I just read an article called: ‘The fight to revive Europe’s shrinking rural areas’.
Now, strictly speaking this article from the Financial Times that I just read isn’t about tourism or destination marketing. But it’s about an issue that people keep trying to suggest tourism is gonna fix.
Look, I love a good view as much as anyone and I love visiting rural areas to get those views. I’ve even worked remotely from some. But I keep seeing people comment on this article, and articles like it, that tourism is THE answer to declining populations and community viability in those areas.
No. Tourism is AN answer, or PART of the answer. Rural tourism alone can’t revitalise shrinking towns and villages. It’s too seasonal, too subject to economic ups and down and travel trends to be a reliable, year-round solution.
That said, a lot of what needs to be done to get these areas truly tourism-ready would also make them far more liveable for remote and hybrid workers.
I know, I know people bring up remote work too all the time in these conversations. But they usually stop at, “Just make sure there’s high-speed Wi-Fi and you’re set.”
No. To be a long-term, sustainable part of a rural revitalisation effort, remote workers (and tourists, for that matter) need much more than fast broadband. They need local transport, healthcare, services, culture. More and more people are making sustainability a priority – in life and in travel so there should be incentives to update older housing stock in ways to support that. It’s about supporting not just their job but their whole life.
Places like this don’t just need regenerative tourism. They need regenerative revitalisation as well.
All of that needs to happen in collaboration with the population that IS there. This isn’t about replacement.
I’ve been a remote worker for a long time, working remotely in both dense urban areas and rural ones so I’ve seen how regenerative efforts can be incorporated into more areas of life. So, not surprised this article caught me eye this morning.