forbes.com
Iceland's Overtourism: Beyond the Golden Circle
Iceland, with a population of 380,000, received almost 2.3 million visitors in 2024, mainly concentrated on the popular Golden Circle route, causing overcrowding and prompting exploration of less-visited but equally stunning regions like the Eastfjords and the North.
- What are the primary consequences of overtourism on Iceland's Golden Circle, and how does it affect the country's overall tourism strategy?
- Iceland's Golden Circle, while popular, suffers from overtourism with nearly 2.3 million visitors in 2024 against a population of 380,000, leading to overcrowding. Alternative destinations like the Eastfjords and the North offer equally stunning landscapes but with significantly fewer tourists.
- How do alternative destinations in Iceland, such as the Eastfjords and the North, compare to the Golden Circle in terms of tourism experience and environmental impact?
- The concentration of tourism in Iceland, specifically at Keflavík Airport and the Golden Circle, highlights the need for better tourism management to distribute visitors more evenly across the country. This imbalance threatens the unique natural beauty and quiet isolation Iceland offers.
- What measures can Iceland implement to manage tourism sustainably and ensure the long-term preservation of its natural environment and cultural heritage while also supporting its economy?
- Iceland's future sustainable tourism model should prioritize dispersing visitors to lesser-known regions through improved infrastructure and marketing. This will help protect the environment while offering a wider range of experiences for tourists.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames Iceland's tourism problem primarily through the lens of the Golden Circle's overcrowding. While this highlights a significant issue, the framing might inadvertently discourage visits to Iceland altogether instead of promoting responsible tourism practices and exploring lesser-known areas. The headline and introduction emphasize the negative aspects of the Golden Circle's popularity, potentially shaping the reader's perception of Iceland as an overly crowded destination.
Language Bias
The language used is generally neutral and informative. While terms like "thundering" (Gullfoss) are descriptive, they don't appear loaded or manipulative. The overall tone promotes responsible tourism, rather than sensationalizing or exaggerating the issues.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the overtourism of the Golden Circle and suggests alternative destinations. While it mentions the South, it doesn't delve into potential overcrowding or less-visited spots within that region. The Westfjords are mentioned as remote, but specific examples of potential crowds are missing. Overall, the omission of detailed analysis of crowd levels in areas beyond the Golden Circle limits a complete understanding of Iceland's tourism challenges.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the choice as either visiting the overcrowded Golden Circle or exploring the more remote regions. It doesn't acknowledge the possibility of visiting the Golden Circle responsibly (e.g., during off-peak hours or using alternative transportation) or exploring less-crowded parts of the popular areas.
Sustainable Development Goals
Overtourism in Iceland, particularly concentrated in the Golden Circle, negatively impacts the sustainable development of communities and the environment. The influx of almost 2.3 million visitors against a population of 380,000 strains infrastructure, causes overcrowding, and threatens the natural environment. Promoting alternative destinations helps alleviate pressure on popular sites, fostering sustainable tourism practices.