Abstract

Keywords:Tourism destinations; Institutional barriers; Digitalization; Geolocation; Destination Management; Big Data

Abbreviations:STDs: Smart Tourism Destinations; IoT: Internet of Things

Introduction

The digital evolution of tourism is no longer a theoretical aspiration; it has become a necessary condition for the competitiveness and sustainability of destinations. Technologies such as the Internet of Things (IoT), geolocation data, and Big Data are profoundly transforming planning models and the management of the tourist experience. Within the framework of Smart Tourism Destinations (STDs), these tools enable a much more accurate understanding of visitor behavior and are paving the way for governance models based on anticipation, evidence, and personalization [1]. These systems articulate the digital, the human, and the sustainable as key pillars of intelligent tourism management.

The STD model, promoted across Europe and particularly advanced in Spain through initiatives such as Segittur and the Smart Destinations Network, rests on five core pillars: technology, innovation, sustainability, accessibility, and governance [2]. From this perspective, Big Data allows for the collection, processing, and real-time analysis of vast quantities of information on tourist flows, mobility, preferences, and behaviors.

Several current examples from Spanish tourism destinations such as Benidorm, Gijon, and Santander demonstrate steady progress in the public integration of Big Data and geospatial data into management strategies. Despite notable advances, there remain significant disparities in technological adoption, including a strong dependency on external providers and institutional barriers. These challenges continue to hinder the systematic incorporation of these tools into tourism planning processes [3,4].

Advantages and Dilemmas of Data-Driven Tourism

Implementing data-driven tourism offers significant advantages at various levels. Among these benefits are increased operational efficiency, enhanced personalization of the visitor experience, better optimization of available resources, and the ability to anticipate risks such as overcrowding or the effects of seasonality [5,6]. Furthermore, it enables the design of public policies that are more aligned with local realities and citizens’ needs, thereby contributing to the resilience and sustainability of destinations.

Nonetheless, these advantages are not without certain dilemmas. First, there is the risk associated with technological dependence. Many medium-sized or small localities lack sufficient human and technical resources, leading them to outsource services to private consultants or technology platforms. This situation may undermine data management autonomy, foster superficial digitalization, and hinder the development of internal capacities [7]. Another sensitive factor is algorithmic governance, namely, the use of automated systems for decision-making without adequate oversight. While algorithms can offer speed and accuracy, they may also perpetuate biases, lack transparency, and exclude certain social groups if not designed with inclusive and ethical principles in mind [8,9]. In this regard, digitalization should not be seen solely as a technical process, but rather as an institutional and cultural transformation, supported by leadership, citizen participation, and well-defined regulatory frameworks.

Privacy lies at the heart of this debate. The large-scale collection of data particularly through Wi-Fi networks, mobile applications, or urban sensors, can infringe on visitors’ privacy if not governed by adequate legal safeguards. Moreover, the commercial exploitation of such data by major tech corporations, without proportionate returns to local communities, creates extractive dynamics that exacerbate inequality [10].

New Practices and Outstanding Challenges

Internationally, several destinations have begun to implement advanced technological solutions that may be regarded as benchmarks in tourism management. Cities such as Dubai and Singapore stand out for their integration of urban sensors, predictive analytics platforms, and intelligent mapping tools, which enable more effective management of tourist mobility and allow authorities to anticipate overcrowding scenarios [11]. In Spain in Santander, for instance, the deployment of a network of sensors across beaches, historical areas, and public spaces has enabled local services to be adapted to real-time demand, enhancing both the visitor experience and the quality of life for residents [12]. These experiences demonstrate that leveraging Big Data and geolocation can serve as a strategic tool for spatial and tourism planning.

Nevertheless, the effectiveness of these technologies is highly contingent on the institutional context in which they are implemented. One of the primary challenges is to strengthen the digital capabilities of both technical teams and decision-makers. It is equally crucial to advance interoperability between systems and to promote open data policies that drive innovation and facilitate citizen participation [13]. Likewise, it is essential to promote digital sovereignty strategies at the local level, ensuring that data generated within territories are governed according to public and ethical principles aimed at the common good. This implies fostering transparent public private collaboration models, investing in digital talent within public administration, and developing indicators that measure not only tourism profitability but also resident well-being [9].

Conclusion

Twenty-first century tourism demands a planning approach that strikes a balanced integration of the digital, the human, and the sustainable. In this context, emerging technologies such as Big Data and geolocation offer an unprecedented opportunity to rethink and transform conventional models of tourism management. However, their adoption must be guided by a critical, ethical, and strategically oriented perspective, ensuring alignment with the principles of sustainable development and collective well-being [14,15].

This is not about the senseless accumulation of data; it is about using data intelligently to build more resilient, competitive, and people-centered destinations. The success of technology adoption does not lie solely in its implementation, but rather in the ability of territories to appropriate it, adapt it to their specific contexts, and convert it into a catalyst for local development.

References

1. Boes K, Buhalis D, Inversini A (2016) Smart tourism destinations: Ecosystems for tourism destination competitiveness. International Journal of Tourism Cities 2(2): 108-124.
2. European Commission (2023) Transition Pathway for Tourism. Publications Office of the European Union.
3. Luna-Reyes LF, Gil-García JR (2014) Digital government transformation and public sector governance. Government Information Quarterly 31(1): 5-14.
4. Parysek J, Wojnarowska A (2020) Smart city concepts and challenges in Polish urban policy. Cities 103: 102762.
5. Li S, Huang L, Li Z (2018) Big data and smart tourism: Applications and challenges. Journal of Travel Research 57(6): 679-693.
6. Buhalis D (2020) Technology in tourism from information communication technologies to tourism and smart tourism towards ambient intelligence tourism: A perspective article. Tourism Review 75(1): 267-272.
7. Hernandez A, Lee M (2025) Hospitality and tourism technology and organizational performance: An integrated framework of HTT business value and future research agenda. International Journal of Hospitality Management 126: 104092.
8. Kitchin R (2017) Thinking critically about and researching algorithms. Information, Communication & Society 20(1): 14-29.
9. Zubillaga-Peña A, Garay L, Font X (2021) Datafication in sustainable tourism governance: Rethinking indicators and accountability. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 29(10): 1643-1661.
10. Morozov E (2020) The net delusion: The dark side of internet freedom. PublicAffairs.
11. Choe Y, Kim J, Fesenmaier DR (2018) Use of sensors and IoT in smart tourism: A systematic review. International Journal of Information Management 39: 145-159.
12. Zubiaga A, Zubiaga L, Belmonte O (2022) The digital transformation of urban tourism management in Santander. Smart Cities 5(4): 1105-1123.
13. Janssen M, Charalabidis Y, Zuiderwijk A (2012) Benefits, adoption barriers and myths of open data and open government. Information Systems Management 29(4): 258-268.
14. Cheng X, Xue T, Yang B, Ma B (2023) A digital transformation approach in hospitality and tourism research. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 35(8): 2944-2967.
15. López Ballester E (2025) The impact of the use of Big Data and geodata in the management of smart tourist destinations in Spain: An analysis from tourism intelligence. Institutional repository.