Annals of Tourism Research_Volume 36 , No.3 , 2009

ANNALS OF TOURISM RESEARCH

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

John Tribe

Professor of Tourism

University of Surrey

Guildford

GU2 7XH

United Kingdom

Email: [email protected]

ASSOCIATE EDITORS

• AnthropologyNelson H H Graburn: Univ of California-Berkeley, USADennison Nash: Univ of Connecticut, USA

• Economics and Management ScienceJosef A Mazanec: Vienna Univ AustriaAbraham Pizam: Univ of Central Florida, USA

• GeographyJohn Coshall: London Metropolitan Univ, UK

• HistoryAuvo A Kostiainen: Univ of Turku, Finland

• HospitalityKaye Chon: Hong Kong Polytechnic Univ, China

• Information TechnologyUlrike Gretzel: Texas A&M Univ, USA

• Leisure/RecreationCara Aitchison: University of Bedfordshire, UKGeoffrey Wall: Univ of Waterloo, Canada

• Political ScienceLinda K Richter: Kansas State Univ, USA

• PsychologyPhilip L Pearce: Psychology, James Cook Univ, AustraliaRegina G Schluter: Univ Nacional de Quilmes, Argentina

• Regional PlanningDouglas C Pearce: Victoria Univ of Wellington, New Zealand

• SociologyErik Cohen: The Hebrew Univ of Jerusalem, IsraelDavid H Harrison: Univ of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji Islands

FIELD EDITORS

Antonios Andronikou: Former Director General, CyprusTourism Organization, Cyprus

Alexander Anolik: President, International Forum of Traveland Tourism Advocates, USA

Lou D’Amore: President, International Institute for Peacethrough Tourism, USA

Francesco Frangialli: Secretary-General, World TourismOrganization, Spain

Victor S Kachanov: Vice President, Central Council forTourism and Excursions, Russia

Walter Leu: Executive Director, European Travel Commission,Belgium

Geoffrey H Lipman: Former President, World Travel andTourism Council, UK

Bengt Pihlstrom: Former Director, Finnish Tourist Board, FinlandTom Selanniemi: Chairman, Aurinkomatkat-Suntours, FinlandSalah E A Wahab: President, Tourismplan, Egypt

COMMENTARY EDITOR

Margaret B Swain: Anthropology, Univ of California-Davis, USA

REPORT EDITORS

Juergen Gnoth*: Marketing, Univ of Otago, New ZealandRussell A Smith*: Planning, Nanyang Tech. Univ., Singapore

PUBLICATION EDITOR

Stephen L J Smith*: Recreation, Univ of Waterloo, Canada

CALENDAR AND INDEX EDITOR

Honggen Xiao: Linguistics, Hong Kong Polytechnic University,

China

RESOURCE EDITORS

Eugeni Aguilo: Economics, Univ de las Islas Baleares, SpainJong-yun Ahn: Public Admin., Hanyang Univ, R. KoreaJulio R Aramberri: Sociology, Drexel Univ, USAIrena Ateljevic: Socio-cultural geography, Wageningen University, The NetherlandsRene Baretje: Economics, CIRET, FranceSusanne Becken: Environment, Lincoln University, New ZealandBill Bramwell: Geography, Sheffield Hallam Univ, UKRalf Buckley: Ecology, Griffith Univ, AustraliaKenneth Button: Economics, George Mason Univ, USAChristine Buzinde: Cultural Studies, Pennsylvania State Univ, USAJoseph S Chen: Leisure, Indiana Univ-Bloomington, USASidney Cheung: Anthropology, Chinese Univ of Hong Kong, ChinaMichael Clancy: Political Science, Univ of Hartford, USAMalcolm Cooper: Urban/Regionals, Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific Univ, JapanPeter U C Dieke: Tourism, George Mason Univ, USAKadir H Din: Environment, Univ Utara Malaysia, MalaysiaDavid A Dittman: Accounting, Cornell Univ, USASara Dolnicar: Marketing, University of Wollongong, AustraliaLarry Dwyer: Economics, Univ of New South Wales, AustraliaWilliam R Eadington: Economics, Univ of Nevada-Reno, USAChristopher Endy: History, California State Univ-Los Angeles, USAEduardo Fayos-Sola: Economics, Univ of Valencia, SpainAlan Fyall: Marketing, Bournemouth Univ, UKVasiliki Galani-Moutafi: Anthropology, Univ of the Aegean, GreeceWilliam C Gartner: Resource Economics, Univ of Minnesota, USACharles R Goeldner: Marketing, Univ of Colorado-Boulder, USAAnton F Gosar: Geography, Univ of Ljubljana, SloveniaRodrigo Grunewald: Anthropology, Univ of Campina Grande, BrazilDogan Gursoy: Hospitality/Tourism, Washington State Univ, USAJan Vidar Haukeland: Sociology, Inst. of Transport Economics, NorwayC. Michael Hall: Social Science, Univ of Canterbury, New ZealandAndrew Holden: Environment, University of Bedfordshire, UKTzung-Cheng Huan: Outdoor Recreation, National Chiayi Univ, TaiwanJens Kr Steen Jacobsen: Sociology, Univ of Stavanger, NorwayTazim Jamal: Management, Texas A&M Univ, USAMyriam Jansen-Verbeke: Geography, Leuven Univ, BelgiumCarson L Jenkins: Economics, Univ of Strathclyde, UKLee Jolliffe: Museum, Univ of New Brunswick, CanadaMaria Kousis: Sociology, Univ of Crete, GreeceMetin Kozak: Tourism, Mugla University, TurkeyNeil Leiper: Southern Cross Univ, AustraliaChristine Lim: Economics, Univ of Waikato, New ZealandDean MacCannell: Applied Behavior Sciences, Univ of California-Davis, USAYoel Mansfeld: Geography, Univ of Haifa, IsraelDarya Maoz: Anthropology, The Centre for Academic Studies, Or Yehuda,

IsraelJerome L McElroy: Economics, Saint Mary’s College, USABob McKercher: Tourism, HongKong Polytechnic Univ, ChinaMarc L Miller: Anthropology, Univ of Washington, USAChaim Noy: Communications, IsraelLars Olov Nyberg: Geography, Mid Sweden Univ, SwedenFevzi Okumus: Management, Univ of Central Florida, USAJames Petrick: Texas A&M University, USAJohn J Pigram: Geography, Univ of New England, AustraliaAntonio Russo: Geography, Univ Rovira i Virgili, Tarragona, SpainOriol Pi-Sunyer: Anthropology, Univ of Massachusetts, USARichard Prentice: Tourism Marketing, Univ of Strathclyde, UKGreg Richards: Geography, Univ Rovirai Virgili, SpainMichael Riley: Sociology, Univ of Surrey, UKMelville Saayman: Recreation, Potchefstroom Univ, South AfricaNoel Salazar: Anthropology, University of Leuven, BelgiumCarla A Santos: Mass Communication, Univ of Illinois, USAPauline J Sheldon: Economics, Univ of Hawaii, USAErcan Sirakaya-Turk: Sustainable Development,

The University of South Carolina, USAEgon Smeral: Economics, Institute of Economic Research, AustriaGinger Smith: Communication, George Washington Univ, USAValene L Smith: Anthropology, California State Univ-Chico, USATrevor Sofield: Anthropology, Murdoch Univ, AustraliaVictor B Teye: Geography, Arizona State Univ, USAParis Tsartas: Sociology, Univ of the Agean, GreeceHazel Tucker: Social Anthropology, University of Otago, New ZealandMuzaffer Uysal: Recreation, Virginia Tech, USASoile Veijola: Sociology, Univ of Lapland, FinlandBoris Vukonic: Economics, Faculty of Economics, CroatiaGordon Waitt: Geography, Univ of Wollongong, AustraliaDoug Walker: Economics, College of Charleston, USANing Wang: Sociology, Zhongshan Univ, ChinaPaul F Wilkinson: Geography, York Univ, CanadaAllan M Williams: Geography, London Metropolitan Univ, UKShinji Yamashita: Anthropology, Univ of Tokyo, JapanJorge Zamora: Consumer Studies, Univ of Talca, Chile

*Department Head and Associate Editor

Editors represent various disciplines in order to ensure both strength and balance in Annals’ multidisciplinary approach to the studyof tourism. Annals Language Bank (Editors): Afrikaans, Arabic, Catalan, Chinese, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish,Ghanian, French, German, Greek, Hebrew, Hungarian, Indonesian, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Malay, Norwegian, Persian, Polish,Portugese, Romanian, Russian, Serbian, Slovene, Spanish, Swedish, and Turkish.

FOUNDING EDITOR

Jafar Jafari

Web: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/annals

Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 373–389, 20090160-7383/$ - see front matter � 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Printed in Great Britain

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2008.10.009www.elsevier.com/locate/atoures

THEENVIRONMENT-TOURISM NEXUS

Influence of Market Ethics

Andrew HoldenUniversity of Bedfordshire, England

Abstract: Society is at a critical juncture in its relationship with the natural environment, arelationship in which tourism has growing significance. Yet, twenty years after the BrundtlandReport, environmental policy has to date had little influence upon the workings of the tour-ism market, the supply and demand elements of which determine the ‘use’ or ‘non-use’ ofnature. Inherent to the market is its environmental ethic, that is, the extent of our recogni-tion of nature’s rights to existence. The thesis of this article is that whilst environmentalpolicy may possibly have a greater influence in the future, it is the environmental ethicsof the market that will be deterministic to the balance of the tourism-environmentrelationship. Keywords: environmental ethics, environmental economics, sustainable tour-ism. � 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION

The literature on tourism’s impacts upon the natural environment iswell-established (e.g., Mishan 1969; Mathieson and Wall 1982; Hunterand Green 1995; Mieczkowski 1995; Holden 2008) and it is not theintention to reiterate its negative and positive consequences. The rapidgrowth in demand for international tourism during the second half ofthe last century has lent a global spatial dimension to these impacts.For example, impacts of tourism on the natural environment of Antarc-tica have been observed (Hall and Wouters 1994; Hall and Johnston1995), whilst the contribution of aviation to Greenhouse Gas (GHG)emissions has become an issue of economic and environmental debate.

In the context of the society-environment relationship, which is at acritical juncture for deciding the extent that human activity is permit-ted to alter patterns of nature, our behavior and attitudes towards thenatural environment will subsequently also influence the tourism-envi-ronment nexus. A lexicon of terms depicting environmental problems,including global warming, ozone depletion, bio-diversity loss, speciesextinction, and ecosystem degradation are now interwoven into the

Andrew Holden is Professor of Environment and Tourism and Director for the Centre forResearch into the Environment and Sustainable Tourism (CREST) at the University ofBedfordshire (Putteridge Bury, Luton, LU2 8LE, England. Email: <[email protected]>). His research interests include environmental ethics; sustainable tourism develop-ment; poverty alleviation; and the tourist behavior/natural environment interface.

373

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news


374 A. Holden / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 373–389

discourse of global society. Scientific evidence suggests that thesechanges are a consequence of human activity rather than natural pro-cesses (Stern 2006; IPCC 2007). Significantly, these changes in the nat-ural environment also present a threat to the ‘‘ecosystem services’’upon which our well-being depends (Millennium Ecosystem Assess-ment 2005).

These ecosystem services include: ‘‘provisioning services’’ for exam-ple, food and water; ‘‘regulating services’’ for example, climate andflood control; ‘‘cultural services’’ that offer recreational, aestheticand spiritual benefits; and ‘‘supporting services’’, for example, photo-synthesis and nutrient recycling (ibid.). Evidently the raison d’etre oftourism is closely linked with cultural services but it is ultimately depen-dent upon the other ecosystem services, that is, recreational benefit isless likely to be obtained if there is a reduction in the quality ofprovisioning, regulating and supporting services. Subsequently, thetourism-environment relationship can be understood as being recipro-cal, tourism influencing environmental well-being which in turn im-pacts upon the characteristics and quality of tourism. The predictednumerical and spatial growth of tourism, the United Nations WorldTourism Organization (UNWTO 2007) forecast an increase in interna-tional tourism arrivals from a current level of approximately 800 mil-lion per annum to 1.6 billion per annum by 2020, implies thattourism will have an increasing global significance as a user of naturalresources in the future.

Tourism’s relationship with the natural environment is made com-plex through the involvement of a diversity of stakeholders, the vari-ance of the spatial dimension of its activities, a lack of cleardefinition of key conceptual themes, and the subsequent difficultiesof the systematic planning of its development. For example, whilstmost stakeholders in tourism would probably agree that ‘‘sustainabletourism development’’ is a desirable goal, the variety of interpretationsof what it actually is, typically lends it a reductionist approach, limitedto isolated examples of environmental initiatives and improvementsundertaken by tour operators, hotel groups or destinations. Thisshared observation of the limitations of sustainable tourism leads Saari-nen (2006:1133) to ask: ‘‘Are the present local solutions to global chal-lenges enough, and do they represent all that tourism can do?’’

Thus, twenty years after the publication of the Brundtland Report(WCED 1987), the subsequent advocating of sustainable tourism byinternational agencies including the United Nations World TourismOrganization (UNWTO), United Nations Environment Program(UNEP), United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organi-zation (UNESCO), the European Union (EU), and the World Develop-ment Bank, the extent to which tourism’s relationship with the naturalenvironment has ‘‘improved’’, however we choose to conceptualizeand measure it, is debatable and contentious.

With reference to a list of rhetorical questions concerning the suc-cess of the mitigation of the negative environmental impacts of masstourism, including; whether the majority of hotels and other tourismcompanies had now adopted environmental management systems; nat-

A. Holden / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 373–389 375

ural resource usage had been minimized and the treatment of effluentis common practice; the hundreds of millions of tourists travelingaround the world had an awareness of the impacts of their consump-tion patterns and behavior, a senior representative of the UNWTOcomments: ‘‘It would certainly be naive to pretend to give a purely po-sitive answer to all these questions. . . Progress towards sustainabledevelopment of tourism is hardly satisfactory while sustainable prac-tices are restricted to a few niche markets, with the rest of the tourismindustry keeping its priorities clearly on profit rather than sustainabil-ity’’ (Younis 2003:13).

It is subsequently argued that environmental and sustainable tourismpolicy has had relatively little influence on the workings of the tourismmarket, the main mechanism for deciding how the natural environ-ment and resources will be used for tourism. Subsequently, when con-sidering the future of the tourism-environment relationship, it isnecessary to observe the dynamics of the market, the workings of whichwill be critical in determining the balance of a symbiotic or destructivetourism-environment relationship.

MARKETS, THE ENVIRONMENT AND TOURISM

Markets act as the key global mechanism for resource allocation,bringing together buyers and sellers, giving voice to people’s valuesthat reflect their preferences (Pearce, Markandya and Barbier 1988).The basis of the supply and demand functions of the market is thatthey generate order to the wider social system through the establish-ment of an equilibrium price, which acts as a type of rationing mech-anism (Heilbroner and Thurow 1998). However, the use of price asthe tool of a rationing mechanism is problematic when no market ex-ists for a good or service, as is the case for some of the services providedby the natural environment, their consequent ‘‘zero price’’ makingthem vulnerable to over-use and exhaustion. These problems are likelyto be accentuated where resources display characteristics of open-ac-cess, that is, a lack of ownership and regulation, which at a global levelhas traditionally included the atmosphere, oceans outside territorialwaters, and the stratosphere (Pearce 1995). Examples of such resourceover-use in the context of tourism include the emission of aircraft pol-lution into the atmosphere; hotels pumping sewage into the sea; andthe mining of coral reefs for building materials.

Efforts are being made to address this lack of market for environ-mental services, most pressingly in relation to carbon emissions andassociated global warming, a problem in which aviation has increasingsignificance. Typically this takes the form of the establishment of car-bon trading schemes, for example, the EU Emission Trading Scheme(ETS) for CO2 that started in 2005, the aim of which is to help memberstates to meet their Kyoto obligations and progress towards low-carboneconomies (European Union 2005). The EU ETS represents the larg-est existing company-level scheme for trading in CO2 emissions,encompassing all 25 member states (ibid.). The second stage of the


EU ETS (2008–2012) has direct implications for tourism, with theintention to include emissions from all aircraft departing from EU air-ports within the scheme. In this case, through governmental co-opera-tion to agree limits for carbon emissions, the atmosphere haseffectively been turned from an open-access resource to a global com-mon property resource, that is, defined by Pearce (1995) as possessingan ownership structure. However, as Pearce et al (1989) noted twentyyears ago, even if markets for environmental services are eventuallygenerated, there is no guarantee this can be achieved before theyare extinguished or irreparably damaged.

Attempts can also be made to economically cost negative externali-ties and to integrate them into the market system through environmen-tal taxation in line with the ‘‘Polluter Pays Principle’’ (PPP). Yet, todate aviation fuel has remained largely exempt from most fuel taxes(Gossling, Broderick, Upham, Ceron, Dubois, Peeters and Strasdas2007), despite producing per passenger kilometer more CO2 thanany other form of transport (Dubois and Ceron 2006). Nor has inter-national aviation been included in the Kyoto Protocol or emissionsincorporated into national GHG inventories (Gossling et al 2007).Whilst the total contribution of aviation to GHG emissions is a topicof contentious political debate, for example the International AirTransport Association (IATA 2007) suggests it is 2 per cent whilst Gos-sling and Peeters (2007) estimate it to be between 3.4 to 6.8 per cent,there is little dispute about the increasing demand for air transport.Associated with this growth in demand will be increased pollution,even allowing for the continued technological improvements in theenvironmental performance of aviation. The quantity of CO2 pollutionfrom aircraft is expected to double by 2025 to between 1.2 billion to 1.4billion tonnes (Adam 2007), whilst scientific calculations indicate thatthe emissions from air travel into the upper troposphere and loweratmosphere have a larger impact upon warming than the level ofCO2 emissions would suggest (Stern 2006).

Other attempts at internalizing the negative externalities of tour-ism’s environmental impacts are noticeable by their absence, not leastbecause of the difficulties of disassociating tourism impacts from otheranthropogenic causes and inherent spatial discontinuities (Hunter andGreen 1995; Mieczkowski 1995). One exception is the case of the Bale-aric Islands in the Mediterranean, the government of which imple-mented an eco-tax on tourists in 2002 at a rate of one Euro pernight, with the aim of funding environmental improvements includingheritage conservation and the protection of land for national parks.However, following the election of the centre-right Popular Party a yearlater in 2003, the tax was rescinded, much to the delight of foreign touroperators and the Balearic’s business community, the majority ofwhom were opposed to the scheme (Templeton 2003). This oppositionwas founded upon reduced demand following the imposition of thetax caused by tourists choosing to visit competing destinations offeringa more competitive price.

An alternative approach to mitigate tourism’s negative environmen-tal impacts is to attempt to control demand as an objective of policy, in


essence a type of rationing of the resource. Two main approaches maybe used to achieve this, ‘‘price control’’ and ‘‘quota’’ control measures.Price control measures rely upon fixing a higher price for resource usethan that determined by market equilibrium, subsequently reducingdemand. A quota control system places a restriction of access on tour-ism stakeholders to natural resources. An example of this approach isthe tourism policy of Bhutan, which limits the permitted number oftourists to a maximum of 20000 per annum, all of whom have to paya fee of US$ 200 per day during their stay. Out of this sum the govern-ment is allocated US$ 65 per day, whilst the limited number ofgovernment approved tour operators use the remainder to provideservices for the tourists and make a profit (Brunet, Bauer, De Lacyand Tshering 2001; Dalrymple 2008).

However, the use of price or quota control measures to restrict accessof usage is usually reliant upon government interference in the marketplace. Given the neo-liberal emphasis of contemporary political econ-omy, such interference may be regarded as politically inappropriate,as was the case in the Balearics. The case of the Balearics also illustratesthe price elasticity of mass tourism demand, implying that if market val-ues do in fact represent people’s preferences of how to maximize util-ity, there would seem to be little concern over the impacts of tourismon the environment.

However, the ability of markets to be able to accurately reflect theplurality of nature’s values in a meaningful way, to permit an individualto make a fully informed and purposive choice between the alternativeuses of scarce resources is questionable. As Holmes (1988) observes,nature carries a range of values alongside the economic, including alife-support value; re-creational value; scientific value; aesthetic value;genetic-diversity value; historical value; and life value. A concept thathas been developed in ecological economics in an attempt to reflectthe importance of nature in fulfilling a wide range of human needsis ‘‘natural capital’’. The concept emphasizes biophysical and geophys-ical process and their outcomes, for example, fish in the sea, oil in theground, in the context of their relationship to human needs over time(Butcher, 2006). In an early reference to natural capital, Pearce et al(1989:42) suggests that the maintenance of the services of the naturalenvironment is essential for the sustaining of economic livelihoods.Yet, two decades later, difficulties still exist in translating the worthof natural capital into market values (Butcher 2006). Nevertheless,the concept has relevance as a signifier of the reliance of developmentand well-being upon nature.

Even if it should prove possible in the future to establish markets forthe services provided by nature for society, the ‘use’ of nature remainsan ethical question as much as one of economic efficiency. As Hollandand Cox (1992:25) comment in the context of the natural environ-ment: ‘‘An important contribution which the philosopher has to makeis to remind us that society must decide what is right, before decidingwhat is efficient’’. Implicit to this statement is our collective environ-mental ethic and the ‘‘rights’’ of nature, which Holland and Cox(ibid.) argue are not subjective and sacrificial, as is the case for ‘‘eco-


nomic value’’. Hence, it is argued that in an attempt to understand therelationship between tourism and nature, it is necessary to clarify theethical basis of society’s relationship with the environment.

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS AND THE TOURISM MARKET

In the view of Nash (1989), the idea that the human-nature relation-ship should be treated as a moral issue represents one of the mostextraordinary developments in recent intellectual history, having po-tential future implications for thought and behavior comparable tothat of the ideal of human rights at the time of democratic revolutionin the eighteenth century. Similarly, to emphasize the significance ofwhat he believes to be the beginning of a contemporary ‘‘moralchange’’ in attitudes to global warming, Attenborough (2007) makesa comparison to the ethical shift in how slavery was perceived 200 yearsago. He suggests that it will be very difficult to impose limits on peo-ple’s behavior, such as the freedom to fly, without individuals possess-ing a stronger environmental ethic.

Although the need to consider our ethical relationship with nature isa contemporary issue, concerns over the effects of industrial develop-ment upon nature were already being expressed in the 19th centuryby notable social theorists, for example, Henry Thoreau and John Ru-skin. However, it was Aldo Leopold (1949) who overtly expressed thehuman-nature relationship in the context of ethics. In his concept ofthe ‘‘land ethic’’, he comments (1949:219): ‘‘In short, a land ethicchanges the role of Homo Sapiens from conqueror of the land-com-munity to plain member and citizen of it. It implies respect for his fel-low-members, and also respect for the community as such.’’

This concept of a land-community has synergy and resonance withindigenous belief systems and practices. That genealogies should existbeyond the human to incorporate the non-human, making humanspart of the landscape rather than separate from it, is common to manyindigenous cultures (Whitt, Roberts, Norman and Grieves 2001). Sub-sequently, it is argued that the spirituality of the non-human world, re-flected in practices such as animism and shamanism, purports to amore caring attitude towards nature than is inherent to humanism.Yet, the extent of the bio-centrism often attributed to indigenous cul-tures is contentious. According to Fennell (2008) this perspective isbased upon little empirical evidence, whilst Pepper (1996) notes thatcounter-views exist to the First Nation Peoples of North America livingas part of an extended community of animals and humans. Inherent tothis counter-position, are accounts of the over-culling of animals; thediscovery of palaeo-biologists of extensive forest and fauna devastationby indigenous peoples before European contact; and the perspectivethat the principal rationale for stewardship was based upon a technicalvis-a-vis moral rationale (Pepper 1996; Fennell 2008).

Included in the concerns of Leopold (1949) was the role of the traveltrade, which he viewed as promoting access to nature in bulk, conse-quently reducing the opportunities for solitude (Hollinshead 1990).However, despite the recent growth in considered literature on ethics


and tourism, for example, Butcher (2003), Fennell (2006), Fennelland Malloy (2007), Hall and Brown (2006), Smith and Duffy (2003),Yaman and Gurel (2006), Lovelock (2008), the balance of ethicalconcerns remains weighted towards the anthropocentric. Nevertheless,both Holden (2003) and Macbeth (2005) recognize the importance ofenvironmental ethics to the tourism-environment relationship. Holden(ibid.) stresses the need for a non-rationalized approach to valuingnature from tourism stakeholders, whilst Macbeth (2005) emphasizesthe requirement for tourism policy makers, and it may be added allstakeholders, to have a reflexive understanding of ethical issues ofthe environment in practice.

Despite the limited development of a conceptual framework for envi-ronmental ethics relevant to tourism, the growth in philosophicalthinking about the moral standing of nature during the last four dec-ades, has led to a large array of diverse views (Booth 1998). However,thematic perspectives can be recognized, categorized by their extentof the recognition of the ‘‘rights’’ of nature to an existence.

‘‘Instrumentalism’’ views nature as having no rights to existence,subsequently determining that human impacts upon nature are unwor-thy of consideration beyond their potential harm to the interests ofother humans, a position supported by a Cartesian philosophy thatstresses our moral superiority to other beings (Nash 1989). Whilst,the non-recognition of the rights of nature to an existence is an ex-treme interpretation of anthropocentrism, a belief in our moral supe-riority over nature provides a rationale for the prioritization ofeconomic growth over conservation. Examples of this philosophy inpractice includes General Franco’s policy for tourism development inSpain, the Plan Nacional de Estabilization of 1959, which held aninherent creed of ‘‘crecimiento al cualquier precio’’ or ‘‘growth at anyprice’’. Similarly, the development of Cancun in Mexico from a villagehousing 12 Maya families in the 1970s to a resort receiving 2.6 millionvisitors per annum, in the process causing the destruction of rainfor-ests and mangroves, the filling of lagoons, and the leveling of sanddunes (Lynas 2003). is representative of an instrumental approach totourism development.

The converse ethical position to instrumentalism is ‘‘libertarianextension’’, in which all sentient and non-sentient beings right ‘tobe’ is recognized, independent of any value bestowed on them byhumankind. Important to the rationale of this thinking is the workof Stone (1972) who drew attention to the rights and legal status of sen-tient and non-sentient being’s in his seminal ‘‘Should Trees HaveStanding?’’ He comments (1972:450): ‘‘It is not inevitable, nor is itwise, that natural objects should have no rights to seek redress on theirown behalf. It is no answer to say that streams and forests cannot havestanding because streams and forests cannot speak.’’

The application of this latter ethic as the rationale for environmentallaw could have dramatic implications for tourism development, chal-lenging an established legal system that is centered upon humanrights. The concept of ‘‘Wild law’’ or ‘Earth jurisprudence’ recognizesthe rights of an ‘‘Earth community’’, in which humans as part of that


community cannot ignore the rights of the rest of it (Thornton 2007).Under this law for example, a hotel owner could be sued on behalf ofthe diversity of species belonging to a coral reef, whose habitat wasbeing destroyed by sewage emitted from the hotel. If the species ofthe coral reef won, the hotel would have to find other means to disposeof the sewage, as the right to existence would be paramount.

The middle ground between ‘‘instrumentalism’’ and ‘‘libertarianextension’’ is occupied by the ‘‘conservation’’ ethic, which recognizesour reliance upon nature and values nature for our own well-being. Inthe view of Vardy and Grosch (1999) this is the diktat of society’s moralreasoning about nature; the conservation ethic being central to envi-ronmental policy as exemplified in the Brundtland Report’s (WCED1987) advocating of natural resource conservation for the benefit offuture generations. Similarly, Holden (2003) suggests that the conser-vation ethic represents the moral reasoning of most tourism stakehold-ers, as demonstrated by the then World Tourism Organization’s (WTO2001) ‘‘Global Code of Ethics for Tourism’’ (GCET), Article 3 of whichstates: ‘‘All the stakeholders in tourism development should safeguardthe natural environment with a view to achieving sound, continuousand sustainable economic growth satisfying equitably the needs andaspirations of future generations’’ (WTO 2001:3).

However, judging by the marginal improvements in the tourism-envi-ronment relationship (Lynas 2003) and the reductionist approach tosustainable tourism (Saarinen 2006) during the last two decades, it issuggested that environmental policy has to date had relatively little ef-fect on the workings of the tourism market. Nevertheless, an evidenttrend is for some tourism suppliers to demonstrate a commitment toenvironmental conservation and protection. A significant innovationis ‘‘corporate social responsibility’’ (CSR), the motivation for whichis uncertain, but would seem to represent a combination of environ-mental altruism, a need for market competitiveness and a medium tolong term business strategy. According to the UNEP (2005:8) theadvantages of CSR for tourism suppliers are, it: ‘‘can have significantbusiness advantages for a company, in terms of its cost savings, marketshare, reputation and preservation of its main business assets—theplaces and cultures their clients are willing to pay to visit’’.

To this list can be added that CSR or the adoption of other environ-mental management practices for example, environmental auditingand codes of conduct, demonstrate an attempt at voluntary environ-mental regulation, which may be influential in counteracting moves to-wards government regulation of the industry. For example in Europe,members of the European Parliament have called upon the tourismindustry to ‘‘face up to its responsibilities’’, pointing out that consum-ers are becoming increasingly aware of ethical issues and expectedassurances over worker exploitation, environmental impacts and chil-dren’s rights (Searle 2005). An increased ethical awareness is also re-flected in industry advertising, for instance, a European low-costairline in its own in-flight magazine stressed its environmental creden-tials about its fuel efficiency and the quietness of its aircraft under the


title: ‘‘Do you care about the environment? So do we’’ (EasyJet2007:18).

Conversely it can be asked, ‘‘What if we didn’t? Would you?’’ Therewould appear to be a presumption within some tourism organizationsthat consumers are interested in their environmental credentials as thisinfluences buying behavior. Whilst this may be true to varying degreesin markets for other goods and services, what evidence is there of astrong enough environmental ethic in the tourism market to influencedemand? Although Poon (1993) had observed the emergence of ‘‘newtourism’’ and ‘‘new tourists’’ by the early 1990s, an implicit character-istic of which was environmental concern, sustainable practices still re-main the preserve of market niches (Younis 2003). The environmentalconviction of these market niches has also been questioned, for exam-ple ‘‘ecotourism’’ has been criticized as a sham by Wheeller (1993,2005), referring to it instead as ‘‘egotourism’’ with the potential tohave similar negative causal effects as mass tourism.

Existing empirical evidence to support or disprove a strengtheningenvironmental ethic within the tourism market is limited and some-times contradictory. A comprehensive environmental attitudinal surveyof 1192 households in the United Kingdom found that although fourout of five households believed that climate change will affect them,and the same number believed that climate change was already havingan effect, only 22 per cent were willing to fly less, defined as flying toone holiday destination rather than two per annum (Energy SavingTrust, 2007). Based upon their willingness to forego personal benefitsfor the sake of the environment, it was the second most unpopularstatement out of five statements presented to the interviewees, the firstbeing a willingness not to purchase a plasma television to protect theenvironment to which only 21 per cent responded positively. In com-parison, 73 per cent were willing to: ‘‘Stop leaving the tap runningwhen brushing teeth’’; 56 per cent were willing to: ‘‘Give up drivingwhen able to walk’’; and 52 per cent were willing to: ‘‘Cook more localproduce’’ (ibid.). Further in-depth analysis was not conducted to un-cover the reasons that lay behind these responses, nor was the existinglevel of awareness of the contribution of aircraft emissions to globalwarming ascertained.

It is observable from the responses to the statements, that thereseems to be a propensity for a higher degree of reluctance to relin-quish activities associated with pleasure than other types. Similarly, Bec-ken (2007) found reluctance from tourists to take voluntary initiativesand be pro-active to address the global impact of air-travel. Based uponfocus group meetings with 32 tourists in New Zealand, she found that alow level of awareness of air travel’s contribution to climate change ex-isted, and that the mitigation of negative impacts was viewed to be theresponsibility of governments and organizations vis-a-vis the individual.

Conversely Asthana and McKie (2005) suggest that there are agrowing number of concerned individuals who are turning away frominternational flights. However, the comments of interviewees indicate adivergence of opinion over who has responsibility for taking action toreduce the demand for flying. For example, one interviewee replied:


‘‘With the government (author’s note: United Kingdom) planning totriple aviation in the next 30 years, the only thing you can do is to takeindividual action’’; whilst another commented: ‘‘Flights are now unre-alistically cheap. It makes it difficult for people to say no to them. Thegovernment should take that decision away from people’’. Implicit tothese two contradictory statements is that whilst individual action isnecessary, the attractiveness of flying may be too strong, making coer-cion from government necessary to reduce demand.

Research undertaken by Chesshyre (2005) into the motivations ofwomen for participating in ‘‘responsible tourism’’ also provides a ri-cher understanding of attitudes and behavior towards the natural envi-ronment. The results reveal a level of culpability about flying, beingviewed as a type of behavior that is discordant with the respondents’usually environmentally conscious lifestyles. Comments included:‘‘I’ve always been quite conscientious about my impact upon the envi-ronment’’; ‘‘I fly a lot and that makes me feel guilty’’; and ‘‘We’re plan-ning to go to Australia next year, but I use a carbon-neutralizingscheme to offset the emission charge’’ (Chesshyre 2005:4). The extentto which these travelers would be willing to deny themselves the plea-sures of tourism for protection of the natural environment was lessclear. The only direct reference to foregoing tourism was made byone respondent who commented: ‘‘The only way to preserve thingsis not to go there at all. But you have to draw the line between com-plete restraint and enjoying something. It should be about having aminimal impact’’ (ibid.). A common approach of the sample was to tra-vel but to attempt to minimize their negative impacts, for examplethrough using less environmentally damaging modes of transportwhere feasible or contributing to carbon off-setting schemes, whilstsimultaneously maximizing their economic contributions to localcommunities.

Ethical concern over the impacts of flying has also been displayed bythe founders of two of the best-selling guide books series for indepen-dent travelers, the ‘‘Rough Guide’’ and the ‘‘Lonely Planet Series’’,which collectively sell 6 million copies per annum (Barkham 2006).Reflecting on concern over ‘‘casual flying’’, Mark Ellingham the foun-der of the ‘‘Rough Guide’’, comments: ‘‘We’ve got a responsibility tomake people aware of the information about climate change so peoplehave a less casual attitude towards flying. We want to show that twocompanies who are direct rivals feel this is an issue important enoughto coordinate and cooperate on’’ (Barkham 2006:3). Ellingham com-pares tourism to the tobacco industry in the sense of the denial of itstrue impacts by the industry, notably the effects carbon emissions fromflying are having on global warming. In new editions of the guides,warnings about the impacts of flying on global warming will appear. Be-side a demonstration of environmental culpability, the ethical stance isnotable in representing a combined approach of two market competi-tors towards a universal benefit. Alongside providing information onless environmentally damaging travel options to air travel where possi-ble, other suggested behavioral changes to reduce negative environ-


mental impacts include flying less but staying longer in destinations,and the donation of money to carbon offsetting schemes.

However, although carbon off-setting may go someway to assuagingenvironmental guilt, such schemes have received a number of criti-cisms, including: varying calculations by different organizations ofthe amount of CO2 emitted by the same flights; up to 40 percent ofthe donations being used to cover administrative and salary costs; peo-ple in developing countries being forcibly removed from their land forthe cultivation of new forests; the planting of non-native trees in mono-culture plantations causing ecosystem disturbance; and that trees onlyabsorb CO2 when they are living, subsequently releasing it when theydie or are burnt (Gossling et al 2007; Robbins 2006). At present carbonoff-setting is in an embryonic stage of usage by the tourism industryand tourists as Gossling et al (2007:241) comment: ‘‘Voluntary com-pensation is still far from firmly rooted in the tourism industry andamongst tourists’’.

Whilst flying has global environmental implications, the ethicalbehavior of tourists at a local level will also be influential in shapingthe tourism-environment relationship, as the impacts of tourism aretypically associated with the cumulative effects of visitation. Whetherthey are consciously aware of it or not, each person has ethical posi-tions which guide their decision-making on moral issues (Macbeth2005), and their subsequent actions. As one tourist commented on anature-based experience to Kilimanjaro; ‘‘I went on a trek up Kilimanj-aro in Tanzania, and what struck me was the amount of rubbish there.We were expressly told not to leave any rubbish, and yet people did. Iwas disgusted that people didn’t listen. You feel that you put the effortin—why can’t everyone else do the same?’’ (Chesshyre 2005:4). Theimplication of this statement is that a similar environmental ethic isnot shared by all the tourists, even those who may be viewed as partic-ipating in types of tourism that could be construed as being environ-mentally centered. This observation is supported by researchundertaken by Zografos and Allcroft (2007) into the environmentalvalues and attitudes held by people thought of as ecotourists becauseof a propensity to visit areas of natural beauty. They discovered thatthere were high levels of variance between the tourists based uponparameters relating to attitudes and action towards nature; supportfor species equality; level of concern for the earth and its limits; anda belief in the level of human skills and development to deal with envi-ronmental problems.

The influence of an environmental ethic on behavior and impactsin situ can be demonstrated through the example of visitor to a forest,who recognizing the intrinsic value of the nature and wildlife avoidsmaking unnecessary noise out of respect for other sentient beings,even when it is certain there are no other people around. In contrast,the visitor who places little value on wilderness beyond its anthropo-centric benefits, may decline from unnecessary noise or disturbanceif other humans are present but may otherwise feel at liberty to makeas much noise as they wish, provided it does not interfere with theenjoyment of others. Emphasis in the latter case is placed upon duty


to other humans whilst in the former it is placed upon duty to all sen-tient beings.

CONCLUSION

Given the expanding spatial boundaries of tourism and its environ-mental impacts, it represents a significant agent for change in the con-text of society’s relationship with nature. Its impacts which havetraditionally been focused upon at a destination and regional level,are now understood to have consequence on a global scale, notablyas an outcome of aviation’s contribution to GHG emissions. The neg-ative externalities of the effects of resultant global warming not onlythreatens the livelihoods of many people, particularly the poor ofdeveloping countries, but also the well-being of eco-systems and thecontinued existence of many species of flora and fauna. It is arguedthat there is a strong propensity for tourism and aviation to be a focusof ethical debate as society seeks to re-evaluate its position relative tonature.

Accepting capitalism as the dominant economic ideology; the mar-ket system will have a central role in the representation of the ethicaland economic values of nature. The market is given higher advocacythrough the forces of neo-liberalism, which favor the minimization ofgovernment interference in it. For example, the strong oppositionfrom the tourism industry to the Balearic government’s attempt to im-pose an eco-tax, illustrates the challenges governments may face to ac-tion that is perceived to reduce market competitiveness for the benefitof the natural environment.

Subsequently, it is suggested that the interaction between the indus-try and the consumer will be the defining relationship in deciding theoutcomes of the interaction between tourism and the natural environ-ment. The strength of the market’s environmental ethic; the willing-ness of stakeholders to trade-off individual benefit for the greaterenvironmental good, will be instrumental in deciding the extent oftourism’s impacts upon nature. In a system that encourages individual-ity, consumption and freedom of choice, symbolized by the right to tra-vel for recreational purposes, a move towards what may be regarded asa more ascetic lifestyle will pose a major challenge.

Tensions over the loss of personal benefit or utility as a consequenceof a stronger environmental ethic are evident in the demand for flying.Whilst there is research (Becken 2007; Energy Saving Trust 2007) thatsuggests a reluctance to voluntarily reduce participation in flying, thereis also evidence (Asthana and McKie 2007) of the beginning of a shiftaway from its use for recreational purposes. If aviation becomes a majorsource of GHG emissions, and the level of public debate over the ethicsof flying increases, it is not inconceivable that the increase of demandfor flying experienced over the last 50 years may begin to reverse. Un-likely as this may seem at present, using the analogy of the tobaccoindustry, the knowledge of the harmful effects of a particular activitycan lead to behavioral changes. Whilst, the tourist who is willing to


fly less presently represents a minority, changes in market behavior arelikely to be incremental and progressive rather than sudden.

However, the ability of technological innovation to mitigate negativeimpacts in the face of increasing consumer demand is debatable. Forexample in the case of the aviation industry, even if a non-carbon jetfuel became commercially viable, there can be no assurance that itwould not have unforeseen long-term negative environmental or eco-nomic consequences. For instance, the cultivation of maize for ethanolproduction to use as a bio-fuel is a contributory factor to increasinggrain prices, having implications for the future of world food consump-tion(Vidal 2007). Nor would the use of non-carbon aviation fuel ad-dress problems of noise and local air pollution, or land-use andecosystem changes, which characterize airport development.

It is optimistic to expect that an approach reliant upon technologicalinnovation and improved management will provide the solutions toenvironmental problems resulting from tourism. Whilst technologicaladvancement has a key role to play in the creation of a more balancedsociety-environment relationship, critically important is the behavior ofindividuals and governments in combination with science. For exam-ple, it was through a partnership of government action to limit chloro-fluorocarbon (CFC) use, chemical companies’ innovation to find anenvironmentally benign alternative to CFCs, and a consumer boycottof CFC emitting products for example, aerosols, that the growth ofthe hole in the ozone layer has been arrested.

However, this partnership of government policy, industrial innova-tion, and change in consumer behavior has not yet been witnessedin the tourism market. Rather, the relationship between the tourismindustry, tourists and governments is at cross-roads of confusing signalsthat may or may not imply change. Nevertheless, whilst the principle ofcarpe diem may remain attractive to some, tourism cannot exist in a voidof connectivity with the changing dynamics of the wider society-envi-ronment relationship.

The effects of changes in this relationship are beginning to filter intothe tourism market. Notably, it would seem that the days of tourismbeing free from constraints of global environmental policy are limited.Aviation will be affected by its inclusion in the follow-up agreement toKyoto, as it will by its inclusion in the next stage of the EU’s ETS agree-ment. Tourism businesses will also eventually be subject to carbon trad-ing schemes and have to look to reduce GHG emissions in line withagreed quota systems. At an individual level, it is not inconceivable thatin the future we will have personal carbon allowances, limiting ouropportunities to travel without the incursion of extra cost.

Nevertheless, environmental policy takes time to be implemented,whilst in the meantime market forces will continue to determine pat-terns of tourism development. It is suggested that the conservationethic has established itself in the market and that there is an embryonicprogression towards a stronger sense of duty to nature. If an environ-mental ethic founded upon the intrinsic right of nature ‘‘to be’’,should become established in the consumer market in the future, thentourism is likely to be different. The desire to travel long distances will


be constrained by our duty to nature, our behavior in natural environ-ments will be more orientated to reducing negative impacts than atpresent, and sentient and non-sentient beings will have legal rightsto representation and redress when their interests are threatened bytourism development. As unlikely as perhaps this seems at present,the thoughts of John Stuart Mill quoted by Nash (1989:8) are apposite:‘‘every great movement must experience three stages: ridicule, discus-sion, adoption’’.

REFERENCES

Adam, D.2007 Flights Reach Record Levels Despite Warnings Over Climate Change.

London: The Guardian May 9, p. 3.Asthana, A., and R. McKie

2005 Rising Number of Greens Ditch Cheap Air Travel. London: The ObserverMay 1, p. 6.

Attenborough, R.2007 A Change in the Moral Climate. London: The Guardian June 2, p. 6.

Barkham, P.2006 Oops, We Helped Ruin the Planet. London: The Guardian March 4, p. 3.

Becken, S.2007 Tourists’ Perception of International Air Travel’s Impact on the Global

Climate and Potential Climate Change Policies. Journal of SustainableTourism 15:351–368.

Booth, E. D.1998 The Environmental Consequences of Growth. London: Routledge.

Brunet, S., J. Bauer, T. De Lacy, and K. Tshering2001 Tourism Development in Bhutan: Tensions between Tradition and

Modernity. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 9:243–263.Butcher, J.

2003 The Moralization of Tourism: Sun, Sand. . .. . .and Saving the World?London: Routledge.

2006 Natural Capital and the Advocacy of Ecotourism as Sustainable Develop-ment. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 14:529–544.

Chesshyre, T.2005 Lean, Keen and Green. London: The Times Travel Supplement August 27,

pp. 4–5.Dalrymple, W.

2008 What Use is Democracy to Idyllic Bhutan? The Daily Telegraph. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news. Sources 23 March 2008

Dubois, G., and J. P. Ceron2006 Tourism/Leisure Greenhouse Gas Emission forecasts for 2050: Factors for

Change in France. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 14:171–191.EasyJet

2007 Do You Care About the Environment? So Do We. Inflight, July:181.London: EasyJet.

Energy Saving Trust2007 Green Barometer: Measuring Environmental Attitudes. London: Energy

Saving Trust.European Union

2005 EU Action Against Climate Change. Brussels: European Commission.Fennell, A. D.

2006 Tourism Ethics. Clevedon: Channel View Publications.2008 Ecotourism and the Myth of Indigenous Stewardship. Journal ofSustainable Tourism 16:129–141.




Fennell, A. D., and D. C. Malloy2007 Codes of Ethics in Tourism: Practice, Theory, Synthesis. Clevedon:

Channel View Publications.Gossling, S., J. Broderick, P. Upham, P. J. Ceron, G. Dubois, P. Peeters, and W.

Strasdas2007 Voluntary Carbon Offsetting Schemes for Aviation: Efficiency, Credibility

and Sustainable Tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 15:223–248.Gossling, S., and P. Peeters

2007 ‘It Does Not Harm the Environment!’ An Analysis of Industry Discourseson Tourism, Air Travel and the Environment. Journal of Sustainable Tourism15:402–417.

Hall, D., and F. Brown2006 Tourism and Welfare: Ethics, Responsibility and Sustained Well-being.

Wallingford: CAB International.Hall, C. M., and M. Johnston

1995 Polar Tourism: Tourism in the Arctic and Antarctic Regions. Chichester:John Wiley.

Hall, C. M., and M. Wouters1994 Managing Nature Tourism in the Sub-Antarctic. Annals of Tourism

Research 21:355–374.Heilbroner, R., and L. Thurow

1998 Economics Explained. New York: Touchstone.1998 Economics Explained. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Holden, A.2003 In Need of New Environmental Ethics for Tourism. Annals of Tourism

Research 30:92–108.2008 Environment and Tourism (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

Holland, A., and B. J. Cox1992 The Valuing of Environmental Goods: A Modest Proposal. In Valuing the

Environment: Economic Approaches to Environmental Valuation, A. Cokerand C. Richards, eds., pp. 12–27. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.

Hollinshead, K.1990 The Ethics of Ennoblement: A Review of Leopold on Leisure and of

Callicott on Leopold. Society and Natural Resources 3:373–383.Holmes, R. III,

1988 Environmental Ethics: Duties to and Values in the Natural World.Philadelphia: Temple Press.

Hunter, C., and H. Green1995 Tourism and the Environment: A Sustainable Relationship? London:

Routledge.IATA

2007 It’s Growing. But It Will Still Be Small in 2050. http://www.iata.org/whatwedo/environment/campaign/bonsai. Accessed 11.07.07.

IPCC2007 Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science (Basic Summary for Policy-

makers). Geneva: International Panel on Climate Change.Leopold, A.

1949 A Sand County Almanac. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Lynas, M.

2003 Should I Stay or Should I Go? The Geographical December:100–104.Lovelock, B.

2008 Ethical Travel Decisions: Travel Agents and Human Rights. Annals ofTourism Research 35:338–358.

Macbeth, J.2005 Towards an Ethics Platform for Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research

32:962–984.Mathieson, A., and G. Wall

1982 Tourism: Economic, Physical and Social Impacts. Harlow: Longman.Mieczkowski, Z.

1995 Environmental Issues of Tourism and Recreation. Lanham: UniversityPress of America.

http://www.iata.org/whatwedo/environment/campaign/bonsai

http://www.iata.org/whatwedo/environment/campaign/bonsai


Millennium Ecosystem Assessment2005 Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis. Washington DC: Island

Press.Mishan, E. J.

1969 The Costs of Economic Growth. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Nash, R. F.

1989 The Rights of Nature: A History of Environmental Ethics. Wisconsin: TheUniversity of Wisconsin Press.

Pearce, D., A. Markandya, and B. E. Barbier1989 Blueprint for a Green Economy. London: Earthscan Publications.

Pearce, D.1995 Blueprint 4: Capturing Global Environmental Value. London: Earthscan

Publications.Pepper, D.

1996 Modern Environmentalism: An Introduction. London: Routledge.Poon, A.

1993 Tourism, Technology and Competitive Strategies. Wallingford: CABInternational.

Robbins, T.2006 The Great Green Rip-off? London: The Observer Travel Supplement

December. The Observer Travel Supplement December, pp. 1–2.Saarinen, J.

2006 Traditions of Sustainability in Tourism Studies. Annals of TourismResearch 33:1121–1140.

Searle, R.2005 Disregard Ethics at Your Peril. London: Travel Trade Gazette 24 June.

Travel Trade Gazette 24 June, p. 20.Smith, M., and R. Duffy

2003 The Ethics of Tourism Development. London: Routledge.Stern Report

2006 Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change. London: HMTreasuryOffice.

Stone, D. C.1972 Should Trees Have Standing? Towards Legal Rights for Natural Objects.

Southern California Law Review 25:450–501.Templeton, T.

2003 A Kick in the Balearics for Eco-tax. London: The Observer, June 8. TheObserver, June 8, p. 5.

Thornton, J.2007 Can Lawyers Save the World. The Ecologist June. The Ecologist June, pp.

38–46.UNEP

2005 Integrating Sustainability into Business: A Management Guide forResponsible Tour Operations. Paris: United Nations EnvironmentProgrammed.

UNWTO2007 Tourism Highlights 2006. Madrid: United Nations World Tourism

Organization.Vardy, P., and P. Grosch

1999 The Puzzle of Ethics. London: Harper Collins.Vidal, J.

2007 Global Food Crisis Looms as Climate Change and Fuel Shortages Bite.London: The Guardian November 3. The Guardian November 3, p. 27.

WCED1987 Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wheeller, B.1993 Sustaining the Ego. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 1:121–129.2005 Ecotourism/Egotourism and Development. In Nature-Based Tourism in

Peripheral Areas, C. M. Hall and S. Boyd, eds., pp. 263–272. Clevedon:Channel View Publications.


Whitt, A. L., M. Roberts, W. Norman, and V. Grieves2001 Indigenous Perspectives. In A Companion to Environmental Philosophy,

D. Jamieson, ed., pp. 3–20. Malden: Blackwell.WTO

2001 Global Code of Ethics for Tourism. Madrid: World Tourism Organization.Yaman, H. R., and E. Gurel

2006 Ethical Ideologies of Tourism Marketers. Annals of Tourism Research33:470–489.

Younis, E.2003 Sustainable Tourism: World Trends and Challenges Ahead. In Nature-

Based Tourism, Environment and Land Management, R. Buckley, C. Pickeringand D. B. Weaver, eds., pp. 11–16. Wallingford: CAB International.

Zografos, C., and D. Allcroft2007 The Environmental Values of Potential Ecotourists: A Segmentation Study.

Journal of Sustainable Tourism 15:44–65.

Submitted 23 November 2007. Resubmitted 1 June 2008. Final Version 26 August 2008.Accepted 5 October 2008. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor: Kadir Din

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com




VALUE, SATISFACTION AND BEHAVIORAL INTENTIONSIN AN ADVENTURE TOURISM CONTEXT

Paul WilliamsAmerican University of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

Geoffrey N. SoutarUniversity of Western Australia, Australia

Abstract: The growth in demand for adventure tourism has been significant in recent years.This study applied an existing marketing framework and empirically examined the relation-ships between value, satisfaction, and behavioural intentions in an adventure tourism context.Four hundred and two respondents provided their perceptions of the value for an adventuretour in Australia. Customer value was conceptualised as a multidimensional construct andindeed three value dimensions had strong, positive influences on customer satisfaction andbehavioural intentions in an adventure tourism setting. Value-for-money was prominent,but also emotional value and novelty value were also significant predictors of satisfactionand future intentions. The present study suggests that researchers should take a broader,holistic view of value in a tourism context. Keywords: customer value, satisfaction, intentions,adventure tourism. � 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION

Adventure tourism has grown significantly in recent years, becominga major niche within the special interest tourism sector, and is said tobe the fastest growing outdoor tourism market sector, with an esti-mated annual growth of fifteen percent (Buckley 2007; Travel IndustryAssociation 2005; Cater 2005; Burak 1998). Indeed, approximately ahalf of American adults (98 million) took an adventure vacation inthe last five years of the twentieth century (Tsui 2000) and a quarterof the European package tour market options have an adventure travelcontext (Keeling 2003). While statistics vary due to the diversity ofadventure consumption, it appears adventure travel’s growth is signifi-cant and likely to continue.

Most adventure research has been undertaken in the leisure sci-ence, adventure education and adventure recreation fields (see forexample: Hall and Weiler 1992; Ewert and Hollenhorst 1989; Ewertand Shultis 1997). In recent years, there have also been a number

Paul Williams is an Associate Professor of Marketing at the School of Business andManagement, American University of Sharjah, (University City, Sharjah, United ArabEmirates, E-mail: <[email protected]>). His main research interests are the links betweenquality, value, and customer satisfaction in the services sector, in particular the tourismindustry. Geoffrey Soutar is Professor of Marketing at the University of Western Australia,Crawley, Western Australia, Australia. Geoff has research interests include the marketing ofservices, especially educational services, the marketing of technology, the role of design inmarketing, and service quality management.

413

414 P. Williams, G.N. Soutar / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 413–438

of notable research contributions specific to adventure tourism (seefor example: Buckley 2007; Page, Bentley and Walker 2005; Swar-brooke, Beard, Leckie and Pomfret 2003; Weber 2001; Sung, Morri-son and O’Leary 1997). To date, however, there have been few, ifany, research studies into the behaviour patterns of adventure tour-ists. What are the needs, wants and expectations of adventure tour-ists? What do they want from their adventure experiences? Whatmotivates them? How often do they want to undertake such experi-ences? What gives them satisfaction? What makes them come backfor more? What are the marketing implications of adventure tourism?The present study was an attempt to answer some of these questionsand used a recognised services marketing framework to examine therelationships between adventure tourists’ perceptions of value, satis-faction and future intentions.

From a services marketing perspective, customer value is a criticalelement in consumers’ consumption and decision making behaviour(Zeithaml 1988; Bolton and Drew 1991; Sweeney, Soutar and Johnson1999). However, it has received considerably less attention than servicequality or satisfaction (Woodruff 1997). While customer value researchhas emerged as a broad and dynamic body of knowledge (Woodruff1997), much of the research to-date has focussed on consumer retailproducts (e.g. Bolton and Drew 1991; Dodds, Monroe and Grewal1991; Chang and Wildt 1994; Sweeney et al 1999; Jayanti and Ghosh1996). In these situations, a utilitarian perspective of customer valuehas been accepted, as value is measured as a trade-off between benefitsand sacrifices, (Zeithaml 1988; Dodds et al 1991). The current study,however, had a services focus, in which perceptions of value differdue to the risk and uncertainty consumers face when considering ser-vices (Murray and Schlacter 1990; Zeithaml 1981; Petrick 2002). Con-sequently, a multidimensional customer value framework, whichincluded utilitarian and socio-psychological perspectives (Sheth, New-man and Gross 1991; Sweeney and Soutar 2001; Woodruff 1997), wasused to capture the complexity of adventure tourism experiences.The study recognised the importance of customer value from a servicesmarketing perspective and examined the construct in an adventuretourism context.

ADVENTURE TOURISM AND VALUE RESEARCH

The Nature of Adventure Tourism

A number of research studies have investigated the rapidly growingadventure tourism domain. More specifically, research has focussedon adventure tourism definitions (Weber 2001; Sung et al 1997; Halland Weiler 1992); the structure of the adventure tourism industry(Buckley 2007; Hudson 2002; Davis, Banks, Valentine and Cuthill1997; Beedie 2003; Swarbrooke et al 2003; Cloutier 2003); the impactsof adventure tourism on the environment (Williams and Soutar 2005;Ewert and Jamieson 2003; Tabata 1992; Cloke and Perkins 1998) and

P. Williams, G.N. Soutar / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 413–438 415

the health and safety of adventure tourists (Page et al 2005; Wilks andPage 2003; Bentley and Page 2001). While many conclusions can bedrawn from these studies, they have tended to ignore the ‘tourism con-sumption’ dimension, which includes consumers being away from ahome environment, often paying a commercial operator to guide thetour and providing specialised equipment (Buckley 2007; Buckley2006).

Similarly, little empirical research has examined the relationships be-tween value, satisfaction and behavioural intentions in tourism con-texts (Baker and Crompton 2000). In tourism, like most otherservices, the consumption experience is complicated by intangibility,dynamism and subjectivity (Botterill and Crompton 1996; Jayanti andGhosh 1996). Tourism consumption experiences include a complexmix of functional, objective and tangible components (e.g., travelling,eating, drinking, and recreating), as well as subjective, hedonic, emo-tional and symbolic components (e.g., enjoying an experience, laugh-ing, socialising and having fun). Several studies have researched theheterogeneous nature of tourism consumption experiences (Ryan1997; Botterill and Crompton 1996; Urry 1990), but there is a lack ofunderstanding about the nature of these experiences or their relation-ship with marketing constructs, such as service quality, customer valueor satisfaction.

Adventure tourism consumers tend to be young, educated, affluent,active thrill seekers who spend significant sums of money in their pur-suit of adventure (Swarbrooke et al 2003; Tsui 2000; Christiansen1990). Adventure travelers are often demanding and discerning con-sumers while on holiday, and often travel to some of the most re-mote, extreme environments of the world to satisfy their needs foremotional highs, risk, challenge, excitement, and novelty (Zuckerman1994; Christiansen 1990; Bello and Etzel 1985; Crompton 1979). Abetter understanding of the socio-psychological dimensions of suchconsumption would help marketers target such consumers moreeffectively.

From an industry perspective, many new adventure destinationsand tourism products have evolved to serve the discerning needs ofadventure consumers. For example, Bentley Page and Laird (2003)found there were more than 400 adventure tourism operators inNew Zealand and that 11% of visitors to the country used theseadventure products. For example, Queenstown, New Zealand, mar-kets itself as the ‘‘Adventure Capital of the World’’ and has a diverserange of adventure products to tempt travelers (Buckley 2007; Clokeand Perkins 1998). The area’s most famous adventure product is the‘‘awesome foursome’’ which includes white-water rafting the rapidson the Shotover River, jet boating through narrow gorges, a helicop-ter ride and the Hackett bungee jump into a 134 meter deep canyon(Cloke and Perkins 1998). Adventure tourists can also go sky-diving,jet boating, white-water rafting, parasailing, four-wheel driving, scu-ba-diving and mountain biking in some of the most distant placeson the planet.


Towards a Multidimensional Perspective of Customer Value

Traditional value research has taken a functional, utilitarian view withthe value construct measured as the net ratio of benefits to costs (Cra-vens, Holland, Lamb and Moncrieff 1988; Dodds 1991; Dodds et al1991; Sinha and DeSarbo 1998; Sweeney et al 1999). For this notionof ‘‘value’’, a buyer and seller infer value if the benefits received aregreater than what is given up. In other words, both parties feel theyare better off because each receives something more useful to him orher than what he or she has relinquished (Sinha and DeSarbo 1998).It has been argued that the utilitarian functional perspective of the valueconstruct is one of the most salient determinants of purchase intentionsand repeat purchase behavior (Chang and Wildt 1994; Zeithaml 1988).

A multidimensional value perspective is often considered moreappropriate in services contexts (Zeithaml 1988; Sheth et al 1991; DeRuyter, Wetzels, and Bloemer 1997; Sweeney and Soutar 2001; Petrick2002) as the sociological and psychological aspects of consumption aremore important because of the interaction between producers andconsumers, and the heterogeneous nature of the service experience(Holbrook 1994). As noted earlier, in many services contexts, valueperceptions differ from those made for goods, due to the greater riskand uncertainty (Murray and Schlacter 1990; Zeithaml 1981). A func-tional value perspective may be too simplistic for such consumptionexperiences (Schechter 1984; Bolton and Drew 1991; Baker andCrompton 2000).

Recently, tourism researchers have begun to address the need for amultidimensional value perspective and have examined its relationshipwith other post-consumption constructs, such as satisfaction and behav-ioral intentions (Murphy, Pritchard and Smith 2000; Petrick 2002; Oh2003; Gallarza and Saura 2006). Thus, Gallarza and Saura (2006) usedan eight-dimensional value framework, initially developed by Holbrook(1994) (efficiency, excellence, status, esteem, play, aesthetics, ethicsand spirituality), to form a three dimensional construct. They foundweak or insignificant relationships and acknowledged there wereoperationalization difficulties with some of the categories. Sanchez,Callarisa, Rodrıguez, and Molineret (2006) also developed a multi-dimensional value scale for use in a tourism context (GLOVAL) but,to date, their study has not been replicated.

Given these issues, it is clear more tourism context information isneeded and the present paper used the PERVAL framework developedby Sweeney and Soutar (2001) to measure customer value in such acontext. PERVAL was adapted from Sheth et al (1991) model andhas been applied to different consumer products. However, it hasnot previously been used in a tourism context. The PERVALframework has a functional value component (functional value and va-lue for money), but also includes other value dimensions (social value,epistemic value and emotional value).

Functional Value. Functional value is defined as the ‘‘perceived utilityacquired from an alternative’s capacity for functional, utilitarian or


physical performance’’ (Sheth et al 1991:160) and is seen as a pri-mary driver of consumer choice. It is often conceptualized as the va-lue received for the price paid or as value for money (Zeithaml,1988; Dodds et al 1991; Bolton and Drew 1991; Holbrook 1994;Woodruff 1997). Common functional value attributes include quality,reliability, durability and price. In tourism, the number of attractionsseen, the on-time performance of a tour, seat comfort, price andsafety record may all influence functional value perceptions. Inadventure tourism operations, functional value is important becauseof safety issues and the planning needed to minimize risk (Williamsand Soutar 2005). Tour operators can offer functional value throughconvenience, contacts, speed, efficiency and administrative help(Christiansen 1990).

Emotional Value. Emotional value is a social-psychological dimensionthat is dependent on a product’s ability to arouse feelings or affectivestates (Sheth et al 1991). Emotional responses are likely in adventuretourism experiences and contribute a large, but often ignored, portionof the explained variance in satisfaction evaluations (Otto and Ritchie1996). In adventure tourism experiences, the emotions that precedeand lead to the emotional highs of exhilaration and excitement are of-ten fear, hesitation and apprehension. Emotional value is, thus, likely tobe a key factor in the consumption of adventure.

Social Value. Social value has been defined as the ‘‘perceived utilityacquired from an alternative’s association with one or more specific so-cial groups’’ (Sheth et al 1991:161). Choices involving highly visibleproducts (e.g. clothing, jewelry) and goods or services shared with oth-ers (e.g. gifts, products used in entertaining) are often driven by socialvalue. In tourism, factors such as interactions between people on atour, the relationship between passengers and the tour guide andthe individual recognition or prestige obtained from undertaking thetrip may create social value. Social value may be strong in small grouptours, similar to the ‘‘communitas’’ and bonding of river rafting partic-ipants highlighted by Arnould and Price (1993).

Epistemic Value. While epistemic value (novelty value) was not initiallyincluded in the PERVAL framework, it is a key component of the adven-ture tourism experience as it includes the novelty of the activity and thedestination (Hall and Weiler 1992). Epistemic value is created when aproduct arouses curiosity, provides novelty and/or satisfies a desire forknowledge (Sheth et al 1991). In tourism, novelty and seeking newknowledge are significant motives for adventure travel (Weber 2001;Walle 1997; Crompton 1979; Bello and Etzel 1985). Epistemic value isa key factor in many adventure tourism products due to tourists’desire for exploratory, novelty seeking and variety seeking behavior(Zuckerman 1994). Tour operators need to change and adapt theirproduct to create new and novel experiences for tourists to ensure theyobtain epistemic value. Epistemic value was included in the present studybecause of its potential importance in an adventure tourism context.


Customer Value, Satisfaction and Behavioural Intentions

Customer Value. Early studies into customer value focused on theretailing sector, generally measuring pre-purchase value perceptionsand their links with purchase decisions or willingness to buy (Doddset al 1991; Liljander 1994; Zeithaml 1988; Sweeney et al 1999). It wasargued by Woodruff (1997) that value concepts differ according tothe circumstances in which customers think about value (i.e., custom-ers could perceive value different before and after purchase). This isimportant as, if repeat purchase is sought, post purchase value percep-tions must be in line with pre-purchase expectations. Woodruff andGardial (1996) also argued value perceptions are linked to otherpost-consumption constructs, such as satisfaction and repurchaseintentions. Patterson and Spreng (1997) found value’s impact on re-purchase intentions was not clear, partially because consumers haveexperience and familiarity on which to base repurchase intentions.However, it seems customer satisfaction is positively influenced by va-lue (Bolton and Drew 1991; Woodruff 1997) and that value is nega-tively impacted by perceived price (Zeithaml 1988; Chang and Wildt1994; Sweeney et al 1999).

Customer Satisfaction. One of the most frequently raised questionsabout satisfaction and its relationship with other constructs has beenwhether it is a cognitive process (through disconfirmed expectations)(Cronin and Taylor 1992; Bolton and Drew 1991; Boulding, Kalra, Sta-elin, and Zeithmal 1993) or an emotional state from post-purchase feel-ings, (Dube and Morgan 1996; Richins 1997; Oliver 1993; Mano andOliver 1993). Woodruff, Cadotte and Jenkins (1983) argued customersatisfaction should be defined to reflect the link between cognitiveand emotional processes as customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction isan emotional feeling developed in response to confirmation or discon-firmation (which is a cognitive process). In the same manner, Pfaff(1977) suggested cognitive and affective models might be appropriatefor describing satisfaction, which justifies the multidimensional ap-proach used in the present study. The cognitively-oriented service qual-ity and value constructs precede the emotionally oriented appraisal ofsatisfaction (Bagozzi 1992; Liljander 1994; Oliver 1997) and it seems va-lue is a more complete antecedent to satisfaction than is quality (Wood-ruff 1997; McDougall and Levesque 2000; Gallarza and Saura 2006).

There has been recent empirical interest in the relationships be-tween quality, value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions in tourism(Oh 2003; Petrick, Backman and Bixler 1999; Baker and Crompton2000; Bojanic 1996; Oh 1999). These studies have used different tech-niques to operationalize variables, different types of multivariate tech-niques to analyze data and different contexts to apply theories. Inparticular, the studies have used a range of scales to measure value, of-ten leaning on the utilitarian perspective of quality and the price paid(Gallarza and Saura 2006), despite the need for multidimensionalitythat was noted earlier. Other weaknesses include the use of single-item


scales to measure the constructs of interest (Oh 1999; Al Sabbahy,Ekinci, and Riley 2004).

A number of satisfaction studies have been undertaken in the tour-ism sector (e.g. Ryan 1995; Crompton and Love 1995; Chadee andMattson 1996; Baker and Crompton 2000). Most have focused on mea-suring the quality of tourists’ experiences and how various quality per-formance factors impact on tourists’ satisfaction. However, it is clearresearch into the subjective, affective and experiential factors thatmake up a substantial portion of consumer satisfaction with tourismservices is also needed (Otto and Ritchie 1996). In tourism, satisfactionis a tourist’s emotional state of mind after an experience. It is not attri-bute-based as it is ‘experiential’ (Baker and Crompton 2000:788) and‘‘emotions may intervene or act as a mediator between performanceand satisfaction’’ (Otto and Ritchie 1996:39). Indeed, Bojanic (1996)found a strong positive correlation between perceived value and satis-faction in a tourism context.

Behavioral Intentions. Several studies have examined the direct andindirect relationships between value, quality, satisfaction and post-pur-chase consequences, such as customer loyalty, positive word of mouth,price premiums and repurchase intentions (e.g. Cronin and Taylor1992; Bolton 1998; Ostrom and Iacobucci 1995; Fornell, Johnson,Anderson and Everitt 1996; Chang and Wildt 1994). Many of thesestudies concluded the relationships between the constructs were com-plex, diverse and dynamic. Cronin, Brady, and Hult (2000) claimedthere was significant divergence of opinion about the relationships(both direct and indirect) between quality, value, satisfaction andbehavioral intentions.

There appears to be widespread recognition of a strong link betweensatisfaction (including perceived quality and perceived value) and re-purchase intention (Rust and Oliver 1994; Bitner 1990). Similarly, con-sumers’ value perceptions seem to drive future intentions (Brady andCronin 2001). Satisfaction has also been found to be a predictor ofpost-purchase behavioural intentions (Zeithaml 1988; Patterson andSpreng 1997). In a pre-purchase context, Chang and Wildt (1994)found value was mediated by quality and price and positively impactedon re-purchase intentions. They also found price had a direct (nega-tive) effect and quality had a direct (positive) effect on purchase inten-tions. Similarly, satisfaction is positively influenced by value (Boltonand Drew 1991; Woodruff 1997), whereas value is negatively impactedby price (Zeithaml 1988; Chang and Wildt 1994). Anderson and Sulli-van (1990) found service satisfaction was strongly related to repurchaseintention. Thus, there appears to be a consensus that satisfaction is anantecedent to future intentions in service environments (Andersonand Sullivan 1990; Cronin and Taylor 1994; Patterson and Spreng1997). It should also be noted that, even though satisfaction has a sig-nificant influence on future intentions, its relationship with valueshould be closely monitored as there are structural links between thetwo concepts (Murray and Howat 2002).


Boulding et al (1993) found a positive correlation between custom-ers’ perceptions of service quality and their repurchase intentionsand willingness to recommend. In tourism, this is important becausethere is a reliance on word-of-mouth for new business. Because ofthe experiential nature of services, word of mouth communicationsare viewed as more reliable and trustworthy. Consequently, they arethe primary means by which consumers gather information about ser-vices (Bolton and Drew 1991; Gronroos 1990; Zeithaml, Berry andParasuraman 1993) and tourism is no different in this regard. In tour-ism, Gallarza and Saura (2006) offered the most recent insight intosome of these relationships in a tourism context. They found moderateto strong links between value, satisfaction and loyalty, but admittedtheir fit-indices suggested the results should be treated with caution.They acknowledged that their sample size and the use of a conveniencesample may have distorted their findings. They also suggested theirstudy should be replicated in different tourism contexts, as was the casein the present study, which is discussed in the next section.

Based on this analysis of the literature, the present study aimed toinvestigate the direct and indirect relationships between multi-dimen-sional value perceptions of value; satisfaction and future behavioralintentions in an adventure tourism context. Specifically, the researchstudy examined the following research propositions:-

� Each value dimension will have a direct, positive and significant associationwith customer satisfaction.

� The socio-psychological dimensions of value (emotional value, social value, epi-stemic value) will have a greater influence on customer satisfaction than the cog-nitive dimensions of value (function value, value-for money).

� Customer satisfaction will have a direct, positive and significant associationwith behavioural intentions.

� Customer satisfaction will completely mediate the relationship between customervalue and behavioural intentions, and customer value will only indirectly influ-ence behavioural intentions.

RESEARCH METHODS

As the study’s interest was adventure tourism, data were collectedfrom customers travelling on four-wheel drive adventure tours to thePinnacles in Western Australia, which is a popular adventure destina-tion. The tours use specialist vehicles to manage a part on-road andpart off-road experience. The tour is marketed as an adventure tour,and includes a visit to several unique rock formations at the Pinnaclesin Nambung National Park in Western Australia about 240 kilometreson bitumen road from Perth. After visiting the rock formations, thetours head back towards Perth, but use rough, off-road tracks for about80 kilometres. This section of the tour takes about 4 hours and in-cludes the more adventurous pursuits, such as driving on the beach,crossing a range of steep sand dunes, and using advanced driving tech-


niques (such as sliding the vehicles sideways down the dune). Some ofthe sand dunes are over 100 feet high and this creates an unnaturalsteep angle for the vehicles, which many first timers find quite fright-ening. The vehicles are driven by qualified drivers and are equippedwith safety and recovery gear and satellite communications.

After obtaining support from the peak industry bodies, seven four-wheel drive tour operators who were running day trips to the Pinnacleswere approached by telephone and in writing and invited to partici-pate. After follow up telephone calls, two operators agreed to partici-pate in the study. One of the authors and a research assistantindependently went on a day-tour from each of the participating com-panies before data collection started and compared the two tours forconsistency and similarity. As part of this preliminary exercise, the fourdrivers were interviewed during the tour and were asked to commentgenerally about the consistency of the tours on a day-to-day basis andasked to highlight where differences may occur. Field notes were takenand the two researchers compared notes to identify any potential dif-ferences. It was concluded that the tours were very similar in termsof route taken; vehicles used (all OKA 14 seater vehicles); similar off-road tracks and sand dune areas (as controlled by government conser-vation authorities); similar driver commentary; same rest stops forrefreshments, lunch and rest rooms; and similar times taken for thetrip (approximately 9 hours). The interaction of the drivers with theconsumers and the interaction between consumers were noted as po-tential areas of difference between tours. However, the tours were con-sidered quite repetitive and, overall, were considered similar in scopefor the sampling strategy and data collection.

Data was collected during the December and January summer holi-day period in Australia, which is the time when weather and off roadand sand conditions are most consistent. It is traditionally warm sunnyweather, with excellent track conditions for off-road vehicles. TheChristmas and New Year holiday period, combined with the end ofthe wildflower season, sees large numbers of tourists on these tours.This sampling strategy was considered appropriate to collect theneeded data in a relatively short time frame. Feedback from the touroperators indicated that passengers during this holiday period are sim-ilar to tourists who take these tours throughout the year, although inlarger numbers. It should be noted, however, that the tour experiencecan vary depending on the season when there may be different weather(colder and wetter in winter), different track conditions (tides canwash away the tracks in the winter) and different numbers of tourists(smaller numbers in winter). This may raise some issues for potentialbias from collection of data only in the summer period and the resultsmay not be generalizable to the whole population of four-wheel driveconsumers on these tours.

Approximately 450 passengers on 41 different tours from the twocompanies were approached to participate in the study. While seatedon the bus, customers were asked to fill in a self-completion question-naire towards the end of a full day adventure tour (approximately 30minutes from the end of the tour). The questionnaire included 65


questions including the data required for this study and some addi-tional background questions required by the participating companies.For all the value, satisfaction and intention questions, customers wereasked to rate their perceptions on a 7-point Likert scale with ‘‘1’’ rep-resenting ‘‘Strongly Disagree’’ and ‘‘7’’ representing ‘‘StronglyAgree’’.

Information as to which customers agreed to participate in the studyand which customers refused was not collected. Consequently, nochecks could be made to assess non-response bias. However, the re-sponse rate was considered very high as a total of 428 questionnaireswere collected and, after checking the quality of responses, 402 usablequestionnaires were obtained, suggesting non-response bias was unli-kely to be an issue. The tour buses from which data were collected alsohad to have a spare seat for the research assistant to administer thequestionnaires and had to have a reasonable number of passengersto make data collection cost effective (approximately ten passengersin the four-while drive vehicle used). The research assistant introducedthe purpose of the survey to customers and outlined that it was entirelyvoluntary and confidential. The surveys were self-completion and theresearch assistant was available to answer questions where necessary.Respondents were asked about the value of their experience, their sat-isfaction with the tour and their future intentions. The various con-structs were adapted from a number of sources, as can be seen inTable 1, as are the individual items used in each case.

The value dimensions were taken from the PERVAL value scaledeveloped by Sweeney and Soutar (2001). A novelty (epistemic) valuedimension was added as it is important in a tourism context. Prior re-search has found doing novel and adventurous things and escapingfrom the routine are important for tourists (Crompton 1979; Jeongand Park 1996; Loundsbury and Hoopes 1985; Hawes 1979; Otto andRitchie 1996), as is seeking insight and knowledge (Walle 1997; Weber2001). The added construct was an attempt to measure these aspects ofthe tourism experience.

The data analysis followed a two-stage procedure. In the first stage,composite constructs for the various constructs of interest were esti-mated using confirmatory factor analysis procedures that reflectedthe relationships between a latent construct and its observed variables(the items in the questionnaire in this case) (Holmes-Smith and Rowe1994; McGill, Hobbs and Klobas 2003). Four indicators were used foreach construct (Bollen 1989) and it was assumed loadings of 0.60 ormore were acceptable (Bagozzi and Yi 1988). Composite reliabilitywas calculated to assess the unidimensionality of the constructs, Aver-age Variance Extracted (AVE) scores were calculated to assess the con-structs’ convergent validity and Fornell and Larcker’s (1981) test wasused to assess the discriminant validity between the constructs. Thegoodness of fit indices for a congeneric model are also a type of validitytest as, for a model to fit well, the items must represent the same latenttrait (Holmes-Smith and Rowe 1994).

In the second stage of the data analysis, the composite constructswere used in a series of regressions that explored the relationships be-

Table 1. Scales Used to Represent the Constructs

Construct Scale items Source

FunctionalValue

Consistent quality Sweeney and Soutar (2001)Done wellAcceptable standard of qualityWell organized

Value forMoney

Good return for money Sweeney and Soutar (2001)Value for moneyGood one for the price paidReasonably priced

EmotionalValue

Gave me feelings of well being Sweeney and Soutar (2001)Was excitingMade me elatedMade me feel happy

Social Value Gives social approval fromothers

Sweeney and Soutar (2001)

Makes me feel acceptable toothers

Improves the way a person isperceived

Give a good impression on otherpeople

NoveltyValue

Made me feel adventurous Bello and Etzel (1985)Satisfied my curiosity Weber (2001)Was an authentic experienceWe did a lot of things on the

tour

Satisfaction Was exactly what I needed Oliver (1997)I was satisfied with decisionIt was a wise choiceIt was a good experience

Intentions I would recommend this tour toothers

Babakus and Boller (1992)

I would go on other tours infuture

Patterson and Spreng (1997)

I would go on other‘‘adventure’’ tours in future

I would go on other day tripwhile on holiday in future


tween the various value dimensions and their respective impact on cus-tomer satisfaction and customer intentions. The variables in the regres-sion models were assessed for non-normality as required formultivariate analysis (Hair, Anderson, Tatham and Black 1998). Thenormal probability plots, skewness tests and kurtosis values did notindicate any major distortion from a normal distribution. While regres-sion assumes residuals (predicted minus observed values) are distrib-uted normally, most tests (and specifically the F-test) are robust to


violations of this assumption (Hair et al 1998; Stevens 1992). In addi-tion to the regressions that looked at the direct effects the value dimen-sions had on satisfaction and intentions, some indirect effects weremeasured. The mediation effect satisfaction had on the relationshipbetween value and intentions was assessed using the three step proce-dure recommended by Baron and Kenney (1986).

THE RESULTS OBTAINED

A summary of the backgrounds of the respondents is shown in Table2. Discussions with the tour operators involved in the study suggestedthe sample reflected their customer base well, which means the resultsare likely to be representative of customers taking these tours.

As was noted earlier, confirmatory factor analysis was used to assessthe measurement characteristics of the various constructs included inthe study. The preliminary results obtained are shown in Tables 3and 4. As can be seen in Table 3, all of the constructs seemed to be uni-dimensional as the models fitted the data well and their reliabilitieswere greater than 0.70 and their AVE scores were greater than 0.50(Hair et al 1998).

It can be seen in Table 3, that respondents generally had positiveperceptions about the value received from their tour, as four of the fivevalue dimensions had means above the midpoint ‘‘4’’ on the seven-point scales that were used. The highest-ranking value dimension wasemotional value, with a mean of 5.1. The traditional value dimensionsof quality and value for money were also rated highly (with means of

Table 2. Respondents’ Backgrounds

Frequency Percent

Gender Male 159 40Female 237 59

Missing 6 1

Age 19 or less 9 220–29 123 3130–39 98 2540–49 51 1350 or more 116 29

Missing 5 1

Country of Origin Japan 187 51S.E. Asia 65 18United Kingdom 54 15Europe 18 5Other 42 11

Missing 36 9

Table 3. A Summary of the One-Factor Congeneric Models

FunctionalValue

Value forMoney

EmotionalValue

SocialValue

NoveltyValue

Satisfaction Intentions

Reliabilitymeasures

Compositereliability

0.87 0.92 0.88 0.94 0.87 0.91 0.86

Averagevarianceextracted

0.63 0.73 0.66 0.79 0.62 0.72 0.62

Cronbach’salpha

0.86 0.91 0.85 0.94 0.84 0.92 0.85

Goodness of fitmeasures

Chi-square 0.84 0.05 6.62 1.21 1.58 1.05 5.96Probability 0.36 0.82 0.06 0.55 0.45 0.59 0.05Goodness

of fitindex(GFI)

0.99 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99

Adjustedgoodnessof fit(AGFI)

0.97 0.99 0.96 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.96

Normed fitindex(NFI)

0.92 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99

Root meansquareerror(RMSEA)

0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07

Root meansquareresidual(RMR)

0.02 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.03

DescriptiveStatistics

Mean (1 to7 scale)

4.8 4.7 5.1 3.0 4.8 4.2 5.4

StandardDeviation

0.77 0.90 0.82 1.03 0.84 0.83 0.92


4.8 and 4.7 respectively). Interestingly, novelty value, which includeditems such as experiencing new places, doing things not able to doat home and feeling adventurous, was also rated highly (4.8). The so-cial value dimension had the lowest mean (3.0), suggesting respon-dents did not feel they would obtain social approval by going on thetour. Respondents were relatively satisfied, although the mean of 4.2


could not be considered high as it was close to the mid-point of ‘‘4’’ onthe scale. Despite this, respondents had positive intentions as the meanintention score was 5.4.

The discriminant validity between the value constructs was assessedbased on the squared correlations that are shown in Table 4. Fornelland Larcker (1981) argued constructs have discriminant validity ifthe AVE score for each construct is higher than the squared correla-tion between that construct and any other construct. Table 4 showsthe AVEs and the squared correlations between the various constructs.It can be seen that all the variables had lower squared correlations thanAVE scores, indicating there was discriminant validity between thestudy’s main constructs. It should be noted, however, that the func-tional value construct and the value-for-money construct had a reason-ably high correlation, despite not breaching the AVE rule noted inTable 4. Future researchers may wish to investigate reasons for thispotential link, as the aspects of ‘‘quality’’ operationalized within thefunctional value dimension, may also be embedded within the value-for-money dimension.

The initial regressions examined the impact of the respective valuehad on satisfaction. The results of the stepwise regression procedureare shown in Table 5. The equation was significant (F = 108.25,p < 0.001) and all five of the value dimensions (functional value; emo-tional value, value for money, social value and novelty value) were sig-nificantly related to satisfaction. The adjusted R-squared statistic was0.64; suggesting value plays a major role in predicting satisfaction inan adventure tourism context. While the relationship between socialvalue and satisfaction was statistically significant, the negative valencesuggests social value did not add to customers’ satisfaction in the pres-ent context. The standardised coefficients suggested novelty value andvalue for money had greater impact than did the other two valueconstructs.

Table 6 shows the results when the impact of value dimensions onintentions was estimated. The regression was significant (F = 98.495,p < 0.001) and three of the value dimensions were significant and pos-itively related to intentions. The adjusted R square value (0.49) indi-

Table 4. Discriminant Validity of the Value Dimensions

Construct Construct

Reliability

Average

Variance

Extracted

Functional

Value

Value for

Money

Emotional

Value

Social

Value

Novelty

Value

Satisfaction Intention

Functional Value 0.87 0.63 0.69 0.65 0.71 0.63 0.67 0.63

Value for Money 0.92 0.73 0.63 0.70 0.76 0.68 0.73 0.67

Emotional Value 0.88 0.66 0.31 0.34 0.73 0.64 0.69 0.64

Social Value 0.94 0.79 0.08 0.11 0.12 0.71 0.75 0.71

Novelty Value 0.87 0.62 0.23 0.30 0.47 0.07 0.67 0.62

Satisfaction 0.91 0.72 0.43 0.50 0.41 0.03 0.44 0.67

Intention 0.86 0.62 0.35 0.43 0.34 0.07 0.30 0.49

Note: Values in the bottom-half diagonal are the squared correlation coefficients, while valuesin the top-half diagonal are the averages of the relevant variance extracted scores.


cated that the value dimensions explained approximately half of thevariance in future intentions in the present context. Value for moneyonce again had the greatest impact, with two other dimensions (emo-tional value and novelty value) contributing positively towards cus-tomer intentions. Two dimensions (functional value and social value)did not appear to contribute significantly to customer intentions.

From these two tables, it is clear there are direct, positive and mod-erate to strong relationships between customer value and customer sat-isfaction and between customer value and customer intentions. Afurther analysis was used to see whether satisfaction mediated the rela-tionship between value and intentions in this context using the threestep procedure suggested by Baron and Kenney (1986). The resultsof the mediated regression analysis are shown in Table 7. In Step 3b,the mediator and the predictor variables were included in the regres-sion simultaneously.

For mediation to be present the magnitude of the beta coefficientsfor the three value dimensions that were significant in Step 1 shouldfall when the mediator (satisfaction) is added. In this case, the stand-ardised regression coefficients between the novelty value, value-for-money and emotional value dimensions and the dependent variableof customer intentions were smaller when satisfaction was added tothe regression equation. This confirms previous studies in which satis-faction was found to mediate the value-intentions relationship (Lam,Shankar, Erramilli and Murthy 2004; Cronin et al 2000). It seems that,for these three value variables, the greater the degree of customer

Table 6. Regression of the Value Dimensions on Intentions

Construct B Std. Err. beta t Sig. VIF

Constant .759 .212 3.589 .000Value for Money .398 .047 .443 8.491 .000 1.617Emotional Value .223 .064 .209 3.474 .001 2.145Novelty Value .170 .062 .161 2.762 .006 2.007Social Value – – – – n.s. –Functional Value – – – – n.s. –

Table 5. Regression of the Value Dimensions on Satisfaction

Construct B Std. Error beta t Sig. VIF

Constant .606 .221 2.744 .006Value for money .313 .062 .314 5.042 .000 3.252Novelty value .363 .058 .309 6.309 .000 2.008Functional Value .224 .069 .192 3.240 .001 2.932Emotional Value .213 .062 .179 3.449 .001 2.260Social Value �.065 .021 �.117 �3.134 .002 1.164

Table 7. Satisfaction as a Mediator between Value and Intentions

Beta t value Sig. R2 F

Step 1—Predictor to Mediator (Value dimensions to Satisfaction)Value for Money to Satisfaction 0.431 9.47 <0.01 0.62 161.40Emotional Value to Satisfaction 0.178 3.41 <0.01Novelty Value to Satisfaction 0.306 6.03 <0.01

Step 2—Predictor to Dependent Variable (Value dimensions to Intention)Value for Money to Intention 0.443 8.49 <0.01 0.49 98.50Emotional Value to Intention 0.209 3.47 <0.01Novelty Value to Intention 0.161 2.76 <0.01

Step 3a—Mediator to Dependent Variable (Satisfaction to Intention)Satisfaction to Intention 0.704 17.16 <0.01 0.49 294.46

Step 3b—Predictor and Mediator to Dependent variableSatisfaction to Intention 0.414 6.99 <0.01 0.55 125.27Value for Money to Intention 0.272 4.85 <0.01Emotional Value to Intention 0.154 2.97 <0.01Novelty Value to Intention 0.038 0.66 n.s.


value provided to customers, the greater the customer satisfaction theyare likely to receive and the more positive their future intentions.

DISCUSSION

The present study attempted to clarify a number of the suggestedrelationships between value, satisfaction and intentions in an adven-ture tourism context. The results generally confirmed the findings ofa number of previous studies in which customer value has been foundto be an important antecedent to customer satisfaction and customerintentions (e.g., Anderson, Fornell and Lehmann 1994; Pattersonand Spreng 1997; Cronin et al 2000). The explanatory power of the var-ious value dimensions was particularly strong in relation to satisfaction(explaining 62% of variance). Similarly, the various value dimensionswere found to influence future intentions (explaining 49% of the var-iance), which confirms the findings of several other researchers (e.g.,Bolton and Drew 1991; Rust and Oliver 1994; Patterson and Spreng1997). It seems adventure tour operators who provide value,particularly value-for-money and novelty value, are likely to have satis-fied customers who are also likely to have positive future intentions.While these findings initially confirm the work of other researchers,the study makes a number of additional contributions.

Firstly, the influence of a multidimensional framework of value isnoteworthy here, as the socio-psychological dimensions (emotional va-lue and novelty value) added to our understanding of value beyond thetraditional value-for-money paradigm. The use of a multidimensionalvalue framework enhanced our understanding of two post-consump-tion constructs with strong explanation of both satisfaction (R square


of 0.62) and future customer intentions (R-square of 0.49). A signifi-cant portion of this explanatory power came from the socio-psycholog-ical dimensions of value (novelty value and emotional value) inaddition to the value-for-money dimension.

Secondly, adventure travelers’ need to gain emotional highs and anadrenalin rush has been noted previously (Bello and Etzel 1985; Chris-tiansen 1990; Swarbrooke et al 2003) and this study confirmed the strongrelationship between emotional value, satisfaction and customer inten-tions in such a context. Adventure tour operators need to explore waysto manage tourists’ positive emotions, such as happiness, enjoyment,excitement, thrills and adrenalin rush, lending support to a number ofstudies that have highlighted the relationship between affective statesand satisfaction (Oliver 1993; Mano and Oliver 1993; Dube and Morgan1996). This result is perhaps not surprising in an adventure tourism do-main, where hedonism and the pursuit of emotional highs, such asexcitement, are key motivators (Christiansen 1990; Arnould and Price1993). Real and perceived risks are key aspects of an adventure experi-ence (Hall and McArthur 1991) and the emotion-laden aspects of risk(fear, exhilaration, excitement) are evident in the marketing literatureof most adventure tour companies. Adventure operators need to managethe emotional highs, within the boundaries of professional risk manage-ment to ensure such activities are sustainable (Williams and Soutar 2005;Page et al 2005).

Thirdly, the strong links between novelty value and satisfaction andfuture intentions should be of interest to adventure marketers. Thisassociation suggests adventure tour operators need to innovate andkeep exploring the latest developments in equipment, to allow themto offer new, dynamic and challenging experiences. Once an adven-ture traveler has consumed the experience, they are likely to seek a dif-ferent, more challenging and more risk laden experience the nexttime. The growth in adventure travel to extreme destinations is per-haps testament to the need to satisfy people’s need for continuous nov-elty value. Innovation and exploration of new environments shouldhelp operators satisfy adventure tourists’ needs for doing different, un-ique and novel experiences while on holiday (Weber 2001; Walle 1997;Bello and Etzel 1985).

Fourthly, the study explored a number of the relationships betweenvalue, satisfaction and intentions in an adventure tourism context forthe first time. While the tourism industry has long recognised theimportance of providing satisfying experiences (e.g., Ryan 1995;Chadee and Mattson 1996; Baker and Crompton 2000), the presentstudy highlights that operators who provide value, through its respec-tive dimensions, are likely to generate greater satisfaction for theirproducts. Specifically, if customers feel that they have received good va-lue, they are more likely to be satisfied with their experience. In addi-tion, customer satisfaction was found to mediate the relationshipbetween three customer value dimensions and customer intentions.This highlights the importance of measuring the direct and indirect ef-fects between value and intentions and supported the work of a num-ber of researchers who have noted this indirect effect in other contexts


(e.g. Lam et al 2004; Cronin et al 2000; Patterson and Spreng 1997;Cronin and Taylor 1994; Baker and Crompton 2000). There is a strongconsensus in the tourism industry that positive word of mouth recom-mendations and repeat purchase are important stimulants for futurebusiness (De Ruyter, Wetzels and Bloemer 1997) and this was evidentin the present study. Future studies need to explore these findings toother adventure tourism contexts.

Finally, the use of congeneric constructs was significant as they havethe potential to more accurately predict their relevant latent variables.The major advantage of a congeneric model is that researchers can mea-sure variations in the degree to which each item contributes to the latentvariable, which is more realistic than assuming equal weights (Holmes-Smith and Rowe 1994). The relatively high R2 figures for satisfactionand future intentions may be a symptom of this more accurate approach.In similar studies, simple summated or averaged scales have been used torepresent a construct, once internal consistency has been verified with-out allowing for the relative contribution of each variable (e.g., Ryan1995; Lemminck, De Ruyter and Wetzels 1998; McDougall and Levesque2000).

From a tourism perspective, the study adds to the existing value, sat-isfaction and intentions literature. Although more research needs to beundertaken before operators can draw inferential conclusions from theresults obtained in the present study, 4WD adventure operators in theWA tourism industry can now better understand that value is a multi-dimensional construct with emotional value, novelty value and value-for-money having significant influences on satisfaction and behaviouralintentions. In practical terms, it means 4WD adventure operatorsshould focus on the provision of the socio-psychological aspects of va-lue in order to gain positive satisfaction evaluations and positive inten-tions. Novelty value and emotional value added considerably to theexplanation provide by value for money, which is traditionally usedto measure value. Focussing on these value components may becomeeven more important as customers become more discerning andsophisticated (Krippendorf 1987; Poon 1993). Four-wheel drive adven-ture tour operators may also wish to explore ways of managing tourists’positive emotions, such as happiness, enjoyment, excitement, thrillsand adrenalin rush, such as through a dramatic narrative of the activ-ities and the experience (Arnould and Price 1993). Overcoming differ-ent challenges (e.g., soft sand, the highest sand dunes, the snakes, thewildlife, the fear of being stranded in the wilderness) may build emo-tional tension. A release from tension comes from overcoming thesedramatic challenges and leads to positive emotional responses (Flukerand Turner 2000; Arnould and Price 1993).

CONCLUSIONS AND LIMITATIONS

As with previous research in this area, many of the constructs associ-ated with satisfaction and value in a services context are intangible, elu-sive and difficult to measure. For example, it is difficult to measure


perceptions in a tourism context (Botterill and Crompton 1996,O’Guinn and Belk, 1989; Jayanti and Ghosh 1996). Although an empir-ically tested scale was used, there is a possibility of unreliable responses.This has particular relevance in tourism where the consumer is on holi-day and may not wish to be interrupted from their experience by fillingin a questionnaire. Although checks were made to ensure the validityand reliability of responses, some responses may not reflect the trueperceptions of the tourists. The generalisability of the results is also alimiting factor as there was only one type of activity (four-wheel drivetours) from two operators (from seven available); in one location (Pin-nacles Western Australia) at one time of year. These limitations obvi-ously inhibit the applicability of these results to other adventure andtourism contexts.

The cross-sectional design of the study creates opportunities for rep-lication, comparative studies and longitudinal analyses in a multitudeof adventure contexts. This would help validate the present study’smain findings and establish the generalizability of the multidimen-sional value framework in an adventure context. The relatively poorperformance of the functional value dimension in the present adven-ture tourism context needs further investigation. Quality and perfor-mance have been found to be key aspects of functional value and tobe related to satisfaction (Churchill and Surprenaut 1982; Sweeneyet al 1999; Tse and Wilton 1988; Zeithaml, Berry and Parasuraman,1996; Oliver 1993; Cronin et al 2000). However, in the present study,functional value did not predict satisfaction or intentions.

Further research is also needed to explore the ‘adventure’ dimen-sion in more detail. While the value framework used in the presentstudy was contextualised towards adventure tourism, there may beother specific value dimensions relevant to adventure consumption.While constructs such as risk and challenge are difficult to defineand measure they are important components of adventure (Ewert1997; Ewert and Hollenhorst 1989), they need to be examined andincorporated in the value model.

Perceptions of risk from driving down a steep sand dune differ con-siderably among customers. Consequently, there may be demographicfactors, such as age, gender and previous experience that impact onthe relationships examined in the present study, especially as percep-tions of risk influence emotional reactions, which was the key driverof satisfaction and positive intentions. Other dimensions of adventure,such as perception of wilderness, challenge, spiritual enlightenment,and perceptions of ‘soft’ versus ‘hard’ also need to be investigatedfurther.

The present study improved our understanding of the value con-struct and its relationship to satisfaction and intentions in an adventuretourism context. An existing customer value scale was adapted and ex-tended to include a range of dimensions applicable to a tourism con-text. Previous studies have tended to use simplistic value scales, whichwere either unidimensional (product is of good value) or bi-dimen-sional value for money constructs (a trade-off between the quality ofthe products and price). The present study suggests value is more com-


plex in a tourism context, requiring a multidimensional value concep-tualisation that includes utilitarian (functional value and value formoney) and socio-psychological (emotional value, and novelty value)dimensions.

REFERENCES

Al Sabbahy, H. Z., Y. Ekinci, and M. Riley2004 An Investigation of Perceived Value Dimensions: Implications for Hospi-

tality Research. Journal of Travel Research 42(3):226–234.Anderson, E., C. Fornell, and D. Lehmann

1994 Customer Satisfaction, Market Share and Profitability: Findings fromSweden. Journal of Marketing 58(3):53–56.

Anderson, E., Sullivan, M. 1990 Customer Satisfaction and Retention Across Firms.Presentation at the TIMS College of Marketing Special Interest Conference onServices Marketing. Nashville, TN. (September).

Arnould, E. J., and L. L. Price1993 River Magic: Extraordinary Experience and the Extended Service Encoun-

ter. Journal of Consumer Research 20(1):24–45.Babakus, E., and G. Boller

1992 An empirical assessment of the SERVQUAL scale. Journal of BusinessResearch 24(3):253–268.

Bagozzi, R. P.1992 The Self-Regulation of Attitudes, Intentions and Behaviour. Social

Psychological Quarterly 55(2):178–204.Bagozzi, R. P., and Y. Yi

1988 On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Journal of the Academyof Marketing Science 16(1):74–94.

Baker, D. A., and J. L. Crompton2000 Quality, Satisfaction and Behavioural Intentions. Annals of Tourism

Research 27(3):785–804.Baron, R. M., and D. A. Kenney

1986 The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social PsychologicalResearch: Conceptual, Strategic and Statistical Considerations. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology 51(6):1173–1182.

Beedie, P.2003 Mountain Guiding and Adventure Tourism: Reflections on the Choreog-

raphy of the Experience. Leisure Studies 22(2):147–167.Bello, D. C., and M. J. Etzel

1985 The Role of Novelty in the Pleasure Travel Experience. Journal of TravelResearch(Summer):20–26.

Bentley, T. A., and S. J. Page2001 Scoping the Extent of Adventure Tourism Accidents. Annals of Tourism

Research 28(3):705–726.Bentley, T. A., S. J. Page, and I. Laird

2003 Managing Tourist Safety: The Experience of the Adventure TourismIndustry. In Managing Tourist Health and Safety in the New Millennium, J.Wilks and S. J. Page, eds., pp. 85–100. Oxford: Pergamon.

Bitner, M. J.1990 Evaluating Service Encounters: The Effect of Physical Surroundings and

Employee Responses. Journal of Marketing 54(April):69–82.Bojanic, D. C.

1996 Consumer Perceptions of Price, Value and Satisfaction in the HotelIndustry: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Manage-ment 4(1):5–22.

Bollen, K. A.1989 Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: Wiley.


Bolton, R. N.1998 A Dynamic Model of the Duration of the Consumer’s Relationship with a

Continuous Service Provider: The Role of Satisfaction. Marketing Science17(1):45–65.

Bolton, R. N., and J. H. Drew1991 A Multistage Model of Customers’ Assessments of Service Quality and

Value. Journal of Consumer Research 17(4):375–384.Boulding, W., A. Kalra, R. Staelin, and V. Zeithmal

1993 A Dynamic Process Model of Service Quality: From Expectations toBehavioural Intentions. Journal of Marketing Research 30(February):7–27.

Botterill, T. D., and J. L. Crompton1996 Two Case Studies Exploring the Nature of the Tourist’s Experience.

Journal of Leisure Research 28(1):57–82.Brady, M. K., and J. Cronin Jr.

2001 Some New Thoughts on Conceptualizing Perceived Service Quality: AHierarchical Approach. Journal of Marketing 65(3):34–49.

Buckley, R. C.2006 Adventure Tourism. Oxford: CAB International.2007 Adventure Tourism Products: Price, Duration, Size, Skill, Remoteness.

Tourism Management 28:1428–1433.Burak, P. G.

1998 The Nature of Adventure in Soft Adventure Tourism. PhD Dissertation,Edmonton: University of Alberta.

Cater, C.2005 Looking the Part: The Relationship between Adventure Tourism and the

Outdoor Fashion Industry. In Taking Tourism to the Limits, C. S. Page andAitken, eds., London: Elsevier.

Chadee, D. D., and J. Mattson1996 An Empirical Assessment of Customer Satisfaction in Tourism. The Service

Industries Journal 16(3):305–320.Chang, T. Z., and A. Wildt

1994 Price, Product Information and Purchase Intention: An Empirical Study.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 22(1):16–27.

Christiansen, D. R.1990 Adventure Tourism. In Adventure Education, J. C. Miles and S. Priest,

eds.,. State College, PA: Venture Publishing.Churchill, G. A. Jr. and C. Surprenaut

1982 An Investigation into the Determinants of Customer Satisfaction. Journalof Marketing Research XIX(November):491–504.

Cloke, P., and H. C. Perkins1998 Cracking the Canyon with the ‘‘awesome foursome’’: Representations of

Adventure Tourism in New Zealand. Environment and Planning D: Societyand Space 16(2):185–218.

Cloutier, R.2003 The Business of Adventure Tourism. In Sport and Adventure Tourism, S.

Hudson, ed., pp. 241–272. USA: Haworth Press.Cravens, D. W., C. W. Holland, C. W. Lamb Jr., and R. Moncrieff

1988 Marketing’s Role in Product and Service Quality. Industrial MarketingManagement 17(November):285–304.

Crompton, J. L.1979 Motivations for Pleasure Vacations. Annals of Tourism Research

6:408–424.Crompton, J. L., and L. L. Love

1995 The Predictive Validity of Alternative Approaches to Evaluating Quality ofa Festival. Journal of Travel Research 34(1):11–24.

Cronin, J., and S. A. Taylor1992 Measuring Service Quality: A Re-examination and Extension. Journal of

Marketing 56(3):55–68.1994 SERVPERF versus SERVQUAL: Reconciling Performance Based and Per-

ception Based—Minus Expectation—Measurements of Service Quality. Jour-nal of Marketing 58(1):125–131.


Cronin, J., M. Brady, and G. T. Hult2000 Assessing the Effects of Quality, Value and Customer Satisfaction on

Consumer Behavioural Intentions in Service Environments. Journal ofRetailing 76(2):193–218.

Davis, D., S. Banks, A. Birtles, P. Valentine, and M. Cuthill1997 Whale Sharks in Ningaloo Marine Park: Managing Tourism in an

Australian Marine Protected Area. Tourism Management 18(5):259–271.De Ruyter, K., M. Wetzels, and J. Bloemer

1997 The Dynamics of the Service Delivery Process: A Value-based Approach.International Journal of Research in Marketing 14(3):231–243.

Dodds, W. B.1991 In Search of Value: How Price and Store Name Information Influence

Buyers’ Product Perceptions. The Journal of Services Marketing5(Summer):27–36.

Dodds, W. B., K. B. Monroe, and D. Grewal1991 The Effect of Price, Brand and Store Information on Buyers’ Product

Evaluations. Journal of Marketing Research 28(August):307–319.Dube, L., and M. S. Morgan

1996 Trend Effects and Gender Differences in Retrospective Judgements ofConsumption Emotions. Journal of Consumer Research 23(2):156–162.

Ewert, A. W.1997 Resource-based tourism: introduction and overview. Journal of Applied

Recreation Research 22(1):3–7.Ewert, A. W., and S. Hollenhorst

1989 Testing the Adventure Model: Empirical Support for a Model of RiskRecreation Participation. Journal of Leisure Research 21(2):124–139.

Ewert, A. W., and L. Jamieson2003 Current Status and Future Directions in the Adventure Tourism Industry.

In Managing Tourist Health and Safety in the New Millennium, J. Wilks and S.J. Page, eds., pp. 67–84. Oxford: Pergamon.

Ewert, A. W., and J. Shultis1997 Resource-based Tourism: An Emerging Trend in Tourism Experiences.

Park and Recreation(September):94–104.Fluker, M. R., and L. T. Turner

2000 Needs, Motivations and Expectations of a Commercial Whitewater RaftingExperience. Journal of Travel Research(May):380–389.

Fornell, C., M. Johnson, E. Anderson, J. Cha, and B. Everitt1996 The American Satisfaction Index: Nature, Purpose and Findings. Journal

of Marketing 60(4), October:7-18.Fornell, C., and D. F. Larcker

1981 Evaluating Structural Equation Modelling with Unobservable Variablesand Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research 18(1):39–50.

Gallarza, M. G., and I. G. Saura2006 Value Dimensions, Perceived Value, Satisfaction and Loyalty: An Investi-

gation of University Students’ Travel Behaviour. Tourism Management27:437–452.

Gronroos, C.1990 Service Management and Marketing: Managing the Moments of Truth in

Service Competition. Lexington, MA: Lexington.Hair, J. F., R. E. Anderson, R. L. Tatham, and W. C. Black

1998 Multivariate Data Analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.Hall, C. M., and S. McArthur

1991 Commercial Whitewater Rafting in Australia: Motivations and Expecta-tions of the Participant and the Relevance of Group Size for the RaftingExperience. Australian Journal of Leisure and Recreation 1(4):25–31.

Hall, C. M., and B. Weiler1992 Introduction: What’s So Special about Special Interest Tourism? In SpecialInterest Tourism, C. M. Hall and B. Weiler, eds., London: Belhaven Press.

Hawes, D. K.1979 Satisfaction Derived from Leisure-Time Pursuits: An Exploratory Nation-

wide Survey. Journal of Leisure Research(4th Q):247–264.


Holbrook, M. B.1994 The Nature of Customer Value. In Service Quality: New Directions in

Theory and Practice, R. T. Rust and R. L. Oliver, eds., pp. 21–71. London:Sage Publications.

Holmes-Smith, P., Rowe, K. J.1994 The Development and Use of Congeneric Measurement Models in School

Effectiveness Research: Improving the Reliability and Validity if Compositeand Latent Variables for Fitting Multi-Level and Structural Equation Models.Paper presented to the International Congress for School Effectiveness andImprovement. Melbourne.

Hudson, S., ed.2002 Sport and Adventure Tourism. USA: Haworth Hospitality Press.

Jayanti, R., and A. K. Ghosh1996 Service Value Determination: An Integrative Perspective. Journal of

Hospitality and Leisure Marketing 3(4):5–25.Jeong, S. O., and S. H. Park

1996 A Cross-Cultural Application of the Novelty Scale. Annals of TourismResearch 23:238–241.

Keeling, A.2003 Getting into Action: The UK Adventure Tourism Market. Insights

14:383–394.Krippendorf, J.

1987 The Holiday Makers. Understanding the Impact of Leisure and Travel.London: Heinemann.

Lam, S. Y., V. Shankar, M. K. Erramilli, and B. Murthy2004 Customer Value, Satisfaction, and Switching Costs: An Illustration from

Business-to Business Service Context. Journal of the Academy of MarketingScience 32(3):293–311.

Lemminck, J., K. de Ruyter, and M. Wetzels1998 The Role of Value in the Delivery Process of Hospitality Services. Journal

of Economic Psychology 19(April):159–177.Liljander, V.

1994 Modeling Perceived Service Quality Using Different Comparison Stan-dards. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction and ComplainingBehavior 7:126–142.

Loundsbury, J. W., and L. L. Hoopes1985 An Investigation of Factors Associated with Vacation Satisfaction. Journal

of Leisure Research 17(1):1–13.Mano, H., and R. L. Oliver

1993 Assessing the Dimensionality and Structure of the Consumption Experi-ence: Evaluation, Feeling and Satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Research20(3):451–466.

McDougall, G. H. G., and T. Levesque2000 Customer Satisfaction with Service: Putting Perceived Value into the

Equation. Journal of Services Marketing 14(5):392–410.McGill, T., V. Hobbs, and J. Klobas

2003 User-Developed Applications and Information Systems Success: A Test ofDe Leone and McGill’s Model. Journal of Information Resources Manage-ment 24(1):24–46.

Murphy, P., M. Pritchard, and B. Smith2000 The Destination Product and its Impact on Traveller Perceptions. Tourism

Management 21:43–52.Murray, D., and G. Howat

2002 The Relationships Among Service Quality, Value, Satisfaction, and FutureIntentions of Customers at an Australian Sports and Leisure Centre. SportManagement Review 5:25–43.

Murray, K. B., and J. L. Schlacter1990 The Impact of Services Versus Goods on Consumers’ Assessment of

Perceived Risk and Variability. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science18(1):51–65.


O’Guinn, T. C., and R. Belk1989 Heaven on Earth: consumption at Heritage Village, USA. Journal of

Consumer Research 16(September):227–238.Oh, H.

1999 Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction and Customer Value: A HolisticPerspective. International Journal of Hospitality Management 18(1):67–82.

2003 Price Fairness and its Asymmetric Effects on Overall Price, Quality, andValue Judgments: The Case of a Upscale Hotel. Tourism Management24:241–249.

Oliver, R. L.1993 A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Service Satisfaction: Compat-

ible Goals, Different Concepts. In Advances in Services Marketing andManagement: Research and Practice, T. A. Swartz, D. E. Bowen and S. W.Brown, eds., (2nd ed.) pp. 65–85. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

1997 Satisfaction: A Behavioural Perspective on the Consumer. New York:McGraw Hill.

Ostrom, A., and D. Iacobucci1995 Consumer Trade-offs and the Evaluation of Services. Journal of Marketing

59(January):17–28.Otto, J. E., and J. R. B. Ritchie

1996 The Service Experience in Tourism. Tourism Management 17(3):165–174.Page, S. J., T. Bentley, and L. Walker

2005 Scoping the Nature and Extent of Adventure Tourism Operations inScotland: How Safe are They? Tourism Management 26(3):381–397.

Patterson, P. G., and R. A. Spreng1997 Modelling the Relationship between Perceived Value, Satisfaction and

Repurchase Intentions in a Business-to-Business, Services Context: An Empir-ical Examination. International Journal of Service Industry Management8(5):414–434.

Petrick, J. F.2002 Development of a Multi-Dimensional Scale for Measuring Perceived Value

of a Service. Journal of Leisure Research 34(2):119–136.Petrick, J. F., S. J. Backman, and R. Bixler

1999 An Investigation of Selected Factors Effect on Golfer Satisfaction andPerceived Value. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 17(1):40–59.

Pfaff, M.1977 The Index of Consumer Satisfaction: Measurement Problems and Oppor-

tunities. In Conceptualization and Measurement of Consumer Satisfactionand Dissatisfaction, H. K. Hunt, ed., pp. 36–71. Cambridge, MA: MarketingScience Institute. Marketing Science Institute, May.

Poon, A.1993 Tourism, Technology and Competitive Strategies. Oxon: CAB

International.Richins, M.

1997 Measuring Emotions in the Consumption Experience. Journal of Con-sumer Research 24:127–146.

Ryan, C.1997 The Tourist Experience: A New Introduction. London: Cassell.1995 Researching Tourism Satisfaction: Issues, Concepts, Problems. London:

Routledge.Rust, R. T., and R. L. Oliver

1994 Service Quality: New Directions in Theory and Practice. London: Sage.Sanchez, J., L. Callarisa, R. M. Rodrıguez, and M. A. Molineret

2006 Perceived Value of the Purchase of a Tourism Product. TourismManagement 27(3):394–409.

Schechter, L.1984 A Normative Conception of Value. Progressive Grocer, Executive

Report:12–14.Sheth, J. N., B. I. Newman, and B. L. Gross

1991 Consumption Values and Market Choice. Cincinnati, OH: South WesternPublishing.


Sinha, I., and W. S. DeSarbo1998 An Integrated Approach Toward the Spatial Modelling of Perceived

Customer Value. Journal of Marketing Research 35(2):236–249.Stevens, B. F.

1992 Price Value Perceptions of Travellers. Journal of Travel ResearchFall:44–48.

Swarbrooke, J., C. Beard, S. Leckie, and G. Pomfret2003 Adventure Tourism: The New Frontier. London: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Sweeney, J. C., G. N. Soutar, and L. W. Johnson1999 The Role of Perceived Risk in the Quality-Value Relationship: A Study in a

Retail Environment. Journal of Retailing 75(1):77–105.Sweeney, J. C., and G. N. Soutar

2001 Consumer Perceived Value: The Development of a Multiple Item Scale.Journal of Retailing 77(1):203–220.

Sung, H. H., A. M. Morrison, and J. T. O’Leary1997 Definition of Adventure Travel: Conceptual Framework for Empirical

Application from the Providers’ Perspective. Asia-Pacific Journal of TourismResearch 1(2):47–66.

Tabata, R. S.1992 Scuba Diving Holidays. In Special Interest Tourism, C. M. Hall and B.

Weiler, eds., pp. 171–184. NY: Belhaven.Travel Industry Association, 2005. Adventure Travel Report. Travel Industry

Association of America, www.tia.org.Tse, D., and P. Wilton

1988 Models of Consumer Satisfaction Formation: An Extension. Journal ofMarketing Research XXV(May):204–212.

Tsui, B.2000 Marketing Adventures. Advertising Age 71(40):38.

Urry, J.1990 The Consumption of Tourism. Sociology 24(1):23–35.

Walle, A. H.1997 Pursuing Risk or Insight: Marketing Adventures. Annals of Tourism

Research 24(2):265–282.Weber, K.

2001 Outdoor Adventure Tourism: A Review of Research Approaches. Annals ofTourism Research 28(2):363–380.

Wilks, J. and S. J. Page, eds.2003 Managing Tourist Health and Safety in the New Millennium. Oxford:

Pergamon.Williams, A. P., and G. N. Soutar

2005 Close to the Edge: Critical Issues for Adventure Tourism Operators. AsiaPacific Journal of Tourism Research 10(3):247–262.

Woodruff, R., E. Cadotte, and R. Jenkins1983 Modelling Consumer Satisfaction Processes Using Experience-based

Norms. Journal of Marketing Research 20(August):296–304.Woodruff, R., and S. F. Gardial

1996 Know Your Customer: New Approaches to Customer Value and Satisfac-tion. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.

Woodruff, R.1997 Customer Value: The Next Source of Competitive Advantage. The Journal

of the Academy of Marketing Science 25(2):139–153.Zeithaml, V. A.

1981 How Consumers Evaluation Processes Differ between Goods and Services.In Marketing of Services, J. H. Donnelly and W. R. George, eds., pp. 186–190.Chicago: American Marketing Association.

Zeithaml, V. A.1988 Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality and Value: A Means-end Model

and Synthesis of Evidence. Journal of Marketing 52(3):2–22.

http://www.tia.org


Zeithaml, V. A., L. Berry, and A. Parasuraman1993 The Nature and Determinants of Customer Expectations of Service.

Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 21(1):1–12.1996 The behavioural consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing

60(April):31–46.Zuckerman, M.

1994 Behavioural Expressions and Biosocial Bases of Sensation Seeking.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Submitted 2 March 2008. Final Version 12 February 2009. Accepted 23 February 2009.Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor: Jorge Zamora


Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 439–458, 20090160-7383/$ - see front matter. Published by Elsevier Ltd.



INTERPRETING SLAVERY TOURISM

Christine N. BuzindeThe Pennsylvania State University, USA

Carla Almeida SantosUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA

Abstract: This inquiry explores the manner in which tourists endow a former slave plantationwith meaning by promoting or demoting its cultural authority. Drawing on the encoding/decoding model, this study utilizes interviews to examine the ways in which tourists decodethe plantation by acquiescing or negating the preferred cultural text through the adoptionof dominant, negotiated or oppositional readings. The findings indicate that as active recip-ients of the preferred reading tourists interpreted/decoded the plantation in dichotomouspolarized ways based on the meaning structures and knowledge frameworks of the interpre-tive communities within which they are situated. In essence, the decoding process, much likethe encoding process is viewed as constituting an array of dominant ideologies. Keywords:decoding/encoding model, interpretative communities, slavery. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

INTRODUCTION

Slavery heritage tourism sites function within discourses of authoritywherein memory and illusion coalesce to shape a romanticized recol-lection of the contentious plantation past; these tourable mnemoniclocales are intricately linked to the history of chattel bondage (Dannand Seaton 2001). They are not apolitical spatialities, equally hospita-ble to any form of cultural expression but rather consist of culturallyspecific values which utilize discursive lenses to influence how histori-cal events are understood and interpreted. Like many heritage sites,they serve as locales of pedagogical power wherein the state disciplineshistory, knowledge, and ultimately the populace (Foucault 1977). Oneof their key roles has been to preserve history and to educate genera-tions about the plantation past vis a vis noble tales describing the livesof the plantation owners and the architectural intricacies of theirhomes (Buzinde and Santos 2008). Another role has been to inspirepride and inculcate nationalistic ideologies, albeit through state engi-neered amnesia by trivializing or annihilating the institution of slaverywithin the heritage metanarratives (Buzinde 2007; Eichstedt and Small

Christine Buzinde is an assistant professor in the Department of Recreation, Park andTourism Management at The Pennsylvania State University (University Park, PA 16802, USA.E-mail: <[email protected]>). Her research focuses on the socio-political dynamics oftourism as they pertain to ethno-representation. Carla Almeida Santos is an assistant professorin the Department of Recreation, Sport and Tourism at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Her research interests focus on the areas of representational politics and socio-cultural aspects of tourism.

439

440 C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439–458

2002). In essence, they are not innocent edifications but rather repre-sentations of thoroughly ideological narratives bound up within polit-ical discourses that tacitly endorse dominant societal values.

As much as slave heritage tourism sites are demonized within aca-demic discourse for their inescapable authority or their impossible mis-sion to show the American plantation past through cosmopolitanrepresentational tactics, one has to acknowledge that there is no uni-fied power bloc or conspiratorial heritage system to blame or defeat.It is rather a tangled skein of complicitous human interactions thatpromote the cultural authority of these sites. After all, the authorityand meaning of heritage sites is, in part, determined by how othervoices, that is, those of tourists, talk them into being. Slave heritagesites gain their credibility not from the onsite magically-imbued objectsthat are portrayed through carefully crafted metanarratives but ratherby the power vested in them by the visiting populations. Thus, ratherthan refer to heritage sites as instruments of institutional oppression,it is far more beneficial to view them as contested sites wherein mean-ing is constructed, reconstructed and negotiated.

The symbiotic relationship between slave heritage sites and tourists,much like most historic sites, is undoubtedly characterized by dialo-gism whereby, the former constructs a preferred reading of a site whilethe latter brings varying socio-cultural experiences to bear on the pro-cess of interpreting the preferred reading. This symbiotic relationshipcalls attention to the polysemous ways of reading/interpreting culturaltexts, in the broadest sense of the term. Describing how individualsconstruct meaning through their symbolic interactions with culturaltexts, Stuart Hall (1980) maintains that audiences consume the con-noted dominant meanings and decode them using the encoder’s hege-monic belief that the crafted message ought to be society’s point ofview. It follows that the audience accepts the encoding and utilizes itas a reference point for how they subsequently read the text; the dom-inant text thus, acts as a benchmark on which their decision to acqui-esce or contest the message is based. Hall (1980), states that the way inwhich the audience reads or views the encoded text manifests in one ofthree ways: a dominant-hegemonic view, a negotiated view or an oppo-sitional view. Audiences who decode a text as a dominant view acceptthe connoted meanings, reconstruct the preferred view and conse-quently, operate within the ‘‘dominant code’’ (Hall 1980:136). Alter-natively, audiences who decode a text through a negotiated reading‘‘acknowledge the legitimacy of the hegemonic definition’’ (Hall1980:137) while operating outside those definitions by concurrentlynegating the dominant reading; such decodings are characterized bysignificant contradictions. Lastly, audiences who decode a text throughoppositional readings comprehend the preferred reading but opposeits dominant code due to their espousal of alternate frames of refer-ence. Therefore, by reading the text, be it in a preferred, negotiatedor oppositional manner, audiences are inevitably developing and utiliz-ing frameworks that enable them to render the world intelligible.

Within heritage tourism studies, the dialogic meaning making rela-tionship between producers and consumers has remained relatively

C.N. Buzinde, C.A. Santos / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 439–458 441

under researched as scholars have predominantly focused on manage-ment attributes (Halewood and Hannam 2001; Garrod and Fyall 2000).Relatively few examinations have explored tourists in relation to heri-tage sites; those who have embarked on this trajectory have focusedon notions of motivation, satisfaction and market segmentation (seeHerbert 2001; Poria, Butler, and Airey 2004). Therefore, despite somenotable exceptions (Bruner 1993; Chronis 2005; Palmer 2005; Prenticeand Andersen 2007; Pretes 2003), not enough attention has been paidto the processes by which tourists symbolically interact with a preferredreading of a site to endow it with meaning; particularly, readings ofcontested slavery heritage sites, such as former slave plantations, whichare linked to unresolved, contentious pasts deeply connected to cur-rent social debates on slavery, race and racism. Indeed, while scholarshave been instrumental in documenting the didactic and hegemonicrole enacted by heritage sites in annihilating slave histories (seeAlderman and Modlin 2008; Dann and Seaton 2001; Buzinde 2007;Buzinde and Santos 2008), inquiries into how audiences decode suchpreferred readings have remained scarce.

It would be presumptuous to assume that the tourist body is homog-enous and that they all espouse interpretations well aligned with thepreferred reading of the site; especially given that, in the age of glob-alization, individuals draw from an array of ideological predispositions.Furthermore, they are exposed to a plethora of popular cultural textssuch as Hollywood movies (e.g., Roots and Gone with the Wind), PublicBroadcasting Service (PBS) documentaries on slavery in America andnovels on antebellum life, all of which influence their interpretationof the plantation’s cultural text. Tourists thus bring an eclectic set ofpreconceptions to the meaning making process that (dis)engages thepast of depravity and the present social order. Comprehending themanner in which contemporary society renders heritage plantationsintelligible is necessary given that the global community is celebratingthe 200th anniversary since the abolition of slavery for Britain, in 2007,and America, in 2008. Numerous commemorative efforts, such as theopening of America’s first National Slavery Museum and the UNESCOSlave Route Project, are marking this historical zenith through theadoption of inclusive messages that foster dialogue, educate the masspopulace and promote national healing. This anniversary has alsospurred numerous academic investigations which although differentin their disciplinary approaches, share the belief that slavery, both inits historical and modern commemorative forms, continues to be amatter of undiminished political and social relevance. The current in-quiry joins these global efforts by drawing from Hall’s seminal workand building on extant tourism studies to explore the varying ways inwhich tourists endow a former slave plantation with meaning. Specifi-cally, through the use of on-site interviews, the study examines the waysin which tourists decode the plantation’s preferred encoding throughthe adoption of dominant, negotiated or oppositional readings. This isan important undertaking because it is through sustained dialog andcontinued understanding of society’s symbolic interaction with


constructions of America’s slavery past that ‘‘our nation can hope atlong last to become free of its legacy’’ (Wilder 2006:11).

INTERPRETING REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PAST

The interaction between the tourist and the plantation is mediatedthrough textual representations; however, it is important to note thattourists are not passive recipients of cultural texts. They approachthe heritage text by drawing on certain value systems that enable themto render the site intelligible. Scholars examining this phenomenonhave been instrumental in illustrating the active role enacted by recip-ients as they engage with the preferred text constructed by heritageofficials. For instance, drawing on ethnographic work at the New SalemHistoric Site, Bruner (1993) describes the relationship between visitorsand the cultural producers of the text as being characterized by com-petition. There exists ‘‘a contest between the museum professionalsand scholars on the one hand who seek historical accuracy andauthenticity versus the peoples’ own popular interpretation ofAbraham Lincoln’s heritage’’ (Bruner 1993:15). Acknowledging thecomplex relationship between producers and consumers, Bruner as-serts that the scientific views espoused and promoted by the heritageprofessionals ‘‘are contradicted and suppressed by how the recon-structed village is produced and by how it is interpreted and experi-enced by the visitors’’ (1993:14). Hence, despite efforts undertakenby heritage site managers to craft a preferred reading, tourists ulti-mately rearticulate it as they see fit.

The active role enacted by tourists is also evidenced in Chronis’s(2005) work on Gettysburg where he illustrates that tourists utilizetheir pre-established knowledge, negotiation mechanism, and imagina-tion to dialogically engage marketers in the co-construction of mean-ing. Notions of socio-historical demarcations of place furthercomplicate the interpretation process. According to Chronis, both ser-vice providers and tourists utilize historical spatialities to ‘‘define andstrengthen social values of patriotism and national unity’’ (2005:386)as they are understood within the present sociopolitical order. In fact,accounts of nation and nationalism resonate within most examinationsof tourists’ construction of meaning. For example, through the investi-gation of three heritage sites in South Dakota—Mount RushmoreNational Memorial, Wall Drug Store, and Rapid City Dinosaur Park,Pretes (2003) states that historic sites, which conceive of nationalismas an imagined community, often offer tourists a venue within whichto affirm and maintain a form of national identity. Such representa-tional strategies that focus on a social imaginary draw on nationalessentialisms to influence levels of consumption; especially as they ap-ply to nationals who imbue the site with familiarity (Prentice andAndersen 2007). In their exploration of visitor motivations and experi-ences of Old Town, Prentice and Anderson discovered that ‘‘Daneswere much more likely to associate the site with their family history’’whereas non-Danes consumed the locale ‘‘as an insight into a common


humanity’’ (2007:675). The numerous ways in which sites are decodedpose numerous challenges for heritage site managers as they aim to de-liver coherent and inclusionary metanarratives that resonate interna-tionally. Such efforts are further problematized when the site inquestion is associated with a history of depravity and oppression, suchas slavery.

Examining the Elmina Castle, a former slavery trading seaport inGhana, Bruner (1996) explores the manner in which tourists ascribemeaning to the site. Extending his notion of contested meanings asthey pertain to historic sites, his investigation indicated that there weredissonant interpretations of the same site between two cohorts of visi-tors; namely, African and African American tourists. The former asso-ciated the site with King Asantehene, a historical figure who wasimprisoned in the dungeon rooms ‘‘after the defeat of Ashanti forcesby the British army’’ (Bruner 1996:294). For this particular culturalgroup the site symbolically represents colonial resistance. The latterhowever, viewed the castle as a symbolic memorial to their enslavedancestors who endured bondage under the Dutch; thus, for this partic-ular cultural group the site was a key location on the transnational mapof the African diaspora. A commonality within the aforementioned re-search is the understanding that when tourists engage cultural textsthey compete for the construction of relevant meanings that affirmtheir sense of being. Consequently, based on their social situatednessthey render certain elements intelligible while rendering othersobsolete.

Encoding the Hampton Plantation

A prerequisite for comprehending tourist’s interpretations of a givenheritage site is the understanding of the encoded or preferred meta-narrative promoted by site managers. As such, prior to presentingthe methods adopted in the current inquiry, a synopsis of the Hamp-ton Plantation and State Historic Park wherein this research was con-ducted ensues. During the 18th and 19th century the Hampton,located in McClellanville, South Carolina, was an active slave plantation(SCSPS 2006). In 1971 it was sold to South Carolina State Park Service(SCSPS) by Archibald Rutledge, a poet laureate whose ancestors hadowned the site (SCSPS 2006). A stately metal gate beckons tourists tothe site and guides them through the majestic grounds along an entry-way beautifully adorned with a canopy of lush trees. Half a mile downthis path, the greenery that envelops the passageway is replaced with astark image of a clear cut plot in which hundreds of multicolored, syn-thetic flowers are dispersed. There are no commemorative inscriptionsin sight describing this monument; however, when asked tourists areinformed that the area is a gravesite for those who were enslaved atthe Hampton and their descendants. There are hundreds of unmarkedgraves identified only by the numerous oblong protrusions in theground that are occasionally accompanied by displays of crucifix-shaped bouquets. One notable exception is Sue Alston’s grave which


showcases a tombstone identifying her as the ‘‘angel of Hampton’’ anddescendant of slaves. Sue Alston is a former slave who, after the aboli-tion of slavery, chose to remain at the Hampton as a cook for ArchibaldRutledge. Remnants of her cabin, which encompass a chimney and apartial wall, are on display. Unlike other plantations, the Hamptonhas no intact slave cabins to showcase; in fact, the area wherein theywere once located currently houses the public bathrooms and guestparking lots.

Through commemorative inscriptions and docent narratives, thetourist gaze is directed towards objects that invoke pleasurable planta-tion experiences (Buzinde 2007; Buzinde and Santos 2008). The con-stant discursive placement of the sites’s past within narratives of localand regional wealth reinforces the importance of this theme to thestate endorsed meaning of the site. Prevalent within brochures, com-memorative inscriptions and docent narratives are statements suchas: ‘‘cultivation of rice . . . created economic prosperity’’; ‘‘the systemof rice cultivation . . . transformed the entire South Carolina CoastalPlain bringing immense wealth to planters’’; ‘‘Carolinians were export-ing 160 million pounds of rice per year’’. Examined in isolation suchaccounts have little significance; however, a contextual examinationelicits that the accumulation of riches is celebrated without mentioningthe inhumane manner in which the wealth was amassed. Within this‘‘matrix of erasures’’ (Ebron 2000:920), accounts of the Other evanes-cently appear under the disguise of terminological inconsistencies suchas servants or laborers; implying consented participation in the labormarket as opposed to chattel bondage.

Measures are taken to enable tourists to relate to the site’s celebra-tory message by knitting them into the fabric of the metanarrativethrough phrases such as ‘‘you would have sat here’’ and ‘‘you wouldhave come in through this door’’. These selected phrases invite touriststo imagine themselves enacting the privileged roles of the elite and in-voke ‘‘an individual sense of belonging and understanding of collectiveroots’’ (Palmer 2005:14). The tour occurs in the purposefully unfur-nished mansion which highlights the structure’s architectural and con-struction details. The docent narratives encompass accounts ofaccumulated wealth, descriptions of hunting and building accoutre-ments and humorous tales of misdemeanors. Artifacts within the man-sion encompass a poster of a family tree and a log book of famousrecipes created by the Hampton women. Notably, the recipe log bookalso catalogues the existence of the thousands enslaved at the Hamp-ton and documents their monetary value based on assigned tasks; how-ever, docents only make reference to the log book in relation to therecipes. The site also exhibits a dilapidated kitchen building whereinthe enslaved prepared meals. The site’s revered image is further an-chored within institutional discourses which have elevated it to Na-tional Historic Landmark status particularly because it exhibits amansion which is ‘‘a centerpiece and monument to South Carolina’sglorious rice age’’ (South Carolina State Park Brochure); this nationaltribute encapsulates the core tenets of the site’s preferred reading.


Study Methods

Tourists’ interpretations of Hampton were explored through semi-structured interviews. Twenty-seven on-site exit interviews were con-ducted with a purposeful sample of tourists during February of 2006.There are various sampling strategies used for purposefully selectinginformation within naturalistic inquiry; the activity focused strategywas adopted because the goal of the study was to sample individualsbased on their engagement in the activity (i.e., site visitation ratherthan geographical origin). Given this directive, the sample resultedin 27 Caucasian participants, sixteen of whom were American while ele-ven were internationals—Canadians and 1 Englishman (the site is sel-dom frequented by ethnic minority). Twelve of the participants werefemales and fifteen were males; the number of participants was guidedby the attainment of theoretical saturation (Patton 2002). They rangedbetween the ages of 45 and 60 and possessed a high school and aboveeducational level. Although several of the American participants wererepeat tourists there was no apparent difference in interpretation orsignificance attributed to the site in comparison to the new comers.Tourists were interviewed after touring the site to ensure they had aholistic view of the produced representations including the masternar-rative offered by the state officiated docents. Interview questionsencompassed: What does this site represent to you? What significancedoes it possess? Why should it be commemorated? Are there other ele-ments that should be added to the overall narrative? If so, what arethey, and in what ways would these additions be beneficial? To ensuretrustworthiness of the data, measures were taken to seek clarificationduring the interview, immediately after the interview and/or afterparticipants had completed the second sightseeing activity.

Narrative analysis was employed to aid the comprehension of theinterpretive processes entailed within the interview context. This ap-proach allowed for the revelation of the narrative structures entailedwithin social agents’ meaning making processes and the identificationof the narrative devices employed by individuals in recounting theirexperiences (Polkinghorne 1988). The analysis commenced with a pro-longed review of the interview transcripts with the goal of gaining anunderstanding of the overall meanings while concurrently preservinga holistic image (Hall 1975). This stage entailed identifying narrativestructures that aided participants in making sense of their experiencesand it also enabled the documentation of recurrent elements. All thetranscripts were iteratively reviewed from numerous horizontal passes,which required not only (re)reading the interviews from beginning toend, but also the assembling of narratives by themes (Coffey andAtkinson 1996).

The coding procedure described by Miles and Huberman (1994) wasemployed to identify emergent themes; within the theme identificationprocess, words, phrases, sentences, or paragraphs that were affiliatedwith the same theme were clustered together, facilitating the classifica-tion of the theme. Thus, via a thorough review and coding process, keyemergent themes were identified. Two overarching themes emerged:


‘‘Slavery as a Munificent Institution’’ and ‘‘Slavery as a Lesson forHumanity’’. Sub-themes for the former were ‘‘Architectural Contribu-tion to History’’ and ‘‘Altruistic Relationships’’, while sub-themes forthe latter were ‘‘Hegemonic Relationships’’ and ‘‘Pedagogical Respon-sibility’’. These overarching themes and sub-themes are important gi-ven their ability to provide insight into the differential ways touristsascribe meaning to the site. For instance, phrases such as ‘‘they wantedto be a Rutledge servant’’, ‘‘they were good to their servants’’ and‘‘there was a better relationship here’’, guided the categorization ofnarratives affiliated with the sub-theme ‘‘Altruistic Relationships’’ whileexpressions such as ‘‘to show for society’s mistakes’’, ‘‘shows howthings really are in this country today’’ and ‘‘should help people reflectupon the past’’ steered the sorting of narratives associated with the sub-theme ‘‘Pedagogical Responsibility’’. Intercoder reliability was attainedthrough the efforts of two independent coders who coded each unitbased on the previously identified decoding categories with the expec-tation that coders would add to the preexisting categories if theyencountered data that suggested the creation of new ones. However,as the analysis progressed coders encountered no additional decodingcategories, in fact, they discovered the absence of the negotiated view(an aspect discussed in the discussion section); this coding procedureresulted in strong coder agreement.

The approach to interviewing was one that emphasized co-produc-tion and co-authorship through the interaction between researchersand participants as co-creators of meaning (Holstein and Gubrium1995). The researchers acknowledge that their varying lived experi-ences, values, belief systems and social localities have in a plethora ofways shaped their approach to this inquiry (Pritchard and Morgan2003). Given their racial classification, black and white respectively, itis can be argued that the latter ‘‘writes from the center from withinthose ideological, discourses and material structures that form the cen-tered structures of power and knowledge’’ (Pritchard and Morgan2003:121) while the former writes from the periphery. However, sucha simplistic binary analysis is complicated, firstly, by the equal academicstatus from which both authors write and secondly, by the various hy-brid identities that they embody as Afro-Canadian and Portuguese-American individuals whose formative years were in Cyprus and Portu-gal, respectively. Thus, to attribute their knowingness to race/ethnicityor nationality would not only be misleading but erroneous becausethey inhabit various geopolitical spatialities that influence theirembodiment of the constructs in question and inform the manner inwhich they render their surroundings intelligible. Consequently, amore appropriate account of their positionalities would view theiridentities as evolving and their writing location as ‘‘not so much cen-tered or marginalized but a place in motion’’ (Pritchard and Morgan2003:121). Such reflexive actions not only enable the researchers to re-flect on ways in which they come to interact with their interlocutors butalso ways in which they draw on their lived experiences to render theobject of research intelligible (Pritchard and Morgan 2003).


Decoding the Hampton Plantation

Two distinct decoding practices were adopted by participants,namely dominant hegemonic and oppositional. Participants whoespoused a dominant hegemonic position shared the site’s preferredtext and discursively constructed the plantation by acquiescing to theprojected message. They justified their views on slavery based on theperception that the institution of slavery was munificent; hence, theplantation was articulated within the realm of its historical architec-tural significance and its altruistic relationships between the enslaversand their enslaved. Participants who adhered to an oppositional/coun-ter hegemonic position negated the preferred textual code and drewupon different frames of reference (Hall 1980). This group viewedthe site as a lesson for humanity and an exemplar of hegemonic rela-tionships between past and present racial groups in America. A discus-sion of the emergent discursive frames follows.

Slavery as a Munificent Institution: Architectural Contribution to History

A common perspective amongst individuals who acquiesced to thepreferred text was the view that the mansion, as a national historicallandmark, justified the commemoration of the plantation. The conflu-ence of the mansion with commemorable history is described by Rob-ert, one of the participants, who states: ‘‘. . . we always appreciate thehistory of a house like this, this house is history, there is a history lessonhere’’. Similarly, albeit exhibiting a nostalgic yearning for the life expe-riences of the denizens of the big house, Betty mentions that the man-sion ‘‘is so special because . . . if [it] could talk it would probably tell alot of stories’’. The notion that the plantation represented a significantcontribution to historical architecture resonated with numerous partic-ipants. Some described the architectural characteristics as distinct incontrast to other historic sites in the area. For instance, one participantcommented on the mansion in comparison to similar structures atother historical plantations such as Drayton Hall. Unlike the previousaccounts, which refer to the plantation as generally representing his-tory, Charlie specifically refers to the architectural design as the maincontribution to history.

One thing I see about this house that is similar with other ones thatwe have seen like Drayton Hall is that this one actually shows somearchitecture . . . an important (emphasis by speaker) part of the historyof this area.

In the above excerpt, Charlie makes reference to the interpretationstrategy adopted by the site that allows tourists to see through variouslayers of the mansion’s construction process. This is a practice wel-comed by tourists who have an appreciation for architectural detailing.Acknowledging the importance of the architectural design, Rose states:

The big thing about this house is showing how the thing was built. It’sdifferent from the normal site that you would go to. It’s really neat. Itteaches you something about history.


Arguably, the site was successful in mobilizing familiar symbols,images and narratives that help shape the subjectivities of the tourists(Ebron 2000). It constructed and produced a longing for place andidentity that the tourists were able to relate to because it invoked asense of home. These dominant readings were well aligned with thepreferred message because they presented the mansion as an iconogra-phy of collective memory; collective memory in this sense refers to amasternarrative wherein the dominant value systems are celebratedwhile subaltern histories are marginalized (Buzinde and Santos 2008).

Slavery as a Munificent Institution: Altruistic Relationships

Participants were asked to delineate other aspects that were entailedin the representation of the plantation. Some participants mentionedthe well kept grounds and/or the historical horticultural designs, as as-pects that also warranted preservation while others were unable toidentify any additional commemorable elements. To further delineatewhether they espoused the preferred reading participants were askedwhether the institution of slavery was an historical element entailedin the interpretation of the site. Those who offered the preferred viewresponded to this question through statements that implicitly mini-mized the problematic nature of the plantations’ past and presentedit as a benevolent institution. For instance, Joe’s discussion of themunificent nature of the chattel bondage is captured in the followingexcerpt:

But people were well here because I read books that stated that theywanted to be a Rutledge servant as opposed to someone else. I meansome of them were mean to their slaves . . . but they didn’t do thathere. Some days they showed up for work some days they didn’t,ummm and it was okay.

Joe, as well as other participants, substantiated their claims based onbooks they had read. Notably, these books were in many cases authoredby descendents of planter families who themselves were justifying theinvolvement of their kin in slavery and, concurrently, romanticizingthe era.

Joe acknowledges the existence of chattel bondage but views it assomething many aspired to be a part of. The association with freewilland gainful employment is explicit in Joe’s account as he makes refer-ence to ‘‘servants’’ and ‘‘work’’; implying they were part of a paid work-force. Similarly, Gloria also claims life was better at Hampton ascompared to other plantations.

I think because of the history that we have read about this place, thisone, I mean don’t get me wrong, we haven’t been to lots of places butit seems that maybe there was a better relationship between the ser-vants and their owners here than a lot of places.

Gloria, juxtaposing the plantation to others in the area, argues thatthe Hampton abided by leaner regulations that favored positive inter-actions between the enslaved and their enslavers. Charlie also concurs


that the Hampton slaves were better off. He, however, views the ceme-tery—located at the entrance of the property—as a prime illustrationof the generosity that characterized the relationship between enslavedand their enslavers.

. . . from what we heard Archibald’s ancestors were nice folk . . . theywere good to their servants, they tried to treat them well. Did ya’allsee the cemetery at the entrance, they gave up the huge prop-erty . . . gave it to their workers so they could all be buried there. Nicepeople like that were hard to come by in those days . . . and Archiewrites a lot about Sue [a former slave] ‘nd how nice she was.

The cemetery in question was donated by Archibald’s ancestorsto the Hampton slave community. Descendants of slaves are nolonger buried in the area and rather choose a cemetery located inGermain Town—an original former slave community (personalcommunication).

The allusion to the pleasantness of the enslavers is a narrative strat-egy well aligned and legitimized by written accounts offered by Archi-bald, a denizen of the Hampton, who revered the plantation andnostalgically described its glorious days. Participants who are familiarwith these cultural texts draw on the offered popular tropes to renderthe locale intelligible. John believes that slaves were better off at theHampton but argues that the preferential treatment at this site is attrib-utable to their cultivated cash crops. He states:

It interested me how the blacks had or created their own little com-munity how they worked . . . Rice planters were much nicer than cot-ton planters.

Unlike Charlie, John does not make any reference to written docu-ments to justify his stance but argues that enslavers on rice plantationswere more pleasant compared to those on cotton plantations. He fur-ther legitimates slavery as munificent in his allusion that it led to thecreation of a unique black community. In general, the discourse struc-ture adopted by participants in this category strategically avoided dis-cussions of the contentions past, subsequently justifying its existencebased on its creation of a key historical artifact—the plantation; as wellas, the development of an African American culture which emergedfrom the alleged munificent relationships between enslaved andenslavers.

These participants articulated the site through narratives of wealthand benevolence consequently drawing upon cogent images of collec-tive memory. Furthermore, through nostalgic yearnings, they deviseddiscursive strategies which defended their American identity andstrengthened their link to the past. Their nostalgic motives can beattributed to the uncertainty instigated by modernity (particular withregards to issues of identity politics) which pushes social beings to seeka certain level of stability, safety and originality from which to base theirsense of self (Halewood and Hannam 2001; Hewison 1987; Lowenthal1985).


Slavery as a Lesson for Humanity: Hegemonic Relationships

A common perspective amongst participants who adopted an oppo-sitional reading was the view that the site epitomized the apogee in les-sons of human existence. To them, it represented a significanthistorical contribution owing to its link to racial issues in America.For instance, Eliza refers to racial history in relation to plantations:

I think that plantations like the one here show the public the devel-opment over a couple of hundred years both black and white, AfricanAmericans and white Americans and red too . . . you know the FirstNations people, how they lived and worked together on this land.

Eliza views the site as a portrayal of not only the ills of chattel bond-age but also as a life lesson on how peoples of various races coexistedwhether amicably or not. She opposes the preferred reading whichclaims there is only one story to recount—that of the white enslaversand their mansion—and rather acknowledges the fact that there arenumerous stories that constitute the site’s past. Jake also agrees thatthe site is an exemplar of racial issues in America. He, however, ex-plains the dominant ideology of the enslavers and describes the plan-tation as a place:

. . . where people that believed blacks were inferior to whites . . . Well,now they have this [points to the mansion] to show for society’s mis-takes, just like the holocaust you see, we need to learn a lessonhere . . .

Jake’s allusion to a similar blunder within human history, the holo-caust, is an interesting juxtaposition which he utilizes to justify his ped-agogically based argument. Positioning the site as exemplar of pastaccounts of white supremacism, he argues that it represents a social les-son for today’s society. Similarly, Bob draws on advice provided to himby a local friend to frame the site as illustrative of the racial dynamics inAmerica: ‘‘my buddy said if you want to know about race in this countrygo visit the plantation, you’ll understand where it all stems from’’.Thus, to members of this group, the site was not merely about a syn-chronous history but a continual construction of the past in the pres-ent. Some had read about issues of race in America while others hadbeen introduced to the topic through popular docudramas such asRoots. For instance, drawing on popular culture, Lou states:

We’d only seen movies, like Roots, and Gone With the Wind. . . .wewanted to see how . . . how the slaves—[trails off] . . . really how theAfrican American blacks and whites lived in this place . . . The houseis nice but the relationship here between blacks and whites is grandin American history, wouldn’t you say?

Lou moves his gaze past the house to the more intangible and invis-ible aspects of the plantation, race relations. Likewise, Eunice also dis-cusses her interest in racial issues.

. . . this peaked our interest in the history of the black people in Amer-ica and their existence under white rule, under slavery. We don’t havea history like this in Canada . . . I mean our experience with the First


Nations people wasn’t the best but it can’t be compared to this withthe plantations and all. We were hoping to find out how the Africansthat were brought from Africa were, you know, treated and how theyhelped build the place.

Given her relative lack of knowledge about American slave history,Eunice sought to augment her awareness through the plantation visitbut was disappointed to discover that the issues she was interested inand thought relevant were in fact not addressed. Overall, slavery andrace cognizance were not only filters through which participants viewedthe site, but also key motivators for travel. It should be noted that theease with which some visitors critiqued the site’s representation canbe attributed to their foreign status, as the following section illustrates.

Slavery as a Lesson for Humanity: Pedagogical Responsibility

Discussing elements that were lacking within the metanarrative,Dean reflects on the overall landscape and tour narrative, and notesthe reluctance to incorporate the institution of slavery:

But I was thinking, the thing here is that there is nothing left of howthe slaves lived nor do they talk about them . . . the plantation is justabout the house, and . . . oh of course Archibald Rutledge. Don’tget me wrong, I think he is interesting too for history and all. Hewas what poet Laureate of the area, right? . . . but what about hisancestors and their connection to slavery, what about slavery and thisplace or province? . . . just that it would have been an interesting thingto include . . . how many slaves were here, how they were treated here,what they did, you know. Mhhh . . . maybe it’s a Canadian thing,maybe America sees it different . . . who knows.

Dean is mystified by the annihilation of slavery in the masternarra-tive; attributing his perplexity to the fact that he is a foreigner. He viewsaccounts of the white residents and the mansion as legitimate historicalevents but points to a major aspect of the plantation that is missingfrom the masternarrative. Likewise, Bob also reflects on the lack of fo-cus on the African American experience within the tour narrative:

I thought that the . . . I don’t know, but I felt that the treatment of theenormous riches that were gotten through slavery was not treated asforcefully or strongly as I would hope it be.

In essence, Hampton’s discursive strategy of trivialization was de-tected by foreign tourists who arguably are not confined by the localsocio-political order. To them, the site was unequivocally linked tothe history of chattel bondage; a historical lesson for humanity. Trudyconcurs with Bob:

Well . . . there wasn’t a whole lot said about slavery . . . But that’s animportant part of letting people know how the slaves were treated . . .what would they have typically been provided with? You know andthings like that could have been incorporated a little bit into this toura little bit more, you know. This needs to be here regardless of howbad it was.


Interestingly, while issues of slavery, within slavery heritage metanar-ratives, have been excised based on the argument that tourists wouldbe offended (Dann and Seaton 2001), this group of participants wel-comed its incorporation. They were aware of the abhorrent nature ofthe issue but viewed it as an important message to convey to the public.For instance, Patrick, a British social scientist, provides insight into howslavery could be represented:

The main thing is to give information that is correct, that is accuratethat is not romanticized one way or another. Too many times thepoint of view is slanted and I don’t know how you make such a hor-rible thing objective anyway. It doesn’t matter how well slaves were‘‘well treated’’ [quotes indicated by speaker] it doesn’t alter the fact thatthey were slaves. It’s morally repulsive. So you know, it’s a fine man-sion, it’s a beautiful plantation but founded on an immoral concept.I think you just have to try and present it honestly . . .

Some constructed meanings of the site in tandem with socio-politicalissues in America. They felt their understanding of the plantationwould illuminate current issues of race in America. For instance,Andrew mentions:

We’re not sure about this but we kindah thought that this . . . showshow things really are in this country today eh, between the blacksand whites. I thought I would learn more on relationship betweenthe slaves and their owners . . . but I think I learnt more about therelationship between blacks and whites now that still has some sorewounds from the past.

Similarly, linking race politics to economic injustices, Gerard states:

I would have liked to see more about the slaves and their enslav-ers . . . I don’t know it [the lack of focus on the institution of slavery]explains a lot of things in terms of current attitudes and what the rela-tionships are . . . you can see that . . . these kinds of places should helppeople reflect upon the past and then address the current economicand social inequities because they are valuable.

The Hampton, in Gerard’s view, should have enacted a didactic roleto help society heal past wounds and thus, facilitate the resolution ofcontemporary social problems that emerged from the plantation era.Much like others, Bob also refers to the link between past racial ineq-uities and present racial biases in America:

I detect a layer of attitudes that existed two or three hundred yearsago, I detect them in 2006. Now being here I understand it more.In Canada too, some of the things we did with the indigenous societywere quite bad too. So it’s good to see this and bring it into a currentstate of affairs.

Discussing the implication for such selective and celebratory repre-sentations, Patrick mentions that the issues have to be explicitly ad-dressed in order to invoke positive and meaningful societal changes.

You cannot exercise present race relations in America from what yousee here on the plantation. This is just a continuation of a long racial


saga. How can they overcome racism when American history still over-looks the contribution of the blacks that were enslaved on this soil?

Overall, the findings indicate that foreign tourists, albeit mostly froma neighboring country, viewed the site as a locale within which a dialogon race and racial issues in America ought to take place. Furthermore,they viewed it as a lesson to humanity, a perspective addressed inAshworth’s (2002) discussion of the reasons why society commemo-rates historical events. Notably, the understanding that the plantationera is a didactic moment in the nation’s history resonates with manyAmericans. Such perspectives provide fertile ground on which to sowcosmopolitan ideals such as the construction of the nation’s first mu-seum on slavery—the United States National Slavery Museum in Fred-ericksburg, Virginia. Even politicians, who once veered away from thistaboo topic, are incorporating it in campaign speeches, as was the casewith President Barack Obama. Numerous positive changes have indeedoccurred in America and continue to break ground however, reflectingon the lapsed time since the abolition of slavery juxtaposed against thepresent socio-political order, one is forced to reckon with the fact thatthere is still a lot for society to collectively accomplish. Change cancommence within slavery tourism sites wherein open dialog has thepowerful ability to foster national and global healing.

INTERPRETIVE COMMUNITIES AND THE DECODING PROCESS

The preferred reading at the Hampton Plantation summoned tour-ists to celebrate the culture of the planter families and their traditionsas symbols of national heritage. However, as active recipients of thepreferred reading, they interpreted the site in dichotomous polarizedways; juxtaposing the dominant text to other socio-political discoursesand constructing their own meanings. They can be broadly sorted intodominant publics and resistant publics; the former, decoded the site byacquiescing to the preferred reading through a dominant view, whilethe latter adopted an oppositional view. Notably, the negotiated viewdid not resonate within the data; this is attributed to the transient nat-ure of the participants and their relative social distance from the localsocio-political nexus that constitutes the site. In other words, the partic-ipants were reasonably removed from the deep, socio-political nexusthat envelops the resident community of McClellanville in which theplantation emerged and wherein locals (both white and black) are con-stantly reminded of their contentious past and are faced with efforts toharmoniously move forward. Had the locals been interviewed for thisstudy, the resonance of this socio-political complexity would likely haveemerged in the form of a negotiated decoding.

The emergence of the two key themes, is not unrelated to Ashworth’s(2002) work wherein he proposes that heritage audiences theoreticallyentail perpetrators, victims and cosmopolitans, however empirical evi-dence often adheres to the latter two constructs; arguably, Americantourists can be viewed as victims in search of a sense of belonging andpurpose that has been destabilized by modernity while foreign tourists


can be classified as cosmopolitans, in search of lessons for humanity.Members within each group constructed symbolic meanings based ontheir expectations, judgments, assumptions and projections; all alignedwith the interpretive communities within which they are situated(McQuail 2000). Interpretive communities share understandings of so-cial reality and mediated content (Fish 1980). They share commonassumptions about how a given cultural text should be read or decodedand adopt similar ideological predispositions needed in interpretingtheir social settings (Zelizer 1993). Within this inquiry, the two interpre-tive communities—dominant and oppositional—adopted distinct inter-pretive strategies that rendered the plantation intelligible. They were,nonetheless, similar in their adoption of interpretations endorsing acertain dialogic ‘‘social performance’’ which built on intersubjectivemeanings particular to their respective ‘‘imagined’’ communities (Fish1980). Individual members possessed agency in that they shared a cer-tain set of common values or beliefs that enabled them to decode theHampton in ways similar to their cohort, but also allowed minor per-sonal variations based on their lived experiences.

The narratives adopted by the resistant publics drew on ‘‘ima-ges . . . that seem to express the fundamental beliefs that Canadianshold about themselves’’ (Francis 1997:10). By adopting these truisms,these tourists provided continuity to the Canadian experience andidentity. Additionally, they incorporated the discursive strategy of mul-ticulturalism which has differentiated them from their southern neigh-bors (Francis 1997). At first, the sensitivity to issues of race and racismexhibited can be viewed as an innocent yet virtuous act characteristic ofall progressive approaches; however, an in-depth look elicits that it is adiscursive strategy that evokes various virtues of Canadianism in reac-tion to the American presence. Such strategic discursive constructionsof self are contingent upon the deficiencies of others and are referredto as negative nationalism (Francis 1997). Another discursive strategyadopted was that of humanitarianism in which participants displayed‘‘an interest in memorialisation to prevent the reoccurrence of similaratrocity’’ (Ashworth 2002:363). The ideological predispositions thatunderpin these established interpretive narratives of multiculturalismand humanitarianism provide comfort, convenience, and familiarity;facilitating the affirmation and maintenance of self-definition.

Conversely, the dominant publics drew upon shared discoursesfounded upon tropes of American memory and nationalism. They in-voked public imaginings to reunite with the past through warmthoughts of home and heritage. They fantasized about the past andreconstructed nostalgic, mythical narratives that enabled them to main-tain a positive and memorable suture to their ancestral ties; one thatwas unmarred by the contentious past of slavery. Interestingly, onecan draw parallels between the nature of their interpretations andthose of African Americans journeying on the Diaspora route. Bothgroups are in search of a pristine and nurturing ‘home’ which theyarticulate by rendering any socio-political ills ‘‘irrelevant, even antithet-ical, to [their] voyage of self discovery and nurturance’’ (Ebron2000:920). For instance, as is illustrated in Ebron’s (2000) work, the


diasporic imaginings espoused by some African Americans exclude anyaccounts of poverty or political instability as they pertain to the Africancontinent; this is not unlike the imaginings of the dominant publicswho invoked memories that silenced the slavery past. These groupsmight differ in their recollections of the slavery past but by travellinghome, be it to the plantation or though a transatlantic journey to Afri-ca, both reunite with their past—not factually, but through ‘‘con-structed memory, fantasy, narrative and myth’’ (Hall 1996:226).

In decoding the plantation, participants engaged in dialogism asthey drew upon common assumptions, thoughts, value systems, prac-tices and traditions characteristic of their interpretive communities(Bakhtin 1981). They constructed their own meanings of the planta-tion through discursive strategies of presencing/absencing and, assuch, endorsed certain discourses while disenfranchising the possibilityof others. The variance both within and outside the groups was attrib-utable to the argument that all texts function as a response to texts thathave gone before, and in anticipation of a response from texts that willbe created in the future (Bakhtin 1981). In essence, the Hampton waspart of a larger cognitive backdrop which influenced the constructionof meaning as participants carried with them previous experiences(Bruner 1994; Chronis 2005) while anticipating future occurrences.

CONCLUSION

This study sought to understand how preferred readings encodedduring production processes were decoded. Within this framework,decodings were categorized as dominant, negotiated or oppositionalbased on the degree of divergence from the original encoding (Hall1980). The findings revealed evidence in support of the dominantand oppositional frames. The absence of the negotiated frame is attrib-uted to the fact that the participants were relatively removed from theintricate socio-political nexus that defines the Hampton and its sur-rounding community. Tourists who adopted a dominant frame acqui-esced to the preferred reading while those who espoused anoppositional approach opposed the dominant text. The site as a cul-tural text was decoded by tourists based on the varying meaning struc-tures and knowledge frameworks within which they were respectivelysituated. In this sense, members within each group were viewed asbelonging to the same interpretive community wherein certain ele-ments of a given cultural object or event were rendered meaningful(Berkowitz and Terkeurst 1999). Each public was united throughshared mnemonic socialization, discursive strategies and collectiveinterpretations of the plantation and/or slavery.

In addition to the dominant ideologies promoted by various inter-pretive communities, the act of interpretation is further complicatedby the notion of identity because, ‘‘to be a member of any human com-munity is to situate oneself with regard to one’s past, if only by rejectingit’’ (Olick and Robbins 1998:122). In fact, the articulation of a certaincultural identity is often a key factor in the consumption of heritage


tourism (Breathnach 2006). Moreover, when tourists decide to visit asite, they are choosing to partake in an experience that often becomesa continuation of their psycho-social selves. It therefore follows thatindividuals, be they dominant or resistant publics, construct meaningswhich serve as a foundation on which to base their identities. Thesemeanings of the past are not static as they are constantly adjusted tofit the needs of those who espouse them, while rejecting counter mean-ings that could potentially threaten group identity (Breathnach 2006).

Slavery related sites are increasing enacting the role of representingthe past in inclusive ways which challenge the use of metannaratives todeflect discussions of slavery (Alderman and Campbell 2008:353). Thistask has been challenging as sites try to remove themselves from theirlegacy of colonialism. This legacy has entailed ‘‘amongst other things,the unequal power relation between majority and ethnic minoritygroups within society, a relation affected by colonial history, westerndomination of non-westerners and by the discourse of ‘Self’ and‘Other’’’ (Lagerkvist 2006:52). As heritage audiences become increas-ingly international and multicultural, slave related sites ought to craftmetanarratives that incorporate pluralistic perspectives. Representa-tions focused on a tourist-centered ethos will allow for portrayals thatlure diverse populations and facilitate wider voice resonance withindepictions (Buzinde, Santos, and Smith 2006). Subsequent investiga-tions are necessary to augment knowledge on how societies commem-orate the plantation era. Such endeavors can commence by posingquestions such as: How do locals interpret plantation sites? And, howare commemorated plantations constructing healing and holistic mes-sages? These are important issues that could contribute to the globaldialogue on consumption of slavery related heritage.

Acknowledgements—The authors thank Edward Bruner, Cameron McCarthy and WilliamStewart for their assistance on the earlier part of this project as well as the officials atHampton Plantation for access to the site.

REFERENCES

Alderman, D. H., and R. M. Campbell2008 Symbolic Excavation and the Artifact Politics of Remembering Slavery in

the American South. Southeastern Geographer 48(3):338–353.Alderman, D. H., and E. A. Modlin

2008 (In)Visibility of the Enslaved Within Online Plantation Tourism Market-ing: Textual Analysis of North Carolina Websites. Journal of Travel andTourism Marketing 25(3/4):265–281.

Ashworth, G.2002 Holocaust Tourism: The Experience of Krakow—Kazimierz. International

Research in Geographical and Environmental Education 11:363–367.Bakhtin, M.,

1981. The Dialogic Imagination. Translated by C. Emerson and M. Holquist.Austin: University of Texas Press.

Berkowitz, D., and J. Terkeurst1999 Community as Interpretive Community: Rethinking the Journalist-Source

Relationship. Journal of Communication 49(3):125–136.


Breathnach, T.2006 Looking For the Real Me: Locating the Self in Heritage Tourism. Journal

of Heritage Tourism 1(2):101–120.Bruner, E.

1993 Lincoln’s New Salem as a Contested Site. Museum Anthropology17(3):14–25.

1994 Abraham Lincoln as Authentic Reproduction: A Critique of Postmodern-ism. American Anthropologist 96(2):397–415.

1996 Tourism in Ghana: The Representation of Slavery and the Return of theBlack Diaspora. American Anthropologist 98(2):290–304.

Buzinde, C.2007 Representational Politics of Plantation Heritage: The Contemporary

Plantation as a Social Imaginary. In Globalizing Cultural Studies: Ethno-graphic Interventions in Theory, Method and Policy, C. McCarthy, A. Durham,L. Engel, A. Filmer, M. Giardina and M. Malagreca, eds., pp. 229–252. NewYork: Peter Lang.

Buzinde, C., and C. Santos2008 Representations of Slavery. Annals of Tourism Research 35(2):

469–488.Buzinde, C., C. Santos, and S. Smith

2006 Ethnic Representations: Destination Imagery. Annals of Tourism Research33:707–728.

Chronis, A.2005 Coconstructing Heritage at the Gettysburg Storyscape. Annals of Tourism

Research 32(2):386–406.Coffey, A., and P. Atkinson

1996 Making Sense of Qualitative Data: Commentary Research Strategies.London: Sage Publications.

Dann, G., and A. Seaton2001 Slavery, Contested Heritage and Thanatourism. In Slavery, Contested

Heritage and Thanatourism, G. Dann and A. Seaton, eds., pp. 1–30.Binghamton: Haworth Hospitality Press.

Ebron, P.2000 Tourists as Pilgrims: Commercial Fashioning of Transatlantic Politics.

American Ethnologist 26(4):910–932.Eichstedt, J. L., and S. Small

2002 Representations of Slavery: Race and Ideology in Southern PlantationMuseums. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Fish, S.1980 Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities.

Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Foucault, M.,

1977 Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Translated by A. Sheridan.New York: Vintage Books.

Francis, D.1997 National Dreams: Myth, Memory and Canadian History. Vancouver:

Arsenal Pulp Press.Garrod, B., and A. Fyall

2000 Managing Heritage Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 27:682–708.Halewood, C., and K. Hannam

2001 Viking Heritage Tourism: Authenticity and Commodification. Annals ofTourism Research 28:565–580.

Hall, S.1996 Introduction: Who ‘‘Identity’’? In Questions of Cultural Identity, H. Stuart

and P. du Gay, eds., pp. 222–236. Thousand Oaks: Sage.1980 Encoding and Decoding. In Culture, Media, Language, S. Hall, D. Hobson,

A. Lowe and P. Willis, eds., pp. 117–127. London: Hutchinson.1975 Introduction. In Paper Voices: The Popular Press and Social Change 1935–

1965, A. Smith, ed., pp. 11–24. London: Chatto and Windus.


Herbert, D.2001 Literary Places, Tourism and the Heritage Experience. Annals of Tourism

Research 28:312–333.Hewison, R.

1987 The Heritage Industry: Britain in a Climate of Decline. London: Methuen.Holstein, J. A., and J. F. Gubrium

1995 The Active Interview. Qualitative Research Methods. London: SagePublications.

Lagerkvist, C.2006 Empowerment and Anger: Learning How to Share Ownership of the

Museum. Museum and Society 4(2):52–68.Lowenthal, D.

1985 The Past is a Foreign Country. New York: Cambridge University Press.McQuail, D.

2000 McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SagePublications.

Miles, M. B., and A. M. Huberman1994 Qualitative Data Analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Olick, J. K., and J. Robbins1998 Social Memory Studies: From Collective Memory to the Historical

Sociology of Mnemonic Practices. Annual Review of Sociology 25:105–140.Palmer, C.

2005 An Ethnography of Englishness: Experiencing Identity Through Tourism.Annals of Tourism Research 32:7–27.

Patton, M. Q.2002 Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks:

Sage Publications.Polkinghorne, D. E.

1988 Narrative Knowing and Human Sciences. New York: State University ofNew York Press.

Poria, Y., R. Butler, and D. Airey2004 Links between Tourists, Heritage, and Reasons for Visiting Heritage Sites.

Journal of Travel Research 43:19–28.Prentice, R., and V. Andersen

2007 Interpreting Heritage Essentialisms: Familiarity and Felt History. TourismManagement 28:661–676.

Pretes, M.2003 Tourism and Nationalism. Annals of Tourism Research 30(1):125–142.

Pritchard, A., and N. Morgan2003 Mythic Geographies of Representation and Identity: Contemporary

Postcards of Wales. Tourism and Cultural Change 1(2):111–130.SCSPS—South Carolina State Park Service

2006 State Park Service <http://www.southcarolinaparks.com>.Wilder, D. L.

2006 Commemorating, Understanding and Overcoming. <http://www.usnationalslaverymuseum.org/pdf/caseStatement.pdf>.

Zelizer, B.1993 Journalists as Interpretive Communities. Critical Studies in Mass Commu-

nication 10:219–237.

Submitted 4 June 2008. Resubmitted 11 October 2008. Resubmitted 29 January 2009. FinalVersion 25 February 2009. Accepted 26 February 2009. Refereed anonymously. CoordinatingEditor: Lee Jolliffe


http://www.southcarolinaparks.com

http://www.usnationalslaverymuseum.org/pdf/caseStatement.pdf

http://www.usnationalslaverymuseum.org/pdf/caseStatement.pdf

Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 459–479, 20090160-7383/$ - see front matter � 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.



VACATION ANDFAMILY FUNCTIONING

Xinran Y. LehtoPurdue University, USA

Soojin ChoiYong-In University, Korea

Yi-Chin LinNational Kaohsiung Hospitality College, Taiwan

Shelley M. MacDermidPurdue University, USA

Abstract: This study explores the unique interplay of family vacation travel, family cohesion,and family communication through a sample of 265 family travelers. The results reveal thatfamily vacation contributes positively to family bonding, communication and solidarity. Fam-ily interaction styles differ during the family leisure travel process. Two types of families areidentified differing on the dimension of cohesion, corresponding to separated and con-nected families. Three types of families are identified differing on the dimension of adapta-tion, corresponding to flexible, confused and structured families. This research represents anattempt to use a unique theoretical framework to empirically assess family functioning in theleisure travel setting. Keywords: family vacation, family functioning, family well-being, familyleisure, family adaptation and cohesion. � 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION

Despite changing family structures and demographics, family life con-tinues to be important to Americans and family travel is perceived as animportant builder of family well-being (Chesworth 2003). Leisure travelfor families in many ways has become a necessity rather than a luxury.According to a recent vacation survey conducted by Expedia.com(2005), when Americans go on vacation, it is all about the family: A thirdof respondents indicate that they spend most of their vacation time trav-eling with their immediate family. The family travel market has grownabout 20% since 2001 according to a Travel Weekly family travel survey(Travel Weekly 2005) and family vacations are _turning into a lucrativeniche for many travel businesses. Tourism practitioners including

Xinran Lehto is an Associate Professor in the Department of Hospitality and TourismManagement, Purdue University (West Lafayette, in 47907, USA. Email: <[email protected]>). Her research interests include family tourism. Soojin Choi is an AssistantProfessor at Department of Tourism at the Yong-in University. Yi-Chin Lin is an AssistantProfessor in the Graduate School of Hospitality Management, National Kaohsiung HospitalityCollege. Shelly Macdermid is the Director of the Center for Families, Purdue University.

459

460 X.Y. Lehto et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 459–479

hotels, cruise lines and resorts have responded to the growth of thismarket by adding amenities, programs and activities designed specifi-cally for families. Amidst the literature for vacation experience, how-ever, family tourism has not received the same level of attention fromtourism researchers. The existing literature has mostly focused onthemes such as decision processes and roles (e.g., Seaton and Tagg1995; Bohlmann and Qualls 2001; Mottiar and Quinn 2004; Decrop2005), influences of parents and children (e.g., Kang, Hsu and Wolfe2003), conflict resolution (e.g., Kang and Hsu 2005) and trip satisfac-tion (e.g., Seaton and Tagg 1995; Gram 2005). While the practicalityof the focus on business or marketing perspectives is apparent, the fam-ily as a travel consumption unit deserves broader scrutiny and has signif-icant social implications. According to the Travel Industry Associationof America (2003), 86% of family vacationers believe that family leisuretravel plays an important role in maintaining family health, well-beingand lifestyle. The need to examine the linkages between family well-being and family vacation has surged as particularly pertinent.

Most recently, the multitude of new technological advances such as mo-bile technology and other communication services have drawn increasingresearch attention to the structural changes in families and influences onsociety at large induced by these technological factors (White and White2007). While family vacation has traditionally been viewed as a uniquesmall group dynamic, where members in a family to a larger degree haveeach other’s exclusive companionship and have minimal interferencefrom their usual life routines and social networks, the internet, cell phoneand other similar conveniences appear to have had a transforming effecton how ‘‘home’’ and ‘‘away’’ are defined. White and White (2007) havediscovered that there has been a co-presence of ‘‘home’’ and ‘‘away’’ thathas had mixed consequences on tourists’ well-being. These changes fur-ther underscore the importance of revisiting the family vacation dynamic,its meaning, and its impact on family well-being. To date, insufficientempirical research has been conducted with regard to the outcomes orimpact of family vacation experiences.

The impact of tourism, as a research subject, is not novel. It hasdrawn substantial attention since the inception of tourism as a disci-pline. Various theories and conceptual frameworks have been pro-posed and empirically verified as to what the outcomes of tourism tothe destination communities and society at large may transpire. A largequantity of research has focused on the positive and negative impactsof tourism on destination communities (Cheong and Miller 2000;McNaughton 2006; McKercher and Fu 2006 as some recent examples).There has also been a recent surge of interest in examining the conse-quences of leisure travel on individual tourists. Researchers havestarted to assess leisure travel benefits on various tourist segments suchas seniors (e.g., Milman and Wei 2002) and patients (e.g., Hunter-Jones 2005). The examination of the effects of tourism on the partof the tourists has been somewhat intertwined with the concepts oftourism motivations and the benefits sought from travel. This is prob-ably because what initially motivates an individual to conduct leisuretravel is related to what this person expects to gain from a trip. While

X.Y. Lehto et al. / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 459–479 461

the large body of tourism motivational theories has lent great insightsfor understanding the types of benefits tourists seek and experiencesor services tourism organizations need to provide, the current frame-works are largely contingent upon individuals as consumption units.Rarely do these models consider the family as a unit. In the case of fam-ily vacation, while each individual member may seek their own out-comes, their individual experiences and benefits sought tend to beintertwined with and influenced by other traveling family members.Gram has pointed out that ‘‘when considering family holidays it mustbe kept in mind that the family is a unit of individuals who seek expe-riences together. However, criteria of what is relevant content and whatallows for immersion and absorption are not necessarily the same’’(2005:6). Researchers note that systematic examinations of family asa small group dynamic in terms of family holiday consumption andvacation outcomes are relatively neglected. This neglect has beendue, on the one hand, to the emphasis in the field placed on under-standing of individual tourism consumers. On the other hand, the dif-ficulties in gathering family consumption data and lack of provenmeasurements have also been cited as some of the challenges facingresearchers in this area (Commuri and Gentry 2000).

As such, family interaction, cohesion and well-being in the context offamily vacation are especially pertinent. This research focused on therelatively neglected socializing and interactivity among family membersin the tourism setting. The purpose of the study was to examine theinteraction and communication dynamics of family members as wellas family bonding and functioning in the vacation context. To be morespecific, this study aimed at providing insights into: 1) how familymembers connect with each other in vacation context; 2) how familiesinteract with the changing environment; and 3) how family membersinteract with each other in the family system during vacation. A totalof 265 vacationing families served as the study subjects. It is importantto note that this family sample is purposive and convenient in nature.These families are mostly two parent families and are relatively affluentand mostly Caucasian. We acknowledge and address these limitationsin the final section of this paper.

FAMILY LEISURE AND FAMILY VACATION

In American contemporary society, family is still considered the fun-damental unit and quality family time has become ever more desired asthe hurried pace of life places stresses upon families. As a subject,family time has drawn much research attention in family studies(Harrington 2001). A multitude of theories indicate that for a familyto function well, ‘‘time spent together’’—indicating meaningful inter-action—is key (e.g., Hill 1988; Shaw 1992; Harrington 2001; Major,Klein and Ehrhart 2002) and shared leisure experiences within thefamily system have consistently been shown to be valued by participantsin many leisure studies (e.g., Kelly 1977; Orthner and Mancini 1990;Fox and Dwyer 1999; Gram 2005). The subject of family leisure has


drawn significant attention from leisure and family researchers. Muchof the past research has examined the benefits of family leisure interms of such factors as family satisfaction and family bonding.Researchers have theorized that shared leisure activities establish andmaintain boundaries in the family system (Orthner and Mancini1991), enhance family unity (Shaw and Dawson 2001), promote collec-tive interests and enhance communications among family members(Shaw and Dawson 2001). All of these are salient factors for familycohesion. Leisure experiences also act as new environmental stimuliand introduce fresh input and energy for family system development.

A number of empirical studies have investigated the relationship be-tween family leisure activity participation and family functioning vari-ables such as cohesion, communication and satisfaction. Researchers,for example, have examined the relationship between the level ofshared leisure participation of husbands and wives and the extent ofcommunication and task sharing in marriage. In his study of analyzingleisure time of married couples during the parental stage of their lifecycle, Horna (1989, 1993) contends that parents view leisure as oneof the means through which the parental role is enacted. Family ori-ented leisure and recreation activities are believed to encouragetogetherness and facilitate intra-family communication and childsocializing. Kelly and Kelly (1994) have discovered that a large percent-age of adult leisure activities are learned within the family context. Thisstudy lends strong support to the proposition that the family is themain associational context of leisure learning. On the other hand,the parent-child relationship is not the only one in which leisure playsa part. Many opportunities for bonding between husbands, wives, sib-lings, and other family members occur during leisure. Kelly (1983)contends that, as a primary resource for familial development, leisureactivities are often expected to provide companionship for other familymembers as well as husbands and wives. Orthner and Mancini (1991)propose that companionship during leisure might be a vital compo-nent in family stability. Using a phenomenological approach, Davidson(1996) explores the meaning of holiday experience for women withyoung children. Davidson discovers that two key benefits of holidayfor this sub population are reduction in pressure and sharing of timein key relationships and roles. Most recently, Shaw and Dawson(2001) challenged the adequacy of the current social psychological def-initions of leisure in capturing or describing family leisure. Accordingto these researchers, family leisure is purposive rather than a freelychosen form of leisure. It tends to be goal oriented and directed to-ward particular extrinsic benefits such as teaching children abouthealthy lifestyles and moral values.

Family leisure takes on various forms. According to Kelly (1983), oneform is informal leisure consisting of ongoing interactions that takeplace mostly in and around the home. Another form occurs in orga-nized and scheduled events. Such events may be perceived as desig-nated high points of family interaction that lend meaning andexcitement. They tend to be events that require some planning andanticipation as well as specific allocation of resources such as time


(Kelly 1983). While acknowledging the pitfalls of measurement andsampling framework of their study of family campers in Minnesota,West and Merriam (1970) have found that shared outdoor recreationhelps sustain and increase family cohesiveness by inducing processesof social interaction within a family. They have argued that familiestend to participate in outdoor activities together more than any othertype of activities, because outdoor recreation often provides uniqueenvironments which isolate families from their normal social world,thereby intensifying interaction and inducing a strong ‘‘we’’ feelingin the group. In addition, such activity is usually a part of a larger tripincluding planning, travel, and recollections which all provide occa-sions for reinforcing the bonds of intimacy and is often ritualized bythe group members. As a multi-phase recreational experience, familyleisure travel provides family members unique settings far removedfrom home, allows them greater flexibility in acting out roles, and of-fers intensified human interaction among family members who aretraveling together (Mayo and Jarvis 1981).

Vacation represents an event of sustained and varied interaction.Family vacation travel is much more than getting to a particular desti-nation. It is a multi-dimensional phenomenon that involves planning,anticipation, trip experience and post trip recollection (Fridgen 1984).All these elements provide family members with an interactive spacethat represents a reconfiguration of interpersonal distance. For in-stance, some parents testify that just being together in the car withno distracting tasks or interference provides a singular opportunityfor communication, especially with older children (Kelly 1983). In thissense, among the wide range of leisure activities that facilitate familialinteractions, family vacation is a unique form of family leisure, giventhis new relativity of space and relationships.

While much family research has consistently examined the leisurepatterns in families and reported a positive relationship between the ex-tent of shared leisure time or experiences and positive family outcomes,there are relatively few empirical efforts to understand the influence ofany specific leisure/recreation activity on the family variables. Althoughfamilies are perceived as one of the fastest growing travel market seg-ments (Carnival 2004), there has been insufficient empirical investiga-tions on the interplay of vacationing together as a family unit andrelational dynamics within the family system (e.g., cohesiveness andadaptability of a family unit). This study attempts to fill this void byexamining how family leisure travel helps improve family bondingand strengthens family boundaries, and how family members relateand adapt to each other during the entire vacation spectrum, that is,vacation planning, actual vacation trip and post-trip recollection.

Family Vacation Decision Making

The family vacation literature has largely focused on the themes ofdecision processes and roles. Researchers note that family vacationdecision making generally follows three styles: husband dominant, wife


dominant, and joint decision making, but family decision styles varydepending on family situational dynamics and vacation types. Children,wives, and past decision experiences seem to exert influences on familydecision making and satisfaction. Decrop (2005) contrasts formalgroups related by blood or marriage (e.g., couples and families) andinformal groups (e.g., friends). He notes that formal groups and infor-mal groups make decisions in different ways and that children haveinfluence on what people chose to do on vacation. Seaton and Tagg(1995) conclude that children’s involvement in the decision makingprocess can improve family vacation satisfaction. According to Darleyand Lim (1986), children have different levels of influence dependingon the type of leisure activities: family movie-attendance, family outing(e.g., picnics), and family sports. They have also observed that the chil-dren’s age has the strongest impact on parental perception of the chil-dren’s influence. Mottiar and Quinn (2004) have found that althoughjoint decisions are dominant in the overall consumption process, wivesplay a significant role in the early stage of the decision process by col-lecting information for the household. The authors advocate that thetourism industry should pay attention to women since they act as a‘‘gatekeeper’’ for tourism products. Howard and Madrigal (1990) con-clude that mothers shape the participation decision in the purchase ofpublic recreation services for their children; children then make theirfinal decisions about those programs based on their mother’s decision.

Another discussion point rests with group consensus and conflict infamily decision making. Kang and Hsu (2004, 2005) have investigatedspousal interpersonal-conflict and resolution modes in determining afamily vacation destination. The authors discover that informationgathering and family discussion induce higher levels of satisfactionamong couples. Teenage children sometimes play the role of informa-tion gatherer when a family encounters conflict in selecting a vacationdestination. Bohlmann and Qualls (2001) identify two types of discon-firmation that impact individual preferences arising from family inter-action or discussion: informational disconfirmation and preferencedisconfirmation. They have found that disconfirmation is a significantexplanatory factor for individual family member preferences andhousehold preference.

Family as a System

Orthner and Mancini (1991) posit that family system theory offerspotentially useful insights into relationships between leisure and familyvariables. This theory assumes that families seek balance betweenmutuality and differentiation. Because systems are made up of differ-ent members, each with their own needs, this leads to a tendency forsystems to spin off differentiated system elements. At the same time,family systems have boundaries that define the extent to which the sys-tem will permit members to exit in the system or system products tomerge with those of other systems. In other words, a family bondaccommodates some differentiation between family members,


encourages mutuality of interests and requires effective communica-tion to maintain this balance within the family system. It is also impor-tant for systems to have stimulation so that new sources of excitementand energy can encourage the system to make changes for the better-ment of the system over time.

Based on the family system theory, a number of models have beendeveloped. One of the most widely used is the Circumplex Model of Mar-ital and Family Systems (Olson 2003). The Circumplex Model revolvesaround two main dimensions of family cohesion and adaptability andresultant relationships hypothesized with family functioning. A thirddimension of this model is communication. Communication facilitatesmovement along the two central dimensions—cohesion and adaptabil-ity. Cohesion is defined as ‘‘the emotional bonding that family membershave toward one another’’ (Olson 2003:514). The variables used to diag-nose and measure family cohesion dimensions are emotional bonding,boundaries, coalitions, time, space, friends, decision making, interestsand recreation. Cohesion focuses on how systems balance separateness(differentiation) and togetherness (mutuality). Adaptability is related toa family’s flexibility and is defined as ‘‘the amount of change in its lead-ership, role relationships and relationship rules’’ (Olson 2003:519).This dimension refers to the family system’s need to change, to be flex-ible, or to adapt and learn from different experiences and situations.The variables for the measurement and diagnosis of family adaptabilitydimension include family power (assertiveness, control, discipline),negotiation style, role relationships and relationship rules.

The Circumplex Model is a classification system that represents dif-ferent family types on a two-dimensional map in which the horizontalaxis corresponds to the level of cohesion and vertical axis to adaptabil-ity. Each dimension has four levels respectively describing the degreeof cohesion and adaptability. As a result, the Circumplex model has16 compartments with each representing a different family function-ing type. The mid-range compartments—flexibly connected, flexiblycohesive, structurally connected, and structurally cohesive—are con-sidered as healthy, while the other compartments are consideredunbalanced and unhealthy (Olson 2003). A self-report instrumentcalled FACES (Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scales)was designed to adequately assess the major dimensions of the Cir-cumplex Model and other related concepts proposed by Olson andhis colleagues.

By adopting Olson’s FACES II (Olson, McCubbin, Barnes, Larsen,Muxen and Wilson 1992), this study attempts to

(1) Investigate how the family system works in the family travel context,that is, how family members interact and bond with each other dur-ing family vacation planning and the actual vacation;

(2) Understand the underlying dimensions of family cohesion andadaptation in the family vacation context and compare those withthe classification schemes of Olson’s Marital and Family Systems;and


(3) Identify typologies of family interaction and functioning stylesexhibited during family vacation.

Study Method

In order to understand the interface of leisure travel and family func-tioning, purposive sampling methods were used. Family travelers weretargeted for the purpose of this study. The family traveler database ofone of the largest travel clubs based in the Midwest region of the Uni-ted States was used. A travel club is a tourism business that providesvacation services to its membership based customers. The survey timeframe was between March and July 2005 corresponding to the intervalwhen most family vacations occurred. A total of 314 families were in-vited to fill out a self-administered survey by the travel club tour man-agers. Each family was asked to fill out one questionnaire. A total of 265valid questionnaires were returned, yielding an 84.4% response rate.

The survey instrument used in this study was composed of two mainsections: demographic information and the scale of Family Functionand Leisure Travel (FFLT), adopted from FACES II (Olson et al1992). Demographic items included gender, household role (e.g.,father, mother, daughter, son), age group, annual family income, eth-nic origin, marital status, occupation, and education. The FFLT wasused to measure the cohesion and adaptation constructs in the familytravel context using a five-point scale (1 = almost never, 2 = once in awhile, 3 = sometimes, 4 = frequently, and 5 = almost always). The origi-nal FACES II contains 30 items, 16 of which are related to cohesionand 14 are about adaptation. The cohesion construct has seven dimen-sions: emotional bonding, family boundaries, coalitions, time, space,decision-making, and interests and recreation. The adaptation con-struct possesses six dimensions: assertiveness, leadership, discipline,negotiation, roles and rules. After some modifications to fit into thetravel context, 16 statement items were retained for assessing familycohesion during the vacation experience and another 15 statementitems were used for measuring family adaptation. A few examples ofthe cohesion measurement statements are: ‘‘Traveling together makesour family ties stronger’’, ‘‘Family members feel close to each otherwhile traveling together’’ and ‘‘While traveling, family members shareinterests and experiences with each other.’’(Table 1 contains all 16items used to measure the cohesion construct). A few examples ofthe adaptation items are ‘‘When planning a trip, family members saywhat they want’’, ‘‘In my family, there is less discipline of children thanusual while on family vacation’’ and ‘‘When planning a trip, familymembers are afraid to say what is on their minds’’ (Table 2 containsall 15 items used to measure the adaptation construct).

The obtained data were analyzed using SPSS 12.0 for Windows.Descriptive statistics were used to profile the characteristics of the sam-pled family travelers. Principle components analyses with varimax rota-tion were computed to identify the factors underlying the cohesionand adaptation constructs respectively. Exploratory factor analyses

Table 1. Factors of Cohesion

Cohesion Factor loading Mean

Factor 1:Emotional bondingTraveling together makes our family ties

stronger.81 4.44

Our family travels together well .76 4.45Family members feel close to each other

while traveling together.74 4.49

While traveling, family members shareinterests and experiences with eachother

.73 4.31

Traveling with family members is qualitytime well spent

.69 4.58

Family members are supportive of eachother during leisure trips

.63 4.52

While traveling together, familymembers respect each other’spersonal time and space

.62 3.98

Tension within my family is morerelaxed while traveling together

.61 3.57

Traveling together as a family makes uscloser to each other

.58 4.24

Eigenvalue = 6.24, Variance explained = 29.40%, Cronbach’s a = 0.89

Factor 2:Coalition and decision-making/functional bondingWhile traveling, family members pair up

rather than do things as a total family.�.75 2.35

While traveling together, my familyenjoys participating in the sameactivities

.64 3.94

In our family, everyone goes his/her ownway when it comes to leisure travel

�.59 1.94

While traveling, family members goalong with what the family decides todo

.58 4.14

When planning a trip, family membersconsult other family members onpersonal decisions

.49 3.83


Factor 3:Family boundariesIt is easier to plan a trip with people

outside the family than with my familymembers.

.81 1.87

It is easier to travel with people outsidethe family than with my familymembers.

.84 2.00


Total variance explained: 55.75%


Table 2. Factors of Adaptation

Adaptation Factor loading Mean

Factor 1:Discipline and rulesWhile traveling, the rules in my family

change.80 2.11

We have different approaches todiscipline children during vacation

.74 1.97

In my family, the roles of familymembers change while on vacation

.71 1.84

While traveling, the rules in my familyare not clear

.66 1.61

In my family, there is less discipline ofchildren than usual while on vacation

.59 2.91

Eigen value = 3.97, Variance explained = 18.12%, Cronbach’s a = 0.78

Factor 2:AssertivenessWhen planning a trip, family members

say what they want.81 4.29

It is easy for everyone to express his/heropinion while traveling together

.74 4.32

When planning a trip, family membersare afraid to say what is on their minds

�.71 1.51

In my family, it is easy for everyone toexpress his/her opinion whenplanning a trip

.64 4.18


Factor 3:Leadership/SyncretismIn planning a trip, the children’s

suggestions are followed.76 3.27

Each family member has input regardingmajor travel decisions

.75 3.99

In my family, everyone sharesresponsibilities when planning a trip

.63 2.97

Eigen value = 1.21, Variance explained = 13.15%, Cronbach’s a = 0. 67

Factor 4:NegotiationMy family tries new ways of dealing with

problems while traveling together.74 2.66

On vacation, family members makecompromises when problems arise

.73 3.74

While traveling, family members discussproblems and feel good about thesolutions

.57 3.66


Total variance explained: 59.56%


were conducted instead of confirmatory factor analyses. This choice ofstatistical technique warrants some explanations. Although the


dimensions of cohesion and adaptation have been well tested andestablished in the original FACES II (Olson et al 1992), they were, how-ever, for the first time being modified and adopted into the leisure tra-vel context. Therefore, the dimensionality of these constructs couldvary or differ. When conducting exploratory factor analysis, a factorwas to be retained if it carried an eigenvalue greater than one and eachitem’s factor loading was higher than 0.40 and did not cross-load onmore than one factor. Reliability tests which yielded Cronbach’s alphavalues were performed on all factors to examine their respective inter-nal consistency.

At the next stage, two separate cluster analyses were performed onthe resulting factors to identify groups of family travelers who re-sponded similarly to the cohesion or adaptation dimensions. Thedecision to perform two separate cluster analyses (one based on cohe-sion statements and one on adaptation statements) instead of onecluster analysis with both dimension statements included was basedon the fact that cohesion and adaptation are two distinctly differentconstructs. Analysis of the two separate clusters allowed better revela-tion of sub-clusters of cohesion and adaptation respectively. For eachcluster analysis, a two-stage cluster procedure was adopted (Punj andStewart 1983). In the first stage, hierarchical cluster analysis using theaverage linkage method was followed to detect the number of clusters.In the second stage, the number of clusters determined in stage onewas used for K-means clustering. To further validate the groupingsresulting from the cluster analyses, discriminant analyses were per-formed on the cluster memberships. One-way ANOVA analyses withTukey post hoc tests were employed to pinpoint the actual groupdifferences.

The majority of respondents are female (65.3%), married (70.6%),Caucasian (94.0%), and above 45 years of age (57.8%). Two thirds ofthe respondents (67.2%) have an educational level above a bachelor’sdegree and a little more than a third of them (39.2%) hold profes-sional positions. In addition, 36% of respondents report their annualhousehold income greater than US $200,000.

Family Functioning During Vacation Experience

This research assesses family functioning during the vacation experi-ence from two perspectives, family cohesion and family adaptation.The sampled families ranked the following cohesion statements highly:

(1) Traveling with family members is quality time well spent(Mean = 4.58);

(2) Family members are supportive of each other during leisure trips(Mean = 4.52);

(3) Family members feel very close to each other while travelingtogether (Mean = 4.49);

(4) Our family travels together well (Mean = 4.45);(5) Traveling together makes our family ties stronger (Mean = 4.44);


(6) While traveling, family members share interests and experienceswith each other (Mean = 4.31);

(7) Traveling together as a family makes us closer to each other(Mean = 4.24);

(8) While vacationing, family members go along with what the familydecides to do (Mean = 4.14);

(9) While traveling together, family members respect each other’s per-sonal time and space (Mean = 3.98); and

(10) While traveling together, my family enjoys participating in thesame activities (Mean = 3.94).

Eight of the above ten cohesion items are related to the emotionalbonding concept. Traveling with family appears to be perceived asquality time well spent, strengthening family ties and contributing toconnectedness of family members. In other words, the respondents be-lieve that leisure travel can play a role in enhancing or sustaining rela-tionships between family members. This finding is consistent withprevious literature on the role of family leisure on family ties (Davidson1996). Two other items (#8 and #10) are related to the concept of coa-lition. It appears that family members tend to form group consensusand share common experiences during family vacation.

The sampled families ranked the following family adaptation itemsmore positively:

(1) It is easy for everyone to express his/her opinion when travelingtogether (Mean = 4.32);

(2) When planning a trip, family members say what they want(Mean = 4.29);

(3) It is easy for everyone to express his/her opinions when planning atrip (Mean = 4.18);

(4) Each family member has input regarding major travel decisions(Mean = 3.99);

(5) On vacation, family members compromise when problems arise(Mean = 3.74);

(6) While traveling, family members discuss problems and feel goodabout solutions (Mean = 3.66),

(7) When planning a trip, family members are afraid to say what is ontheir minds (Mean = 1.51, reversed wording);

(8) In planning a trip, the children’s suggestions are followed(Mean = 3.27).

The top three evaluative items of adaptation seem to be related tothe assertiveness concept. The respondents believe that family vacationoffers a good opportunity for the freedom to express and receive opin-ions, a form of unstructured communication within a family duringdirectional time, which is healthy for family functioning (Orthnerand Mancini 1991). The concept of negotiation also seems to be rela-tively prominent. Vacationing together is perceived as an opportunityto derive mutual compromises and allow negotiations for problem


solving solutions (#5 and #6). Individual and the children’s input ap-pear to be taken into account for vacation planning and decision mak-ing (#4 and #8). This result is consistent with previous researchers’sentiments that joint decision making with input from children is themore popular decision making style (Kang and Hsu 2004, 2005). Over-all, family communication is perceived as important for family mem-bers at the vacation planning stage and during the actual familyvacation. Family communication is perceived as well facilitated throughthis shared leisure experience.

With respect to factor analysis of the cohesion construct, its 16items yielded three factors, which explained about 56% of the vari-ance (Table 1). After examining the measurement items under eachfactor, these three factors were named as: ‘‘emotional bonding(a = 0.89)’’, ‘‘family boundaries (a = 0.78)’’, ‘‘coalitions and decisionmaking/functional bonding (a = 0.68)’’ respectively. Comparing theresulting three factors with the theoretical concepts of cohesion,items of the family boundaries factor were completely consistent withthe findings of Olson, Russell and Sprenkle (1983). However, twooriginally separated concepts with respect to ‘‘emotional bonding’’and ‘‘time’’ were merged into one factor, emotional bonding. More-over, while coalition and decision-making were two different conceptsaccording to Olson, in this study they were merged into one factor as‘‘coalition and decision-making/functional bonding’’. Results showedthat the total internal consistency of the cohesion construct was anacceptable 0.80.

Four factors related to the adaptation construct were derived from15 items, explaining about 60% of variance (Table 2). These four fac-tors were labeled as ‘‘discipline and rules (a = 0.78)’’, ‘‘assertiveness(a = 0.78)’’, ‘‘leadership or syncretism (a = 0.67)’’, and ‘‘negotiation(a = 0.57).’’ Regarding the four resulting factors of adaptation, theitems of the assertiveness and negotiation factors were completelyconsistent with the items of the two respective constructs developedby Olson et al (1983). The factor of ‘‘discipline and rules’’ includedthe items originating from three different concepts. Two items werefrom the original FASE II ‘‘discipline’’ concept (‘‘We have differentapproaches to discipline children while traveling as a family’’ and‘‘In my family, there is less discipline of children than usual whileon vacation’’). Another two items were from the ‘‘rules’’ concept(‘‘While traveling, the rules in my family are not clear’’ and ‘‘Whiletraveling, the rules in my family change’’). The final item was fromthe original ‘‘roles’’ concept (‘‘In my family, the roles of family mem-bers change while on vacation’’). The items of the leadership/syncre-tism factor contained two items originating from the FASE IIleadership concept (‘‘In planning a trip, the children’s suggestionsare followed’’ and ‘‘Each family member has input regarding majortravel decisions’’) and one item from the original ‘‘roles’’ concept(‘‘In my family, everyone shares responsibilities when planning atrip’’). The results showed that the total internal consistency of adap-tation was an acceptable 071.


Segmenting Family Travelers by Functioning Styles

In order to examine the variability in family leisure travel function-ing styles, two separate two-stage cluster analyses were conducted basedon the family cohesion items and the family adaptation items respec-tively. Two distinctive groups with respect to cohesion were identifiedby the two-stage cluster analyses. Cohesion cluster 1 was named as ‘‘sep-arated’’ (N = 81) and cluster 2 was labeled ‘‘connected’’ (N = 184).The two group solution was further supported by the follow-up discrim-inant analysis. Canonical discriminant functions were: Wilk’s Lamb-da = 0.28, Chi-square = 329.15, df = 3, p-value = .000. The classificationmatrices of respondents showed that 100% of the 265 cases werecorrectly classified. This further verified the legitimacy of the twocluster solutions of cohesion. Independent sample t-tests were usedto examine the differences between the two clusters in terms of threefactors of cohesion. The results indicated that the factors of ‘‘coali-tion and decision-making’’ (T = �3.54, P = 0.001; Mcluster 1 = 3.59,Mcluster 2 = 4.08), and ‘‘family boundaries’’ (T = 19.74, P = 0.000;Mcluster 1 = 3.23, Mcluster 2 = 1.37) were significantly different for thetwo clusters.

Members of cluster 1 (Separated) found it easier to plan and travelwith people outside the family than with their own family members.While traveling with their families, they were likely to pair up ratherthan doing things as one whole family unit. Respondents falling in clus-ter 2 (Connected) indicated that they preferred to plan and travel withtheir family members. In addition, they tended to consult other familymembers on personal decisions, participate in the same sets of activi-ties, and go along with what the family decides to do. Members of boththe ‘‘Separated’’ and ‘‘Connected’’ clusters, however, acknowledgedfamily vacations as an opportunity to bond with each other as attestedby the insignificant differences between these two cluster groups(T = �0.85, P = 0.40) and high mean values of the bonding factor forboth groups (Mcluster 1 = 4.05, Mcluster 2 = 4.39).

With regard to adaptation, three distinctive family groups were iden-tified. The three adaptation clusters were labeled as ‘‘flexible’’(N = 68), ‘‘confused’’ (N = 83), and ‘‘structured’’ (N = 114). Twocanonical discriminant functions were calculated (Function 1: Wilk’sLambda = 0.187, Chi-square = 463.86, df = 8, p-value = .000. Function2: Wilk’s Lambda = 0.44, Chi-square = 215.45, df = 3, p-value = .000).The classification matrices of respondents indicated that 98.5% ofthe 265 cases were correctly classified, further verifying the validity ofthe three-cluster solution. One-way ANOVA analyses revealed that allfactors of adaptation were significantly different among the three clus-ters. The Tukey tests further pinpointed where the significances werepositioned. Cluster 3 respondents (Structured) believed that familyrules and discipline were clear and fixed while on vacation, and theywere less negotiable than cluster 1(Flexible) and cluster 2 (Confused).Comparatively speaking, cluster 1 (Flexible) is the most relaxed inrules and discipline. Family members in cluster 1(Flexible) and 3(Structured) tended to express their opinions freely and discuss their


decisions with each other both during trip planning as well as duringthe actual vacation. There was no significant difference between cluster1 (Flexible) and 3 (Structured) in the assertiveness and leadershipdimensions. With respect to cluster 2 (Confused), members exhibitedmoderate discipline and rules during family vacation, but tended tofeel uneasy about expressing their opinions or make suggestions totheir family members either during trip planning or the actualvacation.

CONCLUSION

This study has empirically examined the usefulness of family travel asa means to enhance family functioning. The results indicate that vaca-tion activities provide unique opportunities for interaction among fam-ily members, as well as for interaction of the family system with itschanging environment. This interaction offers new input, energy,and motivation needed for continued family system development(Orthner and Mancini 1991). Furthermore, it facilitates the flow ofinformation through the system, creates memorable experiences forarchival comparisons, and provides a context for ongoing monitoringof its members’ functioning. The vacation-induced exchanges within afamily and between a family and the environment provide usefulempirical validation to Fridgen’s (1984) observation of linkages be-tween tourism and environmental psychology.

Although a number of scholars have proposed, implicitly or explicitly,that family holiday making may foster family bonding and relieve stress,the relationship of vacation and family functioning has been a subject ofrelatively insufficient research. A noticeable amount of discussion onfamily vacation benefits is speculative and lacks empirical evidence. Thisresearch, while exploratory in nature, offers empirical evidence regard-ing the unique interplay between the family vacation and family func-tioning. This research also is a first attempt towards developing andestablishing a measurement scale of Family Function and Leisure Travel(FFLT). Overall, the results indicate that family vacation contributespositively to family bonding, communication and solidarity. The find-ings provide support for the theoretical link between family leisure tra-vel and family functioning. From the perspective of cohesion, thisresearch indicates that family leisure travel promotes bonding. With re-gard to adaptability, family travel plays a role in facilitating family com-munication. This research further indicates that family functioningstyles and types are varied in the vacation context. To a large extent,the results confirm the elements of the cohesion and adaptation con-structs proposed by Olson’s family circumplex model. Although test-ret-est reliability and content validity studies of the FFLT instrument areneeded for construct validity, this study represents a beginning step to-wards empirically examining the family communication and bondingdynamic in light of family vacation.

The role of family holiday making in the research arena of familytime warrants deliberations. American families intensely feel the


squeeze on family time (Jacobs 2003). It is well known that Americanemployees receive substantially less paid vacation than Europeans.The average American works 46.2 weeks per year, while for instancethe French average 40 weeks per year (Green and Potepan 2008). Fam-ily time, however, is considered critical for family well-being. Researchin this domain has empirically demonstrated that the amount and thequality of family time contribute to child development and emotionalwell-being (e.g., Barber and Erickson 2001; Hofferth and Sandberg2001), marital stability (Presser 2000) and family identity formation (Fi-ese, Tomcho, Douglas, Josephs, Poltrock and Baker 2002). In this con-text, investigation of how time spent on family vacation is associatedwith family well-being is particularly pertinent. Family vacations canbe understood as a unique form of leisure involvement. It can beviewed as a unique small group dynamic, where members in a familyto a larger degree have each other’s exclusive companionship, withminimal interference from the usual daily routine and social network.That is, family members are temporarily detached from their usualwork, school or other social networks. This situation usually representsa new configuration of mental space and physical distance among fam-ily members. The outcomes of this research indicate that family vaca-tion appears to be perceived by participants as time well spent. Thisfinding attests to Gram’s (2005) assertion that family vacation producesintense and memorable experiences.

Taking a family vacation should enhance family well-being in manyways. One important contribution could be in the area of family bond-ing. By allowing family members to socialize in a new setting where theyare freed from their routine roles and responsibilities, leisure travelpresents a unique opportunity for family members to bond and inter-act in new ways. All theories of family interaction hold that sharedenjoyable experiences contribute greatly to family bonding. Such expe-riences become strong memories that can be relieved over and overagain. They also lead to traditions, discussions, and other efforts to re-peat the enjoyable experience, in which the bond is reawakened andreinforced. To that end, family vacation as a special form of leisure pre-sents as a wonderful opportunity to strengthen what researchers infamily studies call the ‘‘crescive’’ bond (L’Abate and Baggett 1997).That is, a growing bond that is intrinsically durable. By providing ashared experience, a family vacation may also build shared attitudesamong family members. Shared experiences and attitudes help tomake the family members think in terms of ‘‘we’’ instead of ‘‘I’’ and‘‘you’’ and play a role in forming a strong sense of family. For instance,the development and emergence of these feelings and bonds betweenparent and child or grandparent and grandchild may well become oneof the most effective bases for continuing relationships after the depen-dency bond has been dissolved or weakened.

From a practical perspective, an important implication would be therecognition of the family vacation as a valuable contributor to familycohesion and adaptation. This research suggests a fresh perspectivefor the tourism industry to rethink its role in improving the qualityof family life. To maximize the utility of the family vacation, the


knowledge of how families function while on vacation is particularlypertinent to industry practitioners. For instance, the fact that thereare different family functioning styles on vacation indicates differentneeds are to be fulfilled through vacation. As a result of the varietyof needs exhibited by families, there are new opportunities for industrypractitioners to design and configure destination activity programs andpackages that are better suited for family interaction, and thus enhanc-ing the satisfaction level of family travelers. Tourism practitioners haveundoubtedly jumped on the family travel bandwagon. Hotels, cruiselines and resorts have been aggressively targeting and expanding theirshares of the family market by adding amenities and activities tailor-de-signed for families. Some of the pioneering efforts targeting familytravelers include Hyatt’s ‘‘Club Hyatt program’’ and the marketingprograms offered to children by Radisson, Holiday Inn and Four Sea-sons. Another example is the Hilton Hotels and Resorts. Tapping intothe family-travel market, Hilton gives all children a canvas bag with aninsulated compartment to hold lunch or snacks, a mesh-net drinkholder on the side and an extra pocket for kids to stow all the goodiesthey carry for fun on the road. These industry initiated efforts, how-ever, appear to treat children’s need and adults as two separate entities.This research, on the other hand, points to the need to understandfamily vacation as one consumption unit. That is, activities and pro-grams that can actively engage both the parents and children and pro-vide ample opportunities for them to interact can be appreciated bythe family travelers. It has been noted, however, there may be differ-ences in perceived needs between parents and children (Gram2005). How to create joint experiences where parents and childrenare immersed in activities together can be intriguing.

This study, in a broad sense, contributes to the conceptual and the-oretical development in the field of leisure and family research. Vaca-tions can be viewed as a special domain of leisure. The specificcharacteristics associated with tourism dictate that special attentionneeds to be paid in this area. The outcome of this research can logi-cally be viewed as an extension and application of leisure benefit the-orization into the tourism domain. Within the realm of tourism, thisresearch extends and expands the tourism motivation and benefit re-search into the family context. A family vacation represents a smallgroup dynamic where interactivity of the traveling family membersare an integral part of the vacation experience. In this context, thevalue of vacation extends beyond the border of the individual andpermeates into the family system.

The application of the scale of Family Function and Leisure Travel(FFLT) extends beyond tourism management and plays a role inunderstanding family interaction and communication in an away-from-home environment. Now more than ever, new approaches toenhancing family well-being and functioning are being sought. Thisstudy has attested that family vacation can make unique contributions.Consequently, the FFLT may be of value to family research in general,and family therapy in specific. It provides a new context for examiningand advising on family functioning.


Limitations

While the results of this research provide an initial investigation into thedynamic elements of family functions in the tourism context, it should bekept in mind, that this sample includes only families with financial re-sources and interests in taking leisure trips and therefore represents aselective group of households. A potential pitfall is that this research doesnot address the evolution of family structure in recent years such as in-creases in single parent households and recomposed families. These fac-tors could have major impact on vacation patterns and family functioning.A related limitation lies in the fact that the sample includes only relativelyaffluent and mostly Caucasian families. All these families were from thesame traveling club. Caution must be excised in generalizing these resultsgiven the nature of our sampled population. A third limitation of this re-search is that the study is cross-sectional and evaluative rather than longi-tudinal or observational; the direction of relationship between familybonds and family leisure travel could be questioned (Holman and Jacqu-art 1988). Another similar challenge is that the structured survey ap-proach utilized for this research. While being able to better quantifyfamily vacation and interaction dynamic, this approach can potentiallyrisk falling into the trap of not being able to discern between ideals of fam-ily togetherness and the actual practices of family vacationing. To combatthese uncertainties, future study should and can be designed using ashort-term longitudinal approach. A final limitation of the current studyis our measurement of family functioning dynamics in terms of the familyas a whole on the basis of the perspective of just one family member. Fu-ture study on this topic, when possible, should adopt an approach to incor-porate multiple family members’ perspectives.

REFERENCES

Barber, B. K., and L. D. Erickson2001 Adolescent Social Initiative: Antecedents in the Ecology of Social

Connections. Journal of Adolescent Research 16(4):326–354.Bohlmann, J. D., and W. J. Qualls

2001 Household Preference Revisions and Decision Making: The Role ofDisconfirmation. International Journal of Research in Marketing 18:319–339.

Cheong, S.-M., and M. L. Miller2000 Power and Tourism: A Foucauldian Observation. Annals of Tourism

Research 27(2):371–390.Commuri, S., and J.W. Gentry

2000 Opportunities for Family Research in Marketing. Academy of MarketingScience Review. Retrieved November 13, 2004 <http://www.amsreview.org/articles/commuri08-2000.pdf>.

Chesworth, N.2003 The Family Vacation: A Double Edged Sword. International Journal of

Consumer Studies 27(4):346–348.Carnival

2004 Carnival Valor: The Ultimate Family Vacation. Retrieved December 15,2005, <http://www.carnival.com/cms/International/doc_press/cclvalor_ulti-matefamily/cclvalor_ultimatefamily_chi.pdf>

Davidson, P.1996 The Holiday and Work Experiences of Women with Young Children.

Leisure Studies 15(2):89–103.

http://www.amsreview.org/articles/commuri08-2000.pdf

http://www.amsreview.org/articles/commuri08-2000.pdf

http://www.carnival.com/cms/International/doc_press/cclvalor_ultimatefamily/cclvalor_ultimatefamily_chi.pdf

http://www.carnival.com/cms/International/doc_press/cclvalor_ultimatefamily/cclvalor_ultimatefamily_chi.pdf


Darley, W., and J. Lim1986 Family Decision Making in Leisure-Time Activities: An Exploratory

Investigation of the Impact of Locus of Control, Child Age Influence Factorand Parental Type on Perceived Child Influence. In , R. Lutz ed. Advances inConsumer Research (Vol. 13) pp. 370–374. Provo, UT: Association forConsumer Research.

Decrop, A.2005 Group Process in Vacation Decision-making. Journal of Travel and

Tourism Marketing 18(3):23–26.Expedia.Inc.

2005 Press Room. <http://www.expedia.com/daily/press_room/default.asp>(May 2005).

Fiese, B. H., T. J. Tomcho, M. Douglas, K. Josephs, S. Poltrock, and T. Baker2002 A Review of 50 Years of Research on Naturally Occurring Family Routines

and Rituals: Cause for Celebration? Journal of Family Psychology16(4):381–390.

Fox, M. L., and D. J. Dwyer1999 An Investigation of the Effects of Time and Involvement in the Relation-

ship between Stressors and Work-Family Conflict. Journal of OccupationalHealth Psychology 4:164–174.

Fridgen, J.1984 Environmental Psychology and Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research

11:19–39.Gram, M.

2005 Family Holidays: A Qualitative Analysis of Family Holiday Experiences.Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality & Tourism 5(1):2–22.

Green, F., and M. J. Potepan2008 Vacation Time and Unionism in the U.S. and Europe. Industrial Relations:

A Journal of Economy and Society 27(2):180–194.Harrington, M.

2001 Gendered Time: Leisure in Family Life. In Minding the Time in FamilyExperience: Emerging Perspectives and Issues, K. J. Daly, ed., pp. 343–382.New York: JAI Press.

Hill, M. S.1988 Marital Stability and Spouses’ Shared Time: A Multi-Disciplinary Hypoth-

esis. Journal of Family Issues 9(4):427–451.Hofferth, S., and J. F. Sandberg

2001 How American Children Spend Their Time. Journal of Marriage andFamily 63:295–308.

Horna, J.1989 The Leisure Component of the Parental Role. Journal of Leisure Research

21(2):228–241.1993 Married Life and Leisure: A Multidimensional Study of Couples. World

Leisure and Recreation 35(3):17–21.Holman, T. B., and M. Jacquart

1988 Leisure Activity Patterns and Marital Satisfaction: A Further Test. Journalof Marriage and the Family 50:69–78.

Howard, D., and R. Madrigal1990 Who Makes the Decision: The Parent or the Child? The Perceived

Influence of Parents and Children on the Purchase of Recreation Services.Journal of Leisure Research 22:244–258.

Hunter-Jones, P.2005 Cancer and Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 32(1):70–92.

Jacobs, J. A.2003 Changing Hours of Employment in American Families. Paper presentedat the Workforce/Workplace Mismatch? Work, Family, Health, and Well-Being, Washington, D.C.

Kang, S. K., and C. H. Hsu2004 Spousal Conflict Level and Resolution in Family Vacation Destination

Selection. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research 28(4):408–424.

http://www.expedia.com/daily/press_room/default.asp


2005 Dyadic Consensus on Family Vacation Destination Selection. TourismManagement 26:571–582.

Kang, S. K., C. H. C. Hsu, and K. Wolfe2003 Family Traveler Segmentation by Vacation Decision-making Patterns.

Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research 27(4):448–469.Kelly, J. R.

1977 Leisure Socialization: Replication and Extension. Journal of LeisureResearch 9:121–132.

1983 Leisure Identities and Interactions. Winchester, MA: Wall and ThompsonMarks, S.

Kelly, J. R., and J. R. Kelly1994 Multiple Dimensions of Meaning in the Domains of Work, Family, and

Leisure. Journal of Leisure Research 26(3):250–274.L’Abate, L., and M. Baggett

1997 The Self in the Family: A Classification of Personality, Criminality andPsychopathologyWiley Series in Couples and Family Dynamics and Treatment.John Wiley & Sons. John Wiley & Sons, pp. 169.

Major, V. S., K. J. Klein, and M. G. Ehrhart2002 Work Time, Work Interference with Family, and Psychological Distress.

Journal of Applied Psychology 87(3):427–436.Mayo, E. J., and L. P. Jarvis

1981 The Psychology of Leisure Travel: Effective Marketing and Selling ofTravel Services. Boston, MA: CBI Publishing Co.

McKercher, B., and C. Fu2006 Living on the Edge. Annals of Tourism Research 33(2):508–524.

McNaughton, D.2006 The ‘‘host’’ as Uninvited ‘‘Guest’’: Hospitality, Violence and Tourism.

Annals of Tourism Research 33(3):645–665.Milman, A., and S. Wei

2002 The Impact of Participation in Activities While on Vacation on SeniorPsychological Well-being: A Path Model Application. Journal of Hospitalityand Tourism Research 26(2):175–185.

Mottiar, Z., and D. Quinn2004 Couple Dynamics in Household Tourism Decision-making: Women as the

Gatekeepers? Journal of Vacation Marketing 10:149–160.Olson, D. H.

2003 Circumplex Model of Marital and Family Systems: Assessing FamilySystems. In Normal Family Processes, F. Walsh, ed., pp. 514–548. New York:Guildford Press.

Olson, D. H., H. I. McCubbin, H. Barnes, A. Larsen, M. Muxen, and M. Wilson1992 Family Inventories: Second Revision. St. Paul: University of Minnesota.

Olson, D. H., C. S. Russell, and D. H. Sprenkle1983 Circumplex Model of Marital and Family Systems: Theoretical Update.

Family Process 22:69–83.Orthner, D. K., and J. A. Mancini

1990 Leisure Impacts on Family Interaction and Cohesion. Journal of LeisureResearch 22(2):125–137.

1991 Benefits of Leisure for Family Bonding. In Benefits of Leisure, B. L. Driver,P. J. Brown and G. L. Peterson, eds., pp. 215–301. State College, PA: Venture.

Presser, H.2000 Nonstandard Work Schedules and Marital Instability. Journal of Marriage

and the Family 62:93–110.Punj, G., and D. W. Stewart

1983 Cluster Analysis in Marketing Research: Review and Suggestions forApplication. Journal of Marketing Research 20(2):134–148.

Seaton, A., and S. Tagg1995 The European Family Vacation: Paedonomic Aspects of Choices and

Satisfactions. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing 4(1):1–21.


Shaw, S. M.1992 Dereifying Family Leisure: An Examination of Women’s and Men’s

Everyday Experiences and Perception of Family Time. Leisure Sciences14:271–286.

Shaw, S. M., and D. Dawson2001 Purposive Leisure: Examining Parental Discourses on Family Activities.

Leisure Sciences 23(4):217–231.Travel Industry Association of America

2003 Domestic Research: Travel Market Segment. <http://www.tia.org/Travel/traveltrends.asp> (January 27, 2004).

Travel Weekly2005 ASTA: Family travel up almost 20% since 2001. <http://www.travelweek-

ly.com/articles.aspx?articleid=44854> (24 December 2005).West, P. C., and L. C. Merriam

1970 Outdoor Recreation and Family Cohesiveness: A Research Approach.Journal of Leisure Research 2:251–259.

White, N. R., and P. B. White2007 Home and Away: Tourists in a Connected World. Annals of Tourism

Research 34(1):88–104.

Submitted 14 April 2007. Resubmitted 1 November 2007. Resubmitted 25 November 2008.Final Version 31 March 2009. Accepted 2 April 2009. Refereed anonymously. CoordinatingEditor: Jens Jacobsen


http://www.tia.org/Travel/traveltrends.asp

http://www.tia.org/Travel/traveltrends.asp

http://www.travelweekly.com/articles.aspx?articleid=44854

http://www.travelweekly.com/articles.aspx?articleid=44854




VOLUNTEER TOURISM—‘‘INVOLVEME AND I WILL LEARN’’?

Harng Luh SinNational University of Singapore, Singapore

Abstract: Voluntourism or volunteer tourism is increasingly available and popular amongsteveryday tourists in different parts of the world. Despite its seeming virtue and it often beingpositioned as a form of ‘‘justice’’ or ‘‘goodwill’’ tourism, critics in the public media havebegun to question and criticize the effectiveness or ‘‘real’’ value of volunteer tourism. How-ever, academic work has not yet critiqued volunteer tourism in the same manner. This paperthus provides a critical and timely review of volunteer tourism, using interviews and partici-pant observation with 11 respondents on a volunteer tourism trip to South Africa. This paperreviews volunteer tourists’ motivations (what prompted their participation); performances ofthe ‘‘self’’ in volunteer tourism; and the tensions and paradoxes surrounding volunteer tour-ism. Keywords: Voluntourism, volunteer tourism, motivation, performances, Singapore,South Africa. � 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION

Ha(EghtraveShepreviin th

The pitch is simple. Instead of two weeks sipping wine somewherecomfortable, somewhere scenic, put your money to better use and vol-unteer your labour to a Third World charity or an aid agency. Theidea oozes with virtue. And when something sounds so good, I getbothered. For one thing, I have to wonder what real value volunteertourists offer their hosts.The cynic in me suspects that these short-timers take home morefrom their slumming in the Third World than leave behind for theunderprivileged they are supposed to help... There is the cleansingof developed-world middle-class guilt. There might even be theopportunity to use the experience on a college application or jobresume (Kwa 2007).

Volunteer tourism (a form of tourism where the tourists volunteer inlocal communities as part of his or her travel) is becoming increasinglyavailable and popular amongst everyday tourists in different partsof the world. Despite its seeming virtue and it often being positioned

rng Luh Sin is currently a PhD candidate in Royal Holloway, University of Londonam, Surrey TW20 0EX, UK. Email:<[email protected]>). Her research interests are onl and tourism geographies, particularly on pro-poor, responsible, and volunteer tourism.has conducted fieldwork in Northern Vietnam, Cambodia and South Africa for herous dissertations and research for this paper was conducted during her Masters degreee National University of Singapore.

480

H.L. Sin / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 480–501 481

as a form of ‘‘justice’’ or ‘‘goodwill’’ tourism (see Butcher 2003;Scheyvens 2007; Stoddart and Rogerson 2004), critics in the publicmedia (usually in the form of newpaper commentaries as cited above)have increasingly begun to question the effectiveness or ‘‘real’’ value ofvolunteer tourism (Bennett 2008; Bowes 2008; Judith Brodie, cited inGriffiths 2007; Kwa 2007; Mahti 2007; Sudderuddin 2007). Betweenthose who applaud volunteer tourisms’ presupposed benefits and thosewho prefer to take a more cynical view towards the phenomena, thereis arguably a lack of a middle-ground with substantial research that pre-sents a balanced view of volunteer tourism for what it really is. Mostinterestingly, there appears to be a dearth of academic pieces that havetaken a critical view of volunteer tourism. For the increasing numbersof lay people interested in volunteer tourism and the agencies provid-ing ‘‘voluntourism vacations’’, there is a critical need for research toprovide a firm foundation for a deeper understanding of volunteertourism—in both its positive and negative aspects. This paper acknowl-edges this need, and focuses in particular on individual volunteer tour-ists’ experiences, using fieldwork with a group of volunteer touristsfrom the student-formed team ‘‘Action Africa’’ from the NationalUniversity of Singapore.

This paper begins with an exploration of respondents’ motivationsfor participating in volunteer tourism, followed by a discussion onhow particular motivations, perspectives and objectives of volunteertourism is ‘‘performed’’ on the ground. This research has found thatat least within the group of 11 volunteer tourists interviewed, motiva-tions often revolved around the desire to travel or to visit a differentor ‘‘exotic’’ destination. Also, while volunteer tourists intervieweddid allude to some changes in opinions after their experiences, itwas inconclusive as to whether this has led to substantial changes intheir value-system, social consciousness, or willingness to volunteer inother arenas after their volunteer tourism experience. This is contraryto earlier findings by other authors that has mostly suggested that vol-unteer tourism has very direct and tangible positive outcomes amongstvolunteer tourists (Broad 2003; Brown and Morrison 2003; Campbelland Smith 2006; Halpenny and Caissie 2003; McGehee and Santos2004; McIntosh and Zahra 2007; Scheyvens 2002, 2007; Stoddart andRogerson 2004; Uriely, Reichel and Ron 2003; Wearing 2001, 2003;Zahra and McIntosh 2007). The aim of this paper is thus to uncoverthe underlying tensions surrounding these motivations and perfor-mances and discuss what indeed the aims of volunteer tourism projectsare, who determines these aims, and how differing notions are contin-ually performed and negotiated throughout the entire volunteer tour-ism experience.

SITUATING VOLUNTEER TOURISM

Central to volunteer tourism is the idea that tourism ventures canand should bring about positive impacts to locals in host-destinations.Mass tourism is often criticized for its failure to deliver promised ben-

482 H.L. Sin / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 480–501

efits of developing tourism in developing countries, while reinforcingdependencies. In response to criticisms of mass tourism, many havesought to develop new ways of conducting tourism to reform the indus-try of its ills. Some avenues include that of alternative tourism (Weaver1991, 1995), and sustainable tourism (Butler 1990, 1991; Cohen 1987;Pearce 1987).

It is within such paradigms that volunteer tourism is situated—whereattempts are made to develop a form of travel that is more benign orbeneficial to the local community and the ecological environment.In one of the most comprehensive volumes dedicated specifically tothe study of volunteer tourism, Wearing (2001) situates volunteer tour-ism within the field of alternative tourism and ecotourism (see alsoWearing and Neil 1997; Wearing and Neil 2001; Weiler and Richins1995) and suggests that volunteer tourism has the potential to inducechange, specifically ‘‘value change and changed consciousness’’(Wearing 2003:x). Wearing suggests that volunteer tourism has positiveinfluences on its participants, and this line of thought is echoed inmany other academic works—volunteer tourism is frequently seen asan alternative to the ills observed in other forms of tourism (Grayand Campbell 2007) or is at least assumed to bring about positivechanges in either the volunteer tourists (Broad 2003; Brown and Mor-rison 2003; Campbell and Smith 2006; Cousins 2007; Halpenny andCaissie 2003; McGehee and Santos 2004; McIntosh and Zahra 2007;Scheyvens 2002; Stoddart and Rogerson 2004; Uriely et al 2003; Wear-ing 2001; Wearing 2003; Zahra and McIntosh 2007) or in host commu-nities (Scheyvens 2002; Uriely et al 2003).

In the context of this study however, many participants may not nec-essary see themselves as ‘‘volunteer tourists’’ per se, but describe theactivity instead as ‘‘international service-learning’’. Service learning isdefined as

[a] method under which students learn and develop through activeparticipation in thoughtfully organized service experiences that meetactual community needs, and which are coordinated with a formaleducational institution to address and support an academic curricu-lum (University of Colorado 2005).

Unlike volunteerism that seeks to provide unpaid work on behalf ofothers, the main focus of service-learning is on learning and personaldevelopment. Service-learning is part of a broader set of educationaltools termed experiential learning, ‘‘defined as a process where thelearner needs to reflect upon the experience [in this case, the experi-ence of volunteering overseas] and derives new learning’’ (Osland et al1971:67). The primary goal of service-learning is to cultivate responsi-ble citizenship and encourage students’ active involvement in solvingsocial issues (Canada and Speck 2001). Service learning is thus an at-tempt that ‘‘speaks to our sense of duty and fairness in the world: thosewho can supporting those who cannot, giving opportunities to thoseleft behind’’ (Butin 2005:vii).

Using existing works on both volunteer tourism and service-learningas a basis for understanding volunteer tourism experiences, this paper


goes further in examining the motivations and performances in volun-teer tourism, and argues that individual experiences of volunteer tour-ism vary from person to person, and what each volunteer tourist takesout of his or her experience often results from a complex interplay be-tween his or her original motivations, the specific context of volunteerwork (for example, the type of volunteer project and the approachabil-ity of the local community), and the composition of the volunteer teamamongst other factors. Indeed, the negotiation of ‘‘heterogeneous’’spaces ‘‘with blurred boundaries (where activities and people mingle,allowing a wide range of encounters and greater expressiveness)’’(Edensor 2000:327) is often more than evident in volunteer tourism.In many instances, volunteer tourism destinations are the homes of lo-cals, including those where volunteer tourists simply live with locals inhomestay programmes. In these heterogeneous spaces, tourism be-comes less of a standard routine where tourists are able to gaze froma distance. Instead, tourists need to continually perform their identitiesaround interruptions and distractions—activities of locals that were of-ten artificially excluded in conventional ‘‘tourism bubbles’’. Volunteertourism centers around such ‘‘interruptions’’ and ‘‘distractions’’,where volunteers’ activities revolve on doing volunteer services forand with local people. Volunteer tourism thus functions within suchheterogeneous spaces, and perhaps it is indeed spaces that are hetero-geneous that attract volunteer tourists in the first place.

This attraction to heterogeneous spaces can be understood by themodern tourists’ search for a ‘‘sensuous experience’’, where tourismis ‘‘based more on ‘being, doing, touching and seeing’ rather than just‘seeing’’’ (Cloke and Perkins 1998:189; Crouch and Desforges 2003:7).Crouch argues that instead of the distanced ‘‘post tourist’’, the moderntourist is able to embody encounters, and ‘‘tourism becomes validatedin human practice in relation to knowledge. Knowledge is constructedthrough encounters, and space is important in informing this knowl-edge’’ (Crouch 2002:205). The concept of knowledge, according toCrouch, is no longer ‘‘a product or end point, but informed, inform-ing, and continuing to inform, unstable, fragmented and valued’’(2002:217). Through tourism, tourists are in a constant engagementwith various encounters in spaces, which in turn disturb and reformu-late knowledges. Indeed, Edensor argues that in this continual negoti-ation of spaces and knowledges, individuals also both consciously andsubconsciously ‘‘perform’’ their own identities and positionalitiesthrough the ‘‘strategic ‘stage-management’ of impressions character-ize[d by] the ways in which people attempt to convey particular mean-ings and values in social settings’’(2000:323).

The performance of selves in volunteer tourism should not howeverbeen assumed to be one of positive nature. As with existing criticisms inservice-learning that look into the participant’s resistance towards thelearning process, including their unwillingness to engage in service-learning course material and attributing sufferings to the service-recip-ients’ own fault (see Butin 2003; Clark and Young 2005; Jones 2002;Jones, Gilbride-Browm and Gariorski 2005; Kegan 1994; O’Grady2000), volunteer tourism experiences may or may not lead to positive


changes in its participants. Indeed, Butin warns that some examples ofservice-learning (and volunteer tourism in this case) could possiblydegenerate into a ‘‘voyeuristic exploitation of the ‘cultural other’ thatmasquerades as academically sanctioned ‘servant leadership’’’ (Butin2003:1675).

Volunteer Tourism from Singapore

In Singapore, many youths are actively involved in overseas volunteeror community service expeditions, where participants typically work ina team under the auspices of their school or student organizations. Therise of overseas volunteering expeditions from Singapore was pro-pelled by two developments, the first being a compulsory communityinvolvement programme implemented by the Ministry of Educationin Singapore for all pre-tertiary schools in 1997. This has created agreater awareness of the value of community involvement and is nowseen as part and parcel of a student’s education. The second relateddevelopment is the creation of Youth Expedition Project (YEP) in2000, under the non-government organization (NGO), SingaporeInternational Foundation (SIF, from 2000–2005), and subsequentlymanaged by the National Youth Council (NYC) since 2005.

Under the administration of SIF between 2000 to October 2005, YEPsupported over 9,500 youth in 450 community service projects overseas(Youth Expedition Project 2007, statistics since NYC took over are notavailable publicly). Volunteer services are provided in 10 Asian countries(Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries: Cambodia,Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Thailand and Viet-nam; and China and India). A typical YEP project would then consist ofactivities such as the volunteer component, structured reflection sessions,cultural exchange sessions and issue-based learning sessions. How the YEPteam is conducted, the choice of location, local partner organization, typeof volunteer component and other planned sessions, as well as the recruit-ment of participants, are largely organized by the YEP team leaders (whoare usually student leaders), although YEP does provide some guidelineson what is acceptable or not, and disburse funding accordingly. Invest-ments in YEP then, are built on the aims and expectations that YEP can

give Singapore youth an international experience in the area of theissues they are passionate about. It gives them an opportunity to learnto work together as a team and engage people from a different cul-ture. It helps them to develop a strong conviction about their rolesand obligations towards their communities and society at large. Thelong-term impacts of these YEP teams are tremendous as the goodwilland positive Singapore presence in these countries will contribute tothe fostering of friendships and meaningful exchanges especially atthe people to people level (Youth Expedition Project 2007).

Action Africa—National University of Singapore, University ScholarsProgramme

Volunteer tourists interviewed for this paper however, were indepen-dent of YEP and were instead from a student-initiated team from the


National University of Singapore (NUS) that had named their group,‘‘Action Africa’’. Action Africa was organized under the auspices ofthe University Scholars Programme (USP)—an interdisciplinary aca-demic programme for NUS undergraduates that was modeled afterthe Harvard University’s Core Curriculum Programme. Action Africawas initiated under USP’s ‘‘Global Programme’’ and was a communityservice and cultural exploration trip to South Africa that saw a group of12 participants (including the researcher) spending 26 days in SouthAfrica in December 2004. The aims of the community service projectwere to ‘‘facilitate the profitable growth of black tourism and to assisthome entrepreneurs in creating sustainable ventures’’ in Melkhoutfon-tein, South Africa (Action Africa Expedition 2007).

Participants of Action Africa were all NUS students and were re-cruited by the team leader who initiated the project. Recruitment no-tices were emailed to all the undergraduate students in NUS.Interested parties then emailed the leader of the team and suitablecandidates were invited to a one-to-one interview with the leader.About 25 people turned up for interviews, of which the leader selecteda team of 15 participants. Three selected participants dropped out forvarious personal reasons before the trip itself and 12 final participants(including the researcher) went ahead with the trip to South Africa.

The trip was split up into two major sections, the first being a 12-dayvolunteer component, where participants refurbished three homesinto homestays and cafes catering to local tourists in the township ofMelkhoutfontein located in the Western Cape of South Africa. The sec-ond section of the trip (14 days) was the cultural exploration compo-nent, and the team visited various destinations in South Africa,including the Cape Town, Stellenbosch, Oudtshoorn, Knysna, PortElizabeth, Pretoria and Johannesburg. At each town or city, partici-pants were met with local (and often independent) travel guides whothen explained much of the local social and political contexts in eachdestination.

Action Africa was organized like YEP trips and had requested fund-ing from YEP. However, YEP rejected its funding proposal as ActionAfrica was deemed to be outside the geographical scope defined byYEP (ASEAN countries, China and India). Action Africa was insteadfunded by the USP, Lee Foundation (a charitable foundation in Singa-pore created to fund programs that promote education and other phil-anthropic work), and a number of private donors. Each participantreceived a funding subsidy of $828 to $1,175 that was used to offsetthe total trip costs (excluding personal expenses) of US$2,649. The dif-ferent tiers of funding subsidies existed as USP students received addi-tional funding from the USP programme.

Study Methods

As elaborated on earlier, I had joined the team, Action Africa, as afull member, and was involved throughout the 26 day expedition toSouth Africa no differently from the other members of the team. I


participated in team activities from its initial preparations through tothe post-expedition presentations and photo-exhibition. I also workedtogether with the team in their volunteer services. This manner of re-search as a full participant was undertaken as I felt that observationsand interviews during the expedition reflect a more accurate accountof volunteers’ experiences, where feelings of discomfort and resistance,or satisfaction and attachment were often most immediate andunpolished.

The bulk of fieldwork for this paper then, were mostly one-to-oneinterviews in informal settings, most of which were deliberately semi-structured to give respondents the freedom to elaborate on their expe-riences. In total, the researcher conducted 33 one-to-one interviewswith the 11 volunteer tourists. Each volunteer tourist was interviewedon three occasions—the first interview was conducted prior to the tripto South Africa; the second interview was conducted within the firstweek of the trip; and the last interview was conducted in the last weekof the trip. Questions asked included: why they joined the expedition;what were their expectations of the trip; whether their expectationswere met; what were some of the things they felt they achieved or failedto achieve; and if the trip made any difference to them in general.

Informal discussions between members of the South Africa teamthroughout the volunteer tourism expedition were also noted and re-corded in the form of a research diary. The researchers also observedthe nightly discussion sessions throughout the entire trip. These wereinitially led by the leader of the team (pseudonym, Jacky) and the re-searcher (on alternate days in the first eight days of the trip). These ses-sions usually began with a debrief of the day’s activities, followed by theteam’s thoughts on what they had encountered in the day. The themesdiscussed in the first eight days included: 1. first impressions of SouthAfrica in general; 2. sharing of ‘‘life stories’’ between participants(each participant drew pictures to share the key moments of their liveswith other participants); 3. their impressions of Melkhoutfontein (thevolunteer site); and 4. what volunteering in South Africa meant tothem. Subsequently, the participants took over the discussion ses-sions—each member was to lead the discussion every night on a topiche or she felt was important and worthy of bringing up to the wholeteam. Topics were not vetted by Jacky or the researcher in advanceof the sessions, although members could informally discuss their cho-sen topic in advance with Jacky if he or she wanted to. Themes thatwere brought up by the participants then included:

1. Social issues they observed in South Africa, for example, the high rateof unemployment, drugs, violence, AIDS, apartheid, racial issues, andSouth African youths and their aspirations.

2. How does their volunteering in South Africa help? For example, didtheir volunteering actually make a difference to the people inMelkhoutfontein?

3. Team bonding activities. Games and various activities were conductedto get to know other participants better.


To aid documentation, most interviews and discussion sessions weretape-recorded with consent from the respondents. The recordingswere then transcribed under a pseudonym for further analysis. As sug-gested Cloke, Cook, Crang, Goodwin, Painter and Philo (2004), the re-searcher always informed the respondents at the start of the interviewor discussion session that he or she was ‘‘free to switch off the tape-recorder and terminate the interview if the respondent is upset bythe issues raised’’ (2004:164). This was done in hope of empoweringthe respondents during the research process to give them greaterauthority over what they thought should be included in research ornot. The transcribed interviews were then coded in themes such as‘‘motivations’’, ‘‘performances of the self’’, and ‘‘perceptions of aid-re-cipient’’ to facilitate analysis.

While joining the team enabled the researcher much opportunity inengendering trust and rapport with respondents, it also brought aboutsignificant tensions in the interactions with my respondents. As a fullmember of the team, I spent almost all my time with my team mates(that were also my ‘‘research respondents’’) as I lived, worked andplayed with them. There was hardly a line between what constituted re-search and what did not. Madge elaborates this tension clearly, high-lighting that research involves

playing out a multiplicity of changing roles during the course ofresearch. These roles, which are sometimes complementary, some-times clashing, and which are contingent on our positionality, willaffect the data given/gained and our subsequent interpretations. Inother words, they will influence what we produce as knowledge. Per-sonal relationships with people will influence the ethical decisions wemake regarding what we create as knowledge. Power, ethics andknowledge are interconnected (cited in WGSG 1997:94–95).

However, Spreitzhofer argues the benefits of being an ‘‘insider’’ inresearch, as this often translated into a ‘‘willingness to answer’’ onthe part of the respondent as a result of mutual confidence betweenresearcher and researched (Spreitzhofer 1998:981). It is in fact this‘‘insiderness’’ and ‘‘integratedness’’ (Sibley 1995) that allows in-depthexplorations of the volunteer tourism encounter in this research. Assuch, this paper should be read with an awareness of the researcher’spossible biases, and is as much a (re)presentation of opinions ofrespondents interviewed, as well as a piece of work detailing the re-searcher’s biases and standpoints as a subject enmeshed and embody-ing the complex dynamics of volunteer tourism from Singapore.

MOTIVATIONS OF VOLUNTEER TOURISTS

Volunteer tourists often have a multitude of motivations, and altru-istic motivations are often not mutually exclusive with leisure seekingor self-development motivations. Broad, for example, suggested that‘‘motivations traditionally associated with volunteering, such as altru-ism, will be relevant, along with those associated with recreational trav-elers, such as a search for fun, excitement, adventure, and meeting


others’’ (2003:64). Many volunteer tourists may be simultaneouslyprompted by opportunities to learn and enrich oneself, to enjoy thefeeling of being part of a team, or to express their individuality andaccomplishment through engaging in volunteer work (see Wearingand Neil 2001). Even though volunteer tourism seems to speak of ‘‘jus-tice’’ or ‘‘goodwill’’ tourism that prioritizes the benefits availed to vol-unteer aid-recipients (Butcher 2003; Scheyvens 2002; Stoddart andRogerson 2004), potential benefits to the volunteer worker are alsoimportant motivators. In fact, interviews for this research has revealedthat key motivators often revolve around the ‘‘self’’, most explicitly sta-ted in section headers starting with ‘‘I want to. . .’’. Also intrinsic in thisfocus on the ‘‘self’’ is the comparison with the ‘‘other’’, where the‘‘other’’ could take on a range a characters, from the ‘‘other’’ volun-teer tourist, the ‘‘other’’ peer or member of volunteer’s society whodo not have a volunteer tourism experience, or the ‘‘other’’ encoun-tered in the volunteer experience—the locals in host-communities. Astudy of motivations clearly illustrates desired identities of the ‘‘self’’in comparison to the ‘‘other’’ and serves as a precursor to considerthe tensions between desired outcomes of altruism, aid, and develop-ment in the host destination, versus personal development of the vol-unteer tourists.

‘‘I Want to Travel’’

Similar to Broad’s (2003) research in the Gibbon Rehabilitation Pro-ject (in Phuket, Thailand), many volunteer tourists interviewed statedthe desire ‘‘to travel’’ as one of their main motivations. Volunteer tour-ists interviewed believed that travelling allowed them to see somethingnew and exotic, to do something fun and exciting, or simply to escapemundane tasks at home. One volunteer tourist, Charlotte revealed herreasons for going to South Africa,

Frankly speaking, [my] secondary [reason] is voluntary work. Butcoming first is more of like to travel abroad and get away from Singapore.What attracted me was the South Africa place which is further awayfrom Asia. You know, I don’t want to go to like Cambodia, India. Imean I would go one day but if I have the opportunity to go further awayfrom that I would grab the opportunity (interview in 2004, author’semphasis).

It is noteworthy that Charlotte’s main motivation is to ‘‘get away fromSingapore’’, and to visit a place ‘‘which is further away from Asia’’. Sim-ilarly, another volunteer tourist, Stephen, said: ‘‘I think initially Iwanted to learn more about Africa and all along I wanted to come tothis country’’ (interview in 2004). Participants’ geographical imagina-tions of South Africa was that of a far-away and exotic destination,somewhere ‘‘different’’, and not frequently visited by other Singapore-ans. This makes the choice to participate in volunteer tourism not toodifferent from conventional choices that tourists make in decidingholiday destinations to visit.


To the leader of the team however, the motive ‘‘to travel’’ was re-lated to his desire to immerse in foreign cultures and to experiencesomething very novel. He relates,

I initiated the project because I wanted to experience how Africa wastruly like instead of all the simple stereotypes. And after taking theclass on Africa and hearing the experiences of the Professor, I feelthat the only way to truly understand what Africa truly was, was tosee it myself (interview in 2004).

The volunteering activity during the trip was thus seen as a means tobetter understand local contexts or to develop personal relationshipswith hosts, making the experience a more ‘‘authentic’’ encounter withwhat ‘‘Africa truly was’’.

‘‘To travel’’ therefore encapsulates differing motivations and de-sires even between a small group of 11 volunteer tourists. Commonamongst these desires however, is the notion that travel is a meansin which youths ‘‘stretch out beyond the local to draw in placesfrom around the globe’’ (Desforges 1998:176). Participants’ motiva-tions showed that some had viewed volunteer tourism as an oppor-tunity to perform the desired identities of one who is well-traveledbeyond conventional destinations, and who knows and understandsthe world. Indeed, Munt argued that ‘‘traveling has emerged as animportant informal qualification with the passport acting, so tospeak, as professional certification; a record of achievement andexperience’’ (Munt 1994:112). The clear domination of wanting‘‘to travel’’ among participants thus shows the desire to gain culturalcapital through the collection of knowledge and experience in vol-unteer tourism, and to perform desired identities that will in turnsecure ‘‘entry to the privileges of work, housing and lifestyle’’(Desforges 1998:177).

‘‘I Want to Contribute’’

In contrast, out of the 11 interviewees, only two responded with astrong statement that their main motivation is to volunteer and con-tribute to the local community. While volunteering was mentionedby all interviewees, it was often mentioned in tandem with the advanta-ges that came along with volunteering (especially in terms of learning).For example, Anne mentioned that

I think it offers me a different avenue to know the country. Betterthan to go out on package tours. Whereas for an expedition like this,apart from seeing the country and getting to experience it as a touristsightseeing, there’s an added dimension of doing community service(interview in 2004).

Fellow volunteer, Stephen, similarly reflected that ‘‘community servicewas never a primary objective of this trip. . . My primary objective was tocome here to learn, and to learn through community work’’ (interviewin 2004). This attitude of volunteering and getting to know a place bet-ter is also reflected in what volunteer Jacky has to say,

Personally I feel that I’m a bit of both. When I’m doing my community


service, I see myself as a volunteer but after the community servicephase, I would see myself more as a tourist than a volunteer althoughI wouldn’t hesitate to tell people that the reason why I am in South Africa is tovolunteer. Because I feel that it is very important when you volunteer toalso understand other aspects of the country and to get a more holistic view ofthe country then just simply seeing a part of the country that is in des-perate need of help, and overlooking all else in the country (interviewin 2004, author’s emphasis).

Volunteering is thus largely seen as an activity that was beneficial toboth host-communities and to the volunteers themselves. At least forthis group of respondents, their motivations to participate in volunteertourism are not outwardly centred on contributing to the host-communities.

‘‘I Want to See If I Can Do This’’

Volunteer tourists interviewed also tended to see volunteering as achallenge. This is in line with the belief that ‘‘people express who/whatthey are, to themselves and to others, by engaging in action-leisureactivities’’ (Kernan and Domzal 2001). Going to Africa had conjuredimages of danger and inaccessibility to some respondents (though thisitself is another stereotype of what ‘‘Africa’’ was about), and thisimpression coupled with the demands of physical labor in volunteerwork repels some people from the expedition, while enticing others.Thus, it is not surprising to find that the volunteer tourists interviewedtended to see themselves as highly adventurous and motivated by thedesire to prove themselves. One volunteer, Betsy, for example said:‘‘Not many people come to Africa, and I have never volunteered be-fore. So it’s just something I thought I should try, you know [to] seeif I could do it too’’ (discussion with team in 2004).

Such motivations are very similar to previous research on long-haultravelers or backpackers who see their trip as a challenge or a ritualto signify their coming of age (see Desforges 1998; Desforges 2000).Respondents like Betsy displayed a desire to use the volunteering expe-rience to ‘‘realize a different, undeveloped side of [her] personality orto take on a ‘‘new’’ role in a context where no one will make [her] con-form to expectations about [herself]’’ (Edensor 2000:325).

‘‘It’s More Convenient This Way’’

Finally, another common motivation, surprisingly, was the practicalbenefits of joining a volunteer tourism trip. Four participants alludedto how it was practical to join the team. Anne, for example said: ‘‘Ithought South Africa was a very inaccessible place. . . It’s a lot easierto come with a school trip, then to come on my own’’ (interview in2004). Additionally, Stephen talked about the subsidies provided bythe university and other fund-raisers, saying: ‘‘to go as a tourist, you willspend a lot more money. So it’s the cost consideration, you come [toSouth Africa] for almost a month, you only spend about $1810’’


(interview in 2004). This case however, possibly illustrates the expecta-tions of some volunteer tourists who may be interested only due to thefact that it can be a cheap or subsidized holiday. While it is beyond thescope of this paper to undertake an in-depth study on this issue and toascertain if this situation pertains only to Singapore, it is important forcoordinators of volunteer tourism to acknowledge this situation andbalance the need for subsidies to enable volunteer tourism to remainaccessible to youths, versus the possible outcome that youths are simplymaking use of volunteer tourism to go on a cheap holiday and have nointentions to help host communities or engage in critical out-of-class-room style learning.

PERFORMANCES IN VOLUNTEER TOURISM

As with all individuals, volunteer tourists are active narrators of theirexperiences, seeking to perform their ‘‘selves’’ with elements of self-authorship (see Kegan 1994) and self-actualization (see Giddens1991). Giddens (1991) argues that ‘‘for contemporary generations,identity and life-story explications have become an internal affair’’ (ci-ted in Elsrud 2001:600), and like all other choices an individual makes,the choice of where to travel to, how to travel, and what activities to en-gage in while travelling are all parts of the narrative about one’s iden-tity. Thus the ‘‘self’’ is continually performed both externally to one’saudiences (friends, relatives, and other people one comes across) andinternally to strengthen one’s self-identity. In undertaking a volunteerproject during their overseas trip, the tourist is in fact ‘‘expressing astory about who he or she is or wants to be’’ (Elsrud 2001:599), andactively ‘‘constructing who one might be henceforth’’ (cited in Noy2004:84; Ochs 1997). This section thus relays what sorts of ‘‘selves’’respondents interviewed desire to perform outwardly in their choiceto engage in volunteer tourism in South Africa.

As alluded to earlier in the section on motivations, volunteer touristsinterviewed have appeared to desire an ‘‘authentic’’ understanding to-wards local situations. In these instances, volunteers exhibit a sensethat they are developing (or at least performing a ‘‘self’’ that has devel-oped) a deeper understanding of local conditions. For example, Betsyreflects in her journal, saying that, ‘‘this brings me to something that’sbeen bugging me ever since I reached SA [South Africa]. Income dis-parity here is glaringly wide. It is grotesque’’ (shared with the authorduring an interview in 2004). Betsy was greatly disturbed by the incomedisparity and when interviewed again at a later stage, she shared herrevelation about studying Law:

I just went to Law school ‘cause I couldn’t get into Medicine [Fac-ulty]. And for the past one plus year I was just drifting along. Buthere, I realized how much legal constitutions can mean to a countryand its people. I guess coming from Singapore where everything’sprim and proper I kind of took it for granted. Maybe one day I canuse my legal knowledge to help other people, like what the volunteerdid for Yellow [who had earlier received aid from a previous volunteer


who helped him expedite his legal claims for public housing] (Inter-view in 2004).

While Betsy did not specify if it was the act of volunteering or the in-depth immersion with working in a local township that brought aboutsuch thoughts, it can be observed that through her volunteer tourismexperiences in South Africa, Betsy was able to connect her impressionsof places and issues with what she was doing back in Singapore. Sheoutwardly expressed that her experience in South Africa had a pro-found impact on her attitude towards her studies and future career.She also conveyed that she was only beginning to grasp the impactof her experience. Giddens refers to such encounters of anxiety andopportunity as ‘‘fateful moments’’ (1991), or ‘‘significant points oftransition in people’s lives where reflexivity is heightened because deci-sions have to be made about the self and self-actualization that willhave repercussions for self-identity and lifestyle for a considerablenumber of years ahead’’ (Desforges 2000:935). In this instance, Betsywas also subtly ‘‘othering’’ her peers back home, insinuating thatthrough her volunteer tourism experience, she had gained awarenessand perception that cannot be achieved by an individual ‘‘comingfrom Singapore’’ and not venturing beyond these ‘‘prim and proper’’boundaries.

Jacky, on the other hand, took in his new understanding of places byrelating and comparing what he saw in South Africa, with Singapore.When confronted by ‘‘others’’ who are different from himself, he be-came more self-critical and began to evaluate his own behaviours in dif-ferent situations. He shares:

what is more salient to me is perhaps the team dynamics and thebehaviour and the culture that we bring here ourselves, when viewedin contrast to the locals. . . they were very friendly and as Singaporeanswe are generally very unfriendly, very reserved, and very private butthese South Africans. . . they are very interested in knowing people dif-ferent from them. . . and it is impressive that they are so interested inthe diversity that the world has to offer, coming from such a history ofoppression. . . I think that is something that is quite lacking in Singap-oreans who are more apathetic and we do not care much about othercultures. . . (Discussion with team in 2004).

Here, Jacky questions Singaporeans’ attitude towards diversity andfinds the curiosity displayed by the South Africans to be highlyimpressive. He questions the values and behaviours of himself andother Singaporeans through this encounter with the ‘‘other’’, andengages in the inward negotiation of his ‘‘self’’ in comparison tothe South African ‘‘other’’ who was seen to be appreciative andempathetic.

Another volunteer tourist, Jane, shared her personal experience ofan internal self-actualization and change. She reflected that

it’s not something that tangible, it’s changed me in certain ways. It’squite hard to say. . . the most important thing is that the way I see lifehas changed. In the past I see it as something that you just gothrough, but when I come here I see that actually part of life is also


to struggle, you have to struggle, overcome difficult things to find themeaning of life. (interview in 2004).

Other than an evident change in her self-perception, Jane also notes that‘‘struggle’’ or the need to be challenged is a very important part of one’slife. Certainly, volunteer tourism is seen to entails certain risks and chal-lenges, where ‘‘feeling scared, exhausted and thoroughly tested is some-times part of the deal... adventure might involve a certain amount ofhardship and unpleasantness’’ (Swarbrooke, Beard, Leckie and Pomfret2003:8). Volunteer tourists, like adventure tourists and backpackers,then possibly use these risks involved in volunteering overseas to con-struct and perform their identities (Elsrud 2001). Through her encoun-ter with hosts at volunteer tourism events and her own difficulties andinconveniences experienced as a volunteer, Jane distinguishes herselffrom ‘‘other’’ non-volunteers, and performs an identity of one whounderstands and has faced struggles and responded well to these.

The notion that volunteer tourism can be used to perform the ‘‘self’’however, is also closely related to criticisms leveled at volunteer touristsas they are thought to be seeking opportunities for the sake of resume-building or to appear ‘‘cool’’ or ‘‘adventurous’’ to friends (see Desfor-ges 1998; Desforges 2000). While all the volunteer tourists interviewedagreed that experiences gained would be something they can be proudof and demonstrative of their resilience, tenacity and character, theystopped short of claiming that these are the sole motivations of theirvolunteer experience. Although many volunteer tourists, includingAnne, Joseph and Stephen talked about meeting ‘‘real people’’through their experience, they also expressed uneasiness in essentialis-ing the locals as ‘‘real, authentic tribal Africans’’. This is particularlysalient perhaps because most of the volunteer tourists on this triphad taken an academic course on ‘‘Africa: Communities, Culturesand Civilizations’’. In this course, the students were cautioned againststereotyping Africans as ‘‘tribal’’ people or ‘‘primitive savages’’. Itmight suffice to say that the volunteer tourists thus displayed and per-formed a ‘‘self’’ that is sensitive towards the locals, different from‘‘other’’ mass tourists who are often deemed to be insensitive. How-ever, as tourists, they also displayed an incessant desire to photographand capture almost everything (ranging from children, to scenery andpictures of the township, to wildlife and flora) they come across. Infact, the group of 11 volunteer tourists collectively took about 14,000photos in the course of the 26 days. Volunteer tourists do not necessar-ily shed all characteristics of mass tourists, and are constantly at thecrossroads of negotiating and performing their identities as a volunteerand as a tourist.

TENSIONS AND PARADOXES IN VOLUNTEER TOURISM

Learning (or resistance towards it)

The performances of the ‘‘self’’ as a savvy traveler with a verbalizedsense of social awareness and openness towards volunteering however,


should be contrasted against the seeming lack of action amongstrespondents after the volunteer tourism trip. While there was a senseamongst respondents that the volunteering activity featured greatlyin their experience, and that they felt a greater consciousness towardsparticular societal issues, respondents were not necessarily able or will-ing to commit to further volunteering activities in other contexts (sim-ilar to what was observed in Sudderuddin 2007). This is in contrast toearlier studies that have suggested that ‘‘volunteers are more likely tohave denser social networks and to be politically engaged’’, and that‘‘volunteers appear to be consistently more active members of society’’(Hodgekinson 2003:36, 51). The tension here then, is whether theobjectives of volunteer tourism nurturing ‘‘world-ready-youths’’ witha ‘‘strong conviction about their roles and obligations towards theircommunities and society at large’’ (Youth Expedition Project 2007)can be or is actually being fulfilled. Instead of grooming a generationof youths who are passionate about volunteer work, research for thispaper seems to suggest that respondents interviewed are instead pas-sionate about travelling and going overseas.

Indeed, in the two years immediately after the trip, the researcherhad kept in contact with the interviewees and asked if they had volun-teered or travelled overseas in this period. Of the 11 volunteer tourists,only four had volunteered substantially, of which three had conductedtheir volunteering overseas in trips similar to this one to South Africa.Of these four respondents, one was already a regular volunteer in Sin-gapore prior to joining Action Africa, and the other three were com-mitted to their respective volunteer tourism trips even before the tripto South Africa. This appears to suggest that participating in ActionAfrica had not significantly altered respondents’ post-trip volunteeringactivities. Instead, those who were inclined to volunteer would havedone so anyway, and this also explains why they had signed up for Ac-tion Africa in the first place. Conversely, all participants had gone over-seas for travel of significant duration. It should also be noted however,that most participants went overseas for study, language immersions orwork and travel purposes. The preferred mode of travel also veeredstrongly towards backpacking. This emphasizes the original motiva-tions of this group of 11 participants, where volunteering was mainlya means among many others towards understanding local people’s live-lihoods and culture. Again, the desire to perform the self-identity ofwell-travelled individual who understands the world is reiterated, andit appears that within this group of respondents the objective of ‘‘trav-elling’’ and in turn ‘‘getting to know the world’’ supersedes objectivesof volunteering or addressing social injustices through volunteertourism.

Indeed, the researcher is of the opinion that there is no harm inplacing volunteer tourism’s objectives as ‘‘travelling’’ in a meaningfulmanner where participants are put in suitable positions to encounter‘‘other’’ cultures and contexts—as long as these encounters are takenpositively and reflected upon critically by volunteer tourists. The appar-ent paradox though, is the possibility that despite the desire to perform‘‘selves’’ that are sensitive and matured world-travelers, volunteer


tourists could instead end up reinforcing negative stereotypes or mis-understand what their own positions of privilege entails (see next sec-tion on democracy or the lack of it).

For example, in the course of volunteer tourism, participants’ exist-ing assumptions, stereotypes and privileges may be confronted. Whilethese confrontations acts as an impetus for some to re-evaluate theirpositions and begin a journey towards change, many others might re-ject opinions that conflict with their original beliefs. Resistance thus oc-curs when the volunteer tourism experience exposes participants towhat they are not prepared to process. For example, Stephen sharesthat at times he feels that the locals are not helping themselves. In-stilled with values of hard work and conscientiousness, Stephen opinesthat the South African Blacks are indeed lazy and are poor becausethey choose to drink and smoke marijuana all day. However, Stephenalso says that

But I think maybe it is because I am brought up to believe that as longas I work hard I can succeed. And that is because I am lucky ‘cause wehave many opportunities. My first reaction is to blame the locals fornot working hard for themselves. But maybe there is a bigger problemof society having no opportunities (interview in 2004).

From Stephen’s example, we see that some resistance would naturallyoccur initially. Volunteer tourism should therefore recognize this resis-tance and address these issues faced by participants.

Democracy (or the lack of it)

Another inherent tension observed is that respondents (whetherconsciously or not) tended to adopt a ‘‘giving attitude’’. For example,fund-raising events for volunteer tourism are often termed as ‘‘charitybazaars’’ or involve ‘‘charity movie-screenings’’. Steinback (1951) criti-cizes this mentality, declaring that ‘‘[t]he most overrated virtue. . . isthat of giving. Giving builds up the ego of the giver, makes him supe-rior and higher and larger than the receiver. Nearly always, giving is aselfish pleasure, and in many cases it is a downright destructive and evilthing’’ (cited in Smillie 1995:29). One volunteer tourist, Jane, dis-played this desire to give, saying that, ‘‘I thought it’ll be tougher, morework. I guess we want to give them as much as we can, since we have somuch more’’ (interview in 2004, author’s emphasis). Although Janemeant no malice in her statement, and the researcher noted her sin-cerity in wanting to contribute, her comments bring out the problemswhen volunteer tourism fails to advance democracy and active citizen-ship. Jane’s desire to give is also accentuated by her awareness of her‘‘having so much more’’, and this again problematically juxtaposesher position as being superior when compared to the South Africansin the project. Also, her act of giving relieves her of guilt of being ina superior position, but does not in any way change the system of priv-ileges available to her and not available to the aid-recipients.

The paradox herein is that volunteer tourism will almost always in-volve the ‘‘richer’’ and ‘‘better off’’ providing aid to the ‘‘poor’’ and


‘‘worse off’’. Volunteers from Singapore can be easily seen as richerand superior, forming a problematic dichotomy between thevolunteers and aid-recipients, where volunteers are in a better posi-tion of power to judge and comment on the aid-recipients. ‘‘Other-ing’’ in this sense could potentially create rifts that hinder thebuilding of strong personal relationships between volunteer and reci-pient; it can even cause a situation where the volunteer is seen assuperior.

Agreeing with this opinion, Voluntary Services Overseas director,Judith Brodie, has criticized that ‘‘many ‘volunteer tourism’ tripsto developing countries are expensive, poorly planned and unlikelyto help local people’’ (cited in Griffiths 2007). It is unfortunate inSingapore’s example that despite the widespread use of ‘‘service-learning’’ in volunteer tourism ventures, the underlying conceptsof advancing democracy through encouraging open expression ofopinions by all levels of society has not been observed. Indeed, vol-unteer tourism, like community service in Singapore, has tended tobe apolitical—largely philanthropic and altruistic, rather than associ-ated with political dimensions of citizenship and advocacy. Volun-teer tourists were also hardly encouraged to question whycommunities in host-countries needed volunteer services. Instead,there is a risk that volunteer tourists can be led to assume thataid-recipients were naturally poor, and failed to understand prevail-ing circumstances that impede aid-recipients’ efforts to break out ofthe poverty-cycle (personal observation in 2004). Indeed, ‘‘[w]henviewed as simply helping those ‘less fortunate’, students may failto see the role that their own privilege plays in the dynamics ofpower’’ (Clark and Young 2005:72). For example, despite motiva-tions and the desire to perform a ‘‘self’’ that is sensitive to localconditions, respondents interviewed may not have an adequatelyin-depth understanding of the political and social histories of SouthAfrica and this can undermine their ability to appreciate larger is-sues hampering economic development in South Africa (personalobservation in 2004).

Critics have long expressed disapproval towards apolitical commu-nity service, declaring that it is purely an institutional means that thestate uses to continually reproduce a capitalist status quo while appear-ing to address issues of inequality in society and allowing citizens toappear concerned and responsible (Gorham 1992). In this case, partic-ipation and support in volunteer tourism might be implicitly acceptingstructural inequalities and reproducing imparity in current systemswithout questioning them (Guarasci and Rimmerman 1996; Rimmer-man 1997). While volunteer tourism, especially in Singapore, may ap-pear favourable in enabling the continued stability of the currentpolitical climate, it may not fulfill its purpose of achieving greater soci-etal well-being. Instead, volunteer tourism, whether in Singapore orelsewhere, needs to continually evaluate its position and considerbringing in substantial discussions on democracy and active citizenshipto achieve its true potential.


CONCLUSION

Through an in-depth study of 11 volunteer tourists from Singapore,this article has highlighted various observations about volunteer tour-ists’ motivations, performances, as well as the tensions and paradoxesin volunteer tourism. Interestingly, this study has found that at leastamong those interviewed, motivating factors for volunteer tourists were‘‘to travel’’ rather than ‘‘to contribute’’ or volunteer. Volunteering inthe local community was also but one of the many means of travellingto different destinations to ‘‘learn about local cultures’’ or to ‘‘go be-yond superficial tour packages where you don’t see how people reallylive’’ (interviews with Betsy, Jacky, and Stephen in 2004). In the sectionon performances in volunteer tourism, it was also revealed that volun-teer tourism was often used as an experience (often reflected in re-sumes and casual conversations with friends and acquaintances)which volunteer tourists used to perform a ‘‘self’’ suggesting that heor she was a conscious and worldly tourist or individual.

This emphasis on the ‘‘self’’ is perhaps already acknowledged in anunderstated manner among many involved in organizing volunteertourism. However, instead of leaving such emphasis on the ‘‘self’’ inthe background, it is important to realize upfront that many volunteertourists are typically more interested in fulfilling objectives relating tothe ‘‘self’’. This puts away the altruistic perception of volunteer tourismand allows one to critically assess the nature of volunteer tourism muchlike any other form of tourism—whether considered as mass or alterna-tive tourism. Indeed, the section on tensions and paradoxes in volun-teer tourism highlights the tensions between the differing objectivesbetween funding bodies, versus those of the volunteer tourists them-selves. In summary, this paper elucidated that volunteer tourism couldindeed be reinforcing negative stereotypes of aid-recipients as inferioror less-able through the process of ‘‘othering’’ by volunteer tourists.Also, if volunteer tourism continues to be organized in an apoliticalmanner that neglects critical engagement with issues of democracyand active citizenship, it could easily fail to achieve its purported inten-tions of being ‘‘pro-poor’’ or addressing social inequalities.

Continual and critical reviews of volunteer tourism are thus neededas it emerges with growing popularity. Indeed, tourism forms havebeen and will continue to tend towards addressing social and environ-mental ‘‘responsibilities’’ and it is vital for tourism researchers to dwellin detail on the complex issues encountered by tourists, locals at hostcommunities, and businesses or private organizations providing suchresponsible tourism options. It is hoped that this study has addressedone of the many angles in volunteer tourism and have provided inter-esting insights on the individuals’ experience in volunteer tourism.This paper, however, is but a starting point for further research and dis-cussion. Most importantly, more research focusing on the perspectivesof the aid-recipients of volunteer tourism is needed. Further researchcould, for example explore the power relations arising from volunteertourism within host-communities, especially in terms of the relationsbetween funding organizations and local partners in host-communi-


ties, and how different stakeholders negotiate their power or lack of itin attaining their own agendas.

Acknowledgements—The author would like to thank A/P Chang Tou Chuang for his supervi-sion and support of this research project. This study was funded by the National Universityof Singapore.

REFERENCES

Action Africa Expedition2007 Action Africa <http://www.usp.nus.edu.sg/global_programme/student-

work/action_africa/index.htm> Accessed on 12 November 2008.Bennett, R.

2008 Booming Gap Year Under Fire; Year-off Controversy; The Student Guide.In The Times, 14 August 2008. London.

Bowes, G.2008 Travel: Volunteering: Reality Gap: A Gap Project Should be Rewarding, but

Travellers can Feel They’ve Wasted Their Time. How Do You Choose theRight One? In The Guardian, 6 September 2008. London.

Broad, S.2003 Living the Thai life—A Case Study of Volunteer Tourism at the Gibbon

Rehabilitation Project, Thailand. Tourism Recreation Research 28:63–72.Brown, S., and A. Morrison

2003 Expanding Volunteer Vacation Participation, An Exploratory Study on theMini-Mission Concept. Tourism Recreation Research 28:73–82.

Butcher, J.2003 A Humanistic Perspective on the Volunteer-Recipient Relationship: A

Mexican Study. In Nonprofit and Civil Society Studies, The Values ofVolunteering—Cross-Cultural Perspectives, P. Dekker and L. Halman, eds.,pp. 111–126. New York: Kluwer Academic.

Butin, D. W.2003 Of What Use Is It? Multiple Conceptualizations of Service-Learning in

Education. Teachers College Record 105:1674–1692.2005 Preface: Disturbing Normalizations of Service-Learning. In Service-Learning

in Higher Education, D. W. Butin, ed., pp. vii–xx. New York: PalgraveMacmillan.

Butler, R. W.1990 Alternative Tourism: Pious Hope or Trojan Horse?. Journal of Travel

Research 3:40–45.1991 Tourism, Environment, and Sustainable Development. Environmental Con-

servation 18:201–209.Campbell, L. M., and C. Smith

2006 What Makes Them Pay? Values of Volunteer Tourists Working for SeaTurtle Conservation. Environmental Management 38:84–98.

Canada, M., and B. W. Speck2001 Developing and Implementing Service-Learning Programs. San Francisco:

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Clark, C., and M. Young

2005 Changing Places: Theorizing Space and Power Dynamics in Service-Learning. In Service-Learning in Higher Education, D. W. Butin, ed., pp.71–87. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Cloke, P., I. Cook, P. Crang, M. Goodwin, J. Painter, and C. Philo2004 Practising Human Geography. London: Sage.

Cloke, P., and H. Perkins1998 Cracking the Canyon with the Awesome Foursome. Environment and

Planning D: Society and Space 16:185–218.

http://www.usp.nus.edu.sg/global_programme/studentwork/action_africa/index.htm

http://www.usp.nus.edu.sg/global_programme/studentwork/action_africa/index.htm


Cohen, E.1987 Alternative Tourism: A Critique. Tourism Recreation Research 12:13–18.

Cousins, J. A.2007 The Role of UK-based Conservation Tourism Operators. Tourism Man-

agement 28:1020–1030.Crouch, D.

2002 Surrounded by Place, Embodied Encounters. In Tourism, Between Placeand Performance, S. Coleman and M. Crang, eds., pp. 207–218. New York:Berghahn Books.

Crouch, D., and L. Desforges2003 The Sensuous in the Tourist Encounter. Tourist Studies 3:5–22.

Desforges, L.1998 ‘‘Checking Out the Planet’’: Global Representations/Local Identities in

Youth Travel. In Cool Places: Geographies of Youth Cultures, T. Skelton andG. Valentine, eds., pp. 175–192. London: Routledge.

2000 Travelling the World. Identity and Travel Biography. Annals of TourismResearch 27:926–945.

Edensor, T.2000 Staging Tourism: Tourists as Performers. Annals of Tourism Research

27:322–344.Elsrud, T.

2001 Risk Creation in Travelling. Backpacker Adventure Narration. Annals ofTourism Research 28:597–617.

Giddens, A.1991 Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society and the Late Modern Age.

Cambridge: Polity Press.Gorham, E. B.

1992 National Service, Citizenship, and Political Education. Albany: SUNY Press.Gray, N. J., and L. M. Campbell

2007 A Decommodified Experience? Exploring Aesthetic, Economic andEthical Values for Volunteer Ecotourism in Costa Rica. Journal of SustainableTourism 15:463–482.

Griffiths, P.2007 Charity Attacks Gap-Year ‘‘Volunteerism’’. In Reuters, 14 August 2007.

London.Guarasci, R., and C. A. Rimmerman

1996 Applying Democratic Theory in Community Organizations. In TeachingDemocracy by Being Democratic, T. Becker and R. Couto, eds. Westport,Connecticut: Praeger.

Halpenny, E. A., and L. T. Caissie2003 Volunteering on Nature Conservation Projects: Volunteer Experience,

Attitudes and Values. Tourism Recreation Research 28:25–33.Hodgekinson, V. A.

2003 Volunteering in Global Perspective. In Nonprofit and Civil Society Studies,The Values of Volunteering—Cross-Cultural Perspectives, P. Dekker and L.Halman, eds., pp. 35–54. New York: Kluwer Academic.

Jones, S.2002 The ‘Underside’ of Service-Learning. About Campus 7:10–15.

Jones, S., J. Gilbride-Browm, and A. Gariorski2005 Getting Inside the ‘Underside’ of Service-Learning: Student Resistance

and Possibilities. In Service-Learning in Higher Education, D. W. Butin, ed.,pp. 3–24. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Kegan, R.1994 In Over Our Heads: The Mental Demands of Modern Life. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press.Kernan, J. B., and T. Domzal

2001 Playing on the Post-Modern Edge: Action as Self-Identity. In ConsumerPsychology of Tourism, Hospitality and Leisure, A. G. Woodside, G. I. Crouch,J. A. Mazanec, M. Oppermann and M. Y. Sakai, eds. Oxon: CABI.


Kwa, T.2007 Voluntourism: More Tourist than Volunteer. In The Straits Times, 28 July2007. Singapore.

Mahti, B.2007 Do-gooder Trips Not the Best Way to Volunteerism? In The Straits Times,

11 December 2007. Singapore.McGehee, N. G., and C. A. Santos

2004 Social Change, Discourse and Volunteer Tourism. Annals of TourismResearch 32:760–779.

McIntosh, A. J., and A. Zahra2007 A Cultural Encounter through Volunteer Tourism: Towards Ideals of

Sustainable Tourism? Journal of Sustainable Tourism 15:541–556.Munt, I.

1994 Ecotourism or Ego-Tourism? Race and Class 36:49–60.Noy, C.

2004 This Trip Really Changed Me. Backpackers’ Narratives of Self-Change.Annals of Tourism Research 31:78–102.

Ochs, E.1997 Narrative. In Discourse as Structure and Process, T. Van Dijk, ed. London:

Sage.O’Grady, C. R.

2000 Integrating Service Learning and Multicultural Education: An Overview. InIntegrating Service Learning and Multicultural Education in Colleges andUniversities, C. R. O’Grady, ed., pp. 1–19. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Osland, J., D. Kolb, and I. Rubin1971 Organizational Psychology: An Experiential Approach. New Jersey:

Prentice Hall.Pearce, D. G.

1987 Tourism Today: A Geographical Analysis. New York: Wiley.Rimmerman, C. A.

1997 The New Citizenship. Unconventional Politics, Activism, and Service.Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Scheyvens, R.2002 Tourism for Development. Empowering Communities. Englang: Pearson

Education Limited.2007 Exploring the Tourism-Poverty Nexus. In Pro-poor Tourism: Who Benefits?:

Perspectives on Tourism and Poverty Reduction, C. M. Hall, ed., pp. 121–144.Cleverdon: Channel View Publications.

Sibley, D.1995 Geographies of Exclusion: Society and Difference in the West. London:

Routledge.Smillie, I.

1995 Altruism Under Fire—Non-profit Organizations and International Devel-opment. London: Intermediate Technology Publications Ltd.

Spreitzhofer, G.1998 Backpacking Tourism in South-East Asia. Annals of Tourism Research

25:979–983.Steinback, J.

1951 The Log from the Sea of Cortez. London: Penguin.Stoddart, H., and C. M. Rogerson

2004 Volunteer Tourism: The Case of Habitat for Humanity South Africa.GeoJournal 60:311–318.

Sudderuddin, S.2007 Volunteer at Home? No Thanks. In The Straits Times, 23 December 2007.

Singapore.Swarbrooke, J., C. Beard, S. Leckie, and G. Pomfret

2003 Adventure Tourism: The New Frontier. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.University of Colorado

2005 Chancellor’s Leadership, Residential Academic Program Service Initiativeand the Ethnic Living and Learning Community <http://www.colorado.edu/chancellorslrap/lcglossary.html> Accessed on 24 January 2005.

http://www.colorado.edu/chancellorslrap/lcglossary.html

http://www.colorado.edu/chancellorslrap/lcglossary.html


Uriely, N., A. Reichel, and A. Ron2003 Volunteering in Tourism: Additional Thinking. Tourism Recreation

Research 28:57–62.Wearing, S.

2001 Volunteer Tourism: Experiences that Make a Difference. Wallingford:CABI International.

2003 Special Issue on Volunteer Tourism. Tourism Recreation Research 28:3–4.Wearing, S., and J. Neil

1997 Tourism that Counts: Ecotourism, Volunteerism and Serious LeisureTour-ism Research: Building a Better Industry pp. 141–154. Canberra: Bureau ofTourism Research.

2001 Expanding Sustainable Tourism’s Conceptualization: Ecotourism, Volun-teerism and Serious Leisure. In Tourism, Recreation and Sustainability,Linking Culture and the Environment, S. F. McCool and R. N. Moisey, eds.,pp. 233–255. New York: CABI Publishing.

Weaver, D. B.1991 Alternatives to Mass Tourism in Dominica. Annals of Tourism Research

18:414–432.1995 Alternative Tourism in Montserrat. Tourism Management 16:593–604.

Weiler, B., and H. Richins1995 Extreme, Extravagant and Elite: A Profile of Ecotourists on Earthwatch

Expeditions. Tourism Recreation Research 20:29–36.Women and Geography Study Group of the Royal Geographical Society (WGSG)

1997 Feminist Geographies: Explorations in Diversity and Difference. Harlow:Longman.

Youth Expedition Project2007 YEP project grant <http://www.yep.sg/funding/yep_project_grant.html>

Accessed on 12 November 2008.Zahra, A., and A. J. McIntosh

2007 Volunteer Tourism: Evidence of Cathartic Tourist Experiences. TourismRecreation Research 32:115–119.

Submitted 11 April 2008. Resubmitted 15 November 2008. Final version 22 January 2009.Accepted 4 March 2009. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor: John Tribe


http://www.yep.sg/funding/yep_project_grant.html




THE TRANSFORMATIVE POWEROF THE INTERNATIONAL SOJOURN

An Ethnographic Study of the InternationalStudent Experience

Lorraine BrownBournemouth University, United Kingdom

Abstract: The findings from an ethnographic study of international postgraduate students’adjustment journey through life in England illustrates the transformative potential of theinternational student sojourn. It is shown that removal from the familiar home environmentgave students freedom from cultural and familial expectations and the opportunity for self-discovery, whilst exposure to a new culture offered them the chance to improve theircross-cultural communication skills. The durability of change was questioned by studentswho were apprehensive about re-entry to the origin culture and the receptivity of those leftbehind to the changes they had made. By pointing to the possible similarities between theexperiences of international students and long-stay tourists, this paper calls for research intothe outcome of long-stay tourism, in order to measure the extent of change in tourists’ self-concept and cross-cultural awareness. Keywords: sojourners personal growth, interculturalcompetence, life changes, going home. � 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION

International education is a major export industry at university level,with fierce competition among the key markets of the United King-dom, Canada, New Zealand and Australia (Ryan and Carroll 2005).Since 1997, the number of international students studying in theUnited Kingdom has soared, and their recruitment by British universi-ties has steadily grown; within the UK context, international studentsconstitute 13% of the total student population (318,000), though thepercentage varies across institutions (UKCOSA 2006). In 2006, then-British Prime Minister Tony Blair announced the second phase of aninitiative to promote British HE following the success of his 1999 pro-gram, which set an original target of 75,000 additional internationalstudents and was comfortably exceeded. The second initiative urgedBritish universities to build overseas partnerships that would help them

Lorraine Brown works in the School of Services Management at Bournemouth University(School of Services Management, Dorset House, Talbot Campus, BH12 5BB, UK. Email:<[email protected]>) as Programme Leader for the Tourism Masters Frameworkand as senior lecturer in academic support for international postgraduate students. Herdoctoral thesis is on the adaptation experience of international students to life in the UK.Her research interests include cross-cultural interaction, the impact of prejudice on thesojourn experience and the outcome of culture contact.

502

L. Brown / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 502–521 503

recruit 100,000 more international students by 2011 (MacLeod 2006).The relationship between income generation and overseas recruitmentin Higher Education (HE) has been well documented; income frominternational students plays an important role in the financial healthof the HE sector, representing almost one-third of the total incomein fees for universities and HE colleges in the United Kingdom (Ward2001; Leonard, Morley and Pelletier 2002; Ryan and Carroll 2005). Theadvent of full-cost fees means that most British HE institutions dependon income from international students. In 2004, they earned £4 billionin fees, and students spent as much again on living costs; this level roseto £5 billion in 2006 (MacLeod 2006).

Accompanying the steady rise in the number of international stu-dents in global HE has been a growth in research dedicated to the inter-national sojourn, and cultural adjustment and personal changerepresent two of several research interests. The move to a new environ-ment represents an important life event (Kim 2001): when a sojournerhas completed their primary socialization process in one culture andthen comes into contact with a new and unfamiliar culture, a processof adjustment takes place as the person adopts new behaviours(Gudykunst 1998). In this context, adjustment refers to the processand outcome of change experienced during the international sojourn.According to many theorists, the best outcome for a globalised and mul-ticultural society is the development of intercultural competence, whichis maximised in those who adopt a multicultural interaction strategy:this implies a willingness to both embrace other cultures and retainone’s own ethnic identity; it therefore has the capability to producemediating personalities, with positive implications for world peaceand understanding (Bochner 1981; Gudykunst 1998; Kim 2001).

This paper reports findings from an ethnographic study of the inter-national student experience, and uses its focus on the transformativepower of the international sojourn to encourage tourism researchersto carry out similar studies focused on the power of long-stay tourismto effect change in the tourist.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The impact of tourism on the destination and on residents is welldocumented; however there has been much less attention paid tothe process of change undergone by the tourist (Hottola 2004; Fletcher2005). According to Hampton (2007), this is the neglected dimensionof tourism impact analysis. As Furnham (1984) and Hottola (2004)point out, the sojourner adjustment literature can be used to under-stand how tourism can act as a catalyst for change in the tourist’s out-look and in their behaviour following their time away from the originculture, although both authors complain that there is little cross-overbetween the two fields. The majority of sojourner adjustment researchhas been conducted into an easily accessible international studentpopulation; the theories that have been tested and developed in thisliterature have been subsequently applied to other sojourner groups,

504 L. Brown / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 502–521

including businesspeople and migrants. Indeed, the relationshipbetween international tourism and international education means thatmeaningful comparisons can be made: as Ritchie, Cooper and Carr(2003) point out, an important segment of the educational tourismmarket is the university student whose primary purpose is to gain aqualification but whose impact on the destination is similar to othercategories of tourist and upon whom the impact of travel is likewise sig-nificant. The parallel between the international student and the long-stay tourist is revealed in the common definition of the internationalsojourn as temporary between-society contact for a duration of 6months to 5 years (Jandt 2001; Hottola 2004): indeed, in their treatiseof culture shock and transition, Ward, Bochner and Furnham (2001)include tourists alongside migrants, business people, refugees andinternational students in their typology of sojourners. Hottola (2004)argues that the lack of empirical evidence of tourists’ encounter witha new culture means that tourism academics must engage with the so-journer adjustment literature in order to find sophisticated theoreticaldiscussions of the change brought by cross-cultural contact. It is hopedthat this paper will encourage academics to conduct dedicated re-search into the impact of long-stay tourism, especially as this representsa growing global phenomenon (O’Reilly 2006; MINTEL 2008), whoseimpact on the individual and society is not to be underestimated(D’Amore 1988; Hottola 2004; Milstein 2005; Muzaini 2006; O’Reilly2006; Steyn and Grant 2006). As Hottola (2004) notes, tourists consti-tute the majority of contemporary exposure to intercultural contact:their experiences should be analysed so that an empirical evidencebase of the outcome of culture contact for tourists can be createdand new theoretical constructs can be applied specifically to the tour-ist. It is insufficient to draw conclusions solely from sojourner research,as among the many categories of sojourner, there is variance in thepurposes of travel and the types of infrastructure and superstructureused during the stay.

It is well acknowledged in the literature on the international sojournthat exposure to a new culture has transformative potential. Firstly, thesojourn has the power to increase cross-cultural understanding (Adler1975; Kim 1988; Ward et al 2001): many writers (from Bochner in 1981to Gudykunst in 1998 to Cushner and Karim in 2004), state thatincreased tolerance transforms the sojourner into a human bridgebetween cultures upon their return home: the development of a non-ethnocentric value system enables them to go on to become a mediatorbetween cultures (Bochner 1981, 1986). It is for this reason that theinternational sojourn is described by Gudykunst (1998) as a major con-tributor to a reduction in world conflict; this is a claim also made byd’Amore (1988) for tourism, whilst O’Reilly’s study (2006) found anassociation between backpacking and the development of a sense ofcommon humanity. Indeed, according to Bochner (1986), interna-tional education and tourism are the most powerful positive influenceson world relations. However, it should be noted that Litvin (1998)argues for a less idealistic treatment of the link between tourism andpeace by researchers, arguing that tourism (including educational


tourism) is a beneficiary rather than a generator of peace. Neverthe-less, he concedes that travel is important to the ‘human psyche’. Giventhat the signs are for growth in both tourism and international educa-tion (Ritchie et al 2003; Ryan 2005; O’Reilly 2006), the potential con-tribution made by travel to world relations is a subject worthy of moreresearch. There is so far only limited evidence that tourism improvesinternational understanding (e.g. Askjellerud 2003; Noy 2003; O’Reilly2006; Hampton 2007), and the claim that this is a largely unsubstanti-ated inference remains (Ward et al 2001; Hottola 2004).

Secondly, prolonged absence from the home world carries the po-tential to force a revision in how sojourners view their domestic andprofessional role (Biddle 1979; Vasiliki 2000; Martin and Harrell2004): this carries implications for how sojourners will feel and behaveupon re-entry to the old culture (Bamber 2007). Adler (1975) statesthat the sojourn evolves from a confrontation with a new culture intoan encounter with the self. Similarly, Tucker (2005), Hottola (2004)and O’Reilly (2006) state that tourism offers an opportunity not onlyfor pleasure but also for self-exploration, as freedom from domesticconstraints allows tourists to develop a stronger sense of self. In com-mon with the sojourner adjustment literature, O’Reilly (2006) refersto the transformative potential of travel. It is commonly claimed thatsojourners undergo a journey of self-discovery as removal from thecomfort of the familiar forces them to test and stretch their resource-fulness and to revise their self-understanding (Kim 1988; Berry 1994;Milstein 2005). The currency of the focus on the link between displace-ment and personal change is reflected in the attention recently paid tothe subject by psychoanalysts/philosophers (see Madison 2006; Hayes2007) who use the term ‘voluntary’ or ‘existential migration’ to referto extended trips abroad and who use psychoanalytic theory to under-stand the process of change undergone by sojourners. So great is thechange in the self that the return home can be a source of apprehen-sion, as sojourners may face similar difficulty in adjusting to the homeculture as they did upon arrival in the new culture (Kiley 2000; Wardet al 2001; Steyn and Grant 2006). Nevertheless, the benefits of travelfor long-term career prospects are cited by researchers into sojourneradjustment (Martin and Harrell 2004; Cushner and Karim 2004) andtourism (O’Reilly 2006).

The degree of change wrought in the tourist is arguably a function ofthe purpose and duration of the trip undertaken: a shift in personaland cultural outlook is less likely in the mass and business tourist whosecontact with and immersion into the local culture is often limited(Hottola 2004; Muzaini 2006). Ward et al (2001) state that short-staytourists are not usually committed to their new location, which Jandt(2001) explains by focusing on motivation: most tourists visit a countryfor a short period of time for such goals as relaxation and leisure; a so-journer on the other hand typically lives in a country for a longer per-iod of time, with a specific and goal-oriented purpose, such aseducation or business, and is usually inclined to adjust to some extentto local cultural norms (Gudykunst 1998). Motivation to broaden theireducation is also commonly attributed to backpackers who usually


betray a desire to distance themselves from the mass tourist: the hall-marks of the long-stay tourist are openness, flexibility and tolerance(Muzaini 2006; O’Reilly 2006). The outcome of cultural change inthe tourist/sojourner tends to increase in line with the acceptanceshown towards new cultural norms and practices (Berry 1994;Gudykunst 1998). Meanwhile, distance from the home culture issufficient to promote change in personal self-construal; the longerthe sojourn, the more embedded the new self can become (Kim2001; Hayes 2007). It should be observed however that the extentand type of change experienced by the sojourner are a function ofvariable cultural, environmental and personal characteristics (see Berry1994; Kim 2001).

THE OUTCOME OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOJOURN

Study Methods

The aim of the study from which this paper’s findings are taken wasto obtain the insider perspective on the adjustment process, an aimbest fulfilled by the ethnographic approach which offered the opportu-nity to study students in the natural setting over a long period using thetwin methods of participant observation and in-depth interviews thatcharacterize ethnography (Fetterman 1998). The setting chosen forthis research was the Graduate School at a university in the south ofEngland, as the researcher works there as a lecturer in English forAcademic Purposes (EAP), and is already ‘in the field’; they had directaccess to students and ample opportunity for observation in an overtparticipant role. The researcher did not mark students’ work andhad no input in assessment, and this was important when consideringethical issues. Of the 150 postgraduate international students in theSchool, the majority were from South East Asia, reflecting the mostcommon source of international students for UK universities(UKCOSA 2006); around a third were from Europe, Africa and theMiddle East.

Ethical approval to undertake this study was sought from the univer-sity’s Research Ethics Committee, and informed consent was obtainedto observe and record observations on a daily basis; all students wereassured of confidentiality and anonymity. In addition, thirteen stu-dents from thirteen different nations volunteered to be interviewedat regular intervals over a 12 month academic year (each pre-arranged,tape-recorded interview normally lasted two hours). Although no indi-vidual can represent an entire culture, culture clearly has a definingimpact on an individual’s make-up (Hofstede 1991), meaning thatthere would be access to experience of the sojourn from many differ-ent perspectives. Interviews were complemented and enriched by themany conversations that took place outside these formally arrangedtimes with both interviewees and students from the larger 150-strongstudent cohort. Ethnography is initially inductive (Fetterman 1998),therefore the first interview with students was informal and unstruc-tured, and as advised by Spradley (1979), grand tour questions were


used to stimulate conversation. Subsequent interviews were guided bythe topics that arose in previous interviews, indeed new ideas andthemes emerged throughout the academic year.

The decision to study an institution at a particular time is significant.Students have particularly intense emotional experiences at the start ofterm as they attempted to adapt not only to a new socioculturalenvironment but also to unfamiliar academic situations. Thus bothinterviews and observations started at the beginning of the year, coun-tering the criticism often made of studies of adjustment, that they arehampered by sojourners’ retrospective accounts (Church 1982; Ward2001). Data collection was completed at the end of the academic year,which meant that students’ total experience was captured.

In addition to formal interviewing, participant observation was con-ducted throughout the year, so that the experience of the whole cohortof 150 students was taken into account. Being a participant observer in-volves not only watching a scene but also participating in it and record-ing events and conversations as they occur (Hammersley and Atkinson1995). Examples of observation sites included: induction activities, theclassroom, the corridor, the library, the coffee bar, the canteen, the of-fice and social events organised by the School or University and by stu-dents themselves. On a daily basis, the researcher observed students invarious university settings and conducted conversations with studentsboth in and outside of the classroom. This was a useful way to corrob-orate the data generated by the interviewing aspect of the research,and to allow the researcher to find a saturation point in the codesand categories generated by analysis of both sources of data. Accessto students outside pre-arranged interview times also allowed the re-searcher to probe further issues that required some clarification.

After the initial interviews had been conducted in the first weeks ofterm and observation had begun, preliminary analysis, involving cod-ing field and interview data, was carried out. Coding meant readingthrough notes and repeatedly listening to tapes and reading transcriptsuntil themes or categories began to emerge, as certain phrases events,activities and ideas occurred repeatedly in the text. Transcripts, fieldnotes and email correspondence were scrutinised, and recurring topicswere highlighted to be followed up in further interviews and observa-tion. The author’s supervisory team offered their expertise duringthe analysis phase when codes and themes were identified, helpingto make the study’s findings more objective. One of the major themesof this study concerned the changes in the self that students reportedthroughout and at the end of the data collection period. As with allother research categories, the data produced during the interviewand observational aspects of the research were used to complementeach other and to offer corroboration of the categories generated.

With regard to the generalisability of findings, it is acknowledgedthat a small interviewee sample and the selection of one case will makeit difficult to move to general classifications. Nevertheless, ethnogra-phers often feel that similar settings are likely to produce similar data,and that theory-based generalisation can be achieved, involving thetransfer of theoretical concepts found from one situation to other


settings and conditions (Daymon and Holloway 2002). The setting forthis research was chosen for the researcher’s ability to transfer the find-ings to similar settings, that is, Higher Education institutions in the UKthat recruit international postgraduate students, and also to similar ac-tors, that is, international postgraduates on a one-year intensive Mas-ters programme. It is possible to infer that such students may wellface a similar experience to participants in this study, with modifica-tions according to differing external circumstances and personality dif-ferences. The review of the literature on adjustment reflects many ofthis study’s findings, and points to a common experience among inter-national sojourners. The present paper aims to use the experience ofinternational students to sensitise readers to the possible experiencesof international tourists, and it adds its voice to calls for dedicated re-search into the tourist experience.

Learning About Other Cultures. Asked to reflect on their year awayfrom home, all students highlighted a growth in intercultural compe-tence that carried implications for their future professional and inter-personal relationships. Taylor’s (1994) transformative learning theoryillustrates the learning process of becoming interculturally competent:when a sojourner moves to another culture to live for an extended per-iod, they often experience a transformation out of a necessity for sur-vival and a need to relieve stress and anxiety. This requires thesojourner to look at their world from a different point of view, whichis often in conflict with personal values and beliefs: when they havean experience that cannot be assimilated into their original meaningperspective, the experience is rejected or the perspective changes toaccommodate the new experience. This was simply articulated by thefollowing students:

I’ve learned a lot about life, about the world, it’s amazing. I see life in a dif-ferent way now!

Brazilian student

I think I learned to understand: there were things I didn’t know which I nowknow. I think now I am more open-minded. I have changed; I like to knowwhat’s happening around the world, more interested. I think that will con-tinue, like when I listen to the news, or newspaper I don’t only concentrateon what’s happening in my country. I am more aware of things.

South African student

The mononational perspective that students had arrived with hadshifted: becoming attuned to world events denotes a multinationalframe of reference, which is according to Bochner (1986), a commonproduct of both tourism and international education. Empirical evi-dence of such change in the tourist has also been reported in recentstudies of backpacking and gap-year tourism (Noy 2003; Tucker2005; O’Reilly 2006).

Exposure to other cultures led to a growth in tolerance and accep-tance of new practices and values: the words open, open-minded, under-stand and tolerant were often used to describe how students felt their


outlook had changed. Tolerance and cultural relativism, defined as therecognition that no single culture has the absolute criteria for judginganother (Hofstede 1991), were linked, as the following common re-frains illustrate:

I think if I know more about that I will have a more wide mind to accept dif-ferent things. That’s why we say in Chinese, when we travel it’s better thanreading.

Taiwanese student

Love your country, but be open to others’ culture, and try to understand them.

Chinese student

I believe that this multicultural experience will teach us that people are asunique and right in their values, beliefs or behaviours as we ourselves are.

Indonesian student

It was understood that their cross-cultural experience could havelong-term consequences for intergroup relations. The dynamic link be-tween individual and society was appreciated; that cultural learninginfluences both sojourner and their immediate social circle was widelyacknowledged. Attitudinal change was irrevocable; it would outlast thesojourn, and would carry implications for future business and interper-sonal relationships, its impact extending beyond the individual con-cerned. Indeed, cross-cultural contact had not only transformedstudents into global citizens but the acquisition of culture-specific skillshad also enhanced their employability, equipping them to operate inan increasingly globalised working environment. Indeed, this is a no-tion that is shared by international industry experts (Westwood andBarker 1999; Cushner and Mahon 2002), with reference not only tointernational students but also to the growing gap-year market (Inksonand Myers 2003; O’Reilly 2006).

Changing Perspectives on Life. Reflecting on the past year, studentscommented extensively on changes in their personal attitudes to life.This common theme of conversation in Interview 4 vindicates the wide-spread emphasis in the literature on transition on the power of thesojourn to effect changes in outlook; all interviewees confessed tolife-changing developments in philosophy and behaviour. The termperspective transformation was used by Taylor (1994) to refer tochange in cultural outlook, but it can also be related to change in per-sonal and professional attitudes. It must be emphasised that change inpersonal rather than cultural outlook was the more preoccupying; thisis possibly because of the implications of discovery of a new self for per-sonal and professional relationships, and for its potential impact oneveryday life. In order to understand the process of change that stu-dents underwent, it is pertinent to think of the sojourn as a therapeuticpause in the life they had thus far constructed. Indeed, Todres (2002)states that psychotherapy involves reviewing and revising the self aspreviously understood, whilst Giddens (1991) argues that the anxietyprovoked by transition threatens existential security and demandsthe exploration and reconstruction of the self. Away from the routines


and rituals associated with home and security, individuals come face toface with ‘disturbing existential questions’ and the threat of personalmeaninglessness (ibid).

Becoming Independent. Achieving autonomy was one of the manychanges discussed by students, particularly among those who had beenunder parental control at home and who contrasted freedom of con-trol in the UK with restriction in the home environment:

I have to meet my family every day, sometimes every meal, because we live in thesame house. Sometimes, I have to have lunch with them, and then I have tocome back home and have dinner again. It’s boring. Here, it’s freedom. I thinkI can control more here.

Thai student

Self-control had become important; it was liberating and empower-ing. An initial source of stress, self-reliance culminated in a growthin self-confidence, as the Malaysian student’s typical comment reveals:

You don’t depend so much on people cos you live alone. Everything you doyourself. I would say now I can depend on myself. You are comfortable to goout there. I could go away again.

Early feelings of disorientation were replaced by new-found strength;fear of being alone contrasted a new capacity to withstand stress. Self-efficacy was therefore the product of the confrontation with hardship:this was the necessary precursor of a universal growth in self-belief.This echoes Kim’s (1988, 2001) conceptualisation of the adjustmentprocess as a dynamic interplay between degeneration and regenera-tion: the resolution of internal stress leads to a greater pliability andcapacity to cope with other environmental stressors. A connection be-tween travel and improved self confidence is also supported in studiesof the impact of the gap year (Inkson and Myers 2003; Hampton 2007).

Personal autonomy was not just cultivated among young, single stu-dents; indeed, the older, married students in the cohort described asimilar shift from reliance on their husband to self-direction, and aconsequent rise in self-belief and confidence:

I think I can do things better than I did before. I don’t need company. Before, Ialways want people with me. It make me stronger and more independent.

Taiwanese student

Independence, stress and strength were positively linked; the wordstrong was frequently used to describe changes in the self that had re-sulted from the resolution of stress. The sojourn was viewed as a testingbut life-changing event; it was common to hear students say they wouldbe better wives and mothers because of their improved capacity to bearstress. This was articulated by the Korean and Iranian students (respec-tively) who overcame the challenge of balancing motherhood andacademic life:

Yeah, I can do it, first my kids and study! If I get over it, I become stronger.I am stronger than before. I am better than before.


This study therefore supports the claims made for the mastery of cri-sis that is inherent in transition to increase resilience and coping capa-bility (e.g., Kim 1988; Giddens 1991). There is a thin line between anexperience that threatens and strengthens the self, however, and onthe other hand, the Iranian student confessed that the life of a singleparent student was too hard, that it had almost broken her, provingthat the sojourn has the capacity to undermine as well as buildcharacter:

I don’t want to do it again. I don’t want to go through these things again. Ihave had enough, it was too much to tolerate.

Painful life events might provide the foundation for personal growth,but she didn’t feel that this justified the personal cost. According toGiddens (1991), loss and self-actualisation are intertwined; if an indi-vidual risks entering a transition in life, they will face stress, but theywill develop internal strength as a result. This delicate balance is re-flected in this study as students veered between debilitation and pridein their ability to cope, and some would swap a strengthened internalcapacity for a less stressful emotional life. The stressful nature of tran-sition is possibly irrelevant to tourism in that gappers tend to be youn-ger and unattached (Muzaini 2006), whilst the other growing marketfor long-stay tourism is constituted by older people (Ritchie et al2003; Hampton 2007) who may be similarly unburdened by domesticconstraints.

Confronting Stress. The opportunity for testing and building charac-ter was not provided solely by the challenges inherent in transition; thisstudy reveals the unpredictability of life events as unforeseen personalcrises compounded the stress imposed by immersion in a new culture.A number of personal and medical problems beset many of the 150-strong cohort of students (physical and psychological illness in selfor significant others, financial problems, political or economic crisis,natural disaster at home, accidents and injury, family troubles): distresswas exacerbated by their distance from home and their inability to ac-cess or offer support. The seemingly high incidence of trauma allowsus to wonder whether the sojourn was the trigger, or whether signifi-cant life events are universally experienced in life but are highlightedduring the sojourn and compounded by isolation. For the Iranian stu-dent, such an event was the crisis in her marriage which started in May2004 and led her to comment:

Now my future is over. That is just my life, it is terrible. My life has a bad taste.

Marital problems were short-lived, but were intensely distressing.Biddle (1979) argues that suffering a crisis can improve people’s resis-tance to stress, but such ability did not compensate the temporary dete-rioration in her relationship.

The most distressing event of personal significance to occur duringthe sojourn was faced by the Taiwanese interviewee, whose fatherbecame critically ill in April 2004. Entries in the field journal trackedher concern and stress, which were manifested during every meeting


in tears. In May, she found out that her father was dying of cancer.Finding herself far away from home, not being able to support her par-ents and not knowing whether or not her father would survive until shereturned to Taiwan was agonising:

(Crying.) It hurts his body, so he’s weak now. I feel I am useless because Ican’t do anything for them. If I could just stay with him, I would feel better.

June 12

Her dad has deteriorated badly, the doctors don’t know if it’s treatable. She wascrying as she spoke, streams of tears down her face, had to fetch toilet paper forher. Said it’s the hardest time of her life, she feels helpless, as her parent don’tkeep her informed, they don’t want her to worry. I feel helpless in front of hergrief.

June 30

Powerlessness and anxiety are common reactions to serious illness in aloved one (Kritek 1997), but these emotions were understandably mag-nified by geographical distance. Giving up her course was not an option,given the financial sacrifices already made in order to study abroad, buther absence was a heavy burden. Given that the motivation for educa-tional tourism is to gain a qualification, it is more likely that students willhave no choice but to endure any hardship faced during their stay,whereas tourists whose plans are less fixed may enjoy more flexibility.Nevertheless, it is possible that a return home is unfeasible and a similarendurance test may be faced. Indeed, Inkson and Myers (2003) point toincreased resilience as one of the benefits of long-stay tourism.

Changing Priorities. A change in philosophy on life is a commonreaction to the confrontation with mortality (Lloyd 1996), but such areordering of priorities was frequently reported in the final interview,revealing the potential of the international sojourn to influence thefuture. Removal from familiar routines and the imminence of re-entryprompted an exploration of old attitudes, and professional life re-ceived much attention as quality of life became a priority. This is shownin an excerpt from an interview with a Chinese student:

My philosophy is the most important thing is I have to enjoy what I do. Now if Idon’t want to do it at all, no matter how high the salary is, I will not getinvolved. I still want to find a decent job, to be a manager, but it doesn’t matterwhat kind of job, so far as I enjoy it.

The elevation of happiness above financial reward was interpreted asa direct result of freedom from conformity pressure during thesojourn:

Going back means pressure. Here I feel more relaxed. There is no pressure atall. I think if I could stay here I could do whatever I like.

Freedom of choice in individualist culture served to contrast the de-mands of the ingroup in collectivist society. How sustainable the prior-itisation of life satisfaction over career success would be in China was asource of misgiving, and this raises a concern that was preoccupying for


those who proposed to change their old life: their evaluation had takenplace under conditions that prevailed in the host not the origin cul-ture; there might be a mismatch between their expectations and thereceptivity of their home society.

The Slovenian interviewee made a similar critique of her formerwork ethic; following a period of reflection afforded by the sojourn,she made a commitment to achieve a work/life balance upon herreturn:

On your year abroad you have to ask yourself what is not right. I think I appre-ciate this free time, so now I think I can make a perspective on work. When I goback, I hope I change this so that I will be clever enough not to repeat this mis-take again of spending hours, unpaid hours, for no-one to really appreciate. Iworked really hard in every job I get. Now I’ve had time to reflect on that.

Breaking a negative pattern of behaviour would be a significant step,and it would not have occurred without the objective view on her for-mer life that was provided by distance. Depending on reactions in theprofessional community, such transformation could have importantimplications for emotional and physical well-being: this study thereforeechoes the call made by Martin and Harrell (2004) for research intothe attitudes of colleagues of returning professionals. Extended touristtrips may equally lead to feelings of dissatisfaction with pre-departurework and careers; indeed the successful re-assimilation of returneesis noted by Martin and Harrell (2004) and Hampton (2007) as a signif-icant Human Resource Management problem.

A similar change in outlook between the beginning and end of thesojourn was the Thai interviewee’s rejection of a career choice dictatedby her family, one that she had initially, albeit reluctantly, accepted. Toa home student, the following simple statement might be a commonexpression of uncertainty over their future career:

I still keep thinking about what I’m going to do after I finish the course.

This statement was qualified however by reference to a pull betweenthe individual and the family that would not be so common in individ-ualist culture:

I know that my family need me to help them but I need to go on my way.

The willingness to prioritise the individual over the group marked afundamental shift, representing a break from the norm for obediencein collectivist society to family (Hofstede 1991). This was reflected inthe contrasting emotional reactions of depression at the start of the so-journ over a feeling of inescapability to elation in September 2004when she started to talk about finding my own path:

Making decisions and planning things yourself, deciding yourself what isgoing to come next. If I can change, I will. I cannot figure it out right now.

Whereas in September 2003, she felt a prisoner of destiny, a word sheused frequently to refer to a life she had no control over, one year later,she was using language that reflected an evolution towards autonomy,thereby calling into question not only family loyalty but also a conceptthat is fundamental to eastern religion. According to Giddens (1991),


belief in preordained determinism offers comfort in a world of seem-ing chaos, but rejection of the notion of a mapped-out future was lib-erating rather than unnerving. Nevertheless, there was apprehensionover her family’s reaction to her new-found assumption of control overher own future. It is worth considering that re-entry problems might begreater among those students who, having developed individualist ten-dencies, must return to life in a highly conformist society. As Martinand Harrell (2004) note, the reaction to such evolution is under-re-searched; this constitutes a serious shortcoming in an era of growinginternational travel for education, business and other purposes.

Renegotiating Domestic Life. Re-evaluation of home life was anotheroutcome of distance from the familiar home world. For the Koreaninterviewee, this involved painful reflection on her mothering style,afforded by a cherished hiatus in a stressful working life:

Study make me very, very refreshed, very happy. First time in a long time. I feelso happy. In Korea, I got so much stress dealing with my housework and mywork so I cannot do well for my kids. I didn’t intend it to stay like that, butbecause of my stress, I complained and scold, ‘do this do this don’t do this’.I thought about my attitude to my kids, and I regret it.

Distance from ingrained habits and routines had engineered a newperspective that would have life-long implications for her children:thus the sojourn could be life-changing not just for the sojourner,but also for those around them. Equally, Muzaini (2006) and O’Reilly(2006) argue that some forms of tourism such as backpacking can rep-resent a life-event that has far-reaching consequences for both careerand personal development.

This was also pertinent to the spouse left behind in the home coun-try; removal from the domestic sphere led the Taiwanese interviewee toreview the way she communicated with her husband:

I think meeting different culture will help our relationship. I think some peoplehere, they will do whatever they want, not only what husband want her to do.But before that, I usually do what my husband wants me to do. Although Ihave my opinions, I will put his first priority because in our culture, it’s betterto respect. We usually say your husband is the sky and you are the ground.

Observation of culturally different communication styles made wayfor reflection on changes in her married self, which had been imposedby national culture. The perception of equality in other relationshipsreminded her of her single self; suppression of her voice was an aspectof her married persona that she did not want to resume, and indeed bythe end of the sojourn, she had reverted to her younger, more authen-tic self:

Usually if I give him my opinion, he will think about it and he will respect myopinion. And I think that is good. This is mental change. I think I know moreabout how to get along with my husband. Sometimes if I do what he wants, it isnot really me. And I don’t like that feeling that I do that. I think at the begin-ning, he loves me for what I am but I changed for him, maybe that is not what hereally wants. I think if I can keep growing, I think it’s very good for both of us,we can have more mental communication. It’s just like when we fall in love.


Separation had acted to return the couple to a time in life when theyviewed and valued the other as separate beings, before routine andconformity had taken hold. The ability to express long-withheld opin-ion was empowering, and it restored intimacy. However, the concept ofassertiveness, which Furnham (1979) defines as the proper expressionof any emotion other than anxiety toward another person, is a culturebound and specifically North American attribute. In many other cul-tures, asserting oneself in the way that is normative in the US and partsof Europe is neither encouraged nor tolerated, especially in women(Martin and Harrell 2004). Therefore, a change in culturally-definedwifely behaviour would not necessarily meet approval, and this studentwas perhaps fortunate in her husband’s positive reception to commu-nication differences. Indeed, it might be more common that femalesojourners have to lose the mantle of emancipation if marital tensionis to be avoided.

Posing a further challenge to traditional norms was the vow made bymarried students to renegotiate their domestic role and the allocationof tasks upon their return. Reluctance to resume the demanding roleof wife (and mother) was attributed to a change in expectations follow-ing both observation of the equality in the UK and extended reflectionon their domestic workload before the sojourn started. Indeed, accord-ing to Martin and Harrell (2004), female returnees tend to experiencemore stress upon re-entry than men, especially if the sojourn has beenin a country whose gender roles are less restrictive. As Hofstede (2001)points out, the masculinity-femininity dimension affects how familiesdevelop role differences between boys and girls, and the gap variesby country. Nevertheless, students were hopeful that their absencemight have provoked some evolution in attitude towards domestic la-bour, as the Taiwanese interviewee explained:

In Chinese society, usually women do everything. But I think it’s different here.I always compare like that. When I come to study here, everything he does alone,so when I go back, maybe there will be some progress. He says he appreciateswhat I have to do for him.

This hope is not naıve; indeed Bamber (2007) has coined the termtransformation by proxy to describe the changes in attitude and behav-iour effected in or imposed on immediate friends and family in the ori-gin culture (his study refers to VSO returnees). In this study,resocialisation had taken place at home, involving the assumption ofthe domestic role in their spouse’s absence, and this might lead to will-ingness to accept shared responsibility, given the link between mun-dane activities and attitudinal change that has been previouslyobserved. As Atkins and Bowler (2001) state, gender roles and defini-tions are flexible and dynamic, and are therefore open to change: anew approach to domestic life was not out of the question.

Going Home: A New Beginning. The vow that life would be differentupon re-entry was dulled by awareness that realigning students’ newself with the home culture might be problematic. The final interviewrevealed unanimous concern over implementing changes in a freshly


evaluated personal and professional life. If the home environment didnot receive change well, students would perhaps need to face the taskcommon to returnees of ‘living on the cultural borderlines’, to borrowFeatherstone’s (1995) description of the outcome of cross-cultural con-tact. To illustrate, improved self-mastery, vaunted in the literature ontransition as a positive outcome, might not be prized in the origin cul-ture, as students’ apprehension over the imminent return to strictercontrol indicates:

I’m just relaxed. I prefer life more, I’m independent. I don’t need permissions.Here, I’m alone, I have to organise myself. I like that. How can I go back?

Russian student

Aged 21, this was the first time in her life that this student did notneed to defer to parental authority: the freedom afforded by the so-journ could therefore be viewed as a product of removal from familylife as well as the immersion in a culture, where individuality is prizedover conformity. Indeed, the cultivation of an individualistic outlookwas commonly observed. As previously noted, independence and self-reliance are themes of individualism, as is priority of the self. Couldit be that a society high in individualism gave students the freedomto do as they pleased?

I feel I accept something in your culture, which I didn’t like before, I think thedistance between me and my culture is a bit bigger now, and between me andEnglish culture a bit more closer. I don’t bother myself now.

Iranian student

I don’t care what people think now. I am reluctant now to please someone.

Chinese student

The elevation of self-direction over public opinion was a new devel-opment; however, such an attitude would be met with hostility in col-lectivist society, where expression of individuality is not so widelyaccepted (Triandis, Bontempo and Villareal 1988). Perhaps self-responsibility necessitated a distancing from others, but for studentsre-entering the home country, such fundamental change might notbe acceptable. The journey was not over until they had negotiatedthe return to their old home world. Evolution in attitudes and behav-iour may not necessarily be accommodated at home; reluctance to re-turn to the old self may not be the prelude to life-enhancing change.The anxiety among returning students over the accommodation oftheir new values and behaviours points to conflict between the newand the home cultures. Unless sojourners become successful in movingfluidly between different life worlds, they might be compelled to un-dergo the painful and conflicting process of unlearning the new normsand values absorbed during their journey through a new culture.Sojourners are in the unique position that the outcome of the sojournis only life-enhancing if positive change can be maintained at home. Achange in attitudes may not be easily tolerated if it implies a threat to


others’ understanding of the world and by extension, to their existen-tial security. If the newly constructed self is not sustainable, we mightwonder how sojourners will react; it is possible that the internationalexperience could finish by disabling returnees: they may be unableor unwilling to assume their old role, to forget the journey of self-dis-covery they have travelled. Todres (2002) states that psychotherapy in-volves the undoing of identity which helps people to navigate aplurality of contexts: this has some relevance to this study in that thesojourn acted as a catalyst for self-exploration. However, the parallelbetween the psychotherapeutic and the international student journeyends at the point of re-entry, when the response to sojourners’ newself-understanding is unknown. A similar dilemma may face the inter-national long-stay tourist, whose experiences may act as an excludingand marginalising force, so that they no longer fit in at home. Thisis one of the findings of Bamber’s (2007) study of VSO returnees. AsKrippendorf (1986) points out, people are often motivated to travelby the desire to escape from the monotony of daily life: returning tosuch a life might prove problematic.

CONCLUSION

This paper has shown that the international sojourn has the power toeffect a growth in intercultural competence, as well as a shift in self-understanding, with long-term implications for personal and profes-sional life. Such change is the result of exposure to diversity and ofthe geographical and emotional distance from the home environment.The findings of this study undermine the claim made by Ward et al(2001) that change is more evident among younger sojourners, includ-ing gap-year tourists, whose socialisation is incomplete, as all students,regardless of age, underwent fundamental personal change. It alsocontradicts the link made by Sussman (2002) between cultural identi-fication and change: even those who were highly identified with theirnationality and culture experienced a movement in self-concept. Itcan be construed that during transition, sojourners are faced withthe fundamental existential question about what constitutes the self.Todres (2002) argues that although this existential question is affectedby culture and exposure to cultural differences, it is essentially transcul-tural. The apparent absence of a link between cultural origin andchange in self indicates that change appeared to result from removalfrom routine and transfer to a new role. The self was shown to be devel-opmental, but there was no clear association between type of changeand nationality or culture. Transition offered the foundation for re-evaluation, for freedom from cultural and familial expectations andfor self-discovery that routine tends to prohibit. It is therefore logicalto suggest that such change will also be experienced by long-stay tour-ists who are similarly displaced from both the origin culture and every-day routine. The transformative power of the international sojourn iscaptured in Figure 1. It is shown that, depending on environmentalreceptivity, the sojourn has the capacity to produce life-enhancingchange upon re-entry. However, if the home culture environment does

Developing an internationalperspective; losing the ethnocentric focus

Testingreserves of strength;

building a new capacity for

stress

Becoming independent; taking control

of life

Finding a voice; fighting gender roles;

rejecting societal norms

One way ticket: protecting alteredperspectives

Discoveringpriorities;finding the

authentic self

Intercultural learning;becoming

marketable; becoming peaceable

Confrontingthe cultural

aspect of self; acquiring a

relativistapproach

Challengingstereotypes;developingtolerance and sensitivity

One year later: the end of the sojourn

Figure 1. One Year Later: Altered Selves


not tolerate these changes, frustration may result. There are possibleparallels to be made between the international student and long-staytourist markets in that both types of visitor to the new culture are oftenmotivated to adjust to the local culture for a temporary period and tolearn culture-specific skills. The prolonged absence from the homeenvironment and exposure to new cultural norms and ways of behavingand relating can result in profound changes in cultural and personaloutlook that have implications for the future of both the tourist andsociety, if we are to accept that a growth in intercultural competenceis beneficial to global relations. It is hoped that research on the impactof long-stay tourism will encourage greater understanding of this grow-ing market in the tourism industry: as MINTEL (2008) suggests, theglobal gap year market is set to increase significantly in coming years,with a trend for more flexible working practices allowing professionalsto take extended leave and sabbaticals to embark on Round TheWorld/backpacking trips. In addition, it will provide multinationalcompanies with a better understanding of the change which can occurduring the international sojourn, with potential impacts on theirrecruitment and selection procedures.


REFERENCES

Adler, P.1975 The Transitional Experience: An Alternative View of Culture Shock.

Journal of Humanistic Psychology 15(3):13–23.Askjellerud, S.

2003 The Tourist: A Messenger of Peace? Annals of Tourism Research30(3):741–744.

Atkins, P., and I. Bowler2001 Food in Society. London: Arnold.

Bamber, P.2007 The Impact of Student Participation in International Service–Learning

Programs Education for Sustainable Development: Graduates as Global Citizens 10–11 September Bournemouth University.

Berry, J. W.1994 Acculturation and Psychological Adaptation: An Overview. In Journeys into

Cross-cultural Psychology: Selected Papers from the Eleventh InternationalConference of the International Association for Cross-cultural Psychology, A.Bouvy, R. R. Van de Vijver, P. Boski and P. Schmitz, eds. Leige: Swets andZeitlinger.

Biddle, B.1979 Role Theory: Expectations. Identities. and Behaviours. New York: Aca-

demic Press.Bochner, S.

1981 The Social Psychology of Cultural Mediation. In The Mediating Person:Bridges between Cultures, S. Bochner, ed. Massachusetts: Schenkman.

1986 Coping with Unfamiliar Cultures: Adjustment or Culture Learning?Australian Journal of Psychology 38(3):347–358.

Church, A.1982 Sojourner Adjustment. Psychological Bulletin 91(3):540–572.

Cushner, K., and A. Karim2004 Study Abroad at University Level. In Intercultural Training, D. Landis, J.

Bennett and M. Bennett, eds. London: Sage.Cushner, K., and J. Mahon

2002 Overseas Student Teaching: Affecting Personal, Professional and GlobalCompetencies in an Age of Globalisation. Journal of Studies in InternationalEducation 6(1):44–58.

D’Amore, L.1988 Tourism – The World’s Peace Industry Journal of Travel Research 27(1):

35–40.Daymon, C., and I. Holloway

2002 Qualitative Research Methods in Public Relations and Marketing Com-munications. London: Routledge.

Featherstone, M.1995 Undoing Culture: Globalisation, Postmodernism and Identity. London:

Sage.Fetterman, D.

1998 Ethnography. London: Sage.Fletcher, J.

2005 The Environmental Impact of Tourism. In Tourism Principles andPractices, C. Cooper, J. Fletcher, A. Fyall, D. Gilbert and S. Wanhill, eds.,pp. 194–220. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Furnham, A.1979 Assertiveness in Three Cultures: Multidimensionality and Cultural Differ-

ences. Journal of Clinical Psychology 35(3):522–527.1984 Tourism and Culture Shock. Annals of Tourism Research 11(1):41–57.

Giddens, A.1991 Modernity and Self-identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age.

Cambridge: Blackwell.Gudykunst, W.

1998 Bridging Differences: Effective Intergroup Communication. London: Sage.


Hampton, J.2007 Gap Year Travel and Personal Change: An Exploration into the Long Term

Socio-Cultural Impacts of Tourism on Tourist Unpublished MSC dissertation,Bournemouth University, UK.

Hammersley, M., and P. Atkinson1995 Ethnography Principles in Practice. London: Tavistock.

Hayes, H.2007 (Be)coming Home: An Existential Perspective on Migration, Settlement &

the Meanings of Home. Journal of Existential Analysis 18(1):2–16.Hofstede, G.

1991 Cultures and Organisation: Software of the Mind. London: HarperCollins.2001 Culture’s consequences Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and

Organizations across Nations. London: Sage.Hottola, P.

2004 Culture Confusion—Intercultural Adaptation in Tourism. Annals ofTourism Research 31(2):447–466.

Inkson, K., and B. Myers2003 ‘‘The big OE’’: Self-directed Travel and Career Development. Career

Development International 8(4):170–181.Jandt, E.

2001 Intercultural Communication: An introduction. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Kiley, M.

2000 Providing Timely and Appropriate Support for International PostgraduateStudents. In Good Practice Working with International Students, G. Wisker,ed. Anglia Polytechnic University.

Kim, Y. Y.1988 Communication and Cross-cultural Adaptation. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.2001 Becoming Intercultural: An Integrative Theory of Communication and

Cross-cultural Adaptation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Krippendorf, J.

1986 The New Tourist—Turning Point for Leisure and Travel. TourismManagement 7(2):131–135.

Kritek, P.1997 Reflections on Healing: A Central Nursing Construct. London: Jones and

Bartlett.Leonard, D., L. Morley, and C. Pelletier

2002 The Experiences of International Students in UK Higher Education: AReview of Unpublished Research. London: UKCOSA.

Litvin, S.1998 Tourism: The World’s Peace Industry? Journal of Travel Research 37(1):

63–66.Lloyd, M.

1996 Philosophy and Religion in the Face of Death and Bereavement. Journal ofReligion and Health 35(4):295–310.

MacLeod, D.2006 April 18 ‘‘International rescue’’, The Guardian Web site: http://educa-

tion.guardian.co.uk/egweekly/story/0,,1755401,00.html.Madison, G.

2006 Existential Migration. Journal of Existential analysis 17(2):238–260.Martin, J., and T. Harrell

2004 Reentry Training for Intercultural Sojourners. In Handbook of Intercul-tural Training, D. Landis and R. Bhagat, eds. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Milstein, T.2005 Transformation Abroad: Sojourning and the Perceived Enhancement of

Self-efficacy. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 29(2):217–238.MINTEL

2008 Mintel’s ‘Round The World Travel/Backpacking’ and ‘City and ShortBreaks Abroad’ reports—2006. London: Mintel.

Muzaini, H.2006 Backpacking Southeast Asia: Strategies of ‘‘Looking Local’’. Annals of

Tourism Research 33(1):144–161.

http://education.guardian.co.uk/egweekly/story/0,,1755401,00.html

http://education.guardian.co.uk/egweekly/story/0,,1755401,00.html


Noy, C.2003 ‘This Trip Really Changed Me: Backpackers’ Narratives of Self Change.

Annals of Tourism Research 31(1):78–102.O’Reilly, C.

2006 From Drifter to Gap Year Tourist Mainstreaming Backpacker Travel.Annals of Tourism Research 33(4):998–1017.

Ritchie, B., C. Cooper, and N. Carr2003 Managing Educational Tourism. Clevedon: Channel View Publications.

Ryan, J.2005 The Student Experience. In Teaching International Students, J. Carroll

and J. Ryan, eds. Abingdon: Routledge.Ryan, J., and J. Carroll

2005 ‘Canaries in the Coalmine’: International Students in Western Universities.In Teaching International Students, J. Carroll and J. Ryan, eds. Abingdon:Routledge.

Spradley, J.1979 The Ethnographic Interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Steyn, M., and T. Grant2006 A Real Bag of Mixed Emotions: Re-entry Experiences of South African

Exiles. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 31(3):363–389.Sussman, N. M.

2002 Sojourners to Another Country: The Psychological Roller-coaster ofCultural Transitions. In: Lonner, W.J., Dinnel, D.L., Hayes, S.A., Sattler, D.N.(Eds.), Online Readings in Psychology and Culture Web site: http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~culture/sussman.htm.

Taylor, E.1994 Intercultural Competency: A Transformative Learning Process. Adult

Education Quarterly 44(3):154–174.Todres, L.

2002 Globalisation and the Complexity of the Self: The Relevance of Psycho-therapy. Journal of Existential Analysis 13(1):98–105.

Triandis, H., R. Bontempo, and M. Villareal1988 Individualism and Collectivism: Cross-cultural Perspectives on Self-ingroup

Relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54(2):323–338.Tucker, H.

2005 Narratives of Place and Self Differing Experiences of Package Coach Toursin New Zealand. Tourist Studies 5(3):267–282.

UKCOSA2006 Student statistics Web site: http://www.ukcosa.org.uk/studentstatistics

Vasiliki, G.2000 The Self and the Other Traveler, Ethnographer, Tourist. Annals of

Tourism Research 27(1):203–224.Ward, C., S. Bochner, and A. Furnham

2001 The Psychology of Culture Shock. Hove: Routledge.Ward, C.

2001 The Impact of International Students on Domestic Students and HostInstitutions New Zealand Ministry of Education Web site: http://www.mined-u.govt.nz/index.cfm?layout=index&indexID=2107&indexparentid=1000

Westwood, M., and M. Barker1999 Academic Achievement and Social Adaptation among International

Students: A Comparison Groups Study of the Peer-pairing Program. Interna-tional Journal of Intercultural Relations 14:251–263.

Received 11 March 2008. Resubmitted 18 September 2008. Final version 16 December 2008.Accepted 5 March 2009. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor: Melville Saayman


http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~culture/sussman.htm

http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~culture/sussman.htm

http://www.ukcosa.org.uk/studentstatistics

http://www.minedu.govt.nz/index.cfm?layout=index&indexID=2107&indexparentid=1000

http://www.minedu.govt.nz/index.cfm?layout=index&indexID=2107&indexparentid=1000

RESEARCH NOTE

Heritage Tourism—CurrentResource for Conflict

Yaniv PoriaBen-Gurion University, Israel

Gregory AshworthUniversity of Groningen, The Netherlands

It is often claimed that tourism is an example of transmodernity, representing aworld of peace and understanding, which has broken away from modernity andideals of control and domination. Based on the Contact Hypothesis Theory (Rei-singer and Turner 2003), it is speculated that tourism is a vehicle for social ex-change, providing opportunities for a ‘people’s diplomacy’. This results inreducing inter-group prejudice, conflict, and tension. This paper presents theargument that rather than enhancing understanding, heritage attractions may in-hibit mutual acquaintance and indeed be an obstacle to it. The heritage site is apolitical resource and, as such, it aims to legitimize a specific social reality whichdivides people into ‘‘we’’ and ‘‘they.’’ Heritage attractions often aim to highlightand entrench differences and social boundaries, as contrast between groups isinherently created when something becomes heritage (Tunbridge and Ashworth1996). To highlight this argument, three issues are discussed: (a) the uniquenessof heritagization in comparison to preservation and conservation, (b) the attri-butes of heritage attractions and heritage artifacts as goods, (c) the interpretationat sites that present historical violent conflicts. This discussion challenges the pres-ent body of literature, and the management of the heritage experience, which re-gard heritage sites as agent of change.

The experiential approach to heritage tourism (Poria, Butler and Airey 2003)was adopted here. Accordingly, heritage tourism is the experience of spaces whichpresent tangible and intangible elements perceived by the visitors to be a part oftheir own personal heritage. This is in contrast to the descriptive approach which



www.elsevier.com/locate/atoures

RESEARCH NOTES AND REPORTS

This Department publishes research notes, conference reports, reports on thework of public agencies and associations, field (industry) reports, and other rele-vant topics and timely issues. Contributions to this department are submitted toits two Associate Editors: Research Notes to Juergen Gnoth <jgnoth@ commerce.otago.ac.nz> and Conference Reports to Russell Smith <[email protected]>.Unsolicited conference and agency reports will not be accepted.

522

regards heritage tourism as visits to spaces which are classified, authorized, andauthenticated as heritage. The heritage on show may be part of world or local her-itage, but it must be a heritage that visitors feel is relevant to them more than toothers. Heritage tourism is approached here as the final stage of the heritagizationprocess, a social process whose final outcome is the presentation and interpretation(rather than archiving or sustaining) of heritage or even demolishing. Heritagiza-tion is at the core of heritage tourism, while conservation and preservation arethe core of cultural tourism. Heritagization is a process in which heritage is usedas a resource to achieve certain social goals. One of its main goals is establishingsolidarity among members of a group (national, religious, social, etc.), by high-lighting the differences between them and others so that this differentiation willlegitimize a certain social order. This approach is common in studies about collec-tive memory and its presentation (Smith 2006). However, it differs from Walsh’s(1992) interpretation of this term in the tourism literature. In tourism, heritagiza-tion usually refers to the conversion of cultural resources and their mass customiza-tion into globalized products (Inglis and Holmes 2003). As approached here,heritagization is not about the past but about the use (and abuse) of the past toeducate—and at times inculcate—the public. While preservation and conservationis about saving and protecting a ‘‘real objective past,’’ heritagization is at times inten-tionally based on an invented, hidden, as well as a purposely chosen past. Addition-ally, heritagization centers on ideas and ideological frameworks in contrast topreservation and conservation which focus on objects (sustaining, repairing, restor-ing, and even reconstructing them). In heritagization, history is captured as com-pleted, something that belongs to the inhabitants of the present who can choosehow to interpret and use it to their advantage. Additionally, in heritagization,the general public (and not experts or semi-experts) must perceive the visit expe-rience itself as authentic, and for that reason even fake objects can be used. Thus,conservation aims at cultural enrichment, while preservation adds aesthetic appre-ciation. Heritagization, for which heritage tourism is often the means, aims at legit-imizing a certain social-political order and ideological framework. It does so byrooting them in the past with the hope that they will continue to bear fruit inthe future.

The role of heritage attractions can be understood by thinking of the site and itsexperience as a good/service. Heritage attractions are often located in areas thatare considered prime real estate, and are costly to operate. Additionally, the insur-ance of the artifacts and site maintenance are very expensive, yet, with all thesecosts, the visit to the attraction is often free of charge. Moreover, in certain casesheritage sites indirectly pay for the visits (offering transport or free guides), and,unlike other institutions in the tourism industry, often wish to provide their ser-vices to specific audiences only (e.g., school children). Heritage attractions are(still) subsidized by contributions and donations from the elite and its representa-tives, allowing the financiers to present their agenda, without intervention, criti-cism, or public involvement. The actual price of a heritage artifact can also beunderstood in the context of the heritagization process. A one-of-a-kind heritageartifact is often very valuable because of its symbolic meaning, and not based oncriteria ordinarily used to evaluate cultural artifacts, such as aesthetic appearance.The elite will invest both effort and money, as the meaning of such artifacts isimportant for their current and future social survival. However, as soon as the elitewill loose its legitimacy, the value of the heritage site and its accompanying objectswill crash.

The role of heritage attraction can be exemplified by those sites presenting pastviolent conflicts, which resulted in human atrocities (Goulding and Domic 2009).The literature claims that heritage tourism is about the establishment of peace andunderstanding (e.g., Hooper-Greenhill 1992). If so, one would expect that siteswhich center on the Holocaust, for example, would highlight the dark side of

Research notes and reports/Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 522–532 523

war and advocate peace and tolerance. However, studies indicate that the interpre-tation in such sites follows a heroic, socialist or nationalist approach to interpreta-tion (Timothy and Boyd 2003). Such sites often aim to inform/remind the visitorsof their social belonging, reinforce their loyalty to a certain group of people, andlegitimize a certain ideological framework. Similarly, in sites that present militaryconflicts, usually no call is made for understanding and tolerance. Soldiers—espe-cially in their death—are admired by the living who are grateful to the dead. Anyother emotion is seen as akin to treason. Such heritage attractions, although onlyan example for certain type of heritage attractions, challenge the common thoughtthat heritage tourism is a social mechanism aiming at promoting peace and under-standing.

Heritage attractions aim to facilitate the creation of identity (Bandyopadhyay,Morais and Chick 2008). These spaces aim to endow the present and the futurewith a specific value system, cluttering it with selected tangible and intangible ele-ments. Heritage attractions present ‘‘someone’s heritage and therefore logicallynot someone else’s’’ (Tunbridge and Ashworth 1996:21), and as such they pro-mote solidarity within a certain group by separating it from others. Scholars, prac-titioners, and visitors should be critical and note that these spaces (and theorganization they are part of) aim to set apart people’s identity and the imperish-able, up-to-date reasons for that segregation. It is claimed here that most often her-itage tourist attractions, are a symbol of modernity, serving as walls to preventmodernity’s deconstruction. Based on part of the title of Tunbridge and Ash-worth’s (1996) book, it is claimed here that heritage is not only a resource in conflictbut also a resource for conflict, and heritage tourism is one arena to promote it. Addi-tionally, as heritage attractions play a major role in today’s tourist experience, thispaper challenges the thought that tourism serves as a vehicle for fostering under-standing and minimizing—and hopefully eradicating—stereotyping. The volumeof the visits to heritage sites may also suggest that visitors seek such heritage expe-riences for tracing genealogy (genetic or cultural) and for seeking a sense of supe-riority and uniqueness. To prevent this from happening, heritage touristattractions should be managed responsibly, recognizing their possible effectsand realizing that heritage tourism can be a mechanism for social stability.

REFERENCES

Bandyopadhyay, R., D. B. Morais, and G. Chick2008 Religion and Identity in India’s Heritage Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research

35:790–808.Inglis, D., and M. Holmes

2003 Highland and Other Haunts: Ghosts in Scottish Tourism. Annals of TourismResearch 30:50–63.

Hooper-Greenhill, E.1992 Museums and the Shaping of Knowledge. London: Routledge.

Goulding, C., and D. Domic2009 Heritage, Identity and Ideological Manipulation: The case of Croatia. Annals of

Tourism Research 36:85–102.Poria, Y., R. Butler, and D. Airey

2003 The Core of Heritage Tourism: Distinguishing Heritage Tourists from Touristsin Heritage Places. Annals of Tourism Research 30:238–254.

Reisinger, Y., and L. W. Turner2003 Cross-Cultural Behaviour in Tourism: Concepts and Analysis. Oxford: Butter-

worth-Heinemann.Smith, L.

2006 Uses of Heritage. London: Routledge.

524 Research notes and reports/Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 522–532

Timothy, D., and S. Boyd2003 Heritage Tourism. Harlow: Prentice Hall.

Tunbridge, J., and G. Ashworth1996 Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a Resource in Conflict.

Chichester: Wiley.Walsh, K.

1992 The Representation of The Past: Museums and Heritage in the Post-ModernWorld. London: Routledge.

Yaniv Poria: Department of Hotel and Tourism Management, Ben-Gurion Univer-sity of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel. Email: <[email protected]>

Submitted 11 November 2008. Resubmitted 27 January 2009. Final version 1 March 2009. Accepted 26March 2009. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor: Juergen Gnoth

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.03.003

On the Use of Model Averagingin Tourism Research

Alan T.K. WanXinyu Zhang

City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Econometric modeling now plays a vital role in tourism research. For example,forecasting is an essential element in the process of tourism planning. Quantitativetools are also commonly used to evaluate the economic impacts of tourism. Thelast several decades have seen a large increase in the number of published studieson tourism research using econometric and other quantitative approaches. Amongthe various econometric techniques, the most widely used is probably linear regres-sion by least squares, which attempts to determine how variables of interest, such astourism demand, relate to other socioeconomic factors such as economic growth,exchange rates and so on. While the statistical properties of the least squares tech-nique are well-documented, the technique does not provide researchers with ameans of specifying the model; there is almost always a list of potential explanatoryvariables to consider. Presumably it is safe to ignore university entrance scores inmodeling tourist arrivals, but whether the ultraviolet index has any significant im-pact cannot be known with certainty before the study is undertaken. In practice, weoften face data with an imperfectly specified model and learn of our imperfectionfrom the data themselves. While data-based non-parametric modeling and optimi-zation methods such as the genetic algorithm have gained some popularity amongtourism researchers (e.g., Potter and Coshall 1988; Hurley, Moutinho, and Witt




Timothy, D., and S. Boyd2003 Heritage Tourism. Harlow: Prentice Hall.

Tunbridge, J., and G. Ashworth1996 Dissonant Heritage: The Management of the Past as a Resource in Conflict.

Chichester: Wiley.Walsh, K.

1992 The Representation of The Past: Museums and Heritage in the Post-ModernWorld. London: Routledge.

Yaniv Poria: Department of Hotel and Tourism Management, Ben-Gurion Univer-sity of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel. Email: <[email protected]>

Submitted 11 November 2008. Resubmitted 27 January 2009. Final version 1 March 2009. Accepted 26March 2009. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor: Juergen Gnoth

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.03.004




On the Use of Model Averagingin Tourism Research

Alan T.K. WanXinyu Zhang

City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Econometric modeling now plays a vital role in tourism research. For example,forecasting is an essential element in the process of tourism planning. Quantitativetools are also commonly used to evaluate the economic impacts of tourism. Thelast several decades have seen a large increase in the number of published studieson tourism research using econometric and other quantitative approaches. Amongthe various econometric techniques, the most widely used is probably linear regres-sion by least squares, which attempts to determine how variables of interest, such astourism demand, relate to other socioeconomic factors such as economic growth,exchange rates and so on. While the statistical properties of the least squares tech-nique are well-documented, the technique does not provide researchers with ameans of specifying the model; there is almost always a list of potential explanatoryvariables to consider. Presumably it is safe to ignore university entrance scores inmodeling tourist arrivals, but whether the ultraviolet index has any significant im-pact cannot be known with certainty before the study is undertaken. In practice, weoften face data with an imperfectly specified model and learn of our imperfectionfrom the data themselves. While data-based non-parametric modeling and optimi-zation methods such as the genetic algorithm have gained some popularity amongtourism researchers (e.g., Potter and Coshall 1988; Hurley, Moutinho, and Witt

1998; Chen and Wang 2007; Valdes, Torres and Domınguez 2007), it is fair to saythat, due to ease of implementation and the analysis being easy to interpret, linearleast squares regression remains the most widely used modeling method in tourismresearch, as it does in other social science disciplines.

When confronted by the problem of variable selection in a linear regression,one commonly proceeds by pretesting. For example, to determine the significanceof the ultraviolet index in a model that seeks to explain tourist arrivals, a t test isconducted and the ultraviolet index is either retained or dropped accordingly.The final specification of the model depends on the outcome of pretesting, asdo the estimates of all other coefficients in the model. The popular ‘‘general-to-specific’’ econometric modeling approach, which involves the formulation ofa general model and the application of a testing down process, eliminating vari-ables that are not significant, leading to a simpler specific model, also involvesextensive use of pretest strategies. Specification search by pretesting is widely prac-ticed in tourism research. Vanegas and Croes (2000), for example, searched for thepreferred specification of a model that seeks to explain U.S. tourist arrivals in Ar-uba based on t tests of significance of the regressors, Song, Witt and Gang (2003)examined the demand for Thai tourism using the general-to-specific model selec-tion approach, and Song and Witt (2003) applied the same approach to estimate amodel that explains inbound tourism to Korea.

An issue often raised in criticism of the general-to-specific approach is the lackof understanding of the effects of the pretest strategies that come into play. In-deed, econometricians have known for a long time that pretest estimators, allbeing discontinuous functions of the data, possess rather poor sampling propertiesand distort the usual properties of the least squares estimator in the sense that theend results are not what they appear to be. See, for example, Danilov and Magnus(2004a). In applied studies, however, investigators typically report estimates andassociated precision statistics (e.g., standard errors) as if the estimation had notbeen preceded by pretesting. Obviously, the reported precision statistics are incor-rect. Reporting estimate precision should clearly account for the pretesting thathas been integrated into the procedure.

Recent papers by Danilov and Magnus (2004a,b) attempted to do that, and theyshowed that ignoring pretesting in reporting the precision of the least squares esti-mator can lead to very substantial errors. Another widely practiced method closelyrelated to common pretesting procedures is model selection by schemes such asthe AIC and BIC (the Akaike and the Bayesian information criteria); these meth-ods are routinely applied, sometimes along with stepwise regressions. Again, inves-tigators using these procedures typically proceed as if the final model had beendecided in advance, without acknowledging the additional uncertainty introducedby model selection. There is also a growing collection of literature that discussesthe effects of model selection on inference. See, for instance, Leeb and Potscher(2005).

An alternative approach to pretesting and model selection is model averaging,where one averages across least squares estimates obtained from different models,rather than using only one model arrived at by pretesting or a model selection cri-terion. Model averaging has long been a popular technique among Bayesian statis-ticians. See Hoeting, Madigan, Raftery and Volinsky (1999) for a non-technicaldiscussion. In the econometrics literature, several methods for implementing mod-el averaging in the context of linear regression have recently emerged. Magnus(2002) and Danilov (2005) advocated a weighted average least squares (WALS) esti-mator with weights based on a Laplace prior density. The WALS estimator assumes aset of ‘‘key’’ explanatory variables which the investigator wants in the model on the-oretical or other grounds irrespective of statistical significance, as well as another setof ‘‘auxiliary’’ explanatory variables of which the investigator is less certain. Therole of the auxiliary explanatory variables is primarily to improve the estimation


of the coefficients of the key explanatory variables. Unlike the pretest estimator, theresultant WALS estimator is a continuous function of the data and is admissible.More recently, Hansen (2007, 2008) proposed a model average estimator withweights selected by minimizing the Mallows criterion. One advantage of model aver-aging over model selection is that it pays due attention to the problem of modeluncertainty. Thus, model averaging reconciles the disparities caused by pretestingand model selection, and will undoubtedly be used more extensively in the future.The latest edition of the New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, for example, in-cludes a chapter on model averaging (see, Doppelhofer, 2008).

Model averaging tools have been applied widely in biostatistics, and have recentlyfound applications in economics, finance and sociology. See, for example, Raftery(1995), Levin and Williams (2003), Sala-i-Martin, Doppelhofer and Miller (2004),Bird and Gerlach (2006), Doppelhofer and Weeks (2009) and Magnus, Powelland Prufer (2008a). There is considerable appeal for using model averaging in othersocial science disciplines, and this technical note is meant to broaden its appeal byusing the application in the context of tourism research. Another purpose of thisnote is to alert tourism researchers to the dangers of pretesting and model selectionin terms of underreporting the variability of estimates by way of a practical example.Our examination of model averaging centers on the WALS estimator. More compu-tationally intensive methods can be employed but the WALS estimator has the dis-tinct advantage of being simple and is readily applicable without an unduecomputational burden; the calculation of the WALS estimates does not require com-putationally intensive methods such as the Markov Chain Monte Carlo techniqueswhich are common with Bayesian model averaging. Moreover, appropriate formulaefor computing the standard errors of the WALS estimates are available, while thepractical application of some other model average estimators has been limited tosome degree by the fact that they produce only point estimates.

Our practical example is taken from a recent paper by Reeder and Brown(2005), who used linear regression to determine the degree to which recreationand the development of tourism affected a range of socioeconomic indicators(e.g., earnings per job, income per capita, rent levels, death rate, etc.) in 311 ruralU.S. counties during the 90s and 2000. Corresponding to each of the socioeco-nomic indicators is a multiple regression model with the socioeconomic indicatoras the dependent variable. The key explanatory variable of the regressions isdependency on recreation and tourism as measured by a so-called Z-score. TheZ-score, as developed by Johnson and Beale (2002), covers tourism-related employ-ment and income shares of the local economy, as well as the share of total countyhomes dependent on recreational use. The higher the Z-score the more depen-dent a county is on recreation and tourism. Reeder and Brown (2005) were primar-ily interested in the coefficient estimate of the Z-score, though they also included21 other explanatory variables such as dummy variables on county types and regio-nal subdivisions and a range of demographic variables in each regression. We willreconsider the regression models formulated by Reeder and Brown (2005), not tore-evaluate the conclusions reached by the authors, but to analyze the effect ofpretesting, highlighting the merits of model averaging as an alternative to modelselection.

We have performed analyses based on data of both 90s and 2000, but in theinterest of brevity we only present the results for 2000 here. The general conclu-sions are the same with the data of 90s and the results are available upon request.Table 1 lists the 16 dependent and 22 explanatory variables used in Reeder andBrown’s (2005) study. Our analysis treats the intercept term and the Z-score asthe key explanatory variables and all others as auxiliary explanatory variables. Inillustrating the effects of pretesting we adopt a stepwise selection procedure thatbegins like backward elimination. However, after two or more variables have beenremoved from the model, a forward selection procedure is employed to allow vari-


ables that have been eliminated to be reconsidered for inclusion. The procedurecontinues until no additions or deletions of variables are indicated. In our applica-tion we choose the significance level for adding a variable to be 0.05 and for remov-ing a variable to be 0.10. Note that the significance level set for entering a variableshould always be smaller than that for removing a variable otherwise cycling is pos-sible where a variable is continually entered and removed. Stepwise selection is apopular model selection procedure and automated routines for this procedureare available in most statistical software packages like SAS or Matlab. The estima-tion results for the coefficient of the Z-score are shown in Table 2. Column 2 inTable 2 gives the estimates of the coefficients of the Z-score based on the modelselected by stepwise selection for each of the 16 regressions. The third columngives the 95% confidence bounds of the coefficients when pretesting is not takeninto account. These are the confidence bounds usually reported in applied workwhen the researcher assumes (erroneously) that the model has been chosen in ad-vance. The numbers in Column 4, on the other hand, are the ‘‘correct’’ 95% con-fidence bounds when one pays due attention to the effect of stepwise selection onthe variability of the estimates. The formulae for computing the correct confidencebounds are available from Danilov and Magnus (2004b). We see that in all casesthe commonly reported confidence bounds that ignore pretesting underreportthe true confidence bounds. In some cases the difference between the reportedand the correct confidence bounds can be very large. In the worst case, the trueconfidence bounds are 10.87 times as wide as the bounds that ignore pretesting;on average they are 2.95 times as wide. The correct confidence bounds are typicallymuch wider than is apparent and the reported bounds are far too optimistic.

The WALS coefficient estimates and the 95% confidence bounds appear in Col-umns 5 and 6 respectively. The formulae for computing the WALS confidence

Table 1. List of Variables

Dependent variables Explanatory variables (excluding intercept)

1. Employment-population ratio ofages 16-24

1. Z-score

2. Employment-population ratio ofages 25-64

2-9. Eight dummy variables identifying theCensus regional subdivisions

4. Employment-population ratio ofages 65 and over

10-19. Ten dummy variables reflecting

8. Earnings per job Johnson and Beale’s (2002) recreationcounty types

9. Income per capita10. Median rent 20. Dummy variable indicating whether the

county is influenced by a nearbymetropolitan area

11. Population growth rate 21. Percentage of county population residingin rural areas

12. Travel time to work 22. County population density13. Percentage of population

without HS diploma14. Percentage of population with

bachelor’s degree15. Physicians per 100,000

population16. Age-adjusted death rate per

100,000 population


bounds are available in Magnus et al (2008a). In all cases the WALS and pretestcoefficient estimates have the same sign, and the difference in magnitude betweenthe two estimates is usually not large. However, without exception the WALS esti-mates produce confidence bounds with a decreased width from the (true) pretestconfidence bounds. On average the WALS confidence bounds are 42.84% as wideas the correct pretest confidence bounds; thus notable reductions in estimator var-iability are achievable with the WALS approach. This is expected because modelaveraging usually leads to estimates that are of superior precision than thoseachieved by selecting a single model, as demonstrated in the theoretical literature.While these results are, of course, specific to the data example considered here,the evidence does provide an indication of the performance gains that are possibleover a range of models involving tourism data. The WALS estimator is very easy toimplement—the steps involved in implementing the WALS estimator and the Mat-lab codes written to produce the estimates are available online at http://fbstaff.cityu.edu.hk/msawan/research1.htm. Admittedly, one disadvantage of WALS isthat it is not strictly suitable outside the standard linear regression context; also,the optimality properties established for the WALS estimator do not apply to timeseries models such as ARIMA or transfer function models which are also commontools for tourism research. These issues are currently being addressed; for exam-ple, work in process by Magnus, Wan and Zhang (2008b) is developing a variantof the WALS estimator for models with autocorrelated or heteroscedastic errors.

Finally the following illustration sheds some light on the advantage afforded bymodel averaging in forecasting with common time series models. This is highly rel-evant in light of the large (and growing) tourism forecasting literature. Our illus-tration uses data on the number of long-stay visitor arrivals in Barbados between1956 and 1992 given in Dharmaratne (1995). The author estimated two Box-Jen-kins ARIMA models, namely, ARIMA(2,1,1) and ARIMA(2,1,1)(1,1,1)5, with datafrom 1956 to 1987, and based on forecasted values generated by these two modelsfor the remaining years he concluded that the ARIMA(2,1,1) specification is bet-

Table 2. Estimates of Coefficient of Z-score in Each Regression and Confidence Bounds

Model1 Pre-testestimate

Reported Pre-testconfidencebounds

Correct Pre-testconfidence

bounds

WALSestimate

WALS confidencebounds

1 1.19 (0.50, 1.87) (�0.68, 2.96) 1.19 (0.48, 1.90)2 0.89 (0.20, 1.59) (�0.76, 2.60) 1.00 (0.29, 1.71)3 1.01 (0.56, 1.46) (0.08, 2.01) 1.13 (0.67, 1.59)4 1.63 (�340.92, 344.18) (�456.81, 440.90) 37.8 (�303.22, 378.82)5 880.47 (514.87, 1246.07) (�93.26, 1786.26) 898.9 (520.14, 1277.66)6 1073.54 (558.91, 1588.18) (�222.67, 2311.72) 1077.42 (550.79, 1604.05)7 1538.95 (965.59, 2112.31) (431.10, 2511.70) 1563.95 (992.77, 2135.14)8 32.83 (23.84, 41.82) (16.47, 48.72) 34.28 (25.29, 43.27)9 4.48 (2.89, 6.07) (�0.64, 9.82) 4.84 (3.11, 6.58)10 �0.27 (�0.67, 0.13) (�1.58, 1.07) �0.26 (�0.69, 0.17)11 �0.84 (�1.34, �0.33) (�2.20, 0.50) �0.81 (�1.33, �0.30)12 �1.42 (�1.93, �0.90) (�2.62, �0.13) �1.41 (�1.94, �0.88)13 2.22 (1.59, 2.85) (1.14, 3.36) 2.36 (1.73, 2.99)14 1.59 (�7.49, 10.68) (�21.42, 22.82) 1.32 (�7.88, 10.52)15 �25.88 (�37.60, �14.16) (�62.03, 13.62) �25.45 (�37.93, �12.97)16 0.67 (0.50, 0.83) (�1.05, 2.51) 0.65 (0.47, 0.82)

1 Models 1-16 are based on, respectively, dependent variables 1-16 listed in Table 1.


ter. Our purpose is to demonstrate that substantial gains in forecast accuracy canbe achieved by compromising across the two models. WALS is not applicable herebecause the models involved do not fall within the framework of linear regression.Our subsequent analysis is based on another well-known model weighting scheme,namely, the Smooth AIC weight introduced in Buckland, Burnham and Augustin(1997). This weight is proportional to the value of exp(-AICS \0.5), where AICS isthe AIC score for candidate model S. Dharmaratne (1995) reported the coefficientestimates and AIC scores for both models; for the ARIMA(2,1,1) model, the AICscore is 430.26 while for ARIMA(2,1,1)(1,1,1)5, it is 436.67. While these two AICvalues are very comparable, they still point to a preference for ARIMA(2,1,1).We now apply model averaging using the Smooth AIC scheme and generate fore-casts for 1988 to 1992. Table 3 presents the forecasts and their absolute percentageerrors. The forecast performance of the ARIMA(2,1,1)(1,1,1)5 model is ratherpoor—except for 1992 its predictions are always worse, and usually by a large mar-gin, than those based on the ARIMA(2,1,1) model. The forecast performance ofthe averaged model is quite remarkable—in all cases under consideration the fore-casts obtained from the averaged model are closer to the true values than thoseobtained from the better of the two single models. The averaged model yields amean absolute percentage forecast error of 8.74%, while the corresponding figuresfor the ARIMA(2,1,1) and ARIMA(2,1,1)(1,1,1)5 models are 9.71% and 19.02%respectively.

The techniques that have been illustrated are just two of the available modelaveraging techniques and one can adopt other more complex combining tech-niques in practice. Nonetheless we view the results presented here as being verypromising. Certainly, further exploration of the model averaging approach in tour-ism research seems to be justified.

Acknowledgements—The authors thank Richard Reeder and Dennis Brown of the U.S. Depart-ment of Agriculture for supplying the data used in this study, and the referees, editor andassociate editor for comments and suggestions.

REFERENCES

Bird, R., and R. Gerlach2006 A Bayesian Model Averaging Approach to Enhance Value Investment.

International Journal of Business and Economics 5:93–110.Buckland, S. T., K. P. Burnham, and N. H. Augustin

1997 Model Selection: An Integral Part of Inference. Biometrics 53:603–618.Chen, K. Y., and C. H. Wang

2007 Support Vector Regression with Genetic Algorithms in Forecasting TouristDemand. Tourism Management 28:215–226.

Table 3. Forecast Comparisons

Period Actual Value Forecasts (absolute percentage errors in brackets)

ARIMA(2,1,1) ARIMA(2,1,1)(1,1,1)5 Averaged model

1988 451443 453721 (0.50%) 409067 (9.39%) 451980 (0.12%)1989 461259 463343 (0.45%) 367310 (20.37%) 459600 (0.36%)1990 432092 462613 (7.06%) 348448 (19.36%) 458163 (6.03%)1991 394222 464243 (17.76%) 298296 (24.33%) 457775 (16.12%)1992 385979 473952 (22.79%) 302413 (21.65%) 467266 (21.06%)


Danilov, D.2005 Estimation of the Mean of a Univariate Normal Distribution When the

Variance is Not Known. Econometrics Journal 8:277–291.Danilov, D., and J. R. Magnus

2004a On the Harm that Ignoring Pretesting Can Cause. Journal of Econometrics122:27–46.

2004b Forecast Accuracy after Pretesting with an Application to the Stock Market.Journal of Forecasting 23:251–274.

Dharmaratne, G. S.1995 Forecasting Tourist Arrivals in Barbados. Annals of Tourism Research

22:804–818.Doppelhofer, G.

2008 Model Averaging. In The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, L. Blume andS. Durlauf, eds., (2nd ed.). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Doppelhofer, G., and M. Weeks2009 Jointness of Growth Determinants. Journal of Applied Econometrics

24:209–244.Hansen, B. E.

2007 Least Squares Model Averaging. Econometrica 75:1175–1189.2008 Least Squares Forecast Averaging. Journal of Econometrics 146:342–350.

Hoeting, J. A., D. Madigan, A. E. Raftery, and C. T. Volinsky1999 Bayesian Model Averaging: A Tutorial. Statistical Science 14:382–417.

Hurley, S., L. Moutinho, and S. F. Witt1998 Genetic Algorithms for Tourism Marketing. Annals of Tourism Research

25:498–514.Johnson, K. M., and C. L. Beale

2002 Nonmetro Recreation Counties: Their Identification and Rapid Growth. RuralAmerica 17:12–19.

Leeb, H., and B. M. Potscher2005 Model Selection and Inference: Facts and Fiction. Econometric Theory

7:163–185.Levin, A. T., and J. C. Williams

2003 Robust Monetary Policy with Competing Reference Models. Journal ofMonetary Economics 50:947–975.

Magnus, J. R.2002 Estimation of the Mean of a Univariate Normal Distribution with Known

Variance. Econometrics Journal 5:225–236.Magnus, J.R., O. Powell, and P. Prufer

2008a A Comparison of Two Averaging Techniques with an Application to GrowthEmpirics, mimeo, Department of Econometrics and Operations Research, TilburgUniversity, the Netherlands.

Magnus, J.R., A.T.K. Wan, and X. Zhang2008b WALS Estimation with Non-Spherical Disturbances and an Application to the

Hong Kong Housing Market, mimeo, Department of Econometrics and Opera-tions Research, Tilburg University, the Netherlands.

Potter, R. B., and J. Coshall1988 Sociopsychological Methods for Tourism Research. Annals of Tourism

Research 15:63–75.Raftery, A. E.

1995 Bayesian Model Selection in Social Research. Sociological Methodology25:111–163.

Reeder, R.J., and D.M. Brown2005 Recreation, Tourism and Rural Well-Being. Economic Report Number 7,

Economic Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. (Paper availableonline at http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/ERR7/)

Sala-i-Martin, X., G. Doppelhofer, and R. M. Miller2004 Determinants of Economic Growth: A Bayesian Averaging of Classical Estimates

(BACE) Approach. American Economic Review 94:813–835.Song, H., and S. F. Witt

2003 Tourism Forecasting: The General to Specific Approach. Journal of TravelResearch 42:65–74.


Song, H., S. F. Witt, and L. Gang2003 Modeling and Forecasting the Demand for Thai Tourism. Tourism Economics

9:363–387.Valdes, L., E. Torres, and J. S. Domınguez

2007 A Model to Study the Economic Impact of Collective Accommodation in aRegion. Tourism Management 28:152–161.

Vanegas, M., and R. R. Croes2000 Evaluation of Demand: US Tourists to Aruba. Annals of Tourism Research

27:946–963.

Alan T.K. Wan: Department of Management Sciences, City University of HongKong, 83 Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon, Hong Kong. Email: <[email protected]>

Submitted 18 July 2008. Resubmitted 26 November 2008. Resubmitted 11 February 2009. Final version3 March 2009. Accepted 26 March 2009. Refereed anonymously. Coordinating Editor: Juergen Gnoth

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.03.004



BOOK REVIEW

Culture on TourBy Edward M. Bruner. The University of Chicago Press (<www.press.uchicago.edu>) 2005, ii + 308 pp (notes, references, index). $25.00Pbk. ISBN 0-226-07763-2

Janet ChangChinese Culture University, Taiwan

One word, transnationalism, encapsulates the primary theme that pervades thisbook. The concept is developed through a thorough grounding in and long prac-tice of cultural anthropology. The aim of the book is to apply a reflexive ethnogra-phy to what other researchers (such as John Urry, Nelson Graburn, HildredGeertz, and the author’s own previous works) have written on tourism and culture;the author is successful in achieving this goal. The volume is designed to informwell-educated readers who are interested in both tourism and culture, domesticallyand internationally. Thus, to get the most out of the volume, the reader probablyneeds to be an anthropologist who is familiar with the principles of ethnographyor, at least, who is used to careful reading of reflexive materials. In other words,this is not an easy book for someone who is just interested in international tourism,per se, or even for a reader looking for novel insights into cultural tourism. In fact, itis likely to be difficult reading even for experienced tourism academics.

The work is a compendium of post-tour narratives with cases from East Africa,USA, and Indonesia. In the introduction, the author declares that the unity ofthe book stems from a consistent conceptual perspective based on constructivism.Mobility, travel, and encounters are inherent to the process of tourism at a varietyof temporal and spatial scales. Stories, narration, and retellings are expressionsthat structure and give voice to the tourism experience. Furthermore, various eth-nographic perspectives are presented throughout the book, such as the reflexivityof the tourists, the toured (who, in these cases, are indigenous people), and theauthor; dissident voices associated with heritage sites; ambiguity and paradoxresulting from the historical specificity of cultural products; and the blurred

Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 36, No. 3, pp. 533–534, 2009Printed in Great Britain

www.elsevier.com/locate/atoures

PUBLICATIONS IN REVIEW

This Department publishes reviews of recent publications in or related to thestudy of tourism. Individuals interested in submitting review essays and bookreveiws should write directly to the Associate Editor for Publications in Review,Stephen Smith <[email protected]>. Unsolicited reviews will not beaccepted.

533

complexities of authentic and inauthentic experiences as perceived by tourists. Gi-ven the numerous specialized terms employed by the author, as illustrated by theseexamples, the general reader could easily be scared away.

The volume consists of nine chapters of thick description. The bulk of the textconstitutes reflections on locations that the author has toured and researched.These include Mayers Ranch in East Africa, Elmina Castle in Ghana, heritage sitesassociated with Abraham Lincoln in New Salem, Illinois (US), the mountain for-tress of Masada in Israel, and Indonesia. In the latter case, insights are drawn fromBalinese cultural experiences, Taman Mini ethnic theme park in Jakarta, and rein-corporation of rituals of Toba Batak ceremonies of blessing and gift exchange andrituals for deceased migrants in the Sumatra highlands. The foci of discussion aretourists, the toured objects, and the intertwining relationship among tourists, localpeople, and the author. Of the chapters, that on Ghana is the least developed interms of the breadth and depth of narratives that are considered.

Of the field-based studies of tourism ethnography discussed, this reviewer foundthe Indonesian cases to be most intriguing and the best part of the book. This ispartly because the author has spent a number of years there for personal, profes-sional, and even family reasons, so that the various cultural observations are mostrichly and convincingly confirmed in these cases. Furthermore, it was easier for thereviewer to relate to these cases because of her own travel experiences.

The author is particularly concerned with what he calls the touristic borderzone- a performative space within which tourists and locals meet. He views perfor-mance as constituting emergent culture. The utility of these concepts is clearlyillustrated throughout the cases through the sharing of various stories with readers.Important issues in tourism, such as authenticity, the livelihoods of local people,and identity and power relationships in the nation-state are addressed. In the lattercase, the recreational and political functions of Taman Mini in Jakarta are exam-ined through discussion of the contrasting displays of diverse cultural productsand the tensions between such diversity and the unity of the Indonesian nation,whose national creed is, in fact, ‘‘unity in diversity’’. The varied meanings of suchdisplays to different parties are admirably discussed.

The author is fond of using binary concepts, such as global and local to juxta-pose differing emphases and to provide divergent and balanced perspectives.The constant reflection and reflective narratives of the author are one of thestrengths of the book but they also make it difficult to read and only the persistentand thoughtful reader is likely to glean the variety of perceptive insights that arecontained in this work.

Janet Chang: Department of Tourism, Chinese Culture University, Taipei, Taiwan111. Email: <[email protected]>

Assigned 17 January 2008. Submitted 17 February 2009. Accepted 18 February 2009.

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.02.006

534 Publications in review / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 533–549


Publications in review / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 533–549 535

Tourism Management: Analysis,Behaviour, and Strategy

Edited by Arch Woodside and Drew Martin. CAB International,Wallingford <www.cab.org> 2008, xi + 528 pp (figures, tables, photos,index). $ 55 Pbk. ISBN 978-1-84593-323-4

Erdogan KocDogus University, Turkey

Tourism Management: Analysis, Behaviour, and Strategy, provides extensive coverageof articles written by authors with quite different perspectives on tourism and hos-pitality. The majority of the 27 chapters are quite interesting to read, with Chapter5, on ‘‘Tourist Harassment and Responses’’ by Jerome McElroy, Peter Tarlow, andKarin Carlisle a particularly good one. The authors in this chapter explore animportant topic in tourism and marketing yet one that has been largely ignoredso far. On the other hand, there are one or two chapters too in the book that makethe reader question their raison d’etre in the book.

It is surprising that although there are so many chapters with a marketing orien-tation in the book, this fact apparently did not merit comment in the introductorychapter. For instance, while Chapters 2, 3, 4, 6, 18, and 24 focus on tourist behav-iour, tourist motivation, and tourist typologies, while Chapters 8, 10, 12, 14, 15, 19,and 23 focus on market or product segmentation. Chapters 11 and 20 focus on an-other marketing sub-field: marketing communications. Even among the remainingeight chapters, there are a few others that could be classified to some extent asmarketing-oriented.

The book’s chapters have been grouped into six parts. However, the readermay find it difficult to relate the individual chapters to its particular part becausethe groupings sometimes lack cohesion. The groupings of articles often seems abit forced and artificial. For example, Part 4, ‘‘Implementing’’ covers topics asdiverse as the globalization of health care through medical tourism, theme parkmanagement, and wine tourism. From another perspective, Chapters 25, 26 and27, on economic, sustainability, and human resources, respective, might havecome earlier, possibly just after the introductory chapter. For these reasons,the use of the book may be limited, to an extent, to serving as a reference sourcealone. There are likely to be few scholars who would be interested in reading allof individual articles.

The book is suited for three groups of readers: tourism academics, higher re-search degree students, and practitioners in the field of tourism, hospitality, andleisure who are seeking material on specific topics. Academics with research inter-ests in the fields of tourism, hospitality, and leisure marketing, in particular, mayfind this reference book a helpful tool for designing their own research becauseit provides many original ideas for doing research in the field. Then again, somemight argue that there are already quite a range of tourism and hospitality journalsthat provide access to the topics in this collection.

Additionally, academics involved in postgraduate teaching and research supervi-sion may find the book useful in identifying research topics for their students. Sim-ilarly, higher research degree students may find the book a good source of ideasfor future research and for determining topics of their theses.

The book is not particularly relevant for undergraduate students. Practitionersalready operating or planning to operate in one of the markets covered by thebook may use limited parts of it for bringing themselves up-to-date with recenttrends and developments and hence understand their markets better. However,compared with academics and higher research degree students, the potential forthe book to be used by practitioners may be limited as many may not be sufficientlyequipped to understand and enjoy many of the papers.

Erdogan Koc: Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Economics andAdministrative Sciences, Kadikoy, Istanbul, Turkey. E-mail: <[email protected]>

Assigned 13 January 2009. Submitted 11 March 2009. Accepted 12 March 2009.

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.03.007

Travel and Tourism: An Industry PrimerBy Paul Biederman, Jun Lai, Jukka Laitamaki, Hannah Messerli, PeterNyheim, Stanley Plog. Pearson Prentice Hall <www.prenhall.com>2008, xxix + 608 pp (figures, tables, photos, references, index) US$83.00 Hbk. ISBN 0-13-170129-0

Michael J. GrossUniversity of South Australia, Australia

Any book calling itself a primer has set itself a grand agenda, establishing expec-tations that it will encapsulate all the essential aspects of its topic. Authors in anyfield undertaking this challenge are to be commended for their ambition. This isespecially true in a field such as tourism, which is in a relatively nascent state ofconceptual development, and around which much debate continues to swirlregarding the nature, definition, and components of the field. Faced with myriadoptions for how to structure such a book, any selection of topics is bound to be dif-ficult. However, the authors have assembled a collection of issues that deliver acreditable version of a disparate economic sector.

The structure of the book is complex: two parts, each divided into sections thatare further divided into chapters aimed at different but compatible audiences. PartOne is targeted at undergraduates, with twelve chapters that cover basic elementsof the tourism sector. Part Two has nine chapters that span a variety of more ad-vanced topics that are intended for postgraduates. This design allows instructorsto use the first part as a basis for a core course curriculum, with sections drawn



Additionally, academics involved in postgraduate teaching and research supervi-sion may find the book useful in identifying research topics for their students. Sim-ilarly, higher research degree students may find the book a good source of ideasfor future research and for determining topics of their theses.

The book is not particularly relevant for undergraduate students. Practitionersalready operating or planning to operate in one of the markets covered by thebook may use limited parts of it for bringing themselves up-to-date with recenttrends and developments and hence understand their markets better. However,compared with academics and higher research degree students, the potential forthe book to be used by practitioners may be limited as many may not be sufficientlyequipped to understand and enjoy many of the papers.

Erdogan Koc: Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Economics andAdministrative Sciences, Kadikoy, Istanbul, Turkey. E-mail: <[email protected]>

Assigned 13 January 2009. Submitted 11 March 2009. Accepted 12 March 2009.

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.02.004



Travel and Tourism: An Industry PrimerBy Paul Biederman, Jun Lai, Jukka Laitamaki, Hannah Messerli, PeterNyheim, Stanley Plog. Pearson Prentice Hall <www.prenhall.com>2008, xxix + 608 pp (figures, tables, photos, references, index) US$83.00 Hbk. ISBN 0-13-170129-0

Michael J. GrossUniversity of South Australia, Australia

Any book calling itself a primer has set itself a grand agenda, establishing expec-tations that it will encapsulate all the essential aspects of its topic. Authors in anyfield undertaking this challenge are to be commended for their ambition. This isespecially true in a field such as tourism, which is in a relatively nascent state ofconceptual development, and around which much debate continues to swirlregarding the nature, definition, and components of the field. Faced with myriadoptions for how to structure such a book, any selection of topics is bound to be dif-ficult. However, the authors have assembled a collection of issues that deliver acreditable version of a disparate economic sector.

The structure of the book is complex: two parts, each divided into sections thatare further divided into chapters aimed at different but compatible audiences. PartOne is targeted at undergraduates, with twelve chapters that cover basic elementsof the tourism sector. Part Two has nine chapters that span a variety of more ad-vanced topics that are intended for postgraduates. This design allows instructorsto use the first part as a basis for a core course curriculum, with sections drawn

from the second part to supplement different levels and interests. As a practicalmatter, the distinction between under- and postgraduate fitness of any given chap-ter will be at the discretion of course planners, and, despite the ‘‘advanced’’ adjec-tive applied to Part Two, the academic level of all chapters is relatively equal.

Part One contains two sections, the first of which contains chapters entitled‘‘Dimensions of Travel and Tourism’’, ‘‘An Economic Overview of Travel andTourism’’, ‘‘The Psychology of Travel’’, and ‘‘Sustainable Tourism Development’’.This group of topics provides an overview of the sector’s scope, economics, con-sumer behaviour, and development issues. It provides prelude information uponwhich understanding of subsequent topics can be layered. The early placementof economic considerations sets a tone that is carried through the text. The secondsection of Part One, ‘‘The Sectors’’, contains chapters on ‘‘The Airline Industry’’,‘‘The Rail, Motorcoach, and Rental Car Industries’’, ‘‘The Cruiseline Industry’’,‘‘Amusement Parks and Other Major Attractions’’, ‘‘The Gaming Industry’’, ‘‘Lod-ging’’, ‘‘The Food Service Industry’’, and ‘‘Conventions and Meetings’’. This is theheart of the book, and is a particular strength. It not only includes standard func-tional areas that would be expected, but also some that would typically be presentonly in more specialised texts, such as railroads, rental cars, and theme parks. Thechapter on food service is especially well done, with a sound mix of general andspecific information that leaves the reader with a good understanding of how foodconcepts integrate with the other aspects of the tourism experience.

Part Two contains four sections, the first of which is subtitled ‘‘Defining, Pro-moting, and Selling the Product’’. The chapters in this section are ‘‘Travel Agentsand Tour Operators’’, ‘‘Distribution Channels’’, and ‘‘Destinations: A Psycho-graphic and Sociological Perspective’’. While these and the other Part Two chap-ters stand on their own, some also serve to supplement previous chapters. This iscertainly characteristic of ‘‘Destinations: A Psychographic and Sociological Per-spective’’, which complements the earlier chapter, ‘‘The Psychology of Travel’’,exploring in more detail the connections among lifestyle, psychographics, venture-someness, and the positioning and life cycle of destinations.

The second section of Part Two is subtitled ‘‘Conservation and Intervention’’,with chapters on ‘‘Ecotourism: Tourism’s Green Adventure’’ and ‘‘Government,Politics, and Tourism’’. A deliberate attempt seems to have been made in the latterchapter to counter the general US-centric orientation of the book. This chapteruses a wide array of international settings and examples to illustrate the critical roleof politics in tourism. The third section of Part Two, ‘‘Management Tools’’, con-tains chapters on ‘‘Revenue Management’’, ‘‘Measuring the Economic Impact’’,‘‘Forecasting’’. This is a useful inclusion of practical tools that should constitutea competitive advantage for the book, as the level of detail will provide helpfulexamples for both students and managers. The book concludes with ‘‘What’s Nextfor the Industry?’’, a subsection containing a single chapter, ‘‘The Future’’. Thischapter takes the unusual approach of examining the industry from a historicalperspective of 2030, looking back on imagined world and industry developments.Predictions consider such concepts as the aging population, attraction and destina-tion rationing, space tourism, climate change, and their effects on various industrysectors.

Some of the text’s facts bear re-checking, such as a photo of Boeing 707 jetliner(p. 80) claiming it began commercial service in 1953 (it started in 1958), the Man-darin Oriental group displacing Hyatt and other groups in a table of the ten largestlodging companies (p. 265), and how astronaut Buzz Aldrin’s name is spelled (p.572). However these are minor criticisms in a text filled with a voluminous amountof information on the industry.

Chapters include learning objectives, chapter summaries, margin glossaries, dis-cussion questions, website listings, interviews with industry leaders, ‘‘Focus on


Technology’’ inserts, as well as photographs and illustrations. The book is in-tended as ‘‘a true primer in the sense of a comprehensive educational experiencefor tourism and well-enough balanced to accommodate all of the disparate readerconstituencies’’ (p. xx). The text has succeeded in delivering on its purpose andwould be suitable in a higher education setting as well as for use by industry pro-fessionals who seek a general reference text.Michael J. Gross: School of Management, University of South Australia, Adelaide,South Australia, 5000, Australia. Email: <[email protected]>

Assigned 10 November 2008. Submitted 2 March 2009. Accepted 3 March 2009.

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.03.006

The Encyclopedia of Tourism andRecreation in Marine Environments

Edited by Michael Luck. CAB International <www.cabi.org> 2008,x + 587 pp (figures, tables, bibliography) US$199.00 Hbk, ISBN-13 9781 84593 350 0

Michael M.G. ScantleburyUniversity of Central Florida, USA

Michael Luck’s The Encyclopedia of Tourism and Recreation in Marine Environmentsoffers ‘‘almost 900 entries from its 170 authors’’ (p. v) on tourism and recreationin marine environments. The vision of the editor and his board was to create anessential reference for the subject area. Indeed, the editorial board has done anexcellent job in selecting and editing the entries.

Choosing topics for inclusion in such a volume will always be challenging and adiscussion of the strategy adopted to define the scope of an encyclopedia can beinformative. Unfortunately, there is no discussion of the rationale regarding thetopics selected, except to indicate that it was the intention of the editorial boardto ‘‘bring together the terms, concepts, and theories related to recreational andtourism activities in marine settings’’ (back cover). It is, of course, always possibleto suggest items that might have been included. For example, activities such as kitesurfing, wake boarding, and wave jumping are missing. More importantly, the workof the Caribbean Conservation Association in protecting the marine environmentof the Caribbean since the 60s is not recognized, nor is the work of McGill Univer-sity’s Bellairs Research Institute, which was founded in Barbados in 1954. The cov-erage of specialized encyclopedias often becomes dated, requiring new editions,usually after about five years. Still, this is a timely and useful work.

The double-column layout of the entries is attractive, and the inclusion ofcharts, maps, graphs, diagrams, and pictures to support the concepts discussed is



Technology’’ inserts, as well as photographs and illustrations. The book is in-tended as ‘‘a true primer in the sense of a comprehensive educational experiencefor tourism and well-enough balanced to accommodate all of the disparate readerconstituencies’’ (p. xx). The text has succeeded in delivering on its purpose andwould be suitable in a higher education setting as well as for use by industry pro-fessionals who seek a general reference text.Michael J. Gross: School of Management, University of South Australia, Adelaide,South Australia, 5000, Australia. Email: <[email protected]>

Assigned 10 November 2008. Submitted 2 March 2009. Accepted 3 March 2009.

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.02.004



The Encyclopedia of Tourism andRecreation in Marine Environments

Edited by Michael Luck. CAB International <www.cabi.org> 2008,x + 587 pp (figures, tables, bibliography) US$199.00 Hbk, ISBN-13 9781 84593 350 0

Michael M.G. ScantleburyUniversity of Central Florida, USA

Michael Luck’s The Encyclopedia of Tourism and Recreation in Marine Environmentsoffers ‘‘almost 900 entries from its 170 authors’’ (p. v) on tourism and recreationin marine environments. The vision of the editor and his board was to create anessential reference for the subject area. Indeed, the editorial board has done anexcellent job in selecting and editing the entries.

Choosing topics for inclusion in such a volume will always be challenging and adiscussion of the strategy adopted to define the scope of an encyclopedia can beinformative. Unfortunately, there is no discussion of the rationale regarding thetopics selected, except to indicate that it was the intention of the editorial boardto ‘‘bring together the terms, concepts, and theories related to recreational andtourism activities in marine settings’’ (back cover). It is, of course, always possibleto suggest items that might have been included. For example, activities such as kitesurfing, wake boarding, and wave jumping are missing. More importantly, the workof the Caribbean Conservation Association in protecting the marine environmentof the Caribbean since the 60s is not recognized, nor is the work of McGill Univer-sity’s Bellairs Research Institute, which was founded in Barbados in 1954. The cov-erage of specialized encyclopedias often becomes dated, requiring new editions,usually after about five years. Still, this is a timely and useful work.

The double-column layout of the entries is attractive, and the inclusion ofcharts, maps, graphs, diagrams, and pictures to support the concepts discussed is

helpful. Most have a short listing of Internet resources that facilitate follow-upresearch. The cross-listing of entries through the bolding of entry titles in the textmakes it easy for the researcher to find information and to know quickly whichitems are included elsewhere in the encyclopedia. Further, the font and spacingmake the text easy to read. The 20 pages of references and 24 pages of furtherreading are impressive.

Despite some of the omissions touched on previously, the coverage is extensive.It includes general topics such as the physical environment in which tourism andrecreation in the marine environment occur, the flora and fauna found in theseenvironments as well as the environmental pressures on them, the nature of man’sinteraction and the activities conducted, and the policies and institutional frame-works that operate and guide the human interactions in these marine environ-ments. The volume also provides biographical notes on persons who have hadan impact on the marine environment. These range from the explorers likeChristopher Columbus, Sir Francis Drake, and Vasco da Gama to inventors suchas Jacques-Yves Cousteau and cruise line entrepreneurs, such as Ted and MickyArison.

The style of writing is non-technical, clear, and concise, yet factual and informa-tive. The entries range in complexity from simple definitions, for example, baysand islands, to more complex concepts such as the visitor impact managementmodel/framework. Thematically, the concepts cover the active and passive, fromintrinsic motivation to flow, from whale watching to snuba and surfing. Althoughthere is an effort to cover the globe from the Arctic to the Antarctic, there appearsto be slightly more of a focus on the Pacific and Europe.

The editors and authors have been successful in creating a valuable referencetext. However, a few entries reflect some idiosyncrasies rather than a purely schol-arly approach. For example, something called the ‘‘laws of tourism’’ is includedunder the ‘‘Accessibility’’ entry but without any citation to this concept. The‘‘Windward Islands’’ entry also refers to the ‘‘Society of Islands’’ [sic] in FrenchPolynesia and fails to identify the names of islands in this Caribbean subgroup.Given that ‘‘[t]he economy of most of the islands in this group is heavily depen-dant on tourism’’ (p. 537) and that the ‘‘Caribbean is often referred to as mosttourism dependant region of the world’’ (Jayawardena 2002:89), a paragraph oneach island would have been desirable.

This is, of course, a highly specialized volume so the market is likely to be lim-ited. Still, it will be a welcome addition to the reference collections of libraries inuniversities, colleges, and planning agencies involved with recreation, tourism, andmarine studies.

Michael M.G. Scantlebury: University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida, USA32819. Email: <[email protected]>

REFERENCE

Jayawardena, C.2002 Mastering Caribbean Tourism. International Journal of Contemporary Hospi-

tality Management 14(2):88–93.

Assigned 10 July 2008. Submitted 6 February 2009. Accepted 18 February 2009.

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.02.004




Nature-based Tourism, Environment, andLand Management

Edited by Ralf Buckley, David Weaver, and Catherine Pickering. CABInternational <www.cabi.org> 2008, ix + 213 pp (figures, tables, biblio-graphy, index) US$55 Pbk. ISBN 978-1-84593-455-2

Honggen XiaoThe Hong Kong Polytechnic University, China

The presence of tourists in parks and protected areas often complicates themanagement of reserves because of the need to balance protection and use. Thisbook addresses the links, partnerships, and conflicts between tourism developmentand conservation land management from both conceptual and practical perspec-tives. Selected from presentations to a 2001 conference convened by the Interna-tional Center for Ecotourism Research (Griffith University, Australia), thiscollection offers nineteen chapters on the use of pristine lands for tourism and rec-reation.

The text has a marked Australian focus, with fifteen chapters by Australianauthors. Only eight authors (out of thirty) are from institutions outside Australia.The collection contains only two cases about the US and one dealing with SouthAfrica. Nonetheless, the introductory and concluding chapters add to the valueof this collection as a stand-alone text that will have relevance beyond Australia.

Buckley’s opening chapter presents a review of large-scale trends that trigger thegrowth of nature-based tourism and hence places tourism and commercial devel-opment at the top of the agenda for land management, particularly for publiclands where budgetary resources are often shrinking, and agencies are seekingalternative strategies to sustain their management functions.

Eugenio Yunis also presents a broad overview of sustainable tourism, in this case,from an inter-governmental perspective. The conclusion by Robyn Bushell ties to-gether diverse empirical discussions in a sustainable development framework.While nature-based tourism is proposed as a mechanism to fund conservation ef-forts, there remains the challenge for agencies to plan for appropriate use by vis-itors. Reading through the cases, the extent to which an appropriate level of use ofnatural reserves is maintained constitutes the key challenge for managers. As notedby Bushell, the inadequacy of monitoring and controlling visitor impacts in a pro-tected area largely results from its systems and mechanisms ‘‘which are notequipped to predict or monitor the often complex, subtle, and cumulative impacts[of visitation] on biodiversity or cultural heritage’’ (p. 197). These conceptualdiscussions succeed in setting a context for the technical papers and serve as a plat-form on which the pendulum arguments between conservation and developmentmake sense.

The main body of the text, fifteen technical papers, explores a breadth of issuesrelated to the management of natural reserves for tourism and recreation. The is-sues include financial liability in case of visitor injuries (Jan McDonald), visitor feesand risk management of park agencies (Ralph Buckley, Natasha Witting, andMichaela Guest), economic returns from competing uses of forests (e.g., tourism

and recreation versus forestry as reported by John Ward with examples from NewSouth Wales Native Forests), and the use of visitor impact data by or for park man-agements (Ralf Buckley and Narelle King).

Some of the case studies are conducted in different jurisdictions or on diverseownership structures. For example, Les Carlisle describes a model of partnershipin private reserves in South Africa that incorporates the private sector, the localcommunity, and the conservation agency. Jerry Johnson, Bruce Maxwell, and Rich-ard Aspinall focus on land-use changes in the Greater Yellowstone Region in theUS West, which were accompanied by broader social and economic changes. An-other chapter with examples from outside Australia is by Alan Watson and WilliamBorrie, in which a business approach to managing public lands in the US is intro-duced. The authors outline a proposal to blend marketing activities with protec-tion of public land resources through a focus on relationships, trust,commitment, and social responsibility.

A variety of nature-based tourism activities and their associated impacts areexamined in these studies, including wildlife tourism (Karen Higginbottom, An-drew Tribe, and Rosemary Booth), nature tourism in mountain areas (CatherinePickering, Stuart Johnson, Ken Green, and Graeme Enders), water-based recrea-tion in coastal areas (with two chapters by Troy Byrnes and Jan Warnken), trails(Jennie Whinam, Nicole Chilcott, Roger Ling, and Phil Wyatt), and snow manage-ment in winter tourism (Catherine Pickering and Wendy Hill). An issue commonto all these nature-based tourism activities is their impact on the physical environ-ment. A best practice for environmental management and a method for calculat-ing environmental sensitivity are also presented among these discussions.

In terms of information on which these reports are based, the majority of thechapters can be characterized as qualitative descriptions drawing from documen-tary sources and/or experiences. Hardly any primary data are reported nor dothe analyses presented by most authors involve sophisticated techniques. Thereare, some exceptions, though, such as the chapter on economic benefits from rec-reation versus timber production, and some chapters that introduce methods tocalculate environmental sensitivity, or develop and test a model of tourism poten-tial in the Grampians National Park in the southeast of Australia. Overall, with tighteditorial and stylistic alignments, the text makes a good read.

As implied in the book’s introduction, the purpose of this collection is to facil-itate dialog and information exchange among land owners, land managementagencies, and tourism operators. Arguably, the uptake of research informationby practitioners from anthologies such as this remains to be seen because of thedominance of academic perspectives among the contributors. Readers interestedin this topic could also find an eco-tourism series from CAB International, of whichthis is one of seven titles. Pedagogically, the book is not a good choice as a requiredundergraduate text, yet facilitators of graduate seminars on this subject could ben-efit from the controversies and richness of perspectives derived from many of thesecase studies.

Honggen Xiao: School of Hotel and Tourism Management, Hong Kong Polytech-nic University, Hong Kong SAR, China. Email: <[email protected]>

Assigned 17 November 2008. Submitted 21 January 2009. Accepted 06 February 2009.

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.02.005




Residential Tourism:(De)Constructing Paradise

Mason R. McWatters. Channel View Publications <www.channelview-publications.com> 2008, viii + 188 pp (figures, bibliography, index).Pbk. US$49.95 ISBN 13 9781845410902

Paul F. WilkinsonYork University, Canada

What happens to an area in a developing country when an international maga-zine publishes an article entitled, ‘‘Paradise found: Where to retire abroad’’,describing that area as ‘‘one of five idyllic places—from Patagonia to Phuket—where you can still live like a king on what you’ve saved’’ (Kratz 2005)? The areais Boquete, an agricultural community in the highlands of Panama. Over five years,the foreign population of this community rose from under two dozen to in excessof 500, and is projected to increase into the thousands within the next decade. Theresult, as the author of Residential Tourism notes, is that ‘‘Boquete has been thrustinto a crossroads between its provincial, agriculturally-oriented past and its immi-nent future as an international destination for residential tourism’’ (p. 2).

The aim of this book is ‘‘to examine Boquete at this crossroads and to investi-gate the social impacts of residential tourism on place and community at the locallevel, by directly exploring how its inhabitants—both native and foreign—experi-ence their shared place of residence’’ (p. 2). The book offers insights into the res-idents’ identities, values, desires, and interactions with each other. In addition, ‘‘byinvestigating foreign and native residents’ experience of Boquete at this criticaljuncture, there exists an opportunity to investigate how a complex, transformative,and little understood phenomenon such as residential tourism affects places andcommunities at the local level’’ (p. 2).

McWatters defines residential tourism as ‘‘the enduring practices and lifestyleswhich result from a channeled flow of consumption-led, permanent orsemi-permanent migration to a particular destination’’ (p. 3). While there has beensome research in Spain and France on this phenomenon, there has been little inLatin America, despite the high numbers of expatriates in Mexico and Costa Rica.

McWatters argues that residential tourism is often part of a broader search pro-cess for identifying a final retirement destination. He feels, however, that the morecommonly-used term, international retirement migration, does not adequately re-flect the lasting experiences, effects, and identities that develop and persist in adestination long after the physical process of migration has occurred. He exploresthese topics through four general questions:

� How do native and foreign residents experience their shared place ofresidence?

� What prevailing meaning does this place hold for each residential group?� In a social context, what is being created and what is being destroyed during the

process of residential tourist growth and development?

� What is the evolving nature of residents’ relationships with their place ofresidence?

The research is built on both an excellent analysis of the literature and a solid qual-itative research framework, outlined in detail in an appendix. (In fact, this appen-dix could be well-used in a course on field research methods.)

The book clearly describes both positive and negative impacts of residential tour-ism on this particular community and, by extension, potentially on other commu-nities. The author, however, does not glorify it as progressive development orcondemn it as wrongful destruction. McWatters concludes that ‘‘residential tourismis what it is: one of the many faces of ubiquitous and nebulous globalizing processesacting on a variety of levels to create new forms of social, cultural, and economicinteraction, greater interconnectedness, and significant transformations to ourmany notions of place and community’’ (p. 160). He argues that, by trying to under-stand the effects of residential tourism, positive change can be affected by promot-ing progressive outcomes while simultaneously highlighting and trying to minimizeundesirable outcomes. In particular, he posits two opportunities for promotingsuch outcomes: governmental policy that regulates real estate development in theseareas and provides funding and resources for local people faced with the impacts ofsuch development, and attempts to make residential tourists more aware of the real-ities of the landscape in which they have come to live and their impacts on it.

In contrast to many studies of tourism development that provide little informa-tion about the place being researched, this book presents the reader with a morethan adequate geography—in the old-fashioned sense of the term—of the district.It does, however, essentially fail visually. There is one map of western Panama, butit is poorly reproduced (possibly from the Internet), includes no scale, and doesnot locate the district with respect to the rest of the country. (One is left wonder-ing, for example, how the tourists travel to Boquete. If by plane, where is the air-port? If by road from Panama City, 500 km away, where is the highway?) There is,moreover, no map of the district itself, despite frequent references to local fea-tures, residential developments, roads, and so on. In addition, the author’s photo-graphs range from extremely interesting (e.g., locally-made signs protestingresidential development) to almost completely useless (e.g., a view of the ‘‘interior‘hidden valley’’’ that has no recognizable features).

These minor quibbles aside, McWatters has produced an excellent, well-writtenbook. It appears to be the result of his MA in Latin American Studies at TheUniversity of Texas at Austin where he is currently a doctoral student in Geography.If this is what he can produce from an MA, the results of his PhD are awaited withbated breath.

Paul F. Wilkinson: Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, Toronto, ON,Canada M3J 1P3. Email: <[email protected]>

REFERENCE

Kratz, E. F.2005 Paradise found: where to retire abroad. Fortune <http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/07/11/8265242/index.htm> (Retrieved18 January 2009).

Assigned 18 December 2008. Submitted 23 January 2009. Accepted 26 January 2009.

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.01.010




The Tourism Society’s Dictionary forthe Tourism Industry, 3rd Edition

Verite Reily Collins. CABI Publishing <www.cabi.org> 2008, ix + 150 pp(photos) $29.95 Pbk ISBN 978-1-84593-449-1

Wayne William SmithCollege of Charleston, USA

I have always wanted to brag to my friends and colleagues that I have read anentire dictionary. Now I can say I have done so, and I did it in less than two hours(at least the first time around)! The Tourism Society’s Dictionary for the TourismIndustry, 3rd Edition is an interesting piece of work. This eclectic book goes beyondproviding definitions, to including things such as the international radio alphabet,listings of countries around the world (with basic facts), weights and measures, andairline and airport codes. Add to that a description of idioms and illustrations andone is left with an odd but yet fascinating overview of the tourism sector.

One of the challenges to creating any dictionary is deciding which definitions touse. Consider the term, ‘‘ecotourism’’. The International Ecotourism Society’s(2008) definition of the term is, ‘‘responsible travel to natural areas that conservesthe environment and improves the well-being of local people.’’ Merriam-Webster(2008) defines ‘‘ecotourism’’ as ‘‘the practice of touring natural habitats in a man-ner meant to minimize ecological impact.’’ Fennell (2001) estimates there are, infact, at least 85 different definitions of ‘‘ecotourism’’. Given all these possiblechoices, The Tourism Society’s Dictionary for the Tourism Industry (2008) offers:

1. Destination-based visits/tours and considered to be small-scale tourismdevelopment, using local products and produce with a clear orientationto local flora and fauna. 2. Tours that do not disturb the local environ-ment whist producing income for areas. (p. 26)

While some variation from existing definitions is to be expected, this definitionis awkwardly constructed and it incorporates elements such as ‘‘small-scale’’ thatdo not appear in the most commonly used definitions of ecotourism.

Another example of a curious definition is the one offered for ‘‘tourism’’, itself.While the authors could have chosen to use the World Tourism Organization’s def-inition:

Tourism comprises the activities of persons traveling to and staying inplaces outside their usual environment for not more than one consecu-tive year for leisure, business, and other purposes. (UNWTO 1994)

They offer:temporary movement of people to destinations outside the places wherethey normally live and work generally for pleasure, although there is agrowing sector for business tourism, and the activities during their stayat these destinations. (p. 75)

The dictionary’s occasionally unique definitions may have been acceptable ifthere were a basis for them or some discussion of why the dictionary’s particularwording was adopted. However, there is no background or explanation of howany of the definitions were developed. While such a lack of explanation of the

rationale for specific definitions is consistent with other dictionaries, there are somany instances where the definition is sufficiently idiosyncratic that one begins towonder how the definition was developed.

As a result, this dictionary should not be considered to be an authoritative aca-demic reference. Overall, though, the book could lead to some excellent pub dis-cussions among tourism academics arguing about its definitions. Indeed, the textdid lead to some interesting discussions among my colleagues and me. We noted,for example, an apparent need for tourism academics to develop more terminol-ogy that begin with the letters X (4 entries), Y (8 entries), and Z (6 entries). Moreseriously, while The Tourism Society’s: Dictionary for the Tourism Industry, 3rd Edition isnot appropriate for classroom or scholarly purposes, it is enjoyable to read and haspotential that could yet be realized if some of the entries were based on moreestablished (and explicit) sources in future editions.

Wayne W. Smith: Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, College ofCharleston, Charleston, SC, USA 29424, E-mail: <[email protected]>

REFERENCES

Merriam-Webster2008 Ecotourism http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ecotourism (18December 2008).

The International Ecotourism Society2008 The International Ecotourism Society—Definitions & Principles—ecotourismhttp://www.ecotourism.org/webmodules/webarticlesnet/templates/eco_template.aspx?articleid=95&zoneid=2 (18 December 2008).

Fennell, D. A.2001 A Content Analysis of Ecotourism Definitions. Current Issues in Tourism4:403–414.

UNWTO1994 Recommendations on Tourism Statistics. Madrid: UNWTO.

Assigned 13 November 2008. Submitted 18 January 2009. Accepted 19 January 2009.

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.01.008

A Narrative Community: The Voicesof Israeli Backpackers

By Chaim Noy. Wayne State University Press, Detroit, Michigan, USA48201 <http://wsupress.wayne.edu> 2007, xii + 238 pp (appendices,references, subject index, author index) $29.95 Hbk. ISBN 978-0-8143-3176-7

Wendy HillmanCQUniversity, Australia

A Narrative Community: The Voices of Israeli Backpackers is part of the Raphael PataiSeries in Jewish Folklore and Anthropology of the Wayne State University Press. The



rationale for specific definitions is consistent with other dictionaries, there are somany instances where the definition is sufficiently idiosyncratic that one begins towonder how the definition was developed.

As a result, this dictionary should not be considered to be an authoritative aca-demic reference. Overall, though, the book could lead to some excellent pub dis-cussions among tourism academics arguing about its definitions. Indeed, the textdid lead to some interesting discussions among my colleagues and me. We noted,for example, an apparent need for tourism academics to develop more terminol-ogy that begin with the letters X (4 entries), Y (8 entries), and Z (6 entries). Moreseriously, while The Tourism Society’s: Dictionary for the Tourism Industry, 3rd Edition isnot appropriate for classroom or scholarly purposes, it is enjoyable to read and haspotential that could yet be realized if some of the entries were based on moreestablished (and explicit) sources in future editions.

Wayne W. Smith: Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, College ofCharleston, Charleston, SC, USA 29424, E-mail: <[email protected]>

REFERENCES

Merriam-Webster2008 Ecotourism http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ecotourism (18December 2008).

The International Ecotourism Society2008 The International Ecotourism Society—Definitions & Principles—ecotourismhttp://www.ecotourism.org/webmodules/webarticlesnet/templates/eco_template.aspx?articleid=95&zoneid=2 (18 December 2008).

Fennell, D. A.2001 A Content Analysis of Ecotourism Definitions. Current Issues in Tourism4:403–414.

UNWTO1994 Recommendations on Tourism Statistics. Madrid: UNWTO.

Assigned 13 November 2008. Submitted 18 January 2009. Accepted 19 January 2009.

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2008.07.006



A Narrative Community: The Voicesof Israeli Backpackers

By Chaim Noy. Wayne State University Press, Detroit, Michigan, USA48201 <http://wsupress.wayne.edu> 2007, xii + 238 pp (appendices,references, subject index, author index) $29.95 Hbk. ISBN 978-0-8143-3176-7

Wendy HillmanCQUniversity, Australia

A Narrative Community: The Voices of Israeli Backpackers is part of the Raphael PataiSeries in Jewish Folklore and Anthropology of the Wayne State University Press. The

book was written about the community of Israeli backpackers and the stories fromtheir journeys that form a foundation for their narratives. These narratives thenbecome part of a wider discourse surrounding travel and experiences or eventsthat changed the backpackers. In this case, the narratives were extracted from,and formed the basis of, the author’s PhD research, where he realised early inthe research that ‘‘the structure of the travel narratives was related to their con-tent’’ (p. vii). Therefore, A Narrative Community is about how the performancesof travel stories were socially produced. It examines how the performance of thenarratives produced particular effects on the listeners, the implications of thisfor the audiences who heard the narratives with regard to the particular ideologiesthat were promoted in the ‘‘specific discursive sociocultural context’’ (p. viii), andthe role the specific travel narratives played in these performances.

Furthermore, as it is widely held that tourism research does not have a ‘‘system-atic theoretical framework’’ (p. viii), this book seeks to rectify that position and toprovide the reader with a comprehensive contribution to ‘‘the particularities of thelanguage(s) of tourists’’ (p. viii). Thus, this book focuses on what is unique inIsraeli backpacker’s descriptions of their experiences.

Forty-four Israeli backpackers were interviewed upon their return from overseastravel. The book links the backpackers’ stories through textual analysis and thusserves as a form of interpersonal connectors where the voices of others persuasivelyweave the individuals into a closely bound tourist community, giving those whohave undertaken the ‘‘great journey’’ (as the author calls it) a sense of with com-munal authority and a sought-after sense of shared communal experience andbelonging. Within the context of this monograph, the Israeli backpacker experi-ence is a metaphor for an evangelistic, religious, or born-again rite of passage. Itis also a sociolinguistic journey observed through the lens of metalinguistics. Ulti-mately, it is also a narration itself.

Enthusiasts of Foucault, Bordieu, Barthes, Derrida, Goffman, Bakhtin, Simmel,Lucan, and Bauman will benefit from the theoretical linkages utilised throughoutthe work. Likewise, admirers of Cohen, Crang, Adler, Riley, Urry, Lash, Pearce,MacCannell, Dann, and Elsrud will be enthralled by the intricate weave of researchand related issues to backpacking experiences through the employment of connec-tions to their scholarly work on tourism in general and backpackers in particular.

This book is essentially about the narrative and discursive practices of the Israelibackpacking community and how this community performs the narratives of theirbackpacking journeys after they have returned from their ‘‘great journey’’. Themethod used to gain insight into the performances of the narratives is one of meta-discursive analysis, based on the framing of both the backpackers themselves andtheir travel experiences. ‘‘The book brings together knowledge and methods fromthe fields of linguistic anthropology, discourse analysis and communication’’ (p.ix) in which ethnographies of speech and performance are used to deconstructthe tales of backpacking experiences.

A Narrative Community is divided into nine chapters with an epilogue to concludethe book. It is also divided into ‘‘Sites’’ where the Introduction (Chapters One andTwo) form the first site. This section addresses how backpackers and others whohear their narrated travel stories are seduced into trying the journey for them-selves. Site two is comprised of the quotations of the backpackers who narrate theirtales of physical, mental, and personal growth. This section also provides quota-tions from their personal narrative journeys and provides an insight into the devel-opment of a backpacking narrative community. Site Three is the Conclusion,where the tales of transformation through privation, dedication, and perseveranceare brought to a close. Finally, the Epilogue draws all the narrative threads to-gether and presents us with a cohesive, self-transformed Israeli backpacking com-munity.


The book is clearly written and is logically presented in deconstructionist terms.The style and structure of the book is appropriate to the topic and sets out, withingenuity, the journey from lone backpacker to backpacker community, and allthe stages of growth and self-transformation or discovery in between. The descrip-tion of the creation of snowball stemmata (Appendix A) is appropriate to thebook, as it shows the reader how respondents were identified and the interviewsundertaken. The reference list, subject index, and author index will be helpfulin directing scholars to other relevant works.

This book will be an excellent text for use by researchers, scholars, and studentsof tourism and related studies who have more than a passing interest in the sub-culture of the backpacking community. While this book is specifically written aboutIsraeli backpackers, the findings can be applied to all backpacking communitiesand backpackers. This book is a worthwhile excavation into the life and drivingforce behind backpackers and their raison d’etre. I recommend this work to all thosewho research backpackers and their communities in any capacity.

Wendy Hillman: Department of Behavioural and Social Sciences, CQUniversity,Rockhampton, Queensland, 4702, Australia. Email: <[email protected]>

Assigned 18 November 2008. Review submitted: 14 January 2009. Accepted: 16 January 2009.

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2009.01.009

The Study of Tourism: Anthropologicaland Sociological Beginnings

Edited by Dennison Nash. Elsevier <http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/bookseriesdescription.cws_home/BS_TSSS/description > 2007xii + 305 pp (appendix, references, index) $120.00 Pbk. ISBN 978 0 08044240 2

Edward M. BrunerUniversity of Illinois, USA

This is the most interesting book on tourism that I have read in years. The aim ofthe volume is to trace the early development of tourism studies in anthropologyand sociology. The editor invited thirteen scholars to write personal histories ofhow they first got interested in tourism, to describe the institutional contexts inwhich their studies developed, to discuss the intellectual currents at the time,and to tell how their research has changed up to the present. Before the 70s, therewas no discernible anthropology or sociology of tourism, so what we have here is anaccount of the beginnings presented by the pioneers in the field, and in their ownwords.

The accounts are so fascinating to me not only because of what we learn aboutthe emergence of tourism studies, but also because of what they tell us about theinterplay of the personal and the conceptual. Life stories intersect with academic



The book is clearly written and is logically presented in deconstructionist terms.The style and structure of the book is appropriate to the topic and sets out, withingenuity, the journey from lone backpacker to backpacker community, and allthe stages of growth and self-transformation or discovery in between. The descrip-tion of the creation of snowball stemmata (Appendix A) is appropriate to thebook, as it shows the reader how respondents were identified and the interviewsundertaken. The reference list, subject index, and author index will be helpfulin directing scholars to other relevant works.

This book will be an excellent text for use by researchers, scholars, and studentsof tourism and related studies who have more than a passing interest in the sub-culture of the backpacking community. While this book is specifically written aboutIsraeli backpackers, the findings can be applied to all backpacking communitiesand backpackers. This book is a worthwhile excavation into the life and drivingforce behind backpackers and their raison d’etre. I recommend this work to all thosewho research backpackers and their communities in any capacity.

Wendy Hillman: Department of Behavioural and Social Sciences, CQUniversity,Rockhampton, Queensland, 4702, Australia. Email: <[email protected]>

Assigned 18 November 2008. Review submitted: 14 January 2009. Accepted: 16 January 2009.

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2008.07.006



The Study of Tourism: Anthropologicaland Sociological Beginnings

Edited by Dennison Nash. Elsevier <http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/bookseriesdescription.cws_home/BS_TSSS/description > 2007xii + 305 pp (appendix, references, index) $120.00 Pbk. ISBN 978 0 08044240 2

Edward M. BrunerUniversity of Illinois, USA

This is the most interesting book on tourism that I have read in years. The aim ofthe volume is to trace the early development of tourism studies in anthropologyand sociology. The editor invited thirteen scholars to write personal histories ofhow they first got interested in tourism, to describe the institutional contexts inwhich their studies developed, to discuss the intellectual currents at the time,and to tell how their research has changed up to the present. Before the 70s, therewas no discernible anthropology or sociology of tourism, so what we have here is anaccount of the beginnings presented by the pioneers in the field, and in their ownwords.

The accounts are so fascinating to me not only because of what we learn aboutthe emergence of tourism studies, but also because of what they tell us about theinterplay of the personal and the conceptual. Life stories intersect with academic

stories. Dennison Nash writes about his personal feeling of being an outsider, andhis intellectual life-long focus as a scholar has been on the stranger, the expatriate,and the tourist. Dean MacCannell gives us a brilliant and hilarious account of histeenage years and early development as a scholar, and he includes his dissertationproposal to study European tourism, from 1966! The proposal was rejected by histhesis committee at Cornell as too ambitious, which shows how outrageously con-servative professors can be, but many of the ideas in that proposal are more fullydeveloped in his 1976 classic, The Tourist. If I may add a side comment in thisreview, I say to Dean that yes, you are an anthropologist.

Jeremy Boissevain traces his lifelong love affair with Malta, and his shift from thepositive side of tourism impact back to the more negative side. Erik Cohendescribes how he ‘‘bumped into tourism’’ in his first anthropological fieldwork,where he at first ignored and even resented the tourists that intruded into hisresearch site, but later came to recognize their critical importance for his project.It was a serendipitous event that became a turning point in his professional life.Graham Dann presents a charming description of what he calls, ‘‘The life andtimes of a wandering tourism researcher’’. Nelson Graburn reports on the twistsand turns of his active career, and one comes to understand why Berkeley has be-come an international center for the anthropology of tourism.

Marie-Francoise Lanfant enlightens us about international tourism as a globalsystem, and explains the distressing intricacies of politics at her institution, theCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique. Malcolm Crick presents a movingdescription of his efforts at Deakin University to teach courses on tourism, to gettime off for research, and to obtain decent funding. Before completing an anthro-pological monograph on the community of Maldon, he lost his battle with cancerand passed away in 2006 at the young age of 58. The book is appropriately dedi-cated to his memory. Pierre L. van den Berghe’s chapter is filled with theoreticaland methodological insights, Michel Picard constructs a most sophisticated analy-sis of Balinese tourism, and there are also contributions by Jafar Jafari, ValeneSmith, and Margaret Byrne Swain.

The editor calls the contributors ‘‘informants’’, directs them ‘‘to keep explana-tions and interpretations to a minimum’’, and sees himself as the ethnographer pro-viding the master synthesis. Fortunately, most participants did not follow hisdirective, so we have rich, evocative, and in some cases, brutally honest accounts inwhich the contributors interpret themselves. The concluding chapters by the editorlack an engagement with the interplay of ideas and are thus not an intellectual his-tory, but this was not the editor’s purpose. The meat of the book is in the personalaccounts.

Many of the contributors write about the shift from ahistorical, positivist, struc-tural, and quantitative models of social analysis that had been so dominant in thesocial sciences at the beginning of their careers, to the more interpretative, quali-tative, constructivist, reflexive, and postmodern perspectives that came to be main-stream. Another theme along these lines is the tension between business-orientedmanagement concerns and more scientific theoretical work.

These thirteen authors should not be thought of as isolated individuals develop-ing tourism studies in their own fashion. Rather, they know each other, attend thesame meetings and important conferences—Mexico City in 1974, Marly-le-Roi in1986, Madrid in 1990, Berkeley in 2005—and most importantly, are influencedby and respond to each other’s work in dialogic interplay.

Some contributors correct misunderstandings of their work, which I appreciatedas I have been guilty of these misunderstandings. Nash makes it clear that althoughhe wrote about tourism as a form of imperialism, he is not a Marxist and, in fact,has long fought the Marxists in his department at Connecticut. Graburn empha-sizes that his work on tourism as a sacred journey was inspired not by Victor Turner


but by his Cambridge supervisor, Edmund Leach. MacCannell sets the recordstraight that he did not reduce the tourists’ quest to a ‘‘search for authenticity’’.For me, his clarification was convincing and I now have a better understandingof his position on authenticity.

In fact, I now have a better appreciation of the academic writings of all thesescholars after having read their narrative histories, as I have come closer to under-standing them as persons.

In conclusion, I want to present some data that I have gathered from DeborahWinslow, the Program Director for Cultural Anthropology at the National ScienceFoundation, which is a major source of research funding for anthropologists. Dur-ing the 1980–1986 period, there was no separate category for proposals to NSF fortourism studies, which means that either no proposals were submitted or they wereso few that no separate category was deemed necessary. Sixteen years later, in the2006–2007 period, 8.9% of the cultural anthropology submissions to NSF had atourism component, as did 7.1% of the awards granted (personal conversationMay 14, 2008). These amazing data point to the recent fluorescence of tourism re-search that augurs well for the future of the field, and must indeed be encouragingto the pioneering anthropology-sociology scholars who in the 70s took the first ten-tative steps to develop a new line of inquiry. We owe an immense debt to DennisonNash for bringing this important volume together.

Edward M. Bruner: Department of Anthropology, University of Illinois, 607 S.Mathews, Urbana, IL 61801, USA. Email <[email protected]>

Assigned 6 May 2008. Submitted 15 June 2008. Accepted 16 July 2008.

doi:10.1016/j.annals.2008.07.006


CALENDAR

2009

World Marketing CongressDate: July 22–25Location: Oslo, NorwayTheme: Marketing in Transition: Scar-city, Globalism, and Sustainability. Thecongress offers program tracks onTourism, and Services MarketingInformation: Academy of MarketingScience www.ams-web.org/

International CHRIE (annual confer-ence)Date: July 29–August 1Location: San Francisco CA, USATheme: Bridging the Visions of Hospi-tality and Tourism Education WorldwideInformation: Council on Hotel, Restau-rant and Institutional Education <www.chrie.org>

AIEST (annual conference)Date: August 23–27Location: Savonlinna, FinlandTheme: Management of Change inTourism: Creating Opportunities –Overcoming ObstaclesInformation: International Associationof Scientific Experts in Tourism www.aiest.org

Royal Geographical Society and theInstitute of British Geographers Con-ferenceDate: August 26–28Location: Manchester, UKTheme: The conference offers a sessionon Hospitality and RegenerationInformation: Peter Lugosi <[email protected]>

Advances in Tourism MarketingConferenceDate: September 7–9Location: Dorset, UKTheme: Innovations in TourismMarketingInformation: Alan Fyall <[email protected]>

British Academy of Management Con-ferenceDate: September 9–11Location: Brighton, UKTheme: The conference offers a trackon Hospitality, Leisure and TourismManagementInformation: <www.bam.ac.uk/conference2009>

‘‘Dickens and Tourism’’ ConferenceDate: September 11–14Location: Nottingham, UKInformation: <www.nottingham.ac.uk/ttri>

This department lists conferences and sessions of interest to the academiccommunity. All relevant announcements should be sent directly to the CalendarEditor, Honggen Xiao <[email protected]>. Since the dates or locationsof conferences are subject to change, interested individuals are advised toconsult the listed information sources.


doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(09)00084-Xwww.elsevier.com/locate/atoures

550

International Conference on TourismDevelopment and ManagementDate: September 11–14Location: Kos Island, GreeceTheme: Tourism in a Changing World:Prospects and ChallengesInformation: <www.ictdm.net>

Merkur International Conference onLeisure and Tourism GeographyDate: September 18–19Location: Karlsruhe, GermanyTheme: Developments of Tourism,Leisure, and Recreation in LowMountain RangesInformation: <www.tourismc-futures.org/>

Tourism and the Third Sector: Releas-ing the PotentialDate: September 18–20Location: Neuchatel, SwitzerlandInformation: <www.edutf.org/conference>

IATUR (annual conference)Date: September 23–25Location: Lueneburg, GermanyTheme: The conference offers trackson Leisure; and Environment, Geogra-phy and TravellingInformation: International Associationfor Time Use Research <www.leuphana.de/ffb/iatur2009>

International Conference on CentralEurope and Tourism CompetitivenessDate: September 24–26Location: Veszprem, HungaryInformation: <www.gtk.uni-pannon.hu/tourism.competitiveness>

International Congress on AccessibleTourismDate: September 29–October 1Location: Vienna, AustriaTheme: SMEs Delivering Sustainableand Competitive Tourism for AllInformation: <www.enatcongress2009.info/en/doc/enat_welcome>

Chinese Heritage and Tourism in Aus-tralia and the PacificDate: October 9–11Location: Victoria, AustraliaTheme: Dragon Tails: Re-interpretingChinese-Australian HeritageInformation: <[email protected]>

TTRA Canada (annual conference)Date: October 14–16Location: Guelph ON, CanadaTheme: Away from the Mainstream:Niche Tourism in Urban Fringes, RuralRoads, Cultural Quarters, and Emer-ging DestinationsInformation: Travel and TourismResearch Association-Canada <www.ttracanada.ca>

Destination Development and BrandingConferenceDate: October 14–17Location: Eilat, IsraelInformation: Shaul Krakover <[email protected]>

International Tourism Biennial Confer-enceDate: October 14–17Location: Canakkale, TurkeyTheme: Marketing the Past – Managingthe FutureInformation: <http://tourismbiennial.org/index.php/contact>

ISTTE (annual conference)Date: October 14–18Location: San Antonio TX, USAInformation: International Society ofTravel and Tourism Educators <www.istte.org>

NRPA Leisure Research SymposiumDate: October 14–18Location: Salt Lake City UT, USAInformation: National Recreation andPark Association <www.nrpa.org>

Calendar / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 550–553 551

International Network of Research intoTourism, Cooperation and Develop-ment ConferenceDate: October 15–16Location: Tarragona, SpainInformation: Damia Serrano <[email protected]>

EuroCHRIE (annual conference)Date: October 22–24Location: Helsinki, FinlandInformation: European Council onHotel, Restaurant and InstitutionalEducation <www.eurochrie2009.fi>

Nordic Symposium in Tourism andHospitality ResearchDate: October 22–25Location: Esbjerg, DenmarkTheme: Tourism and Hospitality: TheNordic WayInformation: <www.sdu.dk/om_sdu/institutter_centre/c_tik/nordic_sympo-sium2009.aspx?sc_lang=en>

International Conference on Cities asCreative Spaces for Cultural TourismDate: November 19–21Location: Istanbul, TurkeyInformation: <www.ccsct-ist.com>

Asian Academy for Heritage Manage-ment ConferenceDate: December 1–3Location: Macau, ChinaTheme: Urban Heritage and Tourism:Challenges and OpportunitiesInformation: <www.ift.edu.mo/news/aahm2009/themes.htm>

International Conference on Destina-tion Branding and MarketingDate: December 2–4Location: Macau, ChinaInformation: Dino Couto <[email protected]>

International Tourism ConferenceDate: December 8–11Location: Bridgetown, Barbados

Theme: Beyond the Boundary: CreatingNew Epistemologies in TourismInformation: Sherma Roberts <[email protected]>

IATE (biennial conference)Date: December 11–13Location: Chang Mai, ThailandInformation: International Associationfor Tourism Economics <www.iate2009.org>

Cross Cultural Research ConferenceDate: December 13–16Location: Puerto Vallarta, MexicoInformation: <http://marketing.byu.edu/htmlpages/ccrs/ccs.htm>

2010

ANZALS (biennial conference)Date: February 2–4Location: Brisbane, AustraliaTheme: Exploring New Ideas and NewDirectionsInformation: Australian and NewZealand Association of Leisure Studies<www.staff.vu.edu.au/anzals/ANZALS-journal-authors.htm>

CAUTHE (annual conference)Date: February 9–12Location: Tasmania, AustraliaTheme: Tourism and Hospitality: Chal-lenge the LimitsInformation: Council of AustralianUniversities in Tourism and HospitalityEducation <www.cauthe.com.au/2010Conference.htm>

World Conference for GraduateResearch in Tourism, Hospitality andLeisureDate: May 25–30Location: Cappadocia, TurkeyInformation: Metin Kozak <[email protected]>

Calendar / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 550–553552

ISA World Congress of SociologyDate: July 11–17Location: Gothenburg, SwedenTheme: Sociology on the Move. Thecongress offers thematic sessions onSociology of Leisure and InternationalTourismInformation: International SociologicalAssociation <www.isa-sociology.org/congress2010/rc/index.htm>

World Leisure CongressDate: August 28–September 2Location: Chuncheon, KoreaInformation: <www.worldleisure2010.org>

Calendar / Annals of Tourism Research 36 (2009) 550–553 553

Annals of Tourism Research_Volume 36 , No.3 , 2009

Documents

Transcript of Annals of Tourism Research_Volume 36 , No.3 , 2009