31. 12. 90 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 332/157 
the other contracting parties) must not be forced to 
sacrifice its own vital interests. That would be incom­
patible with the Uruguay Round's guiding principle, 
1. Introductory remarks 
1.1. With more people than ever enjoying more leis­
ure, the prodigious boom in tourism is changing the 
nature of tourism dramatically, and not always for the 
better. The European Year of Tourism is the moment 
to take stock so as to develop a Common Policy for 
Tourism and prepare for furhter large increases in the 
number of tourists. 
1.2. The Committee has judged that its contribution 
to this assessment of the situation and of policy to 
influence developments should take the form of a seri­
ous examination of the future of tourism and its contri­
bution to regional development in its widest sense, 
including town and country planning where relevant. 
Policy at Community level for tourism has so far been 
rather limited, concentrating on consumer protection 
(see report). The Committee is in favour of a more 
comprehensive policy, taking as its starting point the 
avowed aim of Article 2 of the Council Decision on an 
action programme for the European Year of Tourism [l) 
f1) OJ No L 17, 21. 1. 1989. laid down at Punta del Este in 1986, namely the achieve­
ment of conditions striking a balance between the con­
tracting parties' advantages and obligations. 
namely the need to 'stress the economic and social 
importance of the tourism sector inter alia in regional 
policy and job creation'. 
1.3. Tourism has developed into an economic 
activity, offering a variety of service in response to 
consumer demand. Over the past thirty years in particu­
lar, there has been constant growth of the tourist indus­
try in Europe. 
1.4. As an economic activity, tourism has become 
increasingly dependent on a number of different Com­
munity policies. Tourism is not an isolated sector on 
its own. Many fields—transport, environment, social 
and rural development, agriculture, services, etc.—af­
fect tourism and are affected by it. Policies dealing with 
these fields must, therefore, also take full regard of 
tourist developments. Done at Brussels, 20 September 1990. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
Opinion on tourism and regional development 
(90/C 332/42) 
At its meeting on 19 October 1990 the Economic and Social Committee decided to entrust 
the Section for Regional Development and Town & Country Planning with the preparation 
of an own-initiative Opinion (Article 20, paragraph 4 of the Rules of Procedure) and report 
on the subject of tourism and regional development. 
The Section for Regional Development and Town and Country Planning, which was respon­
sible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 19 July 
1990. The Rapporteur was Mr Vassilaras. 
At its 279th plenary session (meeting of 20 September 1990) the Economic and Social 
Committee adopted the following Opinion with no votes against and one abstention. 
No C 332/158 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 90 
1.4.1. In the light of the above, the Committee con­
siders that: 
a) it should be clearly established that tourism and 
regional policy cannot be dealt with in isolation. 
Tourism involves local and regional authorities and 
businesses, both those directly related to tourism, 
such as hotels, restaurants, bars etc., and those 
which are indirectly related, such as commerce, the 
crafts industry, agriculture, etc.; 
b) tourism development therefore involves responsi­
bility at all levels: the principle of subsidiarity must 
apply; 
c) it should be pointed out that the terms 'tourism' 
and 'regional development' do not only apply to 
predominantly agricultural areas, but also to indus­
trial areas which are endeavouring to diversify. 
2. The crisis in tourism: towards a new approach 
2.1. Tourism and leisure activities are a major 
growth sector. By the year 2000 they will form the 
single biggest sector in all developed economies, a direct 
consequence of higher living standards. 
2.2. This ever-increasing demand, confronted with 
uneven growth in, and certain absolute natural limits 
on supply, has brought crisis to tourism. The typical 
holiday on a beach in the sun, on the ski slopes or 
elsewhere has led to over-crowding, over-exploitation 
and depletion of resources for tourism in many regions, 
causing major environmental degradation and cultural 
impoverishment. 
2.3. In reaction, tourists are deserting these tra­
ditional resorts and turning to new destinations, both 
within and beyond the European Community, and new 
forms of tourism. 
2.3.1. For example in the Mediterranean, resources 
of all kinds are already under pressure for the 
100 million annual tourists it receives. Some forecasts 
predict a doubling of these numbers by the year 2000. 
Whether they remain faithful to traditional desti­
nations, which is improbable, or go to new ones around 
the Mediterranean, the consequences will be disastrous 
unless plans are made in time to cope with the challenge 
and limit damage to this fragile environment. 
2.4. It is urgent that policy for tourism and regional 
development take account of these changes. The Com­
mittee emphasizes that this involves efforts by all con­
cerned to develop quality in tourism within the Com­
munity while keeping costs competitive, and in par­
ticular: a) taking note of past mistakes (destruction of ecologi­
cal balance, overloading of installed facilities) 
through exchange of experience on the planning of 
tourist developments and adoption of appropriate 
policies; 
b) investment in infrastructure, especially environmen­
tal infrastructure (1), in the holiday resorts hit by 
the crisis in growth; 
c) active development of alternative forms of tourism; 
d) regulations, where necessary at EC-level, to preserve 
and raise standards; 
e) support for refurbishment of old hotel accommo­
dation and restoration of old buildings for tourist 
accommodation and other facilities. 
2.5. In short, the long-term general interest must 
take precedence over short-term expediency. The aim 
must be to preserve and create beauty, keep things to 
a human scale and encourage sensibility. 
3. The promotion of a longer season and quality in 
tourism 
3.1. Measures taken to implement the council 'Resol­
ution on a better seasonal and geographical distribution 
of tourism' should be reviewed and more stringent 
structural measures to stagger school and other holidays 
envisaged. 
3.2. Alternative forms of tourism can help extend the 
tourist season, promote higher quality and contribute to 
the degree of attraction of many regions. The Commit­
tee considers an integrated Community programme for 
tourism should give special attention to better use of 
resources through such alternative forms of tourism as 
those set out below. 
3.3. Cultural tourism 
3.3.1. Cultural tourism should not be concerned only 
with the artistic and cultural heritage of a region but 
also with its contemporary creativity. People who visit 
a region for primarily cultural purposes (monuments, 
museums, theatres, art galleries, etc.) are, as a rule, 
more inclined to seek out contact with the local popu­
lation and to display greater tolerance and understand­
ing of local characteristics and customs. 
(!) See ESC Opinion on ENVIREG, OJ No C 112, 7. 5. 1990. 
31. 12. 90 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 332/159 
3.3.2. Such tourists are also more likely to be sensi­
tive to environmental isues, to set a good example and 
to provide the local people with a greater sense of the 
worth of their surroundings. 
3.3.3. Cultural tourism stimulates creativity. Many 
artists, thinkers and men of action have gained creative 
inspiration from cultural travel. 
3.3.4. Cultural tourism is less subject to seasonal 
fluctuations. A less-crowded destination is more enjoy­
able. A longer season brings more revenue to the organ­
isers and host countries. Off-season trips are cheaper 
and of greater appeal to the less affluent members of 
society. 
3.3.5. Comprehensive action is needed to meet the 
needs of all-year round visits to monuments, museums 
and works of art, e.g. increased publicity, upgrading 
of the image for cultural tourism, incentives to tour 
operators, protection of cultural sites from looting. In 
particular the community, national governments and 
local authorities should attach great importance to: 
a) the protection, promotion and full use of historic 
and cultural sites and monuments, and natural 
beauty spots (including recreation parks, sports 
centres, etc.); 
b) the organisation and marketing of cultural events 
and recreational programmes; 
c) the promotion outside the European Community of 
the image of Europe as a cultural destination, both 
ancient and modern. 
3.4. Social tourism 
3.4.1. Social tourism is organised by non-profit mak­
ing associations with the aim to make tourism available 
in terms of both quality and price to the less affluent 
members of society. 
3.4.2. Large national organisations, and in Europe 
these are likely to become supranational, have been 
established to give elderly and young people the oppor­
tunity to travel at any time of the year, placing special 
emphasis on the quality of tourism. The Community, 
national and local authorities should support schemes 
to promote social tourism, including all forms of 
exchange schemes (town-twinning etc.). It is important 
that social tourism be integrated with the local economy 
e.g. the network of tourist villages ('Eurovillages') pro­
posed by BITS (International Office for Social 
Tourism). 
3.4.3. The Committee calls for Community finance 
of a study into the means of setting up a European 
Community social tourism tour operator, with the prin­
cipal aim of developing low-season holidays for the 
elderly and the young. 3.5. Agro-tourism (holidays on the farm) 
3.5.1. Agro-tourism is hospitality offered by individ­
ual farms and therefore relies on the continued existence 
of such farms. It allows farmers to expand their activity 
by using existing resources which would otherwise 
remain unexploited and gradually disappear. It offers 
contact with the countryside for those who live far 
away from it, an undamaged environment which it 
helps to conserve and links with the local community. 
3.5.2. The Committee considers agro-tourism as an 
activity which should occupy a smaller part of the 
working day than the rest of the work on the farm. An 
upper limit on earnings from agro-tourism should be 
set, above which it will no longer be considered a part 
of farming. 
3.5.3. Subject to the above conditions and provided 
precautions are taken to avoid unfair competition and 
unacceptable condition's, those who, under existing 
legislation, are responsible for, or participate in the 
running of the farm, should not be required, as in the 
case in other branches of tourism, to have commercial 
licences. 
3.5.4. Harmonisation measures at Community level 
are needed in order to counter the tendency to consider 
agro-tourism and farming as separate activities. This is 
a necessary component of policies for both integrated 
rural development and diversification in the supply of 
tourism opportunities. 
3.6. Upland tourism 
3.6.1. Some upland areas have well-established tour­
ist industries, often even overdeveloped and damaging 
for the site in question, while the potential of others 
has yet to be tapped. The Committee insists that policy 
on upland tourism should be integrated with other 
upland development policies (especially protection 
against forest fires, erosion and landslides), respect the 
natural environment and preserve the beauty of the 
landscape. In this context, hiking, ski-tours, pony-trek­
king, excursions, nature trails, agro-tourism, etc. should 
be strongly supported, helping also to spread activity 
increasingly over the whole year. 
4. An Internal Market for tourism 
4.1. The completion of the 1992 Internal Market 
programme should bring big benefits to tourism, not 
least in transport, provision of services and the whole 
No C 332/160 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 90 
field of citizen's rights (abolition of intra-EC frontier 
control: European Community citizens moving inside 
the Community will no longer be treated as foreigners. 
The Committee reiterates its strong support for com­
pletion of this programme in the light of its significance 
for tourism and regional development. 
4.2. Many measures are however still called for in 
order to achieve a Single Market in tourism. They 
include: 
a) introduction of common regulations to protect tour­
ists from profiteers, other sources of harassment 
and incorrect information; 
b) standardization of the system of categorising tourist 
accommodation (number of stars etc.); 
c) introduction of a computerised system of hotel and 
travel information and reservations; 
d) minimum requirements for standard contracts (e.g. 
governing relations between hoteliers, transporters 
and tour operators, tour operators and sales agenci­
es, and relations with customers at all stages); 
e) interoperability of credit cards and electronic means 
of payment together with promotion of the ECU to 
simplify and stabilize tourist transactions; 
f) effective operation of a pan-European air traffic 
control system; 
g) drawing-up of a common policy at international as 
well as Community level to protect tourists from 
terrorist attacks and improve security in the Mem­
ber States. 
4.3. Certain measures foreseen in the 1992 pro­
gramme may however be counter-productive for tour­
ism. In this respect the Committee draws particular 
attention to its comments on the application of Value 
Added Tax (VAT) and excise duties to transport oper­
ations, under the tax harmonization proposals (*). The 
Committee is concerned that such measures could 
increase rates for intra-Community transport and thus 
discriminate in favour of extra-EC transport links. 
4.4. Similarly tax harmonization measures affecting 
hotels and tourist facilities could, if generally applied, 
raise costs and endanger several hundred thousand jobs. 
The Committee warns against abrupt measures of this 
sort. 
(*) Opinion on the development of civil aviation in the Com­
munity, OJ No C 112/90, 7. 5. 1990, paragraph 7.2; Opinion 
on positive measures for maritime transport, OJ No C 56, 
7. 3. 1990. 5. Tourism and a more cohesive Europe 
5.1. For regional development, tourism is well placed 
to broaden the economic base of both less-developed 
and industrial regions. The Committee emphasizes the 
need for a more balanced distribution of tourism in 
terms of both season and geography. This is in the 
economic interest of all Member States and will enhance 
regional development and care for the environment. 
The piecemeal approach to these issues in the past has 
had few positive results. 
5.2. A more comprehensive approach will need to 
place emphasis on raising both the quality and the 
variety of the tourist 'product' on offer. The Com­
munity and Member States, must make qualitative 
improvement the main criterion in providing assistance 
to touristic development. 
5.3.1. EC Structural Funds (Regional Fund, Social 
Fund, Agricultural Fund, etc.) provide significant sums 
to projects of importance for tourism, both directly 
(e.g. yacht marinas, conference centres) and indirectly 
through general amenities (e.g. roads, electricity or 
water supply). Loans for hotels and tourist facilities, 
not least to small and medium- sized enterprises (SME), 
are also provided by the European Investment Bank 
(EIB), increasingly in conjunction with the Structural 
Funds. The department within DG XXIII of the Com­
mission responsible for tourism in the Community must 
also be involved at the earliest possible stage to ensure 
proper coordination between the various funds. 
5.3.2. The Committee lays great stress on the need 
for the doubling of the Structural Funds to be used to 
influence investment in tourist facilities in the directions 
set out in this Opinion. 
5.3.3. In this respect, the Committee is confident that 
attainment of this objective will be assisted by the new 
programming procedures (Community support frame­
work, pluri-annual operational programmes, etc.). It is 
pleased, for example, to note that the Community sup­
port frameworks for Greece, Italy and Spain establish 
tourism development as one of the five top priority 
areas and, at the same time, explictly endorse several 
of the main conclusions adumbrated in this Opinion 
(alternative tourism, wider geographical and seasonal 
spread, general infrastructure, training). 
5.3.4. However, the Committee remains concerned 
that fine intentions in policy programmes do not always 
lead to effective implementation in practice. This risk 
31. 12. 90 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 332/161 
is clearly increased when only a small part of EC funds 
is allocated specifically to 'tourism' while other national 
and Community expenditure is of equal or greater 
relevance to touristic development. The Committee 
concludes that the tourist interest needs to be taken 
much more seriously into consideration through frame­
work plans (as set out in paragraph 6.1 below) in 
each tourist area. These should be a prerequisite for 
assistance from EC Structural Funds. 
5.3.5. Local framework plans of this sort need in 
turn to be set in the context of a comprehensive pro­
gramme to promote tourism within the Community 
and to attract visitors from non-EC countries. The 
Section would expect such a programme to be based 
on the guidelines set out in this Opinion and on similar 
contributions from the European Year of Tourism, 
complemented by comment and input from the body 
proposed in paragraph 6.2 below. 
5.4. Touristic development in the more disadvan­
taged regions depends to a considerable extent on the 
availability of a core of skilled workers, but such wor­
kers will wish to receive remuneration equivalent to 
that of other productive sectors. This is exceptionally 
difficult where tourist activity is highly seasonal. 
5.4.1. Finding solutions calls for coordinated meas­
ures in a number of fields, such as the prolongation of 
the tourist season and the development of additional 
economic activities during the low season (construction 
work, agriculture, fishing, processing industry, crafts, 
etc.). All these things require the harmonization of 
insurance and social assistance systems in the various 
sectors, together with a system to cover the remuner­
ation of workers for the short period in which they 
will not be employed and vocational preparation in a 
number of skills. 
5.4.2. It is clear that, for reasons of social justice and 
to avoid unfair competition among the Member States 
as regards labour costs, such provisions will have to be 
carried out on the basis of Community coordinating 
Directives. 
5.4.3. Vocational training in the tourist sector could 
benefit from a EEC experimental programme to estab­
lish a common framework for training courses, with 
adequate provision and respect for traditions and cus­
toms (cuisine, folklore, etc.), involving institutes speci­
alized in these fields. 
5.4.4. The Committee welcomes the recent European 
hotel trainee placement scheme (*) which needs to be 
(!) Social Europe Supplement 8/89, p. 103/4. better known, developed on a longer-term basis and 
extended to other categories of tourist employees and 
other sectors of the tourist industry. The opportunity 
to benefit from such a programme provides employees 
with better knowledge of conditions in other parts of 
the Community, the opportunity to learn languages and 
to find occupation during the low season. 
6. Conclusions 
6.1. The prime initiative for the development of tour­
ism must rest with Community States and Regions. In 
the same way in which a strategic plan is essential for 
any major industry, it is equally essential that, in each 
tourist area, development should be based on a frame­
work plan widely discussed between all responsible 
authorities, developers, entrepreneurs and the social 
partners. The Committee considers that the Structural 
Funds of the Community should only be made available 
for assistance and support when there is evidence of 
such a plan in which the participants are prepared to 
make a substantial commitment. There should not with 
few exceptions be support for isolated projects or piece­
meal development. 
6.2. The Committee believes it would be of advan­
tage to set up a European Community tourism pro­
motion body or foundation grouping together the Tour­
ist Boards and other professional interests from the 
various Member States. This body would have the task 
of promoting European Community tourism policy, 
both within and outside the Community, providing a 
forum for discussion as well as necessary background 
material and a data bank. 
6.3. The Committee would also like to see the dia­
logue between the social partners in the tourist sector 
developed at Community level. 
6.4. The Committee would like to see recognition of 
the importance of tourism as a major sector requiring 
European Community action through a specific refer­
ence to it in any forthcoming revision of the Treaty, as 
proposed by the Italian Presidency. 
6.5. The Committee emphasizes the need for the 
vital link between tourism development and the 
environment to be taken into account at every stage. It 
should be reflected in organizational structures e.g. 
the European Environment Agency should include a 
department especially concerned with tourism. Simi­
larly all Mediterranean countries, signatories to the 
No C 332/162 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 90 
Barcelona Convention for the protection of the Medi­
terranean sea against pollution, must intensify implementation: the Community's MEDSPA pro­
gramme is especially important in this respect. 
Done at Brussels, 20 September 1990. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 83/477/EEC on the 
protection of workers from the risks related to exposure to asbestos at work 
(90/C 332/43) 
On 21 June 1990 the Council of the European Communities decided to consult the Economic 
and Social Committee, under Article 118A of the Treaty establishing the European Economic 
Community, on the abovementioned proposal. 
The Section for Social, Family, Educational and Cultural Affairs, which was responsible for 
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 13 September 1990. 
The Rapporteur was Mr Etty. 
At its 279th plenary session (meeting of 20 September 1990) the Economic and Social 
Committee unanimously adopted the following Opinion. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The draft Directive partially reviews the Council 
Directive of 19 September 1983 on the protection of 
workers from the risks related to exposure to agents at 
work: asbestos, hereafter to be referred to as the asbes­
tos Directive. 
1.2. The Committee adopted an Opinion on the draft 
of this Directive in September 1981 (*). It will be recalled 
that the asbestos Directive was the second individual 
Directive under the so-called framework Directive of 
27 November 1980 on the protection of workers from 
the risks related to exposure to chemical, physical and 
biological agents at work (80/1107/EEC). The Commit­
tee adopted an Opinion on the framework Directive in 
1979. 1.3. The main elements of the present revision con­
cern some of the provision in the asbestos Directive 
foreseen in Article 9 of the Directive, the level of action 
(Article 3.3 of the Directive) and the limit values for 
exposure at the workplace (Article 8 of the Directive). 
Furthermore, it adds specific proposals for building 
constructions to Article 5 of the Directive which at 
present only prohibits the spraying of asbestos. 
1.4. The Committee endorses the current proposal, 
subject to the following comments: 
2. General comments 
(!) OJ No C 310/43, 30. 11. 1981. 2.1. It should be recalled that, in its Opinion on the 
Asbestos Directive in 1981, the Committee stated: