+- Punaweb Forum (http://punaweb.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Punaweb Forums (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Punatalk (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Limiting number of tourists to help environment (/showthread.php?tid=1762)
RE: Limiting number of tourists to help environment - mgeary - 01-22-2008
Since this thread is called "Limiting number of tourists to help environment", I thought it'd be worthwhile to look at some factual information about the tourism industry in Hawaii. I did a little Googling, and ran across the Hawaii Tourism Authority's 2005-2015 Strategic Plan:
http://www.hawaiitourismauthority.org/pdf/tsp2005_2015_final.pdf
And here is their website:
http://www.hawaiitourismauthority.org/index.cfm?page=home
I haven't read all 108 pages of the Strategic Plan, but here's a short excerpt from page 6:
"...in 2007 it is estimated that Hawai'i’s visitor industry will account for $12.8 billion in spending for travel and tourism, which will generate, directly and indirectly, approximately 22.3% of total jobs in the State. In addition, it is estimated that the visitor industry will produce approximately 17.3% of the Gross State Product and about 26.4% of total tax revenues."
There's a simple little graph on page 5 that indicates that the number of passenger arrivals in Hawaii by air basically exploded in 1964, but peaked in 1991, and has remained stagnant since then at between 6 million and 7 million air embarkations annually. I understand this doesn't help the environment, directly, but the tax revenues, 26.4% of the total revenues for the state, could be used to do so.
You can read the entire report if you're so inclined, but it's worth posting the Vision of the Hawaii Tourism Authority, which I assume must be a group of profit-minded business people:
"By 2015, tourism in Hawai'i will:
- honor Hawai'i’s people and heritage;
- value and perpetuate Hawai'i’s natural and cultural resources;
- engender mutual respect among all stakeholders;
- support a vital and sustainable economy; and
- provide a unique, memorable and enriching visitor experience."
There's a 5 page section beginning on page 25 dealing specifically with the Hawaiian Culture, with the Strategic Goal "To honor and perpetuate the Hawaiian culture and community"
There's a 5 page section beginning on page 36 dealing specifically with Hawaii's Natural Resources, with the Strategic Goal "To respect, enhance and perpetuate Hawai'i’s natural resources to ensure a high level of satisfaction for residents and visitors."
Aloha!
How do I know?
RE: Limiting number of tourists to help environment - Guest - 01-23-2008
Anyone heard of Kama'aina rates[
]Anyone that thinks this is ridiculous, might want to read This again.[^]
I know this strikes a chord to many of us as many of us rely upon the tourist dollar for our own survival.[
]-----------------
Coming home soon!
RE: Limiting number of tourists to help environment - Kapohocat - 01-23-2008
Damon - Thank you for that link.
I think the key is diversified industry not limiting tourists. And with that industry must come education so that the kids have something to go with their degrees besides being a housekeeper at a resort. What are those industries? I know Rob Tucker spoke of the business incubation center - what businesses are available to keep those not on retirement or benefits at a higher than poverty level wage.
Or how do we lower our cost of living so that both parents dont have to work? Being able to have a single breadwinner will help with kids being unsupervised after school - less drugs and criminal behavior.
What would be the opinion if Hilo suddenly (dont laugh!!) became best place for plastic surgery or cardiac care - and had people from all around the Pacific flocking here, and created an influx of visitors that weren't here to visit the tide pools or trample the rural environment?
RE: Limiting number of tourists to help environment - JerryCarr - 01-23-2008
Cat, I am not laughing. I think your idea about "boutique" medical services has merit. It would not only beef up the local economy in a way that wouldn't necessarily trample the environment, but it would also alleviate our growing shortage of medical care options.
Unfortunately Hawaii does not have a good reputation for business incubation. When I lived on the mainland, business associates would give me "the look" when I told them I was doing business here and planned to live here eventually. They would often mention their perceptions about a hostile regulatory environment, high costs of living and doing business, and lack of educational support, among others. (Business leaders really do research this sort of thing.) The company that Bear and I worked for had an office in Honolulu, but closed it due to the above mentioned issues. Bear and I took early retirement. We would not be living here otherwise.
I am not saying that Hawaii should throw open the door to anything and everything that might provide a few jobs. I do, however, think something needs to be done to improve the business environment, or more and more of the "best and brightest" will be moving on. One of the Honolulu TV stations sent a reporter to honors day at a Honolulu high school last year. The reporter asked the kids in the honors graduating class how many thought they would be living and working in Hawaii in ten years, and only one or two out of twenty held up a hand. Sad, that.
Rob Tucker's idea is great, and better than anything I can think of. I just wish something comprehensive could be done on the state level.
Cheers,
Jerry
RE: Limiting number of tourists to help environment - mgeary - 01-23-2008
Disclaimer: I am not an advocate of tourism for Hawaii, and I have no financial or other interest in promoting tourism there.
As a hopeful future BI resident, my wife and I will have to endure whatever hardships the tourism industry brings to you who live there now. My goal with the links to the Hawaii Tourism Authority was to bring some relevant factual information to this discussion. I was under the (mistaken) impression that air tourist embarkations had been skyrocketing lately, instead of remaining flat since 1991. My answer, if I have one, is to participate in a friendly discussion to address problems realistically based on real facts instead of rumors, impressions or hearsay. Good things happen when ideas get shared, because all of us are much smarter than any one of us.
Perhaps some in Venice, Italy are trying to limit tourism, but I know there are many, many willing and active competitors for tourists, such as Hungary, Las Vegas (what happens in Vegas...), Bali, Costa Rica, Florida, Cancun, Argentina, New Orleans, Australia, China, even Branson, Missouri, etc. Just look at the ads on TV and in the magazines.
There may be realistic ways to reduce the number of tourists who visit the islands, but my choice would be to work instead on the problems that tourists create, whatever those might be. That way you could still reap the benefits of tourism (tax $$$ and employment), avoid limiting their numbers (tourists, that is), and benefit the kama'aina and the environment. Maybe pie in the sky, but as my signature line says, "How do I know", and it wouldn't be the first time that I was wrong, either. ;-)
Aloha!
How do I know?
RE: Limiting number of tourists to help environment - Kapohocat - 01-23-2008
quote:
Originally posted by mgeary...
There may be realistic ways to reduce the number of tourists who visit the islands, but my choice would be to work instead on the problems that tourists create, whatever those might be. That way you could still reap the benefits of tourism (tax $$$ and employment), avoid limiting their numbers (tourists, that is), and benefit the kama'aina and the environment. Maybe pie in the sky, but as my signature line says, "How do I know", and it wouldn't be the first time that I was wrong, either. ;-)
Aloha!
How do I know?
I like your outlook!
"It's never a problem but always an opportunity"...to be able to mesh environmentalism and tourist. Diversify with tourism, etc.
RE: Limiting number of tourists to help environment - macuu222 - 01-24-2008
Breaking News
Inouye: Federal help needed in promoting tourism
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2008/Jan/24/br/br7631025489.html
RE: Limiting number of tourists to help environment - bodysurf - 01-24-2008
Part of the way tourism as the primary industry was sold to Hawaii residents was also that the jobs created would be well paying jobs...not minimum wage type...ones you could actually afford to live on...thus the union involvement. Also that the impacts to residents' lifestyles,environment etc would be minimized. So if the only way tourism can survive is by turning Hawaii into a third world country with slave wages with Hawaiian culture preserved only as a means to show tourists all the 'Happy Hawaiians' and building hotels everywhere with locals unable to afford to live here or have access to beaches etc. anymore maybe it's not such a good deal.
RE: Limiting number of tourists to help environment - punafish - 01-24-2008
Several years ago I had the opportunity to hear Peter Apo speak in Honolulu. His theme focused on the challenges of the tourist market and getting Hawaiians involved. His speech was entitled “Where Are the Hawaiians?” Key points he made:
1)Hawaiian opinions and politics are not “monolithic”—lots of different voices within the Hawaiian community
2)Tourism in itself is not a bad thing but a major overhaul is required that taps into local values and creates a “sense of place”
3)Hawaiian arts, culture and values must be brought into the process so local Hawaiians can benefit and prosper (The popular “Polynesian Luau” was given as an example of NOT promoting Hawaiian culture)
His speech inspired me, and his talking points have become one of the cornerstones of how we aspire to live and do business here.
Note that the bulk of my business is not tourism related as I travel a lot to the mainland working in a completely different industry, so any downturn in tourism will affect us less than most people. However, we are committed to contributing to local businesses, including tourism. Here are some examples of how we do it:
Many of our clients are Japanese retirees who spend 6 months out of the year here. They need every service that anyone else needs and more (due to language and cultural issues). They are very demanding, but are also willing to pay for quality products and services. To keep them happy, we have worked hard on developing relationships with local vendors who are honest, hard-working and keep their promises. (Easier said than done, but we’ve found some gems here). Some examples: handyman/repair services, landscaping, building, pest control, translation/interpretation, car repair, insurance, realtors...to name just a few.
We have also partnered with University of Hawaii acting as their Japan liaison. We are marketing eco-tours, culture tours, and “volun-tourism” with a focus on the 8 million Japanese boomers who are on the cusp of retirement. Yes, Japanese visitor numbers are down, but opportunities abound. The boomers have a collective savings of over $2 trillion. This market is about as close to recession-proof as you’re going to get.
We work and volunteer at our son’s high school: my wife is a part-time teacher (Japanese); I occasionally teach Japanese culture (as a volunteer). Our goal is to provide another career path to the kids. Since virtually all children are “linguistic geniuses” (assuming you start them early enough), it offers new potential opportunities to kids who may not be academically inclined.
We invite Japanese retirees in the neighborhood to volunteer at the school teaching calligraphy, origami, etc.
To the skeptics out there asking what’s in it for us, the answer is that we’re a business, so of course we benefit.
Basically, we want to be a company that the community WANTS to exist. And yes, it makes us feel good to give something back.
My point: let’s be creative about what we CAN do before we start listing all the things we shouldn’t do. And let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
RE: Limiting number of tourists to help environment - morganlady - 01-24-2008
Last week I boarded the free bus that I think runs due to tourism funds. I saw spigots where folks could draw water for free. I saw no parking meters at the Isaac Hale Park, downtown Hilo, or around the laundromats I used.
I took a test at the college - the same one that offers Hula and the Taro heritage as a major. Without tourism, these formalized studies would not occur. Are they offered anywhere else? What will one do after achieving this kind of degree if tourism declines?
Some residents of the state of Hawaii don't feel that the former culture (of one race, as it was before Captain Cook floated into view) is of any interest, just as I don't like to hear Rap or Country Music.
To co-exist, we have to endure what others find vital. I didn't complain to Borders management about the selection of CDs for sale, not even after I discovered that they didn't have a copy of Innuendo for me to purchase.
I ate locomoco, dried algae, pizza and fresh fruit grown in local back yards. (Even tried chopsticks in public - NOT the song.)
I think its great to meet the variety of people I've met on this island so far - Korean, gay, born-in-Hawaii, Californian, German, Jewish, Jehovah Witnesses, widows, mixed-race couples, and the friendly Asian postal counter lady who remembered my name after my 3rd visit.
This from a super-European-ancestry blonde freckled haole (Scandinavian + British mongrel). (super meaning above, not better than)
As Rodney King once said, "Can't we just get along?"
I think most tourists read the glossy ad books and believe that $1 million estates are the norm, so they aren't planning to move here. The other engineers where I worked who vacationed in Maui and Lauai had no clue that small houses could be found for under $250,000 even, on this island. Just don't tell 'em!