Let’s Unpack “Overtourism”, Shall We?

Overtourism is the travel word of the summer. Not ideal, I agree. That and CrowdStrike, yikes.

But overtourism — what actually is it, and is it all as bad as headlines would make you think? Sorry, There’s no chatGPT one sentence answer that fully encompasses the vast social, environmental and economic topics needed to drill down here.

From the get-go, I’m in some way a part of the problem being foisted as overtourism. Advice I’ve given on the internet has sent people into restaurants, cities and places that might not have been accustomed to so many visitors, or where the vibe never catered to visitors. But is that really a bad thing?

This is the crux of the issue, the question of bad for who? I’ve been writing about the impacts of overtourism and its misconceptions for years and coming out of the post pandemic landscape, it’s trickier than ever. One theme: money talks.

Travel Is So Broad And People Are So Naive

First, in response to recent footage of overtourism backlash, where people chastise tourists eating at cafes, the idea that any one person in a city is more or less entitled to ask for a walk in table at any restaurant is ludicrous.

Oh, you’re a visitor? I live here. Oh, you live here? How long? I’ve lived here for X years. Oh yeah? well, my grandparents were born here, so….You see where this is going.

If you don’t like to wait in line, don’t wait in line. The best thing about any city is that life is always changing and neighborhoods everywhere are too. Neighborhoods that are hot one day aren’t the next.

My parents lived in New York when the Upper East Side was shockingly expensive and most of Brooklyn was as budget as it got. Now, Williamsburg is more expensive than the Upper East Side. Is that tourism’s fault? No.

Tourism can certainly be an accelerant to change but we cannot berate people taking advantage of wholly legal opportunities; be it golden or nomad visas, or shorter trips.

Second, the most naive and quickly drawn line by many people who are tired of travel visitors is that tourism doesn’t benefit them. It’s just those hotels and airlines winning, right? Wrong. If you think that, I’m sorry, but you’re either dumb or under informed.

Hoping the latter, for you!

In any city, there isn’t a bar or restaurant that doesn’t benefit from tourism in some form. Quality tourism is the elusive artform.

Tourists bring tax revenue and jobs wherever they go. Hotels alone employ basic work like cleaning teams, sure, but also employ electricians, chefs, engineers, accountants, executives and many other well paid and valuable careers. These jobs help locals live.

Just about everything in business, anywhere, benefits from more eyeballs, more wallets and more foot traffic. When digital nomads move in, they too need electricians, plumbers and services. Whether you have a laundromat, an art gallery, cafe or a fun website, visitors are good and tourism usually plays a part of that.

Done right, tourism is also taxed to account for the social and environmental impact. Each plane ticket includes a series of government fees and hotel overnight guest charges and other fees like ESTA’s tend to help account for movement.

Don’t hate the players.

In a world where restaurants scrape by, many shops too, transient visitors a.k.a tourists are a really vital part of life in any city or major destination. Again, quality and balance are the issue — not tourism itself.

Great cities were built on transient visitors and they absorb the influx in stride. It’s just ridiculous to brand tourism as inherently bad. People, and quality of tourism on the other hand are a legitimate challenge, and not every destination is a city.

The framework of building the “right” tourism at the government level is also a huge problem. For example: some destinations have become the bachelor/ette party places and locals kind of wish they weren’t.

Not Every City And Visitor

The problem is that not every destination is a malleable city and not every visitor is a quality visitor. It’s an ugly truth, but the tourism contributions of mass market budget travelers and boutique affluent travelers are often not the same. In fairness, people flying and staying on points can still be hugely positive travelers spending locally.

People need to sober up and own their local impact. Governments have also been far too slow to modernize policy to protect real estate in cities for those with residency.

The best “sustainable” tourism is one where fewer people spend more money, locally, and spread it wider. There, I said it. It’s not pretty but it’s hard to argue with.

Small islands with plumbing and resources for a population of 5,000 really struggle when 10,000 visitors arrive by day on huge cruise ships already fed and needing the bathroom after chowing down on their all you can eat buffet on board. They’re not supporting local restaurants or b&b’s.

On an island like Santorini, these 10,000 cruise tourists take a picture with a windmill and a donkey and buy a bottle of water because it’s so f**king hot! Even their cruise arranged tour bus is usually some extension of a multi-national cruise operation and very rarely employs truly local people.

As I’ve lamented before, these people coming from cruise ships tend to average spending of under $5 per day on an island. They don’t pay overnight guest taxes, or statistically eat out at local restaurants or support local businesses either. Overnight guests on the other hand bring $100s in value.

Basic math: 5,000 day visitors averaging $5 a piece in local spend is $25,000 in economic value, with a huge impact on local resources. Yet, 1,000 people spending $100 a day brings 4x more economic value, with much less strain (one fifth, arguably) on resources.

These things don’t matter in a city like Las Vegas nearly as much, and Las Vegas by design, is a mass market tourism destination which wants as many people as possible. It’s practically built for quantity over quality, though it of course enjoys both.

We certainly can’t blame people for wanting to see the world. I’d love everyone to see everything. Travelers are going to go where opportunity is. The tricky part is creating the right opportunities that work for everyone and spreading it wider and to places that can cope.

If there’s anything tourists can do better, it’s to embrace local and not just look for the quick picture of “the thing”. I’ve never thought that the joy of being in any destination is one “do it for the gram” moment, but rather the more immersive things that take you all over a place.

Getting the sharing economy balance right is huge too.

A city that allows people to buy up apartment buildings and turn them into totally unregulated hotels in everything but name is a problem, but so too is keeping someone whose worked their whole life to buy a second place from listing it.

Airbnb is a glorious feature of the modern world, but it’s about execution, balance and framework.

It’s great for a person to be able to supplement their income with a second home, or share their own. Foreign holding companies buying entire apartment buildings, kicking out locals and running sketchy unregulated “hotels” is less ideal.

Cities like Los Angeles seem to have found a sustainable happy medium.

Travel Is Classist, Sorry

I’m sorry, but travel is classist again. It kind of always was, we just pretended not to notice as we grew the industry because money talks.

“We” in tourism like when the rich come on small private planes or boats, spend a fortune, take up only a small sliver of the place and tips get kicked up and down from the dock to the kitchen to the cleaning teams. “We” like it less when bus loads arrive and don’t spend big.

I believe everyone should have a chance to experience the world’s many wonders, but making that feasible for all is not that simple.

If the entire draw of an island or destination is natural beauty, actual $#!t flowing into the crystal blue waters because the plumbing backed up from overtourism is not the vibe, and could potentially shut down the whole tourism interest all together and kill a vital industry which employs up to half the population in some countries.

Travel may need to get more expensive to really work for all. That may mean saving for longer and ditching cheap country counting — but travel is always worth the money.

Tourists aren’t to blame for tourism woes. It’s bad stakeholders in business or government that are letting the side down. Silly statistics around total visitor numbers should be irrelevant compared to the underlying economic drivers and societal impact.

In places like Mexico City, where it seems like every remote worker from New York or LA has moved, the city hasn’t kept up with protecting the interests of locals. Tourism is creating incredibly valuable revenue and business boon, but tightening restrictions on who can rent seems like a fair way to keep it so that tourism doesn’t accelerate neighborhood change in a damaging way.

WWYD? A Few Things

This leaves that feeling of, ok, so what should we do then? I’m with you and there are things that can be done.

If you want to help keep the balance between tourism and overtourism in check, I’d recommend the following. Hate on them all you want.

1. Explore “secondary cities” – think about the other place in that cool country you wanted to visit and spend some time there too, so that the country sees wider positive benefit from travel, as tourism spread further.
2. Aim for shoulder season – peak summer travel creates a log jam which inflates prices for all and strains resources. Try to use that hard earned vacation time for a trip when others might be back to work or in school, wherever possible.
3. Support local – don’t eat at multi-national chains or stores when you travel. Shop in places where your support directly impacts the community and those who live there. Usually those purchases are more unique and memorable too.

Tourism is wonderful, not bad, and if we open our eyes to our personal impacts both positive and negative, fewer people will be “over” it.