27 March 2009 As our stay in Costa Rica winds down towards its conclusion, I’ve been thinking about the country and the theme of ecotourism. Of course, my window is limited to the experiences of a few-month visit. But I think I came here with an open mind and even some enthusiasm for what Costa Rica seemed to be trying to accomplish. I leave more skeptical than I arrived.
I find myself wondering if “ecotourism” is simply an advertising gimmick and that tourism here, like tourism everywhere, is a strong economic machine that does more environmental harm than good.
Some clues and impressions:
(1) An overall economic view. Here are some wild guess numbers. Costa Rica has a population of about 3.5 million. If the GDP is ~ $10,000 per capita per year, then the total capital flow in CR would be about $35 billion per year. I’m guessing that there are 2 million visitors annually who spend an average of a week in the country and probably spend about $1500 per person here. The result would be $3 billion, or nearly 10% of the total economy of the country. The government’s take on this is a 13% tax on at least hotel and restaurant bills plus hefty fees of $10 per person per visit to any national park. I’m guessing that the tax would generate government revenue of about $200 per visitor, which could be $400 million per year. If — as in the US — the government represents about 1/3 of the total economy, then the revenue stream generated by tourists to the government would exceed 10%. What does all of the inflow of capital provide? The good news: water is safe to drink, food is healthy, and accommodations are of good quality and reasonably priced. The bad news: roads are dangerous, walking conditions are poor, and the national parks are really underdeveloped for visitors in comparison, say, to the US national park system. I don’t think that much of the money being spent by tourists to the Costa Rican government is providing services that improve the experience of the tourist, such as educating us about how to be more ecologically conscientious.
(2) The link between strong ecology and a strong economy is — I think — widely recognized in Costa Rica. Much less obvious is the belief in a strong ecology for its own sake. When economic prosperity conflicts with ecological preservation, I think the former has the upper hand.
(3) The places we have stayed recently have not been well designed in an ecological sense. The coastal sites mostly rely on room-scale compressor-based air conditioners for dealing with the tropical heat, rather than a more ecological design based, for example, on thermal mass and natural ventilation.
I got to thinking about this especially in the context of Manuel Antonio. The good news is that this corner of extraordinary beauty has been preserved. But the park itself does not appear to be carefully managed. And in the immediate surroundings are the usual stresses on the environment that one finds in any resort community. Also, on the drive down here, we passed through an incredibly long stretch — maybe 50 km of distance — of monoculture African palm plantations, apparently for palm oil. We learn that the squirrel monkeys are endangered. Can they survive with such a small island of undisturbed habitat as this national park?
Costa Rica has declared its intent to become carbon neutral within a moderate period of time. Good for them! Right now, their electricity is substantially provided by hydropower, based on the dam at Arenal. They are installing new, state-of-the-art wind turbines to augment their electricity resources. But I don’t know what they will do about petroleum. They are heavily dependent on gasoline and diesel -- used in automobiles, vans, and buses -- both for their intrinsic economy and also for supporting the tourist trade. Their fleet-average fuel economy can’t be particularly good (bad roads, many SUVs). Worse, as their prosperity grows, they seem headed towards heavier use of private vehicles. How will they transform their transportation system into one that has a small (zero?) fossil carbon footprint? There are no clear clues from our "on the ground" experience during the past few months here.
As we wind down our stay, I am also winding down my “time out.” I put in a solid work day today while Ingrid and Daniela (and the Finkels) enjoyed a leisurely day at the beach. On a late afternoon walk, I headed down to the beach, which is about 1.5 miles from the house we are renting. I made a loop trip out via a dirt road, then along the beach for about a mile, and then back along the main road, which connects the national park to the town of Manuel Antonio (where we are staying). These photos are from the walk.
1. (Top of post) The island and isthmus of Manuel Antonio National Park can be seen in the background. The dirt road from the MA village led down to the coast off to the right in the frame, and from there I could walk along the curve of sand just to the point in the photo where the breakers can be seen. That stretch is outside of the national park and is just a part of the resort community.
2. The local beaches here are much more busy than the ones we visited in Nosara. Ingrid and Amy rented two chaise lounges and an umbrella for the day for about US$10. Beverage vendors and other merchants ply their wares on the beach.
3. A road along this busy stretch of the beach has many merchants with stalls selling all sorts of souvenirs and handicrafts. The colorful sarongs depict some of the country’s iconic fauna: blue morpho, (endangered) squirrel monkey, scarlet macaws, and sea turtles. Massages are available on the beach.
