Some of the ideas you might discuss with your interviewer could include:

Communities with the greatest expected increase in visitors—the y axis—are likely to require more urgent investment to support tourism demands and prevent collapse and environmental degradation.
Communities with the highest return on investment—the x axis—are expected to capture more value per dollar invested, making better use of CF’s resources.
One way to prioritize communities is to look for those with both the expectation of more visitors and a healthy return on investment. Those are “B” and “G.” While their population is slightly smaller than C, F and I, the returns seem to be anywhere from two to three times higher. For example, F is a large community where the number of visitors is expected to double in size and the return is expected to be six percent. In contrast, visitor numbers in B are growing at 120 percent, and the return is greater than 13 percent. Over time, B would be a better investment.
That said, investing in larger communities, such as C and F, will deliver a positive impact to more people.
In addition, communities currently facing difficulties with managing visitor flow, even if visitors are not expected to increase, like in community J, also have a more urgent need for financial and management support.
Finally, feasibility could play a role in prioritization: communities in proximity to other priority communities would allow for bundled interventions, spreading out investment costs, impacting more people, and accelerating overall implementation.

Conservation Forever

Reveal Answer

Reveal Answer

Reveal Answer

Reveal Answer