不消費就別來！世界各地景區用旅遊稅驅逐“低價值遊客”

對普通遊客來說，外出旅遊能省則省，儘量少花錢；但是對於旅遊景點而言，最怕的是景點擠滿了遊客、面臨過度旅遊困境，而遊客消費又達不到他們的期望值。爲此，世界各地景點陸續推出旅遊稅，試圖逼退那些消費少的“低價值遊客”。

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

通常來說，國家和城市都是鼓勵旅遊的，前提是來度假的遊客和他們的消費能刺激經濟增長。

But in the age of overtourism, 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.

在這個過度旅遊的時代，一些熱門景點的接待能力已經超負荷。市中心擠滿了尋找美食的吃貨，歷史景點被大羣自拍遊客破壞，本地人則因爲旅遊業興旺催漲房租而租不起房。更討厭的是，許多遊客的消費都不高：他們藉助應用程序制定超划算的攻略，在遊輪上吃飽了肚子才下船遊覽，然後又返回遊輪吃自助餐，不住酒店而選擇廉價的民宿。

sleuth[sluθ]: vi. 偵查

buffet[bəˈfe; bʌfɪt]: n. 自助餐

forgo[fɔr'ɡo]: vt. 放棄；停止；對…斷念

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.

這就是爲什麼世界各地的景點都陸續開始徵收旅遊稅。在歷史上，旅遊稅是用來給旅遊局、酒店行業組織和景區營銷活動提供資金的，目的是在未來吸引更多人來本地旅遊。

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 overtourism, and also to disincentivize certain kinds of travelers.

然而，威尼斯、阿姆斯特丹、巴厘島、愛丁堡和新西蘭的新旅遊稅卻是爲了達到相反的目的：他們徵收旅遊稅既是爲了幫景點控制過度旅遊造成的不良影響，也是爲了逼走某些類型的遊客。

Elizabeth Becker, the author of Overbooked: The Exploding Business of Travel and Tourism, says the rise of these taxes suggests governments are starting to see that when it comes to tourism, you can have too much of a good thing.

《超售：旅遊業的迅猛發展》的作者伊麗莎白·貝克說，這些稅種的興起意味着政府開始意識到，旅遊業太興旺也可能好事變壞事。

"It’s only in [the] last few years you have tourism taxes that are going to control tourism,” Becker said. This is because more and more destinations are recognizing that “there is no getting around the fact that there is a carrying capacity.”

貝克說：“控制遊客數量的旅遊稅是幾年前纔開始出現的。這是因爲越來越多景點意識到接待能力終歸是有上限的。”

Many of these measures aren’t simply centered on driving down numbers, but rather, attracting a “lower impact, higher value traveler,” she said—one that is going to spend some money, in addition to using resources or crowding the destination. She cites the example of Venice, which for years did little to stem the tide of visitors displacing locals. Now, in addition to a new tourist tax, the mayor has rolled out new measures meant to moderate tourists’ behavior and their effect on the city.

她說，景點的許多措施不光是要減少遊客人數，而且還要吸引“對環境影響更小、價值更高的遊客”，最好就是多多花錢、少佔用資源、不把景點擠爆的遊客。她舉威尼斯爲例，多年來威尼斯幾乎沒有採取措施來阻擋遊客擠走本地人的趨勢。如今，除了新旅遊稅，威尼斯市長還出臺了多項新措施，旨在調節遊客及其行爲對城市造成的影響。

So how do these taxes work to deter “low value” tourism? Amsterdam provided an instructive example at the beginning of January when it implemented a day tourist tax of €8 per person. About a week later, two cruise lines announced they would no longer be stopping in port, and two more lines followed suit in February. These cruise ship “day-trippers” don’t stay in a hotel or eat much at local restaurants (why would you, when you have an all-you-can-eat buffet waiting for you on board?), and are generally in and out of the destination quite quickly. Though the tax—equivalent to the cost of a couple of beers—is relatively small, it was enough to put off extremely price-sensitive cruise lines. And it gave Amsterdam an effective way to say, “Thanks, but no thanks.”

那麼這些新稅收要如何能夠趕走“低價值”旅遊人羣呢？阿姆斯特丹在一月初做了一個示範：向每位遊客每日徵收8歐元（61元人民幣）的旅遊稅。大約一週後，兩家遊輪公司宣佈將不再在該港口停靠，二月份又有兩家遊輪公司相繼效仿。這些遊輪上的“一日遊遊客”不會住酒店，也不會在本地餐廳消費太多（如果遊輪上就有自助餐廳，誰會花這個錢呢？），而且通常在到達後很快就會離開。儘管這項稅的金額不多，不過是一兩罐啤酒的錢，但足以嚇退那些對價格極度敏感的遊輪公司。阿姆斯特丹人用這種有效的方式告知他們：感謝你的到來，不過請你別來了，謝謝。

Not all these tourist taxes are meant to discourage tourists altogether from visiting. Bali—which has seen a huge uptick in visitors since it starred in Elizabeth Gilbert’s 2006 travel memoir Eat Pray Love—is one of the destinations mulling a tax. The roughly $10 fee will be used to preserve the environment and Balinese culture, which has been overrun with yoga retreats and acai bowl cafes. The Jakarta Post reports that officials aren’t trying to drive away travelers, mostly from Australia and China, but see this as a way for travelers to “contribute to preserving” the local culture.

不過，也不是所有旅遊稅都是爲了徹底趕走遊客的。自從伊麗莎白·吉爾伯特的旅遊回憶錄《美食、祈禱、戀愛》在2006年出版後，書中對巴厘島的描寫就吸引大量遊客蜂擁而至。如今，瑜伽會所和巴西莓碗餐廳氾濫的巴厘島也在考慮推出旅遊稅，這項10美元（68元人民幣）左右的稅收將用來保護巴厘島的環境和文化。《雅加達郵報》報道說，當地官員不是想趕走遊客（多數來自澳大利亞和中國），而是希望遊客也能爲當地文化的保護“盡一份力量”。

mull[mʌl]: vt. 思索或思考某事物

Overtourism is often oversimplified, and it’s easy to blame the tourists themselves, or industry-disrupting companies such as Airbnb. But factors such as the rise of low-cost airlines, the growth of the cruise industry, and the failure of some governments to put constraints on growth are often underplayed, Becker says.

貝克指出，過度旅遊經常被看得太簡單了，人們很容易將問題歸咎於遊客自身或愛彼迎等擾亂行業秩序的企業。然而，廉價航班的興起、遊輪產業的發展，以及一些政府未能限制旅遊業過度發展，這些因素的作用經常被輕描淡寫。

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?

伴隨着旅遊民主化的進程，各地官員將繼續面臨同樣的難題：一個景點能否既受益於遊客，又不讓遊客完全毀掉最初的美好呢？

conundrum[kə'nʌndrəm]: n. 難題