Tell me your take on tourism.

I've been reading a thesis paper written in 1994 by María Magdalena Choque Chura, a student at la Universidad Nacional del Altiplano called la "Importancia de la Actividad Turística en la Economía familiar de la Isla Amantaní" [The Importance of Tourism in the Family Economy of the island of Amantaní]. The paper describes Amantaní, its history, and its economy. Although the paper and the data it contains were only compiled 15 years ago, I have found it interesting to try to compare tourism's importance and influence then to what I observed this summer. From what I can tell, much has changed over this time period.

First of all, Chura concludes that receiving tourists was only practiced by a small number of families on Amantaní in 1994. Tourism was profitable for those few families who were involved with it; however, the flow of tourists was very irregular. Specifically, agriculture and fishing accounted for 27.5 and 26.2%, respectively, of annual income for the average family on Amantaní. Tourism services only accounted for 1.18% in comparison. Tourism was more important for helping develop other sectors of the economy like textiles and handicrafts than for generating direct profits. And the economy overall was completely one of subsistence.

Chura also interviewed locals from Amantaní about their opinions of tourism in 1994. Of the 118 family leaders she interviewed, 47.5% viewed tourism as favorable and 23.7% viewed it is unfavorable. The main benefits cited were related to tourism's ability to raise the economic level of those participating in it. And it was precisely those people who relied most heavily on and benefited most from tourism who had a positive opinion of it. The most cited negative consequence was that tourism benefits were not distributed equally, and only those few families with access to a boat were able to prosper and gain power. Also, there were worries that Amantaní would lose some of its character and that the islanders would feel like inferior curiosities instead of equal human beings under the curious stares of tourists.

I do not have equivalent statistics for 2009, but it was obvious that tourism's footprint is much deeper and more widespread today. There are more tourists, more handicrafts, and updated island infrastructure such as stone roads and colorful community centers obviously built with tourists in mind. Las lanchas (small boats) that ferry tour groups between Puno and Amantaní are now outsourced to mainland companies instead of being monopolized by a few powerful Amanteños. And I have no numbers on this, but the economy appears to be dominated by tourism with agriculture taking a secondary role.

I also feel that overall, the locals' opinion of tourism has certainly improved. Tourism money has been invested in community infrastructure and advancement instead of simply channeling directly to a few select pockets. Education and health initiatives have sprung up. And at the same time, daily life and values have not been drastically altered, at least as far as I can see. All of the Amanteños I discussed the topic with had nothing but good things to say about the benefits of tourism. According to Aloy, our host in Sancayuni Alto and the community's kindergarten teacher, before tourism, Amantaní had fewer people, no stone roads, and less community organization; it was basically just farmland. Now there are more opportunities for everyone to have better lives.

I must also point out my one reservation about this final observation. I only got to know the residents of Amantaní who were connected with tourism through hosting guests, selling handicrafts, or driving boats. I also never had a conversation with people in communities in which All Ways was not involved and maintaining libraries. I suspect that there are still some undercurrents of community power and the resulting resentment associated with the industry, but based on the island-wide tourism benefits I witnessed, I don't think these sentiments are nearly as prevalent.

In conclusion, tourism seems to have helped Amantaní move itself forward instead of locking it up as an exotic but impoverished menagerie enclosed by Lake Titicaca. If "exclusion and marginalisation is one of the defining characteristics of the poor,"* then the fact that inclusion and progress are being observed on Amantaní suggests that its people are moving beyond the cycle of extreme poverty. Dare I say that this island is an example of alternative but beneficial economic development?

*from:
2007. Goodwin, H. Indigenous Tourism and Poverty Reduction in Butler R & Hinch T. Tourism and Indigenous Peoples. Butterworth–Heinemann pp84-94