Who counts us on the beach? When sensors decide how Mallorca is distributed

Who counts us on the beach? When sensors decide how Mallorca is distributed

Key question: Who benefits from real-time monitoring of the playas — and what remains in the dark?

In the early morning, when the Paseo Marítimo in Palma still smells of freshly brewed coffee and the fishermen from Portixol are sorting their nets, locals in the bakery are already debating the island government's latest idea: sensors at 150 beaches should in future indicate how full a cove is. The project will be built over three years, costs around four million euros and combines counting devices, anonymous camera processing and the detection of mobile devices to feed occupancy figures into an app and onto a website.

The technology sounds straightforward: by counting at entrances and exits, evaluating camera images anonymously and detecting signals from phones, one can say in real time whether a beach still has space or is congested. A forecast model is also planned to predict how full a section will be the next day. Parking lots in sensitive protected areas such as the Mondragó Natural Park are also to be monitored; the aim is to avoid traffic peaks and overcrowded coves.

The sober numbers are tempting: 150 playas, real-time data, an app to help decide. Popular spots like Caló des Moro or Es Trenc, which attract thousands on social media, appear in the surveys — on some days clearly more people gather there than nature can bear.

But the most important point around which the debate must revolve is not the technology, but governance: Who decides how the data are used? Key question: Who benefits — the residents, the administration, the tourism industry or the technology suppliers?

Critical analysis: the method promises clarity, but not automatically fairness. Real-time information can bring short-term dispersion: visitors move to less frequented beaches or shift their visit. This, however, easily leads to displacement effects: fewer people at Es Trenc today, more at a previously quiet cala tomorrow. Without accompanying measures, there is a risk of merely creating a race between coves.

Data protection is a second issue. Operators emphasize that no personal data are stored. Yet the combination of camera images, mobile signals and entrance/exit counts creates profiles — even if these are technically anonymized. Who sets limits on how briefly data may be stored? Who checks the anonymization? Such questions are still noticeably absent from public debate.

Another blind spot is the social perspective: many locals already avoid places like Sa Calobra or Magaluf when they are overcrowded. For them the island is not an algorithm but everyday life: school buses, garbage collection, weekend noise. An app that displays tourist numbers does not automatically relieve the burdens in settlements adjacent to the beaches.

Everyday observation: in the Mondragó car park I often see, on sunny weekends, cars circling, horns honking, people getting out with towels — the smell of the sea mixing with exhaust fumes. An app can show that the car park is full, but it cannot calm nerves when visitors nonetheless keep searching and clog the access road.

Concrete approaches that go beyond mere data collection: first, open data and independent audits. Raw data or at least aggregated statistics should be accessible to researchers and citizens, and anonymization methods should be externally reviewed. Second, transparent storage rules with minimal retention periods and clear deletion mechanisms. Third, combination with traditional measures – shuttle buses to more distant beaches, regulated parking with tiered pricing, visitor guidance via information at the entrance to the area instead of only on smartphones. Fourth, community governance: local councils (residents, environmentalists, tourism providers) should have a say in threshold values and response plans. Fifth, evaluation phases with clear indicators (environmental impact, traffic relief, resident satisfaction) before the system is rolled out nationwide.

What is missing from the public discourse: an honest cost-benefit calculation with a view to long-term consequences. Four million and three years are not an end in themselves; it is about whether the technology solves structural problems or merely shifts symptoms. Also missing so far is a plan B for cases in which the technology fails — for example in outages, incorrect forecasts or misuse.

Pointed conclusion: sensors can be a useful lens to see how we move around the water. But they are no substitute for political decisions and local responsibility. Without transparency, clear rules and genuine participation, the island risks that digital counters mainly show what is already going wrong — instead of sustainably changing how we manage the beaches.

In the evening, when the lanterns along the Passeig Major slowly come on and in the bars at El Born the conversation again raises the same question — fewer tourists or different management? — the simple insight remains: technology is a tool, not a politician. The real task is to forge the right rules before the sensors have counted.