According to Allen et al (1988), lower levels of tourism are good for the community as they help boost the economy, but as levels increase, the residents change their perceptions towards the tourists. The authors go on to suggest that the tolerance level differs between communities based on their size and resources. Despite the attractions being spread across Iceland, visitors stay in Reykjavik during their trip. The community of Reykjavik is very small and therefore must be easier to disrupt as they have a strong sense of identity. The city is also very proud of its environment and I can imagine that visitors trampling over sites to get photos is affecting the nature and the locals.
Martin- Cejas (2006), states that service quality makes up a big part of our satisfaction levels at a tourist destination and despite expecting the locals to resent us being there, any interaction I had with an Icelandic resident was only positive. This was really lovely and increased the reputation of Iceland even more as even though this increase in tourists may be destroying what Iceland is known for, the residents were still welcoming us with open arms.
It is clear to see that the mass of tourists haven't disrupted the safe and friendly identity that Iceland possesses. I think it is the relaxed and secure nature of the city that actually attracts the tourists to it and rather than destroying it, we all want to be a part of the culture. This may be why they are still accepting us as we are not there to disrupt the every day routine of the locals, however it is up to the residents and the Icelandic Government to react to the increasing amount of tourists.
Due to the poor transport links in Iceland, the most popular option to visit all the sites is to book on a specific timed coach tour that can take multiple groups at once. I assume that demand has increased for these over the years but also that the drivers rely heavily on visitors using them to explore the country. Recently, a care hire system has been introduced at the airport so that visitors can be in charge of where they go and at their own pace. This has given tour guides some competition but has only happened due to the extreme level of tourism.
Furthermore, due to attractions becoming vandalised by tourists, Iceland's parliament discussed introducing a Nature pass for 1,500 ISK that gained you access to the natural sites (Gottlieb, 2015). This would require residents having to pay as well as tourists which caused controversy around the matter. The proposal never went ahead, however the blue lagoon for example, which used to be hot water that anyone could enter, is now an expensive attraction with multiple price packages. The locals must now feel that they can't even explore their own culture and natural environment whenever they choose and there may still be risks that the above proposal could go ahead if things don't change.
Comments