Analysis of the Cruise Ports on the Pacific of Costa · PDF fileAnalysis of the Cruise Ports...

Analysis of the Cruise Ports on the Pacific coast of Costa Rica

Analysis of reviews future management plans, proposals, projects and discussions regarding cruise ships in the general area of influence of the ports of Puntarenas,

Caldera, Quepos, Golfito and Punta Morales

FINAL REPORT

Luis Morales and Lawrence Pratt

CIMS – Sustainable Markets Intelligence Center

For: Center on Ecotourism and Sustainable Development

A Nonprofit Research Organization Stanford University and Washington, DC

This document is part of the study

“The Impact of development associated to tourism along the Pacific coast of Costa Rica”

San José, Costa Rica

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................ 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................ 5 ASSIGNMENT ........................................................................................................................................... 10 METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................................... 11 PORT SYSTEM IN COSTA RICA .......................................................................................................... 12 GENERAL OUTLOOK OF CRUISE TOURISM ALONG COSTA RICA’S PACIFIC COAST ...... 16 GENERAL STATE OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS .......................... 18

A. PUNTARENAS PORT ............................................................................................................................ 20 PUNTARENAS PORT .............................................................................................................................. 22

B. CALDERA PORT ................................................................................................................................... 23 D. GOLFITO PORT ................................................................................................................................... 31 E. PUNTA MORALES PORT AND FERTICA ............................................................................................... 32 F. OTHER PRIVATE MARINAS WITH CAPACITY TO SERVE SMALLER CRUISE VESSELS ..................... 34 G. RECENT PROTESTS IN THE PACIFIC PORTS ..................................................................................... 37

FUTURE PLANS AND PROJECTS ....................................................................................................... 39 DEVELOPING A HOME PORT .................................................................................................................... 43 CREATING A PACIFIC COAST MASTER PLAN ......................................................................................... 45 INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS AND THEIR EFFECT ON PORT DEVELOPMENT ...................................... 45 ESTABLISHING A NATIONAL COORDINATOR TO LEAD THE CRUISE TOURISM STRATEGY ....................... 47 DEVELOPING MODERN CRUISE TERMINALS ........................................................................................... 48 IMPROVING SAFETY AND SECURITY ......................................................................................................... 49 CALDERA CONCESSION PROJECTS: NEW BULK TERMINAL AND DREDGING PLAN ............................. 50 PACIFIC ISLAND CONCESSIONS .............................................................................................................. 50

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................... 53 SOURCES .................................................................................................................................................. 59 ANNEXES ................................................................................................................................................... 65

1. PACKAGED TOUR AREAS OFFERED BY SELECTED INBOUND TOUR OPERATORS IN COSTA RICA.......... 65 2. CARGO AND CRUISE SHIP MOVEMENTS IN CALDERA PORT (2006, 2007, 2008) ................................... 68 3. CRUISE SEASON 2007 – 2008 CALDERA AND PUNTARENAS ................................................................. 70

ENDNOTES ................................................................................................................................................ 72

3

LIST OF ACRONYMS

ARESEP Public Services Regulatory Agency (Autoridad Reguladora de Servicios Públicos)

CANATUR National Tourism Chamber (Camara Nacional de Turismo)

CESD Center on Ecotourism and Sustainable Development

CIMAT Tourist Docks and Marinas Commission (Comisión Interinstitucional de Marinas y Atracaderos Turísticos)

CIMS Sustainable Markets Intelligence Center

COCATRAM Central American Comission for Maritime Transport (Comisión Centroaméricana de Transporte Marítimo)

CNC National Concession Center (Consejo Nacional de Concesiones CNC)

ICT Costa Rican Tourism Board (Instituto Costarricense de Turismo)

INCOP National Port Institute of the Pacific (Instituto Nacional de Puertos del Pacífico)

JAPDEVA Atlantic Development Authority and Port Development Board - Junta de Administración Portuaria y Desarrollo Económica de la Vertiente Atlántica)

LAICA Sugar Cane Agri-Industrial League (Liga Agrícola Industrial de la Caña de Azúcar)

MIDEPLAN Planning Ministry (Ministerio de Planificacion)

MINAE Ministry for the Environment and Energy (Ministerio de Ambiente y Energia)

MOPT Ministry of Public Works and Transportation (Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes)

PSP Private Sector Participation

RECOPE Costa Rican Oil Refinery (Refinadora Costarricense de Petróleo)

SICA Central American Integration System - Sistema de la Integracion Centroamericana

SINAP National Petroleum System (Sistema Nacional de Petróleo )

4

SINTRAJAB Caribbean Ports Worker’s Sindicate - Sindicato de Trabajadores de los Puertos del Caribe

SPC Sociedad Portuaria de Caldera S.A.

UFC United Fruit Company

UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Developmen

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report reviews future management plans, proposals, projects and discussions regarding cruise ships in the general area of influence of the ports of Puntarenas, Caldera, Quepos, Golfito and Punta Morales. Since no recent master plan exists for the Pacific coast, and little related to cruise ships is discussed publicly, most of the input for this document comes from interviews and direct consultations with government officials, private tour operators, and industry leaders. This report is the first time that these ideas, projects and discussions are compiled into a single document, and its goal is to provide additional information to the discussion in formulating policies to protect Costa Rica’s natural and human capital and create sustainable tourism policies. This study aims to build upon the experience and opinions of key actors to assess the future direction of the role of the Pacific Ports in Costa Rica’s tourism sector. The first section gives a description of the five main ports in the Pacific coast, the second section deals with plans for upgrading and expanding the Pacific coast ports, and the third section gives policy recommendations and notes areas for further study. At the moment, only two ports provide service to large cruise ships in the Pacific coast: Caldera and Puntarenas. Puntarenas is the principal cruise port on the Pacific coast receiving 52 ships out of 80 docking on along the Pacific coast in 2008. Although this port was reconstructed specifically to serve cruise tourism and large cargo ships, its structural design and its exposure to strong tides and winds have created conditions that are far from optimal. Without proper modifications and structural renovations more growth in this port does not appear feasible. Caldera was concessioned to a private operator, Sociedad Portuaria de Caldera (Caldera Porting Society, SPC) in 2006, and has handled growing levels of cargo and has substantial investment plans for the next five years. In 2008, Caldera Port has received 27 of the 80 cruise ships that docked in the Pacific regioni. Although the port handles mostly cargo ships, it is also used for passenger traffic, creating delays and constraining the port because passengers have priority over cargo shipments. Although exporters show satisfaction with the new port operator, the priority given to cruise ship passengers is still a matter of concern, particularly because these passenger vessels have subsidized rates. For the other three official ports in the Pacific: Quepos, Golfito and Punta Morales, there are very few specific projects in line to refurbish them. Quepos and Golfito are currently working on feasibility studies through a private sector partnership (PSP) to modernize their facilities; as of yet, however, no specific plans or time frames have been publicly announced. In all ports, cruise ships are

6

given preferential access, and cargo ships must wait until passenger vessels disembark, slowing down movement at the port. Plans for upgrading and expanding the Pacific coast ports tend to center on the provision of higher standards of service within the existing port structures. These range from the design and consultation of port master plans, to regional and local tourism strategies, marketing campaigns and increased lobbying for new regulatory frameworks that speed up renovation processes. No new ports or concessions are underway, but numerous renovation plans and improvements are in the process of being developed or currently under discussion. No up-to-date Pacific Coast or National Master Plan exists to guide these developments. The Transport Ministry (MOPT) stated that funding port infrastructure development is not a major priority in their administration, so the plan must include strategies to promote private sector participation. Among the main policies, this report documents:

1. The possibility of developing a Central American home port in Puntarenas where passengers initially embark to proceed on a cruise trip. At the moment, not only is there significant competition for this proposal, but also very little research exists that analyzes the quantifiable benefits of public expenditure on homeporting.

2. The development of a Pacific coast master plan with the participation of all

of the concerned authorities and stakeholders, as a way to remain globally competitive and have a sustainable position in the worldwide cruise market with strategies for the individual ports.

3. Modernizing institutional frameworks to foster port development. At the

moment, there are two different forms of private sector participation with regards to port infrastructure development. The first are concession agreements and the other are private initiatives. A new institutional mechanism has been formulated that supports private sector participation and gives the necessary credibility and stability to attract industry leaders. This includes the creation of an Office of Superintendent of Ports, that would act proactively, and adequately supervise future and current concessionaries like the one in Caldera.

4. Establishing a national coordinator to lead the cruise tourism strategy

within the Ministry of Tourism, so that it can serve as a junction for the different interests

and concerns. This expert would help design and implement a National Cruise Tourism Policy, which would oversee infrastructure developments within a Port Master plan but would also direct government policy and incentives towards cruise tourism in particular. Most importantly, the cruise tourism policy must be the product of an informed, public debate, which could eventually increase the level of income of local populations

7

without endangering the experience of small-scale nature tourism in nearby areas.

5. Developing modern cruise terminals and port-side infrastructure in order to

create not just basic entry ports, but destinations in themselves, with small tourist villages.

6. Improvement of safety and security has become crucial because cruises

are highly sensitive to security threats, and thus demand heightened levels of security that guarantee a safe and secure passenger environment. A new police squad was created to protect cruise and regular tourists in Puntarenas and Limon. In addition, security threats relating not to crime but to infrastructure in the Puntarenas cruise terminal are being addressed, since there is a real risk that the pier could actually collapse.

7. A new bulk terminal and dredging plan in Caldera, financed by the

concessionary will soon take place. 8. Finally, there is a plan to offer concessions to the Pacific islands, in order

to permit hotel and tourism concessions inhabited islands. This proposal would require a new law to be approved by the Legislative Assembly, including granting new regulatory plans and municipal powers, so that these concessions can be approved by local governments without the need of approval from Congress. However, there are no immediate plans to open these islands for private operation, be it for cruise operators or others.

At the moment, there is a disjointed maritime policy and lack of a coherent strategy. This has resulted in many ongoing plans and discussions for the entire Pacific coast, including isolated initiatives at Quepos and Golfito. This report emphasizes that every form of investment from public or private funding must be compatible with a national tourism strategy aimed at maximizing the positive effects from cruise tourism. If left to private forces alone, port developments on the Pacific coast could risk jeopardizing Costa Rica’s differentiated position in the world tourism market. It would be advisable to concentrate on improving Puntarenas as the quintessential port on the Pacific coast, separating cargo and cruise ships so that cargo vessels do not have to wait to dock and then improving the experience for passengers who chose to disembark. Smaller ports like Golfito and Quepos could specialize on other niches, like pocket cruises, that would not need such high levels of investment. The report documents areas for further research and specific policy recommendations.

8

Areas for further study include:

• How to maximize benefits from cruise tourism to urban areas and port communities like Puntarenas through innovative and publicly led initiatives that foster more spending in the locality. This study needs to assess the experience in other urban ports such as Belize and the realistic possibilities of capturing more of cruise spending locally, given the cruise industry business model is to increase passenger spending on board and with cruise-affiliated businesses on shore.

• An in-depth study of specialty (pocket) cruises to understand how to maximize their positive social and economic impact, since their passengers could potentially engage in more travel within the country and contract higher quality services, without generating a negative impact on ecotourism. This would also include a larger discussion comparing the benefits and costs of pocket cruises vs mainstream cruise tourism.

• The advisability of expanding cruise tourism in Puntarenas is a key issue, with important repercussions to Costa Rica’s national tourism strategy. More research needs to be done to understand to what extent expanding capacity for cruise tourism can be done without eroding the experience in nearby key sites for high value ecotourism tourists, and not compromise the sustainability of natural attractions in the area.

• The costs and benefits of public expenditure on homeporting need to be analyzed, particularly in the case of Puntarenas port, which would entail massive rebuilding and refurbishing of its facilities.

• Further research is needed to understand the implications of marina growth on the local community and the environment. Public opposition to some of these marina projects indicates that there may be potentially adverse effects that have not yet been fully understood.

• An in depth survey of land activities for cruise passengers in terms of demand, cost, types of suppliers, favorite destinations, companies involved and their relation with the cruise companies is of primary importance. More research needs to be conducted that analyzes the types of tours offered, how they impact stay over tourism and mechanisms to augment potential positive externalities within the local population at Puntarenas.

Policy recommendations include:

• The creation of a coherent master plan, which would emerge from a consultative process, is necessary. This would institutionalize a long-run strategy for cruise tourism, without being affected or interrupted by the political cycle. An undirected and unplanned growth of cruise tourism in the Pacific coast could come with irreversible negative consequences.

• Review and revise current cruise policies, many of which are nearly 2 decades old. These include the 1990 Executive Decree giving docking

9

priority to cruise over cargo ships, taxes and fees for cruise ships, and passenger fees which are among the lowest of any port.

• A cruise tourism policy, product of an informed, public debate, could eventually increase the level of income of local populations without endangering the experience of small-scale nature tourism in nearby areas.

• • The creation of an information baseline that is comparable and permits

continuous and systematic monitoring of cruise ship tourism. Establishing base lines and measurable objectives within port and national tourism strategies will permit measuring, ex-post, the evolution of cruise tourism in Costa Rica and the rest of the region

• The formulation of long-term policies that emphasize regional coordination strategies, high value tourism and local capacity building, among other key objectives. Cruise ship policies could ideally be coordinated at a regional level in order to avoid creating a descending spiral of competition that primarily favors the interests of cruise lines.

• The attraction of high value tourism must also remain a key objective in any future plans for cruise tourism. Physically separate cruise ship tourists from those who stay at the places visited, generally wilderness and cultural sites

• The favoring tourists who generate the highest possible economic and social benefits.

All in all, local and national institutions must be prepared to balance often-conflicting development goals if cruise tourism expands, for example in Puntarenas. Economic growth for these urban and port communities depends heavily on foreign tourists, but encouraging mass tourism is not sustainable, and could irreparably damage and saturate key natural attractions, effectively destroying the very social and environmental features that makes Costa Rica a competitive destination. Maximizing positive externalities from cruise tourism is possible firstly if it is properly understood, and secondly if it is addressed as a problem of incentives, social and environmental controls, and the ability to handle complex economic restructuring.

10

ASSIGNMENT The team for the project: The Impact of Development Associated to Tourism Along the Pacific Coast of Costa Rica has consulted with key stakeholders in the cruise industry and has conducted a review of the future management plans, current proposals, pre-projects and discussions regarding cruise ships in the general area of influence of the ports of Puntarenas, Caldera and Golfo de Nicoya. This report is an extension of previous work done by CESD and INCAE related to cruise tourism in Central America, and aims to build upon the experience and opinions of key actors, both in the private and public sectors, to assess the future direction of the role of the Pacific Ports in Costa Rica’s tourism sector. Its goal is to provide additional information to the discussion in formulating policies to protect Costa Rica’s natural and human capital and create sustainable tourism policies. Since no recent master plan exists for the Pacific coast, and little related to cruise ships is discussed publicly, most of the input for this document comes from interviews and direct consultations with government officials, private tour operators, and industry leaders. A full evaluation of the impact of these policies at a socio-economic, cultural and environmental level is not the focus of this study. However, key recommendations are given on the basis of this research and the previous CESD and INCAE studies to help direct these opportunities in ways that maximize positive impacts. Undoubtedly, fostering high value tourism and building upon Costa Rica’s historical strengths will only be possible with a long-term strategy and a correct dimensioning of the cruise tourism industry.

11

METHODOLOGY This report was developed jointly by the Center for Ecotourism and Sustainable Development (CESD) and the Sustainable Markets Intelligence Center (CIMS) at INCAE Business School. All research was conducted in accordance with Stanford University’s Human Subjects Protocol, reviewing relevant publicly available information, interviewing key stakeholders (including government, civil society, private sector actors), and conducting field trips to related organizations and interview subjects. Specifically, this paper draws on input from key tourism, industry and government officials, as well as chamber representatives of related business sectors carried out from April 2008 to February 2009. Among the organizations consulted for this study are: National Port Institute of the Pacific (INCOP), Ministry of Public Works and Transportation (Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes – MOPT), the Caldera Porting Society (Sociedad Portuaria de Caldera S.A.), the National Concession Center (Consejo Nacional de Concesiones CNC), the Costa Rican Ministry of Tourism (Instituto Costarricense de Turismo – ICT), the Tourist Docks and Marinas Commission (Comisión Interinstitucional de Marinas y Atracaderos Turísticos - CIMAT) tour operators like Swiss Travel International, as well as other written contributions from organizations including the National Oil Refinery (Refinadora Costarricense de Petroleo – RECOPE) and the Planning Ministry (Ministerio de Planificacion MIDEPLAN), and various related NGOs. In addition, the project has benefited from press coverage, a literature review and private consultations to other industry experts who chose to remain anonymous. It also builds upon previous research by CESD and INCAE which is contained in “The impacts of Coastal Tourism development on Costa Rica's Pacific Coast”, “Cruise Tourism Impacts in Costa Rica and Honduras: Policy Recommendations for Decision Makers”, “Perceptions of Cruise Tourism Impacts: Economic, Socio-cultural, and Environmental Changes” and “Cruise Tourism and Community Economics in Central America and the Caribbean: The Case of Costa Rica.”

12

PORT SYSTEM IN COSTA RICA The ports in Costa Rica can play a vital role in cruise tourism in three main areas, providing infrastructure, hospitality, and connectivity. Firstly, they offer the core infrastructure for ships to arrive and berth safely, determining the type and frequency of the vessels that can come in. In addition, ports provide the first exposure to tourists, orienting travelers and enriching their experiences with information covering both the natural and cultural aspects of the country. Finally, ports serve as transit locations for incoming and outgoing tourists, providing effective linkages to popular tourist destinations and activities that enhance the tourist’s experience and increase the net benefits to the host country. In addition, understanding port infrastructure development is a crucial step to regulating mass tourism on the Pacific Coast, with possible implications for the rest of the tourism sector, particularly ecotourism. The role of ports in tourism must be analyzed within a national tourism strategy that covers possible costs and benefits in the short and long run. The Costa Rican port system includes two ports on Caribbean coast, in the province of Limon, called Puerto Limon and Puerto Moín, which work as a port complex and together account for 80% of cargo freight in the country and handle 70% of the cruise vessels. The Pacific coast has four main ports: Puntarenas, Caldera, Quepos and Golfito, and two specialized terminals currently used only for cargo: Punta Morales and Fertica. The biggest port in the Pacific coast is Caldera, followed by Puntarenas. Puntarenas city has a long history as trading center, and has been involved in cargo and passenger vessels for more than a century.

Figure 1 Figure 2 Main Maritime Ports in Costa Rica Tourism Arrivals by Port of Entry (2007) Source: Based on SIECA 2001, Estudio Source: ICT 2008. Centroamericano de Transporte Marítimo (ECAT) *Excludes day cruise passengers

13

The Ministry of Tourism yearly statistics indicate that airports are the main port of entry for stayover tourists heading to Costa Rica, accounting for 68.5% of visitors, followed by 31.2% by land and only 0.2% by sea. This statistic does not incorporate cruise ships and vessels that stay for less than 24 hoursii. Cruise tourism is reported as a separate category, where the number of cruise ships arriving in Costa Rica has averaged 210 per year during the last ten years. There has been a sustained tendency in the number of passengers who choose to disembark, with the exception of 1999 and 2004iii.

Figure 3 Figure 4 Total Cruise Ship Passengers Disembarking International Tourist Arrivals in in Costa Rica (2000-2007) Costa Rica (2000-2007)

Source: ICT Statistics Department 2008 Almost all cruise ships berth in either Limon or Puntarenas, which can be considered passenger ports, although they can also dock at freight ports like Moín or Caldera. Cruise ships are given preferential access, and cargo ships must wait until passenger vessels disembark, slowing down movement at the port1. Puntarenas is close to Puerto Caldera, which principally handles freight, and which is currently administered by a private group: Caldera Porting Society (Sociedad Portuaria de Caldera S.A.). Although a private firm manages the port, public policies and regulations affecting the port are made by the public sector, and tariffs overseen by the public regulator, ARESEP (Autoridad Reguladora de Servicios Publicos – Public Service Regulatory Agency). In fact, the three other ports on the Pacific: Quepos, Golfito and Puntarenas are publicly managed and overseen by the Ministry of Public Works and Transportation (Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes – MOPT) and the National Port Institute of the Pacific (INCOP), which deals with administrative policies and regulations

1 This preferential treatment and special tariffs were granted as an incentive to cruise companies in 1990, by executive decree N° 19254-MOPT, negotiated by the inter-institutional board: MOPT-INCOP-JAPDEVA-MEIC-ICT

14

regarding transit, operations and the loading and unloading of vessels in port. In addition, the Ministry of Tourism provides incentives and assigns funding for the tourism industry; and the Ministry of Health enforces sanitation norms.

Figure 5 Total Cruise Ship Arrivals in Costa Rica (1993-2007)

Source: ICT Statistics Department 2008 Other entities involved in the cruise tourism industry include private tour operators, like Swiss Travel Service and TAM Corporation, which provide tours including visiting the Rainforest Canopy, white-water rafting, trips to San Jose, the Poás volcano, the Monteverde cloud forest, and other typical light adventure activities, as well as shopping for arts and crafts in Sarchí. There are also small companies that offer tours, taxi rides and meals at very low cost, but capture only 5% of the marketiv. Sightseeing and excursion trips to tourist centers around ports form an integral part of the cruising experience, and thus tour operators are key stakeholders in the cruise industry. For a sample list of packaged tours and itineraries for cruise passengers in the Pacific, see Annex 1. The latest survey for cruise passengers in Puntarenas done by the Costa Rican Tourism Board ICTv indicates that cruise passengers come mostly from the North American market, where 54.2% of tourists arrived from the US, followed by 16.3% from Canada and 11% from Great Britain. Almost 80% are over 45 years old. Only 4.6% of them booked tours on a local agency, averaging US$ 97.3 per passenger. This indicates more can be done to promote local agencies and tour operators to engage with the cruise tourists, and find novel strategies to permit passengers easily and safely book tours without having to rely exclusively on the cruise ship’s on board facilities, which charge a hefty commission for these tours, ranging between 40%-100%vi. Those who disembarked (64.1%), spent an

15

average of 4.6 hours on land, and their average expenditure while on tour was US$ 60.8, with tourist guides ($78), handicrafts ($44.9) and transport ($43.5) topping the list. Notably, 95% of them were satisfied with the port facilities and 94.7% expressed they felt safe or very safe in Costa Rica.

16

GENERAL OUTLOOK OF CRUISE TOURISM ALONG COSTA RICA’S PACIFIC COAST Most of the plans for upgrading and expanding the Pacific coast ports in Costa Rica have centered on the provision of higher standards of service within the existing port structures, including better passenger services, enhanced security, and other improvements, especially in the Puntarenas and Caldera. On a strategic level, these ideas range from the design and consultation of port master plans, to regional and local tourism strategies, marketing campaigns and increased lobbying for new regulatory frameworks that speed up renovation processes. Most of the future plans and projects covered here will not occur in the very short term, since they need to go through feasibility studies and public consultations, and some even require modifications to laws, regulations and established administrative procedural. Given the country’s dependence on natural resources and nature and culture-based ecotourism, the sustainability of the tourism sector—and the country’s attractions themselves—must remain a key goal in the long run. The projects included in this document indicate that there is an interest to renovate the Pacific ports, particularly in Puntarenas and Caldera, and convert them into more attractive destinations, in an effort to increase the number of cruise tourists that berth each year and enhance their experience while on-shore. While fully evaluating the economic, sociocultural and environmental impacts of such policies is beyond the focus of this study, a set of recommendations is given to guide the process so as to maximize positive externalities. Since Puntarenas and Caldera have historically served as urban ports used by both cargo and cruise ships, the negative environmental and social effects emerging from cruise tourism are much less than for new ports in more pristine environments, which usually require changes to habitat and affect local communities. These urban areas can actually benefit from increased passenger and crew expenditures, if the necessary conditions exist to protect biodiversity and support models of local wealth-generating tourism. If properly managed, cruise tourism could help raise the standard of living for these economically disadvantaged communities. Previous CESD studies suggest, however, that the current cruise industry model has strived to consolidate spending on board, or through joint ventures and peripheral services. To maximize this potential, publicly led initiatives and carefully designed contracts with the cruise companies must be developed in order to create benefits to Costa Rica’s urban areas and port communities. Another important factor is that cruise tourists to Costa Rica tend to visit attractions that are handled separately from the main attractions for stayover tourists, reducing unwanted congestion at key sites. In other words, Costa Rica distinguishes itself because cruise ship tourists are, as part of an unofficial policy,

17

separated from other tourists interested in the country’s wildlife and other natural attractions. This is beneficial because CESD research suggests that the experience of the multiple-day tourists degrades when their visits to an attraction coincide with the presence of cruise ship passengersvii. However, cruise tourism has proven to have very limited positive economic impact in Costa Rica, For example, the on-shore cruise tourist market is captured by large tour-operators, who benefit from barriers to entry for smaller, local enterprises. In fact, passengers on cruise ships have very little interaction with the local population, with the exception of crew members. In addition, the opportunity cost of favoring cruise tourists over cargo ships is significant, since cargo vessels pay port fees that are eight times higher than cruise ships, and also result in important losses for the export sector of the economy, particularly for perishable goods. Lastly, the low value of taxes paid per passenger ($2.50 national rate in Costa Rica, a fixed amount since 1990, compared with a regional Caribbean countries average of US$8.66) and the low (but rising) percentage of disembarking passengers (60% in Costa Rica versus 85% in Belize) represent important sums of lost revenueviii. This has produced a situation “in which the Costa Rican state is subsidizing, by means of developing extremely specialized port infrastructure for cruise vessels, an activity which is highly lucrative for the cruise lines but not for the country”ix.

18

GENERAL STATE OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND DETAILED DESCRIPTIONS All Pacific ports generally lack dedicated facilities for cruise tourism; nevertheless, they are handling cruise vessels on their cargo berths. General facilities like passenger terminals and berths need to be restored and shopping/restaurant facilities within the terminal areas need to be improved. Puntarenas suffers from structural problems including deteriorating pilings, absence of an extension of the pier parallel with the coast, currents that impede docking except at certain hours, depending on the tides. Caldera urgently needs to be dredged and equipped to deal with cargo requirements, and plans are underway to modernize this terminal: plans to begin dredging and building a new bulk terminal will be started in 2008, but have not yet begun. Recope also has plans to invest in a new oil terminal in Caldera, in order to have supply options in addition to Moín Port. Quepos and Golfito are currently working on feasibility studies through a private sector partnership (PSP) to modernize their facilities; as of yet, however, no specific plans or time frames have been publicly announced. These expansions, however, will not be designed to accommodate large cruise ships, but rather smaller vessels known as pocket cruisers which usually accommodate 250 passengers or less and spend more time at ports of call, thereby putting more money per passenger into the local economy.

TABLE 1 Total Cruise Ship Passengers Disembarking by Port of Entry (Monthly, 2007)

Month Pacific Coast

(Caldera, Puntarenas & Golfito) Caribbean Coast

(Puerto Limón)

All Ports

Cruise Ships Passengers Cruise

Ships Passengers Cruise Ships Passengers

Total 86 105,062 130 216,700 216 321,762

Jan 14 11,428 27 41,628 41 53,056

Feb 14 13,893 17 29,793 31 43,686

Mar 10 9,553 26 42,668 36 52,221

April 10 18,759 17 27,360 27 46,119

May 4 5,746 1 3,097 5 8,843

June 0 0 2 5,104 2 5,104

July 0 0 1 3,144 1 3,144

Aug 2 1,789 2 4,662 4 6,451

Sept 2 3,839 0 0 2 3,839

Oct 9 16,104 9 15,813 18 31,917

Nov 9 14,992 11 18,561 20 33,553

19

Dec 12 8,959 17 24,870 29 33,829 ICT Statistics Department, 2008 Only two ports provide service to large cruise ships: Caldera and Puntarenas. The former serves only base cruises, meaning those who start or end their route in Costa Rica. Puntarenas is a stop for continuing cruises. Five private agents provide service to these ships. Although Puntarenas handles the most passengers in the Pacific, most cargo and passenger traffic occurs in Limon, on the Atlantic Coast. Limon Port is deeper and is located in the Caribbean cruise route, which is more transited than the Pacific. As can be seen in the Table 1, Limon Port handled approximately 70% of passenger traffic in 20072. Currently, negotiations between the government and the local port authorities in Limon’s port complex are underway in order to revitalize the Caribbean ports by offering them in concession to a single private operator, but very little progress has been attained so far. The workers union, SINTRAJAB (Sindicato de Trabajadores de los Puertos del Caribe) has asked the local development authority JAPDEVA (Junta de Administración Portuaria y Desarrollo Económica de la Vertiente Atlántica) to strongly oppose grating this port’s operation to a private enterprise. In October 2008, SINTRAJAB requested US$700 million in compensation to allow the government to offer the port to a private concessionaire, to be distributed amongst the union's 1,400 affiliates. The government refused and offered US$80 million instead. Negotiations have stalled since. If successful, the concession plan will redirect cargo and container traffic to Moín by 2016, and convert Limon into a tourist portx.

2 Given the importance of Limon ports, for both for cargo and tourism, government policy has concentrated all efforts at developing them, and as a second priority, modernizing the Pacific ports (Interview subjects)

20

Table 2 Total Cruise Ship Passenger Transit in Costa Rica (Pacific Coast, 2008)

Source: INCOP 2008, Dirección de Planificación Institucional, Accumulated until November 2008. A. Puntarenas Port This port was built in 19103, aimed as a facility to export coffee and as an interconnecting terminal for the incoming train from San José. Today it is the principal cruise port on the Pacific coast receiving 52 ships out of 80 docking on along the Pacific coast in 2008xi. It is located in Puntarenas city, just 16 km from Caldera Port and 80 km west of San José. Puntarenas is built on the tip of a narrow peninsula, and serves as a connecting route to catch ferries to the Nicoya Peninsula or nearby islands. After the 1995 Master Plan, national and local authorities determined it would serve primarily for cruise ships, although it did not have adequate migration and baggage handling facilities. Since 1995, the Master Plan has seen endless revisions and changes, particularly with every electoral cycle, to the point where local authorities regard it as outdated and call for the development of a new one (See Future Plans). To date, several improvements have been made to its infrastructure, particularly its welcome center for cruise passengers, but major repairs still need to be done in its structural foundations. INCOP administers the port and is currently working on various structural

3 The first port in Puntarenas actually dates from 1871, and the current port, built in 1910, replaced it. (See MIDEPLAN 2003).

21

renovations. Cruise ships stopping in Costa Rica use this port primarily from November to April. Puntarenas has expanded its offerings to foreign and national tourists, and now has cleaner beaches, a new aquarium and a new pedestrian walkway called “Malecon” that runs along the North side of town. Unlike Caldera, tourists can stroll around town, and most tourists arriving in Caldera are sent on a bus to Puntarenas, which acts as the welcoming center for both ports. It must be noted, however, that most cruise tourists do not stay in Puntarenas, but go on an organized tour to nearby destinations. Although this port was reconstructed specifically to serve cruise tourism and large cargo ships, its structural design and its exposure to strong tides and winds have created conditions that are far from optimal. Tour operators and service agents have noted that cruise ships can only berth for a few hours, when weather conditions permit. The strong tides combined with the large size of cruise ships has endangered the structural strength of the whole pier, limiting the capacity of the port and forcing cruise ships to berth on only one side. According to a industry expert, this has created a “vicious cycle”, where cruise ships unavoidably collide with the pier and damage it, so no matter how many renovations take place, the port will remain technically inadequate for cruise tourismxii. Although the current government promised to attract more cruise ships as a means for economic development of this struggling port city, there has been no significant growth during this administration. Commentators suggest that the structural issues are simply too profound-- without proper modifications and structural renovations more growth in this port does not appear feasible. Its current characteristics are summarized below:

TABLE 3 Puntarenas Port Description

Characteristic Details Common Types of serviced ships

The port has capacity for both cruise and cargo ships, but the port is now reserved specifically for tourism. In 2007, 34 cruise ships arrived at Puntarenas.

Docking Platform 554 meters long, berth 182.14 meters long, with capacity to handle 2 cruise ships simultaneously. (INCOP)

Access Channel Depth 9 meters (COCATRAM)

Location 9°58' North Latitude and 84°50' West Longitude

Peak Cruise Season Between November and April

Source: INCOP 2008

22

FIGURE 6 Renovation of Puntarenas Welcome Center

2008 1910

Source: La Nación, TicoArtistico.com

Figure 7 Puntarenas Port

Source: INCOP, Skysprapercity.com, www.GoogleMaps.com

23

B. Caldera Port The biggest port in the Pacific region is built with iron and founded on solid rock. All its surface is covered by concrete and can withstand from 3 to 20 tons per square meter. This port is located in Caldera Bay, in Nicoya Gulf in the province of Puntarenas, 16 km south of the city of Puntarenas. Caldera was concessioned to a private operator, Sociedad Portuaria de Caldera (Caldera Porting Society, SPC) in 2006, and has handled growing levels of cargo and has substantial investment plans for the next five years. SPC is a Colombian company in charge of the Caldera Port’s administration since August 2006. It is comprised of two companies, the Sociedad Portuaria de Caldera (SPC) S.A. and the Sociedad Portuaria Granelera de Caldera (SPGC) S.A., both under the same holding company. SPC is accountable for container movement and SPGC is responsible for the export and import of grains. The Costa Rican government gave the Caldera Port administration to this company using the concession framework, and SPC will maintain its administration for a total of 20 years. Previously, Caldera Port was managed by Instituto Costarricense de Puertos del Pacífico (INCOP), a governmental institution in charge of all ports in the Pacific region. In 2008, Caldera Port has received 27 of the 80 cruise ships that docked in the Pacific regionxiii. Although the port handles mostly cargo ships, it is also used for passenger traffic, creating delays and constraining the port because passengers have priority over cargo shipments. Although exporters show satisfaction with the new port operator, the priority given to cruise ship passengers is still a matter of concern, particularly because these passenger vessels have subsidized rates. At this point no major tourism renovations are underway, but at least one private initiative proposal to expand Caldera’s capacity for cruise tourism is being currently developed.

24

FIGURE 8 Puerto Caldera Terminal Blueprints

Source: Sociedad Portuaria de Caldera SA 2008

25

Box 1 Pacific Coast Ports: Cost and Tariff Description for Cruise Tourism Tariffs for cruise ships have been unaltered since they were first established by the Ministry of Public Works and Transportation (MOPT) in 1990, through an inter-institutional agreement (MOPT-INCOP-JAPDEVA-MEIC-ICT N° 19254). Subsidized tariffs were aimed to “foster employment in the Puntarenas province and convert it in an indirect economic engine for development”1. These low rates, and the preference given to passenger ships over cargo vessels have generated considerable losses to the export and the perishable goods sector, since cruise ships have to be attended first without contributing economically to the betterment of the port2. This preference applies to Limon as well. For a maximum stay of 12 hours, ships will be able to dock according to the following subsidized rates, based on their size.

INCOP Official Cruise Ship Service and Passenger Rates (US$) Type of Service Less than 13,000 tons Greater than 13,000 tonsPassenger ship services (docking piloting, boat services, navigational aids, etc.)

$3,750 $4,800

Anchoring $750 $960 Towing $1.575 $2.016 Passenger tax (for in transit cruise tourists)

$2.50 per passenger $2.50 per passenger

Passenger tax (for disembarking cruise tourists)

$4.00 per passenger $4.00 per passenger

Source: INCOP 2008 Port agents verified that cruise ships enjoy a lower tariff when compared to cargo vessels, which pay according to their gross weight (TRB) and length (LOA)3. In fact, the size of the cruise ship does not have a significant impact on the final cost, as was evidenced by the arrival of Queen Mary, one of the largest cruise vessels, who paid the same tariff as smaller ships. A cost estimation, based on the final cost paid by a cargo ship vs a cruise vessel indicates the magnitude of the existing subsidy.

26

Sources: 1/ INCOP 2008 2/ See CESD 2007. According to FLACSO (2004), a new cruise dock was built in Limon in 1998, designed specifically for cruise tourism, but its use is limited and still interferes with cargo ships. 3/ Interview subjects. Caldera is about 16 km south of Puntarenas. Miguel Mena, from the Puntarenas Tourism Chamber, stated that approximately 50 cruise ships arrived at Caldera for the 2007-2008 season, and the same amount is expected for 2008-2009xiv. Nevertheless, Caldera has no local town, and is simply a port area with no attractions within walking distance of the berths. It serves merely as a connecting point, with a small air-conditioned terminal building and very few local vendors selling handicrafts and coffee. There is no public bus service or rental cars available, and there is a tourist booth that provides information about local attractions, which is open whenever cruise ships are in port. Caldera is currently a busy commercial dock whose installations are specially conditioned for cargo use. Tourist passengers either leave to Puntarenas or enter private tour company buses. The following table summarizes the current situation at Caldera, with its most significant characteristics:

Estimated cost comparison for a cargo and cruise ship of identical size

Puntarenas vs Caldera (TRB = 91,627 tons, LOA 294 meters)

Location INCOP/SPC

charges Piloting, Equipment, Rentals, Towing

Other costs (MOPT, Municipal taxes, MAG, etc.)

Final Cost (including all fees)

Puntarenas Cruise

$8,600 $1,200 (special tariff)

$3,200 $13,000

Caldera Cargo $12,230.04 $39,399.61 $661.46 $52,291 Note: Actual performed budgeting exercise at current market rates to compare the final cost of a cargo and cruise ship with the same TRB, LOA based on actual port agent calculations. August 2008 Interestingly, the actual tariffs for cruise ships are not as attractive in terms of net income for port agents when compared to cargo ships. In addition, the personnel needed to attend cruise ships must be bilingual and highly qualified, increasing the costs for port agents. The provision of other services to cruise ships (trash handling, water, etc) is what increases the profitability for these companies. Port handling alone would not be profitable

27

TABLE 4 Caldera Port Description Characteristics Details

Common Types of serviced Ships

Cargo Ships: 604 cargo ships berthed, including Bulk Cargo, Liquid Bu, General Cargo, Reefers, RO-RO, Tuna, Steel and Container Ships in 2007 Cruise Ships: 28 cruisers and 23 smaller passenger ships berthed in 2007

Maximum operation weight on Cargo area

3 Tons per square meter

Maximum operation weight on Transport area

20 Tons per square meter

Access Channel Depth 13 meters (in the middle of low tide) (Until dredging plan is completed, no ships exceeding 9.7 meters in depth will be allowed. After dredging this will increase to 11 meters)

Average Temperature 21.8° Celsius (max 37°Celsius, min 18°C)

Docking Platform 495 meters long by 12 meters wide, with capacity to attend 2 or 3 cruise ships simultaneously

Winds Winds head in a South direction with a speed from 4.2 km/h to 20 km/h

Average Humidity 80%

Tides Average Highest: 2.5 m Average Lowest: 0.3 m

Waves Average Height: 1.5 m Periodicity: 18.4 s

Source: INCOP and SPC 2008

FIGURE 9 Caldera Port

Source:INCOP, GoogleMaps.com

28

The following table summarizes the total amount of equipment purchased until May 2008. Both SPC and SPGC have invested a total of US$9.4 million on equipment purchases. Caldera Port needed new equipment to operate properly. As the port modernizes its infrastructure, Caldera will increase its handling capacity, both for cargo and cruise ships.

TABLE 5 Description of equipment

No. Equipment Picture Description

1 Wharf Tower Level Luffing Crane

This equipment has a capacity to lift 140 ton. It is used to move containers and grains. It has its own spreader.

2 Reach Stacker Trucks

These cargo trucks are used to move containers along the dock surface. These two trucks have a capacity to lift up 45 Ton.

3

Bulk Outloading Hopper

It is exclusively used for grains. Its maximum capacity is 35 Ton. This container can load two trucks at the same time.

4 Kelmar Forklift truck

These elevators are used to lift up containers and iron. They have a capacity to lift up to 18 tons each.

5 CAT Forklift trucks

These elevators are used inside warehouses to keep in order all merchandise

6 Trailers These are used to move containers along the port

7 Remote Control Cane Unloader

These are used to lift up grains. Its capacity is 12 cubic yards

Source: SPC 20008

29

Caldera Port had a severe infrastructure deficit, and fixing this has been a priority for SPC, with total estimated investment exceeding US$ 2 million. According to SPC cargo capacity increased 28% during 2006. In addition, tariffs have been lowered considerably, from US$12.50 per day to variable rates ranging from 0 to $6.50 per day.

Table 6 Structural Budget (2006 and 2007)

Item 2006

Estimated Budget

2007 Estimated

Budget

Status (by May 31, 2008)

Actual Cost

Dock Defenses $140,000.00 In progress

Road reparation $194,250.00 In progress $5,589.74

Security walls $34,371.00 Executed $23,265.99

Free Zone 3A & 4 $259,200.00 Executed $353,332.88

Security fences $45,000.00 $50,727.28 Executed $47,409.73

Atmospheric protection $120,000.00 In progress $133,410.56

Warehouse 1. Reparation & reconstruction

$687,085.00

Soon to be delivered

Warehouse 2. Reparation & reconstruction

$649,082.00

Hangar for equipment. Reparation & reconstruction

$29,300.00

Total $185,000.00 $2,024,015.28

Source: SPC 2008

30

C. Quepos Port Quepos is 185 km from San Jose, and is characterized by its natural beauty (including nearby Manuel Antonio, one of the most popular National Parks in the country) and has a privileged sport fishing location. This area is regarded as one of the premiere nature spots in the country, with beautiful, lush forests and calm beaches. Although it is one of the prime tourist destinations for stay-over tourists, it is not at present a major port of entry for cruise ship tourism. As in Golfito, the United Fruit Company (UFC) built this port in 1939. Its objective was to connect Quepos town with other areas since this town had no incoming roads or airports. The UFC exported bananas and other raw materials from this port until 1970, when it was abandoned for two years until the Costa Rican government took ownership. Today, this port provides services only to receive passengers in small ships. Larger vessels tender their passengers in order to disembark. INCOP only maintains data on the number of passengers who transit through Quepos, totaling more than 37,000 passengers in 2008 (INCOP 2008). This port is 146 m long and 7.5 m deep. Plans to improve its infrastructure were drawn up in 2004 but have not been fully implemented. INCOP plans to invest more than US$ 350,000 to recondition the port for pocket cruises. It is important to note that a new Marina, Pez Vela, is currently underway in Quepos, where up

31

to 300 private and commercial vessels, up to 60 meters long, will be able to dock when completedxv.

FIGURE 9

Quepos Port

Source: INCOP, GoogleMaps.com, 2008 D. Golfito Port This port is located in Golfito bay in Dulce Gulf in the Southern Pacific Region of Costa Rica, 337 km south of San José and 87 km south of Palmar Norte. This port has a length of 180 meters and an average depth of 7-8 meters. Although there is no recent activity repoted in 2007 or 2008, port agents recall that cruises as big as Island Princess (2000 passengers) have used this to reach Drake Bay and nearby destinationsxvi. INCOP’s statistics only register one cruise ship arrived in 2008 with 143 passengers (See Table 2). No major plans for renovation exist at Golfito, but a 217-slip marina is underway, expected to be completed by 2010, but currently delayed due to environmental queriesxvii. Golfito historically served as a major operations center for banana growers, particularly the United Fruit Company (UFC), which built the port in 1939 to export to the United States. The UFC had its headquarters in Golfito but abandoned their activities in the area in 1984, leaving the Golfito Port infrastructure behind. The Costa Rica government took ownership of the port and transferred its management to a local commission, called the Junta de Desarrollo Portuario del Cantón de Golfito, in cooperation with INCOP. In response to the closing of the banana company, the Costa Rican government established the town as a duty-free area in 1990 in hopes of boosting the economy. The region still reports higher than average unemployment rates and the local municipality is very keen on attracting investment and jobs to the region, and tourism is seen as

32

a key engine of growthxviii. The Osa mayor notes in the press the importance of small hotels and the marina, but rarely makes a reference to cruise tourism, signaling it is still an emerging industry. Environmental NGOs in Osa Peninsula have stated concern regarding the arrival of larger cruise ships, but noted they are interested in attracting smaller pocket vessels in particular: “No study exists at the moment to determine Golfo Dulce’s tourism carrying capacity, but we have started to work on guidelines to manage the arrival of private and tourism vessels”xix. Golfito is surrounded by steep hills and tropical rain forests, and has a sheltered position on the Golfo Dulce, in Osa Peninsula, close to the Corcovado and Piedras Blancas National Park. The areas around the Municipal Park and public dock are in need of repair and the downtown area is quite run-down, but its true potential lies in the natural sites and attractions. Local tourism offerings include tours to nearby national parks, botanical gardens, sea kayaking, surfing and sport fishing, among others.

FIGURE 10 Golfito Port

Source: INCOP 2008 E. Punta Morales Port and Fertica Although neither Punta Morales or Fertica are currently used for tourism, these two areas are listed by INCOP as part of the Costa Rican official ports, including Caldera, Puntarenas, Golfito and Quepos. Punta Morales is used mainly to export sugar, alcohol and derivative products. It is located in Chomes, Puntarenas, which is 110 km away from San Jose. This specialized terminal operates during the daytime but has a lighthouse to guide ships to the port. Currently no plans exist for any tourism development in the future, since the port is meant only for private service for LAICA, the Sugar Cane Agro-Industrial League (Liga Agrícola Industrial de la Caña de Azúcar). An official at this institution stated that dividing the port is not a viable alternative, and all future

33

plans are centered on maintaining their current operationsxx. Its most relevant characteristics include:

TABLE 7 Punta Morales Port Description

Characteristics Details

Maximum Dock Weight 30000 metric Tons

Maximum Dock Width 25 m

Maximum Dock Length 190 m

Maximum distance from floating line to warehouse entry in low tide 14.25 m

Maximum distance from floating line to warehouse entry in high tide 12.21 m

Alcohol hose Length: 10.97 m / Maximum Pressure 150 psi

Molasses hose Length: 10.97 m / Maximum Pressure: 150 psi

Alcohol Capacity Line 43 000 l Molasses hose 45 000 l

Source: INCOP 2008

FIGURE 11

Punta Morales Port

Source: INCOP 2008 The Fertica terminal is practically unused and is currently being considered by RECOPE (Refinadora Costarricense de Petroleo), the State Refinery, as a potential buyout to import fuel supplies into the country. Its location is slightly

34

south of Puntarenas port, in Carrizal. No tourism traffic is currently reported at INCOP.

FIGURE 12 Fertica Terminal

Source: RECOPE 2008 F. Other Private Marinas With Capacity to Serve Smaller Cruise Vessels According to the Tourism Docks and Marinas Commission (Comisión Interinstitucional de Marinas y Atracaderos Turísticos – CIMAT), the government agency that oversees all technical aspects of marina development, there are 19 marinas—most of them located on the Pacific Coast—that are currently in different stages of the authorization and permitting process. Most of these projects will be primarily for private yachts and motor boats as well as commercial fishing boats, and some of them will have the necessary capacity to serve pocket cruises. They are all privately financed, and most form part of condominium complexes or resorts. Los Sueños Marina in Herradura, located in the Central Pacific coast, is the first government-approved marina in Costa Rica, built by private developers and opened for operations in 2001. They have a specialized pier for pocket cruises, with capacity for 250 passengers. The Flamingo Marina in the North Pacific will soon be renovated, and the future plans include an area specifically designed for smaller cruises. This project has recently been licensed to a private operator. Although still in the planning stages, the marina in El Coco will cater to smaller commercial vessels. Currently, small cruise ships stay at bay and tender their passengers to the shore. In Quepos, INCOP plans to invest more than US$ 350,000 to recondition the port for private vesselsxxi. Investors in Jaco and Dominical have also expressed interest in serving pocket cruises. At this stage, most projects are under initial stages of development, Golfito has commenced construction, with Flamingo soon to begin works. Both Quepos and Papagayo were inaugurated in December 2008xxii. It is uncertain whether they will all cater to pocket cruises. Whichever the case, the

35

increase in marina permits signals a growing interest for small port development on the Pacific coast, which should be accompanied by further research to fully understand the implications of this growth on the local communities and the environment. None of the marina proposals include plans for berthing ships larger than pocket cruisers, or servicing tenders anchored off shore.

FIGURE 13 Marina concessions under evaluation in CIMAT (2008)

Source: CIMAT 2008 There is an ever-increasing amount of marinas under study at CIMAT. Following is the list of the sixteen most advanced projects that are currently active, with the exception of Puerto Viejo (which has been recently withdrawn), Pez Vela in Quepos which was inaugurated in December 2008, and Marina Papagayo, also inaugurated in December 2008.

36

TABLE 8 Status on Key Marina Concessions (2008)

Project Location Operational Stage in CIMAT

Ship Capacity Water - Land

Owner

PROPOSAL MARINA GUAITIL, PLAYA NARANJO DE PAQUERA

No progress for the last 3 years

360

ING. JORGE MIRANDA , LIC. BERNAL TURCIOS, MARINA GUAITIL S. A.

MARINA LOS SUEÑOS –PLAYA HERRADURA DE GARABITO

Currently operating 200 - 120

GUAPIZUL S.A.,

MARINA BAHIA BANANO, GOLFITO CENTRO

Concession currently processing in National Registry

16 BAHIA BANANO S. A.

PROPOSAL MARINA FLAMINGO, BAHIA POTRERO DE SANTA CRUZ

In selection process at the local Municipality

180 – 100

4 competing firms MUNICIPALIDAD DE SANTA CRUZ

PROPOSAL MARINA PUERTOCITO, PUERTOCITO DE OSA

No progress for several years

35

MARINA PUERTOCITO S. A.

PROPOSAL MARINA EL COCO, PUNTA CENTINELA, PLAYA EL COCO DE CARRILLO

Approved blueprint and currently submitted for concession to local municipality.

300

ASOCIACION PARA EL DESARROLLO DE LA MARINA DE PLAYAS DEL COCO, ASODEMAC

PROPOSAL MARINA PEZ VELA, QUEPOS DE AGUIRRE

Officially inaugurated. Phase 1

225 - 100

MARINA PEZ VELA S. A.

PROPOSAL MARINA GOLFITO O MARINA BAHIA ESCONDIDA EN GOLFITO CENTRO

Under construction: Phase 0

216 – 125

EMPRESA HACIENDA EL DORADO S. A

PROPOSAL MARINA CARARA BAY, PLAYA AGUIJITAS DE GARABITO

Preparing blueprint for submittal

260 – 225

MARINA PUNTA LEONA S. A.

PROPOSAL MARINA PAPAGAYO, PLAYA MANZANILLO, PAPAGAYO

Officially inaugurated. Phase 1

372

ECODESARROLLO PAPAGAYO S. A.

37

Source: CIMAT 2008 G. Recent Protests in the Pacific Ports The arrival of Coral Princess, a cruise ship with 2000 passengers, marked the beginning of the 2008-2009 cruise season. That same day, a group of independent transport bus drivers blocked the dock at Puntarenas, forcing the tourists to walk approximately 300 meters to board their toursxxiii. These drivers claimed they were not granted access to transport these passengers, and these rights have been handed over to bigger companies. Weeks after, a group of small fishermen prevented a cruise ship from docking at Puntarenas, forcing it to leave to Panama. Unlike the taxi driver demonstration, this protest by fishermen showed, for the first time, protests by Costa Ricans who were in no way related to cruise tourism. Although authorities condemned these actions, it is a clear signal that the local population may not be maximizing the opportunities that cruise tourism may generate in terms of perceived income and tours. Miguel Rena, chairman of the Puntarenas Tourism Board, has stated that 50% of passengers who leave the ship at Puntarenas, 70% of them walk throughout the city, buy handicrafts and even take tours from local agencies, not to mention the 60% of the crew who disembarks at the portsxxiv. This stands in sharp contrast to statements from local sellers. Vianney Medina Jimenez, souvenir street seller, claims that tourists mostly leave to San Jose: “Sometimes we don’t sell anything and sometimes only $10”xxv. Luis Solano Vindas, claims vendors from San Jose take the best places and make all the salesxxvi. The ICT statistics for cruise passengers in Puntarenas done in 2006 indicated that only 6.1% of passengers

PROPOSAL MARINA PUNTA SOL, PUNTA CENTINELA, PLAYAS DEL COCO DE CARRILLO

Blueprint submitted 258 ADMINISTRADORA BELLO HORIZONTE LTDA.

COSTA RICA YACHT CLUB, PUNTARENAS CENTRO

Preparing Blueprint 120-45 BERNARDINO BRAVO,

PROPOSAL MARINA PUNTA BOCANA, PLAYA HERRADURA, GARABITO

Preparing Blueprint 240 CONSTRUCTORA HERNAN SOLIS SRL.

PROPOSAL CENTRAL MARINA, PLAYA JACO, GARABITO

Preparing Blueprint 300 JOHN SCHUMACHER

Caribbean Coast (Limon) PROPOSAL MARINA MOIN & RESORT

Preparing Blueprint 250

ADRIAN POLINI

PROPOSAL MARINA ECOLOGICA NEW WORLD, PUERTO VIEJO LIMON

Consultation process

399 GRUPO CARIBEÑO INTERNACIONAL S.A.

38

interviewed chose to adventure on their own, staying at Puntarenas the nearby beachesxxvii. According to an industry expert who worked at a previous port regeneration project, Puntarenas Por Siempre, cruise ships tend to use the services of two major tour operators from San Jose: TAM and Swiss Travelxxviii. Passengers tend to go to more distant destinations, sometimes as far as Sarchi in the Central Valley, and discourage independent tours, by warning passengers that the cruise ship will not wait for them. This tendency must be overcome if local multipliers are to be maximized. Most importantly, this raises the question whether cruise tourism really creates significant revenues in terms of employment and sales for the local population, especially when compared to ecotourism. Government policy must be centered on maximizing positive externalities, and creating incentives to attract the types of tourism that promise the most benefits to the local and national population. More research needs to be conducted that analyzes the types of tours offered, how they impact stay over tourism and mechanisms to augment potential positive externalities within the local population at Puntarenas. Attracting pocket or specialty cruises, instead of larger, all-inclusive resort-style cruise ships, may be a viable alternative that can generate larger benefits to the local population. Pocket cruise companies currently working on the Pacific coast include Windstar Cruises and Lindblad Expeditions. Instead of focusing on ship-board amenities, pocket cruises put a special emphasis on each destination, serving as a educational experience, carrying experts on board and offering a kind of “boutique” or adventure-style cruising experience. These boats generally are much smaller and carry 250 or less passengers, anchoring in areas like Golfito, Coco or Quepos. They can visit areas large cruise lines cannot, but most importantly, as noted in interviews with the Ministry of Tourism, this kind of cruise ship tourism produces greater economic benefits than large cruises, with a better geographic distribution and higher participation of small and medium enterprisesxxix. Furthermore, these ships do not saturate natural attractions or constitute a burden on their sustainability. At the moment, the government has not developed a specific strategy to attract pocket cruises to the country, although they maintain it will be an important element of their cruise tourism strategy, which will be discussed further in the next section.

39

FUTURE PLANS AND PROJECTS Since the Costa Rican government concessioned Puerto Caldera to a private operator in 2006, most efforts from the central government have been directed at modernizing the Atlantic ports. They handle almost 80% the cargo and vessels in the country and nearly 15% of all containerized cargo from Central America, making it the busiest port complex in the region after Panama. However, the Atlantic ports are currently seen as a significant bottleneck for the Costa Rican export economy, due to lack of reform, inefficiency and severe infrastructure constraints, limiting the country’s competitivenessxxx. Mike Hopkins, VP of operations in the U.S. for Crowley Maritime Corporation, states that in Limon “berthing remains a large issue for operators… where the average wait by a container ship for a berth is now 14 hours. Ro-ro (roll-on, roll-off) is much quicker for berthing and stevedoring production, but cruise activity takes a priority over cargo activity even for ro-ros”xxxi. There is a widespread sentiment that port reform is of utmost importance, yet the process to upgrade and expand the Limon port is just getting started, and is not without complications. At least three different proposals for remodeling Moin and Limon are currently under discussion. According to the Ministry for Institutional Coordination (Ministerio de Coordinación Institucional), a technical proposal for the expansion and concession of Moín and Limón was officially presented in July 2007, prepared by the Spanish firm Autoridad Portuaria de Santander. There is also a proposal by the Canadian firm America’s Gateway Development Corporation to develop an oceanic container platform in front of Moín port. Thirdly, the Hamburg Port Consulting Group is working with Costa Rica's Atlantic Port Authority JAPDEVA since the year 2000 to develop an infrastructure and investment master plan for Limón and Moínxxxii. This same company prepared Caldera’s plan, before offering it in concession to a private operator. Costa Rican President Óscar Arias plans to privatize the port complex before his term ends in 2010xxxiii. However, plans are behind schedule. The workers union SINTRAJAB requested US$700 million in October 2008 in compensation for allowing the government to offer the port to a private developer, but the government refused and offered US$80 million, which was immediately rejected. Negotiations are currently stalled. Shipping lines believe that “perceived impact and resistance by Costa Rican port labor from the inclusion of Costa Rica in existing trade agreements still must be resolved before major investment”xxxiv. According to the original schedule, a private concessionaire would be named in December 2008xxxv. A new announcement by JAPDEVA sets March 2009 as the deadline to reach a new settlementxxxvi. The government’s end goal is to modernize both Limon and Moin, handling all general cargo and container traffic at Moín by the year 2016, building a fourth docking position and converting Limon into a tourist only port by 2010xxxvii. Total investment will exceed US$ 600 million, in addition to a World Bank loan of US$80 to revitalize the city of Limon and prepare for the

40

modernization of the port, through urban upgrades, generating new sources of employment and providing technical assistance to the Municipalityxxxviii. In the Pacific Coast, however, no new ports or concessions are underway, but numerous renovation plans and improvements are in the process of being developed or currently under discussion. This report brings them together for the first time. No up-to-date Pacific Coast or National Master Plan exists to guide these developments. According to the National Concessions Council (Consejo Nacional de Concesiones), infrastructure investment in the Pacific Coast must be funded directly by the private sector, optimally through private initiatives and concessionsxxxix. However, this is a cumbersome and complicated process, so no grand scale plans are likely to be implemented in the short term. Puerto Caldera is the exception among the Pacific ports, because it is already under concession and has a list of projects that are soon to be implemented, including a new bulk terminal for cargo ships and a dredging plan. The Treasury Ministry has a complete list of budgeted plans and projects for 2007 through 2011, submitted by INCOP, which is one of the key government agencies in charge of port development. There are numerous plans and organizations working simultaneously--although not in a coordinated fashion--on the plans for the ports in the Pacific coast. Most of the projects deal with repairs or basic maintenance.

TABLE 9 INCOP Future Budgeted Plans and Projects (2007 – 2011)

(1US$ = 520 colones)

Project

Expected

Completion Date

Current Status

Total Budget

Project Funding Type & Source

Dredging in Puerto Caldera

2007-2011

Profile Definition Stage

$1,346,743.30

Institutional Budget - INCOP

Reinforcing and reconditioning of seawall edge

2007 Profile Definition Stage

$325,670.50 Institutional Budget - INCOP

Refurbishing INCOP´s building

2010 Bid/tender or agreement Stage


New software and equipment technological purchases



41

Computer equipment for Auditing Department at INCOP



1 Forklift truck purchase for Puntarenas Port

2007 Financing Stage $153,256.70


Repairing and maintenance for Quepos Port



Access platform repair at cruise ship terminal in Puntarenas



Repairing of all lighthouses and buoy systems along the Pacific coast



Protection and certification of Golfito Dock

2007 -2010

Evaluation Stage $103,448.28


Communication Equipment purchase for all docks managed by INCOP



Office equipment to the new INCOP offices



Capitanía maintenance at Puntarenas Port



Purchase & maintenance of dock defenses at Puntarenas Port

2007 Execution Stage $383,141.76


Golfito Dock main building re-construction



Rebuilding of Jetties at Puntarenas tip and final buildings at Ferries terminal


$1,063,218.39 Trust Fund /Fideicomiso τ

42

Build a touristic boulevard from Mata de Limón to Caldera Beach

2008 Financing Stage $568,965.52 Trust Fund /Fideicomiso τ

Caldera Train Station Re-building

2007 Design Stage $120,689.66 Trust Fund /Fideicomiso τ

Re-building of El Roble-La Angostura Boulevard (first stage)

2007-2008 Design Stage $226,053.64 Trust Fund /Fideicomiso τ

Boardwalk construction from Parque Marino to Tourists Boulevard in Puntarenas

2008 Profile Definition Stage

$118,773.95 Trust Fund /Fideicomiso τ

Souvenirs market construction and urban renewal in Esparza

2008 Design Stage $310,344.83 Trust Fund /Fideicomiso τ

Guapinol site-seeing improvement

2008 Financing Stage $413,793.10 Trust Fund /Fideicomiso τ

Source: Treasury Ministry (Ministerio de Hacienda) 2007

τ Dante Figueroa (2007) differentiates between the Latin American Fideicomiso and Anglo American Trust fund. The idea that a patrimony can be created and adopt an independent existence from its owner in order to serve a particular purpose. Fideicomisos are used to administer commercial and financial purposes in both the private and public sectors, and are defined as the: “legal relationship through which a person called fideicomitente, transfers property to another person, called fiduciario, for the formation of a fiduciary patrimony, subject to the fiduciary ownership of the fiduciario and subject to the achieving of a specific purpose or purposes for the benefit of a third person or of the fideicomitente himself, called fideicomisarios.” xl Beyond infrastructure and repairs, there are no documented and up to date reports on the future of these ports. The following section examines the most important plans and projects for the Pacific region ports that are currently under consideration. They are grouped under eight subheadings and are based on interviews and private consultations to government officials, private tour operators, and industry leadersxli.

43

Developing a home port In interviews, officials with several governmental institutions noted that a key long-run objective is to create a homeport that could eventually compete with ports like Miami as the site where passengers initially embark to proceed on a cruise trip. Although no official plans exist to implement this strategy, it has increasingly come up in regional tourism meetings in Central America. In fact, Crystal Cruises, Silver Seas Cruise Lines and Seabourne Cruise Lines indicate in their home pages that they have cruises that use Caldera as a base portxlii. Among its potential benefits, home porting could derive advantages to the host country through increased expenditure (both visitors and crew members), more stores and maintenance facilities for cruise ships, higher levels of accommodation, etc. At its best, a home port could transform cruise tourists, who generally stay for less than 12 hours and have a low average expenditure, into conventional on-shore tourists, with increased levels of expenditure and longer stays and a higher economic return. Recently, Colon port in Panama was named by Royal Caribbean as a homeport beginning in December 2008 for its ship “Enchantment of the Seas”, making use of a 10,000 m2 transport terminal that cost more than US$15 million to buildxliii. Other countries, including El Salvador, have expressed interest in investing in creating homeports as well. At the moment, not only is there significant competition for this proposal, but also very little research exists that analyzes the quantifiable benefits of public expenditure on homeporting. Local multipliers have been found to be higher for terminal ports than for ports that simply entertain day visitors. In their analysis of Brevard County and Central Florida, Braun et al (2002) found that cruise liner spending in home or terminal ports is more geographically dispersed than passenger spending at ports of callxliv. In addition, an UNCTAD studyxlv for Miami Port determined that 50% of the total economic and employment effect of the mega port was attributable to cruise-related activities, exceeding US $4.5 bn and 23,000 jobs in the year 2000, where jobs created as a result of cruise-related port activity paid higher wages than jobs in other sectors4. Home porting permitted 40% of passengers to stay 1.2 nights prior to or after their cruise, thus benefiting local hotels, restaurants and retail storesxlvi. Cruise passengers accounted for 12% of overall airline traffic, and generated additional employment by locating their head offices at Miami. Finally, these head offices tend to spend on advertising and marketing locally. Nonetheless, not all areas are destined to become home ports. Cruise lines require the availability of modern and efficient airports, sufficient supply of overnight lodging, outstanding port services, and accessibility to a large population center, among others. They also face increasing competition. Wright indicates competition for homeport status has increased significantly, where

4 This figure includes direct cruise economic benefits for $1.7 billion; and other (including indirect) cruise economic benefits for $2.8 billion; and an estimated 23,000 jobs attributable to cruise-related activities (Wright, 2001)

44

almost 100 ports are vying for only 20 cruise lines. Panama and El Salvador’s interest in becoming homeports already pose significant competition to a Puntarenas home port. It is also unclear whether Puntarenas could ever hope to attract the exponentially high numbers of cruise passengers that are needed to take advantage of these economies of scale. What is certain is that a more thorough study of the home port proposal at Puntarenas is necessary to weigh the cost of building and refurbishing facilities to make Puntarenas a home port, versus the potential benefits that may derive to the local and national population. At this moment most ports in Central America are ports of call, since they act as receiving ports to international ships that disembark on several destinations as part of their circuit, in other words, where passengers neither begin nor terminate their journey. Home ports, on the other hand, act as a base for cruise ships, where passengers come back to the home port to berth. A government financed home port would require very high levels of investment in infrastructure. Recently, however, the National Concessions Council (Consejo Nacional de Concesiones CNC) has been presented with a private initiative project from a group of foreign investors who want to convert Caldera into a home port with its own hotel, private marina, biodiversity corridor, golf course and entertainment centerxlvii. Although plans are still very preliminary, the investors see potential in integrating Caldera and Puntarenas, and eventually Limon, to convert Costa Rica into a major cruise destination and tourism cluster, capable of competing with the Panama Canal in tourism and passenger traffic. As with private initiative contracts at CNC, this would be privately financed, but would seek special concessions and permits from the central government, still to be negotiated. Currently, INCOP reports in its Cruise Season Statistics 2008-2009 several base itineraries, mostly pocket cruises, starting and ending at Caldera, but none at Puntarenasxlviii. An industry expert who worked at a previous port regeneration project, Puntarenas Por Siempre, stated that current cruise tourism model might not be compatible with a Pacific home portxlix. Currently, these companies send their passengers to relatively distant destinations on tours handled by large operators, and discourage their passengers from adventuring on their own. This generates additional income for cruise companies, who take an important cut of the cost of the tour, sometimes up to 50% of the total cost paid by the tourist. This does not favor the incorporation of local guides or small enterprises into the tourism cluster, reducing local multipliers. As of late, cruise ship marketing campaigns have increasingly focused on their on-board experiences, simulating all-inclusive resorts, and this has created an incentive for the industry to maximize the time (and money) cruisers spend on board and minimize their time in port. This creates direct competition with local communities for cruise tourism expendituresl. These factors could hinder the positive externalities associated with terminal ports, and novel strategies must be designed to overcome them, if a home port is to be developed and reasonably expected to create development opportunities. In addition, Costa Rica is currently a relatively expensive point to

45

supply a large cruise ship. Food, water and many other critical supplies are considerably more expensive than neighboring countries, suggesting that home porting might be costly, or lead to reduced economic benefit in the local economy. If the potential, social, economic and environmental costs of home ports are not explored in advance, it will be difficult to design strategies to mitigate its adverse effects. For example, if higher and higher numbers of cruise tourists are attracted to a Pacific home port, this could have a negative impact on the sustainability of natural attractions in the area, and could create congestion at key tourism sites. Strategies would need to be designed to mitigate negative environmental impacts, and separate cruise from stay-over tourism, to prevent eroding the experience for high value ecotourism tourists in the long haul. Whether this tendency is on the rise will need to be constantly monitored, in order to inform the debate for public policy-making. Creating a Pacific Coast Master Plan All of the concerned authorities and stakeholders called for the development of a new master plan for the Pacific ports in Costa Rica. The Transport Ministry (MOPT) clearly stated that funding port infrastructure development is not a major priority in their administration, so the plan must include strategies to promote private sector participation (PSP)li. Industry experts agree that the only way to be globally competitive and have a sustainable position in the worldwide cruise market would be to invest in master plans for the individual ports. Currently, an outdated master plan exists, even though INCOP acknowledges it has experienced significant changes with every political cycle. Amongst its incongruencies, the bulk terminal in Caldera will be built in a different location than was initially planned. The Atlantic ports in Moín and Limón, on the other hand, have designed an aggressive master plan, whereby passengers and cargo docks are completely separated, in order to make the cruise terminal a destination by itself, with hotels, shopping districts and all sorts of amenities like food courts, entertainment facilities, etc. Having this all-encompassing project can be useful to direct private participation in port infrastructure, because it creates a national model with a long term strategy, instead of inherently separated facilities. Institutional Frameworks and Their Effect on Port Development Most infrastructure development experts in Costa Rica believe that the development of port infrastructure and dedicated facilities can be best achieved through effective private sector participation (PSP). In Costa Rica, the National Concession Council (Consejo Nacional de Concesiones-CNC) has developed two different forms of private sector participation with regards to port

46

infrastructure development. The first are concession agreements (concesiones), such as the one awarded between the Government and the private developers in Caldera, named Sociedad Portuaria de Caldera (SPC)5. The CNC argues that this system permits the government to reduce its risk, transfer investment needs to the private sector, and maximize technology transfers. The second system, currently being undertaken for the ports of Quepos and Golfito, is called a private initiative (Iniciativa Privada). Here, private actors propose a development plan, taking into consideration aspects such as financial viability, development and constructive requirements, legal and environmental studies, as well as security and clearances considerations, and then present this to the Transport Ministry (MOPT). If the project is found to be in the best public interest, it can become a concession, where other actors are free to bid and participate. If the project is not awarded to the proponent, but rather to a competing bidder, then the proponent is paid for the costs of the development plan. The private sector recoups its investment, once the concession has been awarded, by taking over the management and income of the infrastructure development typically for a period of over 20 years, after which it is returned to the government. At a global scale, cruise tourism developments have been achieved mostly in the private sector, where the government has played a supportive role, sometimes financing the necessary infrastructure developments and awarding incentives and tax breaks to cruise lines or other private actorslii. However, in Costa Rica the necessary enabling environment has not been given to the private sector, and therefore the PSP initiatives have been scant. According to our interviews, the legal framework that currently exists for both of these PSP mechanisms is outdated and obstructive, and was modeled specifically for road infrastructure development more than thirty years ago, without considering port development needs. Politically, it would be impossible to pass a new law through the Legislative Assembly regulating concessions under current circumstances, given the extremely divided congress and the long lag of projects yet to be approved. Nevertheless, the CNC has outlined its requirements for a new institutional mechanism to support PSP initiatives and give the necessary credibility and stability to attract industry leaders. Given that ports are of strategic importance to the country’s economy, CNC argues they should not be regulated by the Public Services Regulatory Office (Autoridad Reguladora de los Servicios Públicos -ARESEP) but by an autonomous entity, that has the necessary background and knowledge to manage the private and public sector interests. For example, sudden shifts in tariffs can erode the port’s competitiveness in the long run, and create disincentives for PSP initiatives. An Office of Superintendent of Ports could fulfill such a role, employing highly trained personnel. Currently, INCOP cannot

5 The Caldera concession faced strong by the worker’s union, who were eventually awarded monetary compensation (Interview subjects)

47

adequately fulfill this role since it has been substantially downsized. Moreover, its inability to contract personnel who worked in the institution in the past has prevented it from using a highly trained and experienced labor force. In addition, the CNC´s role under the Transport Ministry (MOPT) does not permit it to act proactively, nor can it adequately supervise the current concessionary in Caldera. A well-conceived and managed Superintendent Office could solve many of these problems. If the legal institutional framework that regulates this industry is not modernized, only very slow developments will be possible, and those developments that are advanced may be of limited benefit to the country. Every form of investment from public or private funding must be compatible with a national tourism strategy aimed at maximizing the positive effects from cruise tourism. If left to private forces alone, port developments on the Pacific coast could risk jeopardizing Costa Rica’s differentiated position in the world tourism market. With more instruments and databases available to document the impact of cruise tourism, strategies to manage this growth in a beneficial manner would be easier to formulate. In essence, modern policy frameworks to attract public investments must be accompanied by more research and information regarding the possible negative and positive implications of growth in cruise tourism. Establishing a national coordinator to lead the cruise tourism strategy The Ministry of Tourism is currently seeking an expert on cruise tourism to head a separate office which can be fully dedicated to the development of cruise tourism and that can serve as a junction for the different interests and concerns from industry stakeholders, port operators, government departments and other agencies. The workload for the cruise tourism department in the Ministry has been growing, and it is absolutely necessary to create this department in order to effectively design and implement a National Cruise Tourism Policy, which would oversee infrastructure developments within a Port Master plan but would also direct government policy and incentives towards cruise tourism in particular. Since the primary business of ports is not tourism, and there is no clear hierarchy with other departmental authorities and government bodies, the sector suffers from lack of coordination and a fragmented cruise policy. Among its top concerns could be to develop suitable incentive structures for developers and operators; identify and develop passenger terminals; coordinate the development of tourism-related urban infrastructure; oversee research about various aspects of cruise tourism, formulate suitable tax and fee structures for cruise ships, and ensure the necessary quality, training and security measures are implemented for cruise tourism. The role of this department cannot simply be expanding cruise tourism, but rather, assessing and evaluating it as part of a national tourism policy that is guided by high value nature tourism. Formulating of a national policy for cruise tourism is an essential building block, but it must first incorporate a broad based discussion with different actors and stakeholders, to ensure that

48

its policies reflect the complexity and vast implications of these issues. A cruise tourism policy, product of an informed, public debate, could eventually increase the level of income of local populations without endangering the experience of small-scale nature tourism in nearby areas. Developing Modern Cruise Terminals All interviewees agreed that it was imperative to invest in cruise terminals and port-side infrastructure in order to create not just basic entry ports, but destinations in themselves, offering facilities and amenities that go beyond essential servicesliii. For example, the consultants who developed the Limon master plan suggested creating small tourist villages, no bigger than a square kilometer, with small museums, food stalls, handicraft flea markets and tourist information centers around the main entry ports. The World Bank Loan awarded to Limon city aims specifically to foster these types of initiativesliv. Although this is a long term project, INCOP has already invested over US $5 million to restore the Puntarenas welcome center, the pier and a park in Caldera. The welcome center is an old structure from the 1930s, remodeled to showcase a historical museum, a souvenir shop, and a gourmet cafeteria for tourists and the local population. The Puntarenas pier is in very bad condition due to weather and other abuse, and will require over US $1.5 million to be repaired, but will encompass small “islands” where musicians can perform, telescopes can be rented, and typical foods bought. Additional features being considered include the creation of bicycle routes, a marina, modern food stalls, and general investments in tourist infrastructure. Regarding the expansion of Quepos and Golfito, one of the major tour operators stated that they would rather see Puntarenas port reconditioned and modernized rather than undertaking improvement of these smaller portslv. Given the great number of tours and activities in the area, there is currently no better location than Puntarenas to cater to cruise passengers. Similarly, the latest National Development Plan for the Pacific Region clearly states that Quepos, Golfito and Punta Morales have not been designated part of the “national interest,” for cruise tourism development, and makes no specific recommendations of upgrading or

49

remodeling them, with the exception of Queposlvi. Although the document states feasibility studies are underway to invest US$ 1.5 million in Quepos, in interviews, INCOP authorities did not point out any major changes were underway for this facilitylvii. Currently, Quepos port caters primarily to yachts and sport fishing boats, and a handful of coastal tour boats, and is not suitable for bigger ships. Although the port will not undergo any major renovations, the first phase of a private marina in Costa Rica named Pez Vela opened in December 2008, and will eventually offer a resort with hotel, slip owner residences, retail center and repair facility (www.marinapezvela.com). Improving safety and security Government authorities are well aware that cruises are highly sensitive to security threats, and thus demand heightened levels of security that guarantee a safe and secure passenger environment. In December 2006, the Ministry of Tourism together with the National Tourism Chamber (CANATUR) created a specific police force to protect cruise and regular tourists in Puntarenas and Limonlviii. This special police force has been equipped with cars, special uniforms and training (including English courses). Interestingly, this has created tension with the local police force, since they did not receive these benefits. Nevertheless, the Ministry continues to push this initiative and increase the number of officers in charge of securing the port areas. Still, tour operators remain deeply concerned about security threats relating not to crime but to infrastructure in the Puntarenas cruise terminal. Buses can only travel up to a certain point and the structure is noticeably deteriorated when seen from below. So far, no improvements have been done and it is expected that the next cruise season will have even more tourists. The Puntarenas Tourism Board estimates that up to 20 more cruise ships may arrive in the 2008-2009 cruise season in Puntarenas, when compared to the previous onelix. According to tour operators in the area, there is a real risk the pier could actually collapse, and human lives may be lostlx. Although the government has promised immediate action, the tour operators say that the situation has not been addressed for more than two years. Paul Zuñiga, the previous president from

50

INCOP, stated in February 2006 that he “would not risk using the [Puntarenas] port in the next season” unless the necessary repairs took placelxi. The repairs are most urgent in the first 50 meters of the pier where cruise ships dock. Caldera Concession Projects: New Bulk Terminal and Dredging Plan Dredging in Caldera has not been performed since 1999, and according to INCOP 700,000 tons of material need to be removed from the port. The concessionary, Caldera Porting Society SA, which assumed operations in 2006, is supposed to complete this project by the end of 2008, estimating a total cost between US$ 5 and $6 million. This is their main short-term project and considered a top priority by INCOP, and the private operator will finance its cost. Delays in granting official permits, particularly the environmental one, has limited port capacity substantially, since 80 meters approximately have been covered by sand in the first unit, as can be seen in the attached picture. Most importantly, however, the Caldera concessionary will begin construction for a new bulk terminal exclusively for cargo ships loaded with grains, with an approximate cost of US$ 48.5 million, financed by the private operator. This terminal will increase efficiency in handling grains, and will reduce overall cost, which is key because they handle 90% of the import of grains in Costa Rica. In addition, it will free space for more tourists to disembark on the existing port. Pacific Island Concessions Several legal proposals to permit hotel and tourism concessions on Costa Rican islands have been presented to their local municipalities, both in 2006 and 2007, particularly for those islands in the North Pacific coast that are currently inhabited. These include Bejuco, Chira, Caballo, Venado, San Lucas, Tortuga and others. Such a proposal would require a new law to be approved by the Legislative Assembly, including granting new regulatory plans and municipal powers, so that these concessions can be approved by local governments without the need of approval from Congress. The islands currently do not have the necessary facilities to handle large volumes of tourists, and many of them

51

have minimal or nonexistent water and electricity resources. Despite this, more than 17 members of congress, including the Libertarian Party, have endorsed this project. This initiative received negative criticism from ecologists, local spokespersons and businessmen, and has now been archivedlxii. Similarly, another project for titling land to local farmers proved unsuccessful. Its goal was to permit the use of islands and coastal territories and declare them private properties. Despite the Libertarian party efforts, these islands are now under the control of the Ministry of the Environment and Energy (Ministerio del Ambiente y Energía – MINAET). Currently, both Gitana and Tortuga Islands are rented for up to 99 years, which is the maximum permitted by Costa Rican law. Mario Cubero, who has lived at Tortuga for more than 30 years, has a lease for the island, and plans to build small bungalows within its 320 hectares, but has not yet received a concession on behalf of the Puntarenas Municipality and the Legislative Assemblylxiii. Other islands are under the administration of the National Park System, and San Lucas, which was formerly a prison, now is also under MINAET´s management. A tourism expert explained that although there was an initial interest by cruise companies to bid for these concessions, currently this has shifted to other hotel developers and casino operators, who still remain interested. At this moment, however, there are no immediate plans to open these islands for private operation, be it cruise operators or others.

FIGURE 14 Islands in the North Pacific in Costa Rica with potential for private concession

Source: Adapted from Nacion.com

53

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS As the foregoing demonstrates, there are numerous projects and developments related to cruise tourism in the North Pacific shore of Costa Rica. There is also considerable degree of miscommunication and a lack of coordination among the many governmental institutions in charge of managing this growth, signaled through the lack of a coherent master plan for the region on maritime affairs. The Minister of Tourism, for example, has the difficult task of attracting tourism while at the same time regulating its impact on the entire tourism cluster. The government has clearly stated that any investment on port infrastructure will need to come from the private sector, but the current concession mechanisms that would enable these investments are cumbersome and move at a very slow pace. Therefore, a significant increase in cruise tourism on the Pacific coast will not come in the short term. This report is the first time that these ideas, projects and discussions are compiled into a single document, and it is hoped that it will serve as the basis for different stakeholders to take part in this debate, and channel their efforts to maximize benefits for the local and national population, while guaranteeing environmental and competitive sustainability of the industry. Cruise tourism is part of Costa Rica’s large and complex tourism cluster that has not been sufficiently studied, in particular the myriad of issues around cruise tourism, involving port use and development, government incentives and private marinas. Further Research: The following are a set of proposed areas where more research is needed, followed by a series of recommended policy reforms:

• Maximizing benefits from cruise tourism to urban areas and port communities like Puntarenas will only be possible through innovative and publicly led initiatives that foster more spending in the locality. Successful initiatives at other ports worldwide need to be researched so that they may serve as a guide to Costa Rican authorities when formulating a new Cruise Tourism Strategy and subsequent contracts with the cruise lines. This study should include an analysis of how to maximize benefits to Costa Rican businesses given that the cruise industry financial model of consolidating passenger spending onboard and with cruise industry concessions or ‘preferred’ businesses on shore. It should include an examination of other destinations which have successfully negotiated more favorable terms for cruise tourism. The end objective is to democratize the benefits of cruise tourism, benefiting in particular smaller local businesses.

• An in-depth study of specialty (pocket) cruises needs to be conducted to understand how to maximize their positive social and economic impact, since their passengers could potentially engage in more travel within the country and contract higher quality services, without generating a negative impact on ecotourism. Both Quepos and Golfito were named as ideal locations to undertake

54

this option, with potentially high returns on public investment. Similarly, the analysis should cover whether it is advisable to develop these secondary ports in order to attract cruise tourism, or whether it would be advisable to declare these ports off-limits to larger ships and massive tourism. This should form part of a larger discussion comparing the benefits and costs of pocket cruises vs mainstream cruise tourism.

• The advisability of expanding cruise tourism in Puntarenas is a key issue, with important repercussions to Costa Rica’s national tourism strategy. So far, Costa Rica has successfully kept cruise tourism as a small part of its tourism industry compared with other countries in the region. A general consensus among the interviewed parties was that upgrading Puntarenas in terms of safety considerations and making it more attractive to passengers in an effort to generate more spending on shore is urgent. However, more research needs to be done to understand to what extent expanding capacity for cruise tourism can be done without eroding the experience in nearby key sites for high value ecotourism tourists, and not compromise the sustainability of natural attractions in the area.

• The costs and benefits of public expenditure on homeporting need to be analyzed, particularly in the case of Puntarenas port, which would entail massive rebuilding and refurbishing of its facilities. The research should cover potential, social, economic and environmental costs of home ports as well as identifying strategies to mitigate its adverse effects. It should also assess the desirability of undertaking these investments in view of the rising competition in the area, particularly from ports in Panama and El Salvador. More information will also be necessary for base cruises currently docking in Caldera.

• A noticeable increase in small port development alongside the Pacific coast, as evidenced by the increase in marina permit applications, signals the need for further research to understand the implications of this growth on the local community and the environment. Public opposition to some of these marina projects indicates that there may be potentially adverse effects that have not yet been fully understood.

• An in depth survey of land activities for cruise passengers in terms of demand, cost, types of suppliers, favorite destinations, companies involved and their relation with the cruise companies is of primary importance. More research needs to be conducted that analyzes the types of tours offered, how they impact stay over tourism and mechanisms to augment potential positive externalities within the local population at Puntarenas. This will enable local and national authorities to understand how these services impact stay over tourism and what alternatives may exist to augment potential positive externalities within the local population at Puntarenas. Throughout this report, a series of policy recommendations have been made in an effort to help guide public policy makers guide to develop cruise tourism policies that will positively impact the local and national population without endangering the sustainability and competitiveness of the entire tourism industry and its natural capital. Among the most important recommendations is the creation of a coherent master plan, emerging from a consultative process, that

55

anticipates market trends, revisits current assumptions and thoroughly investigates the underlying economics and trade-offs that exist in the cruise industry, with special emphasis on passenger volumes, infrastructure investments, cost-benefit analysis, etc. Without a long-term strategy that incorporates all of the major stakeholders, the development and maintenance of the Pacific ports will continue to be stagnated. Most importantly, a master plan would institutionalize a long-run strategy for cruise tourism, without being affected or interrupted by the political cycle. An undirected and unplanned growth of cruise tourism in the Pacific coast could come with irreversible negative consequences. A successful master plan can only result from an informed debate and wide public consultations. Unless the people who have traditionally lived in port and urban communities are part of the overall development plan, the expansion of tourism can lead to broader environmental and social problems. Such a plan would cover diverse areas, including future developments as well as the terms of operation of the cruise industry, identifying how many ships should dock at the same time, capacity for expansion, open tender systems for transportation and tour operators, standardizing fee and passenger rates and eventually harmonizing them at a regional level, and fitting these policies and other incentives within the national tourism strategy. This master plan must also envision future private participation in the development of infrastructure through concession agreements, and must go beyond recommendations for improved infrastructure. It should focus on strengthening the institutional foundations and improving communication among the many governmental institutions in charge of handling cruise and tourism policies. In essence, the government should never relinquish the promulgation of cruise policies to the private sector as new concession agreements develop, but must engage in a new coordinating role so that the sustainability of the whole tourism industry remains competitive in the long run. Otherwise, the benefits of an expanding and undirected cruise industry may end up in opposition with Costa Rica’s overall development objectives. Such a role will not be possible without a deeper understanding of these new developments in the cruise industry, together with an information baseline that is comparable and permits continuous and systematic monitoring of cruise ship tourism. Such studies can generate comparable data and evaluation programs to adequately assess the state of stayover tourism, smaller pocket cruises, employment analysis and the regulation of concessions for berthing and dock use. Establishing base lines and measurable objectives within port and national tourism strategies will permit measuring, ex-post, the evolution of cruise tourism in Costa Rica and the rest of the region. High quality information and analysis will also give tools to the local and national bodies to set priorities for public investment. In order to adequately manage cruise tourism in Costa Rica and its projected growth, policies must go beyond infrastructure developments and promotional

56

campaigns and focus on long-term policies that emphasize regional coordination strategies, high value tourism and local capacity building, among other key objectives. In all the interviews, the need for a national tourism and cruise strategy was clear, but there was no mention of the need for coordinated regional strategies, which would be highly beneficial to all Central American countries. Cruise ship policies could ideally be coordinated at a regional level in order to avoid creating a descending spiral of competition that primarily favors the interests of cruise lines. Encouraging high volumes of tourists and narrow margins does not ensure higher earnings for local residents or high quality investments. Governments, municipalities and private enterprises must prevent ports from becoming saturated, discourage unfair competitive practices and foster quality and certification mechanisms, higher taxes per passenger, and the establishment of development funds in social and environmental projects. Formulating these types of regional policies will take time and will need to rely on the existing Central American institutional bodies like SICA (Central American Integration System - Sistema de la Integracion Centroamericana). At the moment, most projects were aimed at a national level and were preoccupied with attracting higher levels of cruise tourism, without sufficient understanding of how these policies will affect the competitiveness of the whole tourism industry in the long run. Attracting high value tourism must also remain a key objective in any future plans for cruise tourism. Large groups of tourists can diminish the quality of the experience for stayover tourists, who make the largest contributions the economy. Fostering mass tourism may deteriorate both infrastructure and resources. Therefore, it is necessary to physically separate cruise ship tourists from those who stay at the places visited, generally wilderness and cultural sites, preventing negative repercussions in the future and guaranteeing the sustainability of high value tourism businesses. There has traditionally been an unofficial effort to separate these two types of tourism in Costa Rica, but these informal efforts need to be turned into policy. However, current initiatives for customized tours could negatively impact on the attractiveness of key sites unless proper zoning strategies and physical separation are implemented. The same applies to government financing of cruise facilities. If limited resources exist for tourism infrastructure, the government must first set clear priorities on what kind of tourism it wants to promote, favoring tourists who generate the highest possible economic and social benefits. Previous research indicates that stayover tourists spend twice as much per day than cruise tourists ($120 vs $55) and spend 18 times more than cruise tourists per visitlxiv. Public investment in attracting stayover tourists and guaranteeing the highest possible standards must therefore remain a priority within the national tourism strategy.

57

FIGURE 15 FIGURE 16

Arrivals of conventional tourists Earnings for Costa Rica from both and cruise ship passengers lxv overnight tourism and cruise ship

tourismlxvi Benefits for local populations will only be possible if cruise tourists can enjoy high quality and safety standards at port cities. Just as important as renovating docks and restoring urban areas, training programs need to be offered, together with quality certifications and the upgrading of environmental standards and enforcement capabilities. The needs of passenger and crew members must be anticipated. The current model at Bermuda, where cruise lines have invested in job training and local youth programs, could be emulated in Costa Rica’s Pacific ports so as to democratize the distribution of earnings from cruise tourism. Policies that encourage buying local products, and facilitate arrangements for tours ashore, can emphasize local cuisine and local culture. Currently, the port towns at Puntarenas and Caldera have little to offer to cruise ship passengers. If renovation of boulevards and the creating of dynamic areas are created, local production of arts and crafts could be strengthened. At the same time, skills and instruction programs must be offered to craftspeople and other goods and service providers at ports. Creating the necessary conditions for the local population to benefit from cruise tourism can help improve living standards without jeopardizing other wilderness and natural attractions favored by stayover tourists. Benefiting urban areas and port communities must emerge as a priority for government authorities negotiating the contracts with the cruise lines. The lack of a coordinated maritime policy and a coherent strategy has resulted in many ongoing plans and discussions for the entire Pacific coast, including isolated initiatives at Quepos and Golfito. It would be advisable to concentrate first on improving Puntarenas as the quintessential port on the Pacific coast, completely separating cargo and cruise ships so that cargo vessels do not have to wait to dock and then improving the experience for passengers who chose to

58

disembark. Smaller ports like Golfito and Quepos could specialize on other niches, like pocket cruises, that would not need such high levels of investment. As noted previously, there is an urgent need for research to understand the needs of specialty cruises and therefore maximize benefits to the local populations. Undoubtedly, research and public consultation will be the first step to organize a consistent strategy for the Pacific ports. A second step would be to integrate the Atlantic ports, and eventually fit cruise policy within the framework of a National Tourism Strategy that builds best practices that secures the environmental and competitive sustainability of tourism as the key engine of growth in Costa Rica. All in all, local and national institutions must be prepared to balance often-conflicting development goals if cruise tourism expands, for example in Puntarenas. Economic growth for these urban and port communities depends heavily on foreign tourists, but encouraging mass tourism is not sustainable, and could irreparably damage and saturate key natural attractions, effectively destroying the very social and environmental features that makes Costa Rica a competitive destination. All plans for expansion of the cruise industry, particularly in relatively pristine areas like Golfito and Quepos, must be accompanied by innovative social and environmental development initiatives that can mitigate the potential negative effects cruise tourism expansion, while at the same time improving social and physical infrastructure that will permit sustained economic growth for these economies. Maximizing positive externalities from cruise tourism is possible firstly if it is properly understood, and secondly if it is addressed as a problem of incentives, social and environmental controls, and the ability to handle complex economic restructuring.

59

SOURCES Written and digital publications Araya, Jorge Luis (2008). Puerto Limón y Moín se atascan. Seminario

Universidad. 16 junio 2008. http://www.semanario.ucr.ac.cr/ Ávalos, Ángela and Esteban Oviedo 2006. Gobierno firme en concesionar

muelles. La Nacion Newspaper. September 29, 2006. Arcusin, Susana. Evaluación de la situación del transporte marítimo y los puertos

en la región mesoamericana. Plan Puebla Panamá, Diciembre 2002. Borbón, Alvaro. Presentation: Participación Público-Privada Concesión de Obra

Pública con Servicios Públicos en Costa Rica Consejo Nacional de Concesiones. Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Transportes. San José, Costa Rica. December, 2007

Barquero, Marvin (2008). Marina Papagayo abrirá su primera etapa próximo

lunes. La Nacion Newspaper, December 12, 2008. http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2008/diciembre/12/economia1808877.html

Braun, Bradley, M., Xander, James, A., and Kenneth R. White. 2002. The impact

of the cruise industry on a region’s economy: a case study of Port Canaveral, Florida. Tourism Economics. 8:3: 281-288.

Brenes, Harold (2008). Construcción de marina en Golfito tiene un año de

retraso. September 23, 2008. La Nacion Newspaper, http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2008/septiembre/23/pais1710658.html

Canales, Danny (2007). Megapuerto de Limón-Moín despega en 2008. La

República, 12 de Diciembre, 2007. CESD. Cruise Tourism in Belize: Perceptions of Economic, Social &

Environmental Impact. Center on Ecotourism and Sustainable Development. Washington D.C., USA. November, 2006.

CESD-INCAE. Cruise Tourism Impacts in Costa Rica & Honduras: Policy

Recommendations for Decision Makers. 2007. CESD (2007b). Simposio sobre Paz con La Naturaleza, Power Point

Presentation, Dr. Martha Honey, CESD, CENAT, San Jose, Costa Rica, July 6, 2007

60

Dante, Figueroa (2007). Civil Law Trusts in Latin America, Arizona Journal of International & Comparative Law Vol. 24, No. 3 2007 http://www.law.arizona.edu/Journals/AJICL/AJICL2007/4.%20Figueroa%209x6.pdf

Dunlop, Adam. Issues and Challenges in Caribbean Cruise Ship Tourism. Cepal.

2003. Economist. Floating Fantasy, Travel and tourism survey V 346, I 8050, p 14. .

The Economist. USA. January 10, 1998. Editorial. Beneficios de la concesión. La Nación, Newspaper. San José, Costa

Rica. March 3, 2008. FLACSO (2004). Limón Ciudad Puerto. Informe de Consultoría. San Jose,

Costa Rica, November 2004. Gavarrete, Julio María Isabel Fernández (2001). Puertos y transporte maritime.

Informe final. SIECA/ECAT. Enero 2001. Honey, Martha and Krantz, David. Global Trends in Coastal Tourism Center on

Ecotourism and Sustainable Development. Prepared for: Marine Program World Wildlife Fund. CESD & Stanford University. Washington, DC, USA. December 2007.

Iacovelli, Nicolla (2008). El impulso estratégico para convertir a Costa Rica en

un país de Turismo de12 Meses al año. Proyecto Crucero de “Embarque” Puerto de Caldera y Puntarenas. Abril 2008, Presentation.

ICT (2007). Base única de hospedaje. Cuadros resumen oferta de hospedaje

2007. Instituto Costarricense de Turismo. San José, Costa Rica. December, 2007.

ICT 2007b. INFORME DE ENCUESTAS DE TURISMO 2007. TURISTAS NO

RESIDENTES QUE SALIERON POR AEROPUERTO DANIEL ODUBER LIBERIA I SEMESTRE, Abril 2007.

ICT 2007c. INFORME DE ENCUESTAS DE TURISMO 2007. TURISTAS NO

RESIDENTES QUE SALIERON POR AEROPUERTO DANIEL ODUBER LIBERIA II SEMESTRE, Diciembre 2007.

ICT (2008). Instituto Costarricense Turismo. Anuario Estadístico 2007. Gobierno

República de Costa Rica. San José, Costa Rica. 2008. Intermarine USA (2008). Growth demands Central American port expansions.

December 2, 2008. http://www.breakbulk.com/content/?p=360

61

Iglesias, Laura. Empresa pretende desarrollar “Megamar”. La Nación,

Newspaper. San José, Costa Rica. May 29, 2008. Instituto Costarricense de Puertos del Pacífico. On Line. June 2, 2008.

www.incop.go.cr INCOP (2007). Ministerio de Hacienda (2007). Entidad: Programación de

Inversión Pública Presupuestos (en millones de colones). Encuesta de Proyectos Ministerio de Hacienda. 2007.

INEC (2008). Instituto Nacional de Estadistica y Censos (National Institute for

Statistics and Census) Statistics Department <http://www.inec.go.cr/> INCOP 2008, Acumuladeo de movimiento, turismo y meraderia en Puerto

Caldera, Punta Morales, Quepos y Golifto, www.incop.go.cr/%5Cwa_incop%5CDOCS%5CEstadisticas.xls

Loaiza, Vannessa (2007). Gobierno apura planes para modernizar puertos de

Limón. August 21, 2007. http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2007/agosto/21/pais1208982.html

Loaiza, Vanesa (2007a). Caldera genera ¢1.860 millones para obras en

Puntarenas. La Nación, Newspaper. San José, Costa Rica. February 25, 2008.

Loaiza, Vanessa (2007b). Dinero para becas y calles se empantana. La Nación,

Newspaper. San José, Costa Rica. February 25, 2008. Loaiza, Vanessa (2007c). Falta de permiso atrasa dragado urgente en Caldera.

La Nación, Newspaper. San José, Costa Rica. December 12, 2007. Loaiza, Vanessa (2007d). Muelle dañado recibirá cruceros en Puntarenas. La

Nación, Newspaper. San José, Costa Rica. August 4, 2007. Loaiza, Vanessa (2007e).. Diputados impulsan concesiones hoteleras en golfo

de Nicoya, La Nacion Newspaper, Costa Rica. February 21, 2007. Loaiza, Vanessa 2007f. Isla Tortuga recibe 150 turistas diarios. La Nacion

Newspaper, February 21, 2007. http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2007/febrero/21/pais999220.html

Mata, Esteban 2008. La concesion de lso puertos de limon y moi es una

decision toamda. Interview from La Nacion Newspaper, December 27, 2008

62

Medina-Mora, Oscar. El Sector Portuario: “Una fuente de recursos fiscales o una herramienta de desarrollo”. Colombia. November, 2006.

MIDEPLAN 2003. Plan Regional de Desarrollo 2003-2006. Región Pacífico

Central. Gobierno de Costa Rica 2003. MIDEPLAN (2006). Ministerio de Planificación Nacional y Política Económica.

National Development Plan (NDP 2006-2010) / Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2006-2010 Jorge Manuel Dengo Obregón. Gobierno de la República de Costa Rica. 2006.

Ministry of Tourism. Cruise Tourism-Potential & Strategy Study. Government of

India. India. Final Report: 2005. Monge, Ginnete. Puntarenas ya comenzó proyectos para remozar su apariencia.

. La Nación, Newspaper. San José, Costa Rica. January 12, 2008. Nacion 2007c. Nueva marina en Quepos promete 3.000 empleos. July 13,

2007. www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2007/julio/13/economia1166137.html Nacion 2008c. Japdeva tendría cuatro muelles privados en Moín en el 2016.

www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2008/septiembre/22/pais1709410.html Pratt et al (2007). Cruise tourism and community economic development in

Central America and the Caribbean: The case of Costa Rica. Colorado State University (USA); CLACDS -- INCAE (Argentina). Vol. 4 Nº 2 págs. 213-224. www.pasosonline.org

RECOPE (2007). Portafolio de Inversión en Infraestructura del Sistema Nacional

de Petróleo (SINAP). February 2007. Rojas, Jose (2007). Golfito tendrá marina, condominios de lujo y hasta un

museo . Junw 25, 2007. La Nacion Newspaper, http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2007/junio/25/economia1137164.html

Sabonage, Rodolfo 2008. Update on the Panama Canal Expansion Program. ,

Market Research and Analysis . December 2008. SICA 2006. Código de conducta ambiental para la gestion portuaria en

Centroamerica. Bogota, Colombia, Marzo 15, 2006

SIECA (2001). Estudio Centroamericano de Transporte Marítimo. Editado por Julio Gavarrete y María Isabel Fernández. Guatemala: Enero 2001.

63

Seidl, Giuliano, Pratt, Castro & Majano. Cruise Tourism and Community Economics in Central America and the Caribbean: The Case of Costa Rica. INCAE. Alajuela, Costa Rica. September, 2005.

Sociedad Portuaria de Caldera. Cargo Movements August 2006 to April 2008.

PowerPoint Presentation. Soto, Ronny 2006. Diez cruceros más llegarán a Puntarenas. La Nacion

Newspaper. 29 de Septiembre 2006. http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2006/septiembre/29/pais842255.html

Soto, Ronny 2008. Incop repara muelle de cruceros en Puntarenas. La Nación,

Newspaper. San José, Costa Rica. April 1, 2008. Soto, Ronny 2008b. Transportistas bloquearon muelle de Puntarenas. La

Nacion Newspaper. Septeber 26, 2008. http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2008/septiembre/26/pais1714940.html

Soto, Ronny 2008c. Antigua capitanía de puerto se convierte en centro turístico.

La Nación, Newspaper. San José, Costa Rica. March 26, 2008. Unidad de Estadística ICT. Informe de Encuestas de Turismo 2005. Instituto

Costarricense de Turismo. San José, Costa Rica. December, 2005. Unidad de Estadística ICT. Informe de Encuestas de Turismo. Instituto

Costarricense de Turismo. San José, Costa Rica. December, 2006. Washington Times 2002. Isla Tortuga -- Turtle Island. Government intervenes to

preserve sanctity of environment. http://www.internationalreports.net/theamericas/costarica/2002/islatortuga.html

World Bank (2007b). COSTA RICA CITY-PORT OF LIMON PROJECT

PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN REGION November 2007. http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2007/12/14/000020439_20071214111341/Rendered/PDF/414140CR.pdf

Wright, Aracelly (2001). UNCTAD Monograph on Port Management: The

economic impact of cruise ports: The case of Miami WTTC (2008). World Travel and Tourism Center. Key World Facts.

<www.wttc.com>

64

Interviews Conducted: Sunset Tours/Veragua Rainforest. Cruise tourism specialist. San Jose. British Embassy in Costa Rica, Consultant for maritime affairs. San Jose Refinadora Costarricense de Petroleo. Former employee working on Fertica project. San Jose Punta Morales Port Officer/Director. San Jose ICT Tourism Cluster Specialist. San Jose. CIMAT, Inter-Institutional Commission on Marinas and Tourism Director. San Jose. CIMAT, Inter-Institutional Commission on Marinas and Tourism, Marina Study Researchers (2). San Jose. Sociedad Portuaria de Caldera SA, Operations Manager. San Jose. Grupo HA, Cruise Handler Specialist. San Jose. ICT, Coordinator of Cruise Ships Division, Direct Advisor to the Minister. San Jose. INCOP Presidency Office. Costa Rican Pacific Ports Board, Instituto Costarricense de Puertos del Pacífico, San Jose. SPC, Public Relations Manager of Caldera Porting Society Council, San Jose. CNC, Consejo Nacional de Concesiones, Manager for Private Initiative Projects in National Concessions Council, San Jose. MOPT. Port’s Division Manager. Transport and Public Constructions Ministry MOPT Swiss Travel. Management. San Jose. Grupo Humberto Alvarez, Management. San Jose. Friends of Osa. Puntarenass Office. San Jose.

65

ANNEXES

1. Packaged Tour Areas Offered by Selected Inbound Tour Operators In Costa Rica

Activity

Hori-zontes

Swiss Travel

Camino Travel

Costa Rica

Expeditions

Costa Rican Trails

Arenal Volcano/Lake/ Hot Springs/Hanging Bridges

X X X X X

Bahia Bellena/Ballena Marine N.P.

X

Bajos del Toro/Bosque de Paz

X X X

Biezan Bay X

Braulio Carrillo N.P. X X X

Caño Negro Wildlife Refuge

X X X

Carara N.P. X X X

Cartago X

Catalina Islands X

Cocos Island X

Corcovado N.P./ Caño Island

X X X X

Chirripo Highlands/Cerro de la Muerta/ San Gerardo de Dota

X X X

Dominical & Uvita X X X

Drake Bay X X

Esterillos Beach X

Flamingo Beach X

Golfito X X

Golfo Dulce/Osa X X X X X

66

Peninsula

Guiones Beach X

Herradura X

INBio Park X X

Irazu Volcano X X

Jaco Beach X X X

La Cruz X

La Fortuna X X

La Paz Waterfall Garden

X X X X

Los Angeles Cloud Forest

X

Manuel Antonio N.P. X X X X X

Monteverde Biological Reserve

X X X X X

Nicaragua X X

Nicoya N.P. X X X

Nosara Beach X

Ocotal Beach X

Orosi Valley X

Oro Verde Private Reserve

X

Ostional National Wildlife Reserve

X

Pacuare River X X X X X

Parque Aventura Rio Barranca

X

Pejibaye River X

Penas Blancas River/Piedras Blancas

X X

Poas Volcano X X X X

Puerto Limon/Viejo/ X X X X X

67

Manzanillo

Punta Islita X X X X

Reventazon River X

Rincon de la Vieja N.P. X X X X

Rio Blanco Canyon X X

Rio Esquinas X

Rio Toro X

Samara Beach X X

Samay Laguna X

San Jose X X X X X

Santa Clara X

Santa Elena Cloud Forest

X

Santa Teresa Beach X

Sarapiqui River/Highlands

X X X X X

Savegre Valley X X

Selva Bananito X X

Sierpe River X X

Talamanca Mountain Range

X

Tamarindo or Hermosa Beach/Guanacaste

X X X X

Tambor Beach X

Tárcoles River X

Tortuguero N.P. X X X X X

Turrialba Valley X X X X

SOURCE: CESD preliminary listing based on online web pages, October 2008.

68

2. Cargo and Cruise Ship Movements in Caldera Port (2006, 2007, 2008) ATTENDED SHIPS ACCORDING TO CARGO TYPE

FROM AUGUST 2006 TO MARCH 2008

MONTH/YEAR Bulk cargo Liquid Bulk General cargo Reefer RO-RO Tuna Steel Passengers Containers Others Total

August 2006 7 0 0 3 2 1 2 0 15 0 30September 2006 8 0 1 5 6 1 4 0 22 0 47October 2006 12 0 0 7 8 3 3 3 22 0 58November 2006 8 1 0 4 5 4 2 2 21 0 47December 2006 8 1 0 5 8 2 3 6 19 1 53January 2007 4 2 1 8 4 2 5 8 19 2 55February 2007 8 0 0 10 8 7 4 6 17 3 63March 2007 9 1 1 9 5 2 3 5 21 1 57April 2007 8 2 0 8 9 3 1 1 18 1 51 May 2007 9 1 0 9 5 4 3 0 17 1 49

June 2007 6 1 0 8 6 1 3 0 18 2 45

July 2007 10 0 2 10 10 3 5 0 20 3 63

August 2007 9 0 1 8 7 2 4 0 22 4 57

September 2007 7 0 0 9 7 5 6 0 19 5 58

October 2007 10 0 0 9 7 1 1 1 23 2 54

November 2007 5 1 0 8 5 6 5 3 21 1 55

December 2007 6 1 0 10 8 0 3 6 18 0 52

January 2008 6 1 0 9 4 0 4 10 23 0 57

February 2008 9 0 1 10 8 5 3 8 24 1 69

March 2008 8 0 0 11 6 4 3 8 22 4 66

April 2008 8 0 2 8 8 3 2 1 25 3 60TOTALES 165 12 9 168 136 59 69 68 426 34 1.146

Source: SPC 2008

PASSENGERS FROM CRUISERS AND OTHER SHIPS AUGUST 2006 - APRIL 2008

MONTH/YEARAttended

shipsPassengers in

transitDisembarked passengers

Embarked passengers

Attended ships

Passengers in transit

Disembarked passengers

Embarked passengers

August 2006 - - - - - - - - September 2006 - - - - - - - - October 2006 3 3.493 9 7 - - - - November 2006 2 1.339 442 542 - - - - December 2006 6 827 758 781 1 - - - January 2007 8 1.322 1.511 1.589 1 - - - February 2007 6 973 668 643 2 - - - March 2007 5 4 627 656 1 - 14 - April 2007 1 1.455 2 2 1 - - - May 2007 - - - - 1 - - - June 2007 - - - - 2 106 115 219 July 2007 - - - - 3 - 205 220 August 2007 - - - - 4 - 323 268 September 2007 - - - - 4 - 188 191 October 2007 1 1.773 1 2 1 - - - November 2007 1 1.972 3 2 1 - - - December 2007 6 1.329 592 594 - - - - January 2008 10 1.895 1.725 1.614 - - - - February 2008 8 910 911 906 - - - - March 2008 8 503 824 806 - - - - April 2008 1 - 137 143 3 - 18 - TOTALES --> 66 17.795 8.210 8.287 25 106 863 898

CRUISERS OTHERS

Source: SPC 2008

69

CONTAINERS AND TONNAGE MOVEMENTS AUGUST 2006 TO APRIL 2008

TOTAL TOTAL MONTHLY MONTHLY20 40 20 40 UNITS 20 40 20 40 UNITS TONNAGE UNIT

August 2006 993 1.449 - 46 39.960,71 2.488 3.983 264 497 532 671 16.391,20 1.964 3.132 56.352 4.452 7.115 September 2006 1.172 1.780 - 122 47.954,36 3.074 4.976 146 667 1.277 1.383 21.953,46 3.473 5.523 69.908 6.547 10.499 October 2006 1.207 2.036 - 139 50.382,36 3.382 5.557 239 1.160 1.133 1.714 51.389,78 4.246 7.120 101.772 7.628 12.677 November 2006 1.167 2.193 26 224 53.581,91 3.610 6.027 428 976 842 1.043 28.248,49 3.289 5.308 81.830 6.899 11.335 December 2006 1.117 2.040 - 88 51.344,69 3.245 5.373 224 795 1.141 523 19.229,06 2.683 4.001 70.574 5.928 9.374 January 2007 1.513 1.943 5 345 60.422,07 3.806 6.094 314 969 1.301 1.362 26.890,28 3.946 6.277 87.312 7.752 12.371 February 2007 907 1.263 2 482 38.243,02 2.654 4.399 268 1.027 638 593 26.510,58 2.526 4.146 64.754 5.180 8.545 March 2007 952 1.697 3 350 38.911,61 3.002 5.049 351 1.008 618 931 27.770,26 2.908 4.847 66.682 5.910 9.896 April 2007 890 1.563 26 361 42.417,43 2.840 4.764 256 999 482 465 25.521,79 2.202 3.666 67.939 5.042 8.430 May 2007 1.511 1.828 60 368 54.011,19 3.767 5.963 306 1.265 993 1.375 31.235,18 3.939 6.579 85.246 7.706 12.542 June 2007 1.324 2.083 - 549 54.167,86 3.956 6.588 359 940 728 990 26.246,95 3.017 4.947 80.415 6.973 11.535 July 2007 1.491 2.274 - 166 61.363,19 3.931 6.371 233 800 906 1.090 20.331,74 3.029 4.919 81.695 6.960 11.290 August 2007 1.375 2.479 2 44 59.485,69 3.900 6.423 310 885 1.187 1.957 24.102,91 4.339 7.181 83.589 8.239 13.604 September 2007 1.086 2.224 1 228 49.468,30 3.539 5.991 190 770 978 1.130 19.463,70 3.068 4.968 68.932 6.607 10.959 October 2007 1.285 2.484 4 122 56.297,49 3.895 6.501 240 857 1.017 1.759 21.197,49 3.873 6.489 77.495 7.768 12.990 November 2007 1.481 2.436 - 79 61.604,60 3.996 6.511 249 861 824 1.043 21.842,03 2.977 4.881 83.447 6.973 11.392 December 2007 1.476 2.104 - 148 58.728,35 3.728 5.980 131 744 1.172 1.505 18.409,66 3.552 5.801 77.138 7.280 11.781 January 2008 1.318 2.228 - 419 59.836,42 3.965 6.612 199 1.222 1.115 1.557 31.165,18 4.093 6.872 91.002 8.058 13.484 February 2008 1.447 2.107 1 445 59.570,64 4.000 6.552 238 1.451 1.321 1.080 34.566,26 4.090 6.621 94.137 8.090 13.173 March 2008 1.115 2.095 1 965 51.068,82 4.176 7.236 257 1.331 808 735 33.538,33 3.131 5.197 84.607 7.307 12.433 April 2008 1.306 2.327 56 394 59.147,57 4.083 6.804 293 1.668 729 944 42.112,81 3.634 6.246 101.260 7.717 13.050

TOTAL 26.133 42.633 187 6.084 1.107.968 75.037 123.754 5.495 20.892 19.742 23.850 568.117 69.979 114.721 1.676.085 145.016 238.475

T.E.U.S.FULLEMPTYFULL

TONNAGET.E.U.S.

TOTALMONTH EMPTY

IMPORT EXPORT

T.E.U.S.TONNAGE

Source: SPC 2008

SHIP SERVICES AND CUMMULATIVE TONNAGE AUGUST 2006 TO APRIL 2008

BULK CARGOESATTENDED SHIPSPRODUCT IMPORT EXPORT TOTALSolid bulk 3.408.460,57 - 3.408.460,57 Liquid bulk 128.833,23 - 128.833,23 TOTAL BULK CARGOES 3.537.293,80 - 3.537.293,80

GENERAL CARGO AND CONTAINERSATTENDED SHIPSPRODUCT IMPORT EXPORT TOTALGeneral Cargo 42.864,08 1.184,72 44.048,80 Reefer - Fruit in pallets - 112.316,54 112.316,54 Vehicles 85.487,98 228,26 85.716,24 Tuna 28.375,11 - 28.375,11 Steel and similar 350.218,80 2,96 350.221,76 Containers (full) 1.107.968,37 568.116,65 1.676.085,02 TOTAL GENERAL CARGO 1.614.914,34 681.849,13 2.296.763,47

TOTAL 5.152.208,14 681.849,13 5.834.057,27

TONNAGE MOVED

TONNAGE MOVED

Source: SPC 2008

70

3. Cruise Season 2007 – 2008 Caldera and Puntarenas

Source INCOP 2008

71

Source INCOP 2008

72

ENDNOTES

i INCOP 2008, Acumuladeo de movimiento, turismo y meraderia en Puerto Caldera, Punta Morales, Quepos y Golifto, www.incop.go.cr/%5Cwa_incop%5CDOCS%5CEstadisticas.xls ii ICT (2008). Instituto Costarricense Turismo. Anuario Estadístico 2007. Gobierno República de Costa Rica. San José, Costa Rica. 2008 iii Ibid. iv CESD-INCAE. Cruise Tourism Impacts in Costa Rica & Honduras: Policy Recommendations for Decision Makers. 2007. v ICT (2008). Instituto Costarricense Turismo. Anuario Estadístico 2007. Gobierno República de Costa Rica. San José, Costa Rica. 2008 vi Interview subjects, anonymous. February 2009. vii CESD-INCAE. Cruise Tourism Impacts in Costa Rica & Honduras: Policy Recommendations for Decision Makers. 2007. viii Ibid. ix Ibid. x Nacion 2008c. Japdeva tendría cuatro muelles privados en Moín en el 2016. www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2008/septiembre/22/pais1709410.html xi INCOP 2008, Acumuladeo de movimiento, turismo y meraderia en Puerto Caldera, Punta Morales, Quepos y Golifto, www.incop.go.cr/%5Cwa_incop%5CDOCS%5CEstadisticas.xls xii Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. xiii INCOP 2008, Acumuladeo de movimiento, turismo y meraderia en Puerto Caldera, Punta Morales, Quepos y Golifto, www.incop.go.cr/%5Cwa_incop%5CDOCS%5CEstadisticas.xls xiv Soto, Ronny 2008b. Transportistas bloquearon muelle de Puntarenas. La Nacion Newspaper. Septeber 26, 2008. http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2008/septiembre/26/pais1714940.html xv Nacion 2007c. Nueva marina en Quepos promete 3.000 empleos. July 13, 2007. www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2007/julio/13/economia1166137.html

73

xvi Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. xvii Brenes, Harold (2008). Construcción de marina en Golfito tiene un año de retraso. September 23, 2008. La Nacion Newspaper, http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2008/septiembre/23/pais1710658.html xviii Rojas, Jose (2007). Golfito tendrá marina, condominios de lujo y hasta un museo . Junw 25, 2007. La Nacion Newspaper, http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2007/junio/25/economia1137164.html xix Interview subjects, February 2009. xx Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. xxi MIDEPLAN 2003. Plan Regional de Desarrollo 2003-2006. Región Pacífico Central. Gobierno de Costa Rica 2003. And INCOP (2007). Ministerio de Hacienda (2007). Entidad: Programación de Inversión Pública Presupuestos (en millones de colones). Encuesta de Proyectos Ministerio de Hacienda. 2007. xxii Barquero, Marvin (2008). Marina Papagayo abrirá su primera etapa próximo lunes. La Nacion Newspaper, December 12, 2008. http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2008/diciembre/12/economia1808877.html xxiii Soto, Ronny 2008b. Transportistas bloquearon muelle de Puntarenas. La Nacion Newspaper. Septeber 26, 2008. http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2008/septiembre/26/pais1714940.html xxiv Soto, Ronny 2006. Diez cruceros más llegarán a Puntarenas. La Nacion Newspaper. 29 de Septiembre 2006. http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2006/septiembre/29/pais842255.html xxv Ibid. xxvi Ibid xxvii ICT (2007). Instituto Costarricense Turismo. Anuario Estadístico 2006. Gobierno República de Costa Rica. San José, Costa Rica. 2007 xxviii Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. xxix Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008.

xxx World Bank (2007b). COSTA RICA CITY-PORT OF LIMON PROJECT PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN REGION November 2007. http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2007/12/14/000020439_20071214111341/Rendered/PDF/414140CR.pdf

74

xxxi Intermarine USA (2008). Growth demands Central American port expansions. December 2, 2008. http://www.breakbulk.com/content/?p=360 xxxii Araya, Jorge Luis (2008). Puerto Limón y Moín se atascan. Seminario Universidad 16 junio 2008. http://www.semanario.ucr.ac.cr/ xxxiii Ávalos, Ángela and Esteban Oviedo 2006. Gobierno firme en concesionar muelles. La Nacion Newspaper. September 29, 2006. xxxiv Intermarine USA (2008). Growth demands Central American port expansions. December 2, 2008. http://www.breakbulk.com/content/?p=360 xxxv Canales, Danny (2007). Megapuerto de Limón-Moín despega en 2008. La Rep ublica, 12 de Diciembre, 2007. xxxvi Mata, Esteban 2008. La concesion de lso puertos de limon y moi es una decision toamda. Interview from La Nacion Newspaper, December 27, 2008\ xxxvii Loaiza, Vannessa (2007). Gobierno apura planes para modernizar puertos de Limón. August 21, 2007. http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2007/agosto/21/pais1208982.html xxxviii World Bank (2007b). COSTA RICA CITY-PORT OF LIMON PROJECT PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN REGION November 2007. http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2007/12/14/000020439_20071214111341/Rendered/PDF/414140CR.pdf xxxix Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. xl Dante, Figueroa (2007). Civil Law Trusts in Latin America, Arizona Journal of International & Comparative Law Vol. 24, No. 3 2007 http://www.law.arizona.edu/Journals/AJICL/AJICL2007/4.%20Figueroa%209x6.pdf xli Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. xlii Instituto Costarricense de Puertos del Pacífico. On Line. June 2, 2008. www.incop.go.cr and company web pages. xliii Sabonage, Rodolfo 2008. Update on the Panama Canal Expansion Program. , Market Research and Analysis . December 2008. xliv Braun, Bradley, M., Xander, James, A., and Kenneth R. White. 2002. The impact of the cruise industry on a region’s economy: a case study of Port Canaveral, Florida. Tourism Economics. 8:3: 281-288.

75

xlv Wright, Aracelly (2001). UNCTAD Monograph on Port Management: The economic impact of cruise ports: The case of Miami xlvi Ibid. xlvii Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. xlviii INCOP Cruise Season Statistics 2008-2009 , www.incop.go.cr xlix Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. l Pratt et al (2007). Cruise tourism and community economic development in Central America and the Caribbean: The case of Costa Rica. Colorado State University (USA); CLACDS -- INCAE (Argentina). Vol. 4 Nº 2 págs. 213-224. www.pasosonline.org li Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. lii Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. liii Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. liv World Bank (2007b). COSTA RICA CITY-PORT OF LIMON PROJECT PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN REGION November 2007. http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2007/12/14/000020439_20071214111341/Rendered/PDF/414140CR.pdf lv Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008.

lvi MIDEPLAN 2003. Plan Regional de Desarrollo 2003-2006. Región Pacífico Central. Gobierno de Costa Rica 2003. lvii Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. It must be noted that Quepos is currently undergoing major investment in Marina Pez Vela. Phase 1 was inaugurated in December 2008, and construction work continues. lviii Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. lix Soto, Ronny 2008b. Transportistas bloquearon muelle de Puntarenas. La Nacion Newspaper. Septeber 26, 2008. http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2008/septiembre/26/pais1714940.html lx Interview subjects, anonymous. April-December 2008. lxi Loaiza, Vanessa (2007d). Muelle dañado recibirá cruceros en Puntarenas. La Nación, Newspaper. San José, Costa Rica. August 4, 2007.

76

lxii Loaiza, Vanessa (2007e).. Diputados impulsan concesiones hoteleras en golfo de Nicoya, La Nacion Newspaper, Costa Rica. February 21, 2007. lxiii Washington Times 2002. Isla Tortuga -- Turtle Island. Government intervenes to preserve sanctity of environment. http://www.internationalreports.net/theamericas/costarica/2002/islatortuga.html and Loaiza, Vanessa 2007f. Isla Tortuga recibe 150 turistas diarios. La Nacion Newspaper, February 21, 2007. http://www.nacion.com/ln_ee/2007/febrero/21/pais999220.html lxiv CESD 2005, quoted in Simposio sobre Paz con La Naturaleza, Power Point Presentation, Dr. Martha Honey, CESD, CENAT, San Jose, Costa Rica, July 6, 2007 lxv Source: ICT, quoted in CESD 2007, Cruise ship tourism in Honduras and Costa Rica January 2007. http://www.ecotourismcesd.org/projects/documents/Cruise_Tourism_Impacts_in_Costa_Rica_Honduras.pdf lxvi Source: ICT, quoted in CESD 2007, Cruise ship tourism in Honduras and Costa Rica January 2007. http://www.ecotourismcesd.org/projects/documents/Cruise_Tourism_Impacts_in_Costa_Rica_Honduras.pdf

Analysis of the Cruise Ports on the Pacific of Costa · PDF fileAnalysis of the Cruise Ports...

Documents

Transcript of Analysis of the Cruise Ports on the Pacific of Costa · PDF fileAnalysis of the Cruise Ports...