This paper aims to compare the infrastructural development between Stockholm archipelago and the Greek Cyclades. The purpose is to investigate of what importance the infrastructure, focusing on transport, has for tourism development. This thesis is based on an idea that the Stockholm archipelago has not developed into an obvious tourism destination, which the Cyclades successfully has, despite the similar geographic structure. By studying previously conducted studies within the subject of our choice, we got an idea of what was of main importance and what we should focus on. To get more experience within the subject we conducted interviews with persons considered experts, so called “elite interviews”. To present the empirical material we created a timeline for each destination in the form of eras of important stages in the development. Later were compared the two destinations against one and another. A few subjects which were considered more relevant than others were also handled and discussed.  The main result of this study is that it is crucial for the link between tourism and transport to be understood when working with tourism development. Also, there is a fear of over-exploitation within the Stockholm archipelago, a fear which this study proves to be based on false grounds. Finally we conclude that the solution to these problems, by drawing a parallel with the Cyclades, will be to concentrate the tourism development within a smaller amount of island in the Stockholm archipelago.