- cross-posted to:
- travel@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- travel@lemmy.world
Day-trippers will have to pay €5 to visit Italian city under scheme designed to protect it from excess tourism
Authorities in Venice have been accused of transforming the famous lagoon city into a “theme park” as a long-mooted entrance fee for day trippers comes into force.
Venice is the first major city in the world to enact such a scheme. The €5 (£4.30) charge, which comes into force today, is aimed at protecting the Unesco world heritage site from the effects of excessive tourism by deterring day trippers and, according to the mayor, Luigi Brugnaro, making the city “livable” again.
But several residents’ committees and associations have planned protests for Thursday, arguing that the fee will do nothing to resolve the issue.
“I can tell you that almost the entire city is against it,” claimed Matteo Secchi, who leads Venessia.com, a residents’ activist group. “You can’t impose an entrance fee to a city; all they’re doing is transforming it into a theme park. This is a bad image for Venice … I mean, are we joking?”
You must log in or # to comment.
I find it surprising that it’s unpopular with the residents
My (admittedly naive) understanding was that tourism keeps increasing and there’s no way to build more space, so Venice has become overcrowded and is potentially at risk of sinking?
Sure it’s not great to have to impose a restriction like this, but there aren’t many other ways to reduce the number of people going to a place that they want to go to.
Other than the poor optics of charging entrance as if it’s a theme park, the fee might also embolden some of the more obnoxious tourists in behaving like they would at an ACTUAL theme park rather than how they would as guests in a “real” city, in order to “get their money’s worth”.
Yeah, people definitely have a tendency to act entitled just because they’ve paid money.
It reminds me of this story from Freakonomics:
The economists decided to test their solution by conducting a study of ten day-care centers in Haifa, Israel. The study lasted twenty weeks, but the fine was not introduced immediately. For the first four weeks, the economists simply kept track of the number of parents who came late; there were, on average, eight late pickups per week per day-care center. In the fifth week, the fine was enacted. It was announced that any parent arriving more than ten minutes late would pay $3 per child for each incident. The fee would be added to the parents’ monthly bill, which was roughly $380.
After the fine was enacted, the number of late pickups promptly went… up. Before long there were twenty late pickups per week, more than double the original average. The incentive had plainly backfired.
Interesting story. $3 is worth it for a few minutes of extra child care.
I wonder if they had charged $1 a minute that the parent was late, if that would have nipped the problem in the bud.
I heard that one school (maybe the same school?) had success with a “three strikes and then you find yourself another school” policy.
Wow, that seems unnecessarily harsh.
Who said anything about fines? If anything, your example supports my comment 🤷
Yeah, I was agreeing. I’ll reword my post to make myself clear.
Ah ok 🙂
Someone’s going to carve their name into all the churches.
That and a shitload of dicks.
Thing is, €5 isn’t all that much. I’m not sure who this is going to deter other than shoestring backpackers and people who fly RyanAir. I’d fully expect that price to increase in the future.
My guess is that the term “residents” actually refers to greedy business and hotel owners which are the reason this rule is necessary in the first place.
Residents, commuters, students and children under the age of 14 are exempt, as are tourists who stay overnight.
So they are just attempting to bully the worst kind of tourists out which is totally fair.
Yeah it reads like they do want less tourists but don’t agree with the way they are handling it. Maybe a pride thing, with the theme park comment.
I suspect it’s more unpopular with souvenir shop owners than anyone else.
Maybe the inland residents the ones that are protesting… what we call Venice doesent look to have a lot of residents apart from some particular places
This article is surely taking a group of people and holding them as being representative of the populace as a whole. In fact, much reporting indicates that locals are sick of tourists and tourists, especially on cruise ships, are actively destroying the environment. Venice has already banned cruise ships from certain parts as a result. I call bullshit on this article.
They should honestly increase the cost to something more akin to a theme park. There isn’t that much value that the city brings in beyond it being a tourist destination.
Maybe go with circus prices instead since they both charge you money to see a bunch of clowns.
the obvious solution is to only let in a set number of people per day. This is just a nickel and dime scheme.
This does kinda feel like when Cartman had his own amusement park that nobody was allowed to go to
The fee is only charged on certain days, I believe a total of 29 days this year, to dissuade people from visiting on those days that are considered to be the busiest.
This isn’t going to dissuade anyone though. No one is going to change their vacation plans for $5.
This is just the city wanting money from tourists directly.
which will further entrench the city gov to cater to tourists if they become dependent on such fees
Which they should tbh, it’s a crowded sinking town that’s only real industry is tourism. Help anyone that wants to move out and put in more facilities for tourism to help fund surrounding areas and build the local economy.
29 days is counted until the end of the three months trial in July. So it’s every weekend + every holiday, like 120 days per year
You have to pay 5€ to visit a giant sewer city with no trees in sight and two people per every square meter. A bargain.
Shush you, Venice is magnificent. Wouldn’t want to live there but it’s an extraordinary place absolutely worth experiencing. Ancient, labyrinthine, palaces and churches everywhere, it’s like stepping into the Renaissance.
Good point. But I enjoyed “shush you” the most
I’m upvoting you for adding to the conversation even though we have different opinions. Sadly, people don’t understand how the moderation system is supposed to work.
You have to pay 5€ to visit
You only have to pay that if you’re a day visitor. If you’re staying on one of the main islands, you don’t need to pay. The place you’re staying should have a tourism site ID code, which you can enter on the site to get exemption.
a giant sewer city
I never get why this image is so prevalent. Just visit a month or two before or after the main summer months. May or September perhaps, it’s usually still warm, and I’ve visited many times now and only had a few days when in a few select areas it was a bit smelly. The idea it’s common is just plain wrong based on all of my visits.
with no trees
There are trees quite literally everywhere. Maybe not on Rialto bridge, though. Even next to San Marco, there are some nice gardens. Further along at the Biennale, you will see many more gardens. There’s also a garden right by Piazzale Roma and the train station. Once you leave the main tourist areas, you’ll see plenty of trees pretty much everywhere.
two people per every square meter
Go slightly off season, and actually leave Rialto and San Marco alone once you’ve seen them. You can walk for literally 2 minutes and go from serious crowds to totally alone from either of those locations.
Yeah this is the same person who would complain about Disneyland being overcrowded while visiting on July 4.
If you’re staying on one of the main islands, you don’t need to pay
But if you’re staying on one of the main islands, instead of paying the 5 euro entry ticket you pay the (up to) 5 euro hotel tax
(Note: 5 euro is the hotel tax in the highest season on the highest level, an hostel in low season is 1 euro. But Venice is inherently more expensive than the rest of the country, so if someone wants to save money it’s still cheaper to sleep in an hostel in Mestre, in the mainland, then pay train+entry ticket)
But if you’re staying on one of the main islands, instead of paying the 5 euro entry ticket you pay the (up to) 5 euro hotel tax
City tax is a thing in pretty much every Italian tourist city. We’ve done the stay in Mestre thing, and it is indeed cheaper (the train ticket is really cheap). But, you have to be clear of the main islands before the last train/bus and it’s much better to not have to worry about such things.
There’s some decent priced places to stay on the island. I mean not compared to a hostel for sure, but still reasonable overall compared to a hotel.
You never been, obviously.
You don’t care for culture, gotcha. Now do Disneyland!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The €5 (£4.30) charge, which comes into force today, is aimed at protecting the Unesco world heritage site from the effects of excessive tourism by deterring day trippers and, according to the mayor, Luigi Brugnaro, making the city “livable” again.
Once the heart of a powerful maritime republic, Venice’s main island has lost more than 120,000 residents since the early 1950s, driven away by a number of issues but predominantly a focus on mass tourism that has caused the population to be dwarfed by the thousands of visitors who crowd its squares, bridges and narrow walkways at the busiest times of the year.
The entrance fee, which is required only for access to Venice’s historic centre, is bookable online and will apply on 29 peak days, mostly weekends, from Thursday until 14 July as part of its trial phase.
Federica Toninello, who leads ASC, an association for housing, said: “They think this measure will solve the problem, but they haven’t really understood the consequences of mass tourism on a city like Venice.
The local branch of Arci, a cultural and social rights association, said it would distribute “symbolic passports” to tourists on Thursday as a way of highlighting the “dubious constitutional legitimacy” of the measure in terms of restricting free movement.
While some have raised questions over privacy due to people having to feed their data into the booking system, Venturini said the tool would be useful in “providing more precise figures on visitor numbers”.
The original article contains 648 words, the summary contains 245 words. Saved 62%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
“Venice is the first major city in the world to enact such a scheme.”
London has been charging an entry fee for it’s downtown core for years now.
https://www.visitlondon.com/traveller-information/getting-around-london/congestion-charge
That’s only for vehicles. It isn’t the same thing.
It’s essentially the same thing. Too many people are coming, so charge them a fee. The only reason Venice is per person and not per vehicle is that it’s an island, it’s not like you can drive there.
It may seem like that to the average american, but nobody with more than 1 braincell drives in London. Even when your the congestion charge, you’re basically always better off walking or taking the Underground.
This prevents cars, not people. They’re very much not the same thing.
Polluting vehicles are not the same as people… you know that, right? The reason for the ULEZ is to keep emissions low, not restrict tourism
You can drive in Venice. Well, you could if you’d removed all the tourists.
The London thing does not apply to pedestrians
There is a difference in intent.
The congestion charge in London and other cities is just for cars whole the cities generally provide good mass transit across the toll line.
Venice is charging an admission fee to all tourists no matter how they arrive. Given how low the fee is, all it will probably do is raise revenue for the local government.
It’s essentially the same thing. Too many people are coming, so charge them a fee.
No, it’s not the same thing. Cars don’t have a place in the cities, cities are for humans.
