sfinkz Posted August 30, 2003 Report Share Posted August 30, 2003 Ran across a couple of items of interest today. The first is a study of late-1990's international tourism. Although focusing on individual destinations and not entire countries, it identified the five phases of tourism; 1)Discovery, 2) Settlement by Pioneers, 3) Tourist Development, 4) Overpopulation, and 5) Death (of the unique spirit and qualities of the land as originally discovered). It also found that the areas which have been sustainable and successful along this troubled path have all targeted quality--fewer tourists willing to spend more. The second item is a popular children's book, "Too Much Birthday", which poses the question whether there can be too much of something really good. At first, children laugh at the mere possibility but by the end of the story they recognize how too much of a good thing can make things worse and not better. At the risk of appearing fatalistic, but in view of the current state of affairs, is it possible that tourism in Thailand, as it has been practiced, is in its death cycle, the victim of too much of a good thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 30, 2003 Report Share Posted August 30, 2003 At the risk of appearing fatalistic, but in view of the current state of affairs, is it possible that tourism in Thailand, as it has been practiced, is in its death cycle, the victim of too much of a good thing? How do you mean too much of a good thing? For us or for the Thais in the tourism business? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BelgianBoy Posted August 31, 2003 Report Share Posted August 31, 2003 Hi, More appropriate in General Discussion...... Cheers ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 31, 2003 Report Share Posted August 31, 2003 How do you mean too much of a good thing? For us or for the Thais in the tourism business? Agreed. From the perspective of the Thai economy, the death of the tourism industry - which, despite facile protestations to the contrary, relies on a purient nightlife - would be catastrophic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 31, 2003 Report Share Posted August 31, 2003 >>>5) Death (of the unique spirit and qualities of the land as originally discovered).<<< i always have to throw up when i hear about that "unique spirit". was it ever existing or just an invention based on expectations built up by tourism propaganda? maybe in the early stages of touristic discovery nobody really bothered to look behind the facades while the later stages just bring some more indepth views. people look for some stereotypes. such as the "beautyful" hilltribes, or the "submissive" girls, the "land of smile" while reality has never been that way. what you posted here shows to me, regarding thailand, more that the tourism industry can't keep on fooling people forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pattaya127 Posted August 31, 2003 Report Share Posted August 31, 2003 On the other hand, there are places that tourism can't never quite totally destroy, and that "unique" spirit forces on with resilience. I think it is up to the traveller to be able to discern a place's uniqueness, definitely tourist brochures and "visit..." campaigns can't do that, only make the picture post-card 3-dimensional. As for Thailand, this country has allowed many people to change life (including yours) or have life-changing experiences. This is the miracle: despite the tourist posters and the cliches, one can go beyond and find substance, journeying Thailand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
voodoo31 Posted August 31, 2003 Report Share Posted August 31, 2003 For many countries, especially developing countries and ones which have been somewhat closed to the west in past (Thailand fits into both these categories) tourism can be a double edged sword. Yes you can earn good foreign exchange and create jobs but you also get negatives such as environmental degredation and the eroding of traditional values and way of life. I think tourism in Thailand is well established, supported by the government and in no danger of disappearing. With all the negatives Thailand is still an extremely popular tourist destiantion. I cant see that changing, Thailand appeals to many types of people and nationalities. In the past Thailand's management of tourism has been poor, they have tended just to think just in terms of numbers and not quality in terms of fewer high-end, big spending tourists. Economically I dont think Thailand has many alternatives. In the 80s and early 90s it road the Asian economic miracle of rapid development and foreign investment. Those days are over and these days China attracts most of that kind of foreign investment. On top of this Thailand does not have a highly educated, global orientated workforce (in contrast to say India, Singapore or Malaysia) so it is also unlikely to attract high-end financial, and service orientated foreign investment. So I think tourism will continue to be a very important industry for Thailand and the government will continue to support it. I dont think tourists destination always die as you say. So definitely decline but still linger around and can sometimes be refreshed. Pattay would fall into this category. In many ways Pattaya should be dead but it keeps hangin in there. Despite the over-development, pollution, seedy reputation it has not died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 31, 2003 Report Share Posted August 31, 2003 >>>>>I dont think tourists destination always die as you say. <<<<< i think you answered here the wrong poster. >>>>Thailand appeals to many types of people and nationalities. In the past Thailand's management of tourism has been poor, they have tended just to think just in terms of numbers and not quality in terms of fewer high-end, big spending tourists.<<<< personally, i don't see any way those so called "high end" tourists would come for here other than sex. thailand always was a cheapo masstourism country, and was brilliantly promoting the country as such. what is there a "high end" tourist could be attracted to? beaches? go to the maledives or the caribean temples and asian culture? go to india, china and laos djungles? since thailand has nothing worth mentioning left better go to laos, indonesia or south america. top notch hotels and cuisine? nothing will ever beat italy or france the guy who is genuinly fascinated by the culture and goes all over into villages etc. is the minority, not relevant to the market OK, then you might attract the asian high roller, but without gambling and girls not much will happen. the chinese nuveax riches spend their bucks in macao or burma, or go straight to europe or the states. thailand is a mass destination, where you get relative luxury, for relative small amounts of money. the big spender does not care that much about this. he wants exclusivity. and that i am afraid, thailand is not offering since 40 years. well, other than the vast amount of sex offered to the foreigner. >>>Economically I dont think Thailand has many alternatives. In the 80s and early 90s it road the Asian economic miracle of rapid development and foreign investment.<<< thailand has many natural resources, very fertile agricultural land, and a unique regional position. therefore thailand is a regional force here economically, dominating most surrounding countries. the reason that thailand is the eternal underachiever has more to do with mismanagement than anything else. thailand has lots of alternatives if the leadership could sort its shit out. solely trying to rely on tourism is a dangerous thing - one single little thing can change everything. perfect example was SARS - the biggest media scam ever, and the planes were empty. >>>and the eroding of traditional values and way of life.<<< development? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pattaya127 Posted August 31, 2003 Report Share Posted August 31, 2003 I am wondering what % of tourists are high-end? Surely not enough to fill the tourist $$ baskets of any country. I indeed think i read about TAT wanting to attract high-end tourism. Sure, they can have a few thousand people a year stay in 500$ a night private resorts, but their bread and butter will always be the backpacker/sex tourist/budget-conscious tourists. I don't even think they are kidding themselves with that high-end crap! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torneyboy Posted August 31, 2003 Report Share Posted August 31, 2003 Says pattaya127: On the other hand, there are places that tourism can't never quite totally destroy, and that "unique" spirit forces on with resilience. I think it is up to the traveller to be able to discern a place's uniqueness, definitely tourist brochures and "visit..." campaigns can't do that, only make the picture post-card 3-dimensional. As for Thailand, this country has allowed many people to change life (including yours) or have life-changing experiences. This is the miracle: despite the tourist posters and the cliches, one can go beyond and find substance, journeying Thailand. ""tourist brochures and visit campaigns"" PT these can and do work, These combined with TV travel shows that focus on ""Asia"" have an impact on agents bookings after these promotions IMHO. Thailand will recover more quickly than other countries,the government is doing the right things as in Pattaya with the cabinet meeting etc. Come to Amazing Thailand...very successful campaign in OZ..and we are still using it today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.