自助游和第三世界的发展毕业论文外文文献翻译x.docx

BACKPACKER TOURISM AND THIRD WORLD DEVELOPMENTRegina ScheyvensMassey University, New ZealandAbstract: Third World governments often scorn international backpackers, professing instead an enthusiasm for pursuing higher-value, luxury tourism. This article presents an alternative perspective, elaborating upon ways that providing goods and services for backpackers can promote development, especially at the local level. Several challenges will need to be addressed, however, if such communities are to have some control over the backpacker submarket and maximize the benefits they gain from it. Such challenges include overcoming the self-centered attitudes of some backpackers who might behave irresponsibly, and encouraging Third World governments to establish a policy environment and effective infrastructure which support community involvement in this form of tourism. Keywords: Backpackers, budget, Third World, development.INTRODUCTIONAlmost wherever it is viable, Third World governments are actively pursuing tourism growth in their countries. They are particularly interested in international tourism (Harrison 1992), believing it brings their countries numerous economic benefits including employment opportunities, small business development, and foreign exchange earnings. They tend to assume that more money is earned by attracting tourists who can afford luxury goods and services, despite the fact that this often leads to a countrys dependence on imported products, foreign investment, and expatriate skills, resulting in repatriation of resultant profits (Baskin 1995). But those financial benefits received from luxury tourism developments in the Third World very rarely “trickle down” to be of any significance to people at grassroots level. While a number of academics have noted this problem, thoroughly critiquing forms of tourism development dominated by overseas investors (Britton 1982; Brohman 1996), they have rarely proposed support for alternative forms of tourism based on the village economy (Brown1998). The presumption that high-spending tourists bring the greatest benefits to Third World countries is questioned in this paper. Instead, it argues how local communities in the Third World might benefit from involvement in budget tourism. In particular, the often maligned backpacker market segment is considered. The academic literature provides clues as to how the backpacker segment can be described. This submarket is characterized by budget consciousness and a flexible tourism style, with most participants traveling alone or in small groups. Backpackers are often keen to share the local lifestyle (Loker 1993:33), citing “meeting the people” as a key motivation (Riley 1988:325). Their recreational activities are likely to focus around nature (such as trekking), culture (village stays and more), or adventure (including river rafting or riding camels) (Loker- Murphy and Pearce 1995). This is associated with the tendency for backpackers to travel more widely than other tourists, seeking unusual or out of the way locations and/or experiences (Haigh 1995). According to Riley, “the less traveled route and more difficult way of getting there has a high degree of mystique and status conferral” (1988:321). The tight budget many backpackers impose on themselves is largely related to the longer duration of their travels (Gibbons and Selvarajah 1994). As Cohen warns, however, one could be misled by the idealized image of the backpacker (or “youth tourists” in his study of southern Thailand beaches) “as a curious and adventurous traveler in search of authentic experiences” (1982:221). Perhaps because of its association with the “hippy” and “drifter” tourism of the 60s and 70s, the backpacker segment of the tourism market has not always been welcomed by Third World regional or national governments (Cohen 1973; Erb 2000; Hall 1997; Hampton 1998; Loker-Murphy and Pearce 1995). Much credence has been given to the stereotypical image of the backpacker as an unkempt, immoral, drug-taking individual. In Southeast Asia, the interest paid by most government planners to the backpacker sector is either negligible or negative. According to Hampton, this “sector is at best tacitly ignored, or at worst actively discouraged in official tourism planning” (1998:640). Independent travelers (hereafter tourists)who include backpackersare actively discouraged in the Maldives (Lyon 1997), and have been banned completely in Bhutan as they are seen as posing a threat to the countrys gross national happiness, with only approved tour parties allowed (Wood and House 1991). Meanwhile in Goa, the Director of Tourism believes that “Luxury tourism was the way forward. Hippies and backpackers do not bring in enough money” (cited in Wilson 1997:68). Similarly, efforts to attract tourists in southern Africa are centered on organized mass international tourists who have travel arrangements made for them (Baskin 1995). In some cases, government interest in discouraging backpackers and other budget tourists has been translated into policy. For example, government policy in Botswana states: Foreign tourists who spend much of their time but little of their money in Botswana are of little net benefit to the country. Indeed, they are almost certainly a net loss because they crowd the available public facilities such as roads and camp sites and cause environmental damage . It is important to shift the mix of tourists away from those who are casual campers towards those who occupy permanent accommodation. Encouraging the latter while discouraging the former through targeted marketing and the imposition of higher fees for the use of public facilities, are obviously among the objectives to be pursued While denigrating budget tourists, this policy aims simultaneously to “provide local communities with direct and indirect benefits from tourism activities”, without specifically considering whether it is realistic for impoverished rural communities to cater for higher end tourists. Local communities do not usually have the skills, experience, or resources to provide services for luxury tourists. In many cases, therefore, such communities miss out completely on the benefits of tourism ventures in their own backyards. In order to ensure a strong likelihood of economic, political, and social benefits accruing to a local community, Ashley and Roestress the need for full participation of communities in tourism.This can occur where communities supply the majority of goodsand services to tourists, have considerable input into planning decisions, and collectively manage common resources. When tourism ventures are largely dependent on local cultural and natural resources, and are locally managed, communities can “participate with equity in the tourism process” This paper will argue that such conditions are more likely to be present when communities target the needs of budget tourists, especially the significant backpacker segment.BACKPACKERS AND LOCAL DEVELOPMENTThis paper considers both pros and cons of backpacker tourism in terms of whether it promotes local level development. It provides a review of the literature on this general research theme while also drawing on the authors backpacking experiences through Asia in 1989 90, and more recent fieldwork on related issues of sustainable livelihoods in southern Africa and the South Pacific.Reservations About BackpackersBefore considering ways in which catering to the backpacker segment can promote local development, the discussion raises some concerns about backpackers rather than assuming that they are an inherently desirable submarket. The very tenets of backpacker culture, including the independent nature of backpacker travel and their cultural sensitivity, have been questioned, both in academic writing and popular fiction. For example, the filming in Thailand of one of the novels discussed below, The Beach, starring Hollywood golden boy Leonardo DiCaprio, has sparked numerous discussion sites on the internet and a torrent of media interest in backpacking, particularly focusing on undesirable traits of backpackers. Similarly, when the London- based nongovernmental organization, Tourism Concern, addressed them in a special issue of their magazine, In Focus (Spring 1999), the British press were quick to pick up upon negative aspects backpacker culture. One criticism of backpackers is that, in ensuring that their funds will last for the duration of their travels, they become excessively concerned with bargain hunting (Goodwin, Kent, Parker and Walpole 1998). They may regard haggling as a game, to the extent that they exploit artisans and traders so desperate for a sale that they accept unreasonably low prices for their products (Bradt 1995). According to Riley “Status among travelers is closely tied to living cheaply and obtaining the best bargains which serve as indicators that one is an experienced traveler”. Budi, an experienced tour guide, argues that the average independent tourist to Indonesia has changed somewhat in recent years: Now tourists are going to Indonesia not to see the culture or the people, but to compete with other travelers about how cheaply they can travel. They all want to be the winner, and dont realize how rude they are to local people (cited in Wheat 1995:50). While in the past the tendency for backpackers to seek out more intensive contact with local people has generally been posed in a positive light, some commentators have recognized that such “alternative” tourism forms are also more invasive (Butler 1990). Because they seek “out of the way” destinations, Spreitzhofer argues, the influence of backpackers on Third World societies “ proves often to be more lasting and shaping than organized, spatially selective package tourism”. Furthermore, their very search for authentic experiences is based on exclusion of other tourists (Jamieson 1996), which is why Mowforth and Munt suggest that backpackers can be included in the category of the self-centered tourists they call “ego-tourists”. Possibly, backpackers more lasting influence will involve the problem of seeking out new destinations but failing to understand cultural norms of appropriate behavior in these new locales . Some suggest that backpackers simply do not care about local customs and acceptable behavior, instead showing blatant disregard for social norms (Noronha 1999). Acting out their perceived freedom from social commitments and constraints (Jamieson 1996) may lead then to culturally and socially inappropriate behavior. This seems to be a problem particularly in backpacker ghettos or enclaves. Such places can be found in Khatmandu, Bangkok, and Pushkar, major points of reference on the great backpackers overland route through Asia. There is increasing evidence that such ghettos are now emerging outside of the Asian region as well (Aziz 1999). As one guesthouse manager stated, “The Indian tourists that visit Pushkar have a holy respect for the place, but the foreigners just treat the place as a fun theme park. They drink and smoke in the temples and show no respect”. Scanty or excessively casual dress, drug and alcohol abuse, and casual sexual encounters can all cause insult to local residents, whose reliance on income from tourism often leads them to tolerate what they feel is outright denigration of their customs.自助游和第三世界的发展第三世界国家的政府往往轻视国际背包客，他们更愿意追求更高价值、更奢华的旅游。本文从另外一种角度，介绍了怎样为背包客提供产品和服务可以促进旅游经济发展，尤其在地方一级。对于发展自助游，我们未来的确需要一些挑战，但是前提是这些相关的地方要在背包客微型市场和商家所从中活得的最大利益上做出一定的控制。这些挑战包括：克服一些由于那些不负责任的背包客以自我为中心的态度，鼓励第三世界国家的政府建立一个有效的政策环境和一定的基础设施来支持这种旅游形式参与社区活动。关键词：背包客，预算，第三世界，发展。几乎在任何一个地方都是这样的，第三世界各国政府也在积极地追求各自国家旅游业的发展。他们对于国际旅游非常有兴趣（哈里森1992），认为这会为许多国家带来包括就业机会，小企业的发展和外汇收入等等的经济利益。他们往往把创汇的希望寄托在吸引旅游者可以负担奢侈品和服务，尽管这常常导致一个国家对于进口商品、国外投资和外籍技术人员的过度依赖，其结果导致了最终利润的遣返（巴斯金1995）。但是那些从奢侈旅游上获得的好处对于第三世界国家来讲却很少以滴入式经济的方式令基层民众受惠。虽然一些学者已经注意到了这个问题，彻底批判了海外投资者为主的旅游发展形式（布里顿1982；布霍曼1996），但是他们却很少提出建立在乡村旅游基础上的各种不同新式的旅游经济形式（布朗1998）。关于高消费的游客会对第三世界国家的经济发展带大利益的这一推论在此文中受到质疑，与此相反，本文认为第三世界的地方政府可能在参与预算旅游中受益，特别是在被看低的自助游市场上。学术文献提供的线索描述了如何是背包族。这个市场的特点是细致入微的预算，灵活的旅游方式，多数人会选择单独或者小群体旅行。背包客往往热衷于享受旅游目的地当地的生活方式（洛克1993:33），以“阅人”作为关键的动机（莱利1988:325）。他们的休闲活动可能更关注于自然（比如徒步旅行），文化（乡村住宿等）或者冒险（包括漂流或乘坐骆驼）（洛克，墨菲和皮尔斯1995）。相比于其他的旅行者，背包客在旅行上有更广泛的发展空间，比如寻求不同寻常的旅游目的地和旅游经历（黑格995）。莱利说，“越少人走的路线，越困难的方式则会令人活得越高的神秘感和征服后的成就感。”很多背包客声称预算紧张大部分是因为他们的旅行是更长时间更长路途的旅行。正如科恩所告诫的那样，尽管如此，人们也不能误认为背包客的理想主义者的形象就是作为一个好奇勇于冒险的旅行者对于“真实”经历的追寻（或在他关于泰国南海岸的研究中所提到的“年轻旅行者”)（1982:221）。也许是因为它总与“嬉皮士”和“流浪”旅行有关，60年代和70年代，在旅游市场中背包客这一群体总是在第三世界地区或者国家政府不受欢迎。大部分人都赋予了一个背包客蓬头垢面，不道德、吸毒者的形象。在东南亚，政府规划部门对于背包客所持付的利息或者是忽略不计或者不放入明帐。据汉普顿说，这种部门充其量是在默许忽视，或在最坏地积极劝阻官方旅游规划。独立旅行者（以下简称旅行者）包括背包客已经被不鼓励去马尔代夫旅行，并被完全禁止出现在不丹，因为他们被认为是对当地居民幸福的严重威胁，除非得到当地旅游局的放行同意。与此同时，国奥的旅游局局长认为，“豪华游是未来旅游业的发展方向，嬉皮士和背包客身上没有足够的钱好赚。”同样的，努力吸引游客在南非的“146个背包客和旅游发展”的活动也是基于组织大规模的国际游客为目的。在某些情况下，政府把限制背包客和其他的预算旅游者已经制成了政策。比如，在博茨瓦纳政府的政策中规定：那些在博茨瓦纳花费大量时间但是很少金钱的外国旅行者对于国家几乎没什么经济贡献。事实上他们几乎肯定会出现经亏损，因为他们现有的人民就已经造成了环境公共设施的破坏，比如公路和营地，同时也造成了自然环境的破坏。重要的其实是那些与游客混杂在一起的长期霸占休闲露营的人。通过有针对性的营销和对于公共设施征收的较高的费用，纵容后者而限制前者，显然是其追求的目的。在轻视预算旅游者的同时，这一政策却犯了这样的错误，“希望通过旅游活动给当地提供直接或间接的利益”，但是却没有为贫困农村的现实考虑到当地是否有可能为高端游客提供相应的技能、经验或者旅游资源。因此，在很多情况下，这些地方完全错在旅游企业的利益其实是在他们自己的后院中。为了确保一个经济，政治和累积到一个地方的社会福利的可靠的可能性经济，阿什利和罗伊强调了旅游区充分参与旅游联系的必要性。这可以发生在社区向游客提供大多数的商品和服务，有