COMMENTARY – Shot in the Foot

Xenophobia & Nationalism Retard Tourism Growth in Northern Thailand

CHIANG MAI, Thailand – 28 January 2003 - Recent national and regional press coverage has printed conflicting reports concerning the tourist arrivals dilemma in Northern Thailand.  The Aviation Department has released detailed statistics showing exponential growth in the number of airlines and flights bringing people into the kingdom, but admits that Chiangmai is having difficulties increasing its passenger load due to slow growth of inbound flights. 

In this respect, the Prime Minister’s aim to promote his home city as a regional hub may be more suitable than the inaccurate mass interpretation that it is to become a global hub.  Private tourism industry leaders have complained that returnees are dropping, as they don’t want to see the same, degraded, sights each trip.  

Furthermore, Thai and foreign journalists are now openly writing that the exploitation of “remote” and “pristine” hill tribe villages has got to stop, due to cultural destruction of traditional economies and lifestyles.  Such sentiments have growing support in westernised countries, and in the guidebooks to Thailand, especially in countries that provide the biggest spenders.

Whilst every level of Thai government and tourism promotion organisation turns their attention eastwards, how many have stopped to examine the reality of the visitor numbers, and their value, which arrive from the larger East Asian economies?  Some time ago I pointed out that planners should ignore total arrivals into the kingdom, and instead look at total nights slept here.  

In 2001, East Asia supplied 58% of arrivals (5,786,403) and Europe 25% (2,508,566), however when looking at total nights in the kingdom, the priority reverses to Europe 43% (35,822,322) and East Asia 37% (31,072,984).  I have not yet calculated trends from these Immigration Police statistics but expect to do so soon.  

However, the Bangkok Post reported in May 2002, that British arrivals into Chiangmai were up 57.89% on the previous year – something to remember that counters “official” direction giving, especially when considering that UK citizens traditionally average the longest stays (of any nationality) according, again, to Immigration statistics.

With the above statistics in mind, the recent Chiangmai Mail reports of a deserted Doi Mae Salong, and the drug testing of foreigners in Mae Hong Son, bode ill for those who are attempting to continue businesses based on tourism. 

The opening of the Inthanon Games came as a total surprise to me and every foreigner I know.  Many exasperated friends told me they would have loved to attend the games.  Add those stories to the Wieng Kum Kam Sound & Light show, being held on the same weekend as the internationally famous Borsang Umbrella Festival, and one can see a confused and disjointed message being sent overseas – major events conflicting with each other, foreign tourists wanted by businesses, but harassed by police, and ongoing lack of in-city promotion, in English, of major events.

With these situations, is it surprising that the Bangkok Post story (as above) showed both Thai & Foreign tourists down by 2% year on year in Chiangmai?  Why, at Songkran 2000, were Chiang Rai hospitals reported as renting out beds like hotels due to citywide over booking, but last year that newspaper reported Chiangmai was 20% below previous year’s bookings? 

There are simple explanations going around the expatriate community.  Some friends I escorted to the Wieng Kum Kam event, long term expats with wide experience of many Asian countries, observed the happenings there and concluded, “The organisers don’t want foreigners here”, and, “this is by Thais for Thais”. 

The inaccuracies and distortions of Lan Na history in the Sound & Light performance can be excused – it was theatre after all, and could be passed off as regional identity building in the style of Prime Minister Phibul’s “Thailand for Thais” of the 1930s and 40s.  Yet the inaccuracies portrayed as fact, at the new museum and visitors centre, cannot.  According to Chiangmai Fine Arts Department information boards there - Wieng Kum Kam was the first capital of Lan Na (someone forgot about Chiang Rai, Fang, and the then already 600 year old Muang Ngoen Yang), also the museum states King Chulalongkorn was Rama 4.  Those few “facts” will cause great mirth amongst history educated western visitors, comparing the “Official” written word to their well researched and trusted guidebooks.

The conclusion is simple for anyone who has closely observed the tourism management of Northern Thailand for several years.  Thais are rightly proud and independent, but do not understand the foreigners who visit their country, or what the foreigners want to experience when they get here.  Such misunderstanding manifests itself in the exclusion of foreigners by local-language-only publicity or performance, and the failure to balance the calendar of attractions to smooth the flow of inbound visitors.  

Perhaps it is time for the nationalists to step aside and allow cosmopolitan managers to take charge, managers that would invite foreigners to serve the country as government employed advisors to the tourism industry, nationally, regionally, and locally.  Then the inward flow of foreign currency may emulate western growth levels, and the TAMC may become redundant.  It would send a “Welcome to Thailand” message to foreign business people louder and clearer than any Prime Ministerial apologies, or chamber of commerce dinners for outraged investors concerned about in-cabinet xenophobia.  It would say to the world, “We recognise and value your expertise and experience – please help us to understand you”.  That type of invitation always gains “song-sarn” and assistance.  

The shots in the foot of tourism management would be replaced by the support and guidance of those that know westerners best.  

Thai people love to say that foreigners don’t understand Thais. 

That is a two way street – can Thais truthfully say they understand their foreign guests?