Why European Destinations Must Balance Tourism Growth With Resident Well-Being?

At Helsinki’s Oodi Library, Michael Otremba and Charlotte Bellmann challenged the industry to rethink tourism beyond economics, positioning it instead as a driver of well-being, health and human connection, with impacts that can increasingly be measured through data © City Destinations Alliance

As European destinations face growing pressure to balance tourism growth with sustainability, quality of life and long-term urban resilience, the tourism industry is entering a period of significant transformation. Questions surrounding visitor flows, resident acceptance, regenerative tourism, mobility, well-being and the increasing role of data and AI are becoming central to how destinations position themselves for the future. At the same time, changing traveller behaviour across Europe, from shorter and more frequent trips to shifting expectations around sustainability and authenticity, is forcing destinations to rethink both tourism development and visitor management strategies.

At the CityDNA Conference 2026 in Helsinki, we sat down with Charlotte Bellmann from the German Institute for Tourism Research (DI Tourismusforschung) to discuss how traveller behaviour, sustainability and data-driven destination management are reshaping tourism across Germany and Europe.

From the growing preference for shorter and more frequent trips to the rise of regenerative tourism models, the conversation explored how destinations are adapting to changing visitor expectations while trying to balance the needs of residents, businesses and local communities. The German researcher also reflected on the widening role of data and AI in destination management, the relationship between travel and well-being, and the ongoing challenge of ensuring that tourism creates long-term value rather than simply increasing pressure on cities and infrastructure. 

 

Charlotte, your work at the German Institute for Tourism Research places you at the centre of understanding traveller behaviour and evolving tourism patterns across Germany. From your research perspective, how is traveller behaviour changing today?

From a leisure travel perspective, one of the trends we are observing through the ReiseAnalyse by the Forschungsgemeinschaft Urlaub und Reisen e.V., is a shift towards more frequent short trips, mainly within Germany. The average length of stay of the main holiday has declined in the last decades, while the number of additional short trips has increased.

So, the trend is increasingly about travelling more frequently, but often within the country itself?

Yes, exactly. Traditionally, families would often take one long summer holiday lasting two or even three weeks. What we are seeing now is a shift away from that model. Instead, people are travelling more frequently throughout the year, but for shorter periods, up to four days. The concept of the single, long summer vacation is gradually evolving into a pattern of multiple shorter escapes spread across the calendar year.

Holidays within Germany are very popular, especially for these shorter trips. Germans continue to show a very strong appetite for domestic travel. Certain regions consistently remain the most popular, particularly Schleswig-Holstein along the coast and Bavaria, known for its mountain landscapes as well as the bigger cities in Germany like Berlin, Hamburg, Cologne.

At the same time, Germans continue to travel extensively abroad as well, particularly across Europe. Mediterranean destinations, for example, remain extremely popular among German travellers. What is particularly interesting is that demand for southern European destinations remains very strong even during periods of extreme summer heat, when one might expect travellers to shift towards cooler regions. Despite changing climate conditions, these destinations continue to attract significant demand.

Sustainability and digital transformation are increasingly shaping the future of tourism. From your perspective, where do German destinations still face the biggest gap between sustainability ambitions and practical implementation?

Sustainability is certainly one of the defining issues in tourism today, alongside digitalisation, the development of data hubs and, increasingly, AI. These areas are becoming more and more interconnected.

When it comes to implementation, many German destinations are already doing substantial work to integrate sustainability into tourism development. However, destination management organisations are not always the ones directly responsible for every aspect that influences tourism. Mobility, for example, remains one of the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions in the sector, yet DMOs often only have limited influence over how transport infrastructure and mobility systems are planned.

Cities often perform better in this regard because they already benefit from stronger public transport systems. That naturally makes sustainable mobility easier to implement than in rural destinations.

There has been significant progress across Germany. Berlin, for example, has introduced comprehensive sustainability measurement and certification frameworks, encouraging tourism businesses to participate and actively highlighting operators that meet sustainability standards.
 

"Without the support of the local population, a destination inevitably loses part of what makes it attractive in the first place: its character, its atmosphere, its sense of place."

Based on your research at the institute, do you still find that sustainability in tourism is perceived as expensive, particularly when it comes to reconverting operations and existing structures?

Yes, that perception is still quite common, especially when it comes to reconverting existing structures. Sustainability does involve costs. Traditional tourism operations have often been optimized to keep costs low, sometimes at the expense of environmental and social considerations. Moving toward more sustainable practices therefore requires investment, particularly when retrofitting buildings, upgrading energy systems, or changing operational processes.

In that sense, sustainability does require investment. But I wouldn’t frame it as a simple either-or equation. There is a middle ground where it is possible to develop more sustainable tourism products and operational structures while still maintaining price levels that remain accessible and acceptable for travellers. Importantly, many sustainable measures, such as improving energy efficiency, reducing water use, or minimizing waste, can lower operating costs over time. The challenge is less about sustainability being too expensive overall, and more about the initial investment and uncertainty involved in making the transition.

What are the most important findings that destinations should take into account when looking at the relationship between travel and well-being, particularly in leisure travel?

Research into the connection between travel behaviour and well-being has increased considerably over the past decades, with significant contributions coming from studies in Australia and the Netherlands. There is strong evidence that travel has a positive impact on subjective well-being – meaning the positive emotions people experience, their overall life satisfaction and other aspects. Studies consistently show that people tend to feel more content when they travel than in their everyday routines. This is largely linked to a range of psychological needs that are more easily fulfilled during travel.

Would it be fair to say, then, that this effect is more about psychological relief and autonomy than about the destination itself?

In a way, yes. One of the key factors for recovery is the ability to detach from everyday stressors, whether that is work, household responsibilities or general obligations. Travel creates a mental distance to these stressors and also a sense of autonomy, where individuals regain control over their decisions rather than operating within externally imposed structures.

Psychological needs like these are more effectively met while on holiday or during leisure time. This fulfilment has a direct impact on subjective well-being, which in turn influences how people manage stress. And we know from medical research that stress is a significant risk factor for a range of health issues, including cardiovascular health and broader systemic conditions. In that sense, travel can play a meaningful role in supporting both well-being, recovery and health outcomes.

In a current project in collaboration with Hamburg Tourism analysed the impact of travel activity on the subjective well-being of German travellers, both domestically and internationally. We developed a measurement instrument based on an established psychological model that captures these key need dimensions.

Using this methodology, we were able to quantify the well-being benefits associated with travel behaviour. The project is still ongoing, and here at the conference I presented initial findings together with Michael Otremba, CEO from Hamburg Tourism. Further statistical analysis is currently underway to better understand how these well-being effects are shaped, particularly whether they are influenced by trip design. If that proves to be the case, it would provide destinations with very tangible insights into how they can design products and experiences that actively enhance travellers’ well-being.

Would you then also consider the context of the traveller’s everyday life as part of that equation, rather than only the trip itself?

The life circumstances are definitely an important factor to consider, that leads into the second analytical focus of our study. We are examining whether individual life circumstances play a role in how effectively people recover while on holiday. Essentially, we are asking whether the benefits of travel differ depending on how demanding, stressful or structured someone’s daily life is in the first place… the conditions they are temporarily stepping away from. So, in combination, these two perspectives allow us to better understand not only how travel is designed, but also how it interacts with the realities of people’s everyday lives.

One of the recurring discussions here (at the CityDNA Conference in Helsinki) is how data and optimisation can improve the services that DMOs and cities offer to both visitors and residents. At the same time, there is a broader concern: as destinations increasingly rely on similar data-driven models, curated experiences and global consumer trends, is there a risk that cities start to lose their distinct character and begin to look and feel increasingly alike? How does your research address this tension between optimisation and authenticity?

We don’t currently have a dedicated research project that focuses directly on that question in those exact terms. However, we do have a number of studies looking at tourism acceptance among local populations, which touches on some of the aspects you are referring to.

This is becoming an increasingly important field of research, because in many destinations we are seeing growing resistance from local residents towards tourism development. And that is critical, because without the support of the local population, a destination inevitably loses part of what makes it attractive in the first place: its character, its atmosphere, its sense of place.

As was highlighted in the conference keynote by Professor Greg Clark from The DNA of Cities, it is ultimately the people who shape the identity of a destination. Resident perspectives and needs have to be part of the tourism development process. In fact, there are numerous cases where local communities have actively influenced or even pushed back against certain forms of tourism development. A more sustainable path therefore lies in collaborative approaches where tourism development is shaped jointly with residents.

The keynote clearly highlighted how the “DNA” of a place is essential. It is not just about optimisation or efficiency, but about ensuring that tourism development is rooted in the specific identity of the destination you are marketing and shaping.

So, would you say that one of the core challenges in destination development is finding the right balance between visitors and residents, or is it more complex than that?

I think it is certainly part of it, but it is more complex than a simple balance between visitors and residents. Multiple stakeholder groups need to be taken into account: residents, visitors, businesses, institutional stakeholders and such.

At the same time, destination development also has to address several dimensions in parallel: economic, social and ecological. The challenge is to align these different interests in a way that supports genuinely sustainable development.

Increasingly, in tourism research and practice, this is being discussed through the concept of regenerative paradigm. The idea goes beyond sustainability as “doing less harm” and instead focuses on creating a net positive impact where tourism actively contributes to the well-being of the place and its people. In its ideal form, tourism is structured in such a way that visitors themselves become meaningful contributors to the destination, rather than simply consumers of it.
 

There is an ongoing discussion about whether cities are now shaped not only by residents but also by visitors, who can act as contributors rather than just consumers. Do you think destinations are already moving towards this “net positive” model, or are visitors still primarily perceived as a burden in many cases?

Destinations are currently in a phase of transition. In many places, visitors are still perceived primarily as consumers who place pressure on infrastructure, housing or public space. However, there is growing recognition that tourism and local life are not separate systems, but deeply interconnected.

For a long time, visitors were seen mainly as users of urban infrastructure. Yet much of what is commonly described as “tourism infrastructure” is in fact shared by residents and visitors alike. Restaurants, museums, cultural venues, nightlife and public spaces are not created exclusively for tourists; they are part of the everyday urban ecosystem and contribute to residents’ quality of life as well.

Research increasingly supports this perspective. Our institute has collaborated with the city marketing alliance Magic Cities Germany e.V. to study the relationship between tourism and residents’ well-being. The findings indicate that cities with strong tourism infrastructure often offer a broader range of cultural, social and gastronomic opportunities that are also positively perceived by local communities.

At the same time, whether tourism becomes genuinely “net positive” depends largely on how value creation is structured within the destination. Tourism providers are not simply service operators; they influence whether visitor spending generates long-term local value or quickly leaves the destination again. Where tourism systems are dominated by international corporations, significant portions of revenue may flow back to headquarters abroad, limiting the direct benefits for residents and local economies.

This is precisely where the regenerative tourism paradigm becomes important. The objective is not only to minimise negative impacts, but to ensure tourism creates economic, social and cultural value locally. Destinations therefore need to manage tourism carefully in order to build balanced ecosystems in which visitors actively contribute to long-term local development rather than being perceived solely as a burden.
 

"Travel creates a mental distance to our everyday stressors and also a sense of autonomy, where individuals regain control over their decisions"

How relevant is the concept of sustainable travel today in Germany? To what extent are travellers actually seeking and choosing sustainable offers, certifications and travel options in practice?

We do still see a significant attitude-behaviour gap in this area. In Germany, there is a long-standing tourism consumer panel, the ReiseAnalyse, which has been tracking these developments for many years. It clearly shows that while attitudes towards sustainable tourism are relatively high, both in terms of ecological and social sustainability, actual purchasing and travel decisions often tell a different story. In other words, people tend to express strong support for sustainability, but this is not yet consistently reflected in their travel behaviour, so the gap remains quite substantial.

That said, there are some encouraging developments. In business travel in particular, we are seeing a gradual increase in sustainable choices. This is largely driven by corporate policies, where companies now often require employees to book more sustainable accommodation or to offset their carbon emissions when travelling. In this segment, the relevance of sustainability is clearly growing. Among leisure travellers, however, the trends are still relatively limited. There are signs of change, but they remain small and somewhat fragmented at this stage; still very much in an early phase of adoption rather than a mainstream behavioural shift.

Do you think destinations today risk over-segmenting their visitor strategies, or is it still necessary to differentiate strongly between target groups and tailor offers accordingly?

I think it is important for destinations to understand the different target groups they are addressing. Particularly given the challenges many cities face around visitor distribution and seasonality.

Identifying these audiences clearly,and then developing both communication and products that respond to their specific needs,can be extremely valuable. It helps reduce pressure on peak periods, encourages a better distribution of visitor flows beyond the main tourist hotspots, and ultimately supports a more balanced experience of the city.

In turn, this can also have a positive impact on resident satisfaction with tourism, because it reduces concentration effects and helps integrate visitors more evenly into the urban environment.

Is one of the main challenges for European destinations today to divert visitors away from major cities like Lisbon, Berlin or Rome towards lesser-known or less-visited areas?

In Germany, we are not yet facing a significant over-tourism problem on the scale seen in cities such as Barcelona, Lisbon or Venice. There are certainly instances of crowding in specific areas and during peak periods – for example Berlin has experienced some pressure in that regard, but overall the situation is at a different magnitude compared to some of the more heavily impacted European destinations.

Crowding in certain hotspots can be managed with a well-developed visitor strategy, combined with targeted distribution measures to help alleviate pressure on these areas. The aim is to avoid concentrating demand along a single “main route” of attractions and instead encourage a more even spread of visitors across the city or region.

At our institute, we have also worked on projects analysing visitor flows using mobile app and big data sources. Without going into too much technical detail, these studies clearly show that movement patterns within destinations can be understood and, to some extent, influenced through data-driven management approaches.Ultimately, there is a clear evolution both in research and in practice towards better understanding and shaping how visitors move, but it remains a complex interplay between natural demand patterns and strategic destination management.
 

---

Powered by Meeting Media Company, publisher of Headquarters Magazine (HQ) – a leading international publication based in Brussels, serving the global MICE industry and association community.