Congratulations to the Heritage Watch team for being a finalist in the Tourism for Tomorrow Awards. It is a testament to the great work you are doing in Cambodia. Proud to be a supporter of your work!
Last summer was my second trip to Cambodia, and I remember perfectly how the first "Heritage Friendly" sign made me feel. The seal was in the tuk-tuk I rented and in the hotel where I stayed, and it already made me feel good. On my first trip to Angkor, a couple of years before, I was concerned about how much of my money was being put to good use. There was little information about this available at that time. I have worked in development programs and I am very concerned about how tourism impacts the local community. Seeing the seals made me feel like I was contributing to the improvement of the lives of the Cambodians. This project is helping to raise awareness among visitors of the need to preserve Angkor, and at the same time is encouraging pro-poor tourism.
----------
“History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction.” Calvin & Hobbes
In light of the incredible number of entries submitted to this competition and the relatively narrow scope of them, perhaps it’s time to carefully analyze the title– Geotourism Challenge 2009: The Power of Place – Sustaining the Future of Destinations - and what it really means.
There is no doubt that adequately defining the ‘challenge’ of ‘Geotourism’ is one facing the tourism industry at large and tourists worldwide. Both are increasingly aware of budget restrictions and changing attitudes to tourism in light of enhanced concerns regarding environmental, developmental and local community impact and the subsequent well - documented, expatriation of profits to the latter’s collective detriment. The ‘new’ challenge of geotourism which actively seeks to placate and play up to these concerns is a growth industry and one that is advancing seemingly without checks and balances.
There is a fundamental difference between ‘The Power of Place’ and the creation of places which have a new, fashionable aura for the tourism industry to capitalize upon. There are myriad established destinations of outstanding human interest which require enormous, long-term, collective effort to ‘Sustain their Futures’ and those whose futures are being created through an industry which thrives on publicizing ‘emerging’ places ‘you have to go before everyone else gets there and spoils it’.
A majority of entries in this competition focus on Ecotourism which has become a new buzzword for the age old tradition of enjoying nature with minimal creature comforts, albeit framed within a new modern paradigm whereby those who may have formally enjoyed 5-star comfort without worry over their ‘carbon footprint’ are now being encouraged to do so in increasingly remote, previously unspoiled areas of outstanding natural beauty. This ‘encouragement’ is taking place within the typically narrow confines of debate in the mass media who shout “Green” from the rooftops yet rely absolutely on the continuing levels of largely western-led consumption which have caused, to a great extent, the current levels of environmental degradation. Zoos are now decried as politically incorrect but going to the source of the zoo is deemed ecologically aware.
The issue of sustainability and in particular ‘The Future of Destinations’ must be assessed critically. What is the purpose of the Geotourism competition? Is it an attempt to identify projects working at the grassroots level and with governments to build manageable protection mechanisms into fragile and threatened environments whereby tourism is but one element? Or is it a process by which new areas are being ‘opened up’ to fresh hordes of tourists and related profits? How will the finalists in the Geotourism competition and the winners of this competition be judged? – by the considered selection of a project actively engaged in the former or new projects exploiting the mass media and eagerly anticipating the latter?
Here in Cambodia, as in many other ‘developing’ nations, a disturbing pattern has emerged – the media, both local and international, run seemingly endless stories about wondrous new (largely foreign led) ecotourism projects and how much of a role they can play in preserving areas of natural beauty. These stories tend to display levels of substance which reveal little more than thinly veiled plugs written by journalists who get free holidays while researching other stories - most often decrying the degradation in the immediate surrounding areas being corruptly conducted under the rubric of ‘Big Business’. In many cases, these eco-businesses are run by people with absolutely no background whatsoever in environmental protection but who recognize the potential profits in running an ‘ecolodge’. A limited number of journalists have begun to question a) The reality vs. the rhetoric of these ecotourism businesses (and lets not forget that profit is the bottom line) in terms of their environmental and community impact and long term commitment to their eco-protection (beyond pulling out when these areas have been ‘overdeveloped’) b) The ultimate sustainability of these projects and perhaps most importantly c) The level of cooperation with and assistance to enhancing the role and capacities of established local institutions e.g. Local and national government and their related agencies to become responsible themselves beyond immediate profit within the framework of long - term national development (20-30yrs).
A twenty year veteran of forestry conservation once remarked to me that “no nation in history has ever made any sensible decisions regarding its natural resources until 90% of them have gone” This assessment matches the concurrent rise in interest in ecotourism (or rather the careful and considered corporate promotion of it) and for those that argue that tourism is the way to preserve the environment, they should consider whether the resources they consume on a daily basis in their homes has resulted in the ‘need’ for ecotourism.
Heritage conservation is a primary example of how the concept of ‘Power of Place – Sustaining the Future of Destinations’ can and should be focused effectively. Egypt, Peru and Cambodia have all suffered from a similar fate – their ancient temples were and, to an extent, continue to be ‘must see’ places to be checked off the list of the most discerning ‘travellers’ (previously thanks to now strangely sparse media promotion); yet once these eminently ‘sustainable’ destinations become homogenized into Kouni catalogues and Lonely Planet guidebooks, the challenges facing them increase rather than decrease. Have the huge funds channeled into their development as tourist destinations been matched equally or increased in parity towards effectively preserving them? Has the impact of mass tourism notably benefited the local populations in terms of economic, educational and community opportunity and development or has it sadly passed them by after falsely building so many expectations? Most importantly, have the governments, who are ultimately responsible for ensuring these developments occur, been assisted with long term technical, proactive, and professional backing directly linked with the revenue from tourism?
The answers overwhelmingly are no and the results can be broadly defined as follows: 1) continued degradation, looting and trade in antiquities as less publicized and developed areas are plundered as global elite interest accrues in their cultural importance and market value b) increasing poverty among indigenous populations in the immediate areas as land and resources are utilized for mass tourism c) an increase in tourists but concurrent decrease in educational awareness of the sites’ historic importance and context d) the responsibility for preservation and education falling on a combination of academic institutions, donors / NGOs and government and e) a resultant tendency by governments in developing countries to focus on revenue first (often through procedures lacking in transparency and vision) and sustainability, preservation and education second – lessons which are taught primarily through the lexis of the international tourism industry.
Cambodia’s tourism industry at present is focused almost entirely around the magnificent complex of Angkor Wat. While this has brought immense benefits to a nation acknowledged as among the poorest in the world, this myopic approach (driven by the tourism industry and the demands of tourists) has seen concerted preservation and development of other sites of immense cultural importance – such as Koh Ker, Banteay Chhmar, Preah Vihear and many others, fall by the wayside. More importantly, the tourists who come to Angkor typically and increasingly get whisked around in large buses as part of a whistle stop tour of the wider region with scant regard of their long term impact on the area and minimal educational return for their time. As with the former analogy regarding zoos – there should be an increasing focus on acknowledging that it is pointless seeing artifacts in a museum (artifacts which should and must be returned to their point of origin) – the museum should be living in context and equal time and effort should be taken for tourists to recognize that is what they are witnessing.
Effective Heritage Conservation (the chosen image to represent this competition) is ultimately crucial not only to sustainability of destination but sustainability of our present civilizations since the vast majority of these ancient communities were destroyed or overcome by the concerted destruction of their immediate natural environments. Education is the key to sustainability of destination and cultural heritage has far greater educational value for humanity than ecotourism. The lessons ecotourism seeks to impart in terms of natural environments can best be realized where they have failed to be heeded. In this sense humankind’s greatest cultural monuments are at the same time symbolic of our most monumental failures.
For true sustainability of destinations to become a reality, organizations such as Changemakers and National Geographic must seek to build global interest and support for projects which promote the long term institutional protection of fragile areas of outstanding human interest using tourism as an element of this equation rather than expecting the reverse to lead to success.
I applaud Heritage Watch for its ongoing efforts and sincerely hope to see a project which truly acknowledges ‘The Power of Place – Sustaining the Future of Destinations’ receive the international recognition it deserves.
Comentarios
----------
Deirdre O'Shea
Congratulations to the Heritage Watch team for being a finalist in the Tourism for Tomorrow Awards. It is a testament to the great work you are doing in Cambodia. Proud to be a supporter of your work!
----------
Daniela Papi
PEPY Founder
www.pepyride.org
----------
Principal
Pyle Architects (Phnom Penh and London)
Great work by a great outfit...
----------
Principal
Pyle Architects (Phnom Penh and London)
Last summer was my second trip to Cambodia, and I remember perfectly how the first "Heritage Friendly" sign made me feel. The seal was in the tuk-tuk I rented and in the hotel where I stayed, and it already made me feel good. On my first trip to Angkor, a couple of years before, I was concerned about how much of my money was being put to good use. There was little information about this available at that time. I have worked in development programs and I am very concerned about how tourism impacts the local community. Seeing the seals made me feel like I was contributing to the improvement of the lives of the Cambodians. This project is helping to raise awareness among visitors of the need to preserve Angkor, and at the same time is encouraging pro-poor tourism.
----------
“History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction.” Calvin & Hobbes
In light of the incredible number of entries submitted to this competition and the relatively narrow scope of them, perhaps it’s time to carefully analyze the title– Geotourism Challenge 2009: The Power of Place – Sustaining the Future of Destinations - and what it really means.
There is no doubt that adequately defining the ‘challenge’ of ‘Geotourism’ is one facing the tourism industry at large and tourists worldwide. Both are increasingly aware of budget restrictions and changing attitudes to tourism in light of enhanced concerns regarding environmental, developmental and local community impact and the subsequent well - documented, expatriation of profits to the latter’s collective detriment. The ‘new’ challenge of geotourism which actively seeks to placate and play up to these concerns is a growth industry and one that is advancing seemingly without checks and balances.
There is a fundamental difference between ‘The Power of Place’ and the creation of places which have a new, fashionable aura for the tourism industry to capitalize upon. There are myriad established destinations of outstanding human interest which require enormous, long-term, collective effort to ‘Sustain their Futures’ and those whose futures are being created through an industry which thrives on publicizing ‘emerging’ places ‘you have to go before everyone else gets there and spoils it’.
A majority of entries in this competition focus on Ecotourism which has become a new buzzword for the age old tradition of enjoying nature with minimal creature comforts, albeit framed within a new modern paradigm whereby those who may have formally enjoyed 5-star comfort without worry over their ‘carbon footprint’ are now being encouraged to do so in increasingly remote, previously unspoiled areas of outstanding natural beauty. This ‘encouragement’ is taking place within the typically narrow confines of debate in the mass media who shout “Green” from the rooftops yet rely absolutely on the continuing levels of largely western-led consumption which have caused, to a great extent, the current levels of environmental degradation. Zoos are now decried as politically incorrect but going to the source of the zoo is deemed ecologically aware.
The issue of sustainability and in particular ‘The Future of Destinations’ must be assessed critically. What is the purpose of the Geotourism competition? Is it an attempt to identify projects working at the grassroots level and with governments to build manageable protection mechanisms into fragile and threatened environments whereby tourism is but one element? Or is it a process by which new areas are being ‘opened up’ to fresh hordes of tourists and related profits? How will the finalists in the Geotourism competition and the winners of this competition be judged? – by the considered selection of a project actively engaged in the former or new projects exploiting the mass media and eagerly anticipating the latter?
Here in Cambodia, as in many other ‘developing’ nations, a disturbing pattern has emerged – the media, both local and international, run seemingly endless stories about wondrous new (largely foreign led) ecotourism projects and how much of a role they can play in preserving areas of natural beauty. These stories tend to display levels of substance which reveal little more than thinly veiled plugs written by journalists who get free holidays while researching other stories - most often decrying the degradation in the immediate surrounding areas being corruptly conducted under the rubric of ‘Big Business’. In many cases, these eco-businesses are run by people with absolutely no background whatsoever in environmental protection but who recognize the potential profits in running an ‘ecolodge’. A limited number of journalists have begun to question a) The reality vs. the rhetoric of these ecotourism businesses (and lets not forget that profit is the bottom line) in terms of their environmental and community impact and long term commitment to their eco-protection (beyond pulling out when these areas have been ‘overdeveloped’) b) The ultimate sustainability of these projects and perhaps most importantly c) The level of cooperation with and assistance to enhancing the role and capacities of established local institutions e.g. Local and national government and their related agencies to become responsible themselves beyond immediate profit within the framework of long - term national development (20-30yrs).
A twenty year veteran of forestry conservation once remarked to me that “no nation in history has ever made any sensible decisions regarding its natural resources until 90% of them have gone” This assessment matches the concurrent rise in interest in ecotourism (or rather the careful and considered corporate promotion of it) and for those that argue that tourism is the way to preserve the environment, they should consider whether the resources they consume on a daily basis in their homes has resulted in the ‘need’ for ecotourism.
Heritage conservation is a primary example of how the concept of ‘Power of Place – Sustaining the Future of Destinations’ can and should be focused effectively. Egypt, Peru and Cambodia have all suffered from a similar fate – their ancient temples were and, to an extent, continue to be ‘must see’ places to be checked off the list of the most discerning ‘travellers’ (previously thanks to now strangely sparse media promotion); yet once these eminently ‘sustainable’ destinations become homogenized into Kouni catalogues and Lonely Planet guidebooks, the challenges facing them increase rather than decrease. Have the huge funds channeled into their development as tourist destinations been matched equally or increased in parity towards effectively preserving them? Has the impact of mass tourism notably benefited the local populations in terms of economic, educational and community opportunity and development or has it sadly passed them by after falsely building so many expectations? Most importantly, have the governments, who are ultimately responsible for ensuring these developments occur, been assisted with long term technical, proactive, and professional backing directly linked with the revenue from tourism?
The answers overwhelmingly are no and the results can be broadly defined as follows: 1) continued degradation, looting and trade in antiquities as less publicized and developed areas are plundered as global elite interest accrues in their cultural importance and market value b) increasing poverty among indigenous populations in the immediate areas as land and resources are utilized for mass tourism c) an increase in tourists but concurrent decrease in educational awareness of the sites’ historic importance and context d) the responsibility for preservation and education falling on a combination of academic institutions, donors / NGOs and government and e) a resultant tendency by governments in developing countries to focus on revenue first (often through procedures lacking in transparency and vision) and sustainability, preservation and education second – lessons which are taught primarily through the lexis of the international tourism industry.
Cambodia’s tourism industry at present is focused almost entirely around the magnificent complex of Angkor Wat. While this has brought immense benefits to a nation acknowledged as among the poorest in the world, this myopic approach (driven by the tourism industry and the demands of tourists) has seen concerted preservation and development of other sites of immense cultural importance – such as Koh Ker, Banteay Chhmar, Preah Vihear and many others, fall by the wayside. More importantly, the tourists who come to Angkor typically and increasingly get whisked around in large buses as part of a whistle stop tour of the wider region with scant regard of their long term impact on the area and minimal educational return for their time. As with the former analogy regarding zoos – there should be an increasing focus on acknowledging that it is pointless seeing artifacts in a museum (artifacts which should and must be returned to their point of origin) – the museum should be living in context and equal time and effort should be taken for tourists to recognize that is what they are witnessing.
Effective Heritage Conservation (the chosen image to represent this competition) is ultimately crucial not only to sustainability of destination but sustainability of our present civilizations since the vast majority of these ancient communities were destroyed or overcome by the concerted destruction of their immediate natural environments. Education is the key to sustainability of destination and cultural heritage has far greater educational value for humanity than ecotourism. The lessons ecotourism seeks to impart in terms of natural environments can best be realized where they have failed to be heeded. In this sense humankind’s greatest cultural monuments are at the same time symbolic of our most monumental failures.
For true sustainability of destinations to become a reality, organizations such as Changemakers and National Geographic must seek to build global interest and support for projects which promote the long term institutional protection of fragile areas of outstanding human interest using tourism as an element of this equation rather than expecting the reverse to lead to success.
I applaud Heritage Watch for its ongoing efforts and sincerely hope to see a project which truly acknowledges ‘The Power of Place – Sustaining the Future of Destinations’ receive the international recognition it deserves.
Neil
Enviar un comentario nuevo