4 - Tourism

Although I’ve begun these reflections by contrasting the difference in perception between visitors and residents of Southern Countries, it is not my intention to criticize tourism per se. I simply wish to note that tourists often do not have an opportunity to get a sense of the actual conditions prevalent in the countries they visit—any more than visitors to Canada would necessarily be conscious of social problems in our country.

The estimate is that on average some 400,000 Canadians travel to the Dominican Republic each winter. This is a sizeable group, but one whose experience of the country is often very limited. While a few may seek adventure holidays or even political-awareness holidays, most visitors have moderate incomes and make financial sacrifices in order to have an experience they hope will be refreshing and reinvigorating. It is unreasonable to expect them to do a social analysis of conditions prevalent in the country they visit. But it is also unreasonable to expect them to be very knowledgeable about the conditions in those countries simply because they spent a couple of weeks there.

Tourism has become the world’s largest industry, and many assume that it must necessarily make a significant contribution to the economies of the countries visited, thus benefiting the residents of those countries. That is just not the case. The reality is that many of the tours arranged for visitors to Southern countries are “all-inclusive packages” in which perhaps 80% of the traveler’s fees go to northern-based airlines, hotel chains, and other international companies rather than to locally based businesses and workers.

The all-inclusive package also means that the visitor has little direct contact with the population of the visited country. Resorts are often isolated and contain within their walls all the goods and services their customers require. Visits to local markets are done by bus excursion under supervised conditions. Patrons can even be warned that it is “dangerous” for them to leave the precinct of the resort area.

Tourism certainly has the potential to benefit Southern nations, but unfortunately that potential, by and large, has not been realized. As a result, tourism ministries in countries which are popular winter vacation destinations have even complained about the detrimental effects of tourism: increased local crime, begging, substance abuse, prostitution, and greater economic disparity. Many low-income communities have lost land, water, and access to public places in order to benefit tourists. Even tours marketed as “ecological” are often destructive of wildlife habitats.

Some years ago, in an attempt to combat the negative impacts that tourism can have on host communities and environments, a number of non-governmental organizations advocated what they called “Culturally and Environmentally Appropriate Travel and Tourism.” This would have been a tourism designed specifically to conserve and protect natural resources, respect local cultures, and benefit the residents in the communities visited by supporting local business and workers, choosing locally owned and operated accommodations, transportation, and guides. It would have been roughly the equivalent of a “fair trade” product for the tourism industry.

I don’t see much evidence that this effort has been successful. Today the idea of “eco-friendly tourism” has been appropriated as a marketing term. There may be examples of “culturally and environmentally” friendly packaged tours, but the consumer should be advised that simply calling something “environmentally responsible” does not ensure the product actually is so.

On the other hand, it is a relatively easy thing to make use of local guides, accommodations, and eating establishments. It is at least worthwhile keeping in mind that one’s choices as a tourist are broader than simply the destination one chooses to visit.