Paying to enter a city. Not to use public transport or visit a museum, but simply to set foot in its streets and squares. This is what will happen in Venice on the days of greatest tourist influx, with the introduction of a 5 euro entrance ticket. A "shock" measure, which has sparked the debate on how to manage overtourism in cities of art. But is it really the right solution?
Perhaps the real challenge is another: rethinking the very model of the city of art, for a future in which tourism, culture and quality of life can coexist harmoniously. Shall we talk about it together? Do you like it?
The context and the need for intervention
With its picturesque canals and enchanting historical architecture, our wonderful Venice has long been "fighting" against the waves of tourists who, if on the one hand they bring vital economic income, on the other put the urban infrastructure and quality to the test. of the lives of residents.
The decision to implement an entry tax during peak tourism periods was seen by many as an inevitable step. The mayor of Venice and the tourism department have underlined that, without regulatory measures such as these, it would be impossible to maintain the cultural and structural integrity of the city.
Entrance fee, portrait of a complex measure
The entrance fee is designed to reduce the number of daily visitors and “support” the lost revenue. If possible, to encourage longer stays, possibly more aware and "respectful" of the place. In other words to avoid a certain low-cost "hit and run" tourism that arrives, somehow devastates and goes away.
It risks being a partial and short-term solution. Of course, on the one hand it can discourage "lazy" tourism, but it does not address the root causes of overtourism, linked to global dynamics of mobility, cultural consumption and territorial marketing. And it risks discriminating against those with less availability: a city of art should be accessible to everyone, not just those who can afford an entrance ticket.
In any case, according to the Venice tourism department, the impact of this measure will be carefully monitored to assess whether it actually contributes to an improvement in the situation.
Rethinking cities, not just tourism
To truly address the problem of overtourism, we need an overall rethinking of the city of art model. It is not enough to regulate tourist flows. We need to intervene on the urban structure, on the distribution of activities and services, on mobility and on the quality of living.
Some possible alternative or complementary measures to the entrance ticket could be:
- Decentralization of attractions: creation of new centers of interest outside the traditional tourist circuits, to distribute flows over a wider territory and ease the pressure on the "must-sees".
- Enhancement of widespread heritage: promotion of alternative itineraries and forms of slow tourism, which favor the discovery of minor heritage and the daily life of the neighborhoods.
- Residency policies: incentives for maintenance e the attraction of resident population in historic centers through tax breaks, social housing, local services. The opposite of what is happening everywhere, even in my Naples, with the gentrification of the historic centers.
- Intelligent flow management: use of smart technologies to monitor and direct tourist movements in real time, avoiding congestion and overloads.
- Education and awareness: information and empowerment campaigns for visitors, to promote behavior that respects the urban context and local communities.
Entrance fee, the hunt for a new model of art city
However the Venetian experiment goes, it makes us reflect on what model of city of art we want for the future. A museum-city to be hastily consumed, or a living organism to be inhabited and experienced slowly?
The challenge is to find a balance between conservation and innovation, between tourist enjoyment and quality of urban life. A balance that requires strategic vision, citizen participation and collaboration between all the actors involved: administrations, tourist operators, associations, residents. It is not just Venice that is looking for solutions to the problem of overtourism. I have already mentioned Naples, literally buried under masses of tourists. Other cities such as Barcelona, Amsterdam and Florence have adopted or are considering measures similar to the entry ticket, each adapted to its own urban and cultural specificities. Comparison with these cases can offer important insights into how different strategies can work in various contexts, and what can be learned from the experiences of others.
The entrance ticket is an immediate response to tourist pressure, but it does not provide certainties. The future will tell whether the model of the city with such fragile beauty will become a reference for other destinations or whether it will be necessary to devise more sophisticated and integrated approaches. What do you think?
