Gaps – and Leaps – in Destination Sustainability in 2024
Explore 5 eye-widening GDS-Index destination sustainability insights based on vetted, validated, and verified data from 100 participating destinations
490 ViewsChange has positive and negative implications, but it’s the pace of change that deserves our attention in 2024. This is the main takeaway from the 2024 Global Destination Sustainability Index, which you can download a report of here or read on for 5 key insights…
The GDS-Index is a trusted performance improvement programme to assess and accelerate the progress of a destination’s regenerative journey. It measures, benchmarks, and enhances the sustainability strategies, action plans, and initiatives of more than 100 destination management organisations, municipal authorities, and their tourism supply chains.
1. When it Rains, it Pours
The average 2030 carbon emissions’ reduction target for destinations is 60%. 30 destinations’ target is from 75 to 100% by 2030; 44 have a target from 50 to 74%; 20 from 25 to 49% and five are below 24%. With the majority below 75% and the average progress of how much a destination has reduced its emissions so far against its 2030 target at 40%, there is a real need for improvement.
In last year’s report, we predicted a hotter summer. It broke all records when it came. We expected another season of wildfires, evacuations, and a potential heatwave at the Summer Olympics in Paris. We got what we expected, but what we were less prepared for were the storms and excess rainfall during both opening and closing ceremonies at the Olympics and Paralympics. Climate crisis is increasingly common and can strike at any time, but fewer than half of all participating destinations have a crisis management plan that includes tourism and events, which is very similar to last year’s performance. Half of the destinations on the GDS-Index are large or metropolis cities (1.5 million or more) and 44% of those do not have a crisis management plan in place for either tourism or events, and only 26% have for both.
2. Certified Change
CSRD! CSDDD? GCD!? We aren’t swearing. There are new acronyms on their way to the European Union, and many organisations are bracing for the associated updates to legislation and regulation around sustainability practice and communication. At least one other country has already acted on this, and we anticipate more countries and cities will follow suit in time. What we do know is that certifications are implicated, so the GDS-Index is preparing. Certifiers and accreditors are staking their claim in the marketplace, and the technology sector is ready to capitalise on market opportunities, so change is coming, and fast.
The GDS-Index has eight criteria related to third-party certification and two to international climate commitments or declarations. We are seeing improvements here! The percentage of certified hotels is up by 10%, of venues, up by 13%, of airports, up by 3%, of professional congress organisers (PCOs), up by 6.5%, and of destination certification, up by 8% of those “in process”.
3. Residents’ Rights in a Sea of Visitors
Overtourism has become a dirty word, and the growing need for better visitor management has inspired new criteria measuring a wave of positive change from short-term tourism to cultural- and natural-site protection, and more.
For the “visitor management” criteria, we measure six indicators. Four of these focus on beneficial initiatives, with a score of 83% already measuring visitor flows. By contrast, for the criteria that asks if the destination “conducts a social carrying-capacity study or environmental”, only 13% have a carrying capacity study, and 14% have an environmental one, revealing a need for greater awareness of this vital practice.
For the criteria on “short-term tourism rentals”, most of the destinations have taken several measures, and most of the destinations (besides the lowest-ranked ones) gained points on the GDS-Index for their efforts in this area.
The upper half of the GDS-Index scores an average of 2.44 points out of the possible four in the criteria compared to the lower half scoring 1.14 on the criteria for “destination-wide initiatives or programmes in place that specifically target culturally- and naturally-sensitive sites to increase positive visitor impact”, demonstrating a stark contrast in the destination approaches to these important sites, and a chance to change for the better through it. Out of its four indicators, the highest is 52% of destinations claiming points for this topic, and the lowest is 38%, showing a universal need for more cohesive action in all destinations.
4. Bold, Truthful, and Transparent Storytelling
DMOs navigate and serve a complex web of interested parties. When politics comes into play, it can mean stormy seas. We address the courage it takes to be open and accountable in a few ways.
First, by rewarding evidence of a “formal commitment to DEI” (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) within an organisation (reflected on its website), which 75% have. 54% ensure “DEI communication to visitors”. We also explore their actions to make sure the destination offers “decent work/quality work” in the visitor economy and information about modern slavery mitigation. 62% encourage suppliers to provide quality jobs in tourism but only 20% encourage, educate, and support suppliers to act against modern slavery, while 29% of destinations answered “none” in this criterion.
Secondly, we have several criteria in the Destination Management section that explore willingness to communicate sustainability efforts and performance. 30% do not share anything (“greenhushing”), down 10% from 40% last year. The majority of destinations, 62%, include their sustainability performance in a report. 45% also get points for all 6 indicators for providing “information about the destination’s sustainable events and tourism strategy and initiatives”. The highest of these indicators’ performance has 80% of destinations sharing “sustainability information about key suppliers”, and the lowest has 61% sharing “sustainable events strategy”. 67% always share information on “sustainability strategy and performance in RFP responses and sales information”.
5. Data-accelerated Decision Making
To encourage the use of SMART goals and data in the destinations’ strategies, we track how DMOs utilise them and set objectives, indicators, and targets for environmentally-, socially-, and economically-positive outcomes.
There is an increase in the percentage of destinations measuring any objectives from 80% to 85% percent across the three areas. This is alongside a notable increase in destinations that have started measuring. On the five social indicators we track, there is an increase from average of 58% to 72% with only 14% not measuring any. Environmentally, the average increase is 57% to 67% with 28% not measuring. Lastly, economically, the average increased from an of 62% to 74% and where we only have 12% not measuring any indicators, targets or objectives.
We have consistently aimed to push destinations to utilise data to help professionalise the DMO and its efforts. If we look back to 2020, 53% did not measure social outcomes, 49% did not measure environmental outcomes and 30% did not measure their economic outcomes or their impact. In 2024, the economically-positive outcomes were the only criteria where more than 50% had objectives or performance indicators. Goal setting has certainly been on their agenda to ride the wave of transformation it enables.
