Consequences of tourism depend on how well we learn to wield the weapon

PHUKET: A signboard stowed away in a corner of Phuket Airport informs that hippies will be deported and provides an amusingly detailed description of standard hippie features. Tourism in Thailand has matured since the early days of providing rest and recuperation to the US soldiers in Vietnam, and the raunchy mass tourism associated with the sex trade. With over 19 million tourists a year and a fast growing number of Chinese and Russians, Thailand has to manage great numbers of visitors, while eyeing the neighbouring competition from Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam.

Once a year, I allow myself to indulge being a tourist for a week or two. I fly down to Phuket to hang out on the beach during the off season. The point is to get away and not do much more than get up late, swim, go for a massage and eat good food.

Naiharn beach is small and relatively quiet. The best place to eat is the Coconut Café, a covered deck with a dozen tables and a beautiful view of the beach. The café has supposedly not changed over the last two decades and serves exquisite food at very reasonable prices. It is right next to the Armani Tailors, run by a gentleman of Nepali origin. These places do not really reflect how facilities and infrastructure for tourism has practically defaced Phuket Island, with little authentic quality remaining.

A standard argument for preserving cultural heritage seems to be to earn money from tourists that should come in hordes to visit the exquisite sites. According to World Tourism Organisation statistics, the tourism industry contributes to approximately five per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) worldwide with some smaller economies depending on tourism for up to 25 per cent of their GDP. The trend shows growth of over three per cent. The worldwide international tourist arrivals have practically reached one billion.

International tourism receipts surpassed one trillion US dollars in 2011. It is estimated that six to seven per cent of jobs worldwide are directly or indirectly linked to tourism. These impressive statistics, however, naturally raise concerns about impact of fast-growing tourism on cultural and natural heritage.

In the recently completed second cycle of periodic reporting on the implementation of

the World Heritage Convention in Asia and the Pacific, site managers were asked to comment on factors affecting their heritage. One of the most prominent factors considered to have both negative and a positive impact on World Heritage was tourism and the related infrastructure

development, accommodations, including interpretation and visitor facilities. The positive factors are the income and prestige which comes with promoting and sustaining the heritage sites. On the other hand, many activities can cause physical damage, loss of ambience, spoil the environment and the surrounding context and even alienate the local community.

Nepal is dependent on tourism, and is thus fervently marketed with beautiful images:

naturally Nepal. The idea is that we must increase the tourist numbers. Visit Nepal years are announced. Has any consideration been given on carrying capacity of our sites, the quality of tourism and required management? Is Nepal really ready for even one million tourists? The consequences of the double-edged sword can be either favourable or unfavourable; it all depends on how well we learn to wield the weapon.

Sourced: thehimalayantimes