Some Barcelona residents are fed up

It is a huge dilemma. How do you maintain quality of life for local residents and still keep $2 billion a year in tourist related revenue pouring in?

The saving grace for most communities is that tourists all seem to flock to the same spots, and most people can avoid the onslaught. However, the neighborhoods that are the focus of tourists have the problem magnified.

So, how many people is too many people? How many cruise passengers are too many passengers? How do you regulate? Venice has been struggling with this for years. Some progress on the cruise ship front, but it seems as crowded as ever.

I can understand them, it is a big problem in many places. We've seen many cities regulate tourism in many ways, and there will probably be more to come.

Interesting video on the subject for those who have a few minutes to spare: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHr7GXuqzm0 It certainly has a point.

Barcelona residents have a right to be upset.
Dubrovnik and Venice have taken measures to restrict cruise ships. Can’t blame them. We try to avoid ports where cruise ships visit. They tour a city, only might buy lunch and souvenirs, no money is spent on hotels, dining.

Badger, interesting video starring “Peter from Prague”.

I live in a seasonal area and during the "season" wait times in restaurants double easily. Traffic doubles as well making commuting for workers a headache. However, there is no state income tax and tourism brings in a lot of revenue and supports many businesses and creates a lot of jobs.

This is just political fanfare. You can't stop people from visiting your city without making life worse for your residents.

Hear, hear! But let's get this straight, the problem tourists are not the ones here from this forum, who spend more time and money and are more respectful of local people and culture, you guys are more than welcome to Barcelona!

The issue are more cruise ship tourist who do not spend the night and those young people, mainly from other countries of Europe, who make the city break in Barcelona, spend little time and money, stay in airbnb, go to clubs, get drunk and vandalize the streets. Born and raised in Barcelona and I have seen with my own eyes the slow death of my city over the last decade.

The election is over now, the results are coming in, and it's very close in Barcelona. The Catalan separatist party, Junts, led by Xavier Trias, emerged as the leading party with 11 city council members. They held a slim lead over the Socialists who secured the second position with 10 council members, and the incumbent Ada Colau's party with 9.

The future governance of the city will be determined by alliances formed, most likely current Mayor of the last 10 years Ada Colau will not retain her position even with alliances, as it would be Collboni of the Socialists who could lead an alternative majority against Trias and the Separatists. The wave of dissatisfaction with the mismanagement of the city of Barcelona in recent years by the incumbent Ada Colau has driven the candidacy for alternative parties. It's clear that the status quo has been upended, we will see in the coming weeks who becomes the new mayor of Barcelona.

You can read more about the elections here - https://www.lavanguardia.com/elecciones/municipales/20230529/9002779/regreso-triunfal-trias-collboni-colau-lucharan-sea-alcalde.html

Interesting video Badger. We never, ever rent from AirB&B. I’ve never even looked at the site. We use hotels wherever we can. Dubrovnik has fewer and fewer residents, such a shame. When we can, we rent from Dubrovnik Gardens because the owner lives on the property, one of the very few.

I just returned from a RS tour on which one of the tour members was from the Czech Republic. She grew up in Prague and loved the city but lived in the U.S. for many years. She then returned to Prague but found that tourism had made the city unpleasant and moved to Brno.

Carlos, thank you for weighing in with your insights on the ground.

Nobody is suggesting that tourism be stopped, but managed better. Taxes might be the answer and they could be varied depending upon the month. Also, increase cruise ship docking fees.

Thank you Carlos for your insights. I always learn so much from reading your posts.

I have seen first hand in Barcelona and Venice in particular over the last decade the pressure on the locals from tourism. Everything from cruise ships to the growth of investment properties (e.g. Airbnbs) have changed the economics for locals. Some cities are increasing their tourist fees, some banning cruise ships, others regulating Airbnbs. It will be interesting to see how the new government in Barcelona will work to address these issue.

Nobody is suggesting that tourism be stopped, but managed better. Taxes might be the answer and they could be varied depending upon the month. Also, increase cruise ship docking fees.

So, only the rich are entitled to travel?

The 'problem' has no simple easy answer, but is raising the cost so fewer people can afford it the best solution?

The 'problem' has no simple easy answer...

I agree joe32F, but there has to be a balance, locals' needs should always come first tourists' needs come second, right now Barcelona's tourism is disproportionately skewed to short term, low impact mass tourism, the average overnight stay in Barcelona is only 2 nights.

In the case of the cruise passengers, after breakfasting on board the ship, they disembark for a few hours of sightseeing before returning to their ship or flying out that afternoon. This means they contribute very minimally to the local economy, especially when it comes to the restaurant and accommodation sectors. Little money is spent outside of the main tourist cafes and souvenir stalls, and the congestion is unpleasant for both residents and other tourists. As well many cruise passengers only book tours through the cruise line itself, which leaves even less money in the city.

I do want to remind people that Barcelona is a home port for several cruise ships. This means that people embarking on a cruise will stay in hotels in advance of their cruise and eat at restaurants. Not all are there just for the few hours, but enough that I know it must be hard.

I hope that a good solution is found for everyone's sake. For some travelers, a cruise is the only way they can envision seeing Europe at all. I do notice that cruise ships just keep getting bigger and bigger.

Norway has said that only zero emissions ships will be allowed in the fjords starting in 2025. This is going to eliminate quite a few cruise ships. Only a specialized few small ships will be in the fjords. This is one approach to limit tourism and encourage climate friendly visiting. (disclaimer in pursuit of honesty: I signed up for a fjords cruise in 2024 in order to beat the deadline......)

BMWBGV, I deleted it because it was sort of off topic and might mess up your thread. Sorry

That is true Carol. Our cruise begins in Barcelona this July. We have 3 days in Barcelona and have local hotel rooms. But I also understand the concern of cruise ships and their large amounts of passengers. I fear the megaships that carry thousands are becoming problematic for ports. I can understand looking for ways to limit ships in ports and that way limit day trippers that walk on and off. I have been to Venice and Dubrovnik..I feel for residents like Carlos and others seeing the new word of “overtourism” affect their community. All ports on our upcoming cruise likely experiencing this. Yet cruising such a wonderful way to see and do so much! Conundrum!

Mister E, you didn't have to do that. One of the interesting things around here is threads veering off in different directions.

joe32F, I take your point.

Carol: Smart!

We have been to Barcelona and Venice several times and, yes both cities were loaded with tourists, but we still had great fun. Most tourists don't go into residential areas, just the central tourist areas or other scenic places. Of course, Venice's residences are all over the city. I have always felt that Spanish people are generally polite and friendly. Sorry to read that some are posting offensive signs that are rude and impolite.

One thing about tourists is that they are a double edged sword for locals. They come and spend lots of money for businesses.
I live on St. Simons Island, Georgia, which is on coastal Georgia and we are something of a tourist mecca during the warmer months.

Traffic can be really bad certain times of the year, like Fourth of July weekend, etc., but we manage pretty well, and try to avoid going out much then.

Tourists are evident at the beaches and the village area, they don't ruin our residential areas.

Unfortunately a growing problem over the last decade, that will continue to get worse, and affects a number of places where tourism becomes disproportionate to population. The list gets long, but yeah, Barcelona, Venice, Amsterdam, Cinque Terre, Amalfi Coast, Several places in Sicily now, Dubrovnik, Santorini, and on, and on.

Lots of solutions have been discussed and tried, areas stopped doing promotion, trying to regulate cruise ships, shutting down some things seen as "attractions", taxes, fees...but I think few things can be pointed to that were successful, beyond addressing a narrow part of the problem.

But the problem is not cruise ships, or daytrippers, or cheap package tours, but just the shear volume of people, to which, yes, even the "good tourists" on here contribute to the problem.

As for what would work? Unfortunately we have seen it on a smaller scale at museums, limit availability (Pre-booking, timed entry, limited numbers of tickets). Of course that usually means much higher prices, and drives demand to third parties but it works.

Basically a place has to limit numbers, and this is done through cost. Insist on a hotel stay or charge a daily visitor fee. Numbers still high, charge a higher fee. Stricter regulations on Hotels and rentals, require guides for some sights. All meaning that, yes, to the point that only the wealthier travelers will visit. You limit numbers, without sacrificing revenue generated, even increasing margins due to fewer service workers and local services (police, sanitation, etc.). Now will, or can, cities really control things to that point? I doubt it, both from a logistics issue and a "will" issue. Even Venice didn't push the cruise ship changes, that was mainly for other reasons by others, and the passengers still head to Venice. The fee they imposed and limits really have little effect to date.

I don't see any answer that does not include raising fees or taxes in some manner.

Since most ships in Barcelona are loading or unloading passengers, they are adding a lot to the economy: pre and post hotel and restaurant visits, sightseeing, taxi fares, millions and millions of euros in ship supplies.

The tourists who are more likely to abuse the city are the weekend partiers, for which Barcelona is the magnet (as is Iceland). This is the go-to for bachelor, stag, and hen parties for singles from all over Europe. Amsterdam is facing the same problem and pushback from residents. In fact Amsterdam is trying to dissuade one particular nationality from coming to town for the parties.

The cruise ship dilemma is happening everywhere. Case in point…here in Maine, the residents of Bar Harbor recently voted to limit the number of ships, and therefore, visitors, due to the impact on this lovely town. Of course, this being the United States, a lawsuit was almost immediately filed against the ordinance and is yet to be decided. We'll see what happens.

BMWBGV the boats can pay a pretty hefty docking fee, Venice its about $100,000 a day. Thats one way of putting more money in the economy and cutting down on the boats a little.

But I think every visitor should need a visa and visas should only be given to the worthy. That will help too. Charge $$$$ for the visas, require a 6 hour seminar and passing a test. (I am only half joking).

What i deleted, massively condensed, was about the Prague AirBnb video. It was half of a good discussion, but of little value without the other half:

Prague has 7000 airbnbs and 630,000 occupied dwellings and a 30 year pretty much flat population growth rate. Turning over 7000 for locals to live in will have little or no impact on the housing market.

If the Airbnb's did 80% occupancy they would accommodate 500,000 (8%) of the 6 million Prague tourist each year. With no AirBnb's those tourists are still coming but now they will stay in bright shinny new hotels.

For a local to want to live in Old Town you would have to get rid of half the tourists (at least). Tourism in the Czech Republic brings $66 billion into the economy and I will assume with on Prague to see, the impact across the country will be the same. So there would be a $33 billion economic loss. Tourism employees 240,000 people in the Czech Republic, so there would be 120,000 looking for work.

And lets not kid ourselves. They want to live in those flats because they have been restored with tourist money. 30 years ago when they were dank dumps they would not have wanted to live in them. So what they want is to take away someone elses investment at no cost.

Without the Airbnb income for the units, the banks holding the mortgages would need to be bailed out. Lets say 1/3 of them at $200K each so there is another $400 million in public loss.

On the whole, 6% of all airbnb's are corporate owned, the rest individually. But lets say that that 25% are foreign owned, That means possibly another loss of $500 million by Czech citizens due to reduced asset value (lets call that their retirement money).

So getting rid of the Airbnb's would provide homes for 7000 rich people (cause that would still be prime real estate) at at public cost of $5 million and 17 jobs per unit. Good deal? Yes, a lot of Google Search math and tons of assumptions so I could be off by a factor of 5; would it matter? Up to the people living and voting in that society to choose. Not something an outsider can or should weigh. What an outsider can do, is follow the laws (including only renting legal units).

The European city I travel most often to is dealing with their pereception of the problems with short term rentals in a fairly sane way. They put a moritorium on new short term licenses and the license does not transfer with the sale of the unit. So attrition will deal with the issue and its slow enough to cause less harm and allow for course corrections to repond to unanticipated results like occured in Berlin.

Chnaging AirBnb rules has no impact on my travel, I prefer Hotels. I think in 20 years of travel to Europe, more than 700 nights, I have paid for 10 nights in short term rentals (Booking.com).

The number of tourists I deal with by finding new destinations. As they open up maybe people will shift away from the tourist traps and that will help. And issuing visas to the worthy would be a great help.

As an addendum to the aforementioned regional elections we had in Spain yesterday, in response to a very strong performance by conservative parties, our Socialist Prime Minister, Pedro Sanchez has just called for the Spanish Parliament to be dissolved and a snap general election to take place on July 23, five months before it was originally scheduled.

It's a very risky gamble for Sanchez, as it could spell the end of several years of Socialist rule in Spain, in turn opening the door for the conservative Partido Popular and their far right partners VOX, who have been historically very antagonistic against Separatist movements in Spain. This could in turn lead to a resurgence in Separatist fervor, especially in regions like Catalonia.

For those interested in socio-cultural history of Spain, this will be a very interesting next few months. Let us hope we do not become the new "Yugoslavia", right in the backyard of western Europe.

You can read more here - https://english.elpais.com/spain/2023-05-29/spain-calls-snap-general-election-after-right-far-right-inflict-heavy-local-and-regional-defeat.html

Carlos, interesting. Thank you. My limited perception is that much of Europe is trending right. Interesting to watch things unfold. Wish I were deep enough into it to understnd it better. All I can do is wish you the best and pray Spin avoids the worst that Hungary has developed.

It seems most of the concerns in the article had to do with neighborhood issues. The only fix to the annoyance of residents is to put a control on short term rentals in neighborhoods. Making rentals a minimum of one month should curtail the problem. Heavy fines for landlord violators of leases any shorter. Also, increasing hotel space and mandating it to certain locations away from neighborhoods is the next best.

Issuing taxes and cutting back cruise ships will just eventually hurt everyone economically.

I live four months a year, soon to be 7 months a year, in a European apartment block with not less than 5 airbnb's in it. The only way I know there are airbnb's in it is I looked it up on line. Otherwise the short term renters are indistnguishable from the locals living there. Yes, there are hundreds of horror stories reported every year .... of course .... maybe thousands ..... out of 300 million nights rented world wide.

As for the airbnbs jacking up the cost of housing? Maybe in some places, but not everywhere. So generalizations dont work. The one place that I am familiar with the AirBnb's dont do as well as, or no better than, the long term rentals. They just provide conveience for the owners to get personal use out of the flats too.

But there are problems that need to be addressed.

Although I understand the appeal of Air BnBs the proliferation of them in recent years is really changing the nature of these (and other European) cities. We have just come back from Portugal (packed with tourists) and had several conversations with locals about their city. Their big issue was the increasing cost of rents in central city due to these short term rentals pricing the locals out of the housing market. The average wage in Portugal can't keep up with landlords who can charge significantly more to tourists for short stays. To many of these units change the nature of an apartment building and a neighborhood when filled with foreign tourists instead of locals. I know there are locations when such rentals make sense, but in cities such as Porto and Lisbon I don't feel that this is responsible tourism. Since we all here prefer to appreciate a more authentic experience we are all better off going the hotel route.

Okay, let’s do Lisbon. Lisbon has 325,000 units of which 25,000 are short-term rentals (7.6%) which does seem high but 15% of all housing sits empty and 25,000 are government subsidized. I suspect there is something going on much larger and more complex than short-term rentals.

I dont understand if the short-term renters are behaved, why the issue on that count. But I’m not part of that society so can’t judge the basis of the resentment of short-term foreign nationals. Closing the rentals won’t make the tourist go away from those neighborhoods. Just more crowding on the metro system reaching those neighborhoods. AirBnb’s do cost 3x the average Lisbon cost and do generate about twice the net income of the average Lisbon long-term rental flat. How much is location regardless of if its AirBnb or not and how much is due to the AirBnb’s are renovated and furnished, don’t know and could not begin to judge the situation without knowing that.

The accuracy of my numbers isn’t the issue, it’s the complexity of the situation that is the issue; and I agree there are problems.

There's a non-tourism factor that's impacting the quality of life in many Spanish cities by driving housing inflation—25% over the past year in Barcelona. That factor is the influx of immigration of comparatively wealthy foreigners. Barcelona, as the example we're discussing, is now over 20% non-Spanish and most of that is people from wealthy countries moving there with non-native assets or income to live "the good life" at a discount to their home counties.

Of course, there has long been immigration into Spain from northern Europe, but it was mostly confined to consolidated, isolated communities of German or British retirees. EU freedom of movement and the single currency marked the beginning of significant growth. The city then made efforts to position itself as a "tech and innovation hub", further attracting foreign wage-earners. (And once again illustrating the fallacy of 'trickle down economics) . Early remote work and retiring baby boomers continued to fuel it, and while immigration numbers flattened over covid, it's returned with force.

I don't understand if the short-term renters are behaved, why the issue on that count.

I agree, but it isn't the well behaved the residents have a problem with at all. It is those who party and have no respect for the neighboring full time apartment residents or trash the physical area inside and out. Those are the ones who cause the uproar.

Closing the rentals won’t make the tourist go away from those neighborhoods.

I rather doubt most of the complaining neighborhoods have anything there attracting tourists other than apartment rentals. True, if you live near a sight like Sagrada Familia, there will be people roaming around on the street, but they won't be inside your building.

AirBnB type of rentals is good for the tourist, but does have a negative economic and livable impact on the residents of that city. That is why zoning was established. Who wants a short term rental right next door to you whether it be an apartment, house or condo. Having weekly or daily temporary neighbors would not be a good thing over the long haul.

Has negative economic impact on some of the locals, positive impact on others. Varies by neighbirhood. Hurts living conditions in some neighborhoods like District VII in Budapest (but makes a lot of money for the shops, restaurants, bars which means more Hungarians can live better), has no impact in other neighborhoods (there are 5 in my apartment block, and at least 3 across the street, and you would never know it).

But I wholeheartedly support the locals regulating it through laws, zoning, or house rules. I just don't think the attempts will get the desired outcome in many, maybe even most, locations. Way more complicated than AirBnb bad, no AirBnb good.

As an addendum to this topic, the aforementioned snap elections in Spain have came and passed. The old saying "Spain is different" seems to have been confirmed yet again, as the Spanish electorate has largely rejected the far right nationalist party, bucking the current European trend. As always in Spain who actually runs the country comes down to negotiations 😉

https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/24/europe/spain-elections-reject-far-right-intl/index.html

Regarding how Airbnb is really being used in and affecting the neighborhoods in a city, I suggest consulting the very interesting website:

http://insideairbnb.com/

Here are some other versions of AirBnb worth looking at
BEST RENTAL SITES LIKE AIRBNB AT A GLANCE:
Best Overall: VRBO
Best for Quality Control: Plum Guide
Best for Big City Vacations: Sonder
Best for Hotel-Level Service: Vacasa
Best for Nature Lovers: Getaway
Best for Multi-Stop Trips: Outdoorsy
Best for a Splurge: Marriot Homes & Villas
Best for Combining with Car Rentals and Flights: Expedia
Best for Also Planning Activities: TripAdvisor
Best for Any Type of Lodging: Booking.com
Best for a Home on the Road: RV Share
For an Immersive Cultural Experience: Homestay
Largest Selection: HomeToGo
Best for Travel Inspiration: FlipKey
Most Luxurious Vacation Rentals: Oliver’s Travels
Most Extensive European Portfolio: Novasol
Best Villas with a Pool: Vintage Travel
Best for an Idyllic UK Vacation: Rural Retreats

Thank you everyone for the informative and civil conversation.

As pointed out the issue is complex. Not sure we can blame tourism on cruise ships alone as on another thread here someone pointed out that the number of cruisers to Amsterdam is quite low compared to the number of overall tourist to Amsterdam.

Alaska added a $50 charge to each cruiser to help the port towns with infrastructure but that $50 did not stop Alaska cruises from being the #1 cruise destination for US citizens.

Someone is making money off those cruise ships - Venice, Alaska, Amsterdam, Barcelona.

Taxing - only means higher costs to consider to those who live on a budget. Those with higher discretionary income won't think twice about paying the tax.

I live in central Oregon and a vacation area. As I understand it the town of Bend did restrict the number of short-term rentals but damn the traffic and crowds are amazing....wait the region was (if not is still) one of the fastest growing areas in the country. So like Spain, many people want to live here. I have two friends who moved to Spain in the last 3 years. They can attest to the cost of housing rising as more people immigrate to the region where they live - and of course more immigrants from places like the US with way more income then most people in the little town they live in.

I do fall on the side of "regulations" - whether it be limiting the number of short term rentals or the number of planes that can land at the major airports or number of cruise ships that can dock at one time.

One thing I will say to those people with the signs that read "Go home" and "Tourism kills neighborhoods" - VOTE. It's your local officials who make the rules

More and more, the short-term rental market is being examined, and it has been regulated. In France, there are strict limits.

In the US, COVID did a beat-down of AirBNB empires, where some persons used debt to set up large numbers of short-term apartments. That issue will be coming back. Another concern for many is the "cleaning fee" and "cleaning requirement" for AirBnB. Who wants to go on vacation to spend the last day doing the laundry and vacuuming rugs? But the lure of superficially cheap prices is hard to overcome.

Even in my small town of Sioux Falls, AirBnB is making inroads. I counted the number of properties, and found 378 here. That's probably enough to affect the market for sale of properties. What is needed is regulations which ensure that short-term rentals pay hotel taxes as high or higher than normal hotels.

geovagriffith, I'm glad tourists aren't a problem for you. I've been to St. Simons years ago and it's lovely. It's also small, so probably has fewer rentals than the island I live on, where half the dwellings are owned by non-residents, smaller homes are torn down and replaced by 7 bedroom monstrosities, there are 1700 parking places forced on us by the state government , a county park and the 4th largest city in SC is just across the bridge. We are trying to restrict short-term rentals to the 1600 licenses that already exist, but the state will penalize us financially if we do. Fortunately, we don't currently have a cruise port on our island. Like Barcelona, people moving here from other areas have priced local people out of the housing market, both buying and renting. I am becoming much more sensitive to the problems we tourists create for locals.

cala, gentrification is indeed a problem not limited to urban areas. It really is a shame to see long-term locals being priced out of housing.

69.9% or the residential units in the EU are owner occupied.

So, in 69.9% of the cases of gentrification or increased property value due to things like short term rentals rather than displacement being the result, an increase in personal wealth is the result. Personal wealth that can help take care of one in retirment for instance.

In Eastern Europe, where financial growth is of great need the percentage is well over 75%. In my personal favorite Eastern European country the percentage that is owner occupied is 91.7%. So many might be singing, bring on the gentrification.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_home_ownership_rate
https://www.statista.com/statistics/246355/home-ownership-rate-in-europe/