Some people believe that to protect local culture, tourism should be banned in some areas whereas others think that change is inevitable and banning tourism will have no benefits.
Tourism has been becoming an economic cornerstone of many nations in the world, which can have both positive and negative influences on some areas. There are different views on whether tourists should be prohibited to visit several places in order to preserve the culture and traditions there. In my opinion, a visit to tourist attractions should be maintained without prohibition.
On the one hand, tourism activities have been ruined or damaged numerous spots in term of local custom and tradition. Many people visit a destination and pass other assortment of values, beliefs or behaviour, permeating the locals' deep rooted cultural beauty. The residents would adapt to the new and neglect what they have been used to but still been invaluable. Moreover, many religious events take place while visitors come to snap some fabulous photographs or communicate noisily about the event. Those types of behaviour can drive the indigenous to distraction from the important situation.
On the other hand, in the main many areas from cities to villages count on the income from touristry. In other words, people residing there take advantage of tourist attractions all year round. For example, in Con Dao island, many families or individuals launch various services to support tourists who arrive there mainly for spiritual purposes and financially support themselves, which means if the island is devoid of visitors, a number of residents will suffer from poverty or income reduction. Banning travels seems not feasible to protect the island' traditions as the indigenous have been working on this effectively and wisely.
To sum up, retaining traditional local culture is as significant as developing tourism; however, a ban on tourism in some spots cannot be an appropriate approach to fulfil this goal. This decision must be considered disservice to the locals in some aspects.
Discuss both sides and give your opinion.
Tourism has been becoming an economic cornerstone of many nations in the world, which can have both positive and negative influences on some areas. There are different views on whether tourists should be prohibited to visit several places in order to preserve the culture and traditions there. In my opinion, a visit to tourist attractions should be maintained without prohibition.
On the one hand, tourism activities have been ruined or damaged numerous spots in term of local custom and tradition. Many people visit a destination and pass other assortment of values, beliefs or behaviour, permeating the locals' deep rooted cultural beauty. The residents would adapt to the new and neglect what they have been used to but still been invaluable. Moreover, many religious events take place while visitors come to snap some fabulous photographs or communicate noisily about the event. Those types of behaviour can drive the indigenous to distraction from the important situation.
On the other hand, in the main many areas from cities to villages count on the income from touristry. In other words, people residing there take advantage of tourist attractions all year round. For example, in Con Dao island, many families or individuals launch various services to support tourists who arrive there mainly for spiritual purposes and financially support themselves, which means if the island is devoid of visitors, a number of residents will suffer from poverty or income reduction. Banning travels seems not feasible to protect the island' traditions as the indigenous have been working on this effectively and wisely.
To sum up, retaining traditional local culture is as significant as developing tourism; however, a ban on tourism in some spots cannot be an appropriate approach to fulfil this goal. This decision must be considered disservice to the locals in some aspects.
