Tourism Agility in Times of Crisis and Uncertainty 1 E-Book

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Fachliteratur
• Serie: ISTE Invoiced
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 282

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2025

Beschreibung

In times of crisis and uncertainty, tourism suffers multiple transformations such as societal, ecological, technological, and political changes, among many others. Beyond the cyclical adjustments, these upheavals call for agility on the part of tourism territories and organizations at various levels.

Tourism Agility in Times of Crisis and Uncertainty 1 proposes a multidisciplinary approach to questioning tourism agility in terms of uncertainty, technology and society. This first volume analyzes various discourses around the notion of major crises, proposing agile responses for a different kind of tourism, mixing theoretical solutions and management approaches, while addressing the question of resilience within the tourism sector. Reflections revolve around the digital skills of companies, while agile vectors – linking artificial intelligence and the quest for meaning – are also examined.

Finally, the societal and social approach to tourism agility highlights the crucial issues of relations between tourists and locals, as well as the contemporary dynamics of visitor–host interactions in the context of agritourism.

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Cover

Table of Contents

Title Page

Copyright Page

Foreword

The evolution of destinations and the creation of trajectories

Uncertainty and the adaptation processes of destinations

The complexity of destinations and the challenge of resilience

Agility as a guiding principle for the governance of complex destinations towards resilience

Acknowledgments

References

Acknowledgments

Introduction to the Authors of the Two Volumes

Introduction

References

PART 1: Contextualization and Analyses in Times of Uncertainty

1 Tourism in the Local and National Press: Study of the Impact on the Pre- and Post-Covid Discourse

1.1. Introduction

1.2. Between health crisis and local anchoring: recent development in representations of tourism mediated by the journalistic discourse

1.3. Change as a constant: representations of tourism through crises of contemporary society

1.4. Conclusion

1.5. References

2 Covid-19 Health Crisis and Tourism: Analyses in the 2020–2022 Francophone Scientific Literature

2.1. Introduction

2.2. A global pandemic as a disruptive factor and questions

2.3. Research methodology

2.4. Analysis of the results of the selected journals (Espaces 2020, 2022 and Téoros 2020)

2.5. Conclusion

2.6. References

3 Toward A Different Tourism? Theoretical Solutions to Consider, Avenues to Explore

3.1. From overtourism to sustainable tourism? Rethinking performance indicators

3.2. From overtourism to sustainable tourism? Rethinking the messages to convey

3.3. Conclusion

3.4. References

4 Resilience of a Tourist Destination in the Post-Covid-19 Era: The Case of Val d’Europe Agglomération

4.1. Introduction

4.2. Theoretical framework: the adaptive resilience of an urban tourist destination

4.3. Post-Covid Val d’Europe: framework for participatory observation

4.4. Conclusion

4.5. References

PART 2: Tourism Agility: Between Technology and Society

5 Identification of Digital Skills: A Study of Peruvian Tourist Businesses

5.1. Introduction

5.2. Theoretical framework

5.3. Contextual framework

5.4. Methodology

5.5. Results and conclusions

5.6. References

6 Artificial Intelligence and the Search for Meaning in Support of Marketing Agility in Tourism

6.1. From marketing agility to sense-making in the tourism sector

6.2. Sensemaking

6.3. From open data to Datatourisme

6.4. The contributions of AI to data processing

6.5. The limitations of learning methods

6.6. Sensemaking to bring meaning to AI results

6.7. Conclusion

6.8. References

7 Relationship to Otherness: The Role of Interactions Between Tourists and the Inhabitants of a Territory

7.1. Introduction

7.2. Context and issue

7.3. Inhabitant–tourist–place: the relationship with otherness

7.4. The approach

7.5. Conclusion

7.6. References

8 Reconciling Tourism and Agricultural Agility: On-Farm Activities and “Agritourists”

8.1. Introduction

8.2. Literature review

8.3. Methodological approach

8.4. Results and discussion

8.5. Conclusion

8.6. References

Conclusion

C.1. Tourism, territories and actors: from adaptation to agility

C.2. References

List of Authors for the Two Volumes

Index

Summary of Volume 2

Other titles from iSTE in Science, Society and New Technologies

End User License Agreement

List of Tables

Chapter 1

Table 1.1. Dimensions of the principal corpus by publication year of articles ...

Chapter 2

Table 2.1. Word recurrence for all 12 Espaces articles from 2020

1

Table 2.2. Tourism and Covid-19 in Francophone literature: extract from the th...

Table 2.3. Word recurrence for all 18 Téoros articles from 2020

2

Table 2.4. Tourism and Covid-19 in Francophone literature: extract from the th...

Table 2.5. Word recurrence for all 16 Les Cahiers Espaces articles from 2020

3

...

Table 2.6. Tourism and Covid-19 in Francophone literature: extract from the th...

Table 2.7. Distribution of vision results in analyzed articles

Chapter 3

Table 3.1. Evaluation grid for actions (GRI 2016)

Chapter 4

Table 4.1. Implementation of the territorial brand “VDE fields of opportunitie...

Chapter 5

Table 5.1. The new elements of digital competency (Bonnet and Westerman 2020)...

Table 5.2. Digital competencies (Radigital 2021)

Chapter 8

Table 8.1. Sample characteristics

Table 8.2. Preferred environment in an agritourism experience

List of Illustrations

Chapter 1

Figure 1.1. Intertextual distance according to year (calculated based on forms...

Figure 1.2. Intertextual distance according to newspapers (calculated based on...

Figure 1.3. Terms specific to the pre- (2017–2019) and post-Covid (2020–2021) ...

Figure 1.4. Terms specific to the pre- (2017–2019) and post-Covid (2020–2021) ...

Figure 1.5. Co-occurrences specific to the pre- (2017–2019) and post-Covid (20...

Figure 1.6. Co-occurrences specific to the pre- (2017–2019) and post-Covid (20...

Figure 1.7. CFA of collocations of the noun “tourisme”: year configuration...

Figure 1.8. CFA of collocations of the noun tourisme (tourism): collocation co...

Chapter 2

Figure 2.1. Word cloud for all 12 Espaces articles from 2020.

Figure 2.2. World cloud for all 18 Téoros articles from 2020.

Figure 2.3. Word cloud for all 16 Espaces articles from 2020.

Chapter 8

Figure 8.1. Motivations for choosing the location of the agritourism activity....

Figure 8.2. Activities practiced during the agritourism experience.

Figure 8.3. Tourists’ expectations for their agritourism stay

Figure 8.4. Word cloud of words symbolizing a farm operation.

Figure 8.5. Words characterizing a farm operation.

Guide

Cover Page

Table of Contents

Title Page

Copyright Page

Foreword

Acknowledgments

Introduction to the Authors of the Two Volumes

Introduction

Begin Reading

Conclusion

List of Authors for the Two Volumes

Index

Summary of Volume 2

Other titles from iSTE in Science, Society and New Technologies

WILEY END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT

Pages

iii

iv

xi

xii

xiii

xiv

xv

xvi

xvii

xviii

xix

xx

xxi

xxii

xxiii

xxiv

xxv

xxvi

xxvii

xxviii

xxix

xxx

xxxi

xxxii

xxxiii

xxxiv

xxxv

xxxvi

xxxvii

xxxviii

xxxix

xl

xli

xlii

xliii

xliv

xlv

xlvi

xlvii

xlviii

xlix

l

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

Tourism and Mobility Systems Set

coordinated byPhilippe Violier

Volume 11

Tourism Agility in Times of Crisis and Uncertainty 1

Between Technology and Society

Edited by

Sylvie Christofle

First published 2025 in Great Britain and the United States by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms and licenses issued by the CLA. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should be sent to the publishers at the undermentioned address:

ISTE Ltd27-37 St George’s RoadLondon SW19 4EUUK

www.iste.co.uk

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.111 River StreetHoboken, NJ 07030USA

www.wiley.com

© ISTE Ltd 2025The rights of Sylvie Christofle to be identified as the author of this work have been asserted by her in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s), contributor(s) or editor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of ISTE Group.

Library of Congress Control Number: 2025932946

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication DataA CIP record for this book is available from the British LibraryISBN 978-1-78630-994-5

ForewordThinking on Tourist Destinations as Complex Systems in Times of Uncertainty

Covid-19, climate change and the increasing social, political and ecological tensions of today’s world have enriched both academic and political debates on tourism (Cheer et al. 2019; Prayag 2020; Gössling and Higham 2021). These tensions represent new challenges for tourist destinations, while also intensifying others that were already latent (Prideaux et al. 2020).

From November 8 to 10 2022, the 11th edition of the international multidisciplinary symposium AsTRES (Association for Tourism, Research and Higher Education) was held in Nice. The aim of this event, Tourism Agility in Times of Crises: Replications, Accelerations, Reinventions…? – which led to the publication of this book – was to identify the elements that characterize the “agile” dimension of tourism through a multidisciplinary approach. As suggested in the call for papers, agility or even flexibility should enable tourism and tourist destinations to cope with crises and periods of uncertainty.

Agility can be understood as the capacity of complex spaces, such as tourist destinations, to anticipate and capitalize on ongoing changes. Based on this definition, concepts related to complexity were employed throughout the symposium to analyze how destinations, as places, can adapt, evolve and reduce their vulnerability in the face of crises. The various speakers explored how the iterative, incremental and adaptive structure of agility could be particularly valuable in developing economically, socially and environmentally successful strategies.

In this context, this preliminary contribution to the works presented in this volume seeks to broadly reflect on the need to consider complexity and agility in shaping new alternative pathways to articulate what can be termed “tourism transitions” across various levels or scales.

The evolution of destinations and the creation of trajectories

Research on the evolution, transformation and change in tourist destinations has demonstrated that they are in constant flux (Saarinen 2004) and can respond to critical events due to their dynamism and forward-looking vision. Destinations find the necessary resources to overcome their vulnerability and adapt to new scenarios in diverse ways (Brouder et al. 2017). It is also well established that the transformation of tourist destinations extends far beyond models based solely on tourism performance indicators (Sanz Ibáñez and Anton Clavé 2014). Destinations can be differentiated by the evolving quality of their tourism offerings as they adapt to changes (Equipe MIT 2002), as well as by the transformation of their core activities (Prideaux 2004).

Research on the transformation of tourist destinations has also shown that, during times of crisis, they shape their sustainability through innovation and learning (Hudson 2010), which act as mechanisms for building capacity to overcome vulnerability and increase adaptability (Cheer and Lew 2017; Saarinen and Gill 2018). Historical analyses have illuminated these processes (Walton 1983), as have the application of models like the tourism area lifecycle (Butler 1980, 2014), the study of restructuring dynamics (Agarwal 2002) and investigations into the trajectories of tourist destinations (Coëffe and Stock 2021). In all cases, adaptation strategies lead to varied outcomes, ranging from the redevelopment and reconfiguration of tourism dynamics (Anton Clavé 2012) to the metamorphosis of places (Clivaz et al. 2014), or even the abandonment of tourism activities altogether (Baum 1998).

To grasp the diversity of these situations and the outcomes of these change processes, it is necessary to employ complex, nonlinear and non-deterministic conceptual and analytical models. This analysis can be approached through the lens of evolutionary economic geography (EEG) (Boschma and Lambooy 1999). Key concepts within EEG, such as path dependence (Bramwell and Cox 2009; Ma and Hassink 2013), path creation (Gill and Williams 2014), path plasticity (Halkier and Therkelsen 2013) and path shaping (Bramwell 2011), are useful for understanding how tourist destinations transform into complex places governed by varied processes interacting across different scales (Benner 2023).

We can identify three fundamental pillars that simultaneously influence and distinguish the evolutionary performance of tourist destinations and determine their agility: the role of actors, context and dependency (Sanz Ibáñez and Anton Clavé 2022). From this perspective, the dynamics of destinations cannot be viewed as a simple linear trajectory from less developed to more consolidated states. Instead, this evolution results from multiple forces that produce a diversity of situations, each with different timelines and cycles.

Within this conceptual framework, the intervention of actors can deliberately and consciously shift evolutionary paths away from their inertia (Baekkelund 2021). The context either creates or limits the possibilities for economic actions and interactions (Li and Bathelt 2011). Lastly, past events and decisions, even the most random or involuntary, have long-term consequences (Martin and Sunley 2006).

As a result, each destination, shaped by its own geographical, socioeconomic and cultural conditions, the negotiating power among its various subgroups of actors, its technological penetration, leadership and the governance regime that has emerged, formulates specific responses to the challenges posed by current global change forces and local transitions (Cheer et al. 2021). A clear example of this is the diversity of policies implemented in response to climate change in French winter sports resorts, where organizational transformation and actors’ responsiveness were critical in understanding the trajectory of these spaces (Rech et al. 2019).

Uncertainty and the adaptation processes of destinations

Recent disruptive trends in tourism production and consumption, such as low-cost travel, the rise of peer-to-peer platforms (like Airbnb, for example), Web 2.0, the climate emergency and social networks, have forced destinations to adapt more quickly and confront urgent social, environmental and economic challenges (Fayos-Solà and Cooper 2019). Other more or less long shocks, whether ecological (e.g. Hurricane Katrina), health-related (e.g. Covid-19), economic (e.g. global financial crises) or political (e.g. wars and regional political instability), have also impacted tourist destinations to varying degrees. Depending on their capacity to adapt, these destinations have initiated processes of reorganization, shifted to a different state, or renewed themselves (Brouder 2020).

Thus, while the pandemic was seen by many as an opportunity to critically reassess the prior trajectory of tourism growth, and even used to develop alternative research and action scenarios (Bianchi 2020), there have been diverse responses and dynamics at the destination level, driven by local characteristics and the power interactions among decision-makers. For instance, some destinations have started implementing actions that, at least conceptually, emphasize degrowth (Langer and Schumude 2024), while others have focused their development on social and environmental well-being, promoted sustainable consumption among both residents and visitors, or advanced corporate social responsibility programs aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (European Parliament 2021). Nevertheless, apart from some political actions, there have been notable market inertia following the Covid period, with the pandemic merely acting as a temporary pause in many destinations’ growth dynamics and ability to attract visitors (Mansilla and Hughes 2021).

It is also well documented that tourism is a growing source of conflict within the communities where it develops. This may be due to nuisances (noise, waste, privatization of spaces, incivility and crime), structural transformations in the form of tourism development (such as the opening of hotels, the proliferation of legal and illegal tourist apartments, disruption of commercial activities, transformation of buildings, rising rent prices and gentrification) or the commodification of culture and the environment, which often leads to folklorization: the loss of identity, dilution of cultural identity and the overexploitation of heritage (Novy and Colomb 2019).

The above points clearly illustrate the link between uncertainty and tourism, particularly the relationship between uncertainty and the evolution of destinations (Ghaderi et al.2015). These changes are shaped by the actions and interactions (whether agile or not) of actors and their ability to adapt or create new trajectories in response to structural disruptions or situational shocks, in addition to local challenges (Lew 2014). In this context, the concept of resilience, which originates from disaster studies and challenges the sustainability-based approach to analyzing the transformation of socioeconomic systems (Vale and Campanella 2005; Mehmood 2016), is especially relevant for analyzing destinations as complex socioeconomic and environmental systems in today’s era of uncertainties.

In this regard, analytical models such as the adaptive cycle by Gunderson and Holling (2002) allow the application of the resilience concept to destinations. In this framework, where destinations are both evolving/reactive territories and systems of actors undergoing change processes catalyzed by tourism (Butler and Dodds 2022), uncertainty plays a crucial role, whether linked to new social dynamics or triggered by major shocks. The adaptive cycle comprises four phases: exploitation, conservation, release and reorganization. Without delving into detail, it is evident that this model emphasizes a complex approach to the evolving dynamics of destinations, underlining the pivotal role of agility. As McLeod (2020) demonstrated in the case of the Bahamas, the relationship between governance and resilience, as well as the importance of agent networks, are key to understanding the process of destination evolution.

From this perspective, the agility of human action (actors, leadership, political intervention and collaborative dynamics) largely determines destinations’ ability to respond to short-term trigger events and shape new development paths toward more resilient (innovative and sustainable) long-term goals (Gill and Williams 2014). This is essential for defining objectives such as social innovation, sustainability and inclusive and cohesive growth in tourist destinations, which are inherently complex (McDonald 2009).

The complexity of destinations and the challenge of resilience

In a context of uncertainties where nearly all actors, despite differing approaches (Hall 2019), share similar principles concerning sustainability, there is a consensus on the need to renew tourism on a different foundation, in which resilience would play a significant role (Transforming Tourism Initiative 2017; European Travel Commission 2020). The challenge lies in rethinking and acting on the evolutionary trajectories of the tourism phenomenon in a new way (Knafou 2023). These trajectories are linked, on the one hand, to the ability of destinations to adapt to new conditions of attractiveness, and, on the other hand, to the management of factors correlated with the transformation of the primary productive activity and the broader context of global change (Gibson 2021).

In this framework, establishing destination policies focused on promoting sustainability and the digitization of tourism to revive growth post-crisis is insufficient (European Commission 2022). It must be acknowledged that the challenges faced by destinations are inherently connected to global factors, associated with productive, social and environmental dynamics on a global scale. These factors are ultimately fundamental for resilience (Cheer et al. 2021): the climate emergency, the energy transition shifting market preferences driven by environmental awareness, over- or under-tourism, or even the “infusion” of tourism and leisure into developed societies.

Given that a destination is a multifunctional, multi-component and multi-activity system (Gretzel and Scarpino Johns 2018), managing it poses a significant challenge. To address this, there is a need for complex conceptual, analytical and governance models with a systemic perspective that facilitate the development of its social, physical, environmental and financial capital (Fabry and Zeghni 2019).

Complexity is, in fact, a key term in defining destinations. Here, complexity is understood as the nature and behavior of a system whose components interact non-linearly, without a predetermined plan, spontaneously leading to the emergence of new processes based on the available information. This results in behaviors that are difficult to predict (Colchester 2016). Complexity pertains to open systems, which implies that a destination must be understood within its environment, considering the multiple and varied relationships and interactions that shape it (Baggio and Sainaghi 2011), and that enable its adaptive capacity (Hartman 2018).

The analysis of tourist destinations as complex systems has proven valuable for studying interdependent and multifaceted concepts related to resilience, such as sustainability, vulnerability and equity, among others (Huang and Bahja 2022). These analyses have also contributed to improving classic models of the lifecycle of tourist areas by accounting for turbulence, change and unpredictability (Russell and Faulkner 2004). Additionally, it is important to recall that the complexity approach is one of the three theoretical pillars on which evolutionary economic geography is built, alongside path dependence and generalized Darwinism (Martin and Sunley 2015).

From a resilience perspective, the complexity of destinations can thus be understood as their ability to produce change in order to enhance their capacity for adjustment, and gain flexibility to overcome vulnerability and increase adaptability (Hall et al.2018). In this context, the actions of actors, particularly their agility, refer to the specific actions taken in particular places and times, driven by the envisioning of one or more different futures. These futures are made possible by combining knowledge, networks and other resources in new and sometimes unexpected ways (Grillitsch and Sotarauta 2020). Relatedly, and in agreement with Scutarri and Corradini (2018), it is important to emphasize that resilience should be understood as a property of a complex system. This is useful for defining future trajectories at the scale of each destination, as well as for renewing its alternatives and competitive advantages (Gretzel and Scarpino Johns 2018).

Agility as a guiding principle for the governance of complex destinations towards resilience

Understanding complexity helps to define the actions of stakeholders who participate in the governance dynamics of destinations, leading them toward new scenarios when external forces, with short- or long-term consequences, impact their trajectory (Gössling et al. 2021).

The major challenge for a destination, then, is to establish governance tools in a context of constant change and learning (Fabry and Zeghni 2019), and this by facilitating the change (transformation) rather than merely the reaction (recovery). In this context, resilience, as an inherent characteristic of complex systems, must be a fundamental component of destination governance (Anton Clavé and Matus 2023) and transformation processes of destinations for two reasons. First, studies on resilience demonstrate that while a system‘s ability to react is important, its ability to evolve toward a more sustainable state is even more so. Second, the hegemonic battle between different groups over the definition of resilience criteria (Paidakaki and Moullaert 2017) complicates a “politics of resilience” in which it is essential to disentangle the implicit responses to questions such as “resilience for whom and against what?” (Vale 2014, p. 191).

In the field of tourism studies, the concept of resilience has primarily focused on the capacity to recover following catastrophic events or gradual long-term changes (Hall et al. 2018); however, interest in the evolving resilience of complex destinations extends to their capacity to evolve toward equitable conditions of social and spatial justice, more ecological mobility, mitigation of climate emergency, commitment to low-carbon emission, and social and gender equality. As Zacher et al. (2022) argue, the resilience of destinations thus encompasses the willingness and competence to anticipate crises, implement efficient strategies in case of a crisis, and, in the long-term, grow and adapt for the benefit of all stakeholders, especially the community in which tourism develops.

As such, adaptability is an ongoing process that, from an evolutionary perspective, must consistently involve all stakeholders in the dynamics of a destination. This includes societal change throughout a persistent learning, more and more focused on resilient processes of reflection, preparation, action, governance and execution (Fabry and Zeghini 2019). This largely relies on collaborative efforts among tourism actors and it can be assumed that implementing this can be more difficult for certain destinations than others, depending, among other factors, on the robustness of their structures and the dynamics of their governance (Bono Gispert and Anton Clavé 2020).

With increased leisure time, reduced long-distance mobility, limited purchasing power, a digital lifestyle, more developed environmental awareness, an increasing concentration of economics power and global ecosystemic emergency, to cite some important factors of global change, we can assert that destinations can reduce vulnerability and enhance resilience without compromising on social justice and environmental integrity (Njoroge 2022).

However, the role of agility in meeting the challenge of reinforcing resilience (in the sense of increasing the ability of local destinations to anticipate, prepare for, respond to and recover from disruption while reducing vulnerability) is limited in part due to two shortcomings. First, the lack of coherence amongst most action plans developed by destinations following the recovery policies implemented after the Covid-19 crisis, primarily focused on digitalization and sustainability than on long-term resilience objectives (European Parliament 2021). Second, the lack of measures and tools to help decision-makers in tourism to evaluate the success of the actions and decision undertaken in terms of resilience.

In any case, to conclude, it is necessary to further reflect on the role of tourism in our future society from the perspective of governance for tourist destinations as complex systems (Amore et al. 2018). In this regard, the two volumes that compile the contributions from the symposium Tourism Agility in Times of Crises: Replications, Accelerations, Reinventions...? are of great value. The first volume concerns the uncertainties linked to the dynamics of tourist destinations and tourism in the context of an increasingly digital and technological society that requires agility. The second volume focuses on adaptability, marketing and sustainability, with contributions on territorial attractiveness, digital marketing and sustainability as a key issue for tourism agility.

Acknowledgments

This publication is part of the ADAPTOUR research project (contract number PID2020-112525RB-I00) created by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/50110 0011033.

References

Agarwal, S. (2002). Restructuring seaside tourism: The resort lifecyle.

Annals of Tourism Research

, 29(1), 25–55.

Amore, A., Prayag, G., Hall, C.M. (2018). Conceptualizing destination resilience from a multilevel perspective.

Tourism Review International

, 22(3/4), 235–250.

Anton Clavé, S. (2012). Rethinking mass tourism, space and place. In

Routledge Handbook of Tourism Geographies: New Perspectives on Space, Place and Tourism

, Wilson, J. (ed.). Routledge, London.

Anton Clavé, S. and Matus, S. (2023). Governance: Tourism. In

Encyclopedia of Tourism

, Jafari, J. and Xiao, H. (eds). Springer, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-01669-6_747-1.

Bækkelund, N.G. (2021). Change agency and reproductive agency in the course of industrial path evolution.

Regional Studies

, 55(4), 757–768.

Baggio, R. and Sainaghi, R. (2011). Complex and chaotic tourism systems: Towards a quantitative approach.

International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management

, 23(6), 840–861.

Baum, T. (1998). Taking the exit route: Extending the tourism area life cycle model.

Current Issues in Tourism

, 1(2), 167–175.

Benner, M. (2023). Revisiting path-as-process: Agency in a discontinuity-development model.

European Planning Studies

, 31(6), 1119–1138.

Bianchi, R. (2020). Covid-19 and the radical transformation of tourism.

ATLAS Tourism and Leisure Review

, 2, 1–8.

Bono Gispert, O. and Anton Clavé, S. (2020). Dimensions and models of tourism governance in a tourism system: The experience of Catalonia.

Journal of Destination Marketing & Management

, 17, 100465.

Boschma, R. and Lambooy, J. (1999). Evolutionary economics and economic geography.

Journal of Evolutionary Economics

, 9, 411–429.

Bramwell, B. (2011). Governance, the state and sustainable tourism: A political economy approach.

Journal of Sustainable Tourism

, 19(4/5), 459–477.

Bramwell, B. and Cox, V. (2009). Stage and path dependence approaches to the evolution of a national park tourism partnership.

Journal of Sustainable Tourism

, 17(2), 191–206.

Brouder, P. (2020). Reset redux: Possible evolutionary pathways towards the transformation of tourism in a COVID-19 world.

Tourism Geographies

, 22(3), 484–490.

Brouder, P., Anton Clavé, S., Gill, A., Ioannides, D. (2017). Why is tourism not an evolutionary science? Understanding the past, present, and future of tourism destination evolution. In

Tourism Destination Evolution

, Brouder, P., Anton Clavé, S., Gill, A., Ioannides, D. (eds). Routledge, London.

Butler, R.W. (1980). The concept of a tourist area life cycle of evolution: Implications for management of resources.

The Canadian Geographer

, 24(1), 5–12.

Butler, R.W. (2014). Coastal tourist resorts: History, development and models.

ACE: Architecture, City and Environment (Arquitectura, Ciudad y Entorno)

, 9(25), 203–228.

Butler, R.W. and Doods, R. (2022). Overcoming overtourism: A review of failure.

Tourism Review

, 77, 35–53.

Cheer, J.M. and Lew, A.A. (eds) (2017).

Tourism, Resilience and Sustainability: Adapting to Social, Political and Economic Change

. Routledge, London.

Cheer, J.M., Milano, C., Novelli, M. (2019). Tourism and community resilience in the Anthropocene: Accentuating temporal overtourism.

Journal of Sustainable Tourism

, 27(4), 554–572.

Cheer, J.M., Lapointe, D., Mostafanezhad, M., Jamal, T. (2021). Global tourism in crisis: Conceptual frameworks for research and practice.

Journal of Tourism Futures

, 7(3), 278–294.

Clivaz, C., Crevoisier, O., Kebir, L., Nahrath, S., Stock, M. (2014). The circulation of wealth: Resort development and touristic capital of place. Working Paper, Maison d’analyse des processus sociaux. Université de Neuchâtel, Neuchâtel.

Coeffe, V. and Stock. M. (2021). Tourism as urban phenomenon and the crux of “urban tourism”. In

Progress in French Tourism Geographies

, Stock, M. (ed.). Springer, New York.

Colchester, J. (2016).

Systems + Complexity. An Accessible Introduction to the New Area of Complex System

s. Create Space Independent Publishing Platform, Scotts Valley, CA.

Equipe MIT (2002).

Tourismes 1. Lieux communs

. Belin, Paris.

European Commission (2022).

Transition Pathway for Tourism

. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.

European Parliament (2021). EU Strategy for Sustainable Tourism. European Parliament Resolution of March 2021 on Establishing an EU Strategy for Sustainable Tourism (2020/2038(INI)). Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.

European Travel Commission (2020). European tourism manifesto. Priorities [Online]. Available at:

https://etc-corporate.org/tourism-manifesto/

[Accessed 27 April 2023].

Fabry, N. and Zeghni, S. (2019). Resilience, tourist destinations and governance: An analytical framework. In

Tourismes et adaptations

, Cholat, F., Gwiazdzinski, L., Tritz, C., Tuppen, J. (eds). Elya Editions, Paris.

Fayos-Solà, E. and Cooper, C. (2019). Introduction: Innovation and the future of tourism. In

The Future of Tourism

, Fayos-Solà, E. and Cooper, C. (eds). Springer, Cham.

Ghaderi, Z., Som, A.P.M., Henderson, J.C. (2015). When disaster strikes: The Thai floods of 2011 and tourism industry response and resilience.

Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research

, 20(4), 399–415.

Gibson, C. (2021). Theorising tourism in crisis: Writing and relating in place.

Tourist Studies

, 21(1), 84–95.

Gill, A.M. and Williams, P.W. (2014). Mindful deviation in creating a governance path towards sustainability in resort destinations.

Tourism Geographies

, 16(4), 546–562.

Gössling, S. and Higham, J. (2021). The low-carbon imperative: Destination management under urgent climate change.

Journal of Travel Research

, 60(6), 1167–1179.

Gössling, S., Scott, D., Hall, C.M. (2021). Pandemics, tourism and global change: A rapid assessment of COVID-19.

Journal of Sustainable Tourism

, 29(1), 1–20.

Gretzel, U. and Scarpino Johns, M. (2018). Destination resilience and smart tourism destinations.

Tourism Review International

, 22(3), 263–276.

Grillitsch, M. and Sotarauta, M. (2020). Trinity of change agency, regional development paths and opportunity spaces.

Progress in Human Geography

, 44(4), 704–723.

Gunderson, L.H. and Holling, C.S. (2002).

Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Systems of Humans and Nature

. Island Press, Washington, D.C.

Halkier, H. and Therkelsen, A. (2013). Exploring tourism destination path plasticity: The case of coastal tourism in North Jutland, Denmark.

Zeitschrift fur Wirtschaftsgeographie

, 57(1/2), 39–51.

Hall, C.M. (2019). Constructing sustainable tourism development: The 2030 agenda and the managerial ecology of sustainable tourism.

Journal of Sustainable Tourism

, 27(7), 1044–1060.

Hall, C.M., Prayag, G., Amore, A. (2018).

Tourism and Resilience: Individual, Organisational and Destination Perspectives

. Channel View Publications, Bristol.

Hartman, S. (2018). Resilient tourism destinations? Governance implications of bringing theories of resilience and adaptive capacity to tourism practice. In

Destination Resilience: Challenges and Opportunities for Destination Management and Governance

, Innerhofer, E., Fontanari, M., Pechlaner, H. (eds). Routledge, London.

Huang, A. and Bahja, F. (2022). Complex systems. In

Encyclopedia of Tourism Management and Marketing

, Buhalis, D. (ed.). Edward Elgar Publishing, London.

Hudson, R. (2010). Resilient regions in an uncertain world: Wishful thinking or practical reality?

Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society

, 3(1), 11–25.

Knafou, R. (2023).

Réinventer (vraiment) le tourisme. En finir avec les hypocrisies du tourisme durable.

Faubourg, Paris.

Langer, M. and Schmude, J. (2024). COVID-19 as a paradigm shift? Insights from the de-growth debate in tourism.

European Journal of Tourism Research

, 36, 3607.

Lew, A.A. (2014). Scale, change and resilience in community tourism planning.

Tourism Geographies

, 16(1), 14–22.

Li, P.F. and Bathelt, H. (2011). A relational-evolutionary perspective of cluster dynamics.

SPACES

, 9 [Online]. Available at:

www.spaces-online.com

[Accessed 22 April 2021].

Ma, M. and Hassink, R. (2013). An evolutionary perspective on tourism area development.

Annals of Tourism Research

, 41, 89–109.

Mansilla, J. and Hughes, N. (2021). En dos años no nos vamos a acordar de la pandemia. Análisis del discurso sobre el decrecimiento turístico en Barcelona.

Barataria, Revista Castellano-Manchega de Ciencias Sociales

, 30, 30–52.

Martin, R. and Sunley, P. (2006). Path dependence and regional economic evolution.

Journal of Economic Geography

, 6, 395–437.

Martin, R. and Sunley, P. (2015). Towards a developmental turn in evolutionary economic geography?

Regional Studies

, 49(5), 712–732.