With remote tourism increasing, modern infrastructure has facilitated access to natural environments such as the South Pole for researchers and travellers. Others, however, believe that this tourism expansion generates benefits for only a narrow segment of society. This essay will analyze both perspectives before presenting my own opinion.
Looking first at one side of the argument, advocates of natural tourism argue that visiting isolated natural places has several benefits. A clear illustration of this is that, while most people tend to visit familiar destinations such as other cities or countries, remote natural areas provide more novel and enriching experiences, which in turn equip travellers and scientists with valuable insights and unforgettable memories. Supporters further believe that visiting remote areas enables individuals, particularly researchers, to gain more valuable knowledge related to their fields of expertise. For instance, researchers are able to study the behaviour and living conditions of polar bears in areas that are far removed from human activity.
Conversely, opponents of this development argue that it can be hazardous to travel to faraway natural circumstances if the adventurers are not sufficiently prepared. For example, with the temperature at the South Pole being extremely low, people’s health can be adversely impacted. Those opposing this phenomenon say that traveling to forests can also be dangerous because of the risk of being attacked by animals. Additionally, they believe that visiting isolated places often requires a large amount of investment in researching and ensuring the safety of travelers, the costs of traveling tend to be high. Only scientists and wealthy individuals can afford this activity, which means that this development is likely to benefit only a limited group of individuals.
In conclusion, I would tend to side with the opponents of remote-area tourism. There are many risks to be considered, ranging from the dangers of such environmental conditions to the expenses incurred. It would be more safety to travel to environment which often visited or known by many people.