What would it be like to live near one of the world’s most treasured natural habitats? Some Ecuadorians who once inhabited the Galapagos can no longer respond to this question.
Concerned about negative impact of human settlement, the Ecuadorian government has forced more than one thousand migrants to return to the mainland. Originally, they had traveled to the Galapagos in order to seek wages in service industries that are double what they could earn elsewhere. (The NYT article on this topic can be found here.)
This situation serves as an example of the interconnectivity of migration and the environment.
Migrants tend to move to where they can best make a living, even if it will cause harm to local environments. The priorities of housing, food, and seeking a livelihood often outweigh concern for natural habitats, unless they can be convinced of the long-term benefits of sustainability. On the other hand, environmental change, whether a rapid and devastating hurricane or slow-onset desertification, can lead to the need for people to migrate.
How should governments balance the welfare of their people with the need environmental protection? The answer is not clear. Now some Ecuadorians on the Galapagos ask whether foreign tourists and tortoises are more valued than they are. This is similar to concerns by Kenyans who live outside their country’s national parks.
In the end, perhaps better management of the Galapagos by the Ecuadorian government could have avoided this situation in the first place. It continues to subsidize flights to and from the mainland, and has permitted the islands’ population to double in the past decade, to 30,000 persons.
