Contents
A common belief in our business is that seasonality is a marketing problem: the summer sells itself, the winter does not, so the answer is a better off-season campaign. I understand where it comes from, and I think it is mostly wrong. Seasonality in tourism is the swing in visitors, prices, jobs and opening hours across the year, and it is driven by climate, school holidays and work calendars that no campaign can move very far. What a destination can change is what happens in it when the visitors are fewer, and that depends far more on its residents than on the visitors it is trying to attract.
The coasts and mountain resorts that stay alive all year are not, as a rule, the ones with the cleverest winter slogans. They are the ones where a sports club trains in the evenings, a cultural center has a weekly program, the market still fills up on Saturdays and the cafés have regulars. Visitors who arrive in the quiet months find a place that is running, and they enjoy it precisely because it was not put on for them.
Why does the season begin and end where it does?
The obvious answer is the weather, and the weather does matter. A beach is not much of a product in a cold, wet month, and a ski slope without snow is a hillside. School holidays are the second force, because families can only travel when the children are free, and they all travel at once. Working calendars add a third layer: the August shutdown in some industries, religious and national holidays, the weeks when companies hold their sales meetings.
What gets less attention is that supply makes the season sharper than demand alone would. A hotel that expects weak autumn bookings closes its restaurant in October, then a wing, then the whole property. Airlines drop routes. Tour operators stop selling. Restaurants on the seafront put up their shutters. Each decision is sensible on its own, but together they remove the reasons to visit, and the following year the weak demand is confirmed. The season ends partly because everyone agreed it would.
That loop is starting to loosen in some places. Hotter summers have made the middle of July less pleasant on many warm coasts, and the tourism trends I see in requests from groups and planners point towards late spring and early autumn. That is good news, but it mostly stretches the season at its edges. It does not, by itself, give anyone a reason to be on the coast in January.
What happens to the people who work the season?
For the people on seasonal contracts, the curve on the chart is the shape of their year. A large share of tourism work is built around the peak: contracts that run from spring to autumn, extra staff brought in for six or seven months, students and young people taking summer jobs. When the season ends, many of those people have no income until it starts again, or they leave for other sectors and do not come back.
The ILO’s overview of work in hotels, catering and tourism is blunt about the decent work deficits the sector still carries: hours that are long and unpredictable, low pay, informal arrangements and thin social protection. Seasonality sits underneath several of those problems. A job that lasts seven months is hard to plan a family around. A worker who does not know whether they will be called back next year has little reason to invest in skills for that particular employer.
The same pattern appears in events, only compressed. Congresses, festivals and sports events depend on temporary staff who are hired for a few days, often at short notice, and who carry much of the risk when an event moves or shrinks. The best of them move on to steadier work, and so every new season starts with a team that has to be trained again.
I find this the strongest argument for taking the quiet months seriously, stronger even than revenue. A summary of a EUROPARC webinar on the EU Tourism Platform sets out the aim of off-season work as year-round income, keeping a talented workforce and a steady quality of service. Of those three, the workforce matters most to me. A coast that sheds its trained people every autumn pays for it every spring.
Can a place sell its off-season when nothing is open?
Here I have a criticism of a habit that is common across the industry. Hotels, tour operators and tourism marketers produce attractive material about the shoulder months and the winter: empty beaches, soft light, quiet old streets. Then the visitor arrives and finds half the restaurants closed, no boat trips, a museum with reduced hours and a hotel running on a skeleton crew. The photographs were true, but the experience was not ready.
An off-season cannot be invented by communication. It has to exist first, and it exists when enough businesses agree to stay open, when there is something to do on a weekday afternoon and when transport still runs. That requires coordination between hotels, restaurants, operators and the people who run local programs, and coordination is harder than a campaign because nobody can do it alone.
Some kinds of tourism are naturally better at this. Wellness tourism is less tied to the weather: a thermal hotel or a spa resort can be at its best on a cold, grey day, and its guests often prefer the quiet months. Sports tourism is another, especially the winter training camps that football and athletics teams from colder countries hold on warm coasts, which fill hotels and pitches when the beach crowd is long gone. Meetings and incentive groups also favor the shoulder months, because rates are better and venues are free.
What these examples have in common is that they need the place to function. A training camp needs pitches maintained by local staff, a physiotherapist in the district, a restaurant that stays open. A thermal hotel guest wants a walk, a market, a small museum. The visitor product leans on the everyday life around it, and that life is mostly built and kept by residents.
Who keeps a destination running in the quiet months?
When the hotels close, residents are still there. They still need somewhere to exercise, something to do in the evenings, a place to take their children at the weekend. In destinations with a healthy local life, those needs are met by sports clubs, swimming pools, libraries, community and cultural centers, a cinema, a few busy cafés and a calendar of local gatherings that owes nothing to tourism.
This is the part of the economy that recreation management looks after, and it is usually planned by people who would not say they work in tourism at all. Yet it is exactly what keeps a destination from feeling abandoned in winter. A visitor who arrives in February and finds a crowded weekend market, a basketball game in the local hall or a choir concert in the cultural center has found something no summer program could give them: the place as it actually lives.
Community events are the clearest bridge. A small winter festival, a monthly night market or a regular open-air run is organized for residents first, and visitors are welcome to join. I would much rather see destinations support these modest, repeating events than chase a single large off-season event that fills the hotels for one weekend and leaves the other twelve empty. A program that repeats every week teaches people, locals and visitors alike, that the place has a life outside the summer.
Are remote workers and longer stays the answer?
In recent years, much hope has been placed in visitors who stay longer and travel outside the school calendar: retirees spending the winter somewhere mild, digital nomads who can work from anywhere with a decent connection, people combining a work trip with a few extra days. They do help. A guest who stays a month in November keeps a café, a coworking space and a gym in business in a way that a weekend guest cannot.
But they are not a cure on their own, and I am wary of destinations that treat them as one. Long-stay visitors are, in a sense, temporary residents. They want the same things residents want: a working pharmacy, a gym that is open, a bus that runs, somewhere to meet people. If the place has hollowed out in the off-season, they will not stay long, and if they arrive in large numbers in a small district, they can push up rents for those who live there all year. They fit best into a destination that already has a year-round life, not one that hopes they will create it.
Year-round life comes before year-round tourism
So where should a destination put its effort if it wants a longer season? My answer is closer to home than most strategies suggest. It means making sure the facilities and programs residents use all year are strong: sports halls with evening programs, cultural centers with something on every week, markets that keep their day in winter, public spaces that are lit, safe and pleasant on a dark evening. It means hotels and operators agreeing to keep a share of their offer open in the quiet months and accepting that the first winters will be modest. It means event calendars that put smaller, repeating events in the off-season rather than piling everything into July.
It is unglamorous work. It does not make a good launch photograph, and it rarely appears in a tourism strategy with its own budget line. But it is the work that turns a summer resort into a place, and a place is something people want to visit in more than one month.
I trust a destination whose sports halls are busy on a wet Tuesday in February far more than one whose winter campaign won an award.