Monday, February 25, 2008
Caluclating your Tourist Footprint
Forbidden destinations for Americans have been all over the news recently. Cuba's had a change in leadership at the very top. North Korea is opening up Pyongyang to the New York Philharmonic. These countries which, like many others, have had a genuinely poor record of human rights and afford their population a significant lack of freedom. Although the governments are oppressive and generally undemocratic, the allure of these relatively undiscovered and truly and completely foreign lands is undeniable. Although these countries are difficult (and generally illegal) to visit, it is possible, provided the cash and the willingness to jump through a few hoops are there.
But is it right to spend your money in these places? Will your hard-earned dollars go to feeding the masses? Or will it just strengthen the ruling cadre in Country X? There's an ethical equation involved here.
"Ecological Footprint" is a term that is bandied about a lot these days. Referring to the sustainability of your lifestyle or action, determining a "footprint" can be a good guide to determining whether the positives outweigh the negatives in a certain situation. The time may have come to look at the "Tourist Footprint" that travelers leave after a visit.
The "Tourist Footprint" is probably difficult to calculate. One visit may not accumulate to much in the broad scheme of things but it might lead to a number of different things. So when making plans for the next exotic destination, there are some things worth considering.
1. Who Does the Trip Benefit?
Some countries have strict rules for travel. By limiting the contact a tourist has with ordinary citizens, there are limits to where that dollar goes. Most of the money spent probably goes straight to a government that might be repressive to its people, or discriminates against people in a way that might not jibe with your points of view. The few hundred dollars that one person might spend may not amount to a whole lot, all things considering, but it is the principle. Better to miss out on a rare experience than support something awful in the process.
2. Where Does the Money Go?
When staying at a new destination, does the money stay in the economy? Or does it line the pockets of someone overseas? For example, in Managua, Nicaragua, you can stay at the Intercontinental Hotel or you might decide to stay at the Backpacker's Inn Hostel. Beyond the obvious differences, the money spent in the hotel is most likely not going to anyone in Managua. The hotel is owned by El Salvadorans and the American chain is getting their slice of the pie. Chances are the only Nicaraguans lining their pockets directly from the money you are spending have a last name of Ortega.
On the other hand, the Backpacker's Inn is a small family style hostel run by a person who funnels profits of his hostel into various development projects in the Managua area. There are also plenty of nice, locally owned and operated hotels and guest houses too.
3. What about the Culture?
So what about the culture? This is probably a more esoteric measure. The more someplace gets frequented by tourism, the more a culture caters to it... even if the taste of that culture moves on to something less colloquial and more cosmopolitan. There's a trade off here. The more other people visit another area, the less unique that culture becomes. As our world has grown smaller, the differences between many places shrink and shrink. In many ways, a day in Chicago isn't different than a day in New York. This wasn't the case forty years ago. But cross pollenation has made us more the same, even if there still are differences to celebrate.
Learning is a part of travel. But teaching is too. What a tourist learns about a new culture, he often teaches as much about his own to the people he meets on the road. That thought alone keeps me from reverting to the Ugly American role when things get a bit hairy somewhere.
All in all, this is an easy lesson to learn and even easier to forget. Actions have consequences, positive and negative. By figuring out the "tourist footprint," it is a lot easier to remember that even on vacation, everything has an effect. Personally, I feel that being conscious of it only makes the travel experience more rewarding.
But is it right to spend your money in these places? Will your hard-earned dollars go to feeding the masses? Or will it just strengthen the ruling cadre in Country X? There's an ethical equation involved here.
"Ecological Footprint" is a term that is bandied about a lot these days. Referring to the sustainability of your lifestyle or action, determining a "footprint" can be a good guide to determining whether the positives outweigh the negatives in a certain situation. The time may have come to look at the "Tourist Footprint" that travelers leave after a visit.
The "Tourist Footprint" is probably difficult to calculate. One visit may not accumulate to much in the broad scheme of things but it might lead to a number of different things. So when making plans for the next exotic destination, there are some things worth considering.
1. Who Does the Trip Benefit?
Some countries have strict rules for travel. By limiting the contact a tourist has with ordinary citizens, there are limits to where that dollar goes. Most of the money spent probably goes straight to a government that might be repressive to its people, or discriminates against people in a way that might not jibe with your points of view. The few hundred dollars that one person might spend may not amount to a whole lot, all things considering, but it is the principle. Better to miss out on a rare experience than support something awful in the process.
2. Where Does the Money Go?
When staying at a new destination, does the money stay in the economy? Or does it line the pockets of someone overseas? For example, in Managua, Nicaragua, you can stay at the Intercontinental Hotel or you might decide to stay at the Backpacker's Inn Hostel. Beyond the obvious differences, the money spent in the hotel is most likely not going to anyone in Managua. The hotel is owned by El Salvadorans and the American chain is getting their slice of the pie. Chances are the only Nicaraguans lining their pockets directly from the money you are spending have a last name of Ortega.
On the other hand, the Backpacker's Inn is a small family style hostel run by a person who funnels profits of his hostel into various development projects in the Managua area. There are also plenty of nice, locally owned and operated hotels and guest houses too.
3. What about the Culture?
So what about the culture? This is probably a more esoteric measure. The more someplace gets frequented by tourism, the more a culture caters to it... even if the taste of that culture moves on to something less colloquial and more cosmopolitan. There's a trade off here. The more other people visit another area, the less unique that culture becomes. As our world has grown smaller, the differences between many places shrink and shrink. In many ways, a day in Chicago isn't different than a day in New York. This wasn't the case forty years ago. But cross pollenation has made us more the same, even if there still are differences to celebrate.
Learning is a part of travel. But teaching is too. What a tourist learns about a new culture, he often teaches as much about his own to the people he meets on the road. That thought alone keeps me from reverting to the Ugly American role when things get a bit hairy somewhere.
All in all, this is an easy lesson to learn and even easier to forget. Actions have consequences, positive and negative. By figuring out the "tourist footprint," it is a lot easier to remember that even on vacation, everything has an effect. Personally, I feel that being conscious of it only makes the travel experience more rewarding.
Labels: effects of travel, philosophy of travel, travel
Roger, 3:07 PM
