A new strategy
I wrote last week that we had received a new strategy for the development of tourism in the Kyrgyz Republic until 2015.
I know that it is important to plan ahead and it is refreshing to see people thinking on a scale greater than “today … and perhaps tomorrow” and there seems to be something about five year plans here. I suppose it is a hangover from the Soviet period when Five Year Plans were de rigeur.
It seems odd, however, that a new strategy is being promulgated now … just a month before the elections which will result in a new government, who will decide their own priorities, strategy and programme. The election seems to have created a hiatus which has everyone looking over the shoulders, anxious about what the future may hold for them. We may spend a lot of time and effort working on a new strategy only to have the rug pulled out from underneath us if a newly elected government decides that it has other priorities and wants to travel down a different road.
To be fair, the business of government shouldn’t come to a standstill just because there are elections. There is still work to be done and new Ministers are often appointed during an election campaign even though they may be in office for only a few weeks – or even days. A strategy is an administrative document for implementing policy and at the moment there is a policy which may or may not be revised by the new parliament once it is in place.
There is also a reason why the new document is needed in that the existing strategy was laid down in 2005 and expires at the end of the year. It’s time to look afresh at tourism in Kyrgyzstan and decide where we are, where we want to be in five years time and how we can get there.
It seems to me that a strategy is the wrong place to start. I remember that when I was teaching computing, a major part of the work involved students planning practical projects involving the use of Information Technology to solve a problem. We began by defining the problem, saying what it was the project aimed to achieve and then delved into an analysis of the current situation, and different ways of getting from “:where we were” to “where we wanted to be”. Based on this analysis, the student chose a preferred method of solution for the problem, and designed a system to implement this solution, before going on to actually do so. Once there was a system developed, then it was tried and tested. Finally, there would be a review process with suggestions as to further developments and improvements. It’s an approach which is commonly used in all spheres of life and one that I try to adopt whenever embarking on a new project. Of course, nothing in life is simple – and we often have to vary the approach a little in everyday life, but it offers a good model for problem solving. However, this approach seems to have been overlooked in this case.
It seems to me that we should probably start by defining the issues … and then develop a “concept” which would define “Where do we want to be?”, “What we want to achieve”. A “strategy” could then be devised which would outline how we would try to get there. This in turn would be followed by a plan of activities – a “roadmap”, to use the current jargon, which would outline the steps necessary to achieve this overall aim. To be fair, as it happens, the document that we were sent tries to do all three.
My first thought when I received the document was: “What happened to the consultation?”. Here in Kyrgyzstan, any “normative acts” – draft laws and so forth, are supposed to be subject to public consultation for a period of sixty days before they can be considered by the relevant authority for adoption. We were asked for our comments, as soon as possible, but within a week. It appears, I discovered later, that there had been some “consultation” in the form of a working group that had met to consider the draft document. For some reason KATO, (the Kyrgyz Association of Tour Operators), hadn’t been there and so it came as a big surprise to us. As a result, there were several things in the document which we found relatively unpleasant and unwelcome.
More to the point, however, I question the whole thrust of the document.
As it happens, (and as is often the case), much of the initial analysis contained in the document, (about “where we are”), is quite good. It is what follows that is a little more controversial. I am not sure that it realistically addresses the initial question of “where do we want to be?” Unfortunately, in my opinion, there are some some serious shortcomings. Some important topics are either overlooked altogether or are given only a cursory treatment.
Crisis Management: The country has been through difficult times, and we in the tourism sector have faced a huge crisis this year … and been found ill prepared to deal with the situation. There are a number of huge potential crisis situations which we can predict and anticipate and so make plans for addressing them:
- a major earthquake in the region – we are in a seismically active zone and occasionally experience quakes – the last “big one”, 7.3 on the “Richter scale”, (or whatever scale they use for measuring earthquakes these days), was in 1992 in the Suusamyr region. Fortunately, the area is sparsely populated and there were few relatively casualties – although there were 54 deaths. There have been others – lots of them – of varying degree of severity, and the Tashkent earthquake of 1966 (7.5 on the Richter scale – destroying 78000 homes and leaving 300,000 people homeless), showed what can happen when a built up urban area;
- further political uncertainty – in view of what has happened this year, no more needs to be said about this at the moment;
- potential terrorist acts – likewise, apart from noting that there has been a lot of speculation about how the current uncertainty in the country and in the region could create an environment in which terrorism could flourish;
- the effects on the world economy and the effects this might have on tourism (e.g. transportation to/from Kyrgyzstan) of:
- Climate Change and Global Warming – this did get a mention in the document but I don’t think anyone has really addressed what this might mean – from melting of the glaciers to changes in crop cycles – and hence food production, or the cost of transport, which brings me to the next worrying scenario posited by futurologists;
- “Peak Oil” – the depletion and rapid decline in oil reserves … oil is a vital commodity in the global economy literally “oiling the wheels” on which prosperity depends. More directly for Kyrgyzstan’s tourism industry which relies on far flung markets for its visitors, transportation accounts for huge proportion of our consumption of oil;
- Pandemics – who can forget the effects of SARS, Bird Flu, H1N1 and so on, on the tourism industry;
- Harvest failures – whether it be a result of global warming, pestilence or some other catastrophic influence, a failure of harvests on a global scale would have major implications for Kyrgyzstan as a whole, and for those of working in tourism in particular.
Enumerating these potential “doomsday” scenarios, I feel like Cressida prophesying doom and destruction for her native city of Troy … but, then again, she had a point. I hope that I am not proved right as she was – but I do believe that we have to think about the issues and prepare for the eventuality.
First of all, I think that we need to set up procedures and mechanisms for dealing with these “crises” if and when they occur … publicity and marketing as well as the practical issues (e.g. coordination and relief) which will arise from them.
More to the point I think that we need to consider how we would meet each crisis – they are different and would require different responses – in terms of what direction we want to take Kyrgyz Tourism. I think that there is a lot to be said for the argument that we need to plan for the effects of a down turn in the global economy where potential clients don’t have the necessary disposable income to spend large sums on traveling the globe. Also, we need to consider how potential clients would travel the vast distances to arrive in Kyrgyzstan. In these cases, perhaps we need to look to cultivate more local markets – and for markets where these questions are not so crucial.
Increased regulations: The strategy includes suggestions for a number of new regulations and strengthening those that already exist. Although I can see some logic behind these proposals, I am concerned. Please don’t misunderstand me, it is not that I am opposed to regulation. Indeed I think that there is a vital need for some form of regulation – Health and Safety, Food Safety, Fire Precautions, Construction standards (e.g. for earthquake protection), and so forth. However, I am concerned about what is regulated – and how.
In particular, I note that there are already ample provisions on the statute book for the protection of consumers rights, environmental protection and so forth. The problem, it seems to me, to be a question of the implementation of the existing rules and regulations rather than one of introducing new ones and systems to monitor and supervise them.
There is no mention in the document of certain types forms of regulatory device.
- the possible use “Migratory” or “Landing” Cards at border crossing points as a means of collecting accurate and reliable statistics about the number of visitors to the country and the purpose of their visits – a perennial problem here. In addition, the use of such cards could help to simplify and/or eliminate the need for some visas and for police registration (OVIR).
- “Border Zone” permits. Ever since the days of the Soviet Union, the borders of the country have been under strict control. Whereas many kilometers of the border spread through remote and sparsely populated regions, it is not clear why particular control of who can enter these zones is necessary.
- “Alpine Zone” permits. These used to exist but were withdrawn unilaterally by the government almost ten years ago. To me, this made sense as they used to apply to areas which represented no risk to the average tourist. Indeed, as something like 94% of the country is technically “mountainous” it could be argued that if such permits existed then they were necessary to travel almost anywhere in the country. On the other hand, there are areas where it is necessary to control access – for environmental or safety reasons. For example, to some of the peaks – such as Khan Tengri or Peak Lenin. Access to many mountains in the world are subject to obtaining permission and it seems to me that some similar system could be implemented here. If not a system of “permits”, as such, then perhaps a system that required people going into the mountains to register their intended routes so that, for example, in the event of a problem the rescue services would have an idea of how many people they were looking for, who, and where.
The initial analysis mentioned the possibility for the development of “Self Regulatory Associations”. The idea would be for the self-regulation of sectors of the industry by voluntary associations. For example, in Switzerland hotels are classified and categorized by the Hotels Association. Here in Kyrgyzstan such a system has already been developed and is in the process of being implemented. The state has a role as does the industry. This strikes me as a good idea and it is something that I would want to support. However, beyond this initial mention, I don’t see anything else. Maybe I am just not looking hard enough. I am not sure I follow the logic of introducing Criminal liability for “administrative offences”.
Marketing – this is a subject dear to my heart. I see nothing new in the document about … attendance at fairs, printing materials, development of a “brand” … but nothing about “Market Research” … i.e. to help us determine the most effective use of our limited resources in determining what are we going to market and to whom?
There is little, for example, about Kyrgyz embassies abroad working with the press in the countries where they are based.
Domestic Tourism – this is one thing that I am pleased to see in the document. The development of domestic tourism, which has provided a valuable cushion, especially for Issyk Kul, this year. I don’t think that domestic tourism is a panacea for the tourism industry. It relies on the local population having sufficient disposable income to spend on “luxury items” such as travel and tourism, which for the majority is probably not true at the moment. It also means that money is simply circulating within the country rather than the country earning valuable foreign currency from abroad. However, a thriving tourism industry should rely on a strong domestic demand as much as developing foreign markets. It’s something we have learned this year. There are other benefits as well. It is not only good for local people to visit other parts of their own country for rest and relaxation, it is also good for social reasons, helping to raise awareness of their surroundings, history, culture and environment. It also means that they will better understand what a tourist is looking for when visiting a new destination. A waiter, for example, who has never eaten as a client in a restaurant has an incomplete idea of what level of service a diner expects when they sit at his table as his client. Also, it is better to keep money spent on domestic tourism circulating within the country than to have it spent on tourism abroad or on imports.
What is more, I foresee the possibility that it will be much more difficult to attract foreign tourists to Kyrgyzstan in the future if and when we come to face some of the “doomsday” scenarios that I mentioned earlier.
The document contains some references to “regional development” and road construction. Although I welcome this – we shouldn’t rely on rest and relaxation, “beach tourism” on the shores of Issyk Kul as the sole form of tourism offered by the country. We need to try and develop new markets and to spread the benefits of tourism throughout the country. I see, however, little that will help the more remote (isolated) areas such as Batken, Talas and the Chatkal area of Djalal Abad oblast in the intermediate future. (Probably little can be done in the short term, but we should be thinking about the mid to long term development of these areas.)
Bishkek