Foreign visitors should pay more than local visitors for cultural and historical attractions.
Charging overseas travelers higher than domestic tourists is advisable in some countries as it can be one way to raise the funding for preservation of ancient cultural architectures. I partly agree with this argument.
It is obvious that the more tourists visit the attractions, the more pressure the environment has to face. Littering is one of the main issues, which results from many overseas tourists' lack of awareness to put garbage in the right place. If monument management board do not have enough staff and expense to treat waste in time, it may cause air pollution and bad landscape. Therefore, raising fee for foreign travelers is one way to contribute to financial source to handle this problem. In addition, in some countries, the environmental and cultural value can not be neglected in the pursuit of economic value. For example, Bhutan will not be as famous as they are now with their environmental - friendly lifestyle and thousand -year - old architectures if they emphasize the tourism development.
However, to some extent, domestic and foreign tourists should be treated fairly. Inequaliry can cause peole travelling from other countries not to choose visiting these nations; thus, their GDP will decrease as in fact, overseas travelers contribute a larger amount through their spending on higher quality hotels and restaurants as well as their interests for souvenirs. Besides, unfair treatment experience can create negative impression on the host country, spoiling the nation's image in the eye of international friends. It directly leads to the reduction in the number of tourists; and concequently, the significan fall in the revenue of tourism industry.
To sum up, higher fee for travelers from other countries may benefit countries that want to focus on the preservation of their historical sites. However, they should build attractive travel policy to balance between protecting the environment and generating profit from tourism industry.
To what extent do you agree or disagree.
Charging overseas travelers higher than domestic tourists is advisable in some countries as it can be one way to raise the funding for preservation of ancient cultural architectures. I partly agree with this argument.
It is obvious that the more tourists visit the attractions, the more pressure the environment has to face. Littering is one of the main issues, which results from many overseas tourists' lack of awareness to put garbage in the right place. If monument management board do not have enough staff and expense to treat waste in time, it may cause air pollution and bad landscape. Therefore, raising fee for foreign travelers is one way to contribute to financial source to handle this problem. In addition, in some countries, the environmental and cultural value can not be neglected in the pursuit of economic value. For example, Bhutan will not be as famous as they are now with their environmental - friendly lifestyle and thousand -year - old architectures if they emphasize the tourism development.
However, to some extent, domestic and foreign tourists should be treated fairly. Inequaliry can cause peole travelling from other countries not to choose visiting these nations; thus, their GDP will decrease as in fact, overseas travelers contribute a larger amount through their spending on higher quality hotels and restaurants as well as their interests for souvenirs. Besides, unfair treatment experience can create negative impression on the host country, spoiling the nation's image in the eye of international friends. It directly leads to the reduction in the number of tourists; and concequently, the significan fall in the revenue of tourism industry.
To sum up, higher fee for travelers from other countries may benefit countries that want to focus on the preservation of their historical sites. However, they should build attractive travel policy to balance between protecting the environment and generating profit from tourism industry.