In less than two years, the concept of overtourism has come to prominence as one of the most discussed issues with regards to tourism in popular media and, increasingly, academia. In spite of its popularity, the term is still not clearly delineated and remains open to multiple interpretations. The current paper aims to provide more clarity with regard to what overtourism entails by placing the concept in a historical context and presenting results from a qualitative investigation among 80 stakeholders in 13 European cities. Results highlight that overtourism describes an issue that is multidimensional and complex. Not only are the issues caused by tourism and nontourism stakeholders, but they should also be viewed in the context of wider societal and city developments. The article concludes by arguing that while the debate on overtourism has drawn attention again to the old problem of managing negative tourism impacts, it is not well conceptualized. Seven overtourism myths are identified that may inhibit a well-rounded understanding of the concept. To further a contextualized understanding of overtourism, the paper calls for researchers from other disciplines to engage with the topic to come to new insights.
Purpose This paper aims to contribute to the understanding of the concept of a trend and the discourse of trend analysis. Design/methodology/approach This paper concisely discusses the concept of trends, the value of trend analysis for strategic planning and hierarchical trend pyramids as a tool to scan and analyse trends. Findings The examples will be given of how specific mega, meso and micro trends are related within a hierarchic trend pyramid. Practical implications The tool of trend pyramids helps to structurally analyse and understand trends and developments. Such analysis and understanding are relevant for strategic foresight and scenario planning in leisure and tourism. Originality/value The literature on trend levels and pyramids is scarce and varies in interpretation. The aim of this paper is to integrate the various viewpoints into a useful instrument for the scanning and analysis of trends and developments.
No abstract
Purpose It has been established that values, beliefs and norms are good predictors of pro-environmental behaviour; however, it is less explored how these constructs can be influenced. The purpose of this paper is to assess whether the COVID-19 pandemic, as a shock event, was a “game changer” or it had limited impacts on deep-rooted travel patterns. Design/methodology/approach To understand whether the pandemic has influenced people’s value orientations with regards to sustainable travel, the authors have made use of the value–belief–norm (VBN)theory of environmentalism and conducted a large-scale survey in Germany, Italy, France, The Netherlands and UK (N = 1545). Findings The findings showed that the pandemic caused only temporary change in deep-rooted travel patterns as (self-reported) pre-pandemic behaviour of respondents align with their value orientations and proved to be a good predictor of projected travel behaviour. Based on projected travel behaviour and value orientations, four market segments were identified – Frontrunners, Laggards, Comfortable Crowd and Entitled Stewards. While all segments showed willingness to adapt, the authors found variations in the extent of adaption and in the phases of the customer journey where travellers are likely to make changes. Originality/value According to our knowledge, using the VBN theory of environmentalism to understand the impact of shock events on deep-rooted travel patterns represents a new perspective. Moreover, to the best of authors’ knowledge, this study is one of the first, written in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, which looks at the impact of the health crisis on deep-rooted travel patterns, instead of the commonly studied risk perception.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.