so only the richest should be able to visit such places? Probably from far away countries, whilst people from neighbouring countries are not able to see?
Having recently visited Iceland, I could see that the Reykjavik-area was near its limits. As was the airport (gate areas were overcrowded throughout the terminal). There's plenty of space elsewhere on the island, but the government and Iceland Air have done a really good job convincing tourists to do a quick stopover en route from the Americans to Europe.
And being a regular visitor to Scotland (Scottish by birth, though raised in the US), there are more and more tourists every time I go back. Skye is running into problems supporting the number of visitors at peak season - many showing up without planned accommodation, camping on roadside, etc. The NC500 route is similar - the area is desolate and lightly populated, but it's been pitched as a tourist destination - great to get people out of Edinburg, but facilities are barely adequate, at least at peak season.
It's also a popular layover destination, right?
IcelandAir also allows travelers to split their itinerary for no extra fee, so a few days in Reykjavik isn't too costly (just room/board). I assume WOW does the same.
I was there in mid-January and was amazed how busy both KEF and Reykjavik were for the "offseason." A few locals said there wasn't really an offseason any more.
Not saying it's fantastic, but if you have to ration a resource willingness to pay is a place to start.
I don't feel the same way about every resource (eg health and education) but whether you can visit some old town somewhere doesn't seem essential.
Those nice homes and cars have materials and resources invested into making them. The resources around tourist attractions are limited.
But I don't see why the locals living there would want to. They get to set the rules, and for them the money from rich tourists is certainly more attractive than being able to "show their culture" to a balanced sample of the world population.