Santorini should follow the example of Bhutan
Prime Minister Tshering Tobgay explains how his country’s ‘high-value, low-volume’ policy has boosted tourism in a sustainable way
Sustainability is costly, but you need a balance in order to protect your natural beauty, culture and people, the prime minister of Bhutan, Tshering Tobgay, said in an interview with Kathimerini, explaining how his country has opted for setting a limit on the number of visitors it can accommodate, while encouraging investments with the aim of attracting high-end tourists.
The Bhutanese premier, who visited Greece and made an impression during his appearance at Kathimerini’s Reimagine Tourism in Greece conference last week, talks about the unique index his country uses to measure peoples’ happiness and expresses admiration for Greek culture and the way Greeks have preserved it.
You use a unique index, the Happiness Index, which goes beyond traditional economic measures like gross domestic product and gross national product. What is it exactly? It focuses on how people find happiness through factors beyond just financial wealth, right?
Bhutan is a small, not very rich country of 750,000 people. Just a generation ago, we were almost medieval in our isolation. When our fourth king started developing the country, he said gross national happiness (GNH) is more important than gross national product (GDP). While most of the world focuses on economic indicators like GDP to measure success, Bhutan places the happiness and well-being of its people at the very center of the development agenda.
But you also need growth, don’t you?
Economic growth is important, there’s no doubt about that. But economic growth must be sustainable and equitable. It needs to be balanced with social progress, environmental protection, cultural preservation and good governance. This is the idea of GNH. We in Bhutan have benefited from the principles of GNH for more than five decades, but it still seems to divide people abroad. Some think it is brilliant and wonder why more countries don’t adopt it. Others find it inefficient, arguing that, in the end, it’s the economy and money that drive prosperity.
How do you measure it?
Every five years, we carry out a survey to assess the gross national happiness (GNH) index. We evaluate nine domains: health, education, living standards, good governance, environmental sustainability, time use, psychological well-being, cultural vitality and community. These domains are further divided into 33 indicators, which are measured through approximately 150 questions in a comprehensive survey. It’s an extensive process, more like an interview, collecting substantial information that is then summarized into the GNH index.
And the result is positive?
Each five-year survey consistently shows a slight improvement. The most recent survey, conducted in 2022 after a delay from 2020 due to the Covid-19 pandemic, revealed a small rise in happiness, despite the challenges of the pandemic. During that time, our king took important steps to safeguard the security and welfare of the population. As a result, our country saw only 11 Covid-related deaths, and while the economy is still recovering, businesses were supported through loan freezes and other social security measures during the pandemic. Even in such challenging circumstances, the GNH index managed to show a slight increase.
How do you manage your tourism industry and how sustainable is it in your country?
Bhutan boasts high mountains, beautiful valleys, glaciers, subtropical jungles, rich biodiversity, paddy fields and a unique culture. But, with our about 38,000 kilometers squared, we’re about a quarter the size of Greece, with just 750,000 people. So, we have a different approach to tourism, one that is based on a policy we call “high value, low volume.” Last year, we were able to welcome 170,000 tourists.
But regulating the influx of tourists by limiting their number hurts the economy, doesn’t it?
To limit numbers and ensure sustainability, we charge a Sustainable Development Fee (SDF) of $100 per day, on top of visa fees, and it is our main tool to keep numbers low and value high. Also, tourists must pre-book their entire trip, including hotels, transport and guides. You cannot enter Bhutan just by paying the SDF. Even with the SDF, tourists are not just willing, but are eager to visit us. And in doing so, they contribute to the growth of our economy, but crucially, that growth is sustainable growth.
So, in essence, you discourage people from coming.
No, no, no, we do not discourage people from visiting. We welcome visitors, but are mindful to restrict numbers so that tourism remains environmentally and culturally sustainable. Many might find this restrictive, but those who do visit Bhutan are determined to go on a journey, to actually connect with the country, leave something behind, take something with them and grow together with the country. Before the pandemic, the SDF was $65, included in a $250-per-day package covering all costs – hotels, transport, guides and monument fees. Many people thought that the fee alone was $250, and so thought it was prohibitively expensive expensive to visit Bhutan, but in reality, the $250 included everything – visa fees, SDF, hotels, food, transport, guides, everything – so it was quite reasonable. Now, we have increased the SDF is $100 per day, which helps us maintain the balance between visitor numbers and the country’s capacity.
And how many tourists would be the optimum number?
My target is 300,000 tourists per year, which I think is the carrying capacity of our country, in terms of infrastructure, population, culture and the environment. This year we welcomed only 170,000 tourists, so we need to market Bhutan. I need you to help me to market Bhutan. Here, you have 30 million tourists a year, but you must make it sustainable. Finding solutions is a lot easier for you, since you are so successful.
How did you determine that number? Was it based on some kind of analysis?
‘My target is 300,000 tourists per year, which I think is the carrying capacity of our country, in terms of infrastructure, population, culture and the environment’
The figure of 300,000 tourists per year was largely based on an estimate. I proposed the estimate, and after calculations, it appeared to be a reasonable target, especially if we can spread tourist arrivals evenly throughout the year. Currently, we welcome around 170,000 tourists annually, so increasing to 300,000 nearly doubles it. The tour operators are pleased with the prospect, and I believe it’s a sustainable figure. If we reach it, and it’s managed well, everyone will be happy.
– Is it socially acceptable? How do you use the revenue from the Sustainable Development Fee?
Tourism contributes about 15% to our GDP. The revenue from the Sustainable Development Fee (SDF) funds free healthcare and free education, both of which are provided at no cost in Bhutan. The fee also supports environmental protection efforts, including fighting climate change, compensating farmers affected by it and preserving our nature reserves, wildlife sanctuaries and national parks. While the revenue may not be vast, it plays a crucial role in supporting these initiatives.
Several major hotel chains are operating in your country. Bhutan being a small country, does the government work together with hoteliers and other tourism-related businesses?
Our general tourism policy is indeed very careful, focusing on a high-value, low-volume model with the Sustainable Development Fee of $100 per night, which can be seen as challenging. We prioritize sustainable and responsible tourism. However, in the case of tour operators and hoteliers, the policy is more flexible. High-end international hotels adhere to our regulations when establishing their presence. We already have several in Bhutan, and I believe there is potential for more.
More foreign chains?
Yes! We welcome foreign investors interested in building in Bhutan, and I’m happy to collaborate directly with them. However, it is essential to support and empower Bhutanese entrepreneurs, as they are the true custodians of our land, culture and future. We need to motivate them to do even more. Hence, my primary focus is on promoting Bhutanese-owned resorts. I want to see more Bhutanese entrepreneurs developing their own resorts. For example, we have the Zhiwa Ling resort, which is very traditional yet meets international standards. Also Pemako, which is fully Bhutanese-owned but can compete with the best international resorts. This is the direction we aim to encourage.
Are any limits imposed on construction of hotels since there is a finite number of tourists you can host?
To accommodate 300,000 tourists we will need to build more hotels. To welcome 300,000 high-end tourists, we will need to build that many more high-end hotels, resorts and wellness centers. So no limits imposed as of now. In fact, I welcome foreign investment and experience.
Can the country’s existing infrastructure – from roads, to garbage collection – accommodate the tourist volume?
Yes, our public infrastructure can accommodate 300,000 tourists. However, we are already expanding and improving our roads and utility services. We are also upgrading most of our trekking trails.
How has Bhutanese society responded to your tourism policies? Do people feel they benefit from the policies and therefore support them?
I see justice and fairness from two perspectives – the tourists’ and the Bhutanese people’s. From the tourists’ viewpoint, Bhutan is a unique and beautiful destination that many people dream of visiting. In the interest of fairness, everyone, including backpackers, should have the opportunity to experience it. But is this sustainable? We can’t accommodate millions of visitors without harming the very qualities that they would seek out in Bhutan. If we open the country to everyone in the name of fairness, we risk losing what makes Bhutan special, what makes us unique. From the Bhutanese peoples’ perspective, there is complete support for this policy. That’s why we have been able to implement the high-value, low-volume policy for the past five decades.
Investors and generally people involved in the tourism industry would, I assume, have preferred more tourists.
I understand the position of those in the tourism industry who might prefer more tourists and could argue against the SDF. However, this policy has been a core part of Bhutan’s approach since the fourth king introduced Gross National Happiness in the 1970s. Our first tourists arrived in 1974 –just a dozen of them, from America. Fifty years later, the principle of “high value, low volume” remains unchanged. Most Bhutanese not only accept but actively support this model. When locals visit a monastery to pray or seek blessings and find more tourists than Bhutanese, they are understandably displeased.
We have our own discussion on the issue on how to maximize the positive impact of tourism on Greece, its economy, its people and nature.
It’s like Santorini, for example. I’ve seen Santorini in postcards, books and movies. How do you share its beauty with the world while also protecting it? If five cruise ships unload 10,000 people onto this beautiful yet fragile island, how long can it sustain such pressure? Something has to be done. Think of your home or a hotel. Would you allow more guests into your home that you can accommodate? Would a hotel or resort allow guests to stay totally unregulated? Similarly, by extension, Santorini, or for that matter all of Greece, must regulate tourism to ensure that you can provide the most enjoyable experiences to all involved (tourists and locals) while also not destroying the environment or your rich culture and heritage.
Well, yes, but how do you achieve this?
If it were up to me, I would start with the cruise ships. I would impose a sustainable development fee on each person arriving by cruise. I mean they come by the tens of thousands and just spend the day on, for example, Santorini. This is not fair for the locals or other tourists. And it is not sustainable. As for visitors arriving by road or something else, I might treat them the same for now. But having 10,000 visitors disembark on a single day and flood the island like locusts is not sustainable. I would impose a significant fee on such day visitors. The same goes for the Acropolis. If cruise liners bring 5,000-10,000 people all at once, how can you protect the site? How can other tourists who actually benefit your economy enjoy their visit? What about the locals?
There is also the argument that all those people want to see and admire the monuments and adore the country’s natural beauty.
Fairness dictates that everyone should have the chance to see these places, but sustainability requires balance. In Bhutan, we’ve been fortunate to have enlightened kings who have shown us the way forward. Sustainability might be expensive, but it’s essential. We have a responsibility to protect what we’ve inherited, both for ourselves and, crucially, for future generations. Sustainability is about making wise choices, even if they require short-term sacrifices. In the long term, sustainability is always profitable.
‘Overcome with emotion and gratitude’
What did impressed you the most in Greece, a country that also extensively relies on tourism?
I want to express my gratitude to Greece and the Greek people for all you have given us – civilization, art, culture, history, philosophy and democracy. You have preserved these treasures, and for that, I thank you.
A couple of days ago, my wife and I walked from our hotel to the Temple of Poseidon. The beauty was breathtaking. To think it was built 2,500 years ago! As an engineer, I marveled at the architecture, and when I looked at my wife, she had tears in her eyes. I thought the historical structures had moved her as well. But she clarified that more than the structure, she was overcome with emotion and gratitude at the dedication of the Greek people in protecting it for 2,500 years. In most places, it would have been lost, but here, you’ve preserved it for the entire world and for our future generations. This is the essence of sustainable tourism: the gift you have given us.
I looked forward to visiting the Acropolis as I had studied about it at school, in my history classes, and had read about it in many tourism magazines. So I was excited to visit the historic city, just as any tourist would. However, when I was there, I felt like I was on a pilgrimage to a sacred place. I didn’t see ruins, I experienced history, and felt very fortunate to be a part of a sacred journey through time.
Later, we enjoyed the beautiful Greek landscape – swimming, watching the sunrise, the sea and the blue skies – and I couldn’t help but wonder how many couples have fallen in love or proposed while on holiday in Greece. Very few places in the world can create such magic. But at what point does it become too much?
