|
|
|
 |
|
|
Caribbean needs to address boycott threats
by Roddy Heyliger, Op/Ed.
Posted: Apr 18, 2006 03:13 UTC
|
PHILIPSBURG - The most publicized threat of a tourism boycott against a Caribbean nation was Aruba with respect to the Natalee Holloway case.
Coming on the heels of that, St. Maarten is facing the possible threat of a boycott by one of the victims, a CBS TV Senior Producer who was viciously attacked along with a friend by a group of men early April.
We are aware that travelers across the globe now more than ever consider the potential safety of a tourism destination when making travel choices. Bearing the aforementioned in mind, every tourism dependent destination must continue to enhance security considerations to protect residents and visitors and provide a safe and secure environment.
Caribbean governments and people are also cognizant of vulnerabilities to our tourism product whether be it natural or man-made and are implementing programmes to safeguard and ensure the sustainability and viability of the tourism industry which is the lifeblood of the nation.
The economic importance of the tourism sector is no secret that it is higher for the Caribbean than for any other region in the world. Dependence on tourism continues to grow as traditional productive sectors such as the sugar and banana industries decline and disappear due to globalization and free-trade.
Tourism development within every Caribbean nation plays a key role in creating employment opportunities leading to poverty alleviation. The linkages to other sectors of the economies are too numerous to mention. The image and reputation of a tourism destination is also at stake as Caribbean nations spend millions of dollars a year in marketing and promotion. Therefore it is very important that we safeguard our national economic security just like any other nation would do.
The threat of a boycott of a nation or the issuing of sanctions is usually done by nation-states or an international organization such as the United Nations Security Council. Individual threats seemingly are becoming a method to deal with events that take place on any one Caribbean island.
A boycott against a tourism destination can do serious damage and cause hardship for the people of that destination, and therefore should not be a tool that can be readily used to address an issue by anyone person or special interest organization. If this is the situation which is certainly true today when we look at the Holloway case and the boycott of Aruba, then Caribbean governments must look into this to see what recourse we have as Caribbean governments and Caribbean people.
Considerable resources have been made available by the Aruba and Dutch Governments in the search for Natalee Holloway. With respect to finding the culprits who committed the heinous crimes against the CBS producer and his friend, we learned that law enforcement is putting much effort into finding the persons with three detectives and other resources allocated to the case. One must allow the investigative unit of our law enforcement organs to take their course in finding the culprits.
The Aruba-Holloway boycott is a case study that needs to be studied to see what impact it did have on the Aruba economy. A worse case scenario should also be factored in.
Caribbean nations need to develop a regime that would address boycotts coming from individuals as well as special interest groups. These boycotts can have a devastating impact on the economic well-being of the citizens of a nation leading to economic hardships of families.
We have to protect our interests as well.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
You may bookmark this web page, print it or e-mail it to
a friend in accordance with the fair-use provisions of
copyright laws. The material is intended solely for the use
of the individual user.
Archiving, redistribution, or republication of this
material
on other terms, in any medium, requires the express
written permission of the author or publication and the
notification of the editors of Caribseek News. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
