Cashless tourism: when convenience decides who can travel—and who is left excluded
As hotel receptions, airports, stadiums, and summer festivals switch ever faster to cards and mobile wallets, “cashless” is no longer just a tech trend but also a question of access. For some guests, digital payment means shorter lines, less hassle with exchange offices, and safer transactions. For others, it becomes an obstacle that shapes the itinerary, budget, and impression of the destination—from the first contact at the airport to the last coffee in the city center. More and more often, a traveler only finds out on the spot that cash is not accepted at certain locations at all, or that it is accepted only “exceptionally,” with extra steps and waiting.
The change is most often justified by faster service, lower risk of theft, and simpler management of turnover and accounting. But the consequences are broader: extra fees, worse exchange rates, exposure to card blocks, and a loss of flexibility for families, older people, and visitors from countries where cash is still dominant. In tourism, where every small transaction is part of the experience, an “invisible” barrier can decide whether a guest will spend more—or give up and look for an alternative. When paying becomes a problem, it stops being a technical detail and becomes part of the picture of whether a destination is welcoming—or whether it seems to introduce filters.
What “cashless” means in tourism and why it is spreading
In its simplest form, “cashless” means that a service at a certain location does not accept physical money. In tourism, this model appears in several variants, and each carries different consequences for the consumer:
- Fully cashless – ticket offices, kiosks, hospitality venues, or carriers accept only cards and digital wallets, with no option to pay with banknotes and coins.
- Hybrid model – cash is formally accepted, but it is “undesirable”: fewer registers, limited opening hours, slower service, or reduced availability of small change, so the customer is practically steered toward a card.
- Closed systems – at festivals and events, spending goes through preloaded cards or wristbands, sometimes with conversion into a “virtual currency” and refund rules that are not always intuitive.
The reasons the industry is turning to digital payments are clear: faster service, easier inventory management, reduced cash-handling costs, and better revenue control under conditions of a large number of purchases. In the event industry and at sports venues, an additional motive is throughput—faster lines mean higher sales in a short time, which directly translates into higher income for organizers and concessionaires. In airports and transport, arguments are often tied to security and process standardization, and in hospitality to simpler cash-up procedures and fewer errors during operations. The problem arises when it is overlooked that tourism, by definition, brings together people with different habits, different banking services, and different levels of digital literacy.
Europe is paying more digitally, but cash is still massively present
The digitalization trend is obvious, but European statistics show that cash is still part of everyday life. The European Central Bank, in its study on consumers’ payment habits (SPACE 2024), records a continued shift toward digital payments, especially in the online environment. Still, at points of sale in the euro area, cash in 2024 remained the most commonly used payment method: it was used in 52% of POS transactions, down from 59% in 2022. In transaction value, cards play a more important role, which points to a simple pattern: higher amounts are more often paid digitally, while smaller sums are still often settled in cash.
A similar picture emerges from research on cash acceptance among companies in the euro area. The ECB states that cash acceptance between 2021 and 2024 fell from 96% to 88%, explaining that consumers pay in cash less often and that part of business adapts processes to that trend. At the same time, the vast majority of companies that still accept cash intend to continue with that practice, showing that cash still serves as a “safety net” in everyday transactions. In tourist zones, this can create tension: a guest expects to be able to pay as at home, while being told on the spot that the “rules of the game” no longer include banknotes and coins.
Who feels the “cards only” rule the most
In tourism, inequality is rarely visible at first glance, but it is quickly felt at the checkout. “Cashless” most often affects several groups—not only travelers but also part of the local population that relies on tourist infrastructure:
- Travelers from “cash-based” countries – visitors who arrive with cash or with cards that do not work reliably abroad, as well as those who lack access to affordable international transactions.
- Families and travelers on a tight budget – cash is often a tool for spending control; in a digital environment of constant micro-purchases, it is easier to “lose track” of how much money has already gone.
- Older people and those with lower digital literacy – some of them travel, some live in tourist zones and depend on shops, transport, and services that are digitizing.
- Small entrepreneurs – seasonal trades and landlords who must invest in terminals and pay fees, or risk losing some guests who prefer a card.
- Travelers without stable internet or with a dead battery – a digital wallet and apps depend on the device, power, and network, and crowds and travel often mean exactly the opposite.
The problem is operational too, not just a matter of habit. Cards can be blocked due to a bank’s security rules, transactions can be flagged as suspicious, and mobile payments depend on authentication and sometimes on additional checks. In such situations, cash is the simplest backup plan: it works when the signal is weak, when the device is low on battery, or when the system temporarily does not respond. When a destination completely removes that backup plan, a traveler can be left without a way to pay at the very moment they need it most—on public transport, when entering an event, in a restaurant after a long trip, or when buying basic necessities.
From airports to festivals: where the change is seen fastest
Airports and airlines
For the traveler, the first contact with a destination is crucial: the airport and the transport system. If cash cannot be used there—for example for a fee, a service, or extra baggage—the visitor must immediately rely on a card. Delta Air Lines, in an official notice, states that from May 19, 2025, additional locations in international markets are becoming “cashless” and no longer accept cash. A traveler who is not familiar with the rules can face a very practical problem: it is not about whether they want to pay digitally, but whether they can complete the transaction at the moment they need the service.
Stadiums, arenas, and major events
Sports and concert venues are increasingly switching to “cashless” food and beverage sales, claiming that lines are reduced and efficiency increases. Some venues try to mitigate the problem by introducing “reverse ATM” machines, where cash is converted into a prepaid card valid inside the venue. Although this formally enables spending, it exposes the visitor to extra steps and makes spending less transparent, because the money first changes form and only then is spent. In the crowd before the start of a game or concert, such an “extra step” often means giving up on a purchase, which is the opposite of the official argument about a “better experience.”
Festivals and closed “currencies” on wristbands
A special story are festivals that, alongside “cashless,” introduce their own billing systems—tokens, digital coins, and wristbands. The Brussels Times, in a review of the Belgian festival scene, describes how such systems can be complex for users and relays warnings from consumer actors about transparency, refund rules, and possible losses due to rounding or fees. For tourists, this means an additional layer of uncertainty: they no longer pay in euros or via a standard card transaction, but in a system they must learn on the spot, often under the pressure of crowds. In practice, a visitor may only realize after the event that they have an unused balance or that the refund is complicated.
Is cash a right and where politics comes in
The debate about cash in Europe goes beyond consumer habits and enters regulation. In 2023, the European Commission presented a proposed regulation to strengthen the status of the euro in cash as legal tender. The document states that the concept of legal tender, as interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union, includes a general rule that euro cash should be accepted, with limited and justified exceptions. Within its cash strategy, the ECB emphasizes the goal that access to cash and acceptance of euro cash be legally guaranteed throughout the euro area, precisely because cash infrastructure can quietly shrink.
Norway, although outside the EU, offered a clear example of how a state can intervene. Norges Bank states that in June 2024 an amendment to the law was adopted clarifying the consumer’s right: in sales premises where a business regularly sells goods or services to consumers, the consumer must be offered the possibility to pay with legal tender if it is possible to pay by other solutions in or in immediate connection with the sales premises. Such a rule seeks to prevent digital from becoming the only entry into the market, while not banning digital methods but introducing an obligation of choice.
At the same time, the debate is also being conducted in countries long seen as laboratories of a cashless society. The Guardian, in an analysis of the Swedish case, described how, alongside almost complete digitization of payments, security and resilience arguments are increasingly highlighted, including the need for cash to remain available as a reserve in crises and outages of digital systems. In such circumstances, cash gains a new function: it is not only a means of payment, but also part of the infrastructure that enables continuity of life and the economy.
The cost of convenience: fees, exchange rates, and hidden losses
For the consumer, “cashless” is often not free, even when presented as the standard. If a traveler has to withdraw cash and then convert it into a prepaid card or festival tokens, they lose on several levels: withdrawal fee, currency conversion, possible system fee, and rounding and the unused amount that is hard to refund. With card payments, an additional cost can be dynamic currency conversion (DCC) or bank fees for foreign transactions—which the traveler often does not see immediately, but only on the statement. It is especially sensitive when the tourist is forcibly steered toward a specific payment method, with no real alternative.
For small tourism entrepreneurs, digital payment is a double-edged sword. Cards bring security and reduce the risk of handling cash, but they imply fees and equipment costs, and sometimes an obligation to contract with intermediaries. In seasonal environments and micro-businesses, a difference of a few percentage points can be significant, especially for small amounts that form the backbone of local spending. The result is segmentation: part of the offer remains cash-oriented, part becomes card-only, and the tourist chooses what is available, not necessarily what is the best offer or the most authentic experience.
Destinations that feel open and those that feel closed
A sense of welcome often comes from small details: can you pay for water at a kiosk, a bus ticket, a museum entry, or a meal in a restaurant without extra logistics. When the answer is “no,” a destination can be experienced as less accessible, especially for travelers who are used to cash or travel on a limited budget. Tourism is not only accommodation, but a chain of microtransactions, and every point in that chain can become a bottleneck. If a festival has a closed token system, a stadium does not accept cash, and transport requires an app, the traveler gets the impression that they must be “digitally equipped” to participate in the offer at all.
In that sense, “cashless” is also a reputational risk. A destination that wants to attract a wider circle of visitors must account for different payment habits and different financial capabilities. This does not mean returning exclusively to cash, but understanding how billing rules affect the experience of accessibility. At a time when destinations compete for various tourist profiles, financial inclusion becomes part of competitiveness just like transport connectivity, accommodation quality, or cultural offer. Payment is part of the hospitality infrastructure: the simpler and more predictable it is, the greater the chance that the guest will feel safe and welcome.
How to reduce exclusion without giving up digital
Practice shows that part of the problem can be mitigated without giving up cards. The key is system design and clear visitor information:
- Clear rules before arrival – payment methods should be highlighted on official websites, in apps, and at the entrance, so the traveler can plan and prepare an alternative.
- An alternative without a smartphone – prepaid cards that can be bought with cash without complex procedures, with clearly stated and minimal fees.
- Transparency of conversions and refunds – especially in closed festival systems, where the consumer must know in advance the conditions for refunding unused funds.
- Preserving cash at least for basic services – public transport and basic supply are points where payment-method availability can decide whether a guest can manage.
- Plans for system outages – offline scenarios in case of network or power failure, in which cash is the simplest safety valve.
Institutions in the euro area are speaking more openly about the importance of cash as an option, even as digital payment spreads. The ECB emphasizes the need for access to and acceptance of euro cash to be guaranteed throughout the euro area, and the Norwegian example shows how consumer rights can be directly strengthened by law. In tourism, where differences in habits collide at the same counter and the same checkout, such an approach can be a practical compromise: technology can speed up service, but only if it leaves room for those for whom cash is still the most reliable way to pay.
Sources:- European Central Bank – Study on the payment attitudes of consumers in the euro area (SPACE) 2024, data on the share of cash and payment trends (link)
- European Central Bank – Use of cash by companies in the euro area (survey 2024), trends in cash acceptance in business (link)
- European Central Bank – Access to and acceptance of cash, context of the cash strategy and EU legislative proposal (link)
- EUR-Lex – Proposal for a regulation on the legal tender of euro banknotes and coins (COM/2023/364), interpretation of the concept of legal tender (link)
- Norges Bank – “The right to pay cash”, clarification of consumers’ right to pay in cash (2024 amendment) (link)
- Delta Air Lines – official notice on “cashless” locations and billing rules at airports (link)
- The Brussels Times – overview of festival “cashless” systems in Belgium and consumer-transparency issues (link)
- The Guardian – analysis of Sweden’s rethinking of an almost cashless model and the system-resilience argument (link)
Find accommodation nearby
Creation time: 3 hours ago