How some global tourist hotspots are fighting 'overtourism'

The physical size of the popular destinations at risk from overtourism is a crucial factor in defining the extent of local complaints about it.

Research from Toronto Metropolitan University's Rachel Dodds, published in the International Journal of Tourism Cities, found that major metropolitan centres like London, New York or Mexico City are less at risk despite attracting more tourists.

Visitors also tend to avoid the suburbs, where more residents usually live. Smaller cities, including Venice, Barcelona, Rome, Dubrovnik, and Prague, have a more visible impact and have a bigger problem, which all have significant concerns about overtourism.

Dodds says: "What such places have in common with many other cities is a relatively high proportion of educated and well-spoken residents, many of whom are not involved or who do not benefit, at least directly,  from tourism and are likely to be vocal in opposition to excessive numbers of visitors."

"To some, if not many of them, tourism and tourists are at best an economic necessity, and in some cases, a very real inconvenience and nuisance, competing for road and parking space, for service in shops and offices, for accommodation (for rent for holidays and purchase for second homes) and contributing litter, congestion and noise to the urban landscape."

Researchers from Solent University in Norway analysed 15 European cities and found that the ones most threatened with overtourism were Venice, Florence, Seville, and Lisbon. Venice, for example, has an estimated 30 million visitors a year and only about 50,000 official residents.

Besides the issues specific to urban settlements, there are also adverse effects of overtourism on the environment, including the degrading of coral reefs and pollution of beaches and seas. The French organization Murmuration also lists overconsumption of resources—such as more water needed for hotel pools and increased use of fossil fuels—as a direct negative impact of overtourism.

Combatting threat

Venice is under perhaps the most serious threat. It goes beyond inconvenience, with the waves caused by increased numbers of gondolas in the city eroding the foundations of its buildings.

In September 2023, the city council voted to introduce a new entrance fee to day-trippers, although it wanted to take a cautious approach to the problem without being too harsh, setting the levy at €5. It only applies to tourists who do not stay overnight, who make up about two-thirds of the total number of visitors and tend to spend less in the local economy.

The fee will be tested on peak tourism days starting Spring 2024. There are hopes it will encourage some visitors to defer their trips to less busy times.  

"We want to see if charging €5 can convince some people to choose off-peak days to come to Venice," said Simone Venturini, Venice city councillor for tourism.

In Belize, the government has set up an organisation known as Protected Areas Conservation Trust (PACT). It has been charging every tourist a fee since 1996 to fund this organisation and its conservation efforts. For the first 20 years, this fee was $3.75, but it was raised in 2017 to $20.

A study by researchers from Washington and Lee University and the University of North Carolina suggested that the previous fee had not been enough to fund the necessary conservation efforts in the country. The researchers concluded that Belize could potentially benefit from raising the fee even higher to at least $30 because high-end tourism is not price-sensitive.

The 2017 increase in the fee had not impacted visitor numbers to Belize, and the country's coral reefs would benefit from more conservation efforts.

Elsewhere, limits have been imposed on the number of visitors at major attractions. The rules for 2024 at Machu Picchu state that no more than 500 people per day, including support staff, can start the Inca Trail.

In total, the Ministry of Culture of Peru has limited the number of sales to 4,500 per day, and each visitor cannot stay at the site for longer than four hours.

But that is a higher cap than in 2023, which was set at 3,800. Peru's tourism industry continues to suffer the consequences of the pandemic, and the rise in permitted numbers shows there are substantial economic considerations at work alongside measures to prevent overtourism.

Does it work?

There are claims that additional fees ostensibly supposed to counter overtourism don't really work. In Belize, the money goes directly to a conservation fund, but limiting numbers to prevent damage would probably be more effective than raising funds to pay for repairs.

In Venice, the money is not being directed at conservation efforts. Some researchers, like Rabindra Nepal from the Australian National University, suggest that such fees should only be considered as part of a larger and more complex approach, including:  "A combination of destination-specific economic and non-economic policies to combat overtourism."

"This includes the imposing of corrective taxes and fees; sharing benefits among the locals and tourist authorities; maximising the social and economic benefits from tourism for local residents directly impacted by development; smoothing and extending visitors spread and flow; curbing fossil fuels energy consumption and regulating accommodation supplies."

It's a delicate issue, especially for countries that are significantly dependent on tourism revenues, like Belize.

Efforts to remain a sustainable tourism destination depend on good policies and responsible consumerism.

To return to St. Augustine's analogy, perhaps it is better to make books with more durable bindings and higher-quality paper while also ensuring readers handle them carefully.

In a world where 1.2 billion people are expected to spend time as tourists, translating this approach to global travel may well prove to be a considerable challenge.