Growing Industry in Peru Final Paper

The Fastest Growing Industry in Peru: Examining the Cultural and Economic Ramifications of Tourism in the Sacred Valley Allison Brown Introduction to Latin American Studies Dr. Pearson 3 May, 2020 Brown 1 Argument Tourism inherently seems like a benefit to a country. An increase in visitors spending money in communities and others experiencing one’s way of life. However, the reality in the Sacred Valley is quite different and Peru is “ … characterized by high levels of poverty and deep socio‐economic inequalities … [and an economy] partially based on tourism.” (Rodriguez & Cases-Jurado & Fernández, 2017, pg. 753). Since the modern “discovery” of Machu Picchu in the early 1900s, Peru’s tourist industry has reached unforeseeable levels of annual visitors and tourist development. Local indigenous populations, including the Quechua, have been at the forefront of tourist development and are impacted from the increase of visitors and the Peruvian government’s efforts. An increase in tourists and related development in the Sacred Valley has led to substantial changes in Peru’s cultural and economic climates. In this essay, I will establish how the tourism industry has developed in the Sacred Valley and the ramifications it has for the indigenous populations of the region culturally and economically. The Beginning of Development In order to fully understand the different aspects of tourism in the Sacred Valley region, it is first essential to examine how and why tourism developed to the level it now occupies throughout Peru and the Sacred Valley region. The initial discovery of Machu Picchu is contested by some, recognizably, however, it was first introduced to the western world in 1911 by archaeologist Hiram Bingham from the United States. Following a spread on the cover of National Geographic and fanfare of the supposed discovery, “Machu Picchu returned to relative obscurity after the burst of global interest in the site following Bingham’s initial announcement” (Rice, 2017, pg. 53). The newly discovered was relatively isolated from major tourism a few decades longer until in 1948 when the route from Lima to Cusco to Machu Picchu was coined the “tourist highway” (Casado, 1998, pg. 72) and the region saw an increasing number of tourists annually. For early agencies and tourist groups, it seemed that the local populations were attempting to stall the onslaught of visitors to their ancestral home grounds, “Everything representing Andean culture appeared to stand in the way of modern traveling and, in the eyes of many, a modernizing nation” (Rice, 2017, pg. 56). A Growing Industry This view of the Quechua, Aymara, and Q’eros indigenous groups (Smith & Hunt, 2011, pg. 11) did not dissipate, and even more travel occurred over the years. Relations between the Peruvian and United States governments strengthened under the Good Neighbor Era policies implemented in the mid1930s. These policies developed necessary infrastructure for tourists as an attempt to stimulate the Brown 2 stagnant economy of Peru at the time (Silverman, 2002, pg. 887). With the promotion of enticing tourist attractions like the lost city of Machu Picchu, the “ancient” populations of Quechua, and a promise to see an older and more simple way of life, tourists flocked to a handful of attractions. Lima was often a passover city and still remains as one, with tourists simply passing through the airport to reach their destination, Cusco. Peru’s most visited city, Cusco, is popular for its combination of Incan and colonial accents, large indigenous population, and renowned Incan ruins (Smith & Hunt, 2011, pg. 10). Ultimately though, Cusco is an additional “pit-stop” for the majority of tourists on their way to the main attraction, Machu Picchu. Declared a Peruvian Historic Sanctuary in 1981, a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1983, and inducted as one of the new seven World Wonders in 2007 (Barbieri & Sotomayor, 2020, pg. 4) the archaeological site is easily the most visited in the country. In 2018, a staggering 1.58 million visitors were recorded, increasing by 12% from the 2017 count of 1.41 million tourists (Summer, 2019, pg. 1) with no indication of less visitors in the years to come. As concluded by Rice, the transformation of Machu Picchu that started with Bingham was not an accident, but was purposeful between the Peruvian government’s efforts to transform archaeological sites into popular tourist destinations during the Good Neighbor era between Peru and the United States (Rice, 2017, pg. 54). The Good Neighbor era refers to the period stretching from the early 1930s onwards when the United States was paying particular attention to their ‘neighbors’ to the south. These economic and trade policies were implemented by Franklin D. Roosevelt in order to improve relations with Latin America (Silverman, 2002, pg. 895). The policies had incorporated ideas from both the Modern-Liberal Period and the Period of Import Substitution Industrialization (Jackiewicz & Sellung, 2020, pg. 32-36) and would economically impact the Latin American nation for decades to come by increasing the flow of tourists to Peru. Cultural Tourism Perhaps the most economically successful, albeit newest, form of tourism in the Sacred Valley is cultural. A geographic imaginary of the populations residing in the Andes is one of a simple life and colonial costumes put in place by the government since, “ … tourism became a strategy to contribute to sustainable development in the Andes, advertising focuses on the bright, smiling and colourful side of life, in the process presenting a version of Andean culture frozen in time and divorced from real life” (Zoomers, 2008, pg. 972). Highlighting indigenous populations such as the Quechua allows for the government and tourist companies to perceive a preferred reality of the local populations to tourists in the region, one that fits geographic imaginaries and shields tourists from the realities of over-urbanization and poverty. Brown 3 However, this embrace of the local culture can occasionally provide protection and a stage for their heritage, “The governments of Peru and Bolivia have embraced cultural tourism as a strategy for economic growth, the alleviation of poverty, the conservation of cultural heritage and the protection of indigenous rights” (Zoomers, 2008, pg. 971). Utilizing local populations as a tourist attraction is not a new concept in Latin American countries. Peru has promoted cultural attractions from the shores of Lake Titicaca in Puno to indigenous people selling souvenirs at the steps of Sacsayhuaman in Cusco to turn a profit. Nevertheless, though, the Peruvian government continues to undermine the rights of the Quechua population and traditionally Incan sites; the transformation of Machu Picchu into both a tourist destination and a national symbol created conflict as well as consensus, and “ … the staged authenticity of tourism crafted to publicize Machu Picchu overlooked the grassroots political and cultural demands of Cusco’s indigenous communities … ” (Rice, 2017, pg. 54). Cultural tourism and this gross ignorance of indigenous needs from the Peruvian government is in part caused by the U.S.’s push for Peruvian economic development. Tourism for Economic Development A common misconception not only about Peru but Latin American countries, in general, is that tourism is an assured way to boost the economy and improve the lives of those living in the visited area. In Peru, increasing tourism alone does not assure an economic boost; “Tourism is thus not a guaranteed way to stimulate local development. It depends on policy-makers’ ability to attract the right type of tourist, control costs and benefits, and protect sites from environmental and cultural degeneration” (Zoomers, 2008, pg. 980). At the surface level, increased tourism seems to be an easy way to create employment opportunities across all sectors from hospitality workers to porters on the Inca Trail which would, in turn, stimulate the economy and provide working opportunities for all. However, with a minimum wage equalling $276 USD per month (Dunnell, 2018, pg. 1) and most jobs being seasonally dependent, the direct economic benefits are lost to those who directly work within the tourism sector. An additional limitation to tourism serving as the sole economic ‘export’ for the nation is the geographic layout of urban populations and the most popular tourist destinations, with 60% of the population living in rural areas and having indigenous backgrounds (Smith & Hunt, 2011, pg. 16). The areas where tourists do not heavily frequent do not see any imminent gains from the tourist industry or any substantial federal aid to help develop their region for tourists to attempt to reduce poverty. In a methodological economic simulation through Wiley Research, the following was determined in Peru with the geographical and seasonal limitations on tourism nation-wide and determined that, “ … tourism will contribute to a reduction in poverty [only if] it entails pro-poor design and implementation of Brown 4 tourism sector development … if these conditions are not met appropriately, either tourism will lead to an increase in poverty or, at best, it will have no effect” (Rodriguez & Cases-Jurado & Fernández, 2017, pg. 747). Tourism is not the economic answer for Peru and the Sacred Valley, as a sector it is highly dependent on foreign visitors, and can be volatile depending on the global economy (Jackiewicz & Klak, 2020, pg. 158) , and ultimately not a viable solution for the Peruvian government to alleviate poverty. Concluding Thoughts In brief, since the discovery of Machu Picchu in 1911 by Hiram Bingham, Peru’s tourist sector has continued to grow exponentially with economic misgivings and the cultural repression of indigenous tribes. As confirmed by Rice, the development of tourism to this scale in the Sacred Valley was no accident in part led to the state of poverty and tourist-dependent state that Peru currently occupies. The impacts of cultural tourism economically are clear, and will only continue to worsen Peru’s economy unless measures are taken by the government to develop infrastructure to spread the economic benefits of tourism and listen to indigenous populations. Brown 5 Citations Barbieri, C., Sotomayor, S., & Claudia, G. A. (2020). Sustainable tourism practices in indigenous communities: The case of the Peruvian Andes. Tourism Planning & Development, 17(2), 207-224. Casado, M. A. (1998). Peru's tourism industry: Growth, setbacks, threats. Cornell Administration and Tourism Quarterly, 39(1), 68-73. Dunnell, T. (2018, May 31). The Current Minimum Wage in Peru in US Dollars and Soles. Retrieved from http://www.newperuvian.com/current-minimum-wage-in-peru-in-us-dollars-andsoles/ Jackiewicz, E., & Klak, T (2020). Chapter 10: Mass and Alternative Tourisms in Latin America and the Caribbean. In Placing Latin America (4th ed., pp. 157-174). Jackiewicz, E., & Sellung, A. (2020). Chapter 3: Global Challenges, Regional Change, and Persistent Inequalities. In Placing Latin America (4th ed., pp. 31–60). Rice, M. (2017). Good Neighbors and Lost Cities. Radical History Review, 2017, 51–73. DOI: 101215/01636545-3920679 Rodríguez, Carmen María, Cases-Jurado, Fernández, et al (2017). Wiley Research. Tourism and Poverty Alleviation: An Empirical Analysis Using Panel Data on Peru's Departments, pp. 746–756. Silverman, H. (2002). Touring ancient times: The present and presented past in contemporary Peru. American Anthropologist, 104(3), 881-902 Smith, J. S., & Hurt, D. A. (2011). Roads Less Traveled: Emerging Tourism in Peru. Focus on Geography, 11–23. DOI:10.1111/j.1949-8535.2010.00021 Summer, E. (2019, March). How many tourists visited Machu Picchu in 2018? Retrieved from https://www.perutelegraph.com/news/peru-travel/how-many-tourists-visited-machu-picc u-in-2018 Zoomers, A. (2008). Global Travelling Along the Inca Route: Is International Tourism Beneficial for Local Development? European Planning Studies, 971–983. DOI:10.1080/09654310802163769 Brown 6