business & economy

Also in this section:
World Bank: Panama's informal economy is huge
Strange moves for a government that wants to promote tourism
The Panama News readership figures

Plaza Catedral Flea Market
Transparency: does it mean you should clam up?
Business & Economy Briefs

Tourist visas and immunization requirements

New regulations might affect Panama's tourism

by Eric Jackson

Tourism is a complicated industry, which can be and often is affected by external factors.

Take the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, for example. The immediate impact was the closing of US airports, which was a disaster of a few days' duration for Panama. Then there was a widespread fear among Americans of traveling anywhere outside of the USA. But as the realities of a jihad aimed both at the USA and at Western European countries set in, a greater and more specific fear of Muslims set in that expressed itself in a reluctance to cruise upon the Mediterranean Sea, bordered as it is by Muslim countries on its southern and eastern littorals. That led international cruise ship lines to reposition their Mediterranean ships elsewhere, particularly to the Caribbean Sea, and cruise ship tourism in Panama skyrocketed.

The possibilities of negative publicity --- political turmoil or a heavily reported crime against a tourist are classic examples --- are also well known dangers to tourism. The latter menace is why Panama has its special Tourism Police unit.

But then there are regulatory factors that affect tourism and sometimes decisions are made without much thought about their effects.

In the United States, three post-9/11 regulatory trends have affected Panamanian tourism to various extents:

• The tightening of immigration controls to prevent the movement of terrorists has made it harder for Latin Americans to get visas to enter the USA or to be treated with more suspicion and less courtesy upon arrival if they do get visas, and that has led a lot of Colombians and Central Americans who used to go shopping in Miami or New York to come to Panama City for these purposes instead;

• The requirement of a US passport for American citizens to re-enter the United States has to a still unknown extent discouraged some Americans from traveling abroad, probably to the detriment of Panamanian tourism; and

• Many of the regulations in the US Patriot Act have led some Americans to conclude that their country has in a moment of hysteria abridged rights they hold dear and thus led them to travel abroad to look for a place to which they might emigrate, and a number of these people have come to Panama to either visit or live.

Now we are seeing a couple of Panamanian regulatory moves that may have an impact on our tourism industry.

Largely because of some high profile violent crimes committed by Colombians but also due to a public perception fed by opportunistic politicians that foreigners are taking jobs away from Panamanians, there has been a long-standing demand to reform immigration laws. However, when actual legislation gets proposed its economic effects get pointed out by wealthy and politically connected Panamanians whose interests would be hurt and immigration reform gets pushed off of the National Assembly's agenda.

This dynamic doesn't apply with the same force to administrative actions by the executive branch of government, so despite a legislative logjam there are more frequent regulatory changes.

Shorter tourist visa stays

One of these, which went into effect with little fanfare at the end of May, is that the government has decided to issue tourist visas for only 30 days and to allow only one renewal. Previously, a tourist visa was good for 90 days and could be renewed twice.

So far, the new shorter tourist visa rule is being unevenly enforced, probably because it's new to the folks who work the Migracion booth at the airport and because the change came abruptly without changes in all the printed forms that are used. It remains to be seen whether the crackdown on tourist visa abuse, which this policy is advertised as being, will be equally applied to foreigners of all nationalities or whether it's primarily a Panamanian way of expressing annoyance with Colombians. In any case the shorter visas have elicited quite a bit of commentary and concern in Panama's American community, albeit not enough to prompt any substantial political action.

If the changes are mainly to apply to those who are illegally living or working here on tourist visas, it may force some of the people who use them in that way out of the country. It might, however, just force them to leave Panama briefly more often, or pay more in bribes to have immigration officials look the other way.

The genuine threat to tourism is with respect to the "snowbirds," Canadians as well as Americans from the northern states who like to spend North America's colder months down here. The shorter visas may be enough to convince some of these people to winter elsewhere.

New immunization requirements

The National Assembly is considering a law to comply with an international health agreement aimed at limiting the spread of communicable diseases. Under the policy adopted by the World Health Organization (WHO), a United Nations agency, international travelers would have to carry immunization records along with their passports when crossing into another country. Those without the proper proofs of immunizations would be given shots at the point of entry.

The particular concern here is about something for which there is no inoculation, a pandemic of a deadly flu strain that the world has yet to see. We have had some bird flu scares in recent years, and there is the historical experience of the 1918-1919 worldwide flu pandemic that killed uncounted tens of millions of people and did much to exhaust the energy and resources of both sides in World War I.

For an overview of what the WHO is trying to do, visit their website. The legislation that Panama is considering would require arriving tourists to have their immunization records and provide for shots at the point of entry or exclusion for Panama in the absence of satisfactory records. It is likely that proof of the standard childhood shots would be required, but the specifics of what inoculations are required would be left up to the regulatory process. In fact it's contemplated that there would be agile regulatory changes, as those would be needed to confront some virulent new strain that we had never seen yesterday that pops up tomorrow.

To the extent that this agreement becomes universal or nearly so, the contemplated legislation should not lead tourists to choose some other destination over Panama. But like the 9/11 fright and the passport for re-entry requirement, it would likely keep a number of Americans who would otherwise travel abroad within the confines of US territory and thus out of this country.

The problem is exacerbated with Americans due to the fragmented and privatized US health care system, which does not have a centralized registry that would make it easy to obtain a person's immunization records.

(Well, one might ask, is it really that hard for a person to contact the places where she or he got shots? The best answer to that might be another question: Do you remember where you received your immunizations when you were six months old?)

In the long run world travelers will become accustomed to carrying health documents along with their passports and Panamanian tourism should not be too severely affected by this country's adoption of WHO procedures. In most of the American community's discussion of Panama's proposed adherence to the international immunization regime, it has been perceived as an ill-advised big government measure that will harm Panamanian tourism.

World Bank: Panama's informal economy is huge
Strange moves for a government that wants to promote tourism
The Panama News readership figures

Plaza Catedral Flea Market
Transparency: does it mean you should clam up?
Business & Economy Briefs