It seems that the post-pandemic travel surge is showing no signs of abating, and some popular tourist destinations in Europe have had quite enough.....
When I return to Europe, I'll definitely be looking for less known locations and travelling more in the shoulder seasons.
Thank you for posting the article.
The professional tourism organizations are predicting that Europe as a whole this year will be at or slightly below pre-pandemic levels. But where the article I believe is correct is that the old standbys like London, Paris, Rome, among others, will exceed pre-pandemic by some percent while the secondary tourist locations are coming up short compared to pre-pandemic. January and February in the “secondary” European tourist city that I live in were dismal for tourism compared to pre-pandemic. Yes, new back doors are worth tracking down, but even just secondary cities will be better venues if you want to avoid tourism.
But you are right. Where RS was looking for back doors to Rome, now maybe its time to find back doors to Europe. This thread from a few years ago discusses and lists some ideas. https://community.ricksteves.com/travel-forum/general-europe/back-doors-to-the-back-doors-of-europe
As for shoulder seasons, a lot of enjoyment for some is seasonal. Fly Fishing Bosnia - Spring and Fall (shoulder seasons), beaches in Montenegro and Albania - summer, Christmas celebrations and lights in Budapest - winter. Then anyone of a number of great celebrations, festivals, etc that happen when they happen. If you havent been to Budapest in August you have missed one of the great firework displays in Europe. If you havent been to Mohács in February you have missed an amazing cultural festival and you need to be in Kazanlak in June for the roses.
"Tourism is destroying our city." Those pictures made my wife shudder a bit.
The only answer as far as I can tell is increased taxes and costs to visit sites.
National Parks are implementing reservations to prevent mob scenes in certain areas. Nobody wants to visit "nature" and be surrounded by hordes of people.
Since years all major German cities have reguations not to rent housing space to tourists in a commercial way (Zweckentfremdungsverbot). The situation of missing free apartments is alerting in these cities, so local families are leaving the inner city parts - especially with low income base.
Based on a new court sentence the authorities of district Berlin Mitte can now direct / over-rule a landlord that an apartment will be used in the future again as regular housing space for locals instead of being a tourist apartment. Remark: Nearly 100% of apartments in multi-apartment houses in Berlin are originally planned for housing - so no surprise for landlords; just an improved way to force them not to act against communities.
For tourist this means that between booking and arrival it is possible that the apartment is no longer available for that purpose. In extreme cases guests can end up without accomodation although booking was successful and pre-paid - already happened in context of protecting housing spaces from abuse.
I do not know what it means for Hamburg, Cologne and Munich.
Safest and most social responsible for Berlin travelles is to book and stay in regular hotels and hostels.
The only answer as far as I can tell is increased taxes and costs to visit sites.
National Parks are implementing reservations to prevent mob scenes in certain areas. Nobody wants to visit "nature" and be surrounded by hordes of people.
I think you will see more cities, particularly mid-size to smaller cities where tourist influx is a real burden, adopt more "Pay to Play" measures.
If you read lots of articles on this topic, what you find is that no one is saying they want no tourists, or for the most part even "fewer" tourists, they just want the ones that spend lots of money. So the focus will be on limiting and charging a premium to see prime sights, strict controls and taxes on Hotel and let room rates. Also, while many laud the cities for going after the iconic "Drunk British Package Tourist" and Stag parties as well as those terrible cruise ships, they have no love for the day tripping budget traveler either.
So yes, I think one needs to look for more "back doors" in and out of Europe, however, for myself, and many others on here, we have that luxury, we have seen Paris, London, Barcelona, Madrid, Rome, Amsterdam Venice, and more, multiple times even, so visiting places well down on the tourism list is just natural, maybe needed. But, Venice and Amsterdam, and...are all popular for a reason. If I were just starting out on my travel journeys, you bet that is where I would be heading.
Its a tough one isnt it? How do you regulate access to a city? The only thing that could possibly work is by making it too expensve for the masses. But is that what we want? Tourism to be the rich man's sport?
If you reduce tourism you will have a lot of people out of work unless you generate the same income from fewer people. Again, make it a rich man's sport. In places like Amsterdam I would put a 100% tourism tax on rooms in the thickest tourist areas and use the money to retrain all of the unemployeed tens of thousands of tourist workers.
BAN SHORT TERM RENTALS!! They just effectively did that in Vienna. A third of the rental rooms in the city were in those short term rentals. It will be interesting to see how much short supply and on going demand raise the prices of a room. It could effectively reduce tourism by reducing those that can afford it. There are so many destructive side effects of baning short term rentals in some locations that the 100% tourist tax might make more sense. But same end result, tourism for the rich.
In some cities they could reduce tourism quite a bit by raising the drinking age to 21 or maybe 25 for non-residents. Of course the EU wont allow that sort of discrimination amoung EU nations so it would only apply to non-EU non-residents. Throwig the kids in jail for a few days might be a good solution. They wont want to come.
Banning HOHO busses would be a good start and restricting auto traffic to resident automobiles might help in some locations.
Visas could help too. A $500 EU visa would reduce tourism from outside of the EU.
Many places are now addicted to tourism. They cannot let it go. Complaints by locals are a cry in the wind. The locals are only a part of the city’s people, because there are also locals that make their entire living on tourism.
How can a possible 3$ tax or city entrance fee really change anything? You think that paltry sum would deter anyone?
Venice would not survive without tourism. Yet it cannot thrive with it. Catch 22 all over.
Paris in 2022 out of 44 million tourists, 24.7 m French, 2.4 m Americans, 2 m British, 1.5 m Spanish, 1.5 m Italians, 1.2 m Belgians. So we need to make the French stay home so WE can enjoy Paris? Only about 1/3 of the tourism income came from French tourists but they made up more than half of the tourists. So those are the ones to get rid of, too many and too cheap? No, that doesn’t work, does it?
Is Croatia "adicted" to tourism? Or did they just find a way to have a life (eventually) that was equal to that of a German? But these are democracys so we let them decide what they think is best for them.
Complaints by locals are a cry in the wind.
Fully disagree on that. A place without the native locals - not the new ones working in tourism is a place without culture. Only a ruin stays from old Rome or Greece. Architecture is the tombstone of every ex manifold culture. Just dead stones - no culture, no spirit, no original feeling.
The problem of tourism is the single opportunistic human being - optimizing his / her own private thing without any responsibility or thinking for others. One person can be nice - in masses human beings are the most dangerous killing natural disaster on Earth.
Extreme cases are the cruise ship bubbles of a few thousand people falling into a town such as Flam in Norway with a few hundred people.
The humankind is not made for self regulation supporting a future benefit. We do not even pass the marshmallow test. So, for the survival of local cultures close all back doors with a loud slam and lock them finally!
There are parts of Barcelona that have become no-go zones for locals because of the overtourism and the increase in crime and even violent crime it brings with it, especially in the summertime, the Barrio Gotico is absolutely swamped with foreigners and criminals. I've skipped out on the old town area the last few times I've been back in Barcelona.
Barcelona and the wider Catalonia region are currently going through the worst drought ever recorded, all city fountains turned off, ban on refilling swimming pools in hotels, ban watering public gardens, beach showers shut off, four-minute shower limits in hotels, agricultural irrigation cut by 80 percent, car washing banned. There's talk of a plan to have two ships per day to import water from Valencia to Barcelona just to keep the city going over the summer. I fear for the tourist season this summer in Barcelona will bring on even more restrictions, when we will have a collision of climate change and overtourism to create a really dreadful situation, the city is dying.
I wouldn't want to be a tourist in Barcelona this summer that's for sure, even if they pay me.
You realize most of us complaining about over tourism are doing so as we plan our next trip.
The question I have, for myself as much as anyone else, is it the "back doors" that make the difference or how we spend our time when at a location? I think that the reason that less touristed spots are popular because it gives a more authentic experience of the local culture. I wonder if we should be asking ourselves about how can we can arrange our travel to increase local culture experiences during our travel?
You realize most of us complaining about over tourism are doing so as we plan our next trip.
Mr E, I didn't know whether to laugh or blush when I read that. Yep, you're right on the money. I was sitting there scrolling through the thread, part of my brain thinking about that poor woman trying to go to Russia, and part of it thinking about less heavily touristed places to visit in Spain next year...
What was Pogo's line? "We have met the enemy and he is us."
I wonder if we should be asking ourselves about how can we can arrange our travel to increase local culture experiences during our travel?
Carol now retired, yes to this, as well. I think many of us are giving this a lot of thought; I know Stan and I are. We've been modifying our travel patterns the last few years, visiting fewer places but for longer stays. We're still visiting some popular, over-touristed cities, but being more mindful about it, and we've also spent time in some places that are not on every major tour company's itineraries.
And we like it.
Carol now retired, not everyone travels for the culture. It's possible the majority travel for the history, the architecture, the world class images, the art.
Yes, Mr. E, you just describe my primary reasons for going to Europe-you can also add scenery.
This is a complex problem with some negative repercussions from many well-intended proposals.
And yes, I am part of the problem. I love to travel to Europe, and after the Covid 2020-1 years, I feel like my countdown years for active traveling could be limited.
Looking at my three 2024 trips’ itineraries, about 80% of the locations are in less touristy cities. But, that’s what I enjoy most since I’ve been at the top level tourist destinations.
Some decisions just come down to experience. it’s not unusual for an initial traveler to Italy to want to go to the overcrowded Top 3. When I brought my adult daughter to Italy two years ago for her first European trip, I purposely included two less touristy cities to let her see the authentic Italy, the culture, museums with no crowds, the less-polished look, the restaurants with no English menus or Americanized food, places where she had to use her Italian words….and enjoyed it! She commented afterwards that she was there the same amount of time as her friends, but she was so fortunate to go beyond the Venice/Florence/Rome experience her friends shared.
So how do we get the word out for first-time travelers? Hopefully, that’s part of the reason we’re on this forum!
The humankind is not made for self regulation supporting a future
benefit. We do not even pass the marshmallow test. So, for the
survival of local cultures close all back doors with a loud slam and
lock them finally!
When I read that, I asked myself, if he is serious then who gives the order to close the doors? So it seemed illogical. I chewed on it for a while and was a bit embarassed that it took so long to come to what I think is obvious .... G-d. Given that, I find a lot of validity in Markk's statement.
cala, most of us do. Some really do go for more, and some pretend to be going for more and some think they got more, but didnt really as much as they thought they did.
Is it probable that the majority of those advocating the off beat destinations have already been to Europe's top 10 or 20? Do as I say, not as I did? I know that description fits me and I have to make myself accountable for that from time to time. YES, you need to see the Eiffel Tower!!! You and 44 million other people last year. I did, I am glad I did it. I want my kids and grandchildren to see it. So I told them all to get good jobs so they can afford it becuse someday only the rich will be able to travel.
I am glad for the most part that travel is reaching its pre-pandemic level. Whether that was reflected in the numerous crowded trains , basically ICE I experienced in Germany (the lateness is a factor by itself), I can't say. I look for the numbers of foreign tourists in the major train stations, ie in Munich, Frankfurt, Berlin, Stuttgart, Nürnberg, etc among the crowds, or are they mostly locals.
In France they most certainly were unless you are headed for a place like Versailles, where the international visitors can be swarming all over.
In the 3 countries, Austria, France, Germany, of the 9 week trip last summer, it was crowded.... yes, the summer time crowds I am used to , no doubt about that observation and experience, ie, Paris, Berlin, Vienna, Munich but as long as one can still find accommodations, ie 2 star hotels, Pensionen, at decent affordable prices, eg, under 110 Euro or so, (already done that for Paris in May/June), escaping the skyrocketing prices, I'll still be going over in the summer expecting to deal with the crowds, spending my vacation money on the local economy.
not everyone travels for the culture. It's possible the majority travel for the history, the architecture, the world class images, the art.
Mr E, I just assumed that the history, architecture, world class images, and art are part of the "culture" of any place. Although as I think about it, I can see how some people might just hit the museums, for example, probably oblivious to everything else.
If you are limiting "culture" to mean the way locals live, day to day, then honestly I don't see how we can truly experience much of that without living there. And even then, it would be difficult. Like you, I have spent time living in a foreign country, several years in fact, and I know my experiences were only a shadow of what the locals experienced.
Interesting to ponder, though. But doesn't this lead us all the way back to "Why do we travel?" And the answers are legion.
Jane, you understood the full implication of my content. And quite brilliantly.
I know this discussion and forum are Europe centric, but the same isses r/t tourism are happening here as well. Example: The loss of housing due to the increase in AirB&B etc. Just in my town (around 10,000 people) there are over 1000 Airb&B listings. Granted some of these are attached or are second homes, but it still has negatively impacted available housing stock.
Try driving through Stowe or Woodstock anytime of year. Some towns have closed popular roads during foliage season because of tourists blocking the road, trespassing onto posted land for the perfect picture, etc., etc. While we don't have the added stress of cruise ships, we do see an influx of tourists who change the culture of our small towns. Next month's eclipse is expected to clog roads (with double the commute times for some).
Having said all that, there are so many businesses that are dependent on tourism dollars. We (the global" we") need to find some balance or else the "second cities" are destined to develop the same problems as the "first cities".
*"I know this discussion and forum are Europe centric, but the same issues r/t tourism are happening here as well."
That's a good point! There's also a problem here in B.C. with short term rentals such as Air BnB, and as a result the government is implementing new rules this year that will hopefully address the problem.....
https://vancouversun.com/business/real-estate/bc-new-short-term-rental-regulations-explained
At the moment they're using a limited approach and only applying this to a small number of communities. Hopefully this will have the desired result.
I always stay in hotels when travelling so whatever happens with STR's isn't a concern.
In 1970, a return flight between New York and London retailed for $550. With inflation, that’s around $5,350 in today’s money. With low-cost airlines abounding, tickets between New York and London can range from $300 to $1,000 in economy.
The average hotel rate in Europe was about $160 in 2019. Since then there has been at least 15% in general inflation so today, maybe $185? Some sources say the inflation in the hotel industry in the EU outpaced general inflation so the $185 is probably low. The average cost of an Airbnb in Europe is $114.
So I would speculate that cheap air fares and cheap short-term rentals is a good part of the cause for “over tourism”.
No one wants to say that the solution is pricing a segment of society out of the market, but that is the trend that is either being advocated or is taking place. A possibly influential segment wants flights with big seats and free checked luggage and departures from more cities. All those wants will increase the cost of the ticket and reduce the numbers that can afford to fly. Then we want short-term rentals to go away. That will also limit the number of people who can afford a holiday. I can not find any research or publication that examines the unintended consequences of either stance, so that’s a bit concerning.
But world population and world wealth is increasing so I suspect that other techniques will be necessary to raise the cost to at least 1970 levels and “bring tourism under control”.
Mr. E: My first trip to Europe in 1970 was $670 including a month in a college dorm and meals. That also included the round trip charter flight that cost $205.
My wife's hobby is locating inexpensive airfares--in the middle of the night usually--and she usually comes up with airfares half of the amount most travelers are paying. We're only traveling if we're getting a relative bargain.
Hotels in the major cities are definitely on the upswing in prices, and I've been appalled at the money many people are paying for a bed. We found there are still many European cities and countries that are much cheaper than London/Paris and France/U.K. to stay in. That's where our future trips will be to.
We were in London, Florence and Rome last June for the umpteenth time, and the crowds were simply overwhelming. We're through with the big cities unless we're making flight connections there.
Thankfully we're retired and can pick the times that we go on vacation--less expensive shoulder months. But retirement doesn't mean we're too old to travel, and we've still got places we've never been to to see.
The average cost of an Airbnb in Europe is $114.
This times 30 nights is $3,420 per month. This is a much better return on investment than probably a monthly renter in an apartment. Might not be good for the local residents who need housing, but unless a city controls its tourist rentals, it will just keep getting more and more exploited.
Many tourists on here prefer apartments to rent instead of hotels, so we all contribute to this epidemic of local housing shortages. Let's be honest here, we all look for deals on flights, lodging, transportation, meals, etc. all the time, here and abroad. It is capitalism. Why pay $185 for a hotel room per night when you can have an apartment for $114? Without that AirBnB apartment available, that hotel room will be $215 per night before too long.
Competition reduces prices most of the time. It sometimes makes the product or service worse for the consumer. How many small local businesses or larger retail businesses have Amazon and Wal-Mart put out of business?
No simple solutions. However, I am amazed at the overly concern Americans on this forum have for the small proprietors in Europe that have small hotels, restaurants or tour guide businesses (book direct, Viator is evil), etc., but how often have they stayed at a local motel while traveling in the US or sought out a local restaurant instead of a chain. I know I rarely do because I look for convenience and what I prefer.
Like it or not, we live in a world society of survival of the fittest. Not pleasant, but realistic.
The average occupancy rate in Europe is 76.5% meaning before expenses they make closer to $2.600 and closer to $1.920 after expenses.
But to discuss short term rentals in the context of "Europe" isn't much more rational than making universal world wide statements on the subject.
I am certain in some locations they do more harm than good while in other locations the reverse is true and my trashing them with no knowledge of the facts could hurt innocent prople.
Again, we are talking about democracies and it is certain that they understand their situation better than I do.
But to discuss short term rentals in the context of "Europe" isn't much more rational than making universal world wide statements on the subject.
I agree, I just quoted your statement about the cost of an AirBnB in Europe as $114. My question is, Where would it be beneficial to convert local housing into short term housing? The only place I could see that as beneficial is if there is a glut of monthly housing unoccupied.
Once a monthly housing unit goes off the market into a short term rental program, it affects the lives of people who are in need of full time monthly housing. It is like when an apartment owner decides to upgrade his housing units and converts them to condos. If you are a renter who cannot afford to buy one of the condos, you become displaced.
It certainly is a decision for the local government and if I read the Berlin post correctly, it sounds as if Berlin is doing something about short term rentals displacing monthly rentals. It will be interesting if other cities take note and follow suit,
It is a real issue everywhere, not just Europe. We experience it here in SW Florida. There are vast amounts of short term seasonal rentals which leaves a shortage of monthly rentals which increases the prices of the few monthly rentals. Supply and demand!!! Low supply, high demand, higher prices which excludes many workers who are essential to operating the very businesses in the area.
You can own and rent out a seasonal condo for 4-5 months and make the same or more money than having a monthly renter for 12 months. Less stress on your property, higher earners as renters, money up front and the owner can use it on the off months. Meanwhile, hourly workers drive hours to get to work and businesses compete for those workers because the workers can always find their jobs closer to where they now live, many miles from these seasonal locations. I don't think there is a labor shortage, I think there is an issue connecting labor with businesses where housing is almost nil or unaffordable.
It is an interesting problem to discuss with no quick and easy solution.
To this point, we are traveling in months outside of July and August and June and September only if we're off the beaten track. The other months are fine, really, about anywhere you go.
I am planning a trip presently that begins in a few weeks. The theme of the trip is "No Freeways / Toll Roads / Divided Roads", "No Cities bigger-than 40,000 population", "No Set Plans (other than a vaguely-determined oval loop at the moment).
My goal is to be directed to the next amazing destination based on tips provided to me by people in the current town. Like, I will make a new friend, tell them we're venturing in the direction of a landmark a few hundred miles away and ask them to tell me about some of the more unknown spots we might veer off to along the way. And, what would be a desired place to stay a night or two within 100 km or less.
I'm looking at maps and reading about the regions but a lot of this is going to be a big surprise.
Threadwear, points well taken.
Vienna has gone the same way as Berlin. 1/3 of all the rooms in Vienna are about to be lost. Hotel companies are going to love it. Tourists not so much.
In my city, the short term rentals ended a lot of poverty and helped to renovate neighborhoods. Now new ones are banned and property values took a hit. But the hotel companies came to the rescue and bought up the low value entire apartment blocks and converted them to hotels. Gee, that's better.
Every situation is unique.
And it's 9pm here and i àm sitting looking out the bar window at the apartment blocks in this sort of marginal part of town, 300m from tourism and no more than 20% of the flats have lights on. Housing shortage? Good housing shortage maybe. But they would make sweet airbnbs after renovation.
