Time India follows Bhutan's example on sustainable tourism

Indian tourist destinations witnessed an eight-fold jump in tourists over the last two decades. Unfortunately, this led to serious decay in the health of particularly, popular hill resorts. Can there be a way out? Bhutan shows the way to sustainable tourism as a means to maximise the earning potential.

Hyderabad: How much of tourism is too much? The question baffles avid travelers, particularly to India’s hill destinations which were designed to accommodate a limited number of people.

According to India Tourism Statistics, between 2000 and 2018, the number of tourist visits to States and union territories gone up by a staggering 8.5 times to 186 crore, including 1 crore of foreign tourists. Travelling increased exponentially in the current decade.

The result is evident. From Darjeeling to Shimla or Kullu-Manali, India’s top tourist draws are suffering from common maladies of traffic congestion, overflowing garbage, unbridled construction, water crisis etc.

Lesson from Bhutan

Does this help tourism. India’s smallest neighbour Bhutan says ‘No’. On February 4, Bhutan ended free entry of regional tourists from India, Bangladesh and the Maldives.

Indians, who make 70 per cent of the total tourist inflow to Bhutan, now have to pay a sustainable development fee (SDF) of Rs 1200 ($16.85) a day. The fee is applicable only in popular tourist destinations and is a fraction of the daily charges paid by visitors from other countries.

Bhutan's new sustainable development fee

However, the budget tourists will be hurt. A family of two adults and a child now pays Rs 20,000-25,000 for a low-cost four-night package, including stay at cheaper hotels. SDF will increase their total spend by 50-60 per cent.

As in 2018, Bhutan received 2.74 lakh tourists, including two lakh regional tourists. Two-third of the regional tourist availed cheaper land routes to enter the country. Apparently, majority of them were budget tourists.

And, that takes us to the crux of the issue. Bhutan pursues ‘high value, low volume’ tourism. They don’t want budget tourists to eat out the space for value tourists - who stays longer, spends more on cars, food, souvenir etc.

The policy is not new. Bhutan was always extra careful about its environment, including cultural environment. Over the last decade footfalls in the country increased by nearly three times, reaching upto one-third of its population. This called for scrutiny.

Restricting footfalls will help Bhutan avoid construction spree, waste generation and environmental decay in top destinations and at the same time create opportunity for maximizing revenue from value tourists. Budget travelers are encouraged to visit less explored parts of the country without any SDF.

India playing half-cock

Famous American economist Paul Krugman pointed out that market economy works best when regulated. Bhutan is doing exactly that. Tourist destinations are valuable assets and, like all products or brands their performance will depend on perfect positioning.

Apple doesn’t play in the volume phone segment because that will impact the exclusivity of the brand, which translates into premium price.

Tourists in Shimla

Shimla or Darjeeling were top tourism brands. Failure to regulate the market not only destroyed their aspirational value but also caused severe damage to the product quality. Darjeeling is converted into an urban slum, thereby limiting future revenue potential.

The Indian authorities are aware of the problem and are promoting alternate tourism destinations. A number of such destinations popped up in Darjeeling hills. Premium foreign tourists are visiting new South Goa destinations, where came up top resorts.

However, India is avoiding any direct regulatory intervention, as in Bhutan. This is either to avoid any popular backlash or take an easy way to promote tourism.

Does it help? Look at Shillong. In 2010, Meghalaya got 6.6 lakh tourists. In 2017, they received nearly 10 lakh visitors with an year-on-year growth of 19 per cent. Newspaper reports point at serious overcrowding, congestion, littering and unbridled construction.

Need regulation

Tourism is more of an experience than scenic beauty, as is amply proved by Dubai. The developments in Bhutan could have been a boon to the neighbouring Indian State of Arunachal which has just lifted restrictions on travelling.

Burj Khalifa in Dubai

However, lack of basic infrastructure makes it a costlier proposition. There is no airport. The capital city of Itanagar reflects complete absence of town planning. Car rentals are exorbitantly high, when compared to Bhutan. And, the turnaround time is higher.

The point is clear. India needs long-term, multi-sectoral planning to promote new destinations. Leaving it to the market is a bad idea; as a crowd of unorganized players may end-up blocking the way of organized development.

The existing popular destinations must be graded in terms of their brand-equity, infrastructure, carrying capacity etc, so as to encourage States to put adequate mechanism to stop further decay.

(Article by Senior Journalist Pratim Ranjan Bose)