Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa

Indigenous ecotourism in the Amazon: a case study of ‘Casa Matsiguenka’ in Manu National Park, Peru


Ecotourism can capture biodiversity values and provide incentives for conservation, and many integrated conservation and development projects include an ecotourism component. One key assumption behind this strategy is that ecotourism businesses can achieve financial viability. This paper presents a financial case study of the well-known community-based ecotourism lodge ‘Casa Matsiguenka’, owned by an indigenous Matsigenka population in Manu National Park (Peru), only the second such project to be thoroughly analysed in the literature. Built and financed from 1997 to 2003 with German official aid, the lodge's revenues have only just exceeded operating costs and have not covered the costs of infrastructure replacement, thereby failing to secure long-term business sustainability. Wages and income from handicraft sales have covered about a third of individual cash needs in the two participating communities, but communal income from lodge operating profits (for example to pay for community infrastructure, health care or education) has been minimal. The lodge's difficulties are attributed largely to a flawed business plan in which the lodge has sold its services to its own competitors, a group of ecotourism agencies that have used their lobbying power to create a cartel in Manu. In a narrow analysis, the return on investment for this project has been approximately one-third of what could have been achieved to date by merely investing the start-up grant monies in a bank account and paying the interest directly to the Matsigenka communities in exchange for conservation actions. Broader analysis indicates the modest income and slow pace of business so far has permitted gradual social and economic adaptation on the part of culturally conservative indigenous communities. Moreover, the lodge project has generated processes of social and political organization, and sustained positive contact with Peruvian national society, which can be counted among its successes. The lodge has helped produce dialogue between the Park administration and the Matsigenka communities, a process that could ultimately result in co-management agreements that help to resolve people-park conflicts in the Park.

Corresponding author
*Correspondence: Dr Julia Ohl-Schacherer e-mail:
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

J. Alcorn (1993) Indigenous peoples and conservation. Conservation Biology 7: 424426.

B. Aylward , K. Allen , J. Echeverra & J. Tosi (1996) Sustainable ecotourism in Costa Rica: the Monteverde Cloud Forest Preserve. Biodiversity and Conservation 5: 315343.

M.P. Bookbinder , E. Dinerstein , A. Rijal , H. Cauley & A. Rajouria (1998) Ecotourism's support of biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology 12: 13991404.

F. Danielsen , B. Balmford & A. Balmford (2005) Monitoring matters: examining the potential of locally-based approaches. Biodiversity and Conservation 14: 25072542.

P.J. Ferraro & A. Kiss (2002) Direct payments to conserve biodiversity. Science 298: 17181719.

P.J. Ferraro & R.D. Simpson (2002) The cost-effectiveness of conservation payments. Land Economics 78: 339353.

A. Kiss (2004) Is community-based ecotourism a good use of biodiversity conservation funds? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19: 232237.

O. Krüger (2005) The role of ecotourism in conservation: panacea or Pandora's box? Biodiversity and Conservation 14: 579600.

N. Myers , R.A. Mittermeier , C.G. Mittermeier , da G.A.B. Fonseca & J. Kent (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403: 853858.

J. Peters (1998) Sharing national park entrance: forging new partnerships in Madagascar. Society and Natural Resources 11: 517531.

S.E. Place (1991) Nature tourism and rural development in Tortuguero. Annals of Tourism Research 18: 186201.

K.H. Redford & A.M. Stearman (1993) Forest-dwelling native Amazonians and the conservation of biodiversity: interests in common or in collision? Conservation Biology 7: 248255.

N. Salafsky , H. Cauley , G. Balachander , B. Cordes , J. Parks , C. Margoluis , S. Bhatt , C. Encarnacion , D. Russell & R. Margoluis (2001) A systematic test of an enterprise strategy for community-based biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology 15: 15851595.

S. Schwartzman , A. Moreira & D. Nepstad (2000) Rethinking tropical forest conservation: perils in parks. Conservation Biology 14: 13511357.

M. Stone & G. Wall (2004) Ecotourism and community development: case studies from Hainan, China. Environmental Management 33: 224.

S. Wunder (2000) Ecotourism and economic incentives. Ecological Economics 32: 465479.

S. Wunder (2007) The efficiency of payments for environmental services in tropical conservation. Conservation Biology 21: 4858.

A. Wezel & J. Ohl (2005) Does remoteness from urban centres influence plant diversity in homegardens and swidden fields: a case study from the Matsiguenka in the Amazonian rain forest of Peru. Agroforestry Systems 65: 241251.

D.W. Yu , T. Hendrickson & A. Castillo (1997) Ecotourism and conservation in Amazonian Perú: short-term and long-term challenges. Environmental Conservation 24: 130138.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Environmental Conservation
  • ISSN: 0376-8929
  • EISSN: 1469-4387
  • URL: /core/journals/environmental-conservation
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Type Description Title
Supplementary Materials

Ohl-Schacherer et al. supplementary material
Supplementary tables and figures

 Word (41 KB)
41 KB


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 6
Total number of PDF views: 44 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 256 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 29th March 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.