Tourism case studies

Case studies on changing leisure patterns

Saudi Arabia and USA

Saudi Arabia facts

• 67% of Saudi Arabia’s population is under 35

• Saudi Arabia has now an e-visa to encourage more tourists

• Saudi Arabia made sports a priority in 2016 as a part of 2030 Vision Programmes → three main objectives include: achieving a 40% participation rate, develop elite performance atheletes and grow and empower the sports commhnity

• Saudi invested $1.8 billion into sports industry

• Mass partcicipation and activity levele increases to 23% from 13% in 2015

• Saudi is now home to 9 international sporting events

• Saudi is undertaking a construction of a new $100 million Olympic village

• Saudi is bulidng a new city: Qiddiya which aims to be a primer turist destination, with theme parks, cultural experineces and entertainemnt facilities. They want to diverse their economy and provide new jobs

Engagement in sport and leisure in Saudi Arabia

• Historical constraints: Saudi had strict societal and cultural norms that limited women’s partciipiation in sports and reacrational activities. Wome’s access to sport facilities restricted

• Recent reforms: Now want to increase women’s partcipiation. Now goverment introduced initatives to encourage physical activity amongst women

• Sports education and facilities - now enhancing sports education for women. New gyms and sport clubs for women created

• International participation: Saudi began sending female athletes to Olympics

• Challanges and opportunities: Conservative attitudes reamins. Womes partcipation expected to improve further

USA

• pop of over 331 million

• Rates for engagement slightly higher for men than women

• Engagement in physical activites was around 73% over the last two decades

• There is a link betwen income and activity levels: People with incomes below $25 000 are less liekly to do sports (60%) while people with higher icnome over $75 000 more likely to engage (80%)

Engagement in sport and leisure in the US

• leisre time increases: american adults have gained 4-9 extra hours per week of leisure time since the 1960s due to shorter working weeks

• Impact on low-wage earners - they have experiences a more significant icnrease in leisure time

• Single-person household - in 2022 about 30% of househodl in US were single people

• High wage vs low wage workers: hogh wage workers may allocated a higehr proportion of income to going out - average ameircan hosuehold spends $3008 per year on dining out

• Ethnic variation in leisure activites - 71% of whites, 60% of african americans, and 56% of hispanic reported playing video games

• Student leisure habits: students spend on average 15 hours watching tv weekly and 5 hours per week partcipiating in organised activities

• Changes in facility sizes: Cinemas an theatres replaces by multiplexes. Online stremang increased: Netflix had over 77 million subscribers in 2022

• Evolution of leisure: 21st centrury trend towards home-based leisure such as online streaming services. Covid 19 saw an icnrease in lesiure options being promoted such as streaming exercise programs

National Sports Leagues

Ekstraklasa

Ekstraklasa facts

• 1927 - founded

• 18 clubs

• Proffesional players: 527

• foreign players in league: 40.2%

• Poland fifa rank: 35

• 2025=2026 season - 100th season

• Sponsor: PKO Bank Polski

• Total market value of league: 260.73 million euros

• average player market value: 495 000 euros

• Poland co hosters UEFA Euro in 2012 - National stadium: 58 580 seats in warsaw

Spread of Ekstraklasa clubs and stadiums

• In urban centres → Silesia and warsaw

• Legia warsaw - in warsaw - higher revneu - 54.3 million euro in 2024-2025 season

• Lech Poznań - Poznan - 2025 champions - 34 million euro

• Wisła Kraków - Kraków

• Raków Częstochowa - 25 million euro

• Revenue inequalities between clubs

• National Stadium - 58 580 seats

• Silesian Stadium in Chorzów - 55 211 seats

Ekstraklasa impacts

• total club revenue in 2024-2025 - 299 million euro → doubled revenu in last decade due to impact of social media

• 9282 jobs created

• 140 million euro tax generated

• Money comes from → sponsorship 298 m, media - 428 m, matchday

• multiplier effect → monet circulates in economy - fans spen 715 m pls while clubs produce 947 milion - 1.7 billion to polish economy

Football and polish identity

• most popular sport in poland

• Legia vs Lech

• now investement in womens football

• songs

Issues in polsih football

• hooliganism

• financial inequality between big clubs and smaller

• brain drain - best polish player leave for western countries - szcesny, lewandowki (FC Barcelona)

• racism in stadiums

Festival

• Glastonbury

• Worthy Farm in Somerset

• Site of cultural tourism and temporarily site of leisure

• Situated on many farms - 800 acres

• Started in 1970

• Many secondary tourist attractions

• Dance classes, circus activities, workshops on craving plates

• Price of ticket 360 pounds with 210 000 tickets available

• Secondray resoucres: 400 food stalls, over 5000 toilets, two pharmacies and three medical centres

Factors affecting the location

• Flat space → easy to occupy

• Little disruption to local population as there are 10 000 people living there

• Limitation: lack of proximity to major routes leading to congestion and air pollution

Economic costs of the festival

• Clean up: 780 000 pounds

• Total cost of festival: 22 milion pounds

• Revenue: 82 million pounds

• in 2016 the cost of security was 800 000 pounds and performers get around 2 million

Economic benefits

• Emplyment given to local population

• Visitors spend around 293 pounds

• Some profits go to charity → Water Aid and Oxfam

• Revenue helps in local projects → giving provisions to schools and sporting

Social impacts

• Dealing, drugs, alcochol, substance abuse

• 2017 - 188 crimes reported with 71 arrested which is an increase from 2016 when 40 crimes reported → potentially linked to drug abuse

• 2015 - they organised blood donations to give back to the community

• 2007 - 700 journalists reported on festival

Environmental impacts

• Noise pollution: until late night, disrupting residents a potential solution is organising silent discos

• Air pollution: Increased CO2 emissions due to transport of people and equipment

• Provision of resources: High energy consumption - 120 generators. 1 million gallons of food and water

• Waste - due to large crowds which is expensive to clean (780 000 pounds)

TNC’s and global tourism case study

• Thomas Cook - oldest travel company - began in 1841 in England

How do TNC’s affect international tourism

• Cheaper travel: due to economies of scale. → Having the same website to deal with several diffrent countries and changing the language that appears on screen. → Skyscanner enables 60 mil customers to view identical info in more than 30 languages each month. They also have only 10 regional offices saving money. TNC’s also encourage competition by price chekcing sites people can compare prices

• Simpler travel: package holidays. Thomas Cook offers full package tours from arrival on airport to back home. The travel company does everything for the tourists. Diffrent comapnies also offer local tours in many countries in diffrent languages

• More accessible travel: Airlines and airports expanding. Building of smaller airports such as Modlin and developemnt of low cost airlines like Ryanair and Easy Jet allow for more people from diffrent regions to travel.

Horizontal versus vertical tourism integration

• Vertical integration: company owns each step of tourism including travel agent,airline, coach company, hotel and tour guides. For many years it was easier to make a proft this way

• Horizontal integration: company owns sevral companies offering the same level of tourism. Many airlines are owned by airline groups allowing to make a greater profit as when buying airplanes they can negioatte a better discount for more planes

Industry consolidation

Many brands in travel are owned and operated by the same parent company → making it cheaper for tourists to travel

Costs of TNC involvement in tourism for diffrent stakeholders

• Tourist → lack of choice due to consolidation and prices may be higher because of lack of competition with TNC’s

• Tourism employee at destination → little choice of job opportunites as TNC’s are the only employed. Much monmey repatriated back to host country. Sometimes poor working conditions

• Local person → Loss of local culture and political power compared to TNC’s

• People intrested in development and environemntal issues → more people traveling for longer leads to more pollution - noise, water and visual

Benefits of TNC’s for diffrent stakeholders

• Tourist → lower prices due to economies of scale, similar experince regardless of location, can speak own langauge when on holiday

• Tourism employee at destination → job opportunities, possible training, international standards in terms of contracts (paid leave, fixed hours)

• Local person → Investment of TNC’s in local infarsturcture like airports can stimulate the economy

• People intrested in development and environmental issues → TNC’s are barnd counscious and often have sustinability policies and support charities

Unsustinable tourism case study

Venice

Venice facts

• series of islands of the Adriatic Sea

• 700 heactres

• carrying capacity of Venice: 9780 who use hotel accomodation, 1460 staying in non hotel and 10857 day trippers on a daily basis

• Annual carrying capacity: 8 million people

• Known as „City of Water”

• Population: 50 000 peole

• 50 000 day trippers daily → exceeding carrying capacity which is 20 000

• Annually 20 million tourists

• Often day tripper

• Decrease of local population from 120 00 in 1960 to 50 000 in 2025

• Many attractions: St Marks Basilica and Gondolas → Gondolas are a secodnray attraction

Socio-political conflicts between locals and tourists

• Venetians complain of the loss of culture as for example tourists go to St.Marks Basilica and take photos during massess

• Many day trippers → no added value only leave polution

• Large cruise ships → block natural beauty and the locals protest against them

• Congestion and overcrowding

• Disrespect of historical and herritage sites

• Tourist pigeon culture: tourists give food to the pigeons on St Marks square causing the pigeons to poop everywhere and its acidic so destoys the infrastucture

• Inflation → causing many to move as cant afford necesities

• Local services become overpriced like the post office or medical causing migration

Management of unsustainable tourism in Venice

• 5 to 11 euro tax to visit

• banned unauthorised coach trips

• People that travel by car may be tuned away if they have not pre-booked parking

• People have to buy tickets and come on specific days

• They limited the cruize ship size since 2014 by 20% while ships who weigh over 96 000 tonnes are banned. Cruise ships banned from historic centre of venice

• torugroups limited to 25 people

• Some routes are one way

• There are stict rules and fines for breaking rules from 25 to 500 euros

• Vendors were banned from selling grains for pigeons

• Builidng more affordable housing → not working

• Stewards patrol St Mark’s Square reminding toruists to throw away their litter etc

• Encouraging drinking from drinking fountains

Maldives facts and figures

• archipelago of 1190 island only 200 inhabited

• pop of 300 000

• temps 26-31 celcius

• 400 000 tourist annually

• tousim: 26% of GDP

• 90% of tax revenue comes from import

• Growth fo tourism led to decraese in fishing and growth of eocnomy and job opportuniyties, multiplier effec

• garment production, biats bulding and handicrafts now only 7% of GDP

Maldives vulnerbaility to external shocks

• sea level rise - average only 1.5 m abose sea level - lowest on earth, predocted that sea will rise by 59 cm by 2100

• Tsunamis - islands in tectonically active zone badly afected by tsunami in 2004 killing 100 people dispalcing 12 000 and causing $300 million of property damage

maldives vulnerability to internal limitations

• High consumption of energy and water - toruist conume more than average amldivian - almost all wate prdiuced by desliantion and all eneegy produced by generator except on Male and Hulhule isnalds

• Pollution - solid and liquid wsste is dumped to landfill sites, incinerated or dumped at sea - all unsustianable

maldevies strategy

All new trousim development must:

• produce mitigation against flood - a 40 m setback from high water mark

• Compulsory instalation of incinerators, bottle crushers and compactors

• Must have own waste water traetment plan - instaling deasliantions plants

Maledives aim

• carbon neutarlity within decase

• encouraging wind and solar energy

• foreign investment

• and icnrease employemny

Hosting an international event

London 2012 Olympic Games

Advanatges of hosting the Olympics

• helped regenarte one of London’s poorest areas

• Created 12 000 jobs

• 17 billion pounds spent on upgrading infrastucture

• 2800 new homes buit - 50% affordable housing

• 1.2% reduction in London’s unemployment

• 46 000 people worked at the Olympic Park - 10% previously unemployed

• Women found jobs - 266 placed in construction

• 30 billion pounds spent to transform the Olympic iste into „Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park” whihc included housing, new schools, healt centres, business space and sport venues

• 2800 flats created

• 6.5 billion pounds invsted into infrastcuture

• 10 million pounds to upgrade pedestrain cycling routes

• 90% of demolition waste recycled

• 62% waste reused, recycled or composted

• Encouraged biodiveristy: 300 000 plant were planted in the area

• 1000 new trees planted in East London

Disadvanatges of hosting the Olympics

• Cost 11 billion pounds - stadium 560 million, atheletes village and park 650 million, securit 200 million, running the games 1.5 billion

• Received 675 million pounds lottery funding which could have gone elsewhere

• peopelp and business forced to relocate

• Increased inequalities as Lodnon and South East received funds

• still the area is deprived compared to West London

• Waiting list for social housign in the area is 22 000 with only 28% affrodable

• Still higher unemployment rate than London’s average

Rural hotspot

Machu Pichu, Peru

Facts on Machu Pichu

• 15th cnetru Inca citadel located at 2430 m altitide

• UNESCO Wolr Heita Site

• 1.5 m visitos per yea

• over $ 1 billion annual toruism revenue

• 2500 daily visitor limit

• 5000 visitors at peak

Machu Pichu economic benfits

• 15% of Peru’s GDP

• Local town - Aguas Calientes with pop of 4000 exists almost entirely due to tourism

• Enrey fees : $50-70 per person

• Inca Trail porters - employs 80 000 locals in trekking idnustry

Machu Pichu environemntal problems

• soil erosion and structural damge

• Waste managemnt crisis - Urubama river polluted

• Habityat destruction - forest clered for touirist infrastructure

• landslide risk increasing due to deforestation and consturction

Machu Pichu social and cultural problems

• overcrowding creates conflict between tourist and local s

• Rising property prices in Aguas Calientes

• Economic leakge - interantional tours and airlines capture revenue

Managemnt in Machu Pichu

• daily visitor cap reduced from 5000 to 2500 in 2023 under UNESCO presuure after warnings

• Timed entry ticket - specific slots reducing overcrowding

• Inca Trail perimst - limited to 500 people

• new visitor circuit routes intorduced in 2019 to spread people

• proposed aerail tramway to reduce pressure on Aguas Calientes

Sustainable toursim in LIC

Bhutan

Bhutan facts

• land locked country in south asia

• $200 sustianbale developemnt fee per tourist per day

• 71 607 - tousits visidted in 2019

• 72% of land covered by forests

• $84 million tourism revenue

• absorbs more carbon than it emmits - only country in teh world

• „High Value, Low Impact” policy

Bhutan „High Value, Low Impact” policy

• evry tourists pays a Sustainabel Developemnt Fee - $200 per day - attracting onyl wealthier residnets keeping tourist numbers lower

• All tourist must book thorugh a licenses Bhutanes tour operator - independnet backpacking not permitted ensuring no economic leakege

• Sustainable developemnt fee, funds healthcare, free education and poeverty alleviation

Economic benefits in Bhutan

• tourism - largest source of foreign exchange → 14% of government revenue

• High spend per tourist → signifcant revenue → average tourist over $1000+ per trip

• mandatpry use of lcoal guides and operators reduced leakage and provides jobs

• Life expectancy rose from 48 in 1980 to 72 in 2022 - due to SDF dunded healthacre

Environmental benefits in Bhutan

• forest cover proetcted - canot fall below 60% by law

• forst absorbs 9.4 million tonnes of CO2 annually vs 3.8 million tonnes emitted

• low tourist number - protecetd aniamls and hbaitats

• plastic bags banned in 1999

Limitations and cirtisim of Bhutan

• $200 fee is exclusionary onluy wealthy can come raising questions about who benefits from sustianbility

• over dependnece on tourism - Covid 19 devasted the economy

• youth emigartes to Australia or other countries for better oportunities

• some argue GNH obsures real poverty as 8% still below national poverty line

Social and cultual sustainability in Bhutan

• torusit must respect dresscodes

• all buidlidngs have to follow traditional architectural laws

• televison and inetrnet onyl since 1999

TUI case study fcats

• vertical integration

• serves 19 million customers annually

• opeartes in over 180 destinations

• owen over 400 hotels

• fleet of 130 - TUI arways

• 16 cruise shis

• employs 60 000 people

• 18 billion euros annually

• travel agencies - packahe oliday sales

Positive impacts of TUI

• in spain its tourism contirbutes to 12% of GDP

• invests millions in resort areas , airports and roads - canary islands

• creates jobs

• makes travel cheaper ansd accessible

Negative impacts of tui

• economic leakage → 70-80% tourist spending leaks back to foreign TNCS → locals recieve only 20-30%

• aviation 2-3% of global co2 - pollution

• 20 million toruists a year creates pressure on water resources and waste systemss → Mallorca tourists consume up to 4 times more water per day than locals

• tourist bubble

• commericlaisin local culture

• habitat loss