Is Ecotourism a Useful Tool for Sustainable Development?

The Case of the Mamirauá Reserve in the Brazilian Amazonia

Julio Cesar Souza de Andrade

Supervised by Professor Michael Redclift

2002

This dissertation is submitted as a part of

the MSc Tourism, Environment and Development.
Abstract

This research project is a study of the ecotourism venture developed in the Mamirauá
Sustainable Development Reserve, which is located in the Brazilian Amazonia. The study
takes a diachronic approach, considering all the phases of implementation since 1997.
Issues considered are the following: the participation of local people and how they
benefited from the tourism venture, and how the tourist activities have affected
conservation in the area. For the evaluation, a framework based in indicators of
sustainability is used. It is revealed that tourism activities developed in Mamiraua
contemplates the majority of principles related to ecotourism; however, profitability is
still to be reached.

Key words:
Ecotourism,
Local development,
Sustainability,
Brazilian Amazonia,
Community involvement in tourism.

2
List of Contents Page

Abstract 2
List of Tables and Figures 4
Abbreviations 5
Acknowledgments 6
1-Introduction 7
2-Literature Review 11
2.1- Amazonia : Development and destruction 11
2.2- Sustainable development paradigm 12
2.3- Tourism and ecotourism 13
2.3.1- Tourism: sustainability 13
2.3.2- Ecotourism debate 14
2.3.3- Tourism and ecotourism in the Brazilian Amazon 16
3- Methodology 18
3.1- Description of fieldwork 18
3.2- Framework for evaluation 19
4- Ecotourism in Mamirauá 20
4.1-Evaluative framework 25
4.1.1- Minimization of negative impacts 26
4.1.2- Increase of awareness and understanding 29
4.1.3- Contribution to conservation of protected areas 31
4.1.4- Participation of locals in the decision-making process 32
4.1.5- Generation of economic and other benefits to local people 33
4.1.6- Participation of local people as visitors 36
5- Conclusions 38
6- References 41

3
List of Tables Page

1 - The Most Included Issues in Ecotourism Definitions 15

2 - International Tourist Arrivals in Brazil and Manaus 17
3 – Ecotourism Development in Mamirauá 21
4 – Competition among Ecotourism Ventures in the Amazon 24
5 - Summary of Principles and Indicators for Ecotourism 25
6 – Income from Handicraft Sales 35

List of Figures

1 - Mamirauá Reserve Location 7

2 - Central Amazon Ecological Corridor 8
3 – Ecotourism Management in the Mamirauá Reserve 20
4 - Ecotourists in Mamirauá 22
5 - Information Source for Tourists 22
6 – Service Evaluation 23
7 – Uacari Lodge 27
8 – Income for Local Communities from Ecotourism 33
9 – Origin of Ecotourists to Mamirauá 37

4
List of Abbreviations

AAGMAM – Guides and Lodge Workers Association of Mamirauá

BA – Brazilian Amazonia
DFID − Department for International Development – United Kingdom
EMBRATUR – Brazilian Tourism Authority
IBAMA – Brazilian Environmental Authority
IDB – Inter-American Development Bank
IDSM – Instituto de Desenvolvimento Sustentavel Mamiaua
MCT – Brazilian Science and Technology Ministry
MMA – Brazilian Ministry of the Environment
MSDR – Mamirauá Sustainable Development Reserve
NGO − Non-governmental Organisation
PROECOTUR – Programme for the Development of Ecotourism
SCM – Sociedade Civil Mamirauá
UN – United Nations
UNEP – United Nations Environmental Programme
UNESCO – United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization
WCS – World Conservation Society
WTO – World Tourism Organization
WWF – World Wildlife Fund

5
Acknowledgments

I wish to thank my family as well as old and new friends that help me during this
course. I would also to thank the Instituto de Desenvolvimento Mamirauá and MCT for
their support during the fieldwork. Finally I wish to thank the people of Mamirauá, who
were extremely friendly and receptive.

6
1-Introduction

The Amazonia embraces a total area of around 7.8 million km2, seventy percent of
which is Brazilian territory, representing more than 60% of Brazil. The Brazilian
Amazonia (BA) contains about 40% of the world’s remaining tropical rainforest. It is seen
by the environmental movement as an icon: a great biodiversity, an important carbon
sink, and a regional climate and hydrologic regulator. This region is also home to a
human population of about twenty million people, including an indigenous population of
200,000 people (IBGE, 2000).
Alternatives for conservation and development within the region are highly
debated. Since the 1990s, tourism, especially ecotourism, has been successively presented
as one of the main economic options for the region. Nowadays, tourism is considered the
major industry in the world involving 700 million international trips that generated US$
478 billion in 2000(WTO, 2000).
Even though there is a consensus about some negative impacts that this activity
causes; it has been viewed as an alternative for aiding conservation. Tourist dollars could
convince local people and governments that forests can produce more money in the long
term (Boo, 1990; Dharmaratne, Sang and Walling, 2000). This was one of the reasons
why the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) declared 2002: The
International Year of Ecotourism.
This investigation will present a case study evaluating an ecotourism venture
developed in the Mamirauá Sustainable Development Reserve (MSDR) in the Brazilian
Amazon.
Figure 1- Location of the Mamirauá Reserve

7
 Source: Mamirauá database
This reserve was created in 1990, by the Amazonas state, comprising 11,240 Km2
of the varzea – floodplain - at the confluence of the Solimoes and Japura rivers, in the
BA. The MSDR was recognized in 1993 by the International Ramsar Convention on
Wetlands. Mamirauá is the habitat of two endemic monkey species, and has a human
population of 5,829 residents (Mamirauá, 2002).
Mamirauá and its neighbours, the Amana Sustainable Development Reserve and
the Jaú National Park, are part of the Central Amazon Ecological Corridor. This corridor
constitutes an area equivalent to the size of Costa Rica.
Figure 2 - Central Amazon Ecological Corridor

Source: Mamirauá Reserve

8
 This reserve is managed by a non-governmental organization (NGO), the Sociedade
Civil Mamirauá (SCM), based in Tefé. To carry out the studies that resulted in the
management plan, Brazilian − Science and Technology Ministry (MCT) − and foreign
agencies − DFID-UK and European Union − funded several researchers; also the World
Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the World Conservation Society (WCS) contributed to the
reserve. In 1999 the Instituto de Desenvolvimento Sustentavel Mamirauá (IDSM) was
created to channel more public funds to the reserve. Consequently, the Mamirauá Reserve
adopted a new style of management for protected areas in Brazil.
Due to compounding efforts from government institutions, NGOs and Brazilian
and foreign organizations, Mamirauá became one of the better funded protected areas in
the country. Although there is a persistent mistrust of foreign involvement in the reserve
management by local authorities in Tefé, it seems that at the national level, as pointed out
by Ans Kolk (1998), the political ecology of conservation in the BA evolved from conflict
to cooperation.
These efforts were recognized by the 2001 UNESCO award presented to the
IDSM for its relevant research in conservation and sustainable use of renewable
resources. In 2002, the IDSM director, Marcio Ayres received the La Roe Award from
the Society for Conservation Biology for his ‘social, economic and political work’
developed in Mamirauá.
In the Management Plan of the MSDR, alongside areas for strict conservation,
traditional economic activities such as agriculture, forestry and fishing are allowed under
sustainable management practices in certain zones. Besides, ecotourism is presented as a
strategic economic activity to be implemented in order to reduce the exploitation of
natural resources and to provide extra income for local people (SCM, 1996).
The use of case studies has been a leading mode of investigating the relationship
between ecotourism, development, and environmental protection (Boo, 1990; Lindberg,
1991; Wallace and Pearce, 1996). As argued by Hall and Butler (1995), site specific
studies, by reducing the scale of analysis, lack an overview of the phenomenon studied.
Nevertheless, due to the great number of local issues involved in ecotourism, case studies
can be a very useful approach.
There are some case studies about ecotourism in the BA: Wallace and Pierce
(1996), Nelson (2000), Rossi (2001). All of them were developed in areas near Manaus.
They report little involvement of local communities in decision-making and unwanted
cultural change; the only reported benefits were few employment opportunities. None of

9
these studies focused on protected areas for conservation, one of the main attractions for
ecotourists.
This is the main reason why the ecotourism venture in Mamirauá was chosen as
the object of this study. It is the most well-known ecotourism programme planned and
developed in the BA within a protected area. Not surprisingly, it appeared in the Lonely
Planet Brazil (Noble et al. 2002) as the best place to see wildlife in the BA.
Thus, this research paper aims to investigate how ecotourism was planned and
implemented in the MSDR between 1997 and 2002. Its objectives are: first, to evaluate to
what extent the community living within the reserve was consulted and/or participated in
the decision-making process; second, how the local population has benefited from
ecotourism activities; third, how these activities have affected the conservation of the
natural environment; four, could/should the model implemented in the Mamirauá
ecotourism venture be replicated in other areas in the Amazon, or other parts of the
country? It is worth highlighting that the aims of the research are congruent with the
general aims of the reserve itself: conservation of the varzea environment in the Amazon,
and the improvement of the livelihood of the local human population that has not been
relocated after the creation of the reserve (SCM, 1996).
The main limitation of this study is the short duration since the inauguration of the
ecotourism venture. It underwent the planning phase in 1997/8, the building phase in
1999/2000, and the entire infrastructure was completed in the second half of 2001. Thus,
planning and implementation measures will also be considered in the evaluation.
This early evaluation can be justified by the fact that the Brazilian government and
the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) are funding the national programme to
develop ecotourism, Programme for the Development of Ecotourism (PROECOTUR),
with special attention to the Amazonia. Therefore, it is convenient to have an evaluation
of the already existing ecotourism venture within a protected area of the BA.
A limited budget and a time constraint for fieldwork have reduced the scope of
this piece of research. Another factor that has to be taken into account is that the
collection of data was undertaken during the flood season. In the varzea environment, the
water level can rise up to twelve meters, dramatically altering the ambience. A more
accurate evaluation would require observation during both wet and dry seasons.
The next section will present a literature review on issues of development and
conservation in the BA. Another aspect that will be reviewed is tourism: its nature, and
the possible differences between ecotourism and nature-based tourism. This will be
followed by a discussion about the methods used to acquire data during the fieldwork, and

10
a presentation of the framework to evaluate the ecotourism venture. The ecotourism
venture at Mamirauá and the results of the research will then be discussed. Finally I will
conclude with a critical look at tourism in the BA.

11
2- Literature review

2.1- Amazonia : Development and destruction

In this section a review of the historic development process in the BA will be
presented. Until thirty years ago the BA had only lost 1% of its forests (Padua, 1997),
even though human settlement had begun approximately 10 to 20 thousand years ago
(Meggers, 1971), and European settlers were there for almost five hundred years. Causes
of this phenomenon can be attributed to obstacles of access, endemic diseases, and
especially the availability of timber and agricultural lands in the Brazilian Atlantic forest
and other woodlands in the world.
However, in the last thirty years, the region has undergone a destructive
development pattern, destruction of the natural environment and exploitation of local
communities. Since the late 1960s, backed by loans from international financial
institutions, the Brazilian government decided to develop the region by opening new
roads, and implementing energy and mining projects. Favoured by highly subsidised
credits and tax breaks, national and multinational corporations, with little considerations
to environmental impacts, were involved in the above government projects, as well as
timber extraction, cattle raising and agricultural projects. In 2000 fourteen percent of the
BA had already been deforested (Laurence et al, 2001).
People from all over the country were attracted to this new frontier described by
Goodman and Hall (1990) and Rich (1994). As the majority of the Amazonian soils are
unsuitable for agriculture, most of the new settlements were unsuccessful. This resulted in
the rural population moving to the periphery of the towns, causing what Becker (1995)
called an ‘urbanized forest’.
At the same time the natural environment was being disturbed by the pollution of
rivers and the destruction of the forest to establish agricultural mono crops and pastures,
and the indigenous and traditional population (caboclos) had their land confiscated and
their livelihoods severely affected. In response, rubber tapers, people displaced by dams,
and traditional fishermen formed social movements to defend their rights. These
politically and economically disadvantaged groups became safeguards against the
environmental degradation perpetrated by commercial interests. These movements
echoed in theoretical constructions such as the ‘sustainable livelihood thinking’ by
Chambers (1987), ‘environmentalism of the poor’ (Guha and Martinez-Alier, 1997) and
‘grassroots action for productive conservation’ (Hall, 1997).

12
 2.2- The sustainable development paradigm and the Amazonia

During the 1980s a theoretical construction appeared to reconcile the ideals of

conservation and human development. The World Conservation Strategy (IUCN, 1980)
was the first document to use the term ‘sustainable development’; later adopted as the
pillar of the thesis defended in Our Common Future (WCED, 1987). In both documents
sustainable development is presented as the tool for maximizing human welfare without
causing significant environmental damage and without jeopardizing economic growth.
However, as pointed out by Redclift (1987) and Adams (1990), if sustainable
development is to be effective, it has to deal with the nature of the political economy and
prioritize the basic needs of the poor. Not only does a responsibility to the environment
and the next human generation have to be taken into account, but an intra-generation
balance is also necessary. Goodman and Redclift (1991) pointed out that any account of
sustainability in Latin America has to consider regional and national politics and
economic factors. The structural linkages with the international economy must also be
reviewed. In their opinion poverty alleviation should be a high priority in a strategy of
sustainable development in countries such as Brazil.
Between 1988 and 1992, the years before the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio 1992, environmental issues gained
momentum. New federal legislation recognized several pieces of indigenous land and
created the extractive reserves. A new reserve for protection of the Amazonian varzea, the
Mamirauá reserve, was also established by state law. These decisions were attempts to
create alternatives for environmental conservation while tackling the issue of social
justice by assuring sustainable livelihood for the traditional population in the Brazilian
Amazon.
However, in the aftermath of the Rio’92 UNCED, the struggle between
conservation and economic growth continued in the BA frontier. Becker (2001) points to
the growing lack of integration between conservation and development strategies in this
region.

13
2.3-Tourism and Ecotourism

2.3.1-Tourism: sustainability

Tourism development raises similar questions to development in general. Travel

and tourism comprises the activities of persons travelling to and staying in places outside
their usual environment for less than one year for leisure, business, and other purposes.
On a world scale, in 2000 travel and tourism accounted for around 11% of GDP, and over
10% of all employment (WTO, 2000).
Especially during the 1970s, tourism was heavily promoted by the World Bank
and was presented as a passport for development in less developed economies. However,
after several studies, this trend was criticized. De Kadt(1979) and Mathiesson and Wall
(1982) revealed that, on the one hand, tourism resulted in employment opportunities and
hard currency earning; but, on the other hand, it caused considerable cultural change,
environmental damage and land speculation.
In response to the criticism of mass tourism the 1980s witnessed the appearance of
a green movement advocating new forms of less destructive tourism, under the label of
alternative tourism (Holden, 1984; Krippendorf, 1987; Smith and Eadington, 1992).
Influenced by the philosophy that small is beautiful, these initiatives prioritised local
employment, small scale development and the conservation of landscape. However,
Butler (1992) questioned the practicality of these ideas, showing how difficult it is to keep
all these variables under control in a market economy. Therefore, defining what
sustainability means is a crucial issue for any economic activity.
After the Rio’92 UNCED, debates about sustainability indicators became
increasingly relevant. Mowforth and Munt(1998,116) listed the most frequently used tools
for promoting and assessing sustainability:
“area protection, industry regulation, visitor management techniques,
environmental impact assessment, carrying capacity calculations,
consultation/participation, codes of conduct and sustainability indicators.”

Nevertheless, writers highlight the difficulty of reaching a consensus for the

evaluation of sustainability in a concrete reality (Mowforth and Munt, 1998; Fennell,
1999). On the one hand, the use of measurement techniques creates parameters towards an
effective analysis of sustainability. On the other hand, discussions about implementing

14
regulation, governmental or self-regulatory, in order to enforce precautionary procedures
have caused a lot of controversy.

2.3.2- Ecotourism debate

Trips to national parks or other natural areas are not a new phenomenon (Hays,
1959). Studies of the effects of tourism activities in natural areas have been done for
more than two decades. They have proven the possibility of opposing impacts. On the one
hand, tourism has been an incentive for the conservation of natural resources in many
parks (Owen, 1969 and Trorsell, 1973); on the other hand, uncontrolled tourist activities
can be detrimental to the natural environment, as exemplified by Cohen (1978, 234):
“ It is an amusing irony that the National Park System of California has been
forced to limit the number of permits to backpackers…after several years of
environmental degradation brought about by masses of ‘eco-freaks’ trying to get away
from ‘civilization.”

The appearance of ecotourism as a new tourist phenomenon has been attributed

to some factors: first, the accessibility to cheaper and faster means of transportation,
which made new destinations more accessible; second, the increase in green
consumerism, that generated a greater demand for the implementation of tourist
infrastructure and new services developed by tour operators(Wight,1994); third, the
appearance of professional associations such as the Ecotourism Society in the USA,
which develop guidelines and promote conferences about ecotourism in many countries.
This is a classic definition of ecotourism:
“ travelling to relatively undisturbed or uncontaminated natural areas with the
specific objective of studying, admiring, and enjoying the scenery and its wild plants and
animals, as well as any existing cultural manifestations…” (Ceballos-Lascurain, 1986,
quoted in Boo, 1990).

However, a consensus about a definition is far from being reached. A content

analysis study of over 85 different definitions of ecotourism was done to shed light on this
phenomenon (Fennel, 2001). The majority of these definitions appeared between 1991
and 1996.

15
 Table 1 -
The most included issues in ecotourism definitions
Subject % Of Appearance
Where ecotourism occurs 62.4
Conservation 61.2
Culture 50.6
Benefits to locals 48.2
Education 41.2
Sustainability 25.9
Impacts 25.0
After: Fennel (2001, 407)
As can be seen from the table above, due to the number and complexity of issues
involved, ecotourism is not a simple observable fact. It involves ethic, environmental,
economic and social-cultural issues.
Some writers are very critical of the benefits of ecotourism. For example, Wheeler
(1993, 1994) says that advocates of ecotourism are ‘distressingly naïve’ by not
recognizing the disruptive effects on fragile environments, or ‘disturbingly devious’ to
exploit them for financial profits. Also Butler (1996a) points out that ecotourism
defenders are short-sighted by not perceiving that even where well-managed ecotourism
ventures can produce limited local benefits, the infrastructure and services required to
reach the visited area create further impacts that outweigh the benefits.
Recognizing that ecotourism is a double-edged sword, some authors have
presented more positive views about ecotourism development: Cater and Lowman (1994)
emphasized the importance of a holistic approach and the use of monitoring tools;
Weaver(1998) highlighted the development of more ‘environmentally friendly’ tourist
services in less developed countries that can influence the domestic tourism to follow its
lead; Fennel and Malloy (1997) found that tour operators involved in ecotourism were
fairly more ethical than other kinds of operators. These authors, at least, give ecotourism
the benefit of the doubt.
NGOs involved with tourist issues have criticized the shortcomings of ecotourism
and emphasized the need to empower local communities. Tourism Concern dedicated an

16
issue of its magazine In Focus to evaluate ecotourism. On the one hand, it criticized
ecotourism for being just a label; on the other hand, it presented community-based
ecotourism as an alternative to avoid environmental degradation caused by oil
exploitation in Ecuador (Tourism Concern,2002).
Another NGO long involved with ecotourism is the WWF. The widely quoted
study Ecotourism: Potentials and Pitfalls, was written by Elizabeth Boo(1990), WWF’s
Latin America specialist. This study covered advantages and disadvantages of using
ecotourism as a tool for conservation in Latin American national parks. In another paper
WWF(2001) proposed ‘community-based ecotourism’ where the local community has
considerable control over, and participation in, its development and management, and a
major share of the benefits stay within the community.
However. assuring social sustainability for community-based tourism projects has
not been easy. Examples from Ecuador(Wood,1998;Drumm,1998), Indonesia (Sproule
and Suhandi, 1998), and Namibia(Ashley,2000) showed that to assure viability of
community-based tourism venture, strong support is required from NGOs, governments
and/or limited partnerships with tourism business. No matter which term is used,
community-based (eco)tourism, pro-poor tourism or fair-trade tourism, it seems that the
survival of these initiatives is dependent on the ability to attract a specific group of
people concerned with conservation and local development and truly interested in
supporting them (D’Sa,1999).

2.3.3- Tourism and ecotourism in the Brazilian Amazon

Over the last four years, Brazil has gained 14 places in the ranking of the World
Tourism Organization. Being the 29th destination preferred by tourists worldwide and
receiving more than 5,3 million tourists(WTO,2000).
However, tourism in the BA is very limited, with roughly 1% of foreign visitors to
the country travelling to this region (EMBRATUR, 2001). The main reason being that
there are other more accessible areas for seeing wildlife in South America, such as in the
Pantanal or the Amazon forest in other countries.
Manaus is the main gateway for tourists aiming to visit the BA. However, as can
be seen from the table below, the tourist flux has decreased over the years.

17
 Table 2-

International Tourist Arrivals( thousands)

Year Brazil *Manaus %
1990 1,091 39 3.6
1993 1,572 33 2.1
1995 1,991 36 1.8
1996 2,668 36 1.3
1997 2,849 NA NA
1998 4,818 NA NA
1999 5,107 28 0.5
2000 5,313 27 0.5
2001 4,773 28 0.6
* International tourists registered at classified hotels in Manaus (actual data may be 20-30% higher)
NA- Not Available Source: Amazonas Tourism Office
After Janer, A. (1998)

Nevertheless, according to international trends of increasing numbers of

ecotourists, the number of jungle lodges around Manaus has jumped from six in 1991 to
sixteen in 1996( Neto, 1999). Visitors to these lodges numbered 36,642 in 2001, with
70% of them being foreigners (Amazonas Tourism Office, 2002).
Studies evaluating the sustainability of these jungle lodges (Wallace and Pierce,
1996; Nelson, 2000; and Rossi, 2001) highlighted the deficiency in adequate
environmental management and community participation. The main shortcomings were:
· Lack of participation of local people in the decision-making process;
· Lack of institutional support for capacity building programmes;
·Little concern for the maintenance of local culture;
· Lack of environmental education programmes;
· Lack of financial contributions for the conservation of protected areas.

This resulted in a common evaluation that these ventures could be classified as

nature-based tourism, but they fall short in the aims of ecotourism. This can be attributed
to a profit-line approach by entrepreneurs, and a lack of support and regulation by the
government to build an inclusive development strategy.
These features can change in the future due to investments of U$ 225 million for
the development of ecotourism in the BA, announced by the Brazilin government. This
project, named PROECOTUR, aims to improve the sustainability of existing tourist
activities under the ecotourism banner; and further expand them to other areas in all the
nine states of the BA (MMA, 2001).
18
3- Methodology

As discussed by Alf Waller (1992, 1997), until the 1980s tourism studies gained
recognition from the use of marketing and business quantitative methods. Since it was
necessary to evaluate broader issues such as the nature of the development of tourism, it
was difficult to restrict research methods to surveys and quantitative measures. Qualitative
approaches were used when the empowerment of local people (Ashley and Roe, 1998)
and their perceptions of tourism were studied (Crick-Furman and Prentice, 2000).
This study used qualitative techniques to acquire primary data such as interviews
of key primary and secondary stakeholders and participant observation. Where
quantitative data was necessary, the database of the Mamirauá ecotourism management
was used. This was particularly helpful in accessing data about economic benefits for
local communities such as income generated by wages and the sale of products. Data from
surveys carried out among tourists on the evaluation of the venture was also collected.
This approach allowed a triangulation to be attempted, in order to increase the validity of
the case study as referred to by Hoggart, Lees and Davies (2002)

3.1- Description of fieldwork

The fieldwork spanned a six-week period. The first week was spent in the
Mamirauá office, in Tefé, where documents about the implementation of the ecotourism
venture were browsed. This information was used to identify key informants.
The next three weeks were spent on the reserve. Activities included visiting and
interviewing people: employees on the lodge, craft makers, farmers, fishermen, and
community leaders. Interviewed informants were participants and non-participants in
tourism in three different communities: Boca do Mamirauá and Vila Alencar - the most
visited by the tourists- and Caburini, less involved in tourism.
The following week was spent on the Uacari lodge, where the author participated
in the tourist activities, and interacted with the tourists, lodge workers and guides. It was
an opportunity to evaluate the floating lodge’s sanitary conditions, eco-efficiency related
issues and possible negative impacts on the environment. The author also participated in
visits to communities with tourists in order to ascertain if the guidelines recommended to
prevent negative social impacts were being followed. The majority of the tourists visiting
the reserve were interviewed at the end of their stay.

19
 The last two weeks were spent interviewing key stakeholders in Tefé, who were
local environmental, religious and political authorities. Some of the management staff of
the Mamirauá reserve were also interviewed, especially the ones involved in tourism.

3.2- Framework for evaluation

The tourism venture developed in the Mamirauá Reserve defines itself as

practicing ecotourism. As has been discussed earlier, ecotourism is neither a simple
concept to define nor a clear-cut phenomenon to evaluate. As pointed out by Geoffrey
Wall (1996) the main difficulty in measuring ecotourism’s achievements is the large
number of variables involved.
In this case study an assessment framework was prepared based on an adaptation
of that presented by Wallace and Pierce (1996) to evaluate ecotourism in some lodges
near Manaus, in the BA. For each principle derived from their definition of ecotourism,
Wallace and Pierce (1996) related some indicators. These were presented as markers of
the condition, aiming to make the evaluation more accurate.
A similar approach was used by Ross and Wall( 1999a, 1999b) to analyse
ecotourism in three Indonesian National Parks. The six objectives they selected could be
related to the same six principles recognized by Wallace and Pearce. The above authors
recommend that the choice of indicators should be selected by involved stakeholders at
the site. Due to the limited time for the fieldwork, it was impossible to build a list of
indicators with a consensus of the stakeholders in this Mamirauá case study. However,
some indicators were included based on the fieldwork experience.
For example, it was decided that some issues from the pro-poor tourism (PPT)
framework should be incorporated. As one of the Mamirauá tourism venture raison
d’etre is to improve the livelihood of the local population, some issues raised in the pro-
poor tourism report (Ashley, Boyd and Goodwin,2001) were applicable in this case.

20
 4- Ecotourism in Mamirauá:

The area zoned for ecotourism comprises 35 Km2, and represents 0.3 % of the reserve.
Part of the ecotourism area is located within the restricted zone.
Figure 3 -

21
 This area was chosen due to its natural beauty, its availability of significant
scientific data about local flora and fauna, its proximity to Tefé and its community
support for the development of ecotourism.
The development of ecotourism in Mamirauá evolved in the following three
phases:
Table 3-
Ecotourism Development in Mamirauá
Period Phase Activities Developed *Butler’s Phases
1997-1998 Planning ·local communities consultation process Exploration
·spontaneous demand ·economic feasibility study
·no new infrastructure · scientific research infrastructure

1999-2001 Implementation ·Guides and Lodge Workers Association Involvement

creation
·building of new · arrangements of visits to communities
infrastructure · tourist floating lodge construction
·capacity building development
·soft-opening marketing ·opening of new trails
2002- future Full Functioning · profit sharing mechanism Development
· alliances with tour ·quality improvement of operation
operators ·long-term hospitality training program
·appearance in national ·monitoring of social and environmental
and international tourist impacts
guides

Source: SCM (1999, 2000, 2001) * Butler (1980) tourist area cycle of evolution.

In order to improve the viability of the Mamirauá ecotourism project, its staff
participated in a capacity building programme for community-based ecotourism
developed by the WWF, among seven other initiatives in Brazil.
Another important step for the implementation of the tourism venture was an
economic feasibility study carried out by an independent consultant which affirmed the
viability of the project. The budget was set at US$ 400,000, and was approved by its
funding organisations, the DFID and the Brazilian Ministry for Science and Technology
(MCT). This study also pointed out that in the middle term, relevant benefits to the
community would be generated (Janer, 1998).

22
 The number of visitors to guarantee a profit for the Mamirauá ecotourism venture
was predicted to be between 400-500 tourists per year. Even though 316 visitors came to
Mamirauá in 2001, only 162 of them were full-fare payers. The rest were discounted fare
payers and official visitors, who were related to funding institutions of the reserve as can
be seen from the chart below:
Figure 4-

Visitors per year

350

316
300

277
250

209
200
Ecoturists
total
162
150
145
130
110
100

77
50

1998 1999 2000 2001

Source: Mamiraua database

However, these numbers are expected to rise by developing a stronger

marketing strategy. As can be seen in the chart below, the main source of information for
tourists about Mamirauá is communicated by word-of-mouth to tourists.
Figure5-

Information Source

50

45
Tour
40 operator

35 Friends
30

25 Internet
20

15 Media
10

5 Other
0
1999 2000 2001 Source: Mamiraua at abase

23
 An alternative marketing strategy for NGOs is the development of a customer-
friendly internet homepage (Di Prieto, 2000) and its inclusion in travel guides. One of the
tools in the pipeline is a new homepage with Portuguese, English and Spanish versions for
the ecotourism venture. For the travel guides, a significant sign of the acceptance of the
Mamirauá ecotourism venture was its appearance in the latest editions of travel guides. In
the Lonely Planet Brazil and South America 2002, there are positive reviews about
Mamirauá:
“The [Mamirauá] reserve is the last intact area of varzea (floodplain forest) in the
Brazilian Amazonia – a beautiful, pristine environment of jungle, rivers and lakes. It also
has a very well-run ecotourism program that provides some of the best wildlife viewing in
Amazonia… Mamirauá is a pioneer of the sustainable development concept, which aims
to combine nature conservation and scientific research with improved opportunities for
the local population.” Lonely Planet Brazil (Noble et al, 2002).

Interviews during fieldwork revealed that 85% of foreign tourists decided to visit
Mamirauá mainly due to this Lonely Planet review. Two specialist travel guides about the
Amazonia also provide information about Mamirauá: Cadogan, in English, and Philips,
in Portuguese.
Services provided in Mamirauá have been well evaluated by tourists as can be
perceived from the chart below:
Figure 6-

Service Evaluation by Tourists

year 2001

80

70

60
Excelent
50
Very Good
40 Good
30 Fair
Poor
20

10

0
Lodging Catering Guiding
Source: Mamiraua database

If the categories excellent and very good are considered as one, levels of
satisfaction with services offered by the Mamirauá ecotourism project is over 90%. This is
24
a significant achievement especially if it is taken in consideration that the local residents
had never worked for tourism ventures before.
However, other factors are determinants for the continuity of a tourism venture.
How do Mamirauá’s prices and attractions compare with other famous ecotourism
projects in the Amazonia?
Table- 4
Comparison among ecotourism ventures in the Amazonia
Lodge, Region C R CP Wildlife Access(h) Price 4D/3N (US$)
Ariau, Manaus Y N N Tamed 2.5 375
Aldeia dos Lagos, Silves N N Y No data 5 378
Cristalino, Alta Floresta Y Y N > 450 birds ? 450
La Selva, Napo,Ecuador Y Y ? >425 birds,14 prim. 2-3 604
Explorama, Iquitos, Peru Y Y ? >500 birds 2-3 427
Manu Lodge,Manu, Peru Y Y N >450 birds,13 prim >2 675
Mamiraua N Y Y 370 birds, 7 prim 1.5 360
C-Canopy viewing, R- Research link, CP-Community Involvement, Y-Yes, N-No
After Janer, A.(1998) Source: Lodges/Internet

As shown in the table above, Mamirauá offers a competitive price in relation to

other ventures. In this sample Mamirauá is not considered a primary location for
birdwatchers, and it lacks a canopy viewing platform. Even though it does not present a
record of primates, it does have two endemic monkey species, the charismatic white
uacari and the black squirrel monkey. Research links and community participation are
also special features of the experience in Mamirauá.
Arriving at Tefé, 450 Km west of Manaus, Mamirauá can be reached by boat or
aircraft. Daily flights are available for a cost of U$ 150 from Manaus. A common tourism
package involves pick-up at the Tefé airport and round-trip transportation to the floating
lodge at Lake Mamirauá, boat and trail visits to selected parts of the ecotourism
management area, overnight accommodation and meals at the lodge(usually for 2-3
nights).
Tefé is a regional business center with 65 thousand inhabitants. Besides
commercial activities, fishing and logging are also important sources of income. Even
though Tefé has some potential tourist attractions, such as nineteenth century buildings,
river beaches during the dry season, and a burgeoning local market, it is only used as a
stepping stone for Mamirauá. As the local administration does not have a tourism policy,
this could be a reason why Tefé does not take part in the PROECOTUR. This shrinks the
development linkages that could be produced by the Mamirauá tourism venture.
In the next section more details of how tourism in Mamirauá fits into an
ecotourism evaluative framework will be discussed.

25
4.1 - Evaluative Framework

Table- 5 Summary of Principles and Indicators

Principle 1-Minimization of negative impacts on the environment and to local people:
Group size
Mode of transport/Energy use
Methods of waste disposal
Architectural style/building, materials/décor used
Measures of biophysical change: erosion, water quality, wildlife behaviour
Sensitivity of activities
Attitudes of local people
Social organisation and institutional change

Principle 2- Increasing awareness and understanding of an area’s natural and cultural systems:
Exposure to community
Perceptions of visitors about interpretive activities
Guide training/abilities
Opportunities to contribute

Principle 3- Contribution to conservation and management of legally protected natural areas:

Information about protected areas
Adherence to Reserve’s Management Plan
Collaboration with scientific research and sustainable management

Principle 4- Maximization of the early and long-term participation of local people in the decision- making
process:
Ownership of ecotourism ventures/local committees
Increased access to information and communication

Principle 5-Generation of economic and other benefits to local people that complement traditional
practices:
Local perceptions of changes caused by tourism
Local employment/level
Purchase of local products: values and variety
Continuance of traditional activities
Access to credit and support for partnerships
Services provided for community
Utilization of natural resources
Training/capacity building

Principle 6- Participation of local people as visitors:

Use for environmental education by local schools
Events/special fares for locals/national visitors

Adapted from Wallace and Pierce (1996, 861).

26
4.1.1- Principle 1 Minimization of negative impacts on the environment and to local
people:

Group size
In Mamirauá Butler’s (1996b) approach to carrying capacity is used, limiting
visitors to one thousand per year. Tourist activities have a maximum of thirty tourists at
a time, and groups of four per trail are the limit when visiting the forest. This is a measure
to minimize negative impacts as well as to enhance wildlife sighting. Even though the
current number of visitors is around one third of the maximum established, respect for this
limit can be expected in the future, because the venture is run by a non-profit
organisation.

Mode of transport/Energy use

Motorised boats and canoes with oars are the chief means of transport. The main
possible impacts are: noise, riparian disturbance and low levels of hydrocarbon pollution.
These negative impacts were considered low and localized by an environmental impact
assessment carried out in the reserve (Hughes and Botelho, 2000, 12). Main precautionary
measures include motorboat speed limits, the use of less powerful and less polluting
engines, and careful measures to avoid petrol spills.
As concerning energy supply, the Uacari lodge is equipped with roof-mounted
solar panels to provide electrical energy. In case of over-consumption, a diesel generator
is activated, hence guests are asked to switch off lights when leaving the rooms. It is the
philosophy of the Mamirauá reserve to offer only the basic comforts. So far, it can be
claimed that the eco-efficiency of the project is high, and it handles the issue with great
concern.

Methods of waste disposal

Solid waste: when visitors go on the trails, they are discouraged from carrying
non-biodegradable wrappings. They are informed of these rules on arrival. No tourists or
guides were seen throwing litter during fieldwork. Biodegradable material is disposed
directly into the aquatic system, while non-biodegradable rubbish is burnt on site or taken
back to Tefé, where unfortunately it is dumped in a simple landfill site.

27
Liquid Effluent: due to annual floods of up to 12 meters, sanitation is a big challenge in
this environment. At the moment there are only two liquid effluent treatment plants
consisting of filtration beds of layers of gravel, sand and coal. So far they have the
capacity to treat 20% of the sewage. By the end of 2002 it is envisaged that all sewage
will be treated with additional treatment plants. Potential negative impacts are a localized
increase of biological oxygen demand, and visual impact of sewage dumping especially
during the low water season.
For a tourism venture that aims to be a benchmark, it is below expectations in
this specific item, since neither the treatment system is yet completely installed, nor has
its efficiency has been fully proved.

Architectural style/building materials/décor used

Figure 7 - The Uacari Lodge

Source: Mamirauá database

The Uacari lodge is built mainly in local wood. It was designed by a Brazilian
architect specialized in Amazonian style. It is a set of floating lodges linked by
footbridges. The décor consists of locally produced handicraft. It is a comfortable, rustic
construction well-integrated into the landscape and built by local builders.

28
Measures of biophysical change: erosion, water quality, wildlife behaviour
Currently eleven trails are in use. Erosion is not a considerable threat as the trails
are underwater for about five months. With regard to water quality, the ecotourism
programme has made some tests about the quality of the water in 2000; however, so far it
does not have a consistent monitoring programme for evaluation of the efficiency of the
treatment of sewage.
Establishing monitoring procedures and the development of sound sanitation
technology for the varzea environment could have an indirect benefit for the local
communities. Due to the low level of sanitation in the BA, tourist concerns, revealed in
interviews, can be an incentive to push for public policies to improve the quality of life of
the local population
The special zone for ecotourism is only 0.3 % of the reserve’s total area, thus
impacts on wildlife behaviour could include a reduction of the sight of animals due to
their migration to other areas. Since the middle of 1999, a monitoring programme was
carried out. After an evaluation of the data available, some caveats were revealed that
resulted in changes in the methodology. New measures which started in 2002 will be used
as the baseline.

Sensitivity of activities

Besides maximum numbers of tourists, management techniques are also used to

reduce possible negative impacts caused by the tourism venture in Mamirauá. Guiding is
mandatory on trails and on visits to communities. These visits are pre-arranged by radio in
order to minimise disruption of community life. Tourists also receive a folder with the
following rules: to respect privacy in the houses, not to enter schools during classes, and
to ask permission before taking pictures. Animal feeding and disturbing them are also
prohibited in the reserve.

Attitudes of local people

Attitudes were perceived ranging from a scale of curiosity, pragmatism to a slight

animosity against the taking of pictures manifested by some locals. Most locals are very
curious about tourist habits and motives. One community leader interviewed, in Vila
Alencar, viewed tourists with a pragmatic approach. For him, at the beginning visitors
were somewhat amusing, but now that tourism has become an economic alternative,

29
people are more interested as they begin to reap some benefits. This attitude can be
contrasted with a potentially more controversial one. A resident farmer insisted on being
paid for his picture being taken since local guides were benefiting from tourism. Apart
from the latter, interviews revealed that there was no significant resistance to the
ecotourism venture.

Social organisation and institutional change

The ecotourism venture has fostered the creation of a local Association of Guides
and Lodge Workers (AAGMAM). It is an opportunity for cooperation among people in
neighbouring communities.
Tourism often is a great source of employment for women (de Kadt, 1979). In
Mamirauá, cooks and chambermaids are all women; there are also female guides. Besides,
these ecotourism activities have fostered two women’s associations for the production and
sale of handicrafts. Hence, employment opportunities for women help to empower them
in these communities.
The issue of tips is a sensitive one. Just as the promise of tips can boost the quality
of services; it may also encourage guides to bring tourists into restricted zones. Besides,
exceptionally high tips can undermine the determined basic pay and confuse the local
value system. The current active rule is for tourists to deposit tips in a box for it to be
shared by the group as a whole; however, individual tipping is freely practised.
In short, although risks are present, organisational and institutional changes have
improved the links among communities involved in the tourism venture.

4.1.2- Principle 2 Increasing awareness and understanding of an area’s natural and

cultural systems:

Exposure to community
A visit to a local community is offered as part of the stay in Mamirauá. They have
the opportunity to talk to local residents, as well as take a tour of the community to see
plantations, livestock, the roasting process of manioc flour, and other activities developed
in the communities. These tours are guided by local residents to ensure meaningful
contact and respect for local concerns. The visit lasts about two hours which may be
considered short. However, as tourists have contact with local guides and helpers in the
lodge during the outings, they can continually interact with local people.

30
Perceptions of visitors about interpretive activities

Probably the best example of interpretive material available is the Mamirauá Natural
History Guide (Bannerman and Marigo, 2001). This guide explains about the geology,
biologic evolution, geographic data, fauna and flora species, and the human adaptation to
the varzea ecosystem. Moreover, visitors have videos, books, lectures, maps and folders
about the ecosystem in Mamirauá, as well as about the whole Amazonia. Furthermore,
visitors can count on a trained team of native guides and a bilingual biologist. Sometimes
it is possible to visit researchers working in the reserve.
Nevertheless, it was perceived that the amount of information about the native
people’s social and cultural systems is far less than the amount of information about
animals in the reserve. In interviews with tourists, some pointed out that visits to
communities were more focused on the selling of handicrafts than learning about the local
life style.
As a result, the Mamirauá conservation model risks not being well understood.
The majority of the visitors interviewed at the end of the visit had not grasped that in the
reserve there is a productive management approach linked with conservation, which
permits people living within the reserve to fish and log for sale in order to enhance their
livelihoods.

Guide training/abilities

Local guides have their own knowledge about the rainforest; all of them were born
in the reserve, and their culture is embedded in strategies of surviving in the varzea
environment. The ecotourism venture organized three formal training programmes for
guides. This includes notions of evolutionary theory, ecosystems, taxonomy, ecotourism,
environmental education, environmental impact monitoring, interpreting maps, safety,
first-aid, and Basic English commands (SCM, 2001).
The local guides’ main limitation is the difficulty in communicating with non-Portuguese
speakers. Learning a second language is not an easy task as many of them have only
completed elementary school.

Opportunities to contribute

31
 The willingness to contribute to local conservation and development projects is
one of the alleged features of ecotourism practitioners (Wallace and Pierce, 1996). This
trend was positively assessed from interviews, where the majority of foreign tourists and a
minority of Brazilians said they would contribute to support conservation if a scheme
were presented.
The Mamirauá homepage offers information for collecting contributions through a
Brazilian bank account. However, this current method involves a bank transfer which was
considered time-consuming by foreign tourists. Thus, providing an easier option for
contributions can be an extra source of income that has not been explored yet.

4.1.3- Principle 3 Contribution to conservation and management of legally protected

natural areas:

Information about protected areas

Mamirauá is the unique floodplain natural reserve in the BA. A great amount of
information about research in the reserve can be found in the small library in the Uacari
lodge. Also available is information about the situation of the Brazilian protected area
system.

Adherence to the Reserve’s management plan

Part of the area where the ecotourists activities are developed is within the
“restricted zone” (figure 3, pg- 21). There are rules exists prohibiting trespass of the
restricted areas. Used as buoys for the floating lodge, wood was bought from the
sustainable forest management programme, therefore adhering to the management plan.
Even though the lodge is located in an area rich in fish stock, fish are always bought from
areas where fishing is allowed. Another indicator of the adherence to the management
plan is the hiring of local people; only specialists are from outside.

Collaboration with scientific research and sustainable management

The activities for collaboration between ecotourism and researchers are scientific
tourism and lectures. Although this potential is far from being developed, some groups of
foreign students visited the reserve to participate in research and forest management

32
programmes. Other initiatives reported are lectures about primates and river dolphins. In
these cases tourist groups pay an extra fee.

4.1.4- Principle 4 Maximization of the early and long-term participation of local

people in the decision making process:

Ownership of ecotourism venture/ Local committees

The ecotourism venture belongs to the SCM, the NGO that manages the reserve. There
are drafts, from as early as 1999, about creating local committees to participate in the
management of the ecotourism venture (SCM, 1999, 2000); nevertheless, none were
implemented. This decision has been postponed to a time when the ecotourism venture
achieves the profitability line. This issue was not perceived as an urgent demand by
locals.

Increased access to information and communication

In 1997, when the implementation of the ecotourism programme started, some

meetings were held between the ecotourism coordinator and the communities located in
the zoning area destined for ecotourism activities. A local resident reported that at that
point he had no idea about ecotourism. This fact illustrates the limits and difficulties of
building a participatory process in community-based ecotourism, especially where the
local population has little previous experience with tourism activities. To achieve
empowerment of the communities, a continuous process of consultation and re-evaluation
is required (Ashley and Roe, 1998; Wood, 1998).
In an effort to reach this goal, tourist activities are continuously evaluated in
community meetings. Another way to improve the process of decision-making by the
locals is to provide opportunities to participate in forums and congresses where tourism is
discussed. Last year the president of the Guides and Lodge Workers Association
(AAGMAM) participated in the International Symposium on Ecotourism in the Amazon,
where he discussed community involvement in ecotourism. This is an illustration of good
practice by the Mamirauá ecotourism management.

33
4.1.5- Principle 5 Generation of economic and other benefits to local people that
complement traditional practices:

Local perceptions of changes caused by tourism

On the one hand, two factors were positively highlighted by locals: first, they
could earn some money based on abilities they already had, such as knowledge of their
local environment; second, extra income was generated during the flood season by
tourism activities, when agriculture is not possible and fishing is less profitable. On the
other hand, two concerns were also mentioned: first, the loss of autonomy in tourism jobs;
second, complaints about the obligation to work on patron saints’ days.
Nevertheless, during a meeting to evaluate the tourism activities in 2001, local
workers voiced their hopes for more tourist visits and higher wages (SCM, 2001). During
fieldwork a competition was perceived between the two communities where tourist visits
occur, in order to sell their handicraft. Thus, local guides, lodge workers, artisans and
farmers are interested in the increase of tourist activities

Local employment/level

Fifteen guides and twelve lodge workers are currently working for the ecotourism
venture. This represents 10% of the population of the four communities in this sector of
the reserve, where ecotourism activities are already one of the main sources of income.
Figure 8-

Income for local communities from ecotourism

BrR$

35,000 Products

Services

30,000

25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

-
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002*

*estimated based in data from Jan/June.

Source: Mamiraua Database
*estimated based in data from Jan/June.

34
 As can be seen from the chart above, considering the BrR$ 200 minimum
Brazilian wage in 2002, income generated by ecotourism activities for the communities
involved is enough to employ ten full-time employees. However, as the majority of guides
and lodge workers are only part-time, there are three times more people working for the
ecotourism venture. In the future the workers’ pay is expected increase with the growth in
the number of tourists.
Another way of increasing benefits for communities is the filling of managerial
positions by locals. As in most ecotourism ventures, it is often difficult to fill managerial
positions from amongst the locals, due to low educational levels. Nevertheless, a local
guide will be trained in the near future to be manager at the Uacari lodge.

Purchase of local products: values and variety

Purchase of local produce is one of the trumpeted advantages of ecotourism.

Except for industrial equipment, all the other materials are acquired from the city of Tefé,
thus reducing leakage of tourism profits.
With regard to buying produce within the reserve, some factors have to be
considered. Two aspects are conducive to local buying: first, as ecotourism in Mamirauá
is not treated as a luxury programme, it does not require imported products; second,
emphasis on fresh ingredients and Amazonian food served in the lodge also leads to a
greater consumption of local produce. Nevertheless, some aspects hinder this: first, it is
necessary to convince local farmers to sell in small quantities, due to the small storage
capacity and infrequent demand; second, transportation costs do not make it cost
effective.
As can be seen from Figure-8, income generated by the purchase of local products
increased seven fold in 1999, compared to the previous year. However, in 2000 and 2001
this value was substantially reduced. This discrepancy was the purpose of a meeting
during which the ecotourism team and local communities decided to implement a
different strategy (SCM, 2001).
The successful approach now in practice involves mediation by the local guides
between the manager and the foodstuff producers. This is a way of sharing responsibility
between the manager and employees in order to benefit a greater number of people.

35
 Table 6-
Income from handicraft sales
Year Value (BrR$)
1999 500
2000 1277
2001 3997
Source: Mamiraua database

Another source of income linked to tourism activities is the sale of handicrafts.

Traditional production of everyday utensils was adapted to the taste of visitors and are
sold as souvenirs. Thirty families are involved in this production. In the years 2000 and
2001 income generated by handicraft sales was greater than for any other products sold by
the communities for the ecotourism venture.

Continuance of traditional activities

So far ecotourism has not become a sufficient source of revenue to displace other
activities, as the great majority of locals are part-time employees. During the days when
they are not working within tourism, locals follow their traditional activities e.g.
agriculture, fishing and keeping house. The Mamirauá database shows that only 30% of
the local produce was sold by employees; therefore, benefits are also reaped by those
families not working in the tourism venture.

Access to credit and support for partnerships

Micro-credit is an economic development tool commonly used in Mamirauá. The
use of this scheme also involves a learning process, as the ribeirinhos (varzea dwellers)
are not used to having access to credit, and basic accounting controls. This process
certainly develops a sense of empowerment, as in the past they were overexploited by
barter systems dominated by middlemen.

Services provided to community

In Mamirauá an integrated management approach has been developed, thus it is

difficult to distinguish benefits only attributed to ecotourism. However, improved
transport and communication are some of the services that can be used by local
communities. These improvements have highly increased the sense of security in the
communities. Sanitation is another aspect that is being positively affected by the
36
ecotourism venture, as new technologies are being tested and could be implemented in
other areas of the reserve.

Utilization of natural resources

The special zone for ecotourism is within the restricted zone, thus restrictions were
already set before the ecotourism venture existed. The approach in the Mamirauá Reserve
is conservation allied to sustainable management of natural resources, therefore there is
no clear conflict between ecotourism activities and local people. Sustainable management
is also advertised as one of the tourist attractions, with some student groups coming to
participate in forestry management and ecotourism activities as a special programme.

Training/ Capacity building

As tourism is a relatively new activity for the region, all capacity building
activities had to be developed by the SCM. Guides, cooks, chambermaids and speed-boat
drivers have a number of training courses. As an institution supported by the Brazilian
Ministry for Science and Technology (MCT), the Mamirauá Institute is also evaluated by
the amount of training delivered (IDSM/MCT, 2002). Besides the investment in local
capacity building, managers also benefit from training, although they are not locals. As a
result of this experience, some of the ex-managers and biologists have moved to other
regions in Brazil to start up ecotourism programmes or to become consultants. These facts
make Mamirauá a kind of practical school for ecotourism professionals.

4.1.6 - Principle 6 Participation of local people as visitors:

Use for environmental education by local schools

The SCM carries out an environmental education programme with activities

addressed to people living within the reserve and in the towns around it. Some of these
activities involve visiting the ecotourism management area and the Uacari lodge, where
they can take part in lectures about the reserve and go on the trails. These visits have two
objectives: environmental awareness-raising and marketing of the Mamirauá reserve.
For the great majority it is their first time visiting the area. These visits have occasionally
involved students already living within the reserve. This is an opportunity for the children

37
of lodge workers and guides to visit their parents’ work place, as well as the restricted
zone for conservation.

Special fares for locals/national visitors

Figure 9-

Origin of ecotourists to Mamiraua

Australia
2%

North America
23%

Brazil
38%

South America
1%

Asia
Europe
2%
34%

Prices for ecotourism packages in Mamirauá are two-tiered: national tourists have
a 20% discount in prices as an incentive for Brazilians to visit the reserve. A subsidized
price for a one-day visit is also available for the local residents in Tefé in an effort to
attract support for the reserve.

38
 5- Conclusions:

This report investigated the implementation of an ecotourism venture in the

Mamirauá Reserve in the BA within a region of wetland forest. In this reserve a new
approach to conservation has been implemented whose focus is to integrate conservation
ideals with the improvement of the livelihood of the local population. The reserve was
created in 1990, and ecotourism activities began in 1997 reaching full implementation in
2002. Although the number of tourists visiting Mamirauá is still small, new investments
earmarked for ecotourism in the BA justifies what could be considered an early
evaluation.
This research involved six weeks of fieldwork with the acquisition of quantitative
data from the SCM database, which was enriched and contrasted with primary data
attained by a number of qualitative techniques. Following the steps of similar previous
evaluations (Wallace and Pierce, 1996; Ross and Wall, 1999a) of the controversial
concept, ecotourism (Wheeler, 1993; Fennell, 2001), the findings were used within a
framework with indicators to reveal to what extent the tourism venture in Mamirauá
achieved local development and environmental conservation.
The first aspect discussed was the participation of local communities in the
decision-making process. The implementation of the tourism venture in Mamirauá was
done under a participatory approach. As pointed out by Wilson and Bryant (1997),
environmental management has gradually evolved to be a multi-layered process. In the
Mamirauá tourism venture stakeholders included the SCM, local people, funding
institutions, environmental authorities and consultants. Local people participated in an
early and long-term consultative process to decide about the development of the new
economic activity; thus, they had access to a flux of information that allowed them to
make decisions concerning their participation in the implementation process.
However, the decision-making process was also marked by the disparity of
knowledge and power between local communities and other stakeholders, especially the
SCM personnel. Although a great number of meetings were held suggesting a bottom-up
management approach, the main budgetary and administrative decisions were made by
SCM personnel and external consultants. Thus, on the whole, a mix of top-down and
bottom-up approaches better describe this process.
Building a community-based initiative is a great challenge especially where levels
of illiteracy are high, markets distant, and other demands on time are high(Ashley and

39
Roe,1998). Hopes of enhancing the local communities’ capacity to make decisions are
based on the increasing role of local associations that were fostered during this process. In
the future it is possible that local people can participate in local committees where they
can influence the management of the tourism venture and decide about the distribution of
profits more directly.
A second important aspect was the extent to which the local population has
benefited from the ecotourism activities. They received economic benefits in the form of
employment opportunities as well as market access for selling local produce and
handicrafts. These could be considered limited benefits, but they were highly valued by
the local population as a source of secure income, especially during the flood season. This
is a phenomenon also reported in pro-poor tourism experiences elsewhere (Ashley, Roe,
Goodwin, 2001). They also benefited from access to micro-credit, training programmes
and the development of organisational abilities. However, some disadvantages related to
tourism were pointed out by locals such as the loss of autonomy and the obligation to
work during public holydays, which have interfered in their social life.
In the long-term, the greatest gain provided by tourism activities in Mamirauá is
the reduction of the local population’s dependency on natural resources for their
livelihood, and the discovery that they can make a living using their knowledge of the
rainforest environment.
A third facet investigated was the effects of the tourism venture on environmental
conservation. So far the tourism venture has not been able to generate a profit to invest in
conservation activities. However, during its implementation a precautionary approach to
minimize negative impacts on the natural environment was pursued. Carrying capacity
issues were taken into consideration by the adoption of maximum numbers (Butler,
1996b) even though tourist activities are reduced to a small section of the reserve,
representing only 0.3% of the total reserve’s area. Choices involving architectural design,
building materials, energy use, transport means and waste disposal were made aiming to
reduce negative impacts. Yet, low levels of negative localised impacts are inevitable:
noise, hydrocarbon pollution, waste generation, and some disturbances to wildlife.
Monitoring and evaluating these negative impacts can be vital for the continuance
of the attraction of the tourism venture itself. Monitoring tools are included in the
management process required to run an ecotourism venture (Payne, 1999). At Mamirauá,
since 1999 monitoring systems have been used for examining changes in wildlife
behaviour and water quality; however, the collection and analysis of data has not been

40
consistent. The continuity and consistence of the monitoring systems is required to
demonstrate care of the environment.
A fourth issue pertinent to this research was the extent to which the tourism model
implemented in Mamirauá could/should be implemented in the BA and elsewhere. Even
though it presents some flaws, a superior result was reached in Mamirauá when compared
with commercial tourism ventures located in the rainforest around Manaus (Wallace and
Pierce, 1996; Nelson, 2000 and Rossi, 2001) especially in the following aspects:
participation of the local population, benefits generated for the communities,
environmental care and increase of awareness of the Amazonian environmental and
cultural aspects by locals and tourists.
However, so far the Mamirauá ecotourism venture has not reached a sufficient
amount of tourists to generate profitability. At the moment the continuity of the project
still depends on external grants to finance the project. Thus, an immediate
recommendation for replication is premature.
This case-study demonstrates that ecotourism is not a panacea for development
and conservation in the Brazilian Amazon, as previously alerted by other writers (Rocha,
1997 and Figueiredo, 1999). However, based on the evaluation of the initial development
of the venture in Mamirauá, ecotourism continues to be a valuable option for
development especially in regions near protected areas rich in wildlife and beautiful
landscape. Nevertheless, this will only be possible if the traditional local population is
integrated as an important stakeholder in the development process.

41
 6- References:

Adams, W. (1990) Green Development: Environment and Sustainability in the Third

World. London, Routledge.

Amazonas Tourism Office. (2002) Turismo Manaus. [On line] Available from:
www.visitamazonas.com.br [Accessed 18 June 2002].

Ashley, C. (2000) the impacts of tourism on rural livelihoods: Namibia’s experience.

Sustainable Livelihoods, Working Paper No. 128. London, ODI.

________ and Roe, D. (1998) Enhancing community involvement in wildlife tourism:

issues and challenges. IIED Wildlife and Development Series, No 11. London, IIED.

_________, Roe, D and Goodwin, H. (2001) Pro-Poor Tourism Strategies: Making

Tourism Work for the Poor. London, ODI/IIED, CRT.

Bannerman, M. and Marigo, L. (2001) Mamirauá, A Guide to the Natural History of the
Amazon Flooded Forest. Tefé, IDSM.

Becker, B. (1995) Undoing myths: the Amazon- an urbanized forest. In: Clusener-Godt,
M. and Sachs, I. (eds.) Brazilian Perspectives on Sustainable Development of the Amazon
Region. Paris, UNESCO/ Parthenon Publishing Group.

__________ (2001) Revisão das políticas de ocupação da Amazônia: é possível

identificar modelos para projetar cenários? Parcerias Estratégicas, No 12, Setembro.

Boo, E. (1990) Ecotourism: The Potentials and Pitfalls. Washington D.C.,WWF/USAID.

Butler, R. (1980) The concept of tourist area cycle of evolution: implications for
management of resources. The Canadian Geographer, Vol. 24: 5-12.

42
Butler, R. (1992) Alternative Tourism: The thin edge of the wedge. In Smith, V. and
Eadington, W. (eds.) Tourism Alternatives. Chichester, John Willey & Sons.

________ (1996a) Ecotourism: has it achieved maturity or has the bubble burst? Keynote
address, Pacific Rim Tourism 2000. Rotorua, New Zealand.

_________(1996b) The concept of carrying capacity for tourism destinations: dead or

merely buried? Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research, Vol. 2, 283-293.

Cater, E and Lowman, G. (eds.) (1994). Ecotourism : A Sustainable Option? Chichester,

John Wiley and Sons.

Ceballos-Lascurain, H.( 1986) Tourism, Ecotourism in Protected Areas. Gland, World

Conservation Union.

Chambers, R. (1987) Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Key Strategy for People,

Environment and Development. Sussex: IDS: University of Sussex.

Clusener-Godt, M. and Sachs, I. (eds.) (1995) Brazilian Perspectives on Sustainable

Development of the Amazon Region. Paris, UNESCO/ Parthenon Publishing Group.

Cohen, E.(1978) The impact of tourism on the physical environment. Annals of Tourism
Research, April/June.

Crick- Furman, D. and Prentice, R. (2000) Modelling tourists’ multiple values. Annals of
Tourism Research, Vol. 27(1) 69-92.

Dharmaratne, G., Sang, F. Walling, L. (2000) Tourism potentials for financing protected
areas. Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 27(3) pp.590-610.

Di Prieto, G. (2000) NGOs and the internet: use and repercussions. The IPTS Report , No.
48: 23-27.

43
Drumm, A. (1998) New approaches to community-based ecotourism management. In
Lindberg, K., Wood, M. and Engeldrum, D. (eds.). Ecotourism: A Guide for Planners
and Managers. North Bennington, Vermont, The Ecotourism Society.

D’Sa, E. (1999) Wanted: tourists with a social conscience. International Journal of

Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 11(2/3) 64-68.

EMBRATUR (2001) Demanda Turistica Internacional [On line] Available from:

www.embratur.gov.br/conheca/outrosassuntos/dem_inter01.doc [Accessed 22 June
2002].

Fennel, D. (1999). Ecotourism: an introduction. Routledge, London.

________ (2000) Tourism and applied ethics. Tourism Recreation Research. Vol. 25(1),
pp 59-69.

_______ (2001). A content analysis of ecotourism definitions. Currents Issues in

Tourism. Vol. 4(5), pp 403-21.

________ and Malloy, D. (1998) Ecotourism and ethics: moral development and
organizational cultures. Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 36(4): 47-56.

Figueiredo, S. (1999). Ecoturismo e desenvolvimento sustentavel: alternativa para o

desenvolvimento da Amazonia? In Figueiredo, S. (ed.) O Ecoturismo e a Questao
Ambiental na Amazonia. Belem, NAEA/UFPA.

Goodman, D. and Hall, A. (eds.) (1990) The Future of Amazonia: destruction or

sustainable development? London, The Macmillan Press LTD.

____________ and Redclift, M. (eds.) (1991).Environment and Development in Latin

America. Manchester, Manchester Univ. Press.

Guha, R. and Martinez-Allier, J. (1997) Varieties of environmentalism: essays North and

South. London, Earthscan.

44
Hall, A. (1997). Sustaining Amazonia: grassroots action for productive conservation.
Manchester, Univ. Press. Manchester.

Hall, C. and Butler, R. (1995) In search of common ground: reflections on sustainability,

complexity and process in the tourism system. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 3(2)
99-105.

Hays, S. P. (1959) Conservation and the Gospel of Efficiency: 1890-1920. Cambridge,

Massachusetts, Harvard University Press.

Hecht, S. and Cockburn, A. (1989) The Fate of the Forest: Developers, Destroyers and
Defenders of the Amazon .London, Verso.

Hoggart, K., Lees, L. and Davies, A. (2002) Researching Human Geography. London,
Arnold.

Holden, P. (ed.) (1984) Alternative Tourism: Report on the Workshop on Alternative

Tourism with a Focus on Asia. Bangkok, Ecumenical Coalition on Third World Tourism.

Hughes, R. and Botelho, E. (2000) Environmental Impacts of Support for Phase 2 of the
Mamirauá Sustainable Development Reserve: a Scoping Study. Tefé, SCM/DFID.

IBAMA. (2001). Plano de Acao para Ecoturismo e uso Publico em Unidades de

Conservacao. Brasilia, IBAMA/MMA.

IBGE (2000) Censo 2000. [On line] Available from: www.ibge.gov.br/popul-brasil.xls

[Accessed 12 December 2001]

IDSM/MCT (2002) Primeiro Relatorio do Contrato de Gestao MCT-IDSM, Ano-2001.

Tefé, IDSM/MCT.

IUCN (1980) World Conservation Strategy: Living Resource Conservation for

Sustainable Development. Gland, IUCN/UNEP/WWF.

45
Janer, A. (1998) Ecotourism in the Mamirauá Sustainable Development Reserve-
Economic Feasibility Study. Tefé, SCM.

de Kadt, E. (ed.) (1979) Tourism- Passport to Development? New York, Oxford

University Press/ World Bank/UNESCO

Kolk, A. (1998) From conflict to cooperation: international policies to protect the

Brazilian Amazon. World Development, Vol. 26(8) 1481-1493.

Krippendorf, J. (1987) The Holiday Makers. London, Heinemann.

Laurence, W. et all (2001) The future of the Brazilian Amazon. Science, Vol. 291(5503)
438.

Lee, D. and Snepenger, D. (1992) An ecotourism assessment of Torturego, Costa Rica.

Annals of Tourism Research, Vol-19(2), 366-371.

Lima-Ayres, D. (1992) The Social Category Caboclo. PhD Thesis, King’s College,
Cambridge University.

Lindberg, K. (1991) Policies for Maximizing Nature Tourism’s Ecological and Economic
Benefits. World Resources Institute, New York

McNeely, J. (1992) Contributions of protected areas to sustaining society. In IV

Congresso Mundial de Parques Nacionais e Areas Protegidas. IUCN, 1992.

Meggers, B. (1971) Amazonia: Man and Culture in a Counterfeit Paradise. Smithsonian

Institute. New York.

Mathieson, A. and Wall, G. (1982) Tourism: Economic, Physical and Social Impacts.
London, Longman.

MMA (2001). Program for the Development of Ecotourism in the Legal Amazon –Brazil
−PROECOTUR. [On line] Available from:

46
www.uneptie.org/pc/tourism/ecotourism/wes_portfolio/statements.pdf [Accessed 28 May
2002].

Mowforth, M. and Munt, I. (1998) Tourism and Sustainability: New Tourism in the Third
World. London, Routledge.

Neto, O.(1999) Ecoturismo o exemplo do Amazonas. In Figueiredo, S. (ed.) O

Ecoturismo e a Questao Ambiental na Amazonia. Belem, UFPA/NAEA.

Nelson, S. (2000) The Interrelationship Between Nature-based Tourism in a Community

and Nearby Lodges in the Brazilian Amazon. [On line] Available from www.kiskeya-
alternative.org/publica/ diversos/amazon.html [Accessed 15 February 2002]

Noble, J. et al. (2002) Lonely Planet Brazil. 5th edition. London, Lonely Planet
Publications.

Owen, J. (1969) Development and consolidation of Tanzanian national parks. Biological

Conservation, Vol-1,156-8.

Padua, J. (1997) Biosphere, history and conjuncture in the analysis of the Amazon
problem. In Redclift, M. and Woodgate, G. (eds.). The International Handbook of
Environmental Sociology. Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.

Payne, R. (1999) Sustainable tourism: suggested indicators and monitoring techniques. In

Nelson, J., Butler, R. and Wall, G. (eds.). Tourism and Sustainable Development.
Monitoring, Planning, Managing, Decision Making. 2nd edition. Waterloo, Canada,
University of Waterloo.

Redclift, M. (1987) Sustainable Development: Exploring the Contradictions. London,

Routledge.

Rich, B. (1994) Mortgaging the earth. London, Earthscan.

Rocha, G. (1997). Ecoturismo na Amazonia: uma analise das politicas publicas planejadas
pela Sudam. Rodrigues, A. (ed.) Turismo e Ambiente, Reflexoes e Propostas. Hucitec. Sao
Paulo.

47
Ross, S. and Wall, G. (1999a) Ecotourism: towards congruence between theory and
practice. Tourism Management, Vol-20, 123-132.

____________________ (1999b) Evaluating ecotourism: the case of North Sulawesi,

Indonesia. Tourism Management, Vol-20, 673-682.

Rossi, A. (2001). Culture Conservation and Ecotourism in Manacaparu Lake-Amazonas

/Brazil. Master Dissertation. London, North London University.

SCM (1996). Mamirauá Management Plan. Brasilia, SCM/CNPq/MCT.

_____ (1999) Mamirauá Ecotourism Annual Report. Tefé, SCM

_____ (2000) Mamirauá Ecotourism Annual Report. Tefé, SCM

_____ (2001) Mamirauá Ecotourism Annual Report. Tefé, SCM

Smith, V. and Eadington, W. (eds.) (1992) Tourism Alternatives: Potentials and Problems
in the Development of Tourism. Chichester, John Willey & Sons.

Sproule, K and Suhandi, A. (1998) Guidelines for community-based ecotourism

programs. . In Lindberg, K., Wood, M. and Engeldrum, D. (eds.) Ecotourism: A Guide for
Planners and Managers. North Bennington, Vermont, The Ecotourism Society.

Thorsell, J. (1973) National parks in developing countries. Agricultural and Forestry

Bulletin, Vol. 2, 17-19.

Tourism Concern (2002) Ecotourism: just another label? In Focus, N. 42.

Wall, G. (1996) Is ecotourism sustainable? Environmental Management, Vol-21(4), 483-

464.

Wallace, G e Pierce, S. (1996). An evaluation of ecotourism in Amazonas, Brazil. Annals

of Tourism Research, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp-843-73.

48
Walle, A. (1992) Tourism and traditional people: forging equitable strategies. Journal of
Travel Research, Vol. 19: 14-19.

________ (1997) Quantitative versus qualitative research. Annals of Tourism Research,

Vol.24 (3) 524-536.

Weaver, D. (1998) Ecotourism in Less Developed World. New York, CABI.

Wheeler, B. (1993) Sustaining the ego. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 1(2), 129-
39.

__________ (1994) Ecotourism: a ruse by any other name. In Cooper, C. and

Loockwood, A. (eds.) Progress in Tourism, Recreation and Hospitality Management,
Vol. 6, 3-11. Chichester, John Wiley and Sons.

WCED (1987) Our Common Future. Oxford, Oxford University Press/World

Commission on Environment and Development.

Wight, P. (1994) Environmentally responsible marketing of tourism. In Cater, E and

Lowman, G. (eds.) Ecotourism: A Sustainable Option? Chichester, John Wiley and
Sons.

Wilson, G. and Bryant, R. (1997) Environmental Management, New Directions for the
Twenty-first Century. London, UCL Press.

Wood, M. (1998) Meeting the global challenge of community participation in ecotourism:

case studies and lesson from Ecuador. America Verde, Working Paper 2. Arlington,
Virginia, The Nature Conservancy.

WTO (2000) Yearbook of Tourism Statistics. Madrid, World Tourism Organization.

World Wildlife Fund (WWF) (2001) Guidelines for Community-based Ecotourism. [On
line] Available from: www.wwf.org.uk/tourism/cbt/gs.pdf [Accessed: 20 April 2002]

49