Introduction

Europe’s cities have long been a magnet for global travelers. Amsterdam, Barcelona, Bruges, Dubrovnik, Venice: these names conjure images of picturesque canals, vibrant architecture, and cobblestone streets. Beneath the postcard-perfect facades, however, lies a growing tension: that of overtourism. Local governments, grappling with overcrowding, skyrocketing housing costs, and the erosion of cultural identity, are increasingly turning to regulatory measures. These measures can often clash with European Union (EU) law, particularly the economic freedoms, however. This tension poses complex questions for policymakers, courts, and authorities alike. How far can local authorities go in limiting tourism-related activities without running afoul of EU law?

This risk of a clash was also noted by the European Parliament in its 2021 resolution on ‘sustainable tourism,’, which encourages the European Commission to respect the autonomy of local authorities in addressing overtourism’s adverse effects. Recently, at the G7 Tourism Ministers’ meeting, Italian cities expressed their demands for more autonomy and tools from the EU to manage the influx of tourists.

Airbnb and the like at the center stage

The issue of short-term rentals has undoubtedly received the most attention in legal scholarly literature on overtourism (e.g., Pantazi, 2021; Delhomme, 2024). Platforms like Airbnb have reshaped urban housing markets, driving up rents and pushing out long-term residents. Cities such as Barcelona, Amsterdam, and Paris have introduced strict rules requiring permits for short-term rentals and capping the number of nights properties can be let.

However, these rules often raise questions under the Services Directive, which, among others things, requires ex ante regulation in the field of tourism to be justified by overriding reasons of public interest and to meet proportionality standards. The Cali Apartments judgment of 2020 was seminal in this respect in many ways. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) recognized that protecting affordable housing and preserving the social fabric of cities could justify restrictions. Yet, the Court also emphasized that such measures must be evidence-based and proportionate.

In 2024, the EU enacted legislation regulating short-term rental platforms, mandating data-sharing obligations and standardized registration schemes for hosts. This legislation aims to improve transparency, enabling local authorities to assess the actual impact of short-term accommodation rental services and better monitor and manage tourist flows. While this represents a significant step forward, it offers far from a complete solution.  More specifically, it does not yet address other overtourism issues than those related to short-term rentals.

Beyond the housing issue

The pressure caused by short-term rental initiatives on housing prices is a pressing and topical one. Therefore, it has rightfully received the attention of academics. Other negative externalities of (over)tourism have, however, often remained under-researched, especially in legal literature. Overtourism can, for instance, pose threats to the local economy, as well as to the cultural and social identities of urban environments. It can also have severe negative effects on natural environments.

In Venice, for instance, local authorities have implemented several measures to combat overtourism. These include a ban on large cruise ships entering the historic center, redirecting them to the industrial port to protect the city’s fragile infrastructure. Additionally, the city has introduced a (€5-10) entry fee for day-trippers, with the aim of discouraging mass tourism and preserving its cultural integrity. These efforts are part of Venice’s proactive response to the growing pressures of overtourism on its UNESCO-listed heritage.

Moreover, concerns over short-term rentals sometimes become intertwined with broader concerns on culture and identity. Florence recently announced plans to ban key boxes used for short-let check-ins in its UNESCO-listed centre. The small key boxes with digital pads, used by short-term rental hosts to give tourists easy access to apartments, have come to ‘symbolize Florentine anger’ over the influx of visitors. These short-term rentals often strip living spaces of character, reducing them to bare-bones accommodations devoid of any ties to the city’s culture. For residents, this mirrors their own feelings of displacement and detachment from neighborhoods that no longer feel like home. Florence’s plan to ban these ‘key boxes’ aims to reclaim a sense of local identity in its historic center. These initiatives reflect an urgent attempt to protect the city’s cultural integrity, but they also raise questions about their compatibility with EU law. Would restricting access to tourist services disproportionately hinder cross-border trade or freedom of movement?

An example of overtourism’s economic impact can be observed in Bruges, where authorities are considering measures to address the overwhelming presence of international brands in prime shopping areas. This trend stimulates a tourism-driven monoculture, undermining local businesses, limiting essential services for residents, and reducing employment opportunities outside the tourism sector. This also ties in with the problem of economic leakage (meaning that expenditure by tourists does not flow to local businesses, but to others), a common issue in destinations suffering from mass tourism.

The key legal question is how to reconcile such regulatory measures with the EU-wide protection of economic freedoms. The Cali Apartments judgment seems to testify of the CJEU’s willingness to consider social concerns related to overtourism in urban areas as an ‘overriding reason relating to the public interest’. This means that such concerns can justify restrictions with respect to the freedom to provide services. However, it places a heavy burden of proof on cities.

Conclusion: towards a new balance

European cities such as Amsterdam, Bruges and Barcelona are not just economic hubs; they are cultural treasures, shaped by centuries of history and international trade. Their future depends on finding innovative economic and legal solutions that respect their unique identities and the rights of locals, while ensuring fair access for all. This challenge will require the EU, national governments, and local authorities to collaborate more closely than ever.

What is hopeful, is that lawyers are increasingly mingling in the debate. One of them is Dion Kramer, who gave an inspiring talk on EU law and urban overtourism on 2 December during a webinar on ‘EU Legal Integration and the Transformation of Local Law’. that was part of REALaw’s Administrative Law Dialogues (to listen to the recording, please click here).

Rana Sami’s PhD project, entitled Coping with Urban Overtourism in Europe: EU Law as a Facilitator or an Impediment?, seeks to examine how European cities are navigating the complex interplay between local regulatory measures and EU economic freedoms in addressing overtourism. It focuses on identifying the most common legal measures against overtourism (taken or contemplated), analyzing their compatibility with EU law, and evaluating whether the EU needs to develop a harmonized framework for managing urban tourism sustainably across Member States. While there are no easy answers, one thing is clear: the era of unchecked tourism growth is over. The future lies in sustainable, inclusive, and solutions that work for both tourists and the host communities that they visit. The EU’s recent decision to include a dedicated portfolio for ‘Sustainable Transport and Tourism’ in the new European Commission (2024-2029) signals a strong commitment to integrate sustainability across its policies. However, it remains to be seen what concrete policy or legal actions will emerge from this development and how they will impact the management of tourism in EU cities.

—

Rana Touseef Sami, Doctoral Researcher at the Research Fund University of Antwerp

&

Stéphanie De Somer, Associate professor of administrative law at University of Antwerp, Faculty of Law