Yea, Im from israel and i still dont know why no one visits israel, Welp defenitlly religion tourism. But cmonnn Some people have to come visit we got some ancient and holy sites and no one is visiting them :(
It's not religious tourism it is the performance of a religious duty. Hajj and Umrah are as much tourism as taking communion is brunch, baptism is going to the pool, or burial is spelunking. It's not the same thing even if it seems similar to you. And the grand total of tourist visas that Saudi Arabia issues every year is 0.
yes but from a logistics and services point of view the needs of someone travelling for tourism are pretty much the same ones that a pilgrim has: transportation, hotels, food&beverages, tourist guides and so on.
economically speaking, we can say thad saudi arabia has a quite flourishing tourism industry.
I agree with iuvas here. The hajjis are issued visas to perform Hajj and Umrah. And the hajjis spend their money in the country as all tourists in other countries do. So they could be regarded as "tourists".
I'm with kalbahamut on this. Here is the definition of tourism that Google provides: "the commercial organization and operation of vacations and visits to places of interest." Merriam-Webster defines it as "the practice of traveling for recreation." Dictionary.com defines it as "the activity or practice of touring, especially for pleasure." NONE of those definitions includes religious pilgrimage.
I dunno, I don't see why adding religion makes it any different. They are still personally interested in going to the place and pay money to do so, whether the reason is religious or recreational I don't see why it matters.
I am a Muslim and I 100% agree with Kal on the Hajj. If it wasn't for the religious obligation and the spiritual rewards no one in their right-minds would paying so much money and effort to go through it, as it is very draining physically. However, I disagree on Umrahs because they are not actually a religious duty. Performing an Umrah falls under the 'favorable' or 'beloved' acts in Sharia. Umrahs are also quite a pleasant experience as they typically take around an hour or so to complete and are not especially draining, but you get similar spiritual satisfaction to the Hajj. They can be done in any time of the year and you also get to visit Mecca, shop in its Souks, and experience something different. I know countless people that are financially able who do an Umrah every year (or more) just to refresh themselves.
It's like if the Pyramid of Giza (an ancient monument that draws in large numbers of people every year, just like the Kaaba) also happened to be the centre of an active religion. So overall I'd say there's a fine line between Tourism and Religious duty here, so we shouldn't totally exclude Saudi Arabia from touristic countries.
@kenpo that is a flawed argument. You could also say NONE of those mentions visiting museum, so the people the travel to visit museum are not tourists. #1 place of interest describes it well, so definitely not an argument against it, #2 indeed does not include it #3 does include it, just points out especially, but not just, for pleasure.
And those are only responses to your selected sources. I could give a few aswell. Wiktionary: "The act of visiting another region or jurisdiction for a particular purpose" Tourism comes from tour which is "A journey (through a particular country)" Tourism is simply travelling to another place, sometimes for a specific goal ( a landmark you would like to see, or a pilgrimage) and sometimes just to enjoy yourself in another country.
If you are not convinced, just google: Is pilgrimage tourism. (in fact personally I think it is at the cradle of tourism, at first the main reason people travelled to other places that had religious significance)
If it's not religious tourism but rather than the performance of a religious duty, where does that leave all the millions of business trips? Does it mean these aren't business tourism but rather the performance of a business duty / employment duty?
Whether the travel is voluntary (for leisure/holiday) or involuntary (for business/religion), it all constitutes as travel and tourism.
Unlike the other estranged siblings across Asia (North/South Korea, China/Taiwan, India/Pakistan) there are still extensive economic, familial, cultural and social links between Malaysia and Singapore, with thousands crossing the border for work, holiday and family reasons.
Me too. According to the source Indonesia had 9.9M in 2015 total. According to the one below it aims to have 20M by the year and last year had 1.15M in one month which makes it around 14M per year https://tradingeconomics.com/indonesia/tourist-arrivals
And apparently 400k per month to Bali. That may well be mostly Australians, but does not necessarily mean lots of others go there.
I expected it to be on here aswell, not just from australian tourism, but people from europe too. So why is malaysia on there?? (I know personal experiences does not mean everything, but everything you read see and hear is an indicator) I hear lots of people about indonesia, and virtually noone about malaysia. So if malaysia is on there I definitely would have expected indonesia.
Because it's considered a European country. Yes, the majority of its land is in Asia, but that's mostly Siberia, which is just too darn cold for a whole lot of people to want to live there. The capital, Moscow, along with most of Russia's population, is in Europe.
China/Japan/ROK: large, developed, touristy areas, probably ease of travel/proximity to SEA. Maybe emigrant families visiting, especially for holidays.
UAE: emphasizes tourism. Large airport traffic
But what’s with the large difference between Thailand (38m), Malaysia (26m), and Vietnam (15m). And no Philippines or Indonesia?
Maybe a visa thing, or flight cost thing, or language.
Seems like Kuala Lumpur is nicer than Manila. And there are a lot of people talking in reviews about how much there is to do in Bangkok & how compact it is.
Palestine is
economically speaking, we can say thad saudi arabia has a quite flourishing tourism industry.
And those are only responses to your selected sources. I could give a few aswell. Wiktionary: "The act of visiting another region or jurisdiction for a particular purpose" Tourism comes from tour which is "A journey (through a particular country)" Tourism is simply travelling to another place, sometimes for a specific goal ( a landmark you would like to see, or a pilgrimage) and sometimes just to enjoy yourself in another country.
If you are not convinced, just google: Is pilgrimage tourism. (in fact personally I think it is at the cradle of tourism, at first the main reason people travelled to other places that had religious significance)
Whether the travel is voluntary (for leisure/holiday) or involuntary (for business/religion), it all constitutes as travel and tourism.
And apparently 400k per month to Bali. That may well be mostly Australians, but does not necessarily mean lots of others go there.
- muslims
- Mekka
- Medina
Now makes sense.
Saudi Arabia- hadjis/religious travelers
China/Japan/ROK: large, developed, touristy areas, probably ease of travel/proximity to SEA. Maybe emigrant families visiting, especially for holidays.
UAE: emphasizes tourism. Large airport traffic
But what’s with the large difference between Thailand (38m), Malaysia (26m), and Vietnam (15m). And no Philippines or Indonesia?
Maybe a visa thing, or flight cost thing, or language.
Seems like Kuala Lumpur is nicer than Manila. And there are a lot of people talking in reviews about how much there is to do in Bangkok & how compact it is.