TED Case Studies
Number 736, 2004
by Fernando Eleta-Casanovas

Panama Tourism and Sustainability

1. The Issue

There is opposition by a cross section of the people of Panama to President Mireya Moscoso’s proposal to construct the “Eco- road project” (ERP) through the Volcan Baru National Park (Baru). This shows the majority’s commitment to the respect, protection and sustainable exploitation of the country’s environmental resources. The action by ordinary citizens has brought to light the weaknesses in the country’s environmental legislation. At this crossroads, it would be most productive to channel energies towards strengthening the legal architecture covering protected areas as a fundamental step for national well being. This step would bring coherence between conservation practices and Panama’s tourism policies which seem, and ought, to be moving towards eco-tourism, in line with global and regional trends, and in line with the country’s current multimillion international promotion and branding campaign “Panama, The Path Less Traveled”.

2. Description

The Government of Panama (GOP)¹ has shown determination, regardless of national opposition to the project, to build a road 15.5km long by 4.5mt wide through the Volcan Baru National Park (Reid/Hanily, 2003, p.6). Baru is an integral link of the Talamanca range, the largest continuous forest in Central America.

The forest is part of the bi-national International Friendship Park, known by its Spanish acronym – PILA, which was declared a Cultural and Biosphere Heritage Site by the United Nations Education and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) in 1990 (Hanily2004, p.1). The government’s public discourse for construction is that it is part of its social economic development plans in accordance to the countries tourism master plan.

On November 13, 2003, President Moscoso issued Executive Decree # 107 (G.O. 24,937, 11/13/03, p.5), modifying Executive Decree # 40 of June 23 1976 (G.O.18, 619, 7/13/76), by which Baru was created. The sole purpose of Decree 107 was to open Baru through the ERP. At the time, El Panama America editorialized on the presidential action describing it as ‘no perfect crime.” The editorial went on to say that “the act of malice is so obvious… their improvised reform violates the spirit of the Law through a classical deviation of power (Vamaga/Panama America, 28/11/03).

To attenuate the opposition to the project, the GOP came up with a design that is a hybrid, half road/ half nature path. The study done by the Nature Conservancy (TNC) on the ERP economic and environmental costs expresses this: although it seems as an interesting concept, the reconciliation between transportation and conservation, the current design does not accomplish either goal (Reid/Hanily, 2003, p.29). Moreover, the study introduces an alternate route which offers higher economic returns (Reid/Hanily, 2003, p.24). Contrary to standard procedure, the GOP instead of seeking international financial resources to build the road, it turned to the National Bank of Panama (Banconal) for financing. It is the general impression that one of the reasons for domestic financing is the fact that the ERP would not meet the conservation standards applied by international lending institutions. Such a view is supported by the TNC study which determined that the completion of the road “will contribute to the potential extinction of 115 endangered and endemic mammals reptiles, butterflies and birds” (Hanily, 2004, p.2). The project which would pave -over the existing nature trail, would result in irreparable damage to the value of the site as a silent paradise of primary forest, causing a drop in visitors at one of the top ten most recommended eco-tourism sites in the region (Correa 2004, p.18, 20).

3. Related Cases

648 COSTA-RICA-TOUR The Pros and Cons of Ecotourism in Costa Rica, by Julie Dasenbrock

327 COSTTOUR Costa Rica Tourism and Deforestation, by Mark P. Stevens

4. Author and Date:

Fernando Eleta-Casanovas, April 16, 2004

Master of Tourism Program

Department of Tourism and Hospitality Management

The George Washington University

600 21^St. N.W.

Washington, DC. 20052

eleta@gwu.edu

II. Policy Impacts

5. Geographic Location

The Republic of Panama is situated at 9° 00’ N, 80° 00’ W occupying the southern tip of Central America between the republics of Costa Rica to the north west, and Colombia to the south east. Slightly smaller than South Carolina, Panama has a total area of 78,200 sq. km. Its general climate is tropical maritime: hot and humid with elevation extremes ranging from 0 meters on the Pacific shores, to 3,475 m at the summit of the Baru Volcano (www.cia.org. Fact Book). With its unique geographic locale, the Isthmus of Panama became a bridge of life for man and species. As the Chairman of the Smithsonian Institution has said, “since it rose from the oceans, a mere 3 million years, Panama became a land bridge between north and south America for fauna and flora to cross from one to the other, to flourish or to perish in their new home.” (Small, 2004, p.14.) This contribution to evolution has been overshadowed by the role Panama has played since the 17^th century as a funnel for world commerce. Panama’s territory west of the Canal falls into what Conservation International (CI) has declared the Mesoamerica, or Middleamerica hotspot. As the naturalists at CI note:

“Spanning most of Central America, [it] encompasses all subtropical and tropical ecosystems from central Mexico to the Panama Canal. This includes all of Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica, as well as 34 percent of Mexico and more than 60 percent of Panama. Mesoamerican forests are the third largest among the world's 25 hotspots and are critical for the preservation of the biodiversity of the Western Hemisphere. Their spectacular diversity includes jaguars, quetzals, howler monkeys, and 24,000 plant species. The region is a critical migration corridor for many bird species and the wintering grounds of the monarch butterfly” (www.biodiversityhotspots.org).

6. Environmental

The Volcan Baru National Park, created by Decree # 40 of June 24, 1976 (G.O. 18, 619, p.1-3) is situated on the Pacific slope of the volcano for which it was named. The Park covers 14,000 hectares (6,100 acres). It is an integral component of the larger bi national “Parque Internacional La Amistad” –PILA- (International Friendship Park). (Hanily, 2004 p.2), a bi-national protected area between the republics of Panama and Costa Rica. Together they cut across the western most provinces of Panama, Chiriqui and Bocas del Toro. PILA, founded in 1988, is comprised of 270,000 hectares, and was designated a Cultural and Biosphere Heritage Site by UNESCO in 1990. (www.anam.gob.pa 4/13/04) Baru is connected to PILA by the Caldera River Valley. The area is part of the Talamanca Range, the largest contiguous forest area remaining in Central America. The area of the parks is an integral part of the bi-national sub region of the Mesoamérica hotspot named The Talamanca –Osa- Bocas corridor. Norman Myers, the British ecologist, devised the concept of “hotspot” to solve the dilemma of which lands to protect. “Hotspots are regions that harbor great diversity of endemic species and, at the same time, have been scientifically impacted and altered by human activities (www.biodiversityhotspots.org).

Despite its small area, and due to its varied topography and altitudinal differences the Volcan Baru National Park possesses various microclimates. There are low moist mountain forest, low mountain rain forest, mountain rain forest, very moist low mountain forest, and pre mountain rain forest. The average temperature varies from 20c in the lowest altitude (1,800 mt.) to under 10c at the top of the Volcano (3,475mt). The average rainfall fluctuates between 4,000mm in the lower elevations, to 6,000mm in the higher. Majestic oak trees (Quercus sp.) predominate in the forest canopy on the sides of the massif.

The bioclimatic island effect caused by great altitude and isolation make it a center for endemism, species common to a particular area. Among those worth special mention from the plant world are the orchid Meriania panamensis and the ‘zarzamora’-berry- (Rubus praecipuus). Over 255 species of birds have been recorded in the park, including the long tailed silky- flycatcher (Polygons caudatus) (Navarro, 2001, p.168-170) and the world endangered quetzal (Pharomachus mocinno (Hanily, 2004, p.2). Among the mammals with stable populations in the park, one finds the elusive and endangered mouse (Rheomis underwoodi), the bat (Artibeus aztecuz) and the puma (Felis concolor). (Navarro, 2001, p.170) Created just 28 years ago, there are still private landowners within Baru’s limits. Park access is best during the dry season- January to March.

7. Economic

Baru’s commercial contributions to Panama’s well being are easily identifiable and quantifiable as one will see in section IV. Equally important is the forest’s prevention of erosion, which if damaged can lead to major deterioration of an important water source, the Caldera River. This river is harnessed for hydroelectric generation, and is also utilized for irrigation and the processing of coffee, making it commercially valuable. (Reid/Hanily, 2003, p.16) The forest also prevents the formation of natural dams on the Caldera River, like the ones responsible for death and destruction, in the gateway community of Boquete during the 70 and 80’s. (www.noti.News.com <8/28/03>) The natural benefits, however, transcend the isthmus’s borders. The park grants refuge to over 115 endangered species, and is home to majestic Oak trees, which have great capacity for carbon sequestration.

8. Legal

See below (III Legal Clusters)

9. Suggested Interventions

Substitute EPR for Southern Route.
Codify Panama’s environmental laws
Consider the creation of a Ministry of Tourism and Environment
Carbon sequestration and trading
Land buy out in Baru (stakeholders)
Strengthen civil society, organizations within CONCAUSA

III. Legal Clusters

10. Discourse and Status/Policy Issue:

The Eco road project finds itself in legal limbo as work crews continue their activities at the road’s ends or accesses (areas where environmental degradation has already occurred.) It is in limbo since the National Authority for the Environment - known by its Spanish acronym ANAM²- rejected on January 20, 2004 the environmental impact study (EIS) submitted by the road’s stakeholder the Ministry of Public Works (MOP). An accepted EIS is required by law before building authorization is granted. By denying the resolution, according to the law, MOP was granted five working days in which to file a request for reconsideration. MOP failed to do so. (Correa, 2004, p.28) Days later, and without any explanation, Ricardo Anguizola resigned his post as ANAM’s director. His successor, Dr. Carlos Arellano Lenox, a marine biologist, expressed publicly his opposition to the ERP, and less than a month after assuming office resigned citing the “Faundes Law” which establishes the age limit of 75 to hold public office (Correa, 2004, p.28).

The president’s misguided determination has not ceased. On April 5 Silvano Vergara was fired as ANAM’S National Director for Environmental Evaluation and Regulation. Gonzalo Menendez, who has been acting director since the resignation of Arellano less than a month ago, said in reference to the dismissal, “In these new times, we need, in that position, someone with a more open vision on the environment” (Vamaga/La Prensa 4/6/04). Vergara is the first fired, but the third high official to leave ANAM. Two consecutive directors have resigned since the ERP surfaced.

With corruption embedded in the political system, there is uncertainty regarding what would happen if the ministry of public works presented a new environmental impact study to ANAM. Would ANAM bow to political pressure and accept it and approve the EPR? Or will the 3^rd Division of the court rule in favor of the People’s request via three outstanding actions of Injunctive Relief (Ellas, 1/30/04, p. 64)³, and order the cancellation of the project? In its 2004 report to congress on the state of human rights around the world, the U.S. Department of State (DOS) describes Panama’s judicial system as suffering from “corruption, inefficiencies, political manipulation” (Vamaga/La Prensa, 2/28/04).

11. Forum and Scope/Existing Policy Framework:

The Republic of Panama is signatory to three international instruments which deal with conservation on land: The Kyoto Protocol, The Convention on Tropical Woods 1994 (fact book, www.cia.gov), and The Central American Alliance for Sustainable Development- CONCAUSA, to which the United States is also a signatory. The parties to these treaties proclaim a policy of sustainable development for the area, integrating political, social and environmental considerations. (DOS, 6/7/01) The latter is more a declaration of wills, than a binding convention. The country’s judicial system has consistently granted primacy to Panamanian law over international (Cedeno, 2004).

Panama’s current Constitution, as it relates to this case, dedicates four articles to the preservation of the environment. Article 114, establishes the duty of the State “to provide the people with a healthy environment free of contamination…. as required for the development of human life”.

Article 115 goes on to say that it is the joint responsibility of the State and the people to propitiate economic and social development in ways that “sustains an ecological equilibrium and prevents the destruction of ecosystems.” Article 116 consecrates that the State “shall regulate, control and apply the necessary measures to guarantee that the utilization and exploitation of; terrestrial, pluvial and marine fauna ,as well as forest, lands and waters, is carried out in ways that it prevents degradation and assures its renovation and permanence.” “Article 284 establishes that the state shall regulate the utilization of lands in accordance with the lands’ capacities and the national development plans as to guarantee its optimum exploitation.”(Mizrachi/Pujol, 2001, p. 22.64)

These constitutional principles are regulated by a set of Laws - legislative acts - and by executive decrees. There are two principal pieces of legislation related to the environment, and they are related to one another. The first is Law # 41, created July 1, 1998 “General del Ambiente de la Republica de Panama” or Panama’s general law concerning the environment (G.O. 23,578, 7/3/98, p.1), Executive Decree # 59, March 16, 2000 which created “Reglamento del Proceso de Impacto Ambiental” or Regulations for environmental impact processes (G.O. 24,015, 3/22/00, p.1-40) and the second is Resolution # AG_0292 of September 10, 2001 which established the manual for the implementation of Decree # 59 (Correa, 2004, p. 9).

12. Decision Breadth/Stakeholders/Policy Actors:

The stakeholders can be divided into four basic sectors:

- The executive branch which acts as developer through MOP, and as regulator through ANAM. In a country with week institutions, such as Panama, this can be categorized as having the Moscoso Administration be judge and party in this case.

- Those individuals who owned land inside the confines of the park, four of whom, allegedly own most of the land on the road’s path. (Reid/Hanily2003, p.15) There is oral evidence stakeholders have family ties with President Moscoso and support her initiative.

- The Judicial branch which acts through the 3rd Division of the Supreme Court, the one that hears cases on public administration matters.

- The People, acting through a loose coalition of organizations, and concerned individuals whom collectively, and brought together by the Internet, have focused the voices of the 61% of the Panamanian people who are opposed to the eco-road project (ERP) (Hanily,2004, interview). This group can be divided into local residents of the gateway communities of Cerro Punta-Guadalupe on one end of the road, and Boquete and vicinities on the other, and panama’s general population as a whole who would suffer the effects of ecological devastation at Baru.

13. Legal Standing/Legal Regulatory Framework/Suggested Policy Intervention:

Panama’s constitutional mandates have been weakened by legislation.

Law 41’s broad rather than restrictive definition of “environment” is a fundamental source of constitutional delusion. Article 2 defines “environment” as an “ensemble or system of natural and artificial elements; physical, chemical, biological or socio cultural in nature, in constant interaction and permanent modification by human or natural actions, which frame and condition the existence and development of life in its multiple manifestation” (G.O.23, 578, 7/3/98, p.1).

The European Union (EU) defines it as an “ensemble of systems comprised of objects and conditions physically definable which relate particularly to ecosystems in equilibrium, as we know them now, or in which form they are susceptible to adopt in a foreseeable future.” Note that Law 41 does not include the concepts of “equilibrium” or “future of the ecosystems”. (Correa 2004, p.1&2) Article 67 of the law indicates that “the State will ‘support the conservation’ of those activities of biological diversity ‘preferably’ in its original habitat, especially in the case of wild species of singular character. As a complement, [the State] will ‘advocate’ the conservation of biological diversity in facilities outside there place of origin” (Correa, 2004, p.16). Preference, support and advocacy of conservation fall short of the constitutional mandates contained in articles 114 and 115 as cited above.

Law 41 further weakens the constitutional mandate by failing to ‘legally define’ the constitution’s actual intent when it calls for sustainable development and the protection of the environment. By failing to do so, Law 41 opens loopholes to those who, failing to holistically view the Constitution, would give preference to the ‘productive capacity’ of a landsite [ art.284 ] over the value of protecting the existing biodiversity on the particular site[ arts.114, 115, 116].

Moreover; while Article 115 of the Constitution establishes that the State and the people are co-responsible in maintaining the country’s eco systems, Decree #59, which regulates the “Process for Environmental Impact Determination,” makes public hearings on the issues discretionary to ANAM, not mandatory as the constitution implies. In the ERP case public hearings were held on January 15, 2004 at the gateway community of Boquete⁴.

Further dilution has taken place by the fact that President Moscoso vetoed, in June of 2003, the Crimes Against the Environment Bill. Then unexpectedly on October 7 2003 the President of the Legislature’s commission in charge of revising the vetoed articles decided, without explanation, to file the new draft bill, instead of placing it for a vote, as the commission had recommended. (Ellas, 1/30/04, p.64) President 1Moscoso’s Arnulfista Party controls the National Assembly. Together, these acts took the bite away from Panama’s environmental legislation.

On May 2, 2004, Panama is holding general elections, and the Partido Arnulfista (Arnulfista Party), and its coalition currently in power, is trailing in third place with little if any chance of remaining in power. Its strongest challenger, the Partido Revolucionario Democratico joined by the Partido Popular( Popular Party) in what they have named Patria Nueva (New Homeland Alliance) have publicly committed themselves to revoking Executive Decree #107, the one which opened the park to road construction. (Lewis –Navarro, 2004, < e-mail >) All five running candidates, at one time or another spoke against the ERP. The Arnulfista Party’s candidate, Jose Miguel Aleman, hand picked by Moscoso, had to retract his position on the issue.

IV. Trade Clusters

14. Type of Measure:

The issue at hand is the building of a road through Baru National Park, against the best advice of the scientific community and the people’s will, even as an alternate route has been identified.

15. Relation of Trade Measure to Environmental/Tourism Impact

The degradation of Baru will directly affect Panama’s competitive position in tourism. This is particularly relevant as a transformation is in the making to take Panama from a historically urban/business economy to an ecological destination. (INDESA 2003, p.13) This transformation challenges entrenched interests, and thus far actions taken lack coherence. While spending 18 million dollars on a international promotional campaign under the theme “Panama, The Path Less Traveled” and authorizing, not yet appropriating, 40 million dollars for a Gehry-designed Museum of Biodiversity, the GOP pretends to implement the ERP, and to increase the footprint allowed for development in the Coiba Island National, in both instances, against the best advice of local environmental organizations, The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute-STRI (Hanily, 2004, interview). These contradictions could lead to uncertainty and confuse development with the long term result being a weakened competitive tourism industry at a time when Panama is attempting to expand its economic growth from 4% to 8% a year in order to progressively reduce its poverty (Fernandez, 2004, interview).

16. Trade Product Identification/Trade and Services:

Panama’s eco tourism volume and infrastructure are in an embryonic state, a state which creates the opportunity to learn from the successes and mistakes of others. Notwithstanding, it is the second largest economic activity in the Baru region. (Reid/Hanily, 2003, p.17) The aggregate lodging offer for the two gateway communities, of Boquete and Cerro Punta, is listed at 255 rooms, priced from $20 to $200 a night. Tourism from the area contributes at least $2.7 million dollars a year. (Reid/Hanily, 2003, p.6) The number of visitors to Baru National Park reached 2,660 in the year 2000 with the highest number of visitors occurring in the dry season - January to April - precisely at the time when the quetzals are pairing. (Reid/Hanily,2003, p.13) The TNC study acknowledges the difficulties in forecasting the EPR’ effects on tourism and settles for an estimated drop of 10% in the number of visitors to Baru. (Reid/Hanily, 2003, p.17) As president Clinton’s special envoy to Latin America, Mac McLarty, would say “not trending positively.”

17. Economic Data

In Central America the opportunities from eco-tourism are best exemplified by Costa Rica’s success. In 2001 more than 2/3 of visitors experienced the country’s National Parks, and the total number of visitors is growing by 15 % a year (National Parks, Jan.’04, p.2), adding to the 1.23 billion dollars earned from the tourism sector. During that same year, Panama received half the number of visitors and half the revenues derived from tourism (INDESA, 2003, p.8.).

Beyond number of visitors, Costa Rica’s true success can be found in labor statistics. In the year 2000, the tourism sector alone generated 202,500 direct and indirect jobs in rural areas representing 15% of the labor force (PEA).While in Panama that year the total number of rural jobs, representing 18% of the labor force (PEA) reached 209,000 (INDESA, 2003, p.7).

Rural employment is a world wide challenge, more so in developing nations. This challenge has been burdened by the crash of the international price for coffee. For the gateway community of Boquete, coffee was the principal crop. In 2000, the district had 36% of all mature coffee plants in the province of Chiriqui, producing $7.4 million in sales. (Reid/Hanily2003, p.6) The World Bank’s Headlines for Friday March 12, 2004 carried the ominous title “World Coffee Price Plunge Throws Farmers Into Abject Poverty”(<www.worldbank.org> <DevNews,3/12/04>)⁵. By substituting loss revenue, tourism could play a pivotal role in the economic recovery of areas, like Baru, affected by the coffee price crisis. A crisis for which experts see no easy end.

18. Impact of Trade Restriction:

19. Industry Sector:

Success has come to Costa Rica, but not without loss. In Manuel Antonio (national park) with its 1,000 visitors a day at high season and surrounded by a hotel “strip”, the solitude is long gone (National Parks, Jan.’04, p.1.). Panama, at least for the next decade, could offer an alternative. As the gossip writer from New York, George Rush said, “While I was researching a trip to Costa Rica I ran into disturbing reports of overcrowding… and then I discovered Panama” (Rush 2004, p.190). For preservation efforts to thrive, gateway communities as well as national and international authorities must became unequivocally aware that “mounting evidence shows that conventional, commercial and industrial uses of the rain forest are not only ecologically devastating but also economically unsound (Carr et.al., 1993, p.1).

Through concentrating on ecotourism one creates wealth for the area’s stakeholders, and in so doing, contributes to the conservation of the richness of nature for future generations. At the same time, to sustain a positive experience, and conserve the sites, their fauna and flora, “the complex aspects of carrying capacity must be addressed”(Nat. Parks, Jan.’04, p.3). Information is an essential aspect of sustainable success, not only because as Barry E. Pitegoff, Vice-President Research of Visit Florida, said in class: “information prolongs stays,” but also because successful ecotourism must balance visitation and conservation and without “magic numbers,” (Nat. Parks, Jan.’04, p.3) we can only learn from mistakes if we know mistakes have been made” (Mader,1999, p.2).

20. Exporters and Importers:

V. Macro/Environment Clusters/Tourism Policy Clusters

21. Environmental Problem Type/ Environmental Aspects:

22. Resource Impact and Effect:

Very few roads have been built in tropical forest without resulting in deforestation. An exception can be found in Costa Rica where the conditions necessary for harmony between roads and nature were given (conditions which are not present in Baru today.) Before building the San Jose-Guapiles highway, the Costa Rican authorities expanded the Braulio Carrillo National Park, acquired all private lands that came under the protected area and assigned adequate resources for its protection. (Hanily2004, p.2)

Without a management plan, with private stakeholders within the park, and with a road granting vehicular access to areas where there was none, experience shows that deforestation is unavoidable. The province of Chiriqui where Baru is located has a deforestation ratio of 0.47, the fourth highest among the country’s nine provinces. This ratio might be conservative since ANAM figures showed in 1993 a national annual ratio of deforestation of 510km², while the World Rain Forest Movement gave Panama a ratio of 750 km² in 2001(Correa, 2004, p.15). As a menacing precedent, the GOP authorized the construction of el Corredor Norte (Northern Corridor) through the Metropolitan National Park as part of the capital city’s beltway system. Although, an environmental mitigation plan was approved, nine years later, less than 40% of it has been implemented, ignoring judicial rulings ordering the full implementation of the mitigation commitments. (Correa, 2004, p.23)

The ERP would fragment BARU from the larger area of PILA, unleashing a process called “trophic cascades.” This is a process by which the elimination of predators causes a major perturbation of local species composition, and thus diversity loss⁶ (Hanily, 2004, p.2). At the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (STRI) facility at Barro Colorado, a mountain top which became an island with the construction of the Panama Canal in 1940, scientist have linked the loss of predators to the extinction of 45 species of birds between the 1920s and the 1970’s (Hanily,2004, p.2). In the case of Baru, the gap to be created by the projected road and subsequent activities will decrease migrations from PILA, including major predators, reduce the area of contiguous habitat leading to an increase in the extinction rate. Several of the park’s residents are already globally threatened.

23. Urgency and Lifetime/Urgency and Policy Review:

One can deduct, from all official actions cited, that president Moscoso will try to move forward with the ERP before the end of her term: September 1^st 2004.

All actions to stop the project must be implemented now, before the work crews enter Baru proper. Even as the rainy season sets in, construction can go forward. It will be more expensive but it can go forward. The NGO’s and people’s coalitions continue to be on guard, and to meet regular. (Hanily, 2004).

At an international level, a group of students from The George Washington University Masters in Tourism Administration program (MTA), responding to the author’s appeal, has written to the Under-Secretary of State for Global Affairs, Paula J. Dobriansky, requesting that the U.S. Department of State (DOS), taking into consideration the global need to conserve the world’s precious resources for future generations, and based in the CONCAUSA commitments, take all appropriate diplomatic actions to dissuade the Panamanian government from carrying out such a detrimental project for Panama and for all humanity. (Anderegg et al. 3/11/04). If DOS decides to express a position contrary to the ERP, it would not be alone. On January 15, 2003 Francesco Bandarin, UNESCO’ Center for World Heritage Sites Director expressed to ANAM, UNESCO’s fear that the road could affect the ecological integrity of the area, as previously stated by the World Bank (which has asked for an EIS prior to any decision on the building of such road. (Bandarin, 1/15/04).

24. Substitutes/Alternative Policies:

VI. Conclusion

25. Policy Implications

From a purely academic point of view, the policy issues seem to be: that the GOP wants to build a road to bring prosperity to the area, that there is strong debate over the route it would follow, that environmentalist opposed the Baru route due to the degradation it would bring to one of Central Americas hotspot, and that it weakens Panama’s choice of moving towards eco tourism development. An obvious solution to the policy dispute would be to adopt the southern route. In Mesoamerica however, such rational behavior is uncommon. And that’s why Latin America’s reality; as eloquently expressed by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Nobel Laureate, and Isabel Allende et al. has come to be known in literary circles, and beyond, as Realismo Magico or magical realism. Not withstanding, there are some objective policy recommendations that can be set forth from the so called Eco-Road Project experiences.

26. Recommendations

a) Substitute EPR for Southern Route.

Uniting the gateway communities of Boquete and Cerro Punta is a valid policy objective, for by being connected, they gain critical mass as an eco tourism destination. However that ground link need not be through the heart of Baru. The TNC offers a clear alternative in what has come to be known as “la Ruta Sur” or the southern route (SR). The southern route is a longer link, but it does not pose ecological threats, and it would bring considerable improvement to the lives of between ten to fifteen thousand residents whose agricultural and milk production can benefit from better access and lower transportation cost. The road would also provide the area with access to major rivers whose beauty are an opportunity for tourism and recreation (Reid/Hanily, 2003, p.23-25). The characteristic of the SR as described by the TNC study assured that international financing would be available for its development. With the SR in mind one must sympathize with I.R Eisenmann, a former advisor to president Moscoso and Harvard Neiman Fellow, who described the EPR as an “act of arrogance at the sunset of [the Moscoso] administratio” (La Prensa, 12/30/03, OPED).

b) Codify Panama’s environmental laws

As far as the EPR is concerned, the electoral outcome on May 2^nd is immaterial, as all candidates have shown, at one time or another, their opposition to the project. What is fundamental is that whoever receives the people’s mandate make the codification of Panama’s environmental laws a front-end priority for the administration. That process would grant Panama the opportunity to align its diluted environmental laws with its constitutional mandates, eliminate contradictions and duplicities and to typify all acts of degradation, contrary to the Environmental Code, as subject for criminal prosecution.

c) Consider the creation of a Ministry of Tourism and Environment

There are those who believe that developing countries can benefit from a strong executive - something like a necessary evil. In Panama, there is a growing feeling that the Constitution of 1972 and its reforms need further changes. If the political opportunity arises, the new administration should bring under one roof the agencies responsible for tourism - IPAT- and for the environment – ANAM. The objective of this union at a Cabinet level is to give both issues the level of prominence they deserve in Panama and to bring coherence between tourism and conservation policies. This would create greater opportunity to vie for resources within the central government, and would, by elevating them to ministerial rank, expand their profile and in so doing their level of accountability.

Special consideration should be given to experience in other jurisdictions, and to the inclusion of stakeholders in the policy making process.

d) Carbon sequestration

Study and analyze, together with the US private and public sectors, the core elements for a successful carbon sequestration and trading policy, and develop the necessary legislation to develop this sector in Panama, the one which could be an important source of opportunities & revenue for nature preservation.

d) Land buy out in Baru

GOP should, following Costa Rica’s example in Braulio Carrillo National Park, consider the buy-out of all land properties with in the Park’s area; and establish, via legislation, a conservation statute dictating the terms and conditions under which visitation and eco business activity will take place at Baru. This process could serve as precedent for other parks in the Republic of Panama.

e) Civil Society and CONCAUSA

ANCON, Panama’s largest environmental NGO, should consider promoting within the spirit of the CONCAUSA alliance, the strengthening of ties among peers in Central American. In so doing, the scope and critical mass of the a regions’ conservation movement would be expanded, empowering it to better challenge all policies, in individual countries or at a regional level, which deviate from the values reiterated in CONCAUSA’s resolutions.

VII Other Factors

27. Culture:

Besides the legal/political considerations addressed in earlier section s, it is important to mention Panama’s historical domestic migrations and their impact on the environment.

In rural areas, this migrations known as “Pioneer Fronts” can be found through out the country. They are composed of men in search of lands for logging, agriculture or grassing. But local populations to particular areas follow similar patterns. In the case of Chiriquir, the pioneer fronts are composed of native “chiricanos” and migrations from the province of Veraguas the one which has multiple pockets of extreme poverty and malnutrition. (Jaen 2004) Simple observation of the areas shows the lack of sustainable agricultural practices specially in the Baru area, where the mountain slopes are cultivated with out terracing, and thus provide few crop cycles due to the erosion of the fragile top soil characteristic to the area. With the implementation of sustainable agricultural best practices these degradations could be prevented.

28. Trans-Boundary Issues:

29. Rights:

How to balance the rights of individuals versus the rights of the collectivity has been a long standing policy question, which gathered strength during the XVIII century with the American and French revolutions. How to balance the individuals, land holders within the park, rights, and the common good in Baru is the question? From the case one can deduce that, given the negative impact arising from building a road through the park, and that by having an alternate route available, a clear mandate for the prevalence of the common versus the individual good is established. One of the recommendations listed in the previous section addresses the acquisition of all private property within the parks limits. To assure that such process is done fairly and according to international best practices, it is suggested that the GOP follows the rules for such purposes, contained in the World Bank Manual for Operations. ( www.worldbank.org )

30. Relevant Literature

Ayala, Hana.(1997), “Resort Ecotourism: A Catalyst For National and Regional Partnerships” Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, August, Cornell University.

Bosselman, P. Fred et.al. (1999), Managing Tourism Growth: Issues and Applications. 1^st ed. Island.

Carr, Thomas A. et.al. (Sep.1993), “Rainforest entrepreneurs: Cashing in on conservation,” Environment, Washington; Vol.35, Iss. 7; pg. 12, 10 pgs. ProQuest document D:1632632

Ceballos-Lascurain, Hector (2001), ‘Integrating Biodiversity into the Tourism Sector.’ Report Submitted to UNEP/UNDP/GEF/BPSP<www.ceballos-lascurain.com>

Eleta-Casanovas, Fernando (2003), “Statement of Purpose”. Application form, The George Washington University MTA Program. July.

Feature (Jan.1994), “Ecotourism in the national parks of Latin America,” National Parks Washington. Vol.68, Iss. 1-2; pg. 32, 6pgs. (ProQuest document ID: 4958719).

Figueres, Jose Maria (2004). APEDE Annual Conference, Panama.< www.prensa.com/hoy/portada/1583819.html> < accessed (03/21/04)>

Friedman, L. Thomas (2000), The Lexus and the Olive Tree.2^nd edn, Anchor/Random House.

Garcia-Rodriguez, Fco. J. et al. (2002 ), “The Ecological Orientation of the Hotel Corporation as Key Factor in its Competitive Positioning,” Tourism Studies #154, Secretaria de Estado de Comercio- Secretaria General de Turismo, Madrid, Spain.

Hawkins, E. Donald (2004), ‘The Challenges Of Tourism Destinations and the Roles of the Public and Private Sectors’ A conference. Inter-American Development Bank, April 14, Washington DC.

INDESA, (2003), “Tourism Report,” November 6, Panama, Republic of Panama.

Mader, Ron (1999), Ecotourism research and promotion on the Web: experiences and insights,” International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. Bradford, Vol.11, Iss. 2/3, pg. 78. ProQuest document ID: 1159 21233

Middleton, T.C. Victor (2002). Marketing in Travel and Tourism. 3^rdedn, Butterworth & Heinemann.

Pearce, D.G. (1992), ‘Alternative Tourism: concepts, classifications, and questions, in V.L. Smith et.al. (eds) Tourism Alternatives: Potential and Pitfalls in the Development of Tourism, University of Pennsylvania and The International Academy for the Study of Tourism,15-30.

Small, Lawrence M. (Mar. 2004), “World View” Smithsonian Magazine. Washington, DC.

www.eclac.org/washington

^{1.Acronym utilize by the US. Department of State}

^{2 Created by Law 41, July1, 1998. It
replaced the National Institute of Renewable Natural Resources- INRENARE}

3 Filed by Panama’s Conservation Association (ANCON), National Ombudsman & District Attorney for the Environmen

t⁴At the time, ANAM’s director Anguizola expressed that he would take into account the people’s reservations on the accuracy of the EIS presented by the builders of the road ( Ellas, 1/30/04, p.60).

^{5 Taken together, the prices for Arabica and Robusta have fallen from
an average of $4.00 a pound in 1975, to 50 cents in 2002(deflated) (<www.worldbank.org> <Dev News, 3/23/04>)}

.⁶ Among those threatened are: red fronted parrotlet (Touit costaricensis), the quetzal (Pharomachhurus mocinno) and the near threatened crested eagle (Morpfnus guianensis) (Angher, 2003).

Bibliography

Anderegg, Sarah (2004) Letter from Anderegg et al. (GWU) To Dobriansky (DOS), March 11

Cedeno Anaximedes, a telephone interview with author, March 29, 2004

Correa, Rosario (2004) “ Diagnosis of Legal Status of Baru National Park and the Construction of Cerro Punta-Boquete Road Ancon Panama” ACON, pp 30

Dev News Media center

http:// web.worldbank.org/Website/ External /News/0 ,,date: 03 -12-2004-menu PK: 278

http:// web.worldbank.org/Website /External/ News/0 ,, content MDK20012017595-menú…

El Pulso De Panamá> <Http://elpanamaa.terra.com.pa /epa /> (<Accessed 11 28 03> )

Feature Jan. (1994) “ Ecotourism in the national parks of Latin America, “National Parks Washington. VOl. 68, Iss. 1-2, 6pgs ( ProQuest documents ID 4958719)

Fernandez Marcos, a telephone interview with author, March 29, 2004

(G.O.) Gaceta Oficial, Imprenta Nacional Panamá

Hanily, A. George, (2004). e mail from Hanily (<ghanily@tnc.org>) to Eleta January 21, 5:56 PM (EST)

INDESA, (2003). Tourism Report November 6 , Panama Republic of Panama

Madder, Ron, (1999). Ecotourism research and promotion on the web experiences and in contemporary hospitality managements. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. Bradford, VOL.II, Iss 2/3, pg. 78. ProQuest document ID: 115921233

Office of the Spokesman (2001) Press Release 2001/475, Department of States Washington DC, pp.1

Perez- Burgos, Ileana (2004) Un Ambiente Indefenso, Ellas, Edición 730, La Prensa Panamá, pp60- 64

Political Constitution of 1972 as Reformed by Reformatory Act 1978, the Constitutional Act of 1983 and Legislative acts 1&2 of 1994 Republic of Panama. Misrachi y

Pujol, S.A. 2002 (in Spanish)

Reid, John/ Hanily, A. George (2003) Economic Analysis of Three Road Investment Across the Baru Volcano National Park, and Surrounding Areas in Western Panama

The Nature Conservancy, Panama, Conservation Strategy Fund, and Conservation International (Spanish version)

Rush, George 2004. Wild in Panama, DEPARTURE, March /April edition, American Express Publishing Corporation, New York

<Vamaga News Service > < El Panamá América> Vamaga@cableondoa.net>

1/2001;4/2004