David and Amina, a married couple, arrive at Nyungwe National Park for a weekend getaway. David, originally from Algeria but now a resident of Rwanda for 3 years, reaches for his wallet to pay $60. His wife Amina, a Rwandan citizen, pays 10,000 RWF. Despite sharing the same household, and raising their children as proud Rwandans, they face vastly different pricing simply because of David’s nationality.
In another scenario, Emmanuel, a Nigerian who’s called Rwanda home for almost a decade, plans a hiking trip to Nyungwe with his Rwandan friends. Whilst his friends pay 10,000 RWF each, Emmanuel faces a $60 charge; ten times more expensive despite his deep roots in the community, and his contributions to Rwanda’s development.
Rwanda’s current Nyungwe National Park pricing structure, managed by African Parks, exemplifies this divide. The 2025-2026 entrance fees are set at 10,000 RWF for Rwandan and East African Community citizens, whilst foreign residents in Rwanda face a $60 charge, the same rate applied to African citizens from outside the EAC and other international visitors. Notably, residents must pay in US dollars rather than the local currency they use for everything else in their daily lives.
The Anatomy of Tourism’s Pricing Puzzle
The tiered pricing system has become so normalised that few question its logic. Some argue that dual pricing is justified as it helps support the local economy and ensures that locals can afford basic goods and services, yet this reasoning falls short when examining the treatment of long-term residents versus visiting nationals.
Proponents of tiered pricing typically cite several justifications. Tourism officials argue that international visitors have greater spending power and can afford higher fees. They point to revenue generation for conservation efforts and infrastructure development. Some suggest it prevents pricing out local communities from their own heritage sites.
Yet these arguments crumble under scrutiny. Two-tiered pricing is spreading to protect fragile resources, ease pressure on local communities, and ensure that these places survive for future generations, but this ignores the contribution that residents make to these very communities.
Consider the expatriate teacher working in rural Rwanda, the refugee who’s built a successful business in Kigali, or the international development worker whose children attend local schools. These individuals contribute to Rwanda’s social fabric and economic growth, yet face the same pricing barriers as tourists on their first visit.
This creates an uncomfortable paradox. If domestic tourism truly includes both nationals and residents, why does pricing policy suggest otherwise? The answer often lies in outdated assumptions about wealth, contribution, and belonging that no longer reflect modern Africa’s reality.
The current system essentially penalises integration whilst rewarding isolation. It suggests that residency status matters less than passport colour, undermining the very notion of inclusive development that Rwanda champions.
When Fairness Meets Practicality
The distinction between locals and residents in pricing structures creates practical headaches too. Defining residency becomes complex: Does it require formal work permits? How long must someone live in the country? What about dual nationals or naturalised citizens?
The policy has sparked debate over fairness and the feasibility of distinguishing tourists from local residents, highlighting implementation challenges that extend beyond Rwanda’s borders. Countries implementing such systems often struggle with verification, fraud, and the administrative burden of multiple pricing tiers.
Moreover, residents who pay international rates whilst contributing to the local economy through taxes and spending may feel alienated from the very communities they’ve chosen to join. This seems particularly counterproductive for countries seeking to attract and retain international talent and investment.
The Innovation Opportunity
Rwanda’s tourism sector broke records in 2024, contributing 9.8% to the economy with domestic spending above pre-pandemic levels by almost one third. This success provides the perfect foundation for reimagining tourism pricing structures.
Rather than perpetuating colonial-era assumptions about who belongs where, Rwanda could pioneer a more nuanced approach. A unified resident pricing structure—covering both nationals and documented residents—would signal genuine inclusivity whilst maintaining necessary revenue streams from genuine tourists.
Such a system could differentiate between short-term visitors (under 90 days) and established residents, regardless of nationality. This would acknowledge that someone who’s chosen to make Rwanda home contributes to its development in ways that extend far beyond tourism spending.
The technology exists to implement such systems efficiently. Digital platforms could verify residency status through integration with immigration databases, work permit systems, and tax records. Smart cards or digital passes could streamline entry processes whilst ensuring appropriate pricing.
Learning from Progressive Approaches
Interestingly, some destinations have found more inclusive solutions. South Africa’s approach to Kruger National Park offers a compelling model. The park maintains two pricing tiers: South African citizens and residents pay ZAR 128 per adult per day, whilst international visitors pay ZAR 535. Crucially, both citizens and residents; regardless of their nationality qualify for the same reduced rate upon presenting valid identification.
This unified approach recognises that residency represents commitment and contribution to the country. A British academic working at the University of Cape Town receives the same conservation fee rate as their South African colleague, acknowledging their shared investment in the country’s natural heritage.
Such systems demonstrate that fair pricing needn’t compromise revenue generation. By treating residents as stakeholders rather than outsiders, destinations can build stronger community connections whilst maintaining necessary income streams for conservation and development.
The Domestic Tourism Dividend
Unified resident pricing could significantly boost domestic tourism participation. When expatriate families, long-term residents, and returned diaspora members face the same barriers as first-time tourists, they’re less likely to explore their adopted country’s attractions regularly.
Yet these are precisely the people who become tourism ambassadors, sharing experiences with visiting friends and family, posting on social media, and contributing to word-of-mouth marketing. Their exclusion from domestic pricing represents a missed opportunity for organic tourism promotion.
Furthermore, residents often visit attractions multiple times, bringing different guests and contributing to sustained revenue rather than one-off payments. A resident working in Kigali might visit Akagera National Park several times per year with different visitors, generating more long-term revenue than a single tourist visit.
Rwanda’s Leadership Moment
Rwanda has consistently positioned itself at the forefront of African innovation, from implementing visa-free travel for all Africans to pioneering drone deliveries and leading continental integration efforts. The country’s commitment to open borders and African unity, demonstrated through policies like continental visa-free access, reflects a progressive vision that could naturally extend to tourism pricing.
The country’s approach to governance, technology adoption, and inclusive development has inspired continental peers. Tourism pricing reform represents another opportunity for Rwanda to lead by example, showing that true domestic tourism includes everyone who’s chosen to make Rwanda home—regardless of their passport’s origin.
Such leadership would resonate across Africa, where intra-continental migration, international partnerships, and diaspora engagement are increasingly important for development. Countries watching Rwanda’s tourism success would likely examine and potentially adopt similar approaches.
The ripple effects could extend beyond tourism. Fairer pricing structures signal genuine inclusion, potentially attracting more international talent, investment, and partnership opportunities. They demonstrate that Rwanda views residents as integral community members rather than temporary economic contributors.
The Path Forward
Implementing unified resident pricing needn’t mean lost revenue. Smart pricing strategies could maintain income whilst enhancing fairness. Seasonal adjustments, group discounts, or loyalty programmes could replace nationality-based discrimination with market-responsive mechanisms.
The key lies in shifting focus from who visitors are to how they engage with Rwanda’s tourism offerings. Repeat visitors—whether Rwandan nationals or long-term residents—demonstrate commitment to the country’s attractions and deserve recognition through pricing policies.
Technology can facilitate this transition. Digital platforms could track visit history, residency status, and contribution levels, enabling sophisticated pricing models that reward engagement whilst maintaining necessary revenue streams.
Most importantly, such changes would align Rwanda’s tourism pricing with its broader national values of unity, inclusion, and progress. The country that famously declared “We are all Rwandans” in its post-genocide rebuilding could extend this philosophy to tourism policy.
Conclusion: Beyond Passports and Prejudice
The current tourism pricing divide reflects outdated assumptions about nationality, wealth, and belonging that don’t match modern realities. As Rwanda continues building its reputation as Africa’s innovation hub, addressing these inconsistencies represents both an opportunity and an imperative.
True domestic tourism encompasses everyone who calls a country home, contributing to its economy and society regardless of their passport’s origin. Rwanda has the vision, infrastructure, and leadership capability to pioneer fairer tourism pricing across Africa.
By recognising residents as genuine community members rather than temporary guests, Rwanda could boost domestic tourism participation, enhance its reputation for inclusion, and inspire continental peers to examine their own practices. The country that has consistently chosen unity over division now has the chance to lead Africa towards tourism policies that reflect this choice.
The question isn’t whether Rwanda can afford to make this change—it’s whether the country can afford not to lead this necessary evolution. With tourism breaking records and contributing nearly 10% to the economy, Rwanda has the foundation needed to pioneer a fairer, more inclusive approach that could reshape African tourism for the better.
Innovation has always been about seeing beyond current limitations to imagine better possibilities. In tourism pricing, that better possibility is a Rwanda where everyone who’s chosen to build their life in the Land of a Thousand Hills is welcomed as they truly are: home.
