Some people think using cultural heritage to develop international tourism is wrong. Others think that is the only way to protect cultural heritage. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Cultural heritage is one of essential elements to boost international tourism. Therefore, as a symbol of cultural identity in a particular country, different countries advocate international cultural tourism in order to attract foreign visitors. Hearing some environmental activists concern about the negatives brought by international tourism, much worry arouse in my heart as well in terms of commercial sweeping and the damage of cultural heritage.
A large number of visitors travel for cultural heritage, which affords businessman a precious opportunity to develop commercial business, such as fast-food shop and coffee shop, around the cultural relics for high profits. Take the Great Wall for an example, foreigners tend to go in Starbuck near the Great Wall to relax when they are tired. Gradually, excessive commercial atmosphere in the Great Wall pose a great threat to culture protection as travelers carry the beverages with them when they travel and abandon them as they please.
Additionally, cultural heritage should be viewed as the proud of a country and protected by the whole world. Promoting the tourism of cultural heritage, however, may appeal to a variety of visitors whose behavior may damage the indigenous nature environment. Consequently, cultural heritage are destroyed by human trace and could not be called as relics any more.
On the other hand, preserving cultural heritage need a large sum of money which could be brought by international tourism. The more tourists visit, the more income the local government gets. Thus the cultural heritage could be better protected as more money will be allocated in preservation. Only if the cultural heritage maintain well, the local economy could gain a dramatic increase.
Cultural heritage, a piece of identity card of a country, is used for develop international tourism, which is definitely reasonable. But I argue that the emphasis on the protection of cultural relic is more significant.
Trying to write 5 para. eaasy according to Ray's suggestion. Will it be better? Thands~~
Cultural heritage is one of the essential elements to boost international tourism.
A large number of visitors travel for the cultural heritage, which affords businessman a precious opportunity to develop commercial business, such as fast-food restaurants and coffee shops , around the cultural relics for high profits.
Hearing some environmental activists' concerns about the negatives brought by international tourism, much worry arose in my heart as well in terms of commercial sweeping and the damage to cultural heritage.-----I made several small changes here...
...tend to go in Starbucks near the ...
Promoting the tourism of cultural heritage, however, may appeal to a variety of visitors whose behavior may damage the indigenous, natural environment. ---I just made a small change at the end. Great sentence!!
Thus the cultural heritage could be better protected as more money will be allocated for the preservation of cultural landmarks, buildings, and so forth.----I added a few words.
you seem to have deep understanding of tourism, that double-edged sword.