Assessment 1: Uluru Rock Climbing Ban, Tourism, and Cultural Issues

This report examines the Uluru rock climbing ban, implemented in October 2019, and its multifaceted consequences. The report begins by addressing the debate over whether tourists should be allowed to climb the rock, citing safety concerns and the sacred significance of Uluru to the Anangu culture. It then analyzes the effects of the ban on tourism, acknowledging the initial negative impact on visitor numbers and the Australian economy, while also recognizing public support for respecting the site's cultural importance. The report further investigates potential areas of cross-cultural miscommunication between the First Australian (Aboriginal) population and the broader Australian population, utilizing Hofstede's cultural dimensions (Power Distance, Individualism, Masculinity, Uncertainty Avoidance, Long-Term Orientation, and Indulgence) to highlight cultural differences that may contribute to misunderstandings. The report concludes by summarizing the key findings, emphasizing the importance of respecting cultural heritage and addressing the complex interplay of tourism, cultural sensitivity, and economic considerations surrounding Uluru.

Assessment 1

Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................1
1. Should tourist be able to climb the rock..................................................................................1
2. What are the effects of closing the rock..................................................................................2
3. Areas of potential cross- cultural miscommunication between first Australian and current
Australian Populations................................................................................................................2
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................4
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................5

INTRODUCTION
The current report is based upon the Uluru rock which was made millions of years ago
and it represent the Anangu culture as well, while most of the people visited this place for
adventurous and fun. After 2019, October the place is banned due to death of around 35
members. Therefore, the current study describe whether tourist are able to climb on the rock, and
then describe the effects of closing the rock climbing as well. Further, report will analyze the
potential area of miscommunication between First Australian and Australian population by using
Hofstede model.
1. Should tourist be able to climb the rock
Uluru is an ancient sacred rock in Anangu culture but due to death of many tourist (heart
attack), government of Australia banned tourist climbing from 2019, October onward. Earlier
the tourist are able to climb the rock for adventurous purpose and that is why, they many tourist
clime as well, but due to sudden death of visitors, the traditional owner of the rock have long
requested that visitor not climb Uluru because it is a sacred men's site, ad even many of them
faces injuries from climbing (Bourman, Ollier and Buckman, 2015).
Uluru is consider one of the top tourist attraction point where hundreds of tourist climb
this track to the top of rock, but on the other side, many of them died due to extreme heat and
risk of high winds (Tekeş and et.al., 2018). Therefore, to keep people safe, chain is installed but
as the place is well known for sacred purpose, that is why most of the visitor respect the same
and did not climb. That is why, the owner of the rock pleaded people not to climb only walk
around the base in order to respect their culture. After so many request, government took the
decision and banned on climbing Uluru rock.
On the other side, another reason of ban is such that there is a erosion which is caused by
the passage of thousand of feet and as a result, it has left permanent scars. Further, there is no
toilet facilities for the climbers and the height of Uluru is too high and when it rains the
evaporates waste is washed off the entire rock and heavy wind also cause fall from the rock
(Gutiérrez and Gutiérrez, 2016). Further, Uluru height is big than an Eiffel tower and that is why,
the temperature is too high which cause sudden heart attack as well as many people faint due to
not getting proper oxygen. That is why, tourist should not able to climb the rock.
1

2. What are the effects of closing the rock
From 2017 November, when the decision is passes after pleading Anangu not to permit
visitor to climb on Uluru, it affect tourism in negative way, because the place is famous to attract
visitor for adventurous tour and after banned, many tourist did not come to visit in Australia
(Australia, 2017). As the place is consider one of the attraction point for tourist such that visitor
can enjoy a whole host of experience from sunrise to sunset and the rock also have deep
connection with the Indigenous because of ancient culture. In 2015, around 3 lac people visit
Australia and around 16 percent people also climb Uluru. This ratio is decreases since last from
1990 because at that time, around 75 percent visitor climb. After closing the rock, the tourist got
affected in negative way and as a result, the economy of the country also got affected with the
same.
Moreover, the feedback says that more than 80 percent of the visitors are in favor of the
climb close and earlier there were around thousands of group visited the place but now people
did not climb and only visit around the base only (Twidale, 2016). Thus, it shows that the results
creates negative impact upon tourism activity but on the same time, many people are also happy
with the decision and respect as well.
3. Areas of potential cross- cultural miscommunication between first Australian and current
Australian Populations
The first Australian are the aboriginals people of Australia and though government makes
many laws to support the Aboriginals but still there are different potential cross- cultural
miscommunication that make difference between first Australian and Australian population. It
can be expressed by Hofstede model of culture, which describe how the values in workplace is
influenced by the culture. Thus it is based upon six dimension which are as mention below:
Power distance index (PDI) : This dimension is mainly deals with the fact that all the
individuals in societies are not equal such that it express the attitude of culture with relate to
inequalities. As Australia scores low on this dimension i.e. 36 and the communication is informal
with the Aboriginals as well (Kiernan, 2015). Thus, the fundamental issue is how a society
handles inequalities among people. As the PDI is low that state people strive to equalize the
distribution of power and Aboriginals are also demand for the justification for inequalities of
power.
2

Individualism versus Collectivism (IDV) : Under this, individualism is describe as a
high of this dimension, while lower side of the dimension is collectivism. As Australia have high
score i.e. 90 on this dimension which is a highly individualist culture (Beugelsdijk, Kostova, and
Roth,, 2017). It means that society is expected to be self- reliant and can display their initiative
but on the other side, First Australian are not have this right. Such that they are not easily move
and are treat equality with other Australian and that is why, they are boycott from other areas as
well.
Masculinity versus Femininity (MAS) : The masculinity side of this dimension clearly
stand for a preference in a society in order to achieve, heroism, material rewards for success. On
the other side, Femininity stands for the preference fro cooperation, caring fro the weak. In the
context of Australian people, it scores 61 which is consider as a Masculine society. Moreover,
they are proud of their beliefs and notion but, the Aboriginals faces issue with the same and they
have low score rates as well (Chivas and Bourman, 2018). Therefore, they are many chances of
raising conflicts because Australian population did not consider them equal with their position.
Uncertainty Avoidance Index (UAI) : This dimension express the degree to which the
the society feel comfortable but actually. Such that the score of Australia is 51 which means that
there is a minimum extent to which the member of a culture feel threatened due to unknown
situation. In the same way, First Australians are not comfortable with the situation because they
are discriminate from the society and even government also provide them different rights. As a
result, it create miscommunication .
Long term orientation versus Short term Normative Orientation (LTO) : In this,
every society have to maintain its link with the own past while dealing with challenges at the
time of future and that is why, society also give priority of these existential goal (Marshak,
2015). Thus, Australia score very low i.e. 21 and it also follow normative culture. Such that
Aboriginals have a strong concern in order to establish absolute truth. But on the other side, the
Australian people exhibit the great respect for their tradition and they have a relatively small
chances to save for their future and also focus to achieve the results.
Indulgence versus Restraint (IVR) : It stands for the society which allow free
satisfaction of the natural human drive in order to enjoy life. As Australia has high score i.e. 71
and people live in this are classified under this will love to enjoy their own life. Therefore, they
want to please and spend money as they wish. While on the other side, first Australian did not
3

have enough resources and people belongs to this are not properly educated, that is why, they did
not have a positive attitude and did not posses good tendency towards optimism (Huang and
Crotts, 2019).
Therefore, it clearly reflect that in Australia due to language barrier and cross culture,
there is a big difference between First Australian and Australian population. Even... stated that
indigenous culture is democratic and without defined political authority, the group will never
raise and live in traditional and old beliefs only.
CONCLUSION
By summing up above report, it has been concluded that Uluru represents Anangu culture
and due to sudden death of around 37 people, the owner pleaded government to strictly banned
climbing. Therefore, from October 26, 2019, tourist are not able to climb the rock and report
also concluded that due to sudden death and sudden close of the climb rock, the tourist got
affected in negative way and this directly affect the economy of country as well. While on the
other side, it is also concluded that around 80 percent of the people are in favor of the results as
well. Lastly, report also concluded from the Hofstede cultural model that due to different
language and different rights, there is a big difference between First Australian and Australian
People.
4

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
Australia, P., 2017. About Uluru and Kata Tjuta. Parks Australia.
Beugelsdijk, S., Kostova, T. and Roth, K., 2017. An overview of Hofstede-inspired country-level
culture research in international business since 2006. Journal of International Business
Studies. 48(1). pp.30-47.
Bourman, R. P., Ollier, C. D. and Buckman, S., 2015. Inselbergs and monoliths: a comparative
review of two iconic Australian landforms, Uluru (Ayers Rock) and Burringurrah (Mount
Augustus). Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie.59(2),.pp.197-227.
Chivas, A. R. and Bourman, R. P., 2018. Oxygen isotope dating the Australian regolith: A review
and new applications. Insights on the paradigms applied for mineral exploration in deeply
weathered landscapes.
Gutiérrez, F. and Gutiérrez, M., 2016. Weathering Landforms. In Landforms of the Earth (pp.
111-126). Springer, Cham.
Huang, S. S. and Crotts, J., 2019. Relationships between Hofstede's cultural dimensions and
tourist satisfaction: A cross-country cross-sample examination. Tourism Management. 72.
pp.232-241.
Kiernan, K., 2015. Landforms as sacred places: implications for geodiversity and
geoheritage. Geoheritage. 7(2). pp.177-193.
Marshak, S., 2015. Earth: Portrait of a Planet: 5th International Student Edition. WW Norton &
Company.
Tekeş, B. and et.al., 2018. The Relationship Between Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions,
Schwartz’s Cultural Values, and Obesity. Psychological reports, p.0033294118777965.
Twidale, C. R., 2016. Pre‐Quaternary Landforms and Landscapes. International Encyclopedia of
Geography: People, the Earth, Environment and Technology: People, the Earth,
Environment and Technology, pp.1-7.
5