Bangkok, a World Heritage City

According to Thailand’s Minister of Tourism and Sport, his proposal to develop old cities to be World Heritage sites is good policy. To me, it is also a very interesting idea. Currently, only five places in Thailand are registered as World Heritage Sites by the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization, (UNESCO). This is far fewer in number than the many architectural, cultural, and national resource sites found altogether in Thailand.

It can be noted from World Tourism Organization statistics that countries having many World Heritage sites are in the top ten tourist destinations, and welcome tourists from all over the world. For example, Italy has 41 World Heritage spots and 37.1 million tourists annually. Spain has 40 World Heritage locations and welcomes 52.4 million tourists annually. Thailand has five World Heritage sites and welcomes only 11.7 million tourists annually.

Table 1: Tourist statistics for ten countries having the most World Heritage sites

Note: Turkey is a country ranking eighth worldwide for tourist figures, though its number of World Heritage sites is not ranked within the top ten countries.

Source: UNESCO and the World Tourism Organization, (2005).

Besides spots that the Minister of Tourism and Sport has tried to push for inclusion as World Heritage sites, there are many other temples and architectural sites that could be included, especially in old city areas, on Rattanakosin Island and thereabouts where many ancient historical places would be worth inclusion, for example, Wat Benjamabopit, Wat Rachabophit, Wat Ratchanadaram, Wat Suthat, the Giant Swing, Golden Mountain, etc.

Thailand may also earn more revenue from this, as one analysis showed, in which tourist income could increase about four times more than usual. Thus, World Heritage registration would enhance Bangkok tourism to the tune of about 1.35 trillion a year; compared to its current income of 336,621.89 million baht. Conversely, even if the tourist dollar does not rise, Bangkok’s enhanced World Heritage status would still bring other benefits to Thailand. Once announced as a World Heritage site, the site is indirectly advertised to tourists worldwide, gains educational fund, and UNESCO support for site maintenance.

However, besides focusing just on total tourist spending, each tourist must also be sure to spend more money. Negatively, with an increase to the number of tourists, more problems will occur, for example, increased city crowding, tourist attraction decadence, a lack of basic city infrastructure and facilities, crime problems, and other problems.

Thus, the government should also simultaneously develop businesses involved in World Heritage development; for souvenir sales or hotels and restaurant development in old city areas. Community culture should be enhanced, old market life, and the re-creation of fun festivals or activities for tourists. Transportation facilities should be developed everywhere, and tourist information, security services, and tour guides provided.

The government should create a public campaign for sustaining Thailand’s highly valued traditions, for example Siamese architectural features, and clean green sightseeing. Environmental maintenance must be important to us all, including new city colours and underground electrical wiring, along with well-coordinated and renovated street signs, bus stops, and public telephone boxes to complement surrounding areas.

In my point of view, Bangkok should be pushed as a World Heritage centre. Besides the financial benefits for tourism, cultural and traditional heritage developments would secure Bangkok for the Thai people forever.

Dr Kriengsak Chareonwongsak
Senior Fellow, Harvard Kennedy School , Harvard University
kriengsak@kriengsak.com, kriengsak.com, drdancando.com