What was actually asked
The ISTAC release reads as though 67.9 percent had declared tourism “very beneficial”. That is misleading: “very beneficial” is not an answer option but sits inside the statement itself. Question P50 reads: “Could you indicate your degree of agreement or disagreement with the following statements about tourism activity on your island?” One of them: “Tourism development has been very beneficial for the island and its inhabitants.” The 67.9 percent is the sum of two steps on a five-point scale: 52.9 percent agree, 15.0 percent strongly agree.
On housing – “Tourism pushes up housing prices (rent and purchase)” – it is the other way round: 37.6 percent agree, 39.5 percent strongly agree. That is the highest strong-agreement score among all 28 statements. The tension lies not between the headline totals but in their intensity.
Approval and grievance rose together
The module was first run in 2024, and some questions date back to 2019. For the benefit statement ISTAC reports 62 percent in 2024 and 76 percent in 2019. The 67.9 percent is therefore not a high but a partial recovery.
What has not recovered is more revealing. 62.8 percent agree that tourism should keep being promoted, some 18 points below 2019 (80.4 percent). Only 45.7 percent still say its benefits far outweigh its costs, down from around half in 2024. So more people acknowledge that tourism has helped, while fewer want more of it. Because these are separate scales, the same person can agree with both statements; a contradiction appears only if the numbers are read as two camps.
| Statement | Agreement |
|---|---|
| Tourism drives economic development | 77.3 % |
| Tourism pushes up housing prices (rent and purchase) | 77.1 % |
| Development has been very beneficial for the island | 67.9 % |
| Tourism pushes up the cost of living | 64.0 % |
| Tourism creates precarious jobs | 63.4 % |
| Tourism should keep being promoted | 62.8 % |
| Tourism causes unwanted changes of residence | 62.8 % |
| Benefits far outweigh the costs | 45.7 % |
| Tourism makes society more tolerant | 44.5 % |
Agree plus strongly agree, aged 18 and over, Canaries. Source: ISTAC, ECOSOC, Q2 2026.
The number with policy consequences
A different figure carries political weight. Asked whether tourists should pay for every night of accommodation, 49.7 percent say yes and 24.6 percent no. ISTAC puts the increase at six and a half points.
The more interesting part sits beside it: opposition has barely moved, about 24 percent in both years, while uncertainty fell from 28.5 to 15.4 percent. The increase comes almost entirely from the previously undecided: the debate has not flipped, it has settled. Regional spreads remain wide, from almost 60 percent in southern Tenerife to below 40 percent on El Hierro and Fuerteventura. Asked whether residents should pay, 81.3 percent say no.
Younger people differ – but not on everything
Age is the sharpest divide. Among 18 to 34 year olds, 83.5 percent agree that tourism makes housing more expensive, against 72.0 percent of those aged 55 and over. The benefit statement draws agreement from 58.7 percent of the youngest group and 73.5 percent of the oldest.
The steepest fall concerns a statement with nothing to do with money: 44.5 percent agree that tourism helps create a more tolerant society, down from 56 percent in 2024. Disagreement rose only from 22.7 to 25.4 percent; most of the lost agreement moved to the middle. Calling the youngest group the most sceptical still misses something: on the visitor tax they are the most decided in favour, 58 to 17.5 percent.
Protests, charges and the government’s position
The figures land in a debate that became visible on 20 April 2024, when demonstrations under the slogan “Canarias tiene un límite” were held across the islands and in Madrid. Infobae reported thousands of participants but noted that official figures were not available. The demands included a building moratorium and an environmental levy.
To this day a per-night charge exists only in Mogán on Gran Canaria: 15 cents per person per night since March 2025, the first municipal tourist tax in Spain, with the revenue frozen because the hoteliers’ association FEHT Las Palmas has gone to court. The Tenerife charge often called an “ecotasa” is a different thing: since 19 January 2026 it applies to two trails in the Teide National Park and is not a bed tax. Lanzarote has none in force; a proposal from the Socialist group in October 2024 was rejected as “ineficaz” by the associations Asofuer, FTL, FEHT and Ashotel, according to Diario de Lanzarote, which also doubted residents could be exempted because EU law permits no distinction by place of residence. The exemption 81.3 percent want is thus what the industry considers legally weakest.
The regional government of Coalición Canaria and the Partido Popular rejects an islands-wide charge; on 12 March 2026 parliament turned it down again, according to eldiario.es. President Fernando Clavijo told Canarias7 on 18 April 2026 that he would prefer raising the IGIC: “more quality, less quantity and more added value”.