• Executive summary - key points

1. Galapagos at risk
2. Galapagos is undergoing constant change
3. Changing tourism markets
4. Changing tour operators
5. Local benefits
6. Financing in Galapagos
7. Fishing and differences among the Islands
8. New local operators in tourism
9. Impacts of tourism
10. Leadership and governance
11. Subsidies and incentives in Galapagos
12. Conclusion

• References

５．Local benefits

　There has been a great deal of discussion in Galapagos about the flow - or the absence of flow - of benefits from tourism to local residents. This debate is the basis for pressure to create a new model for tourism. It is partially driven by differences among the islands (primarily Santa Cruz, San Cristobal and Isabela) in the degree to which tourism is an economic driver.

　Tourism has grown very rapidly. Total gross income of boats in Galapagos has grown from $19.6M per year in 1991 to $145.5M in 2006 (of which $25M goes to international travel retailers). Gross income of hotels has grown from $1.1M per year to $10.7M per year in the same time period (Epler 2007). This economic growth has been more notable on Santa Cruz where the principal economic flows to the community occur through ownership, employment and local purchasing of crafts, restaurants and bars (Proano 2006). It is difficult to obtain precise economic data, but it is likely that the greatest flow of benefits to local residents is through employment. Taylor, Stewart and Hardner (2006) indicate that tourism is the main pillar of the Galapagos economy, generating substantial local benefit. Today in Santa Cruz, tourism is the basis of many small- to medium-sized enterprises including construction, commerce, service provision, and the markets and laundries that proliferate in Puerto Ayora. Increasing the number of residents employed within the existing tourism framework would increase the benefit flow from tourism to local residents. If one were to compare Galapagos with the Caribbean Islands, it could be argued that Galapagos already exhibits "tourism with local participation." These benefits can be improved with more effective urban planning and training. However, the benefits are degraded by the arrival of new immigrants (Taylor, Stewart and Hardner 2006).

　Kerr, Cardenas et al. (2004) recommend that the linkages between commercial development, human resources and immigration require much deeper analysis and consideration. Such analyses, including understanding the relationships between wages, inflation, employment and immigration, are required to better plan the sustainable development of towns like Puerto Ayora (Santa Cruz), Puerto Villamil (Isabela) and Puerto Baquerizo Moreno (San Cristobal). It appears that the major immigration threat occurs because town-based small businesses employ non-residents because they are cheaper or because family businesses can employ relatives from outside of Galapagos. Sectors such as service provision, construction, agriculture and even fishing are requesting new outside workers because they are unable to find enough local labor. Bars, restaurants and other service providers also seem to use immigrants instead of local residents.

　Socioeconomic analyses indicate that immigrant labor tends to cost less than resident labor, and that the income expectations of residents are often too high for smaller businesses (Henderson, Zurita et al., 2005). This socioeconomic and cultural reality means that economic growth almost always results in immigration. INGALA and the Municipalities must take the responsibility for designing sustainable commercial options for Galapagos residents based on the realities of the locally-available human resources. Until then, economic growth will directly affect immigration, often independently of regulatory controls.