PrepareConsult Logo

McKinsey & Company Case Study: Conservation Forever | Case Interview Practice

Medium
Other
Market Sizing
Public View

Practice with AI

Hone your skills by practicing this case with our AI-powered consultant.

Conservation Forever (CF), a global conservation NGO, is seeking to prioritise which of three candidate geographies — coastal Peru, steppe Ukraine, or mountain Uganda — should receive its first major restoration and conservation investment. The case progresses into ecotourism revenue modeling for coastal Peru and explores how to maximise visitor revenue while protecting biodiversity. A chart-based prioritisation question is also included.

- CF was founded in 2011 at the start of the UN Decade on Biodiversity, with the mission to permanently conserve large tracts of land and ocean. - Biodiversity loss is identified as a driver of global climate and economic risk, with major value implications for ecosystem services, food security, and human wellbeing. - Three candidate geographies have been shortlisted: coastal areas of Peru, steppe grasslands of Ukraine, and mountain forests of Uganda. - Large-scale conservation projects require significant upfront financing, complex legal coordination, and engagement across government, NGOs, civil society, and donors. - McKinsey has offered pro bono support to help CF prioritise geographies and activity focus areas.

CF must determine which geography to prioritise for its initial conservation and restoration investment, and - having selected coastal Peru - must now identify the most effective strategy to generate sustainable ecotourism revenue to support long-term conservation funding.

• Baseline: 5 communities × 100,000 visitors = 500,000 visitors/year; 2-day stay; $100/day spend → $100M annual revenue • Projected: 600,000 visitors (20% increase) × 4-day stay × $100/day = $240M → $140M additional revenue (140% increase) • Exhibit: Scatter plot of 10 coastal communities by expected visitor growth (y-axis) vs. ROI (x-axis) — used for pilot site selection • Community B: 120% visitor growth, >13% ROI — identified as highest priority pilot • Community F: 100% visitor growth, 6% ROI — higher absolute population impact, lower efficiency
Q1 What factors should CF consider when choosing which geography to focus its conservation efforts on?
Local economic development potential and community benefit (ecotourism, fisheries, jobs)
Biodiversity gains: endangered species, fragmentation reduction, habitat connectivity
Climate impact: carbon sequestration and avoided emissions per geography
Cost structure: land acquisition, infrastructure, operational costs, opportunity costs
Risk profile: political instability, corruption, funding availability, lack of local partners
Q2 How much additional annual ecotourism revenue will the five Peruvian communities generate five years from now?
Current baseline: 500,000 visitors × 2 days × $100 = $100M/year
Future state: 600,000 visitors × 4 days × $100 = $240M/year
Additional revenue generated: $240M − $100M = $140M/year (a 140% increase)
Q3 What ideas would maximise ecotourism revenue across the three levers (visitors, stay duration, spend per day)?
Increase visitors: targeted advertising in nearby South American markets, off-season promotions
Extend stays: package deals (5-day/4-night), multi-village itineraries organised with travel agencies
Increase spend: experience tourism (cooking classes, coral restoration tours, wildlife interactions), sponsorship programmes
Additional revenue outside model: export of value-added local products (crafts, food), seasonal event programming
Q4 Which Peruvian communities should CF prioritise for ecotourism pilots?
Communities B and G offer the best combination of high visitor growth and strong ROI — prioritise these for pilots
Larger communities (C, F) offer broader population impact despite lower ROI efficiency
Community J warrants support despite low projected visitor growth due to current strain on existing visitor management
Proximity between communities should guide bundled interventions to reduce cost per community served

• Use a multi-criteria scoring matrix to evaluate the three geographies across biodiversity, economic, risk, and cost dimensions • Weight criteria according to CF's mission priorities — biodiversity and community benefit should anchor the scoring • For Peru's ecotourism plan, build a three-lever revenue model: visitor volume × length of stay × spend per day • Pilot in high-ROI, high-growth communities (B, G) first — generate proof of concept before expanding to larger communities • Develop a community co-investment model so local residents share in ecotourism upside, ensuring social license • Create seasonal programming to reduce revenue variability and enable year-round conservation funding • Establish clear biodiversity monitoring metrics so revenue growth does not come at the cost of ecosystem health

Practice Sessions

No practice sessions have been proposed yet. Be the first to propose one!

Note: Accepted practice sessions will be available in your profile under "My Practice Sessions".

Case Materials

Loading comments...
Published June 26, 2025 • 129 views
Firm/University: McKinsey & Company
No ratings yet
0