MASS TOURISM – WHERE TO NOW?
Reading Time: 3 minutes
The availability of inexpensive and readily accessible travel for leisure and tourism appear to be endangering cultures, sights, artefacts, fauna and the flora that motivate such travel.Mass tourism may also be accused of accelerating the impact of globalisation and by so doing diminishing and slowly eradicating the very differences that distinguish popular tourist destinations.
It could be said that it is time to stop and ask – Is present day tourism a case of “too much of a good thing”? Are we destroying the wonders of the world because too many of us are able to appreciation them first hand?
Spurred on by a South Pacific islands cruise, I write this opinion piece, identifying some of the many issues raised by contemporary mass tourism, and suggesting that the answers are unknown or at best unclear.
We visit tourist sites forever changed by the endless streams of visitors, and by local folk and others seeking to cater to or take advantage of business opportunities offered by the tourists. What we see is also sanitised to meet our expectations, and is presented so as to maximise the numbers able to see the attraction.
Even those of us who are not overly fussed with museums, art galleries and monuments, feel the effects of mass tourism in that we are no longer able to fully savour the atmosphere of another culture or observe the locals go about their daily lives, as the local way of life is likely to have been altered significantly by the presence of numerous tourists and by locals whose lives now revolve around catering to tourists.
Observing local teenagers texting whilst walking along a rough road on a largely ‘untouched’ South Pacific Island reminded me that tourism’s conquest and alteration of poorer or smaller cultures tends to be achieved in partnership with globalisation.
The windows of opportunity to observe and visit distinct cultures have been closing rapidly as, for example, those who visited China before the country opened itself to commercial dealings with the world, and those who visited Eastern Europe before it turned itself into a nouvelle riche version of Western Europe, can attest. While in those instances we may blame globalisation,in the case of popular destinations such as Dubrovnik, Rome and Prague – all indistinguishable from Disneyland in high tourist season – it is difficult not to attribute the main cause to tourism.
Can and should we do something about this? If so, what?
Should we accept that the days of classic tourism – in which a tourist visits a culture with few if any of the features of the tourist’s culture – are over? They appear to definitely be over for popular, mass, cheap tourist destinations. Accepting that we cannot turn back the clock is clearly the difficult first step.
We can of course seek out lesser well known destinations, but by doing so we will only ensure that those places will also ultimately fall victim to mass tourism.
While taking steps to restrict or prohibit tourism to affected destinations may serve to preserve them or delay their loss of authenticity, it could also deprive such cultures or inhabitants of the financial benefits of tourism. Would it be arrogant and patronising for us to want to preserve a tourist destination’s way of life, depriving inhabitants of the comforts of 1st world life, and instead asking them to continue role playing aspects of ther traditional life in a manner made attractive to tourists.
In addition, the placement of limits on tourism is bound to also deprive many of the opportunity to see geographic or artistic marvels of the world – even if these wonders are no longer what they were, having become contrived exhibits.
Undoubtedly, localities, cities and entire nations are determined to protect or increase tourism, because it enables them to rise above poverty or because they are financially dependent on it – even if it is at the cost of their traditional way of life being transformed or eradicated. However the residents of some better off location – for example Barcelona – are beginning to call for restrictions on tourism in response to the increasingly recognised toll of tourism on their way of life.
Does the above discussion suggest that we need to distinguish between countries dependant on tourism and those quite capable of cutting back on tourism or of protecting tourist attractions by imposing tourist quotas. Unfortunately, the latter would be likely to once again make tourism a pastime available to the moneyed, while the former would subject countries less able to regulate mass tourism and protect their attractions and way of life.
Then again, many tourists simply want to be able to say that they’ve been to the Trevi fountain.
(Visited 8 times, 1 visits today)