Advertisement
There comes a moment in every industry when the evidence becomes too overwhelming to ignore. For Caribbean cruise tourism, that moment has arrived.
For years, governments across the region have celebrated ever-growing cruise arrival statistics. Every new record has been accompanied by press releases, ribbon cuttings, photo opportunities and declarations of another successful tourism season.
Yet a very different conversation is now taking place among economists, hotel operators, tourism researchers and even long-time supporters of the cruise industry. Across the Caribbean, professionals are beginning to ask a question that should have been asked years ago:
Who is really benefiting from all these cruise passengers?
That question is no longer being raised by a handful of critics. It is increasingly being echoed throughout the region. A recent investigative report by The BVI Beacon concludes that while cruise arrivals continue to grow, the economic bargain for Caribbean destinations is becoming steadily less favorable. Larger ships are bringing larger crowds, but not necessarily greater prosperity for the islands that host them.
The reason is obvious.
The cruise ship itself has become the destination.
Today’s floating resorts contain everything a passenger could possibly want. Water parks. Surf simulators. Roller coasters. Broadway-style entertainment. Casinos. Luxury spas. Shopping malls. Dozens of restaurants. Bars. Even private beaches.
Why leave the ship?
From the cruise company’s perspective, this is brilliant business. Every cocktail purchased onboard stays within the cruise company’s ecosystem. Every handbag bought onboard stays within the cruise company’s ecosystem. Every specialty dinner booked onboard stays within the cruise company’s ecosystem. Every casino chip played onboard stays within the cruise company’s ecosystem. The longer passengers remain on the ship, the more profitable the voyage becomes.
That business model makes perfect sense for the cruise lines.
The problem is that it no longer works as well for the destinations.
St. Maarten still provides the harbor. We provide the roads. We provide police protection. We provide customs and immigration. We provide waste management. We provide beaches. We provide the scenery. We provide emergency services. We maintain the infrastructure that makes the destination attractive.
Increasingly, however, the economic return to the destination appears to be shrinking relative to what the cruise companies retain. Researchers interviewed in the BVI investigation argue that the industry now captures a growing share of visitor spending while destinations absorb more of the infrastructure, congestion and environmental costs.
That is not a sustainable partnership.
The cruise industry often responds by pointing to billions of dollars in economic impact studies. No one disputes that cruise tourism creates economic activity. The real question is whether it creates enough economic activity to justify the increasing costs borne by destinations.
There is an enormous difference.
A million passengers may sound impressive. But a million passengers spending very little ashore may contribute less to the local economy than a smaller number of overnight visitors who dine in local restaurants, rent cars, stay in hotels, hire taxis, visit attractions and return year after year.
Volume is not value.
That distinction may become the defining tourism debate of the next decade.
The Caribbean has another problem.
It negotiates separately. Every island competes against every other island. If one destination asks for higher passenger taxes, another offers lower ones. If one destination demands stronger local sourcing, another promises easier access. If one island says “no,” another quickly says “yes.”
The cruise lines understand this dynamic perfectly.
Divide the Caribbean. Negotiate individually. Maintain leverage. The result is a race to the bottom. One island undercuts another until everyone earns less than they should. No individual island has sufficient bargaining power against multinational cruise corporations with billions of dollars in annual revenue.
The Caribbean, however, does.
Imagine if the member states of the Caribbean Tourism Organization and regional governments adopted a common negotiating position. Imagine minimum standards for passenger head taxes. Common environmental requirements. Common local procurement obligations. Common rules ensuring that a greater share of shore excursions is operated by local businesses. Common expectations for investment in destination infrastructure.
The negotiating table would immediately look different.
This is not anti-cruise. Far from it. Cruise tourism remains an important pillar of many Caribbean economies, including St. Maarten’s. The objective should never be fewer cruise passengers. The objective should be a fairer partnership. One where prosperity is shared more equitably. One where destinations are rewarded fairly for the value they provide. One where cruise companies continue to prosper while the communities that welcome them prosper too.
That requires political courage. It requires regional cooperation. Most importantly, it requires leaders willing to stop measuring success by arrival statistics alone. Because destinations are not parking lots for cruise ships. They are living communities. Communities that deserve more than becoming convenient places to dock, refuel, unload garbage, replenish supplies and sail away.
The Caribbean’s greatest tourism asset has never been the cruise ships. It has always been the Caribbean itself.
Perhaps it is finally time we started negotiating like we believe it.
###
Related articles:
Destinations Are Now Parking Lots for Cruise Ships
Bigger ships, smaller returns? Caribbean cruise bargain under strain
Is the Caribbean’s On-Island Resort Sector Being Crushed by the Cruise Industry?
###
ADVERTISEMENT
