The Impact of Tourism on Indigenous Communities - Essay Example

The Impact of Tourism on Indigenous Communities According to the World Tourism Organization (WTO), 2005, 698 million people traveled to a foreign country in 2000, spending more US$ 478 billion. International tourism receipts combined with passenger transport currently total more than US$ 575 billion - making tourism the world's number one export earner, ahead of automotive products, chemicals, petroleum and food. There are countless types of tourism, which should be defined before deciding which ones cause the most harm. There are tourists who are merely back packing tourists who move in with the locals and then go on their way, they do not usually have an environmental or social impact on the surrounding communities (Forsyth 1996). However in the mass tourism trade, large hotels are built, theme parks are developed, etc, all of which can impact the people who usually live in the areas, this can increase or decrease employment, and then can affect the development of the land. For example, as according to the Austrian Preparatory Conference for the International Year of Ecotourism (APCIYE), 2001, the development of national parks, such as the Lake Rara National Park in Nepal. This resulted in the re-placement of four hundred villagers, the Chhhetri people, from their native land. This movement was fueled by tourism and the people who are the land’s natural inhabitants did not have right to say no. However, in Ecuador, the Tambopata reserve integrates the people who inhabit the forests and the forest area itself for outsiders to observe. The main problems of this type of commercial tourism, by creating national park, this creates new incentives for individuals to move into the areas, cut down more of the land, or claim status to live. Furthermore, creating a park creates to dilemma of what should and should not be included as concluded by APCIYE, 2001. The impact of tourism on indigenous communities can often be destructive because tribal and minority groups in developing countries are often targeted as objects to be looked at instead of people (Neale 1999). For example, according to WTO, 2005, for the people in Masai in Kenya, who live near safari parks, the natives themselves have not benefited from the tourists themselves. The Masai were presented as part of the “safari’ package and tourists were invited to observe their lifestyle, which many anthropologists refer to as “staged authenticity,” where people expect to see the exotic, remote, and new, given they have traveled a long distance (Forsyth 2002). Though it doesn’t necessarily mean that the people visiting are causing harm to the natives, however it can increase the barriers between the minority and majority groups who live in the country as a whole. This view is supported by APCIYE, 2001. In Thailand, the majority of the tribes are found in the northern part of the countryhave migrated from the southern part of China over one hundred years earlier. The six major tribes, the Karen, Hmong, Yao, Lisu, Lawa, and Akha have managed to preserve their way if life and distinctive cultures but are visited by tourists in the hilly areas of their habitat (Forsyth 1996). Forsyth (1996) states that the largest attractions are the women from a tribe escaped from Burma decades earlier, who by tradition wear brass coils around their neck. A tradition beginning with young girls before they begin puberty, coils that can weigh up to eleven pounds are used to elongate the neck. This custom has become distorted and objectified as the tourists who hope to catch a glimpse of their way of life arrive by the busloads just to catch a sight of the elongated necked-women. This view has been supported in the work of Forsyth (1999). It is important to remember that there are hidden costs in the tourism industry, which causes a negative impact not only on the people but the country’s economy as well. As Forsyth (2002) states, “rich countries are more likely to profit from tourism than poorer countries, even though these less developed areas have the most urgent need for income, employment, and a need a better standard of living.” The reasoning behind the inability for low-income countries to prosper is that tourism venues are generated not by local business but by external contributors such as the airlines, travel agents, and mass producers of “authentic” souvenirs. This happens because tourists demand standards for food, equipment, and other products that need to be imported, so even if a country makes money from tourists, the cost of importing good to keep customers happy outweighs the revenue generated. These views are supported by Neale (1999). For example, according to Gauzin-Mueller (2006), a study of tourism 'leakage' in Thailand estimated that 70% of all money spent by tourists ended up leaving Thailand (via foreign-owned tour operators, airlines, hotels, imported drinks and food, etc.). Other negative impacts include the infrastructure cost, where tourism can cost the governments a significant amount of money to improve airports, roads, and other areas of travel to make to easier for visitors. According to Gauzin-Mueller (2006) this re-direction of public resources used in areas not important to the inhabitants of the land means less money is spent on education and health. When tourists arrive in remote countries, the demand for basic services and good cause a negative price hike that only affect the locals whose income does not rise, just the cost per item they have to pay. As demonstrated by Patrick Tierney’s (1999) case study, conducted by San Francisco State University, on Belize, the study shows that because of tourism, the prices for locals increased by eight percent on daily goods, such as produce. Some of these impacts can be overlooked, but the fact that many countries’ individuals rely on the tourism industry for jobs. This seems like a steady way to raise income, but if there is an economic recession or natural disasters that effect the flux of individuals coming to court, then there is no way to make money. In the case of seasonal workers, there is no guarantee of employment, which leads to insecurity in medical benefits, housing, and supporting a family (Tierney). Though it appears that the impact of tourism is beneficial to any community by generating plenty of income, the reality is, the negative impact that the industry has on low-income economies outweighs the positive (Neale 1999). The inhabitants of the land are either gawked at or find work based on the temperament of outsiders. The land is altered and defaced, imports that a country cannot necessarily afford are purchased, and attractions are built in order to make it more pleasant for visitors. However despite all the effort an indigenous community makes to improve their economy, that economy will always be dependant on if a tourists will consider the location exotic enough to spend their money, WTO, 2005. Perhaps the largest impact tourist has is it’s unruly and unpredictable temperament. References Austrian Preparatory Conference for the International Year of Ecotourism, 2001. The International Year of Ecotourism (IYE) and the International Year of Mountains (IYM). Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour: Vienna. Forsyth, Tim, 1996. Sustainable tourism: Moving from theory to practice. uk: World Wildlife Fund and Tourism Concern Forsyth, Tim, 1999. International investment and climate change. London: Earthscan. Forsyth, Tim, 2002. Critical political ecology: The politics of environmental science. London: Routledge. Gauzin-Mueller, Dominique, 2006. Sustainable Living: 25 international examples. Birkhase Basel. Neale, Greg, 1999. The green travel guide. London: Earthscan. Tierney, Patrick, 1999. Visitor and merchant perceptions of Belize tourism: A multi-year comparison of two destinations. Congress on recreation and Resource Capacity, 9 September. World Tourism Organization, 2005. Tourism market trends 2004-world overview & tourism topics. World Tourism Organization. Read More