From governance to meta-governance in tourism? Re-incorporating politics, interests and values in the analysis of tourism governance

Abstract

Despite its theorization in the political and policy sciences in the early 1990s, the concept of metagovernance has gained relatively little recognition in tourism studies. Nevertheless, its significance in the political sciences and policy literature, especially as a result of the perceived failure of governance systems following the recent global financial crisis, has only served to reinforce its relevance. Metagovernance addresses some of the perceived failures of traditional governance approaches and associated interventions, and has enabled the understanding of central-state led regimes of shadowed hierarchical authorities and locallevel micropractices of social innovation and self-government. In contrast, tourism studies has tended to restrict study of the political dimension of tourism governance and the role of the state under the traditional parallelism between government and governance. Examination of the how governance is itself governed enables a better understanding of the practices of planning and policy-making affecting tourism and destinations. In particular, the application of concepts of governance are inextricably linked to a given set of value assumptions which predetermine the range of its application A short example of the application of the metagovernance paradigm is provided from the New Zealand context. It is concluded that governance mechanisms are not value-neutral and instead serve to highlight the allocation of power in a destination and the dominance of particular values and interests.

Is There a Good Model for Implementing Governance in Tourist Destinations? The Opinion of Experts

“…Thus, the application of governance is considered a key factor in the achievement of sustainability, since it entails fostering the intervention of the public and private sectors, as well as political will and civil society [1][2][3][4][5]. It also responds to growing demands for information and to involve society in its management, and, therefore, offers a response to the increasing complexity of destination management [6][7][8][9].…”

Silos as barriers to public sector climate adaptation and preparedness: insights from road closures in Norway

“…Recognising that there are limits to the vertical hierarchical power as well as to horizontal regimes of self-coordination (Whitehead 2003), meta-governance highlights practices and procedures that contribute to secure governmental influence (i.e., command and control) in matters that lower political levels are responsible for (Amore and Hall 2016). It also encompasses the state's attempts to steer actors in particular directions (Sørensen 2006), for example when higher-level management supervises local authorities, where the latter has the key responsibility in climate adaptation.…”

Costs and benefits of environmental change: tourism industry's responses in Arctic Finland

“…This is due to the current modes of neoliberal governance emphasising (or assuming) the key and active role of markets to deal with their environmental consequences and possible negative externalities of economic growth for environment (see Jessop, 2002, Rhodes, 1996. Based on this, governing structures increasingly incorporate certain interests that originate from the private sector (Amore & Hall, 2016; see Hall, 2011). Thus, decision-making and responsibilities in adaptation (and mitigation) are also devolved to markets and private-sector operators, which highlight the issue of adaptive management in businesses.…”