Skip to main content

Bhutan Tourism Industry - "Coming to Bhutan is Expensive"; A myth which should be cracked

I MAY BE WRONG, BUT AT-LEAST THIS IS HOW I SEE

The country is divided when the law makers of the nation tabled the  minimum daily tariff of USD 250/tourist/day for discussion. The debate is on and i believe that debate is healthy for any kinds of paradigm shifts and developments. My vote was for doing away with minimum daily tariff, however to maintain the daily royalty of USD 65/tourist/day.

There are many thinkers who believe that tourism policy and the minimum daily tariff has worked in Bhutan and there is no need for revision or rather discussion. I will not argue on this as it has made Bhutan one of the most sought after destination and only about 5 % of those in whose bucket list Bhutan is reflected is able to visit the country. And this is not because Bhutan is expensive. It is because many tourists has always thought that Bhutan's visa is difficult to get which is further coupled with the daily tariff of USD 200-250/day/tourist. It isn't the fault of the tourists, it is the failure on our part. We failed to inform that tariff is a package from where USD 65/day/tourist goes into the government exchequer which goes on to providing free education and health services to the Bhutanese. We failed to inform the tourists that, it covers three meals a day, stay in 3 star government approved hotels, field equipment for trekkers, land transportation within the country with a driver and a licensed guide. Should this be informed or should we pursue marketing on this basis, Bhutan shall see increasing number of tourists.

My argument to do away with the tariff is to provide options for our tourists, provide opportunities to other hoteliers, encourage other firms across the country to market and make themselves known to the tourists. There are some thinkers against the doing away with daily tariff citing the examples from Nepal. We should remember that tourists in Nepal pays only the visa fee of about USD 30.00, however in Bhutan tourists are required to pay visa fee of USD 40 (I am not sure of the figure) and the daily royalty of USD 65/day/tourists. The royalty itself would deter low budget travelers from entering Bhutan like other tourist destinations in South-East Asia, let alone getting the country flooded with tourists.

Should the tariff be waived off except for the royalty, it shall not only form a basis of competition among the service providers but opens wider open choices for the tourists depending on their budget. Having said that, there should be a proper mechanism to monitor the functioning of external agents in the country, there should be a mechanism to check on the number of tourists.

A proper monitoring mechanism in place is the KEY!
Labels:

Comments

Clem Work said…
I think you have a good idea, Sangay. I have been to Bhutan twice, both on official visas with expenses largely covered, so I have not been affected by the tourist fees. However, the current fee would definitely be a barrier to my coming to Bhutan, let’s say with my wife, in which case we’d be paying $500 a day. This is unaffordable for us. Sure, there are plenty of people who wouldn’t blink an eye at such a rate, but there are also plenty of people, maybe retired professors or teachers, other travelers on fixed incomes, and others with a great curiosity and respect for Bhutanese culture who could not afford to enter the country. Imposing the $65-per-day royalty as a floor and leaving the rest to competition probably would drive rates down to a more affordable daily rate. And I like what the $65 is used for—education and health services for Bhutanese. I realize Bhutan is very special and you don’t want to be overrun by hordes of low-budget backpackers, but there has to be a “sweet spot” lower than today’s rates that would accommodate people for whom Bhutan is today an unaffordable destination. I was just in Nepal on a five-day trek in the Annapurna range and paid $70 a day for hotels, meals, guide and porter (and a sixth night at a hotel in Pokhara). Sure, all but one of the hotels were far below 3-star quality, but that’s partly due to the difficult terrain. Anyway, I’m glad to know there’s a debate going on about the minimum daily tariff, and I hope to be back some day!
November 27, 2015 at 8:55 PM
Unknown said…
Hi Professor Clem, How have you been these days? I buy your statement and I am trying to make a point here that even the $ 65 /day/person will also prove to be heavy to many, thus there isn't question of very low budget travelers coming to Bhutan. I hope you and your family will visit us some day.
Regards!
November 27, 2015 at 9:44 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cordyceps

  This article is part of my thesis “Fuelwood Consumption and Production in Alpine Bhutan: A case study in Wangchuck Centennial Park, Bumthang, Bhutan). I have also worked on uses of Cordyceps in Pharmaceutical industries long time back, but could not trace out as of now. If people are interested I will try to re-write it and publish it. I have also cited references, in-case if any readers is interested to explore further. I will also try to provide papers to those who are interested to know more about the organism. What is Cordyceps Cordyceps sinensis is an Ascomycetes medical fungus with a long and illustrious history. The genus Cordyceps is mostly entomophagous flask fungi belonging to the family Clavicipataceae (Winkler, 2008). Although it is not actually a mushroom in the taxonomic sense, it has been regarded as a medicinal mushroom for centuries. The name Cordyceps comes from the Latin words “cord” and “ceps”, meaning, “club” and “head”, respectively (Holliday et al., 2005). Th
2 comments
Read more

Non-Wood Forest Products (NWFPs) or Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs)

Both Non-Wood Forest Products (NWFPs) and Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) refers to what is earlier known as Minor Forest Products (MFPs). The use of "MFPs" terminology has been discontinued as it seems to greatly mis-guide the produce. For instance collection and trade of Cordyceps ( Ophiocordyceps sinensis ) by high alpine dwellers and even Chirata ( Swertia chirata ) in the east (Shigkhar Lauri) contributes more than 50% of their annual earnings, which of-course is clear that these forest products doesnot justify to be called as minor. NWFPs and NTFPs are two very similar yet different terminologies adopted to address these produce of forest other than timber. In short it includes everything besides timber. Rattan Shoot In Bhutan we use NWFP and it is defined in the National Forest Policy of Bhutan, 2011as, "NWFP means resin, varnish, katha, kutch, plants, flowers, seeds, bamboo, bulbs, roots, leaves, grasses, creepers, reeds, orchids, cane, fungi, moss, medic
6 comments
Read more

The Mighty Manas River and Future of "SHE"

The Manas River is a trans-boundary river in the Himalayan foothills between southern Bhutan and India . It is named after Manasa , the serpent god in Hindu Mythology . It is the largest river system of Bhutan, among its four major river systems; the other three are Amo Chu or Toorsa , Wang Chu or Raidak, Puna Tsang Chhu or Sunkoosh . The total length of the river is 376 kilometres, flows through Bhutan for 272 kilometres and then through Assam for 104 kilometres before it joins the mighty Brahmaputra River . Mighty Manas River is formed by merging two rivers, viz. Dangme Chhu and Mangde Chhu in a place called Dung-du-me brag and Un-dhala thang in Panbang.  Confluence of Dangme Chhu and Mangede Chhu  and also showing Bird eye-view of Panbang. Source: Google Earth  The river valley has two major reserve forest areas, namely the Royal Manas National Park   in Bhutan and the contiguous Manas Wildlife Sanctuary encompassing Project Tiger Reserve which constitutes a UNESCO Wo
11 comments
Read more