top of page

By:

Naresh Kamath

5 November 2024 at 5:30:38 am

Indian Tourists Need a Reputation Reset

India has long taken pride in the philosophy of ‘Atithi Devo Bhava’ - the belief that guests deserve warmth, respect and dignity. It is an idea deeply woven into the country’s cultural imagination, often been projected as a defining Indian value. As millions of Indians travel overseas every year, the conduct of a small but highly visible section of Indian tourists is increasingly shaping how India itself is perceived abroad. The issue is not about a single incident or a handful of viral...

Indian Tourists Need a Reputation Reset

India has long taken pride in the philosophy of ‘Atithi Devo Bhava’ - the belief that guests deserve warmth, respect and dignity. It is an idea deeply woven into the country’s cultural imagination, often been projected as a defining Indian value. As millions of Indians travel overseas every year, the conduct of a small but highly visible section of Indian tourists is increasingly shaping how India itself is perceived abroad. The issue is not about a single incident or a handful of viral videos but a pattern that is drawing notice from hotels, tourism operators and local authorities across the world. The debate gained fresh momentum after reports emerged of a Swiss hotel issuing a notice specifically addressed to Indian guests. The advisory reportedly requested guests not to pack food from breakfast buffets for later consumption and reminded them to maintain silence in corridors and balconies. Hotels routinely issue guidelines. But when a particular nationality becomes the subject of a specific advisory, it inevitably raises larger questions about perception. “It is a sorry state of affairs. Indians, especially in groups, are displaying atrocious behaviour. This was anyway bound to happen,” says Subhash Motwani, founder of Namaste Tourism. Embarrassing Incidents Whether the notice was justified is another separate matter. The question is why such perceptions are emerging in the first place. Recent months have seen several incidents involving Indian tourists gain traction on social media. One widely circulated video showed travellers performing garba on an airport tarmac in Vietnam. Garba is among India’s most vibrant cultural traditions and a source of immense pride for millions. Yet airports are highly regulated spaces where safety protocols and discipline take precedence over celebration. The incident became symbolic of a larger problem. The rise of social media has encouraged some travellers to treat foreign destinations as stages for content creation. Public dancing, loud celebrations, disruptive behaviour and attention-seeking stunts may generate views and engagement online, but they can also leave lasting impressions on locals and fellow tourists. India is hardly the first country to confront such a challenge. During the 1950s and 1960s, American tourists acquired a reputation for arrogance abroad, giving rise to the phrase “Ugly American.” Britain spent decades dealing with the international embarrassment caused by football hooliganism. China faced similar concerns as outbound tourism surged during the early years of the twenty-first century. A nation’s image is shaped not just by its economic achievements and diplomatic influence but also by the behaviour of its citizens overseas. India today finds itself in a similar situation. Indian tourists are now among the most visible traveller groups across Europe, Southeast Asia and the Middle East. This is, in many ways, a remarkable success story. However, with visibility comes responsibility. Hospitality professionals across destinations frequently point to recurring concerns. Excessive noise, queue-jumping, disregard for local regulations, overcrowding hotel rooms and attempts to bypass established rules through jugaad are among the complaints often cited. Collectively, repeated experiences can create lasting perceptions. The most revealing aspect of the debate is that Indian travellers often display exemplary discipline in countries known for strict law enforcement. In destinations such as Singapore, the UAE, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, compliance with rules is generally high. Complaints tend to emerge more frequently in places perceived as relaxed or lenient. That suggests the challenge is not one of awareness. Most travellers understand the rules perfectly well. The problem is often a mindset that rules can be negotiated when consequences appear unlikely. Changing that mindset is far more important than introducing additional regulations or issuing fresh advisories. Every interaction at an airport, hotel, restaurant, tourist attraction or public transport system contributes to how a country is viewed. These everyday encounters often shape perceptions more powerfully than government campaigns or tourism advertisements. As India stakes its claim to a larger role in the world, its citizens must recognise that national prestige is shaped not only by economic achievements and diplomatic successes, but also by everyday behaviour abroad. The overwhelming majority of Indian tourists travel responsibly and leave behind positive impressions. Their conduct rarely becomes news because courtesy seldom goes viral. Yet a handful of highly visible incidents can overshadow thousands of positive experiences. The challenge is to encourage responsible travel and a greater awareness that behaviour abroad carries consequences beyond the individual. The conduct of Indian citizens overseas should reflect the confidence and values of a nation seeking not merely recognition but enduring respect. (The writer is a senior journalist based in Mumbai. Views personal.)

The Architecture of Prosperity: Why Some Nations Rise and Others Crumble

Updated: Mar 10, 2025


Architecture of Prosperity


I remember the first time I encountered the idea that geography determines destiny. It was in Jared Diamond’s ‘Guns, Germs, and Steel’ (1997), an ambitious, sweeping argument that placed the fates of civilizations in the hands of crops, climate and contagious disease.


The book was persuasive, enthralling even, but something about it never quite sat right with me. Was it really the case that economic success boiled down to a head start in domesticable wheat and livestock? Years later, Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson’s ‘Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity and Poverty’ (2012) landed on my desk like a thunderclap, dismantling Diamond’s geography-first thesis and replacing it with a bold, elegant alternative: institutions, not environment, shape the fortunes of nations.


The authors have, with elan, dexterity, fascinating detail and eloquent simplicity, explained why certain countries have forged ahead and certain others have lagged behind, both economically and politically.


This book is the culmination of fifteen years of meticulous research, a sweeping inquiry into the forces that propel nations forward or hold them back. Acemoglu and Robinson, who jointly received the 2024 Nobel Economics Prize for their contribution in comparative studies of prosperity between nations, argue that prosperity is not a matter of geography, culture or sheer historical luck, but rather the result of institutions - specifically, whether they are inclusive or extractive. Societies that distribute power broadly, protect property rights and encourage innovation tend to flourish; those that concentrate wealth and control in the hands of the few inevitably stagnate. History, they suggest, is shaped by a slow but persistent “institutional drift,” occasionally jolted by “critical junctures.”


Their analysis reads like an intellectual travelogue through history’s winners and losers. The difference between North and South Korea, they argue, isn’t a matter of latitude or natural resources. It is a matter of governance. One embraced democracy and market-oriented policies; the other entrenched dictatorship and centralized control. It’s the kind of theory that, once encountered, makes previous explanations seem almost quaint.


The book weaves together centuries of history with the precision of a watchmaker. It traverses from the Glorious Revolution in England, which set the stage for an explosion of economic growth, to the predatory colonialism of the Belgian Congo, which left behind an extractive nightmare. We see Japan’s pivot from feudalism to a modern industrial powerhouse post-Meiji Restoration, while Argentina, despite an abundance of resources, floundered under the weight of corruption and cronyism.


But Why Nations Fail is at its most gripping when it examines the nations stuck in the in-between: countries that flirt with economic success despite political repression. China looms large in this category. The authors argue that while Beijing has allowed market reforms, the Communist Party’s firm grip on political life makes long-term success unsustainable. It is a provocative assertion, one that challenges the idea that an authoritarian regime can indefinitely engineer prosperity without democracy.


That said, the book has its blind spots. Acemoglu and Robinson deftly analyse how institutions emerge and evolve, but their narrative falters when confronting the role of external influence, particularly the United States’ own history of meddling in Latin America. The book recounts how countries like Venezuela and Colombia suffered under extractive regimes but largely omits the CIA-backed coups and interventions that helped keep those institutions in place. The absence of this context makes their argument feel incomplete, as if history operates in a vacuum rather than as a contested battleground of power.


Still, ‘Why Nations Fail’ is a triumph of economic history, standing alongside Douglas North’s ‘Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance’ and Acemoglu’s own ‘The Narrow Corridor’ as a landmark work on the fate of nations. In dismantling rival theories like geographical determinism, cultural exceptionalism, even the modernization theory by Seymour Martin Lipset, Acemoglu and Robinson place institutions at the centre of the global economic puzzle. It is an argument that echoes the work of North and Milton Friedman but with a more historical sweep.


As I turned the final pages, I found myself returning to a question that haunts every reader of economic history: If institutions shape nations, who shapes institutions? ‘Why Nations Fail’ provides the diagnosis, but the cure - messy, political and deeply contingent - remains elusive. Perhaps that, too, is part of the story.


(The author is a research scholar based in Mumbai.)

Comments

bottom of page