Ditching the sunlounger in favour of war-torn environments and ever-present risks may not not be a conventional getaway, but for a select few ‘danger tourists’ this constitutes a holiday.
The concept of so-called danger tourism has no specific definition, as being in danger and heading to extreme locations can mean something different from one person to the next, and what motivates someone to embark on this type of niche travel will vary considerably.
People who take dangerous journeys for the sake of adventure are well documented online, such as Youtuber Miles Routledge, who describes himself as “the last Great British Explorer, who goes to the most extreme places on Earth for fun”. In 2023, Mr Routledge ended up in the custody of the Taliban in Afghanistan along with three other British nationals before being released in October of that year. The tourist had previously received widespread criticism for travelling to Afghanistan in August 2021 despite the Taliban takeover and had to be evacuated by the UK military.
Incidents like these are not isolated. More recently, couple Craig and Lindsay Foreman were detained in Iran while on a round-the-world motorcycle trip and have been charged with espionage. Ms Foreman said they travelled to the country “despite the advice of friends, family and the [Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office]”.
“Why? Because we believe that, no matter where you are in the world, most people are good, kind humans striving for a meaningful life,” she added on her social media before the events unfolded.
It’s clear that motivations behind travelling to risky areas are not all the same, yet this type of tourism has stirred up criticism over how ethical it is. When things go wrong, the repercussions can be disastrous, but who gets to choose whats labelled as ‘dangerous’? And how much of this travel is focused on the people, culture and history of the destination rather than risk-taking and danger-seeking?
Read more: What is ‘dark tourism’? Why tourists visit destinations with tragic histories
The difference between danger and extreme tourism
While the two are often used interchangeably, Marcus Hansen, a senior lecturer in tourism and events management at Liverpool John Moors University, who has written extensively on adventure tourism and risk management, argues that “danger tourism is even more extreme than extreme tourism” as there can be a difference in the levels of risk between the two.
When considering danger tourism, we usually think of visiting war-torn locations, also known as ‘war tourism’, as well as heading into areas with high crime rates, levels of instability or exploring regions where governments do not recommend their citizens travel to.
The most dangerous type of travel can arguably be someone who independently goes to an area branded as dangerous, without a tour guide or essential knowledge.
Then there are types of travel such as exploring jungles, climbing mountains, trekking across deserts or going on expeditions in the Antarctic. Many of these activities can be described as adventure travel – taking part in physically challenging activities – yet they are often defined as ‘extreme’ due to the training and financial lengths it takes for a tourist to get there.
However, a personal goal to reach the summit of the most difficult mountains or be one of the few to explore Antarctica is not comparable to a tourist purposefully entering conflict areas and relying on governments to come to rescue them.
While both types of tourism can be labelled as ‘extreme’, it can be argued the two are very different.
“Some are questioning the extent to which Mount Everest is still truly extreme, given the amount of people that climb it every year now. But it’s not a homogenous type of activity,” Mr Hansen explained to The Independent. “So, there are lots of ‘branches’ that fall under the term as a result.”
Read more: From apitourism to agritourism, unusual ways to travel ethically in 2025
While adventure tourism is becoming increasingly popular, it is usually well-regulated and many reputable companies will allow travellers to step outside their comfort zone in harsh climates safely, following countries’ travel guidance and national laws.
Mr Hansen says that the word “extreme” can be used when something adventurous has not been well-established in the tourism sector, such as diving to the bottom of the ocean. The tragic ending of the Titan submersible showed how dangerous this can be. The aim was to visit the Titanic wreckage as part of a tourist expedition but ended in the loss of five lives.
“Most of these activities are unregulated and there is a high chance of serious injury to the people involved,” Mr Hansen said. “That’s where it becomes extreme tourism. It’s simply dangerous and probably not advisable to participate in.”
What all these types of tourism do have in common, however, is the long list of motivations that people have to seek a thrill.
“Freedom, escape, personal development, boundaries, risk-seeking, self-actualisation, thrill, control, overcoming fears,” Mr Hansen listed. “To some, it’s also about the glamour and the novelty of the experience.”
“In general, in society we are increasingly looking to escape risk-averse, mundane lives and push ourselves to explore and engage in unique and meaningful experiences.
“I suppose you could say that to some it’s about getting in touch with our inner selves, which happens when we are right on the edge of what we’re actually capable of doing, or putting ourselves in risky situations.”
What happens when danger tourism becomes purely about the ‘thrill’
Danger tourism, specifically entering war zones, dangerous countries, or places with high crime rates, has an element of controversy surrounding it especially when it comes to people travelling to a place purely because they are chasing a thrill.
That is not to say that all danger tourists do not have a genuine interest in the place that they are visiting, as the curiosity of other cultures has long fuelled the desire to travel beyond simply booking a beach holiday.
In February 2025, North Korea reopened to foreign visitors for the first time since the pandemic, allowing tourists to be bused across the border to the city of Rason. Tours have already been selling out and Britons have been among the first to make the journey despite Foreign Office advice against all but essential travel.
While the Foreign Office states that there are “significant risks” for visitors to North Korea due to its security situation, many travellers are still willing to travel to the country.
However, critics of this type of tourism suggest that it is voyeuristic.
Speaking to The Independent about danger tourism, Debbie Lisle, a professor of International Relations at Queen’s University Belfast, questioned: “Who gets to entertain these feelings and act on them, and who becomes the object that these privileged travellers gaze upon to make themselves feel more ‘alive’”.
“It seems to be a profoundly solipsistic enterprise that is not about interest in other cultures at all.”
Ms Lisle has written about the relationship between war and tourism, and highlights how the countries can be othered and commodified in the pursuit of exciting travel.
She said: “I would say we need to be pretty careful when we divide the world according to safe and dangerous places and to think about how that division maps onto colonial histories.
“We might also want to ask basic questions of inequality and privilege such as who can afford or has the opportunity to travel, who becomes an object for the traveller’s gaze?”
Read more: The destinations cracking down on overtourism
Should we stick to other types of travel?
There are many opportunities for travellers to chase thrills while acting responsibly.
Shackleton, an adventure travel company that hosts safe and industry-leading challenge expeditions in unique locations led by expert guides, says that one of the most important elements when embarking on trips like this is ensuring people are as ready as possible, with months of mental and physical preparedness.
“People are normally drawn to Shackleton Challenges specifically because they want to expand their comfort zone and test themselves in an environment that is both physically and mentally demanding, but within a structure that mitigates the potential safety issues and more often than not would simply not be accessible without the relevant expertise,” the group said.
The company is not in any way associated with danger or war tourism; its expertise lies in challenges in acute environments, from the polar conditions of Antarctica to the Himalayan mountains and the Arabian desert. Shackleton travellers include 44-year-old dentist Cat Burford who became the 13th woman in history to ski solo and unsupported to the South Pole in January 2025 under Shackleton’s programme.
She said: "My solo South Pole expedition was driven by a deep belief that I could do it and a lifelong fascination with Antarctica, sparked by a geography teacher and the stories of great explorers. Initially, my goal was simply to experience Antarctica in an immersive way.
“Seeing other women in the polar world and hearing very different stories was refreshing and hugely motivating, and with the right mentors, my confidence grew.
“Before I knew it, I was crossing Greenland on a 39-day expedition and the dream of skiing to the South Pole was truly in sight.
“This was a unique opportunity to really test myself. I had always felt capable, but here was a chance to prove it to myself, and to test my mental resilience by experiencing 53 days of isolation."
A spokesperson for the Shackleton brand added: “Adventure tourism and extreme tourism is not binary, it’s all part of a continuum from city breaks to the South Pole.”
“To many individuals, whether an expedition is considered adventure or extreme is in the eye of the beholder.”
