Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Norway's Bold Plan to Tackle Overtourism

outsideonline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 278 posts

Re: Norway's Bold Plan to Tackle Overtourism

#151

Post by Spooks »

brainwad wrote: post #51
wellactually wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another way would be to charge a modest lottery entrance fee and limit the number of winners to a sensible quota.

Rationing is not a very fair way to distribute goods or services to people. Some people may value it just enough to pay the entry fee, while others might value it a lot more, but now they have the same chances of receiving it. If you prohibit people from on-selling their tickets, then you also causes losses when people change their minds but are already locked in by the lottery.

For this point: "If you prohibit people from on-selling their tickets, then you also causes losses when people change their minds but are already locked in by the lottery."

You could just have a return program. 30 days out it is free, 10 days out and you pay a small percentage but get your money back. You don't need to rely on selling tickets to others to get your money back

Re: Norway's Bold Plan to Tackle Overtourism

#152

Post by m4rtink »

dymk wrote: post #115
wellactually wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on the values of the host society. They may want to promote democratic access to their country.

What does "democratic access to their country" even mean? The tourists visiting their country don't vote, so you don't mean literally. And any random rationing system you put in place will be inherently unfair in some dimension.

The work "democratic" does not always directly relate to governing a country, but also making something accessible to all without unnecessary limitations - similar to the right to vote.

Re: Norway's Bold Plan to Tackle Overtourism

#153

Post by atomwaffel »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #60
ryanwaggoner wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So? It’s a different experience, maybe even a worse one (though that’s pretty subjective), but a lot more people get to have it.

Let's look at the article: >Surging visitor numbers are threatening Norway’s reigning principle of allemannsretten—the freedom to roam, a concept popular across all of Scandinavia. The thousand-year-old government policy states that individuals, as long as they are polite, can legally walk through any piece of undeveloped property and camp for one night without first obtaining the owner’s permission. This right has w…

> So allemannsretten is threatening to be extinguished because it's a concept that doesn't scale.

While I agree with your main point, I think it’s important to note that this is about a handful of hotspots like Trolltunga and Pulpit Rock. I can’t see any Scandinavian politician seriously suggesting to abolish allemannsretten as such, and Norway has thousands and thousands of square kilometres where it is working just fine.

Re: Norway's Bold Plan to Tackle Overtourism

#154

Post by tgv »

el_cujo wrote: post #67
ohduran wrote: post #24

Currently living in Barcelona, where 'overtourism' is a much bigger problem than in Norway IMHO, it feels weird. You start passing bills on restricting tourism, then the natural next step is being hard on immigration, then Brexit. The ability to control who goes in and who goes out usually falls on the hand of those that shouldn't have that kind of power. Edit: Removed "At the risk of being downvoted" as some comment…

This, it feels very weird to me seeing people advocate for basically only allowing the super rich to travel. To a lot of people, travelling abroad isn't just about getting drunk at foreign clubs and leaving trash everywhere, but about experiencing other cultures and having your world-view widened beyond what you see every day. I think most people would argue these things are good, not just for the individual but for…

So be it. Traveling everywhere every time you want isn't a human right. It's a luxury.

Re: Norway's Bold Plan to Tackle Overtourism

#155

Post by balfirevic »

ido wrote: post #127
balfirevic wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in a city that has had an explosion of tourism in the last 10 years. I don't benefit from it financially (if anything, the rents have shoot up considerably because of it), but it looks to me like it has been the main reason why the city doesn't feel empty and dead after 21h. I'm not sure I would be living here were it not for the side-effects of tourism.

dont you think you benefit from the fact your city's government has more money to spend due to all the taxes collected from tourists' consumption/visits?

Theoretically, it would be possible. But there are several reasons why I don't think of it as financially beneficial:

1) Rent and all cafes/bars/restaurants are significantly more expensive.

2) Most of the consumption is taxed via VAT, which goes directly to national government.

3) Both local city government and national government are corrupt hellholes which are certain to misuse any funds that come their way.

Edit: To be clear, I mean financially beneficial from "live in this particular city" perspective. On national level, tourism is such a high percentage of GDP that it's the only thing keeping the country alive. And we're in for a hell of ride if we stop being a desirable destination.

Re: Norway's Bold Plan to Tackle Overtourism

#156

Post by claytoneast »

hinkley wrote: post #123
cletus wrote: post #55

Welcome to the world of, by some measures, "too many" people having too much disposable wealth. There are obviously worse problems to have. But overtourism is a problem that's only going to get worse. This even affects Mount Everest where people are literally dying just to say they stood at the top of the world. And Everest simply can't support the number of climbers now. You see this in US national parks where the o…

It the Everest case the lottery could be used to pay for all of the externalities. Everyone who wants to climb Everest pays in 100 bucks to register. Winner has to pony up another 900 for the permit, and fines for leaving material on the mountain. Spend the net profit on cleaning up after the people who already left shit on the mountain. But here's another alternative that also fixes it: To get a permit to climb Ever…

Everest permits already cost USD $11,000. The problem is the government doesn't necessarily use that money to clean up the site. The government also doesn't cap the number of climbers, as far as I know. Hence the chaos up there.

http://www.alanarnette.com/blog/2018/12/17/how-much-does-it-...

Re: Norway's Bold Plan to Tackle Overtourism

#157

Post by neves »

el_cujo wrote: post #67
ohduran wrote: post #24

Currently living in Barcelona, where 'overtourism' is a much bigger problem than in Norway IMHO, it feels weird. You start passing bills on restricting tourism, then the natural next step is being hard on immigration, then Brexit. The ability to control who goes in and who goes out usually falls on the hand of those that shouldn't have that kind of power. Edit: Removed "At the risk of being downvoted" as some comment…

This, it feels very weird to me seeing people advocate for basically only allowing the super rich to travel. To a lot of people, travelling abroad isn't just about getting drunk at foreign clubs and leaving trash everywhere, but about experiencing other cultures and having your world-view widened beyond what you see every day. I think most people would argue these things are good, not just for the individual but for…

There are different degrees of overtourism. I'm from a very touristy city, Rio de Janeiro, but when I went to Barcelona, it was really in another league. Almost everybody at the subway were foreigner, as almost everybody in the restaurants.

Re: Norway's Bold Plan to Tackle Overtourism

#158

Post by lozaning »

kgwgk wrote: post #119
eisa01 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s at least one benefit of tourists: you get more and a better selection of restaurants I live in a part of Oslo with a vibrant restaurant scene, and one of the reasons is the extra business tourists drum up

Maybe "more" but restaurants catering to tourists are not usually "better".

Anecdotally, the Italian food one can find within a mile of the Colosseum is lower quality than what you'd get at any American Olive Garden.

Re: Norway's Bold Plan to Tackle Overtourism

#159

Post by graeme »

skohan wrote: post #109
graeme wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at it this way: why is the desire of today's middle class to travel by air more important than the survival of civilization tomorrow? Travel imposes heavy costs on the world, in its current carbon based form. It's only affordable because we pass these costs on to the future.

It's not just the desire to travel by air, it's the economics. When I first moved to Germany I looked into doing a few trips by train, but the flights were much cheaper.

Right. OP was arguing we shouldn't price in externalities because it would conflict with the desire to travel by air.

Re: Norway's Bold Plan to Tackle Overtourism

#160

Post by neves »

PeterStuer wrote: post #71
bjornsing wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea it’s a funny word “overtourism”. I guess it’s what you call it when other people go on vacation (whereas when I go on vacation it’s just “tourism”). :P

Dosage matters. Many things that are completely destructive or toxic are not a problem and even beneficial and enriching in small dosage. Tourism is most definitely one of those things. Typically it benefits a very few in the host location while externalizing the destruction of the culture, the environment and the quality of life for the many that have these places as their home. So it is not about 'you' vs 'the othe…

Not just few people. These are great jobs for an uneducated population.
Post reply on HN