Towards a green economy
■ Waste collection: the remaining 92 per cent of green investment in tourism waste management is allocated to improve the waste collection rate, totalling on average US$ 30 billion per year over the next 40 years under the green investment scenario. The upstream cost of waste treatment is assumed to rise from US$ 1,083 per tonne in 1970 to US$ 1,695.5 per tonne in 2050.
4. Training of employees: 12 per cent of tourism investment in the green investment scenario, or US$ 31 billion on average each year between 2011 and 2050. The cost of training per employee is assumed to be US$ 117 for 120 hours, while all new employees attend training for one year in total over the duration of their career (together with the assumption that as many as possible would be local workforce). Overall, the total cumulative cost of training one employee is assumed to reach US$ 2,854. A variety of scenarios were simulated to study and evaluate the impacts of the variation in training cost per employee per year, in the range of between 30 per cent lower and
higher than the assumed cost (or from US$ 1,998 to US$ 3,711).
5. Biodiversity conservation: 50 per cent of tourism investment, or US$ 123 billion on average each year between 2011 and 2050. Three scenarios are simulated based on different biodiversity conservation costs. These are (a) US$ 119 per hectare, assuming only forest conservation – using the average cost offered by FONAFIFO25
; (b) US$ 451 per hectare assuming
the possibility to undertake forestry and agriculture on that land (based on the experience in Costa Rica, from Forestry chapter); (c) US$ 1,380 per hectare assuming that housing and other related business opportunities can be created, based on what is offered by Amazon Carbon and Biodiversity Investment Fund (ACIF)26
. 25. Fondo Nacional de Financiamiento Forestal, Costa Rica.
26. The Amazon Carbon and Biodiversity Investment Fund (ACIF) offers between US$ 276 and US$ 3,450 per ha, but it is a very specific case for 100,000 ha (US$ 3,450/ha seems high for an average). As a consequence, US$ 1,380/ha is used as a maximum value of conservation cost in this analysis.