A NEW ADMINISTRATIVE LAW FOR A NEW TOURISM: NOW OR NEVER because they represented, I repeat, a challenge in the implementation of public policies in the sector6. And we speak of a challenge because the public authorities do not have all the legal tools at their disposal to put a stop to these problems. Especially, following the publication and subsequent transposition into domestic law of Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market and, at the national level, Law 20/2013 of 9 December, on guaranteeing market unity7. It is becoming more and more complicated to limit the economic activity of tourism because we are moving, inexorably, towards a greater liberalization of the economy. This liberalization is motivated, to a large extent, by the need to boost an economic sector such as tourism, which provides large macroeconomic figures, especially in times of crisis such as those we have experienced in recent decades: the crisis of the financial system, the economic crisis resulting from the Pandemic and the crisis resulting from the war in Ukraine, whose consequences we cannot yet fully assess. The risk, as can be perceived, is related to an uncontrolled increase in the tourist offer, with the corresponding increase in demand, leading to situations of environmental, social and economic tension. In short, that public policies, perhaps well-intentioned, tend to promote low-quality tourism that is difficult to sustain in the future8. Let us now look at some of the main problems in more detail, without wishing to be exhaustive. 6 RODRÍGUEZ-BARCÓN, A., CALO, E. and OTERO-ENRÍQUEZ, R, (2021) “Una revisión crítica sobre el análisis de la gentrificación turística en España”. Rotur, Revista de Ocio y Turismo, 15(1), ““However, tourism has proved to be a double-edged sword. Several studies have found some negative consequences of the massive arrival of visitors. The relevance that concepts such as overtourism (Milano, 2018; Milano, Cheer and Novelli, 2019) or “tourismphobia” (Guitart, Alcalde, Pitarch and Vallvé, 2018; Mansilla, 2020) are recently acquiring point to a certain collapse of the current model and the need to seek other ways to manage mobility in a more sustainable way, with a smaller ecological footprint and less intrusive with the day-to-day life of residents (Colomb and Novy, 2016). Among its consequences we can highlight: the increase in the price of housing and commercial land, the precariousness and seasonalization of employment associated with the service sector, the homogenization of commerce and loss of identity of spaces, the municipal economic pressure to maintain certain infrastructures and services, or the privatization of public spaces”. 7 A comprehensive analysis of the impact of these regulations on the tourism sector can be found at CORRAL SASTRE, A. (2017), La liberalización del sector turístico, ¿Hacia un modelo de turismo sostenible?, Op. Cit., pp. 151 y ss. 8 MANTECÓN, A., (2020), “La crisis sistémica del turismo: una perspectiva global en tiempos de pandemia”, en SIMANCAS CRUZ, M., HERNÁNDEZ MARTÍN, R. y PADRÓN FUMERO, N. (Coords.), Turismo pos- -COVID-19. Reflexiones, retos y oportunidades, Op. Cit., págs. 24 y 25, “Over the last six decades, the Spanish tourism sector has articulated a “model” guided by the basic objective of increasing the number of visitors. All other considerations were subordinated to this principle (both during the dictatorship and during democracy), which has ended up giving it certain structural features. Among others: • Specialization in a predominantly “sun and beach” tourism product, with low added value and demanded by price-sensitive low-middle income consumers.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==