Historical dataset showing Greenland tourist spending by year from N/A to N/A.

The number of travelers in Greenland decreased in 2020 over the previous year, due to the impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Overall, domestic tourists accounted for the highest number of travelers in Greenland, with almost ** thousand visitors in 2020. Danish tourists ranked second on the list, with about ** thousand travelers in 2020.

How many travelers visit the different regions in Greenland? The number of travelers in Greenland decreased across all regions in 2020 over the previous year, due to the impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Overall, the region of Avannaata and Qeqertalik recorded the highest figure in 2020, attracting almost ** thousand visitors, whereas this area reported nearly ** thousand travelers in 2019.

Data collection and GIS data service to the report Regional baseline assessment (RBA) for South Greenland, Scientific Report from DCE – Danish Centre for Environment and Energy No. 482 edited by Janne Fritt-Rasmussen, Katrine Raundrup and Anders Mosbech. The project was funded by Environmental Agency for Mineral Resource Activities.This regional environmental baseline assessment of mining activities in South Greenland is based on a project idea developed between Environmental Agency for Mineral Resource Activities (EAMRA), Greenland Institute of Natural Resources (GINR) and DCE (AU). The purpose of the project is to provide a basis for supporting environmentally sound planning and regulation of mining activities by summarising existing regional background information supplemented with new studies and making these results operational and easily accessible.Detailed information on each layer can be found in the report. The online map is primarily for display and overview.Citation:Fritt-Rasmussen, J., Raundrup, K. & Mosbech, A. (Eds). 2022. Regional baseline assessment (RBA) for South Greenland. Aarhus University, DCE – Danish Centre for Environment and Energy, 172 pp. Scientific Report No. 482 https://dce2.au.dk/pub/SR482.pdfData service URL for GISCaptions to the layers of the report figures

1.1. Area of interest of the Regional Baseline Assessment of South Greenland.

4.1. Harbour seal Area within which harbour seals are found in the AOI. During breeding and moulting, one or more specific haul-out sites within the marked are used (Rosing-Asvid et al. 2020).

4.2. White-tailed eagle territories Number of white-tailed eagle territories in the central and northern part of the AOI. The species also breeds in the southern part, but the numbers are unknown. The squares are 10x10 km, absence of squares represents “no data available”. Based on data from Frank Wille before 2000, DCE AU Data Center.

4.3. Moulting harlequin ducks observed during a survey in summer 1999. DCE AU Data Center.

4.4. Black-legged kittiwake colony locations and size as number of breeding pairs. Data from Greenland Seabird Colony Register, DCE AU Data Center.

4.5. Arctic tern colony locations and size as number of individuals. Data from Greenland Seabird Colony Register, DCE AU Data Center.

4.6. Razorbill colony locations and size as number of individuals. Data from Greenland Seabird Colony Register, DCE AU Data Center.

4.7. Thick-billed murre colony locations Data from Greenland Seabird Colony Register, DCE AU Data Center.

4.7. Thick-billed murre winter areas Data from Greenland Seabird Colony Register, DCE AU Data Center.

4.8. Atlantic puffin colony locations and size as number of individuals. Data from Greenland Seabird Colony Register, DCE AU Data Center.

4.9. Northern fulmar colony locations and size in number of individuals. Data from Greenland Seabird Colony Register, DCE AU Data Center.

4.10. Common eider colonies Data from Merkel et al. (2019). Many of the smallest dots represent breeding colonies with an unknown number of birds. DCE AU Data Center.

4.10. Common eider wintering areas Data from Merkel et al. (2019), DCE AU Data Center.

4.11. Red listed plants Distribution map of observations of red listed (vulnerable and near threatened) plants in the AOI. GINR Dept. of Environment and Minerals.

4.11. Possible area for red listed plants The geographical precision of the individual observations is fairly low, thus a buffer zone (of 8 km, cut off by coastline and 800 m altitude line) of each observation is included in the map (the possible area for the red listed plants). GINR Dept. of Environment and Minerals.

4.13. Bird protection area Source: NatureMap Protected Areas layer, Executive Order on Birds.

4.13. Natural Protection Act area Source: NatureMap Protected Areas layer, Act on Nature Protection.

4.14. Biological important areas The three ecological and biological important areas located in the AOI marked as 17, 18 and 19 in the report by Christensen et al. (2016). For location names mentioned in the text, please refer to Figure 1.1 and the species-specific figures in this chapter.

5.1. Agricultural fields Data from the Municipality Plan for Kommune Kujalleq.

5.1. Agricultural zones Data from the Municipality Plan for Kommune Kujalleq

5.1. Grazing regions. Reference: Government of Greenland.

5.1. Planning zones Data from the Municipality Plan for Kommune Kujalleq.

5.1. Plantations Source: Katrine Raundrup and Karl Brix Zinglersen review of literature and local’s personal comments.

5.2. Muskox population The muskox introduction area at Nanortalik is marked in yellow. Northwest of the AOI, the Ivittuut muskox population is found (also marked in yellow). Source: Christine Cuyler and Karl Brix Zinglersen, Greenland Institute of Natural Resources.

5.2. Reindeer herding areas Reindeer herding areas (marked in purple). The westernmost area is "Isortoq" and the easternmost "Tuttutooq". Source: Christine Cuyler, Katrine Raundrup, and Karl Brix Zinglersen, Greenland Institute of Natural Resources.

5.4. Arctic char catchment. Source: DCE AU Data Center.

5.4. Arctic char river Source: Christensen et al. (2016).

5.5. Atlantic cod Average catches of Atlantic cod in kilos per year (2014-2019). The squares refer to the individual fishery field codes (statistical catch squares). The individual dots are centered in each of the relevant squares and thus do not necessarily refer to the specific catch position within the field code area. Source: LULI database, Greenland Fishery Licence Control.

5.6. Greenland halibut average Average catches of Greenland halibut in kilos per year (2014-2019). The squares refer to the individual fishery field codes (statistical catch squares). The individual dots are centered in each of the relevant squares and thus do not necessarily refer to the specific catch position within the field code area. Source: LULI database, Greenland Fishery Licence Control.

5.7. Lumpfish roe Average catches of lumpfish roe in tons per year (2014-2018). The squares refer to the individual fishery field codes (statistical catch squares). The colour coding refers to the average catch in each of the squares. Source: LULI database, Greenland Fishery Licence Control.

5.8. Northern shrimp Average catches of northern shrimp in kilos per year (2014-2018). The squares refer to the individual fishery field codes (statistical catch squares). The individual dots are centered in each of the relevant squares and thus do not necessarily refer to the specific catch position within the field code area. Source: LULI database, Greenland Fishery Licence Control.

5.9. Snow crab Average catches of snow crab in kilos per year during the period 2014-2019. The squares refer to the individual fishery field codes (statistical catch squares). The individual dots are centered in each of the relevant squares and do thus not necessarily refer to the specific catch position within the field code area. Source: LULI database, Greenland Fishery Licence Control.

5.11. Driving zone for power line Data from the Municipality Plan for Kommune Kujalleq).

5.11. Driving zone snow mobile Data from the Municipality Plan for Kommune Kujalleq.

5.11. Hiking trails Data from the Municipality Plan for Kommune Kujalleq.

5.12. Oil spill sensitivity Oil spill sensitivity along the coast in South Greenland (from Mosbech et al. (2004)).

7.1. Overlay analysis all layers Result of overlay analysis of all 51 map layers listed in Table 7.1, spanning flora and fauna, human use and cultural heritage interests. The maximum cell values are 14, reflecting that in these cells features from 14 different map layers overlap.

7.2. Larger mining projects

7.3. Overlay analysis biological layers Result of overlay analysis of 34 map layers with mainly biologically relevant information (see column “Sub-analysis, biology” in Table 7.1 for included map layers).

7.4. Overlay analysis human use Result of overlay analysis of 29 map layers with mainly human use and cultural heritage relevant information (see column “Sub-analysis, human use” in Table 7.1 for included map layers).

Fishery field codes Statistical catch squares. Source: LULI database, Greenland Fishery Licence Control.

Moldova Visitor Arrivals: Other Countries: Greenland data was reported at 0.000 Person in 2017. This stayed constant from the previous number of 0.000 Person for 2016. Moldova Visitor Arrivals: Other Countries: Greenland data is updated yearly, averaging 0.000 Person from Dec 1992 (Median) to 2017, with 26 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 2.000 Person in 2001 and a record low of 0.000 Person in 2017. Moldova Visitor Arrivals: Other Countries: Greenland data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Bureau of Statistics of the Republic of Moldova. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Moldova – Table MD.Q001: Visitor Arrivals.

In 2021, the highest number of overnight stays in Greenland varied by country of residence. Denmark was the country with the highest number of tourists outside of Greenland, with nearly ** thousand overnight stays in that year.

Mexico Visitor Arrivals: Foreign: Greenland data was reported at 0.000 Person in Mar 2025. This stayed constant from the previous number of 0.000 Person for Feb 2025. Mexico Visitor Arrivals: Foreign: Greenland data is updated monthly, averaging 0.000 Person from Jan 2012 (Median) to Mar 2025, with 159 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1.000 Person in Dec 2021 and a record low of 0.000 Person in Mar 2025. Mexico Visitor Arrivals: Foreign: Greenland data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Secretary of Tourism. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Mexico – Table MX.Q005: Visitor Arrivals: Foreign. [COVID-19-IMPACT]

Mongolia Visitor Arrivals: Year to Date: Foreigners: Greenland data was reported at 0.000 Person in Dec 2019. This stayed constant from the previous number of 0.000 Person for Sep 2019. Mongolia Visitor Arrivals: Year to Date: Foreigners: Greenland data is updated quarterly, averaging 0.000 Person from Jun 2015 (Median) to Dec 2019, with 6 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 0.000 Person in Dec 2019 and a record low of 0.000 Person in Dec 2019. Mongolia Visitor Arrivals: Year to Date: Foreigners: Greenland data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by National Statistics Office of Mongolia. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Mongolia – Table MN.Q001: Visitor Arrivals.

The number of overnight stays in Greenland decreased significantly in 2020 over the previous year, due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. In 2020, tourists in Greenland recorded approximately *** thousand overnight stays, whereas travelers reported nearly *** thousand overnight stays in 2019.

The global tourism real estate market is experiencing robust growth, driven by increasing global tourism, a rising middle class with disposable income, and a preference for unique travel experiences. The market, segmented by application (rental and sales) and type (landscape, commercial, holiday, and residential), shows significant potential across various regions. While data on precise market size and CAGR is unavailable, we can infer substantial growth based on the listed key players – prominent real estate developers like Evergrande, Vanke, and Country Garden – indicating a large-scale and competitive market. The considerable investment and development by these major companies suggest a healthy market capitalization, possibly in the tens of billions of dollars, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) likely exceeding 5%, possibly reaching 7-8%, reflecting the consistent demand for tourism-related properties. Growth is fueled by government initiatives promoting tourism, infrastructure development in key tourist destinations, and the evolving preferences of travelers seeking more immersive and personalized experiences. However, the market faces certain restraints. Economic downturns, fluctuating currency exchange rates, geopolitical instability, and the cyclical nature of the tourism industry can impact investment and demand. Moreover, sustainable tourism practices and environmental concerns are increasingly influencing development and investment decisions, necessitating environmentally conscious projects to remain competitive. Regional variations will also exist; regions with robust tourism infrastructure and established tourism sectors, like Europe and North America, will likely show steady growth, while emerging markets in Asia and Africa may experience more rapid, albeit potentially volatile, expansion. The ongoing competition among major developers is shaping the market landscape, requiring strategic positioning, innovative offerings, and a strong focus on customer experience to gain market share. Future growth will depend heavily on successful strategies addressing sustainability concerns and adapting to shifting traveler preferences.

Over the past ten years, the number of overnight stays in Greenland increased. In 2019, the most popular region was Avannaata and Qeqertalik, reaching over ** thousand overnight stays. The Ilulissat region had the second most overnight stays, amounting to around **** thousand, followed by **** thousand registered stays in the region of Sermersooq West.

This statistic shows the distribution of average overnight stays per guest in Greenland in 2019, by region. That year, the region of Sermersooq East had the highest share of average overnight stays per person, reaching ** percent. In comparison, the average overnight stay per person in the region of Avannaata and Qeqertalik, amounted to a share of **** percent.

This statistic displays the number of sled dogs in Greenland from 2006 to 2016. Over this period, the number of sled dogs in Greenland decreased annually. While there were roughly ** thousand sled dogs in 2006, the number had decreased to ** thousand animals in 2016. Dog sledding is an important part of the Greenlandic culture and a popular tourist activity. Sled dogs are mainly kept in Northern Greenland where winters last long enough to benefit from the dogs.