Tourism beyond numbers

Last week, the tourism industry marked two million tourist arrivals for this year. It is a figure that signals renewed global confidence and a welcome boost to an economy still in recovery mode after the 2022 collapse. Yet it also comes with a sobering reminder. 

The ambitious target of three million visitors, set by the Government at the beginning of the year, will not be met. Tourism authorities have been quick to point to delays in the expansion of the Bandaranaike International Airport as the key reason for this shortfall. While infrastructure bottlenecks undoubtedly play a role, this moment calls for deeper reflection. What does it truly mean to chase numbers — and at what cost?

For too long, Sri Lanka’s tourism strategy has been dominated by arrival targets. Hitting big numbers makes for good headlines, but it risks masking the real questions.  Should our aim simply be to bring more tourists, or to generate more income while protecting our environment and preserving the quality of the visitor experience? Tourism, like any ecosystem, has a carrying capacity. Beyond a certain threshold, services strain, natural resources degrade, and the overall value generated begins to diminish. Growth then becomes counterproductive.

This phenomenon — over-tourism — is already visible in parts of Sri Lanka. National parks are overcrowded to the point of damaging both wildlife and visitor experience. Cultural sites, once treasured for their serenity, struggle under the weight of endless foot traffic. When tourists are herded through these places in long queues, unable to appreciate their beauty or significance, the very essence of Sri Lanka’s appeal is lost.

The tourism industry must therefore remain vigilant about the saturation point,  the moment when volume compromises value. When that happens, tourists depart with a poorer impression of the country, and service providers face burnout, rising operational costs, and shrinking margins. To safeguard the sector, policymakers and industry leaders should work together to establish clear carrying capacities for high-traffic sites. Equally important is spreading tourist arrivals both geographically and seasonally, reducing pressure on the same hotspots and allowing lesser-known regions to benefit.

The conversation around promotion and branding also demands rethinking. The private sector has long criticised the lack of cohesive and consistent marketing efforts from the Government. While this critique is valid, relying on the State alone is neither realistic nor strategic. At a time when public finances are under severe strain — with pressing obligations in welfare, healthcare, and public services — tourism promotion is an area where the private sector must assume greater leadership. With its agility, market knowledge, and access to global networks, the private sector is well-placed to drive targeted, innovative, and sustainable campaigns. Government’s role should be enabling and regulatory, ensuring standards, security, and long-term planning, rather than attempting to be the primary driver of growth.

Ultimately, Sri Lanka needs a tourism vision that prioritises quality over quantity. This means investing in infrastructure that supports eco-friendly travel, empowering local communities to participate meaningfully in the tourism value chain, and educating both visitors and operators on responsible practices. It also means shifting away from an obsession with arbitrary numerical targets.

The ambition should be to build a tourism sector that delivers high value with low impact and one that enriches the economy, protects the environment, and offers visitors authentic, meaningful experiences. Numbers may tell one part of the story, but the true measure of success lies in sustainability, resilience, and long-term benefit.