Context

Tourism accounts for a significant, and growing, proportion of gross global product: an
estimated 10.6% in 1996. In that year, 595 million trips were made abroad (an increase of
5.5% on 1995 and 77% on 1986). By 2010, an estimated 937 million trips will be made.
Total (direct and indirect) spending totalled $3.6 trillion, supporting at least 10% of global
employment. However, fears about the costs of tourism increasingly focus on the
environmental damage done to especially popular honeypot sites as well as the economic
fragility of dependence on tourist income. Since the Brundtland Report and the Rio
Summit, the concept of sustainable tourism (that which does not cause long term
environmental damage) has been focused upon, along with fashionable, but
environmentally ambiguous ecotourism. Key organisations such as the World Tourism
Organisation and the World Travel and Tourism Council try to develop contacts between
different members of the tourism market, to reconcile their competing interests.
Arguments
Pros

Cons

Tourism vastly increases income to a particular

area or country, not only via direct spending
but also through taxation and the purchase of
luxury goods which creates a larger market
than would be possible with purely local
spending. In many less developed countries
tourism acts as an alternative to cash crops,
improving terms of trade and creating a more
diversified economic base.

International tourism in particular may increase

short-term returns, but at the cost of a
dependence on the vagaries of fashions. A
single climatic disaster, such as a hurricane, or
a crime wave (as in South Africa), or terrorist
attack (such as that at Luxor in 1997, where 58
tourists were attacked) will mean the market
quickly collapses. Even without this, changing
trends will mean tourist tastes shift every few
years.

Revenue received from tourists can be

reinvested in improving otherwise poorly
funded infrastructure, both in areas visited and
in the rest of the country too.

Often large sums of money are needed to

attract tourists, so significant capital investment
may be wasted (as in Jeju in South Korea,
which is spending $3.6b over ten years). The
spending is concentrated in resorts rather than
spread across the country, or being put into
providing for basic needs.

The multiplier effect of spending works

through the economy to sustain levels of
employment and increase labour market
flexibility. If local people are employed in the
industry then they are more likely to accept the
demands tourists make.

Many hotels are part of large international

chains, choosing to exploit local labour purely
because it is cheap. It is hard to get banks to
lend money to set up smaller hotels as the
investments are seen as too risky, and so
artificially high interest rates deter investment
or competition.

The recent trend of ecotourism can provide

benefits to serious research, such as in Belize
where tourist divers collect information for
scientists (with a similar project regarding
Australian whale sharks). Governments not
otherwise inclined to protect such species will
have a financial incentive as well as a moral
imperative to do so if tourists encourage it.

So-called ecotourism is as unsustainable as

other forms, given the lack (apart from in
Australia) of an accepted system of
accreditation. Ecotourism can entail anything
from a sincere attempt to maintain the
ecosystem to a packaged imitation of real
wildlife/culture. Ironically, the attractions of
unspoilt countryside are ruined by ever more
visitors: tourism is a good example of classic
market failure, where the social costs are paid
by those receiving few, if any, of the benefits.

Carried out in the right way, tourism may not

conflict with conservation. In York,
maintaining geographical separation between
old and new buildings and refusing planning
permission for certain heights of offices
prevents architectural vandalism. Similar care
has been taken on parts of the Sinai coast. In

It is not purely ecosystems which are damaged

by the pressure of consumption (e.g. by sewage
output or pressure on water resources), but also
ancient monuments or heritage sites. Millions
of feet have eroded paths in the Peak District
and the Great Wall of China. Cheaply
constructed concrete hotels are unsympathetic

fact, artificial imitations in Las Vegas or to the architectural vernacular. Furthermore,

Disneyworld serve to ease the pressure on noise pollution derives from clubs and bars
original areas.
provided for tourists.
There is a longstanding didactic tradition
within tourism, which widens cultural
knowledge and understanding across areas. It is
possible to re-brand an area, such as Las Vegas,
away from a negative image of gambling to a
positive family orientated marketing strategy.

Tourism demands that an area conform to a

certain stereotyped image, often preventing
modernisation or development, or requiring the
local inhabitants to make a caricature of their
own culture. Local hostility is already turning
to litigation over the issues of access to private
beaches, diving areas, water and grazing land.

The numbers of tourists will continue to rise

due to cheaper travel and greater access to
previously closed countries anyway so it is
better to try to provide facilities for them than
to allow unlimited access.

The increased size of the industry is currently

unsustainable. Infrastructure, and in particular
airspace, is already unable to cope with the
amount of journeys demanded so ways must
be found by which to reduce tourists
artificially.