Baguio was never meant to be a city that groans under the weight of 1.56 million tourists a year. It was built as a hill station, a place of respite from the oppressive heat of the lowlands. But the so-called “Summer Capital of the Philippines” is swamped. It has always been swamped (save for its brief respite during the global pandemic that is COVID). Its roads choked with traffic, its parks trampled by crowds, and its resources stretched thin. And yet, city officials continue to push tourism numbers higher without asking the most important question: How much is too much?
Here we go again.
At what point does Baguio say, “enough is enough”? The city raked in a lion’s share (in billions) of the region’s tourism earnings last year, but at what cost?
There’s an assumption that all this money is indispensable for the city’s survival, but that’s a flawed way of looking at things. How much does Baguio really need to function? Does it need to rely on around 1.5 million visitors a year, or could a cap on tourism actually result in a better, more sustainable economy? Tourism money is fleeting—what good is profit if it comes at the price of long-term environmental and infrastructural decay?
And then there’s the issue of water. So we’re supposed to be celebrating the fact that Baguio will not experience drought this year, with the mayor citing the Baguio Water District’s (BWD) efforts to dig more deep wells. But why is no one talking about the real reason why the city still has water? We’ve been experiencing several days of rain already (though not necessarily successive). The real credit belongs to Baguio’s unique climate, not to a well-digging program.
The problem with this approach is that it’s short-sighted. Drilling more deep wells isn’t a sustainable solution. Every new well we dig depletes Baguio’s already fragile water table, threatening the city’s long-term supply. Besides, the over extraction of groundwater can lead to land subsidence, contamination, and irreversible depletion. And yet, instead of acknowledging these risks, the local government is treating the expansion of deep well drilling as some sort of victory.
What happens when the rain doesn’t come? Will we still be pretending that tourism is manageable? Will we still be pretending that adding wells will solve everything?
Overtourism is pushing the city past its limits. Baguio is suffocating, and instead of hitting the brakes, we’re flooring the gas pedal. There has to be a reckoning. The city needs to take a hard look at the numbers and ask itself whether our relentless pursuit of higher and higher tourism numbers is really worth it.
There’s a way forward that doesn’t involve exhausting the city’s resources. Baguio could limit visitor numbers, focus on quality tourism rather than sheer volume, and invest in a tourism model that protects its environment rather than exploits it. Other cities around the world have done it—why can’t we?
Baguio can either continue treading the path of unsustainable tourism, or it can finally acknowledge the cracks forming beneath the surface. If the city really wants sustainability (the government’s buzzword for months now), if it truly aims to preserve what makes it special, it needs to stop treating tourism as an endless cash cow and start prioritizing the well-being of the place and the people who call it home.
Enough is enough.
