An ethical debate that has challenged the tourism industry for decades remains controversial, but is full of nuance and multiple perspectives worth considering.
I always find this conversation so interesting. I’ve talked about the commodification of Ethiopian culture with people within our community. I worry about the lengths we’re going to change our food for western consumption, or seeing more and more white tourists in Addis Ababa — and those worries are completely discarded by those who live in or grew up there, in lieu of the money that commodification brings. In fact, I’ve even been scolded for not wanting to “share” with others.
Right now, the cultural tradition is still very strong, albeit younger people would rather buy American brands than their own. I’ve often been curious about the “point of no return,” or the point in which perception on the issue changes.
As a former Costa Rican hotel owner, we hoped to provide our guests with local experiences and culture. The quote from the Leo DiCaprio movie resonated with me “We all travel thousands of miles just to watch TV and check in somewhere with all the comforts of home.” We had many guests who wanted to watch Tv (our hotel didn’t have any), and some who didn’t care that a sloth or monkey or toucan was right in front of them but they wanted their comforts of home with a new view. I travel to learn something, or be amazed by our beautiful world or connect with cultures different than what I know, but many it seems don’t feel the same. No judgement just different.
Great post. I see tourism growth as just another economic activity that brings with it positives and negatives. Locals gain increased economic opportunities. Not everyone benefits. The retiree living on a fixed income may prefer the previous quiet and lower costs. In the rankings of community growth opportunities, I'd rather see my town develop tourism than build a coal fired power plant.
It's such a conundrum. Imho I do not see a clearcut answer. As the Karkauer comment and the sherpas, yes, they did want extra income to upgrade their lifestyles. The irony is, it always seems to get pushed just a little too far. I'll use MX's Riviera Maya as an example bc I've seen how things evolved. (rather horribly I'm sorry to say). Over-tourism is the only way to describe it. Mangroves have continuously been filled to create more 700-1000 room mega all-inclusive, often chains, from various nations. Initially in our small pueblo, in 1998 Quintana Roo, the 31st state of MX, a territory until 1974, state environmental edicts required hotels in RivMaya to be 'no taller than a palm tree.' That went out the window within 2 years when a very sweet 100 room boutique hotel just out of town went to 3 floors, then 4. Thank god the MesoAmerican Reef was saved, by presidential decree during Calderon's time. A friend, news reporter, would stalk the construction sites in our town, where the premises were chainlink fenced off to all except employees, and at night, Halogen lights were used to fill the mangroves so daytime state employees who checked on environmental standards didn't see in the making. Tulum is just a whisper of what it was--bad quality water -potable and in the nearby ocean as Airbnb and small hotels flush directly into the ocean. Sorry, even though people say, oh, let's have restrictions, money and poverty usually override the 'nonsense' of those quaint ideas. Not to be Debbie Downer, but we did see a pristine wilderness, and were in awe of it. Thirty yrs has changed it. Our friend, a professor at UNAM, water sciences, Pto Morelos, told us decades ago-it's all starting out as 5 star hotels, just wait, in time it will be 1 stars and every tourist in the world will want to come. He was right.
Great insights; reminds me of reading John Krakauer’s insights from his book as I was trekking in Nepal and talking to our guides.
I always find this conversation so interesting. I’ve talked about the commodification of Ethiopian culture with people within our community. I worry about the lengths we’re going to change our food for western consumption, or seeing more and more white tourists in Addis Ababa — and those worries are completely discarded by those who live in or grew up there, in lieu of the money that commodification brings. In fact, I’ve even been scolded for not wanting to “share” with others.
Right now, the cultural tradition is still very strong, albeit younger people would rather buy American brands than their own. I’ve often been curious about the “point of no return,” or the point in which perception on the issue changes.
As a former Costa Rican hotel owner, we hoped to provide our guests with local experiences and culture. The quote from the Leo DiCaprio movie resonated with me “We all travel thousands of miles just to watch TV and check in somewhere with all the comforts of home.” We had many guests who wanted to watch Tv (our hotel didn’t have any), and some who didn’t care that a sloth or monkey or toucan was right in front of them but they wanted their comforts of home with a new view. I travel to learn something, or be amazed by our beautiful world or connect with cultures different than what I know, but many it seems don’t feel the same. No judgement just different.
Reminds me of a 1986 Joe Jackson lyric:
"This really is a pretty scene
Could you ask your kid to smile please
Sorry what exactly do you mean
… Can you say it in English"
That whole Big World album, especially Shanghai Sky, is actually a big influence on the way I think about travel.
Great post. I see tourism growth as just another economic activity that brings with it positives and negatives. Locals gain increased economic opportunities. Not everyone benefits. The retiree living on a fixed income may prefer the previous quiet and lower costs. In the rankings of community growth opportunities, I'd rather see my town develop tourism than build a coal fired power plant.
It's such a conundrum. Imho I do not see a clearcut answer. As the Karkauer comment and the sherpas, yes, they did want extra income to upgrade their lifestyles. The irony is, it always seems to get pushed just a little too far. I'll use MX's Riviera Maya as an example bc I've seen how things evolved. (rather horribly I'm sorry to say). Over-tourism is the only way to describe it. Mangroves have continuously been filled to create more 700-1000 room mega all-inclusive, often chains, from various nations. Initially in our small pueblo, in 1998 Quintana Roo, the 31st state of MX, a territory until 1974, state environmental edicts required hotels in RivMaya to be 'no taller than a palm tree.' That went out the window within 2 years when a very sweet 100 room boutique hotel just out of town went to 3 floors, then 4. Thank god the MesoAmerican Reef was saved, by presidential decree during Calderon's time. A friend, news reporter, would stalk the construction sites in our town, where the premises were chainlink fenced off to all except employees, and at night, Halogen lights were used to fill the mangroves so daytime state employees who checked on environmental standards didn't see in the making. Tulum is just a whisper of what it was--bad quality water -potable and in the nearby ocean as Airbnb and small hotels flush directly into the ocean. Sorry, even though people say, oh, let's have restrictions, money and poverty usually override the 'nonsense' of those quaint ideas. Not to be Debbie Downer, but we did see a pristine wilderness, and were in awe of it. Thirty yrs has changed it. Our friend, a professor at UNAM, water sciences, Pto Morelos, told us decades ago-it's all starting out as 5 star hotels, just wait, in time it will be 1 stars and every tourist in the world will want to come. He was right.