Introduction: studying tourism public policy by Hall

Government intervention.. This week we go one step further to look at what we do to in order or in hope to tame the 'Tourism Monster' and make it our best friend even.. We call these public policies, in our case tourism public policies.. Ideally and theoretically, in trying to shape a beautiful tourism sculpture for the community, various actors come together and make adjustments to the public policies that deal with tourism industry. Sounds simple enough? Hardly, because it doesn't end there. [heykel resmi]

From the first chapter of Hall's book [Tourism and Public Policy], we understand that 'public policy' does not have a single meaning that has been agreed on by those who are involved in the policy making process. Because each interest group has a different agenda, each view public policy in a different perspective. Nevertheless I also like Dye's (1992) interpretation of public policy as, 'whatever governments choose to do or not to do'. Looking back at Turkey, public policy is definitely what Dye says. Of course interest groups such as business and environmental groups are in effect while formulating the policies but it is more of a government job to create and implement public policy. And usually, ideology plays a big part on those public policies. Every government tries to benefit their supporter base so they design the policies in accordance with the ideological direction of the current administration.

When it comes to Tourism Public Policy, things don't get any less complicated. Given that Tourism is a relatively 'vague and spread' subject which can encompass different meanings for each interpreter. Thus, policy being like an 'elephant; recognizable yet hard to define' applies very much to the tourism public policy as you can imagine. For my understanding, I compare it with the word 'terrorism' almost; how each government or political group defines 'terrorism' according to their own needs and perceived outcomes, so they act upon THEIR perception rather than rationalizing it for the greater number.

As it is evident that there are many players to public policy formulation such as the government of course, pressure groups, community leaders and members, and many other with interests at stake, there has to be a common ground where all these parties can and will meet to create public policies. I think that common ground is the attitude of putting the 'region and its people' before anything else and doing what is best for the region and its people. That is the critical role of an ideal government I think; it is not to create a policy rather than to act as the mediator between all parties to find the best policy solutions for that region.

Last but not least, a policy as it has been mentioned in Hall's piece, is a theory more than anything. It is created for a given issue with the hope that, at the end some desirable outcome will be achieved. You can guess that not all the time the desirable outcome is achieved however. Therefore policy is an ever changing process. As people change, as interests change, even as climate changes the policies are (should be) in constant change in keeping up with the times...

Globalisation and Tourism for indigenous peoples By Raymond de Chavez

One of the most occurring topics in Tourism literature today, and probably all time, when talking about the affects of tourism is the ‘affects of tourism industry on Local communities’, especially indigenous peoples. As mentioned in the introduction of this article by Raymond de Chavez, Third World countries saw tourism “as a shortcut to rapid development of the economy”. I remember from my childhood, the president of Turkiye would talk on television about the growing tourism industry as the ‘industry without a chimney’; emphasizing its cleanliness whilst delivering big on the economic scale. It sounded great and most of the public, involved in tourism or not, got behind the industry and showed support only to realize later that this new industry is not really taking their needs into consideration. Actually tourism did not take anything into consideration other than looking for ways to bring more and more people in somehow. This rapid unplanned growth caused the loss of pristine environment, especially on the coastal areas of west and south Turkiye. Growing number of holiday villages and big hotels on these once unspoiled land started to enclose their surroundings and drive the locals away. Adding to this was the pollution of the beaches and the sea as well as growing arrogance of the tourists and their disregard for the local traditions. So, as I read this article and articles similar to this one, I can picture clearly from a local perspective how the tourism monster in unleashed.

To protect and preserve something, first, one has to love that thing. If one loves money more than nature or people, then it is understandable (!) that they will try to protect their interest - money wise. By opening up pristine land occupied by indigenous peoples to tourism industry, to tourism corporations to be exact, it is almost giving up the land rather than giving it away.

What makes me bitter and sad in most of these scenarios is the attitude of 'exploitation'. An exploitation of natural resources, exploitation of traditional values, exploitation of trust between cultures (seeing visitors in 'dollar signs' etc) yet there is not much 'generation' or even 're-generation' of something. Tourism generates money which most of goes to the head offices of the corporations anyway. The money it generates for the local indigenous economy more often than not is not enough to take that economy to another level. The locals are at the base of the wage chain working for a minimum in most cases.

I cannot help but think about the sociopolitical, sociocultural and political affects of Chavez's words when he says,

Cash production for the tourism industry has led to commercialism and individualism in contrast to the indigenous ways of simple living and mutual cooperation.

Tourism arguably has led or helped the disintegration of many cultures, big or small, around the world. 'Individualism and loss of mutual cooperation'. I have grown up in an environment where family was all about mutual cooperation to whereas now that I look around it is more of an individual game. In such a short time of maybe 10 years, now that I move back and forth between Canada and Turkey, I can clearly observe the change as it is happening, not gradually but very rapidly almost in a revolutionary sense. Of course there are many reasons for it; Media, mainly television being at top. However, tourism is not innocent.

Like the example Chavez gives on the hotel that was built on sacred land in the Cook Islands, Tourism and the drive to exploit as much as possible without taking into consideration anything about locals, not even sacred lands is the killer of those communities. Don't you see any resemblance of Americans taking over Native Soil?? I think there is an invasion nowadays under the name of “Tourism”.

As Chavez says, “unless benefit sharing mechanisms are put in place” there is no way tourism will ever help indigenous peoples. It is of course if it's not already too late..