citizenship research projecT
a solution to venice's tourism problem
Image Credit: The Telegraph Newspaper
Venice, Italy: a city synonymous with beauty, grace and antiquity. For many years, Venice has been seen as a cultural hub for many people all over the world. Tourists flock from all countries, towns and regions to admire the architecture, paintings and sculptures among other sites that one can see in Venice. Ultimately, they want a firsthand experience of the magnificence that everyone speaks of. This has led to tourism becoming the number one economic driver of the city. However, although tourism has significantly contributed to the city’s monetary success, it is also the industry that is bringing about its hastened decline. I believe that these tourists do not realize that they are harming the city and do not do it intentionally; however Venice’s destruction is an inevitable consequence of their presence. Peter Debrine, head of the World Heritage and Sustainable Tourism Programme at UNESCO claims “You can't have those kind of numbers come into a site and not have a negative impact”[1]. The people who care the most about protecting Venice are the local citizens because they are the ones who live here and have to deal with the consequences of tourism on a daily basis. The problem of tourism has many different facets, ranging from issues as small as littering to issues as large as permanent damages to the city. Property ownership is included within this range of problems. This is because local homeowners are being forced to move to the mainland because foreigners are buying them out of their[2] homes by increasing real estate prices. But if the locals are completely extinguished from Venice, then there will no longer be a strong body of people protecting Venice in the same way and attempting to fix the many other problems that go along with tourism. Venice’s decline will increase and eventually the city as we know it will disappear. A similar problem arose on the island of Bermuda. As a result the government took the necessary measures to protect Bermuda from foreigners by initially protecting local homeowners and placing restriction on those houses that were available for purchase by foreigners. Just like in Bermuda, I believe that the saving grace for Venice is the local population. Therefore, in order to save Venice, Venice also needs to start with restoring and protecting the local homeowner population.
In 1966 the population of Venice was set at 121,000 inhabitants. Today, at less than 60,000 the city’s population has more than halved2. Simultaneously, the tourist industry has significantly increased. With more than 60,000 tourists per day, daily visitor rates are greater than the number of locals that there are overall[3]. The Venice Times claims that as of 2013, each Venetian citizen is in charge of approximately 354 tourists[4]. Of course this has both negative and positive consequences. The positive consequence of this situation is that the Veneto region, of which Venice is a part, has become one of the wealthiest regions in Italy[5]. It is thought that “22,500 jobs in the city and an estimated billion of Euro per year are pumped into the Venetian economy” because of the tourism industry[6]. In a time when Italy’s economy is in decline, it is comforting for Venice to know that compared to other regions, they are relatively stable monetarily. However "tourism is a double-edged sword," and there are many negative effects that it has caused as well[7].
Different tourists come for different reasons. But no matter what their reason, they seem to all fall in love with Venice and want a piece of Venice for themselves. These wealthy visitors are coming in and swooping up canal-side palazzos and converting them into homes or accommodations for tourists. They are driving the locals out of Venice because their purchases increase the real estate prices, thus pushing the locals out of their homes. There is a significant correlation between the declining local population and the increasing number of tourists and the gap is growing. Since the 1950s when Venetian tourism boomed, “rents have sky-rocked as the ‘rich and famous’ have bought Venetian real estate”[8]. Foreigners are currently dominating the real-estate market. Those Venetians that can still afford to remain in Venice are either extremely wealthy themselves or they have to convert their homes into inns, B&Bs, restaurants or taverns. In 2006, approximately “706 apartments in the historic center have been converted into accommodation for tourists”[9]. That number has since risen and continues to rise.
It is the fear of many, especially the citizens, that if Venice continues down this very dangerous path, there will be no turning back and Venice will seize to exist as we know it. Their fear is made evident by the fact that a mock funeral was held to “highlight the city’s dwindling population”, emphasizing how tourism has taken over [10]. Every day, Venice loses more and more of its inhabitants who flock to the mainland because they can no longer afford to live in their homes. But what tourists do not realize is that these locals are taking Venice’s charm away with them. Venice’s beauty and charm is found in its locals: through the restaurant owners, through those who work at the markets, the gondoliers, the children that run through the streets after school, the old men gathering for a drink in a campo. These little things are what make Venice special. These are people who not only tell Venice’s story, but they are the ones who show it in their everyday lives. If the tourists successfully get rid of all of the locals, “Venice will never again be a normal city, but will become a mere tourist destination and lose its charm – even for the tourists themselves”[11]. Essentially as the local population declines, Venice becomes more like a Disneyland. So what can be done in order to preserve Venice? I believe that the answer lies in the restoration of the local population.
In order to reestablish the local population, the Venetian city government needs to create housing that is solely for the Venetian people. By this I mean that the government itself needs to purchase the properties, sell them to the locals at an affordable price and create laws that prohibit these properties to then be sold to foreigners. If a foreigner would like to purchase a home in Venice, there should be certain properties made available for them, or else they will have to go through the process of becoming a Venetian citizen in order to qualify to purchase these localonly homes. By imposing this system, not only will the local population of Venice be restored, but the foreign presence in Venice will diminish.
A similar system was put into place on the island of Bermuda, located in the Atlantic Ocean. The island found a similar problem where there was an influx in foreign interest in properties in Bermuda. As a result the Bermudian government created several property laws that restricted the foreign acquisition of property. In Bermuda, in order for a non-Bermudian to purchase a house, said house must already be owned by another foreigner. It is therefore prohibited for a Bermudian to sell their home to a non-Bermudian. Currently, about 150 houses are available for sale to non-Bermudians[12]. Additionally the house that one wishes to purchase must “have an Annual Rental Value (ARV) at least equivalent to the minimum established by the Government from time to time”[13]. This is to ensure that only the higher valued properties are available for sale to non-Bermudians, protecting the less expensive real-estate for those Bermudians who are not as affluent. The least expensive home that one could buy in 2006 was $3 million. Condominiums were expensive as well, starting at $1.4 million[14]. That price has since increased.
Foreigners who wish to purchase property in Bermuda are only allowed to do so if the property is for residential use, not for business use. If a non-Bermudian would like to rent their property, they must “obtain the permission of the Minister of Labour & Home Affairs”[15]. It is an extensive process during which many foreigners are denied this ability. It entirely depends on the “merits of the foreign resident”[16] and to whom they wish to rent said property. If they wish to rent a property to another non-Bermudian, the homeowner will incur government taxes. Multiperson homes or apartment buildings are not available for sale to non-Bermudians. Additionally, foreigners are not allowed to purchase more than one property in Bermuda. The same process applies for the purchase of condominiums and apartments; however these buildings also have to be located in a “designated development” area[17].
Similar legislation could be translated to Venetian society. By enabling foreigners to choose housing from only a select group, Venice’s inhabitants will be able to regain the homes that they lost. Secondly, many foreigners who come and purchase properties in Venice will purchase multiple properties at once, which they then rent out for a profit. It is quite successful because the tourist industry in Venice is a 12-month industry, unlike many other places around the world. However, these new laws will prevent foreigners from purchasing multiple properties. Additionally, it will pose restrictions on the rental time periods, who they can rent to, and during which times of the year a property can be rented. By imposing taxes on rentals to other foreigners, the Venetian government will also be able to gather funds that can be used to benefit the city in other ways.
By stopping non-Venetians from purchasing properties for commercial use as well, the tourist money incurred from the tourist industry will go to Venice and the Venetian people, not the foreigners. This is because the hotels, restaurants, museums, everything that creates a significant revenue in Venice will be owned entirely by either the state or the people. The money circulating will not go to foreigners who currently own and profit from their properties in Venice. Hopefully by creating these laws, the foreigners that still choose to purchase property here are people who truly care about Venice and preserving it for the future. This is because many of the laws that I have suggested are ones that require a lot of time. Wealthy foreigners who simply wish to buy a house for their own monetary gain, by obtaining a business, or because they wish to add to their long list of properties, will no longer be as interested in buying property in Venice because the process will be much more difficult and time consuming and they have very little to gain from it monetarily.
Another benefit of this law is that in protecting the local population in this way, Venetians will feel protected and therefore they will trust the government more. Since the extortion scandal that erupted with the former mayor of Venice, the Venetian people have found it difficult to trust the government. Italy has been a breeding ground for extortion and scandal. The scholar Francesco Alberoni said that this kind of activity has become so typical in Italy that even the word friendship within the professional world has “come to carry a secondary, negative connotation of privileges and favours…[it is] a means of…getting round the rules”[18]. It is no wonder that people do not trust the government. It seems that individuals always have a hidden agenda. Therefore, any changes that are trying to be made are very difficult to bring about. The people want to help to save their city but they are reluctant to do so if it means putting their faith, and worse, their money in the hands of the government. By imposing this system, the government will be able to restore faith in the hearts of the locals and hopefully bring about further positive changes to the city.
Of course Bermuda and Venice are two very different places thus changes need to be made in order to adapt the Bermudian law to Venetian law. One of the laws that Bermuda includes is that Non-Bermudians are not allowed to purchase empty plots of land to then purchase their own homes. This law clearly does not apply to Venice as homes cannot be built in Venice. Furthermore Venice should probably include laws and restrictions with regards to construction and building activities. Venice is a much more delicate place than Bermuda therefore there needs to be greater enforcement in order to protect the city. Additionally I believe that foreigners should be required to pay a higher property tax than locals. This money can be used to help save Venice from its many other problems including acqua alta and the sinking structure of the city. Ultimately though the system is one that is very adaptable and the fact that Venice is so unique gives it a huge advantage. With Bermuda on the other hand, one of the major problems currently is that there are so many other luxury islands that tourists can visit, therefore Bermuda is losing much of its tourist population. However, with Venice, there is no other place like it in the world. This gives them the power to have more restrictive laws, if necessary, because there is no secondary option to visiting Venice.
This issue is a pressing one that needs to be addressed as soon as possible. From the clear numerical evidence, Mara Rumiz, the Venice council hosing chief, speculates that by 2030 Venice will be a city with nothing but tourists. The ratio of tourists to locals is increasing significantly, to the point where now, there are more tourists essentially own the city. They are in control of the city because of the weakness of the government and size of the dwindling local body of people. By putting the city’s control back in the hands of the citizens and the government, it is without a doubt that the people will want to make the necessary changes to preserve Venice so that Mara Rumiz’s prediction for Venice in 2030 will not come true. The locals have the best interest of Venice in mind because they live here. Tourists may claim to care about Venice’s future but it does not directly impact them in the same way that it will affect its inhabitants; therefore the foreign interest in the matter is not nearly as strong as the local interest. If we are able to restore the local population, then in turn we may be able to fix these other problems.
Ultimately in order for us to preserve Venice, the government first needs to protect its inhabitants. This will both get rid of many of the foreigners who currently own properties or businesses here, but it will also restore a strong body of locals who can then move forward and make important decisions that will bring out necessary changes to Venice’s tourism industry for the future. This system that I propose has been successfully installed on the island for Bermuda. The one problem is that it has deterred people from coming to Bermuda because there are other islands they can visit which are easier and which have cheaper housing. This problem is irrelevant for Venice. There is nowhere else in Italy, or in the world which is like Venice; therefore, potentially buyers will not want to go elsewhere because there is no equivalent. I believe that this kind of system is the overhaul that Venice needs to restore its glory, beauty and most importantly authenticity. Venice’s authenticity is what makes it unique. It is found in the artwork, in the architecture, but most importantly in the people that reside here. So why not protect them and save the city?
Works Cited
"2013 Record Tourist Numbers in Venice |." THE VENICE TIMES. N.p., 29 Dec. 2013. Web. 19 Nov. 2014.
"Acquiring a Residence and Property in Bermuda." (2009): n. pag. Conyers Dil & Pearman: Barristers and Attorneys. Conyers Dill & Pearman, July 2009. Web.
Alberoni, Francesco. "Friendship." Francesco Alberoni: Official Website. Educom, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2014.
Bernstein, Fred A. "Bermuda For Bermudians." The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 3 Sept. 2006. Web.
Bianchin, Roberto. "Venezia Nel 2030: Una Città Vuotaniente Abitanti Ma Solo Turisti." La Repubblica. N.p., 25 Apr. 2006. Web. 22 Nov. 2014.
Borg, Jan Van Der, and Antonio Paolo Russo. "The Impacts of Culture on the Economic Development of Cities." (2005): n. pag. European Institute for Comparative Urban Research, Sept. 2005. Web.
European Commission. Regional GDP per Inhabitant in 2008. European Commission: Press Release Database. N.p., 24 Feb. 2011. Web.
Hooper, John. "Population Decline Set to Turn Venice into Italy's Disneyland." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media Ltd, 26 Aug. 2006. Web.
Mack, Benjamin. "Tourism Overwhelms Vanishing" Deutsche Welle. Deutsche Welle, 09 Nov. 2012. Web.
"Mock Funeral for Venice's death'" BBC News. BBC, 14 Nov. 2009. Web.
Staiff, Russell. "Contemporary Tourism Issues Venice: A Casestudy." Thesis. University of Western Sydney, Hawkesbury, 2000. New South Wales Higher School Certificate Online. Web.
Vittori, Mara. "The Museum System in Venice." Personal interview. 14 Oct. 2014.
[1] Mack
[2] Hooper
[3] “2013 Record Tourist Numbers in Venice”
[4] “2013 Record Tourist Numbers in Venice”
[5] European Commission
[6] Borg
[7] Mack
[8] Staiff
[9] Staiff
[10] “Mock Funeral for Venice’s death”
[11] Hooper
[12] Bernstein
[13] “Acquiring a Residence and Property in Bermuda”
[14] Bernstein
[15] “Acquiring a Residence and Property in Bermuda”
[16] “Acquiring a Residence and Property in Bermuda”
[17] “Acquiring a Residence and Property in Bermuda”
[18] Alberoni
In 1966 the population of Venice was set at 121,000 inhabitants. Today, at less than 60,000 the city’s population has more than halved2. Simultaneously, the tourist industry has significantly increased. With more than 60,000 tourists per day, daily visitor rates are greater than the number of locals that there are overall[3]. The Venice Times claims that as of 2013, each Venetian citizen is in charge of approximately 354 tourists[4]. Of course this has both negative and positive consequences. The positive consequence of this situation is that the Veneto region, of which Venice is a part, has become one of the wealthiest regions in Italy[5]. It is thought that “22,500 jobs in the city and an estimated billion of Euro per year are pumped into the Venetian economy” because of the tourism industry[6]. In a time when Italy’s economy is in decline, it is comforting for Venice to know that compared to other regions, they are relatively stable monetarily. However "tourism is a double-edged sword," and there are many negative effects that it has caused as well[7].
Different tourists come for different reasons. But no matter what their reason, they seem to all fall in love with Venice and want a piece of Venice for themselves. These wealthy visitors are coming in and swooping up canal-side palazzos and converting them into homes or accommodations for tourists. They are driving the locals out of Venice because their purchases increase the real estate prices, thus pushing the locals out of their homes. There is a significant correlation between the declining local population and the increasing number of tourists and the gap is growing. Since the 1950s when Venetian tourism boomed, “rents have sky-rocked as the ‘rich and famous’ have bought Venetian real estate”[8]. Foreigners are currently dominating the real-estate market. Those Venetians that can still afford to remain in Venice are either extremely wealthy themselves or they have to convert their homes into inns, B&Bs, restaurants or taverns. In 2006, approximately “706 apartments in the historic center have been converted into accommodation for tourists”[9]. That number has since risen and continues to rise.
It is the fear of many, especially the citizens, that if Venice continues down this very dangerous path, there will be no turning back and Venice will seize to exist as we know it. Their fear is made evident by the fact that a mock funeral was held to “highlight the city’s dwindling population”, emphasizing how tourism has taken over [10]. Every day, Venice loses more and more of its inhabitants who flock to the mainland because they can no longer afford to live in their homes. But what tourists do not realize is that these locals are taking Venice’s charm away with them. Venice’s beauty and charm is found in its locals: through the restaurant owners, through those who work at the markets, the gondoliers, the children that run through the streets after school, the old men gathering for a drink in a campo. These little things are what make Venice special. These are people who not only tell Venice’s story, but they are the ones who show it in their everyday lives. If the tourists successfully get rid of all of the locals, “Venice will never again be a normal city, but will become a mere tourist destination and lose its charm – even for the tourists themselves”[11]. Essentially as the local population declines, Venice becomes more like a Disneyland. So what can be done in order to preserve Venice? I believe that the answer lies in the restoration of the local population.
In order to reestablish the local population, the Venetian city government needs to create housing that is solely for the Venetian people. By this I mean that the government itself needs to purchase the properties, sell them to the locals at an affordable price and create laws that prohibit these properties to then be sold to foreigners. If a foreigner would like to purchase a home in Venice, there should be certain properties made available for them, or else they will have to go through the process of becoming a Venetian citizen in order to qualify to purchase these localonly homes. By imposing this system, not only will the local population of Venice be restored, but the foreign presence in Venice will diminish.
A similar system was put into place on the island of Bermuda, located in the Atlantic Ocean. The island found a similar problem where there was an influx in foreign interest in properties in Bermuda. As a result the Bermudian government created several property laws that restricted the foreign acquisition of property. In Bermuda, in order for a non-Bermudian to purchase a house, said house must already be owned by another foreigner. It is therefore prohibited for a Bermudian to sell their home to a non-Bermudian. Currently, about 150 houses are available for sale to non-Bermudians[12]. Additionally the house that one wishes to purchase must “have an Annual Rental Value (ARV) at least equivalent to the minimum established by the Government from time to time”[13]. This is to ensure that only the higher valued properties are available for sale to non-Bermudians, protecting the less expensive real-estate for those Bermudians who are not as affluent. The least expensive home that one could buy in 2006 was $3 million. Condominiums were expensive as well, starting at $1.4 million[14]. That price has since increased.
Foreigners who wish to purchase property in Bermuda are only allowed to do so if the property is for residential use, not for business use. If a non-Bermudian would like to rent their property, they must “obtain the permission of the Minister of Labour & Home Affairs”[15]. It is an extensive process during which many foreigners are denied this ability. It entirely depends on the “merits of the foreign resident”[16] and to whom they wish to rent said property. If they wish to rent a property to another non-Bermudian, the homeowner will incur government taxes. Multiperson homes or apartment buildings are not available for sale to non-Bermudians. Additionally, foreigners are not allowed to purchase more than one property in Bermuda. The same process applies for the purchase of condominiums and apartments; however these buildings also have to be located in a “designated development” area[17].
Similar legislation could be translated to Venetian society. By enabling foreigners to choose housing from only a select group, Venice’s inhabitants will be able to regain the homes that they lost. Secondly, many foreigners who come and purchase properties in Venice will purchase multiple properties at once, which they then rent out for a profit. It is quite successful because the tourist industry in Venice is a 12-month industry, unlike many other places around the world. However, these new laws will prevent foreigners from purchasing multiple properties. Additionally, it will pose restrictions on the rental time periods, who they can rent to, and during which times of the year a property can be rented. By imposing taxes on rentals to other foreigners, the Venetian government will also be able to gather funds that can be used to benefit the city in other ways.
By stopping non-Venetians from purchasing properties for commercial use as well, the tourist money incurred from the tourist industry will go to Venice and the Venetian people, not the foreigners. This is because the hotels, restaurants, museums, everything that creates a significant revenue in Venice will be owned entirely by either the state or the people. The money circulating will not go to foreigners who currently own and profit from their properties in Venice. Hopefully by creating these laws, the foreigners that still choose to purchase property here are people who truly care about Venice and preserving it for the future. This is because many of the laws that I have suggested are ones that require a lot of time. Wealthy foreigners who simply wish to buy a house for their own monetary gain, by obtaining a business, or because they wish to add to their long list of properties, will no longer be as interested in buying property in Venice because the process will be much more difficult and time consuming and they have very little to gain from it monetarily.
Another benefit of this law is that in protecting the local population in this way, Venetians will feel protected and therefore they will trust the government more. Since the extortion scandal that erupted with the former mayor of Venice, the Venetian people have found it difficult to trust the government. Italy has been a breeding ground for extortion and scandal. The scholar Francesco Alberoni said that this kind of activity has become so typical in Italy that even the word friendship within the professional world has “come to carry a secondary, negative connotation of privileges and favours…[it is] a means of…getting round the rules”[18]. It is no wonder that people do not trust the government. It seems that individuals always have a hidden agenda. Therefore, any changes that are trying to be made are very difficult to bring about. The people want to help to save their city but they are reluctant to do so if it means putting their faith, and worse, their money in the hands of the government. By imposing this system, the government will be able to restore faith in the hearts of the locals and hopefully bring about further positive changes to the city.
Of course Bermuda and Venice are two very different places thus changes need to be made in order to adapt the Bermudian law to Venetian law. One of the laws that Bermuda includes is that Non-Bermudians are not allowed to purchase empty plots of land to then purchase their own homes. This law clearly does not apply to Venice as homes cannot be built in Venice. Furthermore Venice should probably include laws and restrictions with regards to construction and building activities. Venice is a much more delicate place than Bermuda therefore there needs to be greater enforcement in order to protect the city. Additionally I believe that foreigners should be required to pay a higher property tax than locals. This money can be used to help save Venice from its many other problems including acqua alta and the sinking structure of the city. Ultimately though the system is one that is very adaptable and the fact that Venice is so unique gives it a huge advantage. With Bermuda on the other hand, one of the major problems currently is that there are so many other luxury islands that tourists can visit, therefore Bermuda is losing much of its tourist population. However, with Venice, there is no other place like it in the world. This gives them the power to have more restrictive laws, if necessary, because there is no secondary option to visiting Venice.
This issue is a pressing one that needs to be addressed as soon as possible. From the clear numerical evidence, Mara Rumiz, the Venice council hosing chief, speculates that by 2030 Venice will be a city with nothing but tourists. The ratio of tourists to locals is increasing significantly, to the point where now, there are more tourists essentially own the city. They are in control of the city because of the weakness of the government and size of the dwindling local body of people. By putting the city’s control back in the hands of the citizens and the government, it is without a doubt that the people will want to make the necessary changes to preserve Venice so that Mara Rumiz’s prediction for Venice in 2030 will not come true. The locals have the best interest of Venice in mind because they live here. Tourists may claim to care about Venice’s future but it does not directly impact them in the same way that it will affect its inhabitants; therefore the foreign interest in the matter is not nearly as strong as the local interest. If we are able to restore the local population, then in turn we may be able to fix these other problems.
Ultimately in order for us to preserve Venice, the government first needs to protect its inhabitants. This will both get rid of many of the foreigners who currently own properties or businesses here, but it will also restore a strong body of locals who can then move forward and make important decisions that will bring out necessary changes to Venice’s tourism industry for the future. This system that I propose has been successfully installed on the island for Bermuda. The one problem is that it has deterred people from coming to Bermuda because there are other islands they can visit which are easier and which have cheaper housing. This problem is irrelevant for Venice. There is nowhere else in Italy, or in the world which is like Venice; therefore, potentially buyers will not want to go elsewhere because there is no equivalent. I believe that this kind of system is the overhaul that Venice needs to restore its glory, beauty and most importantly authenticity. Venice’s authenticity is what makes it unique. It is found in the artwork, in the architecture, but most importantly in the people that reside here. So why not protect them and save the city?
Works Cited
"2013 Record Tourist Numbers in Venice |." THE VENICE TIMES. N.p., 29 Dec. 2013. Web. 19 Nov. 2014.
"Acquiring a Residence and Property in Bermuda." (2009): n. pag. Conyers Dil & Pearman: Barristers and Attorneys. Conyers Dill & Pearman, July 2009. Web.
Alberoni, Francesco. "Friendship." Francesco Alberoni: Official Website. Educom, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2014.
Bernstein, Fred A. "Bermuda For Bermudians." The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 3 Sept. 2006. Web.
Bianchin, Roberto. "Venezia Nel 2030: Una Città Vuotaniente Abitanti Ma Solo Turisti." La Repubblica. N.p., 25 Apr. 2006. Web. 22 Nov. 2014.
Borg, Jan Van Der, and Antonio Paolo Russo. "The Impacts of Culture on the Economic Development of Cities." (2005): n. pag. European Institute for Comparative Urban Research, Sept. 2005. Web.
European Commission. Regional GDP per Inhabitant in 2008. European Commission: Press Release Database. N.p., 24 Feb. 2011. Web.
Hooper, John. "Population Decline Set to Turn Venice into Italy's Disneyland." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media Ltd, 26 Aug. 2006. Web.
Mack, Benjamin. "Tourism Overwhelms Vanishing" Deutsche Welle. Deutsche Welle, 09 Nov. 2012. Web.
"Mock Funeral for Venice's death'" BBC News. BBC, 14 Nov. 2009. Web.
Staiff, Russell. "Contemporary Tourism Issues Venice: A Casestudy." Thesis. University of Western Sydney, Hawkesbury, 2000. New South Wales Higher School Certificate Online. Web.
Vittori, Mara. "The Museum System in Venice." Personal interview. 14 Oct. 2014.
[1] Mack
[2] Hooper
[3] “2013 Record Tourist Numbers in Venice”
[4] “2013 Record Tourist Numbers in Venice”
[5] European Commission
[6] Borg
[7] Mack
[8] Staiff
[9] Staiff
[10] “Mock Funeral for Venice’s death”
[11] Hooper
[12] Bernstein
[13] “Acquiring a Residence and Property in Bermuda”
[14] Bernstein
[15] “Acquiring a Residence and Property in Bermuda”
[16] “Acquiring a Residence and Property in Bermuda”
[17] “Acquiring a Residence and Property in Bermuda”
[18] Alberoni