An interesting part of this article is the discussion of how tourism harms the destination, but has also preserved the destination. Two examples from the article are: Venice. Without tourism, the...
An interesting part of this article is the discussion of how tourism harms the destination, but has also preserved the destination. Two examples from the article are:
Venice. Without tourism, the historic areas of the city would have been torn down and redevloped. With tourism they have been preserved, but now they get so much traffic that it cannot acccomodate the traffic.
Kenya, and some other African countries. Tourism has led to a higher amount of wildlife conservation and paid for rangers to prevent poaching. Without tourism, these ranches would get sold off to beccome hunting grounds or farms. However, tourism is also environmentally destructive.
So the question is how do we as a society balance these factors that are linked together but also in opposition?
In December I visted Tortuguero in Costa Rica. It is an area that is only accesible by boat, with a few resorts. There is a small community of locals to work at the resorts. A local made a comment how about 50% of the local residents had to move away from their home in 2020 due to a lack of work. A few of the rivers that they took small tour boats also grew over in 2020. So the locals are aware of the environmental impact but also the financial necessity of tourism. Reading this article reminded me of that conversation, and the balancing acts these communities have to handle.
An older pandemic-era Guardian article which calls into question our relatively recent advent and normalization of mass accessible international tourism. A poignant question is raised at which...
An older pandemic-era Guardian article which calls into question our relatively recent advent and normalization of mass accessible international tourism. A poignant question is raised at which point are the benefits of universalized international tourism outweighed by the costs to cultures, history, and local economies. International leisure travel was once the provence of the weatlhy and the well-to-do, does a solution exist other than restricting access by class?
An interesting part of this article is the discussion of how tourism harms the destination, but has also preserved the destination. Two examples from the article are:
Venice. Without tourism, the historic areas of the city would have been torn down and redevloped. With tourism they have been preserved, but now they get so much traffic that it cannot acccomodate the traffic.
Kenya, and some other African countries. Tourism has led to a higher amount of wildlife conservation and paid for rangers to prevent poaching. Without tourism, these ranches would get sold off to beccome hunting grounds or farms. However, tourism is also environmentally destructive.
So the question is how do we as a society balance these factors that are linked together but also in opposition?
In December I visted Tortuguero in Costa Rica. It is an area that is only accesible by boat, with a few resorts. There is a small community of locals to work at the resorts. A local made a comment how about 50% of the local residents had to move away from their home in 2020 due to a lack of work. A few of the rivers that they took small tour boats also grew over in 2020. So the locals are aware of the environmental impact but also the financial necessity of tourism. Reading this article reminded me of that conversation, and the balancing acts these communities have to handle.
An older pandemic-era Guardian article which calls into question our relatively recent advent and normalization of mass accessible international tourism. A poignant question is raised at which point are the benefits of universalized international tourism outweighed by the costs to cultures, history, and local economies. International leisure travel was once the provence of the weatlhy and the well-to-do, does a solution exist other than restricting access by class?