I have a question. Limiting the number of visitors in a destination does indeed sound like a good idea, but what about some heritage sites where many visitors are domestic tourists looking to pay a visit for religious purposes? I want to give you an example of the world heritage site of Nepal - Swayambhunath. My last visit to this holy pilgrimage was pretty disquieting as there was this huge crowd of local tourists scattered everywhere along with some international tourists looking to learn about the destination in peace. But then again, there were locals from Kathmandu traveling to Swayambhunath for an annual ceremony of celebrating the month of Gunla Parba. Hence, there wasn't enough breathing space for anyone traveling to this destination. Would limiting the tourist flow at this time would've been the right call? Especially when the months that these festivals fall in are peak tourism season, in Nepal.
Sorry, missed this. Yes I think religious pilgrims are a special case, but again they can be allotted to. Perhaps on big pilgrimage days, recreational trekkers are not permitted--I’d support something like that. In pecking order, I’d suggest pilgrims > domestic tourists > foreign tourists--in that order, and limit tickets accordingly.
I wonder if any country will go all the way upstream to visa conditions in response to over tourism, that is, you can come to our country but you must visit in such and such a way
I think Bhutan the closest example to that, but it is really just “pay us money.” There are though some interesting approaches, years ago I wrote a piece (can’t find it now as I just woke up!) suggesting one approach Indonesia could take to better disperse travellers and to lighten the load on Bali would be to remove the ability to get a visa extension there, instead saying you had to go to another island, say Lombok, which you could use once, then Flores, or Java or whatever.
At the time people suggested agents would just run passports around, but that’s no longer possible as you need to get fingerprinted, and it would work to at least encourage people to travel a bit further and see a more diverse range of stuff.
That’s but one approach--nome perfect, but it would be good to see more places at least try.
I too have been mystified by the idiots who all rush to the boarding gate when they announce boarding for rows 20 to 30 or whatever. This should make boarding much quicker and easier for everyone.
My solution would be to turn all the queue jumpers to a separate queue where all their hand luggage is weighted and measured and every bag 1 gram over the limit or 1 centimeter to big was moved to the hold and they should then be the last to board.
Things could be worse Stuart when the next day you get on a plane and find the idiot from the cafe is sat next to you for the next 6 hours
Oh yes! The number of times I’ve been sitting there waiting and thought “I bet that person is going to be sitting by me” and then ... you know the rest of the story!
I understand the sentiment, but it is equally valid to point out that tourism these days is much more about Veblen good consumption than it is about self enrichment/enlightenment/improvement.
Thorstein Veblen was an economist - a Veblen good is something people buy/use because it shows they are wealthy, not because the good itself has any specific intrinsic value.
I have a question. Limiting the number of visitors in a destination does indeed sound like a good idea, but what about some heritage sites where many visitors are domestic tourists looking to pay a visit for religious purposes? I want to give you an example of the world heritage site of Nepal - Swayambhunath. My last visit to this holy pilgrimage was pretty disquieting as there was this huge crowd of local tourists scattered everywhere along with some international tourists looking to learn about the destination in peace. But then again, there were locals from Kathmandu traveling to Swayambhunath for an annual ceremony of celebrating the month of Gunla Parba. Hence, there wasn't enough breathing space for anyone traveling to this destination. Would limiting the tourist flow at this time would've been the right call? Especially when the months that these festivals fall in are peak tourism season, in Nepal.
Sorry, missed this. Yes I think religious pilgrims are a special case, but again they can be allotted to. Perhaps on big pilgrimage days, recreational trekkers are not permitted--I’d support something like that. In pecking order, I’d suggest pilgrims > domestic tourists > foreign tourists--in that order, and limit tickets accordingly.
Here here! Alas, too much common sense, my friend
It seems simple right?! I don’t get what is so hard here.
I wonder if any country will go all the way upstream to visa conditions in response to over tourism, that is, you can come to our country but you must visit in such and such a way
I think Bhutan the closest example to that, but it is really just “pay us money.” There are though some interesting approaches, years ago I wrote a piece (can’t find it now as I just woke up!) suggesting one approach Indonesia could take to better disperse travellers and to lighten the load on Bali would be to remove the ability to get a visa extension there, instead saying you had to go to another island, say Lombok, which you could use once, then Flores, or Java or whatever.
At the time people suggested agents would just run passports around, but that’s no longer possible as you need to get fingerprinted, and it would work to at least encourage people to travel a bit further and see a more diverse range of stuff.
That’s but one approach--nome perfect, but it would be good to see more places at least try.
Great article. The worst is when you are at the beach and there are miles of empty sand and someone puts their towel down right next to you - uggh!!!
I know!!!!! There’s the whole goddam beach and yet?
I too have been mystified by the idiots who all rush to the boarding gate when they announce boarding for rows 20 to 30 or whatever. This should make boarding much quicker and easier for everyone.
My solution would be to turn all the queue jumpers to a separate queue where all their hand luggage is weighted and measured and every bag 1 gram over the limit or 1 centimeter to big was moved to the hold and they should then be the last to board.
Things could be worse Stuart when the next day you get on a plane and find the idiot from the cafe is sat next to you for the next 6 hours
Oh yes! The number of times I’ve been sitting there waiting and thought “I bet that person is going to be sitting by me” and then ... you know the rest of the story!
Always great reading, Thank you.... Best from Thailand weather conditions upside down here!😂
Cheers!
I understand the sentiment, but it is equally valid to point out that tourism these days is much more about Veblen good consumption than it is about self enrichment/enlightenment/improvement.
Now you have me googling Veblen -- is that a typo?!
Thorstein Veblen was an economist - a Veblen good is something people buy/use because it shows they are wealthy, not because the good itself has any specific intrinsic value.
Ahhh gotcha, learn something every day. And yes, I agree!