In Botswana’s Success: Good Governance, Good Policies, and Good Luck, Michael Lewin raises attention to the conditions in Botswana regarding its economic problems. As Lewin mentioned, during the first few years of independence, the country was very poor and suffered many domestic issues, like land underdevelopment and a low GDP, but things began to change for the better. From the late 20th century to early 21st, it can be seen that Botswana has developed more than before and the two major factors that contributed to this change is due to the abundant resource of diamonds and the national push for tourism. It is discussed in the article that Botswana was able to remake itself and improve its national aesthetics through the lucky discovery of a profitable mineral and strong governmental policies that enabled tourism to be the major tool for economic advancements. However, elaborating more on the ‘strong’ governmental policies, the policies that were put forward resulted ‘high cost low volume’ policies which promoted the establishment of high-end tourism facilities and at the same time discouraged the establishment of cheaper facilities. Lewin emphasised the fact that this method of bringing in tourism to a country creates ‘enclave tourism’ which excludes local people from participation and receiving benefits from tourism. Instead, the benefits are only reaped for the rich. While tourism can be seen as a very effective tool for a country to boost its national reputation and raise revenue, I do not believe that it could be sustained for a long duration of time unless the right actions and policies are in place. In terms of right actions and policies, governments should strive for sustainable policies, which requires a bigger effort that promote both domestic and non-domestic advancements. Like a lot of European countries such as France or England, if tourism policies are done right, the benefits should be wholistic which would allow for the country to develop economically regardless of tourism or not. Moreover, the benefits would last longer and tourism would be a long term strategy for bringing in revenue to the people. The reason why I believe that using tourism as means to bring revenue to a country would only be temporary if done incorrectly, is due to the law of diminishing marginal returns. Every country that promotes tourism and use it as a active to bring in revenue might have great marginal impacts at the beginning, but will slowly the effects will lessen overtime. There will be no more growth eventually because utilitarianism will be achieved. In regards to reaching out to national decision makers of the country for support on an enterprise, I think it would be best to take the time to layout all the different reasons why the business or company would be beneficial to the government or people in society. If the purpose is correct and promotes economic growth, I believe that it would not be difficult to get approval from the government. Perhaps addressing any diplomatic ties the enterprise would create for the country of origin would also be helpful since this would further bring in and sustain development. For the purpose of my group’s project, we plan to market our company in a way that would benefit the country greatly and push for the potential of international expansions.
Question: If tourism is the current trend and method for countries to generate revenue for their economies, would this continue into the future or will there be another area of focus for development?
Work Cited:
Lewin, Michael. “Botswana’s Success: Good Governance, Good Policies, and Good Luck.” Chapter 4, 81-90.
No comments:
Post a Comment