Article by Rodrigo Pozo
In recent months, we have seen headlines that grab our attention:
- Barcelona is once again covered in graffiti with the famous slogan “Tourists go home,” and protesters are chasing tourists away with splash guns.
- In Mexico City, residents have taken to the streets to protest gentrification, which they attribute in part to the arrival of tourists and digital nomads.
These types of demonstrations reflect an increasingly common phenomenon: tension between residents and tourists in cities that receive large influxes of visitors. But it is worth pausing to reflect on an important point: the problem is not the tourists.
The system behind tourist saturation
Travelers—whether backpackers, families on vacation, or digital nomads—rarely intend to harm the city they visit. On the contrary, most seek to enjoy its culture, cuisine, and daily life with respect.
The real source of the problem lies in an economic and political system that:
- Promotes a model of unlimited growth, measuring success in terms of the number of arrivals rather than the quality of the experience or the well-being of the local community.
- Allows the benefits of tourism to be concentrated among a few players (large hotel chains, global tourist rental platforms, international tour operators) while the costs are borne by many:
- Residents, who suffer from rising housing costs, saturation of public space, and loss of cultural identity.
- Workers, who endure precarious conditions despite the industry generating record revenues.
- Tourists themselves, who end up having less authentic and more crowded experiences.
The consumer paradox: real choice or illusion of choice?
Individual tourists are often held responsible: “choose where you travel more carefully, avoid mass rental platforms, seek out local experiences…” And although these decisions are valuable, we cannot forget a fundamental paradox:
If all the options available to us were sustainable and beneficial, then consumer choice would not be a dilemma.
The problem is not choosing between a local hotel or a large platform, but rather that the system allows and normalizes options that are harmful to communities. Thus, the ethical burden is unfairly shifted to the individual traveler, when in reality it should be public policy, urban regulation, and tourism market design that ensure that every available option is positive.
Photo by Tommy Kwak in Unsplash
Towards a fairer and more sustainable tourism model
The protests in Barcelona and Mexico City should not be interpreted as a rejection of visitors, but rather as a wake-up call to the system that manages tourism.
To transform this reality, the following is required:
- Strong public policies that regulate tourist accommodation, the use of urban space, and the protection of residents.
- Participatory governance models, where local communities, the private sector, and government work together.
- Responsible companies that seek a balance between profitability, community well-being, and environmental conservation.
Only then can we resolve this paradox and move towards a form of tourism where no one must take to the streets with banners, because the system already guarantees that the benefits are distributed equitably.
The rejection of tourism is not a rejection of tourists, but of an unequal economic model that privileges a few at the expense of many. Changing it is a shared responsibility, but above all it requires different rules of the game.
