C1 Advanced Cross-text Multiple Matching – test 3. Radna miejska, właściciel hotelu, urbanistka i autor przewodników wypowiadają się o nadmiernej turystyce w zabytkowych miastach: najmie krótkoterminowym, opłatach za wstęp i pasażerach statków wycieczkowych.
C1 Advanced Cross-text Multiple Matching – turystyka w zabytkowych miastach
Poniżej znajdziesz cztery krótkie teksty (A–D) – opinie różnych osób na ten sam temat. Tak jak w egzaminie Reading and Use of English Part 6: 4 pytania, a większość z nich wymaga porównania tekstów. Najważniejsze typy pytań:
- Which writer shares A’s view on…? – szukasz autora, który myśli tak samo jak A,
- Which writer has a different view from the others on…? – trzech autorów się zgadza, jeden nie,
- Which writer, like/unlike B, …? – najpierw ustal, co dokładnie twierdzi B.
Test 3 z serii C1 Advanced Cross-text Multiple Matching. Część pytań dotyczy tego, kto się z kim zgadza, a część – kto sprzeciwia się rozwiązaniu proponowanemu przez innych.
Too many visitors?
A – Clara Rossi, city councillor
Nobody in this city is against tourism. It provides tens of thousands of jobs, and many of the people I represent depend on it. But something has gone badly wrong in the historic centre. Flats that once housed families are now let to visitors by the night, and rents have risen so far that ordinary residents can no longer afford to live there. Every year, the centre loses more of its permanent population, and with them the bakeries, schools and doctors’ surgeries that made it a living neighbourhood rather than a stage set. We intend to cap the number of short-term rentals, and we are also considering a modest charge for day visitors, who use the city’s infrastructure but contribute little to its upkeep.
B – Marco Bellini, hotel owner
Let me be clear: tourism is not a problem to be solved but the lifeblood of this city. Without it, half the shops on my street would close within a year. That said, I share the frustration with the explosion of short-term rentals. They operate with none of the regulations that hotels must follow, and they have hollowed out whole streets. Where I part company with the council is on the idea of charging people to enter the city. A historic city is not a theme park. Visitors who are made to queue at a turnstile will simply go elsewhere, and the damage to our reputation as a welcoming destination could take years to repair.
C – Ingrid Larsen, urban planner
The debate about 'overtourism’ tends to focus on numbers, but numbers are not really the issue. The city could comfortably host far more visitors than it does if they were not all crammed into the same half-dozen streets in the same three summer months. The answer is to spread them out – to promote districts beyond the historic core and to make travel outside the peak season more attractive. Entry fees are a crude instrument that punishes everyone equally and addresses none of the underlying causes. If I had to single out one group, it would be cruise passengers, who arrive in thousands, fill the narrowest streets for a few hours and spend almost nothing locally.
D – James Whitfield, travel writer
I have written about this city for twenty years, and I am uncomfortably aware that articles like mine have contributed to the crowds I now complain about. It would be hypocritical to lecture others without acknowledging that. Still, I think we, as visitors, bear some responsibility. We can travel in winter rather than August, stay longer rather than rushing through, and spend our money in family-run businesses rather than international chains. The worst offenders, in my view, are the cruise ships. Their passengers see the city in a single afternoon, eat on board and leave little behind except congestion.