Does tourism hurt the planet ? Economist, Thomas Friedman’s viewpoints

by Jamie Rhein on

This months issue of National Geographic Traveler has an interview with Thomas Friedman, the New York Times columnist who writes about economic issues and is the author of the book The World is Flat. Keith Bellows, the editor of the magazine asked the questions.

One question dove into the idea of how much does tourism hurt the planet and what should be done about it. In Friedman’s mind, that depends on how tourism is conducted. If people travel without a thought in their heads about the environment, then even the smallest amount of travel can do much damage. But, if people remain cognizant of taking care, then the damage is minimized and travel offers more positives than negatives.

As he points out, and what we’ve learned here at Gadling from our own travels, travel makes places seem relevant so that people are more likely to want to take care of them if they’ve experienced them and the people who live there first hand. Learning about deforestation of the rain forest, for example, has more meaning if you’ve actually been in a rain forest.

Friedman did say that some attractions need more regulations, such as the Pyramids in Egypt. If people can walk all over them willy nilly than they will be destroyed for the rest of us. In my opinion, that’s why organizations like UNESCO’s World Heritage and the National Park Service are so important.

In Friedman’s interview, he also talked about how he and his wife have helped their two daughters grow into global citizens who like to travel. To read the article yourself, click here. Thanks to Intelligent Travel for pointing me to the article.

Russia disproves the “Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention”

by Aaron Hotfelder on

New York Times columnist and mustachioed flat-earth proponent Thomas Friedman posited back in 1996 that two countries with McDonald’s restaurants had never gone to war with each other.

This “Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention,” as some have called it, holds that governments with large enough middle classes to support a McDonald’s would not be able to cajole their populaces into supporting drawn-out wars. People in McDonald’s countries “don’t like to fight wars,” Friedman says, “They like to wait in line for burgers.”

As this short article from the Guardian points out, that theory is now just about shot. Russia’s war with Georgia seems to disprove the idea that countries with McDonald’s automatically shy away from war.

Of course, Friedman was speaking metaphorically, not literally. His main point, that well-off countries tend to avoid war, is still valid.

Now, you’ll have to excuse me while I go pick up a twelver of Chicken Nuggets.

[For a hilarious, scathing review of Thomas Friedman’s The World is Flat, read this article by Matt Taibbi.]