Negative Impacts from the Recovery in Inbound Demand
Levels of recovery in inbound demand can be seen from the above. However, particularly in Tokyo, Kyoto, Fukuoka, Ishikawa, and other regions where demand has returned to more than 80% of pre-COVID levels, in some areas there are concerns regarding overtourism. Excluding Tokyo, the number of inbound tourists has not recovered to 2019 levels. In line with this, it may be that the lack of human resources who can provide services, including at tourism facilities, may be causing a sense of overcapacity and in turn overtourism.
While issues with overtourism were frequently raised even before the pandemic due to the increase in inbound tourists, with the government’s plan of transforming Japan into a top tourism destination and attracting 60 million tourists by 2030, issues with overtourism will no doubt become even more apparent.
Overtourism is not only caused by inbound tourists, but also by the concentration of domestic travelers. In this area, it will be important to make preparations before domestic overtourism becomes a problem. To do so, visualization of the numbers and concentration of travelers will be paramount. Thoroughly understanding numbers that enter each region, numbers of facility users, and the distribution of movement through the digitalization of tickets and other means is essential, and based on this data, examining how to distribute these travelers will be an important topic for tourist destinations in the future.
During the pandemic, many regions limited their number of visitors to a certain extent by digitalizing tickets and requiring reservations. Now, however, as impacts from the pandemic continue to ease, there are various opinions regarding the control of visitor numbers, particularly from local businesses.
In 2023, for example, Yosemite National Park in the US announced that it would no longer continue with a reservation system that was introduced during the pandemic, implementing a different policy to other national parks. There are concerns that lifting restrictions on visitor numbers could prevent visitors from enjoying quality experiences, and at the same time cause damage to the park’s infrastructure and natural environment. On the other hand, in Mariposa County, where tourism-related industries employ approximately 50% of the population, revenue from tourism is only generated in the five months of summer, and so the lifting of restrictions is expected to improve the local economy. In this way, there are an array of different Opinions3.
Elsewhere, some regions have avoided overtourism through a uniform limitation on visitor numbers. In South Tyrol in the Alps of Northern Italy, for example, based on its peak numbers in 2019, the number of overnight stays has been limited to 34 million per year to reduce negative impacts on the environment. The region has also implemented other measures. For example, the opening of new hotels and guesthouses requires approval from the local council, which cannot grant approval if there are no spaces Available4.
Moreover, while some places like Venice are charging entry fees to limit the number of tourists, other regions that were already charging visitors have chosen to increase their fees to limit visitor numbers5. Based on actual conditions in tourist destinations, the course of action to prevent overtourism through destination management is not necessarily simply controlling quantity and improving quality. More specifically, it will be important for regions to hold discussions on how best to balance between quantity and quality.