Florence is an exquisite city. Because of its history and its cultural heritage as the cradle of the Italian Renaissance, it is unique, precious and very fragile. The historic centre – a Unesco world heritage site – occupies a very small space. The city’s 366,000 inhabitants are joined each year by about 11 million tourists. Maintaining the characteristic dignity of the place and meeting the needs of those who live here permanently while managing this volume of tourism, is a great challenge and responsibility. For most of the year, Florence struggles to do either sustainably.
To be clear, tourism is an essential source of income and I am not opposed to tourists. The problem is that many visitors are on a quick in-and-out mission to take selfies in front of a few major sights – Michelangelo’s David, Botticelli’s Primavera, the Piazza della Signoria – to show people at home that they have been to Florence, while essentially trampling the city without contributing anything.
I love Florence and am saddened when I see how mass tourism is hollowing out its ordinary commercial life: just as in attractive cities the world over, neighbourhood stores in the centre have all but disappeared. What is left is aimed at hit-and-run tourist groups, at visitors on the hunt for food, and souvenirs such as magnets or aprons depicting parts of David’s anatomy.
Anyone who has been to Florence in recent years will have experienced how its major sites and the areas surrounding them are completely overrun and smothered. The city attracts many different types of tourist – from the cultural visitor, to the cruise-ship holidaymaker rushing in for a few brief hours. Most move along just a few well-beaten paths: to the Galleria dell’Accademia, the Piazza del Duomo, the Piazza della Signoria, the Uffizi, the Ponte Vecchio, and Palazzo Pitti.
But all of this tourism must be managed, otherwise it stops being a resource and becomes only a problem. And over the years Florence has gradually lost parts of its identity as it has lost its citizens – fewer than 40,000 now live in the historic centre, which is overrun with Airbnb apartments and eateries. Most Florence residents feel profoundly frustrated by the impossibility of leading a normal life in their city. Their precious jewel must be protected and not sold off and compromised any further.
Since 2015, I have had the great honour of directing the famous Galleria dell’Accademia in Florence, best known for Michelangelo’s David. For years I have struggled for legal copyright to protect David’s dignity against commercial exploitation – and have had some major successes.
But the problems I have witnessed both in the gallery and in the city at large have also given me an opportunity to explore possible solutions to over-tourism, considering the obvious, which is that we cannot enlarge the space.
When I arrived eight years ago I got together with museum staff and we devised a masterplan. We started with the museum’s relationship to the city’s inhabitants, many of whom had become distanced from it, perceiving it as a space just for tourists. To give the museum back to the city, we began involving residents in its daily life, launching events for everyone, young and old, accessible for free. Admission to the museum is also free every first Sunday of the month.
I founded an “association of friends” to reconnect the museum with people everywhere. We looked at such issues as the quality of the visitor experience and orientation, as well as seasonal distribution.
Visitors used to crowd along a single trajectory heading straight from the entrance to Michelangelo’s David, allowing just enough time for a selfie there before exiting – mirroring what tourists still do in the city, trooping from the Accademia to the Pitti Palace but seeing little else.
Today, after much hard work, Accademia visitors find a welcoming, modern museum and a high-quality experience. We have opened new galleries, put objects on display that were not visible before and reinstalled others. Refurbished air conditioning means we no longer have to close rooms in the summer heat. LED lighting enhances each individual work allowing us to manage the flow of visitors into every part of the museum. We no longer find them all just piled up in front of David.
We have reduced the maximum number in tour groups to make the visit more enjoyable for everyone. New signage saves time and leaves people feeling reinvigorated, not exhausted. David remains the star attraction. But now our visitors also look at the other objects and give them the dignity and respect they merit. The museum has found a balance.
Thanks to these strategic choices visits to the museum increased by 42% between 2015 and 2023. Last year we exceeded 2 million annual visitors for the first time – not by squeezing them in but by extending opening hours in the summer – late opening twice a week – and having one main exhibition in the winter rather than bunching them in the high season.
By breaking down physical and cognitive barriers to encounters with art and culture we have made the Galleria dell’Accademia a modern, accessible museum that promotes diversity and sustainability. As a result, I believe that many of our extra visitors are local people who were not previously regulars but have been enticed in. We’re seeing a lot more younger visitors too.
In a way, the Accademia can be viewed as a kind of microcosm of Florence. And I have seen what a sustainable approach can achieve. Slower tours, smaller groups, better signage and orientation, de-seasonalisation; distribution of visitors, longer openings; these things have been transformative. They also benefit the city and its inhabitants.
Eleven million people every year want to experience Florence and they can’t be turned away – they can however be managed, and in the process the city’s heritage can be secured for future generations. However, my expertise and ability to act begin and end at the museum door.
Cecilie Hollberg is the director of the Galleria dell’Accademia in Florence
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
