Hotel chains and tourism boards used to have an incredibly effective handshake: finance a campaign, select a few picture-perfect locations, and book flights. But they are quietly retiring that playbook. Rather, a significantly different set of objectives is being presented by destination marketing organizations (DMOs), and not everyone is excited about this.
Tensions over who gets to determine how destinations are marketed, what constitutes success, and where the money flows are developing in a number of states. Under intense public scrutiny, the governor’s office in Hawaii reinstated funding to the Hawaii Tourism Authority (HTA). Aligning messaging with Indigenous communities has become a major topic of discussion in Canada. Visit California is changing its message in California to prioritize experience quality over quantity.
| Topic | Detail |
|---|---|
| Shift in Influence | Tourism boards gaining more authority over branding, budgets, and voice |
| Traditional Power Base | Historically led by hoteliers, chambers of commerce, and elected officials |
| Current Tension Points | Disagreements on funding, sustainability, messaging, and visitor quality |
| Notable Cases | Hawaii Tourism Authority, Visit California, Destination Canada |
| Industry Context | Traveler demographics shifting, with Gen Z and Millennials demanding purpose-driven travel |
| Trend Trajectory | Boards focusing on resident wellbeing, cultural preservation, and economic equity |
This power shift began gradually but has since accelerated. Boards such as HTA functioned for many years under the covert direction of chambers of commerce, hotel associations, and politically appointed stakeholders. Predictable benefits were anticipated, including increased tourism, income, and employment. Today’s tourism equation, however, is more complicated. Accountability is being demanded by locals. It is becoming impossible to compromise on climate resilience. Younger tourists are also looking for genuineness rather than conveniences.
Campaigns centered on slow travel, environmental integrity, and cultural preservation have gained popularity during the last ten years. Not everyone has overlooked this change. Instead of only hiring marketers with slick portfolios, boards are increasingly hiring sociologists, sustainability experts, and community organizers. Redefining tourism as a shared value rather than a transactional export is a deliberate strategy.
I recall being in Gastown, Vancouver, when a guide stopped in the middle of the tour to acknowledge a Musqueam land claim rather than discuss a historic site. The tourists, who were a mix of Californians and Europeans, were clearly moved. I now understand that incidents like that reveal more about the direction of tourism than any billboard ever could.
Not everyone is in agreement. Hotel operators contend that by emphasizing local sentiment too much, destination boards run the risk of offending high-value tourists. Some are concerned that “resident-first” messaging could stifle enthusiasm among tourists. Others bring up pragmatic issues: if room nights and average daily rates aren’t used to gauge success, how else?
In response, tourism boards are retaliating with their own data. According to case studies from Iceland, Bhutan, and New Zealand, visitors are more satisfied when their travels feel purposeful and supported locally. Surveys conducted in British Columbia revealed that visitors were more inclined to suggest a place when they were treated like guests rather than just clients. This change in strategy has been especially helpful in controlling seasonal imbalances and overcrowding.
In the meantime, the playing field has been leveled by the digital landscape. State agencies are no longer the only option for small towns and rural outposts. With remarkably successful outcomes, they can create community-led campaigns, launch their own microsites, and connect with influencer networks. Although there are drawbacks to this decentralization, such as redundant work and inconsistent messaging, it also represents a growing desire for independence.
Several DMOs have discovered methods to balance both sides of the equation through strategic partnerships. They are investing in local events, culinary storytelling, and regenerative tourism initiatives rather than putting all of the money into airport billboards or streaming advertisements. These programs are especially creative because they increase civic pride and economic resilience at the same time.
Many DMOs had existential concerns during the pandemic. Their applicability was put to the test when international travel was suspended. Some completely disappeared, while others rethought their missions. The state tourism board in Oregon changed its focus to encourage virtual storytelling, backyard adventures, and forest stewardship. The pivot was successful. Locals became more involved, and when visitors came back, the story had changed to emphasize appreciation rather than consumption.
The lesson is glaringly obvious for destinations that are just getting started or are recuperating from overtourism. Inclusion of the community must be ingrained, not added. The traditional strategy of marketing first and managing later is becoming less and less credible.
Tourism boards can create stories that are both relevant and grounded by working with regional chefs, artists, and historians. These ads seem especially genuine, more like open invitations than advertisements. And it turns out that this has been incredibly successful in creating enduring relationships.
Expect to see more stories and fewer slogans as boards have more authority over their brand narratives. Clicks and conversions will probably be replaced by metrics like sentiment analysis, community impact, and sustainability indices. It’s a change that calls for political will, patience, and a mental adjustment.
The Undeniable Power Shift Happening in Global Tourism Boards
