Open Collections

Huascaran National Park related expenditures, Peru : a survey

University of British Columbia

The subject of this study is Huascaran National Park and the area known as Callejon de Huaylas in Peru. Since establishment of this Conservation Unit expectations in income and job opportunities were created and restrictions on traditional uses of the land were applied. This thesis evaluates the economic contributions of the Park on adjacent areas and seeks to identify and evaluate the effects of its restrictions. To accomplish this four different direct interview questionnaires were used. The period of study was June to August, 1983. Evaluated within 18 sample days were 20% of the total visitors of the sampling period. A total of 1423 tourists were interviewed. Non-local Peruvian visitors represented 83% of the total, foreign non-resident visitors 13%, and foreign resident visitors 4% of the total sample. It was found that expenditures differed according to resident visitor type though the percentage distribution of expenditures remained relatively constant, with lodging about one quarter of the total, and food from over a third to about half of the total expenditure. The total park-related economic contribution for the study period of 1983 is estimated at 269,214 U.S. dollars. Non-local Peruvians contributed 65% of this total, foreign non-resident visitors 22%, foreign resident visitors 6%, and the Park with 7% in the form of wages and salaries. As an average, Non-local Peruvians spent 24,700 soles per day ($ 16.46), Foreign non-residents 15,900 soles per day ($ 10.6), and Foreign resident 22,600 soles per day ($ 15.06). These findings are against conventional wisdom, according to which non-resident visitors are considered the main source of contribution to the local economy. At present, controlled traditional uses of the land are permitted within parkland. In that sense, the regulation of traditional uses, excluding mining, has not caused economic loss or provided additional economic benefits. Unfortunately, the Conservation Unit is not perceived as a tool of regional economic development. This misconception has led to a lack of support by local authorities. At both regional and national levels, there is no overall coordinating policy and priorities for development are at present left to successive officials who, at any given moment, occupy the decision makers' position.

Text

2010-05-16

For non-commercial purposes only, such as research, private study and education. Additional conditions apply, see Terms of Use https://open.library.ubc.ca/terms_of_use.

http://hdl.handle.net/2429/24763

Forestry

University of British Columbia

Graduate