PAST REPRESENTATIONS
Response from ATHE to the Tourism Inquiry by DCMS (2007)
Association of Tourism in Higher Education (ATHE)
c/o- Professor Peter Burns
Centre for Tourism Policy Studies
University of Brighton
BN20 7UR
www.athe.org.uk
Culture, Media and Sport Committee
House of Commons
7 Millbank
London SW1P 3JA
Tourism Inquiry
Submission from Association of Tourism in Higher Education
1. ATHE: what we are, what we do
1.1 The Association for Tourism in Higher Education (formerly the National Liaison Group for Tourism in Higher Education (NLG) was established following a national conference held in London in October 1993. After seven years and against the backdrop of a rapidly changing higher education landscape and more importantly, with increased involvement by Government agencies in education there was a growing need for a “subject association” to represent tourism.. De facto NLG was increasingly carrying on the role of a subject association. This was best demonstrated by the request that it represent tourism in the Quality Assurance Agency’s Benchmarking exercise in 2000. As a result the decision was taken at the AGM held in December 2000 to revise the organisation’s constitution and to change its name to the Association for Tourism in Higher Education.
1.2 As a mature organisation, and a Learned Society of the Academy of Social Sciences, we see our role increasingly as one that promotes the contribution of university level tourism education and research to an innovative and competitive sector sensitive to the needs of the full range of tourism stakeholders. In formal terms, our objectives are as follows:
- To act as the Subject Association for tourism in higher education in the UK
- To promote the development and recognition of tourism as a subject of study in the UK and liaise as appropriate with other European Union countries and internationally
- To encourage high standards in learning, teaching and research
- To identify and communicate ‘good practice’, statistics and other information about first degrees and postgraduate qualifications in tourism
- To liaise with other bodies concerned with higher education in tourism
- To support, undertake and disseminate research to further these objectives
- To maintain links between education on the one hand, and employers and other interested bodies on the other
The Chair of ATHE is Lyn Bibbings, Department of Hospitality, Leisure and Tourism, Business School, Oxford Brookes University. Lyn is also a non-Executive Director of Tourism South East, and Tourism Liaison Officer for the Higher Education Academy.
2. Tourism in Higher Education
2.1 Higher education tourism provision (including HE in FE colleges) takes place in 120 institutions (see Annex 1). The total population of students enrolled on the principal Joint Academic Coding Scheme JACS subject ‘N8’, i.e. ‘Tourism Transport and Travel’ according to HESA records for 2004/05 was 11,180. Table 1: provides an overview of this population at the four-digit JACS code level.
Table 1: Enrolments in Tourism Transport and Travel 2004/05
| JACS 4-digit Subject | Total | % |
|---|---|---|
| (N800) Tourism, transport & travel | 7410 | 66.3 |
| (N810) Travel management | 135 | 1.2 |
| (N820) Event management | 1385 | 12.4 |
| (N830) UK tourism | 480 | 4.3 |
| (N840) International tourism | 885 | 7.9 |
| (N850) Transport studies | 215 | 1.9 |
| (N852) Sea travel | 170 | 1.5 |
| (N853) Air travel | 405 | 3.6 |
| (N890) Tourism, transport & travel not elsewhere classified | 95 | 0.9 |
| Total | 11180 | 100.0 |
2.2 Tourism is located, inter alia, in HE business schools, departments of geography, anthropology, sociology and media/ cultural studies. Topics taught can be ranged along a continuum with the two poles being characterised as ‘tourism as business’ and ‘tourism as problem.’ In other words, student experience varies from straightforward studies about the management and quantitative analysis of the sector to hard-edged critical appraisal of its impacts-especially in developing countries. In addition to the undergraduate provision, HE also offers a range of Masters level programmes and PhDs.
3 Tourism research in HE
3.1 It is fair to say that globally, the UK is a leading producer of high quality academic journal articles and other research outputs. Our intellectual competitors are Australia and New Zealand. Tourism in both these countries contributes significantly to their international identity and national economy – as reflected in consistent and generous government tourism research funding. However, it is paradoxical that while in the UK, the quality of academic tourism research is unquestionably good, the public funding of this research is fragmented and inconsistent, leading to a lack of empirical work. For example, analysis of Economic and Social Research Council’s grants for the last 25 years reveals that only nine grants have been awarded to tourism studies and only four post-doctoral awards have been made. In no way does this reflect the vital role that tourism plays in the economic and social life of the nation.
3.2 However, the ESRC now recognises that as tourism is such an important part of the economy, and an integral part of society, research that brings together academics and the users of research, should be funded. To this end ATHE have been working with ESRC to develop mechanisms to achieve this.
3.3 This is not yet reflected in other funding programmes. For example, in 2004 a major five year programme called ‘Rural Economy and Land Use-(RELU) was launched by Research Councils UK (RCUK). RELU describes itself as an:
…unprecedented collaboration between the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) and the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). It has a budget of £24 million, with additional funding provided by the Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.” (http://www.relu.ac.uk/about/)
RELU is predicated on following terms:
…Rural areas in the UK are experiencing a period of considerable change. The Rural Economy and Land Use Programme aims to advance understanding of the challenges caused by this change today and in the future. Interdisciplinary research is being funded between 2004 and 2009 in order to inform policy and practice with choices on how to manage the countryside and rural economies. (http://www.relu.ac.uk/about/)
Given RELU’s logo of “Harnessing the sciences for sustainable rural development” it is nothing short of astonishing that not only is there no major tourism strand (given that tourism –as the economic impact of Foot and Mouth demonstrated- is probably more important to the rural economy than agriculture) but there is no tourism research. When asked about this, the programme director, Professor Philip Lowe said
…We have no specific projects on tourism but we do have projects on countryside leisure and recreation including a holistic study of angling and its links with the river environment (led by Oughton), and two projects on disease risks for visitors to the countryside (Killham on E-coli and Quine on tick-borne diseases). (Email correspondence Burns/ Lowe, 12th March 2007).
Having briefly set the scene of tourism education and research in higher education we now turn to the specific issues raised by the Select Committee. It is important to note that ATHE is more interested in some aspects rather than others so the Select Committee issues will not be treated equally.
4 The challenges and opportunities for the domestic and inbound tourism industries, including cheap flights abroad, and their impact on traditional tourist resorts
4.1 Challenges: Limited public sector funding for tourism and high number (80-90%)of private sector SMEs and micro-businesses with budget constraints militating against marketing partnerships. Regional and sub-regional parochialism amongst local authorities working against joined-up thinking and need for collaboration to compete as UK entity. Provision of value for money experiences; quality of customer care and service; realities of unreliable weather patterns and the need for ‘intelligent’ (i.e. not games and arcades) wet weather leisure provision that goes beyond cloned shopping malls. Some ‘lifestyle business’ operators are satisfied with ‘making a living’ rather than ‘making a business’ leading to motivational problems in improving service quality and business efficiency. Some research indicates a general lack of innovation in the sector leaving it unable to satisfy the demand for peak experiences sought out by tourists.
4.2 Opportunities: Window of opportunity with an ageing (baby-boomer) population and disposable incomes suggesting demand for additional holidays and short breaks that might be taken in UK. VFR travel and day visits markets are continually under-exploited in UK. Growing interest in health/ lifestyle holidays also links in with demographic trend; heritage tourism; short break markets; activity holidays. However, the research is predicated on markets and marketing rather than addressing research questions in a scientific manner. The major opportunity is for the tourism sector to work much more closely with the HE sector in driving innovation and productivity. Universities could also work with the sector to use environmental concerns about carbon footprints to promote ‘holidays at home’. But this would need a framework and funding.
4.3 Low cost carriers: This needs intense, non-partisan, multi-disciplinary research. Some indicative research indicates that the impact of low cost carriers is positive for local airports but has little effect on local destinations.
4.4 Resorts: Governments are the only stakeholders that can reverse the decline in resorts, in partnership with private sector. The situation is not good. To cite evidence from Shaun Woodward MP, Minister for Creative Industries and Tourism (Memorandum by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) (CT 64)) to Select Committee on Communities and Local Government Committee dated 27 November 2006:
Domestic Visitors: Visits to the English coast by domestic visitors create around £4.8 billion of expenditure. This is made up of:
- 17% of overnight stays and around £3.6 billion of expenditure. [in 2005, 19.3 million overnight trips were made by UK residents to the English seaside. On these trips, a total of 83.3 million nights were spent.]
- An estimated 7% of day trips and around 5% of spend (approximately £1.2 billion) [The latest figures for day visits cover the 2002-03 period at present, and these show that there were 1.1 billion tourism day visits in Great Britain, of which 7% were to the seaside or coast.
- The average spend per visit for tourism day trips to the seaside and coast was £18.50. markedly lower than the average spend for tourism day visits to either cities or the countryside (£30.80 and £20.70 respectively).]
4.5 One interpretation on these last data (spending patterns) is that visitors find nothing worthwhile to spend their money on (the lack of innovation argument). This interpretation is of course speculative because there is no empirical qualitative base from which to work.
5 The effectiveness of DCMS and its sponsored bodies (such as VisitBritain) in supporting the industry
5.1 DCMS suffers from having a very small staff responsible for tourism and changing staff leading to a loss of knowledge and expertise. Similarly the frequent changes in Ministerial responsibility has led to a lack of experience evident at this level. This has meant there has been a real lack of progress in terms of both data collection and analysis and in policy formulation and implementation. Universities could have a role to play in remedying this situation but there needs to be funding to allow this. There is also little or no funding available to allow the initiation (through DTI) of Knowledge Transfer Partnerships in tourism.
5.2 VisitBritain has suffered a declining budget for many years, and although its functions have been reduced to be primarily responsible for marketing Britain, other functions it previously had, notably research and training, have not been effectively taken on by other organizations leading to a serious gap in data available for the industry. This is particularly important in an industry dominated by SME’s which do not have either the resources or expertise to carry out research on the scale necessary to provide data to inform strategic decision making. This does raise the question about how evidence based policies can be developed.
5.3 Some ATHE members (in the North and Midlands) felt that in their dealings with the tourism industry a perception of VisitBritain being London-centric and out-of-touch with regions persisted. Funding and support for soft initiatives such as training and marketing remains an issue for SMEs and micro-businesses in tourism. A member from Scotland said “There have long been, and remain, very strong feelings indeed within Scotland that, despite the fact that Tourism is the country’s most important industry, we still do not have a dedicated Minister. Moreover, turnover in those holding the Tourism portfolio has been very high indeed over recent years.”
5.4 More needs to be undertaken to ensure tourism has a collective voice and clear recognition that it is valued by ministers and government departments with funding to support that view.
6 The structure and funding of sponsored bodies in the tourism sector, and the effectiveness of that structure in promoting the UK both as a whole and in its component parts
6.1 Responses from members to this issue tended to be conflated with 5 (above). For example, an ATHE member from Sheffield noted that the Yorkshire Tourist Board is still accused of over-representing North Yorkshire rather than the full region. The loss of the coherent framework of national and regional tourist boards has led to increased fragmentation of responsibilities across tourist boards, RDA’s and DMO’s, and, in particular a lack of any coherent framework of responsibility for national data collection and analysis and national training programmes.
6.2 The position of “England” within the UK structure (which has separate tourist bodies for Wales and Scotland) creates an inconsistency that can only damage the success of England and hence of the whole UK both in attracting and retaining tourists and in achieving a coordinated and efficient approach to responding to the challenges raised by tourism. This is exacerbated by the location of tourism within the remit of the RDAs, which take different approaches and express different levels of interest in tourism. This means that different provision for tourism, in matters from funding research to promotion, is made in different regions.
6.3 In the case of Scotland, it is generally felt that, given its strategic importance to the Scottish economy, Tourism remains relatively neglected and under-funded. Whilst VisitScotland is broadly regarded as doing its best with the resources available, it is further felt that there is also a need for a more integrated and effective approach towards promoting the UK and its component parts.
6.4 Likewise, Welsh members of ATHE felt that the impact of what was generally considered a very effective WTB being absorbed into WAG has yet to be seen.
6.5 Funding bodies do not always reach down to grass roots level to see effective partnerships.
6.6 It remains questionable that development agencies have grasped the significance of tourism sector there is continued confusion over strategic direction and communication.
7 The effect of the current tax regime (including VAT and Air Passenger Duty) and proposals for local government funding (including the “bed tax”) upon the industry’s competitiveness
7.1 The UK is a high cost destination (for example public transport costs are among the highest in the world). In this respect, direct taxation on tourism (unless it is hypothecated to addressing specific needs like training, marketing and environmental concerns) damages our competitiveness.
7.2 But, the consideration of the tax regime should not be couched solely in terms of competitiveness. Tax revenues are a significant government benefit from tourism.
7.3 As widely discussed within the industry press of late, there is widespread concern, indeed disbelief, with regard to the mounting taxation burden. In particular, the recent introduction of Airport Departure Tax is considered to be especially ill-judged and flawed in its underpinning justification.
7.4 However, scientific (unbiased) research needs to be undertaken to demonstrate how the imposition of taxes is making the UK less attractive as a European destination.
8 What data on tourism would usefully inform Government policy on tourism
8.1 This question caused much concern to members, many of whom spent time and effort responding to the 2004 Allnutt report on tourism statistics. At that time, the ATHE submission included the following observations:
8.1.1 ATHE assumes that the review of tourism statistics is part of a bigger UN World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) initiative to standardise statistics across nations and ATHE confirms standardisation is a key point for academics, from both a teaching and research perspective. Students are endlessly tripped up by statistics from different countries (or even from the same country but from different years) which purport to indicate the same thing, but have actually been measured in quite different ways e.g. tourism revenue/spending, value of the tourism industry, contribution to GDP, tourism employment, multiplier effect data etc.
8.1.2 ATHE would wish to highlight the following issues:
- Clear, reliable, up-to-date and comparable statistics across a consistent set of areas
- The means of measurement to be clearly expressed along with the data produced e.g. if we are giving statistics about incoming tourist to the UK, or about day trips, we need to have easy access to how these data were collected and which definitions being used.
- Some expression of the comparative accuracy/ reliability of data should also be published – e.g. ‘this is accurate to within =/- 5%’ or similar.
- The ability to compare between countries using the same measures and definitions would be ideal (as per UNWTO plans).
- Better dissemination of data through key publications and via the web
- Data to be able to make up Tourism Satellite Accounts (TSA) for the UK and regionally
- The ability to disaggregate figures down to local levels and to sector levels. At present the figures can only provide national and occasionally regional pictures. This hardly provides a basis for knowing what is happening in tourism
- Samples need to be big enough to allow confidence as well as disaggregation. The sizes are acceptable for the IPS data (although information is not collected for much disaggregation on the supply side) but the UKTS is based on very small samples which really do not permit much breakdown or analysis
- Definitions used for international and domestic should follow the UNWTO definitions
- Regular information on excursions (day-tripper) if we want to have a complete view of tourism
8.2 Responses to ATHE made to the present inquiry elicited the following:
8.2.1 More detailed regional and sub-regional comparable trend data (even rudimentary volume & value data is still lacking)
8.2.2 More widely circulated economic value data (perhaps bottom up rather than ‘weighted down’ = more helpful, particularly at sub-regional & local levels).
8.2.3 ITC resource needed such as a tourism monitor for industry and researchers to subscribe to (a more sophisticated Englandnet?) More user-friendly tourism research points of contact for SME advice/problem-solving?
8.2.4 Lack of data and reliable key performance indicators is hampering any real long term planning. Local data is far from accurate to influence investors and other stakeholders.
8.2.5 There is a major opportunity for RDAs, and the various regional constituent bodies of DCMS along with VisitBritain to work in long term collaborative partnership with universities to produce, analyse and disseminate high quality qualitative and quantitative data on tourism. This could be on a region by region basis within a generic framework using agreed generic methodologies and modes of analysis.
9 The practicality of promoting more environmentally friendly forms of tourism
9.1 We are somewhat surprised at the wording of this issue. It is as though ‘promoting more environmentally forms of tourism’ was an option. It is not a matter of weighing up the ‘practicalities’ but of creating intelligent, innovative tourism products with a low carbon footprint. Such innovation needs to be based on scientific research and training along with public information dissemination about the need to embrace a less damaging approach to using (as tourism does) the environment for leisure purposes. Changing behaviour is the key to this and members of the ATHE (Burns at Brighton and Bibbings at Brookes) have completed a conceptual paper on the issue of managing demand and consumer behaviour as mitigation for climate change and tourism that can be made available as an additional submission to the Committee should they so wish.
10 How to derive maximum benefit for the industry from the London 2012 Games
10.1 Joined-up thinking and inter-regional collaborations needed rather than internal competition.
10.2 Needs to be based upon carefully considered and well-structured research, in such aspects as case study analyses of previous destinations where the Games have been mounted.
10.3 Focus on the medium term influences of Olympics on tourism as well as accepting the nature of mega events that may hinder tourism.
11 General comments about the value of tourism in HE
11.1 Members sometimes feel that it is an under-valued subject area. The multidisciplinary and theoretical bases are often overlooked or misunderstood. There is a need to understand the wider context of tourism and its associated potential benefits for the economy, environmental science/environmental initiatives (eg. Carbon offset projects, climate change etc.) and the social and political implications within context of globalization.
11.2 Without high quality research and associated programmes of study, the tourism sector will be limited in the extent to which it can innovate and meet the needs of all its stakeholders and ultimately remain both sustainable and competitive
11.3 Skills are needed for the sector to be competitive. Future managers need to be equipped with ‘graduate skills’ so that the industry can improve its standing and image as a worthwhile sector to gain employment.
12 final comments
12.1 ATHE is a member of the Tourism Alliance, we have seen the final draft of their submission and fully endorse it.
12.2 Finally, a review of the make-up and structures of DCMS committees and advisory inputs seems to suggest that there is very little call on the existing expertise of tourism professors and other senior academic staff. Much the same applies to Regional Development Agencies and the sponsored tourism bodies of DCMS. Such researchers have knowledge, talent and enthusiasm and they should be an essential part of any tourism planning and policy arena (an example is ‘British Tourism Development Committee’). It is hard to imagine another industry or economic sector where the scientific/ academic community is effectively excluded from policy advice.
ANNEX 1 – Institutions offering tourism HE courses in 2007
| Institutions | Institutions |
|---|---|
| University of Abertay Dundee | Liverpool Hope University |
| The University of Wales, Aberystwyth | Liverpool John Moores University |
| Anglia Ruskin University | Coleg Llandrillo Cymru |
| University of Wales, Bangor | London Metropolitan University |
| Basingstoke College of Technology | London South Bank University |
| Bath Spa University | Loughborough College |
| Bell College | The Manchester Metropolitan University |
| Birmingham College of Food, Tourism & Creative Studies | Mid-Cheshire College |
| Blackpool and The Fylde College (An Associate College of Lancaster University) | Middlesex University |
| The University of Bolton | Napier University, Edinburgh |
| Bournemouth University | Neath Port Talbot College |
| The University of Bradford | Newcastle College |
| Bradford College (An Associate College of Leeds Metropolitan University) | New College Durham |
| University of Brighton | New College Nottingham |
| Bristol, City of Bristol College | University of Northampton |
| University of the West of England, Bristol | Northbrook College Sussex |
| Brockenhurst College | North Lindsey College |
| Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College | Northumbria University |
| Canterbury Christ Church University | North Warwickshire and Hinckley College |
| University of Wales Institute, Cardiff | Norwich City College of Further and Higher Education (An Associate College of UAE) |
| University of Central Lancashire | Oxford Brookes University |
| University of Chester | University of Paisley |
| Chesterfield College | Pembrokeshire College (Accredited College of University of Glamorgan) |
| Chichester College | Peterborough Regional College |
| University of Chichester | University of Plymouth |
| City College Manchester | University of Portsmouth |
| City of Sunderland College | Queen Margaret University College, Edinburgh |
| Colchester Institute | The Robert Gordon University |
| Cornwall College | Scottish Agricultural College |
| Coventry University | The University of Salford |
| Craven College | Salisbury College |
| Dearne Valley College | Sheffield Hallam University |
| University of Derby | Sheffield College |
| Doncaster College | Shrewsbury College of Arts and Technology |
| Duchy College | Southampton Solent University |
| Ealing, Hammersmith and West London College | South Deveon College |
| East Lancashire Institute of Higher Education at Blackburn College | Southport College |
| University of East London | South Cheshire College |
| Edge Hill University | St Mary’s College |
| Exeter College | Staffordshire University |
| University of Glamorgan | Staffordshire University Regional Federation |
| Glasgow Caledonian University | The University of Stirling |
| The University of Gloucestershire | The University of Strathclyde |
| University of Greenwich | University Campus Suffolk |
| Greenwich School of Management | University of Sunderland |
| Grimsby Institute of Further and Higher Education | University of Surrey |
| Guildford College of Further and Higher Education | Swansea Institute of Higher Education |
| Halton College | Trinity College Carmarthen |
| Harper Adams University College | Tyne Metropolitan College |
| University of Hertfordshire | University of Ulster |
| Highbury College | University of Arts London |
| UHI Millenium Institute | Warwickshire College, Royal Leamington Spa, Rugby and Moreton Morrell |
| The University of Huddersfield | University of Westminster |
| The University of Hull | Westminster Kingsway College |
| Hull College | Wigan and Leigh College |
| The University of Kent | Wirral Metropolitan College |
| Leeds: Park Lane College | University of Wolverhampton |
| Leeds Metropolitan University | University of Winchester |
| Leicester College | Worcester College of Technology |
| University of Lincoln | Writtle College |
| Liverpool Community College | York St John Unviersity College |
Source: www.ucas.com (Accessed 04.09.2006)