Exploring the Leakage Effect in Tourism in Developing ... · EXPLORING THE LEAKAGE EFFECT IN TOURISM IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES ... 1.3 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ... UNCTAD United Nations

DIPLOMA THESIS

INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES BAD HONNEF · BONN

TOURISM MANAGEMENT

E X P L O R I N G T H E L E A K A G E E F F E C T

I N T O U R I S M

I N D E V E L O P I N G C O U N T R I E S

- I S S U E S A N D I M P L I C A T I O N S -

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.

ii

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.

iii

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

iv

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

v

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

1

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,

2

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.

3

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

4

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

OBJECTIVE

RESEARCH METHOD

Objective 1 By secondary research: reviewing relevant literature By primary research: employing the results of three expert interviews

Objective 2 By secondary research: reviewing relevant literature By primary research: employing the results of three expert interviews Partially by including a case study based on secondary data

Objective 3 By secondary research: reviewing relevant literature By primary research: employing the results of three expert interviews By including a case study based on secondary data

Objective 4 Mainly by secondary research: reviewing relevant literature Partially by primary research: employing the results of three expert interviews

Objective 5 By critically analyzing and comparing primary and secondary research findings

Source: Author

5

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.

6

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

7

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

8

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.

9

FIGURE 1: THE TOURISM VALUE CHAIN

Source: Gollub et al., 2003:23

10

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

http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/english/beyond/global/glossary.html#99




11

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 income-

multiplier 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

12

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 neo-

colonial 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

13

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.

Figure 3 also shows that a portion of revenues cannot be retained by the local economy. This FIGURE 2: THE TOURISM MULTIPLIER AND LEAKAGE

Source: Weaver& Lawton, 2002:247

14

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 re-

spend 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.

15

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.

16

‘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 out-

of-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) ‘low-

leakage 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

17

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

18

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.

19

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).

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 tourist-receiving 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)

Invisible leakage 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

20

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.

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&

FIGURE 4: LEAKAGES IN TOURISM

Source: Mitchell& Ashley, 2010:81 adapted from Lejárraga &Walkenhorst, 2006

21

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/ pre-

leakage) 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

22

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

23

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’.

24

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.

25

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 import-

coefficient (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

26

‘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

27

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 non-

tourism 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

28

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.

29

TABLE 3: ISSUES WITH LOCAL FOOD SOURCING

TYPE OF ACCOMMODATION

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)

TOURIST BEHAVIOR AND PREFERENCES

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

QUALITY& RELIABILITY

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)

VOLUMES& CAPACITY

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)

SEASONALITY

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

COMPETITIVENESS

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)

LACK OF

COMMUNICATION& MISTRUST

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

30

In 1983 Bélisle claimed that the interrelationship of tourism and food demand is an under-

researched 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

31

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

32

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

33

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

34

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 pre-

leakage/ 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

35

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

36

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.

37

TABLE 4: IRREGULARITIES IN COMPOSING LEAKAGE FIGURES

ASPECT PROBLEM SOURCE

Definiton

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)

Scale of Measuring

Leakage

Diverging scales at which leakage is measured: at a national, regional, tourism product level

Observation by author

Measuring Methods

Different methods grasp different definitional aspects of leakage


Incongruence within

Methods

Incongruence within methods (e.g. multiplier method – different definitions and measuring approaches)

Hughes, 1994; Lejárraga& Walkenhorst, 2007; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010

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

Smith, 1994; Theobald, 2005; Hemmati& Koehler, 2000; Mitchell& Ashley, 2010

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

38

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

39

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 pre-

leakage 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

40

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

41

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

42

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

43

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

44

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 PROBLEM SOURCE

Transparency

Lacking explanations for how leakage was estimated/calculated when citing leakage rates impedes an adequate interpretation of data


Context

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

Comparison

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

45

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:

46

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

47

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).

48

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.

49

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.

50

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)

FIGURE 7: IMPORT PROPORTION OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURE PER PRODUCT CATEGORY

HOTEL I


$0 $100.000 $200.000 $300.000 $400.000 $500.000 $600.000 $700.000

Coffee

Non-AlcoholicBeverages

Alcoholic Beverages

Canned food

Rice

Potatoes

Fruit andVegetables

Seafood

Fish

Meat

Annual Expenditure in US$

Product Category

Import Proportion of Total Annual Expenditure per Product Category - Hotel I (2005)

Annual Expenditure in US$ Share of Annual Expenditure spent on Imports in US$

51

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Coffee

Non-Alcoholic…

Alcoholic Beverages

Canned food

Rice

Potatoes

Fruit and Vegetables

Seafood

Fish

Meat

0%

20%

20%

70%

20%

100%

0%

0%

70%

10%

Percentage of Annual Expenditure

Product Category

Percentage of Imports per Product Category - Hotel I (2005)

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


52

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)

FIGURE 10: IMPORT PROPORTION OF TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURE PER PRODUCT

CATEGORY HOTEL II


$0,00 $100.000,00 $200.000,00 $300.000,00 $400.000,00 $500.000,00

Office Paper

Cleaning Utensils

Toilet Paper

Textiles (eg.towels, sheets)

Cosmetic Products

Alcoholic Beverages

Canned Food

Rice

Potatoes


Seafood

Fish

Meat

Annual Expenditure in US$

Product Category

Import Proportion of Total Annual Expenditure per Product Category - Hotel II (2005)

Annual Expenditure in US$ Share of Annual Expenditure spent on Imports in US$

53

FIGURE 11: PERCENTAGE OF IMPORTS PER PRODUCT CATEGORY HOTEL II


FIGURE 12: EXPENDITURE COMPARISON BETWEEN LOCAL AND IMPORTED GOODS FOR

HOTEL II


0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Office Paper

Cleaning Utensils

Toilet Paper

Textiles (eg.towels, sheets)

Cosmetic Products

Alcoholic Beverages

Canned Food

Rice

Potatoes


Seafood

Fish

Meat

100%

0%

100%

100%

100%

15%

0%

15%

0%

0%

21%

60%

6%

Percentage of Annual Expenditure

Product Category

Percentage of Imports per Product Category - Hotel II (2005)

Percentage of Annual Expenditure spent on Imports

54

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.

55

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.

56

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 semi-

or 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

57

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.

58

TABLE 8: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS AND LINK TO OBJECTIVES

QUESTION QUESTION POSED TO

AIM AND REASONING LINK TO

OBJECTIVE

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

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

Objective 5

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

To obtain perceptions of leakage and its definition

To find out whether definition (a) or (b) finds more approval among the experts

Objective 1

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

Reveals the relevance and significance of leakage

Seeking for an explanation why there is such a debate on leakage in tourism

Objective 2 Objective 5

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

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

Objective 2

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?

TUI

What do leakage rates itself reveal on the economic

performance of tourism at a destination?

EED Mascontour

TUI

To identify the perceived significance and relevance of leakage and reasons for their appraisal

Objective 5

Where do you see the main potential to reduce leakage? EED Mascontour

TUI

To add different aspects to the findings from the literature and from different organizational backgrounds

Objective 3

59

Where do you see the main difficulty in measuring and

comparing leakage?

Mascontour TUI

To add aspects to the findings from the literature

Objective 4

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?

TUI To add aspects from the perspective of a tour operator, who has the biggest sphere of practical action in terms of reducing leakage.

Objective 3

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?

TUI To reveal the significance of economic sustainability and leakage reduction in the corporate social responsibility efforts of a tour operator

Objective 3

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?

TUI To reveal the significance of economic sustainability and leakage reduction in the corporate social responsibility efforts of a tour operator

Objective 5

Source: Author

60

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

61

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.

62

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)

3 Original job title: ‘Referent Nachhaltigkeitsmanagement’

4 For the ease of understanding TUI Deutschland will subsequently only be referred to as TUI

63

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.

64

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

65

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.‘

66

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

67

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

7Original 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.‘

68

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

69

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

70

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

71

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‘

72

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

73

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

9Original 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.

74

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

75

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?‘

76

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‘

77

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%).

78

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

79

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

80

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.

81

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]

82

Gollub, J., Hosier, A.,& Woo, G., 2003. Using Cluster-Based Economic Strategy to Minimize

Tourism Leakages [Online]. UNWTO. Available at: http://www.e-

unwto.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

83

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 Pro-

Poor 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.

84

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].

85

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.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01607383

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=PublicationURL&_hubEid=1-s2.0-S0160738300X00904&_cid=271796&_pubType=JL&view=c&_auth=y&_acct=C000054720&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=1807433&md5=0a278ebe4c1ceef4b540768aed32e0cf

86

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?

87

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?

88

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

(50% fish,

50% seafood)

Fish: 70% imported

Seafood: 100% local US$

290,478

Meat and

sausage 18,000 kg US$ 649,233 90% domestic/local US$

584,310

Rice US$ 36,790 80% domestic US$

29,432

Potatoes US$ 17,373 100% imported 0

Fruits and

vegetables 55,000 kg US$ 333,273 100% domestic/local US$

333,273

Non-alcoholic

beverages 6,000 l US$ 86,564 80% domestic US$

69,251

Alcoholic

beverages 4,000 l US$ 201,984 80% domestic US$

161,587

Canned food US$ 164,112 70% imported US$

49,234

Coffee 500 kg US$ 13,886 100% domestic US$

13,886

Total expenditure for

agricultural products US$ 1,950,104 per

year from Dominican

Republic US$

1,531,451

(= 78.5%)

89

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.)

Gastos al año US$14

Lugar de compra

Carne 426,566.11 US$

Carne de res 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

Carne de cerdo 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

Carne de aves 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




Gastos al año US$

Lugar de compra

Otros carnes Chivo 450 70.00 RD$ 11,361.59 US$ local

12 Datos del año 2005 según la información del departamento de compras del resort (sin bebidas no alcohólicas). 13 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.

90

Pescado 174,615.15 US$

Pescado 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 197,024.35 US$

Mariscos 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 111,733.13 US$

Verduras 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$




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

Productos enlatados

2,477.90 US$

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

Bebidas alcohólicas

145,376.81 US$

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

92




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 123,534.72 US$

Textiles 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$

93

APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW SABINE MINNINGER

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]

94

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

95

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 All-

Inclusive 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 All-

Inclusive 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

96

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?

97

[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

98

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!

99

APPENDIX E: INTERVIEW MATTHIAS BEYER


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.

100

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

101

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

102

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,

103

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

104

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?

105

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, sozio-

kulturellen 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. […]

106

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

107

APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW CHRISTIAN CARLÈ


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.

108

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

109

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

110

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.

111

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,

112

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 Beispiel-

oder 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.

113

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?

114

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 All-

Inclusive 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

115

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.

[…]

116

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!

Documents

Exploring the Leakage Effect in Tourism in Developing ... · EXPLORING THE LEAKAGE EFFECT IN TOURISM IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES ... 1.3 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ... UNCTAD United Nations