279
Arctic Yearbook 2014
community level, regional level and international level simultaneously. Thus, when describing a
system of local practice in tourism, it is impossible to exclude outside complications entirely. On the
other hand the scope of this study is restricted to represent the perspective of the tourist hosts
specifically. The components that are described are thus limited to the accounts of the tourist hosts
and what they see as their system in everyday life. Due to this, the system boundaries were set on the
community and these specific actors. Also, the study does not account for climate impacts of air
travel.
Results
Norm-Adopting Individuals
Why are tourist hosts in Gunnarsbyn practicing tourism in the manner that they do today? The first research
question aims to describe how the tourist hosts are i) norm-adopting in sharing common pool
resources and; ii) learning in developing a practice that is sustainable for their community.
Common standpoints from the interviews emphasize that their practice is vulnerable because
governmental and municipal policies in Sweden are centralized, and efforts in the Swedish periphery
mostly serve traditional industries (forestry, mining, hydropower and agriculture). These efforts leave
little attention to the tourism industry and limit the possibilities of tourist hosts to invest in their
business and employ people. Work opportunities in the traditional industries are currently being
substituted by technology and outsourced to foreign companies, especially forestry, thus “the effect
is: fewer and fewer people that rely on the industry, which naturally leads to a demand for other
industries to be reliant on” (Lorentz, participant). Six main reasons to why the interviewees think
that the tourism industry is vulnerable in this area were deduced:
i. Attitudes that indicate that working in tourism is not economically stable, which makes people
prefer to be employed by traditional industries.
ii. Employment tax is too high for small-scale tourism companies to be able to employ other
people.
iii. Employment policies in Sweden are centralized.
iv. Services and infrastructure are centralized both on governmental and municipal levels and
reaches the community with great inertia even though they are paying the same taxes.
v. Despite active involvement in dialogue with politicians, influencing decision-making and
policies has not been fruitful.
vi. Marketing is essential for tourism, but tools for common marketing from government and
municipalities are lacking.
vii. Free movement through land provides freedom and opportunities, but it also creates the
dilemma of sharing natural resources with larger industries, forestry, mining and agriculture.
The interviewees emphasized that current subsidized industries are in decline and do not serve a
purpose for EA areas, and they have difficulties in seeing result