Your detailed and thorough post due by Wednesday@MIDNIGHT for full credit (A). Partial credit (C) can be earned by posting late, which is better than a ZERO.
Remember, weekly blogging is worth 1/3 of your entire semester grade.
Be sure to communicate with Dr. W as needed - rob.williams@madriver.com.
Read and blog
ECOTOURISM – WHO OWNS PARADISE?, Chapter 6 (Tanzania: Whose Eden Is It?)
1) THESIS: IYOW, post a single sentence that captures the thesis for EACH CHAPTER/ SECTION of our reading.
2) EVIDENCE: Post and number THREE specific observations from EACH CHAPTER/SECTION of our reading(s) that supports your thesis.
Use 2-3 sentences for each observation, and combine direct quotations from the text (AUTHOR's LAST NAME, 27), with IYOW analysis.
3) QUESTION: Include in your post a SINGLE SPECIFIC question you'd ask the class based on our readings.
Thesis: With Tanzania’s rich abundance of wildlife and national parks, ecotourism can potentially evolve from a poor country into an ecotourism destination.
ReplyDeleteFact 1: “For much of the past forty years, and in the past decade more than ever, many have predicted that wildlife tourism will help to pull Tanzania out of poverty” (Honey, 217). Because of the wildlife that Tanzania has to offer I believe this could happen. There are also fourteen national parks that draw in travelers as well.
Fact 2: “Tanzania’s national parks are marketed under the umbrella of nature and adventure tourism, which are both frequently described as ecotourism” (Honey, 218). I think that because there is so much activity to do in Tanzania there’s that much more hope that the tourist industry and ecotourism can pull the country out of poverty.
Fact 3: “Some also claim that the increase in lodges and campsites in areas like Serengeti’s western corridor has reduced the incidence of poaching because the presence of larger numbers of tourists and guides makes it harder for poachers to operate” (Honey, 233). I think the increase in lodges and campsites would definitely be good to decrease the amount of poaching going on. If the country wants to increase their tourism then it needs to have the animals that attract the tourism and it won’t be there anymore if the number of poachers increases.
Question: Could Tanzania potentially become an ecotourism destination such as Costa Rica?
Thesis: Tanzania is one of the poorest countries in the world, but it has great natural capital in the form of biodiversity. Their natural areas are some of the most famous in the world, and they have an immense amount of conserved land. So, what does this mean for their tourism industry?
ReplyDelete1. “For much of the past forty years, and in the past decade more than ever, many have predicted that wildlife tourism will help to pull Tanzania out of poverty” (217). This is the same rhetoric that can be heard in any biodiverse developing country. This is exactly the debate that was prevalent in Iceland during their economic recession, and also the same sentiment that the World Bank preys on. The idea of tourism as the vaccine for poverty is nothing new, but it’s also a double edged sword.
2. “From the outset, conservation organizations in Europe and the Untied States weighed in to build an increasingly powerful lobby to expel the Maasai, arguing that the Serengeti was too fragile and its water too scarce to support both humans and wildlife (220). This is once again a glaringly obvious example of the white savior complex. This essential example of imperialism shows that developed western countries believe that they can impose their ideologies in order to “improve” the global south in the name of economic development. It’s set another example of colonization through the guise of providing foreign aid. First they kick out the native inhabitants of the area, and then move in to “manage” it.
3. "Tanzania pumped a large proportion of its limited resources into primary education, health care, and provision of potable water” (224). This is a fantastic boost in wellbeing for the country, however I wonder what price it came at. Honey says that the funding for this development came from international donors, and foreign aid. However this often means that the World Bank, or some similar organization is involved.
Discussion Question: Was tourism really the economic stimulus that Tanzania needed, or was there another path?
Thesis: Tanzania has a rich wildlife and high biodiversity which could have the potential through tourism to help them pull themselves out of poverty but the country is putting tourism above the people they are trying to help.
ReplyDelete1. Tanzania is one of the poorest countries in the world. The country has an immense amount of wildlife and land. The United Nations have deemed many parts of Tanzania as World Heritage Sights in order to preserve the land and wildlife. The country is growing and so is their poverty. They are hoping to use ecotourism as a way to pull themselves out of poverty. Benjamin Mkapa, the former president of of Tanzania agreed that tourism was the way to save his people in this quote, “a heightened onslaught on poverty, using the weapon of tourism.” (Honey, 217) He and the rest of the country hopes to use their potential to create prosperity for them.
2. Protection and conservation of wildlife has been a large debate in Tanzania. The local people of Tanzania have been hunting wild animals for food, protection, and rituals for hundreds of years. Over the past decade the country has been protecting many of the animals and making it illegal to “poach” these animals. However, the need to please the tourist, let many animals allowed to be killed for big game hunting with a permit. This has led to an increase in the loss of these animals and puts the tourists above the people of the country. This quote summarizes this growing issue, “This mistaken belief-- that parks and the surrounding people must be separated in order to ensure the wildlife’s survival-- guided nearly a century of colonial and postcolonial conservationist policy in Africa.” (Honey 219).
3. Tanzania’s Ecotourism scorecard has a very low score when it comes to respecting local culture. They scored low because the local and indigenous people are looked down upon by the government and tourist. They are often viewed as a tourist attractions and are dehumanized in order to create more of an “authentic” African experience. “They continue to be viewed by government officials, tour operators, and visitors as tourist attractions and sources of souvenirs.”(Honey 253).
Questions: Would the people of Tanzania be better off without the money from tourism, because of the exploitation and disregard of the local people?
Thesis: Tanzania is very rich in its wildlife and national parks, but it shows just how important it is to incorporate the locals into the industry’s efforts, as Tanzania does a poor job in doing so.
ReplyDelete1. Tanzania is one of the poorest countries in the world but one of the richest, and most concentrated in wildlife. Their president wanted to use the weapon of tourism to combat their lack of money, so they started transitioning their already nature-based tourism into a stronger version of ecotourism.
2. However, the country focused too much on its environmental resources rather than its citizens. This resulted in mass relocations from land that was formed into new parks. “Conservation practices were generally unsympathetic to the needs of the local communities whose members were deprived of access to ancestral homelands, grazing land, water, and wildlife, and saw few tangible benefits from either the parks or tourism” (Honey 222) and these efforts “[reduced] the Maasai in NCA to the status of squatters in their own home” (Honey 239). The creation of the national parks hurt the locals rather than benefited them.
3. Tanzania used to allow trophy hunting in blocks of time and land, but prohibited hunting in general to stop poaching efforts. By the 1990s, poaching was decreasing and elephant populations were increasing, so conservation efforts in parks were benefiting especially through policies.
Question: what can Tanzania do to compensate for what they did to the Maasai people?
Thesis: Tanzania’s rich natural capitol lead to it being able to pull itself up from an economic hole with ecotourism but was not perfectly implemented.
ReplyDeleteEcotourism is acting as a gate upwards for Tanzania “For much of the past forty years, and in the past decade more than ever, many have predicted that wildlife tourism will help to pull Tanzania out of poverty” ( 217). If it does work as planed it means that they will be able to become another leading country in ecotourism like Costa Rica.
Not everything was perfect though in the implementation of the ecotourism industry as it did not focus enough on the local people as it should have. “Conservation practices were generally unsympathetic to the needs of the local communities whose members were deprived of access to ancestral homelands, grazing land, water, and wildlife, and saw few tangible benefits from either the parks or tourism” (222).
We can see from this combination of things that just because you have the natural resources to be a great location for ecotourism it does not mean that it will translate to actually being a good system. If we have learned anything from this it is we must proceed with caution when trying to implement green initiatives in the future.
Q: How can we stop countries from rushing in and doing more harm than good?
(1/2)
ReplyDeleteThesis: Although Tanzania has been able to “cash in” on the parks, wildlife, and other nature that draws travellers to the country, the needs and rights of local people have been largely ignored and disrespected. Add onto that a diluted approach to ecotourism, lacking environmental education of locals, and blatant disregard for the basic principles of the industry and you’re left looking at an awesome example of what NOT to do when you’re thinking about getting into ecotourism.
Evidence #1: “Conservation practices were generally unsympathetic to the needs of the local communities, whose members were deprived of access to ancestral homelands, grazing land, water, and wildlife, and saw few tangible benefits from either the parks or tourism” (Honey 222). Although conservation is crucial, conservation at the expense of native peoples suffering is not the way to go about things. It’s hard for me to believe that Tanzania has a viable ecotourism system/industry based on what I’ve read in this chapter.
Evidence #2: “As the volume of visitors and the demand for tourism access in Serengeti has increased, so has the impulse for government to set aside more and more land for wildlife conservation- and the tourism dollars that it generates...In the process, local people were, as they have been so many times in the past, evicted from their lands. Although the government paid compensation to the affected people, a number of locals alleged that the compensation was not sufficient in relation to the property they forfeited” (Honey 234-235). This made me even more angry than it usually would have after reading Honey’s explanation of what went down over the history of Tanzania. The local people were not the problem, so why were they being compromised and disrespected so massively?
Evidence #3: “Tourism is now viewed as one of Tanzania’s best hopes for development, and ecotourism, loosely defined to include nature tourism, ecotourism lite, and genuine ecotourism, is widely hailed by government and tourism officials as the model Tanzania is pursuing” (Honey 249). This quote is mostly in here because of how confused it made me. Based on the definition we have discussed in class and the scorecard Honey covers at the end of each chapter, I don’t understand how a country or sector of the industry can successfully encourage and operate ecotourism lite and genuine ecotourism cohesively. Additionally, I’m not 100% sure what “nature tourism” is and how it’s different from ecotourism, so I’m hesitant to accept the idea that the country can successfully give their resources to each different type of travel opportunity.
(2/2)
ReplyDeleteEvidence #4: “There is a need to develop more culturally sensitive and educational forms of interaction. [Builds Environmental Awareness] In this category, Tanzania receives reasonably high marks for education of foreign visitors, but not for that of Tanzanians” (Honey 251). Without educating the local people, the environment of the area cannot survive. No matter how much ecological knowledge or environmental awareness visitors have, if the permanent residents do not know how to care for and protect the planet change and progress will be difficult, if not impossible.
Evidence #5: “Despite some efforts, much prejudice remains toward the Maasai and other pastoralists. They continue to be viewed by government officials, tour operators, and visitors as tourist attractions and sources of souvenirs. Little meaningful cultural knowledge is passed between tourists and resident people, and tourists continue to focus on mainly wildlife rather than to learn about the country’s people” (Honey 253). Without the ability to effectively integrate knowledge, understanding, and appreciation of the local cultures and peoples into the framework of an ecotourism industry, it will not succeed. While it is important to have a strong foundation of natural appreciation and interest, one of the most important aspects of genuine ecotourism is giving back to the local culture and people, not only economically but with knowledge, respect, and a mutual understanding.
Question: Did Tanzania ever really have genuine ecotourism? Can they?
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1CIFQJcje3QP8OzdAbt9Tip5B2gSaQpNI8VQyg5ngoMw/edit?usp=sharing
DeleteHooray for Tanzania!
ReplyDeleteAll posts below this line = C/LATE!
Dr. W
Thesis: Tanzania has almost all of the basic resources available to become an ecotourist utopia, however the effects of colonization and western influence had destabilized much of the internal structure of the nation, furthermore they set them on a very unsustainable path, so now Tanzania has to work on its own to capitalize on and preserve their unique environments.
ReplyDelete1) “The colonists premise was that Africans, left to their own devices, were wiping out the continent’s wildlife. But, by 1900, the record had already proved it was the white interlopers, not the indigenous peoples, who were most swiftly and systematically killing off Africa’s wildlife,” (Honey, 219) First, I would like to say that I do not get he chance to use the word ‘interloper’ nearly as much as I should. Second I’m pretty sure this is the story that the white man has played out in literally every single culture. The ‘manifest destiny’ of the American west, the colonization of Burma and the countries of Asia, of course to Africa. We blame other people for doing exactly what we do worse. Good thing we don’t do that anymore. Right? Right????
2) “Concerns have, however, been expressed by some conservationists and community leaders as to whether or not this project is really taking local villager’s interests into account,” (Honey, 234)
3) “In coming years Tanzania all either become a place where communities are freer to legally develop tourism as a land use and economic option, or wildlife outside the parks will dwindle, the parks will become more congested with tourists, and Tanzania’s product will begin to lose the competitive advantage that it now enjoys,” (Honey, 249) I’m not entirely sure how we can turn things around for Tanzania, however I do wonder what steps the UN could take to declare Kilimanjaro and the Serengeti as world heritage sites. I think that they both could qualify given the importance of this area to the development of human society and the cultures of Africa. I think that that could wake up the country to their hidden exploitation.
Question: How can we decrease poaching, is it by providing manful work to potential poachers and give them options of employment that doesn’t involve killing rare animals, or maybe we need to increase the amount of people on patrols, or early warning systems.