Japanese city considers dual pricing on public transport to tackle overtourism
The scenic ancient capital of Japan is considering the nation's first dual-pricing system on buses in a bid to tackle a booming influx of foreign visitors.
Kyoto, long famed for its centuries-old temples, shrines and tea rooms, is experiencing an influx of arrivals, fuelled by a weak yen and the lifting of post-pandemic travel restrictions.
Koji Matsui, the mayor of Kyoto, said he is exploring the idea of introducing a dual-pricing system on city-operated buses – which would involve tourists paying a higher bus fare compared to residents.
In 2023, the city of 1.5 million people welcomed seven million tourists from overseas, igniting concerns over the impact on local life.
Kyoto city officials are currently seeking government support to change regulations, enabling the introduction of a dual-pricing bus system, which would help raise funds to tackle overtourism and preserve cultural sites.
Initiatives already under way include a planned accommodation tax rise for stays in Kyoto hotels and the distribution of 'mind-your-manners' leaflets, aiming to educate overseas tourists about the cultural sensitivities of their behaviour.
Speaking in an exclusive interview with The Telegraph, in a tatami mat tea room inside Kyoto City Hall, Mr Matsui said: 'We are considering changing bus fares between residents and non-residents, asking non-residents to pay a slightly higher fare.
'The purpose of this would be to use it as a financial resource to help ease congestion and preserve Kyoto's beautiful cultural cityscape.
'By also having tourists share the burden, we want residents to recognise that, thanks to tourists visiting, their daily lives have become more convenient, or the cityscape has been better preserved. This is an effort to balance daily life and tourism, and we plan to propose it to the city council as part of a roughly two-year plan.'
Japan is experiencing a record influx of tourists. More than 36 million people visited from overseas in 2024, with spending surpassing 8 trillion yen (£46 billion) for the first time, according to recent government figures.
A number of regions in Japan are exploring measures to counter overtourism issues, including Himeji in Hyogo Prefecture, which has proposed raising the entrance fee to its historic castle for non-residents.
The dual-pricing trend is under way elsewhere. Paris officials recently announced plans to introduce dual pricing for non-EU visitors to Le Louvre, one of the city's most popular cultural attractions.
Dual pricing is also in place in many sites across India, including the Taj Mahal, with different entry costs for locals and tourists.
In Kyoto, dual pricing is one of a spectrum of initiatives being explored by government officials, who are keen to welcome tourists to their culture-rich city, while also preserving its heritage and minimising disruption to daily life.
Last summer, Kyoto launched tourist-only buses with routes to popular sites, in an attempt to relieve pressure on city-operated bus routes.
Other problems facing Kyoto include littering and congested transport, according to Mr Matsui.
'In busy areas, some local residents are unable to travel on city-operated buses because they're so crowded,' he said. 'Some buses are used by residents and students and people who need to get to hospital – as well as lots of tourists.
'We think it can be useful to separate local residents from tourists – so local residents can use city-operated buses for their own purpose, and tourists can ride on limited express buses to famous sightseeing spots.'
Cultural sensitivities were also an important factor. The mayor listed a string of examples of bad behaviour among overseas tourists, including eating in the streets, making loud noises in sacred shrines, chasing geisha down the street to take photographs and entering tea rooms without reservations.
'There is a cultural gap in the mentality of Kyoto residents and overseas visitors,' he said. 'A good example of this is eating while walking down the streets, which is not really polite in Japan.' He added: 'Sometimes this is hard for local residents. We have a responsibility to help tourists understand this.'
The mayor was also keen to highlight how overtourism was pinpointed in certain spots – such as centuries-old Kiyomizu-dera Temple or the bamboo forests in Arashiyama – while other areas of the city were relatively quiet.
The geographical make-up of Kyoto – which is wrapped in a circle of mountains, with numerous narrow historic streets at its centre – also makes the small city sensitive to high volumes of tourism crowds.
Mr Matsui added that tourists would always be very welcome in the city, while highlighting his commitment as mayor to ensure that the daily lives of residents were protected.
'The entire city is not suffering from overtourism,' he said. 'And people are not strongly anti-tourist. But there are around 50 million tourists here a year [including both Japanese and overseas tourist visits] – compared to a 1.5 million population of residents, who are paying taxes. They have some expectations that the city of Kyoto will do what it can to make sure they can live here quietly and calmly.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
34 minutes ago
- CNBC
Uncertainty looms as 2025 nears the halfway mark. How to make sure your portfolio is prepared
Stocks have made a recovered from this year's lows, but uncertainty remains a key theme as the second half of the year approaches – and investors can prepare for it. President Donald Trump's rollout of sharply higher tariffs in April sent stocks on a wild ride, with the S & P 500 at one point dipping more than 20% from its all-time high. Traders' hopes for progress in trade negotiations, along with solid first-quarter earnings, helped the market recover since then, however. The S & P 500 is now less than 2% below its its all-time high. Don't just kick back and wait for a continued recovery, though. "Our little tagline here is 'diversifying for resilience,'" said Michael Arone, SPDR chief investment strategist at State Street Global Advisors. "The thought behind the theme for the second half, is that markets are in suspense," he said. Some of the issues for investors to cinsider now include trade policy, soft economic data and the chance that the Federal Reserve holds off on rate cuts for too long, Arone added. Here's how to get your portfolio ready for the remainder of the year Review and rebalance Ignoring your portfolio's asset allocation, particularly at a time when markets are strong, can result in lopsided positions. For starters, think about how large-cap tech stocks in the U.S. were responsible for the market's surge last year. Failure to prune some of those big positions now, and add to underweight sectors, could result in a portfolio that doesn't reflect your goals and risk appetite. This year, investors who shied away from international markets may have found themselves missing out on sizable appreciation. Consider that the Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF (VEU) has returned 16% in 2025, while the S & P 500's return over the same period is a little more than 2%. VEU .SPX YTD mountain The Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF (VEU) versus the S & P 500 in 2025 "If we look through a stock lens, U.S. allocation peaked at 67%, and today it's at 64%," said Arone. "I can tell you there are very few investors I meet with who have 36% of their portfolio invested outside of the U.S. from a stock standpoint." Diversifying into international funds also helps investors gain exposure to sectors outside of Big Tech, said Christine Benz, director of personal finance and retirement planning for Morningstar. "The U.S. is still very tech dominated and growth leaning, but broad non-U.S. indexes are dominated by financials and health care. It's a different set of market components relative to the U.S." Benz likes the idea of investors using a broad global stock benchmark as a guide to determine how much to invest overseas, noting that the split is generally about 60% toward the U.S. and 40% non-U.S. Reassess your goals and risk appetite The market's slide in April might have been a good chance for investors to do a gut check of whether their asset allocation reflects the risk they are willing to take. "My big [issue] is the value of derisking for people who are getting close to retirement," said Benz. "It might not have felt like a great idea to derisk in the throes of tariff-related market losses, but now stocks have clawed their way back into positive territory." Investors who are nearing retirement might want to consider adding safer assets to their portfolios to take advantage of today's higher yields, she added. "Consider taking advantage of the fact that yields are decent today and it will translate to better returns for fixed income versus when yields were very low," said Benz. For savers in retirement plans, this can also mean reviewing where you're directing your contributions. "Let's say you're not ready to retire, but retirement is in the next five to 10 years," said Marguerita Cheng, CFP and chief executive officer of Blue Ocean Global Wealth in Gaithersburg, Md. "You can have some of your existing dollars in something a little more conservative, and when you dollar-cost average you can be a little more growth oriented," she said. Dollar-cost averaging refers to making incremental investments into a certain asset at fixed intervals, say every two weeks, every month or every quarter. By spreading out these investments, you're buying into stocks at different prices over time, instead of trying to wait for the "right" time. Tax-loss harvesting Tax-loss harvesting opportunities may await investors who have taxable brokerage accounts. This involves selling losing positions and using the realized losses to offset gains elsewhere in the portfolio. Be sure to avoid violating the wash-sale rule, which involves selling an asset at a loss and then buying a "substantially identical" security within 30 days before or after the transaction. In such cases, the IRS can block you from taking the loss. Lagging stock sectors this year include energy, health care and consumer discretionary, which might all be solid contenders for tax-loss sales. "Investors with individual stocks, sector funds or ETFs might have an opportunity to take a tax loss in those areas," said Benz.
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Europe heaps harsh sanctions on Russia, saying ‘strength is the only language' Moscow understands
The European Union announced a new package of sanctions against Russia on Tuesday, saying that Moscow's daily deadly attacks against Ukraine show that it is not interested in peace – despite recent diplomatic efforts. The new package – the 18th since Russia launched its full-scale unprovoked invasion against its neighbor in 2022 – is designed to further target the Kremlin's ability to make money from its oil and gas production. The proposal includes lowering the price cap on Russian oil exports from $60 to $45 per barrel and introducing a full transaction ban on Russian banks and financial institutions in third countries that help Russia circumvent existing sanctions. The EU said it is also proposing a ban on the use of Russian energy infrastructure, forbidding any EU operator from engaging directly or indirectly in any transactions that involve the Nord Stream pipelines. The new package will need to be approved by the EU's 27 member states. That could be complicated given previous concerns raised by some more pro-Kremlin governments, such as Hungary and Slovakia, about further sanctions targeting Russia. While both those countries have previously threatened to block new rounds of sanctions, so far they have ultimately voted in favor of them. The President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen said the sanctions were necessary 'because strength is the only language that Russia will understand.' 'We want peace for Ukraine. Despite weeks of diplomatic attempts, despite (Ukraine's) President (Volodymyr) Zelensky's offer of an unconditional ceasefire, Russia continues to bring death and destruction to Ukraine. Russia's goal is not peace, it is to impose the rule of might. Therefore, we are ramping up pressure on Russia,' von der Leyen said at a news conference in Brussels. The leaders of Germany, France, the United Kingdom and Poland last month told Russian leader Vladimir Putin to agree to a 30-day ceasefire or face possible 'massive' sanctions. Putin ignored the ultimatum, proposing instead 'direct talks' between Moscow and Kyiv. But two rounds of talks in Istanbul, Turkey, have made it clear Russia is sticking to its maximalist demands that would essentially equate to Ukraine's capitulation. 'Russia's ability to continue the war is equal to its ability to sell their oil and bypass financial barriers,' Zelensky said Tuesday night, calling the European sanctions package 'an important step' and also condemning the lack of similar measures from the United States. 'Russia has been constantly increasing the number of munitions in its strikes. This is a steady trend, and it means that Moscow is not afraid of anyone in the world,' the Ukrainian leader added. 'Putin wants to continue killing and is taking advantage of the fact that he is not getting a strong response. He does not hear Washington. And this speaks volumes to the world, to everyone.' Explaining why the EU has targeted Russia's energy sector, the Commission chief said oil exports still represent one third of Russian government revenues. 'We need to cut this source of revenue,' she said. The oil price cap was introduced by the EU and G7 countries in December 2022. The cap, which applies to Russia's seaborne oil exports, prohibits Western companies from providing shipping, insurance and other services needed to export the fuel unless it is priced below the threshold. By enforcing a price cap, the EU and its allies have tried to diminish a key source of revenue for the Kremlin while still allowing its oil to flow to the global energy market – because cutting Russia's supplies completely could destabilize the market and cause prices to shoot up. Von der Leyen said on Tuesday that the price cap needs lowering because global oil prices had fallen since the cap was first introduced and now trade 'very close' to the $60 level. The price of a barrel of Brent crude, the global oil benchmark, has dropped 18% since the price cap on Russian crude took effect on December 5, 2022. It was trading at almost $68 a barrel late morning Eastern Time (ET) on Tuesday. The bloc also wants to harden sanctions on Russia's banking sector. Shortly after the invasion, the United States, EU, Britain and Canada jointly banned some Russian banks from the SWIFT messaging service – a high-security network connecting thousands of financial institutions around the world. That has made it far more difficult for those banks to send and receive money from abroad. Now, the Commission wants to go a step further and prevent any EU operator, such a a business, from conducting a transaction with a list of sanctioned Russian banks. It also plans to add another 22 of Moscow's banks to that list. Additionally, the bloc wants to extend the transaction ban to financial institutions in third countries that help Russia circumvent existing sanctions. Von der Leyen said the latest package of sanctions will also broaden the current ban on materials and technologies that can be exported to Russia, adding: 'We want to make sure that Russia does not find ways to modernize its weapons with European technologies.' The sanctions will also include new measures against 22 Russian and foreign companies providing direct or indirect support to Russia's military and industrial complex. CNN's Victoria Butenko contributed to this report.
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Higher ed reform shouldn't punish low-income students
Congress is understandably concerned about the return on federal investment in higher education and the $1.6 trillion in federal student loan debt. But in its rush to fix a system that too often fails low-income students, the Trump administration's 'one big, beautiful bill' would further reduce opportunity and access for those very students and jeopardize the work of colleges and universities doing the most to serve them. If passed, the bill would enact sweeping changes to federal financial aid and accountability rules. Some of its goals are worthy. Colleges should be transparent about student outcomes. They should be accountable for quality. And no student should graduate, or drop out, with insurmountable debt. But reducing access to loans for the students who face the steepest barriers to opportunity is not the way to achieve those goals. One provision of the proposed bill would eliminate subsidized federal loans, which currently prevent interest from accruing while undergraduates are still in school. For students from low-income backgrounds who already borrow more than their wealthier peers, this would significantly increase the cost of a college degree. Another proposal would cap the amount of aid a student could receive at a national median cost by program, without regard for the individual student's or family's specific economic need. The legislation would also eliminate PLUS Loans and raise the minimum course load required to receive full Pell Grant aid, even though many working students enroll part-time by necessity, not choice. Reducing Pell Grant access is counterproductive to lowering student debt. Pell Grant recipients already account for seven of every 10 federal student loan borrowers, and, on average, incur $4,500 more in debt than other non-Pell graduates Capping graduate student borrowing, especially in health and public service fields, would undercut workforce development just as we face national shortages of nurses, teachers and social workers. And the bill's 'risk-sharing' proposal, which would penalize colleges when student loans are forgiven, even through programs like Public Service Loan Forgiveness, would shift resources away from need-based aid and student support and discourage institutions from enrolling those most in need. That includes institutions like the University of Mount Saint Vincent, which I lead. Ours is a small, private, nonprofit university in the Bronx founded in 1847 to educate young women at a time when few others would. Today, we serve students of every background, and more than half are the first in their family to attend college. More than half of our undergraduates receive Pell Grants. Ninety percent of our graduate students are preparing for public service careers in education, nursing or healthcare. And like many mission-driven colleges, we make enormous investments in financial aid and academic support, precisely because we know what it takes for low-income and first-generation students to thrive. This bill threatens our ability to invest in students and potential. It would impose a six-figure penalty, rising annually, because we enroll the very students we were founded to serve. That's not accountability. That's a deterrent. And we are not unique. Hundreds of small, private colleges across the country, many of them religiously affiliated, offer intimate learning environments, close faculty support and flexible programs that enable students to work while pursuing their degrees. These institutions are among the most accessible and most responsive options for students who are otherwise being left behind in higher education. The better path forward is one that strengthens accountability for all institutions without dismantling the tools that low-income students need to access and afford college in the first place. That means preserving need-based aid, not narrowing it. And it means supporting colleges that produce teachers, nurses and public servants, not penalizing them. At a time when the U.S. risks falling behind in educational attainment and workforce readiness, we should be doubling down on institutions that help students rise. The question isn't whether reform is needed, but whether we're reforming the right things. Susan R. Burns, Ph.D., is president of the University of Mount Saint Vincent in the Bronx. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
