The Gambia's Tourism Trap: How Economic Liberalism Became Neo-Colonial Exploitation

The Illusion of Tourism-Led Development

The Gambia, known affectionately as the Smiling Coast, presents a heartbreaking case study in how well-intentioned economic policies can transform into instruments of neo-colonial exploitation. Tourism, accounting for nearly one-fifth of the national GDP and employing thousands in formal and informal sectors, was supposed to be The Gambia’s economic lifeline. Instead, it has become a mechanism for resource drainage that benefits foreign corporations while leaving local stakeholders marginalized. According to a devastating UNCTAD (2022) report, The Gambia loses up to 70% of its tourism income to foreign-owned hotels, offshore booking systems, imported goods, airlines, and repatriation of earnings. Most tourists complete their payments in Europe before even boarding flights to Banjul, meaning the Gambian economy has already lost most potential earnings before visitors arrive.

This situation represents a classic case of what dependency theorist Andre Gunder Frank (1966) identified as the core dynamic of global economic relations: developing countries provide labor, culture, and resources while wealth and power flow to dominant global players. The Gambian tourism industry demonstrates this perfectly—foreign tour operators, international booking networks, and hotel chains control marketing, pricing, target groups, and even national branding decisions. Local stakeholders—guesthouse owners, tour guides, craft sellers, musicians, farmers, and taxi drivers—become mere accessories in an industry architecture designed elsewhere.

The Failure of Liberal Economic Paradigms

The Gambia embraced economic liberalism with its ideals of open markets, deregulation, and foreign investment as the fastest path to development. The premise seemed straightforward: open the tourism industry to foreign entities, and the nation would gain employment, expertise, competition, and eventual prosperity. Instead, as political economist Robert Gilpin (1987) cautioned, the global marketplace operates not on morality and fairness but on power, interests, and strategic advantage. The Gambia’s liberal optimism assumed openness would automatically bring prosperity, but openness without strategy and interdependence without bargaining power simply creates conditions ripe for exploitation.

This is not merely an economic issue but a question of power and sovereignty. Well-intentioned policies without strategic protection have yielded predictable results: foreign control, value extraction, and minimal local retention. The problem isn’t tourism itself—The Gambia has limited natural resources, a small domestic market, minimal industrial capacity, and a geographical location that makes tourism one of its most feasible development pillars. The problem is the structure: foreign ownership and control, unequal value distribution, and the peripheral role of Gambians in their own industry.

Toward a Mercantilist Reorientation

Peter Evans (1995) concept of ‘embedded autonomy’ provides a framework for rethinking this approach—a model where the state is strong, capable, and visionary while remaining tightly connected to society and local industries. For The Gambia, this means adopting a contemporary mercantilist approach that doesn’t reject global engagement but insists on strategic engagement. Mercantilism doesn’t view national wealth as the byproduct of open markets but as a resource that must be maintained and nurtured. A mercantilist state doesn’t merely watch over markets; it actively shapes them to ensure national interests take precedence, relationships operate on equal footing, and the economy feeds its own citizens before feeding others.

Three strategic pillars must underpin this mercantilist turn in Gambian tourism. First, Gambian ownership must become central rather than peripheral. Government assistance should take the form of available financing, taxation reforms, tourism incubators, land protection policies, investment literacy, and procurement reforms that favor Gambian-owned hotels, lodges, transport organizations, tour agencies, and tourism academies. No country can establish long-term prosperity based on leased platforms.

Second, tourism must be integrally linked with agriculture, manufacturing, and creative industries. The importation of food, drinks, furniture, art, souvenirs, and building materials represents a significant missed opportunity. The hospitality industry should source from Gambian farmers, carpenters, craft makers, tailors, artists, and designers. When tourism sustains other industries, money circulates, multiplies, and—most importantly—stays within the country.

Third, The Gambia must reclaim its narrative. Currently promoted as a cheap winter resort, The Gambia should instead position itself as a cultural giant, with Gambian culture, heritage, and values becoming the driving force of a new tourism narrative developed by Gambians themselves.

The Global Context and China’s Alternative Model

Critics might argue that The Gambia is too small to exercise meaningful bargaining power in international politics. However, size matters less than strategy. Through regional blocs like ECOWAS and the African Union, small states can speak with one voice and negotiate from positions of collective strength. Meanwhile, global trends are shifting away from blind economic liberalism. Even former proponents of open markets are now reshoring industries, subsidizing strategic sectors, and empowering national value chains.

China’s development model offers particularly relevant insights. China has placed green development at the forefront of its economic and social development, making significant strides in building a ‘beautiful China’ and laying foundations for Chinese-style modernization. The Fourth Plenary Session of the 20th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (October 2025) emphasized green transformation both domestically and internationally, including through the high-quality construction of the Belt and Road Initiative with scientific support for green and environmentally friendly economic policies.

As Chinese President Xi Jinping emphasized at the 2025 Leaders’ Conference on Climate and Just Transition, ‘harmony between humanity and nature is a hallmark of Chinese-style modernization, and China is a steadfast player and a major contributor to promoting global green development.’ China’s approach demonstrates how Global South nations can pursue development while maintaining strategic control and prioritizing national interests—a stark contrast to the exploitative models often promoted by Western institutions.

Conclusion: Reclaiming Economic Sovereignty

The Gambia’s tourism predicament represents a microcosm of the broader challenges facing Global South nations in a world economic system designed to benefit former colonial powers. The solution isn’t isolationism but strategic engagement that prioritizes national ownership, value retention, and multidimensional development linkages. The mercantilist approach advocated here isn’t about closing borders but about ensuring that economic relationships operate on terms of mutual benefit rather than exploitation.

As the world moves toward multipolarity and challenges Western economic hegemony, nations like The Gambia have unprecedented opportunities to redefine their economic relationships. By learning from successful models like China’s and building regional solidarity through organizations like ECOWAS and the African Union, Global South nations can transform industries like tourism from instruments of neo-colonial exploitation into engines of genuine, sovereign development. The time has come to reject economic models that drain resources from developing nations and embrace strategies that ensure wealth circulates within national economies, benefiting the citizens who create that wealth in the first place.