I am not clear what you intend to mean by << the economics of tourist systems >> . Travel and toursim is a large industry in the world economy, accounting for about 12% of gross world product. Tourism has a very special contribution because a lot of it relies on exploiting natural assets such as beaches, historic city centres and snowy mountains that are found in places which are at geographic disadvantage for most other economic activity i.e. awkward to transport goods and sevices in and out of, far from major cities, poorly connected to 'wired' infrastructure like mobile phone masts. The economies of some places are therefore heavily dependent on toursim, notably islands (Hawaii, Crete, Majorca, Skye, Bali to name a few).
Tourists require four major things to choose a destination in more than small numbers:
1) perceived safety
2) attraction
3) infrastructure
4) low cost access
1) is basic, illustrated by evidence of drops in tourist arrivals/revenue from the slightest whiff of insecurity such as in London for a few months after 7 July 2005 or Egypt after each round of killings. Note however that it is all about perception, not truth. Sri Lanka kept up its tourist inflow despite the civil war there. Londoners themselves caried on life as normal, including intra-London tourism, from 9 July onwards.
2) There is a reason why more foreign tourists visit Edinburgh than Glasgow. People want something delightful to see or do. Some attractions cannot be created, they are natural (sandy beaches, reliable sunshine), or cultural-historic (cathedrals, temples, city walls), but all of these and some with no 'natural' base are created or enhanced by tourism entrepreneurs. Someone provides the places to stay, eat, and drink that turn a beach into a beach resort. Someone builds and manages the ski-run and apres-ski that turns a barren mountainside into a ski resort.
4) is the reason why the Dorset coast gets more tourists than
3) is everything that business creates in a place where tourists do or are hoped to come -- tarmaced roads, airports, hotels and rooms-for-rent, forex bureaux, car rental companies and so on. Everything that, for example, Georgia (on the Black Sea) pretty much hasn't yet got. As well as the museum and the museum shop and the ice cream stand I mentioned at 2).
4) is obviously cheap flights. It's also the point that means mediocre tourist attractions within or close to major prospering cities get more visitors than better attractions further away. The Blue Ridge Mountains get three times as many visitors a year as the Grand Canyon, although most people who have visited both rate the GC as more special -- because many more people live within 4 or 6 hours' drive of the Blue Ridge. Similarly, London Zoo gets many visitors although the animals are much more inspirational in the Kruger National Park.
2006-11-04 19:37:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by MBK 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
syestem ke alawa hamari bhi galti hai hum kanhi bhi kuch bhi docoment chak nahi kerte hai uske liye time milta hai , agent ki bhi galti rehi hai
2016-05-21 23:39:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋