114.世界各地景区用旅游税驱逐“低价值游客”

Tourist taxes are Cropping Up in Destinations

Countries and cities have generally tried to encourage tourism—based on thepremise that holidaying visitors and the money they spend fosters economic development.

通常来说,国家和城市都是鼓励旅游的，前提是来度假的游客和他们的消费能刺激经济增长。

But in the age of over tourism, some popular destinations have reached their limit. City centers are clogged with avocado-toast-seeking hoards, historic sites are trampled by selfie-stick toting visitors, and locals are priced out by rising rents. To add insult to injury, many of these tourists don't spend much money: They use apps to sleuth out super-budget deals, disembark from cruise ships with full bellies to stroll around and then return to their buffets and cabins, or forgo hotels for cheaper accommodation in neighborhoods that were once solely the domain of locals.

但在这个旅游过度的时代,一些热门景点的接待能力已经超负荷。市中心挤满了寻找美食的吃货，历史遗迹被大群自拍游客破坏，当地人则因为旅游业兴旺而不断上涨的房租而租不起房。更讨厌的是，许多游客的消费都不高：他们借助应用程序制定超划算的攻略，在游轮上吃饱了肚子才下船游览,然后又返回游轮吃自助餐，不住酒店而选择曾经只有当地人居住的廉价民宿。

That's why so-called tourist taxes are cropping up in destinations around the world. Historically, these taxes have been used to fund tourism boards, hospitality trade groups, and destination marketing campaigns—the point being to bring more people into the country down the line.

这就是为什么世界各地的景点都突然开始征收所谓的旅游税。在历史上，旅游税是用来资助旅游局、酒店贸易集团和景区营销活动的，目的是在未来吸引更多人来本地旅游.

But a slew of new tourist taxes, or plans for them, in Venice, Amsterdam, Bali, Edinburgh, and New Zealand are taking an opposite tact: They're using tourist tax revenue to both help the destination control the effects of over tourism, and also to disincentivize certain kinds of travelers.

然而,威尼斯、阿姆斯特丹、巴厘岛、爱丁堡和新西兰的很多新旅游税却采取了相反的策略:他们征收旅游税既是为了帮景点控制过度旅游造成的不良影响,也是为了逼走某些的游客.

And as the democratization of travel continues, officials will continue to face the same conundrum: Can a destination benefit from tourists without completely destroying what made it appealing in the first place?

伴随着旅游民主化的进程,各地官员将继续面临同样的难题:一个景点能否既受益于游客,又不让游客完全毁掉最初的美好呢?