Among “Barriers to Travel” in our readings, there are listed: Lack of personal time, institutional barriers such as legal restrictions on travel (visas, trading embargoes etc.), personal health and disability-related issues and crime concerns. Crime concerns are what I have found some interesting writings on especially regarding the difference between Great Britain’s warnings and the warnings issued by the U.S. My fascination is that, regarding the issue of what is “dangerous,” that the definition will vary from culture to culture. For example, the issued warnings from the British Foreign & Commonwealth Office are much different from the U.S. State Department. The FCO advise travelers to “avoid ALL TRAVEL to” the Ivory Coast and Somalia. The U.S. State Department, on the other hand, has issued warnings for 32 countries, which they advise people not to go to. There seems to be no “Avoid ALL TRAVEL” label like the FCO.
In looking at a map recently published by Conde Nast Traveler magazine, the data from the FCO and the U.S. State Department have been placed visually on to shaded maps. The areas suggested to be totally avoided by U.S. citizens are all of the 32 countries mentioned above. An interesting fact is that the FCO, unlike the U.S. State Department, has suggested that the traveler avoid certain parts of Russia and India but the map of the U.S. does not even mention these countries on their list of cautions. Why is this so? Maybe very few Americans travel to India and Russia, but all the same, I believe Britain has shown more flexibility within their data in terms of specific regional warnings rather than the avoidance of one region all together.
British Foreign & Commonwealth Office http://www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1095423800990
U.S. State Department
Comments