Table of Contents 1.Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Problem formulation....................................................................................................................... 2

2. Background ....................................................................................................... 2 2.1 The Physical Setting of Kangerlussuaq ........................................................................................... 2 2.2 The Climate in Kangerlussuaq ........................................................................................................ 3 2.3 The History of Kangerlussuaq ........................................................................................................ 3 2.4 The Current Tourism Situation in Kangerlussuaq ............................................................................ 5

Figure 2.4 Overview of Tourism Offers in Kangerlussuaq ................................................................ 5

3. Methodology ...................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Methods, Material, and Documentation .......................................................................................... 6

3.1.1 Data Collection Method ........................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Operationalisation .......................................................................................................................... 8 3.3 Delimitation ................................................................................................................................... 9 3.4 Source Criticism ...........................................................................................................................10

4. Theoretical Framework .................................................................................. 12 4.1 Tourism Destination Development ................................................................................................12 4.2 Experience Economy .....................................................................................................................14

5. Data .................................................................................................................. 17 5.1 Kangerlussuaq Survey ...................................................................................................................17 5.2 The Tourism Strategy of Finnish Lapland ......................................................................................20

6 Analysis ............................................................................................................. 21 6.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................21 6.2 Local Perceptions ..........................................................................................................................21

6.2.1 Accessibility and Success .......................................................................................................23 6.2.2 Improvements .........................................................................................................................24

6.3 Tourists’ Perceptions .....................................................................................................................27 6.3.1 Kangerlussuaq as a Place of Transit ........................................................................................27 6.3.2. Why visit Kangerlussuaq?......................................................................................................29 6.3.3 Kangerlussuaq as an End Destination ......................................................................................30 6.3.4 Nostalgia ................................................................................................................................33

6.4 Tourism Strategies.........................................................................................................................34 6.4.1 Kangerlussuaq as a part of a national strategy .........................................................................34 6.4.2 Kangerlussuaq and Arctic Tourism .........................................................................................36 6.4.3 Arctic Magic...........................................................................................................................38 6.4.4 Uniqueness .............................................................................................................................40

7. Discussion ........................................................................................................ 42 8. Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 46 9. References ........................................................................................................ 48

1

1.Introduction The overall topic of this project is local and global challenges within tourism, which is an

applicable topic regarding Greenland as a tourist destination. Throughout its history, Greenland has

attracted adventurers from all over the world. The country has great tourism potential, but is also

facing many challenges. For instance challenges concerning the indigenous peoples’ way of life

mixed with the demands of modernity. Thus with the traditional fishing and hunting culture

declining the request for a growing market share of the tourism industry is now more present than

ever. Greenland, in general, has experienced a steady increase of tourists over the last couple of

years and promoted many great tourism initiatives, leading to Lonely Planet awarding Greenland a

place on their Best in Travel 2016 list (Lonely Planet, n.d.). The increase in tourists coming to

Greenland has contributed to the overall economic growth of the country, and these days the

tourism sector contributes with 10 percent of this income (National Turismestrategi 2012-2015,

2012, p. 6). Specific areas of Greenland has been developed more than others in terms of attracting

tourists, and especially the capital Nuuk, East Greenland, and the Southern part of Greenland are

popular among tourists (National Turismestrategi 2012-2015, 2012, p.3). The boost of cruise ships

coming to Greenland has contributed to the increase of tourists in these areas (National

Turismestrategi 2012-2015, 2012, p. 6).

An example of this is Kangerlussuaq, which is a small settlement, located at the end of the

Sondrestrom Fjord in Western Greenland. It is known for its airport, as it is one out of two airports

in Greenland that is large enough to handle larger airplanes. The airport welcomes around 80

percent of all tourists arriving in Greenland. Kangerlussuaq is a small settlement consisting of

around 500 inhabitants, whom are all directly or indirectly dependent on the airport. The area

around Kangerlussuaq is known for its significant nature and its wildlife. Moreover, it is located

only around 25 kilometers from the inland ice, and the area is known to present great possibilities of

enjoying the Northern Lights. Nevertheless, not many people have Kangerlussuaq as their final

destination, as the majority of the tourists arriving in Kangerlussuaq are there to change flights and

then spend their vacation elsewhere.

The aim of the project is to map out the potentials for further development of tourism in the

settlement and surrounding area of Kangerlussuaq. By analysing the different perceptions of the

potential tourists and the locals in the area, this project intends to find out in what ways

Kangerlussuaq can use these potentials and become a more desirable destination for tourists

arriving in Greenland.

2

1.1 Problem formulation What are the challenges and possibilities of developing Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination seen

from the local perspective and tourist expectations, and can experiences and strategies from other

destinations be applied at Kangerlussuaq?

2. Background In order to gain a comprehensive understanding of Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination, we have

chosen to explore different aspects of Greenland’s tourism industry. Moreover, as we aspire to fully

comprehend the complexity regarding Kangerlussuaq, we bear in mind the overall scope of tourism

in Greenland.

Greenland as a tourism destination is a relatively new concept, nevertheless, it is intended to be an

important contributor to the Greenlandic economy. In general, according to an article in

Information, the aim is that tourism will be able to create new jobs and economic growth in the

future (Rotbøll, 2013). The number of tourists coming to Greenland has been steadily increasing

over the past years, for instance the visitor number increased four times between 2003 and 2013

(Taylor, 2013). However, Greenland struggles with some logistic and financial boundaries in order

to attract more tourists. The majority of tourists coming to Greenland are Danish. Greenland is an

expensive destination which naturally limits the number of tourists. In terms of logistic, it is for

instance a disadvantage that all tourists have to fly to either Copenhagen or Iceland in order to fly to

Greenland (Taylor, 2013).

2.1 The Physical Setting of Kangerlussuaq In order to fully understand Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination, it is necessary to consider the

setting of the settlement, as we assume that its unique position is either beneficial or

disadvantageous depending on the situation.

The settlement of Kangerlussuaq is located at the end of the fjord Sonderstrom in Western

Greenland around 75 kilometers north of the Arctic Circle, and “it is the only inland settlement in

Greenland and consequently does not possess the cultural features of coastal places” (Dzik, 2014, p.

58). Historically, the site of Kangerlussuaq did not attract the Intuits or Scandinavian colonists to

settle permanently in the area, due to its location far away from the coast (Dzik, 2014). As a result,

the history of the settlement is short, only dating back to 1941 when the United States established an

air base at the site. Kangerlussuaq belongs to Qeqqata municipality, and in 1992 “the Greenland

Home Rule renamed the town Kangerlussuaq, which means “the big fjord” in Greenlandic” (Nutall,

2004, p. 1061).

3

The Greenlandic ice cap covers about ⅞ of the entire country, which explains why cities and

settlements have emerged mostly in the south and in the west, where there is no ice. The area of

Kangerlussuaq has traditionally been used for hunting reindeers and arctic foxes by the Inuits, but it

has not been desirable for permanent settlement, due to its proximity to the ice cap, as “the inland

region was considered extremely dangerous: it was hunted by qivittut (human outcasts) and a great

variety of “non-empirical” creatures: ghosts, inland people, giants, animal monsters, etc.”

(Grønnow, 2009, p.191). Therefore, traditionally the Inuits only used the area of Kangerlussuaq as a

seasonal fishing and hunting area (Grønnow, 2009).

2.2 The Climate in Kangerlussuaq It is important to consider the climate in Kangerlussuaq when looking at the development of the

settlement, as it provides the area with some limitations regarding its potential as a year round

tourist destination.

The site of Kangerlussuaq is flanked by highlands, and in the surrounding area there are numerous

freshwater lakes, as well as a few saline lakes (Dzik, 2014). Kangerlussuaq has a polar tundra

climate, and “the area within 40 km of this[weather]station is covered by tundra (85%), lakes and

rivers (8%), and oceans and seas (7 %)” (Weatherspark, n.d.). A great characteristic of

Kangerlussuaq is the continental climate and its proximity to the ice cap, which makes the winter

long and cold, and the summer short. Moreover, “the dry climate combined with warm winds that

‘fall’ from the ice cap can result in temperatures of up to 30 degrees Celsius in Summer and -40

degrees in winter making it the coldest inhabited area of Greenland” (World of Greenland, n.d.).

Additionally, the area of Kangerlussuaq is characterised by having two months of total darkness in

the winter, and almost 4 months in the summer of continuous daylight (Dzik, 2014).

2.3 The History of Kangerlussuaq In terms of understanding Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination, we assume that its relatively short

history has had a big impact on its current situation, and thereby also on the tourism industry in

Kangerlussuaq. In order to understand the complexity of the tourism industry in the settlement, we

consider its history important to incorporate in our considerations. Additionally, we consider the

settlement’s airport an essential part of the history of Kangerlussuaq, which is also to be touched

upon into this project.

Sonderstrom Fjord and the area around the fjord was until 1941 a popular fishing and hunting area

for the Inuits during the summer, but it wasn’t until the Americans built an airbase during World

War II that the place became an actual settlement (Dzik, 2014).

4

During the Cold War the airbase was known as Sondrestrom Airbase and was operated by the

American Air Force. The first civilian flight to land at the airport was the ‘Polar Route’ operated by

Scandinavian Airlines between 1954 and 1965 and Kangerlussuaq was one of the fueling stops

enroute to Los Angeles (Jensen, Bisgaard & Heinrich, 2015). A transit hotel was built next to the

airport to meet the needs for passenger accommodation. This hotel is still in function - Hotel

Kangerlussuaq. While in transit, the passengers did not leave the airport and thus it was not actually

the beginning of the tourism history of Kangerlussuaq. In 1992, the Americans left Sondrestrom Air

Base in Kangerlussuaq and the airport became a civilian airport and a transport hub for Air

Greenland. The future of the settlement now relied on the business of the airport and traffic to and

from Kangerlussuaq. In 1992 journalist Linda Dreyfous wrote in the L.A Times:

“Greenland, which won home rule from Denmark in 1979, bought the base for the

equivalent of 15 cents. It plans to transform Sondrestrom into an exotic convention center

and hub for adventurous travelers interested in touring the Arctic” (Dreyfous, 1992).

The exotic convention center has not been built, but the airport is indeed still the biggest transport

hub in Greenland today. This is partly due to the more reliable weather conditions and the climate in

Kangerlussuaq, but also the location of the airport and the length of the runway. Because of the

adverse weather conditions in Greenland - especially on the Atlantic coast - passengers sometimes

experience cancelled flights to their final destinations and therefore gets the chance of spending

time in Kangerlussuaq and the surrounding area. According to Mittarfeqarfiit (Greenland Airports),

the total number of departures from Kangerlussuaq in 2014 was 134.831, many of these passengers

were in transit to other destinations in Greenland (Grønlands Selvstyre, 2015, p. 59). The route

Kangerlussuaq-Copenhagen operated by Air Greenland is the only international route from

Kangerlussuaq Airport today, but according to Air Iceland’s website, Air Iceland will start

operating between Keflavik and Kangerlussuaq in 2016 (Air Iceland, n.d.).

Since the Americans sold the airbase in 1992 there has been an ongoing debate about the future of

Kangerlussuaq Airport and its role as the main international airport in Greenland.(Netredaktionen,

2011) The airport and the runway is, according to the engineering consultancy, Sweco, in poor

conditions and needs to be maintained properly which is very costly (Dollerup-Scheibel, 2015). In

November 2015 Naalakkersuisut (the Government of Greenland) published the report Turisme:

Udvikling og Vækst gennem ændret Lufthavnsstruktur (Tourism: Development and Growth through

changed Airport Structure, translated by authors) investigating how a changed structure of airports

in Greenland could enhance the development and growth of the tourism industry (Grønlands

Selvstyre, 2015). The report suggests that by strengthening the capacity and the length of the

runways in two other airports, Ilulissat and Nuuk, it will be possible to skip the transit in

5

Kangerlussuaq. This will, according to the report, cut both the cost and travel time for passengers

travelling to Greenland and thereby making it both easier and cheaper to reach the most visited

destinations in Greenland (Grønlands Selvstyre, 2015).

2.4 The Current Tourism Situation in Kangerlussuaq The tourism situation in Kangerlussuaq today is important for this project as we consider it to be

crucial in terms of understanding Kangerlussuaq as a destination. Moreover, we consider it essential

to know the current tourism situation in Kangerlussuaq, in order to examine the limitations and

possibilities that exist within the settlement and its future as a tourist destination. The tourism

industry in the settlement of Kangerlussuaq is a fairly new business, as a result of the settlements

relatively short history. In general, nature and wildlife are fundamental features within the

settlement’s tourism offers, due to its geographical location. Kangerlussuaq’s proximity to the

inland ice, offers easy access for tourists to experience the ice cap via a 25 km dirt road (Visit

Greenland, n.d.), and essentially Kangerlussuaq is the only place in Greenland where it is possible

to drive onto the inland ice. The geographical location of Kangerlussuaq offers great opportunities

for tourists to experience the Northern Lights, which is also offered by the local tourist operators

within the settlement. Generally, the tourism industry in Kangerlussuaq offers trips to the ice cap, as

well as dog sledding, kayaking, northern lights, hiking, climbing and mountaineering, guided

sightseeing, opportunities to taste the Greenlandic gastronomy and much more (Visit Greenland,

Kangerlussuaq, n.d.). Different local tourism operators offer these different kind of excursions, and

below the figure shows what each of these different local operators offer the tourists coming to

Kangerlussuaq.

Figure 2.4 Overview of Tourism Offers in Kangerlussuaq

6

In addition to the local tourism operators, the settlement of Kangerlussuaq offers opportunities to

experience and taste the Greenlandic kitchen, for instance Hotel Kangerlussuaq has its own

restaurants that is opened all year round. Moreover, Restaurant Roklubben offers unique

opportunities to taste Greenlandic cuisine for instance muskox, reindeer, and Greenlandic halibut

(Visit Greenland Roklubben, n.d.). Moreover, four different operators offer accommodation in the

settlement of Kangerlussuaq: the Polar Lodge (hostel), the Old Camp (hostel), Hotel

Kangerlussuaq, and Kangerlussuaq Hostel (Air Greenland, n.d.). In general, the tourism season in

Kangerlussuaq is divided into two seasons, as a result of the cold climate, which is; summer season

in July and August, and winter season in March, April and October (World of Greenland, n.d.). The

majority of tourism offers in Kangerlussuaq are offered during the summer season, due to the

greater number of visitors. Moreover, Kangerlussuaq has hosted the annual Polar Circle Marathon

since 2001, which takes place in October, in 2015 there were more than 200 contestants (Polar

Circle Marathon Results, n.d.). Another initiative that is on the way in Kangerlussuaq is the ATV

track between Sisimiut and Kangerlussuaq this has the ability to open up the collaboration between

the two areas.

3. Methodology

3.1 Methods, Material, and Documentation In order to investigate Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination, this project relies upon field-related

books, articles, official tourism strategies, and academic journals along with a survey conducted in

various facebook groups. Additionally, this project will look at other Arctic destination-strategies,

in order to evaluate which parts of different tourism strategies could be applied on the development

of Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination. Influential authors and scholars within the field of tourism

have written the field-related articles that have been used in this project, and they have been

published by acknowledged publishers.

We began by introducing the physical setting and the historical background of Kangerlussuaq. This

was done in order to comprehend the evolution of Kangerlussuaq as a settlement, as well as gaining

a greater understanding of the different components that have contributed to the development of the

place.

In order to integrate theory and the tourism reality in Kangerlussuaq, we have created a survey

which has been published on the internet in facebook groups related to Greenland and

Kangerlussuaq. The survey population has been sampled from specific facebook groups

representing the target group, however the survey has also been passed on from the administrators

of the facebook groups to reach their target groups. In addition to our survey we base our project on

7

destination management and development theories and elements of elements of the tourism

strategies of Finnish Lapland, the National Tourism Strategy of Greenland and the Canadian

Northwest Territory.

3.1.1 Data Collection Method For this project’s survey the theoretical approach outlined by Alan Bryman in Social Research

Methods (2008) has been applied. Following Bryman’s reasoning this section will look further into

what is necessary to keep in mind when conducting a social survey. Richard O’Leary (2003) has

specified that “a defining feature of the survey is that it is a structured method of data collection.

Surveys collect information on the same characteristics or variable about each respondent or case”

(p.302).

Firstly, Bryman (2008) describes the most favorable way to conduct a survey, from the initially

selection of research question to the reflections on the results. According to Bryman (2008) there

are a few aspects one must consider, for instance, sample design and frame, along with what the

appropriate survey population would be. For this project the administration mode of the survey has

been through the internet, and the questions have been developed and reviewed while keeping the

goal of the project in mind.

According to Bryman (2008) there are a few different ways to go about a survey, this project,

however, applies non-probability sampling. Bryman focuses on three different kinds of non-

probability samplings; the convenience sampling, the snowball sampling, and the quota sampling.

The convenience sampling is based on availability such as close proximity to a large group within

the research population, or when a perfect opportunity presents itself. According to Bryman (2008)

“convenience samples are very common and indeed more prominent than samples based on

probability sampling” (p.183). One issue with this kind of sampling is that it is difficult to provide a

result which allows one to generalize and no definitive results can be determined, it is nonetheless a

good “springboard for further research” (Bryman, 2008, p.183). Snowball sampling is, as the name

implies, a process where the researcher will contact a smaller group, and then ask the small group to

either pass the survey on or put the researcher in contact with other people within the same survey

population. This means that there for instance “is no accessible sampling frame for the population

from which the sample is to be taken” (Bryman, 2008, pp.184-185). The trade-off of this type of

sampling is that it is unlikely to be representative, but one will quickly gain a large target group.

However, Bryman argues that since it is used more as a qualitative approach than a quantitative one,

the representativeness is less of an issue. Thirdly is the quota sampling, which especially is used by

commercial research and political opinion polls. This is a representative survey, as it is made to fit a

specific quota of the population, such as age, ethnicity, gender or socio-economic group. According

8

to Bryman (2008), this type of sampling tends to be biased as it “under-represents people in lower

social strata, people who work in the private sector and manufacturing, and people at the extreme of

incomes” (p.187).

Other aspects regarding surveys are necessary to look into, such as what Bryman refers to as sample

size and limits to generalization. The question of sample size is, according to Bryman (2008), one

that often appears, and one without a definitive answer because it depends on the scope of the topic

and whether one is doing qualitative or quantitative research. Naturally, Bryman (2008) states that

the bigger the sample size, the easier it is to generalise and the more correct the sample will be.

Questions such as time and cost and non-responses also play a role, as web-based survey platforms

can be expensive, or in case of face-to-face surveys one might have to travel a long way to meet a

sample size large enough. Non-responses are at play as a factor of insecurity, thus when a

researcher sends out a survey some might choose not to finish it, give unusable answers or

misunderstand some questions. According to Bryman (2008) all types of surveys have limits to

generalisation, because basically it is only possible to say something general about the sample

group and not the general population. There are also other limits such as time, e.g. at what year did

the respondent for instance travel to Kangerlussuaq.

Regarding our survey, we are aware of its limitations, which we have taken into account when

conducting our analysis. Originally, we only intended to make a survey in English, as it is the

language of this project, but due to language limitation within Greenland and the fact that many

from our target audience were found in Danish speaking groups, we chose to translate the survey

into Danish as well. This proved to be more sensible than we had imagined, as the majority of the

answers in our survey have been conducted in Danish.

We are aware of the limitations of posting the survey on facebook groups only. For instance there is

the possibility of people having fake identities, and there is no way of checking whether they are the

persons they pretend to be. Additionally, when conducting surveys online, there is a risk of people

misunderstanding the questions or posing untrue answers in order to further their own interests.

These are however limitations unavoidable, but they have been taken into account, as we have been

critical and skeptical to all answers before applying them to our analysis.

3.2 Operationalisation We have chosen to investigate Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination, as it has a unique and

interesting history within Greenlandic tourism. A general theme of this project is perceptions, both

from tourists’ and locals’ point of views, therefore it is important to stress how this project defines

perceptions. In this project we define perceptions as the comprehension of individuals’ perspectives.

Moreover, we consider perceptions in this context not to be something related entirely to senses, but

9

rather as observations by the individual in terms of how objects and situations are understood,

regarded, or interpreted.

The idea of this project emerged from our general wondering about why Kangerlussuaq is not

already a full functioning end destination. The expenses of traveling to Greenland are significantly

higher than to many other tourist destinations, and the change of flight in Kangerlussuaq only adds

to the cost and time spent. However, the nature around Kangerlussuaq has the possibility of

attracting a variety of visitors, which is why we have chosen to investigate this specific area. In

order to obtain the full understanding of the conditions in and perceptions of Kangerlussuaq we

chose to construct a survey. This survey was conducted with the goal of investigating both the

local’s and the tourists’ perceptions of Kangerlussuaq, and was created with inspiration from

Bryman (2008) as he is an acknowledged scholar within the field of social research methods.

Moreover, we use the two strategies; Grønlands National Turismestrategi 2012-2015 (Greenland

National Tourism Strategy, translated by authors)(2012) and Lapland - Above Ordinary (Luiro,

2013) to illustrate the potentials of tourism development in Kangerlussuaq and to comprehend the

official perspective of the development. Thus these strategies generate examples that could be

applied in Kangerlussuaq. Additionally, in order to support and explain the responses from the

survey and the tourism strategies we apply various theories from the field of tourism destination

development, more specifically peripheral destination theory, destination development theory as put

forth by Haugland, Ness, Grønset and Aarstad (2011) and experience economy theory by Pine and

Gilmore (1999). These theories are chosen as they cover a wide theoretical spectrum, as they are

highly relevant in order to explain potential tourism development issues and possibilities in

Kangerlussuaq. Additionally, we discuss which local and global challenges emerge when

developing Kangerlussuaq as a destination. Furthermore, we discuss the potential initiatives in

Kangerlussuaq, which can be developed in the future and make Kangerlussuaq a unique, desirable

and extraordinary destination.

3.3 Delimitation The subject of this project leaves one with unlimited opportunities and directions to take. In this

section, we will mention some of the choices that we have excluded, in order to maintain a more

narrow focus to fit within the scope of the project.

Kangerlussuaq Airport as a main transport hub in Greenland is often debated and the future of the

airport is often discussed by politicians. We have briefly mentioned the background of this debate

and acknowledge the uncertainty it creates, but in this project we operate under the assumption that

the airport will remain the main airport in Greenland.

10

It would have been beneficial to this project if we had produced interviews with stakeholders in

Kangerlussuaq in order to get a complete overview of the locals’ perceptions and the present-day

tourism industry. However, we chose to exclude interviews from this project due to time

limitations. We could have chosen to do a more thorough tourist segment analysis, however, we

have chosen to focus on other aspects.

Although a recurrent aspect of the discussion within tourism development in Greenland has been to

compare Greenland to Iceland, we have chosen not to. Additionally, we have chosen not to look at

cruise tourism, because even though many cruise tourists start their journey by flying to

Kangerlussuaq, but then move quickly on to their cruise ships. Lastly, we have not chosen to put

our focus on cultural aspects and the matter of authenticity in tourism. We do, however, touch upon

the aspect of authenticity in tourism and tourism productions as discussed and put forth by the

anthropologist Edward M Bruner in Culture on Tour: Ethnographies of travel (2005) and relevant

points drawn by the Stephen Williams and Alan A. Lew in Tourism Geography: Critical

Understandings of Place, Space and Experience (2015). This project puts its emphasis on

destination management and development of tourism in Kangerlussuaq and the periphery region of

the Arctic.

3.4 Source Criticism In order to achieve a certain level of reliability, we have attempted to be critical towards the sources

of this project. Concerning articles, it is noteworthy to state that the writers might pursue an

underlying agenda, and therefore use examples to substantiate the writer’s own project. We have

used Social Research Methods by A.Bryman as the main source for survey theory, which is an

essential part of this project. This book has been used, as we believe that it is representative and

relies on many independent sources. Concerning the academic journals used, we have tried to set up

relevant criteria for judging the sources’ reliability. The journals used are retrieved from verified

databases with restricted access, which demonstrate that they have been approved, and published by

a reliable and acknowledged publisher. Additionally, we have evaluated our sources’ sources to

confirm their credibility.

In order to obtain an adequate understanding of the tourism situation in Kangerlussuaq, we chose to

publish our survey on selected facebook groups on the internet. All of these groups have, to a

certain extent, an unambiguous link to the tourism industry in Kangerlussuaq. As this project seeks

to, among other things, gain insights into locals’ perceptions of the tourism industry, we chose to

publish our survey in the closed facebook group Kangerlussuaq - Sdr. Strømfjord. The members of

this group either live, work or have lived or worked in Kangerlussuaq. We are aware of the fact that

11

the members of this group may not have answered our survey with complete honesty or may have

pursued their own agenda. Nevertheless, as the group is a closed one and all members need to be

approved, we consider the group to be reliable. We chose this specific group, as we believed that it

consisted of local people, who all have a personal connection to Kangerlussuaq. Moreover, it was

essential for us to gain insights into local people’s perceptions of the tourism industry in

Kangerlussuaq, as we have not personally visited Kangerlussuaq.

In order to gain insights into tourists’ perceptions of Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination, we

published our survey to different facebook group all connected to the tourism industry in

Greenland. We published on the following facebook pages: Greenland Travel, Visit Greenland,

Grønlands Rejsebureau, Icelandair, I love Greenland - the Travel Community of Greenland.com.

All of these groups are open facebook pages and everyone can see the content on these pages, as

well as become a member without any preceding approval. We have been in contact with all of the

administrators of these groups, before publishing our survey on their pages in order to get it

approved. All of them allowed us to published our survey on their pages. However, it should be

noted that we only were allowed to publish our survey on their visitor pages, which we believe

generally are not visited by all the members of the facebook group, as it is not the organisation

behind the facebook group that publish content here. Rather it is people who have an interest or

opinion they want to share that look at the visitor pages. As these groups are open, everyone are

welcome to comment or become a member, however we believe that the answers we have received

are genuine, as people needed to actively make a decision about answering our survey. They were

not forced to answer, but we believe that people who have chosen to answer our survey, have a real

interest in the tourism industry in Greenland in general or specifically in Kangerlussuaq.

According to Bryman (2008), the answers of the respondents in a survey cannot say something

general about a population. Regarding our own survey, we are therefore aware of the limitations

within our respondents’ statements and that they do not necessarily represent the general opinion

of the population and the visitors of Kangerlussuaq. As the intention with this survey was to give us

impressions of Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destinations and which development opportunities exist

within the settlement, we believe that the survey is representative.

Finally, we realise that this survey has only been published to a limited amount of facebook groups,

however we chose these specific groups, as we believe that they represent a truthful and broad

scope of different people, who all have a connection to Greenland to some extent.

Conclusively, we have been aware of the fact that our sources might be biased, and therefore they

might not present all facts and views objectively. Especially as we apply tourism strategies

published by government or destination management organisations (DMOs), who only present a

12

narrow and positive aspect of a destination strategy. These tourism strategies are naturally filled

with good intentions, however we are aware that they are not necessarily able to live up to their

intentions. It has however been crucial to the project to apply these strategies in order to gain a

versatile project.

4. Theoretical Framework In order to get a better understanding of how to strengthen and develop tourism in Kangerlussuaq, a

theoretical approach based on different destination development theories have been chosen.

First, an introduction to the three dimensions of tourism development as described by Sven

Haugland, Håvard Ness, Bjørn-Ove Grønseth and Jarle Aarstad (2011) which focuses on the

destination's competences and resources, to strengthen and develop the cooperation between

stakeholders within the destination and to watch and learn from other successful destinations.

Secondly, we will introduce the concept of ”Experience Economy” by Pine and Gilmore (1999).

According to them, it is crucial for an attractive tourist destination to be able to provide unique and

memorable experiences to the tourists and guests, and that a destination's success lies within its

ability to distinguish itself from its competitors.

Thirdly, we present the theoretical framework of peripheral tourism, as presented by various

authors, and applied to other destinations located in the Arctic, both physically but also remote from

political decisions. The main argument is that it there are important elements one have to take into

consideration when initiating tourism development in a peripheral destination, and without these

considerations the destination will decline or the local population will suffer under the strains of the

tourists.

4.1 Tourism Destination Development As this project aims to look at the settlement of Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination, the

following section will outline the multilevel framework of a tourism destination in terms of

development, as established by Sven A. Haugland, Håvard Ness, Bjørn-Ove Grønseth and Jarle

Aarstad in Development of Tourism Destination: An Integrated Multilevel Perspective (2011).

When looking at the development of a tourism destination, Haugland points out that there are three

areas, which are impacting destination development, and “these are: destination capabilities,

coordination at the destination level and inter-destination bridge ties” (Haugland, Ness, Grønseth &

Aarstad, 2011, p.268). These three areas are connected to each other, and thereby have an indirect

impact on destination development (Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad, 2011). In general, a

tourism destination can be studied as several co-producing actors, which are responsible for a

13

mixture of different services, and which are all part of a complex network (Haugland, Ness,

Grønseth & Aarstad, 2011). Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad highlight that it is crucial to look

at a destination as a complex network, as well as taking into account “the challenges of developing

strategies involving a large number of firms and other actors such as, for example, local and

regional authorities” (Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad, 2011, p.269). Regarding destination

capabilities, Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad argue that within a tourism destination, the

multiple actors must share their capabilities and cooperate with one another, as “capabilities may

thus reside at higher levels than the individual actor and represent a network property” (Haugland,

Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad, 2011, p.273). This is a challenge, as the resources and competencies

within the destination usually are scattered between several actors. Additionally, it can be beneficial

for all actors within a tourism destination if they collaborate in terms of creating a “consistent

cognitive image based on shared attributes” (Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad, 2011, p.273),

rather than focusing only on their individual image in relations to customers. Moreover, Haugland,

Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad specify that this is the very first step in terms of developing a destination

brand, and that the destination image “should reflect the geographic area as well as the actors

located in the area. This image should function as an umbrella linking firms and others actors to a

common image” (Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad, 2011, p.274).

Additionally, coordination at the destination level is also essential in terms of tourism development,

as it is beneficial. However, it is usually difficult to establish coordination between small

companies as “companies may lack necessary financial and managerial resources to establish

coordination, and managers in companies often have limited time to devote to such activities

(Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad, 2011, p.275). Moreover, it can be difficult for companies to

agree about the costs and benefits of such initiatives, and they can also be unwilling to invest in

them, because they cannot see the benefits. Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad suggest looking at

the retailing and service sectors, as they have responded “to similar challenges by implementing

vertical and horizontal integration, linking companies closer to each other and thereby enabling

closer coordination” (Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad, 2011, p.275). Closer coordination can

for instance be done through governance structures, contracts, and common ownership (Haugland,

Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad, 2011).

Lastly, inter-destination bridge ties are also important in terms of development of a tourism

destination, as it can be beneficial for the destination as a unity, as well as individual actors to be

connected to the wider region and other destinations in general, because “such connections can be

valuable sources for exchange of information and knowledge” (Haugland, Ness, Grønseth &

Aarstad, 2011, 278). These ties can be between actors, which are operating at different destinations

14

or between common external actors, for instance consulting companies, marketing firms, etc.

(Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad, 2011). Additionally, through theses ties less developed

destination can thereby obtain information and knowledge from more professional destinations

(Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad, 2011).

4.2 Experience Economy There are different ways of addressing challenges when designing and creating a successful tourist

destination. One way of addressing the task is to focus on creating unique experiences that can help

attracting visitors and guests to the destination.

In The Experience Economy : Work is Theatre & Every Business a Stage, Joseph Pine and James H.

Gilmore (1999) define what they see as important factors when trying to attract customers or

‘guests’ as they call them to visit attractions, sights or companies. In the book they introduce

‘experiences’ as “the fourth economic offering” (Pine & Gilmore, 1999, p.2) and the importance of

creating experiences that make an impact on people and leave good memories about the experience

for the future. According to them, there are 4 kinds of economic offerings;; ‘goods’, ‘commodities’,

‘service’ and ‘experiences’ (Pine & Gilmore, 1999, pp. 5-13). Their emphasis is on the latter, the

experience economy, and in what way the experience economy is a useful approach when designing

attractions and attracting more visitors to tourist destinations. Pine & Gilmore (1999) explain how it

is important that the customers feel like guests when visiting a business or a destination and that

companies are providers of experiences and not just services. The uniqueness and the personal

design of an offered experience have great importance when it comes to making a success (Pine &

Gilmore, 1999). They introduce the concept “staging an experience” and “show how staging an

experience in line with customers’ needs is crucial for differentiating oneself from competitors”

(Mehmetoglu & Engen, 2011, p. 240).

Moreover, they divide the experience economy into four different ‘realms’: ‘the entertaining’- to

sense- , ‘the educational’ - to learn- , ‘the escapist’- to do- and ‘the esthetic’ - to be there (Pine &

Gilmore, 1999, p. 31-31). In order for an experience to be considered a good experience that makes

an impact on the people experiencing it, it should, to some extent, involve and incorporate all four

realms. They also divide the experiences into those where the customers are active and

participating, and those where they are passive and receiving. Experiences should both be intense

and unique in order for the customers to really want to engage and “greatly value the offering

because its value lie within them where it remains long afterward” (Pine & Gilmore, 1999, p. 13).

Mehmetoglu & Engen (2011) have tested the theory of experience economy on two Norwegian

tourist attractions and found the model and the theory to be very useful and that

15

“(...) there are implications for how organisations within the tourism industry should think in

regard to creating and developing their products and services. In order to meet the market

needs and demands, it is important to create and ‘stage’ experiences so that they capture the

essence of the four dimensions (feeling, learning, being, and doing)” (Mehmetoglu &

Engen, 2011, p. 250).

Creating a ‘staged’ experience’ as Mehmetoglu and Engen (2011) mention above, naturally brings

forward the question of authenticity and authentic experiences in tourist productions. Edward M

Bruner approaches the question of the meaning and importance of authenticity in tourist

productions in his book Culture on Tour: Ethnographies of Travel (2005): “Authenticity is a red

herring to be examined only when the tourists, the locals, or the producers themselves use the term”

(Bruner, 2005, p. 5). In his book he presents the idea of understanding tourist attractions for what

they are and not what they represent, and states that authenticity as a concept cannot merely be

understood from an objective point of view. (Bruner, 2005).

4.3 Peripheral Tourism Development This section outlines some theories of peripheral tourism development. This is applicable to the

settlement of Kangerlussuaq, however no scholarly work has yet been published with this focus.

The section uses inputs from Peter Keller (1987), Oksana Grybovych and Delmar Hafermann

(2010), Gianna Moscardo (2005), Stewart, Draper & Johnston (2005) and Malcolm J. Anderson

(1991), these scholars have looked into peripheral tourism development, arctic tourism, and the case

of Canada’s Northwest Territory (NWT), which is a good example of tourism development in a

peripheral region. Additionally, much more work has been published about Canada, and this

knowledge and these experiences are important to take into consideration when looking into

tourism development in Kangerlussuaq. The Northwest Territory is located in close proximity to

Greenland, only separated by the Baffin Bay, thus they share the same climate and the same

limitations of their tourist seasons. Already in the 1980s Keller (1987) stated that the NWT

experienced an “increased industrial diversification into tourism” (p.20), even though the region is

peripheral and what Keller calls ‘disadvantaged.’ Stewart, Draper, and Johnston (2005) understand

the interest in peripheral tourism in the Arctic, as they note that it is “the last great wilderness”

(p.286), making it desirable, exclusive and unique for tourists.

The NWT is clearly a peripheral destination, and within the aspect of accessibility Kangerlussuaq

might not be as peripheral as other Greenlandic destinations. However, Moscardo (2005) explains

that peripheral tourism is about more than physical location, it should also include political, social

and economic aspects. To his definition he adds:

16

“Peripheral regions typically: have low levels of economic vitality and are dependent on

traditional industries are rural and geographically remote have aging and declining

populations are reliant on imported technology and information are remote from decision

making and lack political power have poor infrastructure and amenities” (Moscardo, 2005,

p.27).

Therefore it is common that peripheral regions search for possibilities to improve their society, and

here the prospect of tourism shows a potential. Additionally, it is natural that the peripheral regions

view their area as unique and feel that they are able to create extraordinary experiences for the

tourists coming from the outside, this is an aspect where “geography matters” (Anderson, 1991,

p.220). Another aspect where ‘geography matters’ is within the political structure, Anderson (1991)

explains;

“(...) tourism unfolds in unique ways which reflect the underlying political structure and

processes that serve to shape the institutional control of tourism development […] Not only

must we be cognizant of the geographically differentiated tourism product, we must stress to

policy-makers the necessity for regions to be able to control their own development process”

(Anderson, 1991, p.220).

Therefore it is important that the tourism development is supported by the local community, and

comes from within, or as Anderson suggests, is established on a regional level. Keller (1987) also

highlights the importance of the tourism development staying on the local or regional level.

Keller applies a four phases cycle of tourism development in order to explain that every destination

goes through different phases where each phase attract “different typologies of consumers,

producers, and regulating authorities” additionally each phase brings different impacts which

depends on the “growth cycle” and “the hierarchy” represented (Keller, 1987, p.26). The four

phases are called discovery, local control, institutionalism and crises period. It is argued that the

development will start with small scale enterprises involving locals who are satisfied with a small

profit, and therefore “the involvement of authorities is minimal or absent at this stage” (Keller,

1987, p.23). Keller argues that most destinations or initiatives will stay in the first phase of

discovery, and only the destinations “which promise considerable financial returns […] will mature

to experience all four stages of the growth cycle” (Keller, 1987, p.23). Keller’s argument is that

“through time, as visitor volume increases, different hierarchies of authorities take up the leading

role in the decision-making process (...). As the hierarchy of authority changes, so does the source

of capital and supply of infrastructure” (Keller, 1987, p.25), and the more profitable the destination

becomes, the further away the decision making power will be located. This is what Keller (1987)

calls the centre-periphery conflict. Keller elaborates, “development thus often leads to the

17

peripheral tourism industry being ultimately controlled, managed, and possibly exploited by the

developed industrial core regions, turning the peripheries into ‘the sacrificial lambs of the tourism

consuming centres’” (Keller, 1987, p.20). The centre-periphery conflict thus appears when the

decision-making power is out of the periphery authority’s hands, however it can also evolve if the

periphery authority “lacks an understanding of the tourism-development process” (Keller, 1987,

p.21). This is why development strategies are essential within peripheral destinations, because

without these the destination will lose control with the development, and there might be no one left

to take the interests of the locals into perspective.

Keller questions whether an ideal strategy exists, however he does suggest two different version;

first the control over decision making, and second the limited development strategy. Keller (1987)

emphasise the importance of a local population that is ”trained and experienced in the field of

tourism” (p. 26) and that the periphery avoids an ”external take over of development control” (p.

27).

A third approach which Keller presents is “to rely on external expertise, at least in the short term, to

provide the capital for the investment, to implement and manage immediate development needs,

and to assist in the training of the resident population” (Keller, 1987, p.30), within this approach

Keller also adds that it might be preferable to create education or training centers for the local

population in order to maintain local knowledge within the destination.

5. Data 5.1 Kangerlussuaq Survey In order to gain insights into tourists’ perceptions of Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination, we have

chosen to create our own survey, in the interest of retrieving realistic and truthful answers from the

participants. Our survey has been created by using the guidelines stated by Bryman (2008), in order

to make it coherent and proper. Only three questions of the survey were slightly personal, and had

to be answered by all the respondents; sex, age and nationality, this was done for the sake of

retrieving information about the respondents, thus excluding characteristic personal features about

the participants. However, as we wish to keep the respondents anonymous, but in the same time be

able to reference them, we have chosen to identify each respondent with a timestamp. Each

timestamp consists of a date and an exact time which refers to the moment when the respondent

answered the survey. The date and time are not important in themselves, but only as a tool to

identify and separate each respondent, additionally the answers along with the timestamps are to be

found in appendix 1.

18

All the questions of the survey were obligatory to answer for all the respondents, however it was

optional if they chose to write any comments to the questions. This was done in order to force the

respondents to reply to the survey, in order to prevent us from having to receive answers without

any content. The first question the respondents got was “Would you like to visit Greenland?” which

was the point of departure for all the participants. Moreover, we made a clear division in the survey

between the locals and the tourists, by asking “Have you been to Kangerlussuaq?” In their answers

to this question, the respondents had to be more specific in terms of which circumstances they were

connected to Kangerlussuaq, which enabled us to make a clear distinction between the locals and

the tourists’ answers to our survey. Figure 5.2 provides an overview of which questions the

respondents had to answer. As in most surveys each specific answer will lead to different questions,

thus each respondent got more personalized questions based on their previous answer. This was

done in order to obtain a better insight in the respondent’s perception and in order to gain a more

substantial survey. Figure 5.2 takes one through all the questions with a departure from the blue

starting point of sex, age and nationality question and whether the respondent have been to

Greenland, from here the ‘yes’ or ‘no’ takes the respondent in different directions. The questions

does however interlace as the respondents who has not been to Greenland, but would like to go, are

taken to the same questions as the respondents who have been to Greenland.

19

20

5.2 The Tourism Strategy of Finnish Lapland In the Tourism Strategy of Finnish Lapland from 2011-2014 (Lapland - Above Ordinary, n.d. ) the

emphasis is put on “Arctic Magic” and “Pure Madness” – branding Lapland as the cleanest corner

of Europe. The Regional Council of Lapland has actively worked on creating and developing

tourism in order to keep jobs and bring more business opportunities to the region. They have

supported the building of holiday resorts and have visioned how these resorts can bring tourists and

business to the area. Moreover, they have also succeeded in branding the area as a christmas and

family friendly destination and have made the Santa Claus Village, Rovaniemi, situated on the

border of the Arctic Circle into a very popular destination.

Tourism in Lapland is important for the economy of the area and another well-known resort is the

Igloo West Village in Kakslauttannen some 250 kilometers from the capital Rovaniemi where it is

possible for the guests to watch the northern lights from their bed in a personal luxury glass igloo

(Kakslautannen Arctic Resort, n.d.).

According to the strategy of 2011-2014 the regional council of Lapland had decided to invest in the

tourist industry and the building of tourist resorts in order to make tourism an even better business

and thus ensure jobs for the inhabitants. Finnish Lapland is making use of “8 seasonal periods” and

by doing so ensuring more high seasons for tourism in the area.(Lapland Above Ordinary)

In many ways Finnish Lapland resembles parts of Greenland in climate and nature. The Santa Claus

Village and capital of Lapland, Rovaniemi, is situated close to the Arctic Circle like Kangerlussuaq.

According to Finnish statistics there has been a small but steady growth in tourism in Lapland

during the last 20 years (Statistics Finland, 2015).

5.4 Greenland's National Tourism Strategy 2012-2015 In this strategy the emphasis is put on how to insure a financial, social and sustainable growth

within Greenland, as the tourism industry will be a very important sector in the future. The

Government of Greenland is working towards creating jobs within the tourism industry, which will

then open up for new investments. Moreover, the Government of Greenland wants to strengthen the

general diversity of Greenland and reinforce the different regions’ uniqueness from one another

(National Turismestrategi, 2012, p.3). Furthermore, a broad topic within the strategy is the cruise

ship tourists, which is a group of tourists that has expanded rapidly the last couple of years

(National Turismestrategi, 2012, p. 8), and the Government of Greenland has several initiatives

regarding this particular group of tourists e.g. to increase the number and sizes of ships as well as

expanding the season (National Turismestrategi, 2012, p.10).

21

Additionally, the need for new tourist experiences is also mentioned as something important to

handle, in order to attract more people to visit Greenland. Furthermore, the management and

accessibility of Greenland are also topics that are touched in the strategy. The Government of

Greenland specified in the strategy the need for improvement in terms of legislation, in order to

make long term investments and to carry out new experiences for the tourists (National

Turismestrategi, 2012, p. 17).

6 Analysis 6.1 Introduction This analysis will be divided into two different categories of perceptions, specifically with a focus

on the locals’ understanding of tourists and tourism in Kangerlussuaq and the tourists’ perceptions

of and experiences with the area. Hereafter we will look at and compare the different approaches to

tourism destination strategy presented by the Greenlandic Government in National Turismestrategi

2012-2015 (2012) (Greenland National Tourism Strategy 2012-2015) and in the Regional Council

of Lapland’s Lapland - above ordinary (Luiro, 2013).

Firstly, we will look into the local perceptions of the tourism industry in the settlement of

Kangerlussuaq as presented in our survey. Additionally, we will examine the tourism strategy of

Greenland 2012-2015, in order to capture a diverse picture of the tourism industry and the role of

the locals herein. Secondly, we will look into tourists’ perceptions of tourism in Kangerlussuaq. The

data from our survey has provided us with valuable insights in terms of tourists’ expectations and

experiences within the destination, as well as recommendations in terms of tourism in

Kangerlussuaq. Lastly, we will study and analyse Kangerlussuaq and other Arctic destinations in

terms of tourism development and strategies, in order to explore whether initiatives from these

destination can be applied into the tourism setting of Kangerlussuaq.

6.2 Local Perceptions When examining our survey, we noted that out of the 220 participants, 37 stated that they live in the

settlement of Kangerlussuaq. Out of these 37 local inhabitants, 28 of them want to have as many

tourists as possible coming to Kangerlussuaq. While 8 of them want more tourists coming, but not

too many. One of these locals is satisfied with the current stream of tourists. This indicates that the

majority of the local population are open and willing to welcome more tourists and new tourism

initiatives, which is in accordance with the National Turismestrategi 2012-2015 (2012) created by

the Government of Greenland, Naalakkersuisut, “Naalakkersuisut sees tourism and experiences as a

new-growth area in the years to come. Greenland possess great opportunities for this growth” (p.3,

22

translated by authors). Moreover, the respondents’ answers indicate that they have ideas on how to

increase the number of tourists and how to improve the tourists’ experiences when visiting

Kangerlussuaq, as they had to answer questions such as “Which improvements could be done in

order for Kangerlussuaq to become a more attractive end destination?”, “Could you imagine

Kangerlussuaq as an end destination rather than a transit point?”, and “Why would you recommend

Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination?”.

For instance 29 out of 37 locals could imagine Kangerlussuaq as an end destination. 8 local

respondents have stated that they cannot see Kangerlussuaq as an end destination, because of the

lack of tourist activities, accommodation, dining options, and lack of infrastructure within the

settlement. This demonstrates that there is a local awareness of the limitations of Kangerlussuaq as

a tourist destination. However, the majority of the local respondents see possibilities in

Kangerlussuaq as a destination, due to the nature in the area, its close proximity to the ice cap, great

opportunities to experience the Northern Lights, as well as Kangerlussuaq being the only place in

Greenland where you can drive onto the ice cap. One local respondent has noted,

“The nature is different from the rest of Greenland in many ways. The many roads make it

possible for people of all ages to experience the sights around the area and since you don’t

have to get a domestic flight to another destination, the price is kept down” (Appendix 1,

23/11/2015 16:46:44, translated by authors).

In terms of developing Kangerlussuaq as a destination, the uniqueness of the location of the

settlement can be beneficial to a further tourism development when focusing on creating memorable

experiences for tourists. According to Pine and Gilmore (1999) this uniqueness is an important

driver when a destination wants to position itself as a place worth visiting. Additionally, some

locals see possibilities in terms of developing the infrastructure in the surrounding area, for instance

they support building a road between Kangerlussuaq and Sisimiut, which has been a topic for many

years in the municipality (Olsen, 2015). Moreover, the local respondents point out the peaceful and

quiet atmosphere in Kangerlussuaq, as another reason for them to imagine the settlement as a tourist

destination. Nevertheless, according to one local “there is more to see and experience in the coastal

areas of Greenland” (Appendix 1, 24/11/2015 13:25:39, translated by authors) and another local

states that he sees limitations in terms of developing Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination,

“The settlement does not have the capacity to host mass tourism. I think you have to be local

to be sure to experience the great characteristics of Kangerlussuaq. It is obviously not

possible to book neither the occurrence of the Northern Lights nor the appearance of

reindeers and muskoxen, just because of the wish of a few tourists” (Appendix 1,

23/11/2015 23:24:05, translated by authors)

23

However, these perceptions are just from a few local respondents in the survey, which makes it a

minority point of view. Nevertheless, these different perceptions are important to bear in mind,

when talking about Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination. Tourists coming to Kangerlussuaq might

expect to witness indigenous culture in the settlement, however as it is a relatively new settlement,

it is not perceived entirely as a traditional settlement by the locals respondents, eg.,”It

[Kangerlussuaq] has everything except for the multi-colored houses” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015

19:10:40, translated by authors).The lack of the multi-colored houses in Kangerlussuaq could

indicate an absence of what is normally understood as a sign of traditional Greenlandic culture.

Given the fact that Kangerlussuaq was founded as an airbase in the 1940s and did not exist as a

prior settlement before then, it can be difficult for Kangerlussuaq to live up to the expectations that

some tourists might bring with them about the meeting with the authentic Greenlandic culture. The

anthropologist Edward M Bruner, touches upon this paradox in his Culture on Tour: Ethnographies

of Travel “(...) although pretour tourist tales structure the engagement, the final meaning for the

tourists, locals and producers is not given a priori but emerges in a dialogic interplay during their

interactions in the borderzone” (Bruner, 2005, p. 17). This interplay in the border zone is important

to keep in mind when looking at a destination such as Kangerlussuaq, where the pretour tourist tales

and the tourists’ expectations may not live up to the actual travel experience.

6.2.1 Accessibility and Success In general, the local respondents of the survey have made long and valuable comments, which have

provided us with useful information and advices regarding Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination.

One of the local respondents has pointed out how cheap it is to travel to Kangerlussuaq compared to

other destinations in Greenland, “One of the reasons is that it is the cheapest way to experience a

little of Greenland” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 16:15:09, translated by authors). Additionally, another

local respondent state,

“There is easy access from and to Europe, and here you can experience what Greenland has

to offer, without having to buy tickets to the coast. However, you have to do research prior

to the trip in order to match your expectations and what you can experience, as

Kangerlussuaq is not the center of the universe” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 16:32:18,

translated by authors).

This local respondent’s answer demonstrates how crucial it is for the tourists coming to

Kangerlussuaq to match their expectations to the area, as it is a small settlement in the Northern

hemisphere. Anderson (1991) writes about the Canadian arctic tourism that “the ‘arctic image’ is

often the antithesis of tourist expectations” (p.214) because, as he explains “little tourist activity, for

24

example, takes place in winter, due to extreme cold temperatures, arctic winds and few hours of

daylight” (Anderson, 1991, p.214). Instead most of the tourism activity takes place during the

summer months, and he stresses how important it is that both tourists as well as travel agents

understand the realities in order for the destination development to be successful (Anderson, 1991).

Another local respondent points out the easy accessibility to Kangerlussuaq due to the airport,

“Easy access from Copenhagen, very easy access to the nature that already starts at the

airport, which is very different compared to many other places in Greenland, where either a

boat or a car is necessary in order to reach your final destination” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015

17:00:50, translated by authors)

This accessibility for tourists is important for Kangerlussuaq in terms of surviving as a destination,

because it provides the area with numerous possibilities in terms of tourism development, as it is

relatively easy for tour operators to approach the tourists when they arrive in the settlement. This is

also mentioned in the Greenland National Tourism Strategy, which states some challenges that

needs to be settled, e.g. “the need for adapting new accessibility scenarios” (National

Turismestrategi 2012-2015, 2012, p. 4, translated by authors). Additionally, this accessibility is also

crucial in terms of branding Kangerlussuaq in the future as a tourist destination, as it can open up

for new and different kinds of tourists. For instance, Kangerlussuaq can be branded as a cheaper

alternative and destination compared to the usual Greenlandic tour. Haugland, Ness, Grønseth &

Aarstad (2011) writes how important destination capabilities are in terms of destination

development. It is a part of three different components, which Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad

points out is crucial in terms of destination development, which are, “destination capabilities,

coordination at the destination level and inter-destination bridge ties” (Haugland, Ness, Grønseth &

Aarstad, 2011, p. 268). The airport in Kangerlussuaq that provides easy access to the settlement can

be identified as one of these destination capabilities, which is an important factor when talking

about destination development according to Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad.

6.2.2 Improvements Regarding improvements, the local respondents had the option to choose from different categories,

which we had stated in the survey, e.g. improvement of accommodation, improvement of dining

options, improvement of infrastructure, better and more opportunities for tourist activities, or other

things, which they were able to comment on. We chose to focus on the traditional tourist needs, and

we assumed that the locals in the area would have knowledge and an opinion about this,

additionally we gave the local respondents the opportunity to present their own recommendations.

For instance, 24 out of the 37 local respondents responded the need for improvement of

25

accommodation, while 25 out of the 37 pointed out the need for improvement of dining

opportunities. Moreover, 13 out of 37 believe that there is a need for improvement of infrastructure

in Kangerlussuaq, at the same time 17 out of 37 responded that there is a need for better and more

opportunities for tourists activities in the area. 9 out of the 37 local respondents gave additionally

recommendations and their own thoughts regarding improvements in Kangerlussuaq, for instance

they suggest general improvements such as lower prices and more tourist guides. Also, they gave

specific recommendations such as “A road to Sisimiut will provide great opportunities for cabins,

campground, and perhaps a wilderness hotel along the road” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 23:24:05,

translated by authors). The idea of a wilderness hotel, as presented by one of the respondents is

backed up by Stewart, Draper and Johnston (2005) as they argue that the

“Polar regions symbolize the world’s last great wildernesses, so it is not surprising that

much research has focused on the effects of tourism activity, particularly the increasing

numbers of tourists, on what is perceived as the fragile polar environment” (Stewart, Draper,

and Johnston, 2005, p.386).

This demonstrates that there is a tendency for tourist to explore the last fragile regions in the world,

which Kangerlussuaq represents. According to Stewart, Draper and Johnston (2005) “the polar

regions are generally regarded as fragile environments, susceptible to change through human

activity, and thus present substantial management challenges” (p.383), however on the other hand

this is also what attracts one of the most common segment of tourists in Greenland. As it seems to

be the common belief among acknowledged scholars within the tourism industry, that regardless of

these challenges, there is, “increasing recognition that responsible tourism is an appropriate and

legitimate activity” (Splettstoesser, 2000, in Stewart, Draper and Johnston, 2005, p.383).

Responsible tourism is also mentioned in Greenland National Tourism Strategy, regarding different

kinds of development suggestion in the area around Kangerlussuaq, for instance the legislation has

to be changed in order to establish a wilderness hotel (National Turismestrategi 2012-2015, 2012, p.

17). It takes a significant amount of time to change the legislation which the municipality wants to

change, in order to accommodate tourists’ wants and needs. However, the Greenlandic National

Tourism Strategy still wants to handle such matters in the most responsible way in terms of the

fragile surroundings. Developing a tourism industry based on the fragile nature in Greenland is one

of the general challenges, as it is the nature which attracts the tourists, but they cannot be attracted

without some form of tourism infrastructure development. Anderson (1991) poses some questions

to the challenges of improving the infrastructure in terms of increasing tourism in the polar regions,

“Would large investments in new infrastructure, for example, increase demand for the

tourism product and would new facilities be profitable over the entire year? Also, where

26

would the construction workers come from, how would communities accommodate and

accept the change in social life and what would be the short term nature of such a ‘boom’

period? There is also the danger of an over-supply of facilities which may, in the long run,

create an uneven distribution of facilities” (Anderson, 1991, p.215) .

These questions are important to consider in terms of developing Kangerlussuaq as a tourist

destination, as it is a future challenge in terms of its survival as a destination. As Kangerlussuaq is a

small settlement with limited resources and capacity, it can quickly become a place with an over-

supply of facilities, if the tourist development strategy is not performed in a responsible manner.

Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad (2011) argue that improvements of the infrastructure within a

destination is a crucial part of its further development and that it is beneficial to the coordination at

the destination level, however in a place like Kangerlussuaq this has to be done carefully in order

not to destroy its unique character. Kangerlussuaq is still in the development phase of the tourism

cycle, and in order to develop the settlement as a tourist destination some capital would have to

come from the outside. However, this would put the decision-making power far away from

Kangerlussuaq, creating the centre-periphery conflict. In order to avoid the centre-periphery conflict

it is necessary that the local population is involved and takes the lead in the development.

Moreover, the local respondents in our survey highlight the importance of keeping the tourism at a

responsible ground-level, as they focus on tourist recommendation that are respectful to the

surroundings, eg. one respondent notes

“It is easy accessible untouched wilderness and nature that provides you with experiences of

a lifetime. Great opportunities to be guided in the area for those with doubtful compass and

map skills, and an Eldorado for those who have mapping skills” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015

17:02:35, translated by authors).

This demonstrates that the local respondents acknowledge Kangerlussuaq’s possibilities and

uniqueness in terms of its position as a destination. Moreover, it establishes how crucial it is for the

local community to welcome tourist activities, as stated by Williams and Lew (2015), “Local

community tolerance of tourism activities will be affected by the capacity of a locality to absorb

tourists and the degree to which tourists form identifiable groups or create visible problems” (p.

143).

Conclusively, the local respondents from our survey have provided us with a better understanding

of their perceptions of Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination and their attitudes towards tourists

visiting the settlement. The survey shows that there are positive attitudes toward welcoming more

tourists and creating better facilities in order to attract more tourists to Kangerlussuaq. The locals

have ideas on how to improve the destination and lists the settlement capacity, e.g. the lack of

27

accommodation and dining options as the main obstacles. The nature is, according to the locals, the

biggest attraction and also the fact that the tourists can keep the cost down when they are not

continuing on a domestic flights. Through this analysis of the local perceptions of Kangerlussuaq,

we have established that it is crucial to take Kangerlussuaq’s limited resources and the local's

opinions into account and to keep the decision-making power in the settlement, in order to envision

a sustainable and long term development strategy.

6.3 Tourists’ Perceptions When examining our survey and looking at the tourists’ perceptions of Kangerlussuaq as a tourist

destination, we noted that 168 of the respondents of our survey have been in Kangerlussuaq. 38 out

of the 168 have only been in transit in Kangerlussuaq, while 130 of them have visited the settlement

as a tourist destination, which give them valuable insights into Kangerlussuaq as a tourist

destination. In the survey, 2 stated that they have never visited Kangerlussuaq, but have been other

places in Greenland, while 15 stated that they have never been to Greenland.

6.3.1 Kangerlussuaq as a Place of Transit In the survey the tourists had to answer questions such as “Do you know what Kangerlussuaq has to

offer apart from the airport?”, “What does Kangerlussuaq offer apart from being a transport hub?”,

and “Would you consider visiting Kangerlussuaq and the surrounding area?”. Out of the 38

respondents having been in transit in Kangerlussuaq, 25 noted that they know what Kangerlussuaq

has to offer apart from the airport, while 13 answered that they did not know. These answers

demonstrate that around two thirds of the respondents, who have visited Kangerlussuaq while in

transit at the airport, are aware of the tourist opportunities that the area offers, however a small

group of people do not know what Kangerlussuaq has to offer, which is fascinating seen from a

tourist development perspective. According to Williams & Lew (2015)

“Tourist perceptions and motivation (and hence behaviours) are directly shaped by the ways

in which they imagine places, and are encouraged to imagine places by the travel industry”

(Williams & Lew, 2015, p.152)”.

These answers could indicate that although tourism operators are present at Kangerlussuaq Airport,

the impact of the operator's presence might not be good enough to motivate the transit passengers to

come back and visit the area or to find out what the area has to offer. One of the 13 respondents

described why he does not know anything about which tourist activities Kangerlussuaq has to offer ,

“because I have only been in transit, and because it always has been a place you just want to

28

escape” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 16.17.59, translated by authors). Another of the respondents

noted:

“I would rather spend my vacation in Sisimiut, Ilulissat, Nuuk, or other places. However, I

would definitely accept to go, if someone gave me a trip to Kangerlussuaq. I could also

imagine spending an extended weekend in Kangerlussuaq” (Appendix 1,11/23/15 18:09,

translated by authors).

These survey answers illustrate that although this group of respondents do not know what kind of

tourist attractions Kangerlussuaq has to offer, they still have opinions about the place. Another

respondent noted, “To me it just seems like there only is an airport. When you walk to the

supermarket everything looks very empty and deserted. You can see houses and a little bit of life,

but apart from that everything looks very much uninhabited” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 16.53.57,

translated by authors).

The airport and the limitations of the settlement as a tourist destination is something the respondents

mention in their answers after stating that they actually do not have any prior knowledge about the

place. “Kangerlussuaq is an airport and not so much else. Maybe you can go hiking” (Appendix 1,

23/11/2015 15.52.47). These citations show some of the challenges Kangerlussuaq has as a

destination. From some of the answers, you get the impression that Kangerlussuaq is a destination

that grows on you as you spend time there, and that its tourism greatness is not obvious when you

first land there (Appendix 1,23/11/2015 15.52.47; 23/11/2015 16.53.57 ).

Out of the respondents who are aware of what Kangerlussuaq has to offer, 25 answered that most

tourist activities offered in Kangerlussuaq are closely connected to nature. They emphasise the close

proximity to the ice cap, hiking opportunities, and the chances of seeing various kinds of wild

Arctic animals. One respondent noted what she knows about Kangerlussuaq and what it has to

offer, “beautiful nature, the ice cap, I suppose some lakes. Animals;; ice bears, muskoxen. There are

some hiking routes, which I unfortunately did not have time to explore” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015

21.56.55, translated by authors). Stewart, Draper and Johnston (2005) explain the importance of the

nature experiences and the great wilderness, and why so many of the respondents mention this: “It

appears that geographic isolation and a challenging climate, which once precluded tourist visits, are

now the very factors attracting them” (Stewart, Draper & Johnston, 2005, p.383). This also explains

why the tourists recommend outdoor activities and exploring the surrounding nature when asked

about it in the survey. The 17 respondents who answered that they have never been in

Kangerlussuaq, as well as the 38 who had been in transit in the airport had to answer the following

question “Why would you consider visiting Kangerlussuaq?”. When answering this question, the

respondents had to choose from several options, which we had selected when creating the survey,

29

and it was possible for the respondents to choose one or several answers. All the options were

selected, as we regard them as current tourist activities and phenomenons that people can

experience in Kangerlussuaq.

6.3.2. Why visit Kangerlussuaq? When asked why the respondents would recommend Kangerlussuaq, the most common answers are

the ice cap, the silence and the nature. 37 of the respondents answered that they would consider

visiting Kangerlussuaq due to the Inland Ice , 33 answered the Northern Lights, 30 answered hiking,

27 answered Greenlandic culture, 17 answered Sondre Stromfjord, 7 answered hunting, while 9

respondents had other reasons for visiting Kangerlussuaq. These are what makes Kangerlussuaq

unique; the location of Kangerlussuaq with its reliable weather and the proximity to untouched

nature is also a reason for recommending Kangerlussuaq. Several of the respondents have answered

that if you are not into nature you would not enjoy Kangerlussuaq. Those who would not

recommend Kangerlussuaq say that other places they have visited in Greenland are more beautiful

and represents the ‘true Greenland’ better (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 19.01.22;; 23/11/2015 22.05.32;;

24/11/2015 09.30.30). According to Stewart, Draper and Johnston (2005) “the polar regions are

generally regarded as fragile environments, susceptible to change through human activity” (p.383)

which both attract tourists and at the same time create management issues, as many tourists urge to

see something unique and enjoy the perishable nature.

In the survey we asked the respondents the question “Which tourism activities could you imagine in

Kangerlussuaq?” The respondents were able to choose between different options, which we had

selected when creating the survey. These options consisted of different tourism activities, which we

believe can be developed in Kangerlussuaq to some extent. The respondents had the possibility to

choose one or several options in order to answer the question. Out of the options of tourism

activities which we selected, 160 respondents can imagine Northern Light Igloos, 154 can imagine

Ice Cap Trail - hiking and trekking trips, 148 can imagine cabins, 110 can imagine Ice Cap

Wellness, 109 can imagine fishing, 87 can imagine hunting camps while 41 respondents can

imagine other tourist activities in Kangerlussuaq.

Thus, from the survey it is visible that a big part of the respondents can imagine high scale luxury

tourism activities such as Northern Light Igloos and Wellness. Although travelling to Greenland is

considered quite high scale and expensive by many, the settlement of Kangerlussuaq does not offer

luxurious accommodation, which is also emphasised by some of the respondents. If the suggestions

made by the respondents in the survey mirror the actual wishes of tourists visiting Greenland, there

could maybe be a market for luxury tourism in Kangerlussuaq. In Finnish Lapland part of the

30

tourism strategy made by the regional council has been to build bigger resorts to attract more

tourists and create a good experience for the tourists (Luiro, 2013) Something like luxurious

Northern Light Igloos and special Greenlandic gastronomic experiences could maybe help

attracting more tourists to Kangerlussuaq.

Luxurious experiences could perhaps be a driver in a destination where it may not be possible to

handle a lot of tourists visiting at the same time. This could maybe benefit the local economy, but it

could at the same time also destroy the image of Kangerlussuaq as a humble place of great nature.

For instance some of the comments the tourists had were, “(...) I hope that they are not serious about

building a road, as it would ruin the charm for the tourists” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 16:12:10,

translated by authors) and “(...) More tourist activities are not necessary - preserve the natural

possibilities and the area’s unspoiled appearance despite the airport and the air traffic” (Appendix 1,

23/11/2015 16:51:51, translated by authors). “(...) I think the settlement is attractive in its own way

and it does not need to look like any other big city” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 20:04:02, translated

by authors). Again we see how important a role the great wilderness and the nature play in tourists’

perceptions of Kangerlussuaq.

Some respondents also mention the possibility of bringing their children to Kangerlussuaq and

creating a more family-friendly destination.(Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 16:04:31; 23/11/2015

18:01:23 ) However, most respondents have answered that they imagine outdoor and physical

activities as their main interest when visiting Kangerlussuaq. In the tourism strategy of Greenland,

they mention that they will focus on improving the conditions for tourists wanting to engage in

extreme sports and to explore the wild and rough side of the Greenlandic nature (National

Turismestrategi 2012-2015, 2012, p.18).

6.3.3 Kangerlussuaq as an End Destination In the survey we asked the tourists the question “Could you imagine Kangerlussuaq as an end

destination rather than a transit point?” 123 of the respondents answered that they can imagine

Kangerlussuaq as an end destination, while 33 answered that they cannot imagine Kangerlussuaq as

an end destination, but that they look at the area as a place of transit.

When answering the question “Could you imagine spending your vacation in Kangerlussuaq?” in

our survey, 44 respondents answered that they can imagine spending their vacation in the

settlement. Meanwhile 18 respondents answered that that they could not imagine spending their

vacation in Kangerlussuaq. These answers demonstrate that the majority of the respondents both

can imagine Kangerlussuaq as an end destination, and that they can imagine spending their vacation

in the area. However, it should be noted that the majority of the respondents cannot imagine

31

spending a longer vacation in Kangerlussuaq, but rather they would prefer to spend some days

there, e.g. one respondent stated “I would like to spend part of my vacation there, but not all of it.

For me a vacation in Greenland also consist of experiencing the coastal life and the traditional

hunter culture” (Appendix 1, 23/11/15 16:19, translated by authors). This indicates that

Kangerlussuaq faces some challenges in terms of being a tourist destination, as the tourists seem to

want to experience other destinations in Greenland, rather than spending their whole vacation in

Kangerlussuaq. According to the survey, the settlement of Kangerlussuaq also lacks some general

tourism facilitates, which might also be one of the reasons why tourists only prefer to stay there for

days and not for weeks. For instance, we ask the respondents in the survey “Which improvements

could be done in order for Kangerlussuaq to become a more attractive end destination?” The

respondents had several options to choose from in order to answer this question, the options were

chosen by us, as we believe that they represent the general tourism needs within any destination.

118 respondents noted that they want an improvement of dining opportunities in Kangerlussuaq,

107 respondents want improvement of the accommodation options in the settlement, meanwhile 98

of the respondents want better and more opportunities for tourism activities, and 54 of the

respondents noted that they want the infrastructure in Kangerlussuaq to be improved in order for the

settlement to become a more attractive end destination. The respondents also had the option to

choose “other” when answering this question, and 67 of them chose it. These answers demonstrate

that the majority of the respondents believe that there are room for improvement in several matters

in terms of Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination. One respondent noted “Improvement of

accommodation options, [and] Don’t spoil the place with more tourist” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015

16:14:27). However, other respondents were divided in their opinion e.g. on one hand wanting

improvement in Kangerlussuaq, while on the other hand insisting on keeping Kangerlussuaq as the

destination it is today, for instance one respondent noted regarding improvements, “More dining

options, [and] I believe the city is attractive in its own way and it does not need to be like any other

big city” (Appendix 1, 23/1172015 20:04:02, translated by authors). In relation to this another

respondent answered, “More dining options, more tourist activities are not necessary - preserve the

natural possibilities and the area’s unspoiled appearance despite the airport and the air traffic”

(Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 16:51:51, translated by authors).

Of the 168 respondents who have visited Kangerlussuaq as either a destination or been in transit in

the airport, 152 of them will recommend Kangerlussuaq as a tourist destination, while 13 will not

recommend it. One respondent, who will recommend it said, “In order to get an extraordinary

experience” (Appendix 1, 11/24/15 12:05, translated by authors). Clearly a majority of the

32

respondents knowing Kangerlussuaq will recommend it, which could illustrate that Kangerlussuaq

actually have a lot to offer.

Kangerlussuaq as a place of culture?

Some of the respondents mention that they would like to experience more Greenlandic culture when

visiting the settlement. However, none of the respondents mention expectations of experiences of a

traditional Greenlandic indigenous cultural kind, which is in fact also offered by some of the travel

agencies in Kangerlussuaq (figure 2.4). The question is whether a more “staged experience” of the

traditional cultural aspect of the Greenlandic Culture would be a draw and put Kangerlussuaq on the

map of Greenland as more than amazing nature, wildlife and hiking opportunities. Can the lack of

traces of a prior indigenous cultural settlement in Kangerlussuaq be a chance to create a window for

the tourist to experience modern Greenlandic Culture? Or would it be an option to create and stage

traditional Greenlandic customs as a tourist production?

“Postmodern critical perspectives have also undermined the relevance of authenticity, noting

that for many forms of postmodern tourism, authenticity is irrelevant and not something that

tourists actively seek” (Williams & Lew, 2015, p. 128).

With this in mind, the staging of an indigenous culture, could be quite harmless, but at the same

time it could also be unnecessary. As previously mentioned, only a few of the respondents have

mentioned this as a suggested improvement or a reason for why they would not choose

Kangerlussuaq as a destination for vacation. Taking the history into account, another development

option could be to enhance the focus on the special international character of the settlement and

how the landscape, location and both commercial airline industry and military have interplayed

since the 1940s and during the Cold War (1947-1991).

“Geography is important here because the manner in which places vary across the globe

means that in many sectors of tourism there exist multiple authenticities that are place-

dependent. These may be variations on a common theme, but distinctions among places will

often serve to differentiate the authenticity of experience across geographical space”

(Williams & Lew, 2015, p. 128).

Kangerlussuaq’s existence is based on a specific geography, the business from the airport and

buildings of the old airbase, which according to some is not exactly beautiful. However, part of the

authenticity of Kangerlussuaq lies in fact that it does not pretend to be something that it is not, it is

not pretentious and there is a great sense of belonging (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 19:51:41).

33

6.3.4 Nostalgia Many of the respondents write long answers to the questions posed in the survey about the joys and

beauty of Kangerlussuaq. Many of these write that they have lived in Kangerlussuaq for a longer or

shorter period of time. Others have had the experience of their lifetime when visiting Kangerlussuaq

in their youth. It is important to keep in mind that these respondents could have a nostalgic version

of a lived youth or childhood in Kangerlussuaq.

“I have lived in Kangerlussuaq for 7 years and consider the place to be my ‘real’ home.

Lovely time - lots of experiences: Fishing, sailing, hunting, barbequing on the inland ice etc.

I have also been a ‘tour guide for visitors and I have the best friendships from that time”

(Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 19:26:02)

When looking at experiences in retrospect and from a distance, there is a chance that memories can

reflect a idyllic notion of the far past leaving out troubles and hardships. When analysing the

tourist’s answers to the questions in the survey, it is important to keep Bruner’s words in mind:

“I make a distinction between the trip as lived: as it actually happened, the reality; the trip as

experienced. consisting of the images, feelings, desires, thoughts, and meaning that emerge

in individual consciousness; and the trip as told; usually a story but possibly a series of

photographs or other forms of expressions” (Bruner, 1984, p.7 in Bruner, 2005, p. 19).

In the survey the respondent retells experiences using their memories of feelings, and not

necessarily the reality of the trip lived. Thus, as Bruner highlights the importance of being critical

towards a person’s sometimes inaccurate memories, it is noteworthy how these memories are

constructed mainly positive. Another example of the positive retelling of Kangerlussuaq and the

sense of belonging comes from this respondent:

“The beauty of the nature, the extraordinary peace from noise pollution of big cities and

people. the authentic Greenland and the authentic Greenlanders - here’s room for everyone:

When the domestic flights cannot take off because of the weather conditions, well, then the

airport and the cafeteria turn into everybody’s living room - everyone’s welcome and no one

is left out (...)“(Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 19:51:41)

Although these stories and often extraordinary experiences might be coloured by the feelings and

memories of the respondents, but they are still valid as narratives and can serve as inspiration when

developing tourism strategies for a destination.

In this ‘section’ we have looked at the tourist’s perceptions of Kangerlussuaq and found that some

of the biggest issues Kangerlussuaq has when attracting tourists is the tourists’ lack of knowledge of

the place and the strong image of the settlement as a mere place of transit. For those who have

visited the settlement, visits to the ice cap, the great nature and the silence is mentioned as leaving

34

the biggest impression. The history of the settlement and the traditional culture play a much smaller

part. There are suggestions from the tourists on improvements and many have suggested Northern

Light Igloos, cabins and wellness, but there are also a great part of the respondents that are

conservative and prefer things to stay the way they are. We have suggested that some of these more

conservative respondents could have a nostalgic ‘approach’ to development of the area.

6.4 Tourism Strategies Tourism strategies are essential when developing destinations, however there are many different

ways of applying these. In this section our different tourism development theories will be applied

along with examples from other Arctic destination and the National Greenlandic Tourism Strategy.

These are additions that are necessary for a sufficient analysis of Kangerlussuaq’s potential as an

evolving tourism destination. This section focuses on tourism strategies, such as the National

Greenlandic Tourism Strategy and strategies in peripheral regions, and the Finnish Lapland.

According to Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad (2011) investigating experiences from different

destinations can be of great importance in order to learn from and be inspired by when developing

tourism in Kangerlussuaq. Is it possible to combine elements of peripheral tourism development

strategy and the use of experience economy in tourism strategy, and how can some of the elements

be applied in Kangerlussuaq?

To further investigate this aspect of tourism development, it is relevant to look into Anderson’s

(1991) comparative elements of his studies of peripheral destinations in Canada. He states that even

though there are similarities between the strategies, problems and the approaches of destination

development, one aspect is important to keep in mind before general development strategies can be

applied to another destination:

No broad development strategy can be successful if it does not accommodate the localized,

culturally based governance structure and the spatially specific problems that development

may encounter (Anderson, 1991, p.209)

This is important to keep in mind when looking at experiences from for instance the Northwest

Territory (NWT) and destination development strategies for Greenland and Finnish Lapland.

6.4.1 Kangerlussuaq as a part of a national strategy The settlement of Kangerlussuaq has some significant advantages in terms of attracting more

tourists to the area, as an extensive group of people have their cruise trip departure in

Kangerlussuaq, due to the location of the airport (National Turismestrategi 2012-2015, 2012, p. 9).

This can be used in a beneficial manner regarding the development of Kangerlussuaq as a

35

destination. The goal is to keep the cruise ship tourists in Kangerlussuaq for some days either prior

or after their cruise trip, which ideally would be coordinated by the travel agencies before the cruise

ship guests embark on their travels. The Greenland National Tourism Strategy point out how it aims

to develop Kangerlussuaq’s potential in terms of cruise ship tourists (National Turismestrategi

2012-2015, 2012, p. 15). One of the issues regarding the tourists travelling onboard the minor cruise

ships in Kangerlussuaq is that it is a limited season because of the climate, as it is only possible to

sail into the fjord from April to October. Moreover, regarding Kangerlussuaq’s potential for

increasing cruise ship tourists, the settlement’s capacity and infrastructure have to be taken into

account, as the settlement cannot accommodate or welcome thousands or even hundreds of cruise

ship tourists. One realistic scenario would be for Kangerlussuaq to appeal to a group of the cruise

ship tourists, and attract them to come and spend time in Kangerlussuaq, which could be done by

greater advertising through the cruise ship bureaus. In terms of destination development, the

Greenland National Tourism Strategy suggest to focus on other adventure bureaus than Danish-

based Greenlandic travel agencies (National Turismestrategi, 2012, p.10), in order to attract other

kinds of tourists, which can prove to be extremely beneficial for Kangerlussuaq. Moreover, the

Greenland National Tourism Strategy also suggests focusing on other tourists than the Danish, as it

suggests focusing on people from the other Scandinavian countries, as well as Germany. This

observation seems to be particularly imperative, as it is crucial for Kangerlussuaq to attract other

than Danish tourists in order to survive as a tourist destination. Moreover, it is more or less

straightforward to welcome more tourists in the Kangerlussuaq area compared to other destinations

in Greenland, due to the location of the airport. Regarding possible tourism investments, it can be

noted that in the survey 80 % of the respondents answer that special cabins to experience the

Northern Lights from would be a good idea to invest in, in Kangerlussuaq. In this context, it should

be noted that Kangerlussuaq will benefit the most from tourist investments if the investments are

related to the uniqueness of the area, which cabins to experience the Northern Light would be.

Concerning tourism development in Kangerlussuaq, it can be beneficial to look at other Arctic

destinations in terms of how they have managed to develop their area, and according to Haugland’s

theory of interdestination bridge ties, Kangerlussuaq might benefit from closer collaboration with

other destinations.

Iceland has e.g been very successful in the process of linking Iceland with other Greenlandic

destination via Ilulissat and Nuuk (National Turismestrategi 2012-2015, 2012, p. 10). Moreover,

Greenland National Tourism Strategy points out how tourists coming via Iceland provide great

potential for attracting more tourists to Greenland (National Turismestrategi, 2012, p. 10). One

might imagine that if Kangerlussuaq could make interdestinational ties with the popular Ilulissat or

36

with the neighbouring Sisimiut, this would give tourists the opportunity to experience both the

unique nature, northern lights , and the proximity to the inland ice and the more traditional

Greenlandic experience in Ilulissat with the coastline and the indigenous culture.

The tourism setting of Kangerlussuaq is build up by several stakeholders, and they are all relatively

small scale businesses. Regarding establishing Kangerlussuaq as a tourism destination, these small

businesses and stakeholders should work together in order to create one prevailing tourism image of

Kangerlussuaq. Haugland, Ness, Grønseth & Aarstad (2011) believe that it is beneficial for all

stakeholders within a tourism destination if they work together in order to create a “consistent

cognitive image based on shared attributes” (p 273). This is especially true in cases like

Kangerlussuaq, where the tourist segment is relatively limited. In such situations it can be much

more profitable for the stakeholders to work together in relations to customers rather than working

individually, as it can demonstrate a much stronger and better image of the destination itself.

Both among the local respondents and the tourists that have visited Kangerlussuaq there are

respondents that stress the great importance and the mutual benefit of cooperation between different

local stakeholders in Kangerlussuaq and the region (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 23:22:45). The ability

to work together demands social capabilities within the community. Haugland, Ness, Grønseth and

Aarstad (2011) stress the importance of multiple actors sharing their capabilities and cooperate with

one another in order to utilize their potentials within the destination. Moreover, the positive aspect

of the small scale tourism businesses is that they are local stakeholders, which according to Keller

(1987) regarding peripheral tourism development is a significant element for the destination to

become successful and avoid the centre-periphery conflict.

6.4.2 Kangerlussuaq and Arctic Tourism The fact that Kangerlussuaq is an arctic destination adds to its uniqueness, and puts it in its own

category along with other arctic destinations. Thus it is important to analyse which strategies and

which elements are unique within arctic destinations in order to make a successful tourism

destination in Kangerlussuaq. Anderson (1991) explains that there is a gap between the expectations

from the tourists and the actual Arctic tourism experience. “(...) the ‘arctic image’ is often the

antithesis of tourist expectations” (Anderson, 1991, p.214). Keller describes the general perception

of the arctic as “ice, Eskimos and igloos” (Keller, 1987, p.29-30). Anderson (1991) continues,

“Arctic tourism is concentrated in the summer months when there are relatively warm days, flowers

in bloom and relatively ice-free seas” (Anderson, 1991, p.214), this applies to Kangerlussuaq as

well since the temperature in the summer months can reach 30 degrees celsius. Nonetheless, as

mentioned, the inland ice can act in accordance with the expectations of the arctic experience, and

37

this could be utilised more in the promotion of Kangerlussuaq. Anderson (1991) stresses the

importance of matching expectations and he suggests that this match should come from the travel

agencies,

“Tourists and southern travel agents must be made aware of the seasonal variation. An arctic

image which fully indicates the temporal and, spatial diversity of the region is vital to

successful tourism planning policy. Little tourist activity, for example, takes place in winter,

due to extreme cold temperatures, arctic winds and few hours of daylight” (Anderson, 1991,

p.214).

Anderson applies his tourism development theories on the Canadian Northwest Territory which

shares many of the same attributes as Kangerlussuaq. For instance Anderson (1991) describes the

NWT as a “spectacular and dramatic scenery” where “Glaciers cover much of the land. Rolling

tundra glows with delicate arctic flowers and the ‘midnight sun’ gives unlimited time to explore”

(Anderson, 1991, p.212). Additionally, many of the activities available in the NWT are the same as

in Kangerlussuaq, such as hiking, hunting, fishing, skiing, dog sledding, snow mobile tours and

photography (See figure 2.4). Moreover, the NWT has educational activities which could be applied

in Kangerlussuaq as well (Anderson, 1991, p.213). For instance some of the respondents suggest

“(...) a learning center where you get to know about the nature, the ecology, the ice and so on”

(Appendix 1 23/11/2015 15:51:15, translated by authors), “(...) courses in Greenlandic handicraft”

(Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 22:13:21, translated by authors), and “traditional Greenlandic cookery”

(Appendix 1, 24/11/2015 09:08:07 translated by authors). These ideas suggest that this is another

aspect of the tourism industry that could be developed in Kangerlussuaq. According to the

peripheral tourism development theory, initiatives such as these are beneficial as they would be

easy and cheap to establish from within the community. This would empower the local community

and be an opportunity for the locals to share their culture in an authentic way.

Just as in Kangerlussuaq, and Greenland in general, the NWT has one great challenge, according to

Anderson (1991), namely the cost of transport which is a main expense for travellers (Anderson,

1991, p.214). However this expense is lower in Kangerlussuaq compared to other Greenlandic

destination because of the direct flights from Copenhagen. This fact is mentioned by many of the

survey respondents, when they answered the question “Why would you recommend

Kangerlussuaq” (e.g. Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 16:15:09, 23/11/2015 16:04:31, 23/11/2015

19:27:18), which also shows that the cost must be an important element of the development

strategy. It is however necessary to remember that, compared to other global destinations,

Kangerlussuaq would not be able to compete on the price.

38

Another similarity between Kangerlussuaq and other Arctic destinations is the nature and the

fragility of it. Stewart, Draper, and Johnston (2005) write that “It appears that geographic isolation

and a challenging climate, which once precluded tourist visits, are now the very factors attracting

them. For various reasons, however, the polar regions are generally regarded as fragile

environments” (p.383). Thus the fragility adds to the uniqueness of the destination and becomes an

experience in itself. Stewart, Draper, and Johnston (2005) add that the Arctic regions are the

world’s “last great wilderness” (p.286) which is something that many experienced travelers have on

their bucket list. The tourist experience of being on the ice cap are made more unique when

questioning whether the next generation will be able to experience this perishable phenomena. This

is also implied by Stewart, Draper, and Johnston (2005) as they say that the polar regions “have

come to symbolize remoteness, extreme conditions and environmental vulnerability” (p.389). The

fragility of the area does however also create some management challenges in the tourism

development, because tourism operators cannot just bring an unlimited amount of tourist to the area,

because this would leave too many marks on the environment and make it less unique. On the other

hand, it is important to introduce some tourists to the uniqueness of the Arctic, as it is crucial that

people learn and understand the fragility of the nature, and how to preserve it. Moreover, the Arctic

is a place that most people view as a fascinating place to visit, and some even refer to the area as the

Arctic Magic.

6.4.3 Arctic Magic “It [Kangerlussuaq] is such an unromantic, ugly place that it becomes almost magical. It is

also the easiest way in the world to end up in the middle of nature, far away from other

people etc” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 15:51:15, translated by authors).

Magic is an underlying theme in the Tourism Strategy of Finnish Lapland. “Arctic Magic” is a very

special experience that creates special emotions and feelings among the tourists. Lapland is

promoted as a place where magic happens. A kind of magic that you cannot describe, but have to

experience yourself. According to the tourism strategy of regional Finnish Lapland, they intend to

built an industry using the Arctic and its special features and by making use of the Christmas theme,

Nordic Christmas traditions, the reindeers and Sami culture to design experiences (Lapland Above

Ordinary, n.d.).

By turning “First Snow, Christmas, Frosty Winter, Crusty Snow, Departure of Ice, Midnight Sun,

Harvest Season and Colourful Autumn” into eight different seasons, the tourism industry of Finnish

Lapland is adding more seasons to the normal tourist seasons and by doing so opening up for more

possibilities of staying in and visiting Lapland on a special seasonal time of year and for the tourists

to leave with extraordinary experiences from their stay.

39

According to Lapland – above ordinary (2015) it is exactly “Meaningful experiences that stimulate

all the senses and feelings, leaving permanent memories are very easy to find in Lapland” (Lapland

Above Ordinary, n.d.) and parts of the strategy is clearly built on the essential points made by Pine

and Gilmore (1999) in “The Experience Economy”. One of the purposes of the tourism industry is

to leave the tourists with a memorable experience of their visit. Two of the most well-known

‘staged experiences’ in Finnish Lapland are the luxurious Northern Light Igloos in Kakslauttanen

and the Santa Claus Village in Rovaniemi. Especially the Santa Claus Village is a tourism

construction commodifying Christmas and polar tourism. In some ways, this commodification

could be seen as a sell-out of the local culture to attract tourists and business to the region. The

establishment of a Santa Claus Village in the capital city of Lapland, Rovaniemi, some 50 years ago

has now turned into a big establishment.

The tourism in Lapland involves the indigenous peoples of Lapland, the Sami, and their traditional

culture in their tourism strategy (Lapland Above Ordinary, n.d.).

“In cultural terms, Meethan (2001) argues that commodification occurs in two connected

ways: first, as an initial representation of the destination in the images that are promoted

through travel brochures and the media; and second, through the ways in which local culture

is represented and presented in the tourist experience of the destination itself” (Williams and

Lew, 2015, s 129).

An extended use of Greenlandic Culture in the marketing of Greenland is also a part of the

Government of Greenland’s tourism strategy. The purpose of this being “(...) to promote a wider

knowledge of Greenlandic art and culture” (National Turismestrategi, 2012, p. 15, translated by

author).

Could the tourism operators in Kangerlussuaq learn something from these approaches? What could

be the special niche tourism found in Kangerlussuaq? Could the settlement prosper from learning

from the tourism strategy of Finnish Lapland or is this type of tourism staged and constructed by the

tourism industry exactly what Kangerlussuaq should avoid and instead stage the uniqueness that is

already present in Kangerlussuaq;; the silence and the great nature? And is the part of Greenland’s

uniqueness its authenticity and unspoiled nature? Is could be an obvious choice when it comes to a

destination like Kangerlussuaq to find something quite unique and something that may create the

possibilities of experiencing different kinds of Greenlandic magic on different times of the year and

in this way opening up for a longer season. They already host the Polar Circle Marathon in October

every year and could there be more events like this? Would it be beneficial to focus much of the

local energy on hosting events that could create memorable experiences that are only possible to get

in Kangerlussuaq – special events such as the Polar Circle Marathon and the Arctic Circle Race in

40

Sisimiut? Change the image of a destination only visited when flights are cancelled and passengers

have long delays or stay-overs at the airport. Maybe it could even be possible to make a flight

cancellation into a special and unique thing?

6.4.4 Uniqueness The role of uniqueness in the tourism industry has been an ongoing theme throughout our project.

Following the thesis put forth by Gilmore & Pine (1999) about the ‘fourth economy’ and how

creating memorable experiences by focusing on uniqueness can be a valuable business strategy. By

looking at the experiences that have been mentioned by the respondents in our survey and on what

they have emphasised as main attractions in Kangerlussuaq, it is possible to extract a number of

unique experiences that could be further developed by the tourism industry and Qeqqata

Municipality. One respondent writes:

“Because it is a historical time warp (former air base), because the nature is extremely

beautiful no matter in which direction you choose to walk, because the fjord and the inland

ice is amazing” (Appendix 1, 23/11/2015 16:50:10 translated by authors).

Thus, the history of Kangerlussuaq and the surrounding geographical setting are some of the

reasons why Kangerlussuaq could give tourists unique experiences, which are interesting elements

to consider when discussing further touristic development in the area. Another respondent noted:

“The location on the brink of the Inland Ice is unique and it leaves you with the opportunity

of many experiences and thoughts that you will not find anywhere else” (Appendix 1,

23/11/2015 14:56:16 translated by authors).

The proximity of the settlement to the inland ice is a very unique feature of Kangerlussuaq. Many of

the respondents in our survey mention visits to the inland ice as one of the biggest experiences

during their visit. The fact that the destination is blessed with not only an airport but also a unique

type of nature, leaves opportunities for the area around the inland ice to be turned into a more

advantageous part of the tourism industry in Kangerlussuaq. According to Pine & Gilmore (1999)

focusing on a further development of the experiences when visiting the inland ice - in this case the

tourist experiences - can create a bigger economic output (p. X).

In the survey ‘Ice Cap Wellness” was listed as one of the answers to choose from when answering

the question;; “which tourism activities could you imagine in Kangerlussuaq?” Ice Cap Wellness

was an invention by the authors of the survey, meant as an inspiration for the responders to come up

with their own ideas in the blank field. However, 110 respondents ticked option ‘Ice Cap Wellness’

off. Although it is impossible to make any scientifically correct conclusions from these answers, it

could be possible to make a cautious assumption that the proximity to the inland ice could be

41

exploited more by the tourism industry. The climate changes and the melting of the inland ice could

also be used in a tourism context if e.g. ecotourism was to be promoted.

The uniqueness of the nature surrounding Kangerlussuaq is according to the survey its strength and

one of its biggest asset, but also important to handle with care when it comes to tourism

development.

“Many forms of tourism are dependent on the environment to provide both a context and a

focus for tourist activity. However, those same activities have a marked capacity to devalue

and, occasionally, destroy the environmental resources upon which tourism is based”

(Williams & Lew, 2015, p.123).

The uniqueness of Kangerlussuaq that has been mentioned by some of the respondents is for

instance the silence, the loneliness and the endless wild nature. When tourism is promoted in such

an area there is a risk of destroying the nature and thereby the attraction, as mentioned in the quote

from Williams and Lew (2015) above. But the necessity to be creative and initiate unique and

memorable experiences is important in the competition with other destinations and parts of the

experience economy can be important factors when creating a successful tourist destination

(Mehmetoglu & Engen, 2011).

In Rovaniemi, Lapland, the government and the tourism operators have actively and through

cooperation created a Christmas universe and used their unique location with guarantee of snow and

reindeer to create a tourist destination that has been successful for many years (Rusko, R.,

Merenheimo, P., & Haanpää, M. (2013). Kangerlussuaq does not have the necessary infrastructure

and resources to focus on this type of mass tourism, but the place still offers unique experiences and

host events that are already very interesting seen from a tourism development and experience

economy perspective.

One of the events is the annual Polar Circle Marathon, “the coolest marathons on earth”, set in

October every year. (Polar Circle Marathon, 2015). Events like the Polar Circle Marathon is exactly

a type of experience that differs from other experiences and is quite unique. Arctic Circle Race, is

another extreme sports race, that takes place in the neighbouring city of Sisimiut. With an ATV trail

(Olsen, 2015) between the two places there could be a really big potential for the places to

cooperate and coordinate and by “inter-destination bridge ties” (Haugland, Ness, Grønseth &

Aarstad, 2011) develop the tourism in the area. A settlement like Kangerlussuaq and other

destination in Qeqqata municipality could benefit mutually from this type of cooperation on what

Williams & Lew describes as ‘alternative tourism’:

“Although the underlying philosophies of alternative tourism may strongly reflect the

concept of sustainability, the experience of alternative tourism in a growing number of

42

places suggests that such forms may be highly potent as agents of change and generators of

impact” (Williams and Lew, 2015, p. 122).

The impact can be of both positive and negative character, but the uniqueness of the Arctic in

general and not only in Kangerlussuaq can indeed be used in tourism strategies in various ways, in

Finnish Lapland described as ‘Arctic Magic’. In the Northwest Territories and the Baffin Region,

the Arctic region the environment and nature “offers a unique, almost exotic pleasure travel

experience. It provides high Arctic adventure with a natural and cultural resource base that is

distinctive” (Anderson, 1991, p.212). And the potential of exploring and exploiting the uniqueness

is physically present in Kangerlussuaq and also in the Arctic in general.

In this chapter we have looked at where the National Tourism Strategy sees Kangerlussuaq

regarding tourism development in Greenland. We have found that the role of Kangerlussuaq is

mainly as a gateway to Greenland, a cruise port and directed at adventure tourism. Additionally, we

also looked at other Arctic destinations and their approach to tourism and tourism strategies and

analysed which part of the strategies that are applicable to Kangerlussuaq. We have found that the

use of experience economy and the uniqueness in marketing and strategies in other Arctic regions to

some extent can be beneficial when developing tourism in Kangerlussuaq. Moreover, it can be

beneficial with interdestinational collaboration and the sharing of capabilities among neighbouring

destinations in Greenland. The focus on creating cheap and easy initiatives and empowering the

local community can be valuable in small peripheral destinations, as it is important to take care of

the fragile nature. The settlement of Kangerlussuaq belongs to this category.

7. Discussion Looking at Kangerlussuaq, this project wonders why tourism is not a bigger aspect of the economy

in Kangerlussuaq, because it seems that the possibilities are there: it is an optimal place to watch the

Northern Lights, it is within close proximity to the ice cap, it is the gateway to Greenland where all

bigger flights have to land to connect to other areas. Nonetheless, it only has four accommodation

possibilities and only limited offers of tours around the area. It seems that a big part of the tourism

is limited to, what we have chosen to call, Oops-tourism, where the tourists who stay have not

planned it, but are only in Kangerlussuaq because their transit flights have be delayed or cancelled.

We wonder how tourism can become a more integrated part of the economy, as a way to support a

more sustainable society development, both in order to keep the airport, but also not to be

dependent on it alone.

The destination development of the settlement of Kangerlussuaq is a single case with multiple

interpretations in a global context, however it demonstrates how a small case in a remote area can

43

deal with global challenges within a larger framework. The baseline of this project establishes how

crucial it is for a destination like Kangerlussuaq to develop from within rather than being forced to

develop in a specific way. This is important due to number of factors, for instance local initiatives

tend to be more responsible in terms of sustainable solutions in their own area, as they are directly

affected by any changes. It is a well acknowledged idea that the best and most sustainable tourism

comes from within society, where locals become the entrepreneurs and use the competencies they

already have along with their knowledge of the area. Sustainability is one of the major themes

within tourism research, for instance Stewart, Draper, Johnston (2005) mention how important it is

to develop a destination that is sustainable in the largest context, in order to make the destination

more financial secure and resilient. For instance, using knowledge of traditional fishing and

hunting, the surrounding nature and traditional handicrafts within tourism could be a way of

utilising specific competencies within tourism. Thus, bottom-up development could be created from

within, without the need for much capital. Keller (1987) argues that a way of avoiding a centre-

periphery conflict is to limit the growth of the destination in order to maintain the control of the area

and reduce the power of external stakeholders. Even though this might not bring an extraordinary

amount of tourists, it might create a sustainable way to develop Kangerlussuaq as a tourist

destination.

In a case like Kangerlussuaq it is essential to zoom out, in order to look at the destination in a larger

context. This is beneficial in terms of insuring that Kangerlussuaq becomes part of a bigger

framework within tourism development in Greenland. Thus it is important for the tourism sector to

generate collaboration between various domains such as the community and science, due to the

location of Kangerlussuaq in the Arctic. Stewart, Draper, Johnston (2005) highlight how crucial this

is due to the increase of tourists in the Arctic and the development of polar science. Such

collaboration between different domains along with local entrepreneurship can boost destination

development in places like Kangerlussuaq. Moreover, it is ideal because in this way, it will be done

in a respectful manner. Therefore, it is crucial to build the local entrepreneurship initiatives in

Kangerlussuaq, in order to bring local contributions and ideas to the table. Firstly, it is hard to

speculate and plan for the future tourism development in Kangerlussuaq, because the airport status

is constantly changing and the messages sent from the government are in many ways ambiguous.

Since we began working on this project, the Naalakkersuisut has made the decision to improve and

expand the current airport in Nuuk to facilitate more direct international air traffic to the capital

city. The role of Kangerlussuaq as the main international port in Greenland is therefore seriously

threatened. With the current debate about the airport – whether the international traffic should be

moved to Nuuk or if it should stay, the conditions for starting up tourism business in the

44

Kangerlussuaq area might not be so appealing. However, if the aim is that the airport in

Kangerlussuaq should stay and the everlasting airport debate should come to an end, the economy

in Kangerlussuaq has to be based on more than just the airport. In the Greenland National Tourism

Strategy, it is mentioned that Kangerlussuaq is an appealing tourist destination. The question is

whether that refers to the tourism in its current form within the influx of oops-tourists or tourist

coming to Kangerlussuaq to spend their vacation. It could seems necessary for the survival of the

community to develop the tourism industry, however the question of where the investments would

come from is essential. For instance, several respondents mention that their stay at the hotel did not

live up to their expectations, thus it might be suggested that a renovation of the hotel is essential. It

would, nonetheless, be a gamble to invest much money in a hotel without knowing whether more or

less tourist would come in the future. However one cannot expect the tourists to come or stay if the

accommodation does not live up to a specific standard.

Overall, it seems that there has been a significant emphasis on developing cruise tourism in

Greenland, which is also specified in the National Greenlandic Tourism Strategy that says the need

for improvement regarding harbours around Greenland is important. Moreover, the Greenland

National Tourism Strategy strongly emphasises that especially the harbour in Kangerlussuaq is

mandatory to improve, because of the huge amount of tourists who depart on their cruise tours here.

However, our understanding is that cruise tourism is not the only way forward in Kangerlussuaq, as

it does not necessarily contribute to the local communities’ economy on a large scale. Furthermore,

while the cruise tourism is a major part of the tourism market in general, it cannot be operated all

year around in Kangerlussuaq due to the climate. Thus, it should not be regarded as the only

tourism industry within the settlement. Instead there should be even more focus on Kangerlussuaq’s

many other possibilities, e.g. the nature around Kangerlussuaq that calls for new initiatives.

However, the development of these possibilities should focus on wow factor; meaning they have to

be unique compared to other destinations. As small businesses in Kangerlussuaq might not be

enough to attract tourists to visit the area, the way forward could therefore be to create something

extraordinary in the nature around Kangerlussuaq. This should be done in order to attract tourists,

and give them extraordinary experiences, which they cannot experience anywhere else.

When thinking about Greenland in a classical way one automatically sees the images of a wide and

open landscape of ice and snow, and beautiful coloured skies and ice fjords. Most of the images that

come to mind are coloured by the stories and tourist narratives, you have heard from friends and

family visiting Greenland. For a place like Kangerlussuaq, the tourist narratives are of great

importance, since the destination to many people is nothing ”but” a transit point and an airport.

Working thoroughly with Kangerlussuaq's challenges as a tourist destination combined with the

45

many recommendations and experiences from locals and tourists through their answers in our

survey, the project has opened up an understanding of Kangerlussuaq and the surrounding area as a

tourist destination with lots of possibilities and opportunities for extraordinary experiences. With

Ilulissat Icefjord being on the UNESCO World Heritage List and the opening of a learning center in

the city, it could be an idea to look into the possibilities of combining the tourism offers here with

what Kangerlussuaq has to offer. The Kangerlussuaq area and it’s proximity to the inland ice is part

of the uniqueness that Kangerlussuaq could use even more in the tourist development. Especially if

the municipality of Qeqqata will be successful in being accepted on the UNESCO World Heritage

List by the beginning of 2018 (Qeqqata Kommunia, n.d.). Furthermore, it is natural that the

inhabitants of the peripheral regions view their area as unique and feel that they are able to create

extraordinary experiences for the tourists coming from the outside, this is another aspect where

“geography matters” (Anderson, 1991, p.220). Additionally, the fact that Greenland has been listed

on the Lonely Planet’s list of Best Destinations in 2016 this year and has been named “Arctic

Wonderland” could create a desire for tourists to experience the area, and this could get more

attention within the tourism development strategy. The use of the geography of Kangerlussuaq, the

special features of the Arctic and the possibilities of experiencing the great nature in tourism, could

be further improved. The 160 km Arctic Circle Trail that runs between Sisimiut and Kangerlussuaq

with its current 8 huts for hikers, could also be developed further and the accommodations

conditions expanded and improved. With the establishment of an ATV road, the coordination

between Sisimiut and Kangerlussuaq could be better and facilitate the work with the brand

”Destination Arctic Circle” and thereby create more options for tourists visiting the area (Qeqqata

Kommunia, n.d.). The inland ice is already a big part of the Polar Circle Race that takes part in

Kangerlussuaq every year in October. There could perhaps be a market for more event tourism in

Kangerlussuaq such as extreme sports events. These events do not necessarily demand high scale

accommodation or dining and do not need big investment, for instance during the Arctic Circle

Marathon in Sisimiut the contestants sleep in tents. Another aspect of the tourism development that

could be beneficial for Kangerlussuaq to focus on is climate tourism. Trips to the perishable inland

ice could attract tourists interested in environmental sustainability. This combined with climate

friendly cabins driven by solar cells created along the ATV road to Sisimiut, could add a relevant

niche tourism in Kangerlussuaq.

Another addition that could attract more tourist to Kangerlussuaq is if the tourism season could be

expanded. There are of course limitations due to the darkness and the extreme cold weather during

the winter. But if the image of Greenland is ice and snow, trips on dog sleds and igloos, then an

expansion of the season to include the earlier spring and the later fall might be a way of offering

46

tourists this experience. Within the colder season it would also be possible to recreate an ice hotel,

which could give tourists an exceptional experience for life.

8. Conclusion The point of departure of this project has been to answer our problem formulation, which is:

What are the challenges and possibilities of developing Kangerlussuaq as a tourist

destination seen from the local perspective and tourist expectations, and can experiences

from other destinations be applied at Kangerlussuaq?

Investigating locals’ and tourists’ perceptions through our survey, combined with tourism strategies

from various destinations, have provided us with a greater understanding of the tourism situation in

Kangerlussuaq. Furthermore by applying various theories regarding destination development, we

have been able to answer the problem formulation of this project.

According to the findings in our survey, the majority of the local inhabitants of the settlement

welcome the thought of more tourists visiting and spending their vacation in Kangerlussuaq. They

stress the importance of preserving the nature and creating sustainable tourism opportunities.

Additionally, they see many opportunities for improvements and other types of tourism activities

for instance Northern Light igloos and better hiking cabins.

Most of the tourists who have visited Kangerlussuaq emphasise the importance of the accessibility

from the settlement to the inland ice and the extraordinary nature that surrounds the settlement.

They also express the need for improvement when it comes to accommodation and dining options

in Kangerlussuaq as well as more and better choices of tourism activities to take part in.

When it comes to developing a tourism strategy for Kangerlussuaq, an inspiration could be other

Arctic destinations and to look at how they have chosen to actively use the Arctic setting and its

attributes in their tourism development strategies. Moreover it could be beneficial to enhance the

cooperation and coordination between nearby destinations such as Sisimiut and Ilulissat.

The current challenges of developing Kangerlussuaq are centered around the dependency of the

airport and the images of the settlement as a transit point rather than a tourist destination.

The ongoing discussion about the future of the airport and the uncertainty this unsettled decision of

whether Kangerlussuaq will remain the main entrance port to Greenland, has an influence on the

tourism investment in the area, but at the same time it creates a need to develop the tourism industry

in order to make new businesses and create new jobs. The limitations of the settlement in terms of

accommodation and infrastructure are other great challenges and hinder the introduction of mass

tourism. Another big challenge is the location of the settlement, which limits the season due to the

Arctic climate. The lack of a coastline and traces of a previous indigenous culture is a challenge

47

when attracting tourists and living up to the expectations of the more stereotypical visitor of

Greenland. This is, however, also the strength of the destination and provides Kangerlussuaq with

the possibility of developing niche tourism and creating unique experiences for tourists to engage

in. The area poses great possibilities when focusing on niches such as event tourism, climate

tourism and luxury tourism. Moreover, other possibilities include Kangerlussuaq’s proximity to the

ice cap, the perfect conditions to experience the Northern Lights, and the unique nature which

invites the visitors to spend time hiking and hunting.

48

9. References

Air Greenland. (n.d.). Accommodation in Kangerlussuaq. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from https://www.airgreenland.com/destinations/greenland/kangerlussuaq/accommodation-in-kangerlussuaq

Air Iceland. (n.d.). Fly til Kangerlussuaq Grønland med Air Iceland. Retrieved December 14, 2015, from https://www.airiceland.dk/destinationer/gronland/kangerlussuaq

Anderson, M. J. (1991). Problems with tourism development in Canada's eastern Arctic. Tourism management, 12(3), 209-220. doi: 10.1016/0261-5177(91)90005-E

Bryman, A. (2008). Social Research Methods.(3rd ed.) Oxford:Oxford University Press

Bruner, E. (2005). Culture on Tour:Ethnographies of Travel. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Dollerup-Scheibel, M. (2015, November 10). Nye undersøgelser af Kangerlussuaq Lufthavn. Sermitsiaq.AG. Retrieved December 14, 2015, from http://sermitsiaq.ag/nye-undersoegelser-kangerlussuaq-lufthavn

Dreyfous, L. (1992). Air Force Leaves Greenland Base After 50 Years. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved November 23, 2015, from http://articles.latimes.com/1992-10-18/news/mn-1103_1_u-s-air-force

Dzik, A. J. (2014). Kangerlussuaq: evolution and maturation of a cultural landscape in Greenland. Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, 24(24), 57-69. doi: 10.2478/bog-2014-0014

Greenland Outdoors (n.d.). Outdoor Holiday Adventures In Greenland. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from http://www.greenlandoutdoors.com

Grønlands Selvstyre (2015). Turisme: Udvikling og Vækst gennem ændret Lufthavnsstruktur. Rambøll. Retrieved from http://naalakkersuisut.gl/~/media/Nanoq/Files/Publications/Erhverv/Turisme%20udvikling%20og%20vaekst%20gennem%20aendret%20lufthavnsstruktur/TURISME%20-%20UDVIKLING%20OG%20V%C3%86KST%20GENNEM%20%C3%86NDRET%20LUFTHAVNSSTRUKTUR%20DK.pdf

Grønnow, B. (2009). Blessings and Horrors of the Interior: Etno-Historical Studies of Inuit perceptions concerning the inland region of west Greenland, Arctic Anthropology, Vol. 46, pp.191-201.

Grybovych, O., & Hafermann, D. (2010). Sustainable practices of community tourism planning: lessons from a remote community. Community Development, 41(3), 354-369. doi: 10.1080/15575330903444085

49

Haugland, S. A., Ness, H., Grønseth, B., & Aarstad, J. (2011). Development of tourism destinations:An integrated Multilevel Perspective. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 268-290. doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2010.08.008

Jensen, J. F, Bisgaard, I., & Heinrich, J. (2015). Kangerlussuaq / Sondrestrom Air Base. Kulturstyrelsen. pp. 192-196 Retrieved from http://www.kulturstyrelsen.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/dokumenter/KS/service/publikationer/kulturarv/Sektion_04._Groenland.pdf

Kakslauttanen Arctic Resort (n.d.). About us. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from http://www.kakslauttanen.fi/en/about-us/#top

Keller, C. P. (1987). Stages of peripheral tourism development — Canada's northwest territories. Tourism management, 8(1), 20-32. doi: 10.1016/0261-5177(87)90036-7

Lapland Above Ordinary (n.d). Welcome to Lapland. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from http://www.lapland.fi/en/home

Lonely Planet (n.d.). Best in Travel 2016 - Greenland. Lonelyplanet.com. Retrieved December 14, 2015, from http://www.lonelyplanet.com/best-in-travel/countries/9

Luiro, S. (2013). Lapland - Above ordinary. Lapland Tourism Development and Strategy. Matkailu.luc.fi. Retrieved December 11, 2015, from http://matkailu.luc.fi/loader.aspx?id=1aacbbe8-cb33-46e0-a892-cece0b24a9b6

Mehmetoglu, M., & Engen, M. (2011). Pine and Gilmore's Concept of Experience Economy and Its Dimensions: An Empirical Examination in Tourism. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 12(4), 237-255. doi: 10.1080/1528008X.2011.541847

Moscardo, G. (2005). Peripheral Tourism Development: Challenges, Issues and Success Factors. Tourism Recreation Research. 30(1). 27-43. DOI: 10.1080/02508281.2005.11081231

National Turismestrategi 2012-2015. (2012). Nuuk: Naalakkersuisut - Government of Greenland. Retrieved December 14, 2015, from http://climategreenland.gl/media/19173/National-turismestrategi-2012-2015.pdf

Netredaktionen. (2011, November 23). Kangerlussuaq lukkes. Sermitsiaq.AG. Retrieved December 17, 2015, from http://sermitsiaq.ag/kangerlussuaq-lukkes

North Safari Outfitters (n.d). North Safari Outfitters - Greenland. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from http://www.northsafari.com/UK/

Nutall, M. (2004), Encyclopedia of the Arctic - Volume 1: A-F, London: Routledge.

O’Leary, R. (2003) Social Surveys. In R. Miller, & J. Brewer (Eds.), The A-Z of social research.(pp. 302-305) London, England: SAGE Publications, Ltd.

50

Olsen, M. (2015, November 2). ATV spor mellem Sisimiut og Kangerlussuaq:Vejen til bedre udnyttelse af de levende ressourcer. Qeqqata Kommunia. Retrieved December 9, 2015, from http://www.qeqqata.gl/Nyheder/2015/11/ATV_Spor.aspx?sc_lang=da

Pine, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1999). The Experience Economy : Work is Theatre & Every Business a Stage. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Polar Circle Marathon (n.d.). Polar Circle Marathon. Retrieved December 14, 2015, from http://polar-circle-marathon.com/

Polar Circle Marathon Results (n.d.). Polar Circle Marathon @ UltimateLIVE.Retrieved December 17, 2015, from http://live.ultimate.dk/desktop/front/?eventid=2981&language=us

Quqqata Kommunia (n.d.). Arctic Circle Trail. Retrieved December 17, 2015, from http://www.qeqqata.gl/Emner/Turisme/ACT.aspx?sc_lang=da

Quqqata Kommunia UNESCO (n.d.).UNESCO verdensarvsområde i Qeqqata Kommunia. December 17, 2015, from http://www.qeqqata.gl/Emner/Om_kommunen/UNESCO?sc_lang=da

Rottbøll, E. (2013, August 5). Den grønlandske turisme har plads til forbedring. Information. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from http://www.information.dk/468139

Rusko, R., Merenheimo, P., & Haanpää, M. (2013). Coopetition, resource-based view and legend: Cases of Christmas Tourism and City of Rovaniemi. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 5(6), 37-51. doi: 10.5539/ijms.v5n6p37

Santa Claus Village (n.d.). History of Santa Claus Village at the Arctic Circle in Rovaniemi in Lapland Finland | Santa Claus Village. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from http://www.santaclausvillage.info/history/#show_more

Statistics Finland (n.d). Visitor arrivals and nights spend in hotels by Year, Month, Data, Region and Country-PX-Web. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from http://pxnet2.stat.fi/PXWeb/pxweb/en/StatFin/StatFin__lii__matk/020_matk_tau_102_en.px/table/tableViewLayout1/?rxid=c444a3aa-6ac8-4003-b855-bed2d957a475

Stewart, E. J., Draper, D., Johnston, M. E. (2005). A review of tourism research in the polar regions. Arctic. 58(04). pp 383-394.

Taylor, A. (2013, 8 Jan). Greenland Is Making A Big Push To Be The Next Iceland. Business Insider. Retrieved December 14, 2015, from http://www.businessinsider.com/visit-greenland-releases-tourism-videos-2013-1?IR=T

Visit Greenland Kangerlussuaq (n.d.). Kangerlussuaq – nature and wildlife in Greenland. Retrieved December 6, 2015, from http://www.greenland.com/en/destinations/arctic-circle-region/kangerlussuaq/

Visit Greenland Roklubben (n.d) Roklubben. Retrieved December 17, 2015, from

51

http://www.greenland.com/en/providers/restaurant-roklubben/

Williams, S., & Lew, A. (2015). Tourism Geography:Critical Understandings of Place, Space and Experience. London: Routledge.

Weatherspark (n.d). Average Weather For Kangerlussuaq (Søndre Strømfjord), Greenland - Retrieved November 28, 2015, from https://weatherspark.com/averages/27554/Kangerlussuaq-S-ndre-Str-mfjord-Kitaa-Greenland

World of Greenland (n.d). Kangerlussuaq | World of Greenland - Arctic Circle. Retrieved November 28, 2015, from http://wogac.com/kangerlussuaq