| 1. |
- Abbasian, Saeid, 1961-, et al.
(författare)
-
Swedish Travellers‘ attitudes towards Overtourism in cities : an exploratory research
- 2023
-
Ingår i: 31st Nordic Symposium on Tourism and Hospitality Research. - Östersund : Mid Sweden University. - 9789189786370 ; , s. 131-134
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction and literature reviewOvertourism as a sustainability sissue for different tourism stakeholers (Milano et al, 2022;Santos-Rojo et al., 2023) inside and outside destinations has been very explored duringrecent decade. Most earlier studies on the topic have either touched upon localstakeholders on the destination and locals‘ tourismphobia has been frequently mentionedby authors (see e.g. Verissimo et al., 2020; Yrigoy et al., 2023). In the literature, oertourismhas been associated with seasonality, i.e. it happens almost entirely in a peak season(mostly during the summer) and not year round (see e.g. Yrigoy et al., 2023; Ghaderi et al.,2022). From initially having had a focus on some specific coastal European urbandestinations such as Barcelona, Venice and Dubrovnik in many studies (see e.g. Verissimoet al., 2020) the recent years‘ research also has included rural remote places worldwide forinvestigations (see e.g. Eckert et al., 2019; Ghaderi et al., 2022; Lundmark et al, 2020) as wellas new urban destinations that earlier have been unknown as places for overtourism (seee.g. Fedyk et al., 2023).Most earlier attitude investigations on overtourism have had a focus on the destinationsand their local residents and stakeholders (see.e.g. Kim and Kang, 2020; Kuscer and Mihalic,2019). Despites few studies during recent years (e.g. Kainthola et al., 2021)tourists‘ perspective and attitudes on the issue has been less visible in the research.Especially, a lack of knowledge on travellers comming from tourist generating nations orregions and their attitudes towards overtourism in city destinations has been obviouslyinvisible. Thus, the purpose of this research is to fill this gap for Sweden and Swedishtravellers to city destionations. This will be our contribution to existing body of researchon the issue. Following research questions will be answered in this paper:–How Swedish travellers define, perceive and reason around the phenomenon ofoertourism in city destinations?132–What kind of solutions to the problem is suggested by them?MethodologyThis study is explorative in its nature and is based an online survey. The authors initiallyadopted a predominantly quantitative approach to reach a large number of respondents tocater to representativeness (Bryman 2016). Thus, several questions and comment optionswere also purposely given to the respondents to get deeper insigts of their attitudes andperceptions of the topic. The survey that contained 15 questions was firstly screened forethical issues by the host university. The authors guaranteed total anonymity to therespondents through considering the European GDPR (General Data ProtectionRegulation) that concerns protect of personal issues in research. Then the survey waspublished at tens of Swedish social forums (public and private pages on Linkedin andFacebook). After two months (February- March 2023) and several reminders we got 370completed surveys.Preliminary FindingsA look at the sample shows that 55% of the respondens (202 individuals) are women andthe rest are men. A predominat majority of them (74%) are older than 40 year and they areeither employed (56%), retired (31%), students (9%) or others (4%) and a predominantmajority (83%) of them has postseconday/academic education. Over 70% of them state thatthey travel abroad twice or more each year, and 54% has travelled to abroad more than 16times during last ten years. A majority answers that they have good knowledge onovertourism and almost all of them define the term with their own words. Also theydescribe typical examples of situations of ourtourism that they have been witnessses to.Based on their experiences they mention many urban destinations in the world that theyperceived as places with ourtourism. This includes already known places as well as notexpected places, major metropolitain areas as well as small less known towns and specificareas or districts in urban regions. 75% of the respondents beleive that overtourism is aproblem and they point to many enviromental issues, tentions, crimiality, increased prices,negative tourism experiences, etcetera that are linked to overtourism. 25% of therespondents that would not consider it as a problem reason among other things thatovertourism is a temporary phenomenon during short time of peak season, that this is goodfor the destinations economy and standard of living, it facilitates cultural encounters,etcetera. Those that beleive overtourism is a problem suggest as solution more research,knowledge to the general public, quota system, regulations, restrictions, seasonprolongation, etcetera.133Preliminary ConclusionsThe respondents in this research point to a very complex phenomenon with multifacettedproblems as the consequence and that also needs to be solved in a multifacetted way withdifferent actors/stakeholder both in tourist generating regions and in tourist receivingregions i.e. destinations exposed by overtourism. As a part of the respondents mean, onecannot prevent people to travel but people can get important and necessary help beforedeparture but also at the destinations to enjoy the travel without being harmful tothemselves, to other tourists, residents and to the sensitive historical sites and naturalenvironments.ReferencesBryman, A. (2016). Social research methods. Oxford, England: Oxford university press.Eckert, C., Zacher, D., Pechlaner, H., Namberger, P., & Schmude, J. (2019). Strategies andmeasures directed towards overtourism: a perspective of European DMOs. InternationalJournal of Tourism Cities, 5(4), 639–655.Fedyk, W., Sltysik, M., Rolczynski, T., Taheri, B., Borzyszkowski, J., and Okumus, F.(2023), Overtourism in a City Destination from the Perspective of Entrepreneurs:Evidence from Wroclaw, Poland, Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism 14 (2),pp. 442- 457.Ghaderi, Z, Hall, M.C., and Ryan, C. (2022), Overtourism, residents and Iranian ruralvillages: Voices from a developing country, Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism Vol.37, 100487.Kainthola, S., Tiwari, P., & Chowdhary, N. R. (2021). Overtourism to zero tourism:Changing tourists’ perception of crowding post COVID-19. Journal of Spatial andOrganizational Dynamics, 9(2), 115-137.Kim, S., and Kang, Y. (2020), Why do residents in an overtourism destination developanti-tourist attitudes? An exploration of residents’ experience through the lens of thecommunity-based tourism, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research Vol. 25, Issue 8, pp. 858-876.Kuscer, K., and and Mihalic, T. (2019), Residents’ Attitudes towards Overtourism fromthe Perspective of Tourism Impacts and Cooperation—The Case of Ljubljana,Sustainability 11, 1823.Lundmark, L., Müller, D. K., & Bohn, D. (2020). Arctification and the paradox ofovertourism in sparsely populated areas. Dipping in to the north: Living, working andtraveling in sparsely populated areas, 349-371.134Milano, C., Novelli, M., and Cheer, J.M. (2022), Overtourism. In Buhalis, D (Ed),Encyclopedia of Tourism Management and Marketing, pp. 413-416. Elgar onlineSantos-Rojo, C., Llopis-Amorós, M., and García-García, J.M. (2023), Overtourism andsustainability: A bibliometric study (2018–2021), Technological Forecasting & Social Change188, 122285.Veríssimo, M., Moraes, M., Breda, Z., Guizi, A., & Costa, C. (2020). Overtourism andtourismphobia: A systematic literature review. Tourism: An International InterdisciplinaryJournal, 68(2), 156-169.Yrigoy, I., Horrach, P., Escudero, L., & Mulet, C. (2023). Co-opting overtourism: tourismstakeholders’ use of the perceptions of overtourism in their power struggles. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1-17.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Andersson Cederholm, Erika, et al.
(författare)
-
The servitization of game meat: recreational hunting in-between wildlife care and holistic tourist experiences
- 2023
-
Ingår i: 31st Nordic Symposium on Tourism and Hospitality Research – Book of Abstracts. - 9789189786370
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and aim The paper is based on a study of hunting tourism enterprising in Sweden. The paper demonstrates how game meat is ascribed different, sometimes conflicting values in the moral economy of commercial hunting and identifies an emerging process of servitization of the game meat. Recreational hunting in Sweden can be described as embedded in two different but overlapping cultural and socio-economic contexts. One is the traditional non-commercial and stewardship-oriented form of hunting, folk hunting or ‘allmoge’ hunting. It is characterised by a democratic hunting tradition, where the local hunting team is ascribed a main role in wildlife management. These teams often include the landowner, or the landowner may receive either monetary compensation or a proportion of the meat as payment. Another form is the commercial form of hunting, where hunting is packaged and offered to visiting hunters, quite often with services such as accommodation and food included. These different contexts underpin how the value of hunting is being described by hunters themselves; as wildlife care, subsistence hunting (for meat), community togetherness, cultural heritage, recreation, sport, holistic nature experience, or as a sustainable lifestyle consumption (where the game meat is the main ingredient). The differing values and descriptions of hunting reflects the increasingly multifaceted social characteristics of hunters. Due to demographic factors and urbanization, an increasing number of hunters do not have hunting family background and do not have access to land based on ownership or personal networks. New groups of hunters (including an increasing number of women) form a potential tourism market since they are travelling elsewhere for recreational hunting and are often consuming hunting experiences in a packaged form. Consequently, an increasing proportion of hunters may not be socialized in a subsistence-oriented form of recreational hunting where taking care of the meat is a locally based tradition and common knowledge. The tradition of consuming and circulating game meat, which is common in traditional community hunting, may be facing a social and cultural shift, in line with new hunting traditions and practices emerging with new groups of hunters, and a potential marketization of game meat experiences.The aim of the paper is to highlight different values related to game meat in connection to hunting, and to discuss the tensions embedded in these values. In particular, the study focuses on the ambiguous character of the hunting experience product, the process of commodifying hunting experiences and how the game meat are becoming servitized in this process. MethodologyThe study is based on ethnographic interviews with 30 operators/owners of hunting businesses based in Sweden, observations of hunting events, and document analysis of hunting media. By analysing the interviewees accounts, we focus on the mode in which the social reality is explained, narrated and justified (Scott & Lyman, 1968). In this mode, we can also discern many different voices or counternarratives in the interviewees’ accounts as they relate to various, sometimes conflicting, positions and opinions of other stakeholders, such as customers, competitors, authorities, landowners, as well as the public.Theory and preliminary results: The role of meat in the moral economy of recreational huntingIn the Nordic countries, such as Sweden and Denmark, the public is generally supportive of recreational hunting, particularly if it has a utilitarian dimension and if the meat is considered being taken care of (Gamborg & Söndergaard Jensen, 2017; Kagervall, 2014; Ljung, Riley, & Ericsson, 2015; Willebrand, 2009). However, commercialization of hunting is a controversial area, also among hunters themselves. Studies from Norway (Oian & Skogen, 2016) and Finland (Nygård & Uthardt, 2011) and a comparison between Finland and Scotland (Watts, Matilainen, Kurki, & Keskinarkaus, 2017) have shown a similar pattern of ‘frictional resistance’ (Watts et al., 2017) in the local and dominant hunting culture towards hunting tourism. Also studies in Swedish contexts (Dahl & Sjöberg, 2010; Gunnarsdotter, 2005; Kagervall, 2014; Willebrand, 2009) point at a similar direction and have highlighted an ambivalence among hunters towards commercial hunting tourism. In previous publications, we have analysed how these differing, sometimes oppositional, views and traditions among hunters is related to different logics and forms of exchange, highlighting a tension between different value spheres (Andersson Cederholm & Sjöholm, 2020, 2021, 2022). The ‘allmoge’ hunting is in general terms organised by local communities of hunters or through ‘friendship hunting’ a reciprocal relationship where friends are invited to hunt with a team, and the meat is circulated among the hunters and their families. The other is market-oriented, arranging hunting events for visitors/tourists, with differing range of price depending on the segment. These two systems represent different value spheres that both intersect and collide, creating tensions and ambiguity. This is a tension that may be even reinforced considering the circumstance that hunting, as a consumptive form of wildlife tourism (cf. Lovelock, 2008), highlights ethical aspects and can thus be considered to be a morally-contested area (Cohen, 2014; von Essen, 2018). The analysis departs from literature in economic sociology on the moral economy (cf. Thompson, 1971) and the notion of ‘peculiar goods’ – a specific type of commodity that evokes moral doubt or ambiguity when commodified (Fourcade, 2011). This is the kind of goods that must find legitimacy as ‘products’ (Beckert & Aspers, 2011). This present paper builds on previous analyses and investigates how experiences of game meat are being narrated and promoted by hunting operators as well as hunters themselves. In particular, the paper discusses how the notion of sustainable meat is being servitized, that is, promoted and packaged as an experience to be consumed. For instance, there are emerging entrepreneurial activities related to the game meat initiated by small businesses such as events and courses in cutting meat as well as meal experiences that includes hunting, preparing and cooking the meat. These initiatives can also be seen among non-commercial actors such as local hunting associations. It is demonstrated how the concept “servitization” (Vandermerwe & Rada, 1988) may explain and point at emerging forms of hunting tourism services with the meat as the focal point, while simultaneously shed light on the delicate balancing work and ongoing negotiations in a moral economy where economic values are intertwined and balanced towards social and moral values. ReferencesAndersson Cederholm, Erika & Carina Sjöholm (2022). Jaktturism – ett delikat balansarbete i en komplex ekonomi. RIG Kulturhistorisk tidskrift, nr 3: 129-146. Andersson Cederholm, E., & Sjöholm, C. (2021). The tourism business operator as a moral gatekeeper – the relational work of recreational hunting in Sweden. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2021.1922425 Andersson Cederholm, E., & Sjöholm, C. (2020). Decommodification as a socially embedded practice: The example of lifestyle enterprising in animal-based tourism. In M. Hall, L. Lundmark, & J. J. Zhang (Eds.), Degrowth and Tourism: New Perspectives on Tourism Entrepreneurship, Destinations and Policy. London and New York: Routledge.Beckert, J., & Aspers, P. (Eds.). (2011). The Worth of Goods: Valuation and Pricing in the Economy. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Cohen, E. (2014). Recreational Hunting: Ethics, Experiences and Commoditization. Tourism Recreation Research, 39(1). Fourcade, M. (2011). Cents and Sensibility: Economic Valuation and the Nature of “Nature”. American Journal of Sociology, 116(6), 1721-1777. Gamborg, C., & Söndergaard Jensen, F. (2017). Attitudes towards recreational hunting: A quantitative survey of the general public in Denmark. Journal of Outdoor Recreaton and Tourism, 17, 20-28. Gunnarsdotter, Y. (2005). Från Arbetsgemenskap till Fritidsgemenskap: Den svenska landsbygdens omvandling ur Locknevis perspektiv. (Doctoral thesis). Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala. Kagervall, A. (2014). On the conditions for developing hunting and fishing tourism in Sweden. (Doctoral thesis). Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå. Ljung, P. E., Riley, S. J., & Ericsson, G. (2015). Game Meat Consumption Feeds Urban Support of Traditional Use of Natural Resources. Society & Natural Resources, 28(6), 657-669.Lovelock, B. (Ed.) (2008). Tourism and the Consumption of Wildlife: Hunting, Shooting and Sport Fishing. New York: Routledge. Nygård, M., & Uthardt, L. (2011). Opportunity or Threat? Finnish Hunters´ Attitudes to Hunting Tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(3), 383-401. Oian, H., & Skogen, K. (2016). Property and Possession: Hunting Tourism and the Morality of Landownership in Rural Norway. Society & Natural Resources, 29(1), 104-118. Scott, B. M., & Lyman, M. S. (1968). Accounts. American Sociological Review, 33(1), 46-62. Thompson, E. P. (1971). The Moral Economy of the English Crowd in the Eighteenth Century. Past & Present (50), 76-136. Vandermerwe, S. & Rada, J. (1988). Servitization of Business: Adding Value by Adding Services. European Management Journal, 6(4), 314-324.von Essen, E. (2018). The impact of modernization on hunting ethics: Emerging taboos among contemporary Swedish hunters. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 23(1), 21-38. Watts, D., Matilainen, A., Kurki, S. P., & Keskinarkaus, S. (2017). Hunting cultures and the ´northern periphery´: Exploring their relationship in Scotland and Finland. Journal of Rural Studies, 54, 255-265. Willebrand, T. (2009). Promoting hunting tourism in north Sweden: opinions of local hunt
|
|
| 4. |
- Andersson, Göran, 1953-
(författare)
-
City tourism development : Based on institutional governance and a new structure for Destination Management Organisations
- 2023
-
Ingår i: 31st Nordic Symposium on Tourism and Hospitality Research. - Östersund : Mid Sweden University. - 9789189786370 ; , s. 235-239
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundIn Sweden there is a debate how urban areas can be planned compared with the societal context in the future. An important starting point is that city destinations are very attractive for visitors (Maitland & Ritchie, 2009). In addition, in Stockholm there has been a discussion for several years how to cooperate and organise the whole region more efficiently concerning tourism and the tourism and travel industry. In a development project “Besökskraft” in Stockholm a new sort of destination organisation and governance is investigated on a regional level. It is led by “Region Stockholm” and its regional development office. A formal project organisation is developed using a steering committee, a project group, a main working group and several reference groups. The project is financed by EU and internally by the regional development office.Research purposeThe research purpose is to investigate and analyse how institutional governance and Destination Management Organisations (DMO) can support the development of city visitor destinations based on reasons for visitors´ travel. The following six analysis themes are used: City and sub city areas, Governance principles, Destination development areas, Actor networks, Destination Management Organisation (DMO) and Positioning based on travel motivation.Research methodThe first project phase of the development project “Besökskraft” is November 2022 – October 2023. This will be studied, but the plan is to follow the project for three more years. The chosen destination case is the Stockholm county region. As a “companion researcher” I am conducting a case study based on action research using a regional planning perspective. As sub methods interviews, workshops, observation, action studies, webpage investigations and destination report studies are being used. This paper can be considered as a progress report.City and sub city areasIn Stockholm centre there are eight regional cities and in addition a large peri-urban area (Stockholm county council, 2018). This is a foundation for empowered communities and place prosperity, which is discussed in the long-term regional plan RUFS 2050. It i important to find typical functions for these regional cities in order to use the strengths of the place. The functions is closely related to visitors’ travel motivations. This is discussed in the project during 2023. Furthermore, the responsible tourist behaviour will be considered, such as overtourism in cities.Governance principlesOverall governance principles have been discussed in the development project. For example, Hall (2011) has identified four types of governance: Hierarchies, markets, networks and communities, and Cizel, Ajanovic and Cakar (2015) propose that stakeholders´ ideas related to destination governance in Antalya were extracted under three main themes: shared vision, goal congruence and interaction. Bellini & Pasquinelli (2017) propose that cities are developed with their suburbs by specific actor groups, such as the tourist and travel industry through innovation, entrepreneurship etc. However, the overall governance principles, will be developed in the second phase of the project in 2024.Destination development areasAs a starting point the question “What to DO within the region of Stockholm county?” has been used in the development project. The idea has been to find possible working areas and later on to discuss the planned destination organization. Therefore, during the first destination workshop twelve important development areas were identified for the region. After an analysis by the project group three starting development areas have been chosen: competence, infrastructure and positioning. In the next phase about ten more development areas will be chosen. In order to find potential development areas benchmarking with other destination has been conducted. Besides the Smart City Concept could give new ideas in the development project in later phases. For example, Smart City Sweden (2022) proposed that with economic rethinking the areas: climate, energy & environmental, mobility, digitalisation, urban planning and social sustainability could be used.Actor networksThe destination project uses the quadruple-helix method. The general principle is about collaboration between four actor groups: government, industry, research institutes and society. In Stockholm these destination actor groups are related to each other in a complex network. Andersson (2016) has developed an analysis model of the tourism department’s network, where the following six network content dimensions were found during the literature review: stakeholders, reciprocal relations, relation exchange, network driving forces, network management and purpose. One can also ask who has potential how to take the lead position and if there should be a top-down or bottom-up planning approach in the region. Wray (2015) support that the state should take a lead position in managing and coordinating destination stakeholder activities related to tourism product and experience development, destination marketing and management, and sustainable tourism planning. So far the regional office has taken the lead position, but all actors are aware of that only guidance can be used.Destination Management Organisation (DMO)The destination and its network is complex and dynamic. Therefore, DMOs are an important organisational unit. The DMOs need to embrace and engage all bodies (public and private) who are concernd with actions that engage the industry to develop and to improve supply (Spyriadis, Fletcher & Fyall, 2013). There are different levels within the region’s destination structure. On the one hand there is a local destination organisation which has a physical representation task and it works with concrete business products. On the other hand, there is a regional destination organisation which has a digital representation task and it works with supporting activities for tourism. During the development project about 20 more formal DMOs have participated in focus group interviews. It is obvious that local DMOs is really working with local products and individual tourist. However, the biggest DMO owned by the municipality of Stockholm has already taken marketing and planning initiatives which often cover the whole Stockholm region. Therefore, it has to be a coordination of working areas for Visit Stockholm and a planned overall regional DMO.Positioning based on travel motivationThe character of the destination will give some ideas about visitors’ travel motivation. In addition, these travel motivations have to be prerequisites for destination trademarks in relation to the destination image. Within the development project this development are visitors. Furthermore, some cities’ conditions are associated with both positive and negative image, but they have still a great potential (Andersson & Abbasian, 2018). Attractive image of city and regional centres with positioned city tourism products is a prerequisite for new destination structure and actors.Tentative conclusionsThis is the first preliminary research report and the project will continue until at least December 2024. However, some tentative conclusions can be proposed. Within the actor groups in Stockholm there is a positive attitude to a new formal regional destination organisation, even though there are several questions about it: such as financing and the organisations’ objectives. Connected to the development project in Stockholm several governance principles will be discussed in later reports, such as the use of the quadruple principles in the destination network. Furthermore, the role of different DMOs will be discussed and their relations to the whole city and sub-cities. There is also a consensus on what development areas are important to start to work with in Stockholm, such as transportation. A model of different development areas, city area structure and related destination organisation questions will be developed.ReferencesAndersson, G. (2016). An analysis model of tourism academic networks: a Swedish case study triangulated with an EU research project. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism, 16(3), 195-212.Andersson, G., & Abbasian, S. (2018). Analysis Dimensions of City Destination Character and Image Positioning. Almatourism-Journal of Tourism, Culture and Territorial Development, 9(17), 33-54.Cizel, B., Ajanovic, E., & Cakar, K. (2016). Prerequisites for effective and sustainable destination governance. Anatolia, 27(2), 155-166.Hall, M. (2011). A typology of governance and its implications for tourism policy analysis, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19:4-5, 437-457.Maitland, R., & Ritchie, B. (Eds.). (2009). City tourism: National capital perspectives. Cabi.Mehraliyev, F., Cheng Chu Chan, I., Choi, Y., Ali Koseoglu, M., & Law, R. (2020). A stateof-the-art review of smart tourism research, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 37:1, 78- 91.Rivera, J. P. R., Gutierrez, E. L. M., & Roxas, F. M. Y. (2022). Re-thinking governance in tourism: Harnessing tourism’s post-COVID-19 economic potential. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 1-27.Stockholm county council. (2018). Regional Development Plan for Stockholm – RUFS 2050.Wray, M. (2015). Drivers of change in regional tourism governance: a case analysis of the influence of the New South Wales Government, Australia, 2007–2013, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(7), 990- 1010.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
