2013-05-22T14:24:03-04:00 Rooksana Hossenally http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/index.php?author=rooksana-hossenally Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Rooksana Hossenally Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2422590 2013-01-07T01:01:00-05:00 2013-03-08T05:12:01-05:00

Rooksana Hossenally http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rooksana-hossenally/
Myanmar has been in the spotlight since 2010 after the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, long-term political prisoner and human rights activist, now chairperson and general secretary of the ruling party, the National League for Democracy. After almost 50 years of being under military rule and locked out of the international landscape, the country is opening up to the rest of the world with a huge focus on tourism.

In the last year, country has seen rapid development of its infrastructure (the country now has over 200 hotels), a surge in tourist arrivals and a first visit from Obama; the growth of Myanmar is an upward curve hereon. In the first six months of 2012, international arrivals increased by 30% compared to 2011 (Ministry of Hotels and Tourism). However, despite this wave in development and tourism, the Burmese government remains very cautious and has consequently developed a new policy to regulate tourism in the country.

The government recognises that although success is assured and that tourism will continue to grow in the short-term at least, it has also pointed out that Myanmar risks potential unsustainable tourism growth and negative impacts on the environment, its culture and society. "Myanmar will not be a second Thailand," said Mr. Achim Munz, a representative of the policy committee, at the WTM Myanmar Responsible Tourism Policy launch conference last November. "We are very clear about where we want to go," he said.

Although trying to tread carefully, the Burmese government is optimistic about this responsible vision. "The policy isn't a reaction to irresponsible tourism, but more a prevention", said Mr. U Phyo Wai Yar Zar, Secretary of the Myanmar Tourist Federation. While most countries adopt a get-rich-quick attitude to tourism, Myanmar prefers a long-term sustainable development to this type of short-term boost and Myanmar proves to be a pioneer in recognising that although a country can benefit from tourism, it can also be a threat.

The launch conference panel reasserts that due to the way Myanmar is being marketed, through its "unique attributes", it will not appeal to the mainstream tourist looking for cheap sun, sea and lager. The focus is on attracting a particular type of traveller "We warmly welcome those who appreciate and enjoy our heritage, our way of life and who travel with respect," reads Myanmar's responsible tourism vision statement. The plan is to focus on two main channels: nature and spiritual tourism.

In response to the challenge of implementing this new vision, the Nay Pyi Taw Responsible Tourism Statement was drawn up last February. The nine aims of the policy touch on social equality, cultural diversity and authenticity, conservation and enhancement of the environment, competitiveness not just on price, but on product richness, diversity and quality, and training and rewarding of the workforce.

Mr. U Phyo Wai Yar Zar has been in charge of the initiative, together with Mrs Nicole Häuser, representing the Hanns Seidel Foundation in Berlin, which has played a huge role in identifying the pitfalls and solutions in developing Myanmar's tourism industry.

The research behind the policy has been carefully carried out; several regions have been included in workshops allowing the government to identify local needs and ideas. "Identifying what is locally important is vital", said Dr Harold Goodwin, another affiliate of Myanmar's new tourism policy at the last WTM Responsible Tourism conference. "We owe it to the world to use tourism to make a place better by visiting it."

At the Nay Pyi Taw concluding conference, the 22 ministries representing the public sector, the private sector and international tourism professionals attended and agreed that a plan needed to be hatched in time for the big boom. The fact that so many ministries showed such an interest in creating a Responsible Tourism Policy showed recognition and an understanding of each ministry's role as essential if the approach was to be a holistic one. "Responsible tourism doesn't just concern tourism, but touches on all aspects of life: water, fishing, climate, trade, transport, construction, human rights..." said Mr. U Phyo Wai Yar Zar.

The overall outcome was that more rules and regulations were needed in order to control tourism and to avoid making the same mistakes as other countries. The nine aims, or 'Action Plan' was elaborated, the focus being on the inclusion of every individual, from hoteliers to staff, locals and visitors. A handbook has also been printed as a token of the policy. It educates the foreign visitor by giving lots of tips on how to behave in Myanmar, as well as a few local phrases. The guide will be widely available to foreign tourists, and will play a significant part in spreading the kind of tourism the government wants to develop.

The government's plans are being implemented with such fervour that one can only wish for success. However, despite the impressive efforts being made as the country opens up to the rest of the world, one must question how the policy will be implemented when local entrepreneurs start being accustomed to the colour of money. In the face of a development that could bring in a small fortune, will the corners remain square? When we put the question to the panel, we were accused of immense pessimism by another attendee to the conference; however, for the policy to work it is vital to remain realistic. Making sure a responsible tourism policy is respected at every level of a country's structure is no walk in the park, and as much as one can anticipate irresponsible tourism, one must also anticipate the repercussions of temptations to cut corners, as demonstrated in many countries across the world. The example I like to use is that of Mauritius. Beautiful and attracting affluent visitors from across the world, it has experienced a hotel boom mid-2000s. In less than 10 years, the number of hotels on the island has tripled. Despite the investment in the island's tourism industries, a large fraction of the local population still struggles to make ends meet and get around the island. Public transport for example, hasn't improved since the 90s. Tourism in Mauritius is a clear example of how it has not quite benefited the local population in ways that this type of investment should have.

Mrs Häuser and Mr U Phyo Wai Yar Zar agreed that sanctions need to be put in place in order to ensure that the nine steps of the policy are being followed. This might be something that will be developed over the next few years, they said.

Myanmar has proven to be a pioneer in its elaboration of a Responsible Tourism Policy, even if there is still plenty of room for improvement. The distinguishing feature is that the policy was called for organically, from the heart of the country - its people. This alone makes a huge difference in how tourism is going to develop in the country. However, it is vital to recognise that drawing up rules and regulations does not suffice. As Dr. Harold Goodwin said at the WTM Responsible Tourism conference, for a change to really happen any responsible tourism policy needs to include sanctions and transparent reporting. The policy is a great start but it is necessary for continuous and rigorous groundwork to control that the vision is being implemented correctly. It is essential for Myanmar to develop better measures fast if it wants to be ready in time for the big bad mass-tourism machine.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2087143 2012-11-11T19:00:00-05:00 2013-01-11T05:12:01-05:00

Rooksana Hossenally http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rooksana-hossenally/ World Travel Market (WTM) Global Trends Report predicts several new travel trends for the year to come, including digital detox holidays, which are being offered by an increasing number of hotels around the world.

Needless to say that there is a growing penetration - or intrusion as some might put it - of digital devices like smartphones, tablets and laptops. According to a recent TripAdvisor survey, two thirds of Britons have been on holiday with someone who has point-blank refused to switch off their mobile phone. In the United States, Google's 'Our Mobile Planet' survey reveals that 80% of smartphone users do not leave home without their device.

As a result, a number of us have become hopelessly addicted to technology. A Post Office survey published in 2008 reported that a whopping 13 million Britons suffered from 'nomophobia', or no mobile phobia. Going on holiday? The experience barely exists until the photos go up on Facebook for all to see.

"Being connected to the internet is now seen as an extension of ourselves; especially on holiday. And leaving a phone or computer from which you can access the internet behind, is just unthinkable", explains young British professional Carla Owens, while on holiday in the Algarve. We have become slaves to our digital devices, to social media and our habits have gone far beyond just sharing. Saying that we have become completely obsessed with documenting and recording our lives at every turn - be it sharing a photo of an attempt at cooking a new pasta dish or that one has caught a cold - would be an understatement.

As we learn early on in science class, where there's an action, there is always a reaction, and with the technology overload we are experiencing, hoteliers have found that there is a demand for complete isolation away from the internet. They have therefore used this as another way of boosting their sales. Digital Detox holidays will soon be widely available, with some hotels even proofing a separate bar to prevent any WiFi waves getting through. Hotel Monaco in Chicago, which offers a 'tranquility suite', or the Quincy in Washington DC, with its 'be unplugged' package, as well as the Lifehouse Country Spa Resort in the UK, which offers a 'BlackBerry creche', are a few budding examples on the market at the moment.

As great an endeavour it may be to try and save the world's nomophobes by forcing them to take some time out from the constant connectivity, this only points to a sad reality; nomphobia is a more serious condition than anticipated. People are unable to simply push that off button by themselves and checking themselves into a 'digital rehab' for a week isn't really a solution that is viable in the long-term.

So far, the term 'nomophobia' has been thrown around loosely to get a laugh from audiences, when what it actually serves to underline, is that many of us now go to great lengths just to take a break and there is something seriously wrong with this picture.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1928830 2012-10-01T09:59:40-04:00 2012-12-01T05:12:01-05:00

Rooksana Hossenally http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rooksana-hossenally/
'Sustainable tourism' is a term that has been all-too easily thrown around to mean everything from slow travel to making sure human right laws are respected in countries where tourism is being developed. "Sustainable tourism is finding the right balance between the economy, society and the environment", said Gérard Ruiz, President of the French organism, Worldwide Partner for Sustainable Tourism (Partenariat Mondial pour un Tourisme Durable). In the light of the latter, the current mass tourism model fails on all three counts and it is the uniformisation of the holiday experience that is responsible.

Last weekend at a Geopolitical Tourism IRIS conference in Enghien-les-Bains, France, a significant problem was underlined. There is a serious lack of diversity in the landscape and in the overall holiday experience offered at different tourist hotspots, whether in the Caribbean, North Africa, the Mediterranean or Thailand. And it is this 'uniformisation' of destinations that not only impacts the local aesthetic value of a destination, but also makes a country's long-term competitiveness very fragile especially in a financial crisis and in the wake of the Arab Spring.

Tourism can no longer exist as it started in Spain in the Sixties with uncontrolled building of enormous resort hotels of convenience, a concept originally developed by the Parador group, which has since caught on like a merciless epidemic. Scared of being different for fear of not appealing to the relatively wealthy lay western tourist, countries have let themselves be colonised by the Parador model, which has been adopted by a number of large international corporations and applied across the world - a winning formula, but only up to a certain point.

Egypt's Red Sea destinations like Sharm el Sheikh, Hurghada, and El Gouna are all comparable with Tunisia's Sousse, Monastir and Djerba. They all offer exactly the same thing. As Jean-Louis Baladraud, Secretary General of the National Tourism Advice Bureau in France said, "This uniform touristic landscape means the destination is no longer competitive in what it has to offer the visitor". And indeed, sunshine, beaches, sea, cheap food, cheap alcohol and mediocre accommodation at rock-bottom prices with very few real differences mean there is nothing for a particular holiday destination to distinguish itself from another. "For tourism to thrive in a country, a diversification is essential", said Baladraud.

As the recession in the West combined with the Arab Spring in the MENA region have illustrated, as soon as trouble hit, tourism halted in North Africa and the countries crumbled. The uniformisation of holidays and of popular destinations, have left the struggling countries overrun with ghost towns of oversized dilapidated resort hotels stacked up along their coastlines, debts through the roof and nowhere left to turn to overcome the crisis. Even once the situation had stabilised, tourists avoided the region like the plague, and have yet to return.

The lesson here is that if the countries had banked on using more authentic draws to appeal to a wider range of tourists, not only would each area's identity be distinct from the troublesome capital cities instead of every area being lumped in together and the entire country being labelled as a danger zone, but there might just have been a chance of pulling through with a continuous flow of tourists. Instead, these destinations were struck off the tourist map - after all why should tour operators sell holidays in countries that have been branded as risky when they've got mounds of products in peaceful Portugal, Spain, Turkey, Cyprus and in the Greek islands, all offering the exact same thing?

What we need, controlled building regulations aside, is to go back to the drawing board in order to encourage a country's competitiveness by building on its local source unique assets like its culture, landmarks, food, people, architecture and any other authentic aspect of that destination that is capable of differentiating each destination from the next. "Local entrepreneurs and producers need to be accompanied by the government to maximise their productivity instead of sourcing products and services from abroad", said Jean-Pierre Blat, Director of the Regional Committee for Tourism in Ile-de-France. Egypt doesn't need to import chocolate or cheese spreads that are popular in the West in order to guarantee its guests their usual breakfast, but instead should be calling upon local farmers to produce jams with the fruit grown on their farms. As basic an example as this may be, not only would this give the destination part of the diversification it needs and cut on its carbon footprint by sourcing produce closer to home, but it is one way of increasing local farming productivity while keeping revenue generated by tourism in the country, therefore boosting the local economy.

What politicians and actors within the sector haven't understood, said Jean-Louis Baladraud, is that interdependence between sustainable tourism and development can be a way of hauling ourselves out of the recession. And the poor show at this year's Rio+20 - Cameron, Obama and Merkel opted not to attend - just goes to show how tourism has been put on the backburner when it could be used more strategically to fight against the financial crisis that has hit the West and the collapse following the uprisings in the MENA region.

Morocco for example, where the tensions were mainly localised in Marrakesh and Tangiers, has suffered a drastic fall in tourist arrivals. Despite the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office currently holding no formal restrictions when it comes to travelling to Morocco, Thomas Cook, one of the UK's biggest tour operators, has dropped Morocco entirely from its portfolio, which has had a dramatic impact on Morocco's economy. However, certain touristic zones like Essaouira and Agadir, and even Marrakesh, the capital, are peaceful. For having been to Essaouira in June and a colleague having travelled to Agadir over the summer, there were no signs of trouble. Popular cruise companies Holland America and Cunard also substituted stops in Tunisia and Egypt on their itineraries just last month, despite there being no reports of unrest at the destinations concerned.

By letting international developers and tour operators swan into a developing country, exploit its shores, and then go home with their pockets bulging, while leaving behind grotesque uniform concrete structures scarring the landscape, not to mention a large carbon footprint, is the complete opposite of using the tourism industry to authentically stimulate a developing economy. It is this monopoly over a country's resources leading to a uniform (formerly) winning formula whether in Punta Cana, Phuket, Agadir, Sharm el Sheikh, Sousse or Dalaman, that has caused a loss of individual identity for a destination. By applying the infamous Parador model to their own coasts, these countries were unaware that this would reduce their long-term competitiveness. This demonstrates exactly how a lack of a distinct identity and image can cause tour operators and tourists to overreact when a spot of trouble emerges in one part a country. If tourism had been developed more carefully, tour operators may not have dropped entire countries, which is why development and sustainable tourism really should go hand-in-hand.

Hit by political chaos, North African countries have suffered the most, but so have other similar destinations, from the Caribbean (Holguin in Cuba, Yucatan in Mexico, Punta Cana in the Dominican Republic, Ocho Rios in Jamaica, Phuket in Thailand, Antalya in Turkey, Agadir in Morocco, and the list continues). In wanting to adapt themselves completely to the lay Western tourist, but as the recession bites and trends change, the countries are slowly losing their visitors who prefer to go somewhere that offers better quality holidays comprised of a more authentic experience at a destination closer to home. But already ruined by the Parador model, it is too late to overturn these countries' initial short-sightedness. When money is lacking, why pay significantly more to travel halfway across the world when exactly the same infrastructure and weather is available a two-hour flight away? These countries have nothing left to offer, plunging them into financial woes with no ends and losing them a competitive edge on a global scale.

Tourism can be a real lifeline for a country. But as countries bank on providing the same generic holiday experience to tourists based on the 1960s Spanish Parador model, it puts countries branded as holiday destinations in a delicate position either because they have tailored all their infrastructures to a limited type of tourist that today is financially in trouble, or because political unrest has marred their image, leaving them prone to financial collapse. If sustainable, tourism can serve to build a long-term stable economy if only the focus is shifted from big international corporations that create uniform holiday models to local entrepreneurs and producers. By default, this will encourage the development of a distinct identity of a destination, drawing in tourists for its local appeal that cannot be found elsewhere in the world, rather than for generic advantages that are no longer appealing in light of trouble. Increasing a country's competitiveness is important to give off the right signal to a wider range of tourists as well as businesses and can only be done through the development of a more organic, intelligent tourism industry.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1899993 2012-09-20T10:07:19-04:00 2012-11-20T05:12:01-05:00

Rooksana Hossenally http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rooksana-hossenally/
Following the 13-minute amateur anti-Islam film, 'The Innocence of Muslims', which was released on the video uploading site , YouTube, two months ago and a more recent version dubbed in Arabic, has led to numerous demonstrations of anger from extremist Muslims all over the world. The most severe of incidents resulted in the death of four Americans at the United States Embassy in Libya, including that of the Ambassador, Chris Stevens. In France, this was followed by a protest of 250 Muslims outside the U.S. embassy in Paris last weekend, with larger protests worldwide planned for Friday 21 September despite government warnings that another protest in France will be considered as illegal.

Last Wednesday, several caricatures depicting the Prophet Mohammed were published in the popular French paper, Charlie Hebdo, the very same paper whose offices were set on fire following the publication of caricatures of the Prophet, originally published in the Dutch paper, Jyllands-Posten, in 2005. These caricatures have not been taken lightly by the extremist Muslim population in France, with locals reporting mass destruction of the paper by Muslim radicals at newspaper kiosks.

The caricatures have indeed added to an already roaring anger following the release of the amateur anti-Islam film. Extremist Muslims argue that plastering the caricatures on the front page of Charlie Hebdo, after the profound disrespect that had been felt by the Muslim community in 2005, may not have been entirely reasonable, especially amidst current events. However, the French government defends the freedom of the press. According to article 11 of the Human and Citizens' Rights Act in France, every resident is free to speak, write and print what he or she sees fit as long as it is not deemed an infringement of that right in a court of law. A paradox when it comes to extremist Muslims' protest in favour of the censorship of these cartoons and another paradox when one hears French Minister of Foreign Affairs, Laurent Fabius, put a veto over any sort of protest from the Muslim community in France.

Muslims who live in France must abide by French laws and must accept that as much as it is their right to protest, it is the press' right to publish what it likes, no matter how inflammatory or defamatory. French Prime Minister, Jean-Marc Ayrault, has urged citizens offended by the cartoons published in Charlie Hebdo, not to take the law into their own hands and to use the processes in place within the framework of the French legal system.

However, instead of addressing the issues at the heart of the problem, the French government has decided to play by extremist rules in the name of safety and order. Fabius has confirmed that French embassies, consulates and schools would observe precautionary closures in twenty countries on Friday, which is when the extremist Muslim community is said to be planning a mass protest worldwide. In support of this decision, "The Republic of France will not let itself be beaten", said the French Prime Minister on RTL radio station yesterday.

The French government claims to be fighting for the freedom of the press, backing Charie Hebdo journalist, Antonio Fischetti's statement, "Our right to blasphemy is essential to democracy". As true as this statement rings when considering freedom laws in France, we must question whether this isn't all too easy for the government - as a member of the public, I advance my personal doubts on the media's publishing of uncensored content. A number of documentaries, specifically 'Peace, Propaganda and the Promised Land' by Kenyon King, which exposes the impact of powerful U.S. lobbies on the freedom of international broadcasting groups such as the BBC in the United Kingdom when reporting on the Israel-Palestine conflict provides an example as to why the French government's battle in favour of the freedom of the press is not only ideological, but hypocritical. And this means that because isn't truly free, the cartoons could have been censored, leading part of the Muslim community to feel let down by the government for condoning this sort of defamatory press, according to angry members of the Parisian local Muslim community.

Despite the bad publicity received, Muslims urge the world to believe that the entire Muslim community does not adhere to extremist values, or agree with these groups' behaviour, as several members of the minority community asserted last Wednesday in Paris. However, the peaceful Muslim community expresses fears about extremist groups being unstoppable. The young Muslim joining these groups are proving to be the fiercest in their convictions, according to several Muslim ladies originally from Morocco living in Belleville. And the fraction of these young people seems to be growing, they said. Sociologists, like Farhad Khosrokavar, infer that extremist behaviour arises largely from a lack of identity, a general lack of belonging for young Muslim people who are seen by the authorities to profit from potentially violent situations to vent their frustrations.

One must thus ask why France, and other Western countries, have failed such a large proportion of young Muslims. This sort of extremist behaviour in a generally free and democratic country is unacceptable, and while it is the norm to have various groups of differing political stances, even of an extremist nature, why is a growing number of Muslims so ready to be provoked into a violent reaction by editorial content used in such a transparent manner?

Richard Millet, French controversial author of convicted murderer, Norwegian extremist Sanders Breivik's 'Literary Eulogy' ('Eloge littéraire d'Anders Breivik' published by Gallimard, August 2012), said "Brevik's actions should be seen as a warning of the consequences concerning a society that has failed at intercultural integration". He remains convinced that Breivik is a product of a failed society, and that we should not be surprised to see more incidents of this nature take place, especially in France and the United Kingdom. Millet does have a point and looming protest is further proof of the failed integration of Muslims in France, for a great fraction remain adamant that the publication of these cartoons portraying the Prophet is unjust - even under French law.

With more twists and turns than in a soap opera, the situation only seems to be escalating as the world watches and waits for extremist Muslims to set a foot wrong - and no doubt they will. They are extremists, being reasonable isn't what they are about and they certainly do not represent the majority of the world's Muslim community, in the same way that the Ku Klux Klan isn't representative of all citizens of the United States. As several outraged bystanders in Belleville affirmed yesterday, attacking embassies isn't the right thing to do and this relentless sentiment for vengeance isn't a Muslim value. Speaking of the satirical newspaper as the source of the current debate, "Charlie is really stupid, but so is organising mass protests", said a Muslim local who concluded that most Muslims are peaceful and just seek to get on with their lives without conflict. Unfortunately, the heavily stigmatised religion hasn't been helped by extremist behaviour by a dangerous minority, but as per French law, peaceful protest is their right, and the local government must not forget that their laws apply to all citizens, even French extremist Muslims.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1664106 2012-07-17T10:54:39-04:00 2012-09-16T05:12:12-04:00

Rooksana Hossenally http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rooksana-hossenally/
Following the Maldivian government's ministers' highly-mediatized underwater conference in October 2009, a conference with the aim of highlighting the pressing environmental issues with regards to the sinking archipelago, I must say that when my editor announced that I would be jetted off to some of the most dazzling islands in the world, I was keen on getting a sample of this forward thinking. Upon return however, the Maldives, as beautiful as the islands are, left a sour taste in my mouth as far as the environment is concerned. My visit only confirmed that the president's environmental avant garde-ism is a nothing more than a marketing ploy to get himself in his people's good books.

My trip lasted three weeks and my skepticism about President Nasheed's wonderful ideals was far from overruled by what I saw. Going carbon-free is not only impossible for the Maldives, but it would severely penalize the country's main industry: tourism, which would, needless to say, cause the Maldives to slip into dangerous financial waters, in addition to the already rising sea levels around the islands.

A little harsh of me, you might be thinking -- let me explain. Going carbon neutral in the Maldives would require offsetting to a monumental degree. First, the only way of getting around the archipelago's 26 atolls of 1,192 islands is by boat or plane. The President's objectives are without doubt perfectly admirable, but how does he imagine the tourism industry functioning without transport?

Second, very little produce is found locally, so almost everything is imported; another few thousand plane and boat journeys to add to the list. Third, hotels with water villas look incredibly enticing, but it is rare for hotels to put the environment first when it comes to building these sumptuous bungalows. It is startlingly obvious that to build the villas a great part of the coral barrier has had to be cleared to make way for them. Coral can take thousands of years to grow back if the water acidity levels remain acceptable -- something that cannot be guaranteed with rising water pollution levels. Doesn't take a genius to do the math. Less coral means less fish and less fish means less fishing. And after tourism, the main industry is fishing in the Maldives.

Fourth, hotels are only too proud to tell you that they desalinate their own water and bottle it themselves. I agree that this may be more efficient than importing tons of non-biodegradable plastic bottled water, but the desalination process requires the burning of fuel. Another point to add to the list. Fifth, hotels are extremely keen on providing their guests with as many wow-factors as possible, which includes ray-feeding, a major attraction at some hotels, such as the Chaaya Reef Ellaidhoo and we also have our doubts on the Conrad Ranveli's ability to keep the surrounding fish exactly where it can be seen through the glass of its spectacular underwater restaurant, Ithaa, without keeping them fed throughout the day and night. Highly entertaining and beautiful, sure, but extremely counterproductive as this risks severely disrupting the ecosystem; if rays are used to getting their daily fill with minimal effort, then they will no longer scour the ocean floors in the same way, thus changing the way the ecosystem works underwater.

Last but not least, the Maldives stores its rubbish on an island, Thilafushi, close to the capital, Malé. This rubbish tip seems to be poorly controlled however, as many hotels close by will confirm. Our hosts point to the shocking amount of rubbish that both washes up on their paradise-like beaches and gets swept out to sea. And it's not surprising considering the island, like most of the others, is only one meter above sea level. An interesting feature published on the Guardian's website, published in January 2009 by Elin Holyland, illustrates the Maldives' waste disposal problem in pictures.

The above issues however go deeper than the surface we have merely scratched, for when I spoke to locals in the southernmost atoll on Khaadedhdhoo Airport Island, they explained that they understood what the president's objectives are in terms of the environment because they have access to international media, but they explained that President Nasheed has never actually explained the environmental problem the country is faced with to the Maldivian people. According to a very passionate Maldivian gentleman sitting at the café across from the airport, what the president said in a radio broadcast was the following: "We are sinking. So we have to move somewhere else." This, according to the same gentleman, was the extent of the president's discourse to the people on the problem of rising water levels and his initiative to build a second island and plots of lands in nearby Sri Lanka and India to relocate the population.

The fact that President Nasheed hasn't taken the time to explain the problem in detail to the Maldivian people means, for those who understand the extent of the problem, that they have lost all respect for him and affirm that, "All this talk of green issues is just for his own self-promotion." If his people don't understand the problem then how does the president expect the Maldives to be carbon neutral in less than 10 years? For surely a sustainable environmental impact would have to be a general effort made by the entire population.

The only thing President's Nasheed's transparent ploys promote are disillusionment and ironically, more carbon -- a rise in tourist numbers undeniably leads to a rise in carbon emissions. Sadly, the Maldives isn't the only country to use green wash as a marketing tool to promote the country as a top tourism destination. There are plenty more.

So -- still wish you were here?]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1258496 2012-02-06T18:01:52-05:00 2012-04-07T05:12:01-04:00

Rooksana Hossenally http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rooksana-hossenally/
Audrey Richter, mother of three and living in Paris, often walks past certain film posters crossing her fingers that her two under-10s won't gawp at the picture. And it was the case with Les Infidèles: "Selling this sort of image to children from a young age isn't healthy. I don't want my boys to imagine that's what most women are like."

As soon as the poster campaign went up last Friday, the French advertising standards authority (ARPP) received reams of complaints from the public. The campaign shocked consumers, but the worst thing was having to explain the images to young children who asked questions along the lines of "Mummy, why is the naked lady hanging upside down?" said Stéphane Martin, director of the ARPP.

"It's not so much that people were annoyed about their children seeing the images, but more that they don't necessarily want to give them sex-education out in the street." he said.

The two poster designs were deemed sensitive by the ARPP and the entire campaign was pulled. Outdoor advertisers, Médiakiosque and JC Decaux, agreed to take the posters down and replace the campaign with an alternative. Mr. Martin said that the ARPP "thinks this campaign is contrary to the rules on the human image, even though they do have a link with the subject of the film".

The campaign comprised of two posters: one of a dishevelled Dujardin holding onto the ankles of a naked woman hanging upside down, with the slogan 'I'm walking into a meeting'. The second poster pictured co-star, Gilles Lellouche, on the phone with a lady's head covering his crotch and the caption 'The line's about to cut; I'm heading into a tunnel.'


Although the posters have been judged sexist in France, the issue of their explicit nature seems to have been brushed aside. Parents were shocked at how easily such a campaign could have been approved. "The posters are taken down once the nation complains. But the harm is already done. These kinds of posters are another media stunt to get the film more attention." said father of two, Gilles Gaspard. "There should be a process to approve the posters before they go up, not after."

But sexually provocative advertising isn't the public's only worry. Ms. Birchnall said that she is "often shocked at the posters advertising the latest films. Some are extremely bloody and one even lead to one of the children having nightmares."

Mr. Martin of ARPP said that there is no such mandatory screening process before the campaign is displayed, but that there are strict regulations in place that all advertisers are accustomed to following. The ARPP works on a membership basis. Its members comprise all kinds of advertisers, who usually call upon the organism if in doubt about a particular campaign. And this, prior to it going up. However, "JC Decaux and Médiakiosque didn't call us to approve the campaign." said Mr. Martin. "And they (the advertisers) admitted to having doubts about the 'Les Infidèles' campaign before it went up."

Contrarily to the parents of young children, Mr. Martin doesn't think a screening process prior to poster campaigns needs to be applied. "The 'Les Infidèles' campaign for example, did harm women's image, but it is the advertisers' responsibility to act within reason and this was not the case here." Although there was no penalty for breaching advertising regulation, having to take the posters down, reprint them and put them back up again is big enough punishment, said Mr. Martin.

The ARPP's job isn't to check every single advertisement that goes up in the streets or on the internet - which would be a near-impossible task to achieve due to the sheer volume, said Mr. Martin - but it is to make sure that advertisers don't infringe on personal freedom. The deciding factor in pulling down the Les Infidèles campaign was that explaining the posters to their children was imposed on parents, said Mr. Martin.

Paris isn't exactly known for being prude, but parents are becoming more and more concerned about the influences children are exposed to. "It's hard enough bringing up your children without being able to control their desire for things parents might deem unhealthy, especially with the progress of the internet" says parent Gilles Gaspard. "I don't want my children to grow up thinking that guns are normal, that violence is fun and that women are sexual objects. But that's what some film posters condone."

The campaign was relaunched with two new poster designs. The first shows Dujardin and Lellouche sitting with their pants around their ankles and in the second, the two men are standing with their trousers down and their hands covering their crotch area. "Although the posters are still a bit racy, at least there is no allusion to women being pleasure-providers in a society that is sexist enough." said Mrs. Richter.

The Washingon Post suggests that these kinds of posters could reflect a reaction to the Strauss-Kahn scandal. Previous IMF head, Dominique Strauss-Kahn gave French men an even worse international reputation and poster campaigns like that of Les Infidèles just accentuates a stereotype that isn't necessarily true. "Back home people do tend to have a strong image of the "sleazy" and womanising Frenchman, especially married ones," said Ms. Birchnall. "I am embarrassed to be a French man," said Mr. Gaspard. "We're not all sex-obsessed perverts who have multiple mistresses."

However, Mr. Martin of ARPP said that since France operates as a democracy, the ARPP must value freedom of expression for all parties including advertisers. "Advertising campaigns are about interpretation and this is difficult to manage. Otherwise we could apply strict censorship, but this would go against democratic values."]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1230822 2012-01-25T10:24:29-05:00 2012-03-26T05:12:01-04:00

Rooksana Hossenally http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rooksana-hossenally/
Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, has proposed plans for building a sixth airport to relieve traffic around Heathrow and Gatwick, London's two major airports. In the meantime, we've been hit by the financial crisis, Cameron's austerity plans, being on the verge of losing our triple A, soaring Air Passenger Duty (APD) and don't even get me started on rising water levels! And no one has even mentioned that 'Boris' Island is actually a sanctuary for fauna and flora and not some fallow patch of the planet to concrete over; thousands of birds emigrate to the Thames Estuary from the Arctic in the winter.

While Boris is fannying around trying to get a £50 million project off the ground, the rest of the United Kingdom is struggling to feed mouths and keep their shelter. An incoherent move? We'd say so. So what's Boris's trail of thought here?

While it cannot be denied that traffic around Heathrow and Gatwick is becoming hugely problematic, there doesn't seem to be much of a solution. A third runway is impossible to envisage due to the roads not being able to take extra traffic to the airport, but hang on a minute, let's keep things in perspective here. London already has five airports (Heathrow, Gatwick, City, Luton and Stansted) with extremely bad infrastructure inside and out. Wouldn't it be simpler to redesign what we already have instead of building another mega monster of an airport encouraging yet more influx, more traffic, more carbon emissions? I cannot help but sneer at the latter - and to think that the Labour government was trying to pass off APD as a green tax only two years ago!

So alright, the tax payer isn't going to pay for it (just as well) and Boris has assured that he has all the private financial backing he needs to get this project off the ground. Erm, doesn't something seem a little wrong here? No one seems to have a penny to spare when it comes to saving the country, but when millions and millions of pounds suddenly appear on the horizon, it's all "Crisis? What crisis?" Some members of the public call it hypocrisy, others call it irresponsible, but people mostly stick to describing Boris' master plan as just 'plain stupid'.

Even if we knew how to exploit every inch of the planet, shouldn't we learn a lesson and get over our greed and leave some of the earth to rest? Or do we really have to pursue along the lines of the 'Why have less when we can have more?' school of thought. I think I speak for most members of the public in saying that we must draw the line somewhere. It's high time we left the playing field to the younger generation of airports in the UAE or Qatar, for example, and accept the fact that we have got to stop developing before we really have nowhere left to go.
]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1204776 2012-01-16T19:00:00-05:00 2012-03-17T05:12:01-04:00

Rooksana Hossenally http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rooksana-hossenally/
The buildings to be destroyed to make way for the brand spanking new glass and aluminium clad structure include the Britain at War Museum and the old South Eastern Railway offices on Tooley Street as well as a relocation of the Southwark Playhouse. Despite being met by stark opposition, the plans are going ahead, with Southwark Council arguing that a redevelopment of London Bridge Station is vital if London wants to keep up with the times and the changing needs of passengers. They argued that the station is becoming increasingly 'problematic' when it comes to train services and passenger circulation.

The redesign of the station includes three phases: a street-level concourse and a new shopping area. The second phase is the realignment of the railway tracks running through the station. The third aspect of the station redevelopment is the proposed series of undulating canopies above the new platforms. Each platform will be covered along its full length but there will be no overall station roof.

The station will be part of an overall regeneration project for the London Bridge area coined 'The London Bridge Quarter', which will be a brand new district to infuse life into an area that, according to Southwark Council, needs it.

The London Bridge Quarter will include 'The Shard', currently being built; will be Western Europe's tallest building at 310 metres high; reminding us of the Burj Khalifa tower in Dubai, The Shard will also have a viewing platform, offices and a Shangri-La hotel. The complex will include a 40,000sq metre office building called 'The Place', along with the 'Public Realm', with 10,000 sq ft of landscaped gardens as well as a reconfigured bus station. The released plans depict a model that is similar to the redevelopment of King's Cross station and its surroundings. The new station is designed by Grimshaw architects and should be ready by 2018.

According to the London SE1 Community Website, the redevelopment plans caused an uproar with members of the public including Southwark-based architect Benedict O'Looney, chair of the borough's conservation areas advisory group, who is in favour of keeping the South Eastern Railway building which he said is "as good as any building you will find on the Grand Canal in Venice". Local historian Stephen Humphrey has also written to planning officers to plead in favour of keeping the South Eastern Railway offices: "The arguments put forward for a completely new structure do not stand up. In reality, the railway is seeking a new building because it is thought to look 'modern' and 'advanced'." He praised the building for its "warm and cheerful contribution" to the Tooley Street conservation area.

The Victorian Society has also been campaigning to keep the offices, which were built by Charles Barry Jr in 1893. Not only was Barry Jr part of an architectural legacy, his father having designed the Palace of Westminster, but he also designed London's 'Flatiron building', in homage to the iconic building of the same name in New York. Following the closure of South Eastern Railway in 1922, the building was reopened as the Churchill at War exhibition, a restaurant and a paintball complex. The society fought for listed status but it was rejected by the Heritage Minister last month.

Also part of the campaign to keep the Tooley Street offices is high-profile designer, Terence Conran. For him, "These buildings are too good to demolish - I am sure they have a quality that is irreplaceable today and should be reused". Furthermore, historic buildings and areas advisor Malcolm Woods wrote: "English Heritage recognises that the Thameslink [Programme] will deliver substantial public benefits and that Network Rail has put forward a proposal that meets their operational requirements and provides an improved environment for its customers. However, it has not shown to our satisfaction that the demolition of the 64-84 Tooley Street building is necessary to deliver such a station." Cllr Robin Crookshank Hilton agrees with Woods: "I feel that in principle demolition of 64-84 Tooley Street constitutes a form of architectural vandalism".

The new London Bridge Station will undoubtedly generate huge revenue in the area, however, the locals have expressed that they want to hold on to London's essence in the shape of its original buildings as opposed to trying to catch up with some of the Middle Eastern giants like Dubai and Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates.

This issue has caused quite a stir emotionally, psychologically and sociologically for many who are fond of London Bridge's historical heritage. However, despite the long list of opposers to the demolition of the old Southern Railway office building, which is part of what makes up London's quirky identity, the council seems adamant about moving forward and that, at any cost.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1193637 2012-01-10T17:52:16-05:00 2012-03-11T05:12:01-04:00

Rooksana Hossenally http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rooksana-hossenally/
Following Giles Longhurst's shock statement: "Up to 90 percent of editorial content for travel websites will soon be replaced by video," he expressed with a self-satisfied look. Even if no one in the room -- the attendees consisted mainly of the travel press -- reacted aloud, the horror was evident in the atmosphere and was later confirmed by comments and questions that followed the conference. As one freelance travel journalist rightly exclaimed: "I am absolutely horrified at most editorial content being replaced by video!" The fact that most travel press will be replaced by video editors is a shock in itself for writers like us; however, what is even more disappointing is that two of the industry's top websites, especially Frommer's, which prides itself on its editorial content, are supporting this move.

In an Internet-dominated world with video-uploading sites like Dailymotion, Vimeo and YouTube that lead online trends, it isn't surprising that the travel industry should adapt to the demands of the public. However, a key point that seems to have been completely brushed under the carpet is that we sell dreams. We don't sell juicers or blenders, so I ask, is there a real need for travel websites to migrate towards the 'video manual' of the holiday? By this I mean with software like 3rd Planet's technology that allows users to visit most tourist spots in destinations around the world as though they are traveling through a video game.

Furthermore, when asked the question, the speakers did not have figures confirming a demand for this kind of holiday-marketing, so where is the need? Do travelers really want to be able to see their dream destination before visiting it? Will this really boost the flailing travel industry?

Video's great, and it has its place on the Internet, but without editorial content to explain history, geography, seasons, tips and the like, how will video do the job? Also, an unquestionable flaw of this video master-plan is that it will sell a dream that will probably never be a reality, raising traveler expectations beyond the norm: Cambodia's Angkor Wat temple complex looks incredible on 3rd Planet, but it will always show the temples under clear blue skies and beautiful golden sunshine, misleading travelers on a global scale, for will 3rd Planet adapt its technology for the monsoon months? This leads us down an unsteady path; what if the temples are undergoing a complete renovation and travelers are expecting to be able to take lots of picture-postcard shots -- will 3rd Planet adapt its videos to show the temples held up by scaffolding?

Maud Larpent, speaking on behalf of TripAdvisor, presented her company's technology -- a video element uploaded by users with speech bubbles appearing at main sites of interest; the editorial content will also be written by the travel community. Apparently walking around a city, eyes glued to an iPad doesn't seem to cause a stir for Ms Larpent. At a time when TripAdvisor is being heavily criticized for its lack of verification concerning its hotel reviews, is it really the right time to be throwing itself into new depths? Won't this new technology provide new battle ground for tourist sites all over the world? And what about Frommer's? First and foremost a guidebook publisher, we are seeing Frommer's slowly migrating towards the net -- but video? Isn't Frommer's getting a little out of its depth and letting down the entire travel press instead of supporting it? Lastly, ever-so-proud of his brand new technology, Terence Clark comes onto the stage, boasting about how advanced his technology is, but the travel press didn't hesitate on expressing its skepticism on spoon-feeding travellers. As a traveler myself, the aspect of discovery and mystery of a destination is what I am looking for -- aren't you?]]>