Many believe that a lot of destinations greatly benefited from global tourism as it enhances growth in the economy. Although increased traffic and pollution might be a threat to the locals and the atmosphere, I don’t believe that the demerits over-power the advantages.
Places that don’t have the means to grow without treasure, seek to bring in money to develop their habitat. What better way if it can be transformed into a tourist attraction? A vast majority of such lands are encouraged to build the means to accommodate tourists and travelers, which in turn increases opportunities of employment for the natives, and increases the GDP eliciting the place from being underdeveloped to a developing stage. Dubai, once was a place filled with sand and is now transformed into the paradise for luxuries, solely by tourism and oil supply.
On the other hand, there are plenty of effects with increasing amount of people in a place. For instance, the traffic on roads surges the pollution, waste management could be an issue with litters all over the place, the inhabitants could face hiked prices for essentials during the travel season. Even being a sacred place in India, Varanasi, popular among tourists to indulge themselves in enriched and holy history, faces a lot of water pollution, with dumps in the river bodies.
However, at any point in time, the threat to the inhabitants and the environment can be controlled with a proper set of instructions or rules and regulations. Thus, producing a place being aided with tourism rather than getting damaged by it.