All rights reserved. Complete or partial reproduction is prohibited without the permission of Marinus Gisolf and without mentioning the source.

 Tourists’ Profiles and Lifestyles

 1. Introduction

Trying to understand how tourists may behave in environments that are foreign to them is the object of this article and is of direct interests to those working in tourism or studying the subject. In this article it is explained, that with tourism activities, it is not about what a destination can offer or what tourists want from a destination, rather it deals with what at any given destination can serve each type of tourist. For some time now there have been a series of attempts to classify these ‘types’ of tourists for scientific as well as mercantile purposes. First of all a summary will be presented of the main stream developments regarding tourists’ profiles and their practical uses. Then a framework is presented that may help identify the ends tourists are after and how they can be matched at a destination.

 2. Types of attractions and types of tourists

 Tourism is about the encounter between tourists and their holiday destination and therefore it is this particular relationship we shall embark on. Tourists have their sensory intake from sources, called impact sources (q52). Similarly, other terms used are ‘toured objects’ (q110) or ‘experience clues’ (q169, q221, q66). Holiday tourists may look all the same with their bright-coloured clothing, expensive bags, cameras and funny caps, but in fact each of them experiences their vacation differently. When tourists enter their holiday destination local identities – cultural, sociological or natural – become associated with a significance they may have for tourists, whereby these identities turn into impact sources. In other words each tourist attributes some value to the impact source he or she is confronted with through association, recognition, comparison or imagination, among others. The question how we can differentiate among these attributed values leads to an inventory of tourists’ reactions to impact sources, that is to say to the results of their internal processing of sensory intake (q52): tourism deals with what at any given destination can serve each type of tourist, emphasizing the binomio tourist-destination as nucleus of the tourism activity. However, it would be erroneous to describe the encounter between destination and tourists just as a stimulus-response model. Once we interprete the encounter between destination and tourists as the convergence of emotions and activities being an existentially authentic process of interactions that may lead to experiences for both sides (q163), we shall be able to reach a much broader understanding of the phenomenon called tourism.

Impact sources themselves can also be differentiated on the basis of economic value among others. Tourism destinations consist of tourism services, such as hotels or restaurants, and also of tourist attractions, whereby a distinction can be made between the main attraction embodying the destination’s pulling power and side attractions taking advantage of the tourists’ presence. The former can also be called main impact source and the latter side impact sources (q52). For those attractions that are specifically developed or adapted for tourism, visitors will have to pay – in other words these sources represent economic value and are market dependent.

Next there is the general ambiance of a place, its normal daily life and cultural heritage, which is there anyway with or without the presence of tourists. The destination shares these impact sources or experience clues with tourists and hence they can be called Shared Impact Sources (q52) and they form the basic ingredient of any (tourism) destination. One characteristic is, that tourists do not pay for their use and therefore these do not represent direct economic value in tourism. In most cases locals do not receive money for the tourists’ presence either, other than from additional economic activities such as selling souvenirs or by improved local infrastructure, for example. It must also be clear, that main or side tourism attractions are just expressionsof a destination’s culture and not its embodiment. This is an important observation, since it is in contrast to most marketing techniques following the ruling economic approach, whereby marketing is restricted to these impact sources with economic value, while the rolling hills, neat little churches or the locals’ colourful dresses are used as background for the promotion of specific tourism attractions (q222). In marketing what is of importance to the locals – their daily life and surroundings – is pushed backstage (q225) to create the opportunity for visitors to spend.

Returning to the subject of the encounter whereby tourists convert local identities into impact sources – which may remain unnoticed or intensively lived – setting up a typology for tourists and their likes and dislikes prompts an additional question: any of such typologies may be used for a number of different purposes, each of which may require a specific starting point and development. Predicting what type of holiday or destination tourists may like is one reason for such typologies, another may be the design of a tourist attraction and there is also the direct interest of the marketing sector. It seems that predicting tourists’ destination preferences has received the bulk of research interests and more practical approaches have been designed for this purpose. Afterwards some more theoretical methods will be analyzed concerning the general disposition tourists have and which may serve more the marketing sector.

2A. The practical approaches

There seems to be a widespread consensus on tourist typologies concerning a continuum or linear scale with both extremes represented by few tourists only and the middle sections covering more than half of them. In 1972 Stanley Plog (q219) published one of the first of these scales, which later was to be called psychographs. One extreme of this scale refers to individualists people travelling alone or with a partner or friend. They will make their own itineraries and travel at their own rhythm and pace. They want to be active, tend to avoid typical tourist sites and have a keen interest in local populations and their culture. Volunteer work is a serious option and encounters with one’s self and with people from other cultures are of great importance. This is the idealistic end of the scale and since these people try to depart from the usual standards, we can call it the allocentric part of this lifestyle scale.

The other end of the scale gives us a profile of people who do not want any problems before or during their vacation, they like to have everything arranged for them and they want complete relaxation. They are concerned about their own bodies, and therefore their interests are in the fields of sunbathing, massages, spas or plastic surgery, just to mention a few. They have no particular interest in local people or their culture. We call this end of the scale the psychocentric one – see graph 1 at the end of this article.

Plog’s research led to the identification of three more intermediate groups for a total of five: psychocentrics – near psychocentrics –midcentrics – near allocentric – allocentrics. More recently the terminology has been changed and a sixth group has been added: traditionals – sightseers – journeyers – voyagers – pioneers – venturers (q81). Although over the years underlying concepts have been changed – and Plog has made many changes – the model remains a useful instrument, although thorouhly based on western style communities – especially from the USA. Updates of Plog’s tourists’ profiles description can be consulted at: http://besttripchoices.com/travel-personalities/quiz/

One has to keep in mind that the vast majortiy of tourists can be found somewhere in the middle between these extremes. In practice this means that the differences between tourists at either side of the centre are small and therefore difficult to measure. Additionnally, in an ever changing society increasingly moulded by globalizing effects these smaller differences may in practice be unnoticeable. Plog’s model therefore may be useful for specific societies – such as the USA – but for other continents its use may turn out to be limited. The psychographs are mostly about predicting tourist destination choices, but its usefulness for the design of tourist attractions is not clear.

From 1982 onwards Pearce (q156) started to publish a series of proposals around the concept of the roles tourists play in contrast to roles played by travellers. Pearce (q156) emphasizednot so much tourist behaviour itself, but rather a series of criteria for a taxonomic evaluation of typical tourist roles that in turn can be differentiated from other types of roles that are not typical for tourism, but which are related to travelling in general in some way or another. In his article published in 1987 (q223) he distinguished five travel concepts: Environmental – Close Encounter – Spiritiual – Pleasure – Business. It is about an approach whereby subjectivity is turned into a formal model, based on the presumption that there are typical tourist roles that differ from any another travel behaviour pattern. In the end it is about efforts to predict tourist behaviour and its impact on a destination environment. One of the criticisms that has been ventilated of Pearce’s concepts is that in more recent years the World Tourism Organization has widened considerably the definition of a tourist, which means that nowadays the relation tourist-traveller is seen in a different light undermining Pearce’s original concepts.

These two efforts to set up some kind of typology of tourists have been developed with direct practical use in mind. Next we shall look into two examples, whereby a sheer scientific approach forms the cornerstones for typology theories – the first based on socio-psychological grounds and the second with a clear psychological underpinning.

B. The Theoretical Approaches

Eric Cohen (q30) follows a phenomenological reasoning, in which he proceeds from the degree to which tourists let go of the orientation of their every day world and focus on the Other and the unknown (q69). The tourist experience itself is a varied entwining of alienation from everyday life and longing for a different place. The extent to which one is inclined to detach from the familiar world (centre) and attach to a world elsewhere (centre-out-there) may vary significantly and results in a “continuum” of experiences (q159). Underlying travel needs and motives differ highly among (potential) tourists, revealing the importance of the mental distance in tourism rather than simply the physical one.

Based on Cohen’s five orientations, Elands & Lengkeek (q159) set up a series of five modes as part of a quantitative study of people camping at nature sites, ranging from the amusements mode in which individuals step outside the ordinary in search for entertainment, to the dedication mode, whereby the estrangement from ordinary life is so strong that a new everyday reality is sought elsewhere. These shifts in modes or orientations relate to two other terms often used: travel motives based on escape and search respectively (q35; q69; q68). Some tourists may stick to their daily circumstances, while others open up to different socio-cultural environments. Elands & Lengkeek (q159) aimed to understand this propensity to either stay close or move farther away from what is familiar as a dynamic ‘predisposition’ that influences immediate and retrospective experiences of tourist situations. The typologies of subjective interpretations and experiences can be summarized as follows:

Table 1: Key characteristics per experience mode – adapted from Elands and Lengkeek (q159) with additions made by Marinus Gisolf

Table 1: Key characteristics per experience mode – adapted from Elands and Lengkeek (q159) with additions made by Marinus Gisolf

An attempt can be made to link the modes with concepts such as needs, expectations and liminality.

1. The recreational orientation: the stories and metaphors are well known and do not create any tension with everyday reality. Tourists want to be entertained and do not try to depart from their social roles.

2. The second orientation – the diversionary mode – refers to a real difference with normal life and the need to break away from it. A typical metaphor used is that of “recharging batteries”. There is a genuine search for the unknown and tourists take consciously distance from their home social life. However, many will not deviate from the beaten tracks.

3. The experiential orientation refers to much stronger implications of stories and comparisons. The unknown has to be experienced, the break from the own society is complete and consciously liminality zones are entered. Metaphors refer to the mystical, the feeling that there is more between heaven and earth than we can understand. The wild is symbolized by the big five of animals and nature by erupting volcanoes or dense forests.

4. The experimental orientation is very much directed to the Self. Tourists submerge in their holiday environment in search of new values and experiences. Liminality is consciously sought and lived, while experiencing takes on an existentialist manner. Metaphors tell about deep religious believes, about amazement and rapture. The tourist is prepared to undergo a transformation.

5. This orientation is existentialist and motivations are primarily concerning the Self. Liminality is lived in full and the tourist seriously considers the option of passing the threshold to try to enter the destinations socio-cultural environment on a permanent basis. Metaphors refer to the role of nature for the planet, its immensity and untouchability. Religious experiences can also be related to this orientation.

Concentrating more on a personal socio-psychological approach serves as an advantage when trying to apply this typology to a broad set of different cultural settings as well as an ample array of nationalities. When designing tourism activities it is of vital importance to evaluate the encounter tourists have with the destination and to what extent a destination want tourists to enter their world. In this sense managing spaces and places is one of the keys as will be explained furhter on.

A sheer psychological reasoning was applied for the Tourism Experience Model (TEM) developed by J. Gnoth (q163). The TEM first seeks to understand the process of experiencing itself as the precursor to experiences. This is important when considering, on the one hand, the tourist’s role and desire for fulfilling experiences and on the other the unique nature of destinations that are to be involved. Gnoth and Matteucci (q163) explain, thatexperiencing is not only contingent on how the mind perceives the activity in which it is engaged as it interacts with its environment, but also on what the destination provides in terms of possible experience clues. The tourist’s mind becomes aware of its holiday destination in two outlined modalities: the mind either applies the perceptual norms, standards and expectations of a person whose perception seeks the alignment with roles, or his/her mind is humanistically oriented and seeks spontaneous convergence of emotions and situations that reflects the individual’s existence. In this sense there exists a certain agreement with Cohen/Lengkeek’s vision with regards to the degree of detachment of the home environment.

In describing the interrelated processes by which human beings acquire, change and adapt knowledge and skills as a function of their emotional being-in-the-world, one can begin to understand how tourists structure and perceive their destination (q163). The TEM is based on two axes: the activity axis (from consolidating and self-directed to exploratory and other-directed) and the consciousness axis (from role authenticity to existential authenticity). These also show four overlapping areas: egoistic pleasure seeker, re-discoverer, knowledge seeker and holist. 

Egoistic pleasure seeker: In this mode, the tourist experiences known feelings and outcomes and is able to predict what moderately novel environments may produce, and varies their intensity to a measured degree through choice and decisions.

Re-discoverer: Here, the tourist begins to rediscover him or herself as he/she seeks to apply some form of effort in order to re-establish known skills and capabilities.

Knowledge seeker: Novelty seeking moves beyond self-gratification when becoming exploratory and when the mind is seeking.

Holist: If exploratory behaviour becomes spontaneously playful, experimental and seeking existential, emotional convergence, activity becomes creative and holistic as moments are experienced as Gestalts rather than differentially experienced details.

An additional dimension to consciousness and activity is therefore the tourist destination itself as the physical and mental space that turns into a relational place when the tourist engages and interacts with it. It can reveal the types of agency the destination assumes in the interaction (q163) and it is precisely this point that leads to the question of how different types of intervention at a destination can be distinguished.

3. Destination typologies

The four typologies mentioned here – Plog, Pearce, Cohen/Lengkeek and Gnoth – are just some of the many attempts to frame tourism behaviour, to set up a typology of tourists or to design a Tourist Lifestyle Scale. The next step now relates to how corresponding impact sources can be categorized in order to be matched with tourism experience modes or life styles. Earlier on one particular division was mentioned: main and side impact sources with economic value versus shared and incidental impact sources, which tourists can enjoy for free. There is another possible way to distinguish impact sources.

The structure of experience is based on tourist interactions with places, people and artifacts. However what is considered a place at a destination may turn out to be an unknown space for a tourist.It is the destination’s space-place relation that moulds the tourism encounter and resulting tourism activity. Place implies space, and each home is a place in space. A place requires human agency; it is something that may take time to know and a home especially so (q165). The notion of place goes beyond physical matter and transcends tangible qualities such as size, proportions and features (q173). A place is what people make out of a space with their emotional attachment and interaction. Tuan (q171) characterized places as “humanized spaces”, wondering how people understood and recognized them and how they imparted meaning to them.

In practical terms it means that one’s own bedroom is an intimate place, but a hotel room is just a space to sleep. This is an important observation. Both share structure and intention, but the first contains a wealth of emotions and impressions from experiences gained over a certain amount of time, which cannot be said of the hotel room, a scene for only a few nights. The example turns out to be even more intriguing when taking into account the case of home stays, whereby tourists sleep in spaces that are clearly places to the local people. Tourists become backstage intruders in local life.

For local people their daily environment is directly place related, which turns the encounter between tourists and their holiday destination in the widest sense of the term into a complicated entwining of space/place concepts (q222).

Both spaces and places can be turned into experience sources by tourists, but each can be ascribed distinct features for their functioning in tourism. If a place can be defined as being relational, historical and related to an identity, then the space that cannot be defined as relational, historical and related to an identity can be defined as a non-place (q166). International hotel chains, airports or shopping malls are examples. Main tourism attractions are specifically developed for tourists and represent spaces exclusively for them. This means that local people who might visit this attraction may feel the same distanced space, although in the past they may have known the site as a familiar place. Tourists might try to convert these spaces into recognizable places for themselves, however, they will still remain among tourists (q222). Different are those spaces where tourists intermingle with local people in a local setting. This encounter opens up a wider array of options for tourists in their effort to turn space into place, depending on their own predisposition to either stay close or move farther away from what is familiar. In mixed spaces more often than not tourists are non-paying consumers. The point here is to what extent tourism attractions may be scaled on a space-based perspective. Not only do tourists and local people mix at spaces, this may also be the case at public places. Those present in a concert hall are all listeners regardless their background. In general the mixed places show the most interesting mix of direct contact between locals and tourists, while the latter may actively try to convert the mixed place into a personal place. Finally there are places with different characteristics: so-called backstage local life, which is about living places by definition and it is therefore hard for any tourist to penetrate, although there are examples, such as backpackers or volunteers.

So far arbitrarily 5 contact zones between holiday destination and tourists have been distinguished: non-places, tourism spaces, mixed spaces, mixed places and local places. The analysis of the role of spaces and places within the tourism activity at a holiday destination on the one hand and the socio-economic factors defining possible experiences sources on the other is summarized in Table 1.

Returning to experience modes and ways of experiencing as presented in this article, a figure can be designed that serves as a general framework of what at a destination will work for each type of tourist. In Figure 1 the horizontal axis shows the various experience modes as set forth by Elands & Lengkeek (q159) whereby visitors and the people being partially visitor/tourists have been added, while the vertical axis shows the socio-economic impact sources.

The different areas representing space/place relations have been indicated in the figure. Figure 1 is an imaginary model that represents the extent to which tourists make use of tourism attractions depending on their alienation from their home society and the level of search for alternative experiences; a similar figure can be designed on the basis of TEM (q163). The width of each column (tourist experience mode) does not refer to absolute numbers of tourists. These figures do not exist, since the distribution is arbitrary. There are many visitors and visitors/tourists, but whether they outnumber the so-called ‘real’ tourists is questionable and different for each destination. Figure 1 serves as a theoretical framework that helps identify at a destination which types of impact sources may generate a way of experiencing or an experience itself and as such serves a dual purpose. First, the framework helps identify and categorize all impact sources at a destination, especially those that do not represent direct economic value for tourism, while, secondly it provides indications for which orientation of tourists experiencing these impact sources may serve. This model will show up differently for each destination, although general outlines are mosty likely to be similar.

An example would be a tourist who has been identified by the use of questionnaires or direct contact as somewhere between the “Change” and “Interest” modes as set out by Elands & Lengkeek (q159) or between the Re-discoverer and Holist headings in terms of the TEM (q163). Following Figure 1 this tourist will generally be avoiding the non-places and will require limited use of tourist spaces. These are already clear indicators for tour operators or travel agents when preparing a holiday proposal. For this example Figure 1 also indicates that direct contact with local people is desired, a liking for everything that is shared with the local population and this tourist may even want to move into places that usually form part of the local daily routine. Choice of hotels would be the more cosy and small scales lodgings and informal relations. Furthermore, this tourist likes to take his own initiatives, so a holiday with a rental car and a flexible programme would be recommended.

4. Final remarks

What popularly are called tourist profiles or lifestyles and the existing interest in these typologies for marketing reasons have to be handled with a certain caution. A isolated tourist profile without context does not exist. Profiles, typologies, personal characteristics are all relative and highly subjective concepts. Two main arguments have been presented in this article: one cannot separate the tourists’ experiencing from the tourist destination. The second argument embarks the uses that is given to the data generated by typologies.

The first argument needs to be reiterated once more: in this article it is explained, that with tourism activities, it is not about what a destination can offer or what tourists want from a destination, rather it deals with what at any given destination can serve each type of tourist. A destination represents the physical and mental space that turns into a relational place when the tourist engages and interacts with it. Tourists’ involvement in a destination depends on their personal disposition, which can be typified on the grounds of psychological or socio-psychological grounds as explained.

The second argument refers to the purpose typologies are developed, being for the marketing of specific tourism products or for the development of tourist attractions at a destination – just to mention a few examples. The data about tourists’ profiles can be used to help predict tourist behaviour, their choice of holiday or destination and their ways of experiencing. However, there is a catch, because there are more factors in play: the external ones. Bad weather, money problems, robbery, heat waves or tropical storms, road incidents and so on all have a direct impact on tourists’ behaviour. First, external factors may influence a tourist’s choice of holiday deviating from his customary profile and secondly at a destination behaviour may also change on the grounds of forementioned factors.

What interferes with regular tourist behaviour paterns according to the various experience orientations is the form and extent with which tourists react to external factors. Among others this depends on the extent a tourist follows his usual logic and reacts similarly as in his home environment or looks for solutions himself for the (unexpected) situations he is confronted with.Up to date there has been relatively little research on this issue of how tourists react to negative external factors and to what extent their reactions coincide with expierence modes and orientations.

 Additionally, there exists the practice among tourists from the 21^st century on, to be involved in what is popularly known as “tourism zapping”, tending to mix various types of holidays: a few days of wellness holiday alternating with some really adventurous tours, then a bit of culture, while not forgetting one’s Self by engaging in a Reiki course (q150). Figure 1 helps select in this case the different areas that may be combined. Specifically under globalizing influences combining different types of impact sources and destinations seems to be more common nowadays.

At a holiday destination matching tourists’ profiles with certain tourism attractions may be useful, first of all for marketing purposes and secondly for arranging infrastructural aspects in accordance to what tourists are supposed to expect. Figure 1 is just about that. At a holiday destination drawing up an inventory of attractions according to features that can be matched with similar social psychological traits in tourists is a vital exercise for understanding what tourism is about. This inventory then can be matched with the existing image or brand a destination presents, while helping tour operators or travel agents classify any destination’s impact sources according to the specific market segments they relate to.

A last remark: from the beginning of the 21^st century a vast part of (western) tourists travels electronically well-equiped, which may undermine the notion of staying closer or moving farther away from the home environment. It is difficult for anyone to separate oneself from home while continuously in touch via mobile telephone or other devices. It is not yet clear what the consequences are for tourists’ attitudes and how tourists with different experience orientations may handle the Internet during their vacation, but I would not be surprised if I had to re-write this article within a couple of years!

This website is not commercial and does not generate income; therefore from those who actively use its content we appreciate a voluntary contribution, small or symbolic as it may be, by pressing the DONATE button (Paypal system) at the bottom of this page

All rights reserved. Complete or partial reproduction is prohibited without the permission of Marinus Gisolf and without mentioning the source.

All rights reserved. Complete or partial reproduction is prohibited without the permission of Marinus Gisolf and without mentioning the source.

Introduction

  The debate on sustainable development started because the world’s future looks gloomier than ever: diminishing biodiversity, a thinning ozone layer, noticeable greenhouse effects, increasing poverty and discrimination against populations among others (see a.o.: q192 , q188 , q190 , q193 ). Eventually these symptoms reached levels that required solutions that are now being recognised as global (q179). The principles of sustainability were originally developed as a response to these problems. Additionnally my interest is directed at the role tourism plays in a sustainable development and also the extent to which this sustainability may strengthen tourism. In the first case it is about preventing tourism destroying itself by unsustainable practices. The latter case refers, among others, to a sustainable development creating an environment that is appropiate for tourism, void of visual contaminants and pollution, while safe and secure for tourists. A stable political context, sound economy and educated workforce are other parametres that refer to a sustainable development that can boost tourism.

In order to examine how deeply rooted destructive elements are in our Western societies and why there is a need to take a look at our environment with different eyes, I shall put things in a historical perspective and give a brief overview of the development of the relationship between people and their environment.

The Issues

From a legal point of view it is interesting to see how the role of our environment has changed over time. I am talking about things, which form part of the collective memory of a whole society or of a group of people sharing the same environment. From a juridical point of view the way people have considered their environment and nature has changed. Roman law distinguishes in this context two important concepts: a thing or good can have no owner, or there are things or goods that belong to everybody. These concepts are known in Latin as res nullius and res communis (see e.g. q216 , q84). The butterfly whirling around light heartedly has no owner. However at the moment she is captured, she is owned and she stops being res nullius and simply becomes a good. In the case of res communis I think of things that belong to all of us, such as the air we breathe or the sunlight we absorb. Those goods never have just one owner.

The more people there are on the planet, the more we can see a tendency for fewer things to belong to the category of res nullius and the goods that belong to all of us are of ever greater importance. It may be clear, that nature in the form of flora and fauna originally was considered to be res nullius (q84). The human being has always organized himself in relation to his environment. Social and economic structures were set up to secure a place in nature and it is this relationship between people and their environment that has seen drastic changes over time. From the development of the first Homo sapiens, humans competed with all other animals in nature for food. Nature did not have an owner, people formed part of nature and the concept of “private property” was not yet invented. When people started to develop agriculture, they became conscious of the fact that there were things in nature exclusively for them, and that other animals had to be excluded (q114). In terms of law, the fact of exclusion forms the basis for the concept of property (see e.g. q220).

The negative influences that gardening and animal breeding had on the environment were mitigated by the fact that people (some 10 to 20 thousand years ago) felt they were part of nature. The magic of growing plants and the close links with Mother Earth were the cornerstones of their vision of the environment. From the time when people stopped being nomads and founded villages – later to become towns – the link with nature started to change slowly. In part, this was a consequence of the conceptualization of God and the belief that the human being was His creation. The vision of the human being in the centre of the universe has led, among other things, to the development of the concept of private property. People claimed the right to possess something, from which everybody else was excluded. This act turned out to be of great importance for the development of the Western world.

Much later in history, a need to protect res nullius arose, which resulted in the legal figure of state or public property: goods whose exclusive use is restricted to citizenship.

As we shall see later, there are economic considerations in play as well: plants and animals in nature are res nullius and as such lack economic market value; but once they are captured, cut down or shot, they are converted into goods with economic value.

From the seventeenth century on, the concepts of private and public ownership developed to such extent that property became absolute and untouchable in character, breaking the link between nature and society and consequently the responsibility for the environment diminished, leading to the situation nowadays whereby property rights include the right to destroy one’s own property (q84). While a few centuries ago there existed agreement on how to handle the environment, this link has been lost and with it an enormous part of social solidarity in favour of untouchable property, even excluding any consideration on the conservation of nature, environment and society. Additionally, property as a right for future generations is only partially acknowledged. On the basis of higher legal security, life insurance and high inheritance taxes in Western societies, the trend is for those living now to have little concern for the future of the coming generations. They think that those newly won securities will cover them during their lifetimes. Diminishing religious interest (as a consequence of this attitude), living in the present, trying to be fashionable, the feeling that “you live only once” and the ever more dominating concept of “this is mine and nobody can touch it” start to dominate Western thinking. The notion of private property has reached such a state that neither children nor grandchildren are being involved. Property forms an inseparable part of the ego of a person. Not only do people’s considerations of their own future generations play hardly any role, solidarity with fellow citizens and with the environment has largely disappeared. Things without owners hardly exist anymore and even those goods under the heading of res communis are under pressure, not only because of pollution, but also because of the tendency to characterize everything in this world as property – either private or public. The conversion of drinking water into a commodity is one example.

From an economic point of view in modern market-related economies the concept of wealth is only related to what has market value. Goods or services for which value cannot be expressed in money (market exchange values) are not counted as ‘wealth’ (q97). This means, among other things, that nature is not comprehended in the concept of wealth, because it does not represent tangible market value. The destruction of nature, therefore, is not seen as a loss. To the contrary, this destruction forms an important part of increasing wealth, as seen from the point of view of market-directed economies.

This has not always been the case. Centuries ago, those economies functioning within capitalist relations were not only focused on the value of things, there was a content side to it as well. Any productive initiative demanded an investment to be able to start its economic life. With capital one can produce. However, this concept of content has been pushed into the background since the end of the Second World War, while the formal side of capitalism – values imposed by market relations – is dominating (q97). This has led to a growing trend of using capital just to earn more money without being productive. Stock exchange speculation is an example; it’s a ‘game’ in which one gets richer while another gets poorer. Real estate, insurance and world currency market dealings are other examples of people trying to earn money without being productive (i.e. creating material or spiritual wealth by its content). How much people earn seems to be the focal point, regardless of what or how much they produce – physically, mentally or culturally.

The increasing pressure on market economies to reproduce capital faster has led to shorter production cycles. This has been achieved in two ways: by shortening the useful life of a good or by combining a good with the concept of fashion. This means that after some time, products become old-fashioned, lose market value and are replaced, even if they are in excellent condition. In other words, to be able to continue producing at an ever higher pace pushed on by the need to produce gains faster, production has to be growing all the time. The consequences for nature are twofold: raw materials are being extracted from the Earth at an increasing pace while rubbish heaps are becoming mountains, because of the growing number of goods that are ‘returned’ to nature. Both effects lead to the destruction of nature, but neither is seen as causing a loss of wealth. They are rather considered necessary elements for creating wealth and development.

Market-related economies have realized that nature cannot be replaced and that its reproduction is relatively slow. This means that if capital wants to ensure its reproduction, protective measures have to be taken towards nature and natural resources. This has led to the curious situation whereby in many market-related economies, big investments are made to ‘repair’ destroyed nature, despite of the fact that this same nature is still considered to have no market value and its destruction is impossible to measure. From a technical market point of view they are investing in something that, according to the same market relations, does not exist. These types of market relations have come to the fore during the last 150 years or so and have been accomplices to the vast destruction of nature to date.

Humanity lives on unequal terms with nature. During the second half of the 20th century the number of species has diminished at the worst rate of the planet’s history (q217). However, nowhere on this planet this loss of biodiversity has been booked as an economic loss. It must be clear that the limits of sustainability have been exceeded and the speed with which nature reproduces itself is well behind the rhythm of the reproduction of capital. In other words, we take more from the Earth than she can spare for us. Our planet not only has limitations in terms of natural resources, but also as a recipient of waste and CO2 emissions, among others (see e.g. q186). The principals mercantile economies are based on do not contemplate the maintenance of the Earth. These economies are so concentrated on the production of profits that all else is subordinate to this and the planet does not receive any attention at all, much less its future.

This development has led to what we call the consumer society, whereby buying has become nearly as important as owning. More and more we are dealing with goods of which we should ask ourselves, do we really need them? It is all about a society where consumption has become a matter of survival, where solidarity within a society has largely disappeared and the human ego and property have become focal points to the extent that people are only concerned with life today and the future hardly plays any role at all.

Unfortunately, there are more factors active in making the total picture only gloomier. Agriculture suffers a lack of investments because of high risks and low returns in this productive sector, but there is another reason, too. Too much money within the mercantile societies is being used with only one aim: how to reproduce money as fast as possible, without minding improductive use or without thinking for one moment that the production of food needs investments as well. Additionally, under the pressure of diminishing natural fuel resources, oil in particular, bio-fuel production is gaining ground, but this means that fewer resources will be available for food production. Food will become scarce and expensive.

The concept of Sustainable Development

Measures to protect nature and the environment from destruction have become of interest to people at a rather late stage in history. The notion of nature and environmental protection, however, is an old one, but as a social movement we have to go back to the nineteenth century. During the 1860′s a number of national parks were established in the United States (Yellowstone among others) and countries such as Canada and Australia soon followed suit. On an international level the first act to be signed was for the foundation of the International Counsel for Nature Protection in 1913, which later became the World Conservation Union. In those times, the focal point was primarily the protection of nature, as well as the environment.

A new movement was observed by the late 1960s. The high post-second-world-war birth rate (‘baby-boom’) and changing population structures in the Third World (‘demographic transition’) that began in the 1950s spurred many environmental changes. The report produced by the Club of Rome in 1972 (q189) called Limits to Growth made clear that nature protection in itself was not enough. Apart from the introduction of many ecological issues, other crucial factors came into play: poverty and hunger. One of the basic concepts from these times was the idea that the achievement of a healthy society would depend on a radical reorganisation of social structures on a global level.

In 1987 a vision on development came to the fore laid down in what is now known as the Bruntland report: ‘Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’ (q195). The urge behind this vision can be traced back, among others, to precisely the report of the Club of Rome (q189). This report assumed that population and industrial production will keep on growing in a world with fixed available resources leading to a series of compromising effects, such as an ever increasing pollution, lack of non-renewable resources and soil erosion, while the resulting food shortages could mean a population collapse during the 21^st century. At the time the case for there being limits to economic growth as a result of environmental constraints did not receive much support by a majority of mainstream economists.

In turn, the Bruntland report pointed to a development structure based on three fundamental pillars, that is to say economic sustainability, social sustainability and environmental sustainability (q194). Sustainability is all about a vision of development clearly directed at the future. This vision includes close cooperation with local populations, which in turn means a clear recognition that a community, local population or ethnically homogenous group need protection for the conservation of their environment and their culture. Moreover, this vision wants to ensure the type of development that will allow all participants to become better off in both material and socio-cultural ways. This may be related to monetary income and/or to improvements in infrastructure or access to (state) services. The vision of sustainable development is therefore based on three fundamental pillars, that is to say (q194):

• Economic sustainability, which means generating prosperity at different levels of society and addressing the cost effectiveness of all economic activity. In this respect a long-term vision is crucial.

• Social sustainability, which means respecting human rights and equal opportunities for all in society. Among others, an emphasis is put on local communities, maintaining and strengthening their life support systems, recognizing and respecting different cultures and avoiding any form of exploitation.

• Environmental sustainability, which means conserving and managing resources, especially those that are not renewable or are precious in terms of life support. It requires action to minimize pollution of air, land and water, and to conserve biological diversity and natural heritage.

It is important to appreciate that these three pillars are in many ways interdependent and can be both mutually reinforcing or in competition. Delivering sustainable development means striking a balance between them (q194).

However, some criticism has been heard. Within the light of economic sciences it is suggested that sustainable development concepts have emerged in an attempt to reconcile conflicting value positions with regard to the environment (q179). Unlike the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the environment is now a global issue that requires both an international response and a global analysis.

During the 1990s a series of proposals were to follow regarding the core issues that surround sustainable development. Tourism as means of poverty alleviation was one of such initiatives (see e.g. q183), while much attention was drawn to John Elkington’s 1998 publication introducing the notion of a triple bottom line: ecology-economy-social with emphasis on sustainable human development (q218). There is now a growing recognition that environmental conservation is ultimately socially constructed and culturally driven and recognition must be given to cultural values, particularly those of indigenous peoples, and broader principles of environmental justice (q179). In practice it means, that to ensure that nature areas are preserved, somewhat paradoxically people will have to be allowed to visit environmental sensitive surroundings so that policy makers can be persuaded to maintain their reserve status.

The Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development shed some new light on the issues and in 2003, the Marrakech Process was begun as a ten year plan whereby several Task Forces would analyze the issues of Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) in support of regional and national initiatives.

It was not until September 2015 that the United Nations launched a new initiative called simply the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) (q193) , while the even more recent COP21 agreement on climate change has made clear the urge for all parties to be involved. The Paris’ COP21 agreements on climate change (q193) clearly indicate, that the many reports on climate change, global warming or loss of biodiversity (see e.g. q192; q188; q190; q193), reflect what is actually occuring and that a sound sustainable development is paramount, though not the only action to be taken. Furthermore, supporters of the Paris COP21 agreement note that it has already catalyzed private sector investments, and they point to cities and other sub-national actors who have taken the lead up to Paris as a cue to build towards a low-carbon, high-resilience future.

Tourism and Sustainability

Tourism has hardly played any part during any of the three stages of ecological and sustainable developments. When tourism began to develop on a global level, it had little impact on nature protection. During the 1960s and 70s, tourism was not affected by the environmental debate and was still considered a positive phenomenon – the “green industry” and “industry without chimneys” were the metaphors heard the most [QUOTE]. Although initially tourism was hardly mentioned in either of the Club of Rome or Bruntland reports, during the 1990s it had become clear that tourism was a major economic force combining beneficial and harmful outcomes of its activity.

It was not until the end of the 1990s that tourism was lured into the debate on biodiversity. In 2001, rules were established for Biological Diversity and Sustainable Tourism (Convention on Biological Diversity in 2001). The United Nations declared 2002 as the Year of Ecotourism. It is important to note in this context that the concepts of sustainable development in tourism were already playing an important role at grassrootslevels. Many action groups, Non-Governmental Organizations (e.g. The International Eco-tourism Society – TIES – was founded in 1990) or environmental associations had an important stake in the development of sustainable tourism, while international discussion of sustainability had halted somewhat. Meanwhile one has to realize that the lack of the State’s effective capacity to guarantee the complete protection of eco-systems while addressing the need for productive alternatives has created an opportunity for community based sustainable tourism developed by local people in order to find a solution to the eternal conflict between conservation and development.

Tourism was, and still is, seen as a mechanism to both conserve the environment and provide for economic development and employment generation (q193). These recently adopted UN Sustainable Development Goals state in goals 8.9 and 12.8b “…..sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products.” (q193). However, tourism was only mentioned in 3 of its 17 main goals: in goal 8 on economic growth, goal 12 on ensuring sustainable consumption and goal 14 on the conservation and sustainable use of the oceans. Additionally, the notion that international tourism can be promoted as a means of alleviating poverty while simultaneously reducing tourism’s contribution to climate change has also been increasingly criticised (q185; q186; q190).

So far the role of tourists themselves has only scarcely been mentioned in the literature on sustainable tourism development and this role has been limited to portraying tourists as clients in an economy driven setting. Negative impacts concern the environment directly (diminishing biodiversity, deforestation, waste, etc.), water (quality and supply), the air or culture, affecting not only urban areas, but also rural communities (q184). It should be clear by now that the principles of sustainability can be handled much more effectively on a small scale local level, while global issues such as climate change need international attention at the highest levels. Working to conserve the Earth at the local level requires, among others, a strong educational element focused on making people aware of the harsh facts and giving them tools to create greater solidarity among communities, countries and continents. The role of sustainable development should be extended, since changes at local levels are an inherent part of achieving the solidarity needed.

Involving tourists directly in this development seems to be the only viable option. Tourism and therefore tourists themselves have changed from local to global actors. Canalizing their efforts and with it the convergence of the local with the global is paramount for achieving not only the Sustainable Development Goals, but also the COP21 targets to curb climate change.

On the basis of the previous considerations it must be clear that more is needed than just good intentions and development visions directed at future generations. The reasons why our planet has been affected to such enormous extent are deeply rooted, as explained in this article. The principles of sustainable development form an important initiative, but they are not the cure for the disease. Economic issues that have led to the systematic destruction of nature need much more serious solutions than a mere development vision. People’s attitudes – and most of them have been tourists – and their attitudes towards the concept of property must change drastically, particularly in the Northern hemisphere. However, as long as humans consider property as an absolute concept and as the basis of their individualism and continue to base their vision of life on it, it will be hard to realize any change at all. People’s vision of themselves must change dramatically and with it their relation to their neighbours and to their environment.

» This website is not commercial and does not generate income; therefore for those who actively use its content we appreciate a voluntary contribution, small or symbolic as it may be, by pressing the DONATE button (Paypal system) at the bottom of this page «

All rights reserved. Complete or partial reproduction is prohibited without the permission of Marinus Gisolf and without mentioning the source

All rights reserved. Complete or partial reproduction is prohibited without the permission of Marinus Gisolf and without mentioning the source.

Marketing ‘Inbetweenness’

Introduction

 Accelerated changes in style and speed of daily life in Western societies have sparked an urgent need for new tools to analyse the increasingly rapidly changing tourism markets and especially the tourists themselves. Hasty life styles, intensified communications and many other globalizing trends impede free self realization of most individuals living in the so-called developed countries and holidays have therefore grown in importance to counter the negative effects western life styles are causing. Escaping used to be the main motivation for a majority of holiday-makers, but conditions in Western societies seem to force people towards a search for re-encountering their true selves.

As part of the reflexive approach to tourism, in this article changing tourist behaviour is analysed as well as the involvement and the experiencing tourists show during their holidays, since these are of fundamental importance for an understanding of market changes in the hospitality sector and tourism in general. The period a tourist temporarily abandons social status and home influences can be described as a time of transition and transformation; it is like living in between two realities: the home environment that has been left behind, and the destination where one is physically present but not as a part of it; this is a situation of a betwixt and between. Postmodern tourists are locked into an ‘inbetweenness’ of two cultures, of falseness and authenticity or of constraint and spontaneity.

Inbetweenness is described in this article with an introduction to a fairly recently developed concept called liminality, which serves as a tool to get a clearer insight into the changes tourists and tourism are subject to. On this basis shifts in tourism markets are explained and finally a reference is made to the difference with other travellers in general concerning the relation between sustainable tourism development and postmodern liminal tourists.

1. Post-modern tendencies and tourism

From the 1960s on, new social and cultural actions have been coinciding with accelerated globalisation movements leading to what is now known as post-modernism (q60, q62, q117, q120). It has been most noticeable in Western societies and among others it has led to what is called cultural pluralism, which in essence means that people have started to lose their own feelings of belonging to a place by embracing many expressions of different cultures in one way or another (q92). Nationality, ethnicity, gender or class are no longer cornerstones people can build their identity on. This in turn has resulted in a growing egocentric preoccupation with the self (q86), with an increasing consumerist behaviour as one example and preoccupation with the bodily self as another (q62). Having lost their sense of “belonging to” a certain place or culture, it refers to the trend in which people’s strong feelings of once having been tied to that place and culture are now slowly giving way to being tied to a certain time or era (q50). Most people living in postmodern societies have not only lost the links with their cultural backgrounds, but also with authenticity and nature. They seem to live in a world that is increasingly dominated by images and representations, rather than by real and realist objects and phenomena (q92).

The loss of a feeling of identity amid un-authentic people, cultural pluralism, and time-space compression has created uncertainty about the present day and the future (q50). However, at the same time this has prompted a search for historical roots, an idealistic authenticity, longer lasting values or an eternal truth, often drawing explicitly upon the spiritual traditions of the East ( q60, q88, q120). Profound changes in the way that place and time are experienced as a result of accelerated globalization have led to a new questioning of identity, the self and the place people take in this world. Not only are ways of living leading to a sense of loss of identity, for many individuals, work and everyday roles impose constraining and monotonous routines in which individuals find it difficult to pursue their self-realization (q110).

An increasing preoccupation with consumption could be said to make tourism the archetypal postmodern activity, as by its very nature it relies on the consumption of artefacts, natural and built environments, and culture (q62). Additionally, if in postmodern times individuals cannot realize their authentic selves in everyday life, then they are liable to turn to tourism in order to reach this goal (q110); of course this does not imply that nobody can realize self-fulfilment in work or routine life. Tourism can offer freedom from work and other obligatory time, an escape from traditional social roles and the liberty to spend one’s time however one chooses. Indeed, tourism reflects the “anti-structure” of life, an escape from something, rather than a quest for something (q103).

2. Post-modern tourists

The increase of tourism activities is unsurprising therefore as reflected in the growth figures published by the World Tourism Organization (q113). Post-modern tendencies have influenced tourism in general through globalizing and others trends, whereby tourism is seen as a cause as well as a consequence of global transformation. Van der Duim (q41) explains that tourism as a cause, is supposed to induce global flows of people, ideas, imags and capital, whereas tourism as an effect results from increasing global interconnectedness of economic, technological and socio-cultural transformations. Within the context of postmodernist tourism, the clear tendency for more individualist experiences and exclusive authenticity have widened the boundaries of the tourism panorama as well as the number of activities and experiences that can legitimately be categorized as tourism. It seems that nearly every dimension of human culture now has the potential to become a form of tourism. At the same time, to become a tourist coming from a post-modern society and having travel needs based on escape and search encompasses three fundamental understandings:

1. Being a tourist means having to leave the home environment as part of satisfying a travel need;

2. The potential tourist expects to have experiences that in turn will affect him in some way or another; some kind of transformation has to occur. At the end of the holidays a tourist expects to come home having satisfied (some of) his needs and being enriched in many different aspects, other than the monetary one; most tourists expect that they are or feel different than before the holiday and this may just mean a nice suntan or a completely different outlook on life;

3. The third understanding is that tourists enter the unknown motivated by escape and search, where they have to rely on their expectations, previous experiences, factual travel knowledge and personality. Tourists are well aware that they enter a different socio-cultural and economic environment during their holiday where their home “rules” may not apply.

Preceding any tourist’s expectation there is motivation interacting with the need to travel. The need behind the travel motivation may refer to wanting to experience new things or to escaping in the sense of avoiding certain situations; breaking away from the daily grind may serve perfectly well as a motivation to want to travel. In other words, there are the explicit motivations often related to the element of escape, such as wanting to have a rest, recharge batteries, to have some variations from daily life or based on some specific hobby or field of interest, and then there are the implicit motivations: searching for inner-balance, wanting to take one’s own initiatives, pursue self-realization, use one’s own skills or experience involvement and engagement with a certain destination (q47). In the literature on the subject of travel needs and motivations, escape and search form the core elements that can be distinguished (q30, q35, q68, q69). However, the extent to which escape is a necessary step before searching is arguable.

Apart from the importance of the need to travel (point 1 above) and the role of expectations (point 2), point 3 refers to the issue of a tourist’s status at the holiday destination. The period a tourist temporarily abandons social status and home environmental influences can be described as a time of transition and transformation; it is like living in-between two realities: his home environment, which he has left behind, and the destination, where he finds himself physically but does not form a part of it. It is a situation of a betwixt and between or a no-longer but not-yet. Tourists enter into the unknown, where they do not participate in daily routine activities and slide into a world where their “rules” no longer apply.

3. Tourism and liminality

When analyzing this social phenomenon of temporary alienation, comparisons can be drawn with observations stemming from anthropology. In his writings published in 1908, a concept was introduced by French anthropologist Arthur van Gennep based on the Latin word “limen” referring to a “threshold or boundary.” Van Gennep described rites of passage such as coming-of-age rituals or marriage as having the following three-part structure:

1. Separation
2. Liminal period
3. Re-assimilation

The initiate (the person undergoing the ritual) is first stripped of the social status that he or she possessed before the ritual, he or she is then inducted into the liminal period of transition, and finally given his or her new status and re-assimilated into society.

But it was not until the second half of the 20th century that the terms “liminal” and “liminality” gained popularity through the writings of Victor Turner (q102). Turner borrowed and expanded upon Van Gennep’s concept of liminality, ensuring its widespread usage not only in anthropology, but other fields as well.

Examples can be found on different levels. Twilight serves as a liminal time, between day and night. Illegal immigrants (present but not “official”) and stateless people, for example, are regarded as liminal, because they are betwixt and between home and host, part of society, but sometimes never fully integrated. Trans-gender people in most contemporary societies or those accused but not yet judged can be liminal. Another case is that of just married couples: after the honeymoon (time of seclusion) they enter their new home, whereby the bridegroom is supposed to carry the bride over the threshold (“limen”) of the front door. The concept of liminality can be applied to individuals (rites of passage, puberty), groups (graduation ceremonies, religious gatherings, pop concerts, soccer hooligans) or populations (carnivals, days of national mourning or celebrations). The term liminal may apply to short or longer term occurrences, as in the case of periods of wars or revolutions.

The spatial dimension of liminality can include specific places, larger zones or regions. Liminal places can range from borders to no-man’s-lands or disputed territories. Mountain passes, crossroads or bridges are all liminal and do not forget the most important one in tourism: beaches as liminal zones between water and land, whereupon visitors forget their social backgrounds for a moment; besides, in a bathing suit everybody looks more or less the same – it is the physical status that starts to rule rather than the social one.

In most Western societies affected by post-modern tendencies there is no better way to demonstrate one of the most visible consequences of this than to point to the places in this world that have no cultural-historical ties or any fixed identity at all. They are also called non-places and are part of a phenomenon that started to spread around the world from the 1970s on (q22). Often they are seen as beacons for postmodern globalisation and include: international airports, shopping malls and international chain hotels. These are designed and built so that anyone from any culture can feel comfortable and have something they can recognize; places that are inseparably linked to consumption and trade and have an air of luxuriousness; places where people – tourists among them – will have little sensory intake and will be left with hardly any memories, other than their encounters with fellow human beings, although even these seem to be superficial. It is about liminal places and in tourism, airports or hotels where people pass through but do not live in them highlight theinbetweenness that defines these spaces. For a hotel worker (an insider) or a person passing by (an outsider), a hotel would have a different connotation for these two people; however, to a traveller staying there, the hotel would function as a liminal zone. These liminal zones are also characterized by a certain timelessness and cleanliness, erasing any signs of wear and tear.

4. Being liminal

For people, being in a position of liminality means foremost a withdrawal from social action and structures; actually the very structure of society is temporarily suspended (q102). In liminal zones a liberation occurs from the social, intellectual and physical limiting factors inherent to working conditions in the Western world and this refers to the body as well as the emotional inner-person: the liminal experience refers precisely to the feeling of being more one’s authentic self with a higher degree of freely expressing it. There are four recognizable effects this temporary suspension may cause.

First, hierarchy and social structures do not apply anymore, which means that their forces do not limit thought or self-understanding. In liminality people are able to analyze their lives and backgrounds more clearly and they tend to deny prejudices that may rule within their home environment (q110).

Secondly, generally social differences are de-emphasized or ignored (q115). Among groups of liminal people there exists a state of equality and even solidarity, especially when a common goal is sought, such as a pilgrimage, soccer fans accompanying their team, or at rock concerts. Spontaneous friendships, warm contacts and completely undifferentiated social relations tend to prevail. Even on a national level, the celebration of commemorative days or matches of national sports teams (Olympic games!) may “unite a nation.”

Thirdly, the liberation of societal constraints opens up possibilities for a more authentic self with higher levels of self-expression and spontaneity. It also means that reason, prevailing so much in daily life in Western societies, gives way to a more free flow of emotions. The original idea of transformation such as in the case of rites of passage takes place in liminal zones or in state of liminality.

Fourthly, on the basis of diminished social pressures another element may also manifest itself: the darker side of human nature. Under the influence of being in a state of liminality people may want to do things they otherwise are not allowed to do at home. In the case of groups, soccer hooligans are an example of such behaviour and on an individual level, sex tourism and excessive consumption of drugs can serve as examples.

Additionally there is the phenomenon of permanent liminality: an individual or usually a group of people enter a state of being liminal, but for internal or external reasons do not pass on to the next state of re-integration. Monasteries or convents are examples as are groups of hippies living alternative lifestyles. Refugees are by definition liminal and there are cases that their status remains so for an indefinite period, stuck in a society they do not belong to and unable to return to their home environment. This may lead to dangerous developments, precisely because of the lack of societal norms and standards. Extremist groups personify the dark side of the permanent liminal state and in most cases this is related to violence.

Another significant variable is the “degree” to which an individual or group experiences liminality, which depends on the extent to which the liminal experience can be weighed against persisting social structures (q96). Whether people are able and willing to enter a state of liminality voluntarily or by force or whether they consciously try to avoid it can depend on personality traits as well as socio-cultural backgrounds. Distancing oneself from the home social environment may also be different for young people (students) and children, since their involvement in the home society has not been fully developed yet and entering a liminal zone may not be experienced as a fundamental difference or as response to the hasty and stressful life the thirty to fifty five age group has to deal with. The same can be said of elderly people, especially when they are retired.

5. Tourists in liminality

Arguably indeed tourism enacts the three stages that characterize liminality: separation, marginalization, and re-aggregation. The second phase – marginalization – is linked to the concept of liminality. For most tourists entering the state of being liminal consciously marks the moment a holiday really starts. The physical distance away from the home environment helps tourists separate themselves from home societal life, freeing themselves from social structures in favour of a feeling of social equality among tourists in general with a feeling of increased emotional freedom and spontaneity. Clothing and in general the way of dressing is a nearly obligatory external sign for tourists to show they are entering liminality.

 Liminality in tourism can be explored from the inter-personal point of view or the intra-personal one (q110). The latter refers to tourists that are alienated from the home environment, which means a liberation from social constraints and from the loss of the “true self” in public roles and spheres. Tourism activities under conditions of liminality can help tourists re-find themselves as a direct antidote to the loss of the true self in ordinary daily life at home (q15). In such a liminal experience, people feel they themselves are much more authentic and more freely self-expressed than in everyday life, not because they find that the objects or phenomena visited are authentic, but simply because they are engaging in non-ordinary activities, free from the constraints of the daily routine. Among other things this means that the authenticity of emotions starts to prevail, enabling tourists to act much more freely among themselves.

The concept of the authentic self is mainly based on the balance between reason and emotion, and the latter on body and inner feelings (q116). Tourism serves in large measure as a means to help put this balance back on track after the sometimes devastating attacks imposed on most people in developed countries by the stressful and complicated life. Liminality helps create the environment in which tourists can regain their authentic self in the sense of a balance between self constraints and spontaneity (q110) and we could even go one step further and say that the authentic self can primarily be found while staying in liminal zones, while in the daily routine of life at home, it is rather a question of the in-authentic self caused by the process of alienation through the constraints and limitations put up by working conditions and societal pressures (q110).

As far as the bodily part of the self is concerned, beaches are a fascinating domain for analysing liminality in all its aspects, not only because of the territorial liminality between land and sea, but also because of the lack of a clear dress code and therefore the growing importance of bodily feelings at the expense of the mind. Moreover, the time after sunset and before it gets dark plunges the scene into the extra dimension of a liminal time zone. No wonder beaches are still a favourite spot for tourists to rid themselves of any feelings of homesickness. Stripping clothing and social status is different from sunbathing in a local park, where workers pass by and watch or criticize, in other words where normal social life continues.

When exploring the domination of body over mind that is occurring in beach areas, in the case of the bodily a sensual element can be distinguished that can be translated into feelings among other sensations and a symbolic element as part of a culture of sign systems – fashion and ‘good looks’ being two general ones (q44). The latter is related mostly to the idea of a “display” of personal identity, including health, naturalness, youth, vigour, vitality, fitness, beauty or energy, while the sensual element is related to inner-feelings concerning relaxation, diversion, recreation, entertainment, refreshment, sensation-seeking, sensual pleasures, excitement, play and so on (q30, q31). The element of escape is most clearly demonstrated by the physical freedom a tourist enjoys with the minimal clothing used as extra value. The element of search is less obvious and does not always exist for all people. Getting to know one’s own body, having a clearer feeling who one is physically and the sensual pleasures that are often not present in the home country help tourists free themselves from constraints at home and supports their self confidence and esteem. In general the terms used here refer to what is generally known as ‘wellness’ and beach zones have very much to do with that part of the authentic self.

Next to the intra-personal element of tourists in liminality, there is the inter-personal focus and whether liminality is conceived fully or partially there are some basic traits that can be identified.

Tourists in a liminal situation will regard each other as social equals simply based on their common humanity that generates spontaneous relationships developed between equals stripped from their structural attributes (q103). They form part of a liminal travelling tribe whose members will show their typical social contacting: they exhibit none of the reluctance to greet complete unknown fellow travellers they would otherwise demonstrate at home, while commonly introducing themselves to each other with the first name only and the place they come from. They exchange some travel impressions, joke about any general topic and mention their likes and dislikes of globalized products such drinks, top hit-songs or films. It is unusual during the holiday to mention social or occupational status, while attributes such as jewellery or brand-name clothing are left at home. Most tourists have similar consumption patterns, bathing suits, going around in brightly coloured clothing and baseball caps while shopping in more or less the same stores. The food served often reflects the liminal status: different from the home fare, but not typical of the destination either. With group travel, the liminal tribe element tends to show even more clearly. Often friendships within a tour group constitute one of the most important elements of the entire holiday experience and even after returning home many members of the group remain in touch with each other (q52). Liminality here refers not only to the alienation of the home social environment; it very much refers to the state of being liminal and the interaction between liminal people. Thus experiencing within a group is an element derived from liminality, whereby not only the pleasure exists of seeing uncommon things or phenomena, but also of sharing and communicating this pleasure instantly with fellow travellers (q24, q106).

Another point is that of nationality and customs for each country. Countries where people dispose of a relatively large period of leisure time – 4 weeks per year or more – tourists will have various medium or short holidays per year and their need for escape is probably less than their urges to search for new experiences. With 2 or 3-day escapes liminality is usually not sought and the main motivation is a particular interest, hobby or just going shopping (consumerism therefore). In other countries where people can enjoy only one or two weeks off work, the element of escape is likely to dominate the holiday agenda. In this respect it is worthwhile to mention that there are still large parts of the world where people do not enjoy any form of vacation.

One of the effects of being liminal is the opportunity for transformation either bodily, emotionally or mentally. Entering voluntarily a state of liminality creates expectations that may vary according to each tourist. Therefore it would be erroneous to presume that the liminal situation of tourists would erase any differentiation between them. On the surface and in the eyes of many local residents, tourists may all look similar, but the various orientations of experiences expressed by tourists indicate that motivations may differ considerably (q30, q69). Tourists find themselves in more or less liminal situations as part of their efforts to satisfy one or various needs and each tourist tries to have the experiences that fuelled his expectations originally. The liminal travelling tribe is out there on a mission and although this mission is distinct for each of them, nevertheless tourists also have common ground to share between each other.

6. Liminality – an illusion?

The influences of liminality can be analysed from a different perspective: what happens when something goes wrong during a holiday. An accident, robbery, natural disaster or illness will force any person to react to it and only this pressure of having to react breaks the spell of being temporarily free of daily responsibilities. Any mishap will trigger negative emotions such as anger, disgust, pain, disillusion and so on (q47), which are in complete contrast to the freedom experienced in a liminal zone. Under the pressure of negative emotions a tourist will fall back on his home environment, having to contact insurance companies, police, hospital or any other local or international body. Not only does a tourist have to again be involved in a series of networks he had tried to escape, he must also contact family or friends in his home country, picking up the thread of home social life and with this liminality disappears. It shows how delicate a liminal zone is in tourism and the extent to which voluntary liminality may be based on an illusion. With any mishap a tourist will quickly get the feeling that the holiday spell is broken, his being a tourist has finished while he is seriously considering getting home as quickly as possible where he can at least manage his environment and can feel much more secure again. The inbetweenness that defines liminal zones are constructs of the mind made virtual and the same zone may get a completely different connotation as a result of negative emotions. Additionally there is the observation that in the case of forced liminality (refugees for example) a mishap or similar would not change anything regarding their status. Turner (q104) coined the term liminoid to refer to optional liminal experiences such as those in tourism, limiting the concept of liminal to those that are part of the ritual of society itself.

7. Marketing the inbetweenness

The concept of liminality was introduced during the 20^th century, but the idea itself is obviously much older. Even in Greek mythology examples can be found of liminality (q101) and in Oriental as well as Western mythology many examples can be found of liminal personages, places and times. In tourism the concept has been used little so far and the first interrogative therefore is, to what extent the status of tourists being liminal and liminal tourist zones could have been applicable in the past. Hardly any academic research has been carried out on this issue and therefore the only useful leads come from field experiences.

As a practical example the observation can be made that at least until the 1980s it was common for tourists to send postcards with pictures of their holiday destination to friends and family. Colleagues would even be offended if they did not receive a holiday greetings postcard, even though this may not arrive until weeks later (q52). With the years texts became shorter and just before electronic mailing took over, they were even limited to simple picture language: a sun, knife & fork and a little heart to indicate that the weather was fine, food was good and love flourished (perhaps this picture language was the predecessor of electronic messaging and emoticons). It definitely seems that until the 1990s, most tourists had their home crowds very much in mind, meaning that their break from home society during their holidays was only partly experienced as such. It also means that tourists talked with each other about their worries at home and social status was not hidden as is now the case with most 21^stcentury tourists. Nowadays few tourists send email messages to friends or relatives during their holidays and if they do, it is by mass mail, lacking any personal touch and most of Facebook or Twitter use should be interpreted within this context. Communications via computer, iPod, mobile telephone or any other device is fast, voluminous and aggressive, leaving many tourists no choice but to disconnect themselves completely.

 Many tourists used to spend hours buying little presents for their relatives at home. But in the 21^st century, if tourists do buy presents during their holidays, this is left for the last day when the process of de-liminalization has started. The type of souvenir tourists buy nowadays seems to be more geared towards the cultural expressions of a local population, rather than buying something that would just remind them of the place they have been (ashtrays, T-shirts).

 Another observation is that tourists under liminal circumstances do not like to be reminded of time and this is another characteristic appreciated by liminal postmodern tourists. Timelessness is an important ingredient in liminal buildings such as international airports or hotel chains, made visible by the absence of clocks and the continuing presence of cleaning personnel, making sure that any traces of the use of the facilities is removed as quickly as possible, emphasizing the time-spacelessness of liminal zones.

 Tourists have much more access to information compared to the pre-computer era, which enhances the level of preparedness before the start of the holiday. Factual travel knowledge and backgrounds on the destination seems to inspire tourists to want to know more about where they go, increasing therefore the learning element (search as motivation).

 They are all signs of tourists slowly shifting their holiday behaviour to a progressive alienation from societal pressures as from the late 1990s onwards and these signs point therefore at an increasing degree of liminality. The changes in tourist behaviour are caused basically by the post-modern tendencies that increasingly affect societies around the globe. One of its most important manifestations through fast and intensive transport and communications channels is the compression of time and space. Life seems to be faster and the resulting pressure is mostly felt on the level of the lack of self-realization and being oneself. Another consequence seems to be that rational factors have started to control the non-rational ones (emotion, bodily feelings or spontaneity) leaving too little space for satisfaction of the latter. Emotional constraints seem to characterize post-modern living conditions, unbalancing the reason-emotion relation in favour of the former. This has increasingly prompted a shift from the need to escape from it all to a need to search for one’s true self, whereby a liminal environment is the most suitable condition.

 Therefore it is unsurprising that under post-modern influences the concept of liminality is rapidly gaining importance and people coming from post-modern societies tend to enter a liminal status more easily than it is the case with more traditional societies. The concept of liminality therefore is a tool to get a clearer insight into the changes that tourists and tourism are subjected to. The levels of involvement and experiencing that tourists show during their holidays are of fundamental importance for an understanding of market changes in the hospitality sector and tourism in general. As a result these shifts have become visible through various changes in tourists’ behaviour:

1. In practical terms it means there is a slow change towards individual travel to the detriment of travelling in groups or mass tourism. The latter is very much related to the element of escape exclusively, but nowadays tourists need more than just that, which also means that in search of one’s true self a complete breakaway from the home environment is essential. To resist the in-authenticity of post-modern life the authentic self is thought to be more easily realized in spaces outside the reigning social relations, where one can be true to oneself and keep distance from the constraints caused by work conditions, societal life and in-authenticity resulting in a growing importance of being absorbed by a liminal status (q110).

2. Inherent in individual travel is a wider range of possible holiday interests and with this a growing number of niche markets on nearly all levels of human activity. These tendencies have led to a series of market shifts, whereby new niche markets seem to arise at high speed. Similar to the fact that nearly every dimension of human culture now has the potential to become a form of tourism, any search for one’s inner-feelings and bodily needs seem to open up new niche markets. From the 21^st century onwards tourism destinations can be differentiated on the basis of a wide array of activities from health tourism to dark tourism or from new age tourism to sports tourism. As far as group travel is concerned, there is a tendency to organize them around a central theme, rather than just going to a destination.

3. The shift from group travel and mass destinations toward individual tourism and the growing importance of being liminal have prompted many tourists not to emphasize a specific destination they want to go to, instead they appear to look first for the activities they want to carry out. Since being liminal is a priority for many tourists to be able to fulfil their various needs, the choice of destination will depend more on the possibilities to satisfy those needs in the sense that for a destination just being famous is not enough anymore. Tourism destination selection is increasingly based on activity related criteria, while at the same time tourists are less fixed to one particular type of activity. In marketing terms the motivational element of escape can be related to push factors, while search as motivation can be directly connected with the pull factors of many marketing strategies. Along the same lines there is the tendency to do the so-called ‘tourism zapping’; like the postmodern way of watching television by “channel-surfing” – dipping in and out of different settings that capture the interest momentarily, regardless of whether or not the entire programme is watched – they readily mix different styles during the same vacation period: some adventurous trekking, a few days at a spa resort, culture in a city, a Reiki course at an ecological farm for a few days and finally some days at the beach. Dipping into different niche markets as part of the search for finding a personal balance has very much been related to tourism practices since the beginning of the 21^st century and with it the importance to be able to do so under liminal circumstances.

Of interest for marketing strategies is the fact that staying within a liminal status sparks off some side effects, of which the two most important ones are mentioned here:

First, the element of transformation in liminal zones, which is related to the element of search regarding tourists’ travel needs, has to do with tourists’ bodily wellness as a result of the restrictive use of the body in most work environments in post-modern societies. This is partly remedied by the use of gyms and fitness schools and the development of green areas, local outdoor attractions or “theme” parks in the tourists’ home countries, but generally speaking there seems to be a tendency for increased care of one’s own body during the holidays. It concerns a niche market that has grown so fast (q112) the word ‘niche’ no longer applies. Wellness, health or spa tourism is receiving an increasing response from a broad public that dedicates either part or the entire holiday to this tourism market. The existential experience and the importance of finding the authentic self prompt many tourists, once they have entered liminal territory, to focus just on body and emotions and the balance between the two. The quest to recuperate and discover oneself is gaining importance and it is one of the main themes encountered among postmodern tourists (q112).

Secondly, as part of an effort to regain a healthy balance between body and mind under liminal conditions there is a marked tendency for tourists to insist more on luxury. For example, twenty years ago a hotel room with a shared bathroom was still common, but nowadays many tourists insist on rooms with private bathrooms, preferably with a jacuzzi, flat screen television, air conditioning, mini-bar, Wi-Fi, and so on. These luxury items often jeopardize sound sustainable development and furthermore they do not directly enhance the level of experiencing a holiday destination in general; however they do caress bodily feelings, which is often exactly what tourists are after, and furthermore they help create the dream a stay in a liminal zone is supposed to be, therefore forming part of the concept of liminality. An important element of spa resorts is precisely the high level of luxury and comfort these hotels offer. As an extreme counterpart to this type of physical wellness, adventure tourism can be mentioned wherein physical hardship is a base element in the process of getting to know oneself. Those tourists looking for spiritual experiences only may also shun the comfort zones, for a short period at least, and the hardships of staying at New Age farms is a rapidly expanding niche market, not to mention the option of voluntary work.

8. The non-liminal travellers

The concept of liminality has another application: as a tool to help distinguish tourists from any other traveller. For the former it means that social status is temporarily abandoned, but other travellers remain socially the same, regardless of where they are. This also means that at a destination the tourists’ gaze (q106) is different from that of any other passenger, visitor, participant or lecturer, who will look at their environment according to their socio-cultural status and views. In tourism the liminal status of tourists is voluntary as are their motivations and expectations; in contrast, travellers in general have an obligatory reason for moving from one place to another. Having personally enriching experiences is the primary source of motivation for tourists, but that is not usually the case with other travellers such as athletes, lecturers, business people or family visitors. There are many travellers that may fit into the ‘official’ category of tourists, but if they lack the element of liminality, one could arguably doubt to what extent they can be considered tourists or not.

Some more differences emerge from the liminality concept: it means that tourists often expect that holiday destinations are adapted in one way or another to the tourists’ needs, whereas any other traveller will accept a destination as it is. This point of adaptation has an additional connotation. Inevitably tourism will leave its marks on the destination’s environment, economy and socio-cultural life. Although sustainable management is a priority on most development agendas, practice and an extensive literature on the subject indicates that tourists are hardly involved directly in any sustainable development and only a few efforts have been made to involve tourists directly into mitigating their footprints.

There seems to be two clear reasons: the first is related to marketing efforts from tour operators or any other travel organisation that follows the current post-modern approaches of viewing relations from an economic and specifically mercantile viewpoint, wherein the tourist is pictured as the client and the client is King. If a tourist insists on having champagne in the middle of the jungle, any sustainability principle is quickly put aside just to satisfy his majesty’s supposed needs.

The second reason is related to the liminal status, whereby tourists temporarily abandon the daily social responsibilities they are used to at home; this is precisely what liminality is about, so this means it would go against the liminal feeling to demand a responsible attitude from tourists. With most sustainable management schemes tourists are asked to behave just as well or better than they would at home, ignoring the fact that this is exactly what tourists are trying to escape. As was pointed out before, the trend as a part of liminality to demand more luxury puts more pressure on sustainable management. Winning tourists’ support for responsible and sustainable development is therefore a hard task. Marketing the need for sustainability measures has also proven to be a challenge (

MacCannell, D. (1976): “The Tourist: A New Theory of the Leisure Class”. New York: Schocken Books

Another case concerning the application of the liminality concept refers to domestic tourism. People who take time off to explore their own country and decide therefore not to change their socio-cultural environment are obviously less likely to enter the liminal status. The element of escape dominates and in most cases this is simply space-related without any connotation of freeing oneself from the constraints of societal pressures in home or work environments. In one’s own country many societal pressures will remain the same whatever the purpose of the journey is, with the exception of very large countries such as Brazil or India, where internal cultural differences are extensive and people from one area can very well be liminal in another.

The distinction between liminal tourists and ordinary travellers is reasonably clear but arguable. The businessman who takes a few days off during his stay in a foreign country to explore some of its beauties will do so viewing the environment from his own social perspective. Tourists however, may be in a position to take a different view of things they have not been used to before as part of their social alienation. For the same reason appealing to the sustainability sensitiveness of ordinary travellers will have a greater response than in the case of the travelling liminal tribe. Those in favour of responsible tourism should in fact advocate the thesis that all should be travellers and not tourists, but at the same time they should realize that a large part of the difference between the two is a result of socio-economic conditions in the developed world.

 For those working in tourism, students and scholars please remember that this website is not commercial and depend on voluntary contributions, small or symbolic as they may be, by pressing the DONATE button (PayPal system) at the bottom of this page.

All rights reserved. Complete or partial reproduction is prohibited without the permission of Marinus Gisolf and without mentioning the source.

I would like to thank Dr. Eduardo Costa Mielke of the State University of Rio de Janeiro for his observations and help, enormously contributing to the quality of this article.

Introduction

From the seventies onwards possibilities have been explored for tourism to be an instrumental tool for the development of rural economies, but in general terms it seems that there are more failures and unsustainable practices than success stories to be told, especially in developing countries (q147, q148, q149). This article explores some of the problem areas, trying to reconcile (academic) theory with the practice of rural tourism, while highlighting the main issues at stake.

Within the framework of postmodernist tourism the clear tendency for more individualist experiences and exclusive authenticity has widened the boundaries of the tourism panorama as well as the number of activities and experiences that can legitimately be categorized as tourism. It seems that nearly every dimension of human culture now has the potential to become a form of tourism. Although the search for the authentic in the modern sense, where time seems to have halted and the poor must remain poor and culturally stagnated, is still very much alive within postmodern holiday trends, simultaneously there are many groups of tourists with different lifestyles searching for the authentic in the sense of a reality they do not know and want to learn from. Within the same parameters, there is a rapidly growing number of tourists interested in a genuine countryside style as well as in learning skills and customs as a personality enriching set of experiences. It is about tourists who do not travel to a specific tourism highlight, but want to have personal learning experiences and this particular allocentric lifestyle may suit rural tourism development, including elements of volunteer work and home stays.

There is a marked tendency to view life as being economically driven and tourism is no exception. The producer-product-client chain dominates western (postmodern) thinking and it is therefore also applied to rural development. The use of tourism as part of a rural poverty alleviation scheme has followed this same line of thinking: the locals provide a product (lodging and/or tourist attraction) to be sold to clients: the tourists. As shown in literature on the subject, a majority of community-based tourism projects have failed so far in terms of visitor numbers, which has led some people to think that rural tourism development is falling short in poverty alleviation processes.

However, there are other ways to view tourism apart from an economic viewpoint. From a socio-psychological perspective emphasis is being laid on the role a local community plays vis-à-vis a tourism community. The meeting between tourists and their holiday destination is the focal point, which is a view that invites an examination of community-based tourism on the basis of this encounter and at the same this is one of the main concepts of the reflexive approach to tourism. Simple questions such as what each party is looking for and to what extent they share some common ground become much more relevant. Before starting any rural tourism development one must not only investigate what the possible objectives are for each party involved – including tourists – but also the socio-psychological motives that make stakeholders act.

This article describes some parts of the complicated road that local populations have to follow to develop tourism initiatives within their communities. This is a process that should lead to learning experiences and it applies to the people of local communities and tourists alike. For a local community objectives should not only relate to profits, but also to improved infrastructure, contacts with different cultures, new social networks, improved social organization and more cultural awareness, while the tourists’ learning experiences should include a broadening of their horizons, increased awareness of the environment and alternative lifestyles, among others.

Rural Tourism

Rural Tourism can be considered from the point of view of space, time and social relations. Geographers, sociologists, economists and environmental planners alike have long indicated that from a spatial viewpoint there only exists a blurred separation between what can be considered to be urban and rural, mainly because of the physical widening of suburban development, increasing population mobility and the phenomenon of a second home. Some authors define what is rural as the environment where main economic activities are related to agriculture (q67, q78). A wider view differentiates between types of rural space according to the size of the agricultural activity, such as an extensive one with high numbers of (day) labourers and large villages, medium-sized horticultural areas usually near urban centres, or those areas dominated by small family farming.

What is considered to be rural can also be viewed from the point of view of time: people living in urban areas usually have a view of rural areas as being behind in development, where time seems to have halted. It is this nostalgic view of what is considered rural that contrasts with the post-modernist and ‘fast’ life styles of the big cities. This view coincides with what rural tourism development usually tries to convey: the contrast between life in a city and in the countryside. The main traits of this view on rural areas can be summarized as follows:

• rural in functioning, including small firms, little labour division, open countryside, contact with nature, rural heritage or “traditional” practices;

• rural as far as scale is concerned (buildings, farms, etc.)

• traditional in character; slow and organic growth, close family ties with fixed positions within the family (rather than by achievement), locally controlled with a long term development vision;

• represents complex relationships between environment, economy and rural history.

In this sense the ideas of what is rural does not necessarily coincide with the actual rural development or reality of an area (q67) .

From a social perspective rural tourism refers most of all to the community’s participation, empowerment and its receiving most of the benefits (q64). What is not clear is to what extent local participants themselves should have decision making powers or whether this should be channelled through local associations or cooperatives (q100). This issue is closely related to the extent that rural tourism development is following a top-bottom pattern or the opposite. A complete involvement of everybody and everything local seems to be in line with what is called the reflexive approach to tourism, whereby the encounter between tourists (guests) and rural destination (hosts) is the pivot on which tourism hinges (q52).

Obviously the term Rural Tourism can also be viewed from the point of view of tourism and it can be sub-divided according to the type of activity carried out by tourists, based on their motivation to travel. It should be equally obvious that the distinctions made between types of rural tourism can overlap – they usually do. Mowforth (in: q29) summarized:

• Cultural rural tourism: refers to the opportunity offered to tourists to get to know the cultural expression of the rural area visited. This may refer to tangible items (either historical, cultural or both), through the performance of cultural expressions (music or theatre for example), but also by means of the direct contact tourists have with local people and their way of living;

• Eco-tourism: refers to tourists who travel to a destination to observe and enjoy nature and to help preserve these natural resources;

• Adventure tourism: the characteristics of tourists’ motivations are the active participation, sometimes not without risks, in discovering and exploring rural areas; the tourist’s objective is not so much to gain knowledge (such as it is the case with Eco-tourism), but rather the exploration of themselves;

• Specialized tourism sectors: the tourists’ motivations are directed to specific areas, such as agriculture (agro-tourism), social experiences (community-based tourism), etc.

With these subdivisions of tourism activities in mind, there is another common denominator: the main attraction of a rural destination is the destination itself and not some particular tourism highlight. It is about enjoying a type of rural environment that would be the same with or without the presence of tourists (q52); in other words, it is about an authentically rural environment and not some attraction developed for tourists. Additionally, there exists a distinction between soft and hard tourism (q59) (also referred to as the activities of either allocentric or psycho-centric tourists (q81). The first term relates to responsible medium to small-scale tourism, while the second concept has to do with the massification within tourism destinations. Rural tourism, especially when it is community-based, refers to soft tourism, which may lead to constructive and sustainable development for a population, whereas hard tourism may cause more harm than any good to any tourism environment in the long run (q59).

This distinction between two forms of tourism can also explain what the difference is between rural tourism and beach tourism: both forms of tourism take place in non-urban areas, but the latter lacks the agricultural element and in most cases it is related to hard tourism and massification. At the same time it should be clear, that both concepts – rural and beach tourism – do not necessarily exclude each other, because there is rural tourism at coastal areas.

The wide scope of the subject of rural tourism invites a narrowing down of concepts and this article will deal mainly with community-based rural tourism (RCT) for three reasons: as sustainable development, rural tourism projects can only be successful when the local community participates actively; secondly, in Europe, the USA, and increasingly on other continents, rural community tourism is seen as an important tool for protecting cultural heritage and poverty alleviation; and finally, we want to focus this article on showing the principles of the reflexive approach to tourism more clearly.

Some theoretical tools: networks and interactive approaches

The roots of rural tourism development are cultivated by many entities with either global or local interests, fertilized by government authorities or private sectors with macro or micro climates in mind, while the clear aim is to produce win-win situations. Power relations, however, are unevenly distributed by the sheer nature of the stakeholders involved. Some actors may have economic superiority, others fulfil hub-positions, there are groups with a strong cultural heritage to share and others with a lot of know-how. It also means that many different scientific disciplines are involved and the relations between the people having some stake in rural tourism development can be seen from sociological, social psychological, anthropological, economic, geographical or political points of view, just to mention a few. Stakeholders in rural development processes are connected in some way or another and the relations between entities – human actors and natural or built environments alike – are constructed on the basis of common interests and may develop into networks that in turn define the roles each entity will play (q41). This is an interactive view of rural tourism development, whereby tourists themselves are stakeholders just the same and they therefore play their role on equal terms with any of the other entities forming and cultivating the roots of rural tourism development.

Networks are thought to play an important role in regional development. Consequently, stimulating networks has become a dominant policy goal, whereby there is a shift of concern from the outcome to the development process itself (q25). This also implies that the emphasis shifts from mere economic results towards the importance of building and expanding networks, since it is on the basis of new networks that opportunities can present themselves for further development. In most cases this is a process of innovation, in which not only local communities have to be involved but outside actors must equally play their part – including potential visitors.

Rural community tourism is a services-related activity that differs from agricultural or manufacturing production and therefore the introduction of tourism into rural areas impacts much more than just having a “new product” that can be sold. The latter suggests an incremental innovation that doesn’t deviate much from current practices, while the starting up of service-related activities means a radical innovation from all points of view. These radical innovations or novelties demand drastic changes in attitude and business management (q56). Tourism is a novelty within a rural environment and it is related to different sets of networks from those a community may be used to. Thus the introduction of tourism into rural areas leads to changes on the level of networks, infrastructure and community organization among others and it should be clear, therefore, that the introduction of this novelty may take some time (q25). Any new organizational structure imposed either from above or developed from within will take a considerable amount of time and effort to become embedded within a local community.

Innovations as part of a rural tourism development strategy have to be radical in order for them to become embedded within the socio-economic activities and as such there are various areas that can be distinguished (q56). For most rural communities, organizational structures have to be renovated; different infrastructure is required with which the local people may not be acquainted, a complete innovation of marketing efforts is needed, while on a regional level new networks have to be developed (q25). Only with the support of the people from a local community can these goals be achieved and their commitment to any development programme is crucial. A bottom-up approach seems to be the only viable way of ensuring that a rural tourism development will reach the stage of embeddedness.

Rural community tourism development projects

When approaching RCT development from a socio-psychological point of view as part of the reflexive approach of tourism a clear emphasis is placed on the first planning stages that have to make sure that a sound tourism activity is being developed with all or most of the stakeholders in agreement. Starting with the basic conditions for tourism to function local communities have to follow a quite complicated road to arrive at the point of a lucrative and sustainable tourism activity as an established practice within their local way of living. Based on literature and case studies, below we present a series of requirements, conditions and suggestions that have been grouped together in response to a series of problems that RCT projects often suffer, taking into account a socio-psychological approach to the RCT phenomenon.

1. Basic conditions for a tourism project

When any rural community wants to incorporate elements of tourism into their economic activities, it must meet a series of requirements in order to be functional within tourism-related networks. In other words it is about what tourism activities should look like and what requirements there are from the point of view of the encounter between tourist and local community (reflexive approach). A rural community tourism project should be able to produce:

1.1 A general ambiance that helps tourists feel the difference from their own home environment, based on anything local that has not been developed specifically for tourists and would have been there anyway with or without the tourists’ presence; existing agricultural practices or small manufacturing may form part of this ambiance. Local people themselves must never serve as a tourism attraction (this applies specifically in the case of indigenous groups).

1.2 Services related to tourism infrastructure, such as hotels, restaurants, information centres or souvenir shops, among others – in practice these may concern a small inn with a limited number of rooms with shared bathrooms or home-stays with home-cooked food.

1.3 Services related to the sources of tourism experiences, such as tourist attractions, trails, socio-culturally interesting sites and anything else specifically developed or adapted for tourists.

When developing tourism initiatives a distinction can be applied between those elements in tourism related to the internal situation within a community and those factors related to the reality outside. From the point of view of networks, these three points (1.1 – 1.3) refer to internal networks. Points 1.4 and 1.5 refer to external networks:

1.4 The community has to be relatively easily accessible and should be located in between other possible points of interest for tourists at a reasonable half travel-day distance;

1.5 The community should be able to offer telecommunications services and therefore be able to receive reservations and payments while maintaining the corresponding administration, bookkeeping and marketing efforts.

2. The Encounter

The reflexive approach to tourism relates to the interaction between host and guest or destination and tourist. The focal point is the encounter between these two and what happens as a result. From the economic point of view, there is an exchange of goods and services for money (or voluntary labour for example), but at the same time there is the act of experiencing, which may or may not be a result of this economic transaction. Specifically in the case of RCT, tourists gain experiences from things or phenomena they did not pay for: the local culture, landscapes, gastronomy or just the smells and noises that may be quite different from what a tourist is used to. Social contacts, comparing destinations with home environments or just dreaming of a different way of living one could have are assets and part of a series of experiences tourists expect to have and get for free. Rural community tourism is about this encounter between a local community and the tourism communities and before attempting to set up such a tourism project, there must be clear insight into the nature of this encounter as well as the functioning of tourism in rural areas. Analyzing this encounter leads to three levels that can be distinguished:

• Encounters of one human being with another: shaking hands (or whatever local etiquette dictates), a conversation (depending on the language abilities of the tourists or locals), paying for something and receiving change; waving to one another or – even more human – exchanging smiles.

• Encounters with a culture: tourists observing houses that have different architecture, use of colours, new smells and dishes, foreign styles of dress, indigenous music or intriguing religious relics; for a local community the arrival of people from different cultures may open new horizons, too.

• Encounters with oneself: tourists find themselves in exotic environments, whereby some tourists come to learn, others for a social challenge or tourists may be interested in mainly physical activities, while the people of a community can mirror themselves similarly and become more conscious of the cultural roots they possess.

The first type of encounter may provide the actors with social experiences, while the second deals with possible cultural, gastronomic, aesthetic or religious experiences. With the first encounter there may be a barrier owing to different languages and customs – with the second encounter this is no barrier at all; this is precisely what the tourists came for: to experience something new. The third type is related to the kind of authenticity a tourist is looking for.

The basis of RCT is this encounter, which only works when both parties enter on equal terms. In other words a provider-client relationship, which is so dominating in western economic thinking, cannot be applied; instead a much more interactive host-guest relationship should occur in which both parties are partners in tourism.

Any village or community has matters that may capture tourists’ interests and that form clues for possible experiences. These clues or impact sources (Impsources) together form the community’s story come to life through the tourists’ sensory intake leading to experiences. In this sense the encounter between local people and tourists is about the framing of expectations for experiences.

3. Expectations

Before starting out with any rural tourism design plan, expectations for this encounter have to be set according to what is reasonably realistic. Expectations in tourism, in turn, are based primarily on needs and motivations from any actor’s point of view. What can be observed extensively from literature studies and practice is that local communities tend to be motivated by (or lured into) economic opportunities, while tourists are being motivated to have socio-cultural experiences, which means that both parties of this encounter start off with completely different sets of expectations – not a promising start. Too often tourists are taken to believe that socio-cultural experiences can be bought with ready money, while local people are made to believe that by acting according to what tourists like to see, they may be able to earn a living. One often envisages a more romantic version of tourists being attracted by the engaging stories local communities want to tell and after the encounter has taken place, both part in tears for the new friends they have made and the incredible experiences they both have had. Whatever the case may be, actors in RCT development, including tourists, should have a fair start with a chance to tune in on motivations and expectations the various players may have. In the case of local communities dealing with a novelty like the introduction of tourism, this can be translated into the opening up of new external networks that give access to knowledge about tourists and what tourists may be interested in vis-à-vis what the community’s own reality has to offer.

On both sides expectations have to be set according to what can reasonably be expected, which means that existing prejudices and fixed ideas have to be readjusted. In the case of a local population, too often economic gains are presented unrealistically, fuelled even further by some fixed ideas that all tourists are rich and should be charged a lot. This phenomenon can best be observed with regards to communities of homogeneous socio-cultural composition. It is quite understandable that tourists are assumed to be rich, arriving in expensive rental cars or in luxury coaches compared to the old buses the locals have to use for their public transport. Cameras, mobile phones, Ipods or sunglasses tourists carry with them may provoke a certain air of luxury locals are not used to and may lead to certain fixed conceptions of what tourists are like. The opposite may be said of the tourists’ case, where the notion of poverty may evoke certain feelings of being superior and – even worse – the idea of cultural superiority, while obviously the opposite may well be the case. Breaking down prejudices is therefore one of the important tasks RCT has to try to accomplish.

For both parties expectations have to be broad so as to take best advantage of the novelty of the situation, although both parties should know what tourism is all about and what they can expect in tangible as well as intangible terms of the encounter between the two. For both sides of the encounter an increase in networks should be valued highly. In addition a local community should have some understanding of the extent to which a higher number of tourists may mean more direct involvement of national and local authorities in terms of improving infrastructure (electricity, roads, telecommunications, health care, schools, among others). Expectations in tourism also have to do with branding/marketing and the exercise of comparing of what a community can show to what some tourists may be interested in should take place at the very beginning of any tourism development process in rural areas. With traditional tourism project design the expectations of tourists are usually left out, denying that rural tourism is precisely about the encounter between tourists and locals while being a radical innovation for any rural community.

4. Basic conditions for the encounter

Exploring the tourism possibilities a rural area or specific community may have and the sheer nature of the encounter between people of different cultural backgrounds invites another set of observations. An important part of the tourists’ social experiences is based on communication with people from the community, which means that for RCT to be successful, tourists should speak the language of the local people or there should be a language common to both; this means that domestic tourism should be the first choice in the development of RCT projects. Local people generally tend to treat tourists as guests, but at the same time they should understand that tourists want to try to be as “un-guestlike” as possible in their effort to experience “real” (authentic) local life. This point coincides with the observation that in a guest-house or small inn, a tourist can try to feel at home, but with home-stays invariably the tourist will be a guest. In practice it means that in the case where tourists are from a rather distinct cultural background, guest-houses are recommended, while home-stays should be used with those tourists who have closer cultural links (city dwellers going to nearby rural areas, for example). Then there is the point of the extent to which tourists want to be involved in activities with or without the participation of local people. Nature hikes, bicycle trips or agricultural activities can be converted into tourist attractions and it should be clear which of these activities are especially designed for tourists and those that form part of the locals’ everyday life. It also refers to what extent tourists and locals alike open their minds for new experiences and how much this opening may be blocked partially by existing prejudices. The voluntary work option may enhance any social experience. It should be clear that the role of tourists must be taken into account from the beginning of the planning stage of any rural community tourism project.

5. The authenticity of the encounter

What is attractive for tourists first depends on their travel needs, motivations and expectations, further fuelled by their personality and referential frameworks. The view of what is rural from the city-dweller’s point of view usually invites a more nostalgic view of the pure, clean and authentic rural life people are supposed to be living. Postmodern living trends often include elements of being more tied to an era than to a particular (birth) place combined with a distinct feeling of uncertainty about the future. The nostalgic past with clear cultural and economic stagnation forms part of this image of the postmodern urban tourists’ dream some think they can find in rural areas.

In this case authenticity has to look like real, since the resulting authentic experience is what matters. Obviously, real and objective authenticity is one possibility, but there is also the type where an object or phenomenon is experienced as authentic, without having to be real. The story about the object may induce a feeling of authenticity, forming part of the relationship between the tourist, the object and its image. This observation touches the importance of the difference between tourist attractions as being staged for tourists and the daily village life, which is there even when tourists are not. This daily reality cannot be staged, otherwise it would be converted into a tourist attraction and as such, would no longer form part of the locals’ everyday life. How local people deal with their environment is one example of their authentic way of living: their relation to nature is quite different from what a tourist might be used to, since sociocultural and environmental survival factors are usually quite distinct, with a possible exception in the case of domestic tourism.

Another postmodern variant of authenticity in tourism is activity-related authenticity, which directly concerns a person’s self and his change through experiencing an object, phenomenon or activity. By going fishing, one may get a tremendous feeling of peace and quiet – an authentic experience therefore, although not necessarily related to a well-defined tourism attraction. Adventure tourism has much to do with this type of authenticity and rural areas often have plenty to offer. In this case authenticity relates completely to the tourists’ own experiences regardless of the source these experiences stem from while social experiences, for example, tend to be of lesser priority.

On the basis of the issues mentioned so far, an inventory can be made of tourism possibilities at a given rural community. Although tourism can appear in many different forms and present as many “faces” as there are tourists, the types of tourism activities that can be distinguished are eco-tourism, agro-tourism, community tourism, and so on, as spelled out earlier on. Next, activities such as day excursions, multi-day stays, voluntary work, etc. must be decided upon and they should be closely related to the authentic experience value any of these activities may represent.

6. Connecting rural communities and tourists

Viewing RCT from the point of view of the encounter between host and guest as the centre of tourism means that a series of requirements must be met to make this encounter come true. Destinations as well as tourists must be aware of each other’s existence as well as what the motivations are that may bring the two together. Therefore marketing seems to take up an important part of such an exercise, taking into account that it is about the transfer of knowledge combined with the opening up of new networks.

It is hard for a local population to see how tourists arrived at their community and too often locals simply feel that tourists come from nowhere. Suddenly there they are! The complicated machinery of the interconnected networks that got the tourist to a certain place is a reality that most local communities are usually unaware of. Locals often do not know how the tourists got there or how tourism markets function; they are also unaware of what was promised to the tourists or what to expect; neither do they realize who ‘sent’ the tourist or how many tourists they can expect to arrive. Additionally, the inconsistency of tourism, the effects of high and low season and the uncertainty of its markets are well beyond the control of local communities.

External networks should be involved therefore to help local communities connect with those people and organizations that (A) could have a direct interest in their tourism projects and (B) that could help them with designing web pages and other means of communications for marketing purposes. A well defined presence on the Internet through a web page (most likely to be sponsored by an NGO) and/or a presence on Facebook and Twitter are indispensable for the development of RCT projects. In this regard, presence on the Internet serves as a tool to further extend networks outside the region of the RCT project. Websites should have two target audiences in mind: potential travellers and travel agents. It is important to establish a balance between tourists and hosts, and the website should carry a clear message in this respect. First of all this means that the pages should not provide what tourists may like to hear (advertising and propaganda); they must reflect what the community looks like and the activities that can be carried out. It should be made clear that this is about responsible tourism and that tourists also have certain responsibilities.

A common challenge for tourism development in a single rural community is its pulling power because of the absence of a distinctive image. In order to make the most of rural tourism resources, communities could therefore approach their marketing activities from a cooperative perspective, whereby win-win agreements must be set up. This may be difficult without a third party intervention such as public sector entities, since local communities usually lack the necessary financial and technical resources. The use of NGOs, either overtly supported by national authorities or acting with support from international organizations, has proved to be one way to help solve this challenge, although this runs the risk of involving local communities in long-term dependencies and thus jeopardizing their autonomy. Local travel agencies can also be called in as they have expertise with tourists’ expectations and demands. However, responsible tourism policy as applied by these companies should be checked in the field.On the same level cooperative branding can be mentioned that helps to synchronize the pull factors across multiple rural communities or a region as a whole. A mix of complementary businesses involving chains of projects (i.e. tourism routes) may stimulate tourism cooperation and opportunities, hence the mention under 1.4 of the requirement of easy access to other sites suitable for tourism not more than a half-day’s travel away.

What are the pull factors RCT can use actively? Most tourism destinations attract visitors on the basis of certain tourism highlights, famous landmarks, impressive natural phenomena or historical monuments. However, in the case of RCT, tourists are not drawn in by ‘famous’ attractions; instead it is about normal local people with strong historical ties and ways of living. Therefore there should be a clear distinction between those rural areas offering a clear tourism attraction that form part of the more traditional ways of tourism, and those areas that show an endogenous tourism based on primary resources and not artificial ones, with a strong anthropological connotation of meeting the needs of sharing culture and lifestyles. A provider-client relationship should be avoided therefore in favour of host-guest interactions, which should become clear on the websites concerned.

Tourists may get in touch with rural community tourism initiatives directly through the Internet or by electronic mail. In these cases the tourism project can be found simply by surfing the web or from the recommendations of people who have been there. More common, however, is the practice of contacting a travel agent, either inbound in the destination country or outbound in the tourist’s home country. Supply chains as sets of networks help tourists find what they are looking for. Travel agents may fulfil a hub function and therefore it is of some importance that they are involved at some stage in the rural community tourism development process, mostly for their knowledge of what certain groups of tourists may like or dislike. As intermediaries, the role of travel agents is a delicate one, since they have to make clear to potential tourists that a visit to a rural community includes certain responsibilities and these agents themselves should know about local situations.

An important Internet application consists of Social Information Seeking (SIS). In recent years there has been a fast growing number of sites where people can ask questions and they are answered by groups of people or communities. One of the early examples is the site ‘Answerbag’ and since then more have sprung up – Yahoo!Answer appears to be one of the most popular.

The basic idea is quite similar to the Wiki concept, of which Wikipedia is the most famous. Generally, a site consists of 4 parts: a mechanism whereby people can submit questions, a venue for submitting answers, the community built around this information exchange, and finally answers are indexed for search engines, thus enabling web users to find answers given to previously asked questions in response to new queries. This means that these sites can fulfil a second role at the same time as database provider, based on previous answers, which in turn are provided by the people of a community or by any outsider. This can be on global level or limited to specific groups of people with a common interest (communities). The term community is used here in the broadest sense of the word and those sites are called cQA sites. These kinds of sites began to appear on the Internet in 2003 and they have been a growing phenomenon ever since. Apart from this, there was already a tendency for people to ask for information via the Internet, rather than trying to find it themselves. An ever increasing number of people seem to think “why bother seeking an answer when the Internet can connect me with the people who have it?” The habit of asking questions on forums and similar communication platforms is also expanding rapidly.

The possibilities for those interested in tourism are enormous and cQA sites may provide a necessary link between (pre-) tourists and the people from a destination or local community. Due to the fast-growing influences of the various Internet applications that provide people with information and the tools for acquiring specific data such as Search Engine Optimization (SEO) techniques, potential tourists can find a lot more information directly on the Internet and the additional cQA sites carry the concepts even further along a new route of social information exchange, controlled jointly by a community and its visitors.

7. New networks

Once a local population has decided on a project for receiving visitors within their community, an opening is automatically created to connect with outside actors, either being potential visitors directly or other actors involved in some way or another with visitor flows, transport or marketing: the so-called forward linkages. From a development point of view, making an inventory of existing contacts has to be combined with the inventory of external networks the community should have access to.

A major emphasis on rural development processes themselves will lead to the need for taking stock of existing networks as well as the technical and experience knowledge that is available. The questions of who has the knowledge and who has the skills must be the foundation for the inception of a development process. These inventories of knowledge and of the internal as well as external networks not only form the basis of the process design, they also indicate the strengths and weaknesses of internal organization or functioning and as such give an indication of the necessary training and education that should be internalized within the development process. Additionally, the introduction of a novelty like RCT means that new knowledge has to enter the community. Capacity building is one of the major objectives of any development process, but there must also be an exchange of technical as well as experience knowledge.

There are three types to be distinguished:

A. Exchange of existing knowledge. Networks reaching outside a community may enhance contacts with other villages or people from the region as a basis of information and opinion exchange; in other words, these networks build on locally existing knowledge (also called horizontal network integration).

B. New input of knowledge

B1. From governmental authorities, universities or NGOs

B2. From tourism contacts (travel organizations, etc.)

A different case has to do with contacts with NGOs or government agencies, since these networks are about a flow of knowledge towards the community and may contain new concepts, ideas, information or techniques (a vertical flow, therefore). When applying to a process that stresses a bottom-upward approach, new impulses from outside sources are of great importance, but networks have to be established first to let this happen.

C. New initiatives:

C1. Training, instruction and education

C2. Marketing, Internet design, accounting, etc.

A third form is that of forward linkages and it concerns contacts with possible buyers, not only of agricultural products and manufactured goods, but also of the (tourism) services provided. In the latter case this may refer to the tourism services in the community itself and networks concerning travel agents among others.

Once the motivations and nature of a particular rural tourism project have been established among the various actors and a start has been made on acquiring additional knowledge of the possibilities rural tourism may present, the next stage is to define what new elements have to be developed within a community to adapt to some kind of tourism activity. Will it be just an attraction for day-visitors, for multiple-day stays or will there only be indirect participation through the supply of guide services, agricultural products, handicrafts, and so on.

8. Requirements for the RCT development process

On the basis of the theoretical tools introduced, a description can be given of the process of rural community tourism development, keeping in mind that a bottom-up approach is recommended and that these projects are being viewed as radical innovations within the rural environment. Hence, the underlying arguments for a successful implementation of community-based tourism projects in rural areas are based on five assumptions that are interconnected. Once having established that a rural community or area can be of interest to tourists and the locals have shown interest in such an undertaking, all actors must have this awareness for a local rural community project to prosper:

2.1. RCT projects must be developed with the full participation of the local communities involved and should depend on their initiatives; for any initiative to develop into an embedded practice within a community it is this same community that should initiate this development process.

2.2. RCT projects must lead to socio-economically and environmentally improved living conditions for the local community; although the economic effects of tourism in rural areas have been emphasized extensively under the influence of pro-poor movements, benefits should also include improved living and working conditions as well as infrastructure and cultural awareness, among others.

2.3. RCT projects must lead to an increased number of internal and external networks that stimulate creativity and new knowledge in the community. Since the introduction of tourism is a radical innovation, a new flow of knowledge has to enter the community. Training as well as capacity-building form fundamental elements to help local people cope with new tasks, services and technologies so that they are not continuously dependent on outside knowledge, which could jeopardize their autonomy.

2.4. RCT projects must be complementary to any other already existing economic activity in the community and must build initially on the available organizational infrastructure; this assumption is first of all a “safety-valve” to help ensure that tourism evolves into an embedded practice. Secondly, it means that the innovation of introducing RCT may be radical, but at the same time that its influence on a local population and the way the people are organized does not change social structures radically.

2.5. RCT projects must produce an organizational structure that appoints, among others, those community members that are directly involved with the tourists and the tourism infrastructure to be developed; tourism networks depend very much on personal involvement and service, as part of the hospitality offered and to help create the image the community will have towards its visitors. Tourism in general depends largely on personal contacts and networks and therefore any tourism identity cannot afford to have a different person attending network contacts each time. Working in tourism, as in any other activity, needs special skills and not everybody has to be involved directly with tourists. Participation may also involve associated products, such as food cultivation or handicrafts, hence the importance of governance in appointing roles to play and tasks to fulfil.

9. Governance

So far an outline has been given on the basis of a reflexive approach to tourism of all pre-requisites that help identify the feasibility and viability of potential tourism projects in rural areas initiated by local communities themselves. The majority of actions described so far have dealt with the preliminary stage and it has been argued that these actions are of fundamental importance for a RCT project to be successful. However, it seems that a majority of RCT projects carried out did not take this road and rather followed the more traditional theoretical discourse of the provider-product-client model.

Literature and case studies on the topic of RCT show that a failure of marketing and a lack of governance are the major stumbling blocks for rural tourism development to prosper, and this view is supported by many observations of RCT in practice. Both issues are part of the radical innovations that have to take place within a community to successfully develop tourism initiatives. It is precisely the last mentioned element (see 2.5) of internal organization and the managing of external networks that seem to cause problems, and more specifically, the lack of organization is one of the main themes within communities; this is the major problem that women in rural communities have to face.

Governance, management and leadership relate to the internal organization of a community and to the way decisions are being made. Community organization is about a process that relates to responsibilities and commitments; if this were not the case there would be no political sustainability, which in turn may affect the autonomy of a community. A dependency on external organizations concerning knowledge transfer may develop, inducing a lack of self-confidence and lack of decision-making power, thus again undermining autonomy. Additionally, in a given community it may have taken decades for decision making processes to reach their state of embeddedness, but tourism has the power to turn around these processes drastically in the short term and the challenge therefore is to ensure effective decision making within a local population’s reality, maintaining the community’s autonomy and creating efficient organizational structures.

The organization within a community will largely define to what extent the various networks will be established and how they will function. Acting as a community requires many levels of internal organization and this usually involves the formation of some kind of association, cooperative or foundation – these three being the legal frameworks mostly accepted by government authorities and NGOs. On one hand, these forms of organization may help the strengthening and building of networks, but on the other hand one has to realize that they are western legal structures that do not always coincide with local traditions and may mean the exclusion of parts of a population.

10. Sustainability issues

When the first moves are made to look into the possibilities of the introduction of a tourism project together with a local community, sustainability development issues must be high on the agenda. Tourism exerts environmental pressures and impact studies must show to what extent a village or area can support them. Apart from the ecological issues, it has to be seen that the story a community has to tell does not change under foreign influences. The community’s story must be observed by external entities, such as tourism authorities or consultants, and balanced against certain expectations tourists may possibly have as part of the process to test the feasibility of a RCT project. This testing includes the vulnerability of cultural heritage, traditions and customs and how much a community or its members want to expose these to outsiders.

RCT projects have to be seen as an expression of sustainable development itself, although local communities may encounter severe problems mitigating the harmful effects increased numbers of visitors may have on their direct environment. Waste management is one example, since most communities have no other means available other than the rubbish dump just outside the village. Although recycling is a necessary practice, in remote rural areas specifically this is simply not viable. Along similar lines there are many restrictions – often of an economic nature – that stop a local rural community from meeting the sustainability standards set internationally. Local communities may feel they are living in harmony with their environment, but broader ecological issues concerning a region as a whole may demand additional measures be taken, which may be considered by local people as external interference. Tourism may not be a part of these sustainability issues, but the opening up of external networks and the resulting connection of a community to a complete region can lead to consequences at all levels. Additionally in most communities local people care about their natural environment as part of their survival and therefore they are well aware of the solidarity this involves with future generations, but this solidarity might be changed by the presence of tourists, especially when there are too many of them. A local population may give up part of this solidarity under the pressure of tourism, the prospects of financial gains or when pushed by government authorities or investment companies.

Sustainable tourism development in rural areas has captured the interest of government authorities and travel organization at large, but this has not always been translated into practice. The public sectors’ more traditional views invite shorter-term thinking and often seem to deny some of the basics concerning rural community tourism: a local community meeting the tourism community in an encounter where no exchange of money is involved. Similarly the private sectors coincide with the economic approach and the logic of linking rural tourism with sustainable development may contain a large element of wishful thinking, since tourism in general has never distinguished itself as being either sustainable or taking a long-term view of development. Meanwhile one has to realize that the lack of the State’s effective capacity to guarantee the complete protection of eco-systems and the need for productive alternatives in nature buffer zones have created an opportunity for sustainable tourism developed by local people to find a solution to the eternal conflict between conservation and development. RCT, therefore, may well turn into a sustainability tool that can serve the purposes of various stakeholders on national and regional levels.

Final Remarks

Rural Community Tourism development projects have mainly focused on economic impact, but little attention has been paid so far to view these types of development processes from the tourism point of view: the role of tourists, the relation between tourists and community and the windows that are opened for locals and tourists alike. The lack of success of a majority of RCT projects, in terms of low numbers of visitors, particularly in developing countries, seems to be related to poor governance and marketing efforts. Practice has shown that a RCT project may initially break even in economic terms at most and therefore RCT must be developed for reasons other than economic ones. Some more gains in addition to existing income is always a possibility, but there is the point of expanding networks opening the door for innovation as well as creativity and with it the opening of opportunities for new developments with the additional benefit that locals become more aware of their culture and their way of living; tourism therefore is a way of opening horizons not only for tourists, but also for local rural people who can come in contact with a world foreign to their own.

However, the bottlenecks encountered in the form of failing governance and marketing can be taken as symptoms of a deeper rooted problem. In the case of marketing, or to be more precise the lack of it, seems to be directly related to the absence of preliminary studies of what could be presented to tourists, what story a community has to tell and the bridge between the two. The lack of these insights may lead to the problem of how to decide what is best for a community and how to set up corresponding organizational structures. The common denominator of these issues seems to be the reigning economic attitude of external actors towards tourists: “They must be taken advantage of.” This can lead to a development process whereby economic factors dominate and there is no insight into the mechanisms that make tourism work and prosper. Income issues are important as long as they are treated on the basis of responsible tourism principles, while the specific tasks laid down in a well-worked out management plan based on a previously agreed tourism infrastructure are crucial for proper governance. Additionally in practice it seems that public and private sector initiatives should better understand a community’s possibilities and strengths, since the population’s cultural and natural heritage, the exact thing the tourists are coming for, are at stake.

Public and private sectors have been of vital importance to RTC and without them, RCT development processes are hard to envisage. The same holds true for training programmes, which are important elements in preparing communities for the tasks ahead of them. There is no room for a top-bottom approach as RCT consists of the voluntary encounter by both locals and tourists and this encounter does not include any monetary transaction. The traditional view of tourism as the relation between providers and clients cannot be fully applied to the RCT reality. Viewing tourists as clients worth nothing more than their money and hosts as providers who try to gain as much as possible is a view that unfortunately still rules in many handbooks or academic discourse on the subject of rural community development. One has to realize that with most RTC environments tourists pay for lodging and food combined with some services such as guiding or entrance fees to specific tourism attractions, but tourists do not pay for what they have come for: experiencing community life, local culture or rural landscapes, generating experiences that are priceless.

It is about the postmodern tourists from city areas that want to have an encounter with rural people and this tourist has to understand that he has no status within that community other than being a visitor. For any RCT project it is important that rural people maintain the type of hospitality they are used to and that they are not forced to change this for a pattern of a servant-client relation (as often dictated by tourism hospitality manuals), while tourists should clearly understand that they are not going to be served and they must behave as visitors in a foreign environment. The logic of money does not and should not apply, in order to preserve what makes the encounter between the two parties a unique one. However, travel organizations in general still see RCT projects as attractions to be sold to tourists and they want to make sure that the locals provide “complete customer satisfaction” – whatever that may be within a rural context.

Travel organizations, NGOs in general or the public sectors combining economic thinking and socio-psychological perspectives of the encounter between tourists and locals is not just a tendency for the future; it should be today’s reality.

The view that a socio-psychological approach determines the essence of RCT instead of sheer economic reasoning may be contested by many and effectively this has yet to be proven, nevertheless first indications from the field point clearly to this direction. The main aim of this article is to invite the academic world to direct its interests toward these aspects of rural community tourism and the roles tourists play. The views expressed in this article are also directed to those working in tourism to start looking at the activity from a different perspective understanding that profit is not the only goal and RCT is a good example to show that point. Finally, the learning experiences local communities and tourists may acquire are not limited to just these two, but apply similarly to the academic community, travel organizations and public sectors alike.

I would like to thank Dr. Eduardo Costa Mielke of the State University of Rio de Janeiro for his observations and help, enormously contributing to the quality of this article.

For those working in tourism, students and scholars please remember that this website is not commercial and depend on voluntary contributions, small or symbolic as they may be, by pressing the DONATE button (PayPal system) at the bottom of this page.

All rights reserved. Complete or partial reproduction is prohibited without the permission of Marinus Gisolf and without mentioning the source

All rights reserved. Complete or partial reproduction is prohibited without the permission of Marinus Gisolf and without mentioning the source.

Introduction

      In this article the funcionality of sustainable tourism certifcates (STC) is explained together with their advantages and draw-backs. One of the conclusions is, that although the practice of certification will take some time before being known and accepted among tourists, in the short term destination stakeholders may take advantage of the tourists’ current confusion of several issues such as sustainability, certification and authenticity.

Sustainable Tourism Certificates

      Sustainable development has become of great importance from the beginning of the 1990s onwards, and by the end of last century it had started to affect tourism directly. Standarization and implementation of sustainability measures is a major issue in this respect in combination with the question of how to verify whether a tourism entity effectively adopted sustainability measures within its management and operations. One of the answers has been the introduction of certification schemes, resulting in a wide array of different sustainability certification programmes. Travel organisations, NGOs and national tourism boards have been pacemakers for the development of STC. For them it serves a series of purposes, such as the certainty of being able to offer sustainable valued services and to comply with national requirements. Individual tourism entities such as hotels or tourism attractions have also shown their desire for accreditation or being granted awards as part of sustainability management programmes. As such STC have served greatly among most tourism stakeholders as a general part of sustainable development.

      In the 1990s different types of certifications on sustainability practices had already been implemented. Some international agreement was reached in the year 2000 leading to the Mohonk Agreement, which was a “proposal for an International Certification Program for Sustainable Tourism and Ecotourism.” The Agreement is still a point of reference in the development of many ecotourism and sustainable tourism schemes. According to the World Tourism Organization, an average of 50 tourism firms had already been certified per programme in 2002. These are programmes that seek to categorize and certify each tourism company according to the degree to which its operations comply with a model of sustainability. Online research among many different certification programmes indicates that on a destination level the reasoning behind the implementation of certification mechanisms points to a series of objectives:

• STC as a control mechanism for the implementation of sustainable measures;

• STC as an evaluation tool to measure levels of implementation and progress made during a certain period of time;

• STC as a tool for standardization of sustainable practices, their guidelines and recommendations.

      All three objectives – control, evaluation and standardization – seem to have a complementary function. What is not clear cut is the question about who sets the certification standards and who carries out the certification process. National tourism authorities in most countries with high tourism volume are interested in certification processes, but often lack the mechanisms and funding to do so. Travel organisations have started to show an interest in the matter, especially the larger multinational ones such as TUI or Thomas Cook, but they have not always found sufficient response at local levels.

      The same holds true for the standardization process, wherein the great interrogative regards by whom these standards are set. Although most parties agree on basic sustainable measures such as recycling, to what level this practice should be implemented still depends on local circumstances.

      Right now there are many institutions involved in certification processes and their backgrounds may vary considerably. However, the Global Sustainable Tourism Council (GSTC) set up an initiative of a group of organisations that established a set of basic sustainable tourism certification criteria in 2008. Among their listing of the most important certification programmes in 2011 we can highlight the Costa Rica Tourist Board’s (ICT) Certification of Sustainable Tourism (CST), Rainforest Alliance’s Standard for Tourism Operations or the Sustainable Travel International’s Sustainable Tourism Eco-Certification Program STEP. Additionally in Europe the programme TRAVELIFE is being developed, whereby various European countries participate.

      What most certification programmes have in common is their reach into ecological, socio-cultural and economic levels. Taking the case of Costa Rica’s CST programme, the implementing body Instituto Costarricense de Turismo – a government authority – distinguishes four areas

• Physical-biological parameters; evaluates the interaction between the company and its surrounding natural habitat;
• Infrastructure and services; evaluates the management policies and the operational systems within the company and its infrastructure;
• External clients; evaluates the interaction of the company with its clients in terms of how much it allows and invites the client to be an active contributor to the company’s policies for sustainability;
• Socio-economic environment evaluates the interaction of the company with the local communities and the population in general.

      The ICT grants some incentives to those entities with STC recognition, such as discounts on participation at international tourism fairs, for example. Those entities with all 5 levels can even have an own table in the Costa Rica stand for free at any international tourism fair the ICT participates.

      The Costa Rican government introduced the STC scheme primarily to be able to implement sustainable measures in the travel sector and to show to the rest of the world that Costa Rica aims to be a frontrunner in this respect.

Criticism on Sustainability Certification Schemes

      However some drawbacks of STC schemes have come to the fore. The main criticism makes four major arguments. The first problem area stems from the expense involved in implementing all possible measures to mitigate any negative effects from tourism. The bigger the hotel, the easier it will usually be to comply with the measures proposed by a STC, while small and medium-size hotel owners will find it particularly difficult to satisfy all requirements. This means that small-scale initiatives of the local population, whose participation in sustainable development is so important, simply cannot comply with all the standards set forth by a STC. The International Ecotourism Society (TIES) states: “The same structural problems of high costs, complexity, and lack of flexibility to reflect local conditions apply with special force to smaller enterprises. Smaller and medium enterprises (SME) can’t afford expensive programs, need simpler designs, and require latitude to adjust to management and physical limitations. The respondents were unanimous in their view that SMEs need comprehensive support if they are not to be disadvantaged by certification programs.”

      In this respect a STC may turn out to be self-defeating: instead of a friend it turns into a foe of the locals. Are local tourism initiatives really so harmful? No, but the requirements for a STC are complex and their implementation is expensive. For most STC processes, an enterprise has to nominate a person within their organization to handle all sustainability issues, in itself an expensive measure. This person has to receive training at a specialized centre, usually located in a big city. Small local initiatives simply cannot afford these kinds of expenses. Then there is the problem of recycling. In rural areas there are few recycling options and often there are none at all other than the rubbish dump just outside the village. Recycling is a very important practice and any STC will insist on it, but smaller rural tourism initiatives usually have little chance of putting this into practice. There are many more types of obstacles that prevent rural initiatives from participating in STC programmes.

      The second problem area that can be encountered involves tourism entities that do not have a STC. This in no way means that a hotel, for example, is not sustainable in practice, while a hotel with a STC is not necessarily fully sustainable as far as construction and operation is concerned. STC are usually awarded with different rating levels (on a scale of 1 to 5 green leaves, frogs or other icon). Receiving a STC at the lowest level allows a hotel to say it has a STC, but it is clear that there is still a lot to be desired to achieve truly sustainable management. Hotels that do not have a STC may be very sustainable in practice, but for political, economic or idealistic reasons they do not want to pursue certification, a process that is quite bureaucratic and possibly “paternalistic”. Another reason may be that a hotel is established on a rented property or on government property (coastal areas, for example), which impedes a STC rating due to the lack of property ownership (bureaucracy!).

      Obviously examples of sustainable tourism infrastructures without certification also refers to those areas lacking certification systems. For those competing in international markets it is often seen as a handicap when no direct certification opportunities are at hand. However, this situation may change in the future, especially on the basis of more intensive international cooperation in the field of certifications .

      The third problem area refers to the standards or benchmarks used, since without them it is hard to measure the state of affairs or progress made.

      The issue on standarization may be lurred into the North-South debate: the characterization of the North as the self-interested, profit-oriented private sector, while the South is pictured as environmentally conscious and concerned, dominated by civil society. There are many critics who are worried that transnational corporations from developed countries will set the agendas of certification programmes and that this may entail a bias toward Northern interests rather than concerns for Southern needs. Especially this last point shows us how complicated the matter is: nowadays short term (and often short sighted) business interests can be found anywhere, regardless which half of the globe the stakeholder is coming from. Each road to sustainable development on either the Asian, African or American continents is different and therefore should be reflected when trying to measure any progress made in this respect. A possible solution would be mutual or unilateral recognition of national certification schemes by international organizations.

      The fourth weakness of the STC system is that the most important actor in tourism is not consulted: the tourist. In applying sustainable principles the tourist must be incorporated at all levels. One role a tourist plays is that of polluter, a second role is that of mitigator of his harmful effects, the third one is that of selector (tour operator, destination, infrastructure or transport) and the fourth is that of idealist or active supporter of sustainability principles. In order to incorporate tourists into sustainable certification systems, they should be given a chance to test all experiences against sustainability issues and voice their opinions – a practice that has hardly been adopted so far. Little has been done to inform tourists about the existence of certification programmes, their content and importance. Applied to sustainable tourism, the Mohonk Agreement states that “the development of a certification scheme should be a participatory, multistakeholder, and multisectoral process”. Tourists should be considered as the most important stakeholders and should participate, therefore.

Effects of Sustainability Certification Programmes

      Apart from the underlying reasoning, there is the point of the effects of carrying out a STC programme as well as the influences its final results can have.

1. STC as control mechanism for tourists and tour operators

2. STC as motivator

3. STC as marketing tool

      Travel organizations are under pressure nowadays. First of all there is the need for sustainable management and product development and then there is the issue of social responsibilities. In many countries legal requirements have been set in these fields and in general there has been a growing awareness propelled by the press and the Internet.

      So far these pressures refer mostly to environmental issues and consequently they are transferred to tourist destinations and their tourism infrastructure. Therefore this pressure put on tour operators is often delegated to the tourism infrastructure at the destination whereby tour operators put pressure on local agents at a destination to push local tourism infrastructure to be as sustainable as possible. The first answers to these pressures have been the establishment of Sustainable Tourism Certificates. The most obvious way a tour operator knows if lodging or attractions are sustainably managed is by whether or not they possess a STC. The same holds true for tourists: those who care about the influences and footprints they may leave behind will be interested to know how sustainable tourism infrastructure is at a given destination.

      An additional problem is that the certification process appears to tell tourism companies what to do, while it is not always stated clearly what companies are supposed to achieve. Doing the right thing may lead to certification, but we all know that what matters are the results in terms of sustainable development.

      The second effect mentioned here concerns the effects of the STC programmes themselves. Implementing a STC is a fairly long affair that should involve all staff of a given tourism enterprise. The different levels STC programmes manage should be turned into company goals for their personnel to reach. The whole certification process should have a motivating effect and create awareness among all those working at a destination, in itself one of the requirements for sound sustainable development.

      The ecological pillar of sustainable development requires that international eco-accreditation bodies help local communities broaden the emphasis of “local” environmental and health-related problems and embrace a more thoroughgoing account of wider environmental problems, which do not always coincide with the local ones.

      The third effect concerns the tourism destinations’ use of STC as a sales and marketing tool. Showing publicly how sustainable their management levels are and how they care for the environment may form part of the overall image a destination as a whole or parts of it (hotels, attractions) want to create. We shall explain this issue below.

STC as Marketing Tool

      So far the implementation of STC at grassroots levels is clear cut, as well as its importance for any sustainable development. The question arises however as to whether STCs are good marketing tools or not. Any emphasis on good sustainable practices may sound like something positive, but first indications show that this is not necessarily the case. Let us see how the various relations between STCs and stakeholders work.

      Tourists are the main stakeholders in the tourism process and therefore should be listened to. One of the problems arising from the confrontation of tourists with STCs is that tourists first of all want to enjoy themselves during their holidays and in this sense “doing eco” does not necessarily reflect this. Hotels with an eco-label may smack of boredom and seriousness, while tourists are looking more for fun hotels – especially in the case of travelling with children. A “serious” hotel manages a long list of things that are not permitted (noise, bright clothing, smoking, use of plastic water bottles, etc.) and obligations such as separating litter for recycling, taking home used batteries or reduced use of water. It seems that the greater part of tourists prefer no hassle during their holidays, since that is exactly they try to escape from.

      Another point is that of pricing. A three star hotel may decide to try to get the maximum level of a STC. This means that the hotel has to cover a number of extra expenses, which may be earned back in the long run (as is the case with solar energy, for example), but any hotel owner would like to see early returns on extra investments and is tempted therefore to increase prices. Although this hotel may have gained high scores in the STC process, it still remains a three star hotel and the question is to what extent tourists are prepared to pay more for something that is not quite tangible at first sight. Any establishment with a STC may suffer from the image conveyed by the certifications that suggests higher rates, and many tourists may reconsider their use. Remember that at a given hotel water may be solar heated, but for a tourist all hot water feels the same regardless of the way it is heated. In general, most sustainable management measures taken by a company are mostly invisible to the public. We have to keep in mind that wrongly or poorly done sustainable management will be evident, but when done correctly any outcomes are difficult to observe.

      In marketing terms this means that a STC is often regarded by the public as an “extra” with additional costs, in spite of the fact that this was never the intention of any of the other stakeholders involved. Most tourists still do not know what a STC is, and many people within the tourism branch think, that implementing STC programmes without educating tourists first sounds like putting the cart before the horse.

      The obvious question arises, whether the STC process was introduced for tourists or as support for sustainable development. Many hotel owners seem to think of STC in terms of having a direct impact on sales. Luuc van Wezel, owner of the hotel Villas Gaia in Costa Rica with a third level STC rating (3 green leaves) and vice-president of the local Chamber of Tourism CATUOSA: “I am not thinking of going for the 4^th STC level: I haven’t seen any results from the STC so far.”

      Again it is important to realize that most tourists do not ask for a STC and from a marketing point of view there is no clear demand. As Ron Mader – founder of planeta.com – puts it: If we address solely the marketing value of certified tourism services and products, then the evidence shows that value is minimal as long as the STC is not market-driven.

      A similar point of view was heard from Justin Francis, managing director of the UK-based Responsibletravel.com, who commented recently at a LinkedIn groups discussion: “…….the debate has highlighted that ethics alone will not get you much business – as many people who’ve had their businesses accredited have found out as they wait for the sales to come in……People buy experiences, engaging stories about destinations, activites, local community and their hosts – but not a label. Use certification to improve your standards – but not as a marketing tool.”

      Another issue tour operators struggle with is the fact that some destinations are actively involved in sustainability certification processes (as in the case of Costa Rica), while others are not. When one destination or hotel is publicized as having highly sustainable management and another hotel does not, how can it be explained to the public that the latter hotel may be sustainable, but this cannot be shown because of the absence of certification mechanisms in that area? Any travel organisation likes to present its catalogue with destinations with the same characteristics and standards, but in the case of STC, that is still not possible. Hence most travel organisations are still not openly publishing where a STC applies.

      We mentioned a series of problem areas concerning STC marketing effects on tourists: STC results are not very tangible or visible, they may mean higher prices to the public, they have a ring of seriousness or some limitation to holiday fun. Additionally travel organisations struggle with the fact that some destinations may use a STC while others do not, which puts travel organisations in the uneasy position of using them as marketing tools. The problems mentioned here are clear and some of the marketing problems encountered may be solved with time.

      Not all is that negative. So far we have talked about tourists in general, but obviously the market shows a number of subdivisions. Among others we can mention that there are growing numbers of tourists showing higher levels of environmental awareness and an interest in sustainability issues, which in turn has opened up opportunities for niche markets. To mention a few, there is eco-tourism, community based tourism, rural tourism, new-age tourism, agricultural tourism, and so forth. What they have in common is that those tourists that are interested in these market segments are supposed to have an interest in sustainability matters, too.

      Marketing of STC in specific niche markets seems to be a positive effort from all points of view, because of the tourists’ involvement in sustainability matters. However, these niche markets are still small, although no concrete figures are available. Under postmodern tendencies, as pointed out further on, individualism in tourism is growing and with it the niche markets.

Sustainability and tourism marketing

      Apart from niche markets there is another tendency that has to be taken into account. Times are changing and from the 1970s on, new rumblings are being heard that coincide with accelerated globalisation movements leading to what is now known as post-modernism. It has been most noticeable among Western societies and among others it has led to what is called cultural pluralism, which in essence means that people have started to lose their own feelings of belonging to a place by embracing many expressions of different cultures in one way or another. Nationality, ethnicity, gender or class are no longer cornerstones people can build their identity on. This in turn has resulted in an egocentric preoccupation with the self, with consumerist behaviour as important example.

      Growing individualism has led to an increase in individual travel rather than mass group tourism. It may not be a surprise therefore to note an increasing interest among tourists in holiday experiences that are exclusive and authentic, since post-modern tendencies have prompted a search for historical roots, idealistic authenticity, longer lasting values or eternal truths, often drawing explicitly upon the spiritual traditions of the East. It is within this framework of increasing ecological and socio-cultural awareness that sustainable development and its certification processes are starting to receive a much wider audience.

      These gradual changes taking place among Western societies and increasingly in South America and Asia favour individualism in tourism and moreover the search for authenticity. Rather than looking for the (often intangible) sustainability traits of a tourism destination, tourists tend to mix the idea of sustainability with their own concepts: things that are real, typical and authentic. This phenomenon is related to what is known as post-modern nostalgia. The ring of boredom which was mentioned earlier refers to genuine phenomena that have to be respected: in the opinion of many tourists this implies, among others, locally grown food, served by local people in a local setting. In their quest to live true experiences and to find something of themselves during their holiday, many tourists look for an authenticity that they believe may be found with anything labeled sustainable. Basically this is a delusion, but for marketing purposes travel organisations or hotel owners for example may leave tourists with this impression. The point is an interesting one when viewed from the STC standpoint. Does a STC mean a tourism enterprise is authentic or has something authentic about it? Since in part we are dealing with symbol related authenticity (“engaging stories”) and depends on whether or not a tourist has a personal authentic experience, this may be answered affirmatively – with certain restrictions, especially in those cases that a tourism entity was only granted a partial certificate – one or two levels only for example.

      When we look again at some of the problem areas concerning STC and marketing campaigns, we can see that a large part of the problem lies in the understanding of sustainability and not so much in its certification programmes. Sustainability measures have been introduced necessarily, but without involving the most important stakeholder in tourism – the tourist. Not only this is a handicap when implementing sustainability measures, it also means there is a generalized lack of support from the public. It is unsurprising therefore that sustainable tourism certifications have received little support from tourists in general and consequently have had little impact in advertising campaigns. As outlined above, the mentioning of a STC may even have a negative influence on sales for the establishment concerned.

      What we have to keep in mind is, that so often marketing refers to commodification, while neither sustainablity nor STC are commodities, although the latter is under pressure to be converted into one. Increasingly the accreditation process is lurred into a commercial field of giving and taking, which may explain the vast number of accrediting agents that exists nowadays and also the development of the Global Sustainable Tourism Council as counterbalance. Additionally, there is a widespread agreement that the proliferation of ecolabelling schemes in tourism has generated many different attempts which, in turn, has created confusion on the part of tourists; this fragmentation can make it difficult for any programme to function effectively .

      In post-modern times tourists do know the kind of experience they are looking for and how real and authentic these experiences are supposed to be. When a tourist thinks that a STC means that he will get locally grown food served by local people with some authentic local music in the background, he will buy sustainability-certified holiday arrangements. When talking about marketing, every entity active in tourism individually can adapt their publicity to these aspects that suggest authenticity, while sustainability management is kept back and mentioned in the small print or at “the back of the pack”. The lack of proper information about sustainability in general to tourists can be partly absorbed in the short term by consciously mixing the concepts of sustainability and authenticity.

      Another point to mention is the case of STC being used by a national tourism board as part of a international advertising campaign. The image a country such as Costa Rica emanates of caring for the planet – “No Artificial Ingredients” – can serve as a platform for the use of STC in their campaigns without running into the forementioned specific problem areas, while the mutual recognition of national certification schemes by international ones may further enhance a growing understanding of sustainable development in general.

For those working in tourism, students and scholars please remember that this website is not commercial and depend on voluntary contributions, small or symbolic as they may be, by pressing the DONATE button (PayPal system) at the bottom of this page.

All rights reserved. Complete or partial reproduction is prohibited without the permission of Marinus Gisolf and without mentioning the source

Introduction

As part of my studies in the field of the reflexive approach to tourism, in this article I shall give some interpretations of New Age tourism and related tourism activities such as wellness tourism and I shall also show how these phenomena give us an indication of tourism developments to come.

The New Age movement is a Western spiritual or metaphysical and self-help movement that started to take hold during the twentieth century. Followers or practitioners may draw on a variety of different spiritual or religious traditions for guidance, but what they generally have in common is a holistic worldview with an emphasis on the interrelatedness and unification of the Mind, Body, and Spirit. New Agers tend to focus holistically on Self, thus it is also called the human potential movement (q40, q57). When this self-development and realization are turned into a leisure activity we can call it New Age Tourism. It is more a means than an end in itself, thus the essence of this type of tourism is in the exploration of alternative culture as a leisure activity. It is a manifestation of identity as well as sustainable tourism (q92).

Many cultural and alternative religious movements from the 1960s onward have been considered New Age, such as the flower power movement, “Ban the Bomb”, mysticism, Indian meditation, yoga and so on. The common denominator is in the way that New Age people attempt to find new ways of living. That is, their goal is self-realization, liberation and fulfillment, and the means to achieve that end is a socially responsible, ecological approach that facilitates the actualization of both the individual and the wider community’s potential: the desire to transform self and society.

Cittá della Luce is a New Age centre near the small Italian town of Senigallia.

Postmodernism

Profound changes in the way that place and time are experienced as a result of accelerated globalization have led to a new questioning of identity, the self and the place people take in this world (q36). It refers to the trend that people’s strong feelings of once having been tied to a certain place and culture are now slowly giving way to being tied to a certain time or era (q50).

Postmodernism has been most noticeable among Western societies and has led to what is called cultural pluralism, which in essence means that people have started to lose their own feelings of belonging by embracing many expressions of different cultures in one way or another (q50). Nationality, ethnicity, gender or class are no longer cornerstones people can build their identity on. This in turn has resulted in an egocentric preoccupation with the self, with consumerist behaviour as one example (q62). Having lost their sense of “belonging to” a certain place or culture, people also tend to live more superficially, preoccupied with their own image – seeing only images and less objective authenticity around them (q92).

There is a generalized loss of belief in modern society, technology and science – as these have led to the exploitation and destruction of nature and to disenchantment rather than happiness (q60). Most people living in postmodern societies have not only lost the links with their cultural backgrounds, but also with authenticity and nature. They seem to live in a world that is increasingly dominated by images and representations, rather than by real and realist objects and phenomena. The boundaries between true and false, or between fact and fiction seem to have blurred, while consumption and instant gratification have become leading factors (q60).

There is no better way to demonstrate one of the most visible consequences of this than to point to the places in this world that have no cultural-historical ties or any fixed identity at all (q22). They are also called non-places and are part of a phenomenon that started to spread around the world from the 1970s on. Often they are seen as beacons for postmodern globalization and include: international airports, shopping malls and international chain hotels. These are designed and built so that anyone from any culture can feel comfortable and have something they can recognize; places that are inseparably linked to consumption and trade and have an air of luxuriousness; places where people – tourists among them – will have little sensory intake and will be left with hardly any memories, other than their encounters with fellow human beings, although even these seem to be superficial.

The interesting aspect of these kinds of places is that they exist in complete contrast to previous modern times. Gone are the cultural and historical links to places, a particular identity, typical colours and smells, people’s customs, the connection with the earth, the meaning of the sun and moon, and the more profound beliefs that go with this. For example, in earlier days railway stations were real architectural landmarks worth visiting in their own right, while today’s (post)modern stations are indistinguishable steel and glass structures, purposely lacking any kind of authenticity.

A shopping mall that could be found anywhere. This picture was taken in Honduras.

We can mention many more examples, such as the displacement of small local shops by supermarkets and shopping malls. Again, the latter seem to look alike regardless of whether you are in Singapore, Buenos Aires or Moscow. International food is another example, whereby the hamburger (USA), pizzas and pasta dishes (Italy), croissants (France), hot dogs (the sausages were a German idea), Mexican tacos and Japanese sushi can be found in most countries anywhere on the globe, although these dishes retain little of their original smells and flavours having been adapted to everybody’s taste.

The widespread use of all types of drugs and stimulants is another phenomenon that has paralleled the above-mentioned trends and it is closely related to the level people are losing touch with reality. The ever more popular tattoos and piercings also seem to be related to the identity problem. The Internet has provided many people with long hours of virtual entertainment, social networks and complicated games played with people all over the globe, where reality and the virtual, or facts and fiction, seem to be overlapping (q92).

Although many people with a direct interest in New Age ideas also embrace many aspects of post-modernism, there is one point where New Age trends diverge quite markedly from postmodern thinking: there is a distinct belief in nature as an independent reality (New Age), while in post-modernism it is seen simply as a representation (q32, q92). It seems that New Age people accept nature, as it provides them with a framework to think about life, the world and what it means to be a human being. Nature for them seems to possess a reality independent of its representation, image or conception, a place where one feels one can belong (q92).

Tourism and New Agers

The loss of a feeling of identity amid un-authentic people, cultural pluralism, and the compression of space and time not leaving time to think have created uncertainty about the present day and the future. However, at the same time this has prompted a search for historical roots, an idealistic authenticity, longer lasting values or an eternal truth, often drawing explicitly upon the spiritual traditions of the East (q60, q88, q120). It is this postmodern nostalgia that has also pushed some people to the re-invention or re-representation of former religions or cultures (Vikings, Mayas), natural healing methods (acupuncture, aromatherapy and herbal medicine, etc.), organic agriculture and self-sufficiency. At the same time, disenchantment with previous modern times has led to a continued push for alternative styles of living.

In New Age tourism the idea is the experience itself being experienced: people draw upon their own inner feelings and emotions, while reality no longer dominates and rather seems to have been transformed into images. The way people feel about things, the images things represent or the ideas they carry give shape to new sets of experiences. This type of tourism is about tourists in their own identity, tourists exploring themselves as their own main tourist attraction.

Tourism has the potential to respond to these quests to know different cultures and alternative lifestyles. New Age tourism usually embraces some form of environmentalism, community values, constructive host-guest interactions and social responsibility. In this sense New Age tourism can be seen as a mix of identity tourism and sustainable tourism and it is definitely a backlash to existing mass tourism (q92).

Increasingly individualistic behaviour among tourists concerning the search for self and self-realisation and the role of nature and authenticity in this quest are all tendencies that make the tourist the centre of attention and also involve the need to accept him as a full-fledged partner in tourism, since it is the tourist himself who has started to develop a new interest and view on tourism.

With New Age tourism we can see this clear inclination to all that is natural, including clothing or musical instruments made of natural materials and most New Age tourism destinations are located in rural areas close to nature parks or protected areas. New Age tourism in this sense has very much to do with the search for nature in the widest sense of the concept.

Infrastructure

A New Age tourism destination offers lodging and food – generally in a simple and straight forward way. The food is often homegrown and may be vegetarian. Apart from lodging, the site may offer:

• Learning skills, such as wood turning, ceramics, candle making, weaving etc.
• Aesthetic development: art, drama or music;
• Agricultural learning, through courses and direct work involving synergy and permaculture techniques among others;
• Formal scholarly learning, including courses by spiritual and intellectual “gurus”;
• Experiential and personalized self-development: courses on meditation, personal relationships, family constellations or self knowledge;
• Alternative approaches to health and wellness: homeopathy, acupuncture, hypnotherapy, Shiatsu massage, Ayurveda, Yoga, Reiki etc.;
• A country style environment apt for feeling the link with the earth and nature.

This can be considered a form of tourism because of their own free will people travel to an area that is completely different from their home environment and stay there for at least one night. There are planned attractions for visitors (tourists) at these destinations, such as courses that are given, working in the field or any other activity as described above. Furthermore, tourists have particular motivations and needs that in turn generate certain expectations. Tourists have a series of experiences stemming from side and shared impsources, and finally they will evaluate these experiences. The authenticity involved is mainly activity-related (existentialist). Finally, tourists have an economic input, either monetary or by voluntary labour.

With most New Age destinations financial gain does not seem to be particularly important, with education and the transmission of alternative ideology being the primary concern. The financial part seems to be viewed as a way to facilitate an alternative lifestyle and culture, and in this sense New Age tourism differs from traditional forms of tourism. It should also be stressed that this type of tourism is not related in any way to wealth or poverty. People from all walks of life may participate and some New Age destinations may be suitable for (poor) students, drugs addicts wanting to change their lives, or people who simply do not care for material wealth; on the other hand, there are also centers where costs may be quite steep indeed. As is the case with other forms of sustainable and responsible tourism, the issue of tourists with a lot or little money does not change any argument.

Among the activities available at what I call New Age destinations, community life and living in a commune form the backbone, where the principles of alternative lifestyles can be realized. It is interesting to note that in New Age centers I have visited, the tendency has been to turn the “normal” daily city life routine into an especially meaningful activity, while the exotic is turned into something routine. Most visitors to New Age destinations will have to help with washing up or gardening as part of a community effort and these actions are made attractive on the basis of their self-development potential and for facilitating a new relationship with the environment. At the same time the exotic is introduced through foreign artifacts, native musical instruments, exotic food or indigenous dresses for example. Quite often one can find a mix of Buddhist, Hindu or Mayan influences at the same time.

Herb spiral in a synergically designed vegetable garden.

Gardening makes up an important part of daily activities at New Age centres, concentrating on synergic gardening and permaculture on one hand, while stressing the link with the earth and healthy eating habits on the other. One example is an upward herb spiral, whereby the herbs sown in the upper parts need less water than the ones lower down and some herbs are planted on either the north or south side depending on the amount of light they need.

Projects are often started or continued as part of examining human relationships with the landscape, such as building a pond using clay and cow manure to make it watertight. Projects may be left unfinished after a while, since what is important here is the action of doing the project in the first place rather than the final result. By executing such a project one’s ecological sensitivity is tickled and the experience of working the earth and using old survival techniques may inspire many people.

Every New Age centre seems to have its own way of demonstrating its uniqueness to its participants, which may range from community chanting and various rituals to simply giving hugs to each other in the morning. The feeling of belonging to a community is strong, but what holds it together is the interest of the participants (including tourists) in self-realization and their general focus on Self as the common denominator. Somehow there seems to be a common goal, although the particulars may be different for each person. The feeling of “belonging to” is an important ingredient, but never an end result. Tourism in this sense is a means and not an end.

Stove for cooking on vegetable oil as part of a sustainable development project.

The relationship between New Age centres and their direct social environment provides us with a series of interesting observations as a result of the inherent nature of New Agers’ self-realization, liberation, fulfillment and the drive to transform self and society. At the farm VerdEnergia Pacifica in Costa Rica, for example, they make stoves that burn (used) vegetable oil and distribute them among the poorer population in the countryside as cheap alternative for cooking as part of their sustainable development initiatives.

A completele different case is, since most New Age destinations are located in rural areas, local populations may not yet have been influenced by postmodern tendencies, living their ways of life as was the case in modern times or before. This includes more fundamentalist Christian beliefs and anyone deviating from these views may quickly be branded anti-religious or even a dangerous outsider. In this sense I have noted that most participants and leaders of New Age destinations have their roots in city life and have been affected by postmodernism trends, which explains this gap in social contact with local rural populations. However, this statement cannot be generalized due to a lack of scientific research.

Wellness Tourism

It may be useful to look at a tourism phenomenon that dovetails quite neatly with postmodern trends, but is different from New Age tourism. A brochure published by the German National Tourism Board on wellness holidays starts like this (q37): “Are you looking for an individual wellness experience? Yoga in Allgäu, thalasso on the Baltic Sea, excursions in the Black Forest or bicycle tours around the lakes of Mecklenburg? Would you like to play golf, enjoy a luxurious hot-stone massage and a wonderful vital gourmet dinner?” Apart from these offerings most wellness centres stress that stays at their centres have revitalizing powers and are good places for people to unwind and “get away from it all”. The issue of personal health forms an important element in combination with relaxation and experiencing a natural environment. Most wellness centres are luxurious and quite expensive and apart from lodging, activities and spas or saunas, they may provide dietary experts, physiotherapists, naturopaths or trainers to help tourists ensure they put “their work-life balance back on track”.

Swimmingpools at a Wellness Hotel in Germany.

Wellness tourism is foremost about physical wellbeing and the application of yoga is mostly practiced as a means of relaxation and reaching a state of peace and quiet with one’s own body. Most hotels catering to the wellness tourist seem to have a clear client-personnel distinction with all staff trained to make sure tourists feel as comfortable as possible. Comfort is an important ingredient, not to mention beauty treatments, steam rooms, jacuzzis and a general ambiance exuding luxuriousness and relaxation.

In characterizing the range of tourist lifestyles, at one end of the scale we find tourists who are individualists, like to make their own itineraries, travel at their own pace, do not want to visit typical tourist highlights, and have a keen social interest in other cultures, as well as in personal challenges in socially or physically extreme situations (q52). At the other end of the scale we find tourists who like to travel with no problems or hassle, seek complete relaxation, enjoy visiting famous tourist highlights, and their main concern regards their own corporal wellness (sun-tanning, spas or plastic surgery) with little interest in local social contacts or culture. The first group is often called the allocentric tourist’ lifestyle group and the second the psycho-centric one. For more details on tourist lifestyles, please read the corresponding page on this site. Allocentric tourist lifestyles concern more spiritual matters and therefore they are more closely related to New Age tourism, while psycho-centric ones are about an attitude directed at the body rather than the mind and refer to wellness tourism among other kinds (e.g. simple beach holidays). Noteworthy differences are the social aspects, whereby community life is all important in New Age tourism, but in wellness tourism it is about couples or people travelling with their own friends; in New Age tourism the instructors or teachers share self-serve meals with participants, whereas wellness tourists are served individually and need not bother with the washing up afterwards. Along these lines there are many more differences and it should be clear that the two types of tourism are quite distinct, although they seem to have one thing in common: a focus on the self – one on a spiritual level and the other on a physical or corporal level.

Postmodern tourism trend setting

Postmodern tendencies have affected Western societies profoundly and can be noticed increasingly on other continents. Although these tendencies have propelled a growing interest in New Age as well as wellness tourism and especially in the twentyfirst century there has been a marked increase in both, they date from premodern times. Wellness tourism existed in the ninteenth century (e.g. spa resorts in France and Germany) and during the beginning of the twentieth century there were examples of projects along New Age lines. Wellness tourism has always had a certain clientele, partly because of the wide array of activities the term covers (medical tourism and aesthetic tourism being two examples). But throughout history there have always been societal pressures exerted on certain social classes to attend their personal wellbeing.

Life in a commune or New Age centre in general has not usually been considered a kind of tourism or have the voluntary work opportunities at these centres. Along with proliferation of New Age centres, there has also been a growing interest from a broader public leading to a wider acceptance. In turn it seems that New Age centres are effectively seeking openings through tourism or similar programmes and they want to be heard even on international level through associations and intensive use of the Internet. Tourism destinations have started to “borrow” elements from New Age tourism and some hotels are now incorporating spiritual elements into the services they offer, though with the important difference that whereas New Age people try to transform self and society, other tourism initiatives offer people support and help for surviving the postmodern world.

One important way to research a phenomenon such as tourism is by studying its extremes. In practice this means that at both ends of the tourist life style scale there are tendencies whereby tourists become increasingly more preoccupied with Self, identity, self-realisation, well-being and the search for alternatives. The sheer observation of individualist tourism increasing at both sides of the tourism life style scale at the same time shows us first of all that tourists are increasingly looking for their own way to go and under the influence of postmodern tendencies they seek a more independent role in tourism. One observation to be made is the tendency among tourists to mix various types of holidays: some days of wellness holiday alternating with some really adventurious tours, then a bit of culture, while not forgetting one’s Self through a Reiki course. Learning elements are more readily mixed with leisure elements for example. This observation coincides with postmodern tendencies, whereby many people today like to “channel-surf” the television, dipping in and out of different settings that capture their interest momentarily, regardless of whether or not the entire programme is watched.

Secondly, travel organisations must increasingly follow and study the tourists in order to meet the tourists’ needs and tourists will have to be accepted as partners in tourism, rather than simply offering them the usual range of tourism services. The strait-jacket of the sheer economic approach of the provider–product–client relation in tourism prevents a better understanding of postmodern tendencies in tourism.

Apart from evolving tourists’ participation patterns and the travel organisations’ obligation to act accordingly, the rise of New Age tourism highlights a third consequence: the changing role of authenticity in tourism. While during the second half of the twentieth century authenticity was still dominantly object related and what mattered was the fact that the object or phenomenon was absolutely real (such as the famous glacier Perito Moreno in Argentina for example), by the end of the twentieth century a shift from object to symbol related authenticity was evident, whereby it became important that the object or phenomenon generated an authentic experience with the tourists, regardless of whether or not the object was objectively authentic (Disney World is one example). In more recent times and most visible in New Age tourism we see a domination of activity related authenticity referring to a more existentialistic part of authenticity: what matters is the authenticity of tourists’ innerfeelings as an outcome of an activity while the authenticity of objects of phenomena do not longer count at all (by going fishing one experiences a feel of peace and quiet). This point highlights the more independent line tourists have started to follow concentrating more on what they feel and want to feel.

Obviously, the trends mentioned above favour sustainable tourism and sustainable development in general, where the main stakeholder – the tourist – has been left out of the debate so far. It is difficult to exercise sustainable development without sustainability-minded tourists and the tendencies as described above point to higher levels of tourists’ involvement.

New Age tourism should be recognized and although it represents only a small market niche that will remain so by the sheer nature of its modus operandi, its recent wider diffusion gives us an indication of tourism developments to come.

Some examples of New Age centres:

http://www.verdenergia.org

http://www.lacittadellaluce.org

http://www.reiki.it

http://www.fincaipe.com

Some theoretical arguments:

The principals of reflexivity in tourism: http://www.tourismtheories.org/?cat=121

For more information on authenticity: http://www.tourismtheories.org/?cat=49

For more on the tourism lifestyle scale: http://www.tourismtheories.org/?cat=104

For those working in tourism, students and scholars please remember that this website is not commercial and depend on voluntary contributions, small or symbolic as they may be, by pressing the DONATE button (PayPal system) at the bottom of this page.

All rights reserved. Complete or partial reproduction is prohibited without the permission of Marinus Gisolf and without mentioning the source

Introduction

The relationship between sustainable development and tourism is the subject of this article. We shall first have a look at the backgrounds and the reasons behind the concept of sustainability. The debate on sustainable development started because many things in the world were going terribly wrong: diminishing biodiversity, a thinning ozone layer, noticeable greenhouse effects, discrimination against large populations. Eventually there were so many symptoms it appeared to be a serious disease. The principles of sustainability were originally developed as a response to these problems. In order to examine how deeply rooted these destructive elements are in our Western societies and why there is a need to take a look at our environment with different eyes, we shall put things in a historical perspective and give a brief overview of the development of the relationship between people and their environment.

The Issues

From the legal point of view it is interesting to see how the role of our environment has changed over time. We are talking about things, which form part of the collective memory of a whole society or of a group of people sharing the same environment. From a juridical point of view the way people have considered their environment and nature has changed. Roman law distinguishes in this context two important concepts: a thing or good can have no owner, or there are things or goods that belong to everybody. These concepts are known in Latin as res nullius and res comunis. The butterfly whirling around light heartedly has no owner. However at the moment she is captured, she is owned and she stops being res nullius and simply becomes a good. In the case of res comunis we think of things that belong to all of us, such as the air we breathe, the sunlight we absorb or the sea we enjoy. Those goods never have just one owner.

The more people there are on the planet, the more we can see a tendency for fewer things to belong to the category of res nullius and the goods that belong to all of us are of ever greater importance. It may be clear by now, that nature in the form of flora and fauna originally was considered to be res nullius. The human being has always organized himself in relation to his environment. Social and economic structures were set up to secure a place in nature and it is this relationship between people and their environment that has seen drastic changes over time. From the development of the first Homo sapiens, humans competed with all other animals in nature for food. Nature did not have an owner, people formed part of nature and the concept of “private property” was not yet invented. When people started to develop agriculture, they became conscious of the fact that there were things in nature exclusively for them, and that animals had to be excluded. In terms of law, the fact of exclusion forms the basis for the concept of property.

The negative influences that gardening and animal breeding had on the environment were mitigated by the fact that people (some 20 to 30 thousand years ago) felt they were part of nature. The magic of growing plants and the close links with Mother Earth were the cornerstone of their vision of the environment. From the time when people stopped being nomads and founded villages – later to become towns – the link with nature started to change slowly from that moment on. In part, this was a consequence of the conceptualization of God and the belief that the human being was His creation. The vision of the human being in the centre of the universe has led, among other things, to the development of the concept of private property. People claimed the right to possess something, from which everybody else was excluded – a development that turned out to be of great importance for the development of the Western world.

Much later in history, a need to protect res nullius to a certain extent arose, which resulted in the legal figure of state or public property: goods whose exclusive use are restricted to nationality.

As we shall see later, there are economic considerations in play as well: plants and animals in nature in many places are res nullius and as such lack economic market value; but once they are captured, cut down or shot, they are converted into goods with economic value.

From the seventeenth century on, the concepts of private and public ownership developed to such extent that property became absolute and untouchable in character, breaking the link between nature and society and consequently responsibility for the environment diminished, leading to the situation nowadays property rights include the right to destroy one’s own property. While a few centuries ago there was once an agreement on how to handle the environment, this link has been lost and with it an enormous part of social solidarity in favour of untouchable property, excluding any consideration on the conservation of nature, environment and society. Additionally, property as a right for future generations is only partially acknowledged. On the basis of higher legal security, life insurance and high inheritance taxes in Western societies, the trend is for those living now to have little concern for the future of the coming generations. They think those newly won securities will cover them during their lifetimes. Diminishing religious interest (as a consequence of this attitude), living in the present,  trying to be fashionable all the time, the feeling that “you live only once” and the ever more dominating concept of “this is mine and nobody can touch it” start to dominate Western thinking. The notion of private property has reached such a state that neither children nor grandchildren are being involved. Property forms an inseparable part of the ego of a person. Not only do people’s considerations of their own future generations play no role at all, solidarity with fellow citizens and with the environment has largely disappeared. Things without owners hardly exist anymore and even those goods under the heading of res comunis are under pressure, not only because of pollution, but also because of the tendency to characterize everything in this world as property – either private or public. The conversion of drinking water into a commodity is one example.

From an economic point of view in modern market-related economies the concept of wealth is only related to what has market value. Goods or services for which value cannot be expressed in money (market exchange values) are not counted as ‘wealth.’ This means, among other things, that nature is not comprehended in the concept of wealth, because it does not represent tangible market value. The destruction of nature, therefore, is not seen as a loss. To the contrary, this destruction forms an important part of increasing wealth, as seen from the point of view of market-directed economies.

This has not always been the case. Centuries ago, those economies functioning within capitalist relations were not only focused on the value of things, there was a content side to it as well. Any productive initiative demanded an investment to be able to start its economic life. With capital one can produce. However, this concept of content has been pushed into the background since the end of the Second World War, while the formal side of capitalism – values imposed by market relations – is dominating. This has led to a growing trend of using capital just to earn more money without being productive. Stock exchange speculation is an example; it’s a ‘game’ in which one gets richer while another gets poorer. Real estate, insurance and world currency market dealings are other examples of people trying to earn money without being productive (i.e. creating material and spiritual wealth by its content). How much people earn seems to be the focal point, regardless what or how much they produce – physically, mentally or culturally.

The increasing pressure on market economies to reproduce capital has led to shorter production cycles. This has been achieved in two ways: by shortening the useful life of a good or by combining a good with the concept of fashion. This means that after some time, products become old-fashioned, lose market value and are replaced, even if they are in excellent condition. In other words, to be able to continue producing at an ever higher pace pushed on by the need to produce gains faster, production has to be growing all the time. The consequences for nature are twofold: raw materials are being extracted from the Earth at an increasing pace while rubbish heaps are becoming mountains, because of the growing number of goods that are ‘returned’ to nature. Both effects lead to the destruction of nature, but neither is seen as causing a loss of wealth. They are rather considered a necessary element of creating wealth and development.

Market-related economies have realized that nature cannot be replaced and that its reproduction is relatively slow. This means that if capital wants to ensure its reproduction, protective measures have to be taken towards nature and natural resources. This has led to the curious situation whereby in many market-related economies, big investments are made to ‘repair’ destroyed nature, despite the fact that this same nature is still considered to have no market value and its destruction is impossible to measure. From a technical market point of view they are investing in something that, according to the same market relations, does not exist. These types of market relations have come to the fore during the last 150 years or so and have been accomplices to the vast destruction of nature to date.

Humanity lives on unequal terms with nature. During the second half of the 20^th century the number of species has diminished by 30%. However, nowhere on this planet has this loss of biodiversity been booked as an economic loss. It must be clear that the limits of sustainability have been exceeded and the speed with which nature reproduces itself is well behind the rhythm of the reproduction of capital. In other words, we take more from the Earth than she can spare for us. Our planet not only has limitations in terms of natural resources, but also as a recipient of waste and CO2 emissions, among others. The principals that mercantile economies are based on do not contemplate maintenance of the Earth. These economies are so concentrated on the production of profits that all else is subordinate to this and our planet does not receive any attention at all, much less its future. ‘Capital reproduction must be achieved right now and tomorrow we shall see how we can make more profits again’ seems to be the slogan. Life on Earth is being sacrificed for the reproduction of capital in the short term.

This development has led to what we call the consumer society, whereby buying has become nearly as important as owning. More and more we are dealing with goods of which we should ask ourselves, do we really need them? It is all about a society where consumption has become a matter of survival, where solidarity in a society has largely disappeared and the human ego and property have become focal points to the extent that people are only concerned with life today and the future hardly plays any role at all.

Unfortunately, there are more factors active in making the total picture only gloomier. Agriculture suffers a lack of investments because of high risks and low returns in this productive sector, but there is another reason, too. Too much money within the mercantile societies is being used with only one aim: how to reproduce money as fast as possible without thinking for one moment that the production of food needs investments as well. Additionally, under the pressure of diminishing natural fuel resources, oil in particular, bio-fuel production is gaining ground, but this means that fewer resources will be available for food production. Food is becoming scarce and will become very expensive.

The concept of Sustainable Development

Measures to protect nature and the environment from destruction have become of interest to people at a rather late stage in history. The notion of nature and environmental protection, however, is an old one, but as a social movement we have to go back to the nineteenth century. During the 1860′s a number of national parks were established in the United States (Yellowstone among others) and countries such as Canada and Australia soon followed suit. In Holland, the Society for the Protection of Animals was set up in 1864. On an international level the first act to be signed was for the foundation of the International Counsel for Nature Protection in 1913, which later became the World Conservation Union. In those times, the focal point was the primarily the protection of nature, as well as the environment.

A new movement was observed by the late 1960s. The high post-war birth rate (‘baby-boomers’) and changing population structures in the Third World (demographic transition) that began in the 1950s spurred many environmental changes. The report produced by the Club of Rome in 1972 made clear that nature protection in itself was not enough. Apart from the introduction of many ecological issues, other crucial factors came into play: poverty and hunger. One of the basic concepts from these times was the idea that the achievement of a healthy society would depend on a radical reorganisation of social structures on a global level.

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, new rumblings were heard. The Bruntland Report of 1987 and the Rio de Janeiro Conference in 1992 developed a number of basic concepts on what would come to be called ‘sustainability.’ It is interesting to note that the idea of sustainable development was accepted by most political camps. Bringing economy into harmony with ecology sounded good and led to technical innovations, among other things.

Tourism hardly played any part at all during these three early movements. When tourism began to develop on a global level, it had little impact on nature protection. During the 1960s and 70s, tourism was not affected by the environmental debate and was still considered a positive phenomenon – a green industry. It wasn’t until the end of the 1990s that tourism was lured into the debate on biodiversity. In 2001, rules were established for Biological Diversity and Sustainable Tourism (Convention on Biological Diversity in 2001). The United Nations declared 2002 as the Year of Ecotourism. It is important to note in this context that the concepts of sustainable development in tourism were already playing an important role at grassroots levels. Many action groups, NGOs or environmental associations had an important stake in the development of sustainable tourism, while international discussion of sustainability had halted somewhat. The Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development shed some new light on the issues and in 2003, the Marrakech Process was begun as a ten year plan whereby several Task Forces would analyze the issues of Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) in support of regional and national initiatives.

There is widespread consensus on the three main cornerstones of the concept of sustainability: the promotion of a healthy environment and nature protection, the active participation of all parties involved, and economic gains for all participants. In the first place, sustainability is all about the development of a region, a country or a community in ways that affect nature, environment and socio-cultural relations as little as possible so as not to jeopardize these relationships for future generations. In other words, one tries to stimulate the kind of development that allows populations to satisfy their present needs while ensuring that future generations can satisfy theirs in the same way or better.

Sustainability is all about a vision of development clearly directed at the future. This vision includes close cooperation with local populations, which in turn means a clear recognition that a community, local population or ethnically homogenous group need protection for the conservation of their environment and their culture. Moreover, this development vision wants to ensure the type of development that will allow all participants to become better off in both material and socio-cultural ways. This may be related to monetary income and/or to improvements in infrastructure or access to (state) services. Apart from this, the United Nations has drawn up a series of basic human rights, including the right to education, proper nutrition, drinking water, and so on.

To ensure that future generations can satisfy their needs in ways that are the same or better than now, we must mitigate any negative impacts of our actions. The damage we are causing can be roughly divided into two types. There is a group of small-scale damage factors on the one hand and negative effects on a macro level on the other. Issues at the micro sustainable development level entail the harmful impacts of overcrowding, nature destruction, pollution, exploitation, vandalism and crime, among others. The jobs and works needed to protect a nature area, such as the creation of a buffer zone around it or the construction of environmentally-friendly infrastructure, are all quite costly to implement. Unfortunately, funding this work is all too often seen as a matter of government responsibility, rather than as an issue of sustainable development that concerns us all. Other activities that help mitigate harmful effects include organic vegetable gardens, soil conservation by means of permaculture, and avoiding the use of fertilizers. Obviously, recycling is an important example and a necessary practice. Rubbish, litter, garbage and pollution have become nearly unsolvable problems on both micro and macro levels. These issues must first deal with the magnitude of the problem, the degree of damage caused, and the slow rate of biological decomposition.

It must be clear that many actions directed at a sustainable tourism development are taken at the so-called lower levels: action committees concentrate on a certain development matter, while other harmful effects are ignored. Sustainable development often lacks clear problem definition and instructions for their solutions. Financial means are often lacking, too, as well as slow decision making (too many parties involved), lack of regulations and laws, knowledge gaps, manpower and, more than anything else, relevant information. Extensive organisational structures directed at sustainable development issues can have a positive impact on the awareness of an entire population, even though government involvement may be small. That is why we sometimes see that the protection of nature and environment is better developed in one country than in another. Local action committees, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and pressure groups may form a very important lobby for the sustainable development of a region.

Harmful effects at the micro level can also be divided another way: clearly visible versus hidden. The latter refers to harmful actions that are not directly visible and their causes may not be clear. One example is land speculation in tourist areas. This practice seems to be a favourite of foreigners (non-locals) in many parts of the world and rising real estate prices are the usual consequence. This can have disastrous effects on a local economy but no one seems to see this as a problem and there is no talk of trying to stop it.

The second group of harmful effects are large-scale in nature; disappearing biodiversity, diminishing ozone layers, noticeable greenhouse gas effects, marginalized populations are all examples of this group. The macro problem of air pollution caused by aircraft is a matter of international cooperation, while on a micro level local authorities must play their role. Who is going to have a stake in solution-seeking activities may well depend on the pressure exerted by countries, populations or international organisations.

The Balance

On the basis of the considerations above it must be clear that more is needed than just good intentions and development visions directed at future generations. The reasons why our planet has been affected to such enormous extent are deeply rooted, as explained in this article. The principles of sustainable development form an important initiative, but they are not the cure for the disease. Economic issues that have led to the systematic destruction of nature need much more serious solutions than a mere development vision. People’s attitudes, including their attitudes toward property, must change drastically, particularly in the Northern hemisphere. Money must again be used to produce while consumption should be in line with one’s needs; the durability of goods must also be extended. Solidarity with the environment must re-emerge and actions must be taken to involve future generations. Economic models based on zero growth will be necessary.

It should be clear by now that the principles of sustainability can be handled much more effectively on a small scale at the local level, while issues such as the changing of macro-economic systems need international attention at the highest levels. Working to conserve the Earth at the local level requires, among other things, a strong educational element focused on making people aware of the harsh facts and giving them a tool to create greater solidarity among communities, countries and continents. The role of sustainable development should be extended, since changes at local levels are an inherent part of achieving the solidarity needed. We can consider the points below in this respect:

1       The conceptualization of sustainable development should be taken more seriously and not on an ecological level only;

2       Much more direct action must be taken to curb the negative impacts of globalizing processes, such as trends toward homogenized lifestyles, cultures, attitudes and even language. In the case of tourism, destinations must be unique enough to attract tourists and in this sense, globalizing developments may become a threat to them.

3       There must be a growing interest in the ethical side of development issues and in socially-responsible government at all levels.

Achieving the changes needed at the macro level may require that independent global organisations, the United Nations for example, start coping with all the major issues on ecological and economic levels. However, others maintain the view that the globalizing effects of modern times have been the most harmful and they feel that solutions must be taken by countries on the basis of mutual negotiations without any interference from global organisations. Trying to stop the unlimited use of raw materials such as oil, iron and copper will need much more than good intentions and above all, the consumer sector will have to make a response. Recycling can be achieved on a scale much larger than that of today and the necessary investments should be made as soon as possible.

However, as long as humans consider property as an absolute concept and continue to base their vision of life on it, it will be hard to realize any change at all. Man’s vision of himself must change dramatically and with it, his relation to his environment and nature.

There is an element of great importance in tourism, but whereof a tourist cannot create any image beforehand: sustainable development, nature conservation or the role of a local population in tourism. The influences and footprints a tourist leaves behind are usually not taken into account with his holiday evaluation and there are very few tourist interested in doing so. The reason is clear: no need will be satisfied. There is only a very small group of tourists (on the Tourist Lifestyle scale on the left-hand side) that may be concerned at sustainability issues during their holiday.

How many tourists are there who sit down after their holiday and run over in their minds how sustainable their trip was? Or the lack of it?

Very few, I am afraid. What happens is that tourists may notice things or circumstances that show a clear lack of ecological considerations. As part of the coninuous evaluation a tourist may feel guilty when travelling for hours through a barren and dry landscape and to arrive at his hotel with lush gardens, swimming pools and sprinklers working everywhere. Even the most insensible tourist will notice this. The contact between rich and poor is another point, that tourist may question spontaneously. We know that there are many tourist taking pictures of poverty, since it enhances the adventure element of their holidays, but at the same time they may wonder if there is not some project for poverty aleviation they may contribute to . However,  for most tourists that is it what sustainable considerations are concerned.

There are two ways this may change: The first one is making sure a tourist creates a need concerning his role in influencing the environment and the mitigation thereof. To help save the planet may form a well defined need indeed.

Experience has shown that the more tourists are confronted with sustainable practices the more they get interested in it. When one hotel is clearly separating the rubbish and another is not, the tourist may question this. To be honest, the number of tourists that really tries to find out how sustainable an Impsource or hotel is, remains very small indeed. Few tourists show interest how a hotel heats the water, treats the sewage or how local the staff is. Construction materials is another point, where tourists demand comfort in the first place, before really wondering if ecological motives were applied.

On the other hand, tourists like to be critical and they usually like to be asked for their opinion. A better preparation may help tourists to be more critical, which in turn can create a need to be satisfied by means of opinion polls, for example.

The second option is not to wait for tourists to get motivated, but simply to implement a series of obligatory codes of conduct the tourist has to study beforehand (on the Internet) and the tourist has to show that he understands them. When in 2001 after the twin tower disaster airport controls turned extremely strict in name of the national security of the USA, there is no reason not to imply strict measures in name of the salvation of the Planet.

Both options may lead to positive holiday experiences and both need much more attention from all parties involved.

All rights reserved. Complete or partial reproduction is prohibited without the permission of Marinus Gisolf and without mentioning the source.