Keywords: tourism colonialism, tourism neocolonialism
One of the most important areas within the literature is how electricity plays a part in the development of tourism. The precise balances of electric power determine how travel and leisure can be developed in a region, and whether this is an indigenously encouraged process or part of any neo-colonialist plan. Butler and Hinch (2007:308-309) explain that power is not often evenly distributed within most areas, and that political power and monetary power regulate how tourism develops. For instance, in Australia the Aboriginal people are encouraged to engage in tourism development, yet they have little say in how this development occurs, plus they have few means to gain access to their specific ethnical images or representations. Whilst this shows the inequality in vitality, the work will not show what the results of the are. It shows that non-indigenous people do seldom have control over travel and leisure development, however, not what the agenda of the non-indigenous culture is. Also, this is a particular case regarding indigenous and non-indigenous peoples in one country, alternatively than one region lacking control over their tourism strategies in light of effect from international organisations.
However, this discussion is an excellent starting point because it is from such financial and politics inequalities that tourism as neo-colonialism occurs. From 1960's onwards, tourism was seen as a great moderniser that can improve the leads of developing countries. However, because these producing countries often did not have the methods to develop this industry themselves, the resources and experience of developed countries managed to get possible. This also designed the developed countries establish the plan for development, focusing on what would be a good model for a developed country in Europe, for case. This, as explained by Hughes (in Lew, Hall and Williams, 2004:498-499) can be utilized as a way for developed countries to keep control over producing nations and keep maintaining the need because of their dependency on developed countries. However, this will not adequately explain whether this kind of neo-colonial development was short-lived, or whether it still goes on today. Also, it talks about the condition only from whether travel and leisure itself in this form is useful for the vacation spot region, rather than the intertwined relationship of all regions involved tourism activities.
The point being missed here is that it is logical for most travel and leisure initiatives to be influenced and dependant on the needs of these outside the destination region. Whilst local tourism is one matter, it is a tiny concern in comparison with the possible monetary advantages of bringing in holidaymakers from developed countries. As Akama (in Hall and Tucker, 2004:140-141) points out, this is certainly the situation in the development of safari travel and leisure in Africa. It had been initially created through the colonial age, and continues to be influenced by the energy structures that been around at the moment. This was certainly necessary in terms of the development of tourism as foreign investment was required. However, what's crucial here is that this neo-colonial affect means that whilst tourism meets the needs of these from developed countries, therefore the revenues made often do not remain within the vacation spot market, and so no development past this travel and leisure is easily possible whilst there is certainly such a reliance on the developed countries.
How this is interpreted really will depend on the specific degrees of empowerment being reviewed. Chapel and Coles (2007:205) say there are three types of empowerment - national, local and personal. If we are talking about national empowerment, then travel and leisure does suffer from neo-colonial influence. It is because nationwide economies in many growing countries remain reliant on specifically Western-centric types of tourism and its development. However, the affect is perhaps less apparent at local and personal level. Travel and leisure provides work and jobs, which can help individuals move away from previous degrees of poverty. It can also revitalise a location and provide new facilities for locals. However, this is very much indeed dependent on the sort of tourism being developed and the specific economic degree of local people versus the facilities being created. What is clear here is that even though travel and leisure at a countrywide level can be regarded neo-colonial in many areas, this does not indicate the neo-colonial influence reaches down to create negative effects at the local or personal levels.
However, corresponding to Richards and Hall (2003:27) it is likely that negative neo-colonial influence can stretch to the local or personal level, especially if the type of tourism gives little focus on traditional culture and its principles. Also, where tourism occurs in mere some regions inside a country, it adversely affects other regions. As money is invested in one region, another region can suffer from and gain more electric power. This brings about unequal development, and also could leave locals with a choice between residing in an area where their traditional civilizations are eroded but money is obtainable, or living where customs are looked after but investment is not forthcoming. However, this still does not study whether current tourism routines are specifically neo-colonial. It only demonstrates in its most extreme form, neo-colonial travel and leisure can have a poor impact by any means levels and can maintain electricity inequalities, regardless of the seeming economical advantages on the surface.
This notion of pervasive neo-colonialism in travel and leisure is strengthened by Mowforth and Munt (2008:56-57). They describe that countries such as Fiji, despite politics independence, remain neo-colonialist economies because their continuing stability and prosperity depend upon tourism from Western countries. This means further development has to consider these needs, and also helps to maintain earlier colonial spatial structures because they are best suited for the needs of the market that remains so important to the united states. Whilst this certainly appears to the consensus as it pertains to many expanding countries that depend on tourism, the target is perhaps too much just on the monetary impacts rather than the potential effects that neo-colonialism through travel and leisure might well have on competition, culture and category.
For example, Crick (1994:65) points out a study by Mendis (1981) that suggests the type of travel and leisure in Sri Lanka has led to a culture of servility that negative aspects creating a era of butlers. This wipes away ethnic traditions and places racial inequalities between your travelers who are 'served' and the local people who 'provide' them. To be able to continue bringing in visitors, these countries have to cover up other inequalities and poverty, thereby possibly making these problems worse down the line and tacitly helping to keep up with the stereotypes and inequalities between developed countries and the vacation spot region. This again implies that neo-colonial tourism has, at least in the past and possibly still now, took place. However, what's the overall degree of travel and leisure as neo-colonialism, and are there different methods to travel and leisure than the neo-colonialist way?
One area that might be described as a response or antidote to neo-colonial tourism is the increasing development of the impartial traveller. These are people who do not have a tendency to visit regular tourist destinations, and do not seek out founded tourist structures. They believe they are not contributing to the inequalities that have emerged through major traveler development, but in reality such inequalities are often inescapable. As travelers move from one traveler area to individually travel, new lines of travel and leisure are inevitably created. Also, by wanting to control or make a decision exposure to holiday facilities, the traveller is inadvertently contributing to decisions about the development of certain areas. For instance, some boatmen and courses in India have licenses that restrict the areas they can go with vacationers. This means visitors have greater gain access to and freedom within the vacation spot environment than the neighborhood guides - another exemplory case of inequality, even though it is only an effort to possibly allow a less neo-colonial holiday experience. Furthermore, it is this notion of First World visitor determining the plan to the 3rd World that plays a part in inequalities, no matter the form of tourism being developed (Lozanski, 2008:31-33).
This could very well be the largest problem -that the entire debate is only centered on the move of range of motion, education, economics and decision-making in a single direction. For instance, the vacationer situation in Jamaica is often looked at from the negative neo-colonial standpoint, where large overseas hotel chains such as RIU Hotels mean that much of the money generated through travel and leisure leaves Jamaica and ends up back in American countries (Dei, 2006: 200). Even though this is a valid criticism, it only looks at the situation in one side. It generally does not take into account the desires and needs of the Jamaican people, and if having these hotels that remove earnings from the current economic climate is any worse than having no industry by any means. It isn't specifically that earnings is removed, but how this decision is made. If it's developed as part of an indigenously-led tourism model, then it can't be seen to be totally negative. This isn't examined enough in the literature, and the books does not look at the underlying decision-making techniques of countries in terms of travel and leisure development.
For example, it should not be assumed that because an area is developed to meet vacationers' needs plus some elements of traditional culture removed that this will have a poor impact on the neighborhood population or that it is unwanted. This is only our understanding from the Western-centric perspective that it is unwanted. Maintenance of traditional culture is not always desired by locals, and in fact its maintenance may be antithetical to other styles of growth. For example, in Beijing, China, lots of the traditional hutong streets and residences are being replaced with newer high-rise buildings and commercial complexes. Whilst some bemoan the loss of this culture, it can provide better accommodation and facilities to local people who lived in these old areas, and can offer much-needed jobs and activities for an evergrowing middle income (Kuhn, 2006).
Not all travel and leisure is managed by international corporations and their affect over the destination region. Local and nationally-controlled tourism initiatives perform in a different way to neo-colonial tourism, and could enable and help a nation to grow. That is of course shown in developed countries most conveniently, where locally managed tourism helps maintain areas of culture that are considered locally important, as well as assisting regions to develop and move better alongside one another. However, it is less clear and common in developing countries. More research is necessary here, beyond the few specific illustrations that are usually cited showing how local travel and leisure initiatives in growing countries are providing an alternative to the neo-colonial model (Theobald, 1998:69).
The issue is the fact that any adverse result from tourism or any specifically capitalist market-driven decision in travel and leisure is often seen as neo-colonialism in practice, but in truth the deeper origins of your choice have to be looked at alternatively than merely the outcomes. Local travel and leisure initiatives may take benefit of capitalist buildings for tourism development and specifically cater development to the needs of these from developed countries as well as their own people. Hence, it is important to concentrate on the specific underlying effect of certain electricity structures on tourist decisions round the world, which will give a clearer picture as to the true prevalence of neo-colonialism within travel and leisure (Sharma, 2004:66-67).
It must not be seen that changes within the country scheduled to tourism are specifically because of neo-colonialism, or that travel and leisure is only the yoke that replaces colonialism in many countries. Whilst this is really true is some areas, it is also true that change occurs in a natural way and that tourism, whether affected by foreign businesses or not, is a rewarding business (Mowforth and Munt, 2008:49).
However, the real test for neo-colonial influence is whether these changes from travel and leisure and just how tourism has developed is down to local needs and wants, or whether it is purely created by undue affect from large international corporations. It could well be argued though that there is a thin series between your inequalities that inevitably emerge from a neo-liberal market due to the economic and politics inequalities between the producing and developed world and the direct impact of neo-colonialism on tourism. Both can result in negative results for producing countries, even though the decision-making operations might be quite different (Jamal and Robinson, 2009:154-155).
In bottom line, the literature review shows that travel and leisure has and continues to be a neo-colonial activity in at least some areas of the earth, and that this has likely led to unwanted effects for developing countries. However, there are certainly gaps in the literature in conditions of how much of tourism is based on neo-colonial ideals, and no real mention of travel and leisure in developed countries, which contributes a lot to tourism and obviously is normally not seen as neo-colonial in characteristics. However, even if just focusing on expanding countries, there is a insufficient information about the root causes for decisions in these areas, and an excessive amount of a give attention to negative results that perhaps have more to do with general financial inequalities as opposed to the prevalence of neo-colonialism in travel and leisure.
The next section will attempt to look at ways that theoretical frameworks and research methods can be used to fill the spaces in this research and come to a bottom line about the extent to which travel and leisure is a neo-colonial activity.
For this paper, principal research was at first considered as a way, but was dismissed due to difficulty of access to potential participants. Much of the emphasis of tourism as neo-colonialism has to be on producing countries, which immediately makes data collection more challenging. Also, in light of potential issues appealing between personnel within tourism market sectors in these growing countries and those that employ them makes primary research not practical because of this specific matter.
Therefore, secondary research is the most logical design for this paper. This also comes after on from the findings of the literature review, which discovered lots of gaps in the study as well as areas of research that may be examined in greater detail using various theoretical frameworks. This technique section will put together the various supplementary research methods which will be used, how these fit in with the literature review findings and what they can bring to the talk on the prevalence of tourism as a neo-colonial activity.
The first important things to keep in mind is to avoid misreading the scope of neo-colonialism by being caught up within the perspective of neo-colonialism as the complete framework for the study. The study must not basically be conducted from the point of view of the First World, and must look at how both root base of decision-making within tourism and results are identified from the perspective of developing countries. We must also go through the way in which those tourists from producing countries flow into other expanding countries and developed countries, as this can help us to understand the larger picture as it pertains to tourism and its activities. In order to avoid making snap judgements about the nature of travel and leisure, the range of analysis needs to be broadened and a multi-perspective way adopted. This is of course challenging, which is difficult to avoid Western-centric thinking sometimes. However, it is merely employing this method that the real motivations for tourism activity about the world can be recognized. As Ateljevic, Pritchard and Morgan (2007:24-26) discuss, this is known as 'de-centrising the tourism world'.
This is important as a methodological basis for the further research, because the books review identifies the actual fact that many sources concentrate only on the situation from a American perspective, particularly when espousing the issues of neo-colonialism. For example, many of the definitions or types of neo-colonialism focus on how Western countries like the US took benefit of countries such as Cuba as their 'playground', and that this was detrimental to the united states. This will not look at the point of view of Cuba, as well as the other politics aspects that resulted in negative outcomes in your community - reasons that are considerably wider than simply the Western influence on the tourism industry (Jafari, 2003:122).
However, taking a broader approach will not mean ignoring specific case studies and illustrations that could reveal the type of travel and leisure in producing countries, particularly as it stands now. Whilst it should be left to the people in these countries to choose what aspects of their culture are traditional or changeable, it can obviously be seen in areas including the Caribbean that, financially at least, travel and leisure is still dominated by the predominantly white and American corporate influence. For instance, most hotel managers in your community are still expatriates, with only lower positions being organised by local people. This may not be a deliberate example of neo-colonialism as it may genuinely be that this is the ultimate way to make the business successful. However, it is surely an area that needs discovering and higher understanding directed at how these unequal set ups occur - and if they are indeed only a tiny problem or part of a larger problem of American dominance of these sectors (Bennett, 2005:15-17).
This is the reason why case study strategy is important in this paper. There are lots of existing case studies already visible, but as mentioned most of them do not take onward this multi-perspective approach to understand the decision-making within travel and leisure and exactly how this reduces or enhances potential inequalities, and if these inequalities are immediately part of neo-colonial practice or for other reasons. Travel and leisure is a process, which unless there can be an obviously prominent hegemony at work, requires a look at the complex move of global ideas, people and capital. As global movements change, so case studies must go through the current situation and not merely adhere to preconceived notions of inequality (Salazar, in Richards and Munsters, 2010:188).
The research study approach can be an initial accessibility into understanding some specific examples of tourism activity in a variety of countries, and then different trends or patterns can be identified in order to start out forming a more general and overall understanding of the pervasiveness of neo-colonialism within tourism. The research study is useful here as well because it is less important to understand the final results of decision-making, because these can be negative or positive no matter the affect. Instead, it's important, through the multi-perspective approach, to understand the root decision-making within tourism across the world, which will determine whether tourism is merely portion a neo-colonial agenda or whether it is actually a complex global process that is affected by overseas and local celebrities in different ways, leading to different outcomes in various areas rather an absolute neo-colonial dominance (Beeton, in Ritchie, Burns and Palmer, 2005:37-40).
There are extensive cases of potential case studies that can be analysed and used to develop this wider picture that do not necessarily just fit into the traditional model of viewing a holiday area from the positioning of American dominance and growing world dependency. For example, Using and McDonald (2002:191) go through the role that intermediaries play in isolated rural communities in Papua New Guinea. This is not focusing on the outcomes of travel and leisure, but considering how different teams interact, and that it is possible through intermediaries for the holiday to be the same part of something somewhat than at its centre. This would suggest the potential for a power shift from neo-colonialism, even if inequalities and certain negative final results may continue and wider issues of monetary neo-colonialism continue. This means that tourism doesn't have to be specifically neo-colonial in dynamics, even if other inequalities persist for now.
Another good example is a study by Hasty (2002:47) that talks about travel and leisure across Africa and the advertising of Pan-Africanism. This review focuses on tourism in Ghana that is controlled by those within the country and developed to market more unity within Africa. The trouble here's that various different agendas mean that tourist events to market Pan-Africanism remove talk of potential variations and contradictions. Within this sense it isn't merely a issue of neo-colonialism, but wider concerns between a variety of actors and the careful balancing work between culture, politics and economic interests.
Finally, for travel and leisure as neo-colonial activity and its level to be known, current research should be comprehended in light of the global post-colonial surroundings. This fits in with the multi-perspective way earlier mentioned, as it will go beyond the initial endeavors to 'perfect' neo-colonialism that themselves may lead to colonial inequalities. For instance, appealing to lasting tourism as a way to overcome neo-colonialism could exacerbate the situation because the agenda and requirements for sustainability would be placed by the developed countries once again, and did not necessarily look at the must the destination locations. The post-colonial platform moves beyond this to check out the problem from all perspectives as opposed to the earlier ideal of hoping to resolve the inequalities produced from neo-colonialism and colonialism before this (Carrigan, 2010:202-203).
For example, if we go through the case of travel and leisure in the West Indies in a post-colonial sense, we can easily see many of the earlier inequalities that might have been associated with neo-colonialism. These inequalities could be viewed within neo-colonialism if viewed from one point of view or not properly analysed. Rich West Indian minority elites took fee of some parts of the tourism industry, and are exhibiting similar dominance and affect to previous neo-colonial impact. However, as the inequalities in this sense move and neo-colonialism becomes less of an issue, the unwanted effects on many of the local population stay. Further, these new market leaders within the marketplace can move into the international market, and for that reason a greater interactive stage of tourism commences where flows of money and influence come from producing countries as well as to developing countries (Laws and regulations, Faulkner and Moscado, 1998:231-232).
It is also likely that this is of neo-colonialism should alter as globalisation continues and companies are more global in their outreach and ideals. Multinationals will then be as entwined in the destination region as their prior region of origin, or the multinational may indeed originate in the vacation spot region. This alters how these businesses are able to influence tourism, and also how they positively or negatively influence tourism. That which was previously a one-way romantic relationship will develop into a complicated dialogue between consumers, employees, companies and both local and national governments to determine how tourism grows and where its hobbies lie (Page and Connell, 2006:467).
It may be that neo-colonialism only is present in its most extreme form in specific types of travel and leisure that already are of an exploitative characteristics, such as making love tourism. These forms of tourism are unequal due to very character of the activity, but these varieties of tourism are slowly being removed and reduced in the post-colonial world as all stars within the vacationer industry commence to consider them unacceptable. However, it is hard to completely remove these problems due to greater issues of monetary inequality outside of the visitor industry (Bauer and Holowinska, 2009:6).
Overall, the method of the research needs to be multi-perspective, centered on a multitude of case studies to be able to develop an image of the current status of travel and leisure. Most importantly, it needs to be place within the post-colonial context and the questions to be clarified dependant on the subjects rather than the researcher. This will give a view of travel and leisure as neo-colonialism that is not already mired in neo-colonialist thought (Belsky, in Phillimore and Goodson, 2004:286).
The discussion portion of the dissertation use these procedures to analyse this issue, and then the following bottom line section will summarise these conclusions and further suggestions for research.
There is still a clear financial imbalance between your First World and Third World, which is the effect of a variety of factors including First World hegemony and the consequences of colonialism and neo-colonialism.
The American, developed nations still dominate the traveler market, due mainly to their economic superiority. Ethnical changes are less of a concern than they were during the colonial age, but monetary dominance can still undermine destination cultures. Developing countries still need the amount of money in the form of investment to develop tourist markets, and this allows European countries to determine terms, like the flow of cash back to developed countries through multinational companies and the utilization of expatriate staff over local staff. This isn't simply a subject for travel and leisure however, and it is a challenge in almost all economic areas. In tourism the problem is no worse, and in simple fact in lots of ways it is more of the shut system. The great things about travel and leisure often go to American countries, but generally they are the countries that energy demand. Sometimes this neo-colonialism shows itself within the vacationer industry, resulting in inequalities and negative benefits for growing countries.
Not all negative final results within tourism are credited to neo-colonialist factors, and not all neo-colonialist factors within travel and leisure business lead to negative outcomes, particularly when seemed upon from nationwide, local and personal levels.
Tourism as neo-colonialism does indeed keep producing countries reliant on developed countries, particularly if tourism is a sizable part of the GDP. However, not all factors should be considered negative, because it is not merely tourism that maintains developing countries reliant on developed countries. Overall economic and political inequalities also add, as do inner problems within growing countries such as poor management, insufficient resources, wars and political instabilities. Tourism, even though dominated by overseas companies, does provide much-needed careers that may well not otherwise be available, and can help maintain political stability in countries due to needed profits from tourism.
Also, not absolutely all travel and leisure that is locally affected is positive. It can be exploitative between different locations or ethnic organizations, and can do all the harm to culture and the environment as neo-colonial tourism.
Much of the study is too centered on outcomes and the ways to 'solve' neo-colonialist problems within travel and leisure.
Outcomes are not the main concentration here. The concentration should be on the initial decision-making process, because that's where affect and inequalities are most keenly felt. Currently, the research that condemns neo-colonialism only further imbeds it since it is too Western-centric and does not understand the differences between what might reverse foreign impact and what's actually wished and accepted by the vacation spot countries.
Instead, a post-colonial, multi-perspective procedure shows that whilst neo-colonialism in travel and leisure still continues, global flows of money and information are changing, and with it so is tourism.
The world has changed within the last fifteen years or even more with the speedy development of technology and the internet. This has globalised society somewhat and has allowed information flows to go in several directions for the very first time. For example, the Chinese are an evergrowing effect on world travel and leisure, both in terms of China as a vacation spot and its growing wealthy school as tourists venturing surrounding the world. These sorts of developments therefore have to be viewed from different perspectives, and not merely from the recently established perspective of travel and leisure as a neo-colonialist activity. Whilst monetary inequalities allow developed-country dominance to keep, this will not mean that tourism flows aren't modifying or that First-World businesses that get excited about other countries are unwelcome or having a poor impact.
Tourism, whilst still displaying the inequalities within the rest of contemporary society, is slowing starting to move from neo-colonial techniques.
Global inequalities will continue, but tourism is witnessing some change. As individuals from developed countries are more aware of other cultures their demands for travel and leisure change. Also, as producing countries continue to change and develop and their cultures modify, their own features and needs change. The stream of money and information is no longer one-way, which means that not only will producing countries have a say in their own travel and leisure markets, nevertheless they will become the future patrons of other visitor markets in both developed and developing countries. This can all move travel and leisure further away from being a exclusively neo-colonial practice.
In relation to conclusion 3, further research should move away from outcomes-based examinations of the traveler industry when looking at affects on travel and leisure, and instead focus on decision-based analyses. It is in the area of decision-making that affect and inequalities most likely turn out. If negative or positive effects occur from these decisions is certainly important, if the decision is not intensely inspired by multinational businesses under the guise of neo-colonialism, then regardless of the outcomes these visitor activities cannot be said to be neo-colonialist. Furthermore, analyses that concentrate on the origins of decision-making gives a better knowledge of how tourist sectors develop and change as time passes in the present day global contemporary society.
Based upon final result 4, further research should move away from the neo-colonial bottom as the beginning for examination. Globalisation and the climb of larger producing countries such as China have created a really post-colonial landscaping where traditional measures of colonialism and neo-colonialism are less useful. Whilst rich-poor and 1st/3rd world inequalities still predominate, moves of tourism, effect and money are changing and becoming more complex. Merely trying to resolve the previous neo-colonialist bias of travel and leisure is not enough, because any research that starts on this basis will not look at the status of the modern global contemporary society and the inescapable ethnic changes in producing countries. It is important to conduct research from many perspectives, as opposed to the futile effort of trying to solve neo-colonialism by starting from a Western-centric point of view that is decidedly neo-colonialist in aspect because it would not take into account the real views and needs of those who supposedly need 'saving' from the dominance of American society. We should not assume that they want keeping, or that indeed if they do this we could possibly be the ones to bring about this salvation.
Finally, based on conclusion 5, it is important for further research to carry out more in-depth studies of the global vacationer market, and the moves of culture, effect and money that occur. Taking one country at the same time is a good learn to understand the fundamentals of these flows, but it requires a global review, taking a look at the ways in which different actors interact with each other, in order to truly know how the power balance currently rests and where it is likely to move towards in the coming decades.
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay