Why Jamaica’s GTRCMC May Be Uniquely Equipped to Help
After Jamaica’s toughest tourism crisis, GTRCMS founders Bartlett and Waller turn resilience experience toward Nepal — while warning that a natural disaster must not become an unnecessary nationwide tourism collapse
KINGSTON, Jamaica / KATHMANDU, Nepal —Jamaica has just lived through one of the toughest tourism crises in its history and is moving back toward normality. Nepal has suddenly entered a tourism crisis of its own.
Who, then, may be better equipped to understand and assist with the tourism dimension of Nepal’s unfolding disaster than the Jamaica-based Global Tourism Resilience and Crisis Management Centre (GTRCMC)?
Led by Jamaica’s Minister of Tourism and GTRCMC Founder and Chairman, Hon. Edmund Bartlett, together with the Centre’s Global Director, Professor Lloyd Waller, GTRCMC is moving into action as Nepal confronts catastrophic flooding and cascading mountain disasters that have resulted in loss of life, displacement, destroyed infrastructure, stranded visitors and severe disruption to tourism-dependent communities.
Bartlett and Waller shared an update with eTurboNews (eTN) and the World Tourism Network (WTN) only hours ago, outlining the scale of the challenge and the Centre’s readiness to become involved in Nepal’s tourism recovery.
The intervention also follows today’s eTN plea for international tour operators and travel organizations to look carefully at the geography of Nepal before issuing blanket warnings that could discourage urgently needed visitors from traveling anywhere in the country. That distinction could become critical.
Nepal needs accurate and uncompromising warnings wherever visitors would be exposed to danger. At the same time, geographically concentrated destruction should not automatically translate into a perception that every tourism destination across Nepal is inaccessible or unsafe.
The GTRCMC’s own preliminary tourism impact assessment makes precisely that geographic distinction. It identifies the most serious disruption around the Rasuwagadhi–Timure border corridor, Langtang Valley, Syabrubesi Corridor, Gosaikunda area and Nuwakot/Trishuli Corridor, while identifying Kathmandu Valley and wider Nepal as facing indirect disruption and reputational risks.
For an economy in which tourism sustains communities far beyond hotels and major attractions, unnecessarily broad travel warnings and a subsequent collapse in visitor confidence could turn a devastating natural catastrophe into a much longer economic disaster.
And that is exactly the kind of cascading tourism crisis the GTRCMC was created to address.
GTRCMC Expresses Solidarity With Nepal
The Global Tourism Resilience and Crisis Management Centre has expressed its profound solidarity with the Government and people of Nepal following the catastrophic flooding and cascading mountain disaster.
The Centre extended its deepest sympathies to families who have lost loved ones and said it stands with those awaiting news of missing relatives, including international visitors affected by the disaster.
The consequences for Nepal’s tourism sector are particularly serious.
Communities, tourism workers, visitors and businesses have been affected while roads, bridges, communications and other critical infrastructure upon which Nepal’s mountain tourism economy depends have been damaged or disrupted.
The disaster, GTRCMC says, is another demonstration of the growing vulnerability of tourism-dependent destinations to sudden and cascading natural and climate-related hazards.
It also raises a much larger question: Who pays for resilience when the destination suffering the greatest shock has the least financial capacity to recover?
Nepal Tourism: More Than a Visitor Economy
The GTRCMC’s “Nepal Floods 2026: Preliminary Tourism Impact & Resilience Assessment,”prepared in August, illustrates why Nepal’s tourism emergency cannot be separated from the wider economic and humanitarian crisis.
According to the assessment, Nepal received approximately 1.158 million international visitors in 2025, generating an estimated US$628.4 million in international tourism receipts. Tourism contributed approximately 6.7% of Nepal’s GDPand supported more than one million jobs directly and indirectly.
Those jobs extend deep into Nepalese society — from guides, porters, drivers and hotel employees to farmers, artisans, restaurants, family businesses and rural communities.
The report’s scenario analysis demonstrates the potential economic consequences if the disaster triggers a prolonged decline in arrivals.
A 5% decline in annual tourism receipts would represent approximately US$31.4 millionin lost receipts. A 10% decline would increase the exposure to about US$62.8 million, while a 20% decline would mean approximately US$125.7 million.
Importantly, GTRCMC identifies these figures as scenario exposure, not verified disaster losses.
Its broader tourism resilience overview estimates approximately US$520 million in tourism earnings at risk in the short termand around 1.1 million jobs at risk, emphasizing the urgency of restoring confidence alongside infrastructure and livelihoods.
Bartlett: “When Tourism Collapses, Entire Communities Can Collapse With It”
For GTRCMC Founder and Chairman Edmund Bartlett, Nepal demonstrates why tourism resilience can no longer be treated simply as a tourism-industry issue.
It is a development issue.
“What we are witnessing in Nepal is not simply the destruction of infrastructure. It is the disruption of lives, livelihoods and communities whose economic survival is deeply connected to tourism. When tourism collapses in vulnerable destinations, the consequences travel far beyond hotels and visitor arrivals, they reach the guide, the driver, the farmer, the small business owner and the family whose future depends upon the visitor economy.”
Bartlett said the disaster should serve as a global call to action on the financing of tourism resilience.
“The defining question after a disaster should never be whether a destination will recover, but whether the international system has given it the capacity to recover quickly, inclusively and stronger than before. Resilience cannot remain a privilege available only to countries with deep financial resources. Every tourism-dependent nation must have a fighting chance to recover.”
For Jamaica, this is not an abstract concept.
Its own experience of managing severe tourism disruption has placed resilience, crisis preparedness and rapid recovery at the center of the country’s tourism strategy. Now, as Jamaica moves closer to normality following its own difficult crisis, its Jamaica-based global resilience centre is turning that experience toward Nepal.
Where Nepal’s Tourism Impact Is Concentrated
One of the most important findings in the GTRCMC assessment is that Nepal’s tourism crisis has geography.
That matters enormously when deciding what international travelers, tour operators and governments should be told.
The report maps six principal tourism areas and corridors affected by the flooding: Rasuwagadhi–Timure, Langtang Valley, Syabrubesi Corridor, Gosaikunda area, Nuwakot/Trishuli Corridor, and Kathmandu Valley and wider Nepal.
- The Rasuwagadhi–Timure corridor at the Nepal-China borderis among the hardest hit. The report describes severe flooding affecting the main border crossing and Friendship Bridge, with roads and customs facilities damaged or inaccessible and cross-border travel suspended.
- In Langtang Valley, roads, bridges, trails and local lodges have been severely damaged, with rescue operations continuing and the entire valley reportedly cut off.
- The Syabrubesi Corridor, a gateway to Langtang, has also suffered damage to roads and bridges, with tourism businesses affected.
- Around Gosaikunda, landslides and flooding have affected trail routes, resulting in the suspension of pilgrimage and trekking activity.
- The Nuwakot/Trishuli Corridorhas experienced bridge and road damage affecting transport and adventure tourism routes.
- Kathmandu Valley and wider Nepal face a different challenge: supply-chain disruption, flight delays associated with road blockages, cancellations and, critically, the potential reputational impact on future bookings.
Why eTN Says: Look at the Map Before Writing Off Nepal
This geographic reality supports an important message for the global travel industry.
Do not minimize the disaster. Do not send tourists into danger. Follow the instructions of Nepalese authorities. But do not automatically write off an entire country without looking at where the disaster is actually concentrated.
For Nepal, the difference could mean thousands of livelihoods.
Blanket warnings can have consequences far beyond the disaster zone. A traveler considering an unaffected destination may cancel. A tour operator may suspend an entire Nepal program. An airline may experience reduced demand. Hotels hundreds of kilometers from the hardest-hit areas may lose bookings.
Soon, the perception of nationwide danger can become an economic reality even where tourism remains possible.
That is why GTRCMC says recovery communication should be geographically specific, credible and continuously updated.
Severely affected locations must remain subject to the advice and restrictions of Nepalese authorities. But international audiences should also receive accurate information distinguishing those areas from destinations that remain safe and operational.
The objective is not to protect tourism at the expense of safety. It is to protect safety without unnecessarily destroying tourism.
A Strategic Tourism Artery Is Severely Disrupted
The Rasuwa corridor illustrates how a relatively concentrated disaster can carry consequences far beyond the immediate flood zone.
GTRCMC describes the Rasuwa District and Rasuwagadhi–Syabrubesi–Timure corridoras a strategic tourism artery connecting Nepal with Tibet while providing access to Langtang National Park and the Kailash–Manasarovar pilgrimage route.
According to the assessment, 13,523 Kailash pilgrims traveled through Rasuwa during fiscal year 2025/26, representing an increase of 18.75% from the previous year.
Damage to such a corridor therefore affects far more than a road.
It can simultaneously interrupt tourism businesses, pilgrimage movements, cross-border travel, transport, accommodations and the livelihoods of communities along the route.
Waller: “The Speed of the Disaster Must Be Matched by the Speed of Our Response”
GTRCMC Global Director Professor Lloyd Waller said Nepal demonstrates how rapidly a localized environmental event can escalate into an international tourism emergency.
“The Nepal disaster reminds us that in an interconnected tourism system, vulnerability moves faster than borders. Within minutes, an environmental hazard can become a humanitarian emergency, an infrastructure crisis, a tourism crisis and an international crisis involving visitors and families across multiple countries.”
For Waller, the answer is a fundamentally different model of tourism crisis management — one based on intelligence and anticipation rather than simply reacting after damage has occurred.
“The speed of the disaster must be matched by the speed of our response. Tourism resilience can no longer begin after the crisis has occurred. It must begin with our ability to anticipate risk, share intelligence across borders, communicate with visitors in real time, protect tourism-dependent communities and mobilize resources before disruption becomes economic devastation.”
He added:
“The future of resilience is not simply about bouncing back; it is about building systems capable of absorbing shocks without surrendering the livelihoods and development gains that took generations to create.”
GTRCMC in Dialogue to Support Nepal
GTRCMC says it is now in dialogue with relevant authorities and partners about opportunities to provide technical and strategic support to Nepal’s tourism sector as emergency operations evolve into recovery.
The Centre is prepared to mobilize its international network and expertise around several priority areas:
- Crisis intelligence, consolidating and interpreting information affecting tourists, communities, infrastructure and tourism operations;
- Rapid tourism impact assessment, examining the consequences for businesses, workers, visitor flows, trekking and pilgrimage routes, infrastructure and tourism-dependent communities;
- Crisis communications, providing accurate and geographically specific information to travelers, tourism partners and international media;
- International coordinationbetween tourism organizations, governments, development partners, airlines, tour operators and other stakeholders; and
- Assistance for affected visitors, tourism workers and businesses, particularly small enterprises and vulnerable tourism-dependent communities.
This is where the combination of Bartlett’s tourism policy leadership and Waller’s focus on resilience intelligence could become particularly relevant to Nepal.
From Rescue to Recovery — and Then Transformation
GTRCMC’s preliminary assessment does not treat reopening as the end of recovery.
Instead, it proposes a three-phase frameworkextending from emergency response to a fundamental strengthening of Nepal’s tourism economy.
Phase One — Emergency Response: 0–30 days.Priorities include search and rescue, evacuation and shelter, health and psychosocial support, hazard monitoring, logistics and supply chains, crisis communications, assistance for affected tourists and tourism businesses, and rapid damage and impact assessments.
Phase Two — Recovery: 1–6 months.The emphasis shifts to restoring roads, bridges, power, water, telecommunications and sanitation; reopening routes and destinations safely; supporting businesses and protecting jobs; rebuilding visitor confidence; restoring destination reputation; supporting communities; and monitoring the recovery.
Phase Three — Resilience and Transformation: 6–24 months and beyond.Nepal would then move toward climate-resilient infrastructure, sustainable tourism and nature protection, digital and smart tourism systems, workforce development, governance reform, more diversified tourism and new resilience-financing and risk-transfer mechanisms.
The report ultimately envisions a Nepalese tourism industry that is climate-resilient, community-centered, inclusive and sustainable, supported by stronger early-warning systems, resilient infrastructure, protected natural and cultural heritage, empowered communities, smarter investment and stronger partnerships.
From Nepal to a Much Bigger Global Question
The disaster has also prompted GTRCMC to renew a proposal that Bartlett has been advocating internationally: the establishment of a dedicated Global Tourism Resilience Fund.
The argument is straightforward.
Developing destinations often face a cruel inequality after disasters: the countries most vulnerable to catastrophic disruption are frequently those with the fewest resources to finance their recovery.
A Global Tourism Resilience Fund could provide rapid, targeted support for tourism workers and small businesses; restoration of critical tourism infrastructure; destination recovery communications; rebuilding visitor confidence; resilience assessments; early-warning capabilities; and investment in more climate-resilient tourism systems.
GTRCMC believes such a mechanism should bring together governments, international financial institutions, development banks, tourism organizations, airlines, major tourism companies, philanthropic organizations and development partners.
The Centre’s Nepal assessment itself identifies resilience financing and risk-transfer mechanisms among the tools required to build a stronger tourism sector after the immediate crisis.
Bartlett: A Disaster Should Not Erase Decades of Development
Bartlett put the case in stark terms:
“A disaster should not be allowed to erase decades of development simply because a vulnerable country cannot finance its own recovery. The world has built mechanisms to finance development; we must now build mechanisms to protect development when disaster strikes.”
He continued:
“A Global Tourism Resilience Fund would represent more than financial assistance—it would represent a global commitment that no tourism-dependent destination should be left alone at the moment it is most vulnerable.”
Nepal may now provide a real-world test of that philosophy.
The Immediate Challenge: Save Lives Without Unnecessarily Losing Tourism
The immediate priority remains unmistakable: saving lives, finding missing people, assisting visitors and residents, supporting displaced communities and restoring essential services.
Tourism comes after human safety.
But tourism recovery cannot wait until every bridge has been rebuilt before it becomes part of the conversation — because for communities dependent on visitors, tourism is itself part of economic survival.
The GTRCMC assessment summarizes the challenge as one involving people, places, livelihoods and the future. Its final resilience framework calls for strong leadership, collective action, smart investment and rebuilding in ways that leave Nepal better prepared for the next crisis.
That also means resisting two equally dangerous extremes.
The first would be pretending Nepal is open everywhere and that the disaster should not affect travel decisions.
The second would be treating all of Nepal as one disaster zone and frightening visitors away from places where tourism can safely continue.
Nepal needs facts, geography, responsible travel advice and precision — not panic.
eTurboNews, together with Nepal’s tourism leaders, had been urging Trip Advisor, Trip.com and other tour companies to consider Nepal’s geography before warning potential clients booking a hotel in Nepal, far away from the crisis. Bartlett and Waller know this real well and responded
Jamaica has learned firsthand how critical tourism can be to recovery after a major crisis. Now its Global Tourism Resilience and Crisis Management Center, led by Edmund Bartlett and Lloyd Waller, is putting that experience into action for Nepal.
The GTRCMC says it stands ready to work with Nepal and its tourism stakeholders throughout the recovery and will continue monitoring developments. For Nepal’s tourism industry, the goal is not merely to return to where it was before the floods.
Leave a Comment