Coronavirus and Tourism: A unique opportunity for change in Venice and beyond

Before the pandemic, over-tourism and its adverse effects on communities emerged as an unsolvable issue. Cities such as Amsterdam, Barcelona and Venice benefitted economically from the huge influx of tourists, yet, the same cities also faced significant issues including environmental ones. The huge economic dependence of these cities to tourism meant that any potential changes to address them would be controversial. The pandemic and the accompanying massive government recovery funds present a unique opportunity for structural changes to address over-tourism, with Venice setting the example.

Over-tourism

Venice's historic centre has long been one of the most attractive tourist destinations on the planet. The city's uniqueness, combined with its historical sights, exceptional architecture and charming canals have contributed to its appeal. Prior to the pandemic and since 2010, Venice received 20-30 million tourists annually. The number becomes even more astonishing once the small size of the city of 80,000 inhabitants is factored into the equation.

An estimated 32,000 cruise ship passengers would disembark in Venice on a daily basis prior to Covid; that’s around half of the city's population. Indeed, the image of massive multi-storey high cruise ships passing right next to St Mark's Square is both iconic and worrisome. It is estimated that, prior to the pandemic, around 700 large cruise ships entered the city's lagoon and docked at Venice's port each year. While this influx of tourists greatly benefited the economy of Venice, it also caused serious issues.

Cruise ships brought pollution to the city's canals and the surrounding lagoon. The ecological destruction the cruise ships caused is noticeable in Venice's canals, as their water is extremely polluted. The environmental impact of the large cruise ships became obvious at the outbreak of the pandemic, since following the introduction of travel restrictions, the colour of the water in the city's canals became blue again for the first time in decades and dolphins were spotted close to the city's shores.

Cruise ships were also eroding the city's foundations and in recent years contributing to regular floods along with climate change. Massive cruise ships posed an existential threat to the city's historic sights, as by passing close to them there was a danger of collision. Indeed, during stormy weather in 2019, a massive cruise ship almost collided with the famous Venetian Square. The same year, the 13-deck MSC Opera experienced an engine failure and crashed at the city's port, damaging a river cruiser, the port's bankside and injuring 4 people.

What's changing?

To address these issues, appease the concerned residents and prevent a future disaster, the Italian government announced that the entry of large cruise ships into the city's current port will be banned. Similar measures were announced and contemplated many times in the past, yet those never materialised for various reasons.

Covid-19 and the EU's next generation recovery fund present a unique opportunity for the Italian government to finally proceed with such a ban. The travel restrictions imposed mean that any potential disruption caused by such a measure would be limited. Moreover, the fiscal considerations that prevented the imposition of this ban in the past can be addressed through Italy's receipt of an astonishing €191.5bn from the EU's recovery fund.

Two main proposals are being considered. The first - endorsed in 2019 but never materialised - proposes that large cruise ships could be re-routed through a nearby canal, currently mostly used by cargo ships, to dock at an industrial port in the mainland. From there, tourists would be able to get to the city by alternative means. This would mean that large cruise ships won't pass near the historic city centre.

Yet this proposal is criticised by environmentalists, as the cruise ships would still enter the lagoon and cause pollution. The proposal was also viewed negatively by the cruise industry, as the longer distance to the city would reduce its attractiveness. Another issue is that the mainland industrial port proposed to host the cruise ships currently lacks the capacity to do so. It is estimated that a minimum of €40 million would be required for its renovation. Due to the need for modification of the mainland’s port, it is still unknown whether this proposal will go ahead.

To address some of those issues, a new and more radical alternative proposal is also being considered. The Italian government is currently holding public consultations regarding the possibility of building terminals outside the lagoon, thus creating a whole new port in the Adriatic Sea. This would probably entail higher costs, but it would address the concerns of the environmentalists. Notably, the distance of the new port from the city would be significantly smaller than that of the already established mainland industrial port. Despite the fact that such an alternative would be more expensive, it seems achievable, as funds from the EU's economic recovery plan can be used for this purpose.

Reliance on Tourism

For the many Venetians which depend on tourism for their income, the potential ban exacerbates the pandemic-induced uncertainty which has seen tourism revenues plummet. The city's economy, which heavily relies on tourists, has been hit particularly hard by Covid-19, as around 6,000 jobs have been lost and many of its small shops and hotels have declared bankruptcy. More than 4,000 locals work at the current city port, and many of them lost their livelihoods during the Covid-19 pandemic. The ban would harm the city's tourism industry, threatening the €55million which cruise ship passengers spend in Venice yearly.

The ban, thus, brings more uncertainty and there are fears that the proposal would reduce the city's attractiveness to the cruise industry. Indeed, certain cruise lines are already considering alternatives. Following this development, Royal Caribbean has already announced that it will relocate its homeport to Ravenna, one and a half hours away from Venice. The city of Trieste, which is 2 hours away from the city, is also being considered by other cruise lines.

Such fears may prove to be excessive. Venice's attractiveness will not be lost due to the implementation of this measure. Venice is still going to remain in the lists of most tourists and the ban is unlikely to negatively affect the city's overall tourism industry. On the contrary, Venice's infamous canals had started to gain a negative reputation due to their pollution and unbearable smell, issues which the proposed ban could address. Hence, the ban could actually increase the attractiveness of the city. Despite fears that cruise liners might abandon Venice, most still advertise the city in their itineraries. The MSC cruise line has already made it clear that it will continue to use Venice for its cruises in the Mediterranean. As a spokesperson of the MSC acknowledged, cruise liners will simply comply with the authorities guidelines, as the city's tourist attractiveness will be retained, regardless of the ban's implementation and application.

The proposal does not need to threaten and harm the workers of the current Venetian port, who rely on cruise ships. Those workers can simply be relocated to the mainland industrial port or the new Adriatic port, depending on the proposal adopted. Indeed, the proposed ban seems to address, to some extent, the issues which the cruise industry brought to Venice, while doing so at a time when disruption would be limited. The pandemic has presented the perfect opportunity to implement such a change, as tourists, residents, and the cruise industry won’t be disrupted during its implementation. The EU's recovery fund, and the current massive state stimulus to fight Covid, also provide a unique opportunity for Italy to invest and use funds for this measure. More importantly though, the ban would protect the world heritage site of Venice's city centre, and it would reduce the pollution of its canals and lagoon. Despite some practical issues, this ban appears to be a necessary and long overdue change.

Looking Forward

The pandemic has undoubtedly negatively affected cities, regions and countries which rely heavily on tourism. Yet, as the aforementioned proposed cruise-ship ban indicates, it has presented those places with a unique opportunity to experiment and address the long-standing issues which over-tourism has brought. Governments should seize this moment to implement the radical changes needed for tourism to become sustainable, both economically and ecologically, at a time in which immense disruption would be avoided.