The state of Chiapas, Mexico has recently begun to consider ecotourism as a possible answer to the problem of a rapidly diminishing rainforest and severe socio-economic conditions.  Ecotourism has attracted increasing attention in recent years, gaining recognition for its innovative method of linking economic development with environmental conservation.  Ideally, ecotourism efforts bring visitors to tour areas of the rainforest and other wild sanctuaries, thereby generating funds to preserve the delicate ecosystems while simultaneously boosting the local economy.  The theory is fairly straightforward, “because most of the destruction of forests and other habitats is driven by people’s need to grow crops or earn income to support their families, such destruction can be best prevented if continuing sources of employment and income are created that depend upon keeping the resource intact.”[1] Yet preliminary evidence in this emerging market seems to show that practice is not as simple as theory. In order for ecotourism to accomplish the goals put forth for the Chiapanecos, specifically, the indigenous population, several important factors must be considered and balanced.

It is important to consider the social and economic dilemmas that the ‘Chiapanecos’ face when examining the possible impacts of ecotourism on the community.  Chiapas is composed of 74,000 kilometers of mountains and tropical forests[2] which are rich with natural resources and provide the setting for an ecotourism industry to thrive. Chiapas produces 20% of Mexico’s energy, 28% of the nation’s meat, and over 100,000 tons of coffee[3], all tremendously lucrative products. 

However, hardly any of the profits find their way back to the workers or the people of Chiapas. The salaries in Chiapas are three

times lower than the national average. Forty percent of the farmers in Chiapas make only $1.74 a day; this is half the Mexican minimum wage.[4]

The statistics corresponding to the health of the population in Chiapas are equally, if not more, degrading. Each year 14,500 people die from curable diseases in Chiapas - the highest number in the country.[5] The infant mortality is double the national average as well, recorded at 66 deaths per 1,000.[6] This undoubtedly is influenced by the fact that 1.5 million people fail to receive any medical attention. There are .2 clinics for every 1,000 people; this is five times less than the national average.[7] To add to these monstrous statistics, 54% of the population in Chiapas is malnourished - 80% in La Selva Lacandona and in Los Altos (where more than 70% of the indigenous population lives.)  The average diet consists of coffee, pozol (corn), tortillas, and beans.[8]

Similarly, it is important to understand the significance of preserving the Lacandon rainforest, home to many indigenous people, and which is being destroyed at astonishing rates.  In 1875 it consisted of 3.2 million acres.  In the 1940’s the Mexican government labeled the jungle as national territory and opening it up to colonization.  In 1991 less than 600, 000 acres remained. [9]  The rapid rate of deforestation is greatly impacted by the lumbering industry which harvests valuable woods such as mahogany, in many instances ignoring restrictions and gathering lumber from reserves or land belonging to the indigenous groups who lack the resources to defend their land.  Deforestation is also caused, in part, by the clearing initiated by ‘Chiapanecos’ who engage in agricultural production as a livelihood.   

However, the Mayan rainforest in Chiapas provides an ideal setting for a successful tourist attraction.  The ‘Selva Lacandona’ is home to diverse plants and animals unique to the rainforest.  The Mayan ruins in Chiapas, such as Palenque, Bonampak, Yaxchilan, and Piedras Negras are unequaled archaeological sites which draw visitors from all over the world. Furthermore, the arts and crafts particular to the region and the indigenous cultures themselves attract attention from travelers originating in first world countries.  Given the unique conditions that serve to entice foreign visitors, it becomes clear that active conservation of the rainforest can be beneficial to everyone.

   However, in order for ecotourism to help alleviate the two major dilemmas facing the ‘Chiapanecos,’ it must be able to overcome the problems characteristic of Third World Tourism and which are fast becoming criticisms of Ecotourism.  The most significant concern regards the amount of profits which actually reach the indigenous populations of Chiapas.  According to Axel the economic benefits to developing countries through traditional tourism are very limited.  Only 35% of income generated by tourism in Third World countries remain in these countries, while poor sectors of the population receive virtually no profit at all.[10]  However, it is very plausible that this phenomenon could extend into the ecotourism market. 

In order for tourism to benefit the marginalized populations, the rural communities would have to own and manage some or all of the industry – a concept known as ‘community-based ecotourism.’  This becomes complex when considering the international nature of the tourism industry, which can be tremendously profitable for foreign investors or large companies with greater business contacts and the financial resources.  Which is why several conservation organizations and Mexican government agencies have begun to subsidize and promote ‘community based’ ecotourism programs in the Lacandon rainforest. 

Another problem arises when considering the plausibility of large amounts of tourists to visit a delicate eco-system without damaging it.  If ecotourism gets enormously popular, the environment would not be able to sustain large numbers of tourists.  There already exist clear examples of this in Costa Rica and Belize where overdevelopment and significant damage to the natural environment accompanied the growing popularity of the sites.[11] 

Another important factor to consider, although clearly less discernable are the cultural impacts on the indigenous populations, descendants from the Mayan civilization and in many ways constituting a culture distinct and unique from mainstream Mexico.  A large amount of tourists, replete with paved roads to nearby sites is bound to impact local communities with a Western culture of consumerism and materialism which could, in turn, speed acculturation and create internal social problems.[12]  Whether the negative impacts of Western civilization outweigh the possible economic incentives of engaging in ecotourism is debatable; however, it is an important factor to consider when balancing the negative and positive effects.         

Local control through community-based ecotourism in Chiapas is the best answer to the problems indicated above.  The wheels of the ecotourism industry have been greased, as the Miami Herald proclaims “Tourists from all over the world are flocking to Chiapas,” and whether ecotourism is favorable or not, it becomes apparent that community based ecotourism programs would reduce negative impacts and ensure that benefits would be far reaching within the local community.

Community-based ecotourism, where projects are owned and managed by local communities would guarantee that economic rewards were felt within the cooperative.  If they were owned and managed by large-scale companies, the tour groups would come and go, leaving the local population with low-paying, service-intensive jobs and a few pesos for arts and crafts souvenirs.

Similarly, because local indigenous groups can control the amount of visitors to the designated sites, they can effectively reduce negative effects on the ecosystem given their vested interest in the conservation of the rainforest.  This genuine interest might be existent in international tour group agencies.

Current community-based ecotourism projects, although in the preliminary stages, seem to be experiencing moderate success in other countries.  However, it is important to note that long-term effects have not been thoroughly studied by scholars and it is hard to discern, without conducting field research, where organizations’ true interests lie.  ‘Mundo Maya,’ was formed in the late 1980’s and has continued into the current decade by the tourism boards of S. Mexico, Guatemala, Belize, Honduras, and El Salvador, in order to promote tourism in the Mayan jungles of these countries.  Although on the surface the project can appear beneficial to the indigenous communities, Ross criticizes ‘Mundo Maya’ as a clear example of the exploitation of the Mayan people.[13]

 However, there exists evidence that some non-governmental agencies have committed themselves to making positive change. Organizations such as The Nature Conservancy and Conservation International, along with many other researchers see community-based tourism as a valuable answer and have helped fund and develop plans for community based ecotourism.[14]  Similarly, the InterAmerican Foundation is bringing together non-governmental organizations in Mexico to start a consortium that will direct funds to development programs such as ecotourism.  The long-term goals initiated by these organizations – to build ‘social capital’ -reflect expectations which reach far and beyond the initial issues that ecotourism aims to address.  Friedmann explains the logic of building ‘social capital’:

          “Giving full voice to the disempowered sectors of the population

tends to follow a certain sequence.  Political empowerment would

seem to require a prior social empowerment through which effective

participation in politics becomes possible”[15]

Therefore it becomes apparent that community-based ecotourism and grassroots development programs possess the potential to have significant, far-reaching results. One example of a successful program is the Toledo Ecotourism Association in Belize, which was established in response to increasing numbers of uncoordinated tourists into their villages, and which coordinates community based ecotourism in several Mopan and Kekchi Maya communities.[16]  Some basic aspects of the strategy implemented include a limitation of the number of tourists, “an efficient internal quality and cleanliness control”, and a communal fund project in which 20% of tourism revenue is placed in a fund which finances education, health and environmental projects.[17] 

However, this is not a recipe for success; a case study regarding a project in Lacanja, Chiapas found that there were significant organizational problems within the local community and a significant resistance on the part of the indigenous population.[18]  Research concluded that the particular indigenous group was not familiar with the ‘modern’ concepts of finances, management and common interests.  Yet, in spite of this example, it remains apparent that a community-based ecotourism, by the indigenous population and directly benefiting their economy and environment continues to be the form of ecotourism most beneficial to the poverty-stricken population of Chiapas. 

I do not believe that community-based ecotourism should be considered as a sole solution to the problems of poverty and deforestation in the state of Chiapas.  I solely assert that if justly run, it can be used as a tool to help relieve the impoverished populations of Chiapas and increase environmental awareness.  It is also viable that community-based ecotourism programs could achieve far more than originally anticipate and aid in empowering what is now a virtually voiceless group of people residing in the Mayan forest of Chiapas.  However, there also remains the possibility that ecotourism could turn into another form of mass tourism – creating negative impacts both on the indigenous populations and the ecosystem of the Selva Lacandona.  Community based ecotourism projects would have to be aided through capital and managerial training by government and non-governmental agencies, which already is in the process of occurring, as indicated above.  These efforts, however, must effectively make local development projects competent enough to compete with large or international ecotourism agencies.  In conclusion, it appears that community-based ecotourism is undoubtedly a trend which, if managed effectively, can provide long-term positive results for the state of Chiapas.