Article by Eamonn Fitzgerald on November 11, 2011

The first count of the global vote to elect the New7Wonders of Nature has been announced. In alphabetical order, they are: Amazon, Halong Bay, Iguazu Falls, Jeju Island, Komodo, Puerto Princesa Underground River and Table Mountain.

Announcing the results at the headquarters of the New7Wonders Foundation in Zurich, Switzerland, Bernard Weber, Founder-President of New7Wonders, said: “I would like to thank the many champions, citizens, voluntary organisations, public bodies and governments that have helped promote the New7Wonders of Nature campaign over the past four years, starting with over 440 locations from over 220 countries and all the way to the 28 Finalist candidates from whom the New7Wonders of Nature have been chosen.”

The results announced this evening are provisional and based on the first count of votes completed since voting ended at 11:11 GMT this morning. The results will now be checked, validated and independently verified. Once the voting validation process is completed, in early 2012, New7Wonders will then work with the confirmed winners to organise the Official Inauguration events.

Note: It may happen that one or more of the provisional winners announced today will not be confirmed during the validation process, New7Wonders will issue a media update should this happen.

“We congratulate each of these participants on achieving their provisional New7Wonders of Nature status, and look forward to completing the confirmation process to celebrate each one in their own Official Inauguration ceremony early in 2012,” said Bernard Weber, adding, “When the New7Wonders of Nature are confirmed they will join the man-made New 7 Wonders of the World in becoming part of Global Memory for humankind for ever.”

Read more about the New 7 wonders of nature ,

This article is quoted from New7Wonders , read the original article here posted on the 11th of November 2011.

The article is uploaded by Majbritt Thomsen, administrator on ‘Views On Tourism’. Please join the online Views On Tourism network and discussion group in order to achieve personal goals as well as encourage a sustainable tourism development in Bangladesh and South Asia. Read more about this group and how to become a member here.

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

GDP: Direct Contribution
The direct contribution of Travel &Tourism to GDP is expected to be USD86.9bn (4.2% of total GDP) in 2011, rising by 6.4% pa to USD161.7bn (4.4%) in 2021 (in constant 2011 prices).

GDP: Total Contribution
The total contribution of Travel &Tourism to GDP, including its wider economic impacts, is forecast to rise by 6.1% pa from USD223.5bn (10.9% of GDP) in 2011 to USD405.9bn (11.4%) by 2021.

Employment: Direct Contribution
Travel & Tourism is expected to support directly 8,928,000 jobs (3.1% of total employment) in 2011, rising by 3.1% pa to 12,080,000 jobs (3.6%) by 2021.

Employment: Total Contribution
The total contribution of Travel & Tourism to employment, including jobs indirectly supported by the industry, is forecast to rise by 2.6% pa from 25,854,000 jobs (9.1% of total employment) in 2011 to 33,439,000 jobs (9.9%) by 2021.

Visitor Exports
Travel & Tourism visitor exports are expected to generate USD76.1bn (5.6% of total exports) in 2011, growing by 8.2% pa (in nominal terms) to USD148.8bn (5.4%) in 2021.

Investment
Travel & Tourism investment is estimated at USD45.4bn or 8.2% of total investment in 2011. It should rise by 7.8% pa to reach USD95.0bn (or 8.4%) of total investment in 2021.

World ranking (out of 12 regions):
Relative importance of Travel & Tourism’s total contribution to GDP
• 6 ABSOLUTE size
• 4 RELATIVE contribution to national economy
• 2 GROWTH forecast

The South East Asia Region includes Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand,Vietnam

Download the Travel & Tourism report on South East Asia here

About WTTC
The World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) is the forum for business leaders in the Travel & Tourism industry. With Chief Executives of some one hundred of the world’s leading Travel & Tourism companies as its Members, WTTC has a unique mandate and overview on all matters related to Travel & Tourism.
WTTC works to raise awareness of Travel & Tourism as one of the world’s largest industries, supporting more than 258 million jobs and generating 9.1 per cent of world GDP.

This article is quoted from WTTC . Follow the links and get an overview of 2011 WTTC region reports or country reports.

This article is uploaded by Majbritt Thomsen, administrator on ‘Views On Tourism’. Photos from Vietnam by Casper Magnussen.

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

GDP: Direct Contribution
The direct contribution of Travel &Tourism to GDP is expected to be USD523.0bn (2.7% of total GDP) in 2011, rising by 5.9% pa to USD953.4bn (2.8%) in 2021 (in constant 2011 prices).

GDP: Total Contribution
The total contribution of Travel &Tourism to GDP, including its wider economic impacts, is forecast to rise by 5.8% pa from USD1,607.4bn (8.2% of GDP) in 2011 to USD2,903.3bn (8.7%) by 2021.

Employment: Direct Contribution
Travel & Tourism is expected to support directly 63,891,000 jobs (3.5% of total employment) in 2011, rising by 1.9% pa to 77,502,000 jobs (3.7%) by 2021.

Employment: Total Contribution
The total contribution of Travel & Tourism to employment, including jobs indirectly supported by the industry, is forecast to rise by 2.4% pa from 145,802,000 jobs (7.9% of total employment) in 2011 to 184,709,000 jobs (8.9%) by 2021.

Visitor Exports
Travel & Tourism visitor exports are expected to generate USD288.6bn (4.3% of total exports) in 2011, growing by 8.3%pa (in nominal terms) to USD496.2bn (3.6%) in 2021.

Investment
Travel & Tourism investment is estimated at USD247.5bn or 4.1% of total investment in 2011. It should rise by 6.7% pa to reach USD482.0bn (or 4.1%) of total investment in 2021.

The Asia Pacific Region includes South Asia, Southeast Asia, Northeast Asia and Oceania. Download the Travel & Tourism report on Asia Pacific here

About WTTC
The World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) is the forum for business leaders in the Travel & Tourism industry. With Chief Executives of some one hundred of the world’s leading Travel & Tourism companies as its Members, WTTC has a unique mandate and overview on all matters related to Travel & Tourism.
WTTC works to raise awareness of Travel & Tourism as one of the world’s largest industries, supporting more than 258 million jobs and generating 9.1 per cent of world GDP.

This article is quoted from WTTC .
Follow the links and get an overview of 2011 WTTC region reports or country reports.

This article is uploaded by Majbritt Thomsen, administrator on ‘Views On Tourism’. Photos from Thailand by Casper Magnussen.

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

GDP: Direct ContributionThe direct contribution of Travel &Tourism to GDP is expected to be USD483.2bn (2.8% of total GDP) in 2011, rising by 6.6% pa to USD920.6bn (2.7%) in 2021 (in constant 2011 prices).

GDP: Total Contribution
The total contribution of Travel &Tourism to GDP, including its wider economic impacts, is forecast to rise by 6.8% pa from USD1,397.4bn (8.0% of GDP) in 2011 to USD2,727.3bn (8.4%) by 2021.

Employment: Direct Contribution
Travel & Tourism is expected to support directly 66,750,000 jobs (3.4% of total employment) in 2011, rising by 1.9% pa to 80,264,000 jobs (3.6%) by 2021.

Employment: Total Contribution
The total contribution of Travel & Tourism to employment, including jobs indirectly supported by the industry, is forecast to rise by 2.3% pa from 153,719,000 jobs (7.7% of total employment) in 2011 to 192,905,000 jobs (8.6%) by 2021.

Visitor Exports
Travel & Tourism visitor exports are expected to generate USD184.4bn (3.8% of total exports) in 2011, growing by 9.5%pa (in nominal terms) to USD315.8bn (3.2%) in 2021.

Investment
Travel & Tourism investment is estimated at USD216.2bn or 3.9% of total investment in 2011. It should rise by 7.5% pa to reach USD447.0bn (or 3.9%) of total investment in 2021.

BRICs and N11s Region includes the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China) and the N11s (Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Phillippines South Korea, Turkey, Vietnam)
Download the Travel & Tourism report on BRICs and N11 Economic Impact Report here

About WTTC
The World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) is the forum for business leaders in the Travel & Tourism industry. With Chief Executives of some one hundred of the world’s leading Travel & Tourism companies as its Members, WTTC has a unique mandate and overview on all matters related to Travel & Tourism.
WTTC works to raise awareness of Travel & Tourism as one of the world’s largest industries, supporting more than 258 million jobs and generating 9.1 per cent of world GDP.

This article is quoted from WTTC . Follow this link to read the original article and download the tourism report on 2011 BRICs and N11 Economic Impact Report here.
Get an overview of all the region reports from WTTC here

This article is uploaded by Majbritt Thomsen, administrator on ‘Views On Tourism’.

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

The positive momentum of the previous months held strong for Southeast Asia, which led the region with 15.5% growth during the month of June. The rebound in arrivals to Thailand (+54%) positively impacted this overall result, strongly supported by the other reporting destinations in this sub-region all of which enjoyed double-digit growth. This in turn was supported by strong travel demand within ASEAN and an increase in arrivals from China.

International arrivals growth to South Asia was a robust 12% in June, boosted by double-digit increases in inbound numbers to Nepal (+38%), the Maldives (+27%) and Sri Lanka (+20%). India maintained the same pace of growth seen in the previous month at 7%. European arrivals are amongst the main contributors to this growth.

Northeast Asia saw an improvement after posting slow growth of 0.6% in May, with a 3.7% increase in arrivals for June 2011. This growth, however, was very unevenly distributed among destinations in the sub-region. Tourism demand to Japan continued to recover, reducing losses in inbound arrivals from -63% in April to -50% in May and -36% in June. Chinese Taipei (-2%) and China (+1%) registered weak results while Hong Kong SAR (+16%), Macau SAR (+15%) and Korea (ROK) (+11%) enjoyed buoyant growth for the month, supported by the key origin market of China.

It should be remembered that even though the percentage growth rate may be relatively weaker than for other sub-regions, the sheer volume of arrivals to Northeast Asia means that 3.7% growth directly translates into more than 600,000 additional arrivals for the month.

International Arrivals to the Pacific recorded an aggregate decline of 4% in June. The main destinations of Australia (-4%) and New Zealand (-10%) showed significant decreases compared to the corresponding period last year. This downturn was caused – in part at least – by the ash cloud disruption to air travel from the Chilean volcano together with the continued effects of the earthquake in Christchurch. Nevertheless, some Pacific Island nations still managed to show positive growth, especially Palau (+63%), Vanuatu (+27%), Tahiti (+19%), Papua New Guinea (+16%), New Caledonia (+11%) and Cook Island (+8%).

January to June 2011
Of the 31 destinations reporting half-year arrivals (January to June 2011), 26 indicted positive growth, with 14 showing double-digit gains. Clear growth leaders over this period were Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Thailand with gains of 37%, 29% and 28% respectively (January to June, year-on-year).

Collectively, these 31 destinations generated growth of 5.3% for the Asia/Pacific region during the first half of 2011. Even with the loss of almost 1.4 million arrivals to Japan, this cluster of destinations collectively not only countered that contraction but managed to add enough additional arrivals to the collective count to post a year-on-year gain of more than eight million international arrivals.

Kris Lim, Director of PATA’s Strategic Intelligence Centre, said: “The first-half year growth of around 5%, given the challenges the industry has faced so far this year underlines the resilience of travel and tourism in the Asia/Pacific region. The comparatively weaker economies of the USA and Europe mean that much of this growth has had to come from intra-regional travel and this in turn has only been possible because of the stronger regional economies and the continued expansion of airline seat capacity within the region.”

Lim added that at the current rate of growth, overall arrivals to the region will push to the 433 million mark by the end of the year, up from 408 million last year. The majority of the Asia/Pacific destinations will once again look at record numbers of arrivals, led by South Asia and Southeast Asia destinations in terms of percentage growth.

“While European arrivals remain key to South Asia’s growth, Southeast Asia will be driven by the rapidly growing China and India outbound markets while Northeast Asia is expected to see strong gains in arrivals from Southeast Asia driven by the steadily growing LCC network,” said Lim.

1)Asia/Pacific is defined as including the following sub-regions for the purposes of press releases:

For more market trends and insights, please visit www.pata.org/sub-regional-trends-2011

-ENDS-

Issued by:PATA Communications,
Bangkok, Thailand.
Tel: +66 2 658 2000
E-mail: communications@PATA.org
Online newsroom: www.pata.org/Press
Follow PATA on Twitter and Facebook

About PATA
The Pacific Asia Travel Association (PATA) is a not-for profit membership association that acts as a catalyst for the responsible development of travel and tourism within the Asia Pacific region. This year, PATA is proud to celebrate 60 dynamic years of developing responsible tourism.

In partnership with private and public sector members, PATA enhances the sustainable growth, value and quality of travel and tourism to-from-and-within, the region. The Association provides leadership and counsel on an individual and collective basis to over 80 government, state and city tourism bodies; nearly 50 international airlines, airports and cruise lines and many hundreds of travel industry companies across the Asia Pacific region and beyond. Thousands of travel professionals belong to 39 active PATA chapters worldwide and participate in a wide range of PATA and industry events. PATA’s Strategic Intelligence Centre (SIC) offers unrivalled data and insights including Asia Pacific inbound and outbound statistics, analyses and forecasts as well as in-depth reports on strategic tourism markets. For more information, please visit www.PATA.org

This article is quoted from the newsletter PATAnews from PATA . Follow the green link to read the original article published on 2011.08.31.

This article is uploaded by Majbritt Thomsen, administrator on ‘Views On Tourism’.

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

Thailand: International visitors to Thailand increased 28.1% in the first six months of 2011 to reach close to 9.7-million arrivals. Key growth markets: Saudi Arabia (+84%), China (+68%) and Hong Kong SAR (+59%). Context: a year ago Thailand’s political crisis deterred many visitors. Big growth now reflects the artificially low benchmark of last year.

Australia: There were 386,600 visitor arrivals during May 2011, an increase of 2.7% relative to May 2010. This lifts Australia’s inbound total to close on 2.4% over the first five months of the year, a gain of 1.6%.

India: India welcomed 2.9-million visitor arrivals in the first six months of 2011, a year-on-year growth of 10.9%. Foreign exchange earnings grew 12.1% when measured in local currency and 14.2% when converted to US dollars.

How is your destination performing in an increasingly competitive world? Read more Follow the link to here.

This article is quoted from the Pacific Asia Travel Association (PATA) newsletter July 13 2011.

This article is uploaded by Majbritt Thomsen, administrator on ‘Views On Tourism’.

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

Tourism is a significant industry in these areas, as in many of the world’s poorest countries. It can have important impacts on the livelihoods of the world’s poor, but these impacts are rarely well understood and may often be negative. Strategies for enhancing impacts of tourism on the poor need to be developed.
This requires starting with understanding how different tourism approaches affect local people, how the wide range of costs and benefits are distributed among stakeholders and what factors affect benefits to the poor. However, there is a general lack of information on which to base such an understanding, despite a growing interest in promoting local benefits from tourism, particularly around nature conservation areas.
There are numerous case studies, but they are rarely synthesised to identify common trends, contrasts and explanatory factors. They tend to focus either on economic benefits or on cultural/social damage rather than the full range of livelihood issues, and often ignore issues of distribution within and between local stakeholder groups, particularly impacts on the poor.

This paper therefore aims to pull together evidence from a range of case studies on how tourism developments have affected livelihoods of different groups in a cross-section of tourism locations, and to identify some of the processes and influencing factors involved.
The case studies reviewed here cover a wide range of situations and tourism-related activities, with most focusing on the destination level. Some of the case studies give an in-depth view of what happens within village communities as tourism is introduced or expands. Some focus more on the processes of change, some on identifying impacts. Interventions that have enabled local communities to maximise gains and minimise losses from tourism activities are included though are not prominent. Some case studies deal with specific groups such as vendors and women and provide useful insights into processes and impacts affecting these groups. Given their different scope, methodologies, purposes, timing and scale, strict comparisons are difficult. Nevertheless, some instructive comparisons and contrasts emerge from a review of key points from each.

Given the destination focus of most case studies, issues at the national or regional levels or macro-economic issues are not addressed (with the exception of Nepal). Generally, economic linkages are not well explored in the literature that has been reviewed here, although those that do address linkages highlight their importance. The case studies are also limited in their analysis of private sector impacts, and of tourists’ perceptions and preferences. There is also relatively little information on exclusive resorts and the impact they have on the immediate environment, though research indicates that a whole range of new issues emerge from the development of such resorts. This paper has tried to identify these issues – particularly those that have an important bearing on local communities.
Basic details of each case study are summarised in Table 1: country, location, author, type of tourism, and focus of the study. Section 2 provides a brief description of their findings for each country or destination. Section 3 draws together findings concerning impacts of tourism on different stakeholders in local communities, exploring economic, natural resource, and socio-cultural impacts. It also focuses on distribution and seeks to identify key factors affecting impacts. The discussion draws on analysis of the case studies supplemented by information from a number of other research reports, magazines and newspapers articles. An attempt is made in the final section to draw conclusions and make recommendations for a way forward to maximise gains and minimise losses for the poor.

This article is quoted from Overseas Development. Follow the green link to read the original article, here you can also download the paper published April 200 and written by Authors: Kishore Shah and Vasanti Gupta. Edited by Charlotte Boyd.

The article is uploaded by Majbritt Thomsen, administrator on ‘Views On Tourism’.

Please join the online Views On Tourism network and discussion group in order to achieve personal goals as well as encourage a sustainable tourism development in Bangladesh. Read more about this group and how to become a member here.

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

If you’re not failing every now and again, it’s a sign you’re not doing anything very innovative.” What this quote from Woody Allen underscores is that innovation is not as easy as it may sometimes seem. Perhaps this explains why organisations and countries find it so difficult to systematically stimulate and capitalise on innovation.

Why have we not seen Bangladesh reach the same level of economic development as have Vietnam or South Korea over a similar period of time? The answer to this question partly lies in our ability, or lack thereof, to exploit innovation. But before we can appreciate the role of innovation in the economic growth of a nation, it would be helpful to arrive at a clear understanding of what is innovation.

Innovation is a commonly used buzzword. However, it doesn’t hold the same meaning to everyone. Clayton Christensen of Harvard University, an authority on innovation, defines innovation as anything that improves an entity’s existing resources, processes or values, or creates new resources, processes or values.

At first, the definition may seem somewhat repetitive. But the distinction between improving something that already exists and creating something new is very important. In that distinction rests the two different types of innovation: incremental innovation and disruptive innovation.

Incremental innovations are improvements to existing products on dimensions historically valued by people. Aircrafts that fly farther or carry more people, computers that process faster, mobile phones that are smarter are all examples of incremental innovation. Also included in this category of innovation are reconfigurations of existing forms to serve other purposes. Repackaging shampoos into small sachets to make it more affordable or mobile phones with digital cameras are also examples of incremental innovation.

Disruptive innovations, on the other hand, introduce new value propositions and offer something new to the world. They create new markets or radically reshape existing markets. Apple personal computer, Xerox photocopier, Wal-Mart’s discount retail store, and Dell’s direct-to-customer business model are all examples of disruptive innovation. Such innovations are a departure from existing ways of doing things. In Bangladesh, the collateral-free lending mechanism mainstreamed by Grameen Bank could be considered an example of disruptive innovation.

Deeply embedded in the notion of innovation is the need for a mindset that views failure as an opportunity for learning and systematically harnesses the learning to fuel growth. Bangladesh certainly has had its fair share of failures over the last four decades. But perhaps where we falter as a nation is in accepting failures as a process of learning and taking a systemic approach to “processing” the learning into innovation. Let us briefly review how Vietnam and South Korea have harnessed innovation to fuel their economic development.

Vietnam’s growth story began at the end of the Vietnam War in the mid 1970s. After the War, Vietnam implemented its Second Five-Year Plan (1976-1981). However, it set extraordinarily high goals for annual growth rates for industry, agriculture, and national income and aimed to integrate the North and the South. This five-year plan failed to generate the intended growth targets.

But Vietnam learned from this failure and incorporated a more modest and manageable set of goals for its Third Five-Year Plan (1981-85). The planning function was decentralised while the managerial skills of public sector officials were improved.

Subsequently, its political and economic renewal campaign, DoiMoi, combined government planning with free-market incentives and encouraged the establishment of private businesses and foreign investment, including foreign-owned enterprises.

Collectively, the measures Vietnam took were a series of gradual shifts from its earlier strategies. Lowering growth targets, training resources and encouraging private sector participation are not radical shifts. But when these steps are structured in a way where one element builds on the success of another, it allows a country to initiate and harness incremental innovation in its policy-making apparatus. The results were being felt in Vietnam by the late 1990. By then, more than 30,000 private businesses had been created, the economy was growing at an annual rate of more than 7 percent, and poverty was nearly halved.

South Korea’s growth story began at the end of the Korean War in the mid 1950s. After the war, South Korea invested in an infrastructure that included a nationwide network of primary and secondary schools, modern roads, and a modern communications network. While this provided the foundational blocks to achieve a respectable growth rate, it was felt that something radically different would be required to significantly enhance its growth rate.

South Korea introduced a disruptive innovation called chaebol. Chaebols are a small number of extremely large and highly diversified family-controlled business groups. South Korean government deliberately created and nurtured chaebols to use them as locomotives for rapid economic development.

The key benefit of a chaebol stems from a well-understood system to get new ideas and innovations to market. Innovators in most countries, including the US, spend years working without support or resources, attempting to jump through a confusing array of hoops with the hope that they will be noticed by someone with the capital to fund their innovation. In contrast, a South Korean innovator can simply select a chaebol, get a meeting, and pitch their idea to a person who actually has the means to get them started developing their venture.

The chaebols were the backbone of industrialisation in the labour-intensive industries and played a major role in expediting technological learning in industry, upgrading South Korea’s technological capability and globalising South Korean businesses. Although chaebols served their purpose well from the early 1960s for nearly four decades to propel South Korea’s growth, in recent times, major reforms were made to regulate chaebol systems because of various corruption charges and unpaid debts.

What lessons can we learn from Vietnam’s and South Korea’s innovation journeys? The intent is not to merely replicate those innovations, but rather to study the underlying processes that led to the innovations in those countries. One is not suggesting Bangladesh lowers its growth targets as did Vietnam, or that we develop a system here similar to the chaebols in South Korea. Those strategies were the correct course of actions for those countries in those specific situations at those times. But the underlying process of innovation is very similar.

Firstly, both countries recognised and accepted a failure or a challenge. Vietnam realised its growth plan was too high and South Korea realised it wasn’t growing fast enough.

Secondly, both countries were open to learn from those situations and adopt different strategies, if deemed necessary. Moving from a state-controlled system to one that fostered privatisation and foreign ownership required incremental shifts in the Vietnam scenario. Coming up with a radically different chaebol system that was a hybrid between state ownership and full private ownership required disruptive shifts in the South Korea scenario.

Finally, both countries understood well that innovation is not merely a one-off intervention mechanism, but rather a continuous system that requires ongoing effort. Vietnam’s innovation continued past DoiMoi with major education sector reforms in late 1990s and large investments in ICT and agro-breeding technologies more recently. South Korea’s innovation system is exemplified by its capability to take a hard look at a past innovation (chaebol), understand its drawbacks, and take measures to address the issue head-on.

Bangladesh today is at a crossroad with regards to innovation. We can continue on the path we have been for the past four decades where innovation happens mostly by chance. This type of innovation stems from necessity-driven improvisations. In Bangladesh, Grameen Bank’s collateral-free lending mechanism and Brac’s primary education program are perhaps the two most internationally acclaimed examples of this type of innovation. However, such innovations are often recognised only after-the-fact, difficult to replicate across sectors or organisations, and therefore very rare.

Alternatively, Bangladesh can adopt a systemic approach to innovation. This would involve a rigorous study of various initiatives that may have failed or face challenges, learning from those situations, understand the intended outcomes for those initiatives, assess whether the innovation that is required is incremental or disruptive in nature, and finally, develop and implement strategies to materialise the initiatives.

Moreover, we need to extend the approach to include opportunities for action that are beyond existing initiatives. Several supporting elements, such as high education level, reliable infrastructure, adequate funding mechanisms, and better business and governance conditions, are also important factors to making innovation systems successful. However, these elements should be viewed more as co-requisites rather than pre-requisites since an effective innovation system can help enhance these elements as well.

It is not that one approach is better than the other. Both approaches are important because innovation can emerge from structured or unstructured contexts. And therefore policy measures and strategies that allow both approaches to coexist are required.

Pial Islam is Managing Partner pi Strategy Consulting and welcomes feedback at pial.islam@pistrategy.org. The author thanks Seama Mowri and ASM Maruf, Associates at pi Strategy Consulting, for their contributions.

This article is quoted from The Daily Star, Bangladesh . The article was originally published in the monthly publication ‘Forum’ on 2010-02.
There are so many visionary people and valuable resources related to a sustainable tourism development in Bangladesh. If these forces are united great things will happen – both on grass root, private sector and at government level.
Please join the online Views On Tourism network and discussion group in order to achieve personal goals as well as encourage a sustainable tourism development in Bangladesh. Read more about this group and how to become a member here.

This article is uploaded by Majbritt Thomsen, administrator on ‘Views On Tourism’.

Be Sociable, Share!

• 

Vietnam is a country rich in resources, both on and offshore. The availability and abundance of fresh water, forestry and seafood products along with a wide range of tropical fruits and vegetables along with stunning natural scenery makes it a prime destination for visitors seeking an authentic Southeast Asian experience.

However the extremely rapid growth of tourism in the country has strongly affected the environment, in particular the marine environment, and steps are being taken to protect the country’s resources for future generations.

Economically

Tourism has brought prosperity to communities left behind by the urban development of Vietnam’s cities. Towns like Phan Thiet, Hoi An, Qui Nhon and Halong Bay have profited greatly from the influx of tourists.

Ethnic minorities have also benefitted from tourism, but the impact on their fragile cultures has been noted. (See next section for details).

The strong growth of tourist arrivals has increased competition among providers of tourist services, in particular guesthouses, restaurants, transportation services and retail facilities. Profit margins have shrunk considerably as the tourism industry shifts towards more FIT travelers.

The reverse is true for the high-end segment of the market, as more five star resort hotels open to accommodate short-term visitors, mainly from regional countries.

Socio-culturally: Vietnam Sustainable Tourism Development Project

From the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism this plan outlines the steps that need to be taken to protect Vietnam’s ethnic minorities from excessive tourist growth:

www.adb.org/Documents/IndigenousPeoples/REG/38015/38015-M2-REG-IPDP.pdf

Environmentally Sustainable Travel

More protective measures need to be set up in Vietnam to safeguard the environment. In particular, more national parks need to be established, and existing protected areas need more funding to ensure visitors obey the rules set in place.

The eco tourist industry is in its infancy in Vietnam. The Topas Eco Resort (www.topasecolodge.com) is an example of an environmentally sustainable project, one that hires local ethnic minorities and minimizes its impact on the environment by using locally harvested construction materials. As the first of its kind in Vietnam, experts predict more projects like Topas will emerge in coming years.

This article is quoted from the newsletter TourismROI Alert from Tourism ROI. The article was originally published on 2009-07-28

Be Sociable, Share!

•