In many countries, a large portion of national economic activity is due to tourism. In developing countries, in particular, tourism accounts for much economic growth and allows for diversification. It creates jobs, contributing to both social and economic progress.
A large part of the tourism experience is due to souvenirs. They increase consumer spending, contribute to globalization, and associate the tourism experience with identity and culture. Shopping makes up a large part of any tourist experience, from ecotourism to highly commercialized Disney vacations. The act of purchasing and taking home mementos has great sentimental value and can establish brand loyalty over time since the act of remembering the positive experience makes consumers more likely to go back and buy more.
Selling souvenirs allows communities to take advantage of tourism that impacts them. Especially in rural areas, the people who live there have little say over large companies and governments that establish tourism. However, by selling souvenirs, they can use the existing tourism to their advantage by giving tourists an opportunity to purchase souvenirs of sentimental value. In this way, they can make a profit on the tourism that has such a great impact on their communities. The presence of tourism has been shown to trigger an increase in household income and government revenues.
The positive impact of the selling of souvenirs can be maximized if locally owned small shops sell them. Localized companies can make the biggest impact because the profits they make from selling souvenirs are more likely to be invested back into the community, increasing cash flow throughout and contributing to economic progress. When larger corporations are primarily responsible for selling souvenirs, the profits made are usually used elsewhere, minimizing the positive effects of tourism. Thus, souvenirs can contribute positively to the local economy when those who sell the souvenirs are centralized to the area of tourism.
Works Cited:
https://www.pide.org.pk/pdf/DevStudies/discussionpaper/DiscussionPaper5.pdf
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Namibia's Economy
Namibia is a country that not many people think about. It is a small nation, right above South Africa, that bases most of its economy on to...
Tourism is a prominent sector in a lot of countries, which is interesting considering that it's a sector that relies on the consistent draw of attractions or other events within a country. I think it's unlike other kinds of economic interaction between countries in that it isn't really a relationship between two countries, but some use policy similar to an economic blockade by limiting access to certain countries, decreasing tourist revenue that could be supporting policy in a country that another one disagrees with. In terms of souvenirs, I would also think that a lot of people that actually live in the country aren't too happy with the excess tourists, especially because the souvenir selling business isn't a large majority of the population's livelihood.
ReplyDeleteEmma, I agree with you observation that tourism is a unique interaction between countries. Tourists aren't really goods that can be controlled, especially if a country attracts tourists from all over the world. In order to pursue an aggressive economic policy against a country's tourism, a different country would have to somehow block all the tourists from the other countries, which is next to impossible.
DeleteOn your second point, however, I have to disagree. I think that for people who live in popular tourist destinations or countries are actually happy that tourists come, and are happier if they come in excess. The reason is because that some locations are built entirely on the foundation of tourism, so many of the livelihoods of the people in the area depend on the flow of tourists. I remember when I traveled to Puerto Vallarta, a city on the western coast of Mexico. When talking to a local tour guide, I learned that most of the jobs in the area are associated with tourism, so tourists are always welcome. I think you are certainly correct in some situations, but I feel like the majority of the time the people who live in tourist countries welcome tourists.
I think this idea of "is tourism appreciated" is a bit more complicated than discussed. It is important to remember Teagan's third paragraph where she references the fact that a lot of tourism is established by larger corporations or the government without public say, but also because of this locals are able to exploit tourist revenues to boost their local communities. In the end, it comes down to a question of if the population is happy with these larger corporations influence. I think its hard to resolve this question as there could be a lack of competition in tourist industries if larger corporations control tourist profits. However, I am also inclined to believe tourist industries that exist now are happy with the revenue brought. From my understanding, a lot of "tourist locations" have been established for an extended period of time meaning a lot of industry growth revolves around the established tourism. At first this may not be significant, but when considering that there are a considerable amount of people that would probably have the capability to relocate even marginally, as tourist communities are often localized, it would make sense that people who dislike tourism have moved from tourist locations over time. I think lastly, it's important to recognize that in a capitalist society most people prioritize profit over all else and most likely won't complain about tourist profits, meaning those who would have a problem would be those not working in the tourist industry, which as indicated by Henry's Puerto Vallarta story is a very small subset of a communities population.
Delete