Why Foreigners Pay More For Visiting Indian Monuments?

This month, the government of Thailand reduced the entrance fees charged to foreign tourists entering Thai National Parks. They also increased the rates charged to locals.

I tell you, I was pretty surprised.

You see, when it comes to entrance fee pricing, Thailand is very similar to India. The rates for foreigners are hefty (around 400 baht), while those for locals are pretty low (10 baht). And since I can't see the Indian government ever lowering the entrance price for foreigners, the news from Thailand made me pause for thought. 

I looked at the Thai pricing story a little closely. A-ha. Clever, clever, clever.  They've reduced prices for foreigners only on the lesser known parks. The fee at these parks has  gone steeply down, from from 400 baht to 200. This is obviously a move to attract more visitors to these places. So in effect, this drop in rates might actually help generate an increase in revenues!

For locals, the prices have gone up indeed, but only from 10 to 20 baht. However, the price rise has been declared only on the more popular parks. This is a clever move for many reasons. The price increase per person is not high, so it keeps the parks affordable to locals. At the same time, because of the sheer volume of people, the fee hike boosts government revenues and gives the heavily visited parks the additional funding that they need for infrastructure maintenance.

I wonder if this is the sort of thing that India should do.

In an ideal world, of course, all national parks - as well as historical monuments and art galleries - would be free to everyone, no matter what their nationality. But we do not live in an ideal world, and while rich countries may well grandly waive entrances, poorer countries that depend on tourism must be more pragmatic.

In India, the government is pretty clear in its policy.  We're a poor socialist country, they say. Surely Bharat-mata's children should be able to experience their own heritage sites without being charged an arm and a leg! So the fees for Indians at many places are nominal.

And what of foreign visitors? Oh, says the policy, why subsidise the firangis? Let them pay for all this good stuff!

So here we are, with major differences in the prices for locals and foreigners at various Indian monuments. The one that creates the most outrage in tourist circles is Agra. A visit to the Taj Mahal and Agra Fort - both UNESCO World Heritage Sites - costs an Indian less than 50 rupees. The same thing costs 1000 rupees (EUR 12.5) for a foreign national.

When one of my baffled German visitors complained to me about this, I sat down and looked at the fees charged by other world heritage sites. I picked sites from a mix of developing as well as developed economies. Here are some interesting comparisons.

Against the average cost of EUR 6.25 each for the Taj Mahal and Agra Fort:

• Tickets to Machu Pichu in Peru are EUR 18.
• Tickets to Angkor Wat in Cambodia are EUR 10.
• The entrance ticket to the Colosseum in Rome is EUR 16 for non-EU nationals, and there is a discounted price offered to EU Nationals of EUR 11.
• Tickets to the Leaning Tower of Pisa are also EUR 16 at the moment
• Tickets to the Giza Plateau and at least one pyramid - say Khufu - cost EUR 18.
• Entrances to the Forbidden City in China are only EUR 4 (but that may be because the exchange rate is artificially held by the Chinese government).

So - after looking at these prices, my conclusion is - I don't think the Government is significantly overcharging foreign tourists for the Taj / Agra Fort experience.

As far as the differential pricing for Indians is concerned - I believe the Government is perfectly entitled to subsidize its own citizens. If this subsidy helps promote awareness of our heritage, and a sense of national pride, then I'm all for it. Besides, in a poor country like ours, there is no way the man on the street can afford the kind of the prices that these monuments deserve. The subsidy is a dent in the Government coffers, but it is a decision in the national interest which the Tourism department has the right to make.

There is obviously a case to be made for levying flat fees for everyone - Indian or foreign - and I've heard that they're considering flat fees of INR 250 or so. But honestly, if you've been to Taj and seen the number of poor people that come there - none of them could afford this.

In any case, until we hear any decisions, I believe all that  foreign tourists should ask themselves is - am I paying a fair price? Did I get my money's worth at these two monuments for EUR 6.25 per monument?

I think the answer is likely to be a yes.