A Delphi-Based Evaluation of Mountain Tourism in an Italian Alpine Valley: Between the Present Situation and Future Opportunities

Abstract

Recreation is a key ecosystem service provided by mountainous areas. The European Alps are a main attraction for tourists due to their natural landscapes. Nature-based recreation and ecotourism are an opportunity for local communities in alpine valleys. However, tourism may also represent a threat to fragile mountain environments when large numbers of tourists are involved in touristic models based on heavy use of resources. This study aims to provide insights into how local communities in an alpine valley, the Comelico Valley, see the current tourism demand and its future changes. Comelico shares similar environmental and landscape characteristics with the surrounding valleys but is less developed from the touristic point of view. We used the Delphi method on a panel of nine local tourism experts from different areas of operations. The results about the forecast of future activities to be prioritized highlight the importance of diversification of tourism offer towards sustainable activities closer to the concept of nature-based tourism and ecotourism. Activities to be prioritized for development were hiking and thematic hiking, forest well-being initiatives and experience laboratories. These results suggest a potential need to change the present model of mountain tourism towards a more diversified and soft approach to mountain recreation.

1. Introduction

Recreation and leisure are amongst the main cultural ecosystem services provided by green areas and natural environments, with economic values reaching €14.5 billion for visits to national parks and protected areas in Europe [1,2]. With their high endowment of natural resources and biodiversity, mountainous areas are popular destinations for tourism: indeed, in 2019, between 9 and 16% of international tourist arrivals worldwide were in the mountains [3]. Mountain tourism is conceived as “a type of tourism activity which takes place in a defined and limited geographical space such as hills or mountains with distinctive characteristics and attributes that are inherent to a specific landscape, topography, climate and biodiversity and local community” [4]. This definition highlights the link between the physical environment and the role of the community in making mountain tourism possible. It also points towards different forms of tourism, such as rural tourism, agritourism, ecotourism, cultural heritage tourism, adventure tourism, community-based tourism or gastronomy and sport tourism [5].

The European Alps are one of the most important mountain tourism destinations in Europe and the world, with presently more than 120 million tourists per year [3] and growing numbers [4]. However, the touristic development of Alpine valleys is not homogeneous: while some valleys are targeted by very large numbers of tourists [6,7], others are still less developed.

Mountain tourism, its characteristics and its dynamics play a key role in the development of mountainous areas [8]; however, the risks of social, economic and environmental impacts on the fragile socio-ecological systems of mountainous areas need to be carefully considered [9]. This is even more important when taking into account that today, mountainous areas are also facing several external threats, linked to climate change affecting resource availability (e.g., scarcity of snow for winter sports) [10] and to a decline in population, carrying loss of services [11], land abandonment and changes in landscape quality [12].

These challenges are recognized today by international tourism organizations, and new models and guidelines towards the sustainability of the sector are being proposed: examples are the international guidelines provided by the Glasgow Declaration [13] and initiatives such as the International Network of Sustainable Tourism Observatories by UN Tourism and the International Year of Sustainable and Resilient Tourism by the UN General Assembly [14].

There is also clear evidence of academia’s growing interest in sustainability in mountain tourism [15,16,17,18,19]. Research has focused on the shift of tourism models from traditional mass tourism [20] to ecotourism [21]. Ecotourism is conceived as a form of tourism where tourists travel to rural and peripheral areas of developed countries, and increasingly to developing countries, to experience local cultures and perform wilderness adventures [22,23]. Ecotourism has as a key principle the management of conservation and promoting minimal development, compatible with conservation efforts and the local context [24]. This principle places ecotourism on the opposite side of the spectrum compared to mass tourism and similar models. However, there are cases where the distinction between mass tourism and ecotourism can become blurred: as argued by Weaver [25], when tourists do ecotourism activities in large numbers and with a level of service comparable with mass tourism activities, that set of ecotourism activities becomes “mass ecotourism”.

Research findings indicate that in some cases, mountain tourism is already shifting from mass tourism to ecotourism [26,27,28]: this shift is guided by several factors, including climate factors (e.g., decrease in snow), new ways of accessing and staying in the mountains (via Airbnb) and shared transport [15]. Changes in visitors’ demography and their values and preferences also play a role by changing the demand from traditional mountain activities (alpine skiing, hiking…) to new experiences such as well-being experiences, slow tourism activities and experiential activities [29,30,31].

In the Alps, traditional mass tourism relies on large numbers of visitors attracted with standardized packages, especially in winter, which is the dominant season for tourism [32]. Given the increasing demand for mountain tourism, expectations are that Alpine areas currently less frequented will also be visited by growing numbers of tourists in the near future. This grants them an opportunity to prepare and adapt to the changing demand connected to ecotourism. However, there is still limited evidence on how, and if, the shift towards more sustainable models is acknowledged at the local scale. To the best of our knowledge, few studies have focused on how local communities and stakeholders, especially in areas that are yet to be targeted by large tourism flows, perceive current models of mountain tourism and see future possibilities [33,34,35,36].

This paper aims to contribute to filling this gap and investigates how a local community, represented by local tourism experts and stakeholders in a touristic valley surrounded by areas targeted by mass tourism, envisions the development of local tourism. Considering the spectrum of tourism types, the main research question was: is the community considering transitioning to a model closer to ecotourism, with activities related to a local culture and environment compatible with conservation efforts, or is their idea of development closer to more traditional models of mountain tourism?

The analysis was carried out in a case-study area, i.e., the Comelico Valley, located in the Italian northeastern Alps, in a five-year time frame, which is the planning period for tourism at local and regional levels [37]. In line with previous studies on similar issues [38,39], the Delphi method was used to elicit the vision of the local experts on the future of tourism. The results assist in exploring how these challenges and future trends and opportunities for mountain tourism are perceived at the community scale and identifying which trajectories are available for developing mountain tourism from a sustainable perspective. As a side objective, the results of the study can support decision making in the local tourism sector.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

Comelico Valley (Figure 1) covers 280 Km² between 1.000 and 2.000 m above sea level and is in the UNESCO Dolomites heritage area. The valley is rich in forests, covering 60% of the total area (16.800 ha ca.), while pastures and meadows cover 22% of the total area (6.160 ha ca.). Comelico has 7.340 inhabitants [40] and is divided into five municipalities. Comelico has highly valuable landscapes that comprise biodiverse forests, pastures, peatlands and mountains. The high nature value is recognized thanks to the presence of Natura 2000 protected areas covering almost the whole valley [41]. Besides the landscape, Comelico still has active agriculture and animal farming, supporting the production of local cheeses, milk and other food and beverage products [40].

The high value of the landscape and nature is possibly linked to the type of landownership of the area. Most of Comelico’s land is owned by forest commons, i.e., community landowners sharing similar land management objectives, such as conservation and sustainable timber production [42]. Mountain tourism is important in the economics of the valley, and it is based on a winter ski resort and a cross-country ski center, with over 50 hospitality enterprises, from hotels to B&Bs, in addition to holiday homes. However, Comelico is less developed and frequented than the neighboring valleys. It registered 131.616 nights spent in the valley by tourists [43], while in the same years, the nearby Puster Valley (2.072 Km²) registered 7.5 million nights [44], and the much smaller Sappada Valley (60 Km²) registered 95.000 nights [45]. Other famous tourist destinations in the area, i.e., Municipalities of Auronzo (202 Km²) and Cortina d’Ampezzo (252 Km²), registered 234.512 and 698.004 nights, respectively [43]. Because the valley is less developed in the tourism sector compared to all the neighboring valleys, Comelico represents an interesting study area to understand how local experts envision the future of tourism and whether there is room for adaptation to a different model, rather than the predominant mass mountain tourism model of the nearby valleys.

2.2. The Delphi Method

We used the Delphi method to analyze the current mountain tourism situation as well as to develop forecasts for future mountain tourism in the valley. By analyzing the forecasts, the local vision of the future could emerge.

The Delphi method is a technique used to reach a consensus among a group of experts using a series of questionnaires with controlled feedback [46]. It is most useful for supporting decision making [46,47], and it is often used to make predictions about the future [48]. A Delphi panel should comprise between 7 and 15 experts, with more being advisable in specific cases [49]. Consensus can be defined in a variety of ways. In our study, because of the small panel of experts employed, it was expressed in percentage terms and considered to be reached when at least 80% of the participants provided the same answer [50].

Especially in a small context where most actors of a given sector know each other, the Delphi method ensures the possibility to express opinions and pieces of information in an anonymous way and allows restriction-free communication among peers and other colleagues [51]. Other researchers have applied the Delphi method to similar contexts and topics: Haukeland et al. [31] applied it in five different countries in Northern Europe, the European Alps, and the western USA; Konu [52] used it to support the development of nature-based tourism products based on a selected group of customers; and Duglio et al. [53] used it to analyze the point of view of local experts on tourism development in an Italian valley in the western Alps.

2.3. The Panel of Experts

In our study, we chose to involve operators and experts in mountain tourism due to their privileged point of view in the area. Based on their occupation, the selected experts can also be considered key informants for the mountain tourism sector. Most of the candidates were known to the first author of the paper, who conducted previous extensive research in the area involving tourism sector operators [54]. This knowledge served to ensure that the list accounted for the heterogeneous sociodemographic characteristics and diversity of perspectives and activities within the tourism sector. We aimed at five categories: (i) hospitality, (ii) local tourism consortium, (iii) municipalities, (iv) services, and (v) cultural associations. The choice to include different types of participants was made to limit potential bias in responses from a restricted group and ensure a wider overview of the topic under examination. At first, we developed a list of candidates for each category. The list was generated through purposive sampling [55]. We prioritized participants with at least 5 years of experience in the sector, including those with a degree of experience and awareness of the local context. The selection for the hospitality category aimed to represent different categories of companies (B&Bs, hotels and other types of hospitality). We involved the tourism consortium, which by default covers different perspectives on tourism. In fact, the consortium is an association of companies in the tourism sector at the local level that aims to promote tourism in the area where the companies operate. We contacted the two most populous and largest municipalities in the area, encouraging the participation of a representative with competence in tourism. Service activities aimed at including the two main types of services, i.e., outdoor activities and restaurant/food activities. Cultural association experts were chosen based on the range of activities organized by the associations.

To prioritize the final respondent list, we asked for feedback from a tourism researcher resident in the area, but external to the present study, and two local administrators of a local forest common [42] with experience derived from past involvement in the tourism sector, but without any stake at the local level. Eventually, ten experts participated in the Delphi: 5 were women, and 4 were men, with age classes ranging from 25–29 years old up to 60–65 years old.

The experts from the hospitality sector were two managers (one manages a B&B and is also a researcher in the field of tourism; the other manages an “albergo diffuso”, a hotel that offers accommodation in individual rooms spread out in different buildings over a village). For the local tourism consortium, we interviewed two staff members (one of whom was the vice president of the consortium). The local administrations were represented by the tourism councilors of the two main tourist municipalities of Comelico. The services sector was represented by one restaurant manager and one nature guide. Finally, the president of a cultural association of Comelico represented the association sector. The other representative of the cultural associations dropped out after the first round.

The procedure of expert selection and round organization is displayed in Figure 2. Each candidate was contacted via phone to explain the nature and objectives of the study. After collecting the agreement, emails with a description of the study, reference contacts and the first questionnaire were sent out. Participation was voluntary, and a privacy statement was available in the questionnaires, as shown in Appendix A and Appendix B. Due to the involvement of people in the research and the partial anonymity approach, we requested authorization from the Ethics Committee of the University Department. In fact, the participants knew the researcher who invited them to the panel but did not know who the other participants were. The study was granted an ethical waiver (n° 0001338) from the Ethics Committee of the TESAF Department of the University of Padova since this research presented no risk to the participants and their privacy.

2.4. The Questionnaires and Their Rounds

2.4.1. Round 1: Scoping

The first Delphi round is often used for scoping, in terms of generating broad results that can then be the object of comment and selection by the participants [52]. The objective of the first round was to generate an overview of the current state of mountain tourism in the Comelico Valley in terms of practiced activities, percentage distribution of tourists per activity and period of the year of practice according to the participants. The participants were advised to answer only the questions on which they felt more expert. The list of activities was gathered from documents of the local tourism consortium. We asked the participants to describe the profile of tourists practicing each activity in terms of used services, provenance and number of nights spent in the area.

These first sections were used to assess how local experts estimate tourism demand at the local level and support the interpretation of their forecast for future tourism demand based on such estimates.

The final section was about predicting the most important activities in the next five years and the need to develop them. The full first-round questionnaire is provided in Appendix A. The questionnaire construction process was guided by our objectives, according to one author’s expertise in the Delphi method.

The first round started in October 2022, and the data were collected by December 2022. Before sending the questionnaire, we provided each participant with instructions on the study and on the method.

The results of the first round were summarized. Not all participants provided answers to all the questions. Regarding the estimation of tourists practicing activities, we collected 3–4 answers for five activities (hiking, via ferratas, mountain biking, cross-country skiing, snowshoeing) (

Table 1. Number of answers, means and their variability in the first round, and corrections in the second round.

Activity	N° 1st Round Answers	Variability in Percentage Estimates in the 1st Round (%)	Mean (%)	N° of Corrections in the 2nd Round	Corrections in the 2nd Round in Percentage Estimates (%)
Alte vie	2	2–10	6	/	/
Hiking	3	40–65	52	1	70
Via ferratas	3	3–20	11	/	/
Trail running	2	1–5	3	1	5
Mountain biking	3	18–40	29	1	40
Race biking	2	2–4	3	1	5
Forest well-being activities	2	1–5	3	1	5
Fishing	1	1	1	/	/
Downhill skiing	2	30–50	40	1	60
Backcountry skiing	2	3–10	6	2	8–10
Cross-country skiing	3	8–20	10	1	18
Snowshoeing	3	1–20	10	1	20
Sleddog	1	1	1	1	2
Historical hiking	1	8	8	/	/
Food and beverage thematic trails	0	0	0	1	5
Horse riding	2	2–3, 8	6.5	/	/
Ice skating	1	10	10	/	/
Climbing	1	5	5	1	3
Slacklining	1	5	5	1	3

). For six activities—i.e., alte vie (which are multi-day hikes that cross several mountain peaks following specific numbered trails; hikers usually sleep in tents or mountain huts), trail running, cycling, forest well-being activities, downhill skiing, and backcountry skiing—the participants provided two answers (Table 1). In the cases of less practiced and known activities (i.e., sleddog, historical hiking, fishing, climbing, slacklining, food and beverage thematic trails and ice skating), we only got one answer (Table 1). Due to the low number of responses for each activity, linked to the low number of panelists and their different expertise, we only calculated the mean of the percentage of tourists practicing each activity based on the values provided by the experts. Tourist profiles resulting from the experts’ responses were also merged. Finally, a list merging all experts’ responses was generated to provide details on the need to capture the mountain tourism demand in the near future.

2.4.2. Round 2: Corrections and Main Results

After the participants were reminded that they were also expected to participate in a second round, the questionnaire (Appendix B) was sent in April 2023 and collected in June 2023.

The first section of the questionnaire displayed the percentages of tourists for each activity. We requested corrections to the individual estimates of numbers and growth trends for each activity in the past years. The participants were asked to correct the months of practice if they disagreed with the results displayed. Additionally, they were asked to validate, or correct, the percentages of tourists for each activity and to evaluate ongoing trends.

In this second round, the tourist profile for each activity was presented as a summary of the responses in the first round. The complete responses are provided in Appendix B. The respondents were asked to make corrections to their previous answers if necessary. Corrections and additional comments were also requested about the section on activities to be further developed within the next five years. In this second round, a new section was added, asking the respondents to prioritize the three most promising activities to be developed in the next five years.

Lack of corrections was interpreted as agreement with the summarized answers from the first round.

After two rounds, we reached our objective for the forecasting exercises. The study provided consistent estimates of tourist presence and activities to develop suggestions for decision makers, since more than 80% of the participants did not make corrections.

3. Results

3.1. Outdoor Activities: Relevance, Seasonality, and Trends

We reached a consensus on all the activities in terms of share of practitioners (Table 1) and on the categories of activities to be prioritized in the next five years. Consensus in terms of share of practitioners was reached for climbing, mountain biking, hiking, downhill skiing, cross-country skiing, backcountry skiing and snowshoeing.

The local experts estimated the percentage of tourists practicing outdoor activities for each season. Our interest was not in precise numbers per activity, but more in the share of tourists for each activity in the study area, according to the participants. The total sum of percentages can exceed 100%, showing that tourists practice more than one activity during their visits. These results provide a context for evaluating the participants’ forecasts regarding future tourism demand in the valley.

According to the experts, during the winter season, most tourists (40%) practice downhill skiing, with a variability of 20 percentage points, followed by cross-country skiing (10%), with a variability of 8 percentage points, snowshoeing (10%), with a variability of 10 percentage points, backcountry skiing (6%), with a variability of 4 percentage points and ice skating (10%). Sleddog accounted for 1% of tourists. It is a recently renewed offer in the valley, and it requires roads and trails without crowds for the dogs to run, like the valley can offer (Appendix B).

In the summer season, the activity carried out by the largest share of tourists was hiking (52%), with a variability of 18 percentage points, followed by mountain biking (29%), with a variability of 11 percentage points, via ferratas (11%), horse riding (6.5%), historical hiking, which is based on trails that connect to historical monuments or remnants such as the defensive structures built for II World War in Comelico (8%), long trekking routes (alte vie) (6%), slacklining and climbing (3%), with a 2 percentage point variability, trail running and forest well-being activities (3%), with a 2 percentage point variability, and race biking (3%). The food and beverage thematic trails were reported to be attended by 0% of the tourists, with a 5 percentage point variability. These activities were reported to be practiced in autumn and spring as well (Appendix B).

Regarding trends (Figure 3 and Figure 4), there was consensus on a growing trend for hiking (five out of six respondents), mountain biking (five out of five respondents) and backcountry skiing (four out of two respondents). Via ferratas, horse riding, historical hiking, race biking, fishing, ice skating and sleddog were reported as mainly stable. No consensus on trends was reached for downhill skiing, backcountry skiing, slacklining, trail running, alte vie and forest wellness activities. Picking mushrooms or other non-wood forest products, an activity usually practiced in mountainous areas of Italy during the summer period, was not considered in the tourism promotional material, nor was it added by the experts.

3.2. Tourist Profile for Activities with a Growing Trend

The results (Appendix B) show that most hikers come from the same region of the Comelico Valley, i.e., Veneto; they usually stay in the valley between 3 and 6 nights, may use the services of professionals, such as nature guides, and often go to agritourisms, summer farms, and mountain huts for meals; they also purchase local products. Mountain bikers usually come from Veneto or Germany; they usually spend 3 to 6 nights in the valley in a large variety of touristic infrastructures and use the services of tour guides for mountain bike trails; they also usually buy local products. Also, backcountry skiers are often from the region; they spend between 1 and 3 nights in hotels, B&Bs, holiday homes, or rented houses in the valley; they often use alpine guide services.

3.3. Forecasting Future Demand for Activities and Related Development Needs

Regarding important future activities to be developed or started within the next five years, the experts identified the following activities (alphabetical order) (Appendix B):

• Downhill and cross-country skiing;
• Hiking activities;
• Horse riding;
• Laboratories of experiences, such as the production of local artisanal pieces, wild herb collection and preparation, and hay harvesting;
• Mountain biking and e-bikes;
• Scientific tourism [56] via partnerships with universities for field trips, research projects, etc.;
• Remote workers [57];
• Snowshoeing and historical outdoor tourism;
• Well-being and nature-related well-being activities.

For each activity, the experts provided the needs, in terms of infrastructures, skills, and services, to intercept the future demand for the activities to be prioritized. In terms of infrastructures, the most mentioned needs were the improvement of the current trail network, for example, signage, as well as the creation of trails and roads suitable for bikes and horses. The creation or improvement of current mountain huts and summer farms was also frequently mentioned for downhill skiing, hiking, historical and food and beverage hiking, forest wellness activities, mountain biking and e-biking. Most required services are related to the development of an office for the coordination of activities, hospitality services and reservations for tourists, which exists with limited capacity within the local tourism consortium. The need for improvement in transportation, and, possibly, innovative transportation, was also reported for three activities (mountain biking, e-biking and hiking). Finally, the skills and professions required to support the development of the new activities were mostly related to expertise and knowledge of the land and increasing the availability of local nature guides and alpine guides for accompanying tourists. More specific cases were those of forest wellness activities (e.g., forest bathing, yoga in the forest and potentially even forest therapy) and general wellness activities: the former requires professionals in forest bathing-related activities, while the latter requires professionals in the healthcare and wellness sector.

Finally, when asked to rank the three future activities to be prioritized over the others for development, the experts identified (Appendix B):

• Hiking: it was mentioned three times as the first priority.
• Forest wellness activities (e.g., forest bathing), which were mentioned three times as a second priority, and well-being activities (spa and wellness areas).
• Experiences laboratories: they were mentioned two times each as the third priority.

4. Discussion

Our results point out that even in an area where mountain tourism is based on a traditional model of tourism, and on winter sports such as downhill skiing, with a relatively limited demand for the summer season, there is now a widespread perception of a need for a change towards a diversification in winter and summer activities, e.g., hiking, forest wellness experiential laboratories, and mountain biking. This is even evident nowadays, since some of these activities (hiking, snowshoeing and mountain biking) are already practiced in Comelico. The proposed future developments point to a model closer to ecotourism, mirroring the generalized rise of ecotourism models in the Alps [58]. They also align with results of other studies focused on specific activities: Rota et al. [59] and Paletto et al. [60] identified hiking and mountain biking amongst the most important outdoor activities in the Italian Alps, with the latter also identified as an emerging activity. Pröbstl et al. [61] found that in Austria, there is a demand for a widening variety of bike services, with no need to further expand bike trails. Visintin et al. [5] contend that physical and psychological well-being are the main reasons that tourists visit alpine mountain areas. More importantly, the predictions of the local experts of Comelico are consistent with Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 8.9 on local and sustainable tourism, aligning local development in the valley with the desired trends on a larger scale.

The changes in the demanded activities by “local” tourists can be connected to the increase in tourists of new generations, who have a different demand compared to older ones. Although the study did not collect data on the age of visitors, we may expect that in the future, Comelico will be affected by trends in touristic flow similar to those occurring in other mountainous areas. Giachino et al. [30] reported that nature and wildlife, opportunities for relaxation and quietness and sport are key motivations to visit mountains for millennials. Bonadonna et al. [29] showed how millennials have a pronounced sensitivity to the sustainability of winter and summer mountain activities. A main point in characterizing millennials is that they see themselves as travelers rather than tourists [62]; hence, an authentic experience might become more important than other motivations for visiting the mountains. This search for authenticity was also found by Franch et al. [63]. This concept was perceived by the local experts, who voiced the need for local inhabitants with deep knowledge of the land to guide visitors. The local origin of these operators would provide additional value both to the experience of visitors, who are accompanied by an emotionally invested guide, and to the creation of new employment opportunities for the local inhabitants. The argument supporting a stronger and wider connection between community members, as local guides, and tourists is aligned with the principles of regenerative tourism [64]. Regenerative tourism is grounded in the living system theory, which states that all stakeholders in a destination are interconnected and deeply connected to the place of the destination [65].

Our results concerning predictions of key activities for the future are consistent with a higher scale perspective and present a vision of how local experts see the future of mountain tourism in the area. Haukeland et al. [31] identified the ten most important trends in nature tourism in terms of impacts on opportunities for development and income for local communities. In their study, authentic nature and culture experiences, health and well-being from nature activities and guided services or courses about nature and the environment scored high in terms of opportunities for rural development in nature-based tourism in the European Alps; they also highlighted that there is a link between the last two groups of activities related to guided services in nature and health and well-being of nature activities. With the increase in people living in urban areas, there is a growing disconnection from rural areas and a loss of knowledge on how to behave during visits to natural or semi-natural areas. Furthermore, living in urban areas can often be unhealthy due to air pollution, crowds and lack of green spaces, motivating urban dwellers to seek out nature for restoration and well-being. Our panel of local experts did not reach an agreement on the trends for forest well-being activities. Nonetheless, these activities were mentioned among the activities to be prioritized in the next five years. Indeed, there is evidence of a growing interest in forest wellness initiatives, including the growth in forest-care activities [66] and, in general, the increase in demand for outdoor recreation activities after COVID-19 [67].

A final point to be highlighted in our results is some contradictions that emerged between the perceived need for a new, more sustainable model for the valley and the persistent relevance of some traditional activities. Indeed, the local experts expressed different views on the trends in downhill skiing, indicating conflicting ideas about the future relevance of this activity at the local level. Downhill skiing was the only activity practiced by a large share of tourists for which there was disagreement about its trend among the experts. Some of them supported the need to further develop downhill skiing in the near future, a view that contrasts with the widespread opinion on the need to diversify the mountain tourism offer and reduce dependency on a sector that requires large investments and is endangered by climate change, making it increasingly risky and unsustainable [10]. This contradiction is echoed by the ongoing heated debate on the expansion of the local ski resort, to be connected with Puster Valley, one of the largest ski resorts in the northeastern Alps [68]. However, support for further ski development is not dominant in the area. In fact, the local stakeholders of the neighboring Ansièi Valley recognized the need to develop winter tourism beyond snow-based activities [69]. This is a key step in adaptation for the winter season, since research has shown that, besides climate change effects, the current clientele for alpine skiing will decline in numbers due to age and other health issues, and no equal replacement in terms of numbers of consumers will follow [70]. Another inconsistency between identified future developments and the sustainability of tourism is related to the development of mountain biking, which was identified amongst the activities to be developed within the next five years. Research results point out that mountain biking may have relevant environmental impacts, such as soil erosion, trail degradation and vegetation damage [71]. It can also cause conflicts between different recreationists [72,73]. Therefore, to comply with sustainable tourism, its development should take into account several measures to limit its negative impacts, such as reducing the trail slope to induce lower speed [74]. Agreement on other activities that attract a lower share of recreationists, such as trial running, slacklining and “alte vie”, was not reached, possibly due to the difficulty in identifying recreationists planning these activities.

In line with the recommendations of Bausch and Gartner [32], the new tourism demand forecasts by the local experts do not imply new large-scale infrastructures or traditional winter sport development. The Comelico Valley can achieve a sustainable tourism model and allow the diversification of activities suggested by the local experts without completely reshaping its current model.

Based on our results, some policy implications can be made. Uncertainty regarding tourism data at the local level, especially regarding the trends in some of the activities, could be addressed by improving data collection and communication on local tourism. This effort could be coordinated by the tourism consortium, due to its privileged observation point. The advantage of this process, besides more clearly understanding current trends in relevant activities performed in the valley, could extend to improving the knowledge base about current tourist demand for a sustainable tourism model, such as ecotourism. In turn, this understanding could provide a solid base for effectively shifting the current model towards a more sustainable one.

5. Conclusions

Mountain tourism is growing, but at the same time, mountain tourism development is now facing several challenges, such as climate change, socioeconomic change in mountain communities and market changes in the demand from tourists. However, few studies address the issue at a local scale when investigating the perceptions and views of the future of local actors in tourism development.

In this paper, we explored the point of view of local mountain tourism experts on the status and trends of tourism in Comelico Valley. Furthermore, we investigated how they see the future of mountain tourism at the local level.

The results show that specific predictions for local development are aligned with the international literature, signaling how, even at the local scale in an area with relatively low tourism flows, there is a high level of awareness of international trends. Local specificities and conflicts might influence the predictions of local experts, while the individual forecasts provide a vision of the future development of mountain tourism at the local scale. Ultimately, we note that despite being close to well-known and developed mass tourism models and having a current model based on traditional winter activities, local experts do envision a more sustainable range of activities that could re-align the current model to an ecotourism model in the near future.

The study has some limitations. One is connected to the small size of the panel. However, the presence and availability of experts in the area are limited. We tried to minimize this issue by ensuring a representation of expert types that was as large as possible. One of the representatives of the cultural associations opted out of the Delphi after the first round. Given that the cultural association was the only category not directly linked to the tourism sector, the lack of one respondent from this category during the second round might have influenced how the forecasts tended to follow a tourism growth trajectory while accounting less for local community welfare. The main limitation of this study is linked to the method, as the replicability of Delphi studies is difficult to achieve, and, furthermore, a case-study approach does not provide generalizable results. This study should therefore be considered as a first exploration into the knowledge of the tourism development path of Comelico, which needs to be supported by further quantitative studies. More investigations targeted at other valleys are also needed to determine if the development trends in Comelico are also shared by other Alpine communities. Finally, we did not gather the local experts’ views on the effects of climate change and demographic changes in visitors. It would be interesting to determine if climate and sociodemographic changes were ignored by the participants due to a lack of information or perceived low impacts on mountain tourism. In any case, these threats to local development need to be addressed in future research to support local decision makers, but also higher-level planners, in facilitating the shift from the current and somewhat successful model of traditional mass tourism to a more diversified and sustainable model. A fundamental element to be considered for future research at the local scale is the predisposition of local landowners, both common and private landowners, to provide accessibility and resources to direct the tourism shift, as indicated by the local experts.

We conclude that local experts of Comelico are aware of the changing paradigm in mountain tourism. They suggest the development of a tourism model that is closer to the ecotourism concept rather than the traditional models operating in the neighboring valleys and partially in the study area.