COVID Impact on Tourism in South Africa

Helping you to be a Responsible Tourist
Peter Betts
Posts: 2475
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 9:28 am
Country: RSA

Re: COVID Impact on Tourism in South Africa

Post by Peter Betts » Mon Jun 29, 2020 10:17 pm

Harry I have only stayed One night in a hut at Skukuza ..But even Balule , Tsendze , Maroela etc have crowds in the ablution Blocks thats why I have cancelled 3 weeks camping at Shingwedzi in Sept as the country will be peaking that month and my wife has to be in isolation until its over/Vaccine is here ..If she gets the virus ..thats game over with her asthma ..The only SANParks to allow us to camp at the moment will be Mokala and Nossob Kgalagadi where you can book at Double the price Private campsites with your own bathroom ..April is best month to go to the Kalahari but we are late for next year so earliest will be 2022 ..Rooiputs as well where we can shower at our campsite and nobody will see ..Just using the loo ..Jane goes to the nearby picnic site in RSA 25 kms up the road for the serious stuff (Problem as all and sundry use it and for the minor thing she uses a Porta Potti) ..I just can use the spade and roll method and walk over the dune !! =O:

User avatar
RogerFraser
Site Admin
Posts: 5664
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 9:36 pm
Country: South Africa
Location: Durban

Re: The "Corona Virus" and the Consequences

Post by RogerFraser » Wed Jul 01, 2020 8:52 pm

https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/opini ... Jb6veVhhaQ

COVID-19 IMPACT
Safari tourism on brink of extinction as insurers and government fiddle


Fine print gives rise to a paradoxical situation — the lockdown prevented infections on which insurance payouts are now contingent
30 JUNE 2020 - 20:59 DON SCOTT AND BRUCE JENKINS


Image

Tourists on safari in SA. Picture: 123RF.COM

Though the effect is vast and hard to quantify, everyone knows the Covid-19 shutdown of the tourism industry is wreaking havoc on businesses and value chains reliant on travel and tourism. What industry could possibly be sustained on zero income, with zero subsidies or bailouts, for the length of time government has imposed on our sector? Our ailing businesses and the millions of people we directly and indirectly employ seemingly stand alone.


At the worst possible time the apocalyptic intersection and combination of two key issues are unfolding that spell the collapse of the safari tourism industry as we know it.

The first is the government's delay in its deliberations to allow, or not allow, the tourism sector to restart under the operational protocols the industry has pro-actively developed. The second is the intransigent and callous position being taken by the insurance sector in its unwillingness to honour business interruption insurance claims, which hospitality businesses specifically took extensions for to cover against notifiable diseases.

The government, whose initial response to the pandemic seemed decisive and logical, has become inexplicably lethargic in its response to the plight of the tourism sector. Authorities are showing a frustrating unwillingness to open the sector in any meaningful way — the latest amendments to the regulations of the Disaster Management Act under alert level 3 are a clear example.

Allowing for leisure travel while still prohibiting interprovincial travel is a non-starter for any tourism operation outside the large urban centres — safari tourism businesses in particular. In addition, the tourism minister announced on June 26 that licensed accommodation facilities are not allowed to open for leisure travel, but only for business travel! This is in conflict with the published amendments to the regulations and is creating confusion and frustration among tourism establishments.

The insurance industry, for its part, is refusing to pay claims for business interruption against notifiable disease policy extensions. Insurers are arguing that infectious disease extensions can be triggered only if a case of Covid-19 occurred on or near our properties, and that we must prove that the infection led to closing our doors.

Insurers engage in semantic manoeuvring to avoid the underlying intention of the infectious disease clause. When reading the wording in the policies it becomes obvious that the intention of instituting a radius of effect of an infectious disease is to prevent insured businesses from trying to claim against events that haven’t truly affected them. So, for example, a Johannesburg-based business should not be able to claim for a cholera outbreak in Cape Town.

However, in our present situation it is clear that an infectious disease that has swept the world led to a decision by the government to close our sector in an attempt to pre-empt a wave of infections that would overwhelm our medical care capacity. In doing so the tourism sector was forced to shut its doors before we could record any actual cases of this disease on or near our properties. In fact, the pre-emptive shutdown of the sector is the very act that prevented us all from recording cases in the first place, and the insurance industry is using this paradoxical situation to exploit its own version of whether say are valid.

Is our shutdown by government authorities a direct consequence of an infectious disease? Absolutely. Are any of the tourism businesses forced into shutdown doing so as a result of anything other than a notifiable disease? Absolutely not. Is the insurance industry protecting its profits in a time when it should be helping to save an entire sector? We rest our case.

What must be understood is that the intersection of these two critical issues at a time when our industry is at its most fragile could be the death knell for safari tourism in SA. If those in power allow this to come to pass it could mean the systematic unravelling of the region’s most iconic protected areas, the Greater Kruger National Park.

South Africans must proudly unite behind the tourism sector because it contributes 8.6% to GDP and employs about 750,000 locals directly (and about 1.5-million indirectly). Even the president has acknowledged that tourism is SA’s largest employer. An important nuance in these statistics is the geographic distribution of this economic contribution. Tourism spreads the wealth throughout SA, benefiting people in far-flung communities, and is often the only form of economic activity in rural SA. This is nowhere more obvious than in the safari tourism sector of the Greater Kruger National Park — an open system of public and private game reserves, which includes the Kruger National Park, a flagship African wilderness landscape.

A study on the economic gains of the Greater Kruger in 2016/2017 and published in 2019 found that its total GDP contribution was R6,6bn, with about 22,300 people employed and a wage bill of more than R3.4bn. With the average employee in the rural lowveld region supporting up to 10 people, the overall economic reach of the park is nearly 250,000 people.

Most importantly, over 60% of the park's operational expenditure, about R1.3bn, was spent on local businesses within a 50km radius of the complex. For private tourism businesses within the reserves the local spend was about 70%. The economic contribution of the safari tourism sector of the Greater Kruger to SA's GDP is therefore significant, and to the local communities of Acornhoek, Welverdiend, Hluvukani, Bushbuckridge, Huntington, Hazyview, Nelspruit, Hoedspruit, Phalaborwa and Giyani it is crucial.

Our sector is almost single-handedly supporting the entire rural economy of the Kruger lowveld region, and if we disappear the rural communities, small towns and villages that straddle the iconic Greater Kruger will become an economic wasteland. The unravelling of the underlying social fabric will surely follow. The entire protected area is itself under threat, since tourism contributes vast sums to the running costs of public and private nature reserves in the area.

Despite the shutdown and zero income, the tourism sector has been remarkably proactive. In response to the Covid emergency we sprang into action and worked tirelessly with our NGO and government partners to help co-ordinate effective responses to the crisis in the lowveld. We have marshalled our staff, our vehicles and our own funds to assist communities with deliveries of food parcels, made and delivered food to desperate care centres for the elderly, and allocated staff to assist with the online schooling of children in local communities. We have engaged with the Tourism Business Council of SA to help develop well-thought-out and practical operational protocols to ensure safe operations when the sector is allowed to trade again. All of this has been done for no return and without any call to government or other agencies to assist us financially.

But time is running out. Unless the government allows us to start trading, and unless the insurance sector finds its moral compass, the safari tourism businesses of the Greater Kruger will run out of money. Doors will close, never to reopen. More jobs will be obliterated. And with it, one by one we will lose the protected areas that they help fund.

A social, economic and ecological apocalypse must be avoided. For one, the government could put pressure on the insurance companies to urgently address the business interruption claims and, from their side, insurance companies could put pressure on the government to allow us to start trading again in a responsible and meaningful way.

• Scott owns Tanda Tula and Jenkins Rockfig Safari Lodge, both located in Timbavati Private Nature Reserve.

User avatar
Lisbeth
Global Moderator
Posts: 62209
Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
Country: Switzerland
Location: Lugano

Re: COVID Impact on Tourism in South Africa

Post by Lisbeth » Fri Jul 03, 2020 7:56 pm

Pandemic costs Africa travel, tourism almost $55 bln

By Reuters• 3 July 2020

DAKAR, July 2 (Reuters) - African countries have lost almost $55 billion in travel and tourism revenues in three months due to the coronavirus pandemic, the African Union (AU) commissioner for infrastructure and energy said on Thursday.

Amani Abou-Zeid told a news conference the economic impact of lockdowns and border closures to curb the spread of the virus would be severe, with the continent’s air industry hit particularly hard.

She said tourism and travel represented almost 10% of the gross domestic product of Africa.

“We have 24 million African families whose livelihood is linked to travel and tourism,” Abou-Zeid said, adding the downturn had come in a year when Africa was expected to see an increase in travel and air transport.

“The blow is very hard, between the economic losses and the job losses,” Abou-Zeid said. African airlines have seen a 95% drop in revenues, or about $8 billion, along with other losses such as the deterioration of assets, she said.

“Some airlines in the continent will not make it post-COVID-19,” she said, adding the blow came at a time when some airlines were in the early stages of development, while others, such as South African Airways, were in difficulties even before the pandemic.

Abou-Zeid said more resistant carriers such as Ethiopian Airlines were using the opportunity to acquire smaller struggling companies, but the outbreak had put a halt to the AU’s plan for a single African air transport market.

Prosper Zo’o Minto’o, regional director for the International Civil Aviation Organization, told the news conference that African airlines would need an estimated $20 billion to resume operations.

Ivory Coast’s national airline Air Cote d’Ivoire, which restarted domestic flights on Friday, said it had received 14 billion CFA francs ($24 million) from the government to keep it afloat.

(Reporting by Bate Felix; Editing by Catherine Evans and Mark Potter)
"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge

Return to “Your Holidays - Responsible Tourism”