Monocultural Amsterdam: A drain on the economy?

Having spent many years worrying about the social and cultural impacts of tourism, policymakers in Amsterdam are now also beginning to worry about the economic impacts too. Residents and visitors from the Amsterdam Metropolitan Region generate a smaller proportion of revenue for shops and hospitality businesses in Amsterdam than in other major Dutch cities. Businesses are therefore even more dependent on tourists and the fluctuating demand this entails.

In Rotterdam, The Hague, and Utrecht, local residents and regional visitors account for a significant share of retail turnover, with tourists providing additional revenue. In Amsterdam’s city centre, however, tourist spending carries far greater weight. The tourism sector is also highly concentrated there: nearly half of all tourism-related jobs and a quarter of tourism establishments in Amsterdam are located in the city centre district.

A report from May 2026 also indicated that businesses were not seeing their income growing in proportion to increases in visitor numbers.  Shops, restaurants and cafes in the centre of Amsterdam had lower turnover growth than the rest of the city. There were also divergent trends, with some businesses seeing a decline in income in 2024 and 2025. Foreign hotel guests spent more on accommodation in this period, while spending on shopping and eating out remained relatively stable.

These trends are clearly linked to tourism policy in Amsterdam, which has aimed to reduce the number of tourists, decrease the availability of Short Term Rental (STR) accommodation such as Airbnb and to spread tourism from the city centre to other areas of the Metropolitan Region. Among the tools wielded by policymakers was an increase in the tourism tax, designed to reduce visitor numbers as well as generating resources to offset the negative impacts of tourism. As we reported a while ago, this will eventually push the tax burden on Amsterdam hotel rooms to over 40% of the total cost.

It is not surprising, therefore, that the report shows that foreign visitors paying more for their hotel rooms are spending less on other things, such as shopping, eating and drinking.  They are also moving out of the centre of Amsterdam and staying in neighbouring cities in response to the rising cost of accommodation. However, this simply adds to the visitor pressure on the city, as foreign tourists join the daily flow of commuters, students and shoppers and join the throng of day visitors in the city centre.

The Councillor responsible for the city centre indicated that some local residents are now avoiding the city centre because of the monotone shopping offer. Melanie van der Horst  said that  a uniform shopping landscape is ‘not only a question of quality or identity, but also an economic risk for the vitality of the city centre’. This concurs with the results recent research conducted by SWECO, which signalled the rise of ‘monoculturalization’ not only in the Netherlands, but across Europe. An indication that there is a need not only to try and diversify retail supply, but also tourism demand. Residents are increasingly likely to buy online, whereas tourists want to visit physical shops, also as a cultural experience.

The effects of tourism policy in Amsterdam are already being felt, but it remains to be seen if the decline of Airbnb will have the desired effect. Will it attract more high spending visitors? Will it help to diversify the tourist profile?

Watch this space.