Summarize Written Text

Since the mid-1990s, low-cost carriers have reshaped patterns of international travel by unbundling airfares into base fares plus optional charges for baggage, seating, and meals. This model, pioneered in North America and later adapted across Europe and Southeast Asia, reduced average ticket prices by an estimated 40 percent on short-haul routes within two decades, drawing millions of first-time flyers into international tourism. Border towns and secondary airports, once bypassed by legacy carriers favoring major hubs, experienced sudden growth as budget airlines sought lower landing fees and faster turnaround times. Regional economies in destinations such as coastal Croatia and northern Morocco reported measurable increases in seasonal employment tied directly to tourist arrivals following the introduction of new low-cost routes. However, this expansion has not been without consequence. Municipal governments in several popular destinations have introduced visitor caps, tourist taxes, or restrictions on short-term rentals in response to overcrowding, rising housing costs for local residents, and strain on water and waste infrastructure during peak seasons. Critics of unrestrained aviation growth also point to the environmental cost: short-haul flights, disproportionately favored by budget carriers, emit more carbon dioxide per passenger kilometer than longer-haul routes flown by fuel-efficient wide-body aircraft. In response, some governments have begun taxing domestic flights more heavily than equivalent train journeys, while a handful of European countries have discussed outright bans on short domestic routes where rail alternatives under three hours exist. Industry representatives counter that budget aviation remains a vital engine of economic mobility, particularly for lower-income travelers and remote regions historically underserved by transport infrastructure, and argue that emissions concerns should be addressed through cleaner fuel technology rather than route restrictions.