Some people think that tourism benefits the host country. Others think that tourism causes problems for the host country. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

It is widely known that tourism can positively impact on countries’ economy. Even though it has become one of the main incomes among the poorest areas of the globe, opponents argue that the host country might be endangered by the effects of tourism. This essay aims to look into both sides of the argument and reach a logical conclusion. On one side, supporters of tourism report that it results in several benefits for both the travellers and the host country. Generally, willingness to allow themselves some comforts is a common feature in tourists who might need several facilities during their journey: restaurants, hotels and pools could easily forecast an increasing income that may help the general economy of the country. Furthermore, both travellers and host population can benefit from this encounter by learning each other’s different cultures and habits. On the other side, those whom critic tourism suggests that disadvantages outweigh advantages. In detail, they suggest that globalized-tourism should be discouraged for the enormous damage it could cause in the long-term: tourists’ mass arrivals could irremediably damage historical monuments and buildings whose expensive makeover is generally unaffordable for poor countries. Examples can be seen in low-budget travellers or backpackers that, usually preferring self-organized tours and avoiding comfortable accommodation, don’t provide the host country with a high income. In conclusion, considering the possible negative effects that may impact on the architectural structure of buildings and monuments whose inestimable historical and religious values represent a good for the society worldwide, mass arrivals should be restrained by proposing a more sustainable type of tourism.