Coastal development in France

COASTAL DEVELOPMENT IN FRANCE Tourism as a Tool for Regional Development Alan Clarke Gwen1 County Council South Wales. United Kingdom

ABSTRACT Clarke, Alan, Coastal Development in France: Tourism as a Tool for Regional Development. Annals of Tourism Research 198 1. VIII(3):p47461. The coastal develop ment. for tourism, of Languedoc-Roussillon in South West France represents one of the leading examples of State investment in tourism as a means of regional development. Examination is made of the administration, planning and implementation of the tourism project in Languedoc-Roussillon and its success is evaluated in terms of seasonalfty. its effect on income and employment in the region, the social value of the project and its contribution to the national balance of payments. On the basis of these evaluations it is argued that the tourism project has achieved only moderate success and tourism alone has not solved. and is unlikely to solve. the region’s basic problems. The lessons of its use as a tool for regional development in LanguedocRoussillon are of relevance to national governments Languedoc-Roussillon, Eeywords: everywhere. regional development. lessons. Alan Clarke is presently employ&d as Senior Planning Officer (Tour&q11 in the County Planning Department of Gwent County Council. South Wales. He has Master of Science degrees both in Tourism and in Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Strathclyde. Glasgow. Previously. he worked for the Northem Ireland Tourist bard. ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH 1981 VIIl(3)

447

COASTAL

DEVELOPMENT

IN FRANCE

RESUME Clarke, Alan, Le D’eveloppement &tier en France: Le Tour&me comme un outil pour le developpement &gional. Annals of Tourism Research 1981. VIII(3):447-461. Le Bveloppement &tier. pour le tour&me. du Languedoc-Roussillon dans le Sud-Ouest de la France, est un des exemples principaux de l’investissement de 1’Etat dans le tour&me comme une voie de developpement r’egional. On examine l’administration, la planification et la r&lisation du projet de tourisme dans le Languedoc-Roussillon. et l’on mesure son succ&s en fonction des variations saisonn&es. de son effet sur les revenus et sur l’emploi dans la region. de la valeur sociale du projet et de sa contribution B la balance nationale des paiements. Par suite de ces &aluations, on soutient que le projet de tour&me n’a atteint qu’un succes moyen et que le tourisme seul n’a pas &olu, et n’est pas en passe de iesoudre. les probl$mes de base de la region. La tentative de se servir du tour&me comme un outil pour le d&eloppement regional dans le Languedoc-Roussillon est une lecon significative pour les gouvernements nationaux de t&s les pays. Mats Clef: Languedoc-Roussillon. developpement rEgional. leqons.

INTRODUCTION In recent years rising standards of living, longer holidays, and better transport facilities have led to a rapid development of tourism in many European countries. Coupled with this growth certain national governments have increasingly recognized the potential of tourism for regional economic development, especially for regions of relative economic backwardness. Advantages put forward for tourism development include the fact that tourism can use regional resources which otherwise would remain unused while tourist spending provides a direct injection of money into a regional economy and can create an additional source of employment. This paper examines the development of tourism and the results of that development, in one such region, LanguedocRoussillon in southwestern France. 448

ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH 1981 VIll(31

ALAN CLARKE

The Development of Coastal Tourism As with all other economic activity, planning for tourism in France is indicative rather than imperative with strong centralized control. Tourism has assumed increasing importance in the French Five Year Plans both as a means of improving the national balance of payments and also, for a number of specific geographical areas, as a means of rectifying regional imbalance. Because of the growth of holiday travel in Western Europe and the saturation of a fully developed C&e d’Azur. the public authorities in France recognized the need for protecting the last remaining free areas along France’s Mediterranean coast and ensuring their rational development. Consisting of the Provinces of Languedoc and Roussillon. these areas formed an almost uninterrupted expanse of large beaches from the Rh$ne estuary to the Spanish border, often separated from the hinterland by a chain of lakes and salt marshes. The French authorities were mindful of the fact that the creation of a tourist industry promised to strengthen the economy of the region which was traditionally dependent on wine growing, whose income had trailed the national average, and characterized by a high rate of out-migration and high levels of unemployment and underemployment. The virgin state of the 180 kilometers of coast in the region was largely due to unfavorable natural conditions which were beyond the technical resources then available to change: a low swampy coast, subject to flooding and intersected with mosquitoinfested marshes, and without access roads or drinking water. However, these physical handicaps were offset by a number of attractions: a sunny dry Mediterranean climate, a hinterland of strong tourist appeal, three regional airports and one of the most important European highways linking Spain with Western Europe. Following studies in the national planning commission, the French Government in 1963 decided to undertake large-scale intervention along the coast of Languedoc with the aim of increasing its tourism potential. The tourist scheme covered an area compos ed of four Departments and 67 Communes and was envisaged as a tool of regional economic development to raise incomes and create employment in the region, thus reducing the large rural exodus. Additionally, the scheme aimed to satisfy the need for an expan sion of the French tourist industry to help remedy the growing weakness in the French balance of payments. Hence, the scheme aimed to attract foreign tourists and also to cater for the growing ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH 1981 VIII@)

449

COASTALDEVELOPMENTINFRANCE

number of domestic tourists especially by encouraging more social tourism than on the Riviera. thus dissuading many Frenchmen from holidaying abroad. Administration and Planning The launching of the coastal development scheme required administration at two levels. Firstly. at the State level it was decided to develop the area using the traditional services of the State but placed under a single directorate. In 1963. the Mission Interministerielle Pour L’Amhnagement Touristique du Littoral Languedoc-Roussillon was established for overall planning and 4upervision of the project. The Mission Interministerielle was responsible for the acquisition of land and for the carrying out of basic infrastructural works - main roads, ports. forestry. mosquito control, etc. Secondly, with large scale work being undertaken by the State. the preparation of the site and installation of resort infrastructure were to be carried out at the local level by So&t& DCpartementale d’Economie Mixte. Consisting of national as well as local government interests with private enterprise, these companies were to provide basic resort infrastructure such as installation of services and provision of car parks. Once prepared, the serviced sites were then sold or leased by the companies to private developers for building. a The first task of the Mission Interministerielle was to draw up an initial plan for the whole of the coastal area and in 1964 a Plan d’Urbanisme d’Int/e&t R’egional was adopted, laying down the guiding principles of the operation. In 1972 a new regional plan. the Schema Directeur du Littoral Languedoc-Roussillon was prepared, carrying forward the main principles of the earlier plan. These tourism plans completed the general economic development plan of the region, activated since 1953 by the Compagnie Nationale d’Am&agement du Bas-Rh$ne et du Languedoc. The tourist plans for Languedoc-Roussillon were characterized by the creation of a new structure. the tourist unit, which was formed by one or more new resorts, and by several small existing ones, which it provides with a modem infrastructure and means for overall development that meet demands of quality, style and environmental concern. hitherto beyond their reach. The 1972 Schema Plan identified 5 tourist units (see Figure 1). each with an estimated reception capacity of 150.000 beds and based on a beach capacity of 600 persons per hectare and a construction den450

ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH

VIll(3)

ALAN CLAJWE

Figure 1 Laxquedoc-Roussillon: The Tourist Units

sity of 100 beds per hectare. The tourist units laid out along the coastline at distances of 25 to 30 kilometers from each other were to be separated by nature conservation zones, strictly protected to preserve their appeal to visitors. Afforestation zones, tourist protection zones, possible extension zones for the tourist resorts and industrial zones were also defined in the plan (see FFigure 2). Thus the 1972 Schgma Plan was a comprehensive approach to the whole coastal region fixing construction targets, zoning land, proANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH VllY3)

451

COASTAL

DEVELOPMENT

IN FRANCE

Figure 2 Grau du Roi-Palavas:

Built -up

m

aen

Tourist Unit

Com!maintr

F-=-q

Motofway

m

ah@? ro8d

=

lndu8trial

zona

LBnd de8lgmt.d

m

Yachting

ha&our

Pwmtion

0

PosslbiHty for future

Area

of natural tqetWon

hmible

extenslon zones

woodluld

452

of

tof towrlatuse U+OWSfrom mutewayr

--II

*

4b demlopment

ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH

-

VIlI(3)

ALAN CLARKE

tecting nature and promoting afforestation and laying down the guiding principles for the working out of local plans. Implementation of the Plans Implementation of the plans by the organizations and administrative system outlined above was extremely rapid and now seventeen years after the 1964 regional tourism plan, the coast of Languedoc-Roussillon has been completely transformed. By 1979 public and private investment in the tourism scheme had reached 6 billion francs with the Mission Interministerielle estimating that, on average, annual investment in the tourist project accounted for more than 65 percent of total annual industrial investment in the Region. As a result, the coast has been provided with a range of modem tourist facilities including some 17 pleasure (vacation) ports and 7 new towns - La Grande Motte. Cap d’Agde. Gruissan. Port Leucate. Port Barcar& Saint Cyprien. and Port Camargue which will certainly be the largest pleasure port in Europe. A major new road system connects the new resort towns with each other. and with national roads and motorways. and tourism has now developed into a major new component in the region’s economy. ASSESSMENT OF THE COASTAL DEVELOPMENT Although not fully comple’ted, the Languedoc-Roussillon tourism development is now sufficiently well advanced for some assessment of its success to be made, especially with regard to its stated aims for regional development. In assessing the develop ment, consideration will be given to whether tourism has benefitted the region and whether it has been the most appropriate tool for its development. Conventional criticisms of tourism as an economic development tool include its seasonal nature, the fact that it tends to provide only jobs for females, and the leakage of money from the local economy. These criticisms will be examined with regard to the experience of tourism development in Languedoc-Roussillon. Seasonality School holiday patterns, industrial vacation customs. and climatic factors in both generating and receiving areas cause most holiday tourism to be highly seasonal. In Devon and Comwa& for example, hotel bedroom occupancy rates ranged from 14 percent in January to 75 percent in August 1979 (English Tourist Board 1980). But seasonahty is especially severe in France where hohANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH VIIl(3)

453

COASTALDEVELOPMENTINFRANCE

day taking in August is typically one of those rooted French traditions that is proving hard to alter with some 80 percent of French summer holidays taken between mid June and the end of August. Reliance on domestic tourism and on the beach attractions of sun and sand have contributed to make seasonal&y a major problem in the new resorts of Languedoc-Roussillon. The proportion of foreign visitors, although increasing, has always remained under 20 percent and the French tradition of holidaying in July and August has resulted in the resorts having an effective season from only mid-June to mid-September. with heavy pressures on facilities during the first two weeks in August. In the 1976 season. for example, 64 percent of total bednights taken on the coast were taken in July and August and camping holidays were especially seasonal with 88 percent of camping nights taken in these two months (Negre 1976). Seasonality of demand has also resulted in a seasonal fluctuation of employment in the new resorts to serve this demand with the overall result that few permanent jobs in tourism have been provided. With the exception of construction employment, now decreasing with most of the infrastructure established, the Mission Interministerielle estimated that employment directly generated by the tourist project was approximately 9,006 permanent and 19.000 seasonal employees with the season in most resorts lasting just over 4 months. This seasonal bias of employment is characteristic of many regions heavily dependent on tourism. Archer (1977). for example. found that 39 percent of workers in the tourism industry in the coastal strip of East Anglia were employed for less than 6 months of the year. Seasonality. with its adverse effects on income, profitability. utilization of infrastructure, and employment is a world-wide tourism problem but is especially severe in Languedoc-Roussillon due to French holiday traditions. The Mission Interministerielle is now working on developments such as a golf course at St. Cyprien and a sailing school at Port Camargue and promotion of inland attractions in order to extend the tourist season. One adverse effect of seasonality, related to the large proportion of second homes which have developed in the scheme and the almost total tourist function of the new resorts, has been the difficulty in establishing the new resorts as permanent settlements. Port Camargue with a population of 15.000 in summer reduces to 454

ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH V111(3)

ALAN CLARKE

600 in winter. More fortunate are La Grande Motte and Cap d’Agde. which being close to large urban populations at Montpellier. Sete. and Beziers can successfully attract visitors in the

evenings and at weekends. There is also evidence that resorts

such as La Grande Motte and Camon are becoming residential dormitories for workers from Montpellier. However, geography

has dictated that most services and employment opportunities are concentrated in the inland centers such as Nimes. Montpellier. and Biziers. With few services in the new resorts and tourism unable to provide permanent employment for the entire year, the zoning of areas for workshops and craftsmen is insufficient to establish them as permanent settlements. Worst affected in this respect are resorts such as Gruissan and Port Barcar& more isolated from areas of large population and deserted for most of the year. Income and Employment An important objective of the tourist project was to create income and employment in the region. The coastal development scheme affected employment principally in the construction industry and in hotel and commercial employment. But, as noted above, few permanent jobs have been directly generated by the tourist project due to the seasonality of demand. The Mission Interministerlelle estimated that an annual average of some 6.000 employees in the building trade and 1,100 employees engaged in public works also found employment as a direct result of the tourist project (Service Regional De L’equipment/Mission Interministerielle). However with most of the infrastructure now established and a slowing down in the pace of development, income and employment from construction will become less important. But it is not likely to be replaced by the hotel and catering industry .due to the high proportion of second homes and selfcatering accommodation in the scheme. The free sale of property by developers enabled individuals to buy apartments primarily as a real estate investment. The popularity of both second homes and self-catering accommodation has resulted in low occupancy rates. reduced employment and has prejudiced the commercial success of the resorts. Over half of total bednights spent on the coast are in camping and only 3 percent in hotels with the result that the new resorts provide few permanent jobs. La Grande Motte with a summer population of some 30.000 people provides only 1,000 jobs. In addition little permanent male employment has been created. In La Grande Motte. ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH V111(3)

455

COASTALDEVELOPMENTINFRANCE

for example, 50 percent of permanent employees and 54 percent of seasonal employees are female. with 32 percent of permanent and 62 percent of seasonal employees being under 25 years old. In La Grande Motte students represented over a quarter of total seasonal employment. These aspects of seasonal&y and the high proportion of female employment are characteristic of tourism employment in many regions. A study of employment in 61 accommodation establishments on the island of Skye in Scotland found that employment fluctuated from 337 in Summer to 95 in Winter. with ( only one-third of winter employment being male (Brownrigg and Greig 1974). A similar study of tourism in South-west England found that two-thirds of all employees in tourist accommodation were seasonal with nearly 70 percent of jobs filled by women and one-fifth of all seasonal jobs filled by students (Edwards et al. 1976). The low status of the tourist industry as an employer is partly due to the fact that jobs are mainly seasonal. low-paid. and have limited opportunities for promotion, but also reflects attitudes towards tourists and employment in the service industries. In the case of Languedoc-Roussillon. therefore, the existing chronic unemployment in the region has been helped only by a small amount and the problem of seasonal&y has meant that few permanent jobs have been provided, especially for males. The majority of tourist employees. however, have been recruited locally from the urban centers close to each tourist unit (Montpellier in the case of La Grande Motte and S&e and B’eziers in the case of Cap d’Agde), and few foreign workers have been engaged in the project due to the language difficulties. However, it has been charged that the opportunity cost of labor employed during the summer months is high as it has been drawn off the agricultural labor force required for harvesting. In terms of regional income, no precise information is available on tourist expenditure but direct expenditure is estimated to be in the region of 2 billion francs annually, approximately one-third of total investment in the project. The predominance of self-catering accommodation and especially the popularity of camping is likely, however, to result in a low regional income multiplier for tourism. Willis (1977) applied a French tourist multiplier of 1.3 to Languedoc-Roussillon but noted the extreme limitations of applying such a generalized multiplier especially with regard to the leakage of money out of the region. In Languedoc-Roussillon such leakage is likely to be relatively high. 456

ANNALS

OFTOURISMRESEARCHVIII(3)

ALAN CLAHKE

The profits of many real estate companies. hotel and restaurant chains. in addition to taxes, are remitted out of the region. They do not enter the regional economy and consequently have no regional multiplier effect. Despite stringent efforts, speculation in land has taken place putting many investment opportunities out of the reach of local people. Developers include Parisian. Dutch, German. Japanese, and British investors: a large proportion of their profits are likely to leave the region. Additionally being a largely rural region with only a small industrial base, many supplies for the tourist industry have had to be imported into the region. again reducing the multiplier effect. Similar expenditure leakages are characteristic of a number of other rural regional economies. The tourist project has, however, had some beneficial income and employment linkage effects for the region, especially for the construction industry and those industries supplying construction needs. Cement production, for example, has more than doubled. To meet the tourlst demand. there has been an expansion in a large variety of service industries such as shops, banks, insurance, transport. New industries such as boat building and repair have grown in importance and agricultural producers have also become geared to supplying tourist needs. Overall, however, as an income generator for the future of the region, the problems of seasonality. the high proportion of second homes, and selfcatering apartments and the estimated high expenditure leakage have meant that the project would not appear to be fully successful, especially when seen against the massive scale of the original investment. Contribution to the French Balance of Payments Money remitted out of the region does of course not necessarily imply a loss of income to France and for the French Government belief in tourist development as being export generating and import substituting (by attraction of foreign tourists and by the persuasion of French tourists to holiday at home) was often the primary reason for allocation of investment to regional tourist facilities. Although the number of tourist nights spent on the Languedoc coast has shown a strong annual growth of 12 percent since 197 1, the number of foreign tourists holidaying in Languedoc is still relatively low, although increasing. The region has failed to break into the air charter market and most foreign tourists come by car from the neighboring West European countries, and earnings from foreign currency arc likely to be low. ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH VIIlI31

457

COASTALDEVELOPMENTINFRANCE

especially when offset by foreign currency expenditure necessary to supply the tourists such as imported petrol. construction machinery, etc. On the other hand, the project has attracted domestic holidaymakers in increasing numbers. and undoubtedly pressures on the C&e d’Azur have been relieved. Social Value Insocial terms, the project has developed an important new recreation facility for the residents of Languedoc-Roussillon, but many of the social objectives of the scheme have not been fulfilled in total. With the high level of investment. the French Government found itself under pressure from its financial partners, the State and private banks, to amortize its costs quickly and found it could get higher and quicker returns by encouraging luxury flats and hotels than it could from “social tourism,” and more of these have been built than was planned originally. The private ilats have sold well to rich Parisians, Germans, and others, many as holiday homes and with adverse effects on regional income and employment. But there is as yet little sign of the promised cheaper holiday housing, apart from a number of camping sites. usually poorly located at the periphery of the new resorts. Land speculation has occurred and the high cost of accommodation may disadvantage the Languedoc coastline in meeting the leisure needs of the growing urban population around the new European port of Fos. which because of saturation on the coast of Marseilles and the protected coastline of the Camargue, could have satisfied their recreation and tourism requirements in Languedoc. In addition, there has been an uneven incidence of tourism throughout the region, with development mainly confined to the tourist units on the coast and little development of tourism in the hinterland of the new resorts, despite the historical and cultural attractions of the area. This concentration of tourism has been identified in other remote regions. In the Highlands and Islands of Scotland. for example, most tourist nights are spent in settlements along the main tourist circuit such as Fort William and Inverness with relatively few visitors penetrating to the islands (Tourism and Recreation Research Unit 1977). CONCLUSIONS The present paper has sought to identify some of the problems of tourism as a tool for regional development through the case study of the coastal development of Languedoc-Roussillon. In Languedoc-Roussillon the problem of seasonal&y. which is 458

ANNALS

OF TOURISM RESEARCH vtll(3)

ALAN CLARKE

characteristic of nearly all areas that depend on tourism, has been intensified by the French traditions of holiday taking. Although marketing and seasonal variations in tariffs can help, it would ap pear that this major obstacle can only be tackled at a national level. In Languedoc-Roussillon. the problems of seasonality combined with a number of other factors have meant that the use of tourism as a tool for regional development would appear to have achieved only moderate success. Although tourism is an important new component in the region’s economy, infrastructural investment in tourism has benefitted the region as a whole. its contribution to the national balance of payments is likely to be small and, in the context of the scale of investment. it has not fulfilled expectations in the creation of regional employment while many of the income benefits of the multiplier effects of tourist expenditure are likely to be reaped by companies and individuals from outside the region. These factors. which have threatened the commercial success of the coastal development and the new resorts, have meant that many of the social objectives of the tourist project have been ignored and the benefits of the development have failed to penetrate to the resort hinterlands. Perhaps more investment in alternative forms of tourism such as in gftes ruraux. which tend to have greater incidence of local ownership, greater dependence on local labor and supplies, and are less subject to the adverse effects of seasonality, would have brought wider benefits. However, it is already clear that tourism alone will not solve the region’s basic economic problems and for the region to over-specialize in tourism could provoke equally serious problems as those which have arisen from excessive concentration on the vine, with economic recession having a devastating effect on any region overdependent on tourism. Some of the Languedoc resorts, such as Gruissan and Port Leucate. still experience severe financial problems and with diversion of both public funds and private investment to other coastal areas worthy of development, notably the Aquitaine coast. the French government would seem to have taken the view that the economic growth of an under-developed region cannot be accelerated rapidly by such massive intervention in tourism development. The Languedoc-Roussillon tourism project is still in its infancy and, with no tradition in tourism. the region requires time to become established as a tourist center but it would already ANNALS

OF TOURISM RESEARCH VIIl(31

459

COASTALDEVELOPMENTINFRANCE

seem clear that the future economic revival of LanguedocRoussillon must be linked to a more balanced development of agriculture and industry in addition to tourism and which can help increase the regional benefits of tourism itself. Clearly, based on the experience of the coastal development of Languedoc-Roussillon. tourism is unlikely to be the principal base of the economy of any economically fragile region but it can make a major contribution to at least parts of such regions. Tourism can use resources unused by other industries. But if tourism development is desired. a recognition of the part that tourism can play and of the other adjustments in the regional economy that will be necessary to enable that part to be effective are also required. The main requirement in any proposal to use tourism as a tool of regional development may therefore be the education of national governments to these facts. 0 Cl

BIBLIGGRAPHY Archer. B.H.. et al. 1977 Tourism in the Coastal Strip of East Anglia. London: Department of the Environment. Brownrigg. M. and M.A. Greig 1974 The Economic Impact of Tourist Spending in Skye. Inverness, Highlands and Islands Development Board. Bryden. J.M. 1973 Tourism and Development: A Case Study of the Commonwealth Caribbean. Cambridge: University Press. Edwards. S.L.. et al. 1976 Tourism in the South-West Region. London: Department of the Environment for the South-West Economic Planning Council. English Tourist Board 1980 Hotel Occupancy Survey 1979. London: English Tourist Board. 460

ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH

VI11131

ALAN CLARKE

Negre. M. 1977 Le Tourisme sur Le littoral du Languedoc-Roussillon. Ete 1976. Etudes et Statistiques Languedoc-Roussillon. Reperes No. 1. Service Regiona I De L’Equipment/Mission 1976 Etudes, Premier Rapport.

Interministerielle

Tourism and Recreation Research Unit 1977 Tourism in the Highlands and islands, TRRU Research Report No. 27. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh. Willis, F.R. 1977 Tourism as an Instrument of Regional Economic Growth: The Languedoc Littoral. Growth and Change (April):45-47. Submitted November 1980 Revised version submitted January 1981 ,Accepted July 198 1 Refereed anonymously

ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH VlII(3)

481