The proposed renaming of the Kruger National Park could have serious consequences for South Africa’s tourism sector, with significant financial, branding, and economic risks if the change goes ahead.

This is the view of Prof. Elmarie Slabbert, director of the Tourism Research in Economics, Environs and Society (TREES) research unit at the North-West University (NWU). She cautions that altering the name of one of the country’s most iconic attractions must be approached with great care due to its far-reaching implications.

On  September 23, the Mpumalanga legislature adopted a motion to rename the Kruger National Park to Skukuza National Park. The proposal has not yet been finalised.

“Kruger is arguably one of the most famous wildlife brands in the world,” says Slabbert.

“It is mentioned alongside destinations such as the Serengeti and Yellowstone, highlighting its immense brand value and global recognition. Renaming it would, without doubt, dilute that value in the short to medium term, as it would take considerable time for a new name to gain the same level of international recognition.”

She explains that the change would also have substantial financial implications.

“A comprehensive rebranding campaign would be required, including international marketing, updates to digital platforms, advertising, and new material for tour operators. This ripple effect would not only impact the park itself but also everyone who promotes it, both locally and globally. The cost would be significant, and it could take years for a new identity to become established.”

While Slabbert acknowledges that a name like Skukuza National Park might resonate more strongly with local communities, an important consideration, she warns that there may also be resistance from South Africans and international supporters who view “Kruger” as a globally recognised symbol of the country’s tourism offering.

Tourism contributes around 8.8% to South Africa’s GDP and 9.5% before the pandemic. It also supports nearly 1.7 million jobs, making it one of the main drivers of the country’s struggling economy.

“It is important to stress that we cannot afford to lose international visitors at this point, nor can we risk creating confusion around one of our flagship attractions,” Slabbert says.

“Renaming would almost certainly lead to short-term brand loss, visitor uncertainty, and broader economic costs across the tourism sector.”

She adds that while, in the longer term, a name change could offer opportunities for greater cultural inclusivity and repositioning, the key question is whether now is the right time.

“South Africa’s international tourist numbers have not yet returned to pre-COVID levels,” she concludes. “We must carefully consider whether this is a risk we can afford to take right now.”