Beyond the EuroTrip Tourism as Means to European Union Soft Power

BEYOND THE EUROTRIP:
TOURISM AS MEANS TO
EUROPEAN UNION SOFT POWER
Submitted by
PALLAVI SHARMA
In partial fulfilment of the requirements of
the Master of Arts degree in International Relations
Faculty of Social Sciences, South Asian University
Year of submission: 2014

i
DECLARATION
The dissertation titled ‘ Beyond the Eurotrip: Tourism as Means to European Union
Soft Power’ submitted by me in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the Master
of Arts degree in International Relations at the Faculty of Social Sciences, South
Asian University is my own work. The dissertation has not been submitted for any
other degree of this University or any other university.
I declare that no part of this dissertation has been plagiarized. I take responsibility
for the same.
PALLAVI SHARMA 15TH
APRIL 2014
Name of the Student Signature Date
CERTIFICATE
We recommend that this dissertation be placed before the examiners for evaluation.
Signature: Signature:
Siddharth Mallavarapu Dhananjay Tripathi
Chairperson Supervisor
Department of International Relations (DIR) DIR, FSS
Faculty of Social Sciences (FSS)
South Asian University
New Delhi

ii
CONTENTS
Acknowledgement............................................................................................................. iii
List of Abbreviations.........................................................................................................iv
List of Tables........................................................................................................................v
Introduction: Core Concepts - Power, Soft Power, Public Diplomacy and
Tourism ............................................................................................................................1-8
I. Introduction............................................................................................................................. 1
II. Changing International Order, Globalisation and Power Politics ..................... 2
III. Tourism as means to Soft Power: the case of European Union........................ 4
IV. Public Diplomacy ................................................................................................................ 7
V. Conclusion............................................................................................................................... 8
European Union Tourism Policy: An Overview...............................................9-18
I. Introduction ....................................................................................................................9
II. Tourism Policy and its Objectives................................................................................10
i) Policies governing domestic tourism .....................................................................12
ii) Tourism for the International Community .........................................................13
III. Public Diplomacy and the Emergence as the Leading Tourist Destination:
European Union.......................................................................................................................15
i) International Tourism Trends...................................................................................16
ii) Domestic Tourism Trends.........................................................................................16
IV. Conclusion ...........................................................................................................................18
Assessing the European Tourism as a Source of Soft Power ....................19-28
I. Introduction...........................................................................................................................19
II. The Macro Level Analysis: Tourism policy as Public Diplomacy.....................20
III. The Micro Level Analysis: Tourism policy as an effort to build common
“EU-ropean” identity..............................................................................................................24
IV. Conclusion ...........................................................................................................................27
Conclusion ..................................................................................................................29-32
I. Introduction...........................................................................................................................29
II. Hypotheses and Research Questions..........................................................................29
III. Methods and Measurements........................................................................................30
IV. Establishing the “EuroTrip” as a Brand....................................................................30
V. Limitations............................................................................................................................31
References..................................................................................................................33-38

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This is a Master’s degree dissertation on European Union Tourism Policy taken
as a source of Soft Power, submitted to the Department of International
Relations, South Asian University. With the completion of this research work, I
would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to some of those, whose constant
support made the research a success.
I take this opportunity, first and foremost, to express my deepest gratitude and
appreciation to my supervisor, Dr, Dhananjay Tripathi, of the Faculty of Social
Science, South Asian University, without the enduring patience and constant
guidance of whose, this research would not have been possible.
I would further like to convey my gratefulness to the chairperson of the
Department of International Relations, Dr. Siddhartha Mallavarapu and all the
faculty members of the Department in South Asian University for providing me
with this great learning opportunity. I would also like to take this opportunity to
mention Dr. Jayashree Vivekanandan for familiarizing me with some of the core
concepts and theories used in my research, and Dr. Sanjeev Kumar for guiding
me to understand and choose the research methods that I have applied. I would
also like to extend my thankfulness to my fellow classmates for their unending
support and encouragement.
My gratitude also goes to the South Asian University library for providing me
with the research materials, my colleagues from other Departments of the
University who have enlightened me with their varied insights on the topic,
friends, family and relatives for their love and encouragement throughout the
research period, all of which made it possible for me to complete this
dissertation on time.
Last, but not the least, I would like to pour my sincere gratitude to all the unseen
forces that have missed my specific mention, for the contribution towards this
research work.
Pallavi Sharma
April, 2014

iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AU- African Union
CAP- Common Agricultural Policy
CEPS- Centre for European Policy Studies
EU- European Union
EUROMED- Euro–Mediterranean Partnership
IR- International Relations (discipline)
MERCOSUR- Mercado Comum do Sul
NGOs- Non-Governmental Organisations
OECD- Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
UN- United Nations
UNESCO- United Nations Economic, Social, and Cultural Organisation
UNWTO- United Nations World Travel Organisation
UK- United Kingdom
WTO- World Trade Organisation

v
LIST OF TABLES
List Page
1. Table 2.1: EU and the Schengen Members………………………………………..11
2. Table 2.2: Tourism Trends in few of the EU states…………………………….15
3. Table 2.3: International Tourism Trends………………………………………….16
4. Table 2.4: Domestic Tourism Trends………………………………………………..17

1
CHAPTER 1
Introduction: Core Concepts - Power, Soft Power, Public
Diplomacy and Tourism
“If we would had to do it all again, I would start with culture.”
-Jean Monnet (cited in Richards 2005, p. 10)
I. Introduction
Tourism as a social and cultural phenomenon comes with a great capacity, not
just with its contribution to leisure and entertainment, but, also to the economy
by bringing in revenue and generating employment opportunities to men and
women both, and even to politics. On one hand, where much of literature is
available on tourism and its dynamics with economics, environment, and leisure
and recreation, on the other, its dynamics with politics has been under-
researched. With an attempt to link these two interdisciplinary fields, this
research seeks to tie a knot between tourism and politics. The core arguments
to be found in this research work draws from the both the disciplines of tourism
and politics.
Taking the case of Europe, where mass tourism was first experienced (Cohen
1984); this dissertation has looked into the Tourism Policy as adopted by the
European Union (EU) and has made an attempt to place it within the broader
framework of politics by outlining tourism as a source of soft power for the EU.
Europe, after the formation of the EU has created a Schengen zone consisting of
26 European Countries (24 member states of the EU and 2 non-member states)
for which a common tourism policy has been established that seeks to make
tourism easily accessible. Today, EU stands as the leading region for tourist
destination with growing number of tourist arrivals each year (UNWTO 2013).
This research will look into the unique policy that has been adopted by the EU
and try to illustrate the close link that tourism has with politics. The main
purpose of this dissertation is to demonstrate that tourism has been a great
source of soft power for the EU. Time and again the “EuroTrip” has been heard
of as a vacation plan. The popularity of this “EuroTrip” today has grown so
much so that it has almost become a brand as a tourist vacation spot. Is the EU

2
tourism policy a conscious attempt to boost its soft power or has the adopted
policy taken its own course to enhance EU soft power, is the question that this
research will seek to look into. Therefore, to find out what is it that makes
Europe the leading tourist destination and what outcome it has and can serve is
the core idea behind this research.
There are two levels into which this thesis will look into with respect to the EU’s
tourism policy. One will seek to find out the power value of tourism policy at the
micro level by looking into the relationship between EU as an institution and the
individuals of the member states and how the tourism policy as adopted by the
EU has helped the citizens of the region build a sense of common identity, the
lack of which, stands today as the greatest challenge to the EU. At the macro
level, the research will seek to find out the soft power that EU as a region has
over foreign nationals by evaluating the external perceptions of the common
mass in states outside of the EU.
To move forward so as create the required link between tourism and politics, it
is first important to understand the core concepts that the research will revolve
around.
II. Changing International Order, Globalisation and Power Politics
The International system has taken its shape from the consistent struggle for
power between states. Hans Morgenthau defines international politics itself as
“a struggle for power” (Rasheed 1995, p. 95). Power according to Mann (1986,
p. 6) is “the ability to pursue and attain goals through mastery of one’s
environment.” Weber (1968 cited Mann 1986, p. 6) giving importance to social
relationships and contexts, defines power as “the probability that one actor
within a social relationship will be in a position to carry out his own will despite
resistance.” In the discipline of International Relations (IR), power is suggested
to be one actor’s control and influence over the actions and decisions of another
actor. Robert Dahl provides with IR’s understanding of power as the capability
of “A causing B to do something that B otherwise would not have done”
(Baldwin 2002, p. 177).
The struggle for power in international politics has been dominated by the
military and economic capabilities. With the evolving nature of politics
however, the international system in the contemporary era has taken its form

3
by the intensification of intra-state relations due to growing interdependence
brought about by liberal open-market economies, establishment of “partially
centralized management of power” in the form of international organisations,
and advancement of technology (Rasheed 1995, p. 95).
The strengthened intra-state relations due the intensification of globalization
has made the use of military and economic power by states, or what Joseph S.
Nye calls Hard Power, very risky for practice because it entails with it the
danger of sabotaging or jeopardizing the interdependent relations which can
lead to its own loss. The language of military power has dominated important
aspects of international politics for a very long time and even till date holds
significance in doing world politics. However, as we have entered a new world
order of interdependence, the role of military force is declining. Keohane and
Nye (2012, p. 18) argue that “fears of attack in general have declined, and fears
of attack by one another are virtually non-existent.” In the era of globalization
when each and every nation-state is interconnected and tied in a relationship of
asymmetrical interdependence, the use of military and economic coercion
becomes highly undesirable. Now, “communication, education and persuasion
have become major techniques of foreign relations at the expense of military
force” (Gilboa 2008, p. 57). To put in simple words, the phenomenon of
globalization has made it almost imperative to use alternate ways to do politics
in the international system which involves the strategy of persuasion and
attraction.
On globalisation, Kissinger has stated that, “Now we are entering into a new era.
Old international patterns are crumbling; old slogans are uninstructive; old
solutions are unavailing. The world has become interdependent in economics,
in communications, in human aspirations.” (Keohane and Nye 2012, p. 20).
Therefore, because of this mutual benefits and costs that states share in a
globalized international order, the use of hard power can result in costly
outcomes. For instance, the growth of nuclear capable states has increased from
the end of the cold war. So the use of war to do power politics can have adverse
effect for not only the states involved but also other states. Similarly, use of
economic sanctions can lead to blockage of trade between states. This is how
the phenomenon of globalization has created new dichotomies and dilemmas in
doing power politics at the international level.

4
The international system has long witnessed the power of soft diplomacy since
the end of the two World Wars that brought along with it rivalry between the
two remaining superpower. Dance, mostly by the United States, was used as
cultural diplomacy to entice rest of the world to liberal democracy by promoting
liberal dance forms with explicit themes like sexuality, equality among races,
individuality and so on (Prevots 1998). This cultural diplomacy has power of its
own. Nye calls it the power of “seduction” that leads states to “co-opt into
wanting what you want” (Nye 2004, p. 7). The power of “seduction”, soft or
cultural diplomacy is what Nye terms as “Soft Power”. As opposed to the power
of military of economic capability which is called hard power, soft power has no
risk of adverse effects to it. Hence, in the age of globalisation it is more viable to
use soft power as means to achieve the desired outcome.
III. Tourism as means to Soft Power: the case of European Union
Nye, who first coined the term “Soft Power” in the early 1990s, Nye (2004, p. 8)
outlines three main sources of soft power:
a. Culture
b. Values and Institutions
c. Foreign policy
Taking on Weber that “man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he
himself has spun”, Geertz holds culture to be “those webs” of significance that
man has created to give fuller meaning to his existence (Geertz 2000, p. 1).
Culture, is therefore, every aspect of human life that shapes its being from food,
music, values, lifestyle, to literature, art, and sports. As borders of nation-states
are getting distorted as a result of globalization, cultures of different
communities are transcending across societies. The importance of tourism in
understanding, experiencing and imbibing culture is much obvious and hence,
with the evolution in the tourism industry, cultural consumption through it has
also seen a wide growth (Richards 2005).
Tourism is based on the idea of traveling to various destinations, near or far, in
order to derive pleasure out of one’s leisure time. Tourism is defined by
Robinson (2011, p. 1462) as “a discretionary mass leisure practice of the
developed world, is built on technological capacities, and has largely flourished

5
as a liberating practice within capitalist societies, it can be seen as both a
product and project of modernity.” However, now with the advent of easy and
cheap transportation, tourism as a phenomenon is becoming popular over a
wider range of people and it has now changed “from an elite pursuit to a basic
leisure need of the masses” (Richards 2005, p. 13). As tourists visit different
destinations, they engage with, live and experience the culture of another
society/community. Travel intensely shapes one’s cultural experience many a
times leaving psychological, emotive, sensitive, intellectual, aesthetic, and
spiritual impacts (Stebbins 1997).
As Nye places in the importance of culture as a source of soft power and
Richards attributes tourism its importance by considering it a powerful
phenomenon for consuming culture, tourism strategy adopted by nation-states
can emerge as a substantial tool in achieving soft power. Tourism policy,
drawing from Nye’s argument, can be placed within foreign policy (a source that
leads to soft power) that will eventually enhance cultural (another source of soft
power) consumption by foreign nationals.
After the end of the Second World War the dominant role played by modern
Westphalian state began to change (Buzan and Waever 2003). Modern State, as
given by Buzan and Waever (2003) are characterised by rigid government
control of almost all dimensions encompassing the state system, are driven by
the sacred notion of sovereignty based on territoriality and military occupies
one of the most dominant role in the state. Emergence of postmodern states
however, does not go back too far a period. These types of state “retain the
trappings of modernity such as borders, sovereignty and national identity” but
in realms like economics and culture, they adopt a flexible system of interaction
(Buzan and Waever 2003, p. 23). The EU can thus, be seen as a project of
postmodernity. The EU has emerged from the process of regional integration as
a combination of an “intergovernmental organisation and a transnational polity”
(Warleigh 2004, p. 2). The traditional Westphalian state system and sovereignty
based on territoriality does not hold true for the EU as a global actor anymore.
The EU member-states have come together and adopted a common market and
currency, the European Parliament, the Schengen Visa free zone, Common
Agricultural Policy (CAP), referred to in this dissertation as the ‘regional
commons’. These integrated institutions and the adopted policies as the

6
‘regional commons’ of the EU, makes it a unique postmodern actor in world
politics.
Europe has one of the most assorted cultural heritages and is “one of the oldest
and most important generators of tourism” for the EU (Thorburn 1986 cited
Richards 2005, p. 10). Understanding the diverse cultural heritage and a wide
range of tourist attractions and their scope, Bernadini (1992 cited Richards
2005, p. 10) urges the European commission policy makers to give priority
attention to the European tourism industry. Today, with the tourism strategy
adopted, the EU stands as the world’s top tourist destination (European
Commission 2013, UNWTO 2013). This will be discussed further in the next
chapter in greater depth.
Tourism, which was earlier considered a phenomenon that the elites and the
capitalist class engaged in, is now getting more and more diffused among a huge
range of population. As greater audience has emerged as consumers of tourism,
even the trends of tourism are undergoing a change. Experiential tourism is
now coming to take on to the stage. Travellers are now looking to participate in
“experience-based” tourism (Smith 2006). The concept of serious leisure is
gaining prominence as there is increased number of individuals who have
developed “special interest [in] tourism based on the search for and
participation in new and deep cultural experience” (Stebbins 1996, p. 949).
These developments in the trends of tourism have become almost
overwhelming that travellers are now going as far as “to find a career there
acquiring and expressing a combination of its special skills, knowledge, and
experience” (Stebbins 1997, p. 451). This combination of leisure with
seriousness has driven tourism to become a creative industry which has further
resulted in improvement of abilities and skills of travellers (Richards 2011).
Travellers as they explore many destinations, do not just engage with cultural
tourism by visiting heritage sites, but also engage in adventure activities like
horse riding, scuba diving, paragliding, bunjee jumping, hiking, cycling, skiing
and recently also engaging with local festivals that have gone international such
as the North Sea Jazz Festival, Edinburg Festival, Oktober Fest and so on (World
Expeditions 2013; Richards 2008). These activities contribute to a great extent
in development of skills and performance that Richards refers to.

7
Such developments in the tourism sector and the increasing prominence of the
travel industry in shaping lifestyles, and therefore, identities at large make
tourism extremely powerful in projection and presentation of cultural values.
The EU has some of the oldest and the most attractive cultural heritage in the
world, finding itself with an edge in the tourism industry. Considering the scope
and influence of the tourism industry at the global stage, member states of the
EU have gone on to develop a huge number of tourist attractions which include
adventure sports for travellers, innumerable museums, churches, art galleries,
festivals, and cultural events, constructing itself as one of the most striking
tourist destinations for cultural consumption (Richards 2005).
IV. Public Diplomacy
Through these various developments of the travel and tourist industry by the
member states, the EU has attracted not just growing number of foreign
nationals for cultural consumption to the region but also citizens of the member
states of the EU for cultural exchange and identity construction. In the modern
day of information technology when the common public plays a major role in
international relations with their power to contribute to political issues like
legitimacy and recognition, through modes of social media, the concept of public
diplomacy becomes highly important. Public Diplomacy, in the most general
sense, is taken to mean, “direct communication with foreign peoples with the
aim of affecting their thinking and, ultimately, that of their governments”
(Malone 1985 cited Gilboa 2008, p. 57). The tourism policy adopted by the EU
which is easily accessible for travel, economically viable and fulfilling to the
leisure needs of the public, has become a tool of public diplomacy (the claim for
which, in this dissertation, will be substantiated in the chapters to follow)
through which the institution has established direct relation with the public of
its member states and foreign states as well. This easily accessible tourism of
the EU has not just helped in presenting its attractive culture to the people, but
also in “region branding”. We often hear people say that they are going for a
“Euro Trip” for vacation. The popularity of this “Euro Trip” is what can be called
a brand of the tourism industry.

8
V. Conclusion
As discussed above, we can comprehend the immense value that tourism has
when seen within the framework of politics. The two fields are intertwined to
the extent that it has great capacity in shaping identities and influencing culture.
Further in the following chapters, the EU tourism policy at large will be
discussed by analyzing its strategies that has been adopted by the policy makers
and the impacts that the strategy has had over the region.
The second chapter will, firstly, give an overview of the policy of tourism
adopted by the EU and discuss the main objectives that the EU relates with
tourism in the region. Following, it will highlight the tourism trends across all
the regions of the globe at large, and that of the EU in particular by providing
with statistics and figures of the tourism industry, both domestic and
international.
The third chapter deals with analyzing the impact of the espoused tourism
policy of the EU on foreign nationals and how it contributes to shaping of
perception of the EU among these external nationals. The chapter will also
evaluate the impact of tourism on the citizens of the member states of EU as
well, with the main focus being the creation of a sense of common identity
based on solidarity among the citizens.
The final chapter will give a concluding note on the entire research work and
strive to answer the question of why tourism has been analyzed for establishing
the ‘EuroTrip’ as a brand in the tourism industry. Finally, the dissertation will
end by scrutinizing whether the hypotheses observed is verified or not and
return to establish a link between the core research question of whether
tourism serves as a source of soft power, both internationally and domestically,
for the EU. It will then end by outlining some of limitations in the EU, to which
tourism has not served as an answer.

9
CHAPTER 2
European Union Tourism Policy: An Overview
“Europe is the World’s no. 1 Tourist Destination, with the highest density and
diversity of tourist attraction.”
- (European Commission 2013)
I. Introduction
The EU is a mixture of both intergovernmental regional organisation and a
“transnational polity”, in the sense that, it has a legal personality as an
international organisation and at the same time, acts as a parliamentary body
with the capacity to make decision on behalf of the member states (Warleigh
2004). Therefore, it has emerged as a unique system. It is not a modern
Westphalian state with stiff government control of almost all spaces that
encompasses the state system and is not driven by the sacrosanct concept of
sovereignty based on territoriality, but rather the EU has the characteristics of a
postmodern state. It is a type of state that continues to “retain the trappings of
modernity such as borders, sovereignty and national identity” but in realms like
economics and cultural jurisdiction, they have embraced a flexible system of
collaboration (Buzan and Waever 2003, p. 24). The EU can, thus, be seen as a
project of postmodernity which has emerged from the process of regional
integration.
This process of integration has led to uncommon developments in the
functioning of the EU as a global actor and has also affected the working of its
member states. As a result, the sovereignty of the member states have been
diluted to a certain extent which is evident in number of ‘regional commons’
that characterizes the EU. To illustrate few are the common market and the
currency- Euro, the European Parliament, the Schengen Visa free zone, Common
Agricultural Policy (CAP).While counting about the ‘regional common’ in regard
to the EU there is another important common feature of the EU which is often
ignored. It is the tourism policy of the member states. This policy was brought
under the direct purview of the EU through Article 176 B, treaty of Lisbon, 2007.

10
According to this section of the treaty, the EU will support the member states in
the tourism sector through legislation and policy formation for complementing
the actions of tourism within the member states (Treaty of Lisbon 2007, p. 89).
As discussed in the previous chapter, tourism has always played an important
role in the economic sector by its contributions to the creation of employment
opportunities, development, and generation of foreign revenue. In this context,
tourism in the EU has been given immense importance as the policy makers
continue to develop the region’s policy framework for the growth and
improvement of tourism (European Commission 2013). As a result, the member
states have sought to work in partnership by involving local communities, both
private and public firms and their team of employees in the tourism sector
(Verheugen 2005). This partnership has therefore, led to the adoption of a
common tourism policy for the EU in 2010 which has been outlined by the
European Commission. The policy is unique in its characteristic and
consequently, appears attractive. In the next part of this chapter we will focus
on the tourism policy of the EU.
II. Tourism Policy and its Objectives
Firstly, to start with, member states of the EU, barring Ireland and the United
Kingdom, (and including four non-EU members i.e. Iceland, Switzerland,
Liechtenstein and Norway) have ratified the Schengen agreement that was
initially signed by 8 members in 1985 in a village in Luxembourg named
Schengen, thus receiving its name, the Schengen zone, the policies of which
came to force in 1995 within which borders have been dismantled and free flow
of goods and individuals are permitted (Riegert 2013). Table 2.1 below shows
the members of the Schengen zone.

11
Table 2.1- EU and the Schengen Members
Countries Status
Germany EU, Schengen Zone- founding member
France EU, Schengen Zone- founding member
United Kingdom EU, Not a signatory to the Schengen agreement
Luxembourg EU, Schengen Zone- founding member
Netherlands EU, Schengen Zone- founding member
Austria EU, Schengen signatory
Italy EU, Schengen signatory
Denmark EU, Schengen signatory
Finland EU, Schengen signatory
Croatia EU, to join the Schengen later
Malta EU, Schengen signatory
Latvia EU, Schengen signatory
Lithuania EU, Schengen signatory
Spain EU, Schengen signatory
Switzerland Non-EU, Schengen signatory
Greece EU, Schengen signatory
Poland EU, Schengen signatory
Hungary EU, Schengen signatory
Liechtenstein Non-EU, Schengen signatory
Iceland Non-EU, Schengen signatory
Portugal EU, Schengen signatory
Norway Non-EU, Schengen signatory
Estonia EU, Schengen signatory
Belgium EU, Schengen Zone- founding member
Czech Republic EU, Schengen signatory
Slovakia EU, Schengen signatory
Slovenia EU, Schengen signatory
Sweden EU, Schengen signatory
Ireland EU, Not a signatory to the Schengen agreement
Cyprus EU, to join the Schengen later
Bulgaria EU, to join the Schengen later
Romania EU, to join the Schengen later
Source: European commission, (2008). URL: [
http://biblio.ucv.ro/bib_web/bib_pdf/EU_books/0056.pdf ]
The Schengen agreement exempts the citizens of the member states that are
signatories to the Schengen agreement from undergoing the process of visa
requirements and the citizens can not only travel, but work, marry and move

12
around the Schengen zone without any barring. Even foreign nationals
travelling to countries within the Schengen Zone require one visa through
which they gain access for travel to any of the member states, either by rail
route, road or air, and now also on bicycle. This makes travel within the
Schengen zone for citizens of the member states, as well as foreign nationals
highly feasible and hence, easily accessible and affordable for travel purpose.
The European Commission in 2010 adopted the current tourism policy for the
region by outlining the main objectives that the policy seeks to serve. They are:
a) To contribute to the sustainable development of the region
b) To provide with increased employment opportunities for its citizens
c) To advance and promote the region’s cultural and natural heritage
d) To contribute to the shaping of a common European identity
(European Commission 2013).
Within the EU member states, the tourism policies that have been implemented
effects the domestic and international audience differently. Hence, the policies
have been divided into two categories based on their effects on the domestic
and international audience.
i) Policies governing domestic tourism
Keeping the above objectives in mind, the policy makers at the European
Commission have sought to establish tourism in a manner that the sector not
only becomes a source of income and employment throughout the year but also
is easily accessible to the travellers for leisure and work both. Some of the
policies adopted by the European commission have been outlined in the
following subdivisions.
To promote low-season, accessible tourism for a wide range of citizens, the
commission has developed policies like:
a) Calypso: Is a policy implemented by the European Commission to promote
low season tourism. Calypso aims at supporting the disadvantaged citizens of
the EU by helping them to make vacation trips within the member states. It
mainly seeks to support the underprivileged youngsters, people with financial
or any other kind of pressures, people who physically challenged with
disabilities, and old citizens who are above 65 years of age (European
Commission 2013).Calypso however, not only promotes low season tourism but
also gives less popular places with high tourist value a chance to endorse itself

13
as a tourist destinations (European commission 2013). As a result, these places
emerge as important sites for not just cultural consumption but also for
exchange of values and ideas that contribute to a great extent to shaping of
identities.
b) Senior Tourism Initiative: This policy has mainly been adopted for citizens
above the age of 55 who have unrestricted time and the economic backing to
enjoy holiday plans. Through this policy, senior citizens of the EU are
encouraged to travel transnationally through suitable packages that are
adopted mainly by keeping their age group in mind. These packages are brought
forward to this group of citizens through the collaboration of the private and
public sector (European Commission 2013). The main contribution of this
policy, other than its economic benefit and enhancement of tourist activities
during off season, is that they foster a sense of “European citizenship” as these
sections of the citizens receive benefits and privileges in the form of leisure
fulfilment along with different groups of people from different member states.
This contribution is highly significant at a time when the common identity crisis
of what it means to be a “citizen” of the EU is much contested and debated
amongst the citizens of the member states.
ii) Tourism for the International Community
As these above mention tourism may appear attractive to the citizens within the
EU, the European Commission has also adopted various policies that reach out
with their appeal even to foreign nationals who reap the benefit of such policies
with a much of fervour. The policies given below are those that affect the foreign
travellers as well.
a) 50,000 Tourist initiative: This is an initiative that has been adopted by the
European Commission through intergovernmental collaboration in order to
promote travel between the EU and the third world countries. This initiative,
like the Senior Tourism Initiative, is also founded though the joint partnership
of private and public sectors in the EU and the collaborating countries. At
present, the initiative has strong ties with Brazil, Argentina and Chile. However,
it is soon expected to include rest of the countries from the Third World
(European commission 2013). This policy of the EU can really help in enhancing
better ties of the region with the third world countries.

14
b) Euro Velo: This venture is embarked upon with a vision to promote
sustainable, environment friendly tourism. This involves exploring the whole of
the EU through a cycling route (European Commission 2013). Through this
route, Europe can be seen and experienced by tourists, foreign and local,
through personalised journey. Fourteen routes have been constructed so far
and the project is said to be completed by 2020 (EuroVelo 2014). This venture
will enable tourist to experience the European culture more closely by
journeying through the region in a personal engagement.
Further, for international promotion of tourism in the EU, the policy makers
have adopted a simplified process of acquiring visa. Through this program,
foreign nationals can apply a single Schengen visa and travel across the
Schengen zone. The EU has also collaborated with various countries mostly in
South America and regional organisations like Euro-Mediterranean Partnership
(EUROMED), Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD),
United Nations World Travel Organisation (UNWTO) and MERCOSUR
(European Commission 2013).
As a result of such policies adopted at the regional level, the EU has emerged as
the number one tourist destination for a more than a decade now and continues
to receive growing number of tourist arrivals each year (UNWTO 2014). The
policy makers have taken in their drive to continue to make Europe the most
popular destination for travel and vacation by constructing and preserving
excessive cultural heritages and providing a wide range of tourist attractions
within whole of the EU (European Commission 2013). Some of the most
prominent being the Latvian architecture of National Romanticism, art
Nouveau, Archeological heritage under water; old city of Dubrovnik and Stari
Grad Plain in Croatia; Struve Geodetic Arc in Estonia; city of Budapest, Caves of
Aggtelek Karst and Slovak Karst, Ferto cultural Landscape in Hungary;
Megalithic temples of Malta and many more (UNESCO 2013). The graph below
provided in table 2.2 outlines the boost in tourism in the member states which
witnessed a small number of tourist arrivals before the adoption of the tourism
policy under EU. Anastasiadou predicts in her evaluation of the EU tourism that
the central and Eastern European states would witness a wider boost in tourism
(Anastasiadou 2006). This prediction of hers is materialized in tourism trends
in the EU. The graph below shows Latvia, Malta and Estonia to have seen the

15
maximum growth after the adoption of the tourism policy under the EU. The
reason for such a trend is not just due to their emergence as the ‘new’ tourist
destinations with attractive historical cultural heritages, but also because they
are comparatively cheaper than the ‘old’ destinations like Germany, United
Kingdom, Italy and France (Hughes and Allen 2006; Anastasiadou 2006)
Table 2.2- Tourism Trends in few of the EU States
Source: European Travel Commission., 2014. URL: http://www.etc-
corporate.org/images/reports%5CETC-Q4-2013_Trends_and_Prospects.pdf
[Accessed 23rd December 2014].
III. Public Diplomacy and the Emergence as the Leading Tourist Destination:
European Union
As we can see, the policies adopted by the EU are exceedingly tourist friendly.
Thus, the policy of tourism that has been adopted by the EU policy makers
attempts to engage directly with the people, both foreign nationals and the
citizens (taking account of the disadvantaged section as well) of EU. In this
effort, the European Commission, thus, has built a direct relation with the public
through its tourism policy by creating easily accessible and affordable tourism
which can positively shape the leisure needs of travellers. This direct relation of
the EU as an institution/regional organisation with the common masses can
thus, be viewed as a public diplomacy mentioned in the first chapter, that the EU
has engaged it. This form of public diplomacy, which will be discussed
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Malta Croatia Latvia Estonia Poland Italy Spain
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013

16
empirically and in detail in the next chapter, helps in shaping of a positive
external image of the EU, thus helping it gain legitimacy and recognition in the
international community.
i) International Tourism Trends
In order to understand the outcome of this tool of public diplomacy of EU i.e.
tourism policy, and its effects on tourists, we need to analyse the statistical data
of the tourism trends, both international and domestic. Table 2.3 shows the
tourism growth of European Union since start of the 21st century juxtaposed
with other regions of the globe. The bar graph clearly depicts the popularity of
EU member states in the tourism industry. EU had the highest number of tourist
arrivals going up to 430.0 million tourist arrivals at the end of the year 2013,
the lowest being witnessed by South Asia with just 15.2 million.
Table 2.3- International Tourism Trends
Source: UNWTO., 2014. URL:
http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/pdf/unwto_barom14_01_j
an_excerpt.pdf [Accessed 17th December 2014]
ii) Domestic Tourism Trends
The above data represents tourism experience of the EU at the international
level. However, it is also necessary to analyze the domestic tourism trends
within the member states in order to understand the impact of the current
tourism policy on the citizens within the member states. Domestic travel data in
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
2000
2005
2010
2013

17
statistics in the EU is given below in table 2.4. The data shows trips taken by the
citizens of the member states for personal purpose within the EU in 2012.
Maximum visited country is Germany. Whereas Malta, even though having seen
the maximum growth in international tourist arrivals, happens to have the least
domestic tourist arrivals within EU. Germany, France and United Kingdom, on
the other hand, have the largest market for domestic tourist visits. The reason
for this kind of tourism trend has been under researched. However, the
underlying reason for such travel trends within the EU could be due the citizen’s
inclination towards the exotic tourism culture of Western Europe like back
packing across the foothills of the Alps and various cultural festivals. Another
factor could also be that Western Europe was very much inaccessible before the
formation of the EU and with the dismantling of the borders, the sudden
openness towards the rich and highly attractive culture that was portrayed
since the time immemorial, gave way for free and unrestricted travel to the
Eastern Europeans.
Table 2.4- Domestic Tourism Trends
Source: EuroStat., 2014. URL:
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&plugin=1&la
nguage=en&pcode=tin00185 [Accessed 23rd December 2014].
The statistics provided above in the three figures show the wide market value of
the EU in the tourism industry. The policy makers, by bringing the tourism
sector under the direct control of the EU, have put it a great deal of thought to
make the most out of the capacity of the sector in its contribution towards
0
10000000
20000000
30000000
40000000
50000000
60000000

18
bringing foreign revenue, generation of employment opportunities, shaping of
identities and influencing other external states. The outcome of these strategies,
as can be observed through the statistical data above, has made the EU highly
popular and tourists often refer to the travel in Europe as “Euro Trip” emerging
now as a brand in the tourism industry. The Euro Trip is therefore, considerably
economical, accessible and hence, feasible.
IV. Conclusion
Moving forward, the next chapter will build critical connections between
tourism, construction of identity, and soft power. The main objective of the next
chapter will be to show how tourism can be a source of soft power for the EU
that contributes to its recognition in the international community, and at the
same time, how this soft power of the EU can help in creating a sense of what it
means to be “citizens of the EU” i.e. help in the construction of a common
identity for people of the EU. It will also evaluate the success of EU’s public
diplomacy and what value does the “EuroTrip” hold for the policy makers of the
European commission.

19
CHAPTER 3
Assessing the European Tourism as a Source of Soft
Power
"If the European Union is serious about taking a greater role in the world affairs it
will require a public diplomacy capability to match....For the Union to prosper it
must project a positive image of itself to opinion formers and to the ‘man in the
street’ both within and beyond its borders"
- (Gouiveia and Plumridge 2005).
I. Introduction
From the first chapter, it is clear that tourism is a great source for cultural
consumption and that the field has taken a serious turn and has become a part
of people’s lives, mostly the upper class and to a great extent, even the middle
class, all over the world. The second chapter highlights the tourism policy and
trends of the EU as the number one choice of destination for tourism purpose.
This chapter, with a view to answer the main research question discussed in the
introductory section, has been divided into two broad groupings that locates
tourism policy of the EU at the macro level i.e. the international dome, and at the
micro level i.e. the member states of the organisation. The macro level analysis
will seek to evaluate the impact of the adopted tourism policy on the
international community and what the citizens of the international community
perceives of the EU based on their experience or knowledge about the EU
tourism policy. Since, tourism policy, in this research, is being viewed as a tool
of public diplomacy that deals directly with the public of foreign states as
mentioned in the second chapter, the focus of analysis will mainly be on the
foreign national’s perception of the EU as an international actor. The micro level
analysis, on the other hand, will give a critical assessment of the tourism policy
in its contribution towards building of a common identity among the citizens of
the EU. Therefore, this chapter draws heavily from the first two chapters,
making both implicit and explicit connections of tourism as a source of soft
power.

20
II. The Macro Level Analysis: Tourism policy as Public Diplomacy
Enlargement of the EU and bringing tourism under its direct purview, as
underlined in the previous chapter, has enabled the entire region to reap a wide
range of benefits in the tourism sector. In this sector, especially countries in
Central and Eastern Europe like Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia have benefited
from joining the EU and its adoption of the ‘regional commons’ such as the
common market and currency- Euro, and the Schengen zone as it reduces travel
costs for travellers making tourism affordable within the entire region. The EU
assists its member states with aids and fund in projects that relate to tourism
development (Anastasiadou 2006). As a result of all these efforts on the part of
the EU, as we have seen through the figures provided in the second chapter,
tourism has been increasing in the region for more than a decade, standing as
the leading choice for travel. This section will analyze the impact of tourism
policy by the European Commission on the perceptions of the nationals of
foreign states and seek to assess the effectiveness of the tool of public
diplomacy embraced by the policy makers in the form of tourism policy.
EU’s international identity, though a benign one, has been seen by foreign
nationals of external states, as only an affluent economic actor in trade
relations, rather than a global actor in world affairs. In a survey conducted by
many contributors on the image of the EU in Asia, New Zealand, South East Asia,
South Africa, Brazil, and also among organisations like UN General Assembly,
the World Bank, African Union (AU) and some Non-Governmental Organisations
(NGOs) including Al Jazeera, it’s role as a global actor was seen largely as an
ineffective one, or as a “soft entity”, an economic multilateral trade actor in
world economy, with few citizens from these states even lacking knowledge
about what the EU really is or what purpose it aims to achieve (Portela 2010,
Lucarelli 2013, Jain and Pandey 2010, Chan 2010, Fioramonti and Poletti 2008).
However, among those who are aware of the European project and accept its
role as an international actor, the notion of “power for the good”, in their view,
has certainly been exemplified by the EU as a global actor (Lucarelli 2013). This
has got mainly to do with the non-existence of a strong united military/armed
force under the EU. Therefore, the international image of the EU is that of a
‘normative’ or ‘civilian’ power, which means that it is seen as “a powerful actor

21
that has renounced a threat of force and that emphasizes negotiation and
persuasion to achieve its ends in its external relations” (Portela 2010). This
means that the EU’s power is seen more in ‘soft’ terms than ‘hard’. International
identities of states are shaped mainly with its relations and engagements with
the ‘external’. Even with its unique features as a non-traditional state that has
transcended the Westphalian system, as discussed earlier in the second chapter,
the same applies to the EU as well i.e. external perceptions greatly shape
recognition and legitimacy of the EU. Therefore, it means that the EU, with the
absence of hard military power, has to frame its soft power strategies in a way
that it becomes attractive enough to persuade other international actors that it
is dealing with, mainly through its cultural values, institutions and foreign
policy. Tourism can thus be located in such a strategy that the EU has adopted
for promoting itself to the world.
Tourism, as discussed in length in the first chapter, is a great source for
consumption of cultural values as it provides with an opportunity to actively
engage with and live the experience of another community or society. Cultural
heritages like Notre Dame Cathedral, the Latin Quarter, famous historical
churches like the St. Peter’s Basilica or the St. Mark’s Cathedral though still very
popular in Europe, have been complemented with new, modern forms of tourist
attractions. The popularity of emerging tourist destinations in Europe today are
highly shaped by contemporary cultural trends, some of which includes fashion,
festivals, beaches, and music (Richards 2008). The Bread and Butter Festival in
Barcelona, the North Sea Jazz Festival in Rotterdam, the Oktober Fest in
Germany, the Edinburg Fest in Scotland, and even sports organizational events
like the English Premier League, Spanish Premier League, Wimbledon
Championships, to name a few, have gained increasing popularity, attracting
tourists from across the globe, thus becoming a tourist destination on their own
(Richards 2008). The creation of such cultural forums enables tourists to
interact with the locals and provides with a chance to engage with the real
European life. As a result, a lot of “EU-ropean” values can be consumed by the
tourists from the locals during such engagements. After these festivals, tourists,
taking advantage of the single visa policy, usually end up travelling to other
countries within the EU, i.e. apart from the countries where these festivals are
held. Other than these developments in countries of the EU through various

22
projects, there are also other programs that enable even sections like youths
and students from various parts of the globe to travel and experience “EU-rope”.
For instance, the International Students’ Week in Ilmenau (ISWI), Germany; the
International Students’ Festival in Trondheim (ISFiT), Norway (though not a
part of the EU, it has opened its borders under the Schengen agreement) are
sponsored by the Ministry of Education and ventured upon by the youth in
these places which enable youth from all over the world to visit these countries
at the least possible expenditure (ISFit 2013, ISWI e. V. 2013). The creation and
establishment of these new forms of tourist attractions in the EU, has given
opportunity for a wide range of travellers to consume the “EU-ropean” culture.
While the elderly can opt for European travel to enjoy cathedrals, churches and
other cultural heritages, the youth can choose festivals and beaches as their
tourist destinations. Hence, consumption of “EU-ropean” culture through
tourism is open to a wide range of age groups and classes.
The EU, by formulating such highly appealing and attractive strategies in its
tourism policy that have been mentioned above, has contributed in the shaping
a positive image of itself in the perception of foreigners. In an interview
conducted by Portela in some of the South East Asian countries, most people,
according to her, said that the most attractive feature of the EU was its adoption
of a common currency- Euro and the dismantling of borders for an even
integrated Europe by allowing free, uncontrolled movement of citizens and
foreigners (Portela 2010). One person said, “They have opened their borders so
that among the members there’s no need to get a visa”, another person, also
commenting on the common visa policy of the EU member states said, “you
come out of the immigration in Amsterdam and you no longer need to have your
passport stamped anywhere” (Portela 2010, p. 152). Both these interviewees
seem very impressed with the fact that travel within the EU is unrestricted.
Even the travel blogs of visitors describe in great ecstasy about being able to
travel and experience great variations of different cultures in a single trip. Most
have owed their convenience of travelling across Europe to the dismantling of
borders and the adoption of a common currency which made their trip cheap
and easy (Vin 2013, Rowell 2011). Vin, in his blogs, encourages travellers to hire
car and drive across country borders; he also encourages to take the rail in
which one can experience most of the member states within the EU through

23
sightseeing and pours his excitement in his writing about being able to see four
countries in just two days (Vin 2013). In a similar survey conducted in India
regarding the perception of the EU by R. K. Jain and S. Pandey, many responded
that they had unheard of the EU and lacked knowledge about what purpose it
served. Even among the elites, the knowledge of the EU as a global
intergovernmental institutional actor was minimal and the only thing that they
knew was the adoption of Euro and the Schengen visa policy by the EU that
which makes travel comparatively cheaper and more convenient than in other
regions of the world (Jain and Pandey 2010).
The common thread that runs between all these surveys conducted by various
academicians and scholars reveal the lack of knowledge about what exactly is
the EU and what ends it aspires to attain. Even in international affairs and world
politics, the role of EU is prominent mostly in economic and/or trade activities,
eg its functioning in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) as a single entity on
behalf of its member states. However, when it comes to political issues, the role
of the EU is still almost imperceptible and it’s the respective member states that
continue to take charge in politics. For instance, in the UN Security Council,
France and the United Kingdom (UK) hold the Permanent Member seats instead
of the EU as an international actor occupying a single seat on behalf of its
member states. For that matter, even while talking about political affairs most
people know the President of France, Prime Minister of the UK or the Chancellor
of Germany, but the role and functions or even the name of the President of the
EU is hardly known to many. Thus, as a result of these factors, complete
acceptance of the EU by people of the international community is still missing.
Therefore, by adoption the current tourism policy, which has emerged as a tool
of public diplomacy, can be a great source for gaining legitimacy and recognition
from the public. Tourism policies such as those mentioned above can thus, be
located as one of EU’s public diplomacy through which the values of “EU-rope”
can be placed at the forefront for foreign consumption which can ultimately lead
to recognition of the EU as a global actor. Again in a similar kind of survey
conducted in China, Hong Kong, Singapore, Macau, the interviewer received
same kind of attitude towards the EU from the respondents, i.e. a borderless
regionally integrated entity with high index in terms of human rights, education,
culture, democracy and prosperity (Chan 2010, Chaban et al. 2009). As we can

24
see, in the absence of a concrete knowledge about the EU, it can be observed
how its image as a “borderless” entity, with a common Schengen visa policy that
allows travel across 26 countries (refer table 2.1, chapter 2) with a single visa
can be a threshold from where the values like that of respect for human rights,
democracy, culture, and education can be observed in an active engagement
through travel across these “borderless” countries within the EU, can be
understood.
Thus, the common tourism policy adopted by the EU under Article 176 B of the
treaty of Lisbon highlighted in chapter two, has become widely popular to the
extent that it has served as a tool of public diplomacy. Its success is materialized
by the fact that even those who do not know about what the project of EU really
seeks to attain, are still aware of the “EuroTrip”. As a result of this success,
considering the vast tourism capacity by policy makers in various regions, they
have now opened discussions on the EU visa policy as a model to establish
regional visas in their respective regions. South Asia, South East Asia, Eastern
and Southern Africa and also the Middle East are few of the regions that have
started talks on the subject (Harper 2013, Asian Development Bank et al. 2010,
Islam et al. 2010). The image of the EU as a model for regional integration
combined with these developments of single visa debates in other regions, have
further helped the EU in gaining a certain degree of recognition as a global
player. This has, to a great degree, made possible by its adoption of the current
attractive tourism policy mentioned above.
The next section of this chapter will be dedicated to the micro level analysis of
the impact of tourism and will be mainly focused on how the tourism policy of
the EU has affected the citizens of the member states and will seek to analyze
whether the objective of adopting the current tourism policy, i.e. to contribute
to the shaping of a common European identity, as mentioned in the second
chapter, has been fulfilled or not.
III. The Micro Level Analysis: Tourism policy as an effort to build common
“EU-ropean” identity
The success of EU as an intergovernmental regional organisation has been
accepted widely to the extent that many see it as a model for, not just a
postmodern state, but an efficacious process of regional integration. However,
as noted in the above section, its image as a successful regional organisation

25
among academicians, intellectuals and scholars, has not helped the EU in
earning an image of a recognized political, global actor in international affairs.
While the above section dealt with the external perception of the EU among few
parts of the international community, this section will be dedicated in exploring
the internal citizen’s perception about the EU and how these citizens identify
with the larger union.
Benedict Anderson in his famous writing on “Imagined communities” argues
that nationalism as a phenomenon is intrinsically tied to the formation of
nation-states and hence, psychological feelings of nationalism, patriotism and
community are in fact, historically “imagined” that have more to do with culture
than with ideology (Anderson 1983). Therefore, communities are not naturally
given, but are ‘imagined’ and born out of social and political construction. The
modern Westphalian system was born in Europe giving birth to the present
forms of nation-states across the globe. This historical nation-state formation,
consequently, deriving from Anderson’s understanding of nationalism, gave
birth to identity associated with nation states, like everywhere else, even in
Europe. Subsequently, founding of the EU that transcended these historical
nation states brought with it an identity crisis lacking solidarity among the
Europeans. This today stands as one of the biggest challenges to the project of
the EU. Further, the public in the EU mostly identify with the larger Union on
factors of economic success and when the economic conditions deteriorate, it
might have an adverse effect on the public opinion towards the EU. For example,
the financial crisis that emerged in 2008 which affected member states like
Greece, Italy and Portugal, the citizens turned highly skeptical of the EU project
and demanded withdrawal from the EU (Roth 2009, Fraile and Mauro 2010).
Even the citizens that were not affected directly by the crisis protested against
the EU. For instance, the Germans opposed the government support of the
countries affected by the crisis. Economic stability, however, cannot be
guaranteed and each time the EU member states sees a rough financial
situation, the public may withdraw their support for the EU project. In addition,
huge section of the society within the member states, view the project of EU as a
threat to national and cultural identity and some also see it as a project of
capitalism that is exploitative in nature (Checkel and Katzenstein 2009). Now,
the UK has begun talks of withdrawal from the EU. In such a situation with

26
ongoing challenges of identity crisis that the EU is faced with and the public
support being conditioned on the economic success of the EU, the tourism
policy that the policy makers have adopted can serve positively which can
contribute in great part to the creation of a common identity. In the second
chapter we have discussed the various tourism policies adopted by the
European Commission that benefits almost all section of citizens including the
pensioners, physically challenged, those with financial disabilities and also the
youth, thus, making travel across countries easily available for citizens of
member states. However, the main question is, whether the adoption of such
policies can contribute to the formation of common “EU-ropean” identity.
Pretes writes, “The viewing of heritage sights by domestic tourists is a key
aspect in formation and maintenance of a national identity, especially when
national identities are understood as an ‘imagined community’” (Pretes 2003, p.
125). Establishing sites of significance leads tourists to associate with the
common past embedded, in the case of the EU, in churches, heritage sites,
museums that highlight the shared past experience of the birth of
enlightenment, modernity, and Christianity to name a few. Holly Case, thus,
urges the adoption of a technique of “strategically” remembering the shared
past of the Europeans (Case 2009). The strategy of tourism as presented in the
discussion throughout this research work can thus be seen as an effort to
remember the shared history through the technique of creating an appealing
tourism sites and activities. This is mainly because, “centers of cultural
production promote a central value system”, in this case, identity based on
solidarity (Pretes 2003, p. 128).
Under the tourism policy, cultural heritages established, museums are created,
festivals are organized all of which form a ‘fictitious entities’ that shape
identities. These objectified forms of fictitious creations contribute to “a sense
of nation, peoplehood, and collective identity” (Pretes 2003, Prentice et al.
1998). Thus, we can assume that communities are ‘imagined’ because they
emerge from construction of such kind of fiction. Engaging in tourism thus,
contributes actively in the creation, and at the same time, in the adoption of the
‘imagined community’, positively so for the project of the EU.
Identities are intrinsically related to place i.e. those which are bounded by
borders (Wise 2000, Passi 2001, Timothy 2001). Even in Anderson’s

27
understanding, national identities is knit closely together with territorial
nation-states. The EU, by allowing free movements within member states has
challenged the traditional notions of nationalism and moved towards post-
nationalism born out of the post-modern state system like that of the EU.
Therefore, the dismantling of the borders and allowing for free movement
within the Schengen zone without any visa requirements is another aspect of
the tourism sector in the EU that contributes to the creation of a common “EU-
ropean” identity. Fransce, in his blog, argues that the EU is a region with diverse
history and culture, and hence, the only way to create a common identity with
allegiance to the larger Union is by keeping up with the concept of a borderless
EU (Trillas 2013). Even in one of the articles in One Europe, one of the very
popular non-profit voluntary online magazine, a contributor writes, “Mobility
within Europe is crucial in creating a European identity” (Mouzeviris 2014).
Taormina also argues about the importance of experiencing culture and cultural
heritages in Europe for the creation of a common European identity by stressing
the point of these cultural based experiences as an “integral element of a
European set of values” which shape identities (Taormina 2009). Anderson,
analyzing the boost in capitalism, has, in his work of “Imagined Communities”
talked about print capitalism as a functional area that builds ‘imagined
communities’. However, now with the advent of post-modern state that the EU
stands for and the need for post-nationalism based on solidarity, tourism can
(and observing the experiences of the EU citizens available in the blogs and
newspapers that have been evaluated, has), to a great extent, serve as the
modern functional area to build ‘imagined communities’ in the EU.
Thus, deriving from the arguments put forward above, it is clear that tourism
policy adopted by the EU has to a great degree contributed to the creation of a
common identity and can continue to contribute towards shaping of a new post-
modern form of ‘imagined community’ based on post-nationalism in the EU.
IV. Conclusion
The strategy of tourism, as observed in the statistical analysis provided in the
previous chapter and the perceptions and experiences of both foreign nationals
and the citizens of member states, as discussed above, has certainly been a
successful strategy of the EU. The challenges faced by the EU as discussed in the

28
above two sections, is still on-going and tourism definitely is not the only
solution as the EU, even with the current tourism policy, continues to lack
legitimacy and recognition among huge section of people across the world.
Many even consider the EU to be ineffective with minimal visibility in the
international front that remains under the shadow of the individual EU member
states and economic processes (Portela 2010). However, tourism, emerging
from the appealing policy adopted by the policy makers in this sector, have
contributed to a great degree in recognition of the EU as a global political actor
in world matters in the eyes of the foreign nationals. It has also become a
threshold from where the values of “EU-rope” are moving across the globe.
Within the EU, the tourism policy has proven successful to the extent that it has
contributed in creation of a common identity among the citizens of member
states. However, even at this micro level, tourism is definitely not the only
answer because, even with the accessible tourism for wide range of population,
it still has its limits like that of language, which continues to stand as dividing
factor between citizens of different countries within the EU.
Moving on, in the final chapter, concluding thoughts on the potential of the
tourism sector will be given and strive to look into the EU tourism as means to
brand the region and establish the “EuroTrip” as a brand in the tourism
industry. Further, the success of the dissertation work in answering the core
questions of this research will be analyzed and will also evaluate for further
potential of this dissertation in deepening the research area while, at the same
time, keeping in mind the limitations of the field of tourism.

29
CHAPTER 4
Conclusion
EuroTrip goes beyond economics and culture and has established itself as a
brand in the tourism industry, thus emerging as a source of soft power.
I. Introduction
Looking into the phenomenon of the tourism, the industry as a whole comes
with various dimensional outcomes. The travel industry is closely knit with the
economic sector, environmental sector, leisure and cultural sector. However,
observing the gap in the scholarly work and literature of the phenomenon of
tourism in the political sector, this research’s main objective was to analyze the
gap between tourism and politics. Therefore, keeping in mind the cultural
nature of tourism, the core purpose of this dissertation was to bring tourism
within the political discourse from the threshold of culture and soft power.
II. Hypotheses and Research Questions
The research work was based on three fundamental hypotheses. They are:
i. Tourism helps in projection and promotion of culture, values and image of a
state/nation/region.
ii. Tourism can be a source of soft power.
ii. Tourism Strategy of the EU can help in the construction of common identity.
Looking back at the dissertation, the case of the EU that has been studied proves
the above mentioned assumptions, thus testifying all three hypotheses.
Following these hypotheses, the main questions that the research sought to
answer was:
i. How does the currently implemented tourism policy of the EU act as a soft
power in:
a) Creating a sense of common identity among the people of the EU; and
b) Creating legitimacy and recognition at the stage of international politics.
Again, going back the previous chapters, both the research question has been
answered by taking the international and domestic common public of the EU
into focus and engaging closely with the concept of public diplomacy.

30
III. Methods and Measurements
In an effort to answer the research questions, keeping in mind the
interdisciplinary character of the dissertation, a combination of both qualitative
and quantitative methods were applied. Taking an interdisciplinary approach,
literature based research method has been applied. Literature from the
disciplines of political science and tourism with central focus on the concept of
culture was studied, analyzed and evaluated. The findings derived, through the
application of this survey has mostly been discussed in chapter one and three.
Following the literature survey method, data, statistics and figures provided by
various organisations and institutions like the UNWTO, Euro Barometer,
European Travel Commission, and European commission were also analyzed
through the use of descriptive analytical method. The outcome of this
application has been mostly discussed in chapter 2.
Other sources which the research derives heavily from are the secondary
sources. Given the limited time period and the inaccessibility to conduct
interviews with people under survey, newspaper reports, opinion pieces and
blogs have been referred to for collection on opinions and ideas.
IV. Establishing the “EuroTrip” as a Brand
With the progress of the research, keeping in view the boost in the EU soft
power after the inception of the common tourism policy, the concept of the
“EuroTrip” as a brand in the tourism industry is established. Thus, verifying that
the soft power of the EU derives greatly from the tourism industry and the
industry in the EU has not just served as a source of revenue and employment,
but has also led to development of the region as a single entity with the
dismantled borders and has helped to foster a sense of common identity. On the
international front, the tourism policy of the EU has assisted in gaining its
legitimacy as an international actor in world affairs. Further, the EU based on
the success of its tourism policy for the international community, has now
emerged as a successful model of regional polity of peaceful co-existence
grounded on free movement ideals, for both international and domestic public,
in a globalised world order. This success can be seen in terms of the other
regions of the world starting their respective discussions and debates on the

31
idea of venturing upon a similar model of free movement of the people within
their individual regions.
Thus, the tourism policy of the EU has materialized as a successful project that
has greatly advantaged the EU and brought the people of the region closer
together. This success verifies the capacity of the discourse of tourism to widely
shape the political field and therefore, this area can and thus, needs to be
further explored within the discipline of politics.
V. Limitations
With the great scope that tourism embodies, it however, does not completely
cater to the challenge posed by lack of legitimacy and recognition that the EU is
faced with in today’s time, both domestically and internationally. Few of the
barriers that stand on the way of the EU are:
1) Language: The EU is a conglomerate of widely diverse linguistic cultures. As a
result, even the promotion of the values of “EU-ropean” solidarity through the
approach of tourism may not be effective as a whole. English, though being
popular throughout Europe, still has not seeped completely into people’s lives.
The lower class do not have exposure to English language, especially since
education is delivered in the respective national languages in the member states
of the EU. Hence, even with the promotion of tourism and support for travel
through schemes and policies like Calypso, when the barrier of language stands
between the tourist and the host, the notion of a “foreigner” or an “outsider”
remains for both.
2) Economic factors: As discussed in chapter three, economic success is one of
the main factors for support of the project of EU by the citizens and recognition
by the foreigners. However, economic stability depends on the international
system as a whole, and cannot be guaranteed by anybody. In events like the
financial crisis that began in 2008 and affected countries like Greece, Italy,
Portugal, which can occur again, can stand as a great setback to the project of
the EU, both within the region and internationally. In such a scenario, the
tourism policy, acting as a source of soft power, can itself stand a hindrance to
the very success of the industry due to economic instability.
3) Opposition from lower class: As Checkel and Katzenstien point out, the project
of a united “EU-rope” has been highly criticized by the left wing forces within

32
the EU that see it as a project of the capitalist class from which only the elites
and the upper class can benefit and the blue collar job holders and lower class
who do not have the means and the time to travel and learn different language
of the region do not gain the fruits of the project of EU (Checkel and Katzenstein
2009). Even though, the EU tourism policy makers have adopted schemes like
Calypso or the Senior Tourism Initiative, that reach out to these section of the
society, the programs do not reach out to every single person and they can
stand as the biggest challenge to the success of the EU based on solidarity.
4) Inefficient Political Visibility: In the international front, as discussed
previously, the EU as a single, united global actor in the political arena still lacks
complete visibility with its respective member states still playing major roles in
the international political dome while the EU remains in their shadows and
becomes active usually in the economic negotiations for most part of its role as
an international actor. Therefore, as a result, external opinion of the EU still
remains that of a global economic player, tourism being a part of the economic
activity of the EU.
Thus, even with the success of the currently implemented tourism policy, there
are many factors still that stand on the way of the success of the EU as a global
political actor both with the member states and internationally.
This dissertation is only an inception that can open the doors to wider
discussions in the future. Therefore, the EU policy makers, analysts and
academicians should take the field of tourism more seriously and strive to
answer through the industry’s capacity by creating more connections and
establishing stronger and creative ways to overcome the barriers that stand in
front of the EU today.

33
References
Chapter 1
Baldwin, D., 2002. Power and International Relations. In: Carlsnaes, W., et al.,
eds Handbook of International Relations, London: Sage Publications Ltd
Buzan, B. and Waever, O., 2003. Regions and Power: The Structure of
International Security, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Cohen, E., 1984. The Sociology of Tourism: Approaches, Issues and Findings.
Annual Review of Sociology, 10: 373-392
European Commission., 2013. EU Policy – Background [Online]. Available from:
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/background/ [Accessed 11
November 2013].
Geertz, C., 2000. The Interpretation of Cultures, New York: Basic Books
Gilboa, E., 2008. Searching for a Theory of Public Diplomacy. The Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616: 55-77
Ham, P. V., 2008. Place Branding: The State of the Art. Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science, 616: 126-149
Keohane, R. O. and Nye, J. S., 2012. Power and Interdependence, Illinoi: Longman
Mann, M., 1986. The sources of social power, New York: Cambridge university
press
Melissen, J., 2005. The New Public Diplomacy: Between Theory and Practice. In:
Melissen, J., eds. The New Public Diplomacy: Soft Power in International Relations,
New York: Palgrave Macmillan
Nye, J. S., 2004. Soft Power The Means To Success in World Politics, New York:
PublicAffairs
Prevots, N., 1998. Dance for Export: Cultural Diplomacy and the Cold War,
Middletown: Wesleyan University Press
Rasheed, M. F., 1995. “The Concept of Power in International Relations”,
Pakistan Horizon, 48 (1): 95-99
Richards, G., 1996. “Production and Consumption of European Cultural
Tourism”, Annals of Tourism Research, 23 (2): 261-283
Richards, G., 2005. Cultural Tourism in context. In: Richards, G., eds. Cultural
Tourism in Europe, Wellingford: Association for Tourism and Leisure Education

34
Richards, G., 2008. A New Cultural Tourism for a New Europe?. Annals of
Tourism Research, 418-422
Richards, G., 2011. Creativity and Tourism: The State of the Art. Annals of
Tourism Research, 38 (4), 1225-1253
Robinson, M., 2011 Tourism Studies. In: Southerton, D., eds. Encyclopedia of
Consumer Culture, New Delhi: SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd.
Rozmarin, M., 2005. Freedom and Individuality: Foucault and Sexual Difference.
Human Studies, 28 (1): 3
Smith, W. L., 2006. Experiential Tourism Standards: The Perceptions of Rural
Tourism Providers. International Journal of Services and Standards, 2 (3): 273-
285
Stebbins, R. A., 1996. Cultural Tourism as Serious Leisure. Annals of Tourism
Research, 948-950
Stebbins, R. A., 1997. Identity and Cultural Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research,
24: 450-452
UNWTO., 2013. World Tourism Highlights. World Tourism Barometer [online].
11. Available from:
http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/pdf/unwto_barom13_06_
dec_excerpt.pdf
Warleigh, A., 2004. The Basics: European Union, New York: Routledge
World Expiditions., 2013. Types of Adventures [Online]. Available from:
http://www.worldexpeditions.com/au/index.php?section=types_of_adventures
[Accessed 17 November 2013].
Chapter 2
Anastasiadou, C., 2006. Tourism and The European Union. In: Hall D. R. et al.,
eds. Tourism and The New Europe: The challenges and Opportunities of EU
Enlargement, London: CAB International Publishing
Buzan, B. and Waever, O., 2003. Regions and Power: The Structure of
International Security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
European Commission., 2008. The Schengen Area [Online]. Available from:
http://biblio.ucv.ro/bib_web/bib_pdf/EU_books/0056.pdf [Accessed 1 April
2014]

35
European Commission., 2013. EU Policy – Background [Online]. Available from:
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/background/index_en.htm
[Accessed 5 Feb 2014].
European Commission., 2013. Low-Season Tourism [Online]. Available from:
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/calypso/index_en.htm
[Accessed 5Feb 2014]
European Commission., 2013. Tourism for Seniors [Online]. Available from:
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/tourism-
seniors/index_en.htm [Accessed 5th Feb. 2014]
European Commission., 2013. 50 000 Tourist Initiative [Online]. Available from:
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/50k/index_en.htm [Accessed
6th Feb, 2014].
European Commission., 2013. Cycling Routes [Online]. Available from:
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/cycling-tourism/index_en.htm
[Accessed 6th Feb. 2014].
European Commission., 2014. Tourism Trends [Online]. Available from:
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Tourism_tren
ds [Accessed 7th Feb. 2014].
European Commission., 2013. Promoting Europe Internationally [Online].
Available from:
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/international/index_en.htm
[Accessed 5th Feb 2014].
European Travel Commission. 2014. European Tourism 2014- Trends and
Prospects [Online]. Available from: http://www.etc-
corporate.org/images/reports%5CETC-Q4-2013_Trends_and_Prospects.pdf
[Accessed 10th Feb. 2014].
EuroVelo., 2014. Discover Europe by Bike [Online]. Available from:
http://www.eurovelo.com/en [Accessed 6th Feb 2014].
Hughes, H and Allen, D., 2006. Cultural Tourism in Central and Eastern Europe:
the view of ‘induced image formation agents. Tourism Management, 26: 173-183
Treaty of Lisbon 2007 (C 306/01).
Riegert, B., 2013. The Lure of a Borderless Europe [Online] Available from:
http://www.dw.de/the-lure-of-a-borderless-europe/a-16654284 [Accessed 27
March. 2014].

36
UNESCO., 2013. World Heritage List, [Online] available from:
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list [Accessed 17th March 2014].
UNWTO., 2014. World Tourism Highlights. World Tourism Barometer, vol. 12,
Madrid
Verheugen, G., 2005. Europe is Strong when it Acts in Concert. Speech delivered
on 30 June 2005 at Humboldt University: Berlin
Warleigh, A., 2004. The Basics: European Union, New York: Routledge
Chapter 3
Anastasiadou, C., 2006. Tourism and The European Union. In: Hall D. R. et al.,
eds. Tourism and The New Europe: The challenges and Opportunities of EU
Enlargement, London: CAB International Publishing
Anderson, B., 1983. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread
of Nationalism, London: Verso
Asian Development Bank et al., 2010. Key Proposals for Harnessing Business
Opportunities in south Asia, Philippines
Case, H., 2009. Being European: East and West. In: Checkel, J. T. and Katzenstein,
P. J., eds. European Identity, New York: Cambridge University Press
Chaban, N. et al., 2009. European Commission Delegation and EU Public Policy:
Stakeholders’ Perceptions from the Asia Pacific. European Foreign Affairs
Review, 14: 271-288
Chan, K., 2010. Images, Visibility and the Prospects of Soft Power of the EU in
Asia: the Case of China. Asia Eur Journal, 8: 133-147
Chapuis, M., 2009. Preserving our Heritage, Improving our Culture [Online].
Available from:
http://ec.europa.eu/culture/documents/publications/20years_cultural_heritag
e_vol1_en.pdf [Accessed 21 March 2014].
Checkel, J. T. and Katzenstein, P. J., 2009. European Identity, New York:
Cambridge University Press
Fioramonti, L. and Poletti, A., 2008. Facing the Giant: Southern Perspectives on
the European Union. Third World Quarterly, 29 (1): 167-180
Fraile, M and Mauro, D., 2010. The Economic Crisis and the Public Opinion
About Europe”, EUDO Spotlight, 1: 1-5

37
Gouiveia, P. D. and Plumridge, H., 2005. European Infopolitik: Developing EU
Pubic Strategy, London: Foreign Policy Centre
Harper, J., 2013. New Regional Visas will make Life Easier for Travellers
[Online]. Available from:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/expatnews/10350958/New-regional-visas-
will-make-life-easier-for-travellers.html [Accessed 22 March 2014]
ISFiT., 2014. What is ISFiT? [Online]. Available from:
https://www.isfit.org/pages/7 [Accessed 20 March. 2014 URL]
Islam, M. et al., 2010. Economic Integration in south Asia: Issues and Pathways,
New Delhi: Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt Ltd pp 262-263
ISWI e. V., 2013. ISWI 2013 – Moving Youth [Online]. Available from:
http://www.iswi2013.org/en/about-iswi [Accessed 20 March 2014].
Jain, R. K. and Pandey, S., 2010. The European Union in the Eyes of India. Asia
Eur Journal, 8: 193-209
Lucarelli, S., 2013. Seen from the Outside: The State of the Art on the External
Image of the EU. Journal of European Integration, 36 (1): 1-16
Mouzeviris, C., 2014. Shaping Europe from the bottom up [Online]. Available
from: http://one-europe.info/shaping-europe-from-bottom-up [Accessed 19
March 2014].
Passi, A., 2001. Europe as a Social Process and Discourse: Considerations of
Place, Boundaries, and Identity. European Urban and Regional Studies, 8 (1): 7-
28
Portela, C., 2010. The Perception of the European Union in Southeast Asia: low
priority statuses and selectivity. Asia Eur Journal, 8: 149-160
Prentice et. al., 1998. Tourism as Experience: the case of Heritage Parks. Annals
of Tourism Research, 25 (1): 1-24
Pretes, M., 2003. Tourism and Nationalism. Annals of Tourism Research, 30 (1):
125-142
Richards, G., 2008. A New Cultural Tourism for a New Europe? Annals of
Tourism Research, 418-422
Roth, F., 2009. Who Can be Trusted after the Financial crisis? CEPS Working
Document, 322: 1-32
Rowell, D., 2011. Common borders and the Schengen Agreement – Another
Possible European Failure?” [Online]. Available from:

38
http://blog.thetravelinsider.info/2011/12/common-borders-and-the-
schengen-agreement-another-possible-european-failure.html [] Accessed 23
March 2014].
Taormina, S., 2009. Why Cultural Heritage Matters for Europe. Policy document
for Europa Nostra at the Europa Nostra Annual Congress on 3 June. 2009 in Italy
Timothy, D. J., 2001. Tourism and Political Boundaries, London: Routledge
Trillas, F., 2013. Are Sovereignty referenda a good idea in a borderless Europe?
[Online] Available from:
http://realprogressinenglish.blogspot.in/2013/03/are-sovereignty-referenda-
good-idea-in.html [Accessed 19March 2014].
UNESCO., 2013. World Heritage List, [Online]. Available from:
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list [Accessed 17March 2014].
Vin., 2013. Train Travel Exeperiences in Europe [Online]. Available from:
http://www.travelsnapstories.com/2013/10/train-travel-experiences-in-
europe/ [Accessed 23 March 2014].
Vin., 2014. Self- Drive Tour Experience in Europe. [Online]. Available from:
http://www.travelsnapstories.com/2014/03/self-drive-tour-in-europe/
[Accessed 19 March 2014].
Wise, J. M., 2000. Home: Territory and Identity. Cultural Studies, 14 (2): 295-310
Chapter 4
Checkel, J. T. and Katzenstein, P. J., 2009. European Identity, New York:
Cambridge University Press

Beyond the EuroTrip Tourism as Means to European Union Soft Power

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Beyond the EuroTrip Tourism as Means to European Union Soft Power

Similar to Beyond the EuroTrip Tourism as Means to European Union Soft Power (20)

Beyond the EuroTrip Tourism as Means to European Union Soft Power