Regional Tourism and South-South Economic Cooperation Author(s): Krishna B Ghimire Reviewed work(s): Source: The Geographical Journal,

Vol. 167, No. 2 (Jun., 2001), pp. 99-110 Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3060481 . Accessed: 20/01/2012 01:05
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Blackwell Publishing and The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Geographical Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

The Geographical Journal, Vol. 167, No. 2, June 2001, pp. 99-1 l O

Regional

tourism

and

South-South

economic

cooperation
KRISHNA GHIMIRE B
United Nations ResearchInstitutefor Social Development(UNRISD), Palaisdes Nations, 121 1 Geneva 10, Switzerland E-mail: GhimireWunrisd.org Thispaper was accepted for publicationin February 2001 Regionaltourismwithindevelopingcountriesis a growingphenomenon. Yet this aspect has been largelyneglected in social science researchas well as tourismplanning.This paper highlights generalnature,scale and economic significanceof regionaltourism the in three leading regions in Asia,Africaand LatinAmerica.The topic is especiallytimely as economic self-relianceand cooperation are increasinglyreiteratedin the context of the emergence of regional groupings.A key question addressed is whether regional tourismdevelopment representsany new and viable prospects for regionaleconomic improvementand partnership, especiallycompared to international tourismcentred on attractingvisitorsfrom industrialized countries. Based on a criticalassessment of the experiences of three regional blocs (ASEAN the Association of South-EastAsian Nations; SADC-the Southern African Development Community;and Mercosur-a common marketcomprisingArgentina,Brazil,Paraguay and tJruguay, with Chile being an associated member),the paper suggests that a basic appreciation the prospects of of regional tourism is not enough to produce perceptible benefits. Regional tourism development is occurring in a haphazardmanner, with little attention to managing existingsocio-economic inequalitiesand centre-periphery relations.The paper is based primarily the review of secondary literature on readilyavailableto the authorcombined with a few documents obtained directlyfromdifferentregionalorganizations through or Internetsearch. A small amount of material,especially concerning emerging tourism trends and outcomes, is drawn from a research project on nationalmass tourism in developingcountriescoordinatedby the authorat the United NationsResearchInstitute for Social Development, Geneva.
KEYWORDS

tourism,regionaltourismin developing countries,South-Southeconomic cooperation, ASEAN, SADC,Mercosur,self-reliant economic development

I <e incustry, X ourism, transport and trade,has international financing institutions tendedto regard remainedan integralpart of development tourism a 'clean'industry as (especially whencomplanningin developingcountries.In some pared to manufacturing). in recent years, But cases tourismhas been seen as a 'saviour'to environmental problems associatedwith tourism, stagnant industriesand traditionalagriculture, suchas pollution, wasteproblem, the overconstruccreating new inter-sectoral linkages demands. tion,excessiveuse of waterandwood, anddegraand In particular, different the branches the tourism dationof other natural of resources,have become industry, such as accommodation, catering, food clearly manifest. and beverages,excursions, recreational activities Developingcountriesconsideredthey had a andthe entertainment industry, operating tour and 'comparative advantage' vis-a-vis industrialized the transport, souvenirproduction sale are con- world as they possessed exceptional tourist and sideredto open vast prospectsfor employment resources attractions, as warmandsunny and such and income to diverse population groups. weather,attractive beaches, unique wildlifeand Governments, associated business groups and tropical forestsand exotic or authenticcultures.
ISSN 001 6-7398/01 /0002-0099/$00.20/0
t

2001 The Royal Geographical Society

100

Regional tourism South-South and economiccooperation political instabilityand economic stagnation, less detrimentalto the country's balance of payments and should create substantialincome and employment. But despite this potential,very few developing countries have a consistent policy on national tourism. When a significant number of tourists begin to take holidays,they demand facilitiesand services. Governments have tended to cope with this process in an ad hoc manner, with tourism policies being developed in a completely unplannedfashion. Another characteristicof tourism is the rapid development of regionaltourismwithindeveloping countries, with certain emerging prospects for economic developmentin the South,but also many impending problems similar to those associated with internationaltourism. This aspect is so far totally neglected in tourism literature,but a few policy measures are being undertaken at the level of regional institutions. This paper will explore this particular aspect of Southern regional tourism,especiallylookingat it as a possible way of strengtheningSouth-Southeconomic cooperation. For several decades now, South-Southcollaboration has remained an important foreign policy agenda in developingcountries.Thisissue has been especiallyarticulatedin the context of the work of the Non-AlignedMovement, Group of 15, Group of 77 and many other forums. South-South cooperation has been regarded as an essential mechanismfor promotingeconomic development and self-reliance, increasingunderstanding soliand daritywithinthe South and being able to negotiate its demands in world forums.Trade,finance, industryand business,science and technology,transport and infrastructure have been considered as priority areas for collaboration.However, there are few tangibleachievements.Manyof the Southerninitiatives are limitedto designingappropriate strategies and mechanismsratherthan implementing them. A South Centre reportadmittedin 1990 that
... it has generally provedeasier to co-operatein the political sphere,where important joint initiatives continued to be mountedand sustained. economicissues On therehasbeen a wide gapbetween,on the one hand,the rhetoricof solidarity, ambitiousobjectivesin interthe national resolutions, the manyprogrammes out in and set intergovernmental agreements,and, on the other, the actionthathas ensued. SouthCommission 1990, 149

Indeed, in the 1950s and 1960s, newlyindependentcountriesin Asiaand Africafrequently inferredtourism development to be a means of Xresource transfer' from the North to the South. As such, developing countries (usually with financial and technical assistance from bi- and multilateral agencies) sought to promote tourism through identification and development of new sites, promotion and marketing of diversified tourism products, enactment of favourablelabour laws, provision of subsidized credits and tax exemptionsto foreigninvestors.Nationaland international tourism business groups gladly collaboratedwith governmentswhen they saw possibilities for profit. A thornyissue, however, was that the privileged tourist groups, coming mainlyfrom the industrialized countries in the North, tended to respond more to the economic and political circumstances in their respective countries than to needs in Southern countries. In particular,developing countries possessed little capital, technology and know-how to develop tourism. Instead, this situation reinforced 'dependency' relationshipswith industrialized countries.There is a vast amount of literaturethat indicates how this relationshiphas resulted in the repatriation the bulk of tourism of revenues to industrialized countries,while generating many enduringexploitativeeconomic relations, human rightsviolations,and culturaland environmental problemsin touristdestinationsin developing countries (de Kadt 1979; Butler 1991; Pleumarom1994). It has thus become clear that tourism,based on the arrivalof international tourists from Northern countries,was not such a reliablesector as initially perceived. At the same time, in several developing countries, the accompanying modernization processes and development of Westernized leisure ethic- in partstimulatedby the arrival Northern of tourists- have fostered increased domestic tourism. Not only the privileged,but increasinglythe middle and lower strata of the population groups are seeking to travel,and at times even abroad. In fact, in a number of developing countries where one would usuallyimagineinternational tourismto be providing a substantialincome, deficits have emerged between tourism receipts and expenditure by their nationals abroad. Recent examples include Brazil and Thailand (Diegues 2001; Kaosa-ard al. 2001). et Increasingly, in several developing countries, national tourism has become more importantin terms of the total numberof touristsand its contribution to national economy than international tourism (Ghimire2001). In general, it can be said that nationaltourismis less sensitiveto international

In recent years, the issue of South-Southcollaboration has been especially reiterated through regionalorganizationssuch as ASEAN (Association of South-East Asian Nations),SAARC(South Asian Associationfor RegionalCooperation),and SADC

economiccooperation and tourism South-South Regional

101

(Southern African Development Community). At the national level, there are only a small These organizationshave sought to intensify number of developing countries that have In cooperation. line attempted to assess the potential gain (as well as economicandpolitical regional tourism harm)from regionaltourismdevelopment. It is very cooperation, for withthisrationale regional meansof revitalizing recently-especially with the creation of regional is oftenseen as an exceptional economicbase, gen- cooperation bodies - that regional tourism has the and diversifying regional and new employment incomepossibilities been considered as a phenomenon to be recogerating people-to- nized and worth integrating into the regional and forlocalcommunities strengthening people contacts.And a few specificpolicyinitia- planningprocess. alongtheselinesindifferent Regionaltravelpatterns,based on the data protiveshavebeenstarted the to attempts discuss principal vided by W1O, for ASEAN,SADC and Mercosur, This regions. paper features,magnitudeand possible outcomes of are presented in Figure 1. They suggest that a the In some of these initiatives. particular, paper substantialtourismflow occurs between developwill examinewhether regionaltourismdevelop- ing countries in the respective regions. In 1998 ment stands for a new economic dynamo for about 55 per cent of tourists in the ASEAN the region,especiallycomparedto North-South countries came from Asian and Pacificdeveloping countries. Some 73 per cent of the visitorsto the tourism. SADC region originatedfrom Africa.In the case of the Understanding generalnatureand scale of Mercosur,visitors from LatinAmerica constituted tourism regional over 70 per cent of regional arrivals.Indeed, not of hereas activities only is the number of tourists from developing is tourism' identified 'Regional but countries in the region high, but W1O forecasts the by travel peoplewithin sameregion, leisure travelin such as suggest a sustainedgrowthof intraregional outsidetheirusualcountryof residence, America most regionswithindevelopingcountriesin coming Central Africa, SouthEastAsia,Southern the Besides close geographical years. Intraregionaltourist arrivalsin Africa, for andSouthAmerica. countriesin a given regionmay share example, will constitute 64 per cent of all tourist proximity, in ecological arrivals 2020 (compared to 58%in 1995). Simidevelopments, many similarhistorical socio-economic larly,83 per cent of all the tourist arrivalsin East of standards living, characteristics, com- Asiaand the Pacificare to be fromwithinthe region featuresand population cultural structures, to Hencetherearelikely be manydistinct in 2020 (compared to 79% in 1995). In contrast, position. tourist the W1O suggests a decrease for intraregional of in features the composition the principal to and and interests activities their touristarrivals the Americasfrom 77 per cent in leisure their groups, influenceon the local economy,cultureand so 1995 to 62 per cent in 2020 (W1O 1997). Since nationaltourismauthorities,the W1O and fromthe tourists to as forth compared international on North.But information manyof tourismbusiness groupsare keen to give optimistic industrialized figures on the currentand future patternsof tourlacking. aspectsis totally these crucial tour- ism expansion, they at times disregardthe various to Thereis no coherentapproach regional Tourism complexities involved in defining and counting the For ismdevelopment. example, World (W1 Organization O), a United Nations agency different tourist groups. In the case of regional data and tourism, in particular,it is possible that people for which has responsibilities gathering been frequently crossing borders to neighbouring has planson tourism, primarily elaborating concerned with the promotionof internationalcountries for all kinds of purposes may be registourism involving tourists from developed tered as tourists each time they pass the checkto attention the emer- points (Pleumaron1997). Despite these difficulties It countries. has paidtrivial gence of Southern regional tourism. This is in the definitionand counting of regionaltourists, of reflectedin the lackof its treatment core con- regional leisure travel today is undoubtedly a of cepts, definitionsand classifications regional significant phenomenon in many regions in the the tourism,as well as in understanding major South. and theirbehaviour inter- The importanceof regionalor Southerntourism groupsinvolved, tourist and at ests. Looking its past projects publications' appears especially evident when it is compared has with the numberof touristscoming fromdeveloped list, it becomes clear that the organization no undertaken majorprojectsin this area (W1O countries. For example, WTO data suggest that that knowing inthe pastthe in 1998 within ASEAN, SADC and Mercosur is 2000).This surprising in keento get involved techni- blocs Northerntouristscomprisedonly 39, 23 and WTOhas remained avoiding 24 per cent respectively (WTO 2000a). Future issues,whilegenerally cal and managerial politics, power relations and socio-economic expansionin tourismwithindeveloping countriesis more than likely,given a changingleisureethic that inequalities.

102

Regional tourism South-South and economiccooperation

ASEAN
AsialPac. Developed countries 15 7fO_

Europe Mddli0 ESst

28% _

0.6%
/ /

Not spec0ed 4.2%

Latin America 0.3%

<

Northern America 6+5%

SAD4C

Northern

AsialPac.

Developed countries 1.5%

MERCOSUR
Asia/Pac.

Northern America

s8.1% /
>\ =

_
brope 15*2%

Deve}oping countries 0+6% Asia/Pacv Developed countries 0+7/0

Mddle Ast 0.1% wNot specified

4.8% Figure 1 Touristarrivalsin ASEAN,SADC and Mercosur regions in 1998 (in %) Source: WTO 2000a

Regional tourism South-South and economiccooperation

103

attachesimportance recreational holiday parallel growthin regional to to and trade,industry and activities, growingurbanization the aspiration business, wellas to the development transport and as of of citydwellers escape to pleasure holiday andinfrastructure. to and Insomeways,thisapproach was spots,andincreased disposable than tryingto promotetraveland incomes leisure more realistic for purposes amongthe middleclassesas well as the relatedbusinesswithoutcooperationwithinthe aspiring low-income classes in many regions broader issues of economyand commercial rela(Ghimire 1997). tions. With viewto boosting a tourism the region, in Giventhisgrowth potential, inthe contextof people-to-people and contactsare perceivedvitalby seekingto fosterincreased political, economicand removing andcurrency visa restrictions. the case In cultural links,it would seem natural different of certain regionalblocs, tourismdevelopment that regionalorganizations would consider regional committees studygroupshave been created. and travelpromotion be an important to policyissue. In a very few cases, concrete regionaltourism Buthow areconcretepolicymeasures undertaken policy measureshave also been undertaken. To in different regional contexts? Whataretheirpoliti- elaborateon these developments and draw relcal and economic settings?How consistentare evantconclusions the roleof regional on tourism to these measures termsof theirgeneral in objectives promote South-South cooperation, work of the and outcomesin practice? underlying The issue is three regionalblocs in Asia, Africaand Latin to whatextentregional tourism integrated the America assessed. is in are regional planning processas a meansto enhance regionaleconomic cooperationin order to take ASEAN advantage human, of material natural and resources An examination the Association South-East of of available the region,or is it mainly in inducedby Asian Nations (ASEAN)instructive at leasttwo is for powerful regional business wellas national as elite it is one of the leadingSouthern groupsthatare keen to maintain closed,oppor- reasons.First, with significantexperience in a regional blocs, tune tourism market themselves? for How are the regionaleconomic cooperationextendingover rights tourism of workers protected? Crucially, how has comwouldthe ensuingincomeand benefitsbe distrib- threedecades.Second,tourism received prehensive consideration theorganization's in work uted across differentpopulationgroups in the and strategic planning, as countryor region? there any regional Are policy one of the world's especially the regionis major tourism destinations. The specificitiesin these respects comparedto the organization sees tourismto be management international of tourism example? industryprovidingsubstantial 'an important for foreign exchange receipts and employmentopportunities'. Given this,it believes S,oecific experiences regional in tourism cooperation . . . tourism to keep pacewithglobalisation has trendsand The perceptions collectiveregional of self-reliance marketliberalization, enhance the opportunityfor to and economiccooperation not new in develare travelbusinessto expandand compete across national oping countries.Nor is there any lack of formal borders attract and and to regional groupings. Indeed,regional organizations the long-term investments technology sustain viability the tourism of industry. of one typeor another nowcommonly are foundin ASEAN undateda, 4 allregions. muchof the workof these regional But organizations limitedto the level of political Regional is visitors encompass significant a groupof cooperation betweengovernments parliamen- touristsin most ASEAN and countries.In 1998, for tarybodies.Although close collaboration trade example, Thailand Singapore, in in and these tourists industry business, and transport infrastructure, and comprised and26.8 percentof totalincoming 21.3 science, educationand technology,information tourists.In Indonesiaand Malaysia, they repreand communication, environment so forthis sentedthe substantially and higher proportions 45.2 of commonlycalled for and some initiatives have and 69.3 per cent respectively (Table1). Among beentaken, mostcontexts in achievements these the original in members, only the Philippines a has areasare meagre.Nevertheless, establishment relatively numberof regional the low tourists visiting of regional organizations provided political the country, has a reflecting lackof touristsecurity the space to discusscollaboration to seek imple- and infrastructures. emerging and Newly tourism destimentation a certain of number policiesin these nations,notablyLaos and Cambodia, of have also broadareas. begunto attract considerable a number regional of As far as the tourismsector goes, very few tourists, especially since access by cars and regional groupshavepaidspecificattention this coaches has become possiblefrom Thailand. to A areaof activity. Tourism understood expandin cheaper cost of livingand relatively is to unspoiled

104

economiccooperation and tourism South-South Regional

Table 1 Touristarrivalsat frontiersof the ASEANcountries by countries of origin in 1998 (in %) Tourists'origins Asia/Pacific developing countries All ASEAN

Countries visited

North Latin Africa America America

Not Middle Asia/Pacific developed countries2 Europe East specified 4.2 24.8 15.2 10.6 6.6 26.4 14.5 18.6 27.6 7.1 16.83 0.9 5.9 1.0 0.4 0.8 0.3 1.2 0.65 0.2 4.8 9.2 0.1 1.0 45.6 4.23

Brunei Cambodia Indonesia Laos Malaysia Myanmar Philippines Singapore Thailand Vietnam

0.5 0.46 0.1 1.2 1.0

0.3 0.6 0.1 0.15 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.32

1.1 11.4 4.3 5.0 2.04 6.5 24.9 7.4 6.5 2.6 6.47

91.6 46.1 59.0 79.3 78.1 49.4 29.1 49.8 45.5 38.4 55.11

(89.6) (20.4) (45.2) (73 .0) (69.3) (9.6) (6.4) (26.8) (21 .3)
(1.1)3

2.2 11.6 19.4 4.9 7.5 17.4 21.3 22.2 16.9 6.3 15.71

Total for ASEAN 0.69

(36.00)

Source:WTO 2000, 11-803 Notes. 1 US, Canada 2 Japan, Australia,New Zealand 3 Data only specified for Thailand

incentives 3 tourismmanpowerdevelopment; further provide traits and natural cultural tourism,and in to visit these countries.Furthermore, recent 4 environmentally-sustainable travel (ASEAN unfor 5 facilitation of intra-ASEAN years,the Mekongregionhas provedalluring economic investment and tourism develop- dated b, 1). of In recent years, the ASEAN National Tourism groups various attracting thereby mentprojects, and officials tourism Organizations (NTOs) have remained especially businesspeople,government promoters. national was collaboration seen as an active in formulating action.and regionaltourism tourism Regional They have served as strategiesand plans of of spheresoon afterthe establishment a useful institutional important mechanismfor the exchange ASEAN in 1967. Inthe late 1960s andearly1970s, and experience, harmonization were the of vital information and programmes, marketing, when trade and economic investment develop- of tourism policies informationdissemination. cooperation, areas of regional principal to recognized be an training,research and activities have consistently was mentin tourism already In Indeed, most of these these activities. been identified as core issues of regional tourism elementin fostering important createda Sub-Committee 1976, the organization since major collaboration efforts of for on Tourism the development coordinated development place in the 1970s. began to take In and projects theirenhancedmarketing. tourism The NTOs have also sought to tackle problems was Forum established such as epidemics (e.g. cholera),the haze originat1981, the ASEAN Tourism to ing as an annualevent. Variousaspects relating negative media reports and research train- andfrom fires in Indonesia,affect touristarrivals marketing, promotion, tourism in other problems which ing are discussedand plansof actionelaborated the region.Theythus attemptedto reassuretourists throughthis Forum.It designated1992 a 'Visit as well as businesspartners ASEAN NTOswere that to ASEAN Year'with variousmeasures promote doing their best to address these issues jointly to In in tourism the region. 1998,ASEAN proposed These organizations were also on focus its tourismactivities the followingfive (Hamdi 1997). motivated to promote tourism more energetically themes: strategic in order to help to overcome the financial and the 1 marketing ASEAN regionas a singletourism currency crisis that the region faced in 1997. In order to improve the region's image and boost destination; investments; tourism tourism,ASEANdesignated 2002 the 'VisitASEAN 2 encouraging

economiccooperation and tourism South-South Regional Year'underthe leadershipof the NTOs Millennium undated b, 1). as well as the privatesector (ASEAN tourismis recognizedas a vitalelement in Clearly, regionaleconomic development and cooperation. But most of the efforts have been put into the development of international tourism. Regional tourism development has tended to receive insignificantattention, despite the fact that regional touristsare clearlythe largesttouristgroups in most South EastAsiancountries.Indeed,the recent financial and economic instabilitieshave encouraged many South EastAsiantouristspreviouslytravelling to NorthAmericaand Europeto take theirholidays in theirown countriesor the region,therebyproviding further impulse to regional tourism development. Among the strategiesdeveloped to enhance regional tourism are improved transport links, and steady removalof visa restrictions the provision of easier currencyexchange. Economic links have continued to flourish among South East Asian countries in spite of national political instabilities regimes (e.g. or the establishmentof authoritarian Myanmar).But the economic competition among countries and concern about rapid immigration from poorer neighbouringcountries at times also tended to hold back development in regionaltravel and tourism. In addition, a marked difference in standardsof living between the poorer countries (Cambodia,Laos, Myanmarand Vietnam)and the relativelybetter-offones (Malaysia,Singaporeand means that not all South EastAsians have Thailand) an equal capacityfor leisuretravel,althoughupper and upper-middle classes even in the poorer countries have always had sufficient economic means to travelin the region. Attentive NGOs and academics have tended to point out how this division in the standardof livingand nationaleconomic strengthare allowing richercountriesto take more advantageof regional economic and tourismcollaboration.Businessand tourismgroupsfromthe lattercountriesare encouraged to make investmentsin new destinationsand products,with littlecontrol over theiractivities.On the whole, in promotingthis new or regional-level tourism initiativelittleattention is given to the uncaused by desirablesocial and economic hardships tourism,humanrightsviolationsand environmental and Monidegradation.The TourismInvestigation toring team, an NGO designed to foster popular debate and action on tourism, development and issues in the Mekong sub-region,for environmental example, states that:

105

travel leisure the Increasingly, risein Western-style manynegative in the regionis thoughtto trigger practices,customs, consequenceson traditional and familyand communityvalues (Pleumarom
1 999).

SADC

DevelAfrican knownas the Southern Originally and Conference(SADCC) opment Coordination DevelAfrican in established 1980, the Southern acceleraimsto bring (SADC) opmentCommunity ated economic growth,creatingmore jobs and reducingpovertyin the region,in line with the countries.Howmade by ASEAN achievements ever, there have been few tangibleaccomplishments.One problemwas that until 1994 South economicpower,was the Africa, largestregional the end of the not the key player.Following regime,the countryhas swiftlymoved apartheid of to hold 'centre stage' withinthe functioning sees bright As the organization. the organization prospectsfor expansionin regionaltrade and have various institutions been created investment, signedin these areasin recent and new protocols years. African in is Tourism important most Southern safaritourism. countries,especiallyinternational In significant. has tourism also remained Regional the past, regionaltourismwas geared towards needs of a and travel vacation meetingthe leisure groupof whitepeople and a few black privileged But elites and businessmen. in recentyears,secstrata the of and tionsof the middle lower-middle have shown interestin leisuretravel, population frequentlycombined with other activities(e.g. As business). shownin treatment, health shopping, Table2, most of the touristsin the regioncome countries. fromthe SADC the cooperation, develInthe contextof regional to is opmentof tourism considered be a keypolicy Thisis guidedby the idea thattourism objective. from wouldbe one of the mainsectorsbenefiting The closer regionalintegration. specific goal of has tourism been to
development to contribution regional maximize tourism's exchange of and the through generation retention foreign creation,humanresourcesdevelearnings, employment development. opmentand rural 4 SADCundated,

A five-yeartourismdevelopmentstrategywas elaboratedin 1994 which examinedinvestment and infrafacilities of consume needs, development visitor Instead,people are seduced to increasingly research development, resources human and imagesof reality spendmoney structure, and glorified distorted identifiedthe and data collection.It specifically on to enjoythe sightsand pleasures offer. 1 New Frontiers997, 3 need to promote tourismon a regionalscale

106

and economiccooperation Regional tourism South-South

Table 2 Tourist arrivalsat frontiers of the SADC countries by countries of origin in 1998 (in %) Tourists'origins Africa

Countries visited

All

SADC

Latin America

North America'

Asia/Pacific developing countries

Asia/Pacific developed countries2

Europe

Middle East

Not specified

Angola Botswana3 Congo DR Lesotho Malawi Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Seychelles South Africa Swaziland Tanzania Zambia Zimbabwe Total for SADC

141 89.8 41.9 98.6 79.8 29.2 76.7 9.9 72.9 83.9 71.9 75.7 73.00

(8.0) (88.2) (?) (98.4) (64.1 ) (11.6) (75.7) (4.2) (71.0) (78.0) (53.7) (71.7) (68.67)

6.8 0.03 2.3 0.02 0.2

7.7 1.3 0.3 2.9 0.9 1.8 4.2 3.4

3.8 o.64 2.5 0.3 4.4

0.9 0.65

2.1

66.2 7.7 15.0 0.8 12.8 63.2 19.9 80.1 16.9 12.1 18.5 14.6 18.36

0.5 38.4 4.5 0.01 1.6 1.1 0.3 2.1 0.7

0.09

1.1 0.8 2.1 0.1 1.1 0.68

2.7 2.0 0.3 1.4 1.72

0.9 1.6 1 4.1 3.9 1.49

4.0 4.7 3.17

0.17

1.42

Source: WTO 2000a, 11-803

Notes: ' US, Canada 2 Japan, Australia,New Zealand 3 Based on 1997 statistics 4 Data including visitors from Japan 5 Data excluding visitors from Japan 6 In 1996

and Spatial Development; in attractions * Lubombo bearing mindmanyuniquetourist in outcomeof * Okavango International tourism region. primary A UpperZambezi the Southern African of this strategy was the establishment a Regional zone (de Beeret al. 1999). (RETOSA), of Africa Tourism Organization Southern and in 1996, withthe view of coordinating imple- Anotherprojectincludesthe creationof transBut mentingsome of the above activities. as the frontier Mozambique parks betweenSouthAfrica, organization lacked both human and financial and Zimbabwe, easy and thereby facilitating travel to resources, workbecame limitedmainly the improvedaccommodation its facilitiesfor tourists in promotion tourism the region.In particular, (Koch of of 1994).Butprogress the execution many in the has the organization soughtto increase volume of theseprojects beenslowdue primarily the to has of tourismbusiness by welcominginternationallackof necessary as funds, especially the implemenand touristsand by identifying developingnew tation of most projectsis left to the individual (Retosa 2000;de Beer countries market nichesforthe region whichhaveto dealwithmanycompeting et al. 1 999). needs (cf.de Beeret al. 1999). severalinitia- Theaboveinitiatives nevertheless Besidesthe creationof RETOSA, provided have tives have been takento attractincreasedinter- increased officials in institutional space for tourism nationaltourism.Some of the recent projects the regionto exchangetheirpointsof view and undertaken with the specific goal of expanding organizeprotocolmeetings.One such meeting, physicaland social infrastructure September1998, proposedthe creationof a tourism-related in the: andfacilities include single touristvisa for the entire regionto ease for restrictions formalities international and Spatial Development; border * Trans Africa Coast2Coast by and tourists, the issuehassince been discussed Corridor; * Maputo Development

economiccooperation Regional tourism South-South and

107

in immigration authorities the differentmember Althoughvarious strategies have been elaborated, their implementation has been extremely slow countries (SADC undated). travelby owing to the lack of coordinationin monetaryand As far as regionaltourisminvolving and citizensof SADCcountriesis concerned,few-if fiscal policies,financialand politicalinstabilities haveto datebeen under- the dominance of Braziliannational interests to any- concretemeasures and such as promote its automobile,manufacturing agricultaken,althougha numberof countries, and of SouthAfrica, have noted the importance this turalsectors (Grandi Schutt1999; Bucar1997). sector (DEAT 1996). Despite the overwhelming UnlikeASEANand SADC,tourism has received structureand most tourism promo- littleattentionwithin the institutional number regional of tourists, tion activitiesare targetedtowardsinternationalworking of Mercosur. Most of its decisions are products are taken under 11 working subgroups that extend too tourists fromthe North.Tourist this heavilybiasedto servicing groupof tourists, from tax and customs mattersto transport,indusRegional tour- trial and agricultural policies. Tourism is not focusingmainly naturetourism. on in included in these subgroups, although harmonizists, on the other hand,are mainlyinterested holidayrecreationinvolvingvisits to cities and ation of customs, common taxationand investment shopping entertainment. policies and development of transportwould have and historical monuments, investments accom- an indirectinfluence in the expansion of tourismin in On the whole government facilities not reflect the region. do modation othervisitor and of of the interests motivations the bulk regional This is not to suggest that the tourism sector is and of visitors.The participation the privatesector, totally disregarded by the Mercosur group of in to development countries.At the nationallevel Brazil Argentina, whichis seen as crucial tourism and have active tourism policies. This has on the region,has also tendedto concentrate the in particular, nichemarket, muchof the somewhat influenced the Mercosur secretariatto as international tourism investment tourismhas tended to come from recognize the economic potentialof regionaltourin foreigngroups.In many countries,nationaland ism. It has looked at ways of facilitatingregional merelyas subordinate part- tourism by easing border restrictions.Also, the localinvestors remain groupsand the limited development and improvement in cross-border nersof foreigninvestment has remained a constant concern government attemptsto encouragedomesticor infrastructure has communityentrepreneurship producedfew (The Economist 12 October 1996; The Financial the tangible results; hasbeen,forexample, case Times 1 September 2000). These issues were conthis for sidered by the SpecialistMeeting on Tourismand regulations in SouthAfrica. Visaand currency intractable. And the TechnicalCommittee No. 2 on Custom Affairs regionalvisitorsare frequently cultural preconception (OAS 1995). The organizationhas also sought to there is stilla widespread to privi- launch a more coordinated marketingstrategyon whichconsiders 'tourism be an exclusive manyblacksfeel the Internetby seeking to promote leadingtourism lege of whites',therebymaking Westernized tourism destina- sites and facilities in the region (see Mercosur uneasyaboutvisiting tions. Littleattentionis given to many of these 2000). level. Regionaltourism is a well-establishedphenomcritical issuesat the SADC
enon in South Americaand recent policy measures and to improveinfrastructure visitorfacilitiesas well as to reduce frontier formalities have produced several positive results in terms of increasingthe number of tourists in various countries. In Brazil, for example, regional tourists came mainly from Argentinaand Uruguay before the 1970s, but in recent decades the number of incoming tourists from other neighbouringcountries has increased significantly a resultof the improvementin roads as and communicationsystems (Diegues 2001), with regionaltouristscomprisingnearlyhalf of the total incomingtourists(Table3). In Chile,54 per cent of the touristscome from neighbouringcountries. In Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay, this group comprises between two-thirdsand three-quarters of total tourists. still Visaand custom restrictions remaincomplex, especially for tourists from poorer countries. No

Mercosur

market' Spanish; in Mercosur (meaning 'southern is and in Portuguese is called Mercosul) comit Brazil, Paraguay Uruguay, and prisedof Argentina, with Chile being an associatedmember.Bolivia, countries havealsoentered PeruandotherAndean into various cooperationagreementswith the group. Established 1991, Mercosurhas two in objectives: countries; and 1 free tradebetweenmember tradepolicy. 2 a commonexternal and of It aimsat fullliberalization expansion trade its within wro regulations, targetbeingto achieve a free single marketin four membercountries by January 2002. However,progressis limited.

108

Regional tourism South-South and economiccooperation

Table 3 Touristarrivalsat frontiers of the Mercosur countries by countries of origin in 1998 (in %) Tourists'origins LatinAmerica

Countries visited

Africa

All

Mercosur

North America]

Asia/Pacific developing countries

Asia/Pacific developed countries2

Europe

Middle East

Not specified

Argentina Brazil Chile Paraguay Uruguay Total for Mercosur

0.9 0.1 0.2 0.36

77.13 59.7 76.5 76.5 77.9 70.29

(67.9) (47.3) (53.8) (70.2) (76.2) (59.36)

8 94 11.9 8.3 4.4 8.16

1.2 0.6 0.7 0.58

1.3 1.5 0.4 0.75

1 1.5 24.1 12.9 9.5 4.1 15.21

0.3 0.03

2.6 0.7 0.04 8.3 18*0 4.79

0.12

Source: WTO 2000ar 11-803 Notes: ' US, Canada 2 Japan, Australiaand New Zealand 3 ExcludingMexico 4 Including Mexico

specific policy measures have been adopted therebycreatingnew employmentand income towardscreatinga single currency facilitating prospectsfor varioussectionsof the population. or currencyexchangefor regionaltourists.Despite Clearly, was important giveimpetus regional it to to much discussion, there has been no noteworthy tourismdevelopment, especiallyas most of the investment major in infrastructure projects the earnings and fromregional tourism shouldin principle costs involvedare gigantic. in Also, the lack of a remain the regionitself.Howevermuchof this coherent regionaltourism developmentpolicy has remained purely hypothetical. resultsin investments takingplace in a highly The ASEAN bloc has extendedexperiencein haphazard manner. Research, data collectionand regionaltourismcooperation. The centralsecreanalysis tourism on potential, well as its unin- tariatbodies and nationaltourismorganizations as tendednegative impacts the environment, on local are mobilized fostertourismin the region.In to economiesand livelihood systemsare completely SADC, regional a tourism organization beenset has absent. up to coordinate tourismdevelopment activities. In Mercosur, too, attemptshave been made to promotetourismin the region, althoughon a Assessment conclusion and considerably lesserscale. However, mostof these Whatis evidentfromthe above discussion that institutional is structures and activitiesconcerning regional tourism significant all three regional tourism is in weregearedtowards marketing region the blocs. In ASEAN countriesregional in tourists com- more effectively orderto attractan increased prised36 per cent of the total.Thepercentage of number of tourists from developed countries; regional tourists ASEAN in countries standssome- regional tourism development involving the what low, partlybecause there is a substantial nationals member of countries received littleor no international transit tourists of throughSingapore attention. and Thailand. Also, the largenumber Japanese of Fewconcretepolicymeasures havebeen underregional tourists. the firstplace, In tourists who come to the regionlessenthe figure takenfavouring for regionaltourists.In SADC and Mercosur, there is littleunderstanding who the regional of regional tourists addedupto 59 and69 percent of touristsare, their aspirations and interests,and totaltourists respectively Tables 2 and3). In the economic potentialas well as the socio(see 1, actualnumbers, the mid-1990s in ASEAN regional environmental problemsthey represent. Tourism data collectionand analysis heavily are tourists comprised annually million; SADC research, 10.7 and and Mercosur respectively 7.9 and 7.2 million biased towardsinternational had tourism. The econregional visitors (WrO2000a).Giventhis,regional omic capacityand specificrecreation enterand tourism a certain held degreeof economic potential tainment interests regional of tourists scarcely are for increasedinvestmentand entrepreneurship, takenintoaccountwithregard funding to tourism

Regional tourism South-South and economiccooperation

109

projects, and there are no particular attemptsto tion of Thailandis quite expected as in 1999 its broaden those targetingregionaltourists.Also, economy accounted for over 72 per cent of the since the latterremainmore or less invisible in Mekong region's (Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, tourism policles, no tourism-awareness ralsing Thailandand Vietnam) GDP (World Bank 2000; measuresare developedtargeting these regional UNDP 2000). groupsof tourists. Braziland South Africaare equallystriking cases A simplerecognition the potential regional in their respective regions. In 1999, Brazilretained of of tourismis hardlysufficient produce tangible nearly60 per cent of Mercosur'sGDP (50 per cent to the economy had economic results.Also, the lack of government if Chileis included); SouthAfrican investment regional in tourism tourism and policies, a lion's share of 69 per cent of the total GDP of 13 mean that in the majority cases they are not SADCcountries (WorldBank2000; UNDP 2000). of integrated national regional in or economicpolicies. Given their overwhelmingpoliticaland economic There been little has assessment the specificrole command, national economic interests (i.e. the of of regional tourism regional in economicdevelop- interests of national business groups) tend to be ment,as wellas in rural urban and development reflected in the makingand functioningof regional in specificnational contexts. such,it is not surpris- blocs in generaland tourisminvestment,promotion As ingthatthereareno concretemeasures promote and marketing,as well as the benefits derived to Travel formalities,currency communityentrepreneurship and shareholding from it, in particular. in tourism, and employment income-sharingexchange, immigration, and refugee issues and so forth, policies.The crucialquestionis whetherregional which frequently remain key barriersto regional tourism likelyto help to changeexistingecon- integration,heavily reflect the interests of these is omic relations morein favour pooreror weaker countries. In short, in the absence of any instituof groupsand areas,and whatsupplementary policy tionalarrangements share the costs and benefits to measures could be envisaged when this was not of tourism in a more egalitarianmanner among the case?Thisrequires continual a processof policy member countries, present tourism cooperation monitoring critical and evaluation, which remain policies in these three regional blocs are simply totally absentin present regional tourism strategies. likely to reinforce the prevailingcentre-periphery One major problem regional in economiccoop- relations. erationis the handling existing of centre-periphery Another dilemma is that since these regional relations. any attempt fosterregional In to political blocs state theirglobal policy framework include to integration, createfree trading zones, simplify cus- firm adherence to economic liberalization policies tomsandtaxregulations increase and public financ- and strong private sector involvement within the ing of commonindustrial programmes, transport, policies established by the World Trade Organizenergy and telecommunication there is actually ation, it becomes very difficult to differentiate littleguarantee that accruedbenefitsas well as regional tourism investment groups from multiassociated costswillbe equally sharedby member national corporations. In any event, there is no countries. Tourism likely reinforce situation guaranteethat regionalbusiness groups would be is to the since the countrieswhich have political weight, more concerned with promoting regional econrelatively largeGDPand dominance over regional omic development, improving community livelitradeare most likelyto take the lead in tourism hood systems, protecting workers' rights and investment the region. hasbeenthe case,for conserving the environment (see for example, in This example,with Thailand withinthe Mekong-belt, Pleumarom 1999a; Pluss 1996). The trend is where powerful Thaipoliticians, businessgroups, towardsa ratherclose collaborationbetween multithe army,and the like, often team up with the national corporations and regional tourism congovernment regionaleffortsto boost tourism. glomerates to exploit readily marketableregional in Some of these groups are involved in shady features,products,tax incentivesand cheap labour projects involving creation environmentally-for generating hefty, short-term profits. Indeed, the of damaging coursesand casinos,and the rapid most of the tourismpromotionactivitiessponsored golf exploitation unspoiled of historical ecotourism by regional blocs facilitatedthis alliance and proand sites. In any event, as these groups commonly duced many unintendedsocio-economic and ecocontrol the entire chain of tourism develop- logical impacts at the local level. But research ment,including formulation tourism the of plans, and debate are lacking on many of these critical promotion, training, development roadlinks of and issues. investment othertourism in activities, theirdomiIn conclusion, it can be said that, although in nant role is guaranteed (see for exampleNew principle regional tourism represents a useful Frontiers,November-December 1999 and July- instrumentin regional economic self-relianceand August 2000). Insome ways,thisregional domina- progress,includinga level of communitywelfare at
. .. . . . .

1 10

Regional tourism South-South and economiccooperation

the local level, this needs careful planning, taking into account politicaland economic realitiesand Hamdi R 1997 ASEANcrisis team takes haze action http:// www.travel.asia.com/10_1 0_9 7/stories/asian.htm constraints.Althoughthe establishmentof regional Kaosa-ard M, Bezic D and White S 2001 Domestic blocs has helped to bringto the fore some of the tourism in Thailand: supply and demand in Ghimire K ed The native rationale and importanceof regionalcooperationin tourist: tourism development within developing tourism, so far there have been few sustained countries Earthscan,London forthcoming outcomes. Most activitiesremained limited at the level of a declarationof good intentionsand elabo- de Kadt E 1979 Tourism passport to development? Oxford University Press, New York ration of policy strategies, while the measures Koch E 1994 Peace parks in Southern Africa implemented thus far have tended to encourage UNRISD, Geneva unequal relations among member countries and support the interests of business groups. These Mercosur 2000 http://www.sindicato.org.br/mercosul/ index_frame_principal.html resultsare not uniqueto the tourismsector, but are common to many other sectors, such as trade and NewFrontiers 1997 Vol 3 no 12 December 3 investment;they reflect a structuralweakness in 1999 Vol 5 no 6 November-December 2 South-South 2000 Vol 6 no 4 July-August 1 collaboration.
Organization of American States 1995 An analytical compendium of western hemisphere trade arrangements http:// Acknowledgements www.sice.oas.org/cpO6 109 6/English/toc.asp Theauthorwould like to thank Hella Dietz for her PleumaromA 1994 The political economy of tourism The assistancein the search for literatureas well as Ecologist 24 142-7 contactingregional groups for information.The 1997 Politicaleconomy of regional tourism development author also gratefulto two anonymous referees is and environmental change in the Mekong sub-region whocarefullyread the earlierdraft and provided unpublished draft report UNRISD,Geneva mewith many helpfulcomments. 1999 The rise and fall of South-EastAsian tourism Third World Resurgence 103 13-16 References 1999a Tourism, globalization and sustainable developASEANI undateda Plan of action on ASEANcooperation in ment ThirdWorld Resurgence 103 4-8 tourism, C http://www.asean.or.id/economic/poa_tour.htm Pluss 1996 Liberalizationin tourism Discussion paper on undated b Tourism http://www.asean.or.id/economic/ the GATS implications for tourism Arbeitskreistourismus ov_tur.htm und entwicklung, Basel de Beer G R M, Mahlalela S G, Mahumane A, RETOSA Mmatli R A (Regional Tourism Organization of Southern Africa) and Maseko A T 1999 A regionalapproach 2000 The essence of Africa Halfway House (South to tourism Africa), marketing, managementand developmentunpublished RETOSA mlmeo SADC undated Sectorial responsibilitieschart: tourism http:// BucarB 1997 Mercosur an evaluation:a E Brazilian point of www.sadc.int/sadcmain/docs6_4sector.htm view http://www.hfni.gsehd.gwu.edu/ibi/minerva/Falil South 997/ Commission 1990 The challenge to the South Oxford Eliane.Bucar.html UniversityPress, Oxford Butler 1991 Tourism, R environment sustainable and develThe Economist 1996 12 October 19-22 opmentEnvironmental Conservation 18 21 0-1 9 The Financial Times2000 1 September DEAT (Department Environmental of Affairs and Tourism) UNIDP (United Nations Development Programme) 2000 1996 Development and promotion of tourism in South Human development report published for AfricaDEAT, Pretoria UNDP by Oxford lJniversityPress, New York Diegues 2001 Regionaland domestic mass A tourism in Brazil:an overview in Ghimire K ed The World Bank 2000 World development report 2000/2001 native tourist:tourism development within developing publishedfor the World Bank by Oxford University Press, countries WashingtonDC Earthscan, London forthcoming Ghimire B 1997 Emerging mass tourism in the K WTO (World Tourism Organization) 1997 South Tourism Discussion 2020 vision: executive summary Madrid Paper85 UNRISD, Geneva http:// ed 2001 The native tourist: tourism development www.sadcreview.com/Sectoral%2 OReports%2 000/ 02 within tou developingcountries Earthscan, rism.htm London Grandiand Schutt D 1999 Bilande sept J 2000 http://www.world-tourism.org annees de Mercosur Problemes d'Amerique Latine 3 January-March 2000a Yearbook of tourism statistics vols 1 and 2 52nd 95-8 edition WTO, Madrid