Inequity in distribution of tourism income is a major problem in much of Latin America, especially for indigenous communities. Now Panama is taking tangible steps to fix that, beginning with ten pilot projects and a focus on nature and tradition. Iván Eskildsen, the nation’s Minister of Tourism, explains.
Our National Plan Intends To Preserve and Regenerate Ecosystems and Ancestral Traditions
As Panama aspires to become a world-class sustainable tourism destination, local communities need to be considered at the very center of the tourism phenomenon, or sustainability will not be achieved. This philosophy is at the heart of Panama’s Sustainable Tourism Master Plan.
King of the Naso people, Reynaldo Alexis Santana, is said to be the last indigenous king in the Americas. [Photo courtesy of Panamá por Naturaleza]
Panama is a crossroads of extraordinary biological and cultural diversity, connecting the two American continents and two great oceans. Panama is also one of only three countries in the world that is “carbon negative,” absorbing more carbon than it emits. More than 30% of Panama’s land and marine territory is protected, and 7 indigenous, Afro-descendant and mestizo peoples protect the natural and cultural diversity of this international hub.
The Panama Sustainable Tourism Model has been launched by the Tourism Authority of Panama (ATP) to establish tourism as a powerful tool to empower local and indigenous communities, so they can preserve and regenerate Panama’s rich and diverse ecosystems, as well as Panama’s cultural heritage, including ancestral practices at risk of disappearing. Local communities need to be the true guardians of the earth, and of their ancestral traditions.
The Panamanian Foundation for Sustainable Tourism (APTSO) and the ATP, have established the Panama Alliance for Community Tourism (PACT) to work alongside local communities to implement this philosophy.
PACT: a Collaborative Effort
The PACT project is reaching the end of its first phase, working with 10 pilot communities that reflect the cultural diversity of Panama in its main expressions: Indigenous, Afro and mestizo (Spanish heritage): Mata Oscura, Achiote, Bonllik, Santa Fe, Jurutungo, Soloy, Rio Caña, Bastimentos (Bahía Honda), Isla Cañas, and La Pintada.
These communities were selected based on a series of objective criteria that recognized their tourism potential, as well as a sufficient level of preparation that would allow them to reach a “market ready” status in the shortest possible time. With these communities, a diagnosis of their current degree of development was carried out by the PACT team; they participated in training sessions and workshops, and a catalog was prepared with information on the most attractive tourist experiences offered by the 10 communities.
The Soloy Community, one of the 10 pilot communities, is the gateway to the mystical Ngäbe-Buglé indigenous region. [Photo courtesy of Panamá por Naturaleza]
The diagnosis identified both terrestrial and aquatic trails as well as activities that would highlight the communities’ nature and biodiversity. It also recommended improvements and investments needed for trails to join the ‘1000 km of Trails’ project, a national network of trails developed by the ATP to integrate local communities to tourism development.
Also, the diagnosis identified investments needed for the communities’ attractions to be better prepared for visitors. Some of these investments have already been made to improve the visitor experience; other community needs in infrastructure will be submitted to the government’s Social Cabinet. This includes needs for improvements in water systems, community lodging, energy efficiency, among other proposed improvements. These infrastructure needs will also be presented to NGOs and international organizations that have available funds focused on biodiversity protection, and empowerment of local communities, to achieve the outlined roadmap for the pilot communities.
Marketing Community Tourism
In parallel to the preparation of these local communities, marketing strategies are being worked with these local communities, especially through the integration of the communities’ experiences in the tourism catalogs of national and international tour operators.
To accelerate this integration process, a Community Tourism Experiences Innovation Contest was launched together with the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO), offering attractive prizes to the most innovative experiences in community tourism. As a part of the contest, we are facilitating alliances between community providers and tour operators, through different workshops and training sessions.
Panama Community leaders at ATTA’s AdventureNext Latin America 2022 Conference, hosted in Panama City. [Photo courtesy of Panamá por Naturaleza]
To position these community-based experiences in the international markets, Panama has been focusing in the adventure travel market. In February 2022, Panama hosted Adventure Next Latin America, with the theme: “Community-Climate-Connection”. In this event, the 10 representatives of the PACTO pilot communities held a leading role in promoting these community-based experiences directly to dozens of media representatives, international tour operators and businesses. Panama continues to engage with the Adventure Travel and Trade Association (ATTA), bidding to host other international events as a strategic priority to market these community-based experiences, targeting to attract the adventure travel market (valued at $683 billion in global spending per year according to the ATTA).
The Panama Sustainable Tourism Model as an Open-Source Template
In Latin America and many other parts of the world we share a common reality: we have incredible wealth when it comes to biodiversity and cultural diversity, but at the same time we have a terrible distribution of income. We see the Panama Sustainable Tourism Model as a great opportunity to improve the quality of life of rural communities, through the sustainable development of their natural and cultural resources.
Even though the work with local communities is just finalizing its first phase, we are starting to see positive results from the initiatives described above. Some national and international tour operators are integrating these community-based experiences to their catalogs, and are beginning to bring tourists to these communities. We are optimistic that these results will mature in time, and as this happens, we will be committed to share this Sustainable Tourism Model as an open-source template, which can be replicated in other countries committed to the development of local communities and the regeneration of the planet’s ethnic and biological diversity.
[Above, Turtle Island in profile. Photo: Roi Ariel]
For 20 years, ecotourists have been eager to tour a biodiverse volcanic island off the coast of Taiwan. But what happens when both locals and tourists complain about the stringent conservation limits on visitation set by government and academics? Monique Chen explains how stakeholders have harmonized ecological carrying capacity and local economics.
Taiwan’s Turtle Island, an active volcano known for its turtle-like shape, claims a rare lily, an endangered flying fox, a dazzling coral reef, a thriving ecosystem, and a “Milk Sea.” Its proximity to Taipei makes it a tourism magnet – and a management challenge.
The island lies 10 km east off of Taiwan’s Northeast and Yilan Coast National Scenic Area (NEYC), named as one of the Top 100 Sustainable Destinations from 2016 to 2020. Known as Guishan Island in Mandarin, it has a surface of area of 2.85 km2 and a high point of 398 meters above sea level with an unused military outpost on top of the hill. The island’s location off the northeast coast puts its ferries within an hour’s drive of Taipei, and then a mere 20-minute boat ride to the island.
Dated back to the Qing Dynasty (around the 18th century), Turtle Island had a population of 700 villagers at its peak. The whole village was relocated to the main island in 1977 because of the limited health, educational, and transportation resources. After the relocation, the island became a military base from 1977 to 2000. All the land was expropriated by the military.
The accessibility restrictions and the influence of the warm, plankton-bearing Kuroshio Current (pdf) has resulted in a surprisingly well-conserved area of rich natural and geological resources, home to many fish and coral reef species and a critical area for Taiwan’s offshore fishery. Over 50 hot spring vents lie in the sea floor near the “turtle head,” where a unique species of crab lives. There are around 16 species of cetaceans in the area according to studies. A diversity of more than 400 species of plants and 120 species of butterflies, snakes, birds are found in the island, as are two native Taiwan species, the endangered Formosan flying fox and the Formosan lily, as well as a native Chinese fan palm habitat.
Volcanic Turtle ( Guishan) Island – 17 minute video.
Limiting Carrying Capacity
Because of its amazing natural and marine resources, the government reopened Turtle Island for ecotourism in 2000 in response to demand from the tourism industry. To protect island ecology, capacity control was set at 250 persons per day, almost all brought in by ferry. Also, to ensure low impact on the environment, the supporting policy “Regulations for Guishan (Turtle) Island Ecological Tours” (Chinese only) was put into effect. The regulations prohibit fishing, hunting, feeding wild animals, taking any natural resources from the island, and importing animals and plants to the island.
In the first two years, the capacity limit caused some management problems. NEYC, a part of Tourism Bureau Taiwan, was struggling with pressures from local stakeholders, especially private accommodation businesses and ferry companies. Over 10,000 tourists applied to visit Turtle Island every day, but the low draw rate raised issues and complaints from both tourists and local businessmen on the main island.
Increasing Carrying Capacity
NEYC adopted a strategy of slowly increasing tourist capacity while keeping the ecosystem intact. The daily visitor capacity limit was gradually raised from 250 to 350 (2002), then 400 (2005), 500 (2007), 700 (2010), 1000 (2014), and 1800 (2015 to the present).
An endangered Formosa flying fox. Of the bat’s three Taiwanese habitats, Forest Bureau research shows that only the group in Turtle Island has grown steadily since 2010, suggesting that NEYC’s tourist carrying capacity plan has not harmed the ecosystem. Photo: Yang Yueh-Tzu
How did they do it?
It is easy for a DMO to declare it would like to set eco-social carrying capacity according to academic research, but when the DMO actually begins to implement it, stakeholder voices and facility capacity must be taken into account. There are always academic professors who strongly embrace ecological conservation without tourist access and who may not agree with rising visitation. Other professors will take stakeholder opinions and the environmental situation into account. The NEYC staff told me that there was no conflict in their discussion with professors.
In order to help the local economy by replacing the declining fishing industry with a growing tourism industry while still protecting marine resources, NEYC went on to hold meetings with local stakeholders at intervals on how to increase carrying capacity and improve the facilities so as to achieve a sustainable “ecological economy.” Following these discussions, including professors from marine, biological, and recreational departments, NYEC arrived at a plan that balanced the environmental research baseline with local economics. Considering that only a part of island (the tail part, around a tenth of its surface) was open to the public, the dock, hiking trails, and service facilities (toilets) could be improved and maintained.
Rebuilt stairways can handle increased foot traffic to the peak. Photo: Roi Ariel
The tourist-accessible area is around 19,835 square meters and the capacity baseline was originally set at 132 square meters per person in 2000. Visitation sessions were set at 150 people a session before 2010, then 250 people a session in 2010, under the operating procedure controlled by an NEYC guard team. Now tourists are usually split into four 90 to 120 minute sessions per day, with a limit of 450 visitors at the same time during March to November. (The island is closed during monsoon season from December to February.) Wednesdays are reserved for academic organizations only, up to 500 visitors, split into different sessions.
From the sign atop Turtle Island. Photo: Roi Ariel
Coastal guards monitor when tourists get on board and leave the island. Now, there are 13 recreational ferries with a capacity of 85-94 visitors, among which four ferries are owned by the former Turtle Island residents and the rest run by other locals in NEYC area. Most of the tour packages combine dolphin watching and hiking on the island, so some ferries can go dolphin watching first and take turns to get on the island.
The Formosa Lily restoration project allows tourists to see a beautiful springtime white landscape near the tourism center. Photo: Yang Yueh-Tzu
Each group of visitors landed on the island has 90 to 100 minutes to tour along the trail system, guided by licensed guides. After a stop at the tourism center, tourists visit the temple and old primary school buildings, walk around the lake to explore biodiversity, and visit the military tunnel and abandoned fort where they can watch the sea.
According to the report, there are always requests for more facilities and carrying capacity. For example, overnight stay service and submarine tours were suggested. Because NEYC’s main target is to conserve the natural landscape and environment, development with big construction didn’t fit in their plan.
Control of Dolphin Watching
The dolphin/whale watching activity around Turtle Island began even before Turtle Island opened for tourists in 1997. As one observer has noted, “in 20 years, Taiwanese people changed to conserve the cetaceans instead of eating them.”
However, there were no regulations and no consideration of carrying capacity for tourists participating in a dolphin and whale watching package. Given that all ferries have must acquire a license from Yilan county to run a recreational business, the stakeholders decided to limit the number of licenses in the area to 13, tied to a code of conduct. That put an automatic limit on cetacean watching around the island.
Sightseeing ferry at the edge of the Milk Sea. Photo: Monique Chen
The negative impact from dolphin watching activities brought together academics aligned with NGOs, the Fishery Agency, Council of Agriculture from the Taiwan central government to set up a voluntary certification system, “Whale Watching Mark,” in 2003. Among the 13 ferries, only 5 were certified. Due to the complicated documentation process required for certification, and given that green tourism was not mainstream enough in Taiwan, the Whale Watching Mark hasn’t received good responses from ferry companies until now. NEYC has also started to cooperate with Taiwan’s nationalOcean Affairs Council in monitoring dolphin research in the area. Since 2017, researchers have used GPS to track the sight-seeing ferries as an indicator of dolphin movements.
As a DMO, the NEYC has tried to find friendly strategies to get more ferry owners to understand that chasing dolphins may harm the environment. By regulation, tour guides working for ferries and on Turtle Island must be licensed by NEYC twice a year. Through annual tour guide training, the ferry owners have gained more knowledge about protecting the marine dolphins. According to one captain, one protocol among ferries now is to take turns for 10 minutes for tourists to observe nearby dolphin families when more than one ferry approaches them.
COVID-19 and Beyond
During the Covid-19 pandemic, domestic tourism in Taiwan has soared as Taiwanese were not able to travel overseas. Some popular Taiwanese destinations encountered unprecedented negative impacts of overtourism for the first time. Even though tourist arrivals reached full capacity during weekdays, Turtle Island remained under control because of its carrying capacity system.
One challenge NEYC faces now is the “Milk Sea” close to the island, where “God has spilt the milk” as described by promotional agents. The Milk Sea refers to seawater with milky cream color caused by undersea hot springs. The tourism industry has touted this new sightseeing spot as a novelty, and tourists are flooding in. More and more yachts, stand-up paddleboards, and kayaks have come to this area, causing safety problems and conflicts with the ferry boats.
The Milk Sea from atop Turtle Island. Photo: Yang Yueh-Tzu
Fortunately, from 2016, NEYC has been implementing the GSTC Destination Criteria and participating in the Green Destinations Program has helped NEYC gain confidence and not only assess what they have done so far but also act on guidelines for achieving a more “sustainable-ecological economy” tourism pattern. Now some voices among original residents express hope that Turtle Island can be designated a cultural landscape heritage site and the history of their traditions and culture preserved.
Whatever changes to the Island may be, they will be based on official adherence to sustainability criteria. “‘Ecological Island’ is the main management strategy of Turtle Island, and the priority is to keep the eco-landscape and lower the construction impact in Turtle Island,” says Chia Feng Lin, Coordinator of NEYC.
Following the criteria, NEYC keeps on communicating sustainability principles and marine conservation to business owners, tour guides, and ferry owners, along with continued academic monitoring of Turtle Island’s ecological indicators .
To summarize, from the view point of sustainability, stakeholders’ voices and social conditions should be taken into consideration as well as academic research. Although the carrying capacity program may not be 100% perfect from scientists and researchers’ environmental protection perspective, NEYC has found a transforming strategy to meet the needs of the tourists, local ferry owners, and environmental conservation needs.
Hopefully, this example can inspire other destinations to find their own balance strategies.
Appendix
Monique Chen has supplied these additional links (some in Chinese only):
Above: Manolis Beehives in Crete. Photo by Nikki Rose
Everyone knows that the Mediterranean Diet is good for you. We can see that in the fine health of people who have spent their lives eating this way, and esteemed doctors have backed that up with data. But this wholesome way of life is at risk in the place where it began.
The premise of the Mediterranean Diet originated in Crete shortly after World War II, resulting in “The Seven Countries Study.” The basic findings were that some people in Crete lived long, healthy lives because of what they ate (and did not eat) during those hard times. There was no laboratory food, chemical agriculture or mass tourism yet. The only option was fresh and local food, which I call Real and Safe Food (RSF). But things have changed.
Mass Tourism Endangers Mediterranean Diet Foods
When I moved to my grandmother’s homeland of Crete 16 years ago, some communities were importing the Worst of the West at warp speed. Generic forms of holiday making (mass tourism) swept through entire regions, leaving virtually no trace of local life. It didn’t happen gradually enough for residents to determine how to stop the heritage bulldozers. Many people anticipated a better future. But mass tourism affected the way most of my neighbors wanted to live and eat.
Mass Tourism, Malia, Crete, Greece.
Society was moving from subsistence farming/bartering to a world created by multinational corporations and public agencies that served them. Young Greeks wanted what the tourists had – vacations abroad, pizza and beer. The older Greeks wanted their children to have a better education, because their traditional lifestyle was no longer viable. So my neighbors bought into this fast-track system (unwittingly or not) in exchange for their pristine environment and what it provided – RSF.
Crete’s RSF is at risk, and so is the population’s health: the rates of diabetes and heart disease are rising because residents have accepted corporate laboratory food from seed to table. Greek farmers and artisan food producers are rarely invited to speak in international forums, but the truth cannot be told without their voices.
My first concern is, who is thinking about what Crete really needs right now? We need to hear from the people who actually know and are implementing solutions. For more than half a century, public agencies have been appeasing industries that have not served citizens well. Their promotion of Crete’s cuisine or tourism in the countryside is not comforting unless agencies and industries have a plan to protect it first.
Now we have another heritage invader: All-inclusive hotels are on the rise, causing sudden death to local businesses. These compounds typically import 90% of their products, including food. The hoteliers’ excuse is that there is no consistency in local products. Are delectable local tomatoes too good for their customers?
On the ground in Crete, I work with many specialists in organic farming, viticulture, heirloom seed saving, traditional cuisine, botany-ecology, ecotourism, archaeology. Their stories tell about the lack of support for producers of RSF, the lack of protection of biodiversity where our precious wild greens and medicinal plants (horta) comes from.
Chef Mavrakis, Collecting Horta, Crete
Now that our cuisine and nature is “news,” we have the threat of mass tourism operators infiltrating our countryside with caravans of tourists in jeeps or 50 pax buses (they don’t call them people) on their programs entitled, “Authentic Crete.” It’s just the decades-old destructive system invading our priceless heritage.
Chef Dimitris Mavrakis Preparing Horta (Wild Greens)
So when it was time for me to share my knowledge about Cretan Cuisine at a recent conference, I began by sharing my favorite recipe: conservation. Conservation of our priceless ingredients is what we need now more than ever.
Both the local and global community benefit from RSF. UNESCO declared the Mediterranean Diet an “intangible cultural heritage.” While that is admirable, protecting the source of life of all species on Earth cannot be “intangible.” It must be Real. People accomplished this for thousands of years before the advent of chemical agriculture and mass tourism. There are still many people who know how to accomplish this today.
Ask the Producers Themselves What They Need
Instead of the mindset that we are supporting our RSF providers, let’s consider accepting their support. Let’s ask our RSF providers how we can make it easier for them to:
Train and support more sustainable organic farmers, vintners, small-scale fishers, and artisan food producers
Break down the barriers to success – fixed pricing, taxes, distribution, export laws
Create incentives (real living wages and training) to produce and distribute high-quality sustainable organic and sustainably harvested products
Collaborate with lodgers, restaurateurs, chefs and cooks supporting those above
Sustain and create more bona fide eco-agritourism initiatives (not just a place to stay in the middle of nowhere)
Collaborate with archaeologists striving to protect our heritage and share their knowledge about lessons learned and ignored
Collaborate with ecologists and support conservation initiatives
Once we accomplish the above, we can honestly celebrate our priceless “Mediterranean Cuisine.”
Related Video presentation by Nikki Rose on Crete trends in tourism, food, and farming, at the National Hellenic Museum, Chicago, 2013
Related Article “What’s the Mediterranean Diet…and who is on it anyway?
