Empty Apartments, Full Cities: The Contradictions of Short-Term Rentals

In Lisbon, Barcelona, Athens and parts of London, a visitor can arrive at an apartment with a keypad, a cleaning schedule and a professional listing that looks indistinguishable from a small hotel. For the traveller it is flexible accommodation. For the neighbouring resident it may be one fewer home available for a long-term tenant. The same property sits inside two markets with different prices, rules and expectations.

Short-term rentals did not invent tourism accommodation or housing scarcity. What digital platforms changed was the ease with which an ordinary apartment could be marketed internationally, priced nightly and managed remotely. A landlord comparing twelve months of rent with high-season nightly income may see a strong incentive to switch. But occupancy, platform fees, cleaning, insurance, tax, repairs and empty winter weeks make the calculation less simple than headline nightly rates suggest.

Barcelona's long-running restrictions on tourist apartments reflect the political tension. City authorities have argued that housing must serve residents, while property owners and tourism businesses point to visitor spending and their ability to use assets productively. Regulation can cap licences, restrict entire-home lets or increase enforcement. Yet the effect depends on local supply, whether listings are actually removed and what alternative accommodation visitors choose.

The financial comparison between long-term and short-term letting is often presented as a contest between monthly rent and nightly revenue. But the landlord's cash flow depends on occupancy, cleaning frequency, repairs, guest acquisition costs and local taxes. A flat earning an attractive rate during a festival may sit empty through the winter. Professional managers can reduce vacancy through dynamic pricing and distribution across platforms, yet their fees reduce the owner's margin. A property that looks more profitable as a short-term rental in a promotional spreadsheet may produce a less reliable income stream after the full operating cycle is considered.

Mortgage lenders and insurers also shape what owners can do. A residential mortgage may restrict commercial short-term letting, while buildings insurance or a leasehold agreement may impose conditions on guest use. Apartment blocks with shared entrances, lifts and fire-safety arrangements were not always designed for continuous turnover of unfamiliar visitors. Where owners ignore those conditions, the financial risk is not limited to a fine. A dispute following property damage or an emergency can expose gaps in insurance and contractual responsibility. Digital platforms make a listing easy to create; they do not automatically change the underlying legal status of the building.

The phenomenon is uneven across neighbourhoods. A centrally located flat near transport and nightlife can earn a premium from visitors, while a similar property farther from attractions remains primarily residential. When professional operators concentrate multiple units in one building, they change more than rents. Frequent arrivals, luggage, late-night noise and shared-door access alter the daily operation of a residential block designed for permanent households.

Short-term rentals also create a dispersed service industry. Cleaners, linen suppliers, maintenance technicians, key-management firms, photographers, channel managers and revenue-pricing software providers help turn apartments into hospitality inventory. Some operators run dozens of properties with standardised checklists and automated guest messages. The supposedly informal spare-room market has, in many cities, become a professionally managed accommodation sector with hotel-like supply chains.

The benefits are real and often geographically important. A family travelling with children may value a kitchen and several bedrooms more than adjoining hotel rooms. Visitors staying for weeks may shop in local supermarkets, use neighbourhood services and spend outside established hotel districts. Homeowners may use occasional rentals to supplement income. These gains, however, do not establish that every entire-home listing creates more value than a permanent tenancy.

The pressure on housing markets is most intense when tourist demand intersects with limited new construction. Historic districts have narrow streets, protected buildings and scarce development land. Adding new hotels may be difficult, while converting existing flats to visitor accommodation is comparatively fast. In such places, even a relatively small number of professionally operated units can matter to renters searching within a specific neighbourhood and price band. In other cities with extensive vacant stock, the effect may be smaller or concentrated in a few streets. The geography of the housing market matters more than a single citywide listing total.

Residents experience the transformation through daily services as well as housing prices. A neighbourhood dominated by temporary visitors may support luggage storage, brunch cafés and souvenir shops, while schools, repair services and shops serving permanent households face a changing customer base. Some businesses gain and others lose. Local authorities must still provide waste collection, street maintenance and policing, but the people using those services may not contribute through the same channels as permanent residents. A tourism levy can recover some costs, although it does not by itself restore the social networks lost when neighbours move away.

Short-term accommodation platforms depend on trust systems that resemble those of much larger hospitality companies. Guest identification, payment processing, property photographs, reviews, dispute handling and damage claims all influence whether a booking takes place. A single poor review can reduce occupancy; a misleading listing can undermine confidence in the entire marketplace. Professional operators respond with standardised furnishings, rapid maintenance and scripted guest communication. This improves consistency but makes apartments increasingly similar to hotel rooms, raising the question of whether they should face comparable obligations when operating commercially year-round.

Cities also face a measurement problem. A listing count is not the same as a count of homes permanently withdrawn from the rental market. One property may appear on several platforms; another may be offered only when its owner travels; a third may operate year-round as a commercial unit. Policymakers who treat all three identically risk misreading the scale of the housing effect, while operators have incentives to present commercial activity as occasional hosting.

Hotels and serviced apartments add another layer. Hotels face planning, fire-safety, accessibility and staffing obligations that vary by jurisdiction. Short-term rentals may be subject to different registration, tax and inspection requirements. When the regulatory costs differ substantially, competition is not purely about guest preference or efficiency. It also reflects which businesses are required to pay for which safeguards.

Enforcement is difficult without cooperation among platforms, payment providers and local authorities. A city can require registration numbers, but checking listings against approved properties demands reliable data and administrative capacity. A ban that exists on paper may leave unlicensed operators competing with compliant ones. Conversely, sudden restrictions can affect local cleaners and small businesses that built their livelihoods around visitor accommodation.

The labour behind short-term rentals is rarely visible in the listing price. Cleaners may have only a few hours between checkout and check-in, with travel time between dispersed properties and no guarantee that guests leave on schedule. Laundry contractors handle peaks on weekends, and maintenance workers may be summoned after midnight when a lock fails. The flexibility valued by guests often rests on irregular shifts for service workers. A profitable portfolio depends not merely on software and property ownership but on the reliability of people whose labour is fragmented across many addresses.

Regulators increasingly seek data rather than relying on complaints alone. Registration numbers, booking-night reporting and platform cooperation can help distinguish occasional home sharing from year-round commercial operation. But data collection raises privacy, compliance and administrative questions, especially where local authorities lack technical resources. Rules also produce adaptation: owners may switch to medium-term rentals, advertise on smaller platforms or move into different districts. Evaluating a policy requires monitoring the housing supply and accommodation market after the change, not simply counting the licences withdrawn on announcement day.

The central contradiction is that a city can be economically full of visitors while some of its residents struggle to find homes. Neither tourism growth nor housing protection can be judged by a single occupancy statistic. The lasting question is how cities allocate scarce urban space among residents, travellers and businesses, and who captures the value when a home becomes a nightly-priced product.

Developers and city planners face a difficult sequencing problem. Housing supply can take years to increase because land assembly, finance, planning and construction are slow, while a rental apartment can enter the visitor market almost overnight. When demand rises suddenly after a new airline route or major event, the accommodation market responds faster than the residential building market. Regulation becomes a short-term lever in a problem whose deeper causes may include restricted construction, weak transport links and unequal neighbourhood investment. Short-term rentals are therefore sometimes a cause of housing pressure and sometimes an especially visible symptom of it.

For platforms, the challenge is preserving the benefits of flexible accommodation while operating within local rules that differ dramatically between cities. A host in one market may need a licence, safety inspection and occupancy cap, while another faces only tax registration. The compliance burden can favour larger property managers who employ specialists, even when restrictions are intended to protect local residents from commercialisation. The eventual balance depends on whether cities can distinguish occasional household income from accommodation businesses operating at scale and apply rules that reflect the difference.

Interested in the ideas behind this story? Stories of Business offers clearly disclosed sponsored editorial Spotlights and institutional partnerships, while retaining editorial independence. Contact support@storiesofbusiness.com to discuss a collaboration.