Graham raises the issue of how different socio-economic and cultural
groups interpret sustainability- but there is also the moot point of
how they interpret tourism! In particular, recommendations for
small-scale, alternative tourism as a pro-poor strategy for enhancing
local livelihoods in developing countries may be dangerously
ethnocentric. We know very little about the characteristics of
domestic or regional tourism in such areas. Certainly it is very
evident that Chinese domestic tourists have different
attitudes to 'crowding' as we perceive it in Western terms; to the
human manipulation of nature; and to littering. It would be naive to
think that the activities and interests of different types of
tourists do not impinge on one another. Furthermore, domestic
tourists frequently outnumber foreign visitors; in the case of the
south western province of Yunnan in China to the order of 24:1.
We need to understand the context within which tourism,
of whatever type, is set. There may be some degree of complementarity
but, more often than not, the picture is one of conflicts, between
interests, levels and sectors. A better understanding of the
complexities of these relationships is essential before we can
ascertain the role of tourism in development. Which form of tourism
has what sort of implications for improved local livelihoods? How
does tourism fit into the general development scenario at local,
regional and national levels? How about global/local relationships?
If we approach tourism in isolation we will be working in a
vacuum....
Erlet Cater,
Department of Geography, University of Reading
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|