Rather than dual-pricing, why not a four-tiered one?
“I’m surprised that everywhere any monument, any temples, any park, anywhere, foreigners are charged heavily....What kind of a policy is this? Just looting foreigners and tourists? Also there is a unbelievable huge difference in charges for entry between Sri Lankans and foreigners.... Nowhere in the world can one see this looting by the government...” wrote a disgruntled tourist some years ago. The outburst brought together a chorus of supporters who gave vent to their ruffed feelings.
How times have changed though, since then.
This dual-pricing debate has now entered Japan with businesses attempting to strike a balance between catering to local customers and foreign visitors.
Very recently, the mayor of Himeji City in Japan has proposed a significant price increase for foreign tourists visiting Himeji Castle – a UNESCO World Heritage site. The current fee is JPY 1,000 (about $6) for both locals and foreigners alike. The mayor is now suggesting that the entry fee for foreigners be increased five-fold, i.e. to $30 for foreigners, while locals would pay a dollar less, i.e. $5. The extra revenue he explains would help with maintenance and to counter overtourism.
Joining in the melee, and according to FNN broadcaster Osaka’s Governor expressed support for the idea and said he’d like to do the same at Osaka Castle.
Tamatebako, a restaurant in Himeji City’s neighbouring Shibuya district has already begun charging charges locals JPY 5,478 ($36) for a weekday lunch buffet, while foreigners pay JPY 6,578 ($42). For dinner, locals pay JPY 6,578 ($42), and foreigners JPY 7,678 ($49). To obtain the discounted rate, Japanese or foreign resident patrons must show proof of nationality or residency.
Venice has for several years attempted to manage tourist numbers and increase revenue from visitors by introducing a controversial two-tier pricing system that saw prices wildly inflated for outsiders. Major tourist attractions like the Colosseum and the Vatican officially have differing prices for locals; in some cases, foreign visitors are required to pay several times the domestic rate in order to enter. Rome’s Colosseum is less discriminatory in its approach - but offers marked discounts for some European Union citizens.
Yes, I agree with everyone who says that as a foreigner, when I am requested to pay way more than a local to enter an elephant orphanage or historical site, my smile and that warm and fuzzy feeling when holidaying in a country can slightly diminish, but hey, let’s pause a moment. It all comes down to paying for the maintenance of the place throughout the entire year. The reason that this amount is higher than what locals pay is because, the locals keep contributing for the upkeep of the attraction or site through taxes – irrespective of how many tourists visit the site.
Personally, I don’t see why there is such a fuss with the practice of charging more to tourists, so long as the money trickles down to maintaining the place and towards supporting the local economy, without ending in the pockets of a handful of unscrupulous individuals. In Japan and other first world countries that’s likely to happen: in other countries…maybe, maybe not!
If tourism wishes to support and change the world, it must seriously consider a reasonable mechanism. Perhaps the adoption of an unified 4-tiered pricing policy, where travelers from developed economies pay the highest rate, those from economies in transition a lesser rate, with visitors from developing economies paying the lowest and locals to pay the least.
John James went online eight years ago to say “Totally wrong to charge two rates. Trying doing that in the first world and you would be in court!!” Time has proved JJ wrong as the first world he refers to includes Japan and a few other countries that are now courting the trend.
Arahoz Noorhem is a qualified educator who teaches English as a foreign language, a professional jazz pianist, music composer, bird watcher and an intrepid traveler.
|
|
|
|
