Exclusion challenging Sri Lanka tourism’s values

Sri Lanka is once again drawing global attention as an emerging travel destination, with many travel writers exploring its hidden gems. The island offers an alluring mix of sun-kissed beaches, dense wildlife, spicy cuisine, scenic tea trails and rich cultural diversity. This is only to name a few of many other factors such as warm, friendly people that are fuelling unprecedented tourist demand to the country.

Recently, the country’s natural beauty was cast into the global spotlight by a viral Instagram post from a Dutch traveller, claiming “I found Bali 2.0 in Sri Lanka.” While Sri Lanka and Bali are equally beautiful destinations, many argue that Sri Lanka being an entire country offers much broader diversity in nature, culture, and adventure that is exceptionally distinctive to the country. After decades of hardship, from civil unrest to natural disasters, Sri Lanka’s tourism industry is finally stabilising. This slower pace of development, in some ways preserved the country’s pristine environment and allowed its biodiversity to flourish. 

Arrivals for the first quarter of 2025, showed double-digit year-over-year growth, reaching 722,276 visitors. While this figure might seem modest compared to some other destinations, it’s a major milestone for this resilient island. In 2024, Sri Lanka welcomed just over two million tourists, and projections for 2025 suggest the number could rise to over three million. With the country’s ongoing economic challenges, tourism is seen as a much-needed economic lifeline. However, alongside the boom, a troubling trend has surfaced, particularly surrounding the rise of exclusionary practices in the tourism sector. 

In popular hotspots, a growing number of foreign nationals are launching tourism businesses, not all of which are registered or legally operated. Some of these establishments cater exclusively to foreigners, often excluding locals altogether. A major controversy erupted last year when a Russian nightclub in Sri Lanka promoted a “whites only” party, with the phrase “Face Controlled: White” on the poster. After public backlash, the event was cancelled and the organisers issued an apology, but the issue struck a nerve, even to get the attention of the President of the country to consider deporting visa violating tourists.

More worryingly, this discriminatory trend is being adopted by some Sri Lankans themselves. The term “suddas only” (Sinhala for “whites only”) is increasingly used to describe venues that discourage locals from entering, regardless of their economic status. Reports suggest that these practices are not limited to hotels but extend to cafés, boutiques, spas and even beach parties. According to a local tourism operator on the island’s East Coast, “Locals are perceived to be noisy. Some prices are too high and locals can’t afford foreign rates. That’s why some places claim to be for foreigners only.”

Earlier this year, a video circulated widely showing a group of Sri Lankan women being shouted at and chased out of a craft shop by a local woman insisting the shop was “for foreigners only.” The video sparked outrage online. Amid a flood of condemnation, one comment stood out: “Come on. This kind of Facebook bashing has to stop. My husband is Sri Lankan and we shop there.” Few people bothered to explain why her Sri Lankan husband was accepted by this particular craft shop. 

Sri Lankan foreign passport holders who return to visit are especially vocal about being treated as second-class citizens in their own homeland. Despite often spending more than foreign tourists, they find themselves subject to exclusionary policies.

In a powerful article titled “Apartheid in Sri Lanka? An unforgivable insult in my own land,” Dr. Gamini Edirisinghe recounts being denied entry to a tea factory in Pussellawa in the mountains for factory visit charging Rs. 2,000-per-person, he was told flatly: “Factory visits are for foreigners only.” According to him, “We were just an elderly couple, who just had tea from their centre for a fancy price. Since people don’t get high on tea and cakes, these are not preventive measures against alcohol-fuelled idiosyncrasies. What we are talking about felt like a clear-cut case of apartheid, where Sri Lankans are being reduced to second-class citizens in their own land – ironically, at the hands of those who once relied entirely on local support before the trickle of foreign tourists arrived.” 

Inclusive tourism aims to ensure that everyone, regardless of gender, ability, socioeconomic background, or identity has equal opportunities to participate in and benefit from tourism, both economically and socially. This includes men, women of different ethnic backgrounds, marginalised communities, persons with disabilities, and the LGBTQ+ community. While efforts tend to focus on workforce inclusion to address barriers rooted in social gender norms and accessibility challenges, there is insufficient emphasis on ensuring that all customers are treated with equal respect, dignity, and consideration throughout the tourism experience.

It is illegal to be discriminated against on the grounds of race, religion, language, caste, sex, political opinion, place of birth or any such grounds and there is consumer protection for Sri Lankans from being treated unfairly in access to goods and services. With Government authorities largely turning a blind eye, the danger grows that Sri Lanka tourism may alienate not just local and expatriate Sri Lankans, but also the country’s prime source market – the Indian tourists. 

Image credit: Sashi Perera @shashbomb

(The writer has extensive experience in national roles in the Sri Lanka National Tourism Organization.)