For many years now, through an effective and recognized Routes Committee, the Barcelona Chamber of Commerce has been promoting Barcelona's air connectivity. The institution has just published an important study on the subject. With a strong quantitative foundation, it emphasizes three aspects:
1. Air connectivity is key to the future of the Catalan economy.I cannot imagine a Catalan economy that stands out in Europe without good air connections, with Europe and with the world. The global trend is the clustering of innovative initiatives, especially the most groundbreaking ones. Also, by the way, live music is evolving from a model where the artist travels to one where the audience moves. When an international company or institution studies the possibility of opening a headquarters in a new location, it analyzes many factors (taxation, aid, human resources...), but one of the most decisive is connectivity. We did not lose the European Medicines Agency for this reason, but it did not help that Amsterdam's connectivity – KLM's hub – is better than ours. A few years ago, a shipowner from Genoa lamented to me that Genoa's historic shipping companies (and what a history!) were being acquired by US companies which then moved their headquarters to Rome because they had direct flights to the US. It is a cumulative effect: the difference between Barcelona and Genoa in connectivity has been widening.
2. Barcelona's air connectivity has increased significantly. Today, El Prat airport is one of the best-connected with Europe (from 110 cities in 2005 to 170 in 2025). Progress has also been made with America and Asia (from about 10 in 2005 to almost 40 in 2025). But there is still work to be done. It is the great pending challenge.
3. What has made the increase in connectivity possible? Barcelona is not a state capital (Barajas has direct flights to Japan, El Prat does not yet), nor is it the base of any major airline with intercontinental capacity. The Spanair option vanished with the 2008 financial crisis. As for Level, it remains to be seen. The suspicion persists as to whether in the end it will be more than a tactical mechanism to expel the competition. In the past, Iberia established a Barcelona - Sao Paulo flight competing with Singapore Airlines, which already covered this route. As soon as (2016) Singapore let it go, Iberia – mission accomplished – did too. Now Level has expelled Norwegian with the commitment to maintain routes. But the recent reduction in flights to Boston and the suspension of those to San Francisco (two key cities) is not a good sign. In short, the answer to the question is that many of the planes that bring us researchers, business people, and trade fair attendees are filled – and therefore made possible – by cruise passengers, visitors to the Sagrada Família, or the audience of musical events. Without them, many destinations would disappear.
I conclude with two calls for moderation directed at two segments of opinion that may end up being decisive in the evolution of the economy, tourism, and connectivity.
The first – among whom I count myself – is that of those who primarily push to promote a high-productivity economy. We must be aware that to achieve this we cannot, at the same time, be mechanically against any economic activity that intrinsically will never reach the maximum productivity we aspire to. Or that generates unpleasant side effects. The tourism that fills planes is an example of this. Perhaps it is not entirely composed of exemplary tourists, perhaps they are too noisy. Let us therefore implement improvement programs so that their presence bothers us less, but let us not forget that the indirect effect of providing us with connectivity, which may not be as immediate as the noise they generate, is vital for the promotion of a high-quality economy.
The second segment of opinion is that of those who prioritize restricting tourism, and who are not sensitive to the “productivist” argument I have just presented. To them I would say that, even though they may not be receptive to a message in the form of a plea not to harm the economy, they should consider that regarding their objective of drastically reducing tourism, a policy of limiting direct connectivity will have a very limited effect, say of second order, while the effect on the economy will be of first order. They will cause harm for a meager benefit. Very few potential tourists will give up contemplating the Sagrada Familia due to a lack of direct connection. The intercontinental tourist will fly to Madrid and come to Barcelona by high-speed train. And it will not give us connectivity.
