Standing on the Shoulders of Giants

What did Baconianism mean when applied to biblical interpretation? For Bacon, standing at the dawn of the scientific revolution, the main enemy had been Aristotelian philosophy. Thus he taught that science must start by clearing the decks—by liberating the mind from all metaphysical speculation, all received notions of truth, all the accumulated superstition of the ages. “With minds washed clean from opinions” (in his words)......

The method suffered from several serious weaknesses, which we need to grasp in order to understand how it continues to shape the way we read the Bible today. First, the very notion that Christians needed a “scientific” exegesis of Scripture represented a degree of cultural accommodation to the age. By embracing the most widely held scientific theory of their day—and even applying it to theology—evangelicals came close to losing the critical distance that Christians are called to have in every age. Moreover, the empiricist insistence that theology was a collection of “facts” led easily to a one-dimensional, flat-footed interpretation of Scripture.

Metaphorical, mystical, and symbolic meanings were downplayed in favor of the “plain” meaning of the text. And by treating Bible verses as isolated, discrete “facts,” the method often produced little more than proof-texting—pulling out individual verses and aligning them under a topical label, with little regard for literary or historical context, or for the larger organizing themes in Scripture.

Perhaps most serious, however, was the Baconian hostility to history—its rejection of the creeds and confessions that had been hammered out by the church over the course of centuries…… It means the church loses the wisdom of the luminous intellects that have appeared throughout church history—Augustine, Aquinas, Luther, Calvin. By adopting the Baconian method, many American evangelicals lost the intellectual riches of two millennia of theological reflection…… the idea that a single generation can reject wholesale all of Christian history and start over again is doomed to theological shallowness.

Old Books for New Perspectives

The very language and concepts in currency today—like Trinity or justification—were defined and developed over centuries of controversy and heresy fighting, and unless we know something of that history we don’t really know the meaning of the terms we are using,

Moreover, in our own age, with its keener sense of the historical context of knowledge, we recognize that it is unrealistic to think people are capable of approaching Scripture with minds swept clean, like blank slates…… They lose the critical distance afforded by checking their ideas against those of Christian scholars across a wide range of different cultures and historical periods. Instead of seeing farther by standing on the shoulders of giants, they are limited to what they are able to see from their own narrow perspective within a tiny slice of history.

That’s why C. S. Lewis urged Christians to read “old books,” not just contemporary ones. It is difficult not to be taken in by the prejudices of our own age, he wrote, unless we have access to another perspective—which is what old books provide. The great figures in church history are our brothers and sisters in the Lord, members of the Body of Christ extended across the ages, and we can learn much by honing our minds on the problems they wrestled with and the solutions they offered.

- Nancy R. Pearcey, Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity, 2004

Keeping the Bible in the Real World

Every biblical text is organically connected to the era of its writing. Whether looking back to the past, recording the present, or projecting into the future, every Bible passage or book is linguistically, historically, and culturally a product of its day.
 
Here is a hard-and-fast rule of interpreting any part of the Bible:
 

Never project present ideas onto ancient texts! Also, avoid superimposing later biblical ideas on earlier ones.

 
Remember, the time and culture of King David was a far cry from that of Abraham’s day, and Daniel’s epoch was a world away from King David’s. Not to mention the historical and cultural distance between Daniel and the apostle Paul! And beware when you hear it said, “Take the Bible literally.” What does that mean anyway? Literal is a slippery concept. Most often it winds up being what somebody thinks a biblical passage “literally” says “to them.” This approach is dangerous when we seek to interpret the Bible accurately.
 
The proper way to understand the Bible is authentically. As far as possible, this means seeing it in its original historical context. An authentic interpretation is one that respects an author’s language, culture, and history without superimposing elements that are foreign or anachronistic to the time of writing. While we may not be able to know every detail of an author’s historical setting, getting as much accurate information as possible will always enhance our understanding of the text. This is where a discipline like archaeology proves invaluable.
 
The worlds of the biblical characters were real worlds. Sights, sounds, and smells. Blood, guts, and grime. Cities, towns, and villages. Houses, temples, and palaces. Swords, spears, and arrows. Jars, bowls, and lamps. A significant portion of the Bible deals with the accoutrements and objects of material culture. Such things are accessible only by the trowels and brushes of archaeological excavations. While ancient history is pieced together mostly from written texts and inscriptions, the finer details and nuances of societies and cultures are best illuminated from the physical remains buried in the eroding sediments of past civilizations. Indeed, archaeology has a lot to say on the subject of biblical interpretation!
 

Two Extreme Views on Archaeology

Unfortunately, there are two extreme views on the subject of the Bible and archaeology.
 
On the far left are scholars who want the Bible eliminated from ancient Near East archaeology altogether. Archaeology should not be done with a biblical “agenda,” they say. They want archaeology for archaeology’s sake, without a biblical bias attached to it. For these so-called biblical minimalists, the Bible gets little or no voice in the pursuit of archaeology.
 
On the far right are those who think the exact opposite. They disallow archaeology a place in studying the Bible. Put more accurately, they reject any archaeological data that casts doubt on their own interpretation of the Bible. In their minds, because archaeology seems to contradict many of their traditional interpretations of the Bible, they would just as soon steer clear of both archaeology and ancient Near East scholarship. For them, archaeology has no right to speak to biblical interpretation.
 
 

- Steven Collins & Joseph M. Holden, The Harvest Handbook of Bible Lands: 

A Panoramic Survey of the History, Geography and Culture of the Scriptures, 2020.

 

Five Principles for Rightly Handling Scripture

God’s word is our most important and indisputable authority. This is not to say it is the only authority. R. C. Sproul notes that the Reformation notion of sola Scriptura does not mean the Bible is the only authority for the Christian, but that it is the only infallible authority—for the simple reason that God himself is infallible.

1. Scripture should speak to all of life
We should not see the Bible as a manual for how to escape this world, but rather as a book of wisdom for, in part, applying God’s revealed truth to all of life now. Scripture should be both the foundation and impetus for all our knowledge pursuits.
 
2. Scripture should define your paradigm
All of us tend to like the parts of Scripture that support our paradigms while we ignore or downplay the parts that threaten our status quo. But bad things happen when we start shaping Scripture around us rather than ourselves around Scripture. We must always be on guard against force-fitting Scripture into boxes of our liking.
 
3. Scripture is valuable as a whole, not just the parts
Context is everything in Bible study. The truth of any given verse becomes clearer when we see it in the larger context. We get the most out of the Bible when we read it in big chunks and grasp its grand narrative. The Bible is a cohesive narrative.
 
4. Scripture should spark worship and obedience
We must “be doers of the word, and not hearers only” (James 1:22). Our lives should be beautifully transformed by the Bible because we obey what it says. Part of this is acknowledging that the Bible should engage not only our minds, but also our hearts, leading us to love the Lord and trust him more and more. We read the Bible to know its author, to behold the beauty and glory of Christ.
 
5. Scripture doesn’t have to make complete sense
This doesn’t mean we turn off our brains, throw up our hands, and tolerate theological fuzziness. Rather, the difficulties of Scripture should invite us to even more rigorous and precise examination, going deeper and wider in our study as lifelong learners, not because we have to know everything God knows, but because the more immersed we are in Scripture, the nearer we feel to his sweet presence.
 

- Brett McCracken, The Wisdom Pyramid:

Feeding Your Soul in a Post-Truth World, 2021

 

The Curse of the Law

Some people—including some Christians—might think that interpreting the law too carefully is legalistic. We have enough trouble keeping the easy commandments; so what is the point of looking at God’s law in exhaustive detail? Isn’t that legalistic?
 
On the contrary, it is when we have a limited understanding of the law that we are most tempted to legalism, because then we think that we can keep it. If all God commanded us to do was to avoid murdering someone, we might be able to obey him. But we need to interpret the sixth commandment in the context of the whole Bible, with everything it says about murderous intentions. Since the law is spiritual, it condemns unrighteous anger as well as murder. Since it is positive as well as negative, it requires the active preservation of life. And since it represents a whole category of sins, we are forbidden to harm people in any way or to allow others to do so.
 
Is this a legalistic way of thinking? Not at all. This kind of Biblical reasoning rescues us from legalism by preventing us from lowering God’s standard. God’s standard is only maintained when we recognize what his righteousness truly requires. And when we know what God requires, in all its fullness, we also see the full extent of our sin. It is only a full understanding of God’s law that reveals our full need for the gospel. In the words of J. Gresham Machen, “A low view of law always brings legalism in religion; a high view of law makes a man a seeker after grace.”
 
Here we need to recall how to use God’s law. As we have seen, the Ten Commandments are a multi-use item. One of their primary purposes is to show us our sin, so that we will see our need for a Savior. The law points us to Jesus Christ, whom the Scriptures identify as “the end of the law” (Rom. 10:4), meaning that he is the goal or true purpose of the law. The more clearly and thoroughly we understand what God’s law requires, the more clearly and thoroughly we understand the grace that God has provided for us in Jesus Christ.

Christ and the Moral Law

What does the moral law, summarized in the Ten Commandments and rightly interpreted, reveal about the person and work of Jesus Christ? It reveals the full extent of his perfect obedience. The Bible assures us that although Jesus was “born under law” (Gal. 4:4), he “fulfill[ed] all righteousness” (Matt. 3:15) and “committed no sin” (1 Pet. 2:22). This was no small accomplishment! The law of God searches to the very soul. It is utterly exhaustive in the righteousness it requires. We are not capable of keeping even a single commandment with perfect integrity. But Jesus kept them all, down to the last detail, and he did it on our behalf. If we are joined to him by faith, then God regards us as if we had kept his whole law perfectly. Christ was crucified “in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us” (Rom. 8:4a). Therefore, the law shows us what perfect righteousness we have in Christ. To put this in more technical terms, when we know what the law requires, we can understand the doctrine of justification.
 
The moral law also reveals the full extent of Christ’s atonement. The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ died on the cross for our sins. If we have a narrow understanding of God’s law, we might imagine that we did not have very many sins to die for. But a full interpretation of the Ten Commandments reveals the full extent of our sin, and thus it reveals the full extent of the atonement. Christ died for all our sins. He died for our sins against God and our sins against humanity. He died for our idolatry, profanity, and adultery. He died for our lying, stealing, and murder. He died for our sins both inside and out. He died for all the sins we commit in every category of God’s command. He even died for all the sins we committed by sharing in the sins of others. Christ died for all our sins, suffering the full penalty that our guilt deserved. The more thoroughly we understand the implications of God’s law, the more truly grateful we are for the grace of God in the atoning death of Jesus Christ. When we know what the law requires, we can understand the cross.
 
Finally, for those who have put their faith in Jesus Christ, the moral law reveals the full duty of the Christian life. This is another use of God’s law. It shows God’s redeemed people how to live for God’s glory. When we give the law its full interpretation, we gain a better grasp of God’s righteous standard in all its perfection, and thus we have a better idea of how to please him. To put this in theological terms, when we know what the law requires, we can understand the doctrine of sanctification. This is why we study God’s law: to understand our great need for Christ and his gospel and to learn how many ways we can glorify God for his grace.

Overtourism: Code of Conduct

The idea came from Palau, one of the world's smallest nations. And it changed the travel world forever.

Back in 2015, Palau had a problem: new flight routes had created a huge upsurge in visitor numbers, to the point where those tourists outnumbered locals eight to one.

The revenue was welcome in this Micronesian outpost, but the effect of those visitors was not, the sheer weight of numbers putting pressure on Palau's infrastructure, water supply and natural environment.

So the country came up with a novel solution, asking all visitors upon entry to sign the "Palau Pledge", in which they promised to "tread lightly, act kindly and explore mindfully".

"Palau Pledge"

The pledge is a code of conduct, a contract between visitors and locals, a commitment to do the right thing to protect a fragile nation.

Clearly, other destinations took note because there are now multiple tourist hotspots around the world that have introduced a recommended code of conduct for visitors, both to curb poor behaviour and inform those trying to do the right thing of best practice as popular spots struggle under the weight of numbers.

The likes of Kyoto, Bali and even Amsterdam have specified the way they want visitors to act to lessen the impact on locals and their environment.

These are the new rules of travel, which are clearly necessary given the well-publicised poor behaviour of certain tourists in the past few years.

Though some destinations are open about their desire to curb visitor behaviour, others are a little more low-key. Still, any place that is experiencing overtourism will be seeking to strike a balance between allowing visitors access, and keeping the effects of that visitation to a minimum.

Below are some of those fragile though ever-popular destinations, with our guide (and theirs) to how best to conduct yourself to ensure minimum impact and maximum enjoyment for all. Think of it as a Palau Pledge – only, for every destination.

Kyoto, Japan

Kyoto is a classic case of overtourism, a historic and beautiful city that is also quite small with a population of about 1.5 million. Yet it attracts more than 70 million visitors a year. This has led to significant problems for locals, who are unable to move about their city, to shop, dine and indulge in their cultural heritage in the same way they used to.

The Kyoto City Tourism Association has released a "Kyoto Tourism Code of Conduct", a series of recommendations for visitors to lessen their impact. These recommendations include advice on cultural education and respect, encouraging visitors to interact with locals and participate in festivals and events, and even asking that they don't leave leftover food when dining at restaurants (which is seen as very wasteful in Japanese culture).

One of the ways visitors can ease the burden is to seek attractive alternative destinations, such as Kanazawa and Sakata. If you are going to visit Kyoto, refrain from photographing and hassling geiko and maiko (popularly called geisha) on the streets, and try to travel by subway instead of using the over-crowded bus system.

Amsterdam, Netherlands

Here is another classic case of an intensely popular destination that is also locked into a small area with little room for overflow. Amsterdam is home to a little under a million people, yet welcomes more than 21 million visitors a year, many of whom are drawn by the liberal, party-going reputation this city has. That means a lot of drunk, rowdy tourists in a small space.

Amsterdam's tourism bureau has released a list of rules and regulations for visitors, introducing on-the-spot fines of €150 ($250) for acts of public nuisance such as littering, noise pollution and public urination, while drunkenness and the use of marijuana in the old city centre now carry a €100 fine.

Acting appropriately in Amsterdam isn't difficult – if what you're doing would be illegal or upsetting at home, there's a good chance it will be in the Netherlands, too. Authorities want visitors to go out and have fun but to do it in a way that doesn't negatively affect residents.

Machu Picchu, Peru

Not so long ago, Machu Picchu was a niche destination, considered too far off the beaten track for many travellers. Since the turn of the century, however, the Incan citadel's popularity has exploded, with more than a million visitors tramping across this UNESCO heritage-listed site every year. These tourists have been causing permanent damage to the ruins and the surrounding landscape.

Peruvian authorities are clearly torn. On one hand, several sections of Machu Picchu have been closed indefinitely to tourists; those visitors must now follow marked trails, and the number of daily entrants to the site has been capped at 3800. On the other hand, that daily cap will rise next year to 4500, and a controversial new airport is under construction nearby at Chinchero.

To help protect Machu Picchu, it's essential visitors follow all rules and stick to pathways on their visit. It's also best to go in the low season, around April and May, to help spread out crowds and support local businesses. Even better, give Machu Picchu a miss in favour of less-visited historic sites such as Choquequirao, Vilcabamba and Kuelap.

June to August are the peak months for visits to Machu Picchu, but April and May are cooler and quieter, and September and October are also pleasant. 

Southern Thailand

The beaches and islands of southern Thailand are phenomenally popular. Though this boom was in part sparked by the movie The Beach , the truth is that the likes of Phuket – according to some measures, the most overcrowded tourist destination in the world – Koh Phi Phi, Koh Samui, Pattaya and Krabi were always going to attract large crowds, and those crowds would always damage the local environment.

In 2018, Thai authorities took a drastic step: Maya Bay, the perfect patch of sea and sand that featured in The Beach , was closed to tourists entirely for three-and-a-half years to allow for its marine ecology to recover. The bay was closed again in 2023 for two months for similar reasons. Tourist boats can no longer land at the bay and swimming is prohibited.

It's essential for visitors to any popular area in southern Thailand to respect local rules and regulations. This is a country that relies heavily on the revenue generated by tourism, so don't stop visiting – instead, seek to reduce your impact on sensitive areas, and look to alternative islands such as Koh Lanta or Koh Yao Noi.

Prague, Czechia

Prague has been booming as a tourist destination ever since the fall of the Iron Curtain, and that popularity has led to huge changes in the historic centre of the city, where the resident population has been halved, driven out by higher prices, short-term apartment rentals, and tourist hordes. Boozy stag party groups are an ongoing issue.

Prague authorities had the chance for a reset during the pandemic and introduced "Putting Prague First", a plan to sustainably manage the tourism industry as it recovers. This means adding facilities for residents in the historic centre, more closely regulating short-term apartment rentals and appealing to visitors to travel in a way that is slower and more respectful of locals.

There are two key issues that visitors to Prague can help alleviate: the proliferation of short-term rentals, which visitors can manage by staying with traditional accommodation providers such as hotels, or staying outside the historic centre; and the behaviour of drunk, obnoxious tourists, which you can sort out by, you know, not being a drunk, obnoxious tourist.

Bhutan

Bhutan as a country has always been wary of tourists – the Himalayan nation was closed entirely to the world until 1974. Since then, entrant numbers have been carefully managed. The Bhutanese view their environment and their culture as extremely fragile, and so steps are still taken to curb the already low numbers of foreign visitors entering.

In June, 2022, the Bhutanese government introduced a drastic measure to deter all but the wealthiest visitors: it raised its "Sustainable Development Fee" – essentially a daily tax for foreign travellers – from about $100 a day to about $300 a day, on top of a $60 visa fee. That measure was a little too successful, however, with only 14,000 visitors subject to the tax arriving in the first six months of 2023. In September last year, the government slashed that fee to about $150 a day, effective until 2027.

Bhutan is an incredibly beautiful, culturally rich nation that will reward those who make the effort – and pay the money – to experience it. But visitors must ensure they're environmentally and culturally aware, behave respectfully and keep their impact as low as possible. Don't litter, don't steal, be polite, be unobtrusive, support local businesses and guides.

Venice, Italy

The two factors that lead to overtourism – big crowds, small spaces – clearly apply to Venice, the floating city that has been incredibly popular among visitors for decades. Venice's resident population has shrunk from a high of 175,000 to 50,000, while up to 120,000 daily visitors put a huge strain on its infrastructure and environment.

Venetian authorities have introduced measures to curb overtourism, including banning cruise ships over 25,000 tonnes from docking in the city, and beginning later this year, the city will experiment with ticketed, timed entry (checked by QR code), plus a €5 tax on visitors who aren't staying overnight.

Part of the problem in Venice is that there are too many short-term visitors, many alighting from cruise ships, who don't stay the night, and barely spend any money, but just take up space. Visitors can help alleviate this by spending more time and money, steering clear of popular spots such as Piazza San Marco and the Rialto Bridge, while also investigating alternative destinations such as Burano, Caorle and Udine.

Bali, Indonesia

In Bali it's not so much the number of visitors, though, of course, that exacerbates the problem. The main, well-documented issue here is the behaviour of those tourists. News has travelled around the world recently of visitors to Bali exposing themselves at sacred sites, including temples, driving recklessly, drinking to excess, becoming violent, and working without permits.

Last June, Balinese authorities released a list of "do's and don'ts" for visitors. These urge visitors to dress appropriately, respect the customs and beliefs of locals, behave properly at religious sites, refrain from climbing sacred trees, and don't litter, behave aggressively, or take inappropriate photographs.

Without putting too fine a point on it, the code of behaviour required for Bali is simple: don't be an idiot. Don't act in ways you know would be unacceptable at home, and are certainly unacceptable in a foreign, more conservative country. Take the time to learn about local culture and sensitivities and act in ways that are respectful of that.

Five more destinations with rules for visitors

Issues for the German capital, which has seen a boom in visitor numbers, include short-term rentals driving out inner-city residents and local services being replaced by tourist-focused infrastructure. In response, the city has restricted short-term rentals and has also released "Sustainable Berlin" guidelines for visitors, encouraging them to stay in eco-hotels, plus shop, eat and move around the city in a sustainable way. See visitberlin.de

The trick when visiting this tourism-dependent city and country is to do so ethically and sustainably, given previous issues with water insecurity, damage to Angkor Wat and surrounding temples, and the popularity of elephant rides and orphanage visits. Visitors are encouraged to seek out ethical organisations such as Fair Trade Village, Kulen Elephant Forest and Jaya House River Park for accommodation and to obey all rules when visiting historic sites. See tourismcambodia.org

Italian authorities have introduced a range of country-wide rules and fines (from $16,500 to $99,000) for anyone caught vandalising a monument or cultural site. Tourists can also be fined for sitting on Rome's Spanish Steps, swimming in the Trevi Fountain, eating or drinking at famous sites around the country, organising a pub crawl in Rome, or even taking a photo of the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. See italia.it

Yellowstone has a problem: it's really, really popular with vehicle accidents up 90 per cent, ambulance use up 60 per cent, and search and rescue efforts up 130 per cent. Staffing numbers, meanwhile, have dropped. As work on ways to deal with the influx of tourists continues, visitors can help by sticking to marked trails, disposing of all rubbish correctly, and visiting outside the busy summer period. See nps.gov

Barcelona is a relatively small city with a huge number of visitors, many of whom are there to well and truly have a good time. In response, government authorities have introduced strict new licensing laws for properties placed on the short-term rental market, banned smoking on beaches, restricted tour group sizes and limited night-time noise levels in popular tourist districts. See barcelonaturisme.com

source: https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/traveller/reviews-and-advice/the-new-rules-of-travel-14-destinations-that-are-done-with-bad-tourists-20231221-p5eswt.html

When Tourism Destroys the Heritages

The temples of Angkor were built for worship and contemplation. The rulers poured their wealth into them, gilding the spires in gold and silver, commissioning carvings that memorialized their conquests and statues of Hindu gods that were in fact carved to resemble the kings and queens of Angkor. Hundreds, not millions, walked the temples.
 
“For sure, these temples weren’t made to welcome the world, only to pray to God. It is a place solely for God, not even like a western Cathedral where people were meant to assemble,” said Dominique Soutif, head of the EFEO Center.
 
Groslier and his father George, both scholars, had dedicated their lives to Angkor. Now the son was forced to abandon it. I asked if he thought the Khmer Rouge would destroy the temples. He shook his head and said no. The temples were too important to both sides: to prove their nationalism, their patriotism, the superiority of the Cambodian culture. He said he believed the armies would be more protective of the stones at Angkor than the Cambodians who revered them. He was right. Through the six-year war and the Khmer Rouge revolution that ended in 1979, the temples were left largely untouched. Whatever damage they suffered was from decay.
 
Instead, since the war, the worst culprits have been bandits who stole the statuary, often cutting off the heads, and now it is tourism. Soutif outlined the immediate damage being done by the millions of tourists who march all over the temples, their fingers touching the intricate carvings, their arms brushing up against the stones.
 
“Wat Phnom Bakheng, the temple on the hill, the effect of the daily traffic has degraded the temple considerably,” he began. “The steps of Angkor Wat are slippery from the damage by tourists. Inevitably with millions of guests the bas-reliefs have been touched by them and that’s extremely detrimental. I’ve seen Korean guides hitting those bas-reliefs with sticks to demonstrate an historical fact. It’s all just inevitable.”
 
What can be done to reduce the sheer numbers of tourists and prevent this cumulative damage? His answer was revelatory, as if the other shoe had dropped. “It is not as simple as you think,” he told me. “Without the tourists, there would be no restoration, no research,” he said.
 
The Restoration and Recovery
 
That is the price the foreign preservationists and archeologists pay: they have become a very sophisticated clean-up crew, repairing damage caused by tourism as the quid pro quo for the privilege of working at Angkor. The arrangement goes something like this. Angkor draws in the millions of tourists who bring in billions of dollars to this poor country. That tourism volume, in turn, draws the attention of foreign investors who put more money into the country, much of which lands in the private bank accounts of officials. The system works brilliantly for some, but it rests on the splendor of those temples in Angkor. They have to be restored and maintained.
 
This is where the foreign archeologists and their governments enter the picture. In order to have the key role in Angkor, sixteen foreign governments offered to provide their expertise, their labor and their money to restore and research the site. The Cambodian government accepted this proposition on the express condition that this work cannot interfere with tourism at Angkor.
These countries, along with the United Nations, became part of the International Coordinating Committee for the Safeguarding and Development of the Historic Site of Angkor (ICC-Angkor).
 
The Cambodian government created a complementary Apsara association that works with the foreigners while the Cambodian government retains authority over all decisions regarding Angkor as “an historic site, a natural site and a tourist site.” To streamline the effort, each country “adopts” a temple for restoration and posts signs showing that Hungary, Japan, India or the United States is financing the recovery and maintenance of that temple. Germany is the master for stone conservation. France trained a 300-member Cambodian heritage police force to prevent thieves from hacking off statues, bas-reliefs and lintels with hammers and saws. Now theft has largely ended in the official Angkor area. All of the countries praise the “very great openness of the Cambodian authorities to debate aspects of the country’s economic, environmental and social policies that elsewhere would remain jealously guarded.”
  

- Elizabeth Becker, Overbooked: The Exploding Business of Travel and Tourism, 2013.

When Tourism Destroys the Foundation

A mounting problem is water. Siem Reap does not have the modern water and waste system to accommodate these tourists. The temple foundations are sinking as the surrounding water table is being drained by hotels that drill down as deep as 260 feet into ponds and underground aquifers, emptying them in order to have enough water to allow tourists to shower and flush toilets, to clean their clothes and to irrigate hotel landscapes and golf courses at an unsustainable rate. There is no adequate system to filter and dispose of the resulting sewage and the Siem Reap River has been polluted from the irresponsible dumping of waste.

The result is an ongoing threat to the foundation of the temples. At the Bayon, fifty-four towers have started sinking into the ground. Experts worry that the sandy soil is becoming so unstable it could threaten other temples.
 

With the Cambodian government’s approval, Japan drew up a master plan and is building a water supply system for the city of Siem Reap. Korea began building new drainage and sewage networks. France is cleaning up the Tonlé Sap River. The Asian Development Bank is loaning money for some of the projects, and a few hotels have promised to install recycling systems for their used water, all with the aim of repairing the damage done by draining the water table.
 
The Major Patron: South Korea

South Korea is a major patron of the Cambodian tourism industry in Siem Reap. Overall, South Koreans account for billions of dollars of private investment in the Cambodian economy, with a strong accent on tourism. (Only China has invested more money in Cambodia.)

Korean visitors fly to Cambodia on one of Korean Airlines’ nearly daily flights from Seoul. In Siem Reap, Koreans have invested in restaurants, hotels and karaoke bars. The largest project is a new $1.6 billion international airport for Siem Reap that, in theory, could bring up to 14 million tourists to the temples every year. Another South Korean developer is building a $400 million casino resort near Angkor with the avowed goal of drawing the high rollers from Macao and Singapore. The government not only promised the Korean company incentives like corporate tax holidays and low gaming levies; Prime Minister Hun Sen himself entertained the developer in Phnom Penh.

- Elizabeth Becker, Overbooked: The Exploding Business of Travel and Tourism, 2013.