to the influx. Does Amsterdam dare to do that?’
The ABN Amro report with ‘a new look at tourism in Amsterdam’ ignores the crux of the problem. Namely that tourism to Amsterdam has grown by 10 percent annually since 2014 – with the exception of the corona years – and the number of residents by 1 percent. The problem is the volume, the number of tourists in relation to the size of the city.
So the core is the supply of tourists, something ABN Amro certainly not a word. Nothing about Schiphol’s plans to open a fourth terminal for ten million extra passengers, nothing about the plans to open a second airport in Lelystad. Nothing about plans to relocate the Passenger Terminal Amsterdam to build a second cruise terminal in the region. Without doing something about the influx, all measures will have insufficient effect.
The bank asked the municipality not to tackle it alone, but ‘together with the tourism sector’. Earlier in the report she wrote that it should be said that ’86 percent do not recognize the problem of ‘overtourism’. Understandably, the sector wants to profit from overtourism. The tourist does not stay away because it is too crowded. On the contrary, the mass attracts the masses.
Spread is an illusion
The other recommendation is to spread out crowds in advance. ABN Amro proposes to spread the crowds by informing the tourists in advance, in order to influence their behaviour. This ignores the fact that most leisure tourists who visit Amsterdam get up close, make their decision shortly before departure, pre-book transport and accommodation but decide in advance what they want to do. Spread is an illusion, especially in advance.
In the report and in The watchword the discussion is also about whether or not to adjust the tourist tax in order to see the number of visitors. Amsterdam already has the highest tourist tax in Europe and the increase will have a waterbed effect. The tourist will be in the region and will visit Amsterdam as a day visit, preventing the economic importance from declining sharply.
Does the municipality feel the urgency, does it dare to take far-reaching measures? Is she going to establish her position as a shareholder of Schiphol? Will she opt for phasing out cruise tourism, the most polluting form of tourism with the lowest spending? Is she going to do everything she can to keep the second airport from opening? In short, does the city have enough guts?
Stephen Hodes, Muiden