This article in:
For a year and six months now, the border between Finland and Russia has been closed along its entire length. What was claimed to be a temporary measure has apparently become a permanent factor, affecting also the cities of Eastern Finland. According to a November 2024 article in Taloussanomat, the economic losses to South Karelia from the lack of tourists from Russia are estimated by the Regional Council of South Karelia (Etelä-Karjalan liitto) to be up to a million euros a day.
‘In Eastern Finland, the closure of the border is reflected, for example, in increasingly worsening unemployment,’ states an YLE article from February 2025. According to an employment survey published by the Finnish Ministry of Economic Affair and Employment in February 2025, the increase in the number of unemployed job seekers nationwide was 13% - in the timeframe between February 2024 and February 2025. The anti-crisis measures for Eastern Finland announced by the state as early as 2024 have been long overdue, and in the meantime the string of bankruptcies continues.
In November 2023, the Finnish government announced an emergency security measure - the closure of several border crossing points on the border with Russia. The closure quickly covered all crossing points and, after several extensions, became permanent. In fact, only goods trains carrying strategic goods imported by Finland and the EU from Russia are now travelling across the land border.
Apart from the obvious violation of border agreements and EU regulations, the closure has had a major impact on the economy of Eastern Finland. According to the statement of Pasi Toropainen’s, CEO of the South Karelia Entrepreneurs Association (Etelä-Karjalan Yrittäjät), for an article in Kauppalehti of 04.04.2025 ‘Rajasulun aiheuttama isku suhteellisen kova’, after the opening of the eastern border it may take at least ten years to restore the previous volume of interactions - it appears from the text that interactions are understood not only as payment for goods and services by Russian tourists, but also the decisions of investors to invest in business related to the phenomenon of the presence or absence of Russian tourists in the region. The same article quotes Mika Peltonen, head of the South Karelia Chamber of Commerce, as saying: ‘South Karelia's trade and hospitality reached its maximum values in 2018-2019, when the region's daily revenue from these service areas alone reached 1 million euros’.
Apparently, this statement by both Mika Peltonen and the authors of the above-mentioned article in Taloussanomat refers to the study of external tourism to South Karelia in 2019, which the Regional Council of South Karelia commissioned the joint-stock company Tutkimus- ja analysointikeskus TAK Oy (research and analysis centre) to conduct. The results of the study were published on the Council's website on 13.05.2020. The article claims that Russian tourists left more than 310 million euros in Finland in 2019; at the same time, it was Russian tourism that brought the most significant part of South Karelia's income from external tourism - no less than 96.5 per cent (in total, foreign tourists spent more than 321 million euros in 2019). It is worth noting that the number of trips by Russians to South Karelia increased by 15% from 2018 to 2019, hence it can be concluded that if the border had not been closed to tourism, we could have expected an increase in the number of trips and, probably, the region's income in the following years as well. However, the loss estimates are based on 2019 figures, namely without taking into account potential growth.
Based on the data on revenue from Russian tourists, as well as statements by Toropainen and Peltonen, it can be concluded that the closure of the eastern border to Russian tourists has already caused and continues to cause enormous damage to the economy of at least South Karelia, where Russian tourism played a significant role. At the same time, it may take at least ten years to restore the previous volume of revenue and related investments.
The Taloussanomat article adds to the picture of the crisis: Kari Liuhto, a professor of economics at the University of Turku, who is himself from Joutseno in South Karelia, seriously fears that the entire region could be depopulated. ‘Figuratively speaking, it's the end of the world at the eastern border,’ says Kari Liuhto. In his opinion, desolation should be opposed for many reasons, including at the national level.
From an active crossroads of many transport routes, South Karelia has turned into a distant dead end in Europe. Medium-sized and small family businesses, which for years served the needs of tourists, both domestic and foreign, are forced to find new markets or close down. Kauppalehti writes, for example, about the Urheilu-Koskimies speciality shop, a 55-year-old company that is now in financial difficulties due to a sharp drop in demand. The current owner and director of the family business, Janne Koskimies, says: ‘For us, the best solution would be for the war not to start and the borders not to close. But such topics are not decided by us.’
However, the financial and collateral losses from the absence of Russian tourists do not only play a role for Eastern Finland. According to page 23 of the Finnish Government's tourism report published in early 2019 (which includes an infographic referring to Visit Finland's tourism survey), revenue from Russian tourism totalled €659 million in Finland in 2017. Russian tourists were also the most frequent overnight visitors to hotels as they accounted for 17.8 per cent of all overnight stays made by foreign tourists. We were not able to find similar data for 2018, but the Visit Finland presentation (the Finnish Government uses Visit Finland data and infographics for its tourism reports) for that year has data on spending from 2017 to 2019 - in 2018, spending by Russian tourists totalled €650 million. In 2017, spending was €734 million (revenue, remember, was estimated at €659 million). In 2019, according to pg. 32 of the Finnish Government's report ‘Towards a sustainable and secure future for tourism’ (‘Matkailun suuntana kestävä ja turvallinen tulevaisuus’), published in early 2021, revenue from Russian tourists was €632 million.
Thus, based on the values of Russian tourism income for 2017 and 2019 and the estimated income for 2018 (based on expenditure for that year), and assuming that income in subsequent years would have been at least as high as in the interval under consideration (assuming the border remained open), the closure of the eastern border to Russian tourists caused Finland a loss of at least half a billion euros each year since March 2020, when the border was closed to tourists due to the pandemic. From summer 2022 to September 2022, the border was reopened to Russian tourists, but this time period is too short to come into consideration for assessing the loss of profit.
At the same time, the reduction in health and social funding by just €170 million has already triggered a parliamentary confidence vote in the government. The income from Russian tourists alone would be more than enough not only to avoid such a cut, but also to develop this and other areas of public life, not by consolidating health and school units, but, on the contrary, by building and organising new ones.
For a year and six months now, the border between Finland and Russia has been closed along its entire length. What was claimed to be a temporary measure has apparently become a permanent factor, affecting also the cities of Eastern Finland. According to a November 2024 article in Taloussanomat, the economic losses to South Karelia from the lack of tourists from Russia are estimated by the Regional Council of South Karelia (Etelä-Karjalan liitto) to be up to a million euros a day.
‘In Eastern Finland, the closure of the border is reflected, for example, in increasingly worsening unemployment,’ states an YLE article from February 2025. According to an employment survey published by the Finnish Ministry of Economic Affair and Employment in February 2025, the increase in the number of unemployed job seekers nationwide was 13% - in the timeframe between February 2024 and February 2025. The anti-crisis measures for Eastern Finland announced by the state as early as 2024 have been long overdue, and in the meantime the string of bankruptcies continues.
In November 2023, the Finnish government announced an emergency security measure - the closure of several border crossing points on the border with Russia. The closure quickly covered all crossing points and, after several extensions, became permanent. In fact, only goods trains carrying strategic goods imported by Finland and the EU from Russia are now travelling across the land border.
Apart from the obvious violation of border agreements and EU regulations, the closure has had a major impact on the economy of Eastern Finland. According to the statement of Pasi Toropainen’s, CEO of the South Karelia Entrepreneurs Association (Etelä-Karjalan Yrittäjät), for an article in Kauppalehti of 04.04.2025 ‘Rajasulun aiheuttama isku suhteellisen kova’, after the opening of the eastern border it may take at least ten years to restore the previous volume of interactions - it appears from the text that interactions are understood not only as payment for goods and services by Russian tourists, but also the decisions of investors to invest in business related to the phenomenon of the presence or absence of Russian tourists in the region. The same article quotes Mika Peltonen, head of the South Karelia Chamber of Commerce, as saying: ‘South Karelia's trade and hospitality reached its maximum values in 2018-2019, when the region's daily revenue from these service areas alone reached 1 million euros’.
Apparently, this statement by both Mika Peltonen and the authors of the above-mentioned article in Taloussanomat refers to the study of external tourism to South Karelia in 2019, which the Regional Council of South Karelia commissioned the joint-stock company Tutkimus- ja analysointikeskus TAK Oy (research and analysis centre) to conduct. The results of the study were published on the Council's website on 13.05.2020. The article claims that Russian tourists left more than 310 million euros in Finland in 2019; at the same time, it was Russian tourism that brought the most significant part of South Karelia's income from external tourism - no less than 96.5 per cent (in total, foreign tourists spent more than 321 million euros in 2019). It is worth noting that the number of trips by Russians to South Karelia increased by 15% from 2018 to 2019, hence it can be concluded that if the border had not been closed to tourism, we could have expected an increase in the number of trips and, probably, the region's income in the following years as well. However, the loss estimates are based on 2019 figures, namely without taking into account potential growth.
Based on the data on revenue from Russian tourists, as well as statements by Toropainen and Peltonen, it can be concluded that the closure of the eastern border to Russian tourists has already caused and continues to cause enormous damage to the economy of at least South Karelia, where Russian tourism played a significant role. At the same time, it may take at least ten years to restore the previous volume of revenue and related investments.
The Taloussanomat article adds to the picture of the crisis: Kari Liuhto, a professor of economics at the University of Turku, who is himself from Joutseno in South Karelia, seriously fears that the entire region could be depopulated. ‘Figuratively speaking, it's the end of the world at the eastern border,’ says Kari Liuhto. In his opinion, desolation should be opposed for many reasons, including at the national level.
From an active crossroads of many transport routes, South Karelia has turned into a distant dead end in Europe. Medium-sized and small family businesses, which for years served the needs of tourists, both domestic and foreign, are forced to find new markets or close down. Kauppalehti writes, for example, about the Urheilu-Koskimies speciality shop, a 55-year-old company that is now in financial difficulties due to a sharp drop in demand. The current owner and director of the family business, Janne Koskimies, says: ‘For us, the best solution would be for the war not to start and the borders not to close. But such topics are not decided by us.’
However, the financial and collateral losses from the absence of Russian tourists do not only play a role for Eastern Finland. According to page 23 of the Finnish Government's tourism report published in early 2019 (which includes an infographic referring to Visit Finland's tourism survey), revenue from Russian tourism totalled €659 million in Finland in 2017. Russian tourists were also the most frequent overnight visitors to hotels as they accounted for 17.8 per cent of all overnight stays made by foreign tourists. We were not able to find similar data for 2018, but the Visit Finland presentation (the Finnish Government uses Visit Finland data and infographics for its tourism reports) for that year has data on spending from 2017 to 2019 - in 2018, spending by Russian tourists totalled €650 million. In 2017, spending was €734 million (revenue, remember, was estimated at €659 million). In 2019, according to pg. 32 of the Finnish Government's report ‘Towards a sustainable and secure future for tourism’ (‘Matkailun suuntana kestävä ja turvallinen tulevaisuus’), published in early 2021, revenue from Russian tourists was €632 million.
Thus, based on the values of Russian tourism income for 2017 and 2019 and the estimated income for 2018 (based on expenditure for that year), and assuming that income in subsequent years would have been at least as high as in the interval under consideration (assuming the border remained open), the closure of the eastern border to Russian tourists caused Finland a loss of at least half a billion euros each year since March 2020, when the border was closed to tourists due to the pandemic. From summer 2022 to September 2022, the border was reopened to Russian tourists, but this time period is too short to come into consideration for assessing the loss of profit.
At the same time, the reduction in health and social funding by just €170 million has already triggered a parliamentary confidence vote in the government. The income from Russian tourists alone would be more than enough not only to avoid such a cut, but also to develop this and other areas of public life, not by consolidating health and school units, but, on the contrary, by building and organising new ones.