11th May 2020 By Contributor
Former Tourism New Zealand chief executive George Hickton on the tools New Zealand needs to manage tourism and drive ‘value over volume’.
George Hickton
For the past 100 years, our approach to tourism could be summed up in one four-letter word: More.
Yes, I was a part of that, launching the 100% Pure New Zealand campaign in 1999 and proudly watching our industry rise to be the largest export earner over the next ten years as chief executive of Tourism New Zealand.
Whenever I was asked: ‘How many visitors is too many?’ I replied: ‘When visitor numbers exceed our population’.
There was no scientific basis for my view — just a feeling that our passion for our country and a desire to share it would become challenged if visitor numbers exceeded around 4 to 5 million.
Twelve months ago, we started to see growth projections approaching that number and along with it, as predicted, a growth in dissatisfaction.
New terms became commonplace both in New Zealand and overseas: Over-tourism, flight shaming, destination management, and social license to operate. They were all responses to the unsustainable, continued, unfettered growth of tourism.
The industry’s response mantra, which you will find in every Minister of Tourism and chief executive speech, including mine, for the last 20 years, has been to say we’re aiming for ‘value over volume’.
The problem was we never achieved that, because we lacked the effective tools to make it happen.
Instead, we reluctantly accepted that more visitors would be a byproduct of the increased visitor spend we wanted.
Now, with the country’s response to Covid-19 temporarily decimating our tourism industry, we have another new term, ‘reimagining tourism,’ which is what the industry has been tasked to do while we await an industry recovery.
The tourism industry will no doubt fight to restore what it had. This is not a criticism, it’s just a shareholder expectation.
Before we head off down the consultation path, let’s establish what tools we need to manage tourism numbers, their spread across the seasons, and their distribution throughout New Zealand.
Why? Because if we don’t, we will inevitably end up back in the same place.
We don’t want to see Queenstown and Milford overpowered again by visitor volumes.
Or more people overpowering the Tongariro Crossing, or expanding the parking at Tekapo’s Church of the Good Shepherd, or closing access to Cathedral Cove or Hot Water Beach, or cheap campervans festooned with offensive signage freedom camping anywhere.
We must manage the number and distribution of visitors permitted to visit our iconic attractions and by doing so protect our environment and improve tourism outcomes.
We can do this by improving pricing; improving seasonal spread, as more visitors travel off-season to gain access; more evenly spreading distribution throughout the country during the peak season when key sites are full, and improving the quality of the visitors’ experiences at these iconic sites as they become less crowded.
How? There are two obvious options: Border control or attraction control.
Border control would be difficult — even unworkable — particularly for neighbouring Australia and the Pacific Islands. Attraction control is simpler, and some tools are already available through DOC concessions and local government.
But whose responsibility is it to make these decisions?
Neither Tourism Industry Aotearoa or crown entity TNZ are equipped or mandated to make the crucial enforceable decisions required to achieve a better-balanced flow of tourism.
Former chair of TNZ Kerry Prendergast has argued for a new structure encompassing all the key players with the mandate, authority, and funding to set a new direction.
Its task is simple: Preserve the very thing international and domestic tourists value most.
Quality access to our pristine environment from a welcoming population.
After all, isn’t that what 100% Pure New Zealand is all about?
