By Benjamin Lyngdoh
The tourism sector has the peculiarity of belonging to many but is being owned by none. It is like a child of many fathers and arguably is being left to be fed and cared for by none. Firstly and from the academic standpoint, the subject matter called ‘tourism’ is related either directly or indirectly to anthropology, sociology, history, geography, culture, business studies and so forth. Contemporarily, if we include tourism management into the mix of things then this in itself involves innumerable nuances. As such, tourism studies are multi-disciplinary and this is good. It adds richness and variety but at the same time it presents a challenge as far as ‘unity of direction’ is concerned. Secondly and from the grass-roots standpoint, the projects of the PWD and PHE departments, the interest shown by MUDA these days in construction matters, the rulings of the Hon’ble High Court, the investment policies and plans of the private parties/government, mining and quarrying practices, safety and security concerns and so forth all have an impact on the shape and outcome of tourism.
The above two factors can work as a synergy. They can do wonders for the growth and development of tourism. They can function as a base for employment and self-reliance. However, they can pose a number of serious challenges because of the duplicity of command (as there are multiple decision making points) and lack of coordination (amongst the multiple decision making points). Subsequently, a number of issues have crept in as far as tourism Meghalaya is concerned. Well, some of these are not new and are briefed as the following pointers –
Firstly, branding of tourism destinations is relatively a recent concept (as compared to manufacturing). However, marketing is not. The crux of the matter is that in the absence of branding, effective marketing suffers. Branding gives a ‘unique identity’ and ‘differentiation’ to the destination and ‘distinguishes’ it from the available competition in the clientele’s mind. It represents value, utility, strength and reputation. It is an ‘absolute competitive advantage’ and highlights this ‘advantage’ as a ‘unique selling point’. Tourism Meghalaya has to search and find this ‘advantage’ and ‘point’. This issue requires a lot of deliberation. However, for a start they can be built upon the natural breath-taking beauty and splendor combined with relatively better infrastructure.
Secondly, if Meghalaya is to be presented as a holistic tourism destination then there must be a concerted effort from all the stakeholders towards an even spread of tourism resources and attractions. To date, around 45% of the tourism spots are confined to east khasi hills district alone. The share of the other districts is poor with only west garo hills district coming close with 16% share of the tourism spots. This unbalanced distribution presents a major challenge and it is difficult to believe that the other districts lack potential for adequate attention and development. This is more of a community involvement and community-based tourism issue and hence calls for such areas to scan on the feasibility of a tourism-based economy.
Thirdly, we talk about the ‘four P’s’ in marketing. Be that as it may, when it comes to tourism the ‘fifth P’ is crucial. In fact, it is critical. It is the pivot around which the entire tourism activity revolves. This ‘P’ concerns ‘people’. As such, hospitality and presentable behaviour is at the center of everything concerning tourism. The clientele now are more demanding and have huge expectations. They are more health and hygiene conscious. We have moved from the agricultural economy to the manufacturing and further into services. Now at present we are in the experience economy. This ‘experience’ is at the heart of success or failure of tourism. There is a common saying that ‘people will hardly share good news, but they will always talk and share bad/depressing news’. Further, there is a saying that ‘good news is shared with seven people but a bad news with twenty-five’. All of this calls for adequate attention on the experience factor of the clientele. Giving them a great tourism experience is the key to having them back and even in more numbers.
Fourthly, at the top of the clientele segment are the foreign tourists. This is primarily because they normally do longer stays and that way spend a lot more as compared to domestic tourists. Not to mention the fact that the more the foreign tourists, the more is the visibility, value and reputation of the destination (and this is not a colonial mindset but rather a purely business mindset). However, the one thing that such tourists always look for is an airport. In general, it is a factor which determines if a foreign tourist visits us or not. Hence, absence from the airport map of the country is equivalent to losing foreign clientele. In relation to this, I have a question to the government. When you look at the tourism statistics of the country, do you ever wonder why other destinations which are equivalent (or even less) to Meghalaya have more foreign clientele? The answer is simple and the deciding and differentiating factor is an infrastructure called ‘airport’. This is a serious issue and it is high time that we wake up to it.
Fifthly, 90% of the tourism business the world over is micro and small in nature. This is more so in the case of Meghalaya. Entrepreneurship enabled services are at the center of tourism Meghalaya. As sweet as that sounds, there is sourness to it as well. As stated earlier, the tourist these days are more demanding and conscious. This is where our entrepreneurship fails to meet expectations of the clientele. At the outset, we fail to provide the goods demanded. Then our service quality requires a serious look-in. In general, the clientele that visits and interacts with our entrepreneurship find our performance as being average. Well, in some cases it is below average to the extent of leaving the tourist miffed. As such and as a case in point, the clients that go to Sohra/Mawlynnong normally do not eat at such places, forget about staying back. They pack food from elsewhere. Well, one way of looking into it is that these places are not far from Shillong. However, the right way of looking into it is that those places have failed in terms of provision of goods and more importantly the quality of service. Considering the fact that entrepreneurship is a scope for employment and self-reliance, there can be no other issue more serious than this.
Sixthly, our tourism development should be based on the platform of sustainability. This is more so as our tourism is predominantly nature based. It takes many lifetimes to nurture nature and just a single lifetime to destroy it. Hence, sustainability should be at the center. Our destination planning and development will have to be sensitive to the environment and its ‘carrying capacity’. We do not want to end up like another Goa. Equally, there is a realization that we still have potential and can serve far more clientele than the ones visiting now. Amidst all this, we must also respect and resign to the fact that tourism is not a panacea. It is not a magic wand. It will not solve all of our economic and social problems. Not all areas of Meghalaya can be promoted as a tourist spots. Nonetheless, tourism as an economic sector has a huge scope and potential for encompassing a sizeable chunk of the population into meaningful activities and livelihoods.
Lastly and going back to the first two paragraphs, in case of tourism spots which are feasible for promotion, tourism planning and development cannot be secondary to the activities of PWD or other departments. For such spots, the planning and development of that area should be tourism-centric. The needs of tourism must determine and direct the flow of activities of the other departments.
(The Author is Assistant Professor in Department of Tourism and Hotel Management, NEHU, Shillong and can be reached at [email protected])