key: cord-022351-qfhmwqgg
authors: Edgell, David L.; Allen, Maria DelMastro; Smith, Ginger; Swanson, Jason R.
title: Political and foreign policy implications of tourism
date: 2009-11-16
journal: Tourism Policy and Planning
DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-7506-8557-3.50010-3
sha: 
doc_id: 22351
cord_uid: qfhmwqgg

nan

exchange earnings. This chapter describes tourism agreements among nations, intergovernmental organizations and regional industry associations, as well as international tourism facilitation and tourism as a policy for peace.

While the reason for tourism agreements is the promotion of trade through tourism, these agreements also serve additional national policy objectives, such as encouraging international understanding, friendly relations and goodwill. In the past 30 years, the United States has negotiated tourism agreements with many countries. Using those made by the United States with other nations as an example, tourism agreements generally focus on the following specific criteria:

• increasing two-way tourism, • supporting efforts by the National Tourism Organization travel promotion office(s), • improving tourism facilitation, • encouraging reciprocal investments in the two nations' tourism industries, • promoting the sharing of research, statistics and information, • recognizing the importance of the safety and security of tourists, • suggesting mutual cooperation on policy issues in international tourism, • providing for regular consultations on tourism matters, • acknowledging benefits from education and training in tourism, • enhancing mutual understanding and goodwill.

Two prominent examples of international tourism agreements involving the United States and its trading partners are those with the United Mexican States and with the Republic of Venezuela. Both agreements accredit tourism officials as members of a diplomatic or consular post and facilitate the exchange of tourism statistics and information between the two nations involved in the agreement. Interestingly, these and other agreements state that the United States will participate in the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO), although, as stated in the following section, the United States is not a member of that august organization.

The tourism agreement entered into by the United States and Mexico in October 1989, which superseded an April 1983 agreement, assists in facilitating motor carrier and other ground transport across the international border and calls for the nations to share information about automobile liability with one another. Understanding policies involving ground transportation is critical for visitors, as many cross the border in private vehicles. The agreement includes provisions for developing bi-national cultural events to strengthen ties and promote tourism, waiving applicable visa fees for teachers and experts in the field of tourism, promoting travel to regions and developing and improving tourist facilities and attractions in regions which contain examples of native culture in each country, and conducting joint marketing activities in third countries.

The US-Mexican agreement explicitly states that the nations 'will endeavour to facilitate travel of tourists into both countries by simplifying and eliminating, as appropriate, procedural and documentary requirements'. This will conflict with the border crossing policy outlined in the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), which will require all citizens to provide a secured passport when entering the United States or Mexico. This is, of course, in response to acts of terrorism in the United States. This situation is a good example of the need for fluidity in tourism strategy and policy, so that it is not only reactive but also proactive as market conditions and foreign policy change.

An interesting aspect of the tourism agreement entered into by Venezuela and the United States on 7 September 1989 is that it calls for complementary agencies in the two countries to enter into their own agreements with each other. For example, the US National Park Service and Venezuela's Instituto Nacional de Parques are encouraged to pursue cooperative policies related to tourism development and facilitation. The agreement is specific about exchanges and mutual assistance, including efforts to identify tourism experts for short-term exchange assignments and identifying volunteer private-sector executives and professors of tourism who are eligible for sabbatical leave. This arrangement promotes cross-cultural understanding and has increased the body of knowledge in the field of international tourism development.

Organized associations of governments and tourism organizations comprised of groups at the national, regional and local levels can have a particular influence on the politics and foreign policy implications of tourism. There are a number of such intergovernmental organizations designed specifically to handle International Tourism Policy issues. Two organizations at the world level are the UNWTO and the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC). Regional organizations include the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the Organization of American States (OAS), the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and the Caribbean Tourism Organization (CTO). An important regional organization within the United States is the Southeast Tourism Society (STS), which consists of twelve member states. While there are many other organizations that cannot be described here due to space limitations, these seven groups are examples of proactive organizations working to advance tourism in their jurisdictions.

The UNWTO, as part of the United Nations, is the leading international organization in the field of travel and tourism and is headquartered in Madrid, Spain. Originally established as the International Congress of Official Tourist Traffic Associations in 1925, it was renamed the International Union of Official Travel Organizations after the Second World War, before restructuring occurred in 1967. In 1974, in Lusaka, Zambia, a UNWTO budget formula and statutes were adopted allowing for the UNWTO to become an official organization the following year. Its first General Assembly was held in Madrid in May 1975, and the intervening years have seen its emergence as the key world organization for tourism. In 2003, the UNWTO achieved status as a UN-specialized agency. Its current mission statement summarizes its primary responsibility as '. . . (providing) a central and decisive role in promoting the development of responsible, sustainable and universally accessible tourism, with the aim of contributing to economic development, international understanding, peace, prosperity and universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms'. UNWTO offers national tourism administrations and organizations the machinery as a clearing house for the collection, analysis and dissemination of technical tourism information, developing partnerships between the private and public sectors, and supports the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism. Activities include facilitating international dialogue and implementation of worldwide conferences, seminars and other means for focusing on important tourism development issues and policies. The official languages of the UNWTO are English, Spanish, French, Russian and Arabic.

Membership includes roughly 145 member countries, 7 associate members and about 300 affiliate members composed of private sector companies, educational institutions, tourism associations and local tourism organizations and authorities. One country that is not a member of UNWTO is the United States. As part of the downgrading of the US national tourism office in 1996, its membership in UNWTO was cancelled; however, there is new political momentum to have the United States rejoin UNWTO.

The structure of UNWTO is multipartite. At its core is the General Assembly, which meets every two years to discuss its budget, programme and policy. The Executive Council, the governing board for the UNWTO, is composed of 27 members as elected by the General Assembly and meets biannually. The Secretariat, located in Madrid, is made up of officials who are entrusted with implementing UNWTO's programmes and responding to members' needs. There are six regional commissions (Africa, the Americas, East Asia and the Pacific, Europe, the Middle East and South Asia) who meet annually. Nine committees of UNWTO members advise on management and programme content. These are the Programme Committee, the Committee on Budget and Finance, the Committee on Statistics and Macroeconomic Analysis of Tourism, the Committee on Market Intelligence and Promotion, the Sustainable Development of Tourism Committee, the Quality Support Committee, the UNWTO Education Council, the UNWTO Business Council and the World Committee on Tourism Ethics. (Part of the reference for this section was obtained from www.worldtourism.org/aboutwto.)

The World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC) is unique in its structure as it is the only organization representing the private sector in the global context of the travel and tourism industry. It is comprised of business leaders from around the world who are presidents, chairs and CEOs of 100 of the world's foremost travel and tourism companies representing almost all sectors of the industry. According to WTTC, their mission 'is to raise the awareness of the full economic impact of the world's largest generator of wealth and jobs -travel and tourism'. WTTC was established in 1991 by a group of chief executives from major companies within the industry to convince governments concerning travel and tourism's strategic importance. Over the past decade and a half, WTTC has worked with governments to increase understanding of the industry's economic benefits and to persuade them to re-evaluate the role of travel and tourism in their overall policy priorities. An Executive Committee resides in WTTC's headquarters in London, England, and hosts the administration of its programmes.

In July 2003, WTTC revealed its Blueprint for New Tourism that proffered the statement 'which issues a call to action for both government and the industry to make several long-term commitments to ensure the prosperity of travel and tourism -one of the world's largest industries, responsible for over 200 million jobs and over 10 per cent of global GDP (Gross Domestic Product)'. The reasoning for this action stems from recovery measures necessitated by recent set backs experienced in the industry as a result of terrorism, war, economic slowdown and SARS. The president of WTTC, speaking at the 2003 Global Travel and Tourism Summit, stated, 'There is now a new consciousness amongst governments that they cannot leave the growth of travel and tourism to chance. What is needed is a new vision and strategy involving a partnership between all stakeholders -public and private to turn future challenges into opportunities. The Blueprint for New Tourism spells out how that can be achieved'. The guiding principles of 'New Tourism' recognize global consciousness of the importance of tourism, takes a fresh look at the opportunities and partnerships it produces and the delivery of commercially successful products that provide benefits for everyone -not just the traveller but also the local people and communities with respect to their natural, social and cultural environments.

In response to recent acts of terrorism and to prepare for the possibility of future attacks, the WTTC formed a Crisis Committee. The Crisis Committee has been charged with producing an immediate forecast of the impact of such events on travel and tourism so that the industry and government leaders can make informed planning decisions. A model was developed based on the real effects of catastrophic events including the Gulf War (1991), Croatia Peace (1996 ), Luxor Attack (1997 ), Hurricane George (1998 ), September 11th USA (2001 ), September 11th World (2001 ), Bali Bombing (2002 ) and Hong Kong SARS (2003 . The London Underground bombing on 7 July 2005, allowed the global tourism industry to showcase its new proactive preparedness. The WTTC Crisis Committee was convened within 24 hours to forecast impact and propose strategies. In this case, historical non-peace has made the tourism industry more proactive. (Part of the reference for this section was obtained from www.wttc.org.)

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), located in Paris, France, is bipartite in its structure. It serves as a forum in which governments work together to focus effectively on the challenges of interdependence and globalization through economic, social and environmental segments. In its efforts to 'underpin multilateral cooperation', OECD produces global research data, analyses and forecasts to enable economic growth and stability, strengthen trading systems, expand financial services and cross-border investments and promote best practices on the international forefront. It was started after the Second World War as the Organisation for European Economic Cooperation to coordinate the Marshall Plan, and in 1961, adopted its current name in order to address trans-Atlantic and, ultimately, its global reach. There are 30 member countries and more than 70 developing and transition economies working in partnership with OECD who share a 'commitment to democratic government and the market economy'.

The mission of OECD is as follows:

• To achieve sustainable economic growth and employment and rising standards of living in member countries while maintaining financial stability, hence contributing to the development of the world economy. • To assist sound economic expansion in member countries and other countries in the process of economic development. • To contribute to growth in world trade on a multilateral, nondiscriminatory basis.

The OECD's Tourism Committee, headed by an executive-level Bureau, has taken a leadership role in identifying and working towards the reduction of barriers to travel in its member countries. In view of the major importance of tourism among the principal service industries, the OECD Trade Committee in 1979, 1981 and again in 1983 addressed updating and revising the Code of Liberalization of Current Invisible Operations by carrying out a survey of obstacles to international tourism and reporting its findings in a comprehensive report to the OECD Council.

In 1985, a milestone was achieved in efforts to reduce impediments to travel with the approval of a new instrument on International Tourism Policy, which reaffirmed the importance of tourism to the political, social and economic wellbeing of the member countries and agreed to set up formal procedures to identify travel impediments and to take cooperative steps to eliminate them. The OECD tourism instrument recommended minimum amounts for the import and export of national currency, for travel allowances, and for duty-free allowances for returning residents and for non-residents. It also made recommendations concerning travel documents and other formalities that strive towards facilitation of tourism. A finding then was that the most numerous and highly rated concerns among the countries responding were those impediments related to market access and the right of establishment. This reflects the importance of reaching customers in the country of residence in order to attract tourist and travel business. Without a local branch or subsidiary, travel agents, tour operators, airlines and other tourist companies are unable to market their services adequately, placing them at a competitive disadvantage. Today, the OECD is involving itself with emerging issues dealing with sustainable tourism and new directions in rural tourism. (Part of the reference for this section was obtained from www.oecd.org.)

The Organization of American States (OAS), headquartered in Washington, DC, is currently composed of the following countries: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba (by resolution in 1962, the current Government of Cuba is excluded from participation in the OAS), Dominica, The Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and The Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, The United States of America, Uruguay and Venezuela ( Figure 5 .1).

This organization actually had its beginnings in the 1820s, stemming from Simón Bolivar's vision of a region 'united in heart'. In 1890, the nations of the inter-American region formed the Commercial Bureau of American Republics, which later evolved into the Pan American Union, and finally became the OAS. In 1948 it expanded into the English-speaking nations of the Caribbean and Canada, encompassing the hemisphere.

The OAS is committed to democracy for the people (all people have a right to democracy) and governments (government has an obligation to promote and defend democracy) in the member countries of the Western Hemisphere. 'Building on this foundation, the OAS works to promote good governance, strengthen human rights, foster peace and security, expand trade and address the complex problems caused by poverty, drugs and corruption. Through decisions made by its political bodies and programmes carried out by its General Secretariat, the OAS promotes greater inter-American cooperation and understanding' (www.oas.org). The OAS promotes 'Peace, Justice, and Solidarity in the Americas' as titled in their organizational heading. Sustainable tourism is of major concern to the OAS.

The Inter-American Travel Congress (IATC) was established in 1939 to develop travel and tourism in the Americas by conducting studies that maintain dialogue between governments and the private-sector. The organization also provides technical and research support for tourism development initiatives. Today, this focus still prevails. The purposes and functions of the IATC are:

• to aid and promote, by all means at their disposal, the development and progress of tourist travel in the Americas; • to organize and encourage regular meetings of technicians and experts for the study of special problems related to tourist travel; • to foster the harmonization of laws and regulations concerning tourist travel; • to take advantage of the cooperation offered by private enterprise through world and regional organizations concerned with tourist travel which hold consultative status with the United Nations or maintain relations of cooperation with the OAS; • to promote cooperative relations with similar world or regional organizations, either governmental or private, and to invite them to participate as observers at the meetings of the Congresses; • to serve as advisory body of the organization and its organs in all matters related to tourism in the hemisphere.

Within this organization is the Inter-Sectoral Unit for Tourism. This branch promotes sustainable tourism practices and the importance of tourism as an economic development tool, in recognition of tourism's role as the world's number one growth industry. Recent activities have 'focused on tourism development programmes and projects aimed at encouraging cooperative and operational ties at the internal, regional and international levels'. It utilizes the Internet and Websites to promote its findings. (Part of the reference for this section was obtained from http://www.oas.org/main/english/.)

Convening its activities in 1989, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), headquartered in Singapore, was formed as the 'premier forum for facilitating economic growth, trade and investment in the Asia-Pacific region'. The general philosophy is that strong, vital economies cannot be supported by government alone, thus the need for melding government and the key stakeholders in the business sector, academia, industry, policy and research institutions and interest groups within the community. APEC is consistent in its approach to ensure open dialogue and equal respect among its 21 Member Economies, which are Australia; Brunei Darussalam; Canada; Chile; People's Republic of China; Hong Kong, China; Indonesia; Japan; Republic of Korea; Malaysia; Mexico; New Zealand; Papua New Guinea; Peru; The Republic of the Philippines; The Russian Federation; Singapore; Chinese Taipei; Thailand; United States of America and Vietnam ( Figure 5 .2).

These Member Economies account for more than 2.5 billion people and 46 per cent of world trade. Its uniqueness is that it is 'the only multilateral grouping in the world committed to reducing trade barriers and increasing investment without requiring its members to enter into legally binding obligations'.

Under this umbrella, there are eleven working groups focusing on agricultural technical cooperation, energy, fisheries, human resources development, industrial science and technology, marine resources conservation, small and medium enterprises, telecommunications and information, tourism, trade promotions and transportation. The Tourism Working Group (TWG) has set four policy goals to support its function of creating jobs, promoting investment and development, and improving the tourism industry across the region. These policy goals are 1. removal of impediments to tourism business and investment; 2. increase mobility of visitors and demand for tourism goods and services; 3. sustainable management of tourism outcomes and impacts; 4. enhance recognition and understanding of tourism as a vehicle for economic and social development.

The focus for the APEC TWG is on public and private partnership for facilitating tourism investments in the APEC Member Economies and exploring best practices of e-commerce application to the small and medium tourism enterprises in the APEC region. (Part of the reference for this section was obtained from www.apec.org/about.)

In 1989, the Caribbean Tourism Organization (CTO) emerged from its predecessors, the Caribbean Tourism Association founded in 1951 and the Caribbean Tourism Research and Development Centre founded in 1974. The CTO, headquartered in Barbados, is an international development agency and the official body for promoting and developing tourism throughout the Caribbean. This organization provides information and assistance to its member countries and non-governmental members in order to achieve sustainable development. According to the CTO, the organization and its members work together to encourage sustainable tourism that 'is sensitive to the economic, social and cultural interests of the Caribbean people, preserves the natural environment of the Caribbean people, and provides the highest quality of service to Caribbean visitors' (Figure 5.3) .

CTO also has offices in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, with smaller chapters in France, Germany, Holland, across the United States and in the Caribbean. Its composition is not only destination countries, but also private companies including airlines, hotels, cruise operators and travel agencies. Membership is open to all Caribbean countries and currently consists of English, French, Spanish and Dutch speaking nations and territories including the following member countries: Anguilla The central thrust of the CTO is to promote the Caribbean as a 'vacation destination'. Over time, the CTO has produced high-quality Websites, which, in turn, address travellers' quests to make better decisions regarding destination choices. The CTO has successfully and efficiently utilized database marketing as a promotion tool. The organization supports sustainable tourism practices, development of tourism education and awareness programmes, financial guidelines and technical assistance to its members. (Part of the reference for this section was obtained from www.onecaribbean.org.)

The Southeast Tourism Society (STS), headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, is just one example of a regionally based tourism organization found in the United States as well as in other countries. STS is a non-profit membership organization, which started in 1983 and represents the interests of tourism industry members in twelve states: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia ( Figure 5 .4).

Membership includes state travel offices, convention and visitor's bureaus, destination marketing organizations, accommodations, attractions, advertising, media, educational institutions, product suppliers, travel writers and other related industry segments. STS goals are (a) to develop, market and promote domestic and international travel to the member states; (b) to have a governmental relations programme to serve as advocate of the Tourism Industry; (c) to develop tourism accreditation criteria to certify professionals in the tourism management field who want to dedicate their careers to the tourism industry; (d) to provide for an annual Tourism Marketing College with a curriculum that will further the education in marketing expertise of the members and others; (e) to provide programmes and services to the membership as identified by the Board of Directors.

STS continues its dedication to promoting and developing tourism and travel by leading regional and national organizations in innovative programmes and research. In 2002 STS formed the Southeast Tourism Policy Council (STPC), which interfaces with United States federal agencies and members of Congress. The STPC is featured as a case study of this chapter. (Part of the reference for this section was obtained from www.southeasttourism.org.)

A number of political, economic, and social factors influence the government actions and regulations affecting tourism facilitation. Travel bans are imposed from time to time for political reasons. It is not unusual, for example, for a government to prohibit travel of its citizens to war zones or to territories of hostile nations where it has no means of protecting their lives and property. The US Department of State through the auspices of the Bureau of Consular Affairs, American Citizens Services, issues travel warning and consular information sheets, which are travel advisories to warn Americans about adverse conditions in specific countries or territories. Following the terrorism attacks of 11 September 2001, the US Department of Homeland Security was established to serve this purpose and to provide other safeguards for US citizens and international visitors.

In the past, visas were issued freely for travellers and other entry requirements were held to a minimum to avoid discouraging potential visitors. In the aftermath of worldwide terrorist attacks and actions in recent years, safety and security have become high priorities, and governments are readdressing their regulations. As this book goes to print, new policies are being formulated, as discussed below, which will have a major impact on tourism facilitation.

In the United States, as well as other countries, the biometric chip (integrated chip) is being considered as a way of ensuring the proper identification of travellers. The biometric identifiers most commonly used for identification are face imagery or electronic fingerprint impressions. The accuracy of identification registers above 90 per cent when both are used. This technology is now being applied to travellers from nations who previously enjoyed easier access to the United States through the Visa Waiver Programme (VWP).

Residents from 27 countries participating in the US VWP are allowed to travel to the United States for stays of less than 90 days without obtaining a visa. Participating nations, include Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brunei, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Japan, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Singapore, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and The United Kingdom.

This programme began in 1986 to facilitate travel and promote better relations between the United States and the participating countries. Despite the previous ease of travel, as of 26 October 2006, all new or renewed passports of travellers from these countries attempting to enter the United States are required to have a machine-readable passport with an integrated chip (the United States is mandating two index-finger scans). At the same time, transportation carriers will be fined up to $3300 per violation for transporting any visitor travelling under the Visa Waiver Programme to the United States who does not meet these requirements.

Another screening process utilized by the United States began in 2004 aimed at securing our borders, facilitating entry/exit processes, enhancing the integrity of our immigration system, and protecting the privacy of visitors. The US Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology (US-VISIT) programme implemented by the Department of Homeland Security also employs biometric chip technology. Its purpose is to facilitate legal trade and travel across the borders of the US and is in place throughout selected airports, seaports and land ports of entry. This programme is administered by the Departments of Homeland Security and State. New technology is being introduced using radio frequency identification (RFID) technology for land ports in conjunction with heavy reliance on the machine-readable passport and the biometric chip for other ports of entry; but implementation has not been well thought-out, timely or efficient.

In a similar measure to facilitate travel while maintaining homeland security, the Department of Homeland Security also experimented with a Registered Traveler Program (RTP). The RTP allowed selected frequent airline travellers to have priority in airport security lines in exchange for providing more personal information. The programme operated with several thousand frequent travellers hand picked by the airline companies, and was implemented at six airports. Although the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) suspended the programme while evaluating its success, it is expected to be fully implemented and expanded because of strong support from the travel industry and major airports.

Currently, there is considerable discussion arising about the determination of security measures. Uppermost in the tourism industry's debate is determining the most effective and efficient methods of security inspections without overly disrupting travel. As shown by the examples of the VWP, RTP and US-VISIT programmes, careful consideration and cooperation with all participatory countries must occur to bring about desired policy outcomes. Added to this, governments are also seeking ways to stimulate the construction of needed tourist infrastructure, access roads, communications, airport facilities and the many other supply-side requirements for supporting tourism. Efforts are being devoted to conserving areas of natural beauty and developing and maintaining resort areas and sightseeing attractions. Local and national governments often encourage special festivals, sports-related events, entertainment and cultural activities to entice tourists to the area. As a result of increased visitation, other government services, such as police protection and crime control, maintenance of proper health and sanitary conditions and good communications are also necessary to support tourism. Together, the tourism industry and government must work to ensure that the best practice is used in providing these services for the traveller.

Special precautions in facilitating travel must also be taken when episodes of contagious diseases occur, as evidenced by the outbreaks of SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) and West Nile Virus or potential outbreaks such as Avian Influenza A, also denoted as 'H5N1'. On 3 April 2006, the World Health Organization reported an outbreak of H5N1 affecting humans in Egypt, which was the ninth country to report laboratory-confirmed human cases after the first case in Vietnam in December 2003.

Food handling and preparation require special precautions to reduce intestinal illnesses and/or exposure to life-threatening epidemics. Information can be found on the Websites of international travel organizations addressing warnings and advisories. While these measures may result in discouraging or inconveniencing travellers, they are necessary to not only ensure enjoyable tourism experiences at the destination but also to decrease the chance of global epidemics.

As the model for travel safety and security, the airline industry has introduced the most noticeably burdensome practices (exhaustive inspections of luggage and restrictions on items in carry-on bags and one's person). Many travellers may perceive these measures as a hardship which they choose not to endure. They may alter their destination choice and stay closer to home, which allows the selection of alternative modes of travel, such as trains, buses or private cars. Others may see it as part of the travel adventure and will not be deterred. The outcome depends, of course, on the motivations of individual travellers.

A continuing concern of many governments is immigration control. Nearly all countries strictly control the entrance of immigrants and enforce laws against illegal entry. Of particular concern are social pressures created by the need to care for jobless immigrants, and opposition expressed by the local labour force when jobs are scarce. Governments, entrusted with safeguarding their homelands must address the veracity of immigrants' paperwork. To admit foreign visitors and to facilitate their travel within a nation's borders is a political action. Therefore, the method by which a nation's international tourism is regulated becomes an aspect of its foreign policy, as well as its economic and commercial policy, and requires careful planning.

In the fall of 2005, the United States Bureau of Customs and Border Protection issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the implementation of the WHTI. The WHTI would require passports as identification for travellers to the United States from Mexico and Canada. An encumbered entrance is likely to have a negative impact upon these two important feeder markets for the United States. Tourism industry leaders have expressed concerns over the reliance on passports as the only acceptable form of identification and have encouraged the government to develop a robust and focused public communications campaign to keep domestic and international travellers informed.

Many countries sponsor extensive exchanges, cultural programs, lecture services and other events to make people of the world aware of their customs and standards of living. The knowledge gained from contact between persons of different cultures can lead to increased understanding and a relaxation of tensions between nations. The adage mentioned in Chapter 2, 'When peace prevails, tourism flourishes', bears repeating here. (We examine this concept in depth later in this chapter.) International organizations, such as People to People and Rotary International, recognize this truth and support the exchange of people and culture. The implementation of Glasnost in the 1980s led to the doors being opened in Russia in the 1990s, thereby increasing travel into the country, and the dramatic 1989 demise of the Berlin Wall had a profound effect upon East-West travel and continues to do so.

The result is a deeper understanding among people of the world, increased commerce, and a greater step towards international cooperation. Today, a different climate prevails in which Russian relations with the rest of the world are shifting back to more centrist governmental functions. One positive effect of this change may be seen in the field of education. East Carolina University in Greenville, North Carolina, USA, for example, has recognized the contributions of Russian scholars and has supported hiring faculty and promoting visits by its faculty members to Russia as well as hosting Russian visitation on its campus.

Jean-Maurice Thurot, noted for his research in tourism advertising, suggests that tourists create an economic dependence by the host country on tourist-generating countries. This dependence can influence the foreign policy of the host country towards that generating country. This is especially true in nations needing foreign exchange, or hard currency, for economic development. Nations in the process of economic development need to buy key items, especially capital equipment and technology, from the industrial nations in order to speed their own growth. They, in turn, can sell these tourism products to the developed nations.

A country must be made safe for residents and visitors. Civil strife and disorder, such as that occurring in Northern Ireland and England, have had a detrimental impact on tourism. The 1999 military discord in the former Republic of Yugoslavia, a country that used to welcome over 10 million visitors a year, has brought tourism to a virtual standstill. The current political problems in Venezuela and other parts of the world discourage tourism. Using Sri Lanka and the 2006 Israeli/Lebanese conflict as examples, the effects of war on tourism are described in detail later in this section.

In addition to war, the constant threat of terrorism weighs heavily on international tourism in the United States. Travelling contributes to '. . . interchange between citizens which helps to achieve understanding and cooperation', according to Ronald Reagan, a leading historical international peacemaker (Reagan, 1985) . Can tourism be a generator of peace in today's society or is tourism simply a beneficiary of peace? Using democratic peace theory as a foundation in light of recent world conflicts and non-peace events, the answer to both queries could be yes.

The democratic peace theory is founded upon the premise that democracies rarely enter into war or militarized disputes with one another because of their common values. Although there are several examples of disputed cases, the claim that democracies do not engage each other is generally accepted as empirical fact by democratic peace theorists (Rosato, 2003) . However, debate continues on the legitimacy of the theory. The American Revolution, the Second World War (in which Great Britain and the United States were pitted against, among other nations, the democratic nation of Finland) and the Border War in 1995 (in which Peru fought Ecuador) are three examples of nearly two dozen commonly debatable democratic wars. The list of disputable battles dates back to the Greek Wars of the fifth and fourth centuries bc (White, 2000) .

Since democracies do not generally engage each other, then democratic states are motivated to spread global democracy because it will enhance national security and promote world peace -true even though it may involve engaging in war to create sustainable peace. This is a distinguishing characteristic of the democratic peace theory.

The democratic peace theory is based on the principles Immanuel Kant laid out in his essay entitled Project for Perpetual Peace in 1795 (Kant, 1795) . In the essay, he proposed that the three definitive articles for perpetual peace are 1. The civil constitution of every state should be republican. 2. The law of nations shall be founded on a federation of free states. 3. The law of world citizenship shall be limited to conditions of universal hospitality.

A republican civil constitution ensures representation and requires citizen consent for the declaration of war. As citizens are the bearers of the financial and human burdens of war, they are less likely to support the declaration of unnecessary wars. Democratic leaders will typically not engage in a conflict that is unpopular among constituents for fear of being removed from office. Through a federation of free states, nations would be under a set of parameters that would transcend the laws of any one nation. If that set of laws ruled out war, then countries would be legally bound to settle disputes in peaceful ways. As the federation is extended, so too would be the principles of peace. Universal hospitality implies the right of a visitor in a foreign land to be treated hospitably -not as an enemy. Because of the finite size of the earth, its inhabitants must peacefully coexist for humanity to be sustainable.

As the theory has evolved since Kant's original work more than two centuries ago, the following are the three generally acceptable reasons that could lead democracies to engage in war: (1) self-defence in protection of the homeland; (2) prevention of blatant human rights violations in other states and (3) to bring about conditions in which democratic values can take root abroad (Rosato, 2003) . The theory also provides at least two reasons why democracies do not compromise peace with other democratic states. They are norm externalization and mutual trust and respect. This foundation of democratic peace is illustrated in Figure 5 .5.

Norm externalization Democratic peace theory

Under the assumption that peace can be achieved through the spreading of democratic ideals, and if two countries share similar democratic norms and values, then there are no norms that must be externalized upon other nations. Therefore nations with similar values will not fight with each other. Mutual trust and respect connotes that when conflict arises between democracies they will be inclined to accommodate each other or refrain from engaging in hard-line policies. Democracies trust the judgment of nations that believe similarly.

The expansion of democracy in the former Soviet states lent credence to Kant's theory of democratic states seeking pacific relations with one another. In other words, once democratic, the Soviet Union (or its remnants) was no longer the enemy of the United States.

International tourism is the world's largest export earner, making it vital to global trade. Tourism growth is also positively correlated to growth in global GDP. As global economies grow, disposable income typically also rises. The growth of international tourism arrivals generally outpaces GDP. However, because of the elasticity of demand for travel, if the economic situation tightens, spending on tourism will also typically decline (WTTC, 2005) .

The absence of peace disrupts global trade and investment. And when global trade is disrupted, travel declines, which compounds the decline in global GDP. Therefore, tourism benefits from peace and the global economy benefits from tourism development.

When safety and security is endangered by expansionist policies of others, it is an occasion for democracies to jeopardize peace (Rawls, 1999) . The democratic peace theory implies that democracy will bring about political stability. Political stability leads to safety and security in democratic nations. When safety and security is threatened, war will be engaged to ensure future safety and security.

Kant explicitly states that the visitor to a foreign land has the right 'not to be treated as an enemy when he arrives in the land of another'. In principle, the visitor must not be treated with hostility, as long as the visitor acts peacefully within the destination, but visitors to foreign countries today, and in the future, may not find this to be the case as a growing number of countries experience terrorist attacks. Heightened suspicion towards outsiders can lead to less than hospitable conditions where such attacks have occurred.

Travellers rank safety and security as key factors in planning a vacation or convention. Sixty-three per cent of international travellers to the United States report a destination's safety and security as extremely important. Without safety and security in the destination, both business and leisure travel will be negatively affected. In a study conducted by one of the authors of this book, 'Safety and Security' occupies the number one position in The Ten Important World Tourism Issues for 2007 (Edgell, 2007) . Once again, tourism benefits from peace.

An excellent example of the effects of war on a nation's tourism industry is Sri Lanka, which was involved in civil war from 1983 to 2003. The conflict stemmed from the desire of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam to create an independent state in the northeast region of the island, and resulted in fatalities estimated at 60,000 people. While the clash officially ended in 2003, the August 2005 assassination of the Lankan foreign minister has threatened to revive it ( Figure 5 .6).

During the years leading up to the war, the island nation had played host to a steadily increasing number of international visitors. As shown in Figure 5 .7, international visitor arrivals decreased by 17.1 per cent in 1983, Visitor Arrivals 100,000 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Tovah Pinto, Director General of the Israel Hotel Association, reported after the conflict that crisis was looming, as the war had stifled 39 months of growth in Israel's tourism sector. The organization expected demand to fall by 50 per cent in the year following the conflict. Inbound international tourism to Israel is expected to decline by $1.1 billion, and its contribution to the GDP is expected to drop by $1.5 billion, according to the Israel Hotel Association. The Israeli government contributed to recovery efforts by compensating northern Israeli hotels for 60 per cent of their losses during the conflict.

In Lebanon, as the Israeli army entered, tourists naturally fled. Despite tourism development plans put in place before the conflict, the Lebanese Minister of Tourism stated the conflict will negatively affect tourism in Lebanon for 3 years afterward. Upon certainty of a cease-fire, the Lebanese tourism ministry planned a US $2.6 million marketing campaign to revitalize the image of the war-torn nation.

Tourism is often promoted by industry organizations as a vehicle for cultural understanding. The UNWTO, states its position on the matter as, 'Intercultural awareness and personal friendships fostered through tourism are a powerful force for improving international understanding and contributing to peace among all the nations of the world'. Indeed, an entire subset of tourism has developed around the concept of promoting peace through travel. The International Institute for Peace Through Tourism was founded in 2000 to foster and facilitate tourism initiatives that create a peaceful and sustainable world through travel.

In addition to tourism industry organizations endorsing tourism's awareness-creating abilities, world leaders throughout modern history have also realized the benefits of tourism. Mahatma Gandhi said, 'I have watched the cultures of all lands blow around my house and other winds have blown the seeds of peace, for travel is the language of peace' (cited in Theobald, 1994) . In 1963, John F. Kennedy stated, 'Travel has become one of the greatest forces for peace and understanding in our time .

we are building a level of international understanding which can sharply improve the atmosphere for world peace' (Kennedy, 1963) .

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, addressing the Global Travel and Tourism Summit Breakfast in April, 2006, celebrated the power of tourism by stating, 'Travel fosters understanding. It builds respect. The knowledge and experience that citizens gain in their private travels is vital to the cause of diplomacy and international understanding in the twenty first Century'.

Tourism cannot flourish without political stability and safety, which are restricted when peace is absent. Without peace, tourism is diminished; therefore, tourism is a beneficiary of peace. Through creating cultural awareness, tourism can be a stimulus for peace (assuming peace can be incremental). Unfortunately, tourism through intercultural awareness can also be used to impart violence or any other ideal closely held by either the traveller or host.

As indicated in Figure 5 .8, peace can lead to political stability, which can lead to safety and security in the destination, which facilitates tourism. Depending upon the motivation of the traveller and the structure of the destination, tourism can create cultural understanding. Understanding of the people of other nations is a key ingredient leading to norm externalization and mutual trust and respect -critical components that lead to peace among nations, according to the democratic peace theory, as previously discussed in this chapter.

Tourism development -demand creation through marketing and supply expansion through investment -can be part of a strategy for geopolitical stability that includes the promotion of peace, economic development and cultural awareness. However, a sound governmental strategy for peace must be based on more than just tourism.

The prospective economic benefits of tourism frequently influence the internal and foreign policies of governments. In some corners of our globe, inbound tourism is used to showcase the accomplishments of the government or party in power and to increase understanding abroad of the government's policies. Sometimes this approach is successful; sometimes it is not.

In terms of foreign policy, the response by governments to the impact of terrorism on tourism surpasses any prior attentions to security. The global tourism industry has been generally unprepared to deal with increasingly sophisticated acts of violence that use elements of the industry as weapons or targets, such as attacks against passenger trains in Madrid in March 2004, the October 2002 night-club bombings in Bali and the use of commercial airliners as missiles in the US in September 2001. As security becomes more important, organizations such as the WTTC have measures in place to proactively handle crises as they happen.

Private sector groups have conducted training sessions to deal with potential terrorism in light of recent attacks. The aftermath of such devastation has raised the awareness of service organizations, the medical community and the individual. Such efforts help, but for many pleasure travellers the worry, strain and inconvenience exact too much of a toll. It will take a strongly concerted effort of global cooperation, through policy, if the terrorism of the past three decades and its effects on travel and tourism are to be avoided in the future. This will facilitate international trade and development and contribute to efforts to foster peace and understanding. One means to facilitate this cooperation is through the work of intergovernmental tourism organizations such as those described, and many other proactive and productive groups throughout the world. The MOU led to the creation of the Federal Interagency Team on Public Lands Tourism, which consists of representatives of each agency. These representatives regularly attend STPC meetings and serve as liaisons between their agencies and the STPC.

The signing of the MOU gave the STPC significant credibility in Washington, DC and leverage when working on issues with the Federal Interagency Team and other federal agencies. In an effort to maintain visibility in Washington, DC the STPC arranges the STS/STPC Congressional Summit on Travel and Tourism each spring. The conference is an opportunity for any STS member who chooses to participate to hear about current policy issues from members of the Federal Interagency Team and members of the STPC. Attendees are also able to schedule appointments with members of Congress and their staff. This is an excellent opportunity for STS members to push STPC issues as well as other policy issues that are important at the local level.

Listed below are the issues the STPC was actively involved with in December 2005. Following the list is a description of each issue, as supplied by Bill Hardman, Jr, President and Chief Executive Officer of the STS. 

The House adopted a proposal by Resources Committee Chairman Richard Pombo (R-CA) and Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee Chairman Jim Gibbons (R-NV) that would permit the sale of national forests and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and Corps of Engineers lands that contain minerals. This would not apply to the National Parks, refuges, wild and scenic rivers, national trails or conservation and recreation areas. The provision was included in H.R. 4241, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Although the provision refers explicitly only to "Mineral Development Lands Available for Purchase", it would apparently not preclude the purchased land to be used for straightforward development purposes, including residential and commercial development. Environmental organizations have strongly objected to it, and at this time, it has not received much support in the Senate, where it was not included in the Senate Deficit Reduction Act.

In subsequent discussions with Members of the Senate and key staff following the 26 October Senate Hearing described below, STS has been told that no further Congressional legislation regarding the recreation fee program is likely until next year at the earliest and probably not until 2007. At this point, Congress seems willing to wait for the agencies to complete their protracted implementation process.

On 26 October 2005, STS testified before the US Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests regarding the new recreation fee program. In this testimony, STS supported the recreation fee program and the work done by the Federal land agencies to implement it, although it was urged that implementation be expedited. STS urged that the new fee program be viewed as much more than another source of revenue, and should instead be regarded as part of a new, more innovative, flexible, visitor-focused way of managing the Federal lands and as encouraging closer partnerships between the Federal land agencies, State park and tourism agencies, the private sector and gateway communities.

STS continues to work with the Federal land agencies as they are developing guidelines for implementation of the 10-year new recreation fee authority passed by Congress in 2004 as the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act (REA). Several interagency working groups have been formed to develop implementation guidelines for the new fee program. At a 11 February 2005 Department of Interior "Listening Session" with the interagency working group developing the newly authorized America the Beautiful Pass, STS urged the agencies to recognize the potential for this fee program as more than just a source of revenue, but also as a public information and marketing tool. STS also emphasized the importance of developing regional, intergovernmental passes and of working closely with state tourism offices and gateway communities in developing coordinated marketing campaigns combined with administration of the fee program. In a 21 March 2005 communication to Department of the Interior Director of External and Intergovernmental Affairs Kit Kimball, ARVC joined three other allied tourism and recreation organizations in urging that all interagency fee working groups meet with private and intergovernmental organizations to discuss the potential promise and ramifications of the new fee program.

At a 24 June 2005 "Listening Session" in DC on the Recreation Resource Advisory Committees (RRACs) mandated by the REA, STS recommended state-based RRACs instead of national or broad regional ones.

STS was assured in August by senior officials at the Department of Interior that a "state-centred" RRAC program will be established, and it has now been announced that existing state BLM Resource Advisory Committees would be relied upon to perform the RRAC role through special recreation subcommittees. STS questioned this approach in its 26 October 2005 Senate testimony because it is not clear whether the BLM RAC or the RRAC subcommittee would have greater authority. Senate Forests Subcommittee Chairman Larry Craig (R-WY) agreed with this STS concern.

The Forest Service has announced that it will discontinue entrance fees at 435 relatively undeveloped sites (while retaining fees at 4024 sites). The agency hopes this will mitigate continuing strong opposition to the fee program as evidenced by the passage by six state legislative chambers of resolutions condemning the program and demanding Congressional repeal. Congress is not expected to pass such repeal legislation but may hold further hearings on fee implementation by the agencies.

Gateway community businesses, outfitters and concessionaires are closely following reported plans to allow discounts to holders of America the Beautiful Passes for recreational activities such as camping. The concern is that such discounts will reduce net revenue for those private businesses.

Hurricane Katrina and, to a lesser extent, Hurricane Rita have obviously inflicted severe human suffering and devastating property losses in the Gulf Coast. They are also having an enormous impact on Congress and the Federal government. Response and recovery to these two "storms of the century" have dominated debate and discussion on Capitol Hill. With overall projected costs in the $200 billion range, pressure is being exerted on every agency budget and general rescissions of 2-3 per cent are possible in already approved fiscal year 2006 budgets. The public lands agencies and international tourism marketing will not be exempted from such rescissions. Proposals have been made to cut back on the Federal Highway Program authorized by Congress just a few months ago, although this seems unlikely to happen.

The public lands agencies have also suffered considerable direct damage to their park and forest lands located in the Gulf Coast, with the cost of repair and replacement creating additional budget pressures. In November 2005, STS President Bill Hardman toured the coastal areas ravaged by Katrina to see the level of damage and how the travel and tourism industry is recovering in those areas. The dollar amounts for the overall 6-year reauthorization and for specific programs are confusing because we are already 2 years into this reauthorization cycle, which will end 30 September 2009. Nonetheless, we can conclude that not only is the overall $286.4 billion nearly $50 billion more than TEA-21, but also, with one notable exception, that programs directly beneficial to tourism and recreation fared reasonably well compared with TEA-21, with the following amounts not subject to appropriations:

• Transportation Enhancements goes from $590 million annually to $686 million. Supporters of recreational trails and sportfishing and boating were especially pleased with the outcome of SAFETEA-LU. Recreational trails will receive effectively a 62 per cent increase over TEA-21 and sportfishing and boating are rejoicing because the entire Federal tax of 18.3 cents per gallon collected on fuel used by motorboats and small engines will now go into the Wallop-Breaux fishing and boating trust fund. Previously, only 13.5 cents went into that fund. This means the allocation for sportfishing and boating should increase from $284 million per year to about $384 million. Unfortunately, attempts to establish a new categorical program of Recreational Roads with funding of $50 million, of which 68 per cent would have been allocated to Forest Highways and the balance to the BLM, Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation, was not included in SAFETEA-LU because of fiscal constraints. Very few new programs were authorized because there was not enough money to satisfy existing programs.

Controversy continues to rage over the wisdom of more than 5000 earmarked projects, or "set-asides", in SAFETEA-LU that absorb nearly 21 billion dollars in highway funds. It should be borne in mind, however, that many of these set-asides, including visitor centres, bridges, trails enhancements and restoration of historic sites, will directly benefit tourism and recreation, including many projects in western states. 

Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI). On 31 October, STS President Bill Hardman submitted comments to the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection regarding the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the implementation of the WHTI. In his comments, he

• urged greater attention to the economic impact of any changes in border inspection and control procedures; • expressed concern over reliance on passports as the only or de facto acceptable means of identification for travellers from Canada or Mexico; • proposed that closer collaboration between the public and private sectors be institutionalized and made permanent; • recommended that a robust and focused public communications campaign be developed to inform domestic and international travellers of any changes.

Biometric Passports for Visa Waiver Countries. On 15 June, DHS Secretary Chertoff announced that the United States will accept the production of digital photographs to satisfy the 26 October 2005, requirement of biometric identifications on passports for travellers from the 27 countries in the Visa Waiver Program. By 26 October 2006, the VWP countries will have to begin issuing passports with integrated circuit chips, or e-passports. (On 26 October 2005, VWP countries must present an acceptable plan to begin issuing e-passports by 26 October 2006.) There is concern that France and Italy will not be able to comply with this new digital photograph requirement.

Registered Traveller Program. After more than a year's experience, the Department of Homeland Security's Transportation Security Administration (TSA) on 26 September announced it would suspend a test program on 1 October that speeds airline travellers to the front of airport security checkpoints in exchange for providing more personal information. The "Registered Traveller" program operated at six airports and the participants were a few thousand frequent travellers hand-picked by the airlines. Because of strong support for the program from the travel industry and major airports, it appears now that the TSA will soon reinstate and expand the program following full assessment of the test program.

Gateways bill. H.R. 585 is expected to come up for a floor vote in the House of Representatives this fall. Representative George Radanovich (R-CA) reintroduced H.R. 585, the Gateway Communities Cooperation Act, in the first business week of the 109th Congress. The STS supports this legislation, while urging that state governors be given authority to designate communities as gateways.

In order to get H.R. 585 on the "Consent Calendar" in the House, which would mean prompt voice vote approval, revisions have been made in the legislation so that it will not be classified as creating a "new program" that would not qualify for the consent calendar. The main change has been to drop the small $10 million grant program from the bill.

There has been no further action with regard to the National Outdoor Recreation Policy Act. STS continues to work with the American Recreation Coalition and other recreation industry organizations to draft and advocate a National Recreation Policy Act. This would establish for the first time a national commitment to development of a recreation policy for the country. The bill itself would make no substantive changes in recreation policies or programs, but it could result in a sea change in the emphasis given to recreation on the Federal lands. It would accomplish three major goals:

(a) It would "declare a national policy regarding the management and use of lands and waters administered by Federal agencies to provide the American public with abundant, high-quality and diverse recreational opportunities to enhance (1) public health and welfare, (2) appreciation of natural resources and the environment, and (3) economic benefits associated with outdoor recreation for gateway, rural and other communities"; (b) It would direct the Secretary of the Interior to lead an interagency effort to prepare within 12 months "a national recreation strategy that identifies statutory and regulatory impediments to providing and facilitating a diversity of recreational opportunities on Federallymanaged lands and waters, and appropriate means to increase the quantity and quality of recreation opportunities available to the public"; and (c) It would establish an ongoing Federal Recreation Inter-Agency Coordinating Council, with state and local government officials and others from the industry as advisors, to improve coordination of recreation programs and policies and implement the national recreation strategy.

STS joined other industry organizations in explaining this significant legislation to key staff on Capitol Hill. Resistance is expected from environmental organizations that will object to the emphasis given to recreation in this legislation and perhaps from some Federal land agencies that do not see recreation as a major part of their mission.

The draft bill is supported by at least 24 recreation trade associations although some have expressed concern that it would favour some modes of recreation over others. Most environmental and conservation organizations have not endorsed it. The Department of the Interior apparently has reservations about the need for national legislation and would prefer solving any problems through administrative actions.

The Forest Service has drastically lowered its estimate of the economic impact of recreation on the national forests from $111 billion, which had been the figure for nearly a decade, to $11.2 billion. The agency maintains that this is a much more valid estimate because it is based on actual head counts of visitors and interviews of visitors to determine their spending patterns. Recreation industry organizations point out that this estimate only applies to visitor expenditures within 50 miles of National Parks and that it does not include billions of dollars in expenditures made farther away for recreation supplies and expensive "durables" such as boats, snowmobiles, skis and other durables, even though those purchases are made with the clear intent of using them on national forests. Concerns that the lower impact estimate will be used to justify a lower priority for recreation in the Forest Service budget are rejected by the agency, which points out that recreation is still the largest generator of revenue of all activities on the national forests. The validity of the FS economic impact estimates has been supported by a new study of the economic impact of wildlife refuges by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Although a much smaller impact of $1.4 billion is found for 2004, the economic assumptions and methodology are the same and the estimated impact is comparable to the FS when the smaller acreage of the National Wildlife Refuge System and fewer visitors to wildlife refuges are considered.

On 18 October 2005, the National Park Service proposed a new comprehensive policy for managing the National Parks, which is embroiled again in a conflict between those who see the agency's mission to be the unimpaired preservation of the natural resource and those who defend the right of the public to use and enjoy the parks.

In 2000, in the closing hours of the Clinton Administration, the last comprehensive parks policy was issued, over the opposition of recreation user groups who saw it as reducing access and use. Environmental groups are now concerned that the proposed plan will exalt use over protection of the parks. A draft proposal written last summer by Paul Hoffman, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Interior for Fish and Wildlife and Parks especially stirred opposition from environmentalists.

The comment period for this new proposed management policy has been extended until 19 February 2006. The STS participated in a 16 November listening session at the Department of the Interior on the new policy on and is reviewing the proposed policy before deciding whether to submit comments.

In 2006, the interstate highway system will be 50 years old. This 47,000mile network is arguably the most significant public investment in the history of the nation, if not the world, and it has never cost the Federal treasury a dime since it has been entirely financed through the Federal motor fuel tax. Certainly, the tourism industry in America today has been dramatically shaped and boosted by the interstate system. STS and the National Tourism and Recreation Coalition for Surface Transportation are joining with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) to plan an appropriate national celebration of the 50th anniversary of the interstate system in 2006. One project being considered is a reenactment of the 1919 military convoy across America led by then-Colonel Dwight D. Eisenhower, which left a lasting impression on the young colonel of the need for a modern national highway system, and resulted in President Eisenhower's signing into law the 1956 legislation and creating what became known as the Dwight Eisenhower National Defense Highway System. Although the 1919 coast-tocoast convoy spent 2 months traversing eleven states and the District of Columbia, next year's 2-week reenactment would feature participation from all fifty states. The travel and tourism industry and state transportation departments are being urged to work together to plan this celebration in every state.

At the same time, STS is working with the Transportation Research Board, AASHTO, and other travel and tourism and transportation organizations to develop a substantive strategy to promote better relationships between travel and tourism and state transportation departments in every state and to broaden support for future Federal highway policies.

There is growing concern over the future of the national scenic byways program. Although the program fared modestly well in the TEA-LU highway reauthorization bill earlier this year, it is expected that it will come under increasing pressure in the next reauthorization bill in 2009, as fiscal resources diminish. STS participated in a 8 November meeting at the American Recreation Coalition to begin to develop strategies to strengthen political support for national scenic byways.

In the fall of 2005, the STPC surveyed members of STS, the people and organizations for whom the STPC serves as an advocate. The survey was conducted by Jason R. Swanson, a member of the STPC and one of the authors of this text. The survey had multiple purposes, including

• soliciting the input of STS members in developing the agenda for the STPC; • creating a mechanism to periodically collect input from STS members;

• providing a guideline for prioritizing policy issues;

• proactively identifying emerging policy issues; • generating information for policy makers regarding what is important to their tourism constituents. The survey validates the issues the STPC has chosen as being consistent with the needs or desires of the STS membership. However, several new categories of policy issues came out of the survey that should considered by the organization:

• Coastal land and sea issues: off-shore drilling, beach re-nourishment, coastal wetlands restoration; • Federal per-diem rates for travel expenses;

• Third-party intermediaries (Expedia, Travelocity, etc.) and collection of occupancy taxes; • Small business development;

• Cultural preservation, job creation, and environmental quality issues, which are important to mountain areas and cities could be expanded upon; • Other "Other" responses from the survey (summarized):

• Fuel prices; • Health insurance; • Motorcoach regulations; • Proposed Fair Tax law; • Federal flood insurance; • Improved federal system for tracking international visitation; • Eligibility for federal grants for tourism development projects; • Border crossing between Canada and US; • Government competing with private sector;

• Federal money to promote niche tourism markets, such as agritourism; • Fair competition.

As previously stated, one of the purposes of the survey was to generate information for policy makers regarding various aspects of tourism. Specifically, the survey identified outdoor recreation as being extremely important to the tourism industry in the southeast as evidenced by the following: Many of the high-priority policy issues involve areas far beyond economic impact, such as outdoor recreation, cultural preservation, and environmental quality. However, not as much non-economic impact research is being done by DMOs, as shown in Figure 5 .9. With a broader research spectrum, the tourism industry would be better able to provide information that is meaningful to a wider array of policy makers.

A future hurdle for the STPC is conducting more rigorous policy analysis. Policy analysis is important for at least two reasons: (1) to decide on how STPC resources should be allocated based on those issues that may have the largest positive impact on the tourism industry and (2) to provide information that can be communicated in a meaningful way to the political decision makers, the media, and members of the tourism industry. One way in which issues have been prioritized has been based on the likelihood that there will be success in achieving the objective of the particular policy stance. For example, if the political environment indicates the outcome on a particular issue is highly likely to be favourable to the STPC stance, then that issue is pursued. This approach does increase STPC's effectiveness, but the strategy may also take away consideration from other issues that may be more important to sustainable development.

Conducting valid policy analysis will help decide which side of an issue to be on when various members of the tourism industry may have competing agendas. Of course, it is often worthwhile in instances of conflicting views within the industry to pursue other issues that can serve to pull together, rather than polarize, the industry; or, alternatively, to come to a meaningful compromise.

One example of the tourism industry having conflicting views on an issue is funding for hurricane relief. Subsequent to the severe human suffering and devastating property losses sustained in the Gulf Coast region during the 2005 hurricane season, the US Congress proposed funding the expected $200 billion recovery by cutting the budgets of many of the programs that the STPC supports. The budgets of international marketing, federal highway reauthorization and public land agencies were among those programs targeted for budget cuts. On the one hand, STPC was interested in rebuilding an important tourism market; while at the same time, the organization did not want other programs it had supported to lose funding as a result. There was a significant federal appropriation towards the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast states and agency budgets were affected, however, a sort of compromise resulted. The Economic Development Administration within the Department of Commerce awarded STS a $625,000 grant program for a tourism marketing campaign focused on the Gulf Coast states of Louisiana and Mississippi, including the City of New Orleans. Undoubtedly, STS would have been far less likely to be awarded this grant had it not been for the relationships established through the STPC.

While it may not be in the current mission of the STPC, there could also be an opportunity for this organization, or similar organizations, to affect public policy at the state and local level. Through its policy analysis efforts on federal issues, the organization may also be able to offer policy analysis services, through dedicated policy professionals, to members of STS at the state and local levels.

In another means of affecting tourism at state and local levels, the STPC and its MOU could be a model for state tourism organizations to follow when trying to coordinate the efforts of various agencies in the state. The same can be true for tourism policy development at the local level.

Capitalizing on tourism's increasing economic and political importance, the STPC is now one of the most respected tourism advocacy groups in the United States and serves as a model for other regional policy advocacy organizations. More information on the STPC, including the organization's charter, can be found at http://www.southeasttourism.org/ south_T_policy_council.html.

appropriation, $1.744 billion

• NPS operations maintenance: 2006 appropriation, $594.7 million. President Bush's Budget, $595.6 million

• NPS construction: 2006 appropriation, $301 million. President Bush's Budget, $324.3 million

• NPS recreation and preservation: 2006 appropriation, $55 million. President Bush's Budget, $36.8 million

• Forest service recreation: 2006, $265.2 million

• Forest service trails: 2006, $72.5 million. President Bush's Budget, $63.8 million

• BLM recreation management: 2006, $66.1 million. President Bush's Budget, $664.6 million

• Fish and wildlife refuge management: 2006, $393 million. President Bush's Budget, $394 million

• Forest service fire fighting: 2006, $1.779 billion

Interior department fire fighting: 2006, $762 million. President Bush's Budget, $756.6 million

• If there are agency wide rescissions because of Katrina/Rita recovery costs, the preceding figures will be lowered

National Parks 8 National scenic byways program 2. Cultural preservation 4. Transportation 9 National heritage areas legislation 2. Cultural preservation 10. National Parks 10 Earth Island cases and categorical exclusions think nature-based outdoor recreation attractions help motivate travellers to visit the area: • 49 per cent believe the majority of their visitors choose their destination because of its nature-based outdoor recreation attractions • 48 per cent report the majority of their visitors participate in naturebased outdoor recreation during their visit to the destination • 43 per cent indicate the majority of nature-based outdoor recreation attraction

Nature-based outdoor recreation accounts for 15 per cent of total economic impact from tourism, according to survey respondents References

The Ten Important World Tourism Issues for

Project for a Perpetual Peace

The Saturday Review

A Theory of Justice

Correspondence to 25th Session of the Executive Council of the World Tourism Organization. The White House

The Flawed Logic of Democratic Peace Theory

Annual statistical report of Sri Lanka tourism

Global Tourism, the Next Generation

Democracies Do Not Make War on One Another or Do They?

The web-based survey was sent to all members of the STS, of which 149 tourism professionals responded. STS member organizations of all sizes and geographic locations were represented.Respondents were asked to rank the importance of several policy issue categories, based on a five-point scale ranging from "1 Not important" to "5 Very important". The following list shows the average importance score for each of the policy issues.Outdoor recreation (4.43) Cultural preservation (4.21) Environmental quality (4.13) Transportation (4.09) Federal highways (3.91) Job creation (3.81) Public lands (3.58) Homeland security (3.54) National tourism office (3.48) National Parks (3.26) International visitation (3.24) Eminent domain (3.15) This priority of importance can be considered when new issues are selected or when deciding on how to allocate resources for work with current issues. Accordingly, the priority can be applied to the December 2005 STPC issues, as shown below in Table 5 .1.