Adapted by:
Miguel Jorge
WriterJournalist. I've spent more than half of my life writing about technology, science, and culture. Before landing here, I worked at Telefónica, Prisa, Globus Comunicación, Hipertextual, and Gizmodo. I'm part of Webedia's cross-section team.
Alba Mora
WriterAn established tech journalist, I entered the world of consumer tech by chance in 2018. In my writing and translating career, I've also covered a diverse range of topics, including entertainment, travel, science, and the economy.
Venice can’t accommodate the growing number of tourists, particularly those who visit only for the day and leave without contributing to the local economy, aside from creating considerable waste. In response, the city has implemented several regulations, including capping large groups and tracking mobile phones. It also introduced a pioneering entry fee for visitors, which has just doubled in price.
Vulnerable to the influx of tourists. Since its inception, Venice has battled natural forces, constructing stone walls to protect its unique lagoon from the sea. However, the current threat comes not from water but the constant wave of visitors roaming the city. Tourists often arrive with little regard for the city’s ecosystem or economy, carrying backpacks and snacks.
To address the challenge posed by so-called “mordi e fuggi” tourists (literally, “eat and flee”), Venice has reinstated and expanded its controversial entry fee. This measure aims to discourage excessive tourism on busy days. Initially applied for 30 days in 2024, it was extended to 54 days starting April 18.
The fee will penalize those who book last-minute or without prior notice, charging $11.50 instead of $5.75. Rather than serving as a drastic deterrent, this measure sends a clear message: Venice is a unique and fragile city requiring more conscious and respectful tourism.
Balancing protectionism and pragmatism. Implementing the new fee is justified for symbolic and practical urban management needs. In 2023, Venice was close to being placed on UNESCO’s list of World Heritage in Danger due to threats from mass tourism, climate change, and uncontrolled urban development. The city has avoided such a dire classification thanks to initiatives like the entry fee, although UNESCO experts will reevaluate the situation in July.
In 2024, the revenue generated by the fee amounted to $3.2 million, primarily intended to cover the costs of maintaining this experimental system. The impact of the entry fee on tourist numbers has been uncertain. The local government says that days when the tax is in effect actually see more visitors. However, authorities insist that the fee is crucial in operational planning. It enhances the management of municipal services, including garbage collection and urban transport.
Criticism, vigilance, and tensions. According to The New York Times, opposition councilwoman Monica Sambo argues that attempting to govern Venice as if it were a theme park with an entry fee is a simplistic and symbolic solution to a complex structural problem. Sambo advocates for comprehensive policies, such as enforcing a clear limit on the number of days visitors are allowed and regulating tourist accommodations. She also suggests strategies to promote affordable housing and stable employment for residents, aiming to combat the “tourist monoculture” that weighs down the local social fabric.
Additionally, there are concerns about surveillance and privacy. The city uses phone location data and security cameras to monitor tourist flows. Some view these measures as a move toward intrusive monitoring. Moreover, Venice has banned megaphones and limited the size of tour groups to 25 people.
An imperfect tool for an emergency. The entry fee only applies to single-day visitors between 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Those staying in hotels or registered rentals (who already pay a tourist tax) are exempt. Residents, students, and people visiting relatives in the city don’t have to pay the fee either. All visitors are required to register and obtain a QR code before arrival. Advocates like Simone Venturini, Venice’s municipal councilor for tourism, say that this tax represents not just a control measure, but also a statement of principle. To them, Venice isn’t merely a picturesque postcard or a tourist attraction. It’s a living city that deserves respect.
One thing is clear. Some might question the fee’s practical effectiveness. However, when tourism threatens to overwhelm the city of Venice, any attempt to restore balance between residents’ rights and visitors’ desires is both justified and urgent.
Image | Giulia Galante
Related | In Its Fight Against Mass Tourism, Florence Banned Two of its Symbols: Key Boxes and Loudspeakers
View 0 comments