Discussion Paper

Session IV (April17-26, 2003)
"Shaping the Future – Achieving Optimal Results in the Global Market"

Lead (Discussion) Paper:
by Dr. Andreas Ottitsch
Assistant Professor, Forest and Nature Conservation Policy
Wageningen University
Chairgroup Forest and Nature Conservation Policy
Tel:+31 317 478082; Fax:+31 317 478078 ; E-mail: <andreas.ottitsch@a1.net>
Postal address: Postbus 342, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands

Opening Statement
Welcome to the opening of the next round of this e-consultation series. My name is Andreas Ottitsch and for those of you who might wonder, what someone working in “The Lowlands” might have to say about mountain regions, I would briefly like to give some facts about myself. Born in Austria, I studied forestry and did my Ph.D. in forestry on multiple land-use planning and policies in Austrian mountain regions. I later on worked with the European Forest Institute (Joensuu, Finland), where I conducted comparative research on rural development in remote (mountain) regions in Europe as well as on mountain region policies in different European countries.

The same “rules of engagement” apply as with the earlier e-consultations in this series, with which most of you might already be familiar. The basic principle is that every statement is valid, as long as it is presented in an objective manner, worthy of scientific discussion. While the examples presented in this discussion paper may present experience mainly from Europe, the basic principles may assumed to be applicable at a global scale, of course taking into account regional differences and characteristics. However, your experience may vary significantly from this and therefore any input enriching the scope of this will be welcome.

1. Introduction
Most mountain regions face the problem of being situated relatively remote and thus afar from the main markets for products and services, including especially tourism markets, which are situated in urban agglomeration regions. The major challenge thus lies in creating links between – predominantly urban – consumers and predominantly rural remote mountain regions, provided that a sustainable development of mountain environments and their population is considered to be a desirable goal.

In Europe it is possible to witness to witness several basic examples of which direction the development of mountain regions may take, depending on a number of external as well as internal factors.

The two extreme ends of this scope of development can both be witnessed in the Alps, which are located in a central position on the European continent and throughout history have formed both a barrier as well as – along major valleys and passes also important channels of communication, trade and traffic. Depending on the availability of valuable raw materials (e.g. various metal ores or also salt) as well as the location in relation to major trade routes, some regions there have been centers of human development and culture for centuries, whereas others remained remote for long times, inhabited mainly by mountain farmers and – in times of war and invasion forming arriers of retreat and resistance for the regional population.

Since the 19^th century the advent of tourism has changed the character of many regions significantly. What started as a curious activity for some eccentric members of the (mainly foreign) elite, has over the past 150 years in some regions developed into a mega-industry, shaping and changing not only economic and social development, but also highly influencing regional ecology, sometimes to a level which threatens the very basis (i.e. landscape values) of this development. Yet at the same time as some regions, mostly in the Eastern parts of the Alps, have experienced growth in population and economic development linked to tourism and related production and service activities, other regions have experienced economic decline, and depopulation which sometimes has taken on the character of outright abandonment. While sometimes such remote areas are seen as potential core-areas for large scale nature reserves, it is increasingly being recognised that also from a conservation point of view total abandonment is not seen desirable either, as a number of ecological values, such as species or habitat biodiversity are seen to benefit from traditional, small scale agricultural and forest management practices.

The question arises thus, which strategies might be appropriate to chose, to find a “golden middle path” between the two poles with mass tourism and its detrimental effects for environment, social structures and eventually also sound multi-facetted economic development forming one and abandonment forming the other.

In the remainder of this paper some implications based on available scientific theories are presented as a basis for discussion. The idea is that the participants will hopefully find potential links between these and their own experiences so that the potential generalisation value of various theories may be assessed.

This contributions is based upon work by the author and others (1), the results of which have been adapted to the specific scope of this e-consultation.

2. Theories of regional development and their implications for linking mountain regions to global markets
The table below gives an overview on major theories of regional development, the basic ideas behind them, related policy applications and potential consequences for the development of tourism and other activities in mountain regions.

Approach	Basic idea	Policy implications	Consequences for the development of mountain regions
Equilibrium seeking	Enterprises search for the highest profitability	No measures,except some infrastructural investments	Frequently used approach by tourism industries in determining an optimum location for a resort. – ALL-INCLUSIVE-CLOSED RESORT-DESTINATIONS
Technology and innovation	Technology and innovation are sources of restructuring	Considerable input on science and technology	Explains the development of new employment: explains effects of rationalization - LARGE SCALE INSTALLATIONS
Innovative milieux	Region can become an innovative environment creating opportunities	Training and infra-structural investments to support innovations, promotion of SMS-enterprises	Explains the success of certain regions, especially focussing on new and alternative approaches – COMBINATION OF WELLNESS-RESORTS and NATURE TOURISM
Global capitalism	Capital accumulates to the regions with the highest returns	Reducing the costs of the use of production factors	Explains long-term shifts of tourism business – CHANGES BETWEEN COUNTRIES AND CONTINENTS – FUTURE POSSIBILITIES FOR EMERGING LOCATIONS
Regulationism	Emphasises the role of public interventions	The role of state in regulation	Regulation of ownership, capital, trade and labor varies from one country to another – PROVISION OF INCENTIVES (subsidies, tax-breaks) FOR ACTIVITIES IN TOURISM SECTOR
Institutionalism	Emphasises the cultural basis of society as fundamental condition for development	Adaptive practises, learning	Behaviour, values and the institution of society create the cultural niche where the tourism sector operates – DEVELOPMENT OF TOURISM RELATED ASSOCIATIONS (e.g. TOURISM BOARDS etc.) as an INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
Resources and the physical environment	The location and availability of natural resources play a major role in development of regions	Policies to remove physical constraints	Fundamental explanation for the historical development of the tourism sector – DEVELOPMENT OF ACCESS TO REMOTE MOUNTAIN REGIONS WHILE PRESERVING NATURAL VALUES
Keynesian application	Emphasises the role of multiplier effects in aiming at development	Policies to create growth centres	Subsidized tourism activities in remote mountain regions - PROVISION OF INCENTIVES (subsidies, tax-breaks) FOR ACTIVITIES IN TOURISM SECTOR
Product cycles	The optimal location for production unit changes during the life-time of the product (e.g. new leisure time activity)	Policy adjustments according to the cycles	Possibility to take over successful examples from other regions – DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIAL ACTIVITIES IN PRICE-EFFECTIVE LOCATIONS
Supply-side policy	Investments in infrastructure should be encouraged to attract investors	Deregulation, investments in infrastructure, development projects, partnerships	Infrastructural factors are considered as crucial – DEVELOPMENT OF (TRAFFIC) INFRASTRUCTURE, INVESTMENT IN PROTECTION AGAINST NATURAL RISKS (TORRENTS, AVALANCHES)
Human ecology and environmental management	Environmental factors have an increasing importance in location decisions	Regulation, taxation (environmental tax)	Impacts on investments: recycling, closed production processes, etc. – PRESERVATION OF NATURAL CAPITAL – CONTRIBUTION OF CONSUMERS THROUGH TOURISM TAXES etc.
Environmental concern	The industrial sector should take into account the opinions of various interest groups and environmental preferences	Measures for environmental-friendly development	Explains environmentally-sensitive production decisions and similar acquisitions of raw materials – PROMOTION OF “SUSTAINABLE TOURISM” ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING CERTIFICATION ACTIVITIES

The above list is far from complete and admittedly some of the approaches are representing rather extreme ends of the potential spectrum of development. They might nevertheless be suitable as a basis for discussing the basic questions of this round such as:

In the light of your own experience and scientific expertise , which of the approaches highlighted in this discussion paper seems viable and WHY?

And consequently also the opposing argument is of interest, namely: In the light of your own experience and scientific expertise, which of the approaches highlighted in this discussion paper seems NOT viable and WHY?

Looking forward to your contributions.
---------------------------------------------------

(1): Ottitsch A., Hyttinen, P.., Niskanen A., Tykkylainen M., Vayrynen J.: Forest Related Perspectives for Regional Development in Europe – Research Report No. 13, European Forest Institute, Brill, 2002