tourism relies on service industries such as restaurants and hotels. This impacts construction in the area, as well as things like transportation, city services, and utilities. Business interests invest in tourist areas for exposure, and in cases like Niagara Falls for location and proximity to both Canadian and American markets. The downside of tourist areas is lack of industrial developement in the form of factories, since unsightly buildings and smoke stacks tend to undermine the tourist attractions.

Well, I live in a tourist town, and we have a positive impact on the other industries in this state. Why is this? Because the state takes the tremendous amount of tax money genererated in this county by the tourist industry and diverts it to the upstate and lowcountry of SC. Columbia, Charleston, Greenville/Spartanburg … all of those places had adequate roads, interstate access, etc. In Myrtle Beach it is ONE HUGE TRAFFIC JAM on the one road that brings you into town. Too much traffic and insufficient roads in MB equals no other industries for us, but all our tourism related tax money, sent to other parts of the state to improve on their roads equals lots of opportunity for them.

I wonder if all states treat their cash cows the same way.

what country?

1. Rubbish
2. Construction of sea walls, which actually causes more erosion down the coast
3. Destruction of sand dunes
4. over-fishing?
5. pollution of the sea from sewage outlets

The fact that people want a pretty beach sometimes goes against what the best management strategy in an area could be. Eg – these days some srategies are suggesting that it is impossible / unwise to attempt to control the sea and have suggested managed retreat – ie let the sea do what it likes. Of course this goes against tourism, because tourist areas need to be safe and beautiful.

However, also consider that tourism brings in the money to preserve beautiful coastal areas, eg cornwall, etc

there is damage only to the coastal environment if and when people develop them for commercial use (like beach resorts); the tsunami of Dec 2004 is a testament to the (extreme) impact and destruction that happens when coasts and shore lines are “commercialized”; to attract and keep the tourists, people clear the coral reefs (which serve both as nurseries for young fish and sanctuary for small fish, as well as a barrier to slowdown strong tides – like tsunamis); there is an article a few months after the deadly Dec 2004 tsunami that showed how a small insignificant coastal village survived (with almost no casualties and minimal damage) while all other areas on both sides suffered devastating damage and lost of lives; I invite you to visit the web page:

postive= gives philippines a chance to show it’s brightest and loveliest places, lets tourist explore how the philippines was formed

negative= tourist could very well degrade the philippines just by seeing a bad part of town like claire danes.

I Agree with ALEX.

Alex, are with the WWF – Philippines?

the positive meaning of tourism is that it reduce populatation.negative meaning is that it kill many people which are not guilty.

Go to the Chamber of Commerce for the area you are interested in.

POSITIVE. = Tourists do have the money alocated for the trip. The locals of these RESORTS will be the ones benefited and it helps a lot in improving/renovating infrastructures.

NEGATIVE. = Inhabitants of these Natural Resources gets affected. Wild Life in particular.