Content

Home

Sustainable Tourism and Economic development: A case study of Agra and Varanasi
Dr. Prakash Singh* Background and Introduction Over the past decade, many developing countries have turned to tourism as an option for sustainable development. Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (World Commission on Environment and Development 1987). It requires a fair and equitable distribution of the benefits of development, improved well-being for citizens and respect and care for the environment. Tourism emerged from being a relatively small-scale activity into a global economic sector from the 1960s onwards. In 2004, tourism was expected to generate 10.4 per cent of world GDP; 9.4 per cent of global capital investments; 8.1 per cent of worldwide employment; and 12.2 per cent of worldwide exports of goods and services. At present, tourism ranks in the top five world export categories. Tourisms impact on the economies of developing countries is very significant. In recent years, tourisms economic contribution in developing countries has exceeded that of traditional economic activities like agriculture and mineral extraction. Tourism enjoys an advantage for development in small developing states and not surprisingly it has been one of the fastest-growing economic sectors over the past 10 to 15 years. However, given the vulnerability of developing states, there is growing concern about the environmental sustainability of tourism, the potential impacts of further liberalization in the sector and the need to enhance tourisms economic and social development contribution. A few vertically-integrated corporations, located primarily in developed countries, are increasingly controlling international tourism. This tilts the balance of trade in tourism-services in favor of developed countries and encourages anti-competitive behavior. Also, uncontrolled tourism development can impose detrimental impacts on the physical and social environment. Poorly managed tourism may lead to deforestation and erosion; degradation and depletion of biological diversity; disruption of natural habitats; and over-consumption of resources like freshwater and energy. This paper examines the role tourism trade and liberalization plays in fostering or constraining sustainable development. In short, it explores the question: what are the opportunities and barriers to achieving sustainable development through trade in tourism-services? The paper draws on relevant current literature, and existing data on tourism-services in Agra and Varanasi, a popular tourism destination in India. This paper is divided into 4 parts. The first part basically introduces the idea, provides a background, the second part is a brief survey of existing literature and the third part is about methodology, identification of variables, data source etc. The last part is about the major findings and conclusion. Literature review There is plenty of literature available on impact of tourism on the host country but the literature on whether it actually produced any significant economic development for the masses is limited and that too for countries like India, the linkages are not at all researched and established. The review of the current literature is organized by first looking at potential and impact of tourism related to the Economic, environmental and social issues. In the second half, we look at the available evidence on sustainable economic development and on trade liberalization and its linkages with tourism as a whole. Tourism potential and impacts Tourism is activities of persons traveling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes (WTO 2002). It has emerged from being a relatively small-scale activity into a global economic phenomenon from the 1960s onward. Today, it is described as one of the worlds largest and fastest growing economic sectors (UN 1999; WTO 2002). According to the WTO, the growth of international tourist arrivals significantly outpaces the growth of economic output as measured by GDP. From 1975 to 2000, annual international tourist arrivals increased an average of 4.7 per cent, while GDP grew 3.5 per cent. In 2004, 760 million people traveled internationally, a 10 per cent increase over the 691 million in 2003 (WTO 2005). Receipts from international tourism have also grown steadily. In 2003, international tourism receipts totaled US$523 billion, a 6.5 per cent increase over 2002. The WTO remains confident that international tourism will ontinue to grow, and projects that visitor arrivals will reach an estimated 1.0 billion by 2010 and 1.6 billion by 2020.
*Finance & Accounting Area, Indian Institute of Management, Lucknow, UP-226013

Top

IIMK

Part III Tourism and Economic Development

IIML

The rapid growth and impact of this industry has placed it at the centre of international discussions on sustainable development. From an economic perspective, tourism is widely endorsed for creating economic growth and development (WTO 2002). The sector makes a considerable contribution to the global economy through exports, GDP, employment and investment. In 2004, travel and tourism was expected to generate 10.4 per cent of world GDP, 9.4 per cent of global capital investments and 12.2 per cent of worldwide exports of goods and services (WTTC 2004). This places tourism in the top five export categories, preceded only by exports of chemicals, automotive products and fuels (WTO 2004). Tourisms contribution to employment cannot be overlooked. It is argued that because of its labor intensive nature, investments in tourism tend to generate a larger and faster increase in employment than equal investments in other economic activities (Neto 2003). Currently, it provides 214,697,000 jobs, representing one in every 12.3 jobs worldwide or 8.1 per cent of total employment (WTTC 2004). Tourism also contributes to government revenue and supports investments in infrastructure such as roads, telecommunications and health and public facilities. Researchers, therefore, argue this can go a long way in improving local living conditions and attracting additional investments (Neto 2003). The impact of tourism on developing countries is a critical sustainability issue. Proponents note that in recent years, tourisms economic contribution in many developing countries has exceeded that of traditional economic activities such as agriculture and mineral extraction (UN 1999). From 1995 to 1998, tourism revenues were one of the top five sources of export revenue for 69 developing countries and the main source of foreign exchange earnings in 28. In countries where tourism was the main source of foreign currency, its share in total exports was between 79 and 20 per cent (Diaz 2001). Least Developed Countries (LDCs) have been recording increasing shares in the international tourism trade. The WTO claims tourism now accounts for a growing 70 per cent of total services exports in LDCs and is often the first source of foreign exchange earnings. Tourism is also identified as the only major service sector in which developing countries have consistently recorded trade surpluses relative to the rest of the world (UN 1999; Neto 2003). Between 1980 and 1996, their positive travel account balances increased from US$4.6 billion to US$65.9 billion, primarily as a result of the growth of inbound tourism in Asia, the Pacific and Africa (UN 1999). Coupled with its large potential multiplier and spill-over effects, tourism is promoted as a major driving force for economic development in developing countries (UN 1999). The link between tourism and the environmental and social components of sustainable development has received increasing attention. Industry stakeholders assert that, besides its economic contribution, tourism can lead to ecologically and socially sustainable development (WTTC and IHRA 1999). It is suggested that tourism can act as a catalyst for conservation and environmental protection because of the following factors: 1) it is generally non-consumptive and has less impact on natural resources than most other industries; 2) it is based on the appreciation of natural and cultural assets and has greater motivation to protect its resource base; and 3) it can provide valuable revenue and economic incentive to conserve resources which would otherwise be used in more damaging activities (WTTC and IHRA 1999). Socially, tourism is credited for its potential impact on employment; income redistribution and poverty alleviation; contribution to native craft revival, festivals and traditions; and improvements to the physical and social infrastructure, enhancing overall health and social welfare (UN 1999). There are many critics who question tourism as a sustainable development strategy. Some contend that, although tourism has proved effective as a vehicle for economic growth, the fundamental principles of sustainable developmentincluding equity, holistic planning and sustainabilitycannot be easily transposed onto the sector (Sharpley 2000). Economic issues Many researchers are skeptical about the local economic impact and viability of the tourism industry, especially in developing countries. Much skepticism is about the perceived multiplier effect and the uneven distribution of benefits. The multiplier effect implies that earnings from tourism will flow through transactions of workers in the local market, resulting in benefits for the entire destination (McLaren 2003). There is widespread agreement that very little of tourism revenue actually remains in the local economy because of leakages (Gossling 2003; McLaren 2003). Leakage from tourism can be: a) internal, or import-related; b) external, or pre-leakage; and c) invisible leakage associated with resource damage or degradation (Diaz 2001). Internal leakage is highest where there are insufficient backward and forward linkages between tourism and other related sectors of the economy (Diaz 2001, WTO 2002). In most
Conference on Tourism in India Challenges Ahead, 15-17 May 2008, IIMK 115

Top

IIMK

Part III Tourism and Economic Development

IIML

developing countries, the average internal leakage is 40 to 50 per cent of gross tourism earnings for small economies, and 10 to 20 per cent for more advanced and diversified economies (Diaz 2001). External leakage refers to tourism revenue that is not captured by the destination country and is of greater concern among researchers. The external leakage effect in developing countries is exacerbated by the structure of international tourism and anti-competitive behavior in the sector (Sharpley 2000; Diaz 2001; McLaren 2003). The main components of tourismtransportation, accommodation and procurement of customersare dominated by a few vertically-integrated players located mainly in developed countries. These suppliers have significant market power and control the flow of package travelers to tourism destinations. They exert extreme pricing-pressure on small suppliers in developing countries, and capture most of the price paid by the tourists (Sharpley 2000; Diaz 2001). According to Diaz, as much as 75 per cent of the retail price of package tours is retained in developed countries. Foreign ownership within the destination country can also influence the extent of the leakage effect. High levels of foreign ownership and controlespecially by transnational corporationslead to repatriation of tourism revenue in the form of profits, income and imports (McLaren 2003). Besides inequitable distribution of benefits, some critics argue that socioeconomic inequities are also reinforced by existing patterns in the tourism destinations (Sharpley 2000). Sharpley claims that in many less developed countries, tourism is often unevenly distributed, reducing the opportunity for equitable development. He argues tourism is often controlled and influenced by powerful economic and political players, placing small local entrepreneurs at a major disadvantage. Tourism is viewed as an unsustainable development option because of its relative instability (McLaren 2003). Tourism demand is generally seasonal and susceptible to shocks and unexpected events such as natural disasters, regional conflicts and political instability. The number of persons traveling internationally can also be influenced by changes in consumer preferences and the state of the global economy (UN 1999; McLaren 2003; Neto 2003). This is demonstrated by the 1.7 per cent decrease in international tourist arrivals from 703 million in 2002 to 691 million in 2003. The decrease was from events such as the outbreak of SARS, uncertainties from the Iraq conflict, and a weak global economy (WTO 2004). In this respect, researchers caution that the fickle nature of tourism can increase the vulnerability of tourismdependent economies and worsen their economic situation (UN 1999; McLaren 2003; Neto 2003). Some critics contend the employment opportunities promised by tourism have not been realized in many developing countries (McLaren 2003). Besides quantity issues, jobs are usually temporary, menial and low wage when compared to other socially comparable occupations (McLaren 2003; Hochuli and Pluss 20042005). McLaren argues that most middle and top management positions tend to be occupied by foreigners with little opportunity for locals to move up. These deficiencies and inequities in the industry can have serious implications for the economic stability of small developing countries. They can negatively impact the international balance of payments, reduce the multiplier and spill-over effects of tourism, and threaten the financial viability of the sector as a whole. Some proponents point out that many of the disadvantages are not peculiar to tourism, but are rather characteristics of growth and globalization (Deloitte and Touche, IIED and ODI 1999; WTO 2002). They maintain there is no clear evidence that effects like leakage and the perceived high level of foreign ownership are greater in tourism than in other economic sectors. Environmental issues The rapid expansion of tourism poses serious threats to the natural environment in tourism-dependent countries. The large number of persons traveling to tourism destinations often exceeds the carrying capacity, and can impact the environment in various ways (McLaren 2003). Over consumption of natural resources such as freshwater, energy, land and marine resources can lead to resource depletion and degradation. They also contribute to resource conflicts between locals and the industry (Gossling 2003; McLaren 2003; Neto 2003). It is argued that, on average, tourists use greater quantities of both energy and freshwater than locals (Dixon, Hamilton, Pagiola and Segnestam 2001). Concentrated tourism development can also affect natural landscapes through processes such as deforestation, loss of wetlands and soil erosion (Neto 2003). This is a major issue in coastal areas where large-scale development occurs in clusters (Gossling 2003; McLaren 2003). Another major environmental impact of uncontrolled tourism development is damage to ecologically sensitive areas and ecosystems (Neto 2003). Damage arises primarily through pollution, overuse and
Conference on Tourism in India Challenges Ahead, 15-17 May 2008, IIMK 116

Top

IIMK

Part III Tourism and Economic Development

IIML

inappropriate practices. The tourism sector is a key generator of both solid and liquid waste (Dixon et al. 2001; McLaren 2003). The disposal of this wasteoften inadequately treatedcontributes to contamination of land, freshwater and ecosystems such as coral reefs and wetlands. The sector is also highly energy intensive (McLaren 2003; Neto 2003). Hotels and other facilities use large amounts of energy for heating, lighting and other purposes, while tourism transportation consumes significant amounts of fossil fuels. Naturally, this high level of energy consumption and release of emissions can contribute to air pollution and ecosystem damage in host destinations (Gossling 2003; McLaren 2003). These environmental impacts are mostly associated with mass tourism development. Alternative forms of tourism, such as ecotourism, are praised for being more ecologically sensitive and valuable for conserving natural and cultural resources (Honey 1999). Ecotourism emphasizes low-impact and small scale development, controlled visitor numbers, education for locals and visitors, financial benefits for conservation and local communities, and appreciation of nature, culture and local populations (Honey 1999; UN 2001). Given these characteristics, proponents argue that, if practiced properly, ecotourism can contribute to environmental conservation, international understanding and cooperation, economic and political empowerment of local communities, and preservation of cultures (Honey 1999; McLaren 2003). Some researchers contend that the promises of ecotourism have not been realized (McLaren 2003). There are very few examples of financially-viable ecotourism projects and an increasing recognition that many projects labeled ecofriendly are often not sustainable (Gossling 2003). This sustainability problem is attributed to the growing trend towards green washingthe practice of promoting products, services or destinations as green or ecofriendly when they are not (Honey 1999; McLaren 2003). McLaren notes that many hotels and resorts are awarding themselves green certificates for recycling and reusing plastics, while continuing to consume environmentally-damaging amounts of energy and chemicals (McLaren 2003: pp.28). This is a very dangerous trend which can undermine the capability of ecotourism and threaten the resource base upon which it depends (Honey 1999). Socio-cultural issues Tourisms impact on local populations is another key sustainability issue. While some researchers claim that tourism can be an instrument for global peace and cooperation, there are many who stress the negative effects of the industry on host communities. One of the main criticisms is the disruption of traditional and subsistence activities by wage labour opportunities and marginally-higher incomes offered by tourism (Stronza 2001; Gossling 2003). In Zanzibar, Gossling observed that after tourism had become a major economic sector, much of the local population shifted their labour from traditional activities such as fishing and seaweed farming, to tourism-related activities. Researchers argue the danger lies in the strong potential for local communities to become overly reliant on tourism, thus increasing their economic vulnerability (Stronza 2001; Gossling 2003). Another significant impact is on the commodification of cultures. Commodification is the process whereby items such as rituals, ceremonies, history and traditions become viewed as goods and are marketed to the tourism industry (Stronza 2001; McLaren 2003). Besides commercializing cultures, commodification can also affect local identity when locals alter their practices to satisfy the expectations of what visitors think is authentic (Stronza 2001; McLaren 2003). In such situations, cultures become deformed and unreal, as visitors perceptions of authentic are often not the same as historical fact (Stronza 2001; McLaren 2003). Loss of cultural identity can also happen when locals view their culture as inadequate and reject their lifestyles for that of the visitors (Stronza 2001; McLaren 2003). Sustainable tourism development Concern over the economic, environmental and socio-cultural effects of unsustainable tourism has led to increasing international agreement and action promoting sustainable tourism development (UN 2001; Neto 2003). Sustainable tourism development attempts to incorporate the principles of sustainable development into tourism to minimize its negative effects and maximize benefits (WTO 2004). Sustainable tourism emphasizes using environmental resources to maintain biological processes and conserve the natural heritage. It respects the socio-cultural authenticity of host communities and distributes socioeconomic benefits like stable employment, income-generating opportunities, poverty alleviation and social services. It provides informed and meaningful participation of all stakeholdersespecially local and indigenous communitiesand provides high levels of tourist satisfaction (WTO 2004).

Conference on Tourism in India Challenges Ahead, 15-17 May 2008, IIMK

117

Top

IIMK

Part III Tourism and Economic Development

IIML

Two international instruments developed to encourage sustainable development are the International Guidelines for Sustainable Tourism under the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the WTO Global Code of Ethics for Tourism. The WTO stresses that these guidelines be integrated into national tourism plans and policies to ensure the sectors long-term contribution to sustainable development. Lately, there has been a move to prioritize poverty alleviation within the sustainable tourism development agenda. This is due to growing recognition that the economic benefits of tourism do not automatically trickle down to the poor (WTO 2002). In fact, the poor are more vulnerable to the negative impacts of tourism and are least able to participate in its economic opportunities (Deloitte and Touche, IIED and ODI 1999). Many researchers are convinced that tourism can be used to address the poverty problem more directly (Ashley, Roe and Goodwin 2001; WTO 2002). These researchers contend that tourism has many advantages over other economic sectors, making it an effective tool for poverty alleviation. These advantages include: Tourism is consumed at the point of production and provides opportunities for linkages and the sale of additional goods and services; Tourism is a diverse industry and can build upon a wide resource base. This increases the scope for wider participation and for the development of the informal sector; Tourism is dependent on natural capital such as wildlife and culture, which are assets that some of the poor have or are gaining control over through processes of decentralization and devolution of tenure; It offers better labour-intensive and small-scale opportunities than all other sectors except agriculture; It can be developed in poor and marginalized areas that have few export and diversification options; and It employs relatively-high proportions of women and can help address gender inequality problems. Given this comparative advantage, it is recommended that the poverty agenda should be incorporated more explicitly into national tourism plans and strategies to enhance the participation and opportunities for the poor (WTO 2002). The role of government is critical for providing the enabling policy environment (WTO 2002). Proponents argue that pro-poor measures should: 1) increase access to tourism markets for the poor; 2) remove barriers such as lack of credit, skills and assets; 3) promote local management and partnerships to maximize local employment, use local supplies, and managerial training; 4) minimize negative environmental impacts; 5) increase linkages with other sectors such as agriculture, craft and manufacturing; and 6) increase visitor expenditure and use of services provided by the poor. (Deloitte and Touche, IIED and ODI 1999; Ashley et al. 2001; WTO 2002). Tourism and trade liberalization Trade liberalization in tourism-services has received increasing attention. Tourism became part of the multilateral trade agenda when it was one of the twelve services sectors under the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) during the Uruguay Round in 1994. Under this agreement, tourism is classified as Tourism and Travel Related Services and consists of four categories including: hotels and restaurants; travel agencies and tour operator services; tour guide services; and other (Perrin et al. 2001). This limited classification of tourism-services has been widely criticized for not capturing the complex, multifaceted nature of the industry. It excludes a number of vital services such as air transport, cruise services, distribution systems and business and recreational services, all of which are directly linked to tourism and represent significant proportions of its sales (Perrin et al. 2001; Fletcher, Lee and Fayed 2002). The GATS is the first enforceable multilateral agreement to cover trade and investment in services (Mashayekhi 2000; Perrin et al. 2001). Its main objective is to help expand trade in services by gradually eliminating trade barriers, promoting economic growth of trading partners and development of developing countries (Mashayekhi 2000). The GATS provides for the progressive liberalization of trade in services through a three-tiered structure including: general provisions and principles applying to all members; annexes setting out rules for particular sectors such as telecommunications and air transport; and national schedules of commitments on market access and national treatment (Feketekuty 2000; Mashayekhi 2000; Perrin et al. 2001). Feketekuty points out this structure reflects that liberalization of trade barriers cannot be accomplished overnight, not all countries can progress at the same rate and some sectors cannot be liberalized without appropriate regulatory regimes (Feketekuty 2000).

Conference on Tourism in India Challenges Ahead, 15-17 May 2008, IIMK

118

Top

IIMK

Part III Tourism and Economic Development

IIML

The tourism-services sector is one of the most popular sectors in which developing countries have made commitments (IDS 1999; Fletcher et al. 2002). By the end of the eighth round of GATS negotiations, tourism-services had attracted schedules from 97 of the 115 countries that participated (Fletcher et al. 2002). Some researchers say this heavy subscription is partly because tourism-services in many developing countries were already largely liberalized before 1994 (IDS 1999). Despite this popularity, proponents of liberalization claim there are still many barriers to trade in tourism-services that limit the further expansion and contribution of the sector (Fletcher et al. 2002). Unlike restrictions to goods, these trade barriers are less conspicuous and are typically domestic regulations, legislation and administrative processes (Perrin et al. 2001; Fletcher et al. 2002). Some of these barriers are: restrictions on entry visas and foreign currency; restrictions on foreign ownership and investment; obstacles to hiring foreign personnel; and administrative regulations like economic needs tests, restrictions on transfer of funds and repatriation of profits, exchange controls (Krumholz 1998; Fletcher et al. 2002). Fletcher et al. argue that many developing countries implement these types of restrictions because they regard tourism as an infant industry and are obligated to protect their domestic companies. This can be problematic since what a government views as a necessary regulatory measure, a foreign supplier may view as a discriminatory trade barrier. Proponents also emphasize that all trading partners stand to benefit from liberalization of trade in tourism-services. They list the benefits as: expansion of tourism activities; boosts in GDP and export earnings; job creation, particularly in more stable and lucrative areas like business and convention travel; increased foreign exchange earnings and foreign direct investment; increased focus on quality and competitiveness; declining prices for consumers; transfer of commercial knowledge and technology; boosts in government revenue; and spill-over benefits to other related sectors such as financial services (Krumholz 1998; Frayed and Fletcher 2002). All the same, some acknowledge that the specific characteristics of a countrysuch as the level and type of tourism development, the structure and diversification of the economy, its geography, and institutions and social and political realitiescould influence the extent of benefits (Krumholz 1998). One of the most frequent consequences of trade liberalization in tourism-services is its impact on domestic policy-making. Market access rules control quantitative and legal restrictions, while the most favoured nation treatment (MFN) and national treatment provisions require equal treatment of all member states and service suppliers. Critics lament that these provisions of the GATSperhaps more than many other trade agreementundermine national governments ability to regulate tourism services and promote sustainable tourism development (Honey 1999; Hoad 2002; Woodroffe and Joy 2002; Hochuli and Pluss 20042005). It is widely recognized that, to effectively achieve sustainable development objectives, governments may need to implement appropriate regulatory mechanisms (Hoad 2002). Research Methodology, Choice of City, Data etc: After going through the literature, one can easily observe that tourism has economic as well as social and environmental impacts for sure and to have any meaningful study of the impact on a city, it is advisable to go for an integrated approach. The author intends to take a more comprehensive and integrated analysis of economic and other impacts on the tourist cities identified with reference to sustainable economic development. Key variables to study economic, environmental, and social and other impacts have been identified and their behavior over a period of time would be studied and analyzed. The idea behind picking the two tourists cities of Varanasi and Agra for the current study is also by design and intentional. Both Agra and Varanasi attract lots of foreign tourists but the similarity ends there. The tourists in Agra are rich tourists who come via a structured package tour, visit preplanned monuments and destinations, do local shopping again from selected emporiums that beautifully showcase the local handicraft and artisan work. In the light of the above facts, where majority of tourists visiting Agra get involved into a kind of carte, the research question the author tries to ask here is the benefit of this huge tourist inflow to the city having any kind of impact on the local masses or it is largely being cornered by these big fishes. Specifically, we try to look at the major economic and social parameters in the city and how have they behaved and whether our worst fears that the major beneficiary of the influx in tourism is only selected few is actually true and not completely unfounded. Varanasi, on the other hand, is more known for its bag packers kind of tourists, where the majority of them visiting the Holy city come on a totally unplanned and unorganized tour and their planning for what all they would like to see and buy in Varanasi, starts once they reach the Ghats of Benares (Varanasi). Thus, going by the same logic (as for Agra), Varanasi is a city, where big tourist carets dont exist and
Conference on Tourism in India Challenges Ahead, 15-17 May 2008, IIMK 119

Top

IIMK

Part III Tourism and Economic Development

IIML

therefore should gain more from this tourist inflow as compared to Agra. Of course, the volume of money which an Agra tourist can bring in and spend would be substantially higher than compared to a back packer of Varanasi but ultimately, whatever he or she spends in Varanasi may actually percolate to the larger masses or locals. The idea about trying to link tourism with sustainable economic development for the local masses would be tested in these two cities by studying the selected variables which would represent both socio-environment as well as economic development. Selected Variables All-inclusive hotels are properties offering pre-paid packages that include all or most of guest services including room, food, entertainment, tours and sometimes beverages. This indicator is useful for assessing leakages and demand for local goods and services. Package-tour visitors are individuals who purchase inclusive or semi-inclusive vacation packages through the network of tour operators and travel agents. These tour packages can cover all aspects of the trip including flight, airport transfers, accommodation, meals, and sites and attractions. This is a key indicator of leakages and the multiplier effect of tourism. Average hotel occupancy measures the number of rooms or bed-places in the destination occupied over a set period of time. It provides an indication of the profitability and financial viability of hotels. Foreign ownership indicates the role of foreign companies and multi-national corporations in providing tourism-services. It is a good indicator of leakage and the multiplier effect of tourism, plus the level of local involvement and control in the industry. Total tourist receipts refer to total expenditures of tourists during their stay in the destination. This gross figure does not account for leakages. Receipts as a percentage of GDP and total exports measure the value added and balance of payments contributed by tourism. Government revenue indicates the revenue generation potential of the industry. This revenue is collected as direct and indirect taxes such as hotel occupancy taxes, departure taxes, cruise tax, income taxes, alien landholding licences, and consumption and excise taxes. Local involvement and benefit indicators go beyond total employment to include the type of employment created by tourism, wages relative to other sectors, the sectors impact on women, and local ownership and control. Domestic-linkages indicators measure the extent to which tourism is integrated with other sectors of the economy, which is critical for reducing leakages. Resource consumption indicators are concerned with freshwater management and energy efficiency and conservation. Pollution and waste indicators help assess the negative externalities resulting from tourist consumption of tourism products. Planning and regulatory indicators demonstrate if the legislative environment supports sustainable tourism development and if synergy exists between environment and development objectives.

Conference on Tourism in India Challenges Ahead, 15-17 May 2008, IIMK

120