[zild3d]

> economically disadvantaged countries, enthusiastic consumption of the local cuisine, and a subsequent return home marked by self-congratulatory reflections on how much they have supposedly "learned" about other cultures.

There can certainly be a quite shallow "instagram" quality to some traveler's trips, but it's also clear an economically disadvantaged country benefits mutually from this, and if it wasn't they'd be restricting tourist visas, etc

[david-gpu]

> it's also clear an economically disadvantaged country benefits mutually from this, and if it wasn't they'd be restricting tourist visas, etc

Countries are not a monolithic entity. The people in control of the flow of tourists are a tiny minority, and whatever incentives they have to open or close the borders do not reflect what the people who deal with tourists on a daily basis want.

[landryraccoon]

It depends on the county of course, but in my experience service workers at many “touristy” countries seem to benefit directly from tourism.

For example, some of the workers at resorts in Thailand went to college and studied Tourism, a major I didn’t even know existed, and their wages come directly from the tourist industry.

What countries in particular are you thinking of where the locals are very unhappy to see more tourists? I’ve heard Japan might be in that category, and the United States certainly feels that way, but did you experience this yourself?

[lurk2]

Hawaii, Barcelona, and some cities in Latin America like Medellín have had a few incidents to suggest that people are unhappy with tourists there.

A city I have stayed in banned AirBnBs to address an affordability crisis. Tons of locals went wild reporting houses they expected to were circumventing the ban. I remember looking at the press release and finding that all of the AirBnBs in the city amounted to less than 2% of the city’s housing stock.

From what I can gather, these sort of attitudes are an appropriation of reactionary xenophobia directed to an appropriate target in Barcelona, a cultural inferiority complex in Latin America (which receives virtually no tourists compared to all the expatriates they send to the developed world), and a legitimate existential crisis for the Hawaiians.

[lurk2]

> The people in control of the flow of tourists are a tiny minority

The people ultimately in control of this policy are usually elected officials, so I’d (idealistically) say they have at least some incentive to make decisions that the general public wants.

Economic benefits by themselves are just one metric by which we can evaluate desirability, but do you have any reason to suggest that existing policy towards tourism is contrary to the prevailing opinion among those who interact with tourists on a daily basis?

[david-gpu]

> The people ultimately in control of this policy are usually elected officials

Even assuming we are talking about democracies, you still face the same issue: policies regarding tourism are decided at the national or supra-national (e.g. EU) level, while the effects are concentrated on specific neighborhoods of specific towns.

> do you have any reason to suggest that existing policy towards tourism is contrary to the prevailing opinion among those who interact with tourists on a daily basis?

Have you not heard of any popular protests against tourism? Speaking the local language helps here, but sometimes it is also reported in English.

[lurk2]

> Have you not heard of any popular protests against tourism?

I mentioned in another comment that I know of vandalism that has occurred in Barcelona, some demonstrations in Medellín, and a long history of nativist sentiment in Hawaii, but I’m not convinced that these people represent a majority opinion even in tourist destinations. Have you seen any surveys or anything of the kind that would suggest a substantial portion of people are opposed to tourism?