die die aus dem Land rausgeht. Und dann ist auch noch mal
fraglich - wenn es im Land bleibt, es gibt auch Einnahmen die bleiben im Land, aber
davon profitiert nicht die Bevölkerung sondern oftmals nur, pfft, korrupte Eliten oder
Militärdiktaturen oder ja.
Nun sind ja nun die Sickerraten in anderen industriellen Sektoren auch deutlich höher…
[unterbricht]
93
Du redest doch –ganz kurz- Sickerrate – über die Revenue leakage rate, redest du
darüber was wieder abfließt, was erwirtschaftet wird und nicht im Land bleibt?
Ja genau
Oder redest du über den Trickle Down Effekt, was glaub ich auf Deutsch auch als
Sickerrate übersetzt wird. Die Sickerrate von Einnahmen aus dem Tourismus, die bei
der Bevölkerung ankommen, das sind zwei verschiedene Sachen.
Nee, es geht um die Revenue leakage. Ich schreib die Arbeit auf Englisch, dieshalb ist die
übersetzung auf Deutsch teilweise vielleicht nicht genau genug, das tut mir leid.
Also Sickerrate wird auf Deutsch auch dieser Trickle Down Effekt genannt, na gut. Ok
dann, reden wir über‘s Gleiche.
Warum denkst du denn, dass das Thema Sickerraten im Tourismus so viel mehr diskutiert wird
als in anderen industriellen Sektoren? Also jetzt zum Beispiel in der Schwerindustrie werden
halt… [unterbricht]
Ich denke das hat damit zu tun dass die Tourismusbranche kaum kontrollierbar ist, weil
es so eine internationale Branche ist wie kaum eine andere und ähm und deshalb wird
es mehr im Tourismus diskutiert und auch vermehrt im Tourismus diskutiert seit man
erkannt hat, dass Tourismus per se kein Entwicklungsmotor darstellt in armen Ländern.
Also mit per se meinst du jetzt…? [unterbricht]
Also wenn jetzt keine anderen Standards zur Nachhaltigkeit hinzukommen oder vorab
implementiert worden sind, dann ist Tourismus kein Allheilmittel in
Entwicklungsländern.
Und in wie fern denkst du, dass die Höhe der Sickerrate in einem Entwicklungsland abhängig
von Form und Ausmaß des Tourismus ist? Also hast du ja jetzt grade schon so halb
beantwortet …[unterbricht]
Hm, also ich hab dich jetzt nicht verstanden, also nochmal, was?
Also in wie fern die Höhe der Sickerrate in einer Destination abhängig von Form und Ausmaß
des Tourismus ist, also ob jetzt zum Beispiel Massentourismus oder Nischentourismus….
[unterbricht]
Das ist seehr davon abhängig. Das ist abhängig davon, ob es Regulierungen im
Tourismus gibt in Ländern.
Und jetzt spezifisch würdest du sagen, dass in bestimmten Destinationen durch die Form des
Tourismus die Sickerraten deutlich höher sein müssten?
[Pause ]Es gibt, das ist abhängig vom Tourismus, ähm aber zum einen, das ist ne ganz
wichtige Aufgabe und auch ne Herausforderung, die wir an diese multinationalen ähm
Unternehmen stellen müssten – also, dass sie sich dieser Herausforderung stellen dafür
zu sorgen anständig und sauber zu wirtschaften und das auch die Destinationen nicht
94
so ausgebeutet werden, sondern auch was von dem Tourismus haben, der in ihrem
Land stattfindet. Das ist eine Seite. Die andere Seite ist - das hat sich jetzt auch, wie
gesagt, in den nordafrikanischen Ländern herausgestellt, das auch, äh, das ist nur eine
Seite, die andere ist welche, ähm welche, jaa wie ist die Situation vor Ort und da haben
mit Sicherheit Regierungen, Militärdiktaturen schon… das ist die Aufgabe, die an die
gestellt wird. Wenn das Systeme sind, die das überhaupt nicht zulassen, dass man dort
sauber wirtschaften kann - also da fällt mir jetzt zum Beispiel mal Myanmar noch ein,
zum Beispiel. Da muss man sich eher überlegen, boykottiert man diese Länder oder
zwingt man die Länder sich den Standards der Nachhaltigkeit zu unterwerfen Fragezeichen?
Und jetzt grundsätzlich bezogen auf, zum Beispiel, All-Inclusive Tourismus oder Backpacker
Tourismus oder andere kleinere alternativere Formen von Tourismus, denkst du das steht im
Zusammenhang mit der Höhe der Sickerraten?
[Seufzt] Ja die GIZ hat ja Forschungen dazu betrieben, dass All-Inclusive Anlagen
durchaus ein Entwicklungsmotor sein können und dass, je nachdem wie es gemacht
wird, dort auch, ähm, dass es dann von wirtschaftlicher Seite durchaus, ähm, man die
Sickerraten halten kann. So lass ich das auch gelten, was die GIZ sagt, sie hat ja dazu
Studien gemacht äh, ich denke nur trotzdem, dass, ähm, dann aber auch Regulierungen
stattfinden müssen. Also die GIZ konnte das wahrscheinlich für DIE All-Inclusive
Anlagen klarstellen oder aufweisen, dass auch All-Inclusive Anlagen eine niedrige
Sickerrate aufweisen können wenn [besonders betont] bestimmte Standards der
Nachhaltigkeit eingehalten werden. Die Faustregel, da gibt’s auch keine Faustregel, es
geht da um Regulierungen und es geht natürlich auch darum, wie der Tourist
sensibilisiert und aufgeklärt wird. Ist glaub ich ganz egal ob man die Backpacker in
Thailand, die auch nen Massentourismus darstellen, zum Beispiel, oder die AllInclusive Anlage in der Dom Rep vergleicht - wenn alle nur Coca Cola trinken wollen,
ne, dann ähm, [lacht] ist es ganz egal was für nen Tourismus da ist oder welche Form
von Tourismus betrieben wird. Ich hab auch schon Backpacker in Thailand erlebt, die
trotzdem nur ins deutsche Brauhaus in Bangkok gerannt sind um deutsches Bier zu
trinken, so Export Bier und nur importierte, ähm, importierte Güter dort zu sich
genommen oder konsumiert haben
Also sagst du jetzt eher, dass es wirklich abhängt davon wie Formen von Tourismus reguliert
sind und das man das pauschal so gar nicht sagen kann [unterbricht]
Das spielt auch ne große Rolle, aber per se - ich denke generell sind wir noch ganz weit
davon entfernt zu sagen, das die All-Inclusive Anlagen bis jetzt nen ganz großen
Beitrag zur Armutsbekämpfung geleistet haben. Es gilt bestimmt für einige AllInclusive Anlagen, die sich bemüht haben Standards der Nachhaltigkeit umzusetzen,
aber bisher, ähm, sind das glaub ich, sind das sehr wenige. Also ich war jetzt grad im
Südpazifik und ähm, ja na klar können die Einheimischen froh sein, dass sie da
überhaupt alle als Zimmermädchen jaa oder als Chauffeur oder als Fahrer ähm
fungieren, aber in den hohen Positionen sitzen trotzdem nur ausländische Manager und
die Unternehmen gehören auch nicht Einheimischen. Also wenn diese Unternehmen,
diese All- Inclusive Anlagen in einheimischer Hand wären und wirklich mal zu
Qualifizierungstourismus beitragen würden, also sprich auch qualifizierte Arbeitsplätze
95
für Einheimische zur Verfügung stellen würden, und diese auch dementsprechend
schulen und fortbilden würden, dann wäre das mit Sicherheit ein besserer Beitrag zur
Armutsbekämpfung. Und noch bis heute ist es wahrscheinlich wirklich so, dass wer
lokal wohnt lokal konsumiert und das geht überwiegend wirklich nur in nem
alternativen oder Nischentourismus, ähm, der kann dafür garantieren, dass mehr Geld
im Land bleibt als wenn er über nen Reiseveranstalter in Kooperation mit
multinationalen Unternehmen ne Reise bucht - da bleibt sehr wenig im Land. Im
ganzen Südpazifik, wo ich jetzt 6 Wochen lang dazu recherchiert habe, konnte mir
niemand sagen wie hoch die Sickerrate ist, nicht einmal der Präsident, also Französisch
Polynesien, auch nicht der Präsidentder Republik Fidschi wusste das.
Ja um das Thema geht es bei mir auch in meiner Arbeit. Also, dass ich auch erstmal versuche
die Literatur aufzuarbeiten um erst mal zu gucken, wie werden Sickerraten überhaupt
gemessen und da gibt es auch wirklich große Unterschiede wie die gemessen werden, dann
gibt’s auch noch große Unterschiede in den Definitionen von was gehört eigentlich zum
Tourismus und was nicht und das führt halt dazu, dass es schwer zu erfassen ist – demnach
auch schwer zu vergleichen ist und jaa, so meine ganze Frage hinter dieser Arbeit ist
eigentlich, in wie fern Sickerraten denn wirklich alleine was über den wirtschaftlichen Erfolg
oder Misserfolg vom Tourismus für ein Entwicklungsland was aussagen können oder ob man
wirklich daran alleine Beurteilungen treffen kann oder halt nicht.
Nee also ich denke vor Ort sich ein Bild zu machen hilft da mit Sicherheit ein bisschen
mehr. Und zu sehen, also es gibt ja noch andere Indizes wie der Human Development
Index, der in der Dom Rep immernoch verheerend ist und man ganz klar sehen konnte,
dass 20 Jahre Tourismusboom haben nicht geholfen den Human Development Index
irgendwie zu steigern. Oder wie die Elektrifizierung von einem Land ist, wie die
Malediven ,die einen ganz hohen Standard im Tourismus, also auch im Luxussegment
haben und da auch eine sehr energiereiche Industrie darstellt in den Malediven ist es
schon beachtlich, dass es dort 5 Sterne Resorts gibt mit komplett klimatisierten
Räumen, mit sehr hohem Energieaufwand und die Hälfte der Einheimischen auf den
Malediven haben überhaupt keinen Strom und leben ohne jegliche Elektrifizierung.
Aber würdest du denn sagen, dass solche Zustände denn dadurch zustande kommen, dass halt
diese Sickerraten so hoch sind und dass zu viel Geld wieder abfließt?
[Seufzt] Erstens mal, jaaa und zweitens hat es ja nur eins gezeigt: dass der Tourismus
nicht geholfen hat, die Armut zu bekämpfen. [Pause] Also da hat er dann vielleicht
nicht mal nen Schaden angerichtet - in manchen Ländern hat der Tourismus dadurch ja
auch Schaden angerichtet, weil plötzlich die Grundstückspreise und
Lebenshaltungskosten soo hoch geworden sind, dass die Einheimischen abwandern
mussten. Sie konnten sich schlichtweg nicht mehr leisten dort wohnen zu bleiben.
Fragen Sie mal die Fischer-Communities auf der Touristeninsel Phuket von Thailand die Grundstückspreise und Lebenshaltungskosten sind so hoch geworden, dass für die
nur die Abwanderung übrig geblieben ist.
Und würdest du dann sagen, dass in solchen Destinationen, wo jetzt auch die Sickerraten
wirklich hoch sind, der Tourismus dann für die Destination eigentlich nicht lohnenswert ist?
96
[Seufzt] In manchen Destinationen würde ich sagen ja, weil der Tourismus zusätzlicher
Kosten verursacht hat. Und zwar Kosten für Umweltzertsörung, Kosten für
Menschenrechtsverletzungen, die überhaupt nicht zu fassen sind. Im Sinne von HIV,
gestiegener HIV Aids Raten, Kindersextourismus, sexuelle Ausbeutung von Frauen
und Kindern im Tourismus verursachen mit Sicherheit höhere Schaden für ne
Volkswirtschaft als das Einkommen, das durch Tourismus erwirtschaftet wird, wenn’s
nicht mal im Land bleibt.
Aber mit diesen Kosten meinst du jetzt nicht die Kosten, die jetzt durch weitere Imports oder
so entstehen, die gebraucht werden für die Tourismusindustrie?
[Pause] Nein, das bezahlt ja, das ja in erster Linie nicht die Bevölkerung, also ob der
Tourismus lohnenswert für Unternehmen ist oder ob der Tourismus lohnenswert… nee
ich versteh jetzt deine Frage nicht - das hat jetzt mit dem Anderen nichts zu tun, ne.
Die Unternehmen bezahlen das ja und holen sich das Geld ja auch wieder von den
Touristen ein. Den Unternehmen geht es nur darum ne hübsche Gegend zu finden.
Und wenn du jetzt von Unternehmen sprichst … [unterbricht]
Wir reden ja jetzt hier über die lokale Bervölkerung, was für nen Profit die
Bevölkerung davon hat und die lokale Bevölkerung sind nicht die, die Exporte [die
Rede ist eigentlich von Importen] bezahlen.
Ja ja, aber jetzt bei den Unternehmen setzt du jetzt voraus, dass das hauptsächlich
ausländische Unternehmen sind oder auch dass die lokale Bevölkerung in den Unternehmen
involviert ist?
Okee, ich verstehe deine Frage immer noch nicht. Du hast gerade mich gefragt, ob
durch die Exporte [die Rede ist eigentlich von Importen], ob sich das überhaupt noch
lohnt für die lokale Bevölkerung….ahaa….
Nee du hattest ja von anderen Kosten geredet, die entstehen … [unterbricht]
Also die Bevölkerung profitiert vom Tourismus, ja? Egal wo - die profitieren schon
davon, auch wenn es nur marginal ist, indem sie halt Jobs haben, meistens Sweatshops
oder unqualifizierte Arbeit, auch sehr saisonal noch häufig, ja? Aber immerhin, ein
bisschen Geld bleibt Tourismus hängen. Die Frage ist ob andere Kosten, die durch den
Tourismus entstehen, die die Bevölkerung trägt, wie zum Beispiel gestiegene HIV
Aids Raten , die kann man gar nicht in Zahlen, das kann man ja nicht quantifizieren.
Aber das ist ja trotzdem ein Schadens für die Volkswirtschaft wenn es ne ganze hohe
HIV Aids Rate gibt. Und Kindersextourismus in nem Land dafür sorgt, dass ne ganze
Generation an depressiven Kindern heranwächst.
Wo siehst du denn das Hauptpotential die Sickerraten zu reduzieren, also wo würdest du
sagen könnte man ansetzen um zu sagen - da kann man wirklich reduzieren und das versuchen
zu verhindern?
Also ich denke, letztendlich kommt es ja auf den Konsumenten an, welche Reise er
bucht. Der Konsument bestimmt, ja? Der Konsument bestimmt, was er haben möchte
97
und wenn man Sensibilisierung betreibt unter den Reisenden, die dann bewusste
Reiseentscheidungen treffen und sagen - nein, das möchten sie nicht, sie möchten mit
dem Gastgeber auf Augenhöhe stehen, mit Land und Leuten im Kontakt sein und auch
sein Geld im Land lassen bei dein Einheimischen - da kann man schon einiges tun.
Ansonsten so auf… Makroebene ist es mit Sicherheit ratsam, wenn es Regulierungen
im Tourismus gibt, in dem ganzen Marktgeschehen und das ist glaub ich sehr
schwierig, weil es eben multinationale Bewegungen sind. Also ähm und da kann man
zum Beispiel jetzt auch Standards reinbringen von Fair Trade, wird ja in Südafrika
auch vorgemacht, von Fair Trade in South Africa, Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa,
Entschuldigung, die eine Zertifizierung auf die Beine gestellt haben was eine
freiwillige Angelegenheit ist. Länder könnten auch dafür sorgen, dass sie ihre ihren
Markt schützen, das wären ja dann so gesetzliche Regulierungen, aber ich denke so auf
freiwilliger Basis im Sinne von Zertifizierungen ist mit Sicherheit ne sinnvollere
Sache, denn so machen die unternehmen das freiwillig, sie unterwerfen sich nicht
halbherzig Gesetzen und befolgen das, was gemacht werden muss sondern können sich
damit ja auch profilieren und auch für ihr Marketing nutzen. Das hat ja bisher ja noch
nie jemandem geschadet, dass er, was weiß ich, atmosfair zum Klimaschutz anbietet,
den Verhaltenskodex von ECPAT zum Kinderschutz unterzeichnet und implementiert,
ähm, oder ähm, oder sich Standards wie pffff ähm wie Zertifizierungen annimmt, wie
zum Beispiel dieses FTTSA oder Deutschland oder beziehungsweise in Europa, von
Deutschland gestartet, gibt’s ja auch ne neue Zertifizierung, die Tourcert heißt.
Dann würde man ja dadurch, wenn viele Unternehmen das freiwillig machen ja auch hoffen,
dass das ein bisschen Druck auf andere Unternehmen ausübt.
Ja man hofft da eher auf den Nachahmeffekt, genau – dass das globale Standards
werden.
Also dann siehst du da jetzt einmal Potential in Richtung, dass man die Konsumenten
informiert und dass man die Konsumenten quasi ein bisschen formt durch die
Angebotsgestaltung und…. [unterbricht]
Ja ich denke beides - Konsumenten informieren und sensibleren bewusste
Reiseentscheidungen zu fällen und das andere ist, Unternehmen zu motivieren sich äh,
ja Standards der Nachhaltigkeit anzunehmen.
Ja und diese internationalen Regulationen, das wäre dann halt in Richtung, dass man das
Ganze international anders steuern müsste, aber… [unterbricht]
Naja das geht halt auch durch Verhaltenskodizes. Also wenn es da keine
Protektionismusgesetze in den Ländern gibt, die sagen - wir wollen ausländische
Unternehmen mehr bei uns im Land - Also teilweise gibt’s das ja auch das
Einheimische mit involviert sein müssen in bestimmte Geschäftsbereiche. Also das ist
ja hier und da auch schon mal in Ansätzen zu sehen, ich weiß auch nicht ob es der
richtige Weg ist, es ist mit Sicherheit der richtigere Weg auf Freiwilligkeit zu setzen
und auf die Implementierung von Verhaltenskodizes oder Kodizes in der Wirtschaft.
Und, ja, Zertifizierungen.
Gut, dann bedank ich mich sehr für deine Zeit und deine Mühen!
98
APPENDIX E: INTERVIEW MATTHIAS BEYER
Date of Interview: 25th November 2011
Lea Lange: Also, erst mal zur Einführung – was wissen Sie denn bisher über das Thema
Sickerraten/ Leakage?
Matthias Beyer: Ja…. Also das ist insofern ein komplexes Thema, weil ähm, oft
unterstellt wird, dass die Sickerraten enorm hoch sind und das das deshalb keinen Sinn
macht, beispielweise auch in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit Tourismus in
Entwicklungsländern zu fördern. Fakt ist aber, dass man da man da sehr genau
hingucken muss, weil es gibt in der Tat durchaus Lände wo die Sickerrate sehr hoch
sind, die können durchaus bei 80% oder so liegen, aber es gibt auch eben viele Länder
wo die Sickerraten extrem niedrig sind, wo die halt nur ein paar Prozente ausmachen,
insofern muss man immer von Destination zu Destination schauen welche Bedeutung
Sickerraten haben, ähm, große Sickerraten gibt es vor allem natürlich bei den Ländern,
wo eine schwache Ökonomie oder überhaupt ein schwacher Dienstleistungs- und
Warensektor vorhanden ist und das gilt wiederum insbesondere für kleine Inseln, die
mehr drauf angewiesen sind eben viel zu importieren und da können die Sickerraten
unter Umständen besonders hoch sein. Äh, gleichzeitig sind aber Sickerraten, wenn
man jetzt, sagen wir mal, den Tourismus ökonomisch bewerten will, was seine
Relevanz angeht für Armutsbekämpfung etcetera auch nur ein Teilaspekt ist, den man
betrachten kann. Und jetzt kann man nicht sagen wo hohe Sickerraten sind ist
automatisch der Tourismus nichts wert. Das vielleicht mal so als Einstieg. Sie müssen
einfach nachfragen, wenn das jetzt zu wenig war [lacht] oder Sie noch Fragen haben,
fragen Sie einfach.
Nee, das gilt auch eigentlich mehr als Einschätzung um zu wissen, wo wir mit dem ganzen
Gespräch anknüpfen, danke. In wie fern sind Sie denn jetzt mit diesem Thema denn jetzt in
Ihrem Arbeitsfeld im Kontakt. Also, abgesehen davon, dass Sie die Datenerhebung in der Dom
Rep für die GTZ gemacht haben.
Ähm, die Wahrheit ist, so gut wie gar nicht. Weil Sickerraten ehrlichgesagt ziemlich
außen vorgelassen werden. Da taucht zwar immer so eine allgemeine Diskussion auf,
aber mir ist persönlich keine Untersuchung bekannt, die wirklich mal die Sickerraten
untersucht hat. Was untersucht wurde bisher, zum Beispiel auch in dieser All-Inclusive
Studie, ist was sozusagen an Geld hängen bleibt. Da hat man auch gesehen wie viel
Geld unter Umständen bei einer Hotelanlage rausgeht, aber das ist natürlich jetzt nicht
repräsentativ für die Sickerrate eines Landes. Ähm, insofern, wo das stärker vorkommt
- ich weiß da nicht ob Sie mal die Publikation gelesen haben ‚Tourismus in
Entwicklungsländern von Karl Vorlaufer. Das eine Buch ist glaube ich von 1996 glaub
ich, da hat er viele Case Studies gebracht, wo er auch von Sickerraten sprach und die
wohl da auch näher untersucht wurden. Aber das ist jetzt da einzige was mit da spontan
jetzt so einfällt. Ich hab mich jetzt selber auch nie intensiv mit Sickerraten beschäftigt
außer dann, wenn es irgendwie in ner Allgemeindiskussion aufkommt aber ich habe es
nie näher untersucht.
99
Mit allgemeinen Diskussionen meinen Sie auch die Tourismuskritik, also dass es da
angebracht wird?
Ja genau. Zu der ich mich auch zählen würde, aber, ja es gibt halt unterschiedliche
Standpunkte [lacht] im Punkto Kritik und Sickerraten ist so ein heißes Thema.
Gut, Also was würden Sie denn als Sickerrate oder Leakage definieren und dazuzählen? Also
das wird ja doch sehr unterschiedlich ähm gehandhabt was jetzt wirklich dazuzählt und was
nicht, ähm, was würden Sie jetzt so aus dem Stehgreif sagen, was wirklich Teil der Sickerrate
ist?
Ähm, ja also es gibt ja in dem Kontext verschiedenste Definitionen was rein und was
rausgeht. Ich hab das mal -ich such das gerade- für mich mal definiert, ähm, [Pause]
ich hab mal ne Graphik gemacht dazu, Moment … ich suche gerade.. und zwar ähm,
also klar der Tourismussektor steht im Zentrum, beispielsweise Hotels etcetera und die
haben halt nen direkten Impact dadurch das beispielweise Touristen dann eben im
Tourismussektor Geld ausgeben und nen indirekten Impact, was die ganzen Zulieferer
angeht. Das ist die eine Schiene, äh, das sind die sogenannten Multiplikator Effekte.
Und dann gibt es halt noch induzierte Impacts und das ist alles, was mit Löhnen zu tun
hat, ääh und das wiederum ist das, was im Land passiert. Und Sickerraten sind für mich
im Prinzip, ähm, Leakages also alles was an Geld wieder rausfliesst für Importe ins
Ausland. Es gibt aber auch die Definition das man sagt, Sickerraten ist das, was
sozusagen ähm bei der armen Bevölkerung hängenbleibt.
Ja, der ‚trickle down effect‘
Ja das was sozusagen durchsickert bis quasi zum Bauern und Zimmermädchen etcetera
und das ist eben jetzt auch die Frage, worüber ich bisher geredet habe waren im Prinzip
Leakages, also das was sozusagen an Geld abfließt für Importe ins Ausland.
Ja das sind auch die Sickerraten, von denen ich in meiner Arbeit spreche.
Ok, alles klar. Wie gesagt, manchmal gibt es auch Leute, die von Sickerraten reden,
also was sozusagen durchsickert zur armen Bevölkerung, äh, das wird dann manchmal
auch als sickerrate bezeichne, aber das ist eigentlich nicht korrekt.
Ja das ist halt dieser ‚trickle down effect‘
Also wie Sie jetzt Sickerrate definieren ist der richtige Begriff. Also die sogenannten
Leakages, die ähm also sozusagen für Importe ins Ausland gehen.
Aber dann würden Sie jetzt die Einbehaltung der Profite von Ausgangsländern jetzt nicht mit
einberechnen? Also nur das Geld, was in die Destination gekommen ist und dann ggf. wieder
abfließt. Weil es gibt ja auch Standpunkte, die dann wirklich von ner gebuchten Reise
ausgehen und dann das Geld, was die Tour Operators oder Reisebüros jetzt meinetwegen in
Deutschland einbehalten schon als Sickerrate bezeichnen.
Ja, das ist ne interessante Frage, ähm, tja, es fließt in der Tat auch wieder raus, ähm,
wobei es ja eigentlich gar nicht erst angekommen ist. Also für mich sind Leakages
eigentlich Gelder, die im Land sind und rausgehen, aber wenn ich jetzt im Reisebüro
100
ne Reise buche in die Dom Rep für ne All-Inclusive Anlage, dann geht, wenn ich da
1000 € ausgebe und wir sagen 600€ bleiben hier und 400€ gehen ins Land, dann gehen
die 600€, die hierbleiben ja nicht wirklich raus, sondern, die werden hier versteuert, die
werden hier quasi bezahlt und berühren das Land überhaupt nicht. Also würd ich da
überhaupt nicht von Leakages reden. Also klar ich kenne die Diskussion, man sagt
immer es bleibt zu viel von so einer Pauschalreisen, gerade bei Pauschalreisen, gerade
bei Resorts äh, es bleibt ein zu großer Teil des Geldes, was der Tourist, was der Gast
zahlt, im Land und nur ein Bruchteil kommt eigentlich wirklich in
Entwicklungsländern an. Das ist eigentlich die Diskussion, die oft geführt wird. Ob
man das jetzt als Sickerrate bezeichnet, ist ne Definitionsfrage. Also für mich ist
Sickerrate wirklich nur das Geld, was als Einnahme im Land wirklich verbucht wird
aber dann wieder ausgegeben werden muss, beispielsweise für Importe. [Pause] Also
was heißt beispielsweise, ne andere Form gibt es eigentlich gar nicht. Also es sind im
Importe. Also das können Dienstleistungen sein, das können aber auch Waren sein, ne.
Also beispielsweise in der Dom Rep ist zum Beispiel der Fall aufgetreten, dass ähm,
dass man eine deutsche Firma beauftragt hat um die Klimaanlagen zu warten. Weil
man vor Ort niemanden hatte, der die Klimaanlagen wartet. Und dann geht sozusagen
natürlich Geld aus dem Land raus nach Deutschland zu einer Firma, die eben diese
Klimaanlage wartet und das ist für mich ein Leakage, also eine Sickerrate. Das gleiche
gilt natürlich auch für Waren jeglicher Art, seien es Fleisch, Fisch, seien es
Wasserhähne, was man auch immer braucht, was im Land irgendwie entweder nicht
produziert wird oder nicht in der Qualität, in der man es braucht vorhanden ist. Weil
das ist ja dann der Grund warum man importiert. Kann man auch für die All-Inclusive
Untersuchung sagen, natürlich gucken die in erster Linie in die Hotels, das sie im Land
einkaufen, weil es einfach billiger ist, aber das setzt voraus, dass die Waren, das die
Qualität da ist und dass es zuverlässige Zulieferer gibt.
Ja die WTO, da gibt es so einen sehr viel zitierten Artikel von 1995, die halt mal kurz in
Stichpunkten zusammenfassen, was die in Sickerraten miteinberechnen. Und die haben da
genau, wie Sie jetzt gesagt haben auch Importe mit drin, die haben da aber auch Gehälter
ausländischer Arbeitskräfte drin, die Gewinne von ausländischen Unternehmen, Zinsen für
geliehene Gelder aus dem Ausland und sogar Marketingaktivitäten im Ausland für die
Destination.
Ja ok, das ist ja sozusagen, ich bin jetzt immer von der Unternehmensebene
ausgegangen
Also es gibt kein richtig und falsch.
Die gehen halt von der Destinationsebene aus, das ist ja auch richtig. Ähm,
normalerweise werden ja Zinsen weniger jetzt von Unternehmen erhoben, sondern das
ist ja eher ne staatliche Seite. Was die Gehälter von ausländischen Mitarbeitern angeht,
äh, wäre ich mir nicht so sicher ob man das überhaupt als Sickerrate bezeichnen kann,
weil die arbeiten ja im Land und leben eigentlich ja auch da und geben ja auch ihr Geld
da wieder aus. Das haben die All-Inclusive Untersuchen ja gezeigt, unter anderem,
dass es durchaus auch ausländische Mitarbeiter gibt, gerade in Führungspositionen, nur
die leben dort mit ihren Familien und geben auch das Geld da vor Ort aus und was da
jetzt rausfließt könnte höchstens, weiß ich nicht, Erspartes sein, was sie da irgendwo
101
anlegen und das darüber dann rausgeht, aber das kann man ja kaum berechnen. Jaja
erstens das und…. Also ja, da würde ich zumindest nen Fragezeichen machen ob man
das so berechnen kann, alles andere stimmt sicherlich, klar, das kann man dann auch
als Sickerrate bezeichnen.
Ja also ich mein, ganz wirklich ganz viele Autoren diskutieren und definieren das anders, also
es gibt kein richtig und falsch
Also Sie gehen ja wahrscheinlich von der Destinationsebene auch aus. Also Sie fragen,
was geht von der gesamten Destination seitens des Tourismus an Sickerraten wieder
raus?
Mhm, ja also das diskutiere ich halt auch in meiner Arbeit, da gibt es auch einfach keine
Allgemeindefintion und dadurch, dass das jeder anders macht, sind halt auch die Zahlen
einfach schwierig, also wenn man dann Zahlen liest muss man hakt auch ganz ganz genau
gucken wie wurde das gemessen, was wurde da miteinbezogen, also dass da eigentlich
überhaupt gar keine Vergleichbarkeit möglich ist.
Aber das mit der Gesamtreise…. aus meiner Sicht ist es Blödsinn, weil, wer lebt
davon? Davon lebt die Airline, davon lebt das Reisebüro, unter Umständen der
Reiseveranstalter in den Ländern hier - die müssen ja auch irgendwas davon haben.
Anders geht’s ja gar nicht. Insofern ist es Geld, was so wie so nie da ankommen würde.
Weil die eben auf unserer Seite, wenn ich hier in Deutschland buche, auch Leute davon
leben insofern das ist Quatsch zu sagen das ist eine Sickerrate. Eine Sickerrate
suggeriert ja immer, dass das Geld den Entwicklungsländern verloren geht, aber das ist
in dem Fall Quatsch, weil das Geld würde Ihnen nie zustehen, Man kann höchstens
über die Höhe reden und sagen, ok, hier verdienen zu viele Leute dran. Das kann man
von mir aus diskutieren, aber es als Sickerrate zu bezeichnen, also aus meiner Sicht, ist
das Quatsch.
Was finden Sie denn, wenn Sie jetzt eine Sickerrate als Zahl/Prozent sehen, was diese Zahl
allein über den wirtschaftlichen Erfolg oder Misserfolg aussagt. Würden Sie, wenn Sie eine
hohe Sickerrate sehen sagen, dass der Tourismus da eigentlich nicht lohnenswert ist?
Nee, wie gesagt, ich denke da gehören mehrere Faktoren hinzu. Wenn ich ne hohe
Sickerrate sehe, dann würde ich erst mal fragen, woran liegt denn das eigentlich? Ist
das überhaupt nicht anders machbar? Also man spricht ja immer vom endogenen
Potential, also das Potential, was im Land ist, hat man das nicht ausgeschöpft? Also,
Beispiel, ich war auf den Philippinen auch für die GTZ , und da ging es darum große
Hotelketten zusammenzubringen mit lokalen Anbietern, was beispielsweise
Möbelherstellung angeht, Lampenherstellung angeht oder Souvenirs und da hat man
gesehen, dass es da überhaupt keinen Link gab. Die haben immer schön importiert,
obwohl es sehr viele gute Angebote auch auf den Philippinen gab, nur, keiner wusste
was von den andern, keiner von den Anbietern ist mal auf die Idee gekommen mal an
die Hotels heranzutreten. Sondern exportieren immer, anstatt mal zu gucken, was
können wir sogar im Land verkaufen und die Hotels haben sich nicht die Mühe
gemacht um mal zu gucken, wie ist eigentlich das inländische Angebot. Und hinzu
kommt häufig halt auch, dass es ne policy, ne Regelung gibt seitens der Hotelketten,
102
dass bestimmte Sachen einfach zentral gekauft werden müssen. Es gibt häufig für
Hotels, also alles was in Badezimmern ist, also Duschgel, Seife etcetera, da vermerkt
man eben aufgrund von Qualitätsstandards in jedem Hilton, sagen wir mal, die gleiche
Seife liegen muss. Die wird natürlich nicht dezentralisiert produziert, sondern an einem
Ort, meistens in China, insofern ist jedes Hotel, ob es jetzt ein deutsches ist, auf den
Philippinen, in der Dom Rep, gezwungen Seife aus China zu importieren. Weil das halt
die Regel in der Hotelkette ist. Und dadurch kommt natürlich Leakage zustande, die
nicht unbedingt notwendig wäre. Und ähm dann gut, dann muss man halt gucken, was
für Waren und Dienstleistungen werden in dem Land geboten. Nahezu überall ist
irgendwie Landwirtschaft, aber es kann natürlich sein, dass die Qualität nicht stimmt,
die Menge nicht reicht oder eben das falsche produziert wird, also ob das produziert
wird, was die Hotels brauchen. Oder andere Anbieter, das können alle Gründe sein,
warum die Leakages hoch sind. Aber das heißt deshalb nicht per se dass deshalb der
Tourismus nichts bringt. Denn da geht es ja auch noch darum, wie viele Arbeitsplätze
werden geschaffen, was verdienen die Leute, ähm, wo geben die Leute das Geld aus,
etc. Das sind ja auch alles Aspekte, die man zusätzlich berücksichtigen muss.
Warum denken Sie denn wird bei Tourismus so häufig kritisiert, dass ‚nichts im Land bleibt‘?
Denn bei anderen Wirtschaftssektoren ist die Leakage oft deutlich höher als im Tourismus.
Ja, Ideologie. Denn ich glaube dass viele, ähm, nicht damit klarkommen […] da zitier'
ich einfach mal Klaus Lengefeld, dass man eben auch in Badelatschen die Armut
bekämpfen kann - Überspitzt gesagt. Das soll heißen, dass Tourismus, auch wenn es
immer, ja, die heile Welt vermittelt und immer nur mit Strand und mit schönen Dingen
in Verbindung gebracht wird, dass viele nicht zusammenkriegen, dass das auch
wirklich real zur Armutsbekämpfung beitragen kann. Ich glaube, dass da wirklich
Ideologie hinter ist. Und das Zweite ist, dass natürlich der
Entwicklungsländertourismus stark dominiert wird, schon auch von Massentourismus
und damit viele ein Problem haben, die eben sagen, dass diese Form von Tourismus in
großen Hotels und Resorts, die wollen wir nicht, die lehnen wir ab und deshalb wird
pauschal behauptet das würde nichts bringen und man müsste viel mehr traditionelle
Bewirtschaftungsformen, Landwirtschaft etcetera fördern, das würde viel mehr für die
Armutsbekämpfung bringen. Und das war eben auch einer der Gründe, warum diese
All-Inclusive Untersuchungen eben gemacht wurden um mal zu untersuchen ob das
überhaupt stimmt, weil das wurde immer so behauptet, dass der Tourismus nichts
bringt, ohne aber konkrete Zahlen dafür zu haben.
Denken Sie das liegt auch daran weil im Tourismus auch eben Luxus und Armut
aufeinanderprallen?
Sicher! Nur das liegt nicht am Tourismus, beziehungsweise, das liegt schon am
Tourismus, nämlich eben an der Tatsache, dass eben der Kunde zum Produkt reist.
Während ansonsten die Produkte zum Kunden gebracht werden. Wenn ich zum
Beispiel Bananen aus Costa Rica kaufe, dann fahre ich nicht nach Costa Rica, sondern
die Banane kommt zu mir und somit prallt arm und reich gar nicht unmittelbar
aufeinander, weil die Entfernung eben bleibt. Äh, die Banane, also das Produkt
wandert halt, nicht der Produzent und nicht der Kunde, sondern das Produkt. Aber
wenn das Produkt sozusagen das Land ist und die Produzenten vor Ort sitzen, arm oder
103
reich oder wie auch immer, äh, kommen die direkt mit dem Kunden in Kontakt. Und
das gibt eben dann auch Probleme, die woanders so nicht auftreten, eben
soziokultureller Art, sozialer Art etc. Aber letztendlich ist es bei anderen Produkten ja
nicht anders, ansonsten würden wir ja nicht dafür plädieren und kämpfen, dass es
FairTrade Produkte gibt. Weil wir wissen nicht wie die Banane produziert wird oder
die Rose, die aus Afrika kommt, die wir im Blumenladen einkaufen, etc. also ich denk
die Problematik ist grundsätzlich auch in anderen Bereichen gegeben, nur verschärft
sie sich hier, äh, dadurch wie gesagt, dass Kunde, Produkt und Produzent an einem Ort
aufeinanderprallen.
Ja, dadurch ist ja auch viel mehr Transparenz geschaffen. Sie sind ja wie ich gesehen haben,
auch in Themen ‚All-Inclusive‘ und ‚Community Based Tourism‘ involviert- denken Sie, dass
die Höhe der Sickerraten schwankt in diesen Formen von Tourismus?
Ähm [Pause], schwierige Frage. Ich weiß noch nicht mal ob man das so fragen kann.
Äh, von der Art dass CBT ein Nischenprodukt ist und demzufolge auch nicht so diese
Massen an Kunden bedient wie eben eine All-Inclusive Anlage und demzufolge eben
auch weniger Beschäftigung erzeugt, aber eben auch weniger Waren braucht insofern
und äh, eher wahrscheinlich auch auf lokale Angebote zurückgreifen kann als jetzt
große Resorts, wenn es im Land selber nichts gibt. Insofern könnte man sagen, vermute
ich mal, dass wenn es überwiegend CBT gibt, die Sickerraten nicht so hoch sind. Ähm,
aber das ist spekulativ ehrlich gesagt, kann man soo nicht sagen. Aber ich denke schon,
dass in den meisten Ländern schon der Massentourismus überwiegt, gerade die, die
Zugang zu Strand und Meer haben, denn das ist der Tourismus der wiegt im Endeffekt,
überall, in Entwicklungsländern und insofern, also, werden Sickerraten durch diese
Form von Tourismus bestimmt und nicht durch die Nischenangebote.
Es gibt abgesehen von den Sickerraten, die auf nationaler Ebene berechnet wurden, auch
einzelne Projekte wo Wertschöpfungsketten-Analysen gemacht wurden um halt ein
Tourismusprodukt zu untersuchen um zu gucken wo fließen die Gelder hin. Also man könnte
nur in dem Rahmen beurteilen, wie das jetzt mit CBT und All-Inclusive Tourism ist.
Ja ich mein, dass insgesamt weniger hängen bleibt bei CBT ist klar, weil einfach
weniger umgesetzt wird, es weniger Arbeitskräfte sind etcetera. Das ist halt der Punkt.
Also absolut, werden All-Inclusive Anlagen immer gewinnen, aber man muss natürlich
auch relativ sehen, was gibt es da noch für Folgeprobleme, die jetzt sicherlich bei CBT
nicht auftreten. Es ist nicht nur ne Frage von Geld und von Zahlen, sondern da spielen
auch noch andere Punkte ne Rolle. Von der GTZ wird immer gleich gesagt, oder
leichtfertig gesagt – oder aus meiner Sicht leichtfertig gesagt, was für einen enormen
Anteil die an der Wertschöpfung haben die All-Inclusive Anlagen, aber das wird eben
übersehen, dass – auch wenn es hier nicht Thema ist, aber man kann es eben nicht ganz
außen vorlassen, dass auch andere soziale Probleme bestehen […]
Also eigentlich kann man, nach dem was Sie jetzt gesagt haben, pauschal nicht sagen welche
Form von Tourismus höhere Sickerraten mit sich mitzieht und vom Tourismus jetzt ‚besser‘
oder ‚schlechter‘ ist?
104
Ja also man müsste es dann nochmal detailliert untersuchen – also was heißt auch CBT
, also das ist ja auch so ein Begriff den müsste man erst mal genauer definieren, das
kann irgendein kleines Dorfprojekt sein, keine Ahnung, ein Gemeinschaftshotel führt
usw., äh, da wird es keine großen Sickerraten geben, aber es wird auch keinen großen
ökonomischen Impact geben, außer für die Leute, die da unmittelbar beteiligt sind.
Und wenn man im größeren Stil Armut bekämpfen will- und ich denke, das muss das
Ziel sein, dann kann man einem Land jetzt nicht mit 300/ 400 CBT Projekten
ankommen, weil da ist die Nachfrage ja auch gar nicht da. Die Frage ist ja auch immer,
ob das Produkt funktioniert, nebenbei bemerkt, also viele CBT funktionieren auch
nicht und äh, All-Inclusive hingegen funktioniert, das ist eine der Tourismusformen,
die eine der höchsten Wachstumsraten haben, das ist halt sehr beliebt, äh, All-Inclusive
reisen zu machen. Also man muss es auch mal von der Marktseite und von der
Nachfrageseite sehen, also was nützt mir denn ein tolles partizipatives Projekt, wenn
kein Mensch kommt und keine Einnahmen erzielt werden. Dann gibt es zwar keine
Sickerraten [lacht], aber dann gibt es auch keine Einnahmen. Also, das ist….man muss
es eben auch von der Marktseite sehen, was funktioniert? Und wie kann man ein
Höchstmaß an Nutzen für die lokale Bevölkerung aus einer bestimmten
Tourismusform rausholen? Inklusive der Berücksichtigung von sozialen, soziokulturellen und Umweltaspekten. Das ist eigentlich das Ziel, das ist die
Herausforderung.
Und das heißt, man müsste ja auch eigentlich Sickerraten in Relation zu den Profiten
betrachten. Also dass, wenn in einem Land Wahnsinns Profite gemacht werden, kann das
natürlich die Sickerraten im Verhältnis höher sind, das aber letztendlich die Profite aber viel
höher sind als die in einem anderem Land, wo die Sickerraten vielleicht niedriger sind.
Klar, also wenn ich eine Sickerrate von 80% hab, aber trotzdem nen Impact, dass, was
weiß ich, zehn tausend Leute einen guten Arbeitsplätzen haben, da kann man eben
drüber streiten, ob das denn eben zu verteufeln ist oder nicht. Aber genau das ist eben
alles nicht so wirklich untersucht bisher.
Ja weil es halt auch schwierig zu erfassen ist.
Ja es ist schwierig zu erfassen, klar. Aber was mich halt ärgert, und das ist eben dass,
was gemacht wird, dass eben diese Sickerraten immer als Problem bezeichnet werden
genauso wie auch der scheinbar nicht vorhandene Impact von großen Resorts ohne
dass das mal jemand untersucht. Das nervt einfach. Dann wird das so pauschal
gemacht und äh, der Tourismus hat in der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit kein gutes
oder kein großes Standing, das wird sowieso mit argem Auge betrachtet und wenn
dann so ne Argumente kommen, die sind dann Wasser auf den Mühlen derjenigen die,
die schon immer nichts mit Tourismus in der EZ anfangen wollten, ähm und das macht
die Sache dann noch schwieriger sich da zu engagieren. Aber man muss eben sehen,
jedes dritte Entwicklungsland hat den Tourismus als Hauptdeviseneinahmequelle und
ungefähr 4/5 als eine der wichtigsten Deviseneinahmequellen, also das zeigt ja schon –
da geht ne Menge Geld rein in das System. Frage ist natürlich, zugegeben, wie viel
geht wieder raus. Aber zunächst mal kann man nicht sagen, dass der Tourismus an sich
irgendwie nichts bringen würde für Entwicklungsländer so pauschal. […]
105
Also ich hab noch 2-3 Fragen. Grundsätzlich, wo sehen Sie denn das Hauptpotential
Sickerraten zu reduzieren, bzw. sehen Sie eine Notwendigkeit?
Definitiv. Also je weniger Sickerraten, desto besser ist es für das Land, aber, wie
gesagt, da muss man sich eben sehr genau die Situation im Land angucken, ähm,
einerseits [Pause] wie sieht die Nachfrage beim Tourismus aus, was brauchen die, für
Waren und Dienstleistungen und was ist im Land vorhanden und was kann unter
Umständen zusätzlich angeboten werden um eben die Sickerraten zu reduzieren und/
oder warum werden Waren, die gebraucht werden und im Land produziert werden
trotzdem nicht von der Tourismusbranche genutzt,? Was sind die Gründe? und wie
kann man das unter Umständen verbessern? Also beispielsweise, wenn ein Hotel sagt
‚natürlich wir brauchen Tomaten‘ und es werden Tomaten angebaut im Land und
trotzdem haben wir nicht gekauft, von der Hotellerie beispielweise. Warum ist das so?
Also, Qualität, Größe, Zulieferer, Preis? Und daran kann man ja arbeiten, man muss
wirklich immer sehen, wenn ne alte banale Regel in der Marktwirtschaft, wenn die
Nachfrage steigt und das Angebot sich nicht erhöht, in nem Zustand von Knappheit,
damit erhöht sich der Preis. Sprich also wenn ich 500 Hektar Tomatenfelder hab und
jetzt plötzlich alle Hotels auch die Tomaten im Land kaufen, ohne dass ich die Felder
ausdehnen kann, dann wird sich der Preis erhöhen. Ne? Und der geht in der Regel zu
Lasten der einheimischen Bevölkerung weil die Hotels in der Regel mehr zahlen
‚können‘ , weil das immer noch billiger sein wird als die Tomaten zu importieren und
damit würde sich der Tomatenpreis für die einheimische Bevölkerung erhöhen und das
ist natürlich auch wieder ein negativer Aspekt irgendwie, der sich sehr niederschlagen
kann.
Da ist dann halt die Frage ob die Sickerraten dann in Relation wirklich so schlimm sind
Das wäre dann zu untersuchen, in der Tat, in der Tat. […] Aber das kann man eben nur
letztlich im Einzelfall untersuchen, also dazu ne pauschale Aussage hinzukriegen ist
glaub ich gefährlich, würd ich nicht machen. Man kann einfach die Problematik mal
aufzeigen.
Und bezüglich der Messung der Sickerraten, wo denken Sie liegt das Hauptproblem in der
Messung und auch dem Vergleich von Sickerraten?
[Pause] Einerseits an der Frage, die wir schon diskutiert haben, nämlich die
Definitionsfrage. Erst mal muss man festlegen was macht, ähm wodurch zeichnet sich
die Sickerrate eigentlich aus, was gehört da rein? Und dann ist natürlich die Frage, ja
man kann es fast nicht messen, weil eben die statistischen Daten, die Verfügbarkeit
von statistischen Daten, gerade in Entwicklungsländern, extrem schlecht ist. Äh und
man im Prinzip das nicht richtig hochrechnen kann, äh und nicht sozusagen, die
Indikatoren, die für Sickerraten verantwortlich wären auch wirklich in Zahlen fassen
kann um das ungefähr auszurechen. Ich kenn auch wirklich immer nur so Aussagen
‚ungefähr ist die Sickerrate so…‘ und da spürt man oder da merkt man schon, dass ist
nie wirklich berechnet worden, das sind mehr so Schätzungen. Das sind so, ja die
entscheidenden Gründe, warum das nicht funktioniert. […] Da ist sicherlich von Seiten
der Wissenschaft noch einiges zu machen, wenn man da wirklich mal Klarheit
reinkriegen will.
Vielen Dank für das interessante Gespräch
106
APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW CHRISTIAN CARLÈ
Date of Interview: 8th December 2011
Lea Lange: In wie fern sind Sie denn bisher mit dem Thema ‚Sickerraten/Leakage‘ in
ihrem Arbeitsfeld in Kontakt gekommen?
Christian Carlé: Ähm, ist immer mal wieder ein Thema - natürlich auch über
die soziale Schiene bei uns. Wir haben auch zusammen mit der GIZ verschieden
Untersuchen erstellt - einmal mal aus dem deutschen Markt raus, aber auch aus
dem Englischen Markt. Ähm, insbesondere war der Fokus auf All-Inclusive,
weil sich bei dem Thema All-Inclusive sich nochmal das Thema nochmal
emotionaler aufheizt und da noch stärkere Kritik geäußert wird, weil in der
Regel davon ausgegangen wird, dass All-Inclusive mit noch größeren
Sickerraten verbunden ist.
Und waren Ihre Hotels dann auch involviert in den Forschungen, die die GIZ in
Entwicklungsländern gemacht hat in Entwicklungsländern?
Ja zum Beispiel mit dem Robinson Club zusammen wurde ne Forschung
durchgeführt. Mit dem, die Kollegen aus England haben auch ein Partnerhotel
von sich in diese Forschung eingebracht, das war allerdings nicht zusammen mit
der GIZ.
Und jetzt abgesehen von der GIZ, wenn Sie sagen das Thema kommt öfter mal auf –
gibt es da jetzt konkrete Organisationen, die das aufbringen oder mehr jetzt im Rahmen
der Zusammenarbeit und nicht im Rahmen der Kritik?
Ähm, [Pause] es kommen immer mal wieder Stimmen auf, die, ähm,
hauptsächlich aus meiner Wahrnehmung aus dem Bereich der Wissenschaft
kommen, ja Wissenschaftler die immer wieder mit diesen Leakageraten
hantieren, wobei es –das ist ne persönliche Einschätzung oft auch nicht sauber
gemacht wird, sondern mehr oder weniger von Vermutungen da ausgegangen
wird.
Ähm, was verstehen Sie denn unter dem Begriff Sickerrate? Also jetzt nicht
erschrecken, es gibt weder richtig noch falsch, das wird groß diskutiert in der
Literatur, es gibt keine einheitliche Definition.
[lacht] Ja diese Sickerrate ist ganz einfach das oder der Anteil des Geldes, des
Reisepreises, der nicht in dem Zielland verbleibt.
Ja, also der, der nicht im Zielland verbleibt - aber der Teil, der gar nicht erst ankommt,
den zählen Sie nicht dazu?
Ähm, damit meinen Sie zum Beispiel auch den Flugpreis?
Ja.
107
Den würd ich auch dazu zählen. Also komplett vom Reisepreis, der dann nicht
in das Land fließt.
Also Sie würden jetzt sagen was jetzt der Kunde im Reisebüro zahlt, was davon nicht
ankommt plus was dann noch zurückfließt?
Ja genau, richtig. Was das dann gleich zu sehr hohen Raten werden lässt, weil
da natürlich viele an der Wertschöpfung mitverdienen.
Ja, es gibt halt einmal die Definition, die Sie jetzt gesagt haben und dann gibt es aber
halt auch Stimmen, die dafür plädieren, dass man nur das, was erstmal in der
Destination ankommt und wieder rausfließt, das eigentlich nur das als Sickerrate
bezeichnet werden sollte.
Ja, das ist eigentlich auch das, was mehr Sinn macht und mit ähm ja
verschiedenen Entwicklungen, beispielsweise, dass, ja, der Trend weggeht vom
Pauschalpacket, es auch mehr Sinn macht. Es gibt ja auch immer mehr
Angebote, die beispielsweise kein Flugpacket mehr beinhalten und es ja da
wenig Sinn macht, dass es weiter betrachtet wird.
Ja und im Endeffekt werden ja auch, wenn man vom Pauschalpreis ausgeht werden ja
auch die Profite der Reisebüros und der Tour Operator miteinberechnet plus deren
Kosten für ihre Mitarbeiter und so weiter. Also da würde ja eigentlich all das als
Sickerrate gelten.
Ja ich denk da – und da kommt find ich auch nen ganz spannender Moment in
das Spiel, wenn man wirklich auf dieses mitschaut find ich es in der Diskussion
sehr spannend, dass beispielsweise Arbeitsplätze unterschiedlich bewertet
werden in der öffentlichen Diskussion. Dass man da, wenn man nämlich diesen
weitgefassten Begriff der Sickerrate nimmt mit dem Einkommen auch für
Reiseveranstalter, dann würde man ja auch Arbeitsplätze beispielsweise
unterschiedlich bewerten. Das man sagt zum Beispiel Automobilindustrie ist ein
Arbeitsplatz, der in Deutschland geschaffen wird in der öffentlichen Diskussion
als positiv bewertet und in der Reisebranche ist ein Arbeitsplatz, der geschaffen
wird als eher negativ bewertet weil man davon ausgeht, dass Sickerraten eher
was negatives ist.
Ja damit kommen wir eigentlich gleich zur nächsten Frage, warum denken Sie denn,
dass beim Tourismus so häufig kritisiert wird, dass nichts im Land bleibt, weil die
Sickerraten in anderen Sektoren auch oft deutlich höher sind, da gibt es einige
Nachweise in der Literatur, dass die Sickerraten eigentlich im Tourismus
vergleichsweise niedrig sind?
Ich glaube das ist eben ein Grund, den ich gerade genannt habe, was noch dazu
kommt ist, der Tourismus ist natürlich eine anfassbarere Branche, wo man sehen
kann ok was gibt es da, ähm, was passiert eigentlich vor Ort? Wo es vielen
Leuten auch erst bewusst wird, dass Länder gar nicht diese Strukturen haben,
dass sie ähm, ja dass sie nicht viel produzieren können und dass dadurch viel
108
importiert werden muss. Das wird dann an einigen Beispielen sehr griffig, dass
man dann da sagt: So jetzt hab ich hier in meinem Urlaub Paulaner Bier, da
muss ja die Sickerrate sehr sehr groß sein. Durch den Tourismus wird das sehr
anschaulich und ja auch vor Ort erlebt und irgendwie hat jeder schon mal so nen
Beispiel vor Augen. Bei andern Sektoren ist das -meiner Ansicht nach, einfach
viel intransparenter, was da wirklich passiert. Das ist glaub ich ein großer
Grund. Zudem, ähm, ist es manchmal eben so oder häufig so, dass gerade in
fernen Ländern so, dass der Tourismus eine der wichtigsten Einnahmequellen ist
und da wenig andere Sektoren vorhanden sind und deshalb stehen da dann auch
entsprechend hohe Sickerraten, aber das ist auch schwierig jetzt auch wirklich
die Sickerraten überhaupt kleiner zu halten, weil viele Industrien und Sektoren
da noch nicht entwickelt sind. [Pause] Ich glaub diese drei Gründe spielen da
zusammen.
Denken Sie denn, dass hohe Sickerraten jetzt wirklich ne Aussage beinhalten ob eine
Destination wirtschaftlich erfolgreich ist oder nicht erfolgreich ist vom Tourismus?
Wie definieren Sie denn erfolgreich in dem Zusammenhang?
Ja, im Sinne von, wenn jetzt hohe Sickerraten in dem Land vorhanden sind, ob man
dann sagen kann, die kriegen da wirtschaftlich eigentlich nur minimal was raus, weil ja
so viel wieder absickert?
Ich denke schon, dass Sickerraten in jedem Fall ein Indiz dafür sind wie oder
welchen Anteil in dem Land verbleiben, wie erfolgreich das Land dann auch
wirtschaftlich gesehen auch davon profitiert. Ähm, da spielen dann natürlich
auch noch mehr Faktoren ne Rolle, wie dieses Thema – wie wird eigentlich das
Einkommen in dem Land verteilt. Ähm, das ist natürlich auch ne Zahl, die man
sich angucken sollte und nicht allein die Sickerrate. Es kann ja sein, dass dann
eine Person 90% der Einnahmen auf sich vereint, wo man dann auch in Frage
stellen kann, ist das jetzt wirtschaftlich wirklich erfolgreich, obwohl es
vielleicht keine hohe Sickerrate ist. Also, da muss man sich dann auch wirklich
mehrere Komponenten anschauen. Die Sickerrate ist sicherlich auch ein Indiz
dafür, wie erfolgreich das Land dann eben ist.
Und, ähm, Sie hatten ja auch jetzt eben schon das All-Inclusive Thema angeschnitten,
das wird ja besonders kritisiert - würden Sie denn sagen, dass bei dieser Form des
Tourismus weniger Geld im Land ‚hängen bleibt‘?
Ähm, sehr kontrovers diskutiert. Wir sind gerade auch mit der TUI Travel PLC
in ner neuen Studie am ausarbeiten, die wirklich mal die verschieden
Unterkunftsarten vergleicht und guckt, was ist eigentlich der Unterschied? Bis
jetzt wurde ja meistens All-Inclusive isoliert betrachtet und ähm, einzelne
Bausteine rein - zum Beispiel haben wir geschaut - wer bucht mehr Ausflüge?
Sind es die All-Inclusive Gäste oder sind es die Halbpensions- oder
Frühstücksgäste? Und da haben wir tatsächlich festgestellt, dass All-Inclusive
Gäste tatsächlich mehr Ausflüge in das Land buchen. Ausflüge sind allerdings
109
ja nur ein Teil, ähm, ja, des Geldes, was im Land bleibt. Ähm, da sind noch
mehr Bausteine und beim All-Inclusive wird es glaub ich einfach deshalb
kritisiert weil ja, es ist einfach diese Brücke zu schlagen zwischen ‚ ja der Gast
geht jetzt abends nicht raus aus dem Hotel, sondern bleibt im Hotel drin und die
Bars/ Gaststätten haben dadurch natürlich weniger Einkommen‘. Was natürlich
auch keine, ähm, also dieser Effekt ist da, aber es kann auf der anderen Seite ja
auch wieder ein Effekt sein, dass Bauern mehr absetzen und so weiter und so
fort und das ist eben was, was jetzt im zweiten Schritt laufen muss – wie ist
eigentlich der wirkliche Vergleich? Und der ist, aus meiner Sicht, nur
rudimentär.
Bei den All-Inclusive Konzepten kann man ja eigentlich sehr genau nachverfolgen
inwiefern das Hotel mit der lokalen Wirtschaft vernetzt ist, also inwiefern es Essen und
Trinken aus der lokalen Wirtschaft bezieht und da könnte man ja eigentlich viel
genauer nachvollziehen – was konsumiert der Tourist? Wie viel davon ist lokal und wie
viel davon ist international produziert?
Ja genau, darum geht ja die Studie auch schon für den All-Inclusive, wo es das
dann eben für, ähm, ja die anderen Urlaubsformen dann eher Schätzungen sind,
wo jetzt eben die Forschungslücke aufgetan wurde und wir auch gesagt haben –
da muss näher geforscht werden was die Unterschiede sind in Bezug auf
Leakage der einzelnen Urlaubsformen.
Ist das denn jetzt in Ihren Hotelketten ein Thema, also legen Sie darauf wert, dass
lokale Wertschöpfungsketten geschaffen werden vor Ort?
Ähm, jetzt generell oder auf All-Inclusive bezogen?
Ehm, [Pause] ruhig generell.
Ja wir arbeiten mit einem Partner zusammen, generell mit der TUI Travel, der
nennt sich Travel Life. Der, ähm, untersucht Hotels auf das Thema
Nachhaltigkeit hin und ein Kriterium dabei ist beispielsweise auch, woher
bezieht er das Produkte? Bevorzugt er wenn möglich lokale Produkte? Aber
auch, gibt das Hotel Hinweise auf Aktivitäten, die auch noch vor Ort stattfinden
können, beispielsweise Museen und so weiter, also dass da auch nochmal
Wertschöpfung generiert werden kann. Also, was auch ne Rolle spielt ist eben
Bezahlung und Behandlung der Mitarbeiter, das ist auch nochmal ein
Bestandteil, ähm, von Leakage. Dieser Partner bezieht eben in die Kriterien
genau diese Themen eben auch mit ein.
Und das wird dann in der Hotelauswahl überprüft?
Das wird dann überprüft, dann wenn wir Vertragspartner mit dem Hotel sind.
Wir haben einen Vertragsanhang, wo die Hotels sich dazu verpflichten im ersten
Schritt ne Selbstüberprüfung zu machen und dann, sobald sie sich zertifizieren
lassen wirklich mit Audit vor Ort, ähm da auf diese Punkte hin untersucht
werden.
110
Da muss ich jetzt nochmal gerade nachfragen – ähm, die Hotels, von denen Sie jetzt
sprechen – sind das dann die TUI AG eigenen Hotels, wie jetzt Robinson und RIU oder
geht es dann auch um Hotels, die über die TUI einfach gebucht werden über die
Reisebüros?
Nee schon alle Hotels, mit denen TUI einen Vertrag unterschreibt.
Und für die eigenen Ketten – wird das dann im Voraus geguckt oder dann, auch, ähm,
weil ich mein, die bestehen ja schon lange dann die Hotels – wird das dann
nachträglich noch geguckt wo die Produkte her beziehen oder wurde das auch schon in
der Auswahl gemacht?
[…]
Also, die einzelnen Ketten haben dann auch noch mal verschiedene
Umweltstandards, nach denen sie sich richten also, beispielsweise auch nochmal
strenger als, ähm, als das als Vertragspartner für Hotels möglich ist, die
zertifizieren wir beispielsweise auch nochmal mit nem gesonderten Label, das
nennt sich ‚Eco-Resort‘ und gehen damit nochmal einen Schritt weiter und
haben damit spezielle Umweltzertifizierungen, aber es gibt jetzt keine
übergreifenden Regeln -was auch relativ schwer ist- zu sagen, okay, man muss
jetzt 90% lokale Lebensmittel verwenden. Solche festen Regeln mit Zahlen
verbunden haben wir nicht, weil das eben natürlich auch ein Unterschied ist ob
ein Hotel zum Beispiel in der Türkei steht oder ob es auf den Malediven steht.
[Pause] Wo sehen Sie denn das Hauptpotential Sickerraten im Tourismus zu
reduzieren?
Ähm, ich denke es liegt in der Professionalisierung der Lieferketten, ähm,
Lieferketten einmal, ähm natürlich Landwirtschaft, dass beispielweise
kleinbäuerliche Strukturen entsprechend sich organisieren, ausgebildet werden
um den Qualitätsanspruch und Zuverlässigkeitsanspruch von Hotels zu erfüllen.
Das ist immer wieder das Feedback von Hotels, wenn sie sagen sie kaufen nicht
regional/lokal Lebensmittel. Ähm, was das Thema Einrichtung von Hotels
angeht wird das natürlich schon wieder ein bisschen schwieriger, weil es da viel
mehr in Sachen Maschinen und Knowhow in dem Land erforderlich ist. Ähm,
was natürlich noch ein weiterer Ansatzpunkt ist, ist die Ausbildung von
Personal, ähm, da arbeiten wir auch gerade mit der GIZ zusammen, wo wir
überprüfen ob man beispielsweise eine Schule in Nordafrika errichten kann
beziehungsweise unterstützen kann, die sich dem Thema Ausbildung von
Fachkräften widmet. Beispielweise kenne ich da einige Hotels in Ägypten, die
arbeiten mit asiatischen Fachkräften zusammen und wenn man das erste Mal in
dem Hotel ist, denkt man erst mal so ‚ah ok die haben asiatische Fachkräfte,
weil es billiger ist‘, aber deren Argument die Fachkräfte zu nehmen ist
allerdings, dass sie besser arbeiten, besser ausgebildet sind und besseren Service
liefern und dass die Gäste am Ende zufriedener sind. Und da ist eben auch
dieses Thema ‚Ausbildung, Weiterbildung‘ sehr wichtig. Dass eben die Kräfte,
111
die im Land sind auch die Möglichkeit haben die Fähigkeit zu haben im Hotel
zu arbeiten. Also das ist dann als Baustein einmal hauptsächlich Landwirtschaft
und Ausbildung von Fachkräften ist aus meiner Sicht kurzfristig ein Haupthebel.
Langfristig ist natürlich auch die Zusammenarbeit mit weiteren Sektoren
wichtig, damit auch im Land überhaupt die Güter produziert werden können, die
der Tourismus benötigt.
Also die Punkte, die Sie nennen, würden ja alle voraussetzen, dass sich eigentlich in der
wirtschaftlichen Struktur der Entwicklungsländer was tun muss und in der Ausbildung.
Und das es ja eigentlich daran liegt, dass es eben Entwicklungsländer sind und sie halt
eben gewisse Sachen nicht, ähm, 'supplien', ähm geben können und das die deshalb
international bezogen werden.
Ja das ist aus meiner Sicht der Hauptgrund. Teilweise ist das auch Unwissen
von Hotels. Wie ich die Hoteliers kennengelernt habe, wenn es möglich ist
beziehen die in der Regel Lebensmittel von vor Ort aus verschiedenen Gründen.
Das ist einfach frischer, es ist auch günstiger, ähm und wenn es möglich ist,
versuchen die das zu machen. Ich denk schon, dass es größtenteils halt eben an
der Infrastruktur liegt.
Ja und jetzt gibt es in Ketten ja auch viel – also, dass zum Beispiel Sachen wie
Shampoo oder Handtücher – dass, das alles vereinheitlicht und standardisiert sein
muss und jetzt in, weiß ich nicht, in jedem Robinsonhotel das gleiche Shampoo stehen
soll – also bei andern Ketten viel gemacht.
Ja, das habe ich auch schon erlebt, dass es das gibt. Das ist natürlich wirklich
ein Thema Bewusstsein, ähm, also aus zwei Gründen. Einmal natürlich der
Qualitätsaspekt, weil man einheitliche Qualität haben will, aber das hängt
natürlich auch mit Bewusstsein zusammen – es muss ja nicht immer dasselbe
auf der ganzen Welt sein. Es geht ja da wesentlich um die Qualität und von
unseren Hotelketten, da gibt es auch Beispiele, aber in der Regel ist es so, dass
wenn es möglich ist es im Land zu machen, wird es auch dort besorgt. Da auch
wieder weniger auf das Thema Nachhaltigkeit sondern da ist der Preis
ausschlaggebend und weil es eben aufwändig ist global zu beschaffen.
Ja, wobei das ja auch nicht immer so ist – manchmal werden ja auch wirklich Sachen
importiert, weil sie einfach in China billiger produziert werden –jetzt zum Beispieloder halt auch in anderen Ländern.
Ja, wenn solche Sachen passieren, passiert das eher im großen Rahmen und in
großen Mengen. Ich kenne jetzt für unsere Hotels nicht jeden einzelnen Artikel,
der in den Hotels beschafft wird, aber es ist eher weniger der Fall, dass jetzt im
großen Stil für die Hotels eingekauft wird aus China und das in die Hotels
gebracht wird. Das mag’s mal geben, aber ich kenne jetzt keinen Fall wo das so
war.
112
Sie haben ja jetzt gesagt, dass Sie das Hauptpotential in der Ausbildung von lokalen
Arbeitskräften sehen und in der Vertiefung von lokalen Lieferketten. Inwiefern sehen
Sie denn das Handlungsfeld der TUI den in diesem Bereich um das zu verbessern?
Bei uns ist der größte Einfluss natürlich die Hoteliers, weil das sind die, mit
denen wir vertraglich verbunden sind. Ähm, da hab ich ja schon angedeutet,
dass man da eben die Partner sensibilisiert, dass sie eben bevorzugt regionale
Lebensmittel verwenden, mit eben auch all den Vorzügen, das man dieses
Thema Frische, Qualität und so weiter nochmal mitreinbringt. Ähm, dass man
die Hotels unterstützt, sensibilisiert für das Thema Ausbildung von lokalen
Arbeitnehmern – da ist unser großer Hebel und wir suchen jetzt natürlich auch,
wenn wir jetzt zum Beispiel eine Schule aufbauen Hotelpartner damit dazu zu
gewinnen , damit beispielsweise Praktika in den Hotels durchgeführt werden
können. Was wir jetzt in konkreten Fällen natürlich auch machen können ist auf
Behörden einwirken, aber das ist natürlich auch für das Thema Entwicklung
relativ komplex und eher außerhalb unseres Einflussbereiches, als dass wir
sagen könnten: „baut doch mal ne Möbelindustrie auf.“ Das wird natürlich
relativ schwierig werden. Aber, wie gesagt, über Hotels funktioniert das am
Besten und da ist auch unser Einfluss am größten.
Hotels sind ja auch letztlich die Tourismuseinrichtungen, die einfach am meisten Güter
und Services beziehen.
Genau, richtig
Ich hatte jetzt mal als ich auf Ihrer Homepage geguckt habe gesehen, dass Sie ja viel
mit dem Bereich Umweltschutz und sozialer Nachhaltigkeit werben – meinen Sie denn,
dass die drei Säulen der Nachhaltigkeit gleich berücksichtigt sind bei Ihnen? Also, jetzt
zur wirtschaftlichen Nachhaltigkeit – in wie fern tragen Sie das nach außen, was Sie da
machen?
Ähm, ja die wirtschaftliche Nachhaltigkeit spielt ja auch viel wieder außerhalb
unseres Tuns eine Rolle. Also jetzt zum beispielsweise mit Verträgen unserer
Hotels, wo wir jetzt natürlich weniger Einfluss haben, also unser Fokus ist
schon auf den Säulen ‚Soziales und Ökologisches‘, wobei es natürlich, wenn es
in so ein Thema wie Sickerraten reingeht auch wieder unser Thema wird. Da
sehe ich aber eine enge Verbindung auch zum Thema ‚Soziales‘. Und ähm,
wenn man dann auf die ökonomische Säule sieht, dann ist die ja auch sehr stark,
klassischerweise, im Management verankert. Also wenn man dann drauf guckt,
dass das Unternehmen eben dauerhaft auf dem Markt besteht und so weiter und
so fort, das ist klassischerweise eigentlich nicht unser Hauptteil, auf dem wir
uns bewegen. Wo trotzdem die TUI alle drei Säulen eben aus verschiedenen
Abteilungen heraus gleichmäßig zu, ähm zu bearbeiten, ähm sagt man das bei
Säulen? [lacht] …aufzubauen.
Ja wobei die wirtschaftliche Nachhaltigkeit ja schon, nach außen hin an die Kunden
weniger kommuniziert wird als die soziale und die ökologische, oder?
113
In welchem Bezug meinen Sie das jetzt?
Ja, wenn man jetzt nachliest –also das ist ja nicht nur bei der TUI so, sondern auch
grundsätzlich bei Veranstaltern- die soziale und die ökologische Nachhaltigkeit, das ist
halt irgendwie greifbarer und das kann man irgendwie auch greifbarer den Kunden
vermitteln, was man dafür macht, aber jetzt zur wirtschaftlichen Nachhaltigkeit als
solches, was ja eigentlich gleichberechtigt eine der drei Säulen ist, sieht man halt doch
auch in Nachhaltigkeitsberichten oder auf Homepages weniger Informationen zu….
Sie meinen, dass man dann zum Beispiel Zahlen veröffentlicht – wie viel Geld
bleibt eigentlich im Zielgebiet….
Ja oder halt Sachen wie, dass Sie sich zum Beispiel bemühen, dass Ihre Hotels lokale
Wertschöpfungsketten beziehen.
Ah, ok, das meinen Sie. Ja, also das ist, in der Kommunikation, das liegt glaub
ich auch daran, dass eben ein relativ umstrittenes Feld gibt und dass, ähm wenn
wir jetzt zum Beispiel behaupten von uns aus, dass jetzt zum Beispiel bei AllInclusive doch relativ viel im Land bleibt und so weiter und so fort, das ist
natürlich schnell, dass wir da angreifbar sind, zumal auch von der GIZ Seite
noch wenige Sachen dazu veröffentlicht wurden und da ist es natürlich riskant
zu sagen, ok wir gehen jetzt als Erster in die Veröffentlichung gehen mit diesen
Zahlen und kommunizieren die sehr sehr stark, weil es ja eben noch
unvollkommen das ganze Bild ist, was in den Köpfen von den Kunden da ist.
Das ist sicherlich ein Grund, warum es noch nicht so stark kommuniziert ist.
Obwohl das Thema zum Beispiel, dass bei den Hotels bevorzugt auf regionale
Lebensmittel und so weiter geachtet wird, das haben wir auch in
Kommunikation an den Kunden ähm- ich hab grad ein Plakat, was hier im Büro
hängt vor Augen, da steht beispielsweise als erster Punkt bei den Champion
Hotels ‚regional, ökologische Speisen‘ und wird auch kommuniziert aber es
fehlt eben noch ein bisschen die wissenschaftliche Basis um zu sagen, ok, damit
kann man auch sauber nach außen treten. Und dann wird es natürlich auch sehr
schnell wissenschaftlich, wenn man dann über das Thema Sickerraten diskutiert,
wo es nicht mal ne klare Definition gibt, wie Sie am Anfang gesagt haben, wo
es ja doch sehr komplex wird und ökonomische Nachhaltigkeit wird dann doch
eben auch mit dem eigenen Unternehmenserfolg in Verbindung gebracht.
[Pause]
Nicht ganz zufrieden mit der Antwort?
Doch, nee eigentlich letztlich ist es ja dann eigentlich so, dass man in der sozialen und
ökologischen Nachhaltigkeit ja eigentlich die ökonomischen Aspekte wiederfindet, also
soziales – wenn es um lokale Angestellte geht oder ökologische – wenn es um die lokale
Produkte geht, das ist ja eigentlich auch ökonomisch.
Ja deshalb, ist es, und das find ich schön zu betrachten, dass dieses
Säulenmodell nicht ganz glücklich ist, weil es dann so aussieht, dass diese drei
114
Bereiche getrennt voneinander stehen. Also die drei Säulen sollen ja
verdeutlichen, dass nicht am Ende eine Säule stärker gewichtet werde soll als
die andere. Also, aber das soll nicht heißen, dass Umwelt für sich steht oder
Soziales für sich steht oder, dass Ökonomie für sich steht. Das alles drei ist ja
wieder miteinander verbunden, man kann ja auch soziale Themen nicht
losgelöst von Ökologischen betrachten. Genauso wenig die ökonomische Säule.
Ja, ähm, ich hab noch eine Fragen, die ist jetzt ein bisschen aus dem Zusammenhang
gerissen, bezieht sich aber nochmal zurück auf die Definition der Sickerraten und auf
die Problematik –wenn man jetzt eine Prozentzahl sieht und mit Zahlen konfrontiert
wird – was heißen die eigentlich? Wo sehen Sie denn das Hauptproblem, wenn Sie so
eine Zahl sehen in der Vergleichbarkeit oder auch generell in der Messung von solchen
Zahlen?
Ja das ist natürlich, ähm, ein relativ großes Problem, weil das eben genau dieses
Thema Vergleichbarkeit, was die Definition die zugrunde liegt angeht. Sind
wirklich alle Werte da mit drin? Kann man das überhaupt sauber abgreifen?
Also, weiß man, was ein Gast durchschnittlich für ein Abendessen in der
lokalen Gastronomie ausgibt, äh, solche Sachen sind natürlich viel mit
Schätzung, Hochrechnung und so weiter verbunden und eben auch mit
unterschiedlichen Datengrundlagen. Deshalb ist das mit der Vergleichbarkeit
recht schwierig. Zudem muss man ja auch noch, wie Sie am Anfang gesagt
haben, nochmal andere Industrien als Vergleich herbeiziehen und auch gucken,
wo landet eigentlich das Geld? Und man muss im Prinzip jeden Kanal, den man
hat, einzeln bewerten – ähm, kann man das denn? Wie bewertet man, das
schöne Beispiel, das Gehalt von jemandem, der 60% dieser Sickerrate
einstreicht – ist das eben genauso positiv oder negativ bewertet wie eben ein
Einkommen, dass der Tellerwäscher hat. Ja also da ist es sehr gefährlich und
sehr schwierig einfach eine Prozentzahl zu vergleichen ohne, dass man vorher
definiert hat, was damit alles eingeschlossen ist.
Ja, da ist halt auch bei dem Problem bei der Definition, dass halt auch das, was nicht
im Land ankommt, ähm, als Sickerrate einberechnet wird, da kann man halt eigentlich
relativ stark gegen argumentieren und sagen, die Tourismusindustrie – da gibt es nun
mal die Tourismus generierende Region und die Destination, in der der Tourismus
stattfindet. Und die sind halt beide Teil der Wertschöpfungskette.
Ja definitiv. Und dann muss man auch gucken, wo fließt das Geld in
Deutschland hin? Also schüttet beispielsweise TUI das Geld an Aktionäre aus –
wie bewertet man dieses Geld? Ähm, die Aktionärsstruktur – man muss dann
eigentlich sehr weit reingehen um zu sagen: „okay, das ist jetzt gut oder
schlecht“ in so einer Betrachtung. Das ist sehr komplex, weil es eben auch über
verschiedene Länder stattfindet, dieses Geschäft.
[…]
115
Sie haben ja anfangs eigentlich auch gesagt, dass Sie das Geld, was nicht im Land
ankommt auch als Tei sehen, gleichzeitig finden Sie es ja eigentlich auch – so wie ich
das jetzt verstanden hab- nicht 100%ig richtig, dass das miteinberechnet wird?
Ja ich kenn‘s einfach aus der wissenschaftlichen Diskussion, dass das immer
wieder miteinberechnet wird, aber ich es, wie gesagt, nicht unbedingt richtig
finde.
[…]
Ja, gut, vielen Dank für das interessante Gespräch und Zeit und Mühen!
Ja ich hoffe es hat Ihnen weitergeholfen!
116

Exploring the Leakage Effect in Tourism in Developing Countries

Transcription

Similar documents

fashion reportage bon jovi - Es

transmitter 0208

Tourismus geographie - Prof. A. Kagermeier

Alles was Recht ist