Search for insight into balance: experiences from Zeeland

Exercise to arrive at the most useful indicators

First, we tested about 100 indicators that were used as an example for the DDL scale, based on several criteria:

• Availability. Practical experience shows that balance differs greatly at the local level. It is therefore necessary to have data available at least at the municipal level. To what extent are data available at the municipal level for this indicator and how easy is data to obtain in terms of time and costs?
• A causal relationship with tourism. To what extent does an indicator measure a direct cause-and-effect relationship with tourism? For example, there are many indicators that provide insight into the direct importance of tourism for the economy (such as the share of T&R jobs in total employment). Still, it is a lot more difficult to develop an indicator that provides insight into the possible relationship between tourism and crime.
• Significant for balance. How valuable or essential is an indicator in arriving at an assessment of balance? Tourism intensity and density are very telling, while the absolute number of businesses says much less.
• Comparability. To what extent is data available and/or collectable for an indicator for other regions in the Netherlands? Some regions have a lot of data available, others very little. However a comparison is important when interpreting the data.

Based on this assessment, we made a pre-selection of indicators and collected data for the four coastal municipalities. We then organised working sessions with policy officers from different fields of expertise to discuss which indicators they find most telling, whether these indicators help make statements about the balance of their destination and whether any indicators are missing. Based on these steps, we ultimately identified 19 indicators as 'best useful'. Some of these are new or adapted compared to the indicators proposed by the DDL.

Key lessons

The 19 most useful indicators provide a far from complete picture of all aspects of impact and carrying capacity, as mentioned in the DDL scale. It is therefore not possible to make a judgment about balance based on these indicators: we were not able to fill the DDL scale and thus measure balance. However, the municipalities involved say that they now have much more insight into the scale and impact of tourism on their destination. The working sessions with their colleagues from other policy areas were also valuable for recognising the influence of tourism on many parts of the environment.

Why has it not been possible to arrive at a judgment about balance based on the scale?

• A multitude of topics are suggested from the scales, with even more possible indicators. At first glance, the lack of data stands in the way of actual application. On closer inspection, the multitude of topics also appears to be particularly complex. The idea of arriving at a single final assessment of balance does not do justice to this complexity. Despite the connection between all elements of the scale, the subjects can hardly be related one to one. Because how does ecological impact relate to psychological capacity? And how do you weigh economic impact compared to physical capacity?
• Moreover, several topics in the scale are subdivided into a whole series of sub-topics that all also matter and that differ greatly in content. For example, with physical capacity, utilities are a completely different topic than transport infrastructure or the capacity of tourist accommodations. Making a single judgment about physical capacity would ignore the importance and diversity of those different sub-topics. It may therefore be better to let the indicators stand alone, just as CBS has done in the Regional Broad Prosperity Monitor.
• Looking at those indicators, it also appears to be virtually impossible to determine quantitative limit values. It is not possible to state that value X on indicator A represents balance or imbalance. The interaction between the various indicators and the local context plays a too important role in this. Weighing positive versus negative impacts is also not easy to quantify, because impacts are completely different and cannot be offset against each other. Moreover, impacts can end up in different places or with different groups of stakeholders.

This leads to the conclusion that although the DDL scale provides a good framework for thinking about balance, the set of indicators in the scale is too comprehensive and diverse for measuring and assessing balance. It is therefore obvious to arrive at a set of core indicators that address the most essential topics from the scale and based on which the discussion can be conducted.

A useful set of core indicators ideally has the following characteristics:

• jointly do justice to the different aspects of balance;
• are at least measurable at the municipal level;
• offer the possibility of long-term measurements;
• are comparable to other municipalities in the province and beyond;
• can be influenced to a certain extent by (policy) measures.

Continued in Zeeland and South Holland

In Zeeland we are already working on the follow-up. On the one hand, this follow-up focuses on completing the data for the 19 most useful indicators for all Zeeland municipalities and displaying them visually, on the other hand, on devising a multi-year plan for how to proceed when it comes to measuring balance. There is an important interaction with a similar project in South Holland. On behalf of that province, CELTH is working together with Erasmus UPT, Bureau BUITEN and Bureau voor Ruimte & Vrije Tijd to develop and test a generally applicable method for mapping the balance of destinations in South Holland. Given the complexity of the subject, it is extremely valuable to exchange knowledge and experiences with different partners and use them for a joint path forward.

Want to know more?

All steps in the process and all findings from Zeeland have been collected in an extensive methodological report, which can be requested from HZ Kenniscentrum Kusttoerisme: kenniscentrumtoerisme@hz.nl

Daniek Nijland
Researcher at HZ Kenniscentrum Kusttoerisme
Theme Manager Living Environment at CELTH