Sundar's second and third questions
7 views
Skip to first unread message
Seth Sicroff
May 10, 2009, 5:44:59 PM5/10/09
to Mountai...@googlegroups.com
This morning I replied, in a partial way, to Sundar's first question ("Is tourism [in the Everest region] sustainable?'] The short answer is that it will have to be, since (barring disaster) people are unlikely to lose interest in the world's highest mountain. In fact, certain kinds of contretemps are likely to attract the new niche market of "disaster tourists." What elements of the tourist trade are considered unsustainable will be open to debate, and there will certainly be diverging opinions as to the appropriate fixes, but I would hope the government does not choose to Bhutanize the tourism trade by putting an admission stranglehold on it so that only the well-heeled ("quality") tourists can afford to pop in (and quickly leave). I think the Sherpas have done a better job of managing themselves than ACAP has done for the Annapurna Sanctuary (for instance).
On the other hand, I do believe the local community needs to establish a formal guild or trade association to manage their market. Too many sirdars can think of nothing better to do with their money than open yet another lodge in places like Namche and Lukla, which already have too many. Each lodge is more expensive, with fancier showers and fancier sign; lodge-owners don't have time to amortize their investments before their place is rendered obsolete by the new hotel next door. A Khumbu Hotel Association could perhaps place limits on room proliferation in certain zones and set a floor under room rates (even introduce a star system?) so that hotel owners wouldn't be tempted to apply cut-throat competitive tactics to clear the field. One benefit in curtailing investment in lodges might be that there would be more money that could be moved from under mattresses to other types of infrastructure -- such as a really top-notch Sherpa language boarding school.
What I am implying here (in answer to question 2) is that it should not simply be up to "tourism" (meaning tourists) to be responsible. The host community needs to set rules as to how to exploit their commons in a responsible and sustainable fashion. If tourists are handing out candy, commoditizing the culture, violating norms... the locals can simply close down camping grounds, remove the licenses of operators, distribute educational material, or whatever seems most likely to work. Generally speaking, Khumbu tourists are pretty ecosensitive -- they want to do the right thing, but may not recognize the consequences of their actions. The Namche Youth Association and the Sagarmatha Pollution Control Committee (like the Yeti association in Junbesi) are (or can become) appropriate mechanisms for the mitigation of some careless or uninformed behavior. In addition, it is important to publicize work such as Alton's, to keep people informed of evolving perceptions of ecological and cultural risk actors. The Museum has a role to play -- and should get a lot bigger chunk of the funds raised by park ticket sales.
The answer to #3 is definitely yes. A lot of people, both locals and outsiders, have been trying to shape the tourism economy so that the effects are closer to what everyone desires. I have some ideas which may or may not be feasible, and I am hoping the next Bridges program will produce some feasibility results. One general strategy is to bring more communities into the market and to stabilize their involvement. The long trek from Lamosangu to Namche allowed backpacker dollars to trickle-drip into some very poor areas. That opportunity abruptly dried up for many families when the Swiss Road moved the trailhead to Junbesi, a trend that was aggravated by the improvement of air service to Lukla. Those, one of the most attractive large villages on the route, is pretty much ignored these days. We've been thinking about the possibility of enhancing the prestige of and interest in the long trek in by establish a race, or rally, from Junbesi or Lamosangu to Namche -- or possibly to Gorak Shep. This should be a season-opening event, starting in mid-September, for instance, so as to mark an early start to a season that might otherwise not get underway for another sever weeks (depending on the weather or other factors).
Another possibility would be to establish a 100-point-ranking system for mountain climbs. Ascents would not be permitted by climbers who had not already successfully accomplished a peak in the next-lower bracket. So, if Everest is a 95, you would not be allowed a shot at it unless you had already done an 90. You couldn't do a 90 without bagging an 85 -- and so on. Such a system would not only reduce some of the dilettante traffic on Everest, it would also redirect mountaineers' attention to lesser peaks in the general area. That might mean more traffic for Thame and other communities in valleys off the main Everest trail. And it might mean that some climbers would have to spend more time and more money to get up to speed for the biggest trophy peaks.
A final suggestion: organize a Sherpa Development Corps. Put together videos of Sherpas being interviewed about the advantages and disadvantages of tourism in their own home towns. Send a team of Sherpa hospitality professionals to communities that are thinking about developing a tourist trade. Have the SDC help assess the local assets and discuss the hazards and opportunities of development. Draw up a series of plans (one-year, five-year, twenty-year), and go get funding. Maybe the SDC could even have its own development bank -- rather than investing all those sirdar bonuses in Namche and Lukla, spread it around, and use Sherpa marketing know-how to spread the news of new destinations. Tourism is not a zero-sum game: development should focus on growing the pie rather than sharpening competition.
Okay -- one more suggestion. Start promoting a new tourism variant: partourism (<participatory tourism). Partourists come to take part, to help out, to learn, to share. They stay in touch, and they come back. If airport personnel would just get departing tourists to divulge their emails and the places they visited, they could be put on mailing lists, alerted of new developments, asked to help in case of disaster, and so on. Partourism just means turning away from the old paradigm of tourism as voyeurism (whether ecosensitive or not) and getting people used to the idea that once their horizons are expanded, they stay expanded. You become part of a larger world, and you do not retreat to Trenton to finish out your life. You remain a citizen of the world. You pledge allegiance to the friends you make, not to your own flag, and, whatever problems arise, you remain part of the solution.
Seth
On the other hand, I do believe the local community needs to establish a formal guild or trade association to manage their market. Too many sirdars can think of nothing better to do with their money than open yet another lodge in places like Namche and Lukla, which already have too many. Each lodge is more expensive, with fancier showers and fancier sign; lodge-owners don't have time to amortize their investments before their place is rendered obsolete by the new hotel next door. A Khumbu Hotel Association could perhaps place limits on room proliferation in certain zones and set a floor under room rates (even introduce a star system?) so that hotel owners wouldn't be tempted to apply cut-throat competitive tactics to clear the field. One benefit in curtailing investment in lodges might be that there would be more money that could be moved from under mattresses to other types of infrastructure -- such as a really top-notch Sherpa language boarding school.
What I am implying here (in answer to question 2) is that it should not simply be up to "tourism" (meaning tourists) to be responsible. The host community needs to set rules as to how to exploit their commons in a responsible and sustainable fashion. If tourists are handing out candy, commoditizing the culture, violating norms... the locals can simply close down camping grounds, remove the licenses of operators, distribute educational material, or whatever seems most likely to work. Generally speaking, Khumbu tourists are pretty ecosensitive -- they want to do the right thing, but may not recognize the consequences of their actions. The Namche Youth Association and the Sagarmatha Pollution Control Committee (like the Yeti association in Junbesi) are (or can become) appropriate mechanisms for the mitigation of some careless or uninformed behavior. In addition, it is important to publicize work such as Alton's, to keep people informed of evolving perceptions of ecological and cultural risk actors. The Museum has a role to play -- and should get a lot bigger chunk of the funds raised by park ticket sales.
The answer to #3 is definitely yes. A lot of people, both locals and outsiders, have been trying to shape the tourism economy so that the effects are closer to what everyone desires. I have some ideas which may or may not be feasible, and I am hoping the next Bridges program will produce some feasibility results. One general strategy is to bring more communities into the market and to stabilize their involvement. The long trek from Lamosangu to Namche allowed backpacker dollars to trickle-drip into some very poor areas. That opportunity abruptly dried up for many families when the Swiss Road moved the trailhead to Junbesi, a trend that was aggravated by the improvement of air service to Lukla. Those, one of the most attractive large villages on the route, is pretty much ignored these days. We've been thinking about the possibility of enhancing the prestige of and interest in the long trek in by establish a race, or rally, from Junbesi or Lamosangu to Namche -- or possibly to Gorak Shep. This should be a season-opening event, starting in mid-September, for instance, so as to mark an early start to a season that might otherwise not get underway for another sever weeks (depending on the weather or other factors).
Another possibility would be to establish a 100-point-ranking system for mountain climbs. Ascents would not be permitted by climbers who had not already successfully accomplished a peak in the next-lower bracket. So, if Everest is a 95, you would not be allowed a shot at it unless you had already done an 90. You couldn't do a 90 without bagging an 85 -- and so on. Such a system would not only reduce some of the dilettante traffic on Everest, it would also redirect mountaineers' attention to lesser peaks in the general area. That might mean more traffic for Thame and other communities in valleys off the main Everest trail. And it might mean that some climbers would have to spend more time and more money to get up to speed for the biggest trophy peaks.
A final suggestion: organize a Sherpa Development Corps. Put together videos of Sherpas being interviewed about the advantages and disadvantages of tourism in their own home towns. Send a team of Sherpa hospitality professionals to communities that are thinking about developing a tourist trade. Have the SDC help assess the local assets and discuss the hazards and opportunities of development. Draw up a series of plans (one-year, five-year, twenty-year), and go get funding. Maybe the SDC could even have its own development bank -- rather than investing all those sirdar bonuses in Namche and Lukla, spread it around, and use Sherpa marketing know-how to spread the news of new destinations. Tourism is not a zero-sum game: development should focus on growing the pie rather than sharpening competition.
Okay -- one more suggestion. Start promoting a new tourism variant: partourism (<participatory tourism). Partourists come to take part, to help out, to learn, to share. They stay in touch, and they come back. If airport personnel would just get departing tourists to divulge their emails and the places they visited, they could be put on mailing lists, alerted of new developments, asked to help in case of disaster, and so on. Partourism just means turning away from the old paradigm of tourism as voyeurism (whether ecosensitive or not) and getting people used to the idea that once their horizons are expanded, they stay expanded. You become part of a larger world, and you do not retreat to Trenton to finish out your life. You remain a citizen of the world. You pledge allegiance to the friends you make, not to your own flag, and, whatever problems arise, you remain part of the solution.
Seth
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Sundar Sharma <sharma...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Mountain Legecy Network,
Greetings from Nepal.
Its my pleasure to get connected with you. My thanks for this
opportunity goes to Seth Sicroff/ Director, Bridges-PRTD.
I would like to put forward a discussion in regard to design some
activities on sustainability models of tourism in the context of
Nepalese mountain region focusing the issues of social inequalities
with retrospect of tourism development in this region.
Basically , 3 questions are to be answered so as to regard mountain
tourism a best alternative for development,
1. Is tourism in this region Sustaineble?
2. Is it really responsible?
3. Is it possible to make it equitable?
To answer these questions,
Conducting Activities based on the sustainability models can play a
vital role while we can incorporate them in Bridge Nepal Program. We
can consider/ select the community which are far beyond the access to
the benefits of tourism in this region. This is 'working with the
voices of marginalized for sustainability of development
interventions'.
Best ,
Sundar
Sundar Sharma
May 10, 2009, 11:47:25 PM5/10/09
to MountainLegacy
Hello Dr. Keth,
Namaste , Greetings from Nepal.
I would like to thank you for the comprehensive response on the issues
raised. Though the issues are vauge (but not precisely wrong) , they
are to be considered in your way to transforming the challenges to
opportunities. In that respect I agree with you.
I would like to appreciate the innovative ideas like enhancing quality
tourism, promoting tourism as the key for bridging the people and
development , empowering local initiatives, building up organized
networks e.g. sherpa development corps , developing participatory
tourism (partourism) etc. I hope our BridgeNepal program will
consider these ideas for formulating some process models to be
intervened to promote the mountain tourim of Nepal. I am hopeful to
participate and contribute whatever I can.
Best Regards,
Sundar
>
> - Show quoted text -
Namaste , Greetings from Nepal.
I would like to thank you for the comprehensive response on the issues
raised. Though the issues are vauge (but not precisely wrong) , they
are to be considered in your way to transforming the challenges to
opportunities. In that respect I agree with you.
I would like to appreciate the innovative ideas like enhancing quality
tourism, promoting tourism as the key for bridging the people and
development , empowering local initiatives, building up organized
networks e.g. sherpa development corps , developing participatory
tourism (partourism) etc. I hope our BridgeNepal program will
consider these ideas for formulating some process models to be
intervened to promote the mountain tourim of Nepal. I am hopeful to
participate and contribute whatever I can.
Best Regards,
Sundar
> On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 12:39 AM, Sundar Sharma <sharmak.1...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hello Mountain Legecy Network,
> > Greetings from Nepal.
>
> > Its my pleasure to get connected with you. My thanks for this
> > opportunity goes to Seth Sicroff/ Director, Bridges-PRTD.
> > I would like to put forward a discussion in regard to design some
> > activities on sustainability models of tourism in the context of
> > Nepalese mountain region focusing the issues of social inequalities
> > with retrospect of tourism development in this region.
> > Basically , 3 questions are to be answered so as to regard mountain
> > tourism a best alternative for development,
> > 1. Is tourism in this region Sustaineble?
> > 2. Is it really responsible?
> > 3. Is it possible to make it equitable?
>
> > To answer these questions,
> > Conducting Activities based on the sustainability models can play a
> > vital role while we can incorporate them in Bridge Nepal Program. We
> > can consider/ select the community which are far beyond the access to
> > the benefits of tourism in this region. This is 'working with the
> > voices of marginalized for sustainability of development
> > interventions'.
>
> > Best ,
> > Sundar- Hide quoted text -
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hello Mountain Legecy Network,
> > Greetings from Nepal.
>
> > Its my pleasure to get connected with you. My thanks for this
> > opportunity goes to Seth Sicroff/ Director, Bridges-PRTD.
> > I would like to put forward a discussion in regard to design some
> > activities on sustainability models of tourism in the context of
> > Nepalese mountain region focusing the issues of social inequalities
> > with retrospect of tourism development in this region.
> > Basically , 3 questions are to be answered so as to regard mountain
> > tourism a best alternative for development,
> > 1. Is tourism in this region Sustaineble?
> > 2. Is it really responsible?
> > 3. Is it possible to make it equitable?
>
> > To answer these questions,
> > Conducting Activities based on the sustainability models can play a
> > vital role while we can incorporate them in Bridge Nepal Program. We
> > can consider/ select the community which are far beyond the access to
> > the benefits of tourism in this region. This is 'working with the
> > voices of marginalized for sustainability of development
> > interventions'.
>
> > Best ,
>
> - Show quoted text -
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages