Tourism That Transforms: How Uganda’s Parks Power Local Livelihoods and Economies

Nature-based tourism in Uganda is not just about awe-inspiring wildlife or gorilla trekking; it’s also an underappreciated economic engine for local communities. The new World Bank report fills a crucial knowledge gap by exploring how money spent by tourists impacts the surrounding communities of Queen Elizabeth National Park (QENP) and Bwindi Impenetrable National Park (BINP). Utilizing a powerful new model called LEWIE-LITE (Local Economy-Wide Impact Evaluation “Lite”), the study captures both the direct and the often-overlooked indirect effects of tourism spending.

Most prior studies have focused on tourist-facing businesses like lodges and restaurants. But this research goes further, tracking the economic ripple effects as money flows to local farms, services, and households. For Uganda, a nation ranked among the world’s top 10 biodiversity hotspots, this kind of analysis is essential for crafting inclusive tourism policies that not only preserve wildlife but also lift people out of poverty.

A New Lens: The LEWIE-LITE Model in Action

To assess economic impacts, researchers used data from over 200 tourists, local businesses, park authorities, and household surveys within 10 km of each park. The data were fed into LEWIE-LITE, which uses a Social Accounting Matrix (SAM) to simulate how each tourist dollar circulates through the local economy. An interactive online dashboard was also developed, allowing policymakers to explore various scenarios, like increasing tourist spending or adjusting park budgets.

LEWIE-LITE simulations show that tourism spending doesn't just benefit tour guides or hoteliers. It boosts demand for local goods and services, especially from non-tourism sectors like agriculture and retail. Wages paid by tourism businesses get spent in the community, sparking a chain of income and employment gains. The result is a multiplier effect, where one dollar spent by a tourist generates several more in economic activity.

Striking Differences: QENP vs. BINP

One of the study’s key insights is the dramatic contrast in local economic returns between the two parks. At Queen Elizabeth National Park, every dollar spent by a tourist generates $5.67 in production and $2.03 in household income, with a sizable portion going to local workers and entrepreneurs.

At Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, the numbers are more modest: $1.20 in production and $0.37 in income per dollar spent. The disparity arises mainly because a large share of Bwindi’s tourism revenue, especially from expensive gorilla trekking permits, gets channeled to the Uganda Wildlife Authority rather than staying in the local economy. When park fees are excluded, Bwindi’s multipliers improve significantly to $4.29 for production and $1.33 for income, underscoring the importance of localized spending.

Another important finding is the uneven distribution of benefits. Poor households receive only 3% of the gains at QENP and 13.5% at BINP, while wealthier households capture the lion’s share. Women are slightly better represented in tourism-related jobs, but they are largely absent from higher-paying roles and non-tourism sectors.

Beyond Tourism: Local Businesses Reap Bigger Rewards

Perhaps the most surprising discovery is that non-tourism sectors benefit more from tourism than tourism businesses themselves. Local farms, small shops, and service providers see greater income and production gains, thanks to the cascading effects of tourist spending. For example, restaurants that cater to tourists often buy produce from local farmers, who then spend their earnings at nearby retail shops or on household needs.

This reinforces the idea that strengthening supply chains between tourism and local agriculture or manufacturing can dramatically improve the economic footprint of tourism. Policies that promote local sourcing, local ownership of businesses, and employment of community members can amplify benefits. The study found that businesses with local ownership were more likely to hire locally and reinvest in the community.

Smart Spending: Community Programs with High Returns

Uganda’s community revenue sharing program, which directs 20% of park entry fees and $10 per gorilla permit to nearby communities, also plays a pivotal role. According to simulations, every $100 spent through this program generates $245 in local GDP at QENP and $120 at BINP. These investments fund local infrastructure and reduce human-wildlife conflict, all while creating jobs and stimulating the local economy.

Moreover, the LEWIE-LITE model can project future impacts. Assuming pre-pandemic tourism growth continues, QENP could generate an additional $5.1 million in household income, and BINP up to $2.8 million, depending on how revenue is distributed. Such growth not only justifies the operational budgets of the parks but also validates increased investments in tourism infrastructure and community outreach.

Final Thought: A Blueprint for Inclusive Tourism

This report challenges decision-makers to think beyond park gates. Tourism’s potential lies not just in visitor numbers but in how deeply and widely tourist dollars flow into surrounding communities. With tools like LEWIE-LITE, Uganda now has the ability to make data-informed choices that ensure conservation and community prosperity go hand in hand. For a country blessed with extraordinary natural assets, this could be the roadmap to a greener, fairer economic future.